Major_Blackhart
Codexia Lord Sodom
Dude, as pumped as I was over Arcanum, first fucking thing I did was read the goddamn manual.
I dunno but MCA is a pretty good wHine maker. HA.So basically we arguing how a wine maker lacks qualification for his job if he's not good at getting drunk?
He proved this a long time ago.So just so I understand this thread, Chris Avellone just proved himself to be a Hepler-tier gamer?
That's Planescape Torment and most Obsidian games all right.Josh Sawyer said:This will probably sound really bad, but I don't think most RPG designers actually think about gameplay -- especially not core gameplay. I think this is due to a few problems: first, some gamers (and even some game devs) view gameplay as a chore. They are quite vocal about wanting to pursue the story and characters more as a choose-your-own adventure novel than as an integral part of a role-playing game. Because of this, designers often focus on the creative aspects of RPGs to a fault -- essentially letting the core gameplay elements fall by the wayside. The result is, unsurprisingly, worse gameplay that even more players are loathe to engage.
New Vegas has fun gameplay, so decrees Sawyer and the millions who bought it (more than Fallout 3).Including New Vegas.
Millions also bought Skyrim proving that it has better "gameplay". Or wait, how about CoD? Ditch the argument from authority.New Vegas has fun gameplay, so decrees Sawyer and the millions who bought it (more than Fallout 3).Including New Vegas.
There's a huge difference between how they handled kotor2 and NV in regards to gameplay.
See when you say things like this I find it difficult to take you seriously.Hilariously, skills increase damage of your firearms. Yes, that is how guns work.
Well I'm sorry for asking for consistency. Fallout doesn't have majix, but now it has apparently. Having your skill increase the lethality of a bullet is inconsistent with the game world. You can call it a cry for immershun if you want to. Deus Ex did it better. Yes, it also had damage increase depending on skill, but it was like 10%, i.e. basically none, but the difference in reload speed, accuracy and recoil was huuuuuuuge which made or broke a gun for you.See when you say things like this I find it difficult to take you seriously.Hilariously, skills increase damage of your firearms. Yes, that is how guns work.
New Vegas has some of the best shooting combat of any shooter with role playing. Pseudosimulationist suckers need not apply. /self-evident
So abstractions are only conveniently believable outside action-oriented gameplay? Is increasing your science, medicine, first aid skills by killing scorpions and rats in Fallout 1/2 consistent with its game world, then?
"Abstraction" means taking a real-life concept and eliminating unnecessary characteristics from it while retaining the relevant ones. Making up nonsensical shit has got nothing to do with it.So abstractions are only conveniently believable outside action-oriented gameplay?
"Abstraction" means taking a real-life concept and eliminating unnecessary characteristics from it while retaining the relevant ones. Making up nonsensical shit has got nothing to do with it.So abstractions are only conveniently believable outside action-oriented gameplay?
That's the developers' decision, obviously. I'm just reiterating the dictionary definition here.And how, exactly, can you determine what constitutes irrelevant and unnecessary in a representation of something
I don't know, does that have anything to do with whether NV's gunplay makes any sense? Curing eye damage with a doctor's bag is a simplified version of performing eye surgery, i.e. an abstraction. Having bullets do a different amount of damage based on who's pulling the trigger is reinventing the laws of physics, i.e. not an abstraction.and that the ability of a character to shoot a gun determining in-game damage be a less accurate depiction of real-life than, say, using something like Luck to determine critical hit chance? Or curing eye damage with a doctor's bag?