JarlFrank said:
Also, Hory...
you previously mentioned "RPG without tactics". So generally, what you dislike most are the blob-combat crawlers, right? Would you play and enjoy an RPG with combat as its main component and a small amount of character interaction [with meaningful C&C], if it was isometric, terrain had an effect and you actually had to use your characters' abilities to succeed? [like, where more things count than just numbers and you have to think and use tactics] I wonder about that, because you never directly attack the combat, only the "you only have to calculate to win".
I probably would play that, but not if it was another D&D adaptation or LotR-setting ripoff. E.g. ToEE.
Darth Roxor said:
Why, yes, definitely, thanks for proving my point.
However, DUNG-ON KRAWLURZ DUN NEED TACTIX!!111
Castanova said:
Hory's entire argument revolves around that dungeon crawlers are just math and, since 6 year olds can do math, 6 year olds can play dungeon crawlers effectively.
That's just the exaggerated version of the argument, but it's not far from the truth, unfortunately. The serious version is that dungeon crawling is largely a dumb activity.
Except he forgot about the analogous argument: C&C is just reading and, since 6 year olds can read, 6 year olds can play C&C games effectively.
Wrong, C&C is about reading, understanding and interacting. Simple example of just reading: me playing SC2 as a kid, and not being able to finish it because I didn't really understand enough and was unable to interact accordingly. And C&C doesn't even have to be about reading! Choices don't have to be presented nor chosen textually. Even attacking a NPC is a "choice" - which in dungeon crawler usually has no consequence other than other NPCs might become hostile.
Fact is, Hory continues to describe a game that doesn't exist. A dream game where NPCs act like real people, present true challenges in dialog.
Whether it exists or not doesn't influence my argument that dungeon crawlers are retarded. And these games do exist - P&P RPGs. And if you mean video games only, try
Facade.
It's like Hory's argument boils down to: every RPG in existence is for children. It's just that certain RPGs are for older children.
Most RPGs can be enjoyed by children. Some RPGs can be enjoyed by adults, but dungeon crawlers are usually enjoyed by taste-lacking no-life adults.
Hory, the reason you're being called a LARPer is not because you dress up like an Elf and frolic in your local public park with a plastic sword. The reason you're a LARPer is because you're playing RPGs like Fallout on your computer and, in your mind, you're experiencing amazing choices & consequences and tactical combat, the likes of which are a feast for the true intellectual. You're LARPing a person playing C&C simulators while you're really just playing an isometric RPG with fewer combat situations than usual.
I know why he calls me a LARPer. But I still like to laugh at his inability to use words with their correct meaning.
JarlFrank said:
What I don't understand is how he degrades dungeon crawlers to numbers only.
Last time I played a dungeon crawler I had to use the skills of my party effectively in order to win a battle. Just being good at maths didn't really help.
I claim that the actions you must take in battle are effectively so obvious, straightforward and repetitive, in dungeon crawlers, as to not even be considered as a gameplay element worthy of being mentioned. There are a lot of enemies in one place, you cast fireball. Do they have fire protection? You cast the next most powerful spell for which they don't have resistence. Does their mage have the highest damage? Attack him first. And so on. As I said, this is so simple a bot could be scripted to do it. Yet everyone likes to pretend how much more smarter thy are than Oblivion fans, because they play games with a lot of numbers.