Eddo36 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Well, you know that some RPGs are designed with options to make everybody happy. But since you can never impress everyone in everything, how do you think K3 should be? Should it be made to impress every KOTOR player a little bit, leaving everybody a little bit satisfied with the gameplay but none overly satisfied, OR should K3 be made to impress most K3 players a lot and having the fun factor a lot higher for those players, yet a very small percentage of KOTOR players will feel left out and unsatisfied? Remember, you can never impress everybody with anything you do.
Krookie Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Eddo, this is again, another stupid post. That's like asking, "Do you guys want KOTOR3 to be good, or for it to suck?" To answer your question, I want the game to suck so badly, but I want it to be 60 hours long, so I guess I want quantity, honestly...
Eddo36 Posted July 8, 2005 Author Posted July 8, 2005 It's actually a pretty legit post on the compromise issue (been getting enough heat from the mods about it as it is). The question is, do you want it to be good a little bit for everybody (and sucks for nobody), OR do you want it to be good a LOT for most people (and sucks a lot for some people)?
GhostofAnakin Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Um? This post makes little sense for one main reason: how exactly can something appeal to a vast majority of fans if it has no quality? I think I understand what you're trying to ask, but the use of the terms "quantity" and "quality" don't fit in what you're asking. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation)
Eddo36 Posted July 8, 2005 Author Posted July 8, 2005 I mean a LITTLE quality or A LOT quality. Just that the LITTLE applies to EVERYBODY and the A LOT applies to NOT EVERYBODY, only most.
GhostofAnakin Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I mean a LITTLE quality or A LOT quality. Just that the LITTLE applies to EVERYBODY and the A LOT applies to NOT EVERYBODY, only most. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But that's a rather weird assumption. Why would a HIGH quality game not appeal to the general mass of players? And why would a LOW quality game (with a bit of quality) appeal to such a large population? In essense you're suggesting that the majority of the KOTOR gamers would like a game that is 50% complete, but only "hardcore" gamers want a game that's 100% complete. I think that's a rather weak and illogical assumption. "Console exclusive is such a harsh word." - Darque"Console exclusive is two words Darque." - Nartwak (in response to Darque's observation)
Eddo36 Posted July 8, 2005 Author Posted July 8, 2005 It is that way in general because, to appeal to more players, you have to make more compromises. And compromise = sacrifice
SteveThaiBinh Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Are you asking whether the developers should focus on making one aspect of the game excellent (graphics or story or role-playing), or develop all of them equally but to a lesser extent? "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov)
Krookie Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 To NCR: If you see this, my pop-tarts are burning again with this post.
Eddo36 Posted July 8, 2005 Author Posted July 8, 2005 Are you asking whether the developers should focus on making one aspect of the game excellent (graphics or story or role-playing), or develop all of them equally but to a lesser extent? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Actually focusing on impressing one genre of players, the majority. Rather than attempting to reach out to everybody. Think, which way will get you the most profit?
jodo kast 5 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Eddo, this is again, another stupid post. That's like asking, "Do you guys want KOTOR3 to be good, or for it to suck?" To answer your question, I want the game to suck so badly, but I want it to be 60 hours long, so I guess I want quantity, honestly... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Your right, Eddo dude make a post thats worth while, but i voted on quality.
Gabrielle Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I know, I know, I want the game ASAP! I just adore all of the f*cking bugs it will have and at times make it unplayable. But at least I'll have it.
jodo kast 5 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Ugggghhhhhhhhhhhhh <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You have no idea
jodo kast 5 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I know, I know, I want the game ASAP! I just adore all of the f*cking bugs it will have and at times make it unplayable. But at least I'll have it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah Gabbs, you adore all the f*cking bugs
SteveThaiBinh Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Actually focusing on impressing one genre of players, the majority. Rather than attempting to reach out to everybody. Think, which way will get you the most profit? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So what you're asking is: "Should Kotor 3 be a pure role-playing game, or should it be a hybrid with elements of other genres (such as First-Person Shooter) in order to attract a wider audience?" "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov)
Eddo36 Posted July 8, 2005 Author Posted July 8, 2005 I meant generally storywise, but other interpretations of implementations can be considered.
SteveThaiBinh Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I meant generally storywise... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> OK, so the question is a choice between two different kinds of story. Do you mean: "Should the story of Kotor 3 be very deep and involving (but also quite linear), or should it be very flexible and non-linear, with many different ways to role-play, (but also less deep)?" "An electric puddle is not what I need right now." (Nina Kalenkov)
jodo kast 5 Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Please feel free to join the ongoing discussion regarding Kotor3 http://forums.obsidianent.com/index.php?35145 Fionavar Eddo36, please post your K3 topics in Obsidian General, thank you
alanschu Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I know, I know, I want the game ASAP! I just adore all of the f*cking bugs it will have and at times make it unplayable. But at least I'll have it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'd honestly wonder if this isn't the case, given how fanatical people can be at demanding content, of any kind, as soon as humanly possible. You get people hacking into developers work studios if you don't supply them with the stuff they wanted. I almost see greater outcry for a game delay announcement than I do for a game with bugs.
213374U Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 - When he is best, he is a little worse than a man, and when he is worst, he is little better than a beast.
RevanRedefined Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 I meant generally storywise, but other interpretations of implementations can be considered. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now you're just using big words to make your post sound legit. <_<
dufflover Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 If I understand your options correctly, I saw Quantity, because I'm not a big fan of RPG's. Final Fantasy turned me off from looking at any RPG till KotOR, and I only bought that because of the Star Wars tag and "FPS Shooter"-like screenshots. Anyway, my point is that if they made too much like an RPG - again, they've changed alot so this is open to big interpretation. Ofcourse I don't want the game to suck and my interpretation was referring to things like having mini-turret games and stuff. Pure Pazaak - The Stand-alone Multiplayer Pazaak Game (link to Obsidian board thread) Pure Pazaak website (big thank you to fingolfin)
CoM_Solaufein Posted July 8, 2005 Posted July 8, 2005 Looks like another winning thread. War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is StrengthBaldur's Gate moddingTeamBGBaldur's Gate modder/community leaderBaldur's Gate - Enhanced Edition beta testerBaldur's Gate 2 - Enhanced Edition beta tester Icewind Dale - Enhanced Edition beta tester
Recommended Posts