.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
TwinkieGorilla
-
Posts
946 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by TwinkieGorilla
-
-
Wasn't it your point that everyone who would like romances wants them BioWare way? Just trying to take a grasp here.
I always feel better after taking a grasp.
Anyway, no. My point(s) as follows:
1) Videogames are a poor medium to tackle the subject.
2) When it happens, its usually embarrassing, juvenile or clumsy.
3) The people really up in arms are, most likely, the type who want the BioWarian version of this.
4) That said, the casual take on the subject is frivolous enough that it needn't be utilized in the first place especially since: see 1 & 2.
-
3
-
-
-
Will you be upset if they say their vision includes romance? I'd guess yes, but maybe you'd give them the benefit of the doubt?
Upset? Nah. Mildly disappointed maybe...since it would feel like pandering. As for benefit of the doubt I haven't seriously for a second imagined they'd take a BioWarian approach to such a thing just because people appear to be clamoring for it.
-
2
-
-
Is it hostile if I mention that I read your post while 'Tain't No Sin by Tom Waits and sung by William S. Burroughs is playing on my work speakers and the absurdity of the situation made me giggle like a fool? Cheer up, Merin. It's a beautiful day. Just not a beautiful day to suggest romance in a classic cRPG, y'know?
-
2
-
-
So you are pro removing all the sidequests and lore?
No, you've got me right. In fact I won't be satisfied until the game is stripped of everything but environmental shadows. I've got an idea already, let me know what you think:
Animated Grass: The Reckoning
-
I personally have no problem with sarcasm. But some people tend to think that sarcasm justifies hostility and if someone disagrees, well, he just didn't understand their highly intelligent remarks!
Sarcasm is a rethoric tool, a way to show hole in someone's reasoning. I.e. when you would say something along the lines of "yeah, cause there are a plenty of games showing the romances can be done right!", you're making a point. This is sarcasm (not very sarcastic, I know, but just to illustrate), but leaves space for reasoning. Use your sarcasm all you want to make a point. Don't use it to mock or ridicule or impute some opinion I haven't endorsed.
Or whatever, do what you like. Some people just like being hostile.
So I'm not being romantic enough, is that it?
-
1
-
-
Oh, ok yeah. I'm sometimes being sarcastic so....? Hostile. That makes sense.
*ahem*
I hope you never encounter anybody truly hostile then. For your own sake.
-
Could a possible solution be a stealth roll upon entering a location, during the act, and then again upon leaving?
-
You consider that post as being hostile?
-
What, don't you want to be immersed, Twinkie ?
Ehehe. You know...that's funny. Because it's always those heavy-handed moments which really break the 'mershun and show how the medium tends to embarass everybody involved and remind you of its shortcomings.
-
Clicking on an icon and then rolling around like Harry Potter with the Invisibility cloak doesn't match my idea of stealth.
I'm not sure how you got that from what I was suggesting but ok.
-
2
-
-
If you don't equate romance itself, in whatever genre or media as childish, then in fact you are counting videogames as a childish form of entertainment and romances in them get caught by extension.
Which really is sad.
Why is that sad? I'm an adult and feel completely comfortable calling videogames one of my guilty juvenile pleasures. I don't look to them to fulfil me the same way an Ingmar Bergman film or T.S. Eliot poem would. I play videogames to play games. To have fun using strategy, solving puzzles and hopefully get entertained with some fresh, interesting and well-implemented stories and ideas. But even the most well-written games (PS:T for instance) do not come anywhere near the most well-written films, books or poems. It is what it is.
UH OH CUE VIDEOGAMES VS ART CONVERSATION IN 3...2...1...
-
2
-
-
It's something that's fun but mechanically challenging to implement, given that it's probably something that'd only see use a few times at most in a typical playthrough. I can definitely see actions of this nature being made an option through 'dialogue' instead without damaging immersion overmuch. I'm thinking particularly of the give gun to kid trick in Fallout 2.
I am admittedly completely naive about the degree of difficulty in implementing such a thing. All I know is that its something I've always wanted and have never quite got, though some games have had one or two aspects. Dialogue options are fine (and certainly better than nothing) but wouldn't, for me at least, satisfy the urge of using poisons as lethal weapons. Or simply the desire I have for fixing the situation where a game's npcs are suddenly all alerted to something they'd really have no way of being alerted of.
Although in one sense this is a problem with a global reputation so maybe it can be improved through a different kind of reputation system?
Keeping in mind my game-making naivete, what things do you think might help this sort of thing? What is it which alerts npcs to a situation? I can't imagine at the very least that this couldn't be tweaked, right?
That means the injure level depends on the level of stats of both our PC and the enemy NPC.
Problem I have with this though...is that if you really were a trained assassin or bad ass ninja (bear with me here) you would absolutely be able to kill somebody in one silent blow (if we're talking weapons) or with a single cyanide capsule (if we're talking poisons).
-
I don't think someone asked the question: why do people don't want romances in game?
Because the format is not equipped to handle it in a less than embarrassing way.
-
Neither does doing a sidequest, or reading a lore book. Let's cut all sidequests and lore books out of the game.
Oh man its like you totally get the point or something!
TwinkieGorilla, I think you're too readily equating romances entirely to sex
What I'm equating is Videogame Romances = Sad and Childish.
That is all.
-
2
-
-
Stop the ad hominems.
I don't think you know what an ad hominem is.
Already reported.Thanks. I'm sure the mods appreciate the tattling too.
-
I don't see how. Too many games let you get away with murdering a guy just because everyone's back is turned. But then they turn around, see you standing over him with a bloody knife, and they're completely dumbfounded as to what happened. I understand the problems with complex AI that may cause these issues, but I think it's valuable to consider fixing it if reasonable. I think a system that forces the player to consider what evidence they leave behind and any witnesses could make it interesting.
Hehe. I'm not talking about putting a bucket over somebody's head here. The first thing I mentioned was being in a completely secluded environment.
EDIT: re-read my op and maybe I didn't make that clear. So, yes, secluded. Like in a dark alley or room with closed door, etc.
-
Even if I agreed with your point (which I understand but still disagree with) there is still the remaining issue that it's the sort of thing which has never really been done well in the format of videogames and when people are clamoring for "romance" what is most likely happening is not a MotB reference but BioWare fans who want to have videogame secks.
-
Just because nobody saw you, it doesn't mean they can't figure it out.
Ok, I realize my desire for a lack of "Holy **** the entire town knows how could they possibly know?!" ala most games is getting meta because I'm asking for a more realistic approach. But you're getting maybe too meta? Even still, I could see "bluff/lie/charisma" skills/traits allowing a player to talk their way out of getting caught or high solo sneak skills allowing paths into, I don't know, back windows for instance...without being seen.
-
I think your use of "you" here is confusing, since we'd be talking about the character in game and not the player, but it seems to be you think that its the player who has the "relationship" with the companion in game.
Well, this is one of the things which puzzles me. I mean...are you saying people really want Shepard to get busy with a blue alien? Because that doesn't make any sense. At all. It does nothing to propel the story or game.
-
1
-
-
Maybe you can murder a servant from the castle where your target lives, put on his/her clothes and then infiltrate the castle, poison some food or set the whole place on fire. Would be awesome.
Ah, yes! That is something I've rallied for years for (disguises). New Vegas touched on it a little (and AoD looks to have an interesting take as well) bit but I'd love that to be a fully implemented game mechanic. I do realize that this may be asking too much but these are two things which no game has ever satisfied me with.
(it's like what you could do in Fallout 1 and 2 by using Super Stimpaks on NPCs)
Hehe, yes but actually implemented by the devs instead of exploited by the player.
-
Yay. But it should be worth while, because in most RPG's sneak kills are either never need or a big obstacle, because some team members can't sneak...
In some party-based rpgs you can select one character and go off on your own, no?
-
I've always been a fan of the idea that once your pc is alone, in a closed room, or far enough away from other npcs, that a murder can take place without the entire town (or a single other person, for that matter) becoming alerted. Whether due to sneaking skill-checks, poisons, or silent throat-slitting I'd love the game to give some focus to this.
Funny. This is something I've discussed so often throughout the years and I'm coming up a little empty with all the ideas I'd like to elaborate on. Maybe anybody else interested in playing a ninja-like character can come in and bounce some ideas off each other?
For instance, one thing I've always wanted is something like cyanide capsules or poison vials which can be used as viable fatal weapons and not simply small health-drains. Maybe the npc has a drink in their inventory and a sneak skill-check coupled with a special "Silent Killer" trait/perk/ability allows the pc to successfully taint the drink?
Yay, nay?
EDIT: somebody suggested I make a poll. Let me know if I could rearrange the poll in a more constructive way.
-
3
-
-
...sigh...just tell us already where the big, bad romance touched you
Oooh, have I bothered you enough that you're gearing up for the personal attacks? Interesting.
Games. These are games. Mmmkay?
But for those of you who really want to huggy-kissy your companions, tell me why. What do you get out of it? How does it help your classic cRPG gaming experience? You feel more complete if the pixelated sprite which represents you is imagined to be holding hands with the pixelated sprite which represents somebody you love because...yeah, see...that's another good one. You "love" your companion(s)? Really? Hehe. Ok.
-
1
-
[Merged] Gods save us another romance thread
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
Yes. Which brings us back to number 1.
Look, if anybody can do it right it's probably these guys. But do I want time wasted on such nonsense? No. Would I actually ask for it? Hell no. Would I start a thread insisting a cRPG include it? Oh, hell no.