Diogo Ribeiro

While I don't particularly care for MOGs, DeathzBlade brings up a good point. It doesn't mean anything to the developers that certain elements of a franchise may be applied in a contradicting way when applied to a MOG. As players we can have the valid concern or desire to see those games do not go against the setting or gameworld consistency of some franchises, but nothing (other than the developers' own intention) prevents a massive multiplayer game from spawning endless Jedis, Vampires or Vault Dwellers, no matter how much it isn't mean to.

You're a queer fellow. Heya, it's me, Imoen! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wat'cha want? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yer all buffle-headed.

Yeah, there's not even a chance to do that. You just find some furniture, then when you enter the room it shows the message you see on the first screen (

You're welcome

Quoted for the power of +1.

I wasn't making a direct comparison between both; only illustrating that using something in a videogame which has a parallel in real life does not necessarily make it more realistic, if at all. No doubt, although there doesn't have to be a need to force the player to achieve a result in a given timeframe; instead, you can just let the player do things at his own leisure, but simply provide different consequences for the time he takes. Of course, this is different than an overaching timer which will eventually spell Game Over, but then again, different timers with different concepts behind them.

I think you actually get experience from killing him as well, although if I recall it isn't as much as it is given for talking him out of it. My Chaotic Neutral gnome talked him out of it... Then backstabbed him. Strangest part of that scenario is that no one in the tavern seems to care I'm attacking Marl.

Baldur's Gate 2. I think the worst example of how consequences, and by association consequences of evil actions, were handled in Baldur's Gate is how you can slaughter innocents but then go to a nearby temple and offer money to bump your reputation back up, even to a 20.

Actually I'm surprised when I do find people who actually have similar expectations to mine when it comes to games in general, and roleplaying games in particular.

I'm not denying it has an analogue in the real world; I've explained as much in my posts addressed to LoneWolf16. However, there's a clear difference between a gameplay mechanic that is trying to simulate real life and one that isn't - regardless of what parallels one might find in real life. Wouldn't you agree it would seem out of place to suggest a game which has swords is realistic simply because swords exist in real life? Pressure of time is present in real life, just as the need to make decisions and perform actions - but simply because this is also applied in videogames as wells doesn't mean it's doing so with the intention of being realistic, aka imitating real life or carrying the same expectations of elements found in real life or in the real world into a videogame. In fact, the very application of those things in videogames may not coincide with how they operate in real life at all. That's why I've outlines several times the nature of my suggestion wasn't meant to be realistic, but didn't deny there's a parallel in the real world.

Isn't it just possible to make it so the experience table is updated with new values and information for further levels?

It can add to the credibility and consistency of some situations, and by association, it can add to immersion, as well as introduce other venues for roleplaying. So, yes. No, because as I've told you before (but incredibly it always got lost in translation), trying to make it feel 'more real' isn't the issue or intention. Consistency within the gameworld and credibility of its mechanics are what's at stake, and these are not associated with realism. They may be, depending on the context of the game; but it aren't in the case of this suggestion. So, to finalize your attempt to divine my meaning, it should simply read: "I think timers, both general and specific, can be a good thing to implement as they can potentially add to the immersivenes of a game."

As you say so, it depends on implementation. But one poorly designed and implemented timer should not be held as entirely representative of all possible implementations of timers. One bad example is not a rule. As for the mechanic itself, there should be some measure of feedback given to players. Don't. We need more ramblings here. If for no better reason than to just challenge some people's obviously insecure egos.

My point had to do, in a way, with both. Eventually it branched off at some point and I focused solely on the timed events, or universal timer. It's safe to say that it was mainly about the concept of time itself split into certain aspects, one of them being an overaching timer, another being story specific timers.

I'd hazard the quote in your previous post was more adequate, though; not that that wouldn't work, although it feels too narrow in scope.

Pretty much, yes. For a brief exposition of some examples that would be based on that mindset, you can see this post.

As alanschu pointed out, I was talking to someone else. Also, there wasn't a problem with just quoting that part per se as I don't really expect people to comment everything I write; if there was a problem, it stemed from your misinterpretation of my point, taking it as a suggestion for realism in games when it was far from it. I disagree, because my point has remained the same ever since I started posting on the subject of time limits in this thread. Unless you care to point me to where exactly I have supposedly been fudging my statements so I can be clearer.

It's not uncommon to be playing a game and suddenly stumbling upon something you feel just begs the question "What were they thinking?". It may be a small quirk of the game, to a severe handicap, to something that just doesn't sit well or flat out contradicts the setting, story or established elements of the game. Basically, something you feel is just weird, obnoxious, questionable, or just plain bad design from the game's creators. Case in point, Exhibit A: Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance for Gameboy Advance. Troughout the course of the game, Juste Belmont will come across various collectibles which are decorative in nature. When reaching a certain room in the castle, Juste will comment on how the room lacks in taste... And decide to decorate it with the afforementioned items. So, what

The timer could have just halted when the party reached the stronghold. Your suggestion of variations depending on the directions also seems pretty sound.

DREAMY STUD OR STEAMY DUD? YOU DECIDE!

That's a pretty good point. Admitedly, I am focusing on timed events on a standalone basis; in other words, for the most part I'm not deeply judging and analyzing it in the context of how it can be reconciled with the quirks of mainstream videogame development and casual gamer focus. That'd be a fine point of discussion, I guess, how can certain niche or hardcore gameplay mechanisms find their way into mainstream CRPGs.

I didn't insult you, LoneWolf16. I believe I have suggested a certain aggitation, but then again it's not always easy to deal with a fair number of people lunging at you from all sides because they misunderstood something I said... Repeated times. So, apologies for the perceived hostility. As for the impact of timed events, I wasn't suggesting that they'd significantly impact gameplay to the point of outstaying their welcome. One very simple example of having no time limit to reach the endgame - but still taking into account the time a player takes - stems from Planescape: Torment. If you spend a long time levelling up the Nameless One, the Transcendant One will be more powerful. This is more of a power level example than actual time, but still it reflect the time the player spends levelling the character. Another (more drastic) example is Fallout, and how some cities will suffer with the Mutant invasion the more time you take to destroy the Master's plans. The game wasn't that long into production, and it showcases, even if admitedly a small fraction, of how timed events can significantly alter a gameplay experience while still providing ample opportunity to explore a considerable part of the gameworld and roleplay your character. This was also visible in one of Jeff Vogel's games, although I can't remember if it was a Geneforge or Avernum title. My prime suggestion is that timed events can add another level of credibility to the main personalities and locations of a game. It is entirely understandable that some players may not like X or Y game features in their games. All I've said is that I find having major events depend on player quickness can be a good idea. If a player takes too long and cities start getting destroyed as a result of the villian's unchecked acquisition of power, this presents different levels of roleplaying possibilities. A character is faced with choices with meaningful consequences: does he try to defeat the main villain even if he is relatively weak in order to try and save millions? Does he willingly sacrifice a few hundreds so he can become stronger in order to vanquish the villain? Maybe the player can prevent the destruction of the continent's capital city by reaching it the moment an invasion is starting. Take Throne of Bhall, for instance: These are the kinds of situations where I think timed events can really make a good impact.

I got it immediately and I never watched Rocky and Bullwinkle. I had heard of it before so that may be why.

I was 'playing' a Level 42 Enchanted Motorcycle Bastard Lunatic, but eventually running the executable was as pointless as the 'game' itself.

True, you