50 reasons why.. part two

[Gromnir]

anybody the least familiar with d&d crpgs should know that wotc has a strange pov concerning adult themes. the whole mirrored mask encounter in nwn2 were a nod to that strange history. is innumerbale examples of prostitution, drug use, slavery, and the non-specific jiggly that rift seems enamored with, but crpgs since nwn has been different. one popular explanation is 'possedley that some hasbro big wig sees his pre-teen son playing nwn and realizes that game has a BROTHEL in it. forebear. in any event, since that time developers has had much tighter restrictions on adult content in games than wotc seems to demand of print material.

 

troika, being slow learners, did not thinks that new wotc policy regarding adult content in games applied to them. fools. so they has to remove their brothel late in development when wotc puts kibosh on it and other stuff in toee.

 

when black isle were making bg 3 there were numerous developer complaints, and bioware, even though inexplicably they seemed to have been afforded more freedom to do adult content than other developers, also recognized that d&d crpgs woulds have to become more child safe in future.

 

this is well tilled soil. rift is just getting to the party late.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps jiggly is not inherent better than pg rated material. am not sure why some people seems to assume that kinda subjectivity into the equation. am reminded of how carrie fisher had to have her breasts strapped down in star wars because lucas didn't want story to be 'bout sex. is amusing that maybe worst of the three original films were the only one having jiggly. jiggly = better? hardly.

Edited November 26, 2006 by Gromnir

[Darque]

Thread pruned a bit.... <_<

 

Could we not devolve into a spamfest?

 

Any chance of constructive discussions appear to be diminishing at a rapid pace.

[Riftworm]

anybody the least familiar with d&d crpgs should know that wotc has a strange pov concerning adult themes.  the whole mirrored mask encounter in nwn2 were a nod to that strange history.  is innumerbale examples of prostitution, drug use, slavery, and the non-specific jiggly that rift seems enamored with, but crpgs since nwn has been different.  one popular explanation is 'possedley that some hasbro big wig sees his pre-teen son playing nwn and realizes that game has a BROTHEL in it.  forebear.  in any event, since that time developers has had much tighter restrictions on adult content in games than wotc seems to demand of print material.

 

troika, being slow learners, did not thinks that new wotc policy regarding adult content in games applied to them.  fools.  so they has to remove their brothel late in development when wotc puts kibosh on it and other stuff in toee. 

 

when black isle were making bg 3 there were numerous developer complaints, and bioware, even though inexplicably they seemed to have been afforded more freedom to do adult content than other developers, also recognized that d&d crpgs woulds have to become more child safe in future.

 

this is well tilled soil.  rift is just getting to the party late.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

lol ..where did I even say I wanted nudity or "jiggly"? That's not me, and you misperceived my statements. I was referring to the basic underwear you see in NWN1 when you remove your armor. It's realistic to me, that's all. I'd like to know I have a body underneath my armor. You don;t have to be Artifical Girl 2 explicitness and porno ethics to show a basic model of the body clothed with underwear. I don't know if you hail from the bible belt areas or something but it's just normal to me to be able to see the models of a body when optioned to change armor in any RPG, I'm used to it as are others making the same complaint.

 

Even family games like Sims are able to show this. Understand that there are more adults playing PC games than console. And even Console games walk that line more than NWN1 which reveals more than NWN2.

[roshan]

I noticed some similer themes in how this sort of a discussion is being handled.

 

The discussion does not need to be handled.

 

As I said, I meant no insult, I am just attempting to make the point that everyone is equally responsable for allowing things to be blown out of proportion.

 

I dont think anything has been blown out of proportion.

[Gromnir]

anybody the least familiar with d&d crpgs should know that wotc has a strange pov concerning adult themes.  the whole mirrored mask encounter in nwn2 were a nod to that strange history.  is innumerbale examples of prostitution, drug use, slavery, and the non-specific jiggly that rift seems enamored with, but crpgs since nwn has been different.  one popular explanation is 'possedley that some hasbro big wig sees his pre-teen son playing nwn and realizes that game has a BROTHEL in it.  forebear.  in any event, since that time developers has had much tighter restrictions on adult content in games than wotc seems to demand of print material.

 

troika, being slow learners, did not thinks that new wotc policy regarding adult content in games applied to them.  fools.  so they has to remove their brothel late in development when wotc puts kibosh on it and other stuff in toee. 

 

when black isle were making bg 3 there were numerous developer complaints, and bioware, even though inexplicably they seemed to have been afforded more freedom to do adult content than other developers, also recognized that d&d crpgs woulds have to become more child safe in future.

 

this is well tilled soil.  rift is just getting to the party late.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

lol ..where did I even say I wanted nudity or "jiggly"? That's not me, and you misperceived my statements. I was referring to the basic underwear you see in NWN1 when you remove your armor. It's realistic to me, that's all. I'd like to know I have a body underneath my armor. You don;t have to be Artifical Girl 2 explicitness and porno ethics to show a basic model of the body clothed with underwear. I don't know if you hail from the bible belt areas or something but it's just normal to me to be able to see the models of a body when optioned to change armor in any RPG, I'm used to it as are others making the same complaint.

 

Even family games like Sims are able to show this. Understand that there are more adults playing PC games than console. And even Console games walk that line more than NWN1 which reveals more than NWN2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you ain't asking for real. under heavier armour you typically has a layer of padding worn in addition to clothing, and we cannot thinks of any metalic armour we would ever want to consider wear without clothing beneath. what you want is unrealistic... and we suspect more voyeristic motives in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[kirottu]

I noticed some similer themes in how this sort of a discussion is being handled.

 

The discussion does not need to be handled.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But but we

[Dark_Raven]

you ain't asking for real.  under heavier  armour you typically has a layer of padding worn in addition to clothing, and we cannot thinks of any metalic armour we would ever want to consider wear without clothing beneath.  what you want is unrealistic... and we suspect more voyeristic motives in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOLZ You would be a walking freezer in the cold having that metal touch your skin. Plus the weight of it would dig into you shoulders cutting into you.

[Gromnir]

 

you ain't asking for real.  under heavier  armour you typically has a layer of padding worn in addition to clothing, and we cannot thinks of any metalic armour we would ever want to consider wear without clothing beneath.  what you want is unrealistic... and we suspect more voyeristic motives in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

LOLZ You would be a walking freezer in the cold having that metal touch your skin. Plus the weight of it would dig into you shoulders cutting into you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

not only that, keeps in mind that elastic were invented relatively recent. most underwear in the middle ages were pretty bulky and tended to cover from neck to toe anyways. no elastic socks. no elastic waistbands. etc. knight is gonna wear a gambaison to boot.

 

not real to wear less.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Cantousent]

Actually in these past few threads it has been only the fanboys who have been engaging in namecalling - and these same people have been calling Soulthief a troll. This is obviously unfair, and this must be taken into account before condemning Soulthief for the blob comment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It is true that the defenders should use discretion in their responses. However, soul made a statement concerning my "apathy" because I didn't agree with his point. It's not a matter of the defenders rising up en masse to attack the poor, blameless detractors.

 

Of course, we should be respectful in our discussions. Still, a little heat on the issue isn't so bad as long as the thread doesn't devolve into an outright flamewar. Once that happens, we close the thread, give folks friendly warnings, issue an official warning, or delete the entire thing and forbid the issue as a discussion in its current form. We haven't reached that point yet, but folks in this thread are getting a little close to the edge.

 

For example, please stop calling each other liars, tards, or other such names. I will delete these references in the future and I won't look kindly on folks who use these labels. Liar is a charged term in English, and folks on both sides should avoid using it on others. Tard is simply offensive, and future use will likely result in a warning.

 

You can bash each other a bit. For example, saying I'm "apathetic" is a bit silly, but it's not particularly offensive in and of itself. Calling someone retarded is over the line. You guys are smart. You know where to draw the line. I shouldn't have to draw it for you.

 

EDITed for clarity.

[Riftworm]

anybody the least familiar with d&d crpgs should know that wotc has a strange pov concerning adult themes.  the whole mirrored mask encounter in nwn2 were a nod to that strange history.  is innumerbale examples of prostitution, drug use, slavery, and the non-specific jiggly that rift seems enamored with, but crpgs since nwn has been different.  one popular explanation is 'possedley that some hasbro big wig sees his pre-teen son playing nwn and realizes that game has a BROTHEL in it.  forebear.  in any event, since that time developers has had much tighter restrictions on adult content in games than wotc seems to demand of print material.

 

troika, being slow learners, did not thinks that new wotc policy regarding adult content in games applied to them.  fools.  so they has to remove their brothel late in development when wotc puts kibosh on it and other stuff in toee. 

 

when black isle were making bg 3 there were numerous developer complaints, and bioware, even though inexplicably they seemed to have been afforded more freedom to do adult content than other developers, also recognized that d&d crpgs woulds have to become more child safe in future.

 

this is well tilled soil.  rift is just getting to the party late.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

lol ..where did I even say I wanted nudity or "jiggly"? That's not me, and you misperceived my statements. I was referring to the basic underwear you see in NWN1 when you remove your armor. It's realistic to me, that's all. I'd like to know I have a body underneath my armor. You don;t have to be Artifical Girl 2 explicitness and porno ethics to show a basic model of the body clothed with underwear. I don't know if you hail from the bible belt areas or something but it's just normal to me to be able to see the models of a body when optioned to change armor in any RPG, I'm used to it as are others making the same complaint.

 

Even family games like Sims are able to show this. Understand that there are more adults playing PC games than console. And even Console games walk that line more than NWN1 which reveals more than NWN2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you ain't asking for real. under heavier armour you typically has a layer of padding worn in addition to clothing, and we cannot thinks of any metalic armour we would ever want to consider wear without clothing beneath. what you want is unrealistic... and we suspect more voyeristic motives in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Was the Bioware team being "voyeuristic" in showing underweared models? I seriously doubt that was their motive. Mine is the same. You are correct in that underneath full plate someone would be expected to wear a padded cloth suit. Though I doubt there is any precedent for putting a padded full suit underneath a robe, light armor or 0 base armor clothing. In any case we're talking about fantasy where many here seemed to shoot down the notion that realism applied to armor anyways (I disagree on the grounds that they wouldn't be please seeing blue tights and a red cape on their NWN characters, so Medieval is referenced).

Edited November 26, 2006 by Riftworm

[Gromnir]

anybody the least familiar with d&d crpgs should know that wotc has a strange pov concerning adult themes.  the whole mirrored mask encounter in nwn2 were a nod to that strange history.  is innumerbale examples of prostitution, drug use, slavery, and the non-specific jiggly that rift seems enamored with, but crpgs since nwn has been different.  one popular explanation is 'possedley that some hasbro big wig sees his pre-teen son playing nwn and realizes that game has a BROTHEL in it.  forebear.  in any event, since that time developers has had much tighter restrictions on adult content in games than wotc seems to demand of print material.

 

troika, being slow learners, did not thinks that new wotc policy regarding adult content in games applied to them.  fools.  so they has to remove their brothel late in development when wotc puts kibosh on it and other stuff in toee. 

 

when black isle were making bg 3 there were numerous developer complaints, and bioware, even though inexplicably they seemed to have been afforded more freedom to do adult content than other developers, also recognized that d&d crpgs woulds have to become more child safe in future.

 

this is well tilled soil.  rift is just getting to the party late.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

lol ..where did I even say I wanted nudity or "jiggly"? That's not me, and you misperceived my statements. I was referring to the basic underwear you see in NWN1 when you remove your armor. It's realistic to me, that's all. I'd like to know I have a body underneath my armor. You don;t have to be Artifical Girl 2 explicitness and porno ethics to show a basic model of the body clothed with underwear. I don't know if you hail from the bible belt areas or something but it's just normal to me to be able to see the models of a body when optioned to change armor in any RPG, I'm used to it as are others making the same complaint.

 

Even family games like Sims are able to show this. Understand that there are more adults playing PC games than console. And even Console games walk that line more than NWN1 which reveals more than NWN2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you ain't asking for real. under heavier armour you typically has a layer of padding worn in addition to clothing, and we cannot thinks of any metalic armour we would ever want to consider wear without clothing beneath. what you want is unrealistic... and we suspect more voyeristic motives in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Was the Bioware team being "voyeuristic" in showing underweared models? I seriously doubt that was their motive. Mine is the same. Youa re correct in thaat underneath full plate someone would be expected to wear a padded cloth suit. Though I doubt there is any precedent for putting a padded full suit underneath a robe, light armor or 0 base armor clothing. In any case we're talking about fantasy where many here seemed to shoot down the notion that realism applied to armor anyways (I disagree int he grounds that they wouldn't be please seeing blue tights and a red cape ont heir NWN characters, so Medieval is referenced).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

will you make up your mind? you want realism or fantasy?

 

and yeah, under robes, especially in a northern climate, we would expect full clothing to be worn. neverwinter ain't a city on the med you know. oh, and leather armour is not as supple as those leather pants you no doubt got in your jiggly drawer. leather armour is not worn next to skin neither. all nwn2 avatars would have to be redrawn with some serious chafe marks/wounds to get your kinda realism.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 26, 2006 by Gromnir

[Riftworm]

anybody the least familiar with d&d crpgs should know that wotc has a strange pov concerning adult themes.  the whole mirrored mask encounter in nwn2 were a nod to that strange history.  is innumerbale examples of prostitution, drug use, slavery, and the non-specific jiggly that rift seems enamored with, but crpgs since nwn has been different.  one popular explanation is 'possedley that some hasbro big wig sees his pre-teen son playing nwn and realizes that game has a BROTHEL in it.  forebear.  in any event, since that time developers has had much tighter restrictions on adult content in games than wotc seems to demand of print material.

 

troika, being slow learners, did not thinks that new wotc policy regarding adult content in games applied to them.  fools.  so they has to remove their brothel late in development when wotc puts kibosh on it and other stuff in toee. 

 

when black isle were making bg 3 there were numerous developer complaints, and bioware, even though inexplicably they seemed to have been afforded more freedom to do adult content than other developers, also recognized that d&d crpgs woulds have to become more child safe in future.

 

this is well tilled soil.  rift is just getting to the party late.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

lol ..where did I even say I wanted nudity or "jiggly"? That's not me, and you misperceived my statements. I was referring to the basic underwear you see in NWN1 when you remove your armor. It's realistic to me, that's all. I'd like to know I have a body underneath my armor. You don;t have to be Artifical Girl 2 explicitness and porno ethics to show a basic model of the body clothed with underwear. I don't know if you hail from the bible belt areas or something but it's just normal to me to be able to see the models of a body when optioned to change armor in any RPG, I'm used to it as are others making the same complaint.

 

Even family games like Sims are able to show this. Understand that there are more adults playing PC games than console. And even Console games walk that line more than NWN1 which reveals more than NWN2.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

you ain't asking for real. under heavier armour you typically has a layer of padding worn in addition to clothing, and we cannot thinks of any metalic armour we would ever want to consider wear without clothing beneath. what you want is unrealistic... and we suspect more voyeristic motives in any event.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Was the Bioware team being "voyeuristic" in showing underweared models? I seriously doubt that was their motive. Mine is the same. Youa re correct in thaat underneath full plate someone would be expected to wear a padded cloth suit. Though I doubt there is any precedent for putting a padded full suit underneath a robe, light armor or 0 base armor clothing. In any case we're talking about fantasy where many here seemed to shoot down the notion that realism applied to armor anyways (I disagree int he grounds that they wouldn't be please seeing blue tights and a red cape ont heir NWN characters, so Medieval is referenced).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

will you make up your mind? you want realism or fantasy?

 

and yeah, under robes, especially in a northern climate, we would expect full clothing to be worn. neverwinter ain't a city on the med you know.

 

HA! Good Fun!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I prefer to see the models body in underwear when I change my armor. I prefer to see underweared models as an option for any host of reasons when modding. I'm no pervert for wanting to see that. To me the underlying principle is that this should be an option to me as a modder, not restrictive. The same can be said about the NWN2 campaign where it's more restrictive on two fronts than the NWN1 OC, I both cant freely explore, nor can I attack a villager. These things may seem childish or corny or stupid to you, but they seem "free" to me. And ultimately far more immersive. Is it reality that people walk around plotted in god mode when they have no integral use to the story? Is it realistic that I have a predetermined path I cant wander from?

 

..

Edited November 26, 2006 by Riftworm

[Krookie]

can you guys quit quoting each other?

[Gromnir]

josh, can you please add a full range of hose accesories to nwn2. our immersion is destroyed without gambaison and hose options. and while you is at it, bring back aribeth armour.

 

on second thought, just get practiced spellcaster and augment summoning/healing feats into game and forget 'bout silly minutae like adding underwear.

 

in any event, rift already gots reason why skin is not in with wotc as far as crpgs is concerned, so we cannot figure out why this line o' nonsense continues.

 

"And ultimately far more immersive."

 

is far more immersive because it is unrealistic or because it is more fantastical? we can't keep up with you on this issue. we get that you like naked better. fine. even when you has been told why your demand is iimpossible, and you has been confronted with the reality that your demand is actually less realistic than the nwn2 status quo, you still contend that this is a reason that nwn1 is better than nwn2?

 

...

 

okie dokie.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 26, 2006 by Gromnir

[kirottu]

Maybe they could add underwear over the clothes?

[Gromnir]

btw, we understand that to get list to 50 rift had to conjure up some pretty ridiculous stuff. we wish that he/she woulda' simply stuck with serious concerns rather than using hyperbole.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Bokishi]

Did medieval people even wear underwear?

[Sand]

I will never understand the prudishness of people not wanting to see nudity. For godsakes people, do you wear clothes in the shower?

[Krookie]

depends if my parents are home.

[Sargallath Abraxium]

 

 

...I gotta say, Grommy's last few posts damn near made me piss meself...all this talk 'bout butt-piercin's an' hose accessories makes Baby Jebus smile, I tells ya...

 

 

...WHO LUVS YA, BABY!!...

Edited November 26, 2006 by Sargallath Abraxium

[Sand]

depends if my parents are home.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

[Krookie]

Edited November 26, 2006 by Krookie

[Bokishi]

Krookie, that made no sense at all.

[Riftworm]

That wasn't a response to my comments Gromnir. You seem more content on exaggerating my statements and answering your own exaggerations than responding to my specific comments. And nowhere did I say that was the only reason NWN1 was better than NWN2. The "skin" you seem so afraid of, is one issue out of 50.

 

My interpretation of realism is realized and fufilled to my satisfaction in NWN1, but not in NWN2, for many reasons beyond the underwear issue.

 

And what you consider ridiculous about my 50 reasons list, I do not. And the many others here that have agreed with the points in there I'm fairly certain do not either, or else they wouldn't have agreed.

 

-

Edited November 27, 2006 by Riftworm

[Cantousent]

I think your points as a group are by and large ridiculous. Some of the points you make are actually valid, but more for NWN2 in general rather than as a comparison between NWN and NWN2. Overall, your presentation has made it hard to figure out which points have any real weight.

 

For instance, you rail against Obsidian because of the detail on the character clothing. When Sawyer cites WotC's role as the licensor, you ignore him or make comments that essentially pain him a liar. That's simply not reasonable. This is especially true since it doesn't make sense for Sawyer to lie regarding this issue. Moreover, what he says seems reasonable in light of other DnD games we've seen in recent years. Blaming Obsidian because WotC doesn't allow for greater latitude doesn't just seem wrongminded. It's small-minded. It's petty.

 

It's a non-issue and raling about it detracts from other, legitimate points you have.

 

The weapons/armor issue is a different beast. We could have a more or less reasonable discussion regarding this aspect. I don't agree with you on the issue because, simply put, it's nuts to suggest that the way designers depict weapons and armor in these games is "accurate" or "realistic" at any rate. Folks want realism, but only realism on their terms. A number of folks running around dueling with halberds or pikes? Sure. :Eldar's shaking his head chuckling icon:

 

All we need now is someone to come along and say that firearms killed armor.

 

Then someone can say that cannons brought the end of fortifications.

 

Then Sawyer can jump in with both feet and lecture us at length concerning air power.

 

Realism is great, but the sheer number and types of weapons Bioware depicted in NWN1 was not particularly realistic. It wasn't really meant to be. That was a concession made to fun rather than realism. Of course, in addition to being a web-designers, graphic artists, and authories on all game design issues, I'm sure some of you folks have a PhD in history or some such.

 

...But we can't get that far. We're too busy discussing whether or not Sawyer is telling us the truth. You'd really better be careful about insinuating folks are lying around here. The fact that WotC's double standard regarding the license is well known and disputing it undermines other arguments.

 

You guys don't have to die on every hill. Choose one that makes more sense.