alanschu

I wouldn't be so sure he's just baiting you, as I have little idea exactly what you're talking about as well. How do you make a storyline that just revolves around the everyday affairs of a character? At the same time though, you could argue that these things are bad because they take away from the fun of a game. If a game was still far and away the most fun you had ever played and ever will play, in spite of crashes, bugs, bad sound, and long load times, then I wouldn't be surprised if some would rate it as the best ever.

Seriously, what do you expect? If a warlock throws on a conventional robe, they'll probably look like a conventional robe.

They made suppositions about what they'd expect. Few companies come straight out and say games are failures, so it's not unreasonable to take what Microsoft and Bioware said with some skepticism. As an aside, give it a rest. You've made your point. The main topic discussing it has long since past.

"Never rub another man's Rhubarb!" - The Joker I don't know why, but that was the first quote I thought of when entering this thread.

Fire away.

Worked better within the story, though. The assumption that Anakin would restore order to the force was part of the Jedi's hubris. Apparently nobody was smart enough to recognize that the Sith were just as much a part of the Force as the Jedi, and there were more Jedi than Sith. Or maybe nobody really knew the definition of the word "balance". Considering George Lucas' pop mystical aspirations and his terribly written characters, that just might have been the case. Seems to me that in a way, Anakin did bring balance to the Force, seeing how Luke sprang from his loins and all. But in another, more accurate way, he didn't. Unless I've got it wrong. I'm not a big SW scholar as it is. Anyway, there aren't any coincidences in SW, thus implying a predetermination of roles and thus, everybody is their own special Chosen One. What are we arguing about again? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I feel (and it seems you do too) that the "balance" to the force was wiping out most of the Jedi.

I forgot how awesome you are.

Can't be said for the Oilers

True. If Troika/Activision only expected 50k sales (unlikely) with Bloodlines, then you could easily argue it was a success.

I would agree that neither KOTOR2 nore NWN2 were strikes as well. The solid poke over the in field to get you in the game

You didn't. I asked it. I think the prophecy was a sham personally. And if not, it seemed to apply more to Anakin than to Luke. Luke was just the benficiary of good genes I understand this. In terms of how we play the game (since I'm trying to not diverge too far off of the idea being used in videogaming) and the enjoyment we get out of it, I don't see there as being too many differences. And if you're not someone that is Boo-urnsing towards the idea of a Chosen One, then none of my messages really apply to you then. EDIT: I agree wholeheartedly with Pixies' assessment of Hades' comment.

Says the guy that referred to him as a diaper head illuminati. And unfortunately, Troika seems to be a victim of shoddy quality. The ideas behind their games were okay, and I'm a big fan of the Bloodlines universe. But both it and TOEE (and I think even Arcanum) had issues with fatal bugs and Bloodlines had severe performance issues. You have people that are playing Half-Life 2 just fine struggling along with poor performance, in addition to memory leaks. The gamestopping bug I encountered was just the icing on the cake. It doesn't matter if the quality of the story, characters, and all that are A+++, if the presentation is buggy and unstable. As for RPG companies not holding or folding based on their games, look at Origin Systems. The company went under a different direction after the EA bought out, made crappy Ultima games, and has since had its doors shut. Ultima IX was the pinnacle, with the game itself being so god awfully bug-ridden that Electronic Arts later sent every person that bothered to register the game an updated CD, with a letter apologizing about the state the game was released in. It's not the only thing. It never is. Sony's Betamax was superior to VHS, but Sony's refusal to license it curtailed its lifespain. But the quality of products is still pretty important.

Speaking of them, the Siege of Canton has gone on for many, many days now. By my estimate, it seems like 240k chinese versus 120k Japanese. The one bad thing is that if Japan decides to shore bombard this city, I'll probably be in a world of hurt. Some Chinese bombers are getting in airstrikes however, to help with the attrition. I'm still just doing bombardments however. I wouldn't dream of fighting in a town with full fortifications with only twice the soldiers. The airlift of supplies is finally starting to payoff, as most units seem to be meeting their supply requirements, which will help them fight more effectively. I also got a bit lucky in Burma. I noticed one of my bases were bombed out of a strike from Mandalay, so I switched some of my bombers (that were softening up the cities at the line) to do an Airfield attack on Mandalay. The result was a 4 pronged attack, including 48 LB-30 Liberator Heavy Bombers, and it resulted in around 30 damaged airplanes on the ground alone, plus a few fighters that tried scrambling and were cut down by a combination of defensive fire from the bombers, as well as the P-40 escort. While many planes were damaged, not a single one was destroyed on my part. A severe blow to Japanese operations in the Far East theatre.

Was Aragorn really "chosen?" Was he really anything more than the decendent of a king? Why does the heroism and courage that he display somehow become tainted and less enjoyable because he has a bloodline that contains royalty, whereas Frodo is of a special race that allows him to hold the Ring of Power without being immediately corrupted. Is Luke Skywalker really "chosen?" Because he was skilled with the Force? No one else other than Luke would be able to do what he did? You also talk about Cloud, the Baldur's Gate series, and so on, which are arguably the most popular and successful RPGs of their respective styles. So what exactly is the significant difference? That they are "normal" and display courage? And furthermore, as I stated in my original question, is the game really more enjoyable otherwise.

KOTOR 2 and NWN2 would probably have been underhand lofts Maybe Obsidian is like that fastball player that struggles in slopitch!

An on June 18th, 1942, the Allied Armed Forces in the Philippines have officially capitulated to the Japanese Aggressors. Unfortunately, it means those 80k japanese troops in that area are going to be going somewhere else instead. A valiant effort.

Unless you happen to be playing for some friends in a slo-pitch game and don't really understand the rules since you're used to playing softball. I guess then, to apply the analogy, it still counts as a strike, but your company will never fold.

Fate played a large part, simply because he was a hobbit. Besides, what you just described is not what you were in Oblivion either. Though it was a bit of a mistake on my part, because I typically associate "Chosen One" with being "PC is big and bad and ultimately stops great cataclysm." Is a game about saving a kingdom really, deep down, significantly different and more enjoyable if you are just "some guy" that saves it, or someone "chosen" to save it. Again, it's nice, and I wouldn't mind either (I don't really like it when plots stop and wait for the player), but you will still get people complaining about it.

A foul ball is a strike.

So what exactly do you do then? Do you make the PC completely uninvolved in the actual conflict? Because either you're solving it, or you're doing what you can to help. Do people not like, for instance Aragorn, even though his contribution to solving the problem is essentially just trying to help buy Frodo the time he needs?

Exactly. It's not like you were off and about doing your thing, and suddenly Martin wins the game while you're off doing something else.

It's funny, because people will complain about being the big chosen one who does everything, and then at the same time, complain if their role isn't always the primary role. I don't necessarily mind it if the PC isn't the big solution to the problem, as long as the PC is involved with it.

It was more a question along the lines of whether or not reading Mein Kampf would have lead people to resist the holocaust. I was hoping you'd be familiar with it and could provide some insight.

A brief history of time was an excellent book. Admittedly I have not read Mein Kampf, but would reading it have lead to the holocaust not happening?