Pink Petal Games
Game Discussion => General Discussion & Download => Topic started by: ShiningRadiance on July 16, 2010, 12:05:47 AM
-
I'm sure that many of you have seen this debate here and there.
Would you prefer a sandbox game, or a more challenge-based storyline game?
Would you prefer both, if a 'sandbox mode' were added in an options tab?
The 'challenge' type would include character personalities that would be moddable, and would add in many features. The sandbox mode would be more like it is currently, if you'd like it better that way.
Normally, the development is not a democracy, according to Doc. However, Doc has created an exception in this case, apparently.
(I have spoken with Doc about this thread, and he has approved it generally as it is)
Try to avoid any personal attacks, should you argue. We're all adults here.
-
so, what? we can't get new features and sandbox?
I'd like to think that "both" is the right answer, but I can't shake the feeling it would be the same bullshit "sandbox" slavemaker has now
-
Another vote for both. I have zero clue as to why certain people think that the sandbox elements will go byebye if you add story elements or challenging gameplay elements.
-
Depends on what you mean by story. I suppose my ideal scenario would be a sandbox containing a bunch of different stories with varying levels of detail, difficulty, and length with some linking to others and others not. That's not really the game I expect Whoremaster to be though.
Really , I want DocClox to either do one of two things. What he wants to do, because the things he's said he wants to do interest me. Or to do the things he's most against, because then he'll likely quit Whoremaster. Not that I don't want him working on Whoremaster, but then he'll probably work more on Clonemaster, and I love the concept behind Clonemaster.
-
I don't think I can put myself in one side on the other. On one hand, I like a game that has some meat to it, where I can look at where I am and where I was and think "this is what I've accomplished, this is what I've worked for". On the other hand, I have no idea how moving in that direction would harm the sandbox aspect. I don't see the fundamental incompatibility here.
I'm not sure there's even much of a debate. I mean, take the Grand Theft Auto games. They're textbook sandbox, but they also have a definite story progression with gameplay choices that broaden over the course of the game; that said, if you don't want to have to work to unlock the tanks and rocket launchers then there are cheat codes. WM does even better: instead of cheat codes, it has extensive customization capacities and a legitimate and detailed settings file that can alter fundamental game mechanics and essentially give you all the freedom you could ever want. Those clearly aren't going away. I have no idea what sandbox fans are afraid of.
And I don't mean that in a flippant "what the f are you complaining about?" kind of way. It's an honest question. What freedoms are the sandbox players worried would disappear for good? I just can't think of a single thing you can do now that you couldn't do if challenge/progression features were implemented. And that's why I ask, because it's not because I can't see it that it's not there. I'd like to know what the doubts and worries are.
-
Controlling an unnecessary number of businesses to buy brothels is annoying. What's the point of that? More features like that might just make the game unnecessarily bothersome when all you want to do is see masturbation material.
But it ultimately turns back into "What do you want from this game?" Everyone's experience will undoubtedly differ.
-
More features like that might just make the game unnecessarily bothersome when all you want to do is see masturbation material.
The logical conclusion to this train of thought is why bother with a game at all. Just grab some images and whack away. Why go through the extra step of hitting a next week button. Just dl the girl packs and view them in infranview.
-
Well the only major concern I can think of that sandbox players might be worried about is the girls. I don't know how the girl archetypes will work as of yet. But from my understanding only girls with specific stats will be available in certain areas. If these archetypes don't change which girls are available when but only their starting stats. Then I see no problem with anything.
I assumed any story elements entered into the game would be side events you may run into, and you may very well never have to do or see. That sounds like it's pretty much still a sandbox game to me. Naturally this brings up the whole "Town wards" conversation. How will that work? Will it be story progressive? Or will defeating rivals simply progress you? Honestly, I don't think it matters. What do you really LOSE if there's no sandbox mode? You can still do the same things you've always done, at the same pace you always have. I'm afraid I don't see the issue between adding any sort of story, whether it's story progressive or not.
I think the issue here is more about whether the PC has a personality or not.
The 'challenge' type would include character personalities that would be moddable, and would add in many features. The sandbox mode would be more like it is currently, if you'd like it better that way.
(I apologize ahead of time if I pulled this out where it wasn't intended but that's how it looks to me)
Now here's my thoughts on it, EVER since I saw Docs "broken girls story" I was pertty adamant about having a personalized main character, really added to the immersion imo. His PC was very neutral but not a push over, he had a strong sense of justice but he wasn't going to let someone underhand him. I thought that was really rare in a video game. I even started a whole topic about "defining the PC personality" so yeah, I can say I was all for it. HOWEVER, due to the modability of WM. Defining a clear personality is going to be impossible when everyone adds their own events and characters. I'd like to avoid that if all possible, not matter how good a writer you are, I doubt you'll be able to define the PC as clearly as the original writer. So what i'm trying to say is, I think it'd be easier to just avoid the whole personality and make the PC silent.
As for other characters, I don't see how they could be silent. Or why you wouldn't want any in the game.
-
I am voting for both as while I like the way it is now it wouldn't hurt to have more depth to the action.
-
I'd like to think that "both" is the right answer, but I can't shake the feeling it would be the same bullshit "sandbox" slavemaker has now
Out of curiosity, what's the problem with the slavemaker sandbox? I want to finish all the girls before I try the sandbox mode, but I don't get much time to play, so I havn't tried it yet.
Really , I want DocClox to either do one of two things. What he wants to do, because the things he's said he wants to do interest me. Or to do the things he's most against, because then he'll likely quit Whoremaster. Not that I don't want him working on Whoremaster, but then he'll probably work more on Clonemaster, and I love the concept behind Clonemaster.
True enough. I was looking forward to working on Clonemaster :)
Controlling an unnecessary number of businesses to buy brothels is annoying. What's the point of that? More features like that might just make the game unnecessarily bothersome when all you want to do is see masturbation material.
Well, it'll be easy enough to start with all the wards unlocked in sandbox mode. And with the wards, we can dispense with the business count requirement, since the wards will have t he same effect. If we disable the rivals and the mayor as well, then there shouldn't be anything to intrude if all you want to do is find girls and look at mucky pictures :)
But it ultimately turns back into "What do you want from this game?" Everyone's experience will undoubtedly differ.
Hmmm ... a list of features the "sandbox faction" want to see would be very helpful. So far, from my perspective at least, the interaction has been a bit like this:
Me: So, what do you guys want?
Sandboxer: Just, you know, do what you do. Make it better
Me: You can't be more specific than that?
Sandboxer: Dev stuff. Do dev stuff. Don't bother me with the details.
Time passes
Me: So, how about this...
Sandboxer: No! You FOOL! You're doing it WRONG! Are you STUPID or something?
So I guess what would be useful would be a list of features, framed as positives, that I could include in the game. If I know what people want, I'll do my best to include it.
The logical conclusion to this train of thought is why bother with a game at all. Just grab some images and whack away.
That's how I tend to see it. What does the game currently offer the sandboxers that they don't get from browsing the image folders? Would a gallery mode suffice, or does there need to be some context in order to achieve the desired effect?
Well the only major concern I can think of that sandbox players might be worried about is the girls. I don't know how the girl archetypes will work as of yet. But from my understanding only girls with specific stats will be available in certain areas. If these archetypes don't change which girls are available when but only their starting stats. Then I see no problem with anything.
The archetype idea is that instead of having separate file formats for girls and random girls, we have a single format for girls, and make random/unique a flag in that format. From a player perspective, the main benefit is that you can open a girlsx file and change any unqiue girl into a random, or vice versa, just by changing one field.
Internally, it means we can tidy up a lot of the data structures, shrink the save file size, and clean up a lot of code, but that's not really relevant here.
I assumed any story elements entered into the game would be side events you may run into, and you may very well never have to do or see. That sounds like it's pretty much still a sandbox game to me.
I think there are two separate uses of the word "sandbox" here. There's the GTA sense of the word, meaning a basically open-ended game with lots of side missions, and then there's the way I belive Slave Maker uses it, to mean unrestricted access to the girls with no encumbering plot requirements.
Naturally this brings up the whole "Town wards" conversation. How will that work? Will it be story progressive?
Well, you'll need to find a way to get access. Bribery will always work, but isn't going to be cheap. Or there'll be more creative ways to unlock a ward. Once you have access, you need to overthrow the rival based there before you can fully control it.
It's a way of giving sub-goals and of letting rivals get stronger as the game progresses, and adding a bit of depth and texture to the game.
I think the issue here is more about whether the PC has a personality or not.(I apologize ahead of time if I pulled this out where it wasn't intended but that's how it looks to me)
You may well be right.
Now here's my thoughts on it, EVER since I saw Docs "broken girls story" I was pertty adamant about having a personalized main character, really added to the immersion imo. His PC was very neutral but not a push over, he had a strong sense of justice but he wasn't going to let someone underhand him. I thought that was really rare in a video game. I even started a whole topic about "defining the PC personality" so yeah, I can say I was all for it. HOWEVER, due to the modability of WM. Defining a clear personality is going to be impossible when everyone adds their own events and characters.
That's a reasonable concern, I think. It shouldn't be impossible to manage, though. If we have character guidelines about the PC, and stipulate that anything that gets included into the main distribution may get the wording tweaked a little, we can probably keep a consistent voice for the MC. And there's always the option for a zip of scripts with purely neutral menu options, or for an MC with a completely different character.
Oh, and thanks for the kind words :)
I'd like to avoid that if all possible, not matter how good a writer you are, I doubt you'll be able to define the PC as clearly as the original writer. So what i'm trying to say is, I think it'd be easier to just avoid the whole personality and make the PC silent.
There is one other issue I have with that. A completely silent character is a lot harder to write than you'd think. Look closely at some of the Fallout3 dialogue, and you'll see they follow some really convoluted paths sometimes, just to avoid the MC having to say something. There's also a danger of Lassie Syndrome. "What's that girl? You say there's been a cave in at the old mine?"
So a silent PC is hard to do, and harder still to do well. It's also something I find kind of bleak and depressing. This was the issue, more than anything else that convinced me that I should start my own game.
-
I'd go for both to give more options, but personally I wouldn't mind that much if the sandbox mode got left out.
-
It seems to me like the 'friction point' could be the silent-nonsilent MC, as Mehzerz said. I'm not going to part with silent or non-silent, as both are possible and probably enjoyable.
There is one other issue I have with that. A completely silent character is a lot harder to write than you'd think. Look closely at some of the Fallout3 dialogue, and you'll see they follow some really convoluted paths sometimes, just to avoid the MC having to say something. There's also a danger of Lassie Syndrome. "What's that girl? You say there's been a cave in at the old mine?"
So a silent PC is hard to do, and harder still to do well. It's also something I find kind of bleak and depressing. This was the issue, more than anything else that convinced me that I should start my own game.
True, they are harder to do, but not impossible. I met that problem while writing my own tabletop RPG adventures. I had to write some flavour texts and scripts before I even knew the player's choice for name, race, gender or class (my very good friends always got it done the day before... bastards). It can be done, but you risk ending mad like Lost screenwriters. I had to use the mentioned Lassie-type dialog, the "change words for action" trick, the sign / body language route ( "nodded at him...", "smiles and...", "waved hand in disapproval"...), even had to adopt arbitrary nicknames for player characters so I can avoid the unknown gender / name issue. Yeah, sort of hell.
If you don't have time or don't feel like writing stuff, go mass effect. Instead of complex Fallout 3 type dialogue, use 'evil / neutral / good' based dialogue. Oh, my god! such complexity in dialogue choices is overwhelming and... No, no, no. The game dialogue seems to be different because it's written into three different styles (wich I reduced to evil / neutral / good), but choices end doing basically the same (lame, but cost-effective). The shorter, the better, leave most of it to player's imagination.
-------Evil line---Evil answer-------
/ \
--->X---Neutral line---Neutral answer---X--->
\ /
-----Good line---Good answer----
In addition or instead of that, a dialog file could be added so modders could edit dialogue texts. Thus, anyone can change his character lines to whatever he/she/it likes.
Having said that, I'm afraid whatever satisfies sandboxers in terms of playability could piss off devs in terms of complexity / coding. By now we all should know pissing off devs is not a good idea...
-
In addition or instead of that, a dialog file could be added so modders could edit dialogue texts. Thus, anyone can change his character lines to whatever he/she/it likes.
A dialog file does make sense. If nothing else if means people can edit the dialog without having to understand (much) Lua
Finding keys for the entries might be a challenge though. Unless we just go with TEXT0001, TEXT0002 ... TEXT9999
[edit]
Something like this:
wm.dialog = {
TXT001 = "Hello Little Girl",
TXT002 = "Hello Mister",
TXT003 = "Would you like to see some puppies?"
TXT004 = [[
Not only am I not interested in puppies, I have to inform you that I am
in fact an undercover police officer, and you are under arrest for wearing
a dirty mac whilst hiding in the bushes
]],
TXT005 = "Oh, bugger!"
}
That could be included directly as lua code, so there's no problem parsing. You can put any chars in between [[ ]] string delimiters so there's no problem with quotes like in XML. The big problem is that you don't necessarily know which script TXT734 refers to
I could add nested tables that refer to the event:
wm.dialog = {
example_encounter_1 = {
GIRL001 = "Hello Mister",
MAN002 = "Oh no, not you again. I remember you from the last example.",
GIRL003 = "Aren't you going to show me your puppies?",
MAN004 = "Look, if you're going to bust me can we just get on with it?"
},
example_encounter_2 = {
-- etc, etc
}
}
The worry here is that the more complex the file gets, the more offputting it becomes to the less technically adept.
Still, it's an interesting idea
-
Sandbox with missions and alignment stats that actually do something.
-
ok, since it seems people have different ideas of what the sandbox mode would be, here's what I was thinking
a story is good, but not an actual campaign
make the story a chain of quests/missions that you can do at your leisure, but do not significantly affect what is available to you
think bethesda games
you can do anything you want, with or without the story, but the story brings some changes to the world (like say, oblivion gates or enclave vertibird events)
have the story quests grant some rewards/services/a better chance to x
what I hate the most is that as the (not actual, but suggested) development progresses the game seems to constrict the player
a lot of the ideas flowing around are about making the player play the way "he's supposed to"
take for example the map thread
I really liked doc's network structure of wards
you had some requirements, in that you need to take the adjacent ward before moving on to the next, but it was very flexible and non-linear
then I go to the next page and see d31r3x's map, and the wards are split in tiers where you must take all the wards in the current tier, before moving on to the next
and there are no reactions to this
I was going to ask about that in thread, but didn't want to bitch about freedom of playing again (which is made completely pointless by this post)
about slavemaker
it has no sandbox. there is a mode called "sandbox", but it's not sandbox
I think it is best described as "skirmish"
basically, you choose any girl you want, and play without the new features
once you're finished with that girl, it's like you never trained her
a real sandbox would be exactly like the current "campaign" mode, but without the restrictions on what girls you train, and with the ability to re-train girls
that's it. that was all he needed to do to make a sandbox
now, I had to play the game from scratch every time an important update was released, and every time you do the same thing
the game makes you follow a routine and a pre-set road
sure, you could chose some other girl instead of the one you always train, but you couldn't do anything with her, because you have little time, and your skills are not high enough to make it
and that's it
I am not against a story, but why can't we have that story IN the sandbox?
not or-or, but have the game stay what it is, with the story
edit: also, who the hell faps to wm?
-
and that's it
I am not against a story, but why can't we have that story IN the sandbox?
not or-or, but have the game stay what it is, with the story
I submit the question: why does the game have to stay the way it is? Why not let the dev's add stuff and we can say if we like it or not after they add it?I've said it before, but the dev's got us this far. Why are we assuming that anything they add will destroy the game.
I'm all for sandboxes, but can the rest of us kids have the rest of the playground built to? It's like 1 or 2 kids jumping up and down in front of the construction crew trying to convince them not to build the monkey bars or the slide because the sandbox is just fine. Meanwhile the rest of the kids have been waiting on the monkey bars and slide for a long time now. The kids just have to remember that the construction crew isn't going to remove the sandbox when there done with the playground. That's just dumb since it's so popular. They'll leave it there and maybe even add a bigger one since it was more popular than they originally thought.
-
/facepalm
not "as it is", what it is
add all the stuff, the story, the features, the map, all that crap
just let it stay the same game
who said anything about destroying the game? who said they shouldn't add anything?
also, with that analogy, I'm not sure you understand what "sandbox" is
I am not telling them to leave anything out, and I am not saying the game is fine as it is, or I wouldn't care what they do with it, I'd just be playing this version
-
what I hate the most is that as the (not actual, but suggested) development progresses the game seems to constrict the player
a lot of the ideas flowing around are about making the player play the way "he's supposed to"
Well, for the record, I want a game with lots of different ways to do things. There is no "supposed to" in my book. I am however quite keen on making the player do some work in order to achieve a few milestones, on the grounds that it makes for a more satisfying conclusion.
you had some requirements, in that you need to take the adjacent ward before moving on to the next, but it was very flexible and non-linear
then I go to the next page and see d31r3x's map, and the wards are split in tiers where you must take all the wards in the current tier, before moving on to the next
and there are no reactions to this
I was going to ask about that in thread, but didn't want to bitch about freedom of playing again (which is made completely pointless by this post)
You should have said something.
I didn't think it was that big a deal, personally. D31r3x was quite keen on the level idea, I didn't have any major objections, and no one else seemed to have object, so why not? Plus d31r3x was doing to work and doing a better job that I could have done. That said, I could be talked into making it a config option. I just need to know there's an issue to address...
-
also, with that analogy, I'm not sure you understand what "sandbox" is
Wow... really? That analogy was more analogous to people complaining they want a sand box who then complain loudly when the devs do something else... but ok, we could totally screw up the spirit of the analogy if you want...
-
Well, for the record, I want a game with lots of different ways to do things. There is no "supposed to" in my book. I am however quite keen on making the player do some work in order to achieve a few milestones, on the grounds that it makes for a more satisfying conclusion.
You should have said something.
I didn't think it was that big a deal, personally. D31r3x was quite keen on the level idea, I didn't have any major objections, and no one else seemed to have object, so why not? Plus d31r3x was doing to work and doing a better job that I could have done. That said, I could be talked into making it a config option. I just need to know there's an issue to address...
I think unlocking all the wards from the start will give him basically what he wants. So far I think the wards are the only restrictive feature being talked about. If you wanted to, you could open every feature that gets added. All the floors for the catacombs, any jobs that may be restricted, wards, ect. pretty much anything you have to progress towards will be open from the start. However any story progression and various events still have to be worked for. (there's your sandbox mode)
That's what you want right? I do like the idea of "several ways" to do one task, so that's definitely refreshing to see in an H game, or any game really.
As for the MC's personallity (I keep switching between PC and MC lol) If we can distinguish a set personality then it doesn't matter to me. It's easier to feel and understand for a character that actually speaks. Someone who isn't as good of a writer may have trouble with creating events anyways, I personally would love to make some, but I doubt my writing abilities could convey the mood as well as I'd hope they would. That's the benefit of a forum though, a group of peers. :p
-
That's what you want right? I do like the idea of "several ways" to do one task, so that's definitely refreshing to see in an H game, or any game really.
Sounds about right.
Hmmm... I should probably give some thought to alternative victory condtions, a la Alpha Centauri. Avenging your Father, Political Control of Crossgate, having an insane amount of cash/girls. Maybe a diplomatic victory, if I ever get around to looking at diplomacy. My todo list grows daily at the moment
I personally would love to make some, but I doubt my writing abilities could convey the mood as well as I'd hope they would. That's the benefit of a forum though, a group of peers. :p
Which is a good point. Peer review is a powerful tool for establishing consistency.
[edit]
messed up the quote tags again...
-
Which is a good point. Peer review is a powerful tool for establishing consistency.
Maybe set up a reward system for endgame victory. Different rewards for different victories? Like get money from taxes from political victory, bonus girls and brothels for killing your rivals off, half running cost for diplomatic victory?
-
I think unlocking all the wards from the start will give him basically what he wants. So far I think the wards are the only restrictive feature being talked about. If you wanted to, you could open every feature that gets added. All the floors for the catacombs, any jobs that may be restricted, wards, ect. pretty much anything you have to progress towards will be open from the start. However any story progression and various events still have to be worked for. (there's your sandbox mode)
Set this up by way of the config file (Sandbox mode On|off) and everyone is happy.
As for the MC's personallity (I keep switching between PC and MC lol) If we can distinguish a set personality then it doesn't matter to me. It's easier to feel and understand for a character that actually speaks. Someone who isn't as good of a writer may have trouble with creating events anyways, I personally would love to make some, but I doubt my writing abilities could convey the mood as well as I'd hope they would. That's the benefit of a forum though, a group of peers. :p
My writing sucks too. :D However I'm sure there are a few writers on this board that would be willing to team up with a scripter. That way, one person concentrates on the story while the other worries about implementing it.
-
Maybe set up a reward system for endgame victory. Different rewards for different victories? Like get money from taxes from political victory, bonus girls and brothels for killing your rivals off, half running cost for diplomatic victory?
I believe this is actually on the to-do list. Or something very similar... it's just a very expansive list. :p
-
On the topic of masturbation material:
It makes it more fun to know that you've completely crushed their spirit, shattered their confidence, and made them a totally obedient nymphomaniac with masterful skill in every form of intercourse.
It lets me release my evil in a stronger fashion.
-
On the topic of masturbation material:
It makes it more fun to know that you've completely crushed their spirit, shattered their confidence, and made them a totally obedient nymphomaniac with masterful skill in every form of intercourse.
It lets me release my evil in a stronger fashion.
And you think that adding storyline elements will weaken this fantasy? Or are you hoping that having a sandbox mode will allow you to flesh out your own fantasies more?
-
My replies to various things in this thread.
Scripting.
The scripters need a reference and some sort of syntax checker
Also scripting at the moment is a tad clunky.
The sandbox v story argument.
First I want to know what people want in a sandbox mode. IT will not be like the sandbox mode in slave maker. How he can call it a sandbox mode is beyond me since all the mode does is give the player all girls unlocked and allow the player to train them over and over. The player still has to unlock all the items and people over and over again for playthrough.
-
And you think that adding storyline elements will weaken this fantasy? Or are you hoping that having a sandbox mode will allow you to flesh out your own fantasies more?
I'm not voting, simply because I'm fine either way. The reason I argue is out of fun, not necessarily because I believe either side.
There's another reason that I decided to post this, but you don't quite need to know that.
That being said, there are times that I do care about the topic at hand.
What I was referring to was specifically the comments about just opening up the folders to look at the hentai. Context makes it better.
-
I'm not voting, simply because I'm fine either way. The reason I argue is out of fun, not necessarily because I believe either side.
I see, that's good to know.
-
Scripting.
The scripters need a reference and some sort of syntax checker
Agreed. There's a partial reference at the moment on the manual thread. I'll update it once I have the scripting a bit nearer completion.
Also scripting at the moment is a tad clunky.
True enough. But getting it to production quality is the next task on the list. I've got one more fight case to convert, then the scripting.
-
I think having both is certainly optimal, but I'd much rather have a good story than no story if I have to choose. I also think I have a bit in common with ShiningRadiance in that asserting dominance is a major turn on. I've got a bit of experience writing and wouldn't mind contributing at all. Previously, I had some aspirations towards writing some events out, but was convinced it would be better to wait until the event system actually worked.
Anyway, I'm not really a programmer at all, and even the old event system was a more than a little confusing to me, but if you'd like someone to simply write up some story elements, I'd be glad to contribute. I'd like to end up writing some events as well, especially if someone could actually work with me to get the coding side committed properly. If someone wants to point me in the direction of something that needs to be written, I'd be happy to knock out something to show what I can do. (Looks at DocClox as the person who would know best.) <_<
-
More than happy to have your input - just give me a week or so and let me get the event system a bit more stable, and then we'll see what we need done and who wants to tackle what :)
-
With the new game I'm making I'm aiming for both. Think of morrowind, oblivion and fallout 3, they aim for both focus less on the sandbox aspect. What I'm aiming to do is create scripted quests and generated quests. If you think of the left 4 dead games I'm using a similar system although not as advanced (doesn't need to be with the style of game I'm making).
-
I can't say I'm intimately familiar with the Left 4 Dead games, but I played a few times, and the only "quest" I can remember is the "Be Alive at the End of the Level" quest.
-
There were the "don't set off car alarms" quest, but that was more of a secondary objective. Maybe more like Riot Response for the PS2.
-
With left 4 dead I'm referring to the AI director. It monitors the situation in the game and creates game events to spice things up depending on how well (or bad) the characters are doing. What I'm going to do is something similar, except instead of just spawning enemies and 'treasure' it will also spawn quests that it will build from event templates and mix and match parts of templates to create longer quests.
The initial release of the game will probably only have a basic version of this method so don't expect anything fancy but I plan to build on it as I will want to use the technology in some future games as well.
A good example of how this might work in the game is say your making a sizeable living through farming and your family is doing really well. Then the game might create a drought causing you some hardship, or it might spawn some fairy creatures that will reek havoc in your crops. While if you are doing really poorly you might be given the chance to aid a fey creature which will reward you handsomely. Now its hard to say how detailed I will be able to get this AI director in this game but I will be aiming for this level.
-
That actually sounds pretty cool (and I never even knew that was in the Left 4 Dead games,) except that what you're saying just sounds like punishment for players who are doing well and rewards for those who do poorly. Communism!
But seriously... I think I'd find it easier to get behind if (and this is assuming the game *can* be set up this way) a person who's performing exceedingly well will find that achieving the next milestone (say they need to gather wood and supplies to build a larger farm) much more difficult to achieve (many more monsters in the woods the trees come from, or additional quests need to be performed to get... planning approval or whatever.)
It'd also be nice if players who beat the higher odds get something to show for it... not necessarily something that aids in the game, but possibly something like a trophy. Better furniture for the harder won improved house, maybe.
Anyway, seems to me like hitting people with bad events for doing things right is just mean.
-
heh, yeah it sounds a little mean but as it is going on behind the scenes and should be subtle then the player will hopefully never notice what is going on. It is basically a way to increase the difficultly while the player is playing. It will take into account also how new the player is, for example if the character is just starting a new game it will certainly not spawn a dragon in the woods.
In addition the AI will follow the very important game design rule of just rewards. That is if you overcome something difficult you will get a reward equal to that difficultly.
-
...Do all topics end up off-topic like this?
Oh well.
-
I just have one, very important question to ask. Is Left 4 Dead playable single player or is it multiplayer only? I always assumed the latter. If it's the former then I'm gonna feel stupid and probably pic up one of the 2 games next week.
-
It has single player but the others are CPU who won't be much if any help, kinda like slimes of dragon quest series.
-
That explains This (http://static.funnyjunk.com/pictures/0912010.jpg)then. :D
-
...Do all topics end up off-topic like this?
Oh well.
lol I have yet to see one that hasn't. In all fairness, I think both parties will be happy (enough) with what seems to be decided on. Which is to go with the story route, keep things with some sort of progression, but offer the sandbox mode as an option for anyone who isn't interested in that sort of thing. Leaving the game open to them to explore as they please.
As for the MC being silent or not, well that seems to be undecided still. I'm actually rather interested in everyones opinion on that. All I've heard so far are explanations as to scenarios where it works and doesn't. As well as neutral stances on both. I've yet to see any of the Devs make a decision as well. It's their game after all. Other than Doc who seems to be going for the personal MC, I've yet to see any opinions on the matter.
So to keep it simple, who prefers what and why?
I'll start,
Preference is Silent.
Why: Despite the suggestion on creating a sort of "guide" as to how the MC should be personalized I still highly doubt he'll be as defined as the original writer had set him. Now after reading how writing for a personal MC could be easier, I can't disagree on that at all. The problem there is continuity and i'm still not convinced he'll be consistently defined with several different modders out there writing their own scripts.
-
I'll start,
Preference is Silent.
Why: Despite the suggestion on creating a sort of "guide" as to how the MC should be personalized I still highly doubt he'll be as defined as the original writer had set him. Now after reading how writing for a personal MC could be easier, I can't disagree on that at all. The problem there is continuity and i'm still not convinced he'll be consistently defined with several different modders out there writing their own scripts.
Well We could just give the MC Schizophrenia as a unremovable trait to explain why his personality jumps around so much. :D
Another less lulzy solution would be to set up a frame work for the MC. This way, script writers will have a list of major events to write for. This won't stop all people from writing piecemeal scripts for the MC. But we should get a few coherent MC's out of the deal.
-
Well We could just give the MC Schizophrenia as a unremovable trait to explain why his personality jumps around so much. :D
Another less lulzy solution would be to set up a frame work for the MC. This way, script writers will have a list of major events to write for. This won't stop all people from writing piecemeal scripts for the MC. But we should get a few coherent MC's out of the deal.
Well you're right. We have to be honest here, anyone can write the MC however they want. Even if WM goes in the route of a talking MC then someone can just later go through the entire game and adjust it so that the MC is silent. Or if someone doesn't like how the MC is written they could just simply re-write the entire script changing the personality completely. My choice for the silence isn't due to a gameplay preference but more so a modding one. I'd be much more comfortable writing scripts and events for a silent MC than a voiced one.
"I" want to know what everyone else thinks on this... and I don't think I've seen yours or much of anyones opinion on the matter. Do you plan on writing your own scripts? Choosing the direction for this will change WM quite considerably.
-
I have to disagree, Mehzerz: Writing for a silent protagonist is probably easier, yes, but my main problem with it is that silent protagonists only really work well without ranges of choices. In games like Zelda your choices are generally limited to something like "Yeah, let's go" and "I'm not ready yet." Here we have a range of interactions being taken with girls, customers, and rivals. Even if nobody writes up dialogue for the protagonist (which I think would be a mistake,) he'll still have the dynamic reactions of someone making different decisions in different instances, we'll just have to imagine what they are saying by the context of the other characters' replies. (Which, if the writers have something specific in mind, poses the challenge of setting up the proper context in the *reply* for people to know what the pc was *supposed* to have said, and then you end up with the same "continuity" problem, anyway.)
To me the best solution is just making sure that whoever's committing the dialogue into the game proofreads the dialogue first and either edits it for consistency, or gives notes and has the contributing party edit it. I don't actually see it as being as much of a problem as other people though, since the pc's dialogue has always been fairly short and to the point, though, and if it's defined by player choices, the choices will define the dialogue and in essence provide the consistency required.
-
silent protagonist
sometimes I think of him as a power-hungry authority figure, sometimes a sadist, a businessman, or just a guy trying to get by
it contributes to the game more than an actual character would, in my opinion
and just a friendly advice
don't approach anything with "it's ok, it will be moddable"
you're not todd howard, make shit right from the start
-
I actually wrote up a post detailing how I prefer neither. But then I realized, Unless you are a Link or a Gordon Freeman. You aren't actually silent. Take Dragon Age. Sure the character doesn't speak, but that's a lot of text being spewed out. And I don't think this game could possibly have a "pure" silent MC. A lot of the feed back players receive from this game is text based. And the images will probably never fit the scene that is playing out 100%. (we are basically gathering up fan images as pac creators.)
Sure we could script a scene that fits whats going on in an image, but that would be very limiting since you basically have to cross your fingers and hope artists drew the idea you had in your head. So script writers will rely more on text than on imagery to try and get a scene across. Doesn't necessarily mean that the MC will speak, but we will be at least peering inside his or her head when a scene plays out. As apposed to us imagining what their response was. (Like Imagining that Grodon just told Alyx Vance to go fuck off when she called him a man of few words.)
So I guess that's my take on it.
-
well, having some history beyond what there currently is, would help (for me at least) in making some types of events, and having some voice would help inspire and determine if I want to write some events out (like what will work or won't), so for me I would like to see a more lively MC, but I think as much should be left to chance as possible, with only minimal assumptions (but then I'm the person who never likes the given options in most games). I don't really know what a silent MC would be, except it kinda feels like some one who doesn't say anything, thus leaves a lot to desire, and makes script writing harder (if it's anything like it was in Zelda: Ocarina of Time, or games where it's more lead by 3rd party narratives then players choice). so some one who points, or is just lead along, grunts would be a bad thing.
so maybe a personality, or various personalities, to suit the choices that are made, but try to keep a minimum on the back story, or limitations. but more fleshed out then it is now. Having a character chose a history at the beginning would/could be helpful if there are going to be more then one personality- or advantage set. then the personality could be tied to the history, and past experiences based on that. though it would require a great deal more time to develop. there could be specific quests or quests tailored/altered to seem so for each history.
also I have to agree with Lorde this game can't have a purely silent MC, for the reasons he says.
-
well, having some history beyond what there currently is, would help (for me at least) in making some types of events, and having some voice would help inspire and determine if I want to write some events out (like what will work or won't), so for me I would like to see a more lively MC, but I think as much should be left to chance as possible, with only minimal assumptions (but then I'm the person who never likes the given options in most games). I don't really know what a silent MC would be, except it kinda feels like some one who doesn't say anything, thus leaves a lot to desire, and makes script writing harder (if it's anything like it was in Zelda: Ocarina of Time, or games where it's more lead by 3rd party narratives then players choice). so some one who points, or is just lead along, grunts would be a bad thing.
so maybe a personality, or various personalities, to suit the choices that are made, but try to keep a minimum on the back story, or limitations. but more fleshed out then it is now. Having a character chose a history at the beginning would/could be helpful if there are going to be more then one personality- or advantage set. then the personality could be tied to the history, and past experiences based on that. though it would require a great deal more time to develop. there could be specific quests or quests tailored/altered to seem so for each history.
also I have to agree with Lorde this game can't have a purely silent MC, for the reasons he says.
I have to agree in thinking a purely silent MC would leave little to be desired in this game. One that gives some minor thoughts or details on a subject may be necessary.
Seems you guys are more prone to the more "Mass Effect/Kotor" Bioware type game MCs. Where there's three or four personalities per individual choice. But they largely don't speak unless asked a question or for input on a subject. In my opinion silent MC's seem secondary, like part of the group but not the leader. If you played Persona 4 it seemed like the main characters best friend was more of the MC than he was. That's something I'd largely like to avoid with WM.
So I guess what I'm trying to say the MC who only speaks AFTER given a particular alignment choice or the like, might very well be perfect for WM. A personality would largely be defined by your actions rather than his words. If you played Mass Effect each option gave widely different personalities, and they got away with it because people normally chose a particular path which all flowed together. The best part about this option is that the MC would also be easier to write since you'd have to write three or four definite personalities.
-
I think we're actually fairly well in line on this. It seems, perhaps, that I've been taking the word "silent" as much more of an absolute than some people. My idea of a non-silent protagonist wasn't a particularly verbose one, but certainly one who speaks when necessary or when spoken to (like the "I run a business in town; why don't you come work for me?" line.)
-
Seems you guys are more prone to the more "Mass Effect/Kotor" Bioware type game MCs. Where there's three or four personalities per individual choice. But they largely don't speak unless asked a question or for input on a subject. In my opinion silent MC's seem secondary, like part of the group but not the leader. If you played Persona 4 it seemed like the main characters best friend was more of the MC than he was. That's something I'd largely like to avoid with WM.
This is actually a very good point with Persona. It's very hard to convey a story through a silent MC. Often times, you have to write for the MC through the other characters. So you end up more like a spectator than an actual participant in the story. Sometimes it works. Especially with great character design. P3's mc came across as someone who would just stand there with his hands in his pockets listening to an mp3 player while the Seniors made all the plans. Then, go whack something over the head when they decided what to do. P4, not so much.
The alternative of course (and persona sorta touched on this with the Social Link part) is to have the MC not as silent but speaking through a multiple choice set up. So this way, you don't end up like P4 where another character steals the spotlight. (In WM's case, the girls would most likely steal the spotlight. Or maybe even well scripted gang leaders.)
-
don't approach anything with "it's ok, it will be moddable"
you're not todd howard, make shit right from the start
Right for whom?
It seems not everyone has the same conception of what is right for this game
-
Right for whom?
It seems not everyone has the same conception of what is right for this game
I realize not everybody's familiar with the development process, so I shall enlighten him.
There's the planning phase, where you draw out a plan, maybe write a storyboard and jot down design ideas.
Then there's the coding phase, which may, or may not, involve scraping up whoever you can find to code.
Then there's the alpha phase, where you test something that may or may not crash your computer and force you to reinstall whatever OS you have.
Then there's beta, where you know it won't cause you to rip your hair out while trying to hunt down that pesky windows install disk, but it's still quite buggy so you unleash your creation upon numerous people, while you laugh at their plight and expect them to tell you every little bug they find.
Then there's final release, which most of the bugs have been ironed out. There may still be a few bugs here and there, but overall it's pretty well stable.
I'd also like to note... Superman for 64 completely skipped the beta phase and went straight to final release... Shoving Lois Lane into the floor to keep her safe was the best bug EVER!
There is no such thing as a perfect game with perfect design that's bug free. That's a myth. Different strokes for different folks. Some people like Dragonball Z, some people don't. Some people are entrapped by the idiocy of American Idol, some aren't. Don't come in here spouting your "Make shit right from the start" crap. If you want a game made your way, make it yourself. The source is available, edit it to your liking, and play it.
-
Right for whom?
It seems not everyone has the same conception of what is right for this game
Make it right for me, damnit!
-
Don't come in here spouting your "Make shit right from the start" crap. If you want a game made your way, make it yourself. The source is available, edit it to your liking, and play it.
I would sig this if I wasn't so disorganized and needed my work list staring at me in the face.
Make it right for me, damnit!
But what if I want something different Then you? :'(
-
I would sig this if I wasn't so disorganized and needed my work list staring at me in the face.
But what if I want something different Then you? :'(
I want my girls to get drunk then accidentally kill a client during rough sex and get arrested >.> Conjugal visits baby!
-
Why isn't this a flying sim? I DEMAND MORE FLYING. THIS GAME SUCKS.
(Totally off-topic again)
So guys... sandbox or story? Oh and Personal MC or no? Mass Effect MC?
-
I hope that my vote's clear, but for the sake of conciseness: Both, with story favored over sandbox; Personal character with voice, defined more by choices than predetermination.
-
I've been thinking about this. You know how part of the problem with the sandbox discussion was that different people used "sandbox" to mean different things? Well I think we're using "personality" in a couple of different ways, too.
Let's look at the Mass Effect examples. Shepard gets three responses to each option - roughly corresponding to good/neutral/evil in D&D terms. So some folks are taking the enirely sensible view that the Shepard who's willing to do something horrible and selfish in a given circumstance has a different personality to the one who's willing to say nice things in order to get to exactly the same place. It's a reasonable way of looking at it. I mean Shepard doesn't know his choices are meaningless, after all.
On the other hand, I don't think it's the most useful way of looking at it. For the purposes of this disucssion, it's better to think of Shepard as a man (or woman) who like most of us is capable of both good and evil, and makes moral choices on a case by case basis.
Looked at that way, Shepard has a fairly clear, singular personality. He's got your basic miliary mindset. He's goal oriented; a team player; no discernable sense of humour; he thinks IP licences are a really good idea (I wonder why) and he's a wee bit clueless when it comes to getting laid. That's how I think of Shepard's personality. The Good/Neutral/Evil options are better thought of as morality, and from a game design viewpoint, they are complimentary to the matter of personality.
In morality terms, I'd like to write events that (like Mass Effect) offer a range of moral responses. Unlike ME, I'd like them to make some sort of difference.
In terms of personality, I see the MC as having a clearly defined persona. He's a tough guy, but not brutal or mindlessly violent; he has a sense of humour, tending towards the dry, larconic end of the spectrum; he has a strong sense of right and wrong, and like many real world criminals, he's capable of getting upset by any moral outrage that he hasn't actually caused.
In a lot of ways, he's like a Raymond Chandler PI, dropped into a fantasy setting and working as a criminal rather than a detective. There's a quote from Chandler that puts it nicely.
But down these mean streets a man must go who is not himself mean, who is neither tarnished nor afraid. He must be, to use a rather weathered phrase, a man of honor -- by instinct, by inevitability, without thought of it, and certainly without saying it. He must be the best man in his world and a good enough man for any world... He will take no man's money dishonestly and no man's insolence without a due and dispassionate revenge ... and his pride is that you will treat him as a proud man or be very sorry you ever saw him. He talks as the man of his age talks -- that is, with a rude wit, a lively sense of the grotesque, a disgust for sham, and a contempt for pettiness.
-
I certainly like the possibilities of having choices affect later events, but it seems like it'd be incredibly tedious (from my limited perspective) to code all the possibilities if you have branching choices like that with the size of the coding team at your disposal. Seems like you could use the Disposition/Suspicion stats that are already there to enable or limit choices a player has in reaction to events... hooray for pulling more ideas from Mass Effect!
-
I certainly like the possibilities of having choices affect later events, but it seems like it'd be incredibly tedious (from my limited perspective) to code all the possibilities if you have branching choices like that with the size of the coding team at your disposal.
Well, we're not going to change much in the long term. The game remains a sandbox game (in the GTA sense) and main quest is still going to be the same. But I can imagine we might have side-quests where your choices affect gameplay. In the simplest sense, a decision might grant access to a game resource or not - or grant access to different resources depending on how you choose. We could have events that were referenced by different events.
In that sense, it's not as bad as trying to implement multiple story paths in an ADV game, where thje complexity rapidly spirals out of control. The consequences of your actions are limited to a relatively small set of events.
I don't know - maybe I'm drawing an artificial distinction here.
Seems like you could use the Disposition/Suspicion stats that are already there to enable or limit choices a player has in reaction to events... hooray for pulling more ideas from Mass Effect!
-
Just a couple of days off and I've been blamed of Town Wards dictatorship ??? (never meant that), some people want WM to be a flying sim (if it's an space opera flying sim, you can count on my support ;D ) and others are making some sort of WM MC psychological profile (we have seen that in a number of tv series, but the person of the profile was always a psycho killer... :D )
Anyone heard about 'psychological projection'? Now I think of it, after reading all posts of this thread, it seems that the MC silent choice is meant to be a 'insert your personality here' character rather than a pure silent protagonist. I think playing WM could be a mental exercise of sanity, where anyone can be cruel, wicked, mischievous and do all of those evil and funny things which could grant you a ticket to a cell in the city jail / insane asylum. Can't it be achieved through multi-choice text lines (MassEffect fashion)? I mean, even if they don't affect main story that much, players can still feel they're playing the way they want.
-
Just a couple of days off and I've been blamed of Town Wards dictatorship ??? (never meant that)
You made a suggestion that seemed reasonable. No one objected at the time. Seems fair enough to me :)
Anyone heard about 'psychological projection'? Now I think of it, after reading all posts of this thread, it seems that the MC silent choice is meant to be a 'insert your personality here' character rather than a pure silent protagonist.
Yeah. Scott McCloud talks about this in the opening chapter of Understanding Comics. I had some notes on this I was going to post earlier. I might see if I can find them.
Can't it be achieved through multi-choice text lines (MassEffect fashion)? I mean, even if they don't affect main story that much, players can still feel they're playing the way they want.
That was my hope and expectation, I must admit.
-
I'll be happy with an arena you can fight your girls in or something >.>
Hrmm there seems to be a theme here...
Meh... Imma go to bed then imma write up a project plan when I wake up.
-
Just a couple of days off and I've been blamed of Town Wards dictatorship
yes, you're quite the martyr
I never accused you of anything, I was just confused about how we got from the network to levels without anyone saying anything about it, the fact that I do not like the idea is secondary
he's a wee bit clueless when it comes to getting laid
dude, what?
though, I agree that there is a general problem in communication here, most apparent in this thread
I figured this was a
"take them to the dungeon"
vs
"yeeeeessss, do imprison them in the bowels of my dungeon, where I may assert my dominance over them by placing tapeworm-like creatures on, or in the general vicinity of, their vaginas, among many other things. hyuk hyuk"
I do think you're just making everyone play your character, though
and I hated me/alpha protocol dialogue system
most recent example would be a guy saying "I have a proposal for you"
one of the options says "proposal", and I figure he'll ask for the details of the proposal
"lol I'm a bachelor lol"
that's not what I wanted him to say. it's not funny, it doesn't even make sense, being a bachelor doesn't stop you from getting married
now, I just know someone is going to take this as a personal insult, since none of my posts seem to evade that, but I don't want my character to speak/think whatever you or whoever wrote the event wants him to. not because I doubt anyone's writing skills, I just don't want your opinions in my game
however hard you try, this game will never have as strong a story as, say, baldur's gate, or planescape: torment, and they didn't even have set characters
adding a set personality to a weak story will not make this a better game
I am not trying to be an asshole, I am speaking the truth, and deep down, you know it
I, on the other hand, know non of my words will make a difference, because you will just do it anyway
I hated mass effect for many reasons, one of which is the dialogue
I did not think it was written well (and since it was written by drew karpyshyn, I'm right beyond the shadow of a doubt), shepard has a very limited personality
I know you said
For the purposes of this disucssion, it's better to think of Shepard as a man (or woman) who like most of us is capable of both good and evil, and makes moral choices on a case by case basis.
but it wouldn't be true, because paragon shepard is not the same man renegade shepard is, because drewy didn't write the lines of a singular character with different views of the world, he wrote his usual "evil guy who gets the job done", and then he just wrote up the other guy
and did it badly
edit: and yes, I am aware I praised one of his works, and then implied he's a bad writer. he's not, he just really, really sucks lately, and I am angry at him. I am a hypocritical whore
-
I do think you're just making everyone play your character, though
You know what? I really can't be arsed with this any more.
It seems clear that the poll is asking the wrong question: here's a new one (http://pinkpetal.org/index.php?topic=478.msg9016#new)
After which, one way or another, I will regard the matter as settled.
-
I am sorry for annoying you, but if you are so hell-bent on doing everything the way you want, why have these discussions?
you couldn't have possibly expected everyone to share your opinions
if you don't want discussions on development of the game, don't allow them
-
I am sorry for annoying you, but if you are so hell-bent on doing everything the way you want, why have these discussions?
Why yes fixet, I am indeed hell-bent on asserting my dominance over the pink petal community. That's why in my previous post I linked to a poll where I offer to stand down if it turns out the majority are in fact opposed to my idea. Because that's the best wayto force everyone to do as you say - by standing down and letting everyone else get on with it.
if you don't want discussions on development of the game, don't allow them
Gosh. You don't suppose that maybe I invite discussions of the subject because actually I do care? That I might be a wee bit peeved at the way you persistently distort the opinions of others and present everyone else in the worst possible light? No, of course not. That's just silly. It's just because I'm power mad. There, I admit it. You can be happy now.
-
the only time I ever mentioned "asserting dominance" was in that dialogue option which had nothing to do with you, or anyone else, and was actually referring to a torturing "event"
where you came up with that, I have no clue
and the whole "standing down if people don't like that one thing I wanted to do" crap hardly sends the message you think it does
and when was I, exactly, distorting other people's opinions? or presenting everyone in the worst possible light?
no, really, I'm curious. ever since I started posting here, I find myself constantly apologizing for things I never said
I really can't help but draw a parallel between this and the whole exodia fiasco
I said it then, and I say it again, 90% of his heinous attacks on you were never directed at you to begin with
you were being childish then, and you are being childish now
-
the only time I ever mentioned "asserting dominance" was in that dialogue option which had nothing to do with you, or anyone else, and was actually referring to a torturing "event"
where you came up with that, I have no clue
You don't think that was kind implicit in "I am sorry for annoying you, but if you are so hell-bent on doing everything the way you want, why have these discussions?"
and the whole "standing down if people don't like that one thing I wanted to do" crap hardly sends the message you think it does
fixet, I don't give a tinker's damn what message you take from it. If you're right about the majority opinion, you get to win. Be happy.
-
1. no, I don't, because it wasn't
2. yes, that is readily apparent from your previous post, where you explained to me why you did it
and I never said anything about a majority
those were my opinions, and fuck you, you hypocritical prick
first you call me out on distorting other people's opinions, then you evade my asking for an example, and then proceed to distort my words
what do I get to win? some half-assed compromise? oh, wait, you'd stop working on wm if that happened
-
LOL tapeworms on vaginas.
-
Sigh. This is like my second post on this board, and I'm already getting involved in a flamewar. Don't really like leaving Doc to defend himself alone, though. So...
and I never said anything about a majority
those were my opinions, and fuck you, you hypocritical prick
No, fuck you, you whiney little bitch.
I am not trying to be an asshole, I am speaking the truth, and deep down, you know it
How respectful of other peoples' opinions does that sound? 'Fuck whatever you say, my words are the truth, the sole truth, the truth that you all know and are ignoring'. It's a pretty good way to be an asshole.
I must admit, I'm rather entertained at you claiming to speak the truth ('For the silent majority' like exodia? The language is getting rather familiar), and then flipping out when he puts up a poll to determine the overall opinion and offers to back off.
1. no, I don't, because it wasn't
Yes it was. If you're a critical failure in communications and didn't mean to imply it, that's fine, but it was pretty definitely implied.
not because I doubt anyone's writing skills, I just don't want your opinions in my game
Then take them out, dumbass. The game is highly moddable for a reason.
Hey, I understand that you want the game the way you want it. Who doesn't? The difference here seems to be that you want to strongarm the devs into making the game the way you want it, while everyone else is satisfied to mod it for themselves.
Getting into the personality versus silent debate for myself... your character is bloody well saying something. People are reacting to it. They're not reacting to what the player's imagining, they're reacting to what the scriptwriter's imagining. A silent protagonist is either practically not even in the game (Persona 4), or they have a personality that everyone is reacting to and that's shaping events, but you don't actually see it so you're imagining another one and getting consistently cockblocked when nobody reacts to the personality you imagined.
If you don't like the personality, mod in another one. I don't want your opinions in my game either, fixet.
-
This topic is now about Pie (or Pi if you prefer.)
I like apple myself. (Apple Pi greatness might cause a singularity. Probably best not to mess with. Though it would have a very tasty cinnamon flavored event horizon.)
-
Personally, I was very disappointed to find out the Life Of Pi was not, in fact, a history of geometry.
-
I was horrified to see what happened to the apple pie in American Pie.
-
Pie is most delicious if it is virgin pie :-\
-
(http://www.foodnetwork.co.uk/content-images/RecipeImages/R999.jpg)
Banana cream pie... every word of this is erotic, and every bit is tasty.
Thank you, Banana Cream Pie.
-
Chocolate mousse pie...
-
I agree that banana cream pie is delicious, but the direly mislabeled cheesecake gets my vote for most delicious pie.
-
No, fuck you, you whiney little bitch.
there is a distinct difference between making a statement and whining
How respectful of other peoples' opinions does that sound? 'Fuck whatever you say, my words are the truth, the sole truth, the truth that you all know and are ignoring'. It's a pretty good way to be an asshole.
I must admit, I'm rather entertained at you claiming to speak the truth ('For the silent majority' like exodia? The language is getting rather familiar), and then flipping out when he puts up a poll to determine the overall opinion and offers to back off.
so, you think this game WILL have a better/deeper story than bg or ps:t? you do realize the whole "truth" only refers to that one paragraph, and not what I say in general?
don't put words in my mouth. I said it already, what I say is what I say, not a majority
and there is difference between making a poll and making "choose what I want, or I quit" poll, which is exactly what this is
Yes it was. If you're a critical failure in communications and didn't mean to imply it, that's fine, but it was pretty definitely implied.
english is not my native language, so that is entirely possible, but as the writer of that sentence, I assure you it was not meant to imply any intent at asserting dominance
that was an honest question. if you do not want something in your game, why have discussions about it?
you don't see toady posting polls like "do you want dwarf fortress to be turned into elf village? oh, and if you do, I quit"
Then take them out, dumbass. The game is highly moddable for a reason.
that argument is not very valid, I could just say: "hey, you want a personality? mod it in yourself"
Hey, I understand that you want the game the way you want it. Who doesn't? The difference here seems to be that you want to strongarm the devs into making the game the way you want it, while everyone else is satisfied to mod it for themselves.
I, on the other hand, know none of my words will make a difference, because you will just do it anyway
I was not trying to strongarm anyone. I said it because I wanted to say it
and, really, doc is a grown man who is perfectly capable of defending himself and/or banning me, if need be
I am not, as some seem to believe, fighting over the direction wm would take, and I actually respect doc as much as I could respect someone I know next to nothing about
this was a conflict on a personal scale and has little to do with wm
-
Raspberry Pie. Deliciously Tasty.
-
You drama queens need to take this shit somewhere else....now just to make it clear this is meant in a respectful manner as this is not the intended use of this thread.
So can we get back to the topic?....don't really know what started this or care...I'll go read more of this thread now.....
-
and, really, doc is a grown man who is perfectly capable of defending himself and/or banning me, if need be
I'm not going to ban you (I couldn't anyway) but I did appreciate the show of support. As for defending myself...
I am not, as some seem to believe, fighting over the direction wm would take, and I actually respect doc as much as I could respect someone I know next to nothing about
this was a conflict on a personal scale and has little to do with wm
Well, yeah. You told me I just wanted to make everyone play my character. This seemed a little petty at the time, and as I result I was exasperated and sarcastic. In return you told me to fuck off and called me a hypocrite.
Now can we move on? This isn't advancing the debate even remotely
-
there is a distinct difference between making a statement and whining
so, you think this game WILL have a better/deeper story than bg or ps:t? you do realize the whole "truth" only refers to that one paragraph, and not what I say in general?
don't put words in my mouth. I said it already, what I say is what I say, not a majority
and there is difference between making a poll and making "choose what I blah blah blah blah blah.
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
blah blah blah blah.
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah!
blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah.
What does any of this have to do with pie?
-
Try a word count... perhaps the post was 314 words long. ^_^
-
Well, yeah. You told me I just wanted to make everyone play my character. This seemed a little petty at the time, and as I result I was exasperated and sarcastic. In return you told me to fuck off and called me a hypocrite.
Now can we move on? This isn't advancing the debate even remotely
I said I think you're making everyone play your character, which is something very common among writers
and the rest was after you basically labeled me as a deranged sociopath, distorting people's opinions and presenting them in the worst possible light
and there is no debate anymore, we have a poll, and we'll see what happens. if people want their personality written, fine, I'll accept it
how's about we put this down as a failure to communicate, and move on
What does any of this have to do with pie?
if you want to make an apple pie from scratch, first you must smoke weed everyday
-
I'm not gonna write 314 blah's to protest my distaste of anything not pie related. :D
if you want to make an apple pie from scratch, first you must smoke weed everyday
What the... No you don't. That's brownies.
-
(http://shaunphilly.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/carl_sagan.jpg)
you know nothing of science
-
Carl Sagan != Pie.
Carl Sagan = Pi = Sorcery.
Carl Sagan Scares me ???
Contact was a good movie book though, would have been better with Pie and Pi. Not just Pi.
-
I think, a lot of the confrontation between mr. fixet here and others is due to misunderstandings. I don't think english is his first language so it's hard for him to voice his opinions clearly and concisely.
This of course is all speculation on my part, but that's what seems to be the case. 90% of what you say fixet, I just don't understand. That could be because i'm small minded or... you have no clue as to what you're trying to say yourself.
So yes, I suppose you have the right idea to say: "How's about we put this down as a failure to communicate, and move on."
-
Ah, Sagan I loved his Cosmos series as a kid. I wonder if I can find them again.
edit: hooray for Hulu!
-
@mehzerz
honestly, I think you guys aren't really paying attention to what I write, and just come up with conclusions of your own
for example, I said like 2 posts ago that english is not my native language, and that it is entirely possible this is a problem on my part, yet here you are with your own theory of exactly the same thing I already said
I don't even know what the problem is anymore
-
@mehzerz
honestly, I think you guys aren't really paying attention to what I write, and just come up with conclusions of your own
for example, I said like 2 posts ago that english is not my native language, and that it is entirely possible this is a problem on my part, yet here you are with your own theory of exactly the same thing I already said
I don't even know what the problem is anymore
Ok, my bad. I suck. I think this thread has lived its life. Seems to me that the discussion is over anyways.
-
Ok, my bad. I suck. I think this thread has lived its life. Seems to me that the discussion is over anyways.
Preety much, Unless people want to keep talking about Pie|Pi or Carl Sagan.
-
Preety much, Unless people want to keep talking about Pie|Pi or Carl Sagan.
I don't know much about him. But he sure knows how to sport a turtle neck.
-
I don't know much about him. But he sure knows how to sport a turtle neck.
wow I haven't laughed that hard in a while. Then again, I do have a strange sense of humor.
-
Why yes fixet, I am indeed hell-bent on asserting my dominance over the pink petal community. That's why in my previous post I linked to a poll where I offer to stand down if it turns out the majority are in fact opposed to my idea. Because that's the best wayto force everyone to do as you say - by standing down and letting everyone else get on with it.
Gosh. You don't suppose that maybe I invite discussions of the subject because actually I do care? That I might be a wee bit peeved at the way you persistently distort the opinions of others and present everyone else in the worst possible light? No, of course not. That's just silly. It's just because I'm power mad. There, I admit it. You can be happy now.
Batman kicks everybody's ass.
Oh yeah...
Pie rules *nod nod*
-
Oh Carl Sagan... I remember fondly taking off on an adventure in the Spaceship of the Imagination... and then waking up an hour later when the class lights came back on because Carl Sagan has the dullest voice ever.
-
Hm. I like blueberry pie, myself.
And that expression frightens me. It looks like he's going to use the Power Of SCIENCE! to turn me into a woman, then rape me.
Which is, for clarification, unrelated to the topic of blueberry pie.
-
Well vagina is sometimes called pie
-
Well vagina is sometimes called pie
... and you can find the circumference of the inside of a vagina with Pi.
... and Carl Sagan most likely came from a vagina.
IT ALL FITS TOGETHER NOW!
-
Diggin the new topic title. Maybe we can get a similar approach for the other controversial thread. :p
-
All this Carl Sagan, Pi and vagina thing sounds like witchcraft to me. Maybe Carl Sagan is a witch -he came out of a vagina, and we know witches have one... so... Carl Sagan would probably burn like witches do, mostly because he's made of wood -as witches are- and we all know wood floats in water... and... (...) Oh, I can't remember the rest, but I'm sure we can test wether Carl Sagan is guilty of witchcraft or not using a duck and Bedemir larger scales. We must be careful not to attract the attention of the Inquisition, though.
P.D. I'm sure TF didn't expected the spanish inquisition as well...
(http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/9008/spanishinquisition.jpg) (http://img541.imageshack.us/i/spanishinquisition.jpg/)
-
Carl Sagan was an astronomer.
Therefore Carl Sagan + Pie == Pie in the Sky
The truth is out there!
-
I did once posit in a particularly boring astronomy class that Carl Sagan's skeletal remains would be positioned in such a way as to act as a sundial, thus giving people the ability to calculate any number of things, including they're own exact position on the earth. Sounds like witchcraft to me.
-
i have to vote for story. sandbox is fun, but a story can drive games to greater heights where a sandbox would fail. and all in all, a sandbox feature would take less time to create and could be added in towards the end of creation. a story cant be added in at the end of a production and still be outstanding. i myself love sandbox games but it would be better in my opinion to play a game that could have sandbox features but doesn't, than to play a game with sandbox features and a story mode that just doesn't play well.
-
Get back on topic Alucard
PIE IS AWESOME!
Point me to some youtubes of Carl Sagan...
-
Hulu has it all.
http://www.hulu.com/cosmos
Classic educational show before everything became about the environment.
-
(http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/pi-pie.jpg)
-
(http://image3.examiner.com/images/blog/wysiwyg/image/pi-pie.jpg)
+1000000 EPIC POINTS!!!!