Llyranor

I'm not sure what a ruckus would actually accomplish by this point. This game isn't that far off, what could they plausibly do? Cancel the game, delay it? Atari isn't going to be happy. Attempts to lengthen it would be artificial at best, and - at this point in the dev cycle - it WILL most probably lead to a cheapening of the final product (unless you're of a mind that quantity - any kind - warrants supporting). The conveyed message would be at best for their next product. The devs KNOW you want longer games, but unless you consist of the major buying power of their product, you're fighting an uphill battle. Limited resources and all. Ideal world, hmm? Of course, there's one way to really voice your opinion in a significant manner, but you should prepare to shell out for consoles in the future.

Go Habs! ^_^

To each their own, I guess. At this point, I have better things to do than invest in a 'decent' game.

Please stop posting outright lies. You may think that they are vain attempts at being funny, but when it happens an uncountable amount of times, it just makes you look stupid. It does not reflect well on you as a person, and being a member of these message boards, it does not reflect well on... this forum.

that would be nice, but it ain't practical. crpg story is not novel writing or short story writing. got relatively fixed resources... and if it turns out that your resources not match your hopes and desires for story, which you thinks is gonna get cut or expanded? looks at nwn2 for your answer. content (possibly relevant or even integral to story,) got cut 'cause quality of game could not be maintained with september deadline looming. just write the story. bah. is not realistic... is not the way a game developer can approach. crpg story is not and cannot be organic. HA! Good Fun! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Go go industry!

Heh. There was a time when I'd have gone 'looks boring' over these. Gameplay if king

The first Malak battle was the lamest piece of crap ever. The presentation of that whole scene was nauseating. You beat the crap out of him once. He runs away. You beat the crap out of him again. Bastilla saves you from certain death and gets captured! YAY!

I don't use the NATO dudes I find the sprites easier to keep track of. I like the animations more than the tiny green arrows.

Actually, I like Magical Volo's TBB. Power does not come from character level alone.

Say you have two games. One focuses on interactive storytelling, and roleplaying applies in the context of the story. Basically, choices and consequences all to different extent relate to the story. Heck, let's even take a recent example, Oblivion. Rather than making a vast explorable world, with limited emphasis on the story, you would focus on the Amulet of Kings, Boromir, etc. Only, you would turn it into a complex nonlinear story, where you could have meaningful interaction within. Got the Amulet? How about trading it to the black market? You interactions with the world would be via the story, rather than for exploration's own sake (to an extent, perhaps similar to exploring the world of Fallout specifically because you were looking for the waterchip). In terms of plausibility, this could be done quite easily within less than 20 hrs, and still provide quite a satisfying experience. Is it not a RPG if you can roleplay your character within the story? On the other side, take Oblivion, but make it 'Bioware/Obsidian' style. Sidequests and so on, linear storyline with some sprinkles of choices spread throughout, only marginally. The main quest could take, maybe, 20 hrs in total. Only, because of lack of focus, it would be pretty linear (go to Spellhold, then go to the Underdark, then the elven city, rock on!). The difference would be that the game would be longer because you would diverge from the storyline at various points, engaging in exploration and sidequests that have no or little link with the main story. Which would you prefer?

Hehe, I would so cheat as a DM. Rewarding intelligence and punishing stupidity and keeping the players on edge when I'd feel it was appropriate. I see rules as just an aid, nothing more.

there is an argument that a good story cannot be told in a crpg format in less than 30 hours. cut out all the tangential side-quests and you not really gots a crpg anymore

What if a PC gets killed because of a completely incidental roll that wasn't precipited by any sort of player stupidity?

What if the rules get in the way of said role-playing/experience?

<3 dorkface

Are rules in and of themselves relevant, or is their purpose to enhance the players' experience as optimally as possible?

HoI2 <3

NICE MODERATING JOB EVERYONE

Wrong game. That's BG3.

Well, Nines was.

Does it matter, or should the main quest be completely linear by default because it makes for better storytelling?

Ultimately, the problem with 'have item, proceed with story' design is that it is COMPLETELY linear. Lazy boring design.

Enter The Matrix sold something like 2.5 million. Was it a good game? How does one objectively label a game good or not? Popularity, stability?

Does an idiot who throws away HK's parts away 'just because' deserve to be able to build him again?

Only because Starcraft Ghost isn't out yet!