Diogo Ribeiro

I'd be surprised if it wasn't. The added info that Obsidian's first game is made simulatenousl for console and PC also increase the odds of it being KoTOR2.

The Crimson Room is a small, flash-based point'n'click game. The premise is that you are in a room and must exit. Its not GotY material, but its a fun little diversion, which can last anywhere from 5 minutes to several hours, depending on your aptitude for this sort of thing. The Crimson Room You play in a first person mode, and gameplay consists of finding items to use in the environment. There is a guide on the internet, which is quite easy to find, but will make it too easy. For those that like this kind of thing, enjoy

Where did he say this?

I don't presume to speak on Tri's behalf, but no, that wasn't his point. His main concern in the topic was about ways to reduce mandatory combat, not a way to avoid anything he disliked. In fact, Tri likes combat, otherwise he wouldn't have defended aspects of ToEE and Wizardry 8 in the past. Like me, i think, he just doesn't agree that mandatory combat is the right way to go, and that there are varied and valid possibilities to make it happen. In another news, i wonder how much combat-centric KoTOR would've been if not developed with consoles primrily in mind. That's one of the downfalls of console RPGs, too much combat. I have little doubt that, if KoTOR were a PC-only title, we'd have seen something between the BG series and NWN.

Your general comment read that Bioware should keep doing what they're doing, instead of, quote, "please a small minority of hardcore gamers". My reply didn't started this whole discussion, because it wasn't meant to. My reply only pointed out that pleasing hardcore gamers was not what was at stake, and wasn't Tri's, nor my, point. Point out what i don't like, why, and what i think should be done. How they would take and handle the criticism, however, would be left to themselves. Also, depends on what kinds of improvements we'd be talking about. In this case, having more alternatives to combat instead of making it mandatory in many instances would be an improvement for a CRPG. Like Tri pointed out, Taris had some elements which allowed for a more varied gameplay section, and that is true, regardless of how much some people liked it or disliked it. Yes, well, being in a minority isn't really a surprise or a setback to me, and influencing Bioware isn't something i'm after. At best, i can only give comments and advice, and like i said, they can take it as they wish. I dislike some things they've done in their games, and have no problem with telling it to them. They have their thing going, and they'll likely keep doing it, regardless of what i, or anyone else, will say.

We're getting there (mostly because of developer decisions), but i think that wasn't his point.

Maybe. I'd speculate, but that is out of the scope of whats being talked about, as far as i'm concerned. However, its no big secret that their main target are not the hardcore gamers. That their game design isn't centered around, or based on, harcore gamers' concepts about gaming, isn't also any news. Why you insist on asking me this after i initially said i believed this wasn't about pleasing hardcore fans also remains a mystery. Thats their decision. I don't know where it would take them. But i honestly doubt they'd stop trying to improve their games, regardless of platform. Good for them. Though, try and do what i told you, remain on-topic. Tri's point was that certain things could be improved, and he gave the example of Taris as a good example of there being hope for Bioware to improve their gameplay in certain instances. You were the one that questioned a need for Bioware to improve, and i pointed out that they should keep improving, so as to not keep the same old formulas on all games (hence the stagnant remarks). How this made it so i was saying KoTOR was stale must've taken quite a bit of effort on behalf of your hyperactive imagination. I don't know. I rarely label myself, specially when it comes to creating a label describing what kind of gamer i am simply by what i play or like. Even if i did thought it was stale, explain to me how that would make me hardcore - and something other than simply disagreeing with the masses, as you imply, please.

No, you don't have to reply. You don't have to reply to anything i ask, neither do you have to comment on anything i say. I'd just appreciate it, if you feel like doing any of those, to at least keep a level head, and not to throw around assumptions that i'm taking it personaly, when in fact i'm only taking it on-topic (or trying to).

Yes, i apologize for not liking answers which barely have anything to do with what i said. I apologize for being so on-topic and asking a modicum of relevance in comments to what i post. What was i thinking, dammit? *tsk* Er, no. I don't know if you're being daft by nature or by fun, but your "answers" barely qualify as such, given you're answering things i didn't asked. Nowhere in that post did i said, or posted anything that led you into asking me back what would happen regarding Bioware's decisions moving them away from a certain market layer (in fact, for someone who believes Bioware shouldn't be bothered with the harcore gamers, i really can't grasp the relevance of that question, or why you should pose it, even). I also didn't argued against their success, neither did i stated KoTOR was stale (unless you consider that stating something in the lines of "a company should improve their design choices and associated implementations so as to their products do not feel stagnant" somehow equals to claiming KoTOR is stagnant; but i'm sure you can see that, if that is your case, it's not my fault). Unless of course answering with irrelevant things was the point of your answer, and therefore i apologize for expecting seriousness to be a part of it.

Whatever happens, happens. My point wasn't about wheter their decisions moved them closer to the mainstream and/or 'hardcore' gamers, neither about would be consequences of that. Who's trying? Who said otherwise? As i answer this, i have to question if its possible to fudge up the interpretation of what i said even more. :ph34r:

This doesn't need to be the case with all games. Torment was actually the reverse of this, and Fallout had it so depending on what you chose, experience was balanced (not perfectly, o'course). Using diplomacy in some situations would be as rewarding as killing off everyone that moved.

I think this is hardly about pleasing hardcore gamers; after all, they have improved their game design over the years, and their games are still financial successes, despite what 'hardcore' gamers tell them. Its only in their interest to improve and fine tune their game design; there's only so much a company can present in the form of stale gameplay or stagnant design choices over and over and over until it bites them hard.

Kneecap biting is a good tactic.

There's a difference between saying they should define the role, and saying they are the ultimate form of defining one. Which one passed by unnoticed to you, i wonder? And what was the lame joke i apparently stole?

And who said they were the all/end all of ROLE-PLAYING? Apparently, no one. Ooops. Also, your rhetorical questions (as you so kindly pointed out) are moot. There's no number that defines your emotional state, but that wasn't my point either. Read closely what you're answering to; i'm not stating that numbers are defining of everything you do (because they aren't), they can simply allow character to have added expressions in the gameworld (i point out to the "acting a certain way" part of what i posted). But the point of it was pretty much what you said so already, that they're not t3h w1n!, but that they help define the role. Taking a cue from yourself, Period.

It's too bad those "silly little numbers" are what define your character's possibilities of acting a certain way in a CRPG.

*rolls up sleeves* Here we go again. *sits back and watches intently*

Rampaging across the plains, wielding gilded boxing gloves, cometh Role-Player! And he gives a spectacular cry: "I'm going to pummel you all the way to Old Bonny Scotland!!!" ..... WTH?

It doesn't really feel TB at all, but yeah, sure. Those factors aren't hard to factor in, the problem is making the game appeal to the RPG fan and the twitch gamer. Morrowind managed to pull it off on one hand (some twitch elements with stats and skills), but the end result was arguably flawed. But KoTOR doesn't feel like a SW game as far as combat goes, something Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy pulled off very well. The dynamic and fast-paced combat, plus very well done lightsaber implementation are a big plus for it to feel like an SW game.

Being a "pacifist" is no more fun nor different than being any other type of character that can do other things. Its just based on character skills and planning you decide to use in the game. Its not an ultimate tactic, its just a tactic like any other.

Being a pacifist in a game is more of a fun thing to do than a necessity, or a must. Combat is always present, and as far as i'm concerned, that's a good thing. I like combat, i just don't like combat at every turn. Various options to solve a situation is what should be aimed for.

Well combat doesn't have to be difficult. It just needs to be challenging, and fun. While no doubt there's always people who found KoTOR's combat fun, it was likely more due to the cinematic presentation and not for its simplicity (after all, many Bioware fans liked combat in the BG series as well, and BG2's combat was deeper). For instance, i liked ToEE's combat, but if the AI used more combat abilities in combat, it'd certainly be more challenging. Combat was cinematic, but i don't think that combat should be like that. I found the cinematic presentation just made it feel shallower. No amount of Hollywoodesque embelishment around it hid the fact it was a shallow combat model.

Disregarding those that didn't like the style of combat itself, the combat was in fact too easy, and mostly because of what tri and newc0253 pointed out. Simply because the combat was apparently liked by many people doesn't mean it shouldn't be improved.

As long as PS:T's deficient combat model isn't taken as an example as well, i agree with that.

I never actually managed to play Rifts