| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Applebrown
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Posts: 36
Location: Canada |
Scratch. I just thought about it more. 4 categories.
STORY
CHARACTERS (includes PCs and NPCs as always)
COMBAT
INTERACTION
25 in each category ideally.
I'm going to combine both interactions because I think that I can accurately describe all the pertinent interaction of the world in 25 conditions.
Still 100 total, but this is more streamlined, and I like it better.
Applebrown |
Thu Feb 13, 2003 2:43 am |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote:
Originally posted by Applebrown
Just wanted to add that Michael, I think overall you and I are trying to accomplish different things.
I'm not so sure our goal is that different when I read the rest of your post, but perhaps out methods still are.
You are intending to give a scale of how "deep" or "heavy" the RPG is, while at the same time, giving it the benefit of the doubt that it is indeed an RPG.
This is quite an accurate statement, about my intensions, but I also believe that it covers a great deal about the player "freedom" question.
What I'm trying to do is rate it on an ideal "realism in any imaginary world" (to use what I wrote above) scale, whether in fact how far it reaches to that fixed point where the game has all the features of that ultimate realism in an imaginary world. I'm trying to make my criteria actually so that if an action game accidentally slipped into the review pile, the system would be robust enough to rate it, and actually show a low score.
Realism is one thing, and freedom is equally important. Ex: Night/Day shift could add to Realism. More character professions adds to more freedom for the player!
I might find later that eventually there's an equally valid RPG game out there that totally shatters all the criteria I will have, and that I can't deny it in the slightest that it's in all ways an RPG. So then I'd have to revise it. But I'm trying to make the criteria so that it could still include something I haven't thought of. Neither yours nor mine will cover all bases. But if they get us further ahead with thinking deeper thoughts, then it will have all been worth it.
I guess we always can find a game or two which challenge any system for border decisions. We can only try to refine the system accordingly when it happens, in the meanwhile hopefully 98% of all other games are easy to put into the system, and get a deserved result.
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Thu Feb 13, 2003 9:48 am |
|
|
cybersaber
Village Dweller
Joined: 13 Feb 2003
Posts: 1
|
| Time ot throw a monkey wrentch into things... |
|
Okay, I have just forced my unwilling brain to read 95% of all 15 pages of post dating back to september of last year. It wasn't pretty, and it took some threats of blunt force trauma to my brain, but I got most of it read.
Unfortunately I have not had the luxury of four months to digest some of the material fully, and I will not post any critiuqes of the dual systems zealously fought over by thier two creators here until I have digested it all.
That being said, I want to get my foot in the door with the following ideas:
I would define a pure RPG as "an interactive story told from the first-person, where you have direct control of only your alter-ego, and must affect your environment through either physical direct action or by persuasion of other beings to comply with your will."
It can be more or less than this, but it must at least strictly adhere to this standard to be "pure" RPG. Deviation introduces hybridization, such as the DM in D&D who is too lazy to roleplay all his NPCs, and so gives the PC direct control over them (perhaps subject to restrictions) and this makes the game an RPG/Strategy hybrid.
Any objective scales we create should measure the compliance of a game to that statement, as well as the degree of mimesis acheived. (click the word mimesis above to access a technical definition)
Thus, a game could be big or small, customizable or not, "scripted" or not, open-ended or not.
Open-ended is a poor term, by the way. Both a human GM and a computer can end the game in whatever state they choose. The Gm could fall over dead or the computer could lose power at any time. "GM/game flexibility" would be a more accurate term, in the sense that it would denote the ablity to go off the map, or do something unexpected more accurately than the former term. Besides, a COMPLETELY open ended scenario is a simulation, not a game. You can't play a game with no end conditions.
Also, "scripted" is a likewise poor term. It is unnecessarily prejorative, because by having rules, all games have built in scripting. A human GM can just addapt the script on the fly is all.
There are some biases in some people's thinking here so far, such as humanoid-centric thinking - such as ability to custize equipment or clothing. What if I was a round red ball? I would have no need of such things, but that would in no way preclude making a game into a pure RPG.
This can still be fun, but it is not a "pure" rpg.
Thus, all that out of the way, perhaps some major categories should be:
Preservation of mimesis (for those of you who didn't read or didn't understand that definition above, this means that a PC should never experiece something that destroys or interferes with the sense that they ARE the PC, or that makes the suspension of disbelief impossible)
Thus a perfect "score" might not be desirable for some players, as a game that is perfect in every sense, but likes to poke fun at itself or other games necessarily harms mimesis for the sake of a - hopefully - good joke. (Fallout comes to mind - not in the sense that it's perfect but that it has that sort of humor in it)
This category would make it unnecessary to list specifcs of the game world as all it would care about is, "Has the designer made the universe believable?" and "Are the PC's experiences consistent with the universe created for him, and his situation?" Thus, day/night/age/etc questions could all be summed up in this one area, without any bias created by our real lives.
NOW, after that is all said and done, we could create a companion scale that we could use to compare it to our sujbective ideals. This could include EVERYBODY's ideals, with those that the reviewer doesn't feel qualified to comment on due to bias/inexperience, etc, (such as an old skooler like me reviewing the storyline of a hack-n-slash game, or someone who hates third-person games) able to abstain from filling out certain sections, or to at least put comments explaining their bias someone. This would not assign an overall value, but would rather assign numbers to different categories, like MC's without worrying about subjectivity.
Anyway, I'm outta time to rant and post ideas, or spellcheck even. Feel free to pick this post apart at your leisure fellas. |
|
Thu Feb 13, 2003 8:13 pm |
|
|
Applebrown
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Posts: 36
Location: Canada |
Hi cybersaber. Welcome.
quote:
I would define a pure RPG....
This is what I want to get away from. Having to define "pure" and "hybrid". You know, we don't need to throw the word pure at any game, since it's such a subjective word anyway (not a bad thing but not what I'm at least aiming for), and then shoot it off into space as one of the only "pure" RPG's, destined to hold that badge forever. Really, so what if a game is "pure"? I'll admit, I have my favorite stories written by my favorite author(s), that I think no one can possibly top. But really, how is that helping anything? It doesn't mean that Joe Dufass, 3rd year in 8th grade, can't come up with something resembling a story... even if it blows and is not "pure" by educated standards.
If you really want to define pure and have it count, then how about making up a scale that has pure at one end and unpure at the other, and see what that achieves (which admittedly might be just as much as any of our ideas).
quote:
It can be more or less than this, but it must at least strictly adhere to this standard to be "pure" RPG.
My scale attempts to not really care what type of game it is, but is going to judge it on the freedom scale regardless, which I believe RPG's usually aspire to do anyway. Even though I don't have all 25 criteria down, now's as good a time as any to show some of the conditions of my story segment. It's definitely not done yet and not organized. There are still the CHARACTERS, COMBAT and INTERACTION conditions to put down, some of which I have also written down but am not showing now.
STORY
:: Game starting location is affected by choice of PC(s) during character generation
:: Choice of PC(s) during character creation has a distinct impact on at least part of the story
:: Game has many interim quests that are not a part of the main story
:: Quests take on more than one type: ex: fetch item, then bring to location or back to source
:: Many quests may be completed in more than two fashions, according to the skills of the PC(s)
:: Interim quests not central to the main story often have more than one step required for their completion
:: Each quest involving the main storyline often has more than one step required for its completion
:: It is possible for the PC(s) to distinctly alter the course of the main story during gameplay
:: The story has multiple distinct endings based on the PC(s) actions
:: It is possible for PC(s) to play through both constructively and destructively and still successfully reach an ending
:: Story offers multiple angles of emotional involvement: ex: love, sadness, joy, fear, anger
:: Many quests following the main storyline do not have to be completed in a specific order
:: PC(s) can read about the lore of the world from objects placed in the game world
:: Players may access an in-game quest journal to aid in keeping track of quests
:: Players may write their own notes of the story with an in-game journal
:: The main story branches in several places: i.e. the player must miss several parts each time through
:: Many quests are given through more than just one medium, i.e. NPC's
:: Multiple quests have some sort of time requirement
:: Multiple quests have no time requirement
:: Game includes multiple NPC factions with different agendas
:: Alliances are possible between PC(s) and various factions, hurting your standing with other factions
:: Alliances with different factions may be broken, switched, and remade within the course of the game
:: NPC faction agendas can have an impact on the difficulty of both main quests and interim quests
quote:
Also, "scripted" is a likewise poor term. It is unnecessarily prejorative,
I'm sure you mean pejorative. Can you explain where you saw it that it shouldn't be used?
quote:
There are some biases in some people's thinking here so far, such as humanoid-centric thinking - such as ability to custize equipment or clothing. What if I was a round red ball? I would have no need of such things, but that would in no way preclude making a game into a pure RPG.
You're exactly right. So, in my scale as I've explained a few times above, there is an n/a category. Any condition that is not possible (and is explained or is obvious) will receive an n/a and it will not count against the game. But seriously, many of the conditions that I'll have will be easily translated to account for a PC being a Ball. The ball will still have to gain abilities such as bouncing higher, resisting gravity, etc. It will still be given quests by other NPC balls or other objects. So I think I'll cross that bridge when it comes.
By the way, the story elements above I'd really like some comments on. If you think they should be there, changed, etc, please let me know. What they need to encompass is specificity yet adaptive to include many different games. There will be a Yes answer if the condition is satisfied, a No if it's not (and can possibly be), and an n/a answer if it doesn't apply and is explained or obvious why it doesn't. And if you can add a couple more it would be good too. It's possible I missed some critical story elements... but it's not done yet. 
Applebrown |
|
Thu Feb 13, 2003 10:11 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
Welcome Cybersaber.
If you have read almost all the previous posts, you must got a lot of spare time on your hand. 
Regarding "pure" RPG's, I'm with Applebrown and his comments regarding this subject.
If we want a deeper score system, I think we can't avoid subjectivity completely, and the trick is not only to find the criterias, but also formulate them so, that they clearly can be answered explicit no matter the reviewers bias to the game.
Applebrown: Your story criterias, is looking very interseting so far, it's clearly that you have put in some serious thought into them, and I already have thought about some comments too. But I will however digest a little more on your list, and come back with a more fully comment range.
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Fri Feb 14, 2003 9:04 am |
|
|
NamelessOne
Village Dweller
Joined: 23 Feb 2003
Posts: 1
Location: Gainesville, FL |
Taken at it's broadest sense, any game in which you assume a role would be an RPG, so Duke Nukem and Lara Croft, and even Grim Fandango would be considered RPGs. And the truest example of this sort would be Half-Life. Although probably no one on this forum would consider these games RPGs.
To me, the most important aspect of an RPG is that their is character development that it directed by the player.
Secondly is choices in the gameplay.
Take a game like Anachronox or Septerra Core. To me these are really adventure games, and not RPGs at all. Sure, your characters develop, gain levels and abilities, and you can buy things to equip them better and improve their abilities, but you have no freedom or choice in how they develop. Moreover, you have really no choice in how you play the game. It's just a bunch of conversation and inventory puzzles until your done. (Yes I have no respect for console RPGs.)
As far as Thief goes, it is one of my favorite games of all times, but I can't consider it an RPG, except in the broadest of definitions. Both Thief and Half-Life have an amazing amount of freedom in how you play them (even though Thief is mission based), but neither of them has any true character development except for new equipment... but then again, who in real life kills their hundreth cave slime and gains five units of strength for it?
_________________
____________________________________
Wha? Sig what? I don't understand... |
|
Sun Feb 23, 2003 5:54 am |
|
|
Ceyan
Village Dweller
Joined: 03 Mar 2003
Posts: 1
|
Note: I didn't have the will power to read all 15 pages, so several of the ideas/concepts I bring up might have already been discussed.
-----------------------------------------
You people have been approaching this from the wrong direction. A genre has to be identified by something it has that no other genre has.
For example, Strategy games involve managing economy (to some extent, anything from something like Civ (obvious management) to Command & Conquer (managing your credits to build units)) while tactical games are pure combat oriented, no much else to manage. Adventure games have you managing some sort of character through a world focused on non-combat related actions. Action games focus on combat related actions. Simulation games involve in depth physics/realism in the scope of the game content. And so on...
Since the dawn of console/PC gaming, all games (that I personally know of, and trust me I've watched the RPG "scene" for several years, and I've gone back and researched/played any old rpgs I could get my hand on) and the one component console/PC rpgs have over any other genre is the engine. Before I elaborate, take this into considering, several games may have been considered RPGs but don't fit into my reasoning category (the old text-based games, games like Baldur's Gate, etc... They are classified as RPGs in general, but they don't fit into my reasoning, I'll get to that later). Basically it's like this, the engine you use to walk around with (adventure or for just viewing cinematics) is different from the engine you use to do other actions (such as combat). Final Fantasy is a good example, you wander around on a map (be it a world, dungeon, whatever) and when you engage in combat you move into a complete (or nearly completely different screen), a shift in the engine.
Now, as I mentioned above, several games people would swear are RPGs don't fit into this category. A RPG is a role playing game, basically you become someone else (anyone who hasn't played a pen&paper RPG won't understand this, so if you haven't played one before you shouldn't even be discussing RPGs because you have no idea what a true RPG is), which is the biggest limitation of console/PC RPGs. You simply can't play a RPG on a console/PC, because you require total freedom to manipulate your character (role) in any way you want (within the limits of the physical world, again, concept from pen&paper). So, tell me, can you play a console/PC rpg, walk up to a NPC and say any sort of line you want and have them give a total random line back each time you do that, while having both conversations make sense? No, you can't, it's literally impossible given our current technology, there has to be limit somewhere because you dealing with coded AI, not a sentient being.
Now, a few examples to prove what I meant about Baldur's Gate and text-based games. First of all, text-based games are not RPGs, they are either adventure or action dependent upon the content simply because that's all you can do in a text-based game (trust me, I've played plenty of them (Hell, I'm a MUD freak myself)) interaction in text-based games is extremely limited. Baldur's Gate is an easy one to describe, sure it uses D&D (classic pen&paper system) standards, but just because it uses that doesn't mean it's an RPG, Really, I could play Grand Theft Auto all I want but I'll never be able to classify it as a Racing Sim. These kind of loopholes exist in all RPGs that don't fit into my reasoning. However, if you look back on it, my reasoning fits in with all games that you can't find a loophole. Of course you may find one or two games that think "outside the box" but that's true in any genre, 95% of the time my reasoning works perfectly. |
|
Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:12 am |
|
|
Applebrown
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Posts: 36
Location: Canada |
Ceyan, welcome to the discussion, but I'm not going to bother to quote what you said because you bring up a lot of topics that don't make much sense to me. As you didn't have the time to read at least the last 5 pages or so, I don't have the time to quote and try to counterargue most of what you said.
You said we're approaching this from the wrong direction. Would you mind telling us what you mean by the term "this" in the statement preceeding this one? What are we approaching wrongly? That might clarify your position a little more, because we honestly have covered just about the gamut from the RPG perspective.
I really don't get your connection between the engine of a game and the genre. Certainly some genres fall into using a particular type of game engine for the typical game, but honestly I can name RPG's that have used isometric 2D, 3D, 1st person, top down, etc. engines, and that really doesn't define a genre for me. Strategy games have used 2D, 3D, first person, space, etc. So many engines from different genres cross each other, that to classify a genre even mostly on its engine seems unwise at the least.
Before you respond, please do us a favor and read at least the last 5 pages. We've really come a long way with a direction, or at least like to think so.
Applebrown |
|
Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:34 am |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
Hi Ceyan: I'm like "Applebrown" not convinced about your arguments for us using the wrong approach, and your "engine" conclussion can't I connect to a deeper RPG-element filled game either. You have to explain further.
Applebrown: The more I read your suggestions, the less comments I actually got, but I still got some minor complains on your STORY topics:
quote:
Originally posted by Applebrown
STORY
:: Game starting location is affected by choice of PC(s) during character generation
Nice one.
:: Choice of PC(s) during character creation has a distinct impact on at least part of the story
This one will lead to discussions (distinct impact) is not precise enough, and this is one of the topics that needs more levels
:: Game has many interim quests that are not a part of the main story
How many is many??? And again isn't 50+ interim quests better than 15, or don't it give the game deeper RPG ness of freedom.
:: Quests take on more than one type: ex: fetch item, then bring to location or back to source
Okay
:: Many quests may be completed in more than two fashions, according to the skills of the PC(s)
Precise enough!
:: Interim quests not central to the main story often have more than one step required for their completion.
All of them or just a few of them needs to fulfill this criteria???
:: Each quest involving the main storyline often has more than one step required for its completion
Okay
:: It is possible for the PC(s) to distinctly alter the course of the main story during gameplay
The topic is okay but how much is "distinctly"???
:: The story has multiple distinct endings based on the PC(s) actions
Again unprecise adjectives leading to biased discussions
:: It is possible for PC(s) to play through both constructively and destructively and still successfully reach an ending
Check
:: Story offers multiple angles of emotional involvement: ex: love, sadness, joy, fear, anger
Is 3 angles enough???
:: Many quests following the main storyline do not have to be completed in a specific order
Is 3 enough???
:: PC(s) can read about the lore of the world from objects placed in the game world
Okay
:: Players may access an in-game quest journal to aid in keeping track of quests
ahh, it sure is convenient, but I'm not sure it's enhancing the RPG-feeling?
:: Players may write their own notes of the story with an in-game journal
Like my answer above.
:: The main story branches in several places: i.e. the player must miss several parts each time through
Several???
:: Many quests are given through more than just one medium, i.e. NPC's
Okay
:: Multiple quests have some sort of time requirement
Multiple???, otherwise nice topic
:: Multiple quests have no time requirement
Multiple???, otherwise nice topic
:: Game includes multiple NPC factions with different agendas
Multiple???, otherwise nice topic
:: Alliances are possible between PC(s) and various factions, hurting your standing with other factions.
various???, otherwise good topic.
:: Alliances with different factions may be broken, switched, and remade within the course of the game
Okay
:: NPC faction agendas can have an impact on the difficulty of both main quests and interim quests
Okay
Applebrown
Actually in the beginning, I would have comment on you missing the topic about a frequently developing main story, but after some consideration, I can see that some of your other topics scratches the topic indirectly, but I still would suggest a specific line with this involving issue.
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Mon Mar 03, 2003 10:59 am |
|
|
Applebrown
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 13 Nov 2002
Posts: 36
Location: Canada |
Excellent comments Michael, thanks. Over the last couple weeks I've been focusing much of my time working on an NWN module so haven't allowed myself much time to work on this but it's been in my mind.
Anyway, I will give what you said some thought, and try and remodel some and perhaps reword others. When I used "distinct" in a couple places, you could substitute the word "noticeable"... and if it's too confusing I might change that. If something has a noticeable impact because they're playing a "Nord" character for instance, as opposed to "Balonian", on the main storyline, then that's a feature that I don't believe needs to be further clarified. If you notice it, it's good.
And to some others, I'll see if I can address somehow the "more is better" approach you favor.
Applebrown |
|
Mon Mar 03, 2003 2:36 pm |
|
|
The Big Joke
Village Dweller
Joined: 07 Mar 2003
Posts: 1
|
quote:
essential for crpgs:
- quests, goals, tasks, assignments, your character/party have to do
- skills, characteristics, ranks, that can be improved
- items, weapons, armour,... to find, to buy or to get in quests
- a good story
- fun
Id say that i somewhat agree whit you. But i dont see skills as somthing important. Its there in most CRPGs (yes the c has to be there if its about computer roleplaying games), but it does not have to be.
I dont agree whit weapons, armour and things like that ether.
What it does need is:
A strong story (no, Diablo 2 does not have this)
A social part (and saying Go kill big dragon is not good enought)
The ability to chose path trought the adventure.
There are not many CRPGs that fits in there. Almost non realy.
(daggerfall is an exeption )
When it comes to MMOCRPG than the requiraments are a bit diferant:
A world that is open, and has a strong and interesting story.
A good way to socialise whit other players
Roleplaying people.
Worth pointing out is that i play pen and paper RPG and it makes me react diferant to most CRPGs. |
|
Fri Mar 07, 2003 5:12 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote:
Originally posted by The Big Joke
quote:
essential for crpgs:
- quests, goals, tasks, assignments, your character/party have to do
- skills, characteristics, ranks, that can be improved
- items, weapons, armour,... to find, to buy or to get in quests
- a good story
- fun
Id say that i somewhat agree whit you. But i dont see skills as somthing important. Its there in most CRPGs (yes the c has to be there if its about computer roleplaying games), but it does not have to be.
I dont agree whit weapons, armour and things like that ether.
What it does need is:
A strong story (no, Diablo 2 does not have this)
A social part (and saying Go kill big dragon is not good enought)
The ability to chose path trought the adventure.
There are not many CRPGs that fits in there. Almost non realy.
(daggerfall is an exeption )
When it comes to MMOCRPG than the requiraments are a bit diferant:
A world that is open, and has a strong and interesting story.
A good way to socialise whit other players
Roleplaying people.
Worth pointing out is that i play pen and paper RPG and it makes me react diferant to most CRPGs.
Hi B.J.
Skills and items, may not define any roleplaying elements in them self, and I can imagine a good CRPG without those two topics, but they will probably be called adventures instead on the PC. I believe that the main question here is about the importants of character development in a CRPG. None would apply more to an adventure games, or action games in the PC world I guess. I think besides "roleplaying" your character and developing a story and interact with NPC's, the character development gives the game another dimension and freedom to evolve your character as you choose.
Skills & items are certainly 2 topics which can add to the freedom of character development.
MMOCRPG do mostly have a wide open gameworld, and live characters to interact with, but I also would like that feeling in a single player game. I know computer AI will still come short to many live characters, but as close as it can get, is also a + in my book in a single player game.
We can agree on a "strong story" and a "social impact" as very important topics, but the trick is how to define the criterias, so they really covers those topics without leaving the choice at the more or less biased reviewers.
Applebrown and I have tried to make a list of criterias which can define a strong open evolving story. Even though we don't agree on each criteria, I think we are not that far apart from each other on the "story side".
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Mon Mar 10, 2003 10:22 am |
|
|
Ariel
Harmonious Angel
Joined: 21 Jul 2001
Posts: 432
Location: Germany |
Hello there, once again! Everyone in for another round?
quote:
Originally posted by cybersaber
There are some biases in some people's thinking here so far, such as humanoid-centric thinking - such as ability to custize equipment or clothing. What if I was a round red ball? I would have no need of such things, but that would in no way preclude making a game into a pure RPG.
I was the one talking about some kind of humanoid requirement. I admit that humanoid is too hard a term, so make it "sentient being" and we're set. Your idea of mimesis is very interesting but as far as lifeless objects are concerned, such as a red ball, I think it only works if you impose human conditions on those objects. You are a human and are as such bound to think as a human. Lifeless objects usually don't think or move by themselves.
quote:
Originally posted by Applebrown
quote:
Originally posted by cybersaber
Also, "scripted" is a likewise poor term. It is unnecessarily prejorative, because by having rules, all games have built in scripting. A human GM can just addapt the script on the fly is all.
I'm sure you mean pejorative. Can you explain where you saw it that it shouldn't be used?
Maybe he was referring to my definition of an RPG. (link) I don't think it's pejorative, if I understand the term correctly, but it might at least be a rather loose term. When I say "scripted", I mean that the player in an RPG should have some sort of flexible destiny, so to speak, in a more or less controlled environment. And yes, that can be a lot of things, it's just that without any kind of Game Master (e.g. human or computer) who guides the player through an interesting story, an RPG would be pretty boring in my opinion.
I think rules alone don't suffice because they might provide an interesting RPG experience if complex enough, or they might not.
quote:
Originally posted by Applebrown
And, I've revised my main goal. My main goal is not to tell whether the game is good, bad, heavy or light. It's to tell how much "freedom" is in your RPG. It's based upon the ideal that the more choices one has, the better... one that I think is pretty much in line with the RPG in general.
After three months of consideration , I believe that this seems like a really good idea, if we really want to get somewhere.
So then, how's your progress? Have you considered Michael's comments above already?
_________________
“Through the sounds of falling rain, through the clouds of bitter times
I see the pure grace of your smile, in dreams of the warmth in your eyes” - Tim North |
|
Fri Jun 13, 2003 9:53 pm |
|
|
HiddenX
The Elder Spy
Joined: 20 Jul 2001
Posts: 749
Location: NRW / Germany |
Don't forget this thread - (c)rpg-friends
_________________
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild= |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 10:59 am |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
No ,I won't , But I had parked it very deep in the back of my memory.
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Tue Oct 28, 2003 11:42 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... , 14, 15, 16 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Mon Apr 08, 2019 6:42 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
