Jump to content

drake heath

Members
  • Posts

    83
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by drake heath

  1. Which is why there's no one end all answer on what a good character is no matter how many people with degrees say otherwise. Because it's not a science, (depending on whether or not you believe it is) it's an art, which is objective. Like I think Picasso's art blows, but many consider him to be great. I know people who think Shakespeare is a hack. It's just an opinion, and that's all it will ever be. Call me a dumbass for thinking that, but whatever, it doesn't make you right.
  2. I think any literature professor will vehemently disagree with this. Which is why they aren't authors.
  3. Well then, I guess we can all agree that there aren't set rules for what a good character is, it all depends on the individual reader.
  4. I'm saying "undertones". I didn't say it was actually pedophilia. Also DA2 wasn't made in the Middle Ages.
  5. A character just has to be interesting, they don't need to grow, or be sympathetic, or even be plausible, they just need to be interesting. Whether it's because they interact with people an interesting way, have an interesting personality/story, etc. they just have to keep my attention and make me want to see them more.
  6. She's awkward, has little to no experience in interacting with people, and basically acts like a child. Yeah, I'd call those pedophilic undertones.
  7. I'm fine with getting the same ending as everyone else as long as I can get there differently. Alternate endings always seemed like the cheapest way of implementing player choice, it doesn't really effect anything it's just which ending slide you get. And it brings up images of bad imports of player choice, which rarely ever work out.
  8. The companions in Dragon Age 2 weren't really bisexual, or at least not in a realistic sense. They'd have sex with you no matter what, just as long as you chose the heart icon. They're heart-icon-sexual, to the point of being really creepy. The prime example being Merrill the "virgin girl-next-door". The "rival" version of that romance had so many abusive and pedophilic undertones, I'm surprised it got past the rating board.
  9. In retrospect, Mass Effect 1 wasn't a very good RPG. Hell, it wasn't a very good setting in general. The only reason I liked it was because I was desperate for a sci-fi RPG.
  10. - I prefer Sci-Fi over Fantasy, seriously, I like Fantasy, but I'm tired of it, bring on some more sci-fi. - Fallout 2 wasn't that good, Fallout 1 was better, and New Vegas was the best Fallout game. - I enjoyed Fallout 3, but not for the crap story, it was fun to explore. - I also liked Skyrim, quite a bit. - I a bit of a graphics snob and I prefer 3rd person games over isometric, but I never expected PoE to be that. - Old cRPGs have not aged well, especially the ones that use ADnD. - Which is why I haven't, and probably will never finish Planescape. - Alpha Protocol wasn't well put together, but I really liked it anyways. - BioWare hasn't made a good game since DA:O. - Mass Effect 3 is one of my favorite games... to viciously make fun of and hate, it's one of the dumbest "RPGs" I've ever had the displeasure to play. - Also Crusader Kings 2 is the best RPG in the way it handles moral decisions.
  11. That has bugged me too, however, Eternity is probably the only setting I can think of where this shouldn't happen. Thanks to the soul system, everyone with a powerful soul is essentially a magic user, so it's not just mages who get to be insanely powerful. And this subject related to the original subject also makes me wonder how social class might even function in a setting like PoE, due to the impact of magic. In the real world, an uprising of peasants might be put down because they tended to be poorly equipped and badly led compared to the army a king might be able to put together. What happens in a world where, with a little study, a peasant can learn how to throw fireballs or cast a charm that makes an opponent fight on his side? There's a democratizing effect when the most powerful weapons are available to anyone. Will the soul system mean that such is the case? Will those who want to maintain their power have some justifiable advantage in terms of magical power against those they're exploiting? The average peasant probably wouldn't be able to learn how to throw fireballs, and if magic is genetic you'd be able to make it so the peasants can't possibly be able to learn anything if they never had any magic blood. With the souls thing, you could have a strange type of meritocracy (soulocracy?) where people with "strong" souls are automatically placed in a higher position than someone with a "weak" soul, regardless of mortal lineage. It can also still be just as unfair and stratified, probably even more so as you can't improve your soul if it's "weak" (versus the usual ways you can improve your station in a feudal society), as those with "strong" souls will just be naturally better than you at everything.
  12. I never got why fantasy worlds don't all have an upper classes that consists entirely of mages and magic users. You'd think in real life they'd be at the top for a long time until someone invents guns.
  13. Ladies are what move units, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN HA. HA. HA. SO VERY FUNNY. I wouldn't have a problem with it. It's not like males can engage in parthenogenesis. Genetic diversity takes a backseat when simple survival is an issue. Spermatozoa are just highly-mobile ova. You're not much of a god if you can't create some sort of spawn spontaneously. DOHOHOHO Gods usually have to sleep with their sisters and mothers to reproduce though.
  14. If they do I really hope they don't go with the predictable, left-wing stuff, like "evil rich people vs. good poor people". Something like in Assassin's Creed where you can tell someone's a bad guy because they don't share the same political views as the devs.
  15. Also Science! really isn't important in video games decisions, so saying Science! is against their decision to have no romances is putting Science! up like it's some kind of deity. Like you're saying Science! will smite them for their faithlessness, or something.
  16. Oblivion's wilderness and dungeons were procedurally generated but the rest of TES games and FO3 were not. No one liked Oblivion's lack luster wilderness and samey dungeons so they went back to manually crafting the world in FO3 and Skyrim.
  17. FALSE. Unless of course you make romance an out-of-the-blue option after 5 dialogues without any buildup like BioWare. If you want romance you need to pay; * Writer for a full year (say, 10K) * Actual gameplay dev(s) to implent said writing (triggers, script, writing) (another 10K) * If aside from just the writing you want more (say, a quest)... add 30k minimal (for a short one) Total cost; 50k (and as stated, this is a low estimate). Feel free to pay OE that for the romances. I won't stop you... but I doubt you will. Nah man, just get some erotic fan fic writers, they'll do it for free.
  18. It's two halfs of a larger picture of the Battle of St. Quentin From a Spanish historical art blog, http://angelgpinto.blogspot.com/
  19. Alright, I gotta stop there, I don't know what's with people on the internet, but trying to justify adding romances in with Science! is just completely silly. It's like the Talimancers who tried to use Science! to find how what their waifu's sweat tasted like.
  20. Have races be treated differently is fine. But how will you make it so genders are treated differently? Because if the only difference is "women can seduce men to get what they want" or "men will flirt with/harass a female character all the time", I'd rather not have that. At all. I'd rather have the completely unrealistic "men and women are completely equal in this quasi-Medieval society" because at least that's not puerile, (it's also the thing I do in fantasy campaigns, because it's awkward for everyone when you try to simulate sexism in a fantasy RPG, especially PnP RPGs).
  21. Even if 100% of fans wanted them, I don't believe we have the time and other resources to implement them well. I am not inherently opposed to romances, but I don't want to spend time implementing something I'm not confident we will be able to execute at a high level of quality. I read this statement as that he either wants to implement high quality romances or none at all but most certainly Josh doesn't want to implement anything half-baked. Josh only spends time on things he's confident will be of high quality and I think that's great news for the game Anyway, if, and this is probably a big if, there is ever going to be any romance in an add-on for example or in a sequel, we hopefully can be confident that it will be in fact a new high level quality approach to romances, and not some generic half-baked "romance" that are abundant in other games. And anyways, if the fans want cheesy, low quality, waifu romances they can make a mod for one.
  22. So I guess if they want to continue people's characters this means the PC can't die in the end? That's a shame, I never liked importing characters, I'd much rather their stories get tied up in their own games. Leave the sequels to other characters, and if the original PC has to die to end their story, so be it (even though I'd rather they not die, I'd rather them retire or go disappear). One of the reasons I didn't like Mass Effect, Sheploo got really lame as the games went on and turned into Space Jesus. And I really like making protagonists for games, any mechanic that prevents me from making new characters isn't something I like.
  23. Wizards, I want to see how the magic in PE works in-universe, i.e. like if it's genetic or anyone can do it.
  24. If they decided to go really epic in PE, I wouldn't mind a less epic more down to earth style story for the sequel. Too much epicness can be a bit much, and it just devolves into spectacle creep if you try and top yourself all the time. Also it's best if you restart with a new PC in sequels, having the same protagonist for every game doesn't work well in RPGs.
×
×
  • Create New...