.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
HereticSaint
-
Posts
140 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by HereticSaint
-
-
The OP clearly isn't enough of a history nerd to understand such a broad statement about the effectiveness and application of Leather armor is incredibly ignorant.
The effectiveness of Leather armor was derived from many, many factors, just like all armor, how skilled and knowledgeable the craftsman making it was, where the material came from (In this case, what animal it came from), if there was any other material used in combination with it, or used in it, such as metal rivets, underpadding/overpadding, etc. Then, it had to be kept in mind the budget/value of the person wearing the armor, the climate, what type of maneuverability they wanted, if they wanted to be able to protect from glancing blows or full on hits, etc. Lastly, keep in mind most peasants didn't have access to refined metal, but quite a few had access to beasts they could slaughter for their hide and boiling it so it hardens is something that many peasants would've been able to do as well.
Making a blanket statement of, "Leather armor is useless" is just as stupid as making a blanket statement of, "Metal armor is useless".
-
Should there be spells that mechanically work as, "if you don't save versus this, you die", not in my opinion. I much rather the game just control Hit Point inflation and have regular spells (as long as they are equal level spells, cast by equal level spellcasters) be that dangerous. I think protection against magic should be something invested into via character traits/feats/training and equipment just like you need to do to be more durable against physical attacks.
To me, that opens up more build options and expands the gameplay. Sure, you can have some ridiculously armored fellow who is trained to have incredibly adept avoidance of melee attacks. But spells will be more dangerous, so you have to rely on your party members using spells to protect said party member against magic. Then you have a range class who has incredible magical protection, but not so much physical protection so you have to be careful of their positioning and be acutely aware of the potential of Rogues and the like sneaking up on them. Or you could have a more well balanced character who can skirmish and take a bit of punishment from both, but if you have an enemy (like a boss type character) who is incredibly adept at a single aspect then they can't just facetank everything they do without backup.
So, more or less my answer is, "depends on what direction they go in with gameplay, class and item mechanics". But more no than yes.
-
1
-
-
I'm okay with pretty much whatever they do if it isn't based around what skills you use. Sure, it makes more logical sense (lol, logical sense in world full of magic, gods, etc), but most sane people who experienced how that can play out in Elder Scrolls IV understand just how god awful such a system can be. Oh man, I didn't jump enough this level, so I get gimped stats, or oh man I didn't run in circles for five hours (hold down forward while watching a movie), I get gimped stats, etc, etc. Basically, it encouraged masochism and anything but sensible and enjoyable play from the player to not randomly become a complete gimp.
-
I'm not a fan of the modern Bioware-style romances.
"Hey, you're cute."
"Want to ****?"
"Sure!"
"*Cue porno music.*"
"Awesome. We're a couple now!"
It comes off as to me, more as fan service, than legitimate character development. I don't mind the concept of in-game romances, in theory but most of the time the Bioware-style is disappointing, especially with the "love = sex" portrayal. I'd personally want to see a well-written chaste/asexual romance in a game for once, rather than everything basically leading up to sex and that being the end of it. Likewise, I'd like to see a relationship that's purely sexual, with no emotional l attachment involved - and unlike a certain character in DA2, they never come around to the idea of monogamy.
But more than that, I want to see other sorts of relationships. I felt that Imoen and <CHARNAME> had a lot of potential, developing their brother and sister relationship - and I want to see oaths of brotherhood, and just close friendships.
See, it's funny, because I almost yelled, "Please, for the love of God, nothing as retarded as Isabella." but then, I, unlike apparently half the people still in this thread realized that Obsidian isn't Bioware and therefore won't completely fail at writing. Seriously, anyone who is mentioning Bioware at this point is either entirely new to this threads (in which case, run while you can), or missing the point.
Very few people have said love has to explicitly mean sexual intercourse between two characters and if it's explained in a well written way why there can't be then I'm all for it. However, it the whole world is suddenly chaste then I'd like that explained as well.
Having a few romances in the game isn't all of a sudden going to completely hamstring their writing process like some people are trying to argue, either and if you want to state putting in said romances would take several months of writing then I don't see what your problem is unless you completely lack any and all faith in the people writing for this game to get something right, or you (speaking in general terms) are just like, "I don't like romances, so no" (which is a stupid reason).
-
1
-
-
I think I've figured something out. If you like romances in games, perhaps you liked playing with Barbie and Ken and pretending they were getting married and pooping out lots of babies? If you don't like romances, chances are, you preferred GI Joe action figures and you liked imagining Cobra getting his ass kicked. (God help those of you whose parents forced you to merge your play time with your baby sister and combine GI Joe action time with Ken and Barbie country club time).
The thing with RPGs is once upon a time they were mostly about GI Joe kicking Cobra's ass, and then at some point -- hard to pinpoint when exactly -- Barbie started showing an interest in GI Joe and all of sudden poor Joe had to start having feelings and being all sensitive and crap. Before you know it, Barbie moved in and started decorating Joe's house with frilly curtains and making him watch Bridges of Madison County and Twilight on the weekends. Now (thanks to Bioware) GI Joe has hung up his rocket launcher, quit the army and become a mopey, emo, D-bag -- an emotional cripple, cut adrift in a world where he's ill-equipped to keep that dirty Ken from stealing Barbie.
I know the days of role-playing games being tied to tabletop war games is over, but I'm so damn tired of RPGs being turned into melodramatic, interactive soap operas. I just want my barbarian, Tahvo Ukonnen, of the Northern Steppe to be able to cleave that goblin in twain without having to ego stroke a bunch of navel gazing, water drinkers that choose to tag along after him.
Gender identity is something you clearly don't understand. Giving children options is important, and shunning a little boy who may want to play with ponies or a barbie doll is no different from shunning some random gay guy. It's pretty clear by your, frankly, quite offensive statement regarding having to, "mix your play time", that you are a very rigid, person, unwilling to expand their view of their beliefs, let alone change them.
It's no wonder you want a shallow experience devoid of emotions which scare or bother you in some fashion. News flash, you don't have to enjoy taking it up the butt to realize that it isn't your business to go around town trying to convert any and all gay people you meet. Nor is it your, or any other persons job in here to try and tear down people because they enjoy well written romances in their games. It doesn't happen for people who look for books and novels, it doesn't happen for people who look for movies.
I'm sure this is going to get turned around as me forcing romance into this game, yet again, for the umpteenth time, but it isn't. The people who are against romance are worse than religious zealots. Try to convert someone for five minutes, if they don't completely change their world view it's time to start blowing things up. Get over it and get over yourself.
If Obsidian puts romance in the game because they deem it a good idea and it bothers you then that is your problem. It isn't Obsidians problem, it isn't my problem, it isn't other people who want romance ins problem. Also, people twist, "wanting" something in a way that is just ridiculous. I want a million dollars, I want world peace, I want a cure to deadly diseases, I want a fix to world hunger and energy cricises. That doesn't mean I demand, nor expect them.
I honestly hope you didn't mean to come off as such an intolerant person.
Also, if you want such a shallow experience of just slashing at people with an axe, then Golden Axe is probably more your speed.
Most of all this thread really needs to die. I realize I don't have to participate in it, but it still exists and some of the **** people say is just ridiculous.
-
How many times are you going to complain about this same subject? You've clearly been explained that it's going to be this way as far as they know and they believe it to be a good mechanic and idea.
Gameplay wise you have absolutely no right to say how it'll work, because, well, the game doesn't even really have gameplay now.
Lore wise, they can make the lore whatever they want, it doesn't have to be logical. Maybe Soul magic can't be explicitly controlled for healing because the Gods deem it so, but it does reach a sort of recuperative state that accelerates healing while someone sleeps.
There are a million other explainations, you just don't want to accept that the gameplay is going to be different. Not every adventuring party has to have a Priest, astonishing, I know. I'm sorry your love of Priests has gotten you offended by this idea.
-
1
-
-
Next up: Pushing a boulder around in real life to facilitate the in-game Strength check required for something.
Doing double backflips to facilitate agility/dexterity checks.
Just saying, that's exactly what you are asking for. It should be shown by default on ALL difficulties, that, or dialogue should never, ever, ever be the least bit vague, at all. Which directly impacts the writing, which is bad.
-
1
-
-
Not everything has to be a dice roll to be fun, interesting and replayable.
I mean, if we are going to start adding random chance to quest outcomes, how about we add random chance that your character contracts a terminal illness and you don't notice it till you're dead two days later. Then, unless the player is really diligent they can't even save scum out of it! Yay! I mean, hell, this even fits in with the theme of this game world not having developed medicine.
The only games that need random outcomes on events/quests are Roguelikes, FTL being a prime example of where it's okay, because basically the whole game is built upon everything being a dice roll. This game is not.
-
1
-
-
I absolutely hate the idea of critical failures both on paper and in practice. A real swordsman doesn't swing his sword around into his own torso on average one of of every twenty attacks. He likewise doesn't fling it 50 ft away because he misses his target. I can more reliably swing a sword than that. Even having to roll a one twice in a row on a D20 to get any real dangerous critical failures is still bothersome.
I like critical hits, but I think that chance to crit should be more based on armor than it has traditionally been in the past. AKA: Full Platemail should have an innate critical strike reduction chance that eats a percentage off someones chance to crit. AKA: Archer with 5% chance to crit attacks someone in Full Platemail but Full Platemail has a 80% (or 50, or whatever) reduction in the chance of being critically struck. So now the Archer actually has a 1% chance to critically strike.
-
Gambling is a terrible gold sink; people will only do it if it gives them a net gold gain, one reasonable given the time invested. They'll save scum to force it to be a net positive, but if you disable save scumming they will either ignore it (if it's a net negative) or do it (if it's a net positive).
Item upkeep is just plain un-fun. Again, why add in extra gold faucets to the game in the first place? Every piece of gold you take away from the player for something not fun is going to annoy the player. The best gold sinks are fun, like upgrades for the house and the stronghold as well as customizing our followers at the adventurer's hall. Crafting also has promise as a fun gold sink.
HAHAHAHAHA. You think gambling is a poor gold sink, but crafting is a good one.
I really, honest to god hope you are joking.
As for upgrades to a stronghold/housing, we are lucky to even have those as an option, so a game that wouldn't have these would then have absolutely no potential gold sinks besides crafting then according to you?
Gambling isn't about net making gold. You could easily make items that you can only get from gambling that have near to no vendor value but that are incredibly unique or powerful. Much more fun than, "Gather 5 purple flowers, 5 Xander Roots, combine!" YAY, I understand the vast and interesting world of Alchemy!
-
While people may not like gold sinks, it's the most reasonable answer.
If you look at it from a logical sense, when an adventurer is doing a quest that risks his life he is going to want the reward to be worth potentially losing his life, for anyone but an extremely selfless character this could easily mean earning more than a peasant earns in a year for a few hours worth of work. On top of that, when you kill a person, unless you are in some ridiculous hurry you gain access to all they carry on them and chances are if they are a challenging foe they have valuable loot, and if they aren't then it's just a speed bump meaning it's basically free money anyway. If you kill someone in their home you immediately gain access to all of their most valuable possessions, including items that may have taken several years worth of what a noble may earn if that's who you killed, for example.
I'll just restate it, the easiest gold sinks are:
- Gambling
and
- Item upkeep for magical items.
Otherwise you have to do things that as a player who wants a game that makes sense are an annoyance, such as making it so when an enemy wearing full plate and having several weapons to choose from as well as fine bolts/arrows/etc only drops a fraction of that, if anything, for example.
-
Thread dead for three days because it contains awful ideas within? Better bump it.
-
I think it's safe to say this won't end unless the moderators end it.
-
Money sink options:
- Gamblng mechanic
- Wages for hireable party members every "X" amount of hours played within the game
- Wages for people within your fortress, whether they be merchants, farmers, servants, guards, trainers, etc.
- Having some sort of system where you can hire mercenaries or guards from within your fortress or taverns to do certain acts depending on if you are good or evil, making these tacts endlessly rewarding for being repeated would be somewhat difficult though.
- Items having a durability and needing to be periodically repaired and maintained.
- Having lots of dialgoue options that require extra monetery incentive.
- Requiring a tribute at the end of every endless dungeon level to unlock the next level.
I'm sure there are a ton more as well, it's just a matter of what they think would fit and be worthwhile in terms of development time and cost.
-
-snip-
If by, "notes", you mean they were suggesting that you be required to type out any and all important information for every quest you do (because you have no idea how long they'd be and what parts of dialogue would be important), then yes, it's busy work and it's bad game design to require the player to do that. This isn't about having an extra notepad and you not understanding that makes me, "lol".
Having a player keep notes on information explicitly given to them doesn't require the player to think, it requires the player to type for five minutes (or longer) after every encounter with any NPC tied to any quest that has any important information, dialogue, items, etc. Having a player think would be adding books to the game about lore, people or other peoples journals within the game and then later on having an NPC who specifically asks you about something and you needing to make a connection between the two and having to specifically type out the answer required (as opposed to it being a selectable option from within the dialogue boxes).
-
The very reason I stopped making serious posts within these threads is because they don't want a discussion. Hell, you still have kenup yelling about Bioware, it's brain damaging honestly.
-
2
-
-
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be the sole person deciding what is good design and what isn't. I'm not saying I am either, however, I'm not the one completely decrying how a specificy genre of games handles their mechanics. AKA: Roguelikes, their whole system of mechanics and gameplay are based on death being permanent and dying does end up pissing you off, but the thing that makes it fun is learning and finally triumphing, if not over the entire game then over a new area.
X-Com is very intentionally built around losing characters and moving on, that's part of the difficulty of the game. It's intentional, the people who enjoyed the original X-Com more often enjoyed this mechanic than they didn't enjoy it.
Limiting healing magic means you aren't forced into having a Priest in your party on X difficulty because the game is balanced around you having a healer. Meaning you have more possiblity in what classes you take and your tactics and overall options playing the game. You eluded this to if not being a flat out bad mechanic, as worrying. What worries me is you use a terrible example of X-Com having bad game design, when it doesn't, (at least in that respect), then you complain about them getting rid of an awful, restrictive mechanic of having to have a healer or essentially playing the game on hard mode.
-
I'm sure they already have staff to do that, like they have a staff member that organizes all the interviews for them.
I think you may be mistaking the type of volunteers I'm talking about. Definitely not random people. People that are very, very good at what they do. Not everybody that backed the project is going to be a random nobody like me.
For instance down the line they might need an Intern Tools Programmer for the game, and let's say one of the backers puts in a resume and happens to be an absolute wizard Unity programmer, but not necessarily someone from the gaming industry.
I know a guy from Estonia who's just entered first year university, and he was far better at programming at 16 than anyone in my university course. There's some pretty ridiculous people out there.
edit: I'm pretty sure they're paying that South African guy by the way, as a contracter.
Maybe I'm just too much of a pessimistic person, but someone being that good at what they do but not being employed (or by some miracle, being employed and still having enough free time) brings up red flags as to why they aren't currently employed. I don't know , maybe they are so good at their job they can knock it out and still have free time. I mean, I guess if Obsidian thinks it's a viable avenue of getting work done and they are screening these people that it could work out.
-
Please don't add unnecessary busy work to the game. If I wanted that I'd be off collecting Rat Teeth (that seemingly only drop from one of out every ten rats) in World of Warcraft.
It's just a quick example. Did you expect him to lay out an entire epic quest for his example?
In his example he is suggesting that it is a good mechanic for you to have to write down information that is explicitly given to you. This is not a good mechanic, this is not an interesting mechanic. It's busy work.
It's busy work just like killing 10 rats to get 1 Tooth for a quest where you need 10 Teeth is busy work. They could just make you need 100 Rat Teeth and make them a 100% drop rate, but they know if the player understands just how poorly designed and implemented the quest is that it's horrific game design.
Just like a Journal that requires you to write down, "Shady guy with Hens went west" or whatever random bs that needs to be entered. The game can easily facilitate that for you, it isn't a matter of player skill, and as long as the person playing isn't a blithering idiot it amounts to busy work. This is bad game design.
An example of a good Journal would be the Witcher 2, written as portrayed by a companion of a character doing the quests, it adds lore and dialogue that you won't see unless you read it, meaning it isn't just a note of what's happened thus far, it's all interesting from a story perspective. This is good game design.
If you need the journal to tell you to go east when the guy just told you, then you're kind of dumb.
That isn't what I said, but being stupid as you are I don't expect you to understand my post, let alone good game design. Which, by the way, was what my post was actually about.
To reiterate: Making me write down knowledge put out in the open, busy work. Yes, it may not be relevant to something just said as I should remember it, but this isn't book keeping simulator 2012, having to write down every detail of every quest because it may be a quest that lasts for several hours or longer is busy work.
Busy work = collecting rat teeth from rats that don't drop teeth every kill
= Bad gam design.
ITS. SIMPLE. READ.
-
On the contrary
The Wasteland 2 team put up a thread and invited people to contribute to the project, and I'm sure people sent emails as well.
They have said that they found some amazing talent this way.
This was one of the given examples
One thing we noticed both on Eternity and Wasteland II is once the engine was announced, the amount of volunteers that poured in going "I do environment art in Unity in my spare time, I really enjoy doing it, could I send you a sample?" and then going back and forth with those guys. The Wasteland II guys found this guy in South Africa who is just doing a fantastic job laying out maps in Unity.
That feels like a rare option in the industry, the amount of people willing to just come on board and just pitch in because they know the engine and the technology. We've had programmers, artists, and people who do metrics analysis using Unity plug-ins. It's been really interesting and kind of gratifying.
Out of the 75,000 people that pledged, there's bound to be some people that are extremely good at something that could benefit the project.
Until the game hits shelves and the portions worked on by volunteers isn't obliterated by critiques and players it isn't safe to say anything about that.
Also, while it wouldnt' be 75,000 people volunteering, you'd have to devote someone to going through the volunteers, making sure their qualifications check out, then having them sign a contract to keep the project hush hush and beleiving they actually will. Then you have to entrust portions of your workload to them, meaning if they screw up, get lazy or otherwise don't live up to expectations you are behind in certain aspects.
This is all assuming they don't work on something like coding and hide something malicious. It really, really doesn't seem like a good idea to let, "random" people tool around your game.
-
Please don't add unnecessary busy work to the game. If I wanted that I'd be off collecting Rat Teeth (that seemingly only drop from one of out every ten rats) in World of Warcraft.
It's just a quick example. Did you expect him to lay out an entire epic quest for his example?
In his example he is suggesting that it is a good mechanic for you to have to write down information that is explicitly given to you. This is not a good mechanic, this is not an interesting mechanic. It's busy work.
It's busy work just like killing 10 rats to get 1 Tooth for a quest where you need 10 Teeth is busy work. They could just make you need 100 Rat Teeth and make them a 100% drop rate, but they know if the player understands just how poorly designed and implemented the quest is that it's horrific game design.
Just like a Journal that requires you to write down, "Shady guy with Hens went west" or whatever random bs that needs to be entered. The game can easily facilitate that for you, it isn't a matter of player skill, and as long as the person playing isn't a blithering idiot it amounts to busy work. This is bad game design.
An example of a good Journal would be the Witcher 2, written as portrayed by a companion of a character doing the quests, it adds lore and dialogue that you won't see unless you read it, meaning it isn't just a note of what's happened thus far, it's all interesting from a story perspective. This is good game design.
-
There are many ways to be creative with the journal, but I would prefer one where the player takes an active role. Geneforge did this in an interesting way, quests you got were automatically jotted down for you, but only the basic task and not anything surrounding it. Instead of being spoon-feed each and every step of a quest you had to manually write down important parts of conversations you've had yourself.
Let me make up an example to better illustrate what this does in practice. A farmer is missing one of his hens and wants you to find it for him, you now have "Find hen for farmer x" among your quests. Next you speak to another farmer and he mentions in passing that he saw an suspicious individual carrying a hen heading towards the east, now in many games this would have updated your quest entry but this is not the case here. The quest entry doesn't change, but if you were attentive and read what he said you now have written down the relevant information in your journal for future reference and are hopefully one step closer to finishing the quest.
Please don't add unnecessary busy work to the game. If I wanted that I'd be off collecting Rat Teeth (that seemingly only drop from one of out every ten rats) in World of Warcraft.
-
I supported Obsidian and this project on Kickstarter so Obsidian would develop and design this game, not a group of volunteers. These volunteers would have to be initiated into just the design and direction they want to take this game, which would take time and resources by itself, which means they would have to recieve a bare minimum return on that effort. On top of that they would have to look over all the work that these people did and in the case of coding, make sure there is absolutely nothing malicious within said code which means more effort lended towards that. On top of that you would have to have confidence that someone who did this work wouldn't leak any information you don't want leak, yes, there's contracts but can you really trust these people to not tell their friends? Friends who will leak random information on random websites, no.
Interns are one thing, I don't know if they have any working on this and if so how many, but usually there's a capped amount that is acceptable depending on the studio and then once you reach that point everyone just needs to work harder if they want to reach the goal at the same point.
Basically, what I'm trying to say, is having random people from the public contribute is a terrible, awful idea that almost positively would lead to more work than it saves and potentially lead to random lines of malicious code or leaks of information about things they aren't ready to talk about yet for whatever number of reasons.
-
fudge, A lot of idiots on this board. First, I never said I want PE to be easy, EVER! So shut that noise. Secondly, what the hell is wrong with all of you? I was merely mentioning my opinions and you attack me? You act like I killed your favorite pet, pissed on it, made a stew, and then sent it too your families as a Christmas meal. You know what? News Flash. Not EVERYTHING about the old games were great. You know why? Because it was all new! It was all trial and error and limitations of programming at the time. There are something that should definitely not be in the new games, not because of making it easy, but because it was not fun to the MAJORITY of players, EVEN THE OLD SCHOOL PLAYERS. Oh, but I guess they do not count because only REAL gamers play grimhard.
Also, this trend of making games so freaking hard like demon souls is exactly that, a trend, the old games were not that hard. Many of you are just on the trend badwagon, if PE makes a game like the older games, guess what? It would not be any harder than those games which IS FINE. If they make it super hard like you want IT WILL NOT BE LIKE THE OLD RPG GAMES. Your the ones asking for change. However, it seems a lot of you want one hit kills, degrading armour, forced hunger/eating, and half a dozen other things that most of us just do not find fun and were not even in the old games.
But, I digress. I never opened this thread to start a flamewar, I was just expressing my concern that some mechanics might not be fun when actually playing. As for XCOM, I either have a bugged game or the posters who say they loaded a save right before a character died is lying. *shrug*. Too far in to start a new game and see if the same thing happens, after I finish I will try it again.
Here is essentially what the posts from you in this thread have boiled down too.
- "X-Com on easy is too hard."
- "X-Com prevents save scumming (When it doesn't) and you think save scumming should be encouraged, or at the very least allowed."
I don't necessarily flat out disagree with save scumming, but the point is even on easy you want this.
What do these two things lead me to understand? That you have a severe lack of understanding of basic tactics and strategy and even if this game is similar to old style games in a non abrasive way you will complain while playing on the easiest difficulty. Yes, this bothers me.
You also went,
- "I highly disagree with some of the design decisions they are going about to make your characters feel more important"
I'm not going to be one of those people who say, "The game is going to be developed my way, GTFO", but I will say I absolutely love the decisions they've made regarding characters having healing spells and medicine in general. It makes it feel less mandatory to have a specific party composition and indeed it does make the characters feel more important. If you've never played a Roguelike you won't understand this, and it almost sounds like you haven't with what you've been saying in this thread.
Fact of the matter is if this game is balanced around someone who wants to save scum X-Com on easy I will have issue with that. (Fortunately, I think it won't). I do like having options when playing a game, but there comes a point where the games difficulty should push back and I shouldn't have to self impose challenges on myself just to make a game have any difficulty whatsoever.
-
2
-
The Case for Romance.
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted · Edited by HereticSaint
This has been done to death, unfortunately there's a serious disconnect between the reality of the situation and peoples perceived reality of the situation, I've named names in the past, but I'm over that. It's pretty obvious who we are talking about here though.
It really boils down to one point at the end of the day, why is there going to be a distinct lack of one facet of social interaction between characters when all others will exist? It makes it feel more akward, not less (Here's where people try and pin you for wanting some dating sim, or pointing at you as if you are some sexual deviant looking for virtual pornography). There's no good reason to not include romances beside potential limits on development time, just like there's no good reason to not include friendships beside potential limits on development time. That doesn't read as, "Every NPC in the game needs to be your love slave" as much as certain people want to read it as such.
Personally I'm a fan of leaving all forms of character interaction and development open as a potential and I think being diametrically opposed to a certain form of it because it may make some people uncomfortable is sort of a cop out. To me it's sort of the same thing as leaving out friendships in a game and going, "Why does your character need to befriend other characters? Are you completely socially inept in real life? Go get some real friends!" It's insulting and not based within reality.
This definitely isn't something that will make me hate, or even necessarily dislike the game so much as just make it seem more bland, and less fleshed out.