alanschu

I'm playing 2006, as I only have a PC. The game does have a console interface though. It's not surprising that the bulk of the work is aimed towards the ginormous market of consoles.

What about NBA Live or the NHL series? Try winning games with a goalie that has an overall of 50. Or even scoring in NBA when your players have a FG rating less than 50. What about the fact that I can still consistently defeat way more powerful foes in Morrowind despite having crappier statistics?

You can only trade with a nation if you are not at war with that nation. During the peace treaty though, you can demand/offer the usual trade options in order to sweeten the deal if you're getting crushed, or demand stuff if you are annihilating the enemy. The reason why I posted is that metadigital said you could still trade with nations you were at war with.

I posted that because you said you could trade with people at war: In my screenshot, the diplomatic action was inititated by ME, and the only diplomatic option I can propose is a peace treaty. I cannot trade with countries that I am at war with.

The stats are affected by coverage though. How many times does it get completed with pass defense cranked and QB/WR pumped? Regardless, with a team of <50 FG rating players in NBA Live, you're not going to win, ever, given that they will blow wide open layups frequently. Better yet, try playing any sports game with a team of the players with the lowest ratings for speed, on any difficulty other than the easiest ones. Furthermore, even with an equivalent car model, I'm not going to win the High Speed circuit in Gran Turismo unless I've boosted the stats of my car. I can also consistently win fights in Morrowind despite being outclassed in every statistic.

Nope. You can order it by mail with a cheque. You can also buy it with Paypal (which does not require a credit card either).

You don't need credit cards (nor credit) to take part in e-commerce.

If the game was nothing more than single-player mob killing, then people would not subscribe to the game. I know I didn't play WoW just to endlessly kill mobs.

It's possible in an RPG for a wizard to beat a warrior in melee combat. In KOTOR, I was able to beat characters many levels higher than me (I was level 2) on Taris. There are many sports games where it is quite difficult to beat a better team, especially on very hard difficulties. Try playing a game of NBA Live with a team of people that are all less than 50 for their FG rating. See how many games you win. Likewise, it's also possible for me to beat a character in an RPG that is statistically superior to me in every way. In fact, most bosses in RPGs are statistically superior to the PC in every way. I played a game called 4D-Boxing back in the day, which let you create a character from scratch and improve his Power, Speed, and Stamina. Unless I had a good combination of all three, there's no way I had a chance at taking on the champ. He'd beat me every time, no matter how good I was at the game. But I wouldn't consider it an RPG.

Not sure what you're saying. But if he has a credit card, then he likely has the ability. Even if he is a grown man without a credit card, there are alternatives to purchasing the game without a credit card. Like I said, I doubt he lacks the ability to buy the game. He may not want to because of whatever reason, but that does not restrict his ability to purchase something online. He may not be able, but I highly doubt it, given that e-commerce tries to make itself as available as possible.

I think RPGs need more than stat based gameplay though at the same time. I don't consider NHL 2006 to be an RPG.

Oh, a con. I wasn't reading it like that. Still, how does it cheat you out of money?? I played WoW for a few months, but lost interest and quit playing. The only reason why someone gets "addicted" to the game is because they are enjoying it. Also, if anyone has access to it, PC Gamer ran an interesting article looking into the validity of the MMO's requiring a subscription fee. It was a good read.

He's also stated that he's going to be playing PC games for a very very very very very very very very very long time. I'd be surprised if he didn't have the ability to purchase the game.

Actually, Hades has said specifically that he rates the value of his game based on the dollar to hour of gameplay. This only relates to real money spent, so if he could get a game for $25, he'd expect 25 hours of gameplay. There was never any discussion about the market value or anything of the like. I would also doubt that Hades constitutes a part of hte common PC game market demand, as he has stated many times that he would only play CRPG games. Although he's clearly not part of the common PC game market demand now, as he has sworn against PC games now for console games. Besides, Hades considers himself a hardcore RPG gamer, which is exactly the type of gamer that Geneforge markets to. The only thing missing, is the willingness to purchase a game online. However, I suspect this to be a convenient excuse simply to not buy the game. But to go back to the original point, Hades' barometer is about real dollars spent to hours of gameplay. KOTOR was a poor value because he did not get 50 hours of gameplay, yet Baldur's Gate 2 was an exceptional value because he got more than 50 hours of gameplay. Based on Hades' definition alone, he would need 25 hours of gameplay for Geneforge to be a good value. I don't recall a bundle, but yes you are correct. I never disputed that. Individually, each game is $32 with the book bundle, so you'd probably get the three games for around $100

What's a con?

Then why did you bring up all the talk about market value?

I never said it does. The only part that relates to you is you made a comment about how it costs $100 for the three games, and I said that you can actually get them for $25 each.

I still fail to see how this relates to people that claim to be hardcore RPG players that don't care about graphics, yet can't look past the poor graphics of Geneforge.

It wouldn't have to be $0. I'm sure many people could justify buying a video game for $1 even if it's just there. Naturally this would not apply to Geneforge. Most likely, he sees that the game would not sell for $50, which is likely what he'd need to sell it at to take care of retail packaging for the game. This does not make the game have $0 market value though. So? His game specifically targets that niche market. In fact, the majority of successful online resellers have very limited product selection and market to specific audiences. It's easy to sell someone a product if they are specifically looking for it. It's why Overture began offering reverse lookup tools to see what people were searching for and whatnot. If he was to try to get non-RPG players to play his game, then yeah it'd be more difficult. But he doesn't. He knows his market, and the games he makes appeal to his market. That's all that matters. The entire PC gaming market is NOT the market for Geneforge. The thing is, many people claim to be in that market (i.e. the "don't care about graphics at all, just gameplay" RPG fans), that can't look past the graphics. Having said that, I still don't know why this was brought up to begin with.

Then I guess the market value of Geneforge is $25. The product directly markets to those interested in very "RPG" experiences. It hits it's target audience right on the hammer, and doesn't worry about the audiences that don't care about the game. The majority of demand for a product like Geneforge is from people that want a hardcore CRPG experience (you could probably argue that ALL of the demand is for that). Geneforge has been a successful franchise selling at $25 so far.

Those words "vast majority" hurt it though. "Vast majority" is not all-encompassing

I think the problem with the colour analogy is that I don't see any reason why game genres must be static and non-evolving. Also, if the majority of the world decided to call red orange from now on, then guess what, orange would be the new red

So how do you determine market value of a game then? And why is Geneforge not market value? I think it's more than the technology alone, given the experience that interactive media provides. And what on Earth does all this market value talk have to do with those that state that graphics are irrelevant, and only the gameplay need apply, that don't play Geneforge?

I agree. I also make plays for strategic land areas as well, so as to being able to either use a city as a canal, or to create a place where a limited number of units can defend indefinitely. Units on the defensive in mountains with fortresses are pretty much impregnable!

I try to not get involved in these too much anymore, as I find it gets pretty subjective. Although I would say that a requirement for the marketplace to consider a game to be an RPG would be stats-based gameplay, in addition to other things perhaps. I can't think of any games that I would consider an RPG in terms of the genre, that don't have stats-based gameplay. Although I can think of games that have stats-based gameplay that aren't RPGs. So there's something more, maybe even a list of optional things, where it must have 1 off that list (whatever that list may be).