Gromnir

tob felt rushed to you? ok, if you say so. tob had more new material and detail than any other expansion we can name

Like pretty much most of Bioware work to me ... 'cause the first thing that comes to mind when you thinks of BG2 is that it feels like it was rushed. HA! and no doubt some kids equate a mature rating with maturity, but that is not Gromnir's way of thinking. regardless, drak is free to voice his opinion... and each time he does so we feel a little less guilty 'bout dismissing him so readily. HA! Good Fun!

am not sure how the biowarians came to embrace their current romance model. you gots these tangential romance stories that seems to be lifted from comic books or teen tv soap operas

"When they commited their evil deeds, they didn't describe in intimate detail how perverse and cruel and nasty they were, randomly throwing in adjectives like 'pathetic' and 'worthless' to describe pretty much everything simply to show how mean they were." not get your point. vader walks in on leia with a with a torture device. we see the remains luke's family, slaughtered by stormtroopers in one of the most grisly scenes of the entire film, admiral announces that a planets is destroyed to make a point. the emperor tries to goad luke into attacking, and announces the imminent death of his friends to accomplish this. etc. "When they commited their evil deeds, they didn't describe in intimate detail how perverse and cruel and nasty they were, randomly throwing in adjectives like 'pathetic' and 'worthless' to describe pretty much everything simply to show how mean they were. "If they did, it would've been pretty lame." as noted above, they did on more than one occasion... the absence of specific dialogue is hardly meaningful. you not have actors in a game who can be subtle. you not got great camera work or direction and you only can work in so many cutscenes and they is rarely is detailed 'nuff to have the same impact as something on film. you got loads of dialogue though. a game is gonna convey story through dialogue. compare the amount of dialogue in The Grapes of Wrath book v. movie. is lot less dialogue in the movie, no? is not just a matter of length neither. *shrug* so it ain't that all of the sith was spouting their evil rhatoric, but you thought too many did. when an admiral balks an order to destroy a planet in kotor or when you meet an archeoligist more interested in knowledge than power or when you convince a student that the sith way ain't all that it is cracked up to be, or when you meet any number of sith on taris who, whether it be in bars or in the undercity, who just seem to be following orders rather than having AGENDAS OF EVIL, then you see as exceptions proving a point? okie dokie. HA! Good Fun! p.s. "I don't think this point is being missed by anyone" was a comment by phosphor... we was being economical by responding to both o you in one post.

btw, it seems that folks still is missing the point of irenicus... but that fault is mostly the fault of the biowarians. his motivations was hardly as simple and clich

"Even with Darth Vader and the Emperor, dialogue spoken with no purpose but to show how 'evil' they were was the exception rather than the rule. " oh come now... that ain't true and you know it. the dialogues and scenes with the emperor and darth vader was almost exclusively included to show us just how nasty they was. dress 'em up in black and play ominous music, and have them torture folks or reveal plans to kill/hurt the hero's loved ones and friends. "The Sith can represent evil without having every last Sith trooper long only to kick puppies and launch children into orbit unprotected." is hardly accurate. is a number of folks on korriban that not fit this description including archeologists and students and prospective student, so try not to be overstating for effect... diminishes your point. "I don't think this point is being missed by anyone" really? sure seems that way. go read some reviews or maybe check out some threads at bio or here or codex. if you have folks saying, "why are the villains and heroes in kotor so stereotypical," when the reason "why" is so damnably obvious, then we cannot help but think that some folks has missed something. look at reviews and threads here and elsewhere that talk 'bout how unoriginal kotor story and characters was. why is the kotor villains and heroes so stereotypical? answer:

"With that in mind, I'm not sure I'd want them to stop using a formula that, for whatever reason, worked for me personally." yeah, but the formula is also a trap. can kotor2 do what kotor did... can it simply give us a recreation of star wars characters and plot and themes? the obsidians have a great opportunity with kotor2... they is gonna be developing one of the most anticipated titles of the year, and Gromnir don't think they has the luxury of being able to take advantage of bioware's simple (albeit very clever and undeniably efficacious) approach to story elements. obsidian is going to have to do something different... or maybe not... kotor was a game that despite so many seeming flaws, succeeded with an overwhelming number of folks... gestalt. example: combat was very easy and poorly balanced, but it had a kewl factor for most peoples that made it enjoyable... and the cinematic aspect of combat (something that necessarily limited its tactical appeal,) further bolstered the feeling of nostalgia that seemed to be the main goal of the game. lightsabre combats was looking like movie lightsabre combats 'nuff to make folks get that warm and fuzzy feeling they gets when they recalls first having seen such battles on the Big Screen... which was reinforced by the story aspects. would a turn-based kotor with overhead perspective have been able to create a nostalgic glow in folks as they watched one of their party avatars move forward 4 hexes and then take a single swipe with their lightsabre? so

not gonna get started on sauron/grendel kinda antagonists... not worth asking why dragons is malevolent and horde gold. as to kotor and simple Good v. Evil characters... duh. the star wars movies used the traditional archetypical characters and plots and themes. kotor brazenly, unapologetically, and successfully recreated what many folks liked

try not to fib. in another thread you made some generalizations 'bout folks who seemed to be 'gainst applying d&d rules to crpg games... and when Gromnir asked you to give some specific examples of folks representative of your bizarre generalizations, you could not do so... probably 'cause no such people ever existed. regardless, it was your reasoning that was twisted and flawed and that is why we bring up in this thread

took how many pages last time we dealt with you to make you see that your observation that folks 'gainst d&d rules was not necessarily 'gainst more options in a crpg? am not gonna spend similar 'mount of text showing how silly you is again being in present thread. no performance by Gromnir... am too tired to go through that kina effort again. hey kid, you win. congrats. HA! Good Fun!

someone called morrowind compelling? i wish i had bought that version then. the story in my copy was so uncompelling i stopped playing before i found out what it was. well, keep in mind that the person who called fallout and morrowind compelling also noted that compelling story is purely subjective... after he notes that compelling story ain't difficult to add to a game with complete freedom of character development. ... is reason why we lost interest in thread as a whole. HA! Good Fun! p.s. case studies is very important when dealing with extreme examples o' early childhood development as nobody ever has raised a child in complete isolation... and we hopes they never does. we depend on unfortunate accidents and monstrous behavior to supply us with some small handful of examples of what happens to a child raised in isolation.

i've no idea how this matters to your argument - i can barely figure out who is arguing what any more - but fyi a child 'raised' in complete isolation wouldn't be a blank slate - they'd be a complete and utter vegetable that would be incapable of having a personality in the first place. not exactly what you'd call great roleplaying material. just a thought. http://www.feralchildren.com/en/language.php genie, in particular, is a good read. girl was raised in near total isolation. was not a complete veggie, but she never was able to grasp basic grammar. as to z... if fallout and morrowind is your examples of compelling stories focused on protagonist, 'specially w/o any explanation as to how they is compelling and protagonist focused, then yeah, you is spouting nonsense and do not deserve the effort we has spent on replies. simply say that such things is "subjective," is no more than noise... a flatulent for punctuation maybe? is also not good to assume that Gromnir and sp is sharing same argument.. might be part of your problem. HA! Good Fun!

with a larger world you necessarily need more such encounters, and as frank's encounters is already obviously more work to implement than the mundane vanilla encounters... and the circle begins again. the more complex you make, the fewer you can include. the more you include, the less complex they can be. ask developers how much stuff they has had to leave out of games in past. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

and additional balancing concerns, and additional dialogues as well... and additional bug testing too. is not just a simple matter of adding in a simple script.

am not sure how your use of argumentum ad populum reduces the irony of your initial statement. was you grammatically correct when you said, "Gronmir, notsomuch. How's the grammar problem coming along?" both of those sentences is flawed, no? then what is you complaining 'bout? is ironic that person complaining of another person's grammar would make so many grammatical errors in one short post. HA! Good Fun!

I know you're an intelligent person, so when you tell the truth, I usually have no problems with what you say, but honestly, your idea that i'm confused or something, comes off as an empty and pointless statement, and your refusal to explain your motivation for quoting what i said earlier and make a fuss out of it makes me wonder if this isn't mere trolling. You were the one who told me to "take my time"... getting itchy? Surely you forgot the part where i stated that "compelling" is subjective? Wait you didn't forgot - you simply dismissed it as an excuse. Convenient. are not even replying to our posts no more... is just complaining that we is mean and then you spouts ridiculously meaningless statements. oh well... as soon as you learns to pay attention, we will respond. HA! Good Fun!

"Gronmir, notsomuch. How's the grammar problem coming along?" irony defined. HA! Good Fun!

"Maybe Grommy is right and the problem is you dont even know what concept you are arguing against.. " exactly. poor fella is kinda confused. *shrug* am still wiating for his story... or at least an example of a game where you gots a compelling story focused on a protagonist that can be anything. claims that he gave examples... but we sure not see any. surely wasn't suggesting that morrowind or fallout fit the bill? again, is easy to make silly claims w/o even trying to back up. write us a story. not have to be detailed... just give us the dust jacket version. HA! Good Fun!

Give me a reason why I should even bother. Its got nothing to do with what was being talked about, and is unrelated to the entire conversation, at least from my side. Too bad that for a change, i did clarify and people didn't understood. But hey, I'm getting used to it, so don't feel bad. And if you've never seen character development being handled by players, i can only suggest you'd play more games. why should you do it? why, because you said it were not hard. so do it. you is acting as if the tendency of developers to make characters with more defined backgrounds is an issue separate from story... and they is not. must ask why a developer would give more limited character development to a player. write compelling story for a character that can be anything. you is back to complaining that you is misunderstood... and you is not. you just don't understand the issue. makes others have to work twice as hard if they wish to keep discussing with you. HA! Good Fun!

"I probably could, with the appropriate time invested into it, but then, not only is "compelling" subjective, but I honestly doubt you're speaking seriously, so excuse me if I also don't take the "homework" seriously." no excuses... just do it. "Regardless, what I wrote was about character development, which is possible of happening outside strict story-driven aspects. " too bad you made remarks in direct response to sp comments 'bout story aspects... and unless you clarify much, what you is asking for has not really ever been done. complete freedom to define character and compelling story... ain't ever seen that. HA! Good Fun!

"Defining a character is always, or should always be, dependant of what the player decides." fair 'nuff. now, here is your task: write a compelling story with a protagonist who is not only the main character but is alternately a neutral/elven/female/druid or a chaotic evil/halfling/male/bard or a lawful good/dwarven/female/fighter. furthermore, you is not to place any demands on that protagonist to advance the story in a particular direction. take your time

actually, despite the tendency of developers to let stuff slip, it won't be official

"Imagine if killing enough orcs in random encounters leads to rewards from local lords, or if the orcs start to take notice and increase their numbers and bring spell casters and chieftans on their raids. Maybe what looked like a good thing leads to higher prices at merchants because the suddenly more brutal orc parties are raising the cost caravan guards. From a design perspective, this looks more difficult than it is...it isn't." what exactly does your example prove? seems to show us how you can cram more complex and intriguing quests into less space. recalls the encounters in bg2 where if you continued to cast spells in amn you would get attacked by increasingly tough opponents? nothing new you suggest. and not seem to require a bigger world with greater freedom to explore non-essential areas at all... quite the contrary in fact. is a good way to get more stuff into a smaller and more limited world. *shrug* regardless, we thinks it is kinda silly to suggest that a complex situation where random encounters with orc bandits leads to increasingly tough encounters and where local merchants and politicians reacts different to you based on how you deal with such encounters is being no more complicated or time consuming to develop than some insular bandit encounter in the woods. we hate being the voice o' common sense... just seems so... wrong. HA! Good Fun!

not see no point to "openness" unless there is something worth doing at a majority of those non-essential locations. you can have a huge and sprawling world that you can explore at your leisure, but if 99.9% of encounters is dull or repetitious then why should we care that we could spend 40 hours of game time just walking from one pointless location to the next. a handful of orcs who jump you in the middle of nowheres

in what way? deus ex machina still not got nothing to do with the protagonist being focus or not. stealing the show and deus ex machina is somehow the same thing in a person's mind? the only show in iwd was the npc stories... reliance on deus ex machina not seem to have a real point. as to final fantasy references... they is lost on Gromnir. *shrug* oh, and as to pointing out that the npcs have more developed stories even in games where ther protagonist is the focus... well that gets a big "duh," too from Gromnir. not know how many times we has noted that it is easier to write npcs 'cause they is static and not dependent on a player who may have radically different playing styles. the fact that npc (especially villains) Steal the Show of game stories even in games where the protagonist is the focus further proves out our point, not his. HA! Good Fun!