Indalecio Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 Much logic I sense in that one... ...Not ready to be an adventurer is he... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 The only problem with the Juhani and Bastila examples stated earlier is that you still have to fight them, multiple times with Bastilla. So, basically what you're doing is still 'killing' them only in a different way. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nartwak Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 Yes, Maria, just like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shdy314 Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 The only problem with the Juhani and Bastila examples stated earlier is that you still have to fight them, multiple times with Bastilla. So, basically what you're doing is still 'killing' them only in a different way. Killing them in a different way. :D What the hell does that mean? You aren't going to be able to redeem most Sith without showing them your strength in combat. Showing a Sith that the lightside is powerful enough to still beat them down no matter how bada** they think they are with their DS powers is a big step in convincing them back to the light. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arkan Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 You're still basically reducing them to zero (or one) hitpoints, just with a different outcome. "Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger." - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials "I have also been slowly coming to the realisation that knowledge and happiness are not necessarily coincident, and quite often mutually exclusive" - meta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaguars4ever Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 The only problem with the Juhani and Bastila examples stated earlier is that you still have to fight them, multiple times with Bastilla. So, basically what you're doing is still 'killing' them only in a different way. Killing them in a different way. :D What the hell does that mean? Wouldn't make any sense if he ever made sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Lord of the Bith Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 I'm going to age myself here, but I can remember when games were all-combat because that's all the devs could do. Wizardry, to whit. The gold box games came out and floored me, because we finally had story to go with our combat. And colors. Lots of pretty colors... <sigh> Anyway, today we have processing power on our desktops that would give Nasa pee-pee pants fifteen years ago, but our beloved RPGs are still full of killing and killing and killing. (GIVING TEN PERCENT XP?!! POR:ROMD made me sick!!!) Yes, developers have insane time and money constraints that keep the really good stuff from being released, much like Hollywood. What did that create? Independent movies. Low-budget, not the production value, but they could go out on a limb and do the things we're asking for. Independent games are a thing of the past, however. Remember Shareware? It's a dead art now, since you must have a team of graphic artists, an original score, and a horde of voice actors or you won't sell unit one. If we want a change, (or other options) we must quit pre-ordering the glitzy IP-laden, celebrity filled, coprorate games and paying without regard for what we truly want. Content over graphics. Before the flames begin, I realize I'm posting on the board of the very idea I'm railing against. I'm going to buy this game, no matter the reviews and no matter the XP cap. In the meantime, I'm going to be playing some Wizardry, Phatasy Star II, and Curse of the Azure Bonds and wishing I had enough free time to write a 2-D RPG that addresses this problem. I have to eat, though... Anyway, one of my two cents. Flame away or agree, I won't mind a bit. Just don't mention 'Carth' or all of the Trolls will instanly desend on this topic and call everyone 'Gay' or 'Racist' and the devs will erase it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LostStraw Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 Hmm, I remember something different. When I think of the "Old Games" I can't but help thinking of text-based adventures, which if I recall were usually a lot more about story then combat. I don't think there was ever a time when I've existed that games were all action... I've always seen a Day of the Tentacle* or Quest for Glory* game even through the large shareware movement of Jill of the Jungle* games. Now, they may not be as popular but they're still around and most likely always will be. And if you want you could always head off to the http://www.the-underdogs.org/ and pick some of those old classics up. *I don't mean those exact games, but types of games like them. P.S. Has anyone here played Twinsen's Relentless Adventures? I still have fond memories of that one (probably because I wasn't too old when I played it ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quiquag Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 There are a lot of instances in KOTOR where you are rewarded with more XP if you don't fight. One instance is in the grove with Juhani, if you fight and kill her you get 35 XP but if you turn her to the light side you get like 1200. Another example is in the shadow lands. If you kill Freyer you get less XP then if you side with him, and go to the wookie tree house to talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OLD SKOOL WHEELMAN Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 Much logic I sense in that one... ...Not ready to be an adventurer is he... Wrong, you are. Spam, you must... :ph34r: :ph34r: :ph34r: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darion Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 yeah it would be good to let enemies flee or to leave them unconcous, at least for the light side but at the same time the dark side should be let to kill most of the NPCs that u want, with the lightsaber on off option discussed in another topic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0th1ng Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 A good alternative againt hack'n'slash games would be Planescape:Torment, Arcanum and Fallout(although you gotta knock a few people's lights out in order to avoid killing them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EnderAndrew Posted May 29, 2004 Share Posted May 29, 2004 Your comments are well made, and I agree with a lot of them. However, I feel that good story-intensive role-playing experiences are best found in good PnP games. Action-oriented games are no less valid, they just appeal to a different demographic. I've been striving to see more story-oriented games that are less focused on combat, but I haven't seen one yet. Even as good as Planescape Torment is, you still have some dungeon-crawl involved. Lionheart allows you to talk you way out of half of the game, but you still have to endure click-and-kill. I tire of the repetitive nature of combat in most CRPGs. I only enjoy combat in CRPGs when it's tactical. I'm not sure if you're familiar with the Camarilla, White Wolf's big fan club. They run a large global LARP game with thousands of members. It's a very political, yet dangerous game of jihad. My proudest achievement during my time in the Cam was playing a character always thrust-head first into major national and regional storylines without killing another PC in my 3 and a half year span. There was still a lot pf PvP scheming, and I was the target of a lot of it as a Prince, but I never killed another player. Pure combat bored me. And a clever roleplayer should be able to out-think a situation and get around things. CRPG's rely on skill-checks, or prerequesites to determine if you can solve a quest in a method other than combat. And even then, the solutions to a quest are finite and preordained. CRPG's can never truly emulate the open-ended responsiveness of having someone run a PnP or LARP RPG. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now