alanschu

I'm not criticizing it. I don't think any combination of the 3 are any better or worse than any others. They are all powerful.

Meh, IIRC Domination is pretty powerful too. They were all quite powerful.

Actually it can be exceptionally interesting. Especially if you incorporate your solution and mine. If you go in and kill the prisoner yourself, and come back and talk to the NPC, his responses will be adjusted to the action you had performed. I think it helps immensely with immersion, as it gives you the impression that you're in a living, breathing world. It would also make sense if you were roleplaying the game from a point of view where you prefer to not get your hands dirty, but rather let others do the dirty work for you.

To say that we want linear stories is also a misnomer. I also wouldn't consider "spamming on the flatter button" to be an "engaging conversation." I mean, if you want to get technical, everything is one-directional, in the terms that Crash Girl depicted. Nothing in the game is done without a designer having put it in the game for you to do. It's always from the designer to you.

Yes, clearly Example: NPC1: So, what should we do with the prisoner? PC: 1) Kill him 2) Spare him Naturally, I can't imagine how this has any affect on the gameworld. It is 100% the same before and after this dialogue. Especially if sparing him leads to help/backstabbing in the future.

I'm planning on making an adventure that is at least a couple of hours. I think you'll like it Llyranor

I think that's what I like about Total War (and Myth...hmmmm exploding undead) is that I don't have to worry about unit building or resource gathering. With Total War, it's quite possible to win (and win handily) even if you're outmatched (in unit strength, as well as unit numbers). The thing I like about Empire at War is that the unit building is abstracted out of the battlefield, which is kind of silly. I'd much rather have a game be about the tactical decisions (and strategic, if there's a world map) rather than making sure I don't forget to build my new units, or get my new tech upgrade, or whatever. My days of playing the C&C and SC style RTS games are definitely passed.

Well, when I say keep me in mind, it's not necessarily to play with. Just to mention it because I don't have as much time to keep up on this sort of stuff anymore. If I could consolidate my gaming information to one forum, that'd be sweet

I don't know if I would consider "Flying, seeing places, and swimming" as "gameplay." They all seem to fit under "moving around the gameworld." I will give you the custom spell options. But I think you're just breaking up similar stuff to make your list. I guess that asks, what exactly IS gameplay? Because to you, you considered going and seeing a place to be gameplay. Couldn't you say that going and having an engaging conversation with someone, that is interactive, gameplay as well?

OMG too bad you're busy. Thanks though I'll look into it. For the record, I'm all about the realistic WW2 strategy games, so keep me in mind

Sounds like Lucas was interested in that idea with Empire at War as well. While you have to build your units "outside" of combat, if you want to bring in more units you need to capture the reinforcement points on the map. I could see myself getting CoH simply because it's a WW2 game. Though it still depends on how RTSish it is. I don't want it to be like Codename Panzers where units still have HP and whatnot. Though I have a feeling that that is what it will be like. I am interested in its AI though.

What's Company of Heroes' MP going to be like. You mentioned it would be similar to Dawn of War? Though I haven't played Dawn of War.

I would looooooooooooooove a multiplayer campaign mode.

Well, only in the sense that MW has a ton of gameplay but characters and story aren't so great. SO if you are into gameplay I think you will find MW a very rewarding and involving game. If you are into story and vivd characters you probably won't. Dooesn't make one better than the other, but the oppostion is pretty clear even from th emajority of posts in this thread. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Err, I don't know if Morrowind is really all that involving gameplay wise either. It seems to be limited to exploring, attacking (through normal weapons or magic), and talking to NPCs. I like stories because they complement good gameplay so well. When your decisions as a character affect interesting people, it adds so much to the gameplay because it makes you put so much thought into your gameplay decisions. Stories aren't just reserved for books, and they've been a part of computer games (especially RPG games) for over two decades.

Thanks. I was curious about that. I wasn't aware of a script importer, though that does make things nice if it automatically converts your scripts.

Where'd you find time to play through a game like Vampire pretty much twice?

Why?

You sir, deserve a cookie! Unfortunately I don't have one. I think people care too much about the bonuses. I mean...really....do we need any MORE help defeating the bad guys? The game isn't exactly hard.

IIRC, you can get influence points with many people if you team them up with Kreia. Do something evil, they'll get upset, and Kreia will explain why it's an excellent decision, and you'll gain influence with them.

I think the game kind of suffers from too many joinable NPCs. And since he couldn't become a Jedi, it made choosing him even harder IMO. I think it would have been neat if there were more situations where an NPC would only be with you for a short time. I mean, GOTO joining you was weak weak weak.

Hehe I figured someone would post that. What awareness on the ice. I hope he wins the Calder, and I think he's impressing enough that the media won't just shoo-in it to Mr. Crosby. I think Ovechkin's flair helps him, as it brings a ton of attention to him. I wonder if Sid's production will be affected with the loss of Sir Ziggy

At least Fallout 2 was a bit more varied. I was never really able to play BG through more than once. I had tried numerous times, but struggled. I was able to play through BG2 three times though.

Well, it will definitely appeal to the faster paced RTS crowd. To be honest I would have preferred if things were a bit slower in the game all around. Perhaps something for me to mod for myself I could see myself getting it when the price drops, because it's Star Wars and I can build Death Stars and watch Darth Vader own X-Wings.

In other news, does Alexander Ovechkin score any ugly goals???

I like the idea behind the galactic map, and I think things are a little more straightforward than Rebellion. Though, I didn't really hate Rebellion as much as others. Though it did have me building fleets of Star Destroyers and whooping ass....so my objectivity is already gone I love the space battles.....the ground battles are what I'm less than thrilled with. I also like the idea about how technology is handled, and how they tried to bring out the differences between the two factions. Rebellion was just the same thing with slightly different units on both sides.