SPLIT: what is an RPG

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:53 am

the guardian wrote:You do post mostly useless crap.

Wrong, although I suppose it's debatable. And you're one to talk.

most annoying username ever wrote:You were taking RPGCodex's motto literaly too.

Did Spazmo think that people had actually stopped writing the word "role" in RPG? No. He was talking about the concept of modern RPGs. As was I. Nobody was taking anything literally. You're making no sense. Again.

fallout ranger · Post by **fallout ranger** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:57 am

Subhuman wrote:
the guardian wrote:You do post mostly useless crap.
Wrong, although I suppose it's debatable...

says you

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:27 am

Subhuman wrote:
the guardian wrote:You do post mostly useless crap.
Wrong, although I suppose it's debatable. And you're one to talk.

Alas, poor objectivity. Subhuman knew it not at all.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:35 am

I don't know why I bother. You're all acting like you piss gold, when each one of you is guilty of posting pointless comments from time to time. Stop being such hypocrites.

My original point was that Susan shouldn't be calling arguments "useless". If he has nothing to contribute but weightless criticism, he should keep his yap shut. Me and Spazmo were getting along just fine without his commentary.

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:50 am

Subhuman wrote:You're all acting like you piss gold, /snip

You have a point ! I really should take less vitamin supplements.

Subhuman wrote:when each one of you is guilty of posting pointless comments from time to time.

'Twas more directed at your denial of posting useless shite. Thereby communicating your hypocrisy.

theguardian, atoga and even the Fuckwit have not yet claimed they post exclusively witty, relevant, useful, worthwhile comments (or at the very least, not in this topic.) Everyone is useless occasionally, some more so than others.

Subhuman wrote:Stop being such hypocrites.

I can't see anyone else trumpeting denial, so in this you appear to be alone (so far.)

Spazmo · Post by **Spazmo** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:55 am

Okay, this thread is totally derailed and Subhuman is a Final Fantasy fanboy anyways, so I'm going to take a page from the book of Blargh here.

Subhuman, you're a putz.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:06 am

Blargh wrote:theguardian, atoga and even the Fuckwit have not yet claimed they post exclusively witty, relevant, useful, worthwhile comments

And neither did I. Guardian said I posted mostly crap, and I disagreed - most of my posts aren't crap. But I never said they were all worthy, or intelligent, or relevant, or useful. If you would actually take the time to read what was said and respond to that, instead of what you misconstrue to be the truth, you'd stop shooting yourself in the foot.

Spazmo wrote:Subhuman is a Final Fantasy fanboy anyways, so I'm going to take a page from the book of Blargh here. Subhuman, you're a putz.

See my above comments to Blargh. Just because you want it to be true, doesn't necessarily make it so. I never at any point said I liked Final Fantasy. I'd never even typed the words "Final Fantasy" until this very thread. Best of all, that mage quiz had nothing to do with Final Fantasy. You just like arguing for the sake of it, which is one of the most annoying qualities that anyone can adopt. If you can't stick to the facts, keep your hands off the keyboard.

Ernesto · Post by **Ernesto** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:16 am

What makes a RPG a RPG is choice and the quality of the game rides on the amount of choice. We all know Final Fantasy sucks the big one because it's so linear -- Point A to Point B. Level up. Repeat. Same with Diablo and Baldur's Gate.

Many argue that stats and character classes make an RPG. Wrong, bitch. They're merely an extenstion of choice, the choice to develop your character any way you want. Character classes suck ass though because the player only has one path of development, really.

Spazmo is winning/won the argument, Veneral. The topic's a little too punk rock for j00 to winxor.

Blargh · Post by **Blargh** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:17 am

Subhuman wrote:And neither did I.

Your claims of being detached from hypocrisy would dispute that.

Subhuman wrote:most of my posts aren't crap.

There you go trying to be objective, in this theguardian is closer to the mark.

Subhuman wrote:But I never said they were all worthy, or intelligent, or relevant, or useful.

No, at least not directly, instead you accused others of hypocrisy, and simultaneously attempted to exonerate yourself of that same, terrible charge. Perhaps you should be more thoughtful with regard to your choice of words, and your interpretations of the words of others ?

Subhuman wrote:If you would actually take the time to read what was said and respond to that, instead of what you misconstrue to be the truth, you'd stop shooting yourself in the foot.

Bah, I shall take a page from my very own book (apparently) - you're a knob.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:29 am

I was not being hypocritical, because I never said all of my posts were perfect. They were being hypocritical, because they said I shouldn't post crap when they had done the same. That's what this boils down to. We're getting lost in conjecture and misinterpretation. And as Spazmo said, this is way off base from the original topic.

Blargh wrote:
Subhuman wrote:If you would actually take the time to read what was said and respond to that, instead of what you misconstrue to be the truth, you'd stop shooting yourself in the foot.
Bah, I shall take a page from my very own book (apparently) - you're a knob.

What is it with you and sidestepping arguments? RESPOND TO MY POINT PLZ.

DX wrote:What makes a RPG a RPG is choice and the quality of the game rides on the amount of choice. We all know Final Fantasy sucks the big one because it's so linear -- Point A to Point B. Level up. Repeat.

That's an opinion, one that many RPG fanatics share. I don't think the Final Fantasy games suck just because they're linear. I don't think they suck at all - the stories are involving, the characters are colorful and likable, and the battle systems are fun. It's just a different kind of RPG from something like Fallout, which does have a lot more freedom. But I'm more concerned with how the game draws me in and keeps me playing - freedom of choice is great, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee a great game. I'm more concerned with how a game connects with me emotionally.

Koki · Post by **Koki** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:19 am

The RPG for me is to be able to control and develop your character. Not some 'Beee in the roooleee Luke!' crap, because, as Spazmo wrote, I could have been even in a role of goddamn Bomberman.

So, hundreds of statistics and points to spend in all 56426 classes of weapon mastery(The blue one) is where I'm happy.

- Munchkin

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 2:07 pm

Sunhuman wrote:That's an opinion, one that many RPG fanatics share. I don't think the Final Fantasy games suck just because they're linear. I don't think they suck at all - the stories are involving, the characters are colorful and likable, and the battle systems are fun. It's just a different kind of RPG from something like Fallout, which does have a lot more freedom. But I'm more concerned with how the game draws me in and keeps me playing - freedom of choice is great, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee a great game. I'm more concerned with how a game connects with me emotionally.

Hey, I agree.

On a side note, I know I'm posting useless posts half the time.

the guardian · Post by **the guardian** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:44 pm

I don't post spam exclusively, I seldomly contribute here and there. An example : Explaining to Ozrat why making hash with ispropyl is unwise, calling off the photoshop Rex's face topic, ect ect. I've never portrayed myself as a pseudo intellectual who tells everyone to shut up unless they're going to contribute to his one-on-one debate on an open forum.
If someone posts his opinion, or Criticize you, you can either consider it or ignore it. Your, "I'M THE KING OF TOWN" approach whenever someone gives a negative feedback is ridiculous. I wrote that you post crap in general(And we can do a vote on that. Want to guess the results?) , and my original message was directed more to your arrogancy whenever someone takes a stab at your opinions. Your replies regularly follow along the lines of, "I am right, and you're the last person in the world who should be criticizing me on that", over and over again. It appears no one can criticize you unless they just signed in on the forum. Blargh said it better than me, though.

On RPGs : I always envisioned the idea of RPGs as D&D on the computer. Taking the term Role Playing Game as it is... That realy COULD apply to just about any game on the computer - I take the role of Sam, I take the role of Drizzt in a giant, gay cave, I take the role of Pacman with an eating disorder, ect ect. Of course, what constitutes as a proper D&D game, and as so, to a proper RPG game, is something I won't delve in, as I don't know shit about the subject other then the fact that protection goes up the more tacos you owe, or something like that.

As for FF games : The stories are just the same old formula over and over again, the characters tend to fit straight into their stereotypes, and each new FF games is just FF1 with a better script and better action sequences - but that's not necessarily a bad thing, because maybe you're into that shit(I'd be more connected to Squall if he raped Rinoa instead of acting like a chritian metal fan all the time). It's why we've been playing Doom clones for years, it's why we purchased C&C even though it was just Dune 2 with a new harvester : Because we like a certain type of game, and we want more of it. Granted, some want innovation, but the people in favour of that idea are becoming a minority. (<---This is a rant that contributes nothing to the original discussion, -tg)

FF:CC was a lot different, though. Different in an entirely shitty way. I can't believe I spent money on a game that plays like an utterly lame Secret of Mana(<---This is a rant that contributes nothing to the original discussion, -tg).

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 4:00 pm

Yeah, FF:CC was real shit(OMG PLAYE WITH FRIENDZ). FF:T was awesome though.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:36 pm

the guardian wrote:Your replies regularly follow along the lines of, "I am right, and you're the last person in the world who should be criticizing me on that", over and over again. It appears no one can criticize you unless they just signed in on the forum.

Oh, please. I may have sounded a bit peeved when I responded to Susan, but that's because I don't like people butting in and trashing a perfectly good conversation by calling it "useless". How very arrogant of me.

Sorry, but I call people on their shit. I don't think I'm above all of you, and I don't think I'm smarter than all of you. If someone criticizes me, I will defend myself. That's human nature, not arrogance. (And if someone has a valid criticism of me instead of just knee-jerk "You're a moron" comments, which is usually the case, I will back off and shut my trap.)

the guardian wrote:Taking the term Role Playing Game as it is... That realy COULD apply to just about any game on the computer - I take the role of Sam, I take the role of Drizzt in a giant, gay cave, I take the role of Pacman with an eating disorder, ect ect.

Agreed, and let's face it: The term "role-playing game" isn't very descriptive anymore, for the reasons you just mentioned.

That's why RPGCodex's motto makes no sense - it's not as if modern RPGs don't involve playing roles, which is what the motto implies. Spazmo is saying that most new RPGs aren't as complex and choice-oriented as the older ones like D&D. Basically, the Codex's motto sounds smart without actually meaning anything. That was my original complaint.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:20 pm

The point is, everyone knows what RPGCodex's motto refers to, meaning modern RPG sucks.

The fact that you question it DOES make you a moron.

Mr. Teatime · Post by **Mr. Teatime** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:26 pm

I know what it refers to, but I do agree when read without knowing about the site, it doesn't make that much sense. I can see about putting the 'role' back in RPG, but surely RPG Codex isn't doing that - a developer, or a role-playing site (where you role play) would put the 'role' back into 'playing games'.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:50 pm

most annoying username ever wrote:everyone knows what RPGCodex's motto refers to, meaning modern RPG sucks.

If that is the intended message, there are better ways of putting it.

most annoying username ever wrote:The fact that you question it DOES make you a moron.

No, it makes me a person who hates elitist platitudes that don't hold weight.

S4ur0n27 · Post by **S4ur0n27** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 7:59 pm

In other words, a moron.

Subhuman · Post by **Subhuman** » Fri Oct 22, 2004 8:02 pm

Bra. Vo.