Bethesda and PnP mechanics

[whirlingdervish]

<snip>

I am suggesting it's not. Or maybe it is and it isn't. Maybe it is a word being thrown around a lot by PR people, but that doesn't make it false or bad or eeevil or whatever. Immersion is still important to people, people still find FPP to be more immersive, et cetera.

Immersion was not initially a word thrown around by PR people until they needed an excuse to make everything in FPP, because very few devs are willing to spend the time and money to make a reasonably well thought out, 3rd person or iso engine, even in games/franchises that should be made using them. It is, however, not used correctly by these PR people, just as they constantly misuse many other words until they are relegated to the pile of meaningless buzzwords.

They might as well say, "we have to make games in FPP, because we don't know any better"


Immersion isn't evil or good, it is a valuable tool for skilled gameworld/level designers and it allows them to use multiple means (regardless of the use of FPP shiny graphix) to make the player feel that the gameworld is alive and would be that way with or without the interaction of their player character.

Go play doom, and try to tell me that it's more immersive than fallout, just because it's FPP.

Immersion has nothing to do with the angle that you are viewing the game world from.

It has to do with how that game world convinces you that it's real and interactive, regardless of the perspective.

Effective use of sounds, scripting, and AI have more to do with Immersion than perspective ever will.

Please, drop the "FPP is naturally more immersive" line.
It, out of all the things you are saying, makes you look quite ignorant of the intricacies of game design.
(like a PR guy )

 

[Deleted member 53669]

I'm about to request VATS... maybe

 

[xdarkyrex]

Yes, because playing the game like two or more years after it comes out and following its development in expectation are two completely different things. I didn't follow, I don't know, Homeworld's development, and I love that game (played it two years ago). And I don't know squat about its philosophy, and seriously, if I had to write about it, I'd have to READ about it first. Which is something some people are forgetting about: they need to read about Fallout so that they can have a decent opinion about it.

Got it?

Yes, you would have to, because you would be writing something objective, but what Tyshalle is writing right now is NOT objective, he is not pandering to the public, he is debating over the subjective virtues of the games to part of the fanbase, and he is making his point quite well. The philosophy of the design of the game is completely irrelevant. Tell me, when you look at a cool drawing, do you like it because of some sort of philosophical pretensions the creator intended, or do you like it because it is cool? Don't pretend that art is only determined by the creator, the designers philosophies may be worth something, but there have been many artists that have created something beyonmd what htey originally intended. This is the nature of art, and saying otherwise makes you somewhat of a philistine or art-fascist.

And here I go posting before I've read the entire thread again. You pretty much have covered all the bases here, so I guess I'll be overlapping you a great deal, but yeah, I basically agree with most of what you wrote, and think you're far more well reasoned than you're being given credit for.

I am sort of half assing my argument (not intentionally) as I have made it several times in the past. It becomes more tedious each time. Also, I know just about all of the more important lore about Fallout, including the fallout bible and lots of the developer stuff. Being around here for a little while gives you that sort of insight.

Where's Rosh?

Thank god he isn't here, that man was a fuckin ass.

When immersion means only FPP and awesome graphics, as defined by the media and the PR, it really has absolutely no value whatsoever.
Drawing conclusions from this, any game that isn't first-person or doesn't have awesome graphics can't be immersive no matter what, right?

Thats a fallacy. It doesn't necessarily need to be one of those two extremes.

Go play doom, and try to tell me that it's more immersive than fallout, just because it's FPP.

Immersion has nothing to do with the angle that you are viewing the game world from.

It has to do with how that game world convinces you that it's real and interactive, regardless of the perspective.

Effective use of sounds, scripting, and AI have more to do with Immersion than perspective ever will.

Please, drop the "FPP is naturally more immersive" line.
It, out of all the things you are saying, makes you look quite ignorant of the intricacies of game design.
(like a PR guy )

This is wrong, ever single aspect of the game has to do with immersion, up to and including perspective. It is far from the single and only indicator, every single thing contributes and all of them can be mismanaged. But yes, Doom was considerably more immersive than, say, Duke Nukem 2.

 

[Deleted member 53669]

Thank god he isn't here, that man was a fuckin ass.

Black wrote:
Where's Rosh?

Sounds like my kinda guy.

Tyshalle wrote:

Dopemine Cleric wrote:
Your a dumbass.


Good, but maybe insulting other people's intelligence might work better for you if you actually could differenciate between the words "your" and "you're."

However, this is actually educational, and I think I'm starting to see things from Brother None's perspective a bit more. I mean, similar to how you can tell based on marginal evidence from early released information what the entire quality of a game is going to be, I can tell, based on the quality of the very first word you wrote, that the rest of your post is going to be filled with nothing but stupidity and inane bullshit.

UR UH DUMASS

DUMASS


DUMASS

DUMASS

GRRRRuuughhhhhhh ME WANT COOKIE



*Need Mentats to post at NMA.... note taken*

 

[Sorrow]

Where's Rosh?

Heh ...
I share that sentiment. Somehow this thread made me wish he was here ...

*gets back to working on his BG2 TC*

 

[meatbot]

I'm not a rabid, obsessed Fallout fan, but even I can make the relatively simple deduction that Beth has no buisness calling this fallout 3.

I bought Tactics for what it was. A squad based tactial combat game. I had no illusions that it was a sequel. Therefor, my expectations of the game were lower than those I would have had if they had marketed it as Fallout 3. I DID NOT even bother with the mind boggling douchebaggery of POS.

I'm with the NMA old timers here. Yes, I thought when I bought it that Fallout was a good adaptation of a table top RPG. I ALSO believe that TB/ISO is inherently part of what makes fallout and fallout 2 what they are. You simply CAN'T take away those two MAIN features and try to call the game fallout 3.
Call it a fallout inspired FPS? Sure. NO problem. If it was done well, I'd probably buy it, just like I bought, played and enjoyed BioShock. But don't cram a boatload of lies and contradictions down my throat, then tell me this game is fallout 3, upgraded. Horsepucky. Someone made an allusion to this earlier, but i'll clarify it.

Years ago, there was a game called Archon.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon_(computer_game)

It was *sort* of like chess. Ie, different colored squares for a board, two rows of pieces... soldiers for pawns on one side, goblins for pawns on the other, etc, but you and your opponent had to battle for the squares. That doesn't make it Chess 2. It makes it a game inspired by another game. It may hold some superficial similarities to a game of chess, BUT IT AIN'T CHESS.

I played it, I liked it, but when I want a good game of chess with someone, I don't break out Archon.

End of story.

[/b]

 

[Morbus]

Yes, you would have to, because you would be writing something objective, but what Tyshalle is writing right now is NOT objective, he is not pandering to the public, he is debating over the subjective virtues of the games to part of the fanbase, and he is making his point quite well.

Your logic is flawed. I CAN'T talk about homeworld because I only played the game. If I wanna talk about it, even if it's just on a random forum, and NOT make a fool out of myself, I'd have to read about it... Otherwise, well, I'd just be making a fool out of myself. If I wanna talk about something, I gotta know what I'm talking about.

The philosophy of the design of the game is completely irrelevant. Tell me, when you look at a cool drawing, do you like it because of some sort of philosophical pretensions the creator intended, or do you like it because it is cool?

Hey, dude, this is so not about whether you like Fallout 3. This is about how it should be made... Jeez, man, what's up with you? Haven't you read the posts or something?

Don't pretend that art is only determined by the creator, the designers philosophies may be worth something, but there have been many artists that have created something beyonmd what htey originally intended. This is the nature of art, and saying otherwise makes you somewhat of a philistine or art-fascist.

Beyond implies it's not against... Fallout was not made for the creators, it was made for the players. And the creators had a kind of players in mind. Those players like PnP rules, they like narrators, they like point and click mechanics, they like, oh yeah, turn based! Oh, the horror! It doesn't matter what YOU like, if you like Fallout, then you'd like Fallout 3 if it had the same design as Fallout. So don't come and think that just because you see something in a certain way you can tell what that something is. Otherwise I'd go over at Valve's forums and complain about HL2 because it's not all alienish and laboratorical like HL1 was. Because I like HL for that, but that's not what it's really about... Or I'd go over at Rockstar's forums and complain that GTA isn't tongue-in-cheek anymore and that there are no more in-car-auto-weapons. Because I liked GTA for that! But, again, that's not what it's about... Do I have the right to complain just because I see things a certain way? No! It's not my game, I'm not a fan, and I don't go over there bother the game's fans... I stay on my corner and complain about the badly done sequels of the games I like. And you should do the same.

 

[Per]

It isn't convincing you that you're in the monitor, because that would be stupid, and ineffectual on all but the most retarded of individuals.

I'll just note that I agree with the variations on this and not bother with any specific "we used to have novels but now we have graphics" bullshit or "games aren't primarily about gameplay" bullshit or "the less abstract the better" bullshit.

Also it's a strange day when Sorrow is crushing someone with reason.

 

[Morbus]

Also it's a strange day when Sorrow is crushing someone with reason.

I miss his old avatar

 

[Sorrow]

Which one?

 

[DGT]

Yeah, Rosh is dearly missed.

But in any case, why is this thread full of the same garbage that's been posted here by Bethdrones so many times in the past?

But yes, Doom was considerably more immersive than, say, Duke Nukem 2.

That is not the question that was asked. If you're going take the losing side of an argument seen many times at NMA already, please try to do so in a manner indicating you have at least a portion of your intellect remaining.

As far as "LAWL IMMERSHUN" goes: the argument is old, and invalid. Games are played for what? OH, THAT'S RIGHT: fun! Not realism/"immersion", though many seem to forget it. Not for PURTY SPARKWY GWAPHICS, though graphics are of course expected to be reasonably good by modern standards. So: even if you believe you can prove FPP is more "immersive" than "iso" (which you cannot, as that would be a subjective matter), you must surely realize that there is no meter for "fun." [/serious]

Except, of course, that konsole kidz like yourself are sadly warped in what you find entertaining. [/patronizing joke]

 

[Deleted member 53669]

Yeah Sorrow, I miss Megatron....

 

[Ureshi]

But yes, Doom was considerably more immersive than, say, Duke Nukem 2.

 

[Deleted member 53669]

 

[Azrael-Arkangel]

 

[Xenophile]

Ok.. I am a sucker for punishment. I just had to come back and read the news. but I must say I am pleasantly suprised.

Way to go xdarkyrex and Tyshalle, it's nice to see some rational arguements. I wish I had the fortitude (and time) to write the well reasoned multi-page rebuttles you guys have, but I think you guys are doing just fine.

and Sorrow... find a new phrase "strawman" is so 6 months ago.

 

[Kyuu]

Way to go xdarkyrex and Tyshalle, it's nice to see some rational arguements.

I think you're confusing "rational" for "agrees with my own predisposition."

 

[Deleted member 53669]

I think he was being sarcastic Kyuu....

 

[Xenophile]

No actually I was being quite serious. I think their arguements are pretty well thought out.

 

[Black]

O, which? That FO1 and 2 aren't immersive or that FPP is more immersive than iso?