First Dishonored video footage

[AEmer]

What's the difference between being offended and being pissed?

[Jonas]

Would you be offended if I called you a gaylord? Yeah, probably, right? Would you be offended if I punched you in the face? Doesn't sound right, does it?

[Cybernetic pig]

So you are a Bioware fan, at least that is the only possible explanation for your sudden offensive/defensive post. I respect you Jonas, but I dont appreciate you turning on me like that.
This is your domain, so i'll leave you be. But i'll be back like a parasite when HDTP is released, that you can be sure of .

Thanks for TNM, I am at the end now. It is a great game amoungst a load of shit, so I greatly appreciate it.

Before I go got one more for 1.0.5:
When you meet Treskton in ABI if you throw a gas grenade down and then interact with the mirror it bypasses the conversation and spawns Treskton, who does not attack and dies in one bullet.
Oh and if you attack Athena & Dark Templar in Goat Templae(TM) most of the guards are unresponsive/unpredictable.

[AEmer]

Would you be offended if I called you a gaylord? Yeah, probably, right? Would you be offended if I punched you in the face? Doesn't sound right, does it?

What? I enjoy lording over anything and everything.

And I would certainly take offense to being punched in the face, though I suppose being offended wouldn't commonly be used to describe my state of mind. I mean, I'd absolutely be offended, but it's not the only thing I would be.

But I suppose I asked because I was curious why you corrected him, and not so much because I couldn't see any distinction between the two words.

[Jonas]

So you are a Bioware fan, at least that is the only possible explanation for your sudden offensive/defensive post. I respect you Jonas, but I dont appreciate you turning on me like that.

That's a pretty patronising thing to write.

Yes I'm a BioWare fan, not in the sense that I think they're infallible and all their games rock, God knows my opinions of Dragon Age 2 are complex but mostly negative, but when you write this: "God of war has a jump mechanic, that doesn't fit in with Bioware's design paradigms, it's not 'awesome' enough apparently" that just strikes me as a stupid and pointless criticism. Well it's not even criticism, it's just a cheeky jab at the game. So all games that don't have a jump button suck now? That's certainly an opinion one might hold.

I didn't "turn on" you. The tone of your post annoyed me, not least because of the smiley, and rather than letting it slide and ignoring you, I was in the mood to let you know. This forum intersects in a really annoying way with a large demographic of old-school gamers who have taken it upon themselves to actively hate almost everything that has been made since 2002. As I myself have a fairly broad taste in games that encompasses substantial amounts of the mainstream market along with a bunch of small niches, this attitude consistently frustrates me, and sometimes that makes me post things that sound a lot more hostile than they were intended. If you don't want me to "turn on" you, don't sound so much like an RPG Codexer.

Thanks for TNM, I am at the end now. It is a great game amoungst a load of shit, so I greatly appreciate it.

And I appreciate you letting us know, as well as I appreciate all your detailed comments and feedback.

I am fully capable of regarding you as a friend in one respect and then having minor fights with you in another respect. Just ask Hassat Hunter, with whom I had great collaboration on the 1.0.4+ fan patch as well as the walkthrough, while we duked it out about what I perceive to be his hipstery and elitist reactionary attitude towards mainstream games

And don't worry about what's my domain or not, you have to be quite an asshole to get banned from here, I remember perhaps 2 people at most who got banned from here over the past 6-7 years for reasons other than being spam bots.

When you meet Treskton in ABI if you throw a gas grenade down and then interact with the mirror it bypasses the conversation and spawns Treskton, who does not attack and dies in one bullet.
Oh and if you attack Athena & Dark Templar in Goat Templae(TM) most of the guards are unresponsive/unpredictable.

You can chalk the first one up to emergent gameplay. I mmmmmmmay look at the second one, but I make no promises as far as Deus Ex's AI is concerned, it's a mess.

But I suppose I asked because I was curious why you corrected him, and not so much because I couldn't see any distinction between the two words.

Regardless of its dictionary definition, the word "offended" did not accurately describe what I was feeling. That's all.

[Jaedar]

jump mechanic, that doesn't fit in with Bioware's design paradigms, it's not 'awesome' enough apparently

Actually I think this is a "somewhat" paraphrased quote from a developer talking about the game.

It's been a long time, but I seem to remember reading one of the developers defending not having a jump in a way that could be paraphrased/mocked as not awesome enough.

[Jonas]

Well if that's true, it makes more sense. But I'd be interested to see the source/context for that.

[DaveW]

I do hate it when game developers don't include jump in a game, usually for two reasons:

a) When I'm bored I like to jump around a lot.
b) It means you're relying on the developers to manually add each obstacle you can jump over - which tends to not be many, so even though your character feasibly could hop over a small step and get to another area, the developer doesn't want you to. That breaks the idea of a game to me - if I can only play exactly how the game developer wants me to I may as well be watching a film.

Not that the above is relevant to the discussion at hand.

This forum intersects in a really annoying way with a large demographic of old-school gamers who have taken it upon themselves to actively hate almost everything that has been made since 2002. As I myself have a fairly broad taste in games that encompasses substantial amounts of the mainstream market along with a bunch of small niches, this attitude consistently frustrates me, and sometimes that makes me post things that sound a lot more hostile than they were intended. If you don't want me to "turn on" you, don't sound so much like an RPG Codexer.

I agree that hating/liking a game based on it's age is stupid. But, in general, that's not what people do - if you compare the mechanics of an older game to one made recently, they're substantially different. You don't seem to mind that, but some people do - and your attitude that everyone should like that change smacks of the same elitism you criticize them for.

[Jonas]

I do hate it when game developers don't include jump in a game, usually for two reasons:

a) When I'm bored I like to jump around a lot.
b) It means you're relying on the developers to manually add each obstacle you can jump over - which tends to not be many, so even though your character feasibly could hop over a small step and get to another area, the developer doesn't want you to. That breaks the idea of a game to me - if I can only play exactly how the game developer wants me to I may as well be watching a film.

Not that the above is relevant to the discussion at hand.

No but it's an interesting discussion. First of all, it could be argued that jumping around a lot goes against the aesthetic that a lot of games are trying to produce. If you're working hard to create a serious, dramatic science fiction epic, letting your players jump around like maniacs may not be a great idea. You can limit it by reducing shooting accuracy immediately after a jump, but since the Mass Effect series has moved away from expanding/contracting reticules like almost all other FPS/RPG hybrid, they can't really do that.

It also allows the developers more freedom in how to define the borders of their levels. I mean seriously, properly encapsulating the levels of The Nameless Mod without just giving up and using invisible walls was fucking hard, between crate stacking and the speed enhancement aug. Fuck, if you count grenade climbing as a legitimate action, it's literally impossible. So you end up with city levels where every street is lined by a huge skyscraper, or outdoor levels with enormous cliffs and hilariously tall fences everywhere.

I mean don't get me wrong, I'm all about exploration, so of course I love games that give me that kind of freedom, but that doesn't mean I think that's what all games should be about.

Finally, when there's jumping, there tends to be falling to your death. I just finished playing Kingdoms of Amalur, it has a fair amount of verticality, with many areas layered with overpasses and canyons and bridges and so on, and in exploring that, and in having hectic and often extremely mobile fights there, it was really nice to know that you didn't have to worry about falling off the side of a cliff to your bloody death. KoA instead had (admittedly very gamey) jump-off points where you could press A to jump down and be confident that you would survive the fall. They even managed to use this to create a lot of little secrets and intricate alternate paths that felt pretty cool to discover.

So yeah, lack of jumping can lead to Fable 1's problem where the levels are filled with knee-high fences that are somehow impossible to traverse, but on the other hand it can be used to create a much more focused game experience, or it can even remove some typical frustrations from the game. I get that you prefer the type of exploration that may follow when you let the player jump, and I get that - in fact so do I. But I don't think it's the right thing for every game.

If nothing else, it's always good when developers remove the option for themselves to add goddamn jumping puzzles to their game. Just look at what happened with DXI in TNM

I agree that hating/liking a game based on it's age is stupid. But, in general, that's not what people do - if you compare the mechanics of an older game to one made recently, they're substantially different. You don't seem to mind that, but some people do - and your attitude that everyone should like that change smacks of the same elitism you criticize them for.

But that's not my attitude at all, and if it seems that way then I've made a miscommunication. My problem is that the people who tend to prefer older game mechanics also tend to act like it's a personal insult to them that the mainstream games industry has moved in a different direction. I don't think everybody should like the way the mainstream has changed, I think everybody should be allowed to like whatever they damn well please, and that's why I get pissed when people roll their eyes at CoD players just for liking a different type of game than they do, or speak of console games as though anybody who plays games on a console is a 12-year-old with ADHD or a frat boy alcoholic on the way to dropping out of college (I don't mean you, btw, I realise you were just taking the piss).

It's ironic how I get angry at people for acting like others aren't allowed to like a certain type of game, and now I'm being accused of thinking others aren't allowed to dislike a certain type of game. I guess that's on me, I must've not made my position entirely clear. I suppose when those inevitably entrenched arguments develop, the lines tend to blur a little bit.

[Jaedar]

Well if that's true, it makes more sense. But I'd be interested to see the source/context for that.

Totally understandable.

[DaveW]

No but it's an interesting discussion. First of all, it could be argued that jumping around a lot goes against the aesthetic that a lot of games are trying to produce. If you're working hard to create a serious, dramatic science fiction epic, letting your players jump around like maniacs may not be a great idea. You can limit it by reducing shooting accuracy immediately after a jump, but since the Mass Effect series has moved away from expanding/contracting reticules like almost all other FPS/RPG hybrid, they can't really do that.

It also allows the developers more freedom in how to define the borders of their levels. I mean seriously, properly encapsulating the levels of The Nameless Mod without just giving up and using invisible walls was fucking hard, between crate stacking and the speed enhancement aug. Fuck, if you count grenade climbing as a legitimate action, it's literally impossible. So you end up with city levels where every street is lined by a huge skyscraper, or outdoor levels with enormous cliffs and hilariously tall fences everywhere.

I mean don't get me wrong, I'm all about exploration, so of course I love games that give me that kind of freedom, but that doesn't mean I think that's what all games should be about.

Finally, when there's jumping, there tends to be falling to your death. I just finished playing Kingdoms of Amalur, it has a fair amount of verticality, with many areas layered with overpasses and canyons and bridges and so on, and in exploring that, and in having hectic and often extremely mobile fights there, it was really nice to know that you didn't have to worry about falling off the side of a cliff to your bloody death. KoA instead had (admittedly very gamey) jump-off points where you could press A to jump down and be confident that you would survive the fall. They even managed to use this to create a lot of little secrets and intricate alternate paths that felt pretty cool to discover.

So yeah, lack of jumping can lead to Fable 1's problem where the levels are filled with knee-high fences that are somehow impossible to traverse, but on the other hand it can be used to create a much more focused game experience, or it can even remove some typical frustrations from the game. I get that you prefer the type of exploration that may follow when you let the player jump, and I get that - in fact so do I. But I don't think it's the right thing for every game.

If nothing else, it's always good when developers remove the option for themselves to add goddamn jumping puzzles to their game. Just look at what happened with DXI in TNM

I's probably not right for every game, but I think with most games I've played that don't have it I've wanted it to be there. For me it's a trade-off between the serious tone (i.e. stopping me jumping around like an idiot) and the immersion of being able to act how I want. If I can't move my character over a small obstacle when the developer doesn't want me to, that breaks the immersion for me - and I value that more than tone.

I guess it's because I also love films that I think games should be completely interactive (as in, not 'artificially' limited). That's why I don't find games like Modern Warfare interesting - because there's no way for me to play the game how I want, just how the developer made it - so all it is to me is a sort-of interactive movie. Except in a movie, you get better writing.

That said..I also hate invisible walls and jumping puzzles

But that's not my attitude at all, and if it seems that way then I've made a miscommunication. My problem is that the people who tend to prefer older game mechanics also tend to act like it's a personal insult to them that the mainstream games industry has moved in a different direction. I don't think everybody should like the way the mainstream has changed, I think everybody should be allowed to like whatever they damn well please, and that's why I get pissed when people roll their eyes at CoD players just for liking a different type of game than they do, or speak of console games as though anybody who plays games on a console is a 12-year-old with ADHD or a frat boy alcoholic on the way to dropping out of college (I don't mean you, btw, I realise you were just taking the piss).

It's ironic how I get angry at people for acting like others aren't allowed to like a certain type of game, and now I'm being accused of thinking others aren't allowed to dislike a certain type of game. I guess that's on me, I must've not made my position entirely clear. I suppose when those inevitably entrenched arguments develop, the lines tend to blur a little bit.

Alright, I misunderstood who you were directing your frustration at then - and in which case I agree. I don't like a lot of modern games, pretty much for the above reason that I preferred how games used to be push interactivity a lot more, but if that's what people want to buy then I'm not going to criticize the developers too much for delivering it.

I can only speak for myself but the only reason I would sound annoyed at people who like those games is because it means the type of games I like are becoming increasingly rare.

[Jonas]

I can only speak for myself but the only reason I would sound annoyed at people who like those games is because it means the type of games I like are becoming increasingly rare.

Yeah I understand that, and I think that's the foundation that the RPG Codex attitude rests on as well. But there are better ways to deal with that disappointment

I think you're generally pretty good about it.

[DaveW]

I can only speak for myself but the only reason I would sound annoyed at people who like those games is because it means the type of games I like are becoming increasingly rare.

Yeah I understand that, and I think that's the foundation that the RPG Codex attitude rests on as well. But there are better ways to deal with that disappointment

I think you're generally pretty good about it.

Oh, probably - I wouldn't try and justify it, but I'm human and selfish

[Jaedar]

Yeah I understand that, and I think that's the foundation that the RPG Codex attitude rests on as well. But there are better ways to deal with that disappointment

you mean like throwing 10k dollars on funding an rpg ?

[Jonas]

That is a perfect way to deal with it, yes.

Speaking of which I'll be launching a $70,000 Kickstarter for a fairly old-fashioned RPG in about a month. Have I ever mentioned how much I love the RPG Codex?