Diogo Ribeiro

That's a good point. Specially the second, which Bioware apparently loves doing.

Bioware Q&A is ocasionally quite bad.

Well, from what i remember, FF games were mostly linear from 1 to 4. 5 i found out i had to play it in a linear fashion, because the remaining locations weren't making sense or weren't "open". 6 i believe was fairly open to me, and 7 was initially very linear, and alternated ocasionally. 8, which is all a big blur now (surprisingly, since its quite likely my favourite of the series), also had its moments. Ragnarok was damn cool The Dress Spheres, i was told they felt more like a gimmick and were more about showing the female character's... ehem... attributes. Not having played however, can't comment much.

I never criticized his honesty (or anyone else's for that matter, that I can recall). The most i've criticized were Bioware's decisions in terms of game design. While i don't disagree with your definition, i basically state they seem adventure games because 1) much like adventure games they are centered around predefined characters with usually predetermined roles. Even Torment often feels like one for that matter. 2) they're very linear 3) they usually depend on completing one task or another to advance in the game, usually from point to point in a straight line. Sure they have other elements, but the basic premise feels like that of an adventure game. I'm not considering an adventure as something entirely revolving around solving puzzles or anything like that. I stopped playing them . I dabbled in the 10th, and haven't finished the 9th yet, but i gave up on console RPGs some time ago, so I can't see myself return to them (even if i wanted, my PSX has apparently become a piece of junkpile). I haven't played any PS2 RPG in recent times, even. I followed an acquaintance of mine playing trough Xenosaga but it felt too boring and contrived. Other recent games i just watch someone else play them. The thing i like most about the FF games were the different means of character customization. The Job and Junction system remain my favourites, though the Grid Sphere didn't seem too bad. But in game terms i became dissatisfied with the series, and don't plan on returning there.

Yeah i feel the same way on that one; Viconia felt like the only interesting romance there. Though I disliked the option of "redeeming" her, felt like I was creating another Drizzt <_< And Aerie's an insuferable **** who's only interesting when she gets a backbone, which is like, towards the end game. I accept that, however, their priorities seem too weird for the RPG genre. The genre is not really know for its mass market appeal, and trying to make mainstream RPGs ends up getting them reputation, no doubt, but their games feel more like FF games. And FF games are basically adventure games with combat and some character advancement, but are too market driven to be RPGs. Not that this means it might be a game, but its certainly not a good RPG if it focuses on non-RPG elements to sell. Yup.

Would you give a massage to your mother? [/end poor attempt at Pulp Fiction reference]

*bets money on Hades and Darque*

Pretty much like Hades_One put it, there's no point in using a ruleset if its using it carelessly. No amount of Rule 0 apologism removes that fact. Its not a question of being a carbon copy, its of questionign yourself "What can the rules do for the game that my own rules wont?". If you go with using a pre-established ruleset, then its because it fits your vision for the game; using it, but changing it shows theres something you didn't quite studied on the rules, otherwise there would not be a need to change them. A company could just as well create a SW CRPG without basing it on a specific ruleset. Bioware could do this and succeed, as the rules were not what sold the game: Bioware's name and the SW setting did.

You could always install the fanmade Concurrent Romances, i think it allowed to have people of every race and gender have romances <_< But as to that question, i don't know. Given Bioware does games for the mainstream, therefore appealing to the majority, they might also target the majority's orientation. Wouldn't surprise me.

Thats right, go for brownie points. Its easy to forget that i pointed out i talked to people who said this, and the rest i said. But for a change, since you weren't aware of anyone that said it, i was in the wrong, automatically. Try not to reduce me to your level. You want to talk of being sillly? You ask me something totally unrelated to what was being talked on the thread, based on your loose assumption of something I said. Despite me saying I'd probably be able to do it with time, you claim I said I would pull it off. Also despite claiming I could take my time, you complain about how it wasn't done little time after you asked for it (perhaps you were expecting that easy=quick?). Then you claim I was talking of something ("complete freedom to define character and compelling story") when i wasn't. Then you disregard what I post without basis for it. Need I go on, or is this enough for you to disregard again? How quaint. Thanks, but no thanks. I didn't win, and refuse that claim. What I seem to have received wass a warning as to who I shouldn't take seriously in the future. Its easy how myths are created around online personas, but in reality said personas are as fallible as they try to make others seem. I appreciate you showing me this.

Correct I talked to quite some female gamers who were absolutely let down by being stuck with Annoy-men. Hmm-hh. While that's understandable, I feel that making it accessible on some things made it collapse on others. Well, you can add variations in things without making those variations depending of everything pertaining to the character. In BG2, associating with a stat would be possible - and necessary - as there weren't skills. And stats can go the same way as skills for tracking those things. If you base a character's determination of a skill level (say you track his speech skill every 10 percentual levels until its maximum, 100), you can translate this to determining the same via a stat, from 1 to 20 (its normal maximum).

The issue is not if you're paranoid, the issue is if you're paranoid enough. :ph34r:

Yeah, keep performing for the audience, Grom.

Well that was the point, to come up with something other than amnesia. I didn't come up with a flawless solution, that's pretty much obvious, but apparently it provided something plausible. There's also a part of the game which is under control by the devs. My initial point is that character development should belong to players. Thats why i have no problems being given a character with a premade past per se, though i'd have a problem if the majority of my remaining future decisions would be taken from me. I'm free as much as possible to develop the character of TNO, despite the fact i'll be subject to some things out of my control. In this case, the construct would possibly have a memory, just no recollection of it as his task was to behave in a given way and report it to the creator. We may even be talking of a construct who purposedly erased his knowledge of the past to experience premade personalities other than his own. Or you can come up with the excuse that his memories are there, but his inner elements that binded notions of good and evil are gone, thus rendering his memory, albeit present, something he really doesn't feel his own, and can decide to explore the situations while creating new morals and definitions. Or you could drop the idea and go with a being that found the means to travel trough time, and each change he makes changes his past, thus his memory of it. Didn't McFly in Back to the Future found himself in a similar situation? I mean it worked until part 3 :D Well, did you used complex and long sentences, or short and concise? Did they have several outcomes, or no? It depends on what you'd consider easy. Like the PC example, jsut because you have 120 tweakable elements in character creation doesn't mean they need to have an outcome, or a constant use in the game. If you look at the example, BG2, you'll have mutliple dialogue lines, and they most of the time lead to the same answer. What if you reduced those various dialogue lines into merely 2 or 3, but on the other hand, replaced the single answer with two answers, each with a different outcome? If you go by the concept that writing is dialogue is a hard task, that's true - but how productive is it to write it like it was in BG2? Not much. Another of Fallout's winnign aspects is that it shows what i'm talking of - few dialogue lines with differences. There are very few long-winded answers, and fewer times when you're assaulted with answering options (unless you're asking someone information over a general topic, like asking people about citiies, at which point you're given a listing of them). That was one of his points, however, its a weird one, given BG2 is already quite replayable for its fans. If we have the concern that players do not replay games, then why include in BG2 other things to replay with? They have locations to explore, spells to choose from and use, romances, strongholds, and classes. Weird. I'm more inclined to think they didn't had the luxury of time (despite their games usually having more time and money invested than other BIS games), or that they did not had the know-how at the time, than it was because of a supposed genuine concern over how many people wouldn't replay it. Something i wouldn't mind much, if the options and dialogues were more concise, and carried weight. Don't forget the high Int for added dialogue options B) You had to gain access to the Brotherhood in the first place, which wasn't necessarily easy. Either you had a high lockpick value and an electronic lockpick, or you had to search for a Holodisk in the Glow (heavilly radiated crater with automated defense forces below). True. Although, if we use some of their own concepts, they could've bring Imoen back like they did with Sarevok (though honestly, i still wouldn't have payed attention to her, but it would be a moral issue, if she was placed in Hell*). Also, for a game that allows you to import information from your save file, they don't expand on it enough, do they? You only retain your level, name and class. They went to the point of tracking down if you killed Drizzt (because obviously Drizzt is uber important ), but not others that travelled with you. *By that, i meant that, given she was also a Child of Bhaal, could surface in Hell, exactly where Sarevok is, after she died. The game could track that. In fact, you could have her be the victim of the Selfish test. Note that i know this would remove her would-be "importance" of the main part of the narrative, but hey, i'm guessing Bioware could make some other form of assumption on behalf of the player <_<

But hell, don't just take my word for it. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 1's description of Computer Science fits the game's CG well: as in the game, you are very much bringing TNO into life by determining its stats.

Well, we could start talking like this. Zantetsuken: Yes. Shadow Paladin: No. Zantetsuken: Yes. Shadow Paladin: No. Zantetsuken: Yes. Shadow Paladin: No. Until someone spoils the fun by posting "Maybe".

I'm not favouring removing dialogue, just suggesting a better analysis of the times where its not really necessary. This isn't just concerning distracting the player with dialogue lines that don't lead anywhere, its also about NPCs' logic. One other example would be Aran Linvail. I'm almost certain 90% of his dialogue lines lead always to the same answer. Thats counting despite what and how i tell him things. Do you suppose that talking to someone aggressivelly will prompt a serene answer from them? Troughtout a dialogue? I don't think so. I'm not so sure its just because of the ruleset. In a somewhat recent online convo with David Gaider at RPGCodex, people asked him about what they considered to be a problem with romances, where ugly, low reputation characters with low stats for their mental capacities could not only speak fluently, but could win over their lovers. Gaider stated something which involved Bioware opting for that route because players did not liked to be challenged, if i recall correctly. One thing is to be under pressure from time constrains and not paying much attention to stats, the other is deciding that the player shouldn't be put into a difficult position because he made a wrong choice It leads to a kind of automation and sedation in gameplay that isn't very healthy, methinks. I didn't said there was anything wrong with bribing, merely what possessed the devs to give players the chance to try and talk Bodhi (a high-level powerful Vampire) out of harming the group, but didn't think of giving that option when the party was confronted with a group that could possibly be bribed. This isn't always the case. You may need to mix and combine your Speech values with information about who you're talking to. IIRC. talking the Master out of his plans involved high Cha, high Speech, and having read Vree's Mutant autopsy reports. While its not like that all the time, its not always just relying on the stat itself. I think this was true for the Saturn versions (which were divided into 3 chapters, although only one was translated and released in NA), am i correct? I played the Genesis versions and never spotted this. Agreed, but thats precisely the problem. If we are to use recurring characters in the series, then you'll see how people flock over to Sarevok, or even Minsc. Imoen never really stood out in the first game. Bioware just took the liberty of expecting us to care for her because we were both orfans in Candlekeep, despite the player never experienced any kind of affinity for the character during that time. In fact, the only time where you may get some sympathy for the character is in BG2, after the torture. However the character was highly underdevloped. I was much more happy with Sarevok's return then I was at the thought of having to hear "Hun, yer a queer fellow." again :ph34r:

Good luck in curing the devs. Go, you. Incidentally, you are generating the character. If it was called "Character Creation", it'd be a clear mistake, but "Character Generation" is correct, as "generating" usually means to define something, and that's what you do, you define/generate the (possible to define, o'course) elements of the character.

Well theirs has more acceptance, but then again, they do it more often. They have more series, and have mastered it quite well. Twinsen was definetely "cute", but the styles are different. Each worked on their own. Also, Pokemon and Yugi Oh seem to be more accepted, true, but not necessarily because of the anime style, but rather because of the whole merchandise surrounding them. Don't also forget how Mana and CC are made by Square. Most things that Square do are widely accepted, even if they were using good anime in it or not.

When they talk, that is. Remember how you're given usually 3 lines of dialogue to try and determine the nature of the killers hired to kill you in BG1? That's 3 lines (or 4), *all* leading to the same. And you know its funny? What you ask them is irrelevant, as they have a convenient note explaining their motivation. Remember how, despite how many lines you get in BG2, Irenicus himself states that you'll get "no villain's exposition" out of him? And how you can read his freakin' diary? Thats basically it. Its fine to give lines to players to which they can express the character, but more than 2 lines for an event which you cannot handle differently? I believe this tends to just bog down the game. Choices should usually be more meaningful, or more taken into account; or the amount should be reduced, if they do not give anything to the player. In the case of the hired killers, one line would suffice, for instance. What if my character has abilities which aren't taken into account? Yes like you said, some are there for the character; but what if the character has the means to persuade someone, but there isn't an option? Well, we can blame the NPC, stating his personality doesn't allow to bribe/convince him/etc.. But with 18+ on Charisma, a female PC, 237,580 gold pieces, and enough trinkets to make the finest shop in Athkatla blush when looking at their stock, it ends up being weird how you can't bribe on more than one ocasion o_O Would your character be more of a character if he could say five things instead of two, if those two conveyed feelings for the character? And why are you given the option of bribery on some occasions but not others? What led the devs to think, say, that you can ask Bodhi if you can do something to appease her (Spellhold) and not being able to tell the 4 NPCs that invade Garren Windspear's home you'd pay them to avoid confrontation? Its not strict to BG2, though, but its annoying as far as giving several ways of expression. Unfortunately for me I had left Imoen's chunks bleeding on the side of the road near the Friendly Arm Inn. But much to my surprise her chunks rejoined and opened my caged door in BG2 <_< I'm all up for having the developers come up with ways to make me feel involved with NPCs, but that was quite the assumption they made there. The worse part was having everyone tell me the urgency in finding Imoen, when i could take as long as I wished; and she wasn't even important at all, as i could finish SoA and ToB without her. She wasn't even memorable for the remainder of the game after she rejoined my rank. Xan, Xzar and Shar-Teel were more memorable, yet, they were either dead or gone. At least Viconia was back, and they had the great insight of killing Khalid. Its not really about preconceptions about an entire game (i certainly don't expect a game to be like other games i've played; we'd be screwed if that happened), but rather, how certain elements are handled. No doubt D&D is usually centered on heroic enterprises, but that doesn't mean that they should 1) always be about heroism (PS:T wasn't about heroism, it was very individualistic in that matter), and 2) that my character is given large control but little outcome. No doubt the game succeeded despite my problems with it, but its undeniable that roleplaying in the game was very poor (at least as far as meaningful decisions and dialogue choices).

Speaking of which, what games would you cite has having been instrumental in expanding your knowledge on gaming, wheter in developing, wheter in broadening your gaming horizons?

I think that there doesn't need to be a constant negotiation with individuals. Many people believe that Frank Horrigan was basic as we couldn't talk him out of it, but in retrospect, like me, he also had a job. My point however, is that, if there isn't a chance to dialogue, why include the option? Or why bother with about 20 different lines of dialogue if its going to amount to combat? I always disliked that in BG, it made the situation feel fake. I tend to use some degree of imagination occasionaly, but it depends on the game. To me IWD gave me good options for character creation, as did Wizardry 8; however, imagining backgrounds was fairly useless, and roleplaying, expressing my characters, was mostly fruitless. Thats not to say I can't create pasts, stories, or backgrounds. I can. They just don't matter. Its like creating characters' pasts for a story, but then have them automatically put the past behind, and have most of their future assumed for them. By contrast Fallout was the opposite, and BG had the right idea of character creation but then had very limited expression. The whole experience i got out of BG2 was mostly the good aspect of char creation, but looking disapointed as I just followed things that forced me to make choices, or making choices for me. I highly disliked that the devs assumed I *had* to care for Imoen, or for Irenicus' torture. I highly disliked that being evil was almost the same as being good, only with "Me Gnaarl, me kill!" dialogue choices. Being Chaotic Evil would imply I shouldn't care for some things, like helping Elhan. And that I spent about a month improving my character to end up being captured anyway... was very bad. I didn't felt amused by that one, not one bit. This isn't to say that i tolerate similar things in PS:T and don't in BG2, thats not the reason. Its just that choices are just taken away, or not given, despite its not as strict a game as PS:T was. And I admit I may have been spoiled with FO. Who doesn't?

I came here after leaving BIS, but not because they ended. I simply go to other places and Obsidian's forums were mentioned so i tracked down the site, and waited for their opening.

But you have to concede that "finding my way" is a linear affair, of which you cannot handle as you wish for the larger part of the game. That i can create my character is established, but "finding my way" isnt something worth bragging about if it entails a tight leash. It feels mostly, in the games we've been talking of (possible exception being Fallout and Morrowind in one or two events), of finding out our way trough a maze with one single path to it. Even if you ignore for a minute the fact that PS:T has a predetermined character, and BG doesn't (in the same sense of PS:T of course, as its forcing you to a role regardless), and just focus on the rest of the game, expressing the Bhaalspawn that you are comes off as something empty. The very fact that i can create my own Bhaalspawn should have been taken into consideration, and instead I can only "define" myself in matters of choosing the good or evil path in the game's quests (and evil is barely present). Even in story-driven terms, TNO is given better expression. Should the fact that you can use imagination to roleplay a character be used in a medium which doesn't care about your imagination? And should the game's inneficciency in allowing for better ways of expressing your character be excused because i can use imagination? Fallout proves to be very good in RP as it represents many character nuances according to your decisions. You can't imagine on the same scale as a PnP game, but there are many things you can do in it, and your character will change and evolve based on it. Not so much an opportunity for that in BG2, despite that I can use imagination on both.

Curiously, they labelled TNO's statistical tweaking as "Character Generation"