What would Tidus do?

Brother None

This ghoul has seen it all
Orderite
In a recent rather creative article, eToychest imagined a world where Tidus of Final Fantasy X fame would be stuck in Fallout's post-apocalyptic wasteland, or in other words, "[w]hat if Tidus’ Zanarkand never actually existed, and instead, this spiky haired hero had woken up in Vault 13". This rather unique exercise of the intellect seems to be a veiled attempt to illustrate the strength and weaknesses of Western cRPGs versus Japanese cRPGs;<blockquote>After escaping the sewers and emerging in the desolation above, Tidus would probably have his first panic attack. The vault, after all, was a constricting place. Having been born there, most dwellers likely wouldn’t know what a wide, open space even meant, really. Conceptualization is nothing compared to visualization. Being thrust into Fallout’s open-ended, non-linear world would undoubtedly make Tidus piss his pants. Spira, it seems, was constructed with invisible guardrails, and Tidus seemed to feel right at home, merrily going along the path that was set for him. Here, Tidus could go anywhereat any time. For a young, spiky-haired boy of unnatural attire, that can be a frightening prospect.

(...)

Unlike on Spira where everyone gets a somewhat-equal chance at jabbing endlessly at each other until someone dies (temporarily or permanently depending on where you are in the land), the post-apocalyptic world of Fallout is much less forgiving, as Ian would have likely found out. Action points rule the day after World War 3, but how could Tidus know? He’d been locked in a vault for 16 years where the only conflicts that existed were over who gets to pour the water for the community. And, no, a phoenix down won’t fix a shotgun blast to the crotch. Sorry, Tidus, it must be disconcerting to witness such a bloody mess and not be able to do anything about it. Mostly, though, sorry to Ian. What a way to go.</blockquote>Link: What Would Tidus Do, I Roll Twenties on eToychest

Spotted on RPGWatch.
 
While you can't fault the artwork that went into the various Final Fantasy games, the plot characters theme and gameplay are all NOT in the same league as Fallout or even Fallout 2. (FoBOS and FOT notwithstanding). So, why I would care what the fuck one of the generic Spikeyhairs would do in the Fallout world is beyond me.

I do believe Spikeyhair would be eaten by eviserated by a deathclaw, if you must know. You see, Deathclaws are bad motherfuckers, Spikeyhairs are not.
 
TheSarge said:
While you can't fault the artwork that went into the various Final Fantasy games, the plot characters theme and gameplay are all NOT in the same league as Fallout or even Fallout 2. (FoBOS and FOT notwithstanding). So, why I would care what the fuck one of the generic Spikeyhairs would do in the Fallout world is beyond me.

I thought I pointed that out, the entire article appears to be a disguised comparison between the complexity of Fallout vs the simplicity of FF.
 
Jabberwocky said:
I thought I pointed that out, the entire article appears to be a disguised comparison between the complexity of Fallout vs the simplicity of FF.

Obviously his ability to read through the thread and way the value of what was said is beyond him.

I would really like to see "I am So Emo Tidus" in the Fallout setting.
Playing it would be even better, to find cool new ways to kill Tidus, sounds awesome.

"I" always hated those retarded people who played FF, now let me deface their "God". :falloutonline:
 
I'm amazed that someone bothered to do this...and glad. They make a great comparison.

So did the author love American CRPG's or just hate Japanese RPG's?

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
Odd thing to read.

I doubt he was commenting on Japanese RPGs as a whole, though, probably just the Final Fantasy style ones.
I'd see it as an exercise demonstrating the difference between a consequential, realistic RPG and essentially a one-shot adventure like Final Fantasy, which many people see as an RPG.

Also, he points out no weaknesses of Fallout and no strengths of FF. Heh.
 
Tidious is a godamn fag, and the article actually didn't point out very much except a glance of "open-endness" vs. "linear" and that Tidious is a gay, which we already knew before.

Anyways, JRPGs suck ass.
 
The Vault Dweller said:
I'm amazed that someone bothered to do this...and glad. They make a great comparison.

So did the author love American CRPG's or just hate Japanese RPG's?

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller

What the hell is an "American CRPG" ;) A western RPG is the only rpg, the japRPG are not RPGs by any diffinition, they are closer to a playable movie (make that a playable manga style movie). For some reason people have this preconcieved notion that "if you can collect new armour and go up levels then it must be a rpg" Well you can collect armour and new weapons in Doom but I would call that a RPG. The JapRPGs have less freedom than ultima 1. real rpgs should be an electronic version of a paper game where the player can do anything, you imagine trying to play a paper based rpg with a group of friends where the dungeon master/game master would only let you follow his exact script .
 
Wild_qwerty said:
What the hell is an "American CRPG" ;) A western RPG is the only rpg, the japRPG are not RPGs by any diffinition, they are closer to a playable movie (make that a playable manga style movie). For some reason people have this preconcieved notion that "if you can collect new armour and go up levels then it must be a rpg" Well you can collect armour and new weapons in Doom but I would call that a RPG. The JapRPGs have less freedom than ultima 1. real rpgs should be an electronic version of a paper game where the player can do anything, you imagine trying to play a paper based rpg with a group of friends where the dungeon master/game master would only let you follow his exact script .
Well supposedly 'native' JRPGs are a lot different, much more based on choice and consequence. Unfortunately, we never get to see those.
 
I honestly wouldnt mind JRPG's at all if the more "non-linear" titles were more popular. Really its just all about Final Fantasy which though I have enjoyed the stories are very non-linear.

Some decent examples of non-linearity are the Star Ocean series and Final Fantasy tactics. Although the main story really doesnt change, the side stories lead to different characters that create different dialogue situations for both games. Also Star Ocean has somewhat different endings. Though Final Fantasy Tactics was very mature (in a good way) and Star Ocean is very childish (in a bad way).

Sincerely,
The Vault Dweller
 
What the hell is an "American CRPG" ;) A western RPG is the only rpg, the japRPG are not RPGs by any diffinition, they are closer to a playable movie (make that a playable manga style movie). For some reason people have this preconcieved notion that "if you can collect new armour and go up levels then it must be a rpg" Well you can collect armour and new weapons in Doom but I would call that a RPG. The JapRPGs have less freedom than ultima 1. real rpgs should be an electronic version of a paper game where the player can do anything, you imagine trying to play a paper based rpg with a group of friends where the dungeon master/game master would only let you follow his exact script .

An interesting theory but to present a different perspective, A role is defined as taking the part of a character by an actor. Most actors are not allowed to make their own choices and are following a script for their lines and actions, just like the final fantasy games. But instead of an actor its a player who has some control over the characters. So when your playing a role playing game your taking on the role of the main character and following the script. a side not that by this definition fallout is not a role playing game because there is no role, the character and its actions and lines are completely open. A lot of people assume that a role is only a role if they have complete control in making it, but its actually the opposite where the role is created by some one else and they are merely taking it and following its script.
Just some thoughts I might be completely out there
 
Ugh, not that bullshit again.
Playing around with the semantics of the word 'role' like that only serves to create confusion and muddle the meaning. In fact, it makes the entire concept meaningless.
If you look at how the term is actually *used* instead of your 'interesting theory' that has no basis whatsoever, you come to a completely different definition.
 
The only part of that post I understood was the last part, how can you play around with the meaning of the word? How is it changed in this circumstance? As far as I understood it none of its definitions could change its meaning that much.
My idea was based on facts, the dictionary meaning of the word role. I wasn't aware we were playing wikipedia rules for words.
And just too make things worse, I was reffering to the previous post as an interesting theory and mine as a different perspective.
 
starmagnus said:
The only part of that post I understood was the last part, how can you play around with the meaning of the word?

The meaning of the world role? Not all that much, though it is a bit semantic to throw the actor's definition at it.

The meaning of the world role in role-playing game? You can play with that a lot.

Let me ask you a question, would you look up the word corporate to define neocorporatism? If so, do you realise you'd arrive at a completely wrong definition of neocorporatism? Being semantic about the word role doesn't change the definition of role-playing.
 
starmagnus said:
The only part of that post I understood was the last part, how can you play around with the meaning of the word? How is it changed in this circumstance? As far as I understood it none of its definitions could change its meaning that much.
My idea was based on facts, the dictionary meaning of the word role. I wasn't aware we were playing wikipedia rules for words.
And just too make things worse, I was reffering to the previous post as an interesting theory and mine as a different perspective.
Yes and, as I noted, a useless, and faulty, perspective. Kharn explained why it's a faulty perspective: because you take the word 'role' out of context (thereby removing the meaning of the word in the context it was mentioned) and then try to re-establish its 'normal' meaning in the original context. That's how you play around with the meaning of the word 'role' in the context.

It's also a useless perspective, because it expands the term 'role-playing game' to such a level that *any* video-game becomes a role-playing game.

Note also that the post you were quoting *nowhere* was talking about the definition of 'role' but only about the definition of 'RPG', a concept that came from certain tabletop games established (mainly) in the 70s. A cRPG is just a computerised version of that.
 
Back
Top