thank you impossible.
you''re not too bad either.
no i like anime but i''m not obsessed.
my point is pretty clear.

a game should be complex to the point it makes you think.
about what''s going on in the story.
of course this applies more to RPG''s and adventures (most but not all)

but complex should not be micromanagement of a character or brigade that is meant for 5 people.]
that''s insane.
make people think, and they get something from it and they''ll talk about it and appreciate it.

i have more to say but.... gotta go to the bathroom.

I''m a big anime fan, I said bad anime storylines, there are plenty of anime with good, or at least entertaining storylines, but there are lots of bad messed up ones also.

FRIENDLY NEIGHBORHOOD (with a billy club) BOARD COP HERE:

Not naming names, but I'd like to remind everyone here to keep the discussion civil. If you disagree, be sure to disagree respectfully. Calling someone's idea stupid doesn't move the debate forward, contributes nothing to the board, and doesn't speak well of your discussion skills. Additionally, personal attacks will only get you moderated, so why bother?

You can disagree without being disagreeable.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

[edited by - Wavinator on September 16, 2002 3:06:38 AM]

Was that aimed at me? hehe. sorry!! just my opinion.. i''ll try to be less.... er.. disrespectful? though, you know what it''s like when you talking to arrogant people.. just roll your eyes.. ug. nevermind.. won''t get into that.

¬_¬

thats why they invented consoles, light and fluffy entertainment for those who dont want a challenge.

Give me a damn killer strategy pc game.
Also playing against the computer is one thing, playing against other people is the best.

Their are plenty of good hard to learn pc games, but if you love console games, every game on a pc would be almost amazing.

also I got three words for ya -
"star wars galaxies"

Im just a beginner!!!

http://www.actsofgord.com

I''m a little on the fence on this issue. I like games that are relatively complex. I grew up on the text-entry Sierra games, where I''d spend hours trying to figure out the right phrase to pull a lever or whatever. I felt good when I was able to master the system, so I was a little hesitant when Sierra switched to the point-and-click system. But, after a while I warmed up to it. I was able to focus more on the complexity of the puzzles, than the complexity of the interface.

Most computer games are puzzle games when you think about it, aren''t they? Some puzzles are just more abstracted than others.

In an FPS, you are usually in some sort of maze. The puzzle is to figure out which direction to turn at each intersection to get to the end of the level. On top of that is the puzzle of enemy encounters. Who do you shoot at first? What can you hide behind for cover. Should I blow my few rockets now, or save them till later?

In an RTS, the puzzle is where to set up base for the best defensive position while still having access to your resources. What units do you make, and how many of them you need before launching an offensive. Do I spend my resources on a bunch of small units or on one big unit?

In an RPG, besides the obvious puzzles: Quests, the big puzzle is often what armor and weapons to equip to have the best chances of defeating the bad guy. Do I memorize my ice shield spell in case he casts a fireball, or my flame shield in case he casts an ice bolt?

In an MMORPG (in EQ anyway), what combination of player classes do I need to crawl this dungeon? Do I want a Cleric along to heal me, or an Enchanter to mesmerize the monsters?

The problem with most "simple" games is that there is really only one puzzle. The hit points, damage values, and armor classes might scale-up as you proceed in the game, but the puzzle doesn''t change. In EQ, a "tank" (Warrior), a healer (Cleric), a damage-dealer (Rogue) and a crowd-controller (Enchanter) is the "perfect group(TM)." The tank goes toe-to-toe with the monster to take the damage, the healer heals the tank, the crowd-controller keeps additional monsters from joining in and the damage-dealer dishes out the pain. The combination works from level 5 to level 50. And at level 60, you just need several groups of the same. Sure, there are exeptions and variations on this, but it works.

I''m looking to play games with more than one puzzle. None of the individual puzzles have to be overly complex, and the interface should be consistant through-out. That puts the "complexity" where it is needed, where it is fun. Otherwise the game is "played" on the first level, and just repeated as necessary until the credits roll.

well the console comment is not exactly true.
maybe PC games are allowed to have more depth because of the insane amount of memory they can have. but at times that could just lead to a bloated system, where everything is so complex that it is stupid and not worth playing. console games may not the RPG king but it has a loyal following and some are actually pretty good. remember all that goodness (or the best parts anyway) has to fit in that itty bitty space.

@Alpha_ProgDes:

I don''t think that''s true.
As soon as the CD was used for games, memory wasn''t that important anymore. Most games fit on 1 CD, but if you need more space, you can add more CDs to the game. It''s not that expensive anymore.
More space gave the developers the chance of doing more complex games and (of course) adding a massive amount of multimedia content to them.

In another way somebody might say:
"Hey, the PS2 uses DVDs, but if you release a PC game just on DVD, a lot of people will hate you".
What I want to say is:
The complexity of a game doesn''t have anything to do with console or PC, but rather with the developers'' heads.
IMO the better RPGs were released on consoles anyway, but that''s a matter of preference, since I''m more a fan of the Japanese RPG-style (which i call JRPG).

some of what you say is true.
a game can be rather large... especially with the use of DVDs.
but you also have to take other components as well.
most prevalent the RAM in consoles...
perfect example Quake 3!
on the Dreamcast, Playstation 2, and PC.
though they are pretty much the same game, each platform (for lack of a better word) has a different level of depth. Not because of the amount of space on the CD/GD but because of the RAM space. Therefore there can be complexities in one that are not found on the other.
Especially graphics-wise. Remember you can have all the HDD/CD space in the world but if you have no RAM then how you do go into depth with you game? Your game can only go so far.

Since I don''t play alot of computer games, I really can''t make a fair comparision. But yeah I enjoy console RPGs alot too.

quote:

---

Original post by MSW
But is a complex formula the ONLY way to do this?

---

i never said u needed a complex formula for a potion. perhaps make it a function of the players metabolism and a success percentage depending on the potion itself. its a potion.. all it can do is be a potion.. running something as simple as a potion through the engine would be totally useless cause you can only improve on the concept of a potion so much.
why use an entire factory to make a couple ice cubes?
if this kinda of complex character skill system is implemented in whatever.. then take advantage of it in appropriate ways. it would open doors to whole new levels of depth in gameplay if designed to take advantage of it in the right situations



"The human mind is limited only by the bounds which we impose upon ourselves." -iNfuSeD