sfg

NPC Character RPG Game

I see, so whoever votes TB is wrong automatically. Nobody can like TB. The correct choice is RTwP. Because you say so. Gotcha. And seeing the usual arguments against TB I would say that those who vote for RTwP have never even seen, let alone played, a TB game.

I'm curios, why is it such a big problem? The game has a manual that can familiarize players with everything needed to know how to play. Who/what are those "professional game testers"? What backgrounds do they have? I find the game too easy anyway, without the need to know much of D&D, but how would fix this problem? Better documentation? Or just make it even easier so each and every game tester can "breeze through it"? Would that make it less tuned to people familiar with AD&D? Or when do you think a game is "good" from this perspective? At what category of players do you stop?

Role-playing is not playing dress-up. It's about stats, not about looks. You CAN'T play Gandalf (or some specific character), unless the game specifically casts you as Gandalf (that specific character). If you're playing it in "your head", then keep it there. If in your mind some random character you created is Gandalf then you can just imagine he's wearing his clothes as well. Or, if you think that the character you created should wear THIS but definitely not THAT, RPGs are not for you and you're the cause of the decline. Because, in real life someone actually sees you. In a computer game, nobody does. And if you think the people in the game care what you wear, you have serious troubles. Similarly, if you only play games to look cool and make screenshots to show to others, then again, please leave RPGs alone and play some dress-up game or something. RPGs are not about satisfying every little disturbed fantasy of everybody out there. Why can't people just leave them alone and go play Bioware dating-sims/dress-up games? RPG = stats. RPG =/= hats

No. How you look has nothing to do with role-playing, but everything with LARPing. This is supposed to be an RPG not a LARPing simulator.

Romances being a necessary "feature" of RPGs is what's stupid. And it should be fought and destroyed. I don't care if you want romances or if they're there, but when there's people claiming that a game is not an RPG without romances or that they won't play the game without romances, it just shows that those people have no place playing RPGs and are better off with dating simulators. RPGs are NOT dating simulators and are NOT about love affairs.

Why is everyone taking "memorization" so literally and using that to claim the system is silly/stupid? First, it's an abstraction of a system. I don't know why you confuse it with the verisimilitude of the story or whatever. This way you could just say that hit-points and many other abstractions are stupid as well. Second, if it was called "preparing" then it wouldn't have been stupid?

You are greatly exagerrating to make your point seems like it has more validity than it actually has. Neither of the Infinity Engine games required you to have so many different weapons. In fact, most (if not all) immunities were to non-magical weapons. Once you had a magical weapon you could use that, no need to switch. Also, if a creature is immune to fire it means that the extra fire damage the weapon deals doesn't count, not that you don't damage it at all. Maybe that's not good enough for you either? How about making all spells affect everybody too then! Can't be bothered to have a couple of different spells ready. Don't know how it's done in MMORPGs, but there's no reason to think they'd turn this into a singleplayer MMORPG.

And why no? Why so vehement? How does it affect you, exactly? Do you work for Obsidian or are you a feasability expert, maybe?