console RPG, is it really role playing?
David Leung
Have nothing better to do, so I figure I'll start a
discussion on something
that I've been thinking about. The definition of RPG, or
rather the console's
definition of a RPG. For those uninitiated, RPG = Role
Playing Game.
Having played console RPGs since the days of Phantasy Star
from the
SMS era, and playing RPGs on the PC, I've come to realize
they mean
different things on both systems. What I mean is, they're
both called
RPG on both platforms, but they don't have the same
meaning. Lets start
with the definition of a RPG game. By it's name, one would
say a RPG
is a game where you take a role of a made-up or pre made
character, and
use that character's characteristics and traits to navigate
the game world to
reach the game's objective. From my experiences from
playing console
RPGs, it seems that description doesn't fit any of the old
or new RPGs.
When I think about RPGs, I think about games like Fallout,
System Shock2,
Planescape Torment, Baldur's Gate. All these games allow me
to pick a
role and give me a degree of freedom to follow, and
role-play that character,
whether it be the choice to fight or talk my way out of a
jam, or to use
other means within my ability to complete my objective. To
me that is
role playing. It seems to me that console RPG are way too
one dimensional,
too straight forward. It all basically plays like an
adventure game with
puzzles thrown in. And all conflicts are ended in battles,
with the occasional
multiple choice thrown in. I guess what I'm trying to ask
is, where is the
ROLE in RPG? I equate playing console RPG with reading a
book,
the only difference being the occasional death from a boss
fight. I donno,
maybe they should stop calling those types of games RPG, and
do what
Yu Suzuki did with Shenmue and give it a different genre
name. Because
by my account, console RPG does not fit into my prescription
of a RPG.
Anyways, just some thoughts running through my mind, feel
free to comment.
Dave. L
Alan Kwan
To understand the nature of console RPGs, we can look at the history
of development of these games. Originally we have table-talk (pen and
paper) RPGs. These are really about role-playing, no question about
it. There is a game system (combat system and character development
system), but the essence of the game is imagination (guided by the
common sense knowledge of the players and the game-master) rather than
the system.
Then PC CRPGs came along. These games extract the system part of
table-talk RPGs into a computer program. Since a computer can never
demonstrate the common sense knowledge of a human GM, these games are
somewhat restrictive on what the player can do. Though, efforts are
often spent on capturing the 'feel' of table-talk RPGs via a complete
and consistent world setting, the freedom of the player's actions,
etc.
And then we have Japanese console CRPGs. These games are usually
imaged not after table-talk RPGs, but rather PC CRPGs or other console
RPGs. Many developers of these games have never known about
table-talk RPGs, nor have they played the PC CRPGs. Since it is the
system part of the PC and console CRPGs which are most visible, it is
the only part of "RPG" captured by most console CRPGs. In short,
console CRPGs are similar in form to the PC CRPGs (in the system part,
which is not the essence of table-talk RPGs), but they have failed to
capture the essence of "role-playing" (which is imagination guided by
common sense). Because of simplification of the system and the
recycling of the same old stinking system all the time, the games
quickly become boring, so a tendency to center on the "story-telling"
aspect has come about. In other words, console CRPGs are completely
detached from their original roots (namely, the table-talk RPG) in
essence, and are hardly about "role-playing" at all. Rather, they are
about story-telling, or system in a few cases.
Occasionally, we do have a few good console CRPGs which are good in
either story-telling or system. The essence is different, but it can
be fun, if done well.
On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 01:31:49 -0500, David Leung <dle...@attcanada.net>
wrote:
"Live life with Heart." - Alan Kwan / ta...@notmenetvigator.com
http://home.netvigator.com/~tarot (hard-core game reviews)
(please remove anti-spam section "notme" from mailing address)
Dimension S editor: http://www.digiweb.com/~dimension-sega/
David Leung
Doh, heh thanks.
Dave. L
"a b x y !" wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 01:31:49 -0500, David Leung <dle...@attcanada.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >Have nothing better to do, so I figure I'll start a
> >discussion on something
> >that I've been thinking about. The definition of RPG, or
> >rather the console's
> >definition of a RPG. For those uninitiated, RPG = Role
> >Playing Game.
> >Having played console RPGs since the days of Phantasy Star
> >from the
>
> [snip line-wrap problems]
>
> Dave, your line wrap is set at 60 characters. I was drunk by the time
> I got to this point in your post ..
>
> --
> ~ post in haste, repent at your leisure ~
Raymond McKeithen II
"a b x y !" wrote:
> ~ post in haste, repent at your leisure ~
Take your own advice...
--
Raymond
remove "suchiepai" for email
Jeff Williams
news:38d3424d...@news.netvigator.com...
> And then we have Japanese console CRPGs. These games are usually
> imaged not after table-talk RPGs, but rather PC CRPGs or other console
> RPGs. Many developers of these games have never known about
> table-talk RPGs, nor have they played the PC CRPGs.
I disagree with that. Console RPG's have been around nearly as long as PC
RPG's, and they weren't originally just based on other console RPG's
(obviously). The first console "RPG" that I can remember is Adventure for
the Atari 2600, which was released in 1978 - pretty much the same time as
the first PC RPG. Console RPG's were a bit more limited at first because
consoles at that time were nowhere near as powerful as computers, but they
both came out of the same table-top RPG's. Most console RPG's today take
their inspiration from sources other than table-top RPG's, but that's just
as true of PC RPG's today (with the possible exception of some of the later
D&D games - though there were D&D games for the Sega Saturn as well).
And as far as modern RPG's go, look at what Yu Suzuki said just the other
day in his IGN interview. When coming up with the concept for Shenmue, he
took his inspiration as much from the original Ultima and Wizardry games for
the Apple II as from other console RPG's.
Neither PC nor console RPG's really capture what table-top RPG's are about.
They're just different - different from each other and different from
original RPG's. But that's just the evolution of gaming.
--
// Jeff Williams
// ge...@nervhq.org
David Leung
Jeff Williams wrote:
>
>
> I disagree with that. Console RPG's have been around nearly as long as PC
> RPG's, and they weren't originally just based on other console RPG's
> (obviously). The first console "RPG" that I can remember is Adventure for
> the Atari 2600, which was released in 1978 - pretty much the same time as
See, this, to me is the problem. How can you say that Adventure is a RPG?
I too have played that game, and unless you consider Zelda a RPG, which it
most resembles to the modern-day game, there is no way you can consider
Adventure to be a RPG. I think the problem with RPG is that too many
companies use that term as a gimmick/promotion to sell the game. When
it really has very little RPG in the actual game. Just because the game has
a few puzzles or stat increases to characters that in itself does not make
it a RPG.
Dave. L
Alan Kwan
wrote:
>"Alan Kwan" <ta...@notmenetvigator.com> wrote in message
>news:38d3424d...@news.netvigator.com...
>> And then we have Japanese console CRPGs. These games are usually
>> imaged not after table-talk RPGs, but rather PC CRPGs or other console
>> RPGs. Many developers of these games have never known about
>> table-talk RPGs, nor have they played the PC CRPGs.
>
>I disagree with that. Console RPG's have been around nearly as long as PC
>RPG's, and they weren't originally just based on other console RPG's
>(obviously). The first console "RPG" that I can remember is Adventure for
>the Atari 2600, which was released in 1978 - pretty much the same time as
>the first PC RPG.
It is not a "Japanese" console RPG, and is in no way like any RPG,
Japanese or PC.
Having sword and sorcery, dragons, etc. doesn't make a game an "RPG".
The first RPGs (probably D&D, and DQ) were in (Tolkien-like) fantasy
settings. Not every RPG is in a fantasy setting, and not every game
with a fantasy setting is an RPG. Ghost and Goblins and Black
Dragon/Black Tiger are obviously not RPGs.
>Console RPG's were a bit more limited at first because
>consoles at that time were nowhere near as powerful as computers, but they
>both came out of the same table-top RPG's.
I've read somewhere that DQ was inspired by some PC RPG. The FC/NES
was certainly capable of rather complex games. It doesn't take much
processing power to run (the game-structural part of) an RPG game
engine. 97% of modern console power is devoted towards graphics.
Alex Westley
Both American and Japanese RPGs (you seem to like CRPG, but thats
generally used as an acronym for a specific type of RPG, those of PCs,
hence the "C" for Computer) have roots in the D&D-styled pen and paper
RPGs. Pen and paper RPGs aren't some American-specific thing either.
They are a mainstay of Japanese otaku culture.
Both just took different evolutionary paths. CRPGs grew (grue? heh,
terribly obscure joke that 90% of the people reading this won't
understand..) out of text adventures like Zork. The idea was that the
game world is open...within certain rules. It wasn't really possible to
tell much of a story through a game like Zork (later Infocom games got
better at this, though), so when the Ultimas came along, they stuck with
using rules with a minimalist story. The combat system is at the core.
Gaining experience is the name of the game.
Japanese RPGS evolved from one single source: Dragon Quest on Famicom.
It defined the genre. Here though, the platform itself was what decided
the game structure. On a PC you have a keyboard to mess with all these
minute details of a complex battle system...On a console like the
Famicom, you had a two-button joypad. So the game ends up being based
somewhat on a conversational model. One button is yes, one is no (sort
of). This lingers today with accept and cancel buttons. If you end up
having a lot of conversations then the game is naturally going to
gravitate towards a narative structure. The battle system is there and
the basics of the rules are still there, but your control of the battle
is still basically yes and no and the rules of things like attack
percentage are all but hidden from the gamer.
So you see, they end up being polarized. Its now to the point were "RPG"
isn't really descriptive enough. Technically speaking, a game like
Septerra Core is a CRPG just by virture of it being a PC game, but
lately games of its ilk (American-made, Japanese-style) RPGs have been
dubbed JRPGs, regardless of the country of origin. There are other
variants too, like ORPGs, which are based on MUDs and have neither
complex combat nor a strong narrative, but rather a more social
interaction angle.
All of these ARE role-playing though. The idea in all of them is that
you assume the role of a character. In a JRPG you see a story though the
eyes of a character, in a CRPG you "imagine" a story around a character
and build their stats up to suit yourself, in an ORPG you ARE the
character, or at least the character is a persona totally of your own
design (who also speaks with your "voice").
Alan Kwan wrote:
>
> To understand the nature of console RPGs, we can look at the history
> of development of these games. Originally we have table-talk (pen and
> paper) RPGs. These are really about role-playing, no question about
> it. There is a game system (combat system and character development
> system), but the essence of the game is imagination (guided by the
> common sense knowledge of the players and the game-master) rather than
> the system.
>
> Then PC CRPGs came along. These games extract the system part of
> table-talk RPGs into a computer program. Since a computer can never
> demonstrate the common sense knowledge of a human GM, these games are
> somewhat restrictive on what the player can do. Though, efforts are
> often spent on capturing the 'feel' of table-talk RPGs via a complete
> and consistent world setting, the freedom of the player's actions,
> etc.
>
> And then we have Japanese console CRPGs. These games are usually
> imaged not after table-talk RPGs, but rather PC CRPGs or other console
> RPGs. Many developers of these games have never known about
> table-talk RPGs, nor have they played the PC CRPGs. Since it is the
> system part of the PC and console CRPGs which are most visible, it is
> the only part of "RPG" captured by most console CRPGs. In short,
> console CRPGs are similar in form to the PC CRPGs (in the system part,
> which is not the essence of table-talk RPGs), but they have failed to
> capture the essence of "role-playing" (which is imagination guided by
> common sense). Because of simplification of the system and the
> recycling of the same old stinking system all the time, the games
> quickly become boring, so a tendency to center on the "story-telling"
> aspect has come about. In other words, console CRPGs are completely
> detached from their original roots (namely, the table-talk RPG) in
> essence, and are hardly about "role-playing" at all. Rather, they are
> about story-telling, or system in a few cases.
>
> Occasionally, we do have a few good console CRPGs which are good in
> either story-telling or system. The essence is different, but it can
> be fun, if done well.
>
> On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 01:31:49 -0500, David Leung <dle...@attcanada.net>
> wrote:
>
> >Have nothing better to do, so I figure I'll start a
> >discussion on something
> >that I've been thinking about. The definition of RPG, or
> >rather the console's
> >definition of a RPG. For those uninitiated, RPG = Role
> >Playing Game.
> >Having played console RPGs since the days of Phantasy Star
> >from the
> "Live life with Heart." - Alan Kwan / ta...@notmenetvigator.com
> http://home.netvigator.com/~tarot (hard-core game reviews)
> (please remove anti-spam section "notme" from mailing address)
> Dimension S editor: http://www.digiweb.com/~dimension-sega/
--
"Doko ni datte, hito wa tsunagatte iru." -Lain
Alex Westley, aka Kragma
http://www.zoomnet.net/~otaku
Rodrigo Andrade
>rather the console's
>definition of a RPG.
Only PCs have true RPGs (Baldur's Gate, Might & Magic, Lands Of Lore).
Console RPGs are too damn linear. It's like an interactive story.
--
RODRIGO
==================================================================
USENET quote of the month:
Violence is used as a solution because violence solves problems
as well, violence wouldn't be used if it didn't solve problems.
...
Violence works, and it works well. It's pretty good entertainment too.
I thought the crime Timothy McVeigh pulled off in the
Oklahoma City bombing was both innovative, and creative.
-- Charles Doane
Click here to make $$$:
http://www.alladvantage.com/home.asp?refid=aux380
http://www.gotoworld.com/getpaid/default.asp?rid=1050460156
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
"Rodrigo Andrade" <gamm...@REMOVEatt.net> wrote:
>
> >The definition of RPG, or rather the console's definition of a RPG.
>
> Only PCs have true RPGs (Baldur's Gate, Might & Magic, Lands Of Lore).
>
> Console RPGs are too damn linear. It's like an interactive story.
And that's pretty much what an RPG is, yes.
-ZFP
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
ta...@notmenetvigator.com (Alan Kwan) wrote:
>
> And then we have Japanese console CRPGs. These games are usually
> imaged not after table-talk RPGs, but rather PC CRPGs or other console
> RPGs. Many developers of these games have never known about
> table-talk RPGs, nor have they played the PC CRPGs. Since it is the
> system part of the PC and console CRPGs which are most visible, it is
> the only part of "RPG" captured by most console CRPGs.
Well that, and the whole storytelling and character development part of
"table-talk" RPG's that most PC RPG's have utterly failed to capture...
> In short, console CRPGs are similar in form to the PC CRPGs (in the
> system part, which is not the essence of table-talk RPGs), but they
> have failed to capture the essence of "role-playing" (which is
> imagination guided by common sense).
Actually, they have perfectly captured the "essence" of role-playing
games, namely the opportunity to become a part of an epic adventure and
watch and participate in it as it unfolds. They don't allow the freedom
of the real thing, but they have the interactive storytelling aspect of
it pretty much mastered.
> In other words, console CRPGs are completely detached from their
> original roots (namely, the table-talk RPG) in essence, and are hardly
> about "role-playing" at all. Rather, they are about story-telling, or
> system in a few cases.
And since role-playing has always been about storytelling on some level,
they remain very true to their roots, they merely capture a different
aspect of role-playing than what PC RPG's capture.
Captain Calzone
anthropomorphic personification of neo_zo...@hotmail.com spoke to
me, and made me titter:
>In article <I5uB4.11680$mf.9...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
>"Rodrigo Andrade" <gamm...@REMOVEatt.net> wrote:
>>
>> >The definition of RPG, or rather the console's definition of a RPG.
>>
>> Only PCs have true RPGs (Baldur's Gate, Might & Magic, Lands Of Lore).
>>
>> Console RPGs are too damn linear. It's like an interactive story.
>
>And that's pretty much what an RPG is, yes.
OK, I will admit something nasty about myself. I am and have been for
a long time a pen and paper RPG player. Games like Rifts and AD&D
have taken up much of my time some days. Maybe I play differently
than ZFP, but when we ROLE PLAY we role play. We don't just roll dice
to a story. If we decide we really can't be bothered saving the
princess and her kingdom and instead want to go south and let the damn
thing be overrun with orcs, we do so. Sure, there are obvious
penalties for such an action (such as the possability of a refugee
from the kingdom trying to hunt us down and the fact that we will
never get around to getting that huge treasure) but it is our choice.
In reality, very few games evewn begin to breath down the next of pen
and paper RPGs. No console RPG's do. That is why they are not the
same genre of entertainment thingy. That is also why they don't even
try to be in the same genre. I love me console RPG's, but will never
once claim them to embody the same essence of RPGing as AD&D or Rifts.
----------------
Captain Calzone
The One and Only!
(THANK GOD!)
----------------
"Gimmie that pen, bet your ass I will sign,
cause I need a beer and it's tittie squeezin time!"
Frank Zappa
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> OK, I will admit something nasty about myself. I am and have been for
> a long time a pen and paper RPG player. Games like Rifts and AD&D
> have taken up much of my time some days. Maybe I play differently
> than ZFP, but when we ROLE PLAY we role play. We don't just roll dice
> to a story.
So your merry band of adventures just wanders aimlessly, doing whatever
they damn well please? What's the point? There's a reason that they
release pre-written adventures for every RPG system I can think of.
There's a reason that the GM in White Wolf games is called a
"storyteller"(as I recall). RPG's are about the players working with
the GM to create a story, not just about doing whatever you feel like
doing.
> In reality, very few games evewn begin to breath down the next of pen
> and paper RPGs. No console RPG's do. That is why they are not the
> same genre of entertainment thingy. That is also why they don't even
> try to be in the same genre. I love me console RPG's, but will never
> once claim them to embody the same essence of RPGing as AD&D or Rifts.
The "essence" of RPG's is not and has never been simply the ability to
do whatever you want. The essence of an RPG is to become someone else
and to be a part of some grand adventure. Console RPG's do a fine job
of providing that experience.
keniwasa
<ot...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
[snip]
>
>Both just took different evolutionary paths. CRPGs grew (grue?
heh,
>terribly obscure joke that 90% of the people reading this won't
>understand..) out of text adventures like Zork. The idea was
that the
Heh, possibly more like 95%. I have no problems with leaving
them in the dark about that reference :p. Good post, by the way.
[snip]
>--
>"Doko ni datte, hito wa tsunagatte iru." -Lain
>
>Alex Westley, aka Kragma
>http://www.zoomnet.net/~otaku
>
>
Ken
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <38d69fcc.2659403@news-server>,
> cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
> >
> > OK, I will admit something nasty about myself. I am and have been
for
> > a long time a pen and paper RPG player. Games like Rifts and AD&D
> > have taken up much of my time some days. Maybe I play differently
> > than ZFP, but when we ROLE PLAY we role play. We don't just roll
dice
> > to a story.
>
> So your merry band of adventures just wanders aimlessly, doing
whatever
> they damn well please? What's the point? There's a reason that they
> release pre-written adventures for every RPG system I can think of.
> There's a reason that the GM in White Wolf games is called a
> "storyteller"(as I recall). RPG's are about the players working with
> the GM to create a story, not just about doing whatever you feel like
> doing.
ZFP, for awhile, I was thinking of actually trying to be NICE to you,
but these paragraphs show your one-mindedness and reminded me of why
I even griped at you in the first place. Ok, let's see if I can still
work out that thing about being nice...
Ok, I reread the above paragraph and decided to interpret it in a most
plain and literal fashion. Role Playing is about, well, ROLE PLAYING.
the story is there, yes, but its not about a random amnesiac saving
the world from the white-haired pretty boy, the story is about the
Player Chaarcters, and their lives and actions. Its not the world's
story like in Console RPGs, its THEIR story. If they don't save the
princess, the paragraph writes "So-So with the sword got/bored/lost
interest/had better things to do/chickened out/etc. and decided not
to rescue the princess." and the paragraph writes the opposite if
vice-versa. Yes, doing what they want is very valid and that can lead
to very interesting adventures, much more so than giving us a
predesignated ride can.
>
> > In reality, very few games evewn begin to breath down the next of
pen
> > and paper RPGs. No console RPG's do. That is why they are not the
> > same genre of entertainment thingy. That is also why they don't even
> > try to be in the same genre. I love me console RPG's, but will never
> > once claim them to embody the same essence of RPGing as AD&D or
Rifts.
>
> The "essence" of RPG's is not and has never been simply the ability to
> do whatever you want. The essence of an RPG is to become someone else
> and to be a part of some grand adventure.
And you can do that by doing whatever the hell you want. Hell, as I
remember, Daggerfall, the
very-popular-PC-Game-I-Love-to-talk-about-that-happens-to-have-its-own-
NG, was popular just BECAUSe you could do whatever you want.
If its any consolation, there WAS a "Main Quest" but following it was
unessecary and the game continues on after you finish it (There's
"endings" about six actually, but they only mark that you completed the
main quest).
Don't get me started on Quest for Glory, the other series of RPGs I like
to talk about. Sure, they had main quests and, unlike DF, you HAD to
follow them, but there were at least three ways of getting through every
event at least.
Console RPG's do a fine job
> of providing that experience.
IMO, these are more like fantasy quick-fixes... people like me who
usually only go for really complex stuff (Remember I'm not sure others
do this... I am "One and Possibly/Apparently Only") occasionally take
breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we tackle smething that
doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a cartoon.
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Name two games based on Tom Clancy books.
Hint: I said TWO, and it ain't called
"The Hunt for Rainbow Six" either.
James The One and Apparently Only
keniwasa <keniwasa...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <38D629B0...@zoomnet.net>, Alex Westley
> <ot...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> heh,
> >terribly obscure joke that 90% of the people reading this won't
> >understand..) out of text adventures like Zork. The idea was
> that the
>
> them in the dark about that reference :p. Good post, by the way.
I think I'll be nice and give them a hint: Four letters, starts with a
Z, PC Text Adventure, ITS TITLE MENTIONED IN ONE OF THE BAOVE
PARAGRAPHS...
Heh, I love knowing everything!
>
> [snip]
> >--
> >"Doko ni datte, hito wa tsunagatte iru." -Lain
> >
> >Alex Westley, aka Kragma
> >http://www.zoomnet.net/~otaku
> >
> >
>
> Ken
>
> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion
Network *
> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet -
Free!
>
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
What really sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are
hard to find, needless to say I haven't seen the
show yet.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> ZFP, for awhile, I was thinking of actually trying to be NICE to you,
> but these paragraphs show your one-mindedness and reminded me of why
> I even griped at you in the first place. Ok, let's see if I can still
> work out that thing about being nice...
>
> Ok, I reread the above paragraph and decided to interpret it in a most
> plain and literal fashion. Role Playing is about, well, ROLE PLAYING.
> the story is there, yes, but its not about a random amnesiac saving
> the world from the white-haired pretty boy, the story is about the
> Player Chaarcters, and their lives and actions. Its not the world's
> story like in Console RPGs, its THEIR story.
Yes, just as FF7 was really Cloud's story and FF8 was Squall and Rinoa's
story(and a bit of Laguna's). Of course the story revolves around the
player characters, but there has to BE a story, not just undirected,
random actions.
> IMO, these are more like fantasy quick-fixes... people like me who
> usually only go for really complex stuff (Remember I'm not sure others
> do this... I am "One and Possibly/Apparently Only") occasionally take
> breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we tackle smething
> that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a cartoon.
Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching the
wrong cartoons.
-ZFP
keniwasa
Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>In article <1ba90248...@usw-ex0102-015.remarq.com>,
>keniwasa <keniwasa...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
>> In article <38D629B0...@zoomnet.net>, Alex Westley
>> <ot...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
>> [snip]
>> >
(grue?
>> heh,
>> >terribly obscure joke that 90% of the people reading this
won't
>> >understand..) out of text adventures like Zork. The idea was
>> that the
>>
>> them in the dark about that reference :p. Good post, by the
way.
>
>I think I'll be nice and give them a hint: Four letters,
starts with a
>Z, PC Text Adventure, ITS TITLE MENTIONED IN ONE OF THE BAOVE
>PARAGRAPHS...
>
>Heh, I love knowing everything!
James, I'm really glad you know everything.
I hope, though, that the rest of you who understood the joke
will refrain from explaining it as I don't want anyone who
didn't get the joke to feel foolish. One should, after all,
never explain a joke to someone who didn't get it.
>>
>> [snip]
>> >--
>> >"Doko ni datte, hito wa tsunagatte iru." -Lain
>> >
>> >Alex Westley, aka Kragma
>> >http://www.zoomnet.net/~otaku
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Ken
>>
>> * Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's
Discussion
>Network *
>> The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in
Usenet -
>Free!
>>
>>
>--
>---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
>What really sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are
>hard to find, needless to say I haven't seen the
>show yet.
>
>
>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.
>
>
Ken
NonDeskript
> Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching the
> wrong cartoons.
The WRONG games and cartoons? God, you really are a smug elitist ass
aren't you?
--
-David
Robert Chang
> >In article <1ba90248...@usw-ex0102-015.remarq.com>,
> >keniwasa <keniwasa...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> In article <38D629B0...@zoomnet.net>, Alex Westley
> >> <ot...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> >
> (grue?
> >> heh,
> >> >terribly obscure joke that 90% of the people reading this
> won't
> >> >understand..) out of text adventures like Zork. The idea was
> >> that the
> >>
Well, you know if they are in the dark, then they are likely to be eaten by
a Grue.
West of House,
-bob
--
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> > Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching
> > the wrong cartoons.
>
> The WRONG games and cartoons? God, you really are a smug elitist ass
> aren't you?
You don't know James. Sweeping generalities like "games and cartoons
are good when you don't want to use your brain" deserve no better
response, especially coming from a person who puts down landmark anime
series while praising garbage like He-Man.
-ZFP
Captain Calzone
>In article <38d69fcc.2659403@news-server>,
>cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>>
>> OK, I will admit something nasty about myself. I am and have been for
>> a long time a pen and paper RPG player. Games like Rifts and AD&D
>> have taken up much of my time some days. Maybe I play differently
>> than ZFP, but when we ROLE PLAY we role play. We don't just roll dice
>> to a story.
>
>So your merry band of adventures just wanders aimlessly, doing whatever
>they damn well please? What's the point? There's a reason that they
>release pre-written adventures for every RPG system I can think of.
>There's a reason that the GM in White Wolf games is called a
>"storyteller"(as I recall). RPG's are about the players working with
>the GM to create a story, not just about doing whatever you feel like
>doing.
Oh no, we don't just wander aimlessly. Why, I recall once we went
South and when we were talking to a shopowner about where to get a
magical item identified decided we really liked some of the swords on
his wall and stole them. And who is to decide what is a story? To
me, the adventures I have had in AD&D and Rifts are great stories to
the point where I have actually had several fun times recounting them
to other players. The act of making your own story does not preclude
it from being a story. Role Playing is about working to create a
story, but it is a story about people. And people don't always WANT
to fight the dragon. Some of them run away like little girls. Just
because it requires the players and DM to THINK on the FLY does not
mean it isn't role plkaying. In fact, it means it is role playing at
it's purest.
>
>> In reality, very few games evewn begin to breath down the next of pen
>> and paper RPGs. No console RPG's do. That is why they are not the
>> same genre of entertainment thingy. That is also why they don't even
>> try to be in the same genre. I love me console RPG's, but will never
>> once claim them to embody the same essence of RPGing as AD&D or Rifts.
>
>The "essence" of RPG's is not and has never been simply the ability to
>do whatever you want. The essence of an RPG is to become someone else
>and to be a part of some grand adventure. Console RPG's do a fine job
>of providing that experience.
True, but who says what is a grand adventure? I love the Discworld
novels. In several of them Rincewind is the main character. He
speands more time running away from things and screaming for help in
27 different languages (he can just scream in 12 more) than he ever
speands fighting evil, which he does only very reluctantly. In sum,
he is doing whatever he damn well pleases. Still a story. Still an
adventure.
Ever hear the saying that the fun was the journey, not the end? That
is how we play. Real adventures don't have nice, concise plots and
logical progressions. Real adventures just kinda happen on their own
to people who would rather not be bothered. We role play real
adventures. I feel sorry for anyone who has to play your "dice roll
to a storyline" campaigns.
Captain Calzone
>
>Yes, just as FF7 was really Cloud's story and FF8 was Squall and Rinoa's
>story(and a bit of Laguna's). Of course the story revolves around the
>player characters, but there has to BE a story, not just undirected,
>random actions.
In todays console RPG, yes there does. In Pen and Papaer RPGs, there
does not because the plotline can be DYNAMIC!!! It can change due to
what the players WANT to do. Player doesn't want to go through
another damn cave, player says "sod it" and goes off to the evil
monkey god's castle. See?
>> IMO, these are more like fantasy quick-fixes... people like me who
>> usually only go for really complex stuff (Remember I'm not sure others
>> do this... I am "One and Possibly/Apparently Only") occasionally take
>> breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we tackle smething
>> that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a cartoon.
>
>Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching the
>wrong cartoons.
And apparently trying to reason with the wrong closedminded trolls...
(and yes, kiddo, I've thought about it for a long time and you are a
troll. my personal favorite current troll, yes, but still a troll)
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> >Yes, just as FF7 was really Cloud's story and FF8 was Squall and
> >Rinoa's story(and a bit of Laguna's). Of course the story revolves
> >around the player characters, but there has to BE a story, not just
> >undirected, random actions.
>
> In todays console RPG, yes there does. In Pen and Papaer RPGs, there
> does not because the plotline can be DYNAMIC!!! It can change due to
> what the players WANT to do. Player doesn't want to go through
> another damn cave, player says "sod it" and goes off to the evil
> monkey god's castle. See?
And an increasing number of console RPG's offer you decisions that
affect the story in meaningful(or at least visible) ways.
> >Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching
> >the wrong cartoons.
>
> And apparently trying to reason with the wrong closedminded trolls...
You call me "closeminded", you you're the one rigidly adhering to a
definition of "RPG" that excludes console games?
Bryan Lambert
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>You don't know James. Sweeping generalities like "games and
cartoons
>are good when you don't want to use your brain" deserve no
better
>response, especially coming from a person who puts down landmark
anime
>series while praising garbage like He-Man.
>
In other words, you're bound and determined to turn yet another
otherwise interesting thread into a ZFP bitchfest (both by and
about) simply because you've had disagreements with one of the
participants in the past.
That's just fucking marvy.
Bryan Lambert
HOME: bryn...@minn.net
WEB: http://homegame.org
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> Oh no, we don't just wander aimlessly. Why, I recall once we went
> South and when we were talking to a shopowner about where to get a
> magical item identified decided we really liked some of the swords on
> his wall and stole them. And who is to decide what is a story? To
> me, the adventures I have had in AD&D and Rifts are great stories to
> the point where I have actually had several fun times recounting them
> to other players. The act of making your own story does not preclude
> it from being a story. Role Playing is about working to create a
> story, but it is a story about people. And people don't always WANT
> to fight the dragon. Some of them run away like little girls. Just
> because it requires the players and DM to THINK on the FLY does not
> mean it isn't role plkaying. In fact, it means it is role playing at
> it's purest.
Of course it requires the GM to think on the fly, but how dynamic it is
doesn't determine whether or not it's "true" role-playing. That's like
claiming people who play through pre-written adventures, or those who
use pre-generated characters are not "really" role-playing. That's like
claiming people who DO choose to more-or-less stick to the story aren't
"really" role-playing, and only those who go off and do their own thing
are.
> >The "essence" of RPG's is not and has never been simply the ability
> >to do whatever you want. The essence of an RPG is to become someone
> >else and to be a part of some grand adventure. Console RPG's do a
> >fine job of providing that experience.
>
> True, but who says what is a grand adventure? I love the Discworld
> novels. In several of them Rincewind is the main character. He
> speands more time running away from things and screaming for help in
> 27 different languages (he can just scream in 12 more) than he ever
> speands fighting evil, which he does only very reluctantly. In sum,
> he is doing whatever he damn well pleases. Still a story. Still an
> adventure.
Just because the main character is less-than-heroic doesn't necessarily
mean the adventure is less-than-epic. Squall certainly wasn't much of a
hero, nor was Cloud.
> Ever hear the saying that the fun was the journey, not the end? That
> is how we play. Real adventures don't have nice, concise plots and
> logical progressions. Real adventures just kinda happen on their own
> to people who would rather not be bothered. We role play real
> adventures. I feel sorry for anyone who has to play your "dice roll
> to a storyline" campaigns.
Who plays those? Not me, that's for sure. My role-palying adventures
were every bit as "real" as yours, just as console RPG's are every bit
as "real" as any pen-and-paper RPG.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
Bryan Lambert <bryncthy...@minn.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> In other words, you're bound and determined to turn yet another
> otherwise interesting thread into a ZFP bitchfest (both by and
> about) simply because you've had disagreements with one of the
> participants in the past.
>
> That's just fucking marvy.
This thread won't turn into a "bitchfest" if people like you and the
previous poster would stop attacking me. You want an on-topic thread?
Maybe you should say on-topic...
Captain Calzone
>In article <38d7cf6f.5653757@news-server>,
>cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>>
>> >Yes, just as FF7 was really Cloud's story and FF8 was Squall and
>> >Rinoa's story(and a bit of Laguna's). Of course the story revolves
>> >around the player characters, but there has to BE a story, not just
>> >undirected, random actions.
>>
>> In todays console RPG, yes there does. In Pen and Papaer RPGs, there
>> does not because the plotline can be DYNAMIC!!! It can change due to
>> what the players WANT to do. Player doesn't want to go through
>> another damn cave, player says "sod it" and goes off to the evil
>> monkey god's castle. See?
>
>And an increasing number of console RPG's offer you decisions that
>affect the story in meaningful(or at least visible) ways.
And that is what I love most about RPG's. Games like Star Ocean are
paving the way bit by bit. I have this dream where someday all RPG's
will give you options that dynamically affect the outcome of the game.
Course, without some really freaky advances in AI scriptwriting
protocalls this would mean more development time. I could live with
it, though.
>> >Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching
>> >the wrong cartoons.
>>
>> And apparently trying to reason with the wrong closedminded trolls...
>
>You call me "closeminded", you you're the one rigidly adhering to a
>definition of "RPG" that excludes console games?
No, I am the one who claims console RPGs and Pen&Paper RPG's are
totally different things which have different definitions. I also
states that console RPG's don't have much of any pure Role Playing,
and what they have does not touch the pen&paper dynamic. Don't recall
saying console games weren't RPG's. Just said they weren't the same
genre of thingy as the P&P
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> >And an increasing number of console RPG's offer you decisions that
> >affect the story in meaningful(or at least visible) ways.
>
> And that is what I love most about RPG's. Games like Star Ocean are
> paving the way bit by bit. I have this dream where someday all RPG's
> will give you options that dynamically affect the outcome of the game.
That's a double-edged sword, however. Without structure, without some
kind of goal, there's no real motivation. A GM can allow greater
freedom, because no matter which way the players decide to go, he can
provide some sort of goal for them to achieve, or at least flesh out
events along the path they'd chosen to keep things moving along.
Nothing short of a perfect AI could do this in a game, however.
> >You call me "closeminded", you you're the one rigidly adhering to a
> >definition of "RPG" that excludes console games?
>
> No, I am the one who claims console RPGs and Pen&Paper RPG's are
> totally different things which have different definitions.
You claim one lacks the "spirit" of the other. Elsewhere you implied
that your role-playing adventures were "real" whereas mine were not.
That seems like a pretty clise-minded attitude to me.
> I also states that console RPG's don't have much of any pure Role
> Playing, and what they have does not touch the pen&paper dynamic.
They do indeed have role-palying, by the very definition of
role-playing. What they lack is true freedom, but since even the very
act of playing a role in inherently restrictive, I see little wrong with
this. If you're playing the role of Squall, for instance, then choosing
to dump Rinoa and go after Selphie would be completely out of character.
> Don't recall saying console games weren't RPG's. Just said they
> weren't the same genre of thingy as the P&P
They both serve the same purpose: allowing you to take on the role of
another person, and they both have similar gameplay. I'd say that puts
them in the same genre.
Captain Calzone
>That's a double-edged sword, however. Without structure, without some
>kind of goal, there's no real motivation. A GM can allow greater
>freedom, because no matter which way the players decide to go, he can
>provide some sort of goal for them to achieve, or at least flesh out
>events along the path they'd chosen to keep things moving along.
>Nothing short of a perfect AI could do this in a game, however.
True, but a guy can dream. what I was implying was a game where you
could make certain choices that actually dynamically affected the
storyline. I know true freedom is a near imposability in video game
RPG's, which is why I said my dream was for the ability to change
things. It all seemed so promising back in Dragon Warrior 1 when, at
the very end of the game, you could decide to join the dragonlord and
use your powers for evil. Sure, it just gave you the bad ending, but
it seems that most games have ignored one of the neatest thingsd about
the first JRPG
>> No, I am the one who claims console RPGs and Pen&Paper RPG's are
>> totally different things which have different definitions.
>
>You claim one lacks the "spirit" of the other. Elsewhere you implied
>that your role-playing adventures were "real" whereas mine were not.
>That seems like a pretty clise-minded attitude to me.
Well, one does lack the spirit of the other. Console RPGs do lack the
spirit of role playing found in P&P games. To play a role in a P&P
game you creat the character, give him his personality, and make his
decisions. In most console RPg's you make him run about and fight.
Different kinds of role playing and different spirits.
>
>> I also states that console RPG's don't have much of any pure Role
>> Playing, and what they have does not touch the pen&paper dynamic.
>
>They do indeed have role-palying, by the very definition of
>role-playing. What they lack is true freedom, but since even the very
>act of playing a role in inherently restrictive, I see little wrong with
>this. If you're playing the role of Squall, for instance, then choosing
>to dump Rinoa and go after Selphie would be completely out of character.
Well, I think we have reached an impass. You define role playing as
playing a role in a play. Like acting. you have a role to play
andyou do exactly what that role says you have to.
I define it as creating a character, getting into him, and then
playing it as if playing a sport. You make decisions on the fly, and
controle the destiny of your little dude. The old theatre vs sports
class war begins anew :)
>> Don't recall saying console games weren't RPG's. Just said they
>> weren't the same genre of thingy as the P&P
>
>They both serve the same purpose: allowing you to take on the role of
>another person, and they both have similar gameplay. I'd say that puts
>them in the same genre.
That is another impass. I believe the heart of role playing to be
decision making. Console RPg's, while having similar combat, lack the
ability to controle your own destiny. That is why they are a
different genre. Sure they are still role playing games, in the
theatrical sense. P&P RPG's, however, let you controle your own
destiny. The heart of the gameplay there is based on deciding what
you do and what you say to people and whatnot. totally different
cores.
Captain Calzone
>Of course it requires the GM to think on the fly, but how dynamic it is
>doesn't determine whether or not it's "true" role-playing. That's like
>claiming people who play through pre-written adventures, or those who
>use pre-generated characters are not "really" role-playing. That's like
>claiming people who DO choose to more-or-less stick to the story aren't
>"really" role-playing, and only those who go off and do their own thing
>are.
Well, it depends on what you do with those premade adventures.
Sometimes they can embody true roleplaying. My favorite example of
such was a freind of mine's story. He was doing a premade box set
with a bunch of people. Using his own ingenuity he actually knocked a
bunch of enemies off their feet by tossing a dead party member at them
(he was a hill giant... they can get a lot of velovity tossing a dead
dwarf) He was really role playing because he was able to innovate and
use the characteristics he had given his character to allow him to do
that.(mainly, his hill giant was dumb, and a bit of an inconsiderate
prick) His character was premade, but he inserted his own personality
characterists and used his own ingenuity to toss that dwarf.
>
>> True, but who says what is a grand adventure? I love the Discworld
>> novels. In several of them Rincewind is the main character. He
>> speands more time running away from things and screaming for help in
>> 27 different languages (he can just scream in 12 more) than he ever
>> speands fighting evil, which he does only very reluctantly. In sum,
>> he is doing whatever he damn well pleases. Still a story. Still an
>> adventure.
>
>Just because the main character is less-than-heroic doesn't necessarily
>mean the adventure is less-than-epic. Squall certainly wasn't much of a
>hero, nor was Cloud.
BUT they saved the day and knew when to grit their teeth. Rincewind
only saved the day by accident usually. Lord knows Daviid Ap Howell
never went for the death deuls in his campaigns. He did whatever he
damn well pleased. The adventure, the stories, just kinda happened
afterwards. Tis the way with real adventures. That was the whole
point of the "real adventures" quip. Real adventures don't have a
plot. The plot is what the hero ends up doing of his own free will.
>
>> Ever hear the saying that the fun was the journey, not the end? That
>> is how we play. Real adventures don't have nice, concise plots and
>> logical progressions. Real adventures just kinda happen on their own
>> to people who would rather not be bothered. We role play real
>> adventures. I feel sorry for anyone who has to play your "dice roll
>> to a storyline" campaigns.
>
>Who plays those? Not me, that's for sure. My role-palying adventures
>were every bit as "real" as yours, just as console RPG's are every bit
>as "real" as any pen-and-paper RPG.
Well, you seemed to be implying that your role playuing experience was
rather strict to the plotline and low on the ability to make life
decisions for the characters. If you take out the ability to chose
what you do, you lose the ability to controle anything but combat.
While real role playing can happen there, it is much more rare and
hard to come by.
And Console RPG's are real RPg's, BTW. just real in a different
sense. Just like theatre is just as much a drama as the superbowl.
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8b6pro$evo$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
you,
> > but these paragraphs show your one-mindedness and reminded me of why
> > I even griped at you in the first place. Ok, let's see if I can
still
> > work out that thing about being nice...
> >
> > Ok, I reread the above paragraph and decided to interpret it in a
most
> > plain and literal fashion. Role Playing is about, well, ROLE
PLAYING.
> > the story is there, yes, but its not about a random amnesiac saving
> > the world from the white-haired pretty boy, the story is about the
> > Player Chaarcters, and their lives and actions. Its not the world's
> > story like in Console RPGs, its THEIR story.
>
Rinoa's
> story(and a bit of Laguna's). Of course the story revolves around the
> player characters, but there has to BE a story, not just undirected,
> random actions.
Of course, forcing you to do set things in a certain order is only ONE
way of making a story, and it certainly isn't the best way. You realise
those Dragonlance books, all their storylines come from actual
Role-Playing sessions? (Well, Dragons of Autumn Twilight does, anyway...
It says so in the back of the book if you need a reference).
>
> > IMO, these are more like fantasy quick-fixes... people like me who
> > usually only go for really complex stuff (Remember I'm not sure
others
> > do this... I am "One and Possibly/Apparently Only") occasionally
take
> > breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we tackle smething
> > that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a cartoon.
>
> Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching the
> wrong cartoons.
Actually no, I just happen to look deeper and be less ignorant than
others. For example, some people view He-Man as a toy-commercial
and Filmation as a small-ass company that reuses animation alot, when
I can point out episodes of He-Man that had *Gasp* character development
(Teela's Quest and Pawns of the Gamemaster, so there!) and can point out
FIlmation shows that only reused generic scenes like running and
transformations (Waldo Kitty and Ghostbusters) and even one movie of
theirs that didn't reuse any footage at all (Pinoccio and the Emporer of
the Night). The people who say otherwise speak from ignorance.
(As for as my knowledge goes, She-Ra WAS just a blatant toy commercial
though).
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <MPG.13416a105...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> >
> > > the wrong cartoons.
> >
> > aren't you?
>
> are good when you don't want to use your brain" deserve no better
> response, especially coming from a person who puts down landmark anime
> series while praising garbage like He-Man.
Too bad ZFP is one of the people who's only seen the worst episodes of
He-Man (There were alot of episodes that WERE blatant shell-outs,but as
I said, once in awhile episodes feature development of the characters).
As I rmemeber, I was putting down Batman while praising He-Man, Batman
is not anime. If there's been any anime I've raised He-Man against,
it was probably Sailor Moon (At least He-Man's reused animation DOESN'T
take up about ten minutes of the freaking show!) or Ninja Scroll (Lame
cliche... The main character is a hired mercenary who gets personally
involved, and he has to fight *The Eight Devils of Kimon* enough said).
Back to Batman, well, when He-Man gets a girl, she's actually an
important part of the series instead of a plot device who's going to
either die or leave at the end of the episode/movie.
I recently saw the Batman animated flicks BTW... Mask of the Phatasm was
good, Sub-Zero was crap, Batman-Superman was OK (Ok, the only reason I
even tried this one is because Joker's one of my obsessions... errr,
favorite villains).
James The One and Apparently Only
> >> usually only go for really complex stuff (Remember I'm not sure
others
> >> do this... I am "One and Possibly/Apparently Only") occasionally
take
> >> breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we tackle smething
> >> that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a cartoon.
> >
the
> >wrong cartoons.
>
>
> troll. my personal favorite current troll, yes, but still a troll)
Closeminded yes, yer personal favorite yes, troll however I don't think
I can label him yet. To be a troll, you got to INTENTIONALLY set out to
piss people off. ZFP does it inadvertantly, not his fault at all.
He hates He-Man? Fine, I just live in the knoweldge that he's only
lived with the blatant toy commercial episodes and missed most or all
the good ones, he prefers newer stuff to older stuff no matter what?
I've had my fair share of bias.
Now, if you excuse me...
(James wanders off and contemplates "Why the hell am I defending ZFP?")
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <38d7f14b.14322677@news-server>,
> cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
> >
> > >And an increasing number of console RPG's offer you decisions that
> > >affect the story in meaningful(or at least visible) ways.
> >
> > And that is what I love most about RPG's. Games like Star Ocean are
> > paving the way bit by bit. I have this dream where someday all RPG's
> > will give you options that dynamically affect the outcome of the
game.
>
> kind of goal, there's no real motivation.
Unless you happen to be playing the role of a crack-induced monkey...
(I don't. I prefer the role of the guy with the big.... sword. I was
gonna say "Stick" but I didn't wanna stem the dirty little kids' minds
on this NG)
> A GM can allow greater
> freedom, because no matter which way the players decide to go, he can
> provide some sort of goal for them to achieve, or at least flesh out
> events along the path they'd chosen to keep things moving along.
> Nothing short of a perfect AI...
...Or another player...
>... could do this in a game, however.
>
> > >You call me "closeminded", you you're the one rigidly adhering to a
> > >definition of "RPG" that excludes console games?
> >
> > No, I am the one who claims console RPGs and Pen&Paper RPG's are
> > totally different things which have different definitions.
>
> You claim one lacks the "spirit" of the other. Elsewhere you implied
> that your role-playing adventures were "real" whereas mine were not.
They aren't. An Adventure where you're guided every step by in-game
programming is no adventure at all. Its like having a built-in
walkthru, except you can't find alternatives.
> That seems like a pretty clise-minded attitude to me.
>
> > I also states that console RPG's don't have much of any pure Role
> > Playing, and what they have does not touch the pen&paper dynamic.
>
> They do indeed have role-palying, by the very definition of
> role-playing. What they lack is true freedom, but since even the very
> act of playing a role in inherently restrictive, I see little wrong
with
> this.
How is the act of playing a role inheretly restrictive?
> If you're playing the role of Squall, for instance, then
choosing
> to dump Rinoa and go after Selphie would be completely out of
character.
Unless you're playing FF8, why the hell would you have to play as
Squall?
>
> > Don't recall saying console games weren't RPG's. Just said they
> > weren't the same genre of thingy as the P&P
>
> They both serve the same purpose: allowing you to take on the role of
> another person, and they both have similar gameplay. I'd say that puts
> them in the same genre.
Yet some time ago you were argueing that PC RPGs and "Action"-RPGs
weren't in the same genre as Console RPGs, my, the hypocrisy...
(James forgot the all important rule: Role-Playing ZFP comes with the
disadvantages "Not very self aware" and "Unabale to recognize own
hypocrisies" and the punishmenet is now all hells gonna break loose...)
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
James The One and Apparently Only
keniwasa <keniwasa...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
> In article <8b6qjc$fep$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, James The One and
> Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >In article <1ba90248...@usw-ex0102-015.remarq.com>,
> >keniwasa <keniwasa...@my-deja.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> In article <38D629B0...@zoomnet.net>, Alex Westley
> >> <ot...@zoomnet.net> wrote:
> >> [snip]
> >> >
> >> >Both just took different evolutionary paths. CRPGs grew
> (grue?
> >> heh,
> >> >terribly obscure joke that 90% of the people reading this
> won't
> >> >understand..) out of text adventures like Zork. The idea was
> >> that the
> >>
> >> Heh, possibly more like 95%. I have no problems with leaving
> way.
> >
> >I think I'll be nice and give them a hint: Four letters,
> starts with a
> >Z, PC Text Adventure, ITS TITLE MENTIONED IN ONE OF THE BAOVE
> >PARAGRAPHS...
> >
> >Heh, I love knowing everything!
>
> James, I'm really glad you know everything.
>
> I hope, though, that the rest of you who understood the joke
> will refrain from explaining it as I don't want anyone who
> didn't get the joke to feel foolish. One should, after all,
> never explain a joke to someone who didn't get it.
Oh, sorry, didn't realise I was making an arse of myself.
I figured that since Zork is pretyy popular and everyone here is a
long-time gamer (besides, the sweries continues to this day)...
Reminds me, I heard there was a Zork movie coming out...
EvaUnit02
>Who plays those? Not me, that's for sure. My role-palying adventures
>were every bit as "real" as yours, just as console RPG's are every bit
>as "real" as any pen-and-paper RPG.
I think the point is that some RPG players actually want to play a role
rather than watch a role unfold.
-Eva
<neo_zo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8b8qq6$uve$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <38d7cd59.5119402@news-server>,
> cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
> >
> > Oh no, we don't just wander aimlessly. Why, I recall once we went
> > South and when we were talking to a shopowner about where to get a
> > magical item identified decided we really liked some of the swords on
> > his wall and stole them. And who is to decide what is a story? To
> > me, the adventures I have had in AD&D and Rifts are great stories to
> > the point where I have actually had several fun times recounting them
> > to other players. The act of making your own story does not preclude
> > it from being a story. Role Playing is about working to create a
> > story, but it is a story about people. And people don't always WANT
> > to fight the dragon. Some of them run away like little girls. Just
> > because it requires the players and DM to THINK on the FLY does not
> > mean it isn't role plkaying. In fact, it means it is role playing at
> > it's purest.
>
> Of course it requires the GM to think on the fly, but how dynamic it is
> doesn't determine whether or not it's "true" role-playing. That's like
> claiming people who play through pre-written adventures, or those who
> use pre-generated characters are not "really" role-playing. That's like
> claiming people who DO choose to more-or-less stick to the story aren't
> "really" role-playing, and only those who go off and do their own thing
> are.
>
> > >The "essence" of RPG's is not and has never been simply the ability
> > >to do whatever you want. The essence of an RPG is to become someone
> > >else and to be a part of some grand adventure. Console RPG's do a
> > >fine job of providing that experience.
> >
> > True, but who says what is a grand adventure? I love the Discworld
> > novels. In several of them Rincewind is the main character. He
> > speands more time running away from things and screaming for help in
> > 27 different languages (he can just scream in 12 more) than he ever
> > speands fighting evil, which he does only very reluctantly. In sum,
> > he is doing whatever he damn well pleases. Still a story. Still an
> > adventure.
>
> Just because the main character is less-than-heroic doesn't necessarily
> mean the adventure is less-than-epic. Squall certainly wasn't much of a
> hero, nor was Cloud.
>
> > Ever hear the saying that the fun was the journey, not the end? That
> > is how we play. Real adventures don't have nice, concise plots and
> > logical progressions. Real adventures just kinda happen on their own
> > to people who would rather not be bothered. We role play real
> > adventures. I feel sorry for anyone who has to play your "dice roll
> > to a storyline" campaigns.
>
> Who plays those? Not me, that's for sure. My role-palying adventures
> were every bit as "real" as yours, just as console RPG's are every bit
> as "real" as any pen-and-paper RPG.
>
> -ZFP
Captain Calzone
anthropomorphic personification of James The One and Apparently Only
<jim_...@my-deja.com> spoke to me, and made me titter:
>In article <38d7cf6f.5653757@news-server>,
>cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>>
>> And apparently trying to reason with the wrong closedminded trolls...
>>
>> (and yes, kiddo, I've thought about it for a long time and you are a
>> troll. my personal favorite current troll, yes, but still a troll)
>
>Closeminded yes, yer personal favorite yes, troll however I don't think
>I can label him yet. To be a troll, you got to INTENTIONALLY set out to
>piss people off. ZFP does it inadvertantly, not his fault at all.
>He hates He-Man? Fine, I just live in the knoweldge that he's only
>lived with the blatant toy commercial episodes and missed most or all
>the good ones, he prefers newer stuff to older stuff no matter what?
>I've had my fair share of bias.
Well, I consider some people trolls who don't fit into the Mario
Monks/Nobody's Perfect mold. Sometimes just being obstenant to a
dangerous degree can do that. c'mon, most people consider Doaney a
troll. I can't think of one USENET sin he has committed that Zippy
hasn't. (personal sins, like hating so many people, just don't count
toward true trolldom)
>Now, if you excuse me...
>
>(James wanders off and contemplates "Why the hell am I defending ZFP?")
>
I've done it too... back a coiuple years ago we had a "best poster"
thread and I mentioned Zippy. I just have always found him
entertaining... admittedly in a morbid sort of a way, but entertaining
nontheless. And ya gotta love it when he gets into flame wars with
Doaney. Miller has NOTHING on Zippy when it comes to arguing with
Doaney, which has fed my personal belief that they are one and the
same very disturbed person :)
----------------
Captain Calzone
The One and Only!
(THANK GOD!)
----------------
"USENET is like Tetris for people who
still remember how to read"
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> Too bad ZFP is one of the people who's only seen the worst episodes of
> He-Man (There were alot of episodes that WERE blatant shell-outs,but
> as I said, once in awhile episodes feature development of the
> characters).
The production values, acting, writing, etc. were universally low.
> As I rmemeber, I was putting down Batman while praising He-Man, Batman
> is not anime.
Batman is still far superior.
> If there's been any anime I've raised He-Man against, it was probably
> Sailor Moon (At least He-Man's reused animation DOESN'T take up about
> ten minutes of the freaking show!) or Ninja Scroll (Lame cliche... The
> main character is a hired mercenary who gets personally involved, and
> he has to fight *The Eight Devils of Kimon* enough said).
Yet it's production values were infinitley higher, the acting was
superior, and He-Man is no less cliched.
> Back to Batman, well, when He-Man gets a girl, she's actually an
> important part of the series instead of a plot device who's going to
> either die or leave at the end of the episode/movie.
Batman never really "gets the girl". The current Batman, in Batman
Beyond, has a more-or-less steady girlfriend.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> Well, I consider some people trolls who don't fit into the Mario
> Monks/Nobody's Perfect mold. Sometimes just being obstenant to a
> dangerous degree can do that. c'mon, most people consider Doaney a
> troll. I can't think of one USENET sin he has committed that Zippy
> hasn't. (personal sins, like hating so many people, just don't count
> toward true trolldom)
Doane's posts are(or were, at the very least) more inflamatory than
ANYTHING I've ever posted. Even "Zelda sux" doesn't begin to approach
statements like "homosexuals are no better than child molesters".
> I've done it too... back a coiuple years ago we had a "best poster"
> thread and I mentioned Zippy. I just have always found him
> entertaining... admittedly in a morbid sort of a way, but entertaining
> nontheless.
I'll take what praise I can get.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> Well, it depends on what you do with those premade adventures.
> Sometimes they can embody true roleplaying. My favorite example of
> such was a freind of mine's story. He was doing a premade box set
> with a bunch of people. Using his own ingenuity he actually knocked a
> bunch of enemies off their feet by tossing a dead party member at them
> (he was a hill giant... they can get a lot of velovity tossing a dead
> dwarf) He was really role playing because he was able to innovate and
> use the characteristics he had given his character to allow him to do
> that.(mainly, his hill giant was dumb, and a bit of an inconsiderate
> prick) His character was premade, but he inserted his own personality
> characterists and used his own ingenuity to toss that dwarf.
Alright, but was his role-playing experience less "real" or "true" just
because he was using a pre-made character in a pre-made adventure?
> >Just because the main character is less-than-heroic doesn't
> >necessarily mean the adventure is less-than-epic. Squall certainly
> >wasn't much of a hero, nor was Cloud.
>
> BUT they saved the day and knew when to grit their teeth. Rincewind
> only saved the day by accident usually. Lord knows Daviid Ap Howell
> never went for the death deuls in his campaigns. He did whatever he
> damn well pleased. The adventure, the stories, just kinda happened
> afterwards. Tis the way with real adventures. That was the whole
> point of the "real adventures" quip. Real adventures don't have a
> plot. The plot is what the hero ends up doing of his own free will.
I think you've just contradicted yourself. If the plot is what the hero
ends up doing, then any adventure has a plot. However, I still wouldn't
consider a random series of events to be a real plot.
> >Who plays those? Not me, that's for sure. My role-palying adventures
> >were every bit as "real" as yours, just as console RPG's are every
> >bit as "real" as any pen-and-paper RPG.
>
> Well, you seemed to be implying that your role playuing experience was
> rather strict to the plotline and low on the ability to make life
> decisions for the characters. If you take out the ability to chose
> what you do, you lose the ability to controle anything but combat.
> While real role playing can happen there, it is much more rare and
> hard to come by.
Simply being in character takes away true freedom. I think the basic
concept of RPG's includes some sort of progression and advancement,
however non-linear. It's all well and good to have freedom, but if your
character isn't doing anything meaningful, what's the point? If you
take out any ability to choose, you're just left with combat, but if
there's no goal to acchieve, no purpose or motivation, then you're
really just left with combat again. There needs to be SOME structure,
however flexible and improvised.
> And Console RPG's are real RPg's, BTW. just real in a different
> sense. Just like theatre is just as much a drama as the superbowl.
Um, okay.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
> >freedom, because no matter which way the players decide to go, he can
> >provide some sort of goal for them to achieve, or at least flesh out
> >events along the path they'd chosen to keep things moving along.
>
> True, but a guy can dream. what I was implying was a game where you
> could make certain choices that actually dynamically affected the
> storyline.
Well, those exist, ranging from the minor freedoms in FF8 to the more
profound choices FM3 claims to allow.
> >You claim one lacks the "spirit" of the other. Elsewhere you implied
> >that your role-playing adventures were "real" whereas mine were not.
> >That seems like a pretty clise-minded attitude to me.
>
> Well, one does lack the spirit of the other. Console RPGs do lack the
> spirit of role playing found in P&P games. To play a role in a P&P
> game you creat the character, give him his personality, and make his
> decisions. In most console RPg's you make him run about and fight.
> Different kinds of role playing and different spirits.
I don't think that total freedom was ever a part of the "spirit" of
role-playing. I think the point was simply to allow you to become a
different person and go adventuring in a fictional world and interacting
with other fictional characters. In a sense, ANY game allows this, but
only RPG's use the same sort of system to do it.
> >They do indeed have role-palying, by the very definition of
> >role-playing. What they lack is true freedom, but since even the very
> >act of playing a role in inherently restrictive, I see little wrong
> >with this. If you're playing the role of Squall, for instance, then
> >choosing to dump Rinoa and go after Selphie would be completely out
> >of character.
>
> Well, I think we have reached an impass. You define role playing as
> playing a role in a play. Like acting. you have a role to play
> andyou do exactly what that role says you have to.
Not quite. I simply define role-playing as taking on the role of
another person, however much control you do or do not have.
> >They both serve the same purpose: allowing you to take on the role of
> >another person, and they both have similar gameplay. I'd say that
> >puts them in the same genre.
>
> That is another impass. I believe the heart of role playing to be
> decision making. Console RPg's, while having similar combat, lack the
> ability to controle your own destiny.
By making decisions in combat, you are controlling your own destiny in
a console RPG. Many recent games allow you to affect the plot in a
meaningful way. Most allow at least dialogue options and control over
character growth, party composition, etc. It seems like you've set an
arbitrary line, below which the level of interaction and control does
not meet your standard for the genre.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
> others. For example, some people view He-Man as a toy-commercial
> and Filmation as a small-ass company that reuses animation alot, when
> I can point out episodes of He-Man that had *Gasp* character
> development (Teela's Quest and Pawns of the Gamemaster, so there!)
A thimble-full of cliched character development does not rescue the
series from being pure crap.
> and can point out FIlmation shows that only reused generic scenes like
> running and transformations (Waldo Kitty and Ghostbusters)
Which in no way improves the overall quality of the show.
> and even one movie of theirs that didn't reuse any footage at all
> (Pinoccio and the Emporer of the Night).
Again, the degree of recycled footage is not the sole measure of a shows
quality. The animation in He-Man was crap the first time it was shown,
and would've remained crap even if they had never recycled it.
Paul Bauman
NonDeskript wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 16:26:33 GMT, neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching the
> > wrong cartoons.
>
> The WRONG games and cartoons? God, you really are a smug elitist ass
> aren't you?
Not as smug & elitist as the "ass" who presumes all videogames and anime to
be "games & cartoons" the equivalent of mental morphine when his "brain
hurts" from thinking too deeply (if we could all be so lucky).
Please...dispense with the pipe and smoking jacket, and try to open your
mind just a smidge.
NonDeskript
I don't think that's what he said though. He simply said that he likes to
play video games and watch cartoons when he wants to relax. Not everyone
takes them seriously, you know. They are just entertainment. I'm not sure
where you got this mental morphing, brain hurting crud from...
--
-David
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> I don't think that's what he said though. He simply said that he
> likes to play video games and watch cartoons when he wants to relax.
No, he said:
"people like me who usually only go for really complex stuff (...)
occasionally take breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we
tackle smething that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a
cartoon"
He's not only suggesting that he's superior, but is putting down games,
anime, and their fans at the same time...
Captain Calzone
anthropomorphic personification of Paul Bauman
<psba...@cats.ucsc.edu> spoke to me, and made me titter:
>
>
>NonDeskript wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 16:26:33 GMT, neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>> > Just goes to show that you're playing the wrong games and watching the
>> > wrong cartoons.
>>
>> The WRONG games and cartoons? God, you really are a smug elitist ass
>> aren't you?
>
>Not as smug & elitist as the "ass" who presumes all videogames and anime to
>be "games & cartoons" the equivalent of mental morphine when his "brain
>hurts" from thinking too deeply (if we could all be so lucky).
>Please...dispense with the pipe and smoking jacket, and try to open your
>mind just a smidge.
I am offended by your bias against smoking jackets. I myself have a
smoking jacket somewhere in my closet and it is a proud, contributing
member of the community. Why, just the other day it helped set up a
daycare program for poor pennyloafers.
Captain Calzone
anthropomorphic personification of neo_zo...@hotmail.com spoke to
me, and made me titter:
>In article <38d833dc.930719@news-server>,
>cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>> True, but a guy can dream. what I was implying was a game where you
>> could make certain choices that actually dynamically affected the
>> storyline.
>
>Well, those exist, ranging from the minor freedoms in FF8 to the more
>profound choices FM3 claims to allow.
I never said there was no hope. Games have come a long way in the
more recent past to giving the user real controle over his destiny,.
but it is really not close to where it could be.
> Well, one does lack the spirit of the other. Console RPGs do lack the
>> spirit of role playing found in P&P games. To play a role in a P&P
>> game you creat the character, give him his personality, and make his
>> decisions. In most console RPg's you make him run about and fight.
>> Different kinds of role playing and different spirits.
>
>I don't think that total freedom was ever a part of the "spirit" of
>role-playing. I think the point was simply to allow you to become a
>different person and go adventuring in a fictional world and interacting
>with other fictional characters. In a sense, ANY game allows this, but
>only RPG's use the same sort of system to do it.
The point was to give you a fantasy world to have adventures in as a
fictional being of your own creation. The openendedness allowed for a
great ammount of freedom. If you wanted to charge the minataur with
your level 1 mage, then full speed ahead and damn the torpedos, you
could. It is difficult to get immersed in your fictional character if
the storyline is predestined and your choices limited.
>>
>> Well, I think we have reached an impass. You define role playing as
>> playing a role in a play. Like acting. you have a role to play
>> andyou do exactly what that role says you have to.
>
>Not quite. I simply define role-playing as taking on the role of
>another person, however much control you do or do not have.
And that is role playing. One type. I have said countless times that
console RPGs and P&P RPG's are both RPG's, just not at all the same
thing. It IS possible for both to be Role Playing Games but have
different levels of role playing.
>>
>> That is another impass. I believe the heart of role playing to be
>> decision making. Console RPg's, while having similar combat, lack the
>> ability to controle your own destiny.
>
>By making decisions in combat, you are controlling your own destiny in
>a console RPG. Many recent games allow you to affect the plot in a
>meaningful way. Most allow at least dialogue options and control over
>character growth, party composition, etc. It seems like you've set an
>arbitrary line, below which the level of interaction and control does
>not meet your standard for the genre.
Combat. You have two choices when it comes down to it. Live or die.
Live and continue the predestined story or die and stop playing. Not
a real ammount of choice there.
Dialoge... unless I've lost my marbles, I seem to recall most games
having a right and a wrong answer. the right answer progresses, the
wrong one does nothing.
They do allow control over character growth which is good. That is
one of the reasons I loved Grandia so much. I could really decide how
my characters ended up powerwise. I still had no option of anything
to do aside from completing the main quest, but it was an interesting
innovation for console RPGs.
I, however, have set an arbitary line. It is the line where one can
control one's destiny completely, and where one cannot. To me full
role playing is impossible without free will.
Captain Calzone
>In article <38d83661.1575528@news-server>,
>cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>>
>> Well, it depends on what you do with those premade adventures.
>> Sometimes they can embody true roleplaying. My favorite example of
>> such was a freind of mine's story. He was doing a premade box set
>> with a bunch of people. Using his own ingenuity he actually knocked a
>> bunch of enemies off their feet by tossing a dead party member at them
>> (he was a hill giant... they can get a lot of velovity tossing a dead
>> dwarf) He was really role playing because he was able to innovate and
>> use the characteristics he had given his character to allow him to do
>> that.(mainly, his hill giant was dumb, and a bit of an inconsiderate
>> prick) His character was premade, but he inserted his own personality
>> characterists and used his own ingenuity to toss that dwarf.
>
>Alright, but was his role-playing experience less "real" or "true" just
>because he was using a pre-made character in a pre-made adventure?
Well, no actually. Mainly because the guy DMing the game had a very
loose way of doing things that invited innovation and straying from
the base stoyline of the adventure. If he had been stuck to the plot
(as some DMs I've met make you do... UNGH I despise them) with no real
leeway it would have been less true role playing because he would have
had less control. Actually, the weird bit is that after that session
the same adventure continued "outside the box" (to throw in a
completely innapropriate catchphrase) for some weeks.
>> BUT they saved the day and knew when to grit their teeth. Rincewind
>> only saved the day by accident usually. Lord knows Daviid Ap Howell
>> never went for the death deuls in his campaigns. He did whatever he
>> damn well pleased. The adventure, the stories, just kinda happened
>> afterwards. Tis the way with real adventures. That was the whole
>> point of the "real adventures" quip. Real adventures don't have a
>> plot. The plot is what the hero ends up doing of his own free will.
>
>I think you've just contradicted yourself. If the plot is what the hero
>ends up doing, then any adventure has a plot. However, I still wouldn't
>consider a random series of events to be a real plot.
No contradiction. You just have to think sideways a bit. The plot is
what the hero ends up doing, but there is no plot while he is doing
it. Plots and stories happen after the adventure is done. Plots
exist in chronicals. Adventures exist in real time.
Also, something that came to me last night while driving to Orono to
visit a friend. Would you consider the Hitchhikers Guide to the
Galaxy books to have a plot? They came to me as having no real end.
No real goal actually. Damn good reads and an engrossing story of
adventure, but totally filled with random actions.
>>
>> Well, you seemed to be implying that your role playuing experience was
>> rather strict to the plotline and low on the ability to make life
>> decisions for the characters. If you take out the ability to chose
>> what you do, you lose the ability to controle anything but combat.
>> While real role playing can happen there, it is much more rare and
>> hard to come by.
>
>Simply being in character takes away true freedom. I think the basic
>concept of RPG's includes some sort of progression and advancement,
>however non-linear. It's all well and good to have freedom, but if your
>character isn't doing anything meaningful, what's the point? If you
>take out any ability to choose, you're just left with combat, but if
>there's no goal to acchieve, no purpose or motivation, then you're
>really just left with combat again. There needs to be SOME structure,
>however flexible and improvised.
Being in character does not even reduce freedom. Wouldn't be a role
playing game without characters. It would be a bunch of silly people
talking to eacyh other and randomly rolling dice. Being in character
is actually a form of freedom because you decide the traits your guy
has. You decide if he is a nice guy, a drunkard, a sheep lover, a
usenet addict, a gun nut or a Libertarian. You create characters
which you can work with and expand upon. It is really just controled
schitzophrania with rules.
And without an overriding goal you get to have some fun with it. you
make your own goals. You give the players options and the game ends
up being a series of smaller adventures instead of one big one. They
are adventures the players want to do. The players might suddenly
decide that fighting the undead ain't their bag halfway up the castle
of Count Notforartyou and bugger off. Role playing interactions,
robberies, saving princesses, and mugging old men are all fun and, if
you play it right, can all fit into one campaign. Real people usually
don't charge dragons.
>> And Console RPG's are real RPg's, BTW. just real in a different
>> sense. Just like theatre is just as much a drama as the superbowl.
>
>Um, okay.
Sorry, shouldn't have used simile on you. It was a cheap tactic. I
was, of course, refering to my earler assessment of your type of RPG
to be more like theatre with a lot of solid plot. Can be very
dramatic. So can the superbowl, which has no solid plot. Just a lot
of variables. In retrospect, it wasn't a very good one.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> >Well, those exist, ranging from the minor freedoms in FF8 to the more
> >profound choices FM3 claims to allow.
>
> I never said there was no hope. Games have come a long way in the
> more recent past to giving the user real controle over his destiny,.
> but it is really not close to where it could be.
I'm not sure it could be much better. Until we can create a true AI,
games are limited by the ability of the writers to create branching
scenarios.
> >I don't think that total freedom was ever a part of the "spirit" of
> >role-playing. I think the point was simply to allow you to become a
> >different person and go adventuring in a fictional world and
> >interacting with other fictional characters. In a sense, ANY game
> >allows this, but only RPG's use the same sort of system to do it.
>
> The point was to give you a fantasy world to have adventures in as a
> fictional being of your own creation. The openendedness allowed for a
> great ammount of freedom. If you wanted to charge the minataur with
> your level 1 mage, then full speed ahead and damn the torpedos, you
> could. It is difficult to get immersed in your fictional character if
> the storyline is predestined and your choices limited.
But the very existence of pre-written modules and pre-generated
characters seems to suggest otherwise. Clearly, RPG sessions were
meant to have some sort of underlying structure, however flexible or
non-linear the end result is.
> >Not quite. I simply define role-playing as taking on the role of
> >another person, however much control you do or do not have.
>
> And that is role playing. One type. I have said countless times that
> console RPGs and P&P RPG's are both RPG's, just not at all the same
> thing. It IS possible for both to be Role Playing Games but have
> different levels of role playing.
I don't think it's at all clear where you're drawing the line between
one type of role-playing and another.
> >By making decisions in combat, you are controlling your own destiny
> >in a console RPG. Many recent games allow you to affect the plot in a
> >meaningful way. Most allow at least dialogue options and control over
> >character growth, party composition, etc. It seems like you've set an
> >arbitrary line, below which the level of interaction and control does
> >not meet your standard for the genre.
>
> Combat. You have two choices when it comes down to it. Live or die.
> Live and continue the predestined story or die and stop playing. Not
> a real ammount of choice there.
You can choose how to fight a battle, who will fight, what they will
fight with, whether to fight or run, etc.
> Dialogue... unless I've lost my marbles, I seem to recall most games
> having a right and a wrong answer. the right answer progresses, the
> wrong one does nothing.
Sort of like real life, really. If you don't ask the right questions,
you won't get the right answers.
> They do allow control over character growth which is good. That is
> one of the reasons I loved Grandia so much. I could really decide how
> my characters ended up powerwise. I still had no option of anything
> to do aside from completing the main quest, but it was an interesting
> innovation for console RPGs.
It's not really a recent innovation, since games as early as FFLegend 1
were doing that.
> I, however, have set an arbitary line. It is the line where one can
> control one's destiny completely, and where one cannot.
No role playing game meets this criteria, not unless your characters
are omnipotent, you don't bother to remain in character, and you have
the most permissive GM available. Otherwise, there will always be
lmitations(your alignment, your stats, your gm, etc.) that keep you
from having controling your destiny completely(much like real life,
actually).
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> >Alright, but was his role-playing experience less "real" or "true"
> >just because he was using a pre-made character in a pre-made
> >adventure?
>
> Well, no actually. Mainly because the guy DMing the game had a very
> loose way of doing things that invited innovation and straying from
> the base stoyline of the adventure. If he had been stuck to the plot
> (as some DMs I've met make you do... UNGH I despise them) with no real
> leeway it would have been less true role playing because he would have
> had less control.
But would it have been more "true" role-playing if he had made his own
character? Would it have been less if he actually chose to follow the
plot? Now, here's the big question: would it have been less "true"
role-playing to adhere to the base storyline if it was in-character for
the pre-generated character he was using to do so?
> >I think you've just contradicted yourself. If the plot is what the
> >hero ends up doing, then any adventure has a plot. However, I still
> >wouldn't consider a random series of events to be a real plot.
>
> No contradiction. You just have to think sideways a bit. The plot is
> what the hero ends up doing, but there is no plot while he is doing
> it. Plots and stories happen after the adventure is done. Plots
> exist in chronicals. Adventures exist in real time.
There IS a plot, regardless of what the hero happens to be doing at the
time. What else is the GM for, after all? There's more to a plot that
the hero, after all...
> Also, something that came to me last night while driving to Orono to
> visit a friend. Would you consider the Hitchhikers Guide to the
> Galaxy books to have a plot? They came to me as having no real end.
> No real goal actually. Damn good reads and an engrossing story of
> adventure, but totally filled with random actions.
Not much of a plot then, however entertaining. There are plenty of
games like that too. I had no real idea what was going on in FFT, but
it was still lots of fun.
> >Simply being in character takes away true freedom. I think the basic
> >concept of RPG's includes some sort of progression and advancement,
> >however non-linear. It's all well and good to have freedom, but if
your
> >character isn't doing anything meaningful, what's the point? If you
> >take out any ability to choose, you're just left with combat, but if
> >there's no goal to acchieve, no purpose or motivation, then you're
> >really just left with combat again. There needs to be SOME structure,
> >however flexible and improvised.
>
> Being in character does not even reduce freedom. Wouldn't be a role
> playing game without characters. It would be a bunch of silly people
> talking to eacyh other and randomly rolling dice. Being in character
> is actually a form of freedom because you decide the traits your guy
> has. You decide if he is a nice guy, a drunkard, a sheep lover, a
> usenet addict, a gun nut or a Libertarian. You create characters
> which you can work with and expand upon. It is really just controled
> schitzophrania with rules.
Thus, you accept certain restrictions on your actions to prevent
everything from just being a bunch of people talking and rolling dice.
So, where do you draw the line? Why is it that the restrictions
imposed by remaining in character do not keep it from being role-
playing, but the restrictions of following a storyline(for example) do?
> >Um, okay.
>
> Sorry, shouldn't have used simile on you. It was a cheap tactic. I
> was, of course, refering to my earler assessment of your type of RPG
> to be more like theatre with a lot of solid plot.
I understood that, but I didn't really have anything to say in response.
James The One and Apparently Only
Heh, I wondered wether or not you guys were talking about me. Now that
I'm sure you are, I'd like you to pinpoint exactly how I suggested I was
superior and how I put down anything. The truth? I didn't, I simply
said games and anime aren't very complex, and the only people offended
by that are obsessive fans (which of course proves you're an obsessive
fan, ZFP). No attempts to hurt anyone here, I was simply stating what I
feel is true (A plot that blatantly explains everything to you can't
really be complex).
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8b9lk5$rf0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > Actually no, I just happen to look deeper and be less ignorant than
> > others. For example, some people view He-Man as a toy-commercial
> > and Filmation as a small-ass company that reuses animation alot,
when
> > I can point out episodes of He-Man that had *Gasp* character
> > development (Teela's Quest and Pawns of the Gamemaster, so there!)
>
> A thimble-full of cliched character development does not rescue the
> series from being pure crap.
I dunno about that... By that logic, most anime seems to have almost
nothing to rely on since they are mostly character development, and
cliched development at that (Ninja Scroll-Hired Ninja who has personal
involvement with the bad guys and who's girlfriend dies, I've been
hearing that one since either the sixties or eighties)
>
> > and can point out FIlmation shows that only reused generic scenes
like
> > running and transformations (Waldo Kitty and Ghostbusters)
>
> Which in no way improves the overall quality of the show.
Then why do people complain about it, since it also in no way makes the
show any worse?
Also, Looking at the animation, I noticed that while He-Man and Skeletor
and his followers do have the same build, everyone else does not. Just
thought I'd nix that one while we're at it.
>
> > and even one movie of theirs that didn't reuse any footage at all
> > (Pinoccio and the Emporer of the Night).
>
> Again, the degree of recycled footage is not the sole measure of a
shows
> quality. The animation in He-Man was crap the first time it was shown,
> and would've remained crap even if they had never recycled it.
So, the sole measure of the animation quality is what determines the
quality of the show? Bwahahaha.
Of course, that would be the only thing that would make Ninja Scroll
better, since it obviously has no other advantages, and He-Man does have
better music (even if it does sound like typical cartoon stuff to some
people) which is a far more important trait.
While I've noticed some animation problems (I hate Teela's character
design... she is really, REALLY disproportioned) animation isn't really
much of a measure in determining quality. I've seen many movies and
cartoons that have had crap-anmation yet have still been good. Danger
Mouse, a wacky British spy cartoon, for example (And those "Banana Man"
shorts after each episode were rather hilarious too) had really bad
animation, yet I rmemeber it being somewhat good (and somewhat popular).
In fact, Britain has produced alot of great flicks whihc don't always
have the greatest visuals: John the Fearless, Bakshi's LotR, A
Clockwork Orange, etc. (All of these, except possibly John the Fearless,
should be easy enough to find).
And it seems Filmation's animation as a whole got better before they
went poof... Those Bravestarr Commercials I've seen look great
(Those are NOT the reason I've been wanting to see Bravestarr, however.
I been wanting to see it because it toys with original concepts) and
Pinoccio and the Emporer of the Night... was up to the Saturday-Morning
Standards of the time.
Even if it didn't get better, its not like other companies, like Hanna
Barbera (SPECIFICALLY Hanna Barbera) were really any better. Scooby,
for example, had NO DETAIL to the characters. It was even more cliched
than He-Man or Ninja Scroll, since alot of HB shows from the same period
also consisted of four or so teens and an animal who constantly ran from
monsters.
James The One and Apparently Only
> anthropomorphic personification of neo_zo...@hotmail.com spoke to
> me, and made me titter:
This part of the thread kinda lost me, then found me, then lost me
again, but I need to respond to this part.
> Also, something that came to me last night while driving to Orono to
> visit a friend. Would you consider the Hitchhikers Guide to the
> Galaxy books to have a plot? They came to me as having no real end.
> No real goal actually. Damn good reads and an engrossing story of
> adventure, but totally filled with random actions.
I have the "Ulitmate Hitchhiker's Guide" which is all five books plus on
short story compiled. Actually, I found them simply lame attempts to be
funny, with some good jokes (Ok, only two... the whale thing and
Agrajag). If you like to be funny, one thing I figured out is that
its probably not gonna be as good if you planned it out. Some of my
humor attempts on alt.games.daggerfall (namely, the ones people LIKED)
I came up with completely on the turn of the screw, and I find that to
be true with cartoons as well.
In fact, the only way to make a really good adventyure, comedy or not,
is to come up with stuff on the screw of the turn. A pre-written story
is no adventure. Are you REALLY exploring a cave if a park ranger is
guiding you to the exit? NO! You're explorign the cave if you havev to
find the exit ON YOUR OWN.
Back to being funny. The only way you can be funny is if no one expects
the joke. I really never liked Tex Avery's cartoons because his were so
typical and predictable, yet Popeye cracks me up almost constantly
because I never know what the hell Popeye is saying when he mumbles
(Oh, and the Spinach cracks me up too) same goes with some early Warner
Brothers shows (BEFORE Looney Tunes became the big name).
If you know what to expect, it just ain't funny. ie. Waldo Kitty is..
amusing (I didn't make me laugh enough to be considered funny) Garfield,
however, is lame.
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <38da9b8e.5916826@news-server>,
> cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
> >
> > Also, something that came to me last night while driving to Orono to
> > visit a friend. Would you consider the Hitchhikers Guide to the
> > Galaxy books to have a plot? They came to me as having no real end.
> > No real goal actually. Damn good reads and an engrossing story of
> > adventure, but totally filled with random actions.
>
> Not much of a plot then, however entertaining.
They're not really all that great IMO, Poor attempts to be funny.
> > Being in character does not even reduce freedom. Wouldn't be a role
> > playing game without characters. It would be a bunch of silly people
> > talking to eacyh other and randomly rolling dice. Being in character
> > is actually a form of freedom because you decide the traits your guy
> > has. You decide if he is a nice guy, a drunkard, a sheep lover, a
> > usenet addict, a gun nut or a Libertarian. You create characters
> > which you can work with and expand upon. It is really just controled
> > schitzophrania with rules.
>
> Thus, you accept certain restrictions on your actions to prevent
> everything from just being a bunch of people talking and rolling dice.
> So, where do you draw the line? Why is it that the restrictions
> imposed by remaining in character do not keep it from being role-
> playing, but the restrictions of following a storyline(for example)
do?
Because being in chaarcetr has almost nothing to do with what you do
with your character. Whats to stop him from getting a personality
change halfway through? Following a storyline, however, takes away
pretty much any real choice you have in the matter (Console RPGs prove
that... "Let's Save the world, Chrono!""No""Chrono! Say yes to impress
Marle!""No""Chrono! Say yes to impress Marle!""No"... This keeps up
until you say "Yes").
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8b9m84$s2l$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
of
> > He-Man (There were alot of episodes that WERE blatant shell-outs,but
> > as I said, once in awhile episodes feature development of the
> > characters).
>
> The production values, acting, writing, etc. were universally low.
Now trhat I've watched a few episodes, did notice that some of the worse
episodes (Diamond Ray of Disappearance, the inital episode) were rather
dumb. Writing? Are you talking about how all the characters yell stuff
like "My so-so will finish you!" yea, that was dumb, but its not like
badly-translated anime (Or badly-translated Godzilla movies) haven't had
this, and this happens less in the better episodes.
>
> > As I rmemeber, I was putting down Batman while praising He-Man,
Batman
> > is not anime.
>
> Batman is still far superior.
Not really. It has better animation, but the music sucks (Doesn't even
have a SONG!) and its really inconsistent and doesn't bother to be at
all realistic, with Joker always dying (Batman/Superman Movie: World's
Finest) or getting in a situation where he really could not have lived
(In one episode he fell down a chimney of a nuclear power plant) yet
he's always alive and well later on. Don't get me started on Mr.
Freeze. First his wife is dead, then in Sub-Zero his wife is alive and
cryogeneically frozen. Then let's talk about how Batman always knows
every little step the villain takes and seemingly teleports around
(This happens so much in the series that examples would take up this
whole post, so I'll just refer to that one where Joker fell in the
chimeny again. Earlier, Batman was in a building being held by Harley
Quinn, he escaped after Joker had run off. Joker jumped on a RANDOM
TRAIN... and Batman somehow managed to be right behind him). He-Man has
nothing like this, Batman does it constantly. Now if Superman were
doing it I could believe it, since Superman is an unrealistically
powerful superhero to the point of invincibility (Which is why I don't
like Superman... Semi-invincible heroes do not a good show make) but
Batman could not have done it at all, no matter what Gadgets he has, and
specifically not without being seen or making noise.
>
> > If there's been any anime I've raised He-Man against, it was
probably
> > Sailor Moon (At least He-Man's reused animation DOESN'T take up
about
> > ten minutes of the freaking show!) or Ninja Scroll (Lame cliche...
The
> > main character is a hired mercenary who gets personally involved,
and
> > he has to fight *The Eight Devils of Kimon* enough said).
>
> Yet it's production values were infinitley higher, the acting was
> superior, and He-Man is no less cliched.
production values... let me figure out what that is and I'll get back to
you. For now I'll assume its how much money the show made, in which
case He-Man musta made lots since it lasted three years.
Acting Superior? To the lame shell-out episodes of He-Man, yes, to
the episodes of He-Man they actually WORKED on, its about equal (I'm
seeing the dub BTW).
And true He-Man is no less cliched, since it reeks of typical
Filmation/80s cartoons elements (Ya know, I'm a big goodie good who
can do all the work "With the help of a few friends").
Not to say He-Man is some bastion of animation, no, that would have to
go to either Filmation's Ghostbusters or Waldo Kitty (also by
Filmation).
>
> > Back to Batman, well, when He-Man gets a girl, she's actually an
> > important part of the series instead of a plot device who's going to
> > either die or leave at the end of the episode/movie.
>
> Batman never really "gets the girl".
Well, he's had quite a few different lovelifes during all his serieses.
Shwo never really bothers to stay consistent with this either. One
minute he's in love with Catwoman (Or rather, Selina Kyle) and then a
whole new girl is introduced simply for a movie, etc.
> The current Batman, in Batman
> Beyond, has a more-or-less steady girlfriend.
I've actually been trying to find a place where I can rent "Batman
Beyond: The Movie" for awhile (I'm assuming this "Movie" is simply the
first few episodes put together, like the Battlestar Galactica
theatrical release). I like to start at the beginning rather than
skip around (which is why I still haven't seen Babylon 5 yet). Only
exception is when I don't really have a choice (If I find a BraveStarr
tape, I don't give a damn what volume I get, I'm gettin it, and screw
whoever tries to stop me!).
Now I need to get back to FF8... I just got done out-running a
Crab-Monster thingy, which it took me a few thunder Spells to defeat
(I hate using spells because I prefer them to go to powering up my
character). Good Point: Its more difficult than previous FFs.
However, I think that they should tweak the Junctioning just a bit.
How about junctioning a certain number of thunders to your strength as
opposed to simply junctioning the spell itself, and the rest of the
Thunders stay in your magic slot? Have 100 Junctioned and 100 in your
reserves...
Just thought I'd suggest what they could do with FF9...
>
> -ZFP
EvaUnit02
But the very existence of pre-written modules and pre-generated
characters seems to suggest otherwise. Clearly, RPG sessions were
meant to have some sort of underlying structure, however flexible or
non-linear the end result is.
I dunno. I think they were just there for the people who wanted that
option. I seem to remember a pretty clear divide between those that played
with modules and those that didn't. But as you've said before, both were
very much RPGs.
-Eva
<neo_zo...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:8beacd$qp$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
NonDeskript
> In article <MPG.13441bb5...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> >
> > I don't think that's what he said though. He simply said that he
> > likes to play video games and watch cartoons when he wants to relax.
>
> No, he said:
>
> "people like me who usually only go for really complex stuff (...)
> occasionally take breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we
> tackle smething that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a
> cartoon"
>
> He's not only suggesting that he's superior, but is putting down games,
> anime, and their fans at the same time...
To me, it just sounds like he has different tastes. Most games don't
require complex thought. I haven't played a single Console RPG that does
yet. And most cartoons don't require complex mental thought either. Its
entertainment, relax, don't take it so personally.
--
-David
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
> > series from being pure crap.
>
> I dunno about that... By that logic, most anime seems to have almost
> nothing to rely on since they are mostly character development, and
> cliched development at that (Ninja Scroll-Hired Ninja who has personal
> involvement with the bad guys and who's girlfriend dies, I've been
> hearing that one since either the sixties or eighties)
Most anime has more than a thimble-full of character development, and
much of it is less chiched than crap like He-Man.
> > Which in no way improves the overall quality of the show.
>
> Then why do people complain about it, since it also in no way makes
> the show any worse?
It shows how cleaply made it is.
> Also, Looking at the animation, I noticed that while He-Man and
> Skeletor and his followers do have the same build, everyone else does
> not. Just thought I'd nix that one while we're at it.
They're all just variations of the standard musclebound hero body type.
> > Again, the degree of recycled footage is not the sole measure of a
> > shows quality. The animation in He-Man was crap the first time it
> > was shown and would've remained crap even if they had never recycled
> > it.
>
> So, the sole measure of the animation quality is what determines the
> quality of the show? Bwahahaha.
No, just the animation quality.
> Of course, that would be the only thing that would make Ninja Scroll
> better, since it obviously has no other advantages, and He-Man does
> have better music (even if it does sound like typical cartoon stuff to
> some people) which is a far more important trait.
Both are fairly mindless action, but Ninja Scroll is good, slick,
well-produced mindless action, unlike He-Man.
> While I've noticed some animation problems (I hate Teela's character
> design... she is really, REALLY disproportioned)
So are all of the characters.
> animation isn't really much of a measure in determining quality. I've
> seen many movies and cartoons that have had crap-anmation yet have
> still been good.
He-Man does not fall into this category.
> In fact, Britain has produced alot of great flicks whihc don't always
> have the greatest visuals: John the Fearless, Bakshi's LotR, A
> Clockwork Orange, etc. (All of these, except possibly John the
> Fearless, should be easy enough to find).
Clockwork Orange had excellent visuals.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
> I'm sure you are, I'd like you to pinpoint exactly how I suggested I
> was superior and how I put down anything.
"Those of us who like complex stuff" implies that you are somehow
different from those you are addressing. The idea that games and anime
require no thought insults those who enjoy them.
> The truth? I didn't, I simply said games and anime aren't very
> complex, and the only people offended by that are obsessive fans
> (which of course proves you're an obsessive fan, ZFP).
I imagine the creators would also be offended that you claimed their
work was so simplistic.
> No attempts to hurt anyone here, I was simply stating what I feel is
> true.
You may feel it is true, but it isn't, and claiming otherwise is
ignorant at best, trolling at worst.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> To me, it just sounds like he has different tastes.
He did not express it as a matter of taste, but a matter of
intelligence.
> Most games don't require complex thought. I haven't played a single
> Console RPG that does yet.
I guess you haven't played the better ones.
> And most cartoons don't require complex mental thought either.
I guess you don't watch good anime, or even the better western cartoons.
> Its entertainment, relax, don't take it so personally.
Mush of it is entertaining because it is though provoking and complex.
To suggest that one's interests are somehow just mindless fluff is
insulting.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Batman is still far superior.
>
> Not really. It has better animation, but the music sucks (Doesn't even
> have a SONG!) and its really inconsistent and doesn't bother to be at
> all realistic, with Joker always dying (Batman/Superman Movie: World's
> Finest) or getting in a situation where he really could not have lived
> (In one episode he fell down a chimney of a nuclear power plant) yet
> he's always alive and well later on. Don't get me started on Mr.
> Freeze. First his wife is dead, then in Sub-Zero his wife is alive and
> cryogeneically frozen. Then let's talk about how Batman always knows
> every little step the villain takes and seemingly teleports around
> (This happens so much in the series that examples would take up this
> whole post, so I'll just refer to that one where Joker fell in the
> chimeny again. Earlier, Batman was in a building being held by Harley
> Quinn, he escaped after Joker had run off. Joker jumped on a RANDOM
> TRAIN... and Batman somehow managed to be right behind him). He-Man
has
> nothing like this, Batman does it constantly. Now if Superman were
> doing it I could believe it, since Superman is an unrealistically
> powerful superhero to the point of invincibility (Which is why I don't
> like Superman... Semi-invincible heroes do not a good show make) but
> Batman could not have done it at all, no matter what Gadgets he has,
> and specifically not without being seen or making noise.
Blah, blah, blah. Yes, the WB DC adaptations have excellent music.
Yes, tha animation is better. No, Mr. Freeze's wife was never dead.
Yes, villians tend to escape dire circumstances in any sort of
super-hero plotline. Batman knows what the villians are going to do
because he's clever. He-Man was presented as every bit as
semi-invicible as Superman. Batman does not teleport, they just don't
bother to show him en-route because it would waste time.
> > Yet it's production values were infinitley higher, the acting was
> > superior, and He-Man is no less cliched.
>
> production values... let me figure out what that is and I'll get back
> to you. For now I'll assume its how much money the show made, in which
> case He-Man musta made lots since it lasted three years.
That's not what production values are.
> Acting Superior? To the lame shell-out episodes of He-Man, yes, to
> the episodes of He-Man they actually WORKED on, its about equal (I'm
> seeing the dub BTW).
Then you're not seeing good acting.
> Not to say He-Man is some bastion of animation, no, that would have to
> go to either Filmation's Ghostbusters or Waldo Kitty (also by
> Filmation).
Neither are superior to something like Ninja Scrol. The only worthwhile
Ghostbusters series was the one based on the movies.
> > Batman never really "gets the girl".
>
> Well, he's had quite a few different lovelifes during all his
> serieses. Shwo never really bothers to stay consistent with this
> either. One minute he's in love with Catwoman (Or rather, Selina Kyle)
> and then a whole new girl is introduced simply for a movie, etc.
It IS consistent. He's a rich playboy and he goes through a lot of
girlfriends.
> Now I need to get back to FF8... I just got done out-running a
> Crab-Monster thingy, which it took me a few thunder Spells to defeat
> (I hate using spells because I prefer them to go to powering up my
> character). Good Point: Its more difficult than previous FFs.
> However, I think that they should tweak the Junctioning just a bit.
> How about junctioning a certain number of thunders to your strength as
> opposed to simply junctioning the spell itself, and the rest of the
> Thunders stay in your magic slot? Have 100 Junctioned and 100 in your
> reserves...
The way it's done forces you to budget your spells carefully.
David Leung
Shesh guys. If you guys want to flame and argue this long,
why don't you take it to email or something? at least change
the tread? I'd hate to have to filter the subject I started to
begin with. This is getting damn tedious.
Dave. L
James The One and Apparently Only wrote:
> In article <8bdr4l$f0r$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> > In article <MPG.13441bb5...@news.pdq.net>,
> > NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I don't think that's what he said though. He simply said that he
> > > likes to play video games and watch cartoons when he wants to relax.
> >
> > No, he said:
> >
> > "people like me who usually only go for really complex stuff (...)
> > occasionally take breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we
> > tackle smething that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a
> > cartoon"
> >
> > He's not only suggesting that he's superior, but is putting down
> games,
> > anime, and their fans at the same time...
>
> Heh, I wondered wether or not you guys were talking about me. Now that
> I'm sure you are, I'd like you to pinpoint exactly how I suggested I was
> superior and how I put down anything. The truth? I didn't, I simply
> said games and anime aren't very complex, and the only people offended
> by that are obsessive fans (which of course proves you're an obsessive
> fan, ZFP). No attempts to hurt anyone here, I was simply stating what I
> feel is true (A plot that blatantly explains everything to you can't
> really be complex).
> >
> > -ZFP
> >
> > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> > Before you buy.
> >
> --
> ---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
> Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
> hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
> the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
>
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
David Leung <dle...@attcanada.net> wrote:
>
> Shesh guys. If you guys want to flame and argue this long,
> why don't you take it to email or something? at least change
> the tread? I'd hate to have to filter the subject I started to
> begin with. This is getting damn tedious.
If you're interested in this subject, why have you posted so little on
it? There have been plenty of on-topic posts, but most have come from
me and only a single other poster. If it concerns you though, I will go
back to ignoring James.
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8beujs$mce$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
Errr, Batman no, I can't stand that little ditty it plays whenev3er
Batman appears. Superman is only SLIGHTLY better, and te live-action
movies have better music than either of the cartoons.
> Yes, tha animation is better. No, Mr. Freeze's wife was never dead.
Umm, yes she was. Didn';t you watch Mr. Freze's introductory episode?
Some guy broke open the cryogenic freezing thing, effectively killing
her, which is why Freeze wants revenge.
> Yes, villians tend to escape dire circumstances in any sort of
> super-hero plotline.
At least in He-Man there's always a good reason for it.
> Batman knows what the villians are going to do
> because he's clever.
Or maybe he's phsychic and we don't know it yet :)
> He-Man was presented as every bit as
> semi-invicible as Superman.
No he wasn't. He-Man simply has super-strength and thinks. He's come
close to death several times.
> Batman does not teleport, they just don't
> bother to show him en-route because it would waste time.
So, he manages to get from the Batcave to the enemy hideout to the EXACT
random train that Joker is riding on in under five minutes? yea,
whatever.
>
> > > Yet it's production values were infinitley higher, the acting was
> > > superior, and He-Man is no less cliched.
> >
> > production values... let me figure out what that is and I'll get
back
> > to you. For now I'll assume its how much money the show made, in
which
> > case He-Man musta made lots since it lasted three years.
>
> That's not what production values are.
As I said, letb me figure out what production values are then I'll get
back to you.
>
> > Acting Superior? To the lame shell-out episodes of He-Man, yes, to
> > the episodes of He-Man they actually WORKED on, its about equal (I'm
> > seeing the dub BTW).
>
> Then you're not seeing good acting.
They seemed to do a good job, as far as english anime dubs go. coulda
been worse... coulda had another Macron One on my hands (Macron One was
another 80s anime, and a lame Voltron-rip-off.... Down to the point of
even having the exact same translation problems).
>
> > Not to say He-Man is some bastion of animation, no, that would have
to
> > go to either Filmation's Ghostbusters or Waldo Kitty (also by
> > Filmation).
>
> Neither are superior to something like Ninja Scrol.
Ninja Scroll they are superior to. Now, if you were comparing them to a
good anime, like Gundam Wing...
> The only
worthwhile
> Ghostbusters series was the one based on the movies.
I dunno about that... I thought that the series you refer to was lame
and that the two movies were FAR superior. More worthwhile than that
"Extreme Ghostbusters" crap, at least...
>
> > > Batman never really "gets the girl".
> >
> > Well, he's had quite a few different lovelifes during all his
> > serieses. Shwo never really bothers to stay consistent with this
> > either. One minute he's in love with Catwoman (Or rather, Selina
Kyle)
> > and then a whole new girl is introduced simply for a movie, etc.
>
> It IS consistent. He's a rich playboy and he goes through a lot of
> girlfriends.
So, why is it that these past loves are never mnetioned except when
convenient for a story arc?
>
> > Now I need to get back to FF8... I just got done out-running a
> > Crab-Monster thingy, which it took me a few thunder Spells to defeat
> > (I hate using spells because I prefer them to go to powering up my
> > character). Good Point: Its more difficult than previous FFs.
> > However, I think that they should tweak the Junctioning just a bit.
> > How about junctioning a certain number of thunders to your strength
as
> > opposed to simply junctioning the spell itself, and the rest of the
> > Thunders stay in your magic slot? Have 100 Junctioned and 100 in
your
> > reserves...
>
> The way it's done forces you to budget your spells carefully.
Well, thats true, as I said, I prefer not to use magic at all (Maybe I
shoulda junctioned Thunder to Squall's attack and never had to of spent
a spell)...
I love junctioning. Few things they could tweak here and there but it
seems they've got a good magic system. One qualm I have is that if an
enemy is carrying a Cure spell, you're invincible.
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8benka$f23$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
the
> > > series from being pure crap.
> >
> > I dunno about that... By that logic, most anime seems to have almost
> > nothing to rely on since they are mostly character development, and
> > cliched development at that (Ninja Scroll-Hired Ninja who has
personal
> > involvement with the bad guys and who's girlfriend dies, I've been
> > hearing that one since either the sixties or eighties)
>
> Most anime has more than a thimble-full of character development,
As I said, "They are mostly character development"
> and
> much of it is less chiched than crap like He-Man.
The better animes yes, of course, anime isn't put under the same
restrictions as saturday morning cartoons.
At worst though, the character development can suck, the plot can be a
bunch of randomly conjured events, and the show could be inconsistent to
the point where you can't even place its genre.... I'll note I just got
done watching the whole first Slayers series here....
>
> > > Which in no way improves the overall quality of the show.
> >
> > Then why do people complain about it, since it also in no way makes
> > the show any worse?
>
> It shows how cleaply made it is.
Oh, guess that makes Sailor Moon, Voltron, and Macron One really cheap
peices of crap. Nothing wrong with being cheap, really, many good
classic games are avaialle and good prices now...
>
> > Also, Looking at the animation, I noticed that while He-Man and
> > Skeletor and his followers do have the same build, everyone else
does
> > not. Just thought I'd nix that one while we're at it.
>
> They're all just variations of the standard musclebound hero body
type.
Errr, not really. Try looking at Orko, Man-at-Arms, or King Randor.
>
> > > Again, the degree of recycled footage is not the sole measure of a
> > > shows quality. The animation in He-Man was crap the first time it
> > > was shown and would've remained crap even if they had never
recycled
> > > it.
> >
> > So, the sole measure of the animation quality is what determines the
> > quality of the show? Bwahahaha.
>
> No, just the animation quality.
You seem to be basing your whole opinion of the show on the animation
alone...
>
> > Of course, that would be the only thing that would make Ninja Scroll
> > better, since it obviously has no other advantages, and He-Man does
> > have better music (even if it does sound like typical cartoon stuff
to
> > some people) which is a far more important trait.
>
> Both are fairly mindless action, but Ninja Scroll is good, slick,
> well-produced mindless action, unlike He-Man.
Good, slick, badly written, completely preditcable mindless action.
>
> > While I've noticed some animation problems (I hate Teela's character
> > design... she is really, REALLY disproportioned)
>
> So are all of the characters.
No, not all of them look like they have constant back problems, just
Teela.
>
> > animation isn't really much of a measure in determining quality.
I've
> > seen many movies and cartoons that have had crap-anmation yet have
> > still been good.
>
> He-Man does not fall into this category.
Better episodes do.
>
> > In fact, Britain has produced alot of great flicks whihc don't
always
> > have the greatest visuals: John the Fearless, Bakshi's LotR, A
> > Clockwork Orange, etc. (All of these, except possibly John the
> > Fearless, should be easy enough to find).
>
> Clockwork Orange had excellent visuals.
I don't recall anything particularly impressive... Though this movie did
do a fine job of getting the theme song to "The Lone Ranger" stuck in my
head :) Anyway, it looked no different from other 70s flicks...
While we're on the subject of good shows without the greatest visuals,
Rocky and Bullwinkle, Dudley Do-Right, Danger Mouse...
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8bem7s$dl6$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
that
> > I'm sure you are, I'd like you to pinpoint exactly how I suggested I
> > was superior and how I put down anything.
>
> different from those you are addressing. The idea that games and anime
> require no thought insults those who enjoy them.
Unless playing games gives your brain a good workout, how is this
insulting?
>
> > The truth? I didn't, I simply said games and anime aren't very
> > complex, and the only people offended by that are obsessive fans
> > (which of course proves you're an obsessive fan, ZFP).
>
> I imagine the creators would also be offended that you claimed their
> work was so simplistic.
Yea, and McDonald's would be offended if you claimed they had bad
service. If Filmation were still around they'd be pissed that you're
calling He-Man cheaply made. Nintendo wuld be pissed at my comments
about Pokemon.
If you create something, you're almost naturally gonna get
pissed at anyone who hates it.
So what was your point again?
>
> > No attempts to hurt anyone here, I was simply stating what I feel is
> > true.
>
> You may feel it is true, but it isn't, and claiming otherwise is
> ignorant at best, trolling at worst.
There's alot of truth here. Name ONE, even ONE, anime or game that
DOESN'T blatantly explain all the important stuff to you. And don't
say Xenogears, remember I've beaten that one.
James The One and Apparently Only
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
> Long before the wossname, in Wed, 22 Mar 2000 05:44:45 GMT, an
> anthropomorphic personification of James The One and Apparently Only
> <jim_...@my-deja.com> spoke to me, and made me titter:
>
> >In article <38d7cf6f.5653757@news-server>,
> >cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> >>
> >> And apparently trying to reason with the wrong closedminded
trolls...
> >>
> >> (and yes, kiddo, I've thought about it for a long time and you are
a
> >> troll. my personal favorite current troll, yes, but still a troll)
> >
> >Closeminded yes, yer personal favorite yes, troll however I don't
think
> >I can label him yet. To be a troll, you got to INTENTIONALLY set out
to
> >piss people off. ZFP does it inadvertantly, not his fault at all.
> >He hates He-Man? Fine, I just live in the knoweldge that he's only
> >lived with the blatant toy commercial episodes and missed most or all
> >the good ones, he prefers newer stuff to older stuff no matter what?
> >I've had my fair share of bias.
>
> Well, I consider some people trolls who don't fit into the Mario
> Monks/Nobody's Perfect mold. Sometimes just being obstenant to a
> dangerous degree can do that. c'mon, most people consider Doaney a
> troll. I can't think of one USENET sin he has committed that Zippy
> hasn't. (personal sins, like hating so many people, just don't count
> toward true trolldom)
Let me look up "Obstenant"...
Yea, I see what ya mean. ZFP occasionally lashes out widly at anyone
who doesn't agree with him (He lost his one and only friend this way :)
when he's an ass himself. Think ZFP would be better if he were a LOT
more self-aware?
>
> >Now, if you excuse me...
> >
> >(James wanders off and contemplates "Why the hell am I defending
ZFP?")
> >
> I've done it too... back a coiuple years ago we had a "best poster"
> thread and I mentioned Zippy. I just have always found him
> entertaining... admittedly in a morbid sort of a way, but entertaining
> nontheless. And ya gotta love it when he gets into flame wars with
> Doaney. Miller has NOTHING on Zippy when it comes to arguing with
> Doaney, which has fed my personal belief that they are one and the
> same very disturbed person :)
I must disagree here. One thing I like about ZFP is his usefulness as
Comedy Relief, and he just never accomplishes that with Doane... Of
course, I have yet to hear ZFP INTENTIONALLY crack a joke, either.
I can do it any damn day of the week I feel like and get an uproar of
laughter from anyone but him.
> ----------------
> Captain Calzone
> The One and Only!
> (THANK GOD!)
> ----------------
> "USENET is like Tetris for people who
> still remember how to read"
>
Captain Calzone
with this thread anymore. Therefore, I will sum up my points. Role
Playing is becoming a character. When you BECOME a character, you
make his choices and decide how he reacts to things.
RPG's are devilded into two groups. Electronic and P&P. P&P RPGs are
open-ended allowing truely dynamic player choice as to what goes on.
Electronic RPG's, due to constrains of physical possability and
developer shortsitedness, do not. In fact, the majority lately afford
the gamer very little in the choices of what he does.
Role Playing in a console RPG is like playing a role in the theatre.
Role Playing in a P&P RPG is like being the role.
Both, by their literall definitions are "role playing" of sorts.
However, by literal definitions EVERY Game is role playing so I draw
the line at the different types. Theatrical and reality(just a word
I'm using for lack of a better one). Both work within fantasy, but
theatrical works within a fantasy storyline and reality works within a
fantasy setting only.
Now there we go. I expect Zippy to respond to this one, but I've used
up all time time I've allotted myself to be goofing on usenet today.
Time management is a bitch.
NonDeskript
> In article <MPG.134555c26...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> >
> > To me, it just sounds like he has different tastes.
>
> He did not express it as a matter of taste, but a matter of
> intelligence.
Oh yeah? Post the "I'm smarter than all you stupid people" quote, please.
> > Most games don't require complex thought. I haven't played a single
> > Console RPG that does yet.
>
> I guess you haven't played the better ones.
Which ones are those? Which Console RPGs don't lead you around by the
hand? I know of Saga Frontier, but that got panned just because of that.
> > And most cartoons don't require complex mental thought either.
>
> I guess you don't watch good anime, or even the better western cartoons.
Actually, when I watch anime, I ONLY watch good anime. Most anime seems
derivitave and boring to me. But there are a few films which I find
genuinly entertaining. But most of them aren't that complex, at least not
in my eyes. And which complex western cartoons should I be watching? Is
Batman (one of the few genuinley good cartoons left) supposed to be
complex? Because it isn't.
> > Its entertainment, relax, don't take it so personally.
>
> Mush of it is entertaining because it is though provoking and complex.
> To suggest that one's interests are somehow just mindless fluff is
> insulting.
Mindless fluff... You do have a skill for putting words in peoples
mouths, Neo.
--
-David
Charles E. Taylor IV
b...@csua.berkeley.edu (Robert Chang) writes:
> Well, you know if they are in the dark, then they are likely to be eaten by
> a Grue.
They can alleviate that to some degree by simply TURNing a MIRROR.
Somewhat of a twist, as that reference isn't from the original, but I
wouldn't want to be a cruel puppet and give it away.
This thread, however, is a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
--
Charles E. "Rick" Taylor, IV <cha...@clemson.edu>
http://orangesherbert.ces.clemson.edu
"> get bar Bar ... bar ... bar ... bar ..."
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> > He did not express it as a matter of taste, but a matter of
> > intelligence.
>
> Oh yeah? Post the "I'm smarter than all you stupid people" quote,
> please.
Maybe you missed it. It's the part that goes something like "people
like me who use our brains all the time...". Unless you're an idiot,
you couldn't have missed the insulting tone, so I'll assume you're just
being purposefully obtuse.
> > I guess you haven't played the better ones.
>
> Which ones are those? Which Console RPGs don't lead you around by the
> hand? I know of Saga Frontier, but that got panned just because of
> that.
Non-linearity isn't the only way that a game can require thought. In
fact, even non-liearity doesn't necessarily make a game any more
complex.
> > I guess you don't watch good anime, or even the better western
> > cartoons.
>
> Actually, when I watch anime, I ONLY watch good anime. Most anime
> seems derivitave and boring to me.
Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
> And which complex western cartoons should I be watching? Is Batman
> (one of the few genuinley good cartoons left) supposed to be complex?
> Because it isn't.
It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
> > Mush of it is entertaining because it is though provoking and
> > complex. To suggest that one's interests are somehow just mindless
> > fluff is insulting.
>
> Mindless fluff... You do have a skill for putting words in peoples
> mouths, Neo.
Can you think of another way to interpret the claim that games and anime
require no thought and are merely a break from more complex activities?
That was Jame's original sentiment, after all...
-ZFP
Robert Chang
(Charles E. Taylor IV) wrote:
> In article <bob-ya02408000R2103000935150001@news>,
> b...@csua.berkeley.edu (Robert Chang) writes:
>
> > Well, you know if they are in the dark, then they are likely to be eaten by
> > a Grue.
>
> They can alleviate that to some degree by simply TURNing a MIRROR.
> Somewhat of a twist, as that reference isn't from the original, but I
> wouldn't want to be a cruel puppet and give it away.
>
> This thread, however, is a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
I suppose that you could try FROTZing one...
This space left intentionally blank,
-bob
--
EvaUnit02
-Eva
"Robert Chang" <b...@csua.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
news:bob-ya02408000R2703001053310001@news...
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <MPG.13494d1bf...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> >
> > > He did not express it as a matter of taste, but a matter of
> > > intelligence.
> >
> > Oh yeah? Post the "I'm smarter than all you stupid people" quote,
> > please.
>
> Maybe you missed it. It's the part that goes something like "people
> like me who use our brains all the time...". Unless you're an idiot,
> you couldn't have missed the insulting tone, so I'll assume you're
just
> being purposefully obtuse.
I think he said, "Post the 'I'm Smarter than all you stpid people'
comment, please" not "Post your deilberate misinterpretations, please"
>
> > > I guess you haven't played the better ones.
> >
> > Which ones are those? Which Console RPGs don't lead you around by
the
> > hand? I know of Saga Frontier, but that got panned just because of
> > that.
>
> Non-linearity isn't the only way that a game can require thought. In
> fact, even non-liearity doesn't necessarily make a game any more
> complex.
Sure as hell works for Strategy games. Would Civ or RotK have any more
strategy if you HAD to take the russians first (Or, in RotK's case, the
upper fragment of China)? No, in both cases it would actually reduce
the complexity and take away planning your campaign.
>
> > > I guess you don't watch good anime, or even the better western
> > > cartoons.
> >
> > Actually, when I watch anime, I ONLY watch good anime. Most anime
> > seems derivitave and boring to me.
>
> Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
Yup, now yer being an arse about it. Yea, most anime is derivative and
boring. I'll nit-pick what I know of Evangelion and Slayers, for
example: Eva derives from the bible :) and Slayers derives from typical
japanese storytelling techniques (Big Explosion=Powerful wizard, enough
said). Boring? Any anime can be boring. Gundam Wing is one of the few
animes I like and I can get bored of it any time.
>
> > And which complex western cartoons should I be watching? Is Batman
> > (one of the few genuinley good cartoons left) supposed to be
complex?
> > Because it isn't.
>
> It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
Oh please, its made up of the typical "Apply/Subtract any real ascience
or logic as is conveniant for the plot" routine that just about anything
outside of a well-made book does.
>
> > > Mush of it is entertaining because it is though provoking and
> > > complex. To suggest that one's interests are somehow just mindless
> > > fluff is insulting.
> >
> > Mindless fluff... You do have a skill for putting words in peoples
> > mouths, Neo.
Heh, "Neo" ZFP doesn't deserve to be named after pretty lights...
>
> Can you think of another way to interpret the claim that games and
anime
> require no thought and are merely a break from more complex
activities?
> That was Jame's original sentiment, after all...
I can interpret it merely as the truth. Look and you'll see. Games
hold you by the hand and force you on a premade path. Oh gee, why don't
they hjust choreograph the fight scenes so we'll all be doing fake
Power-Ranger-esque dances as well? Anime also has a REALLY bad problem
of blatantly explaining everything, from the subtlest subtlety to the
blatantly obvious ("I know his secret, that's why he wants to kill me"
AS IF WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT!--Gundam Wing).
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
NonDeskript
> In article <MPG.13494d1bf...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> >
> > > He did not express it as a matter of taste, but a matter of
> > > intelligence.
> >
> > Oh yeah? Post the "I'm smarter than all you stupid people" quote,
> > please.
>
> Maybe you missed it. It's the part that goes something like "people
> like me who use our brains all the time...". Unless you're an idiot,
> you couldn't have missed the insulting tone, so I'll assume you're just
> being purposefully obtuse.
Maybe you're reading too much into that... Naw, not Neo. He wouldn't do
that... Oh wait, he always does that. Nevermind.
And is that a direct quote? Or are you putting words in his mouth like
you tend to do?
> > Which ones are those? Which Console RPGs don't lead you around by the
> > hand? I know of Saga Frontier, but that got panned just because of
> > that.
>
> Non-linearity isn't the only way that a game can require thought. In
> fact, even non-liearity doesn't necessarily make a game any more
> complex.
Ok, you still haven't answered the question. Which Console RPG's require
complex thought, require more than just reading a story and walking to
the next plot point? I know your precious FF's don't fall into that
catagory. Lufia did, but you'd never admit that it was more complex that
FF.
> > Actually, when I watch anime, I ONLY watch good anime. Most anime
> > seems derivitave and boring to me.
>
> Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
Yeah, Princess Mononoke and My Neighbor Totoro are pieces of crap, aren't
they? *sigh* Neo you know NOTHING about what I do or do not watch. Do not
assume. It makes you look like an ass. And you do that well enough
already.
> > And which complex western cartoons should I be watching? Is Batman
> > (one of the few genuinley good cartoons left) supposed to be complex?
> > Because it isn't.
>
> It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
Well, its pretty simple. Most episodes fall into the typical "Villian
appears, Batman almost loses to villian, beats villian" catagory. Very
little character development.
> > Mindless fluff... You do have a skill for putting words in peoples
> > mouths, Neo.
>
> Can you think of another way to interpret the claim that games and anime
> require no thought and are merely a break from more complex activities?
> That was Jame's original sentiment, after all...
Well, it doesn't take much complex thought to watch a cartoon/movie.
Sorry. It generally doesn't. Movies and anime that require complex
thought are very rare. And the same goes for console games. Not that they
aren't fun. Hell I love them. But they aren't that complex in general.
--
-David
James The One and Apparently Only
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Mar 2000 18:13:02 GMT, neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
>
> > In article <MPG.13494d1bf...@news.pdq.net>,
> > NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
Just thought I'd point out a few things about our dear friend ZFP while
I'm here.
> > >
> > > > He did not express it as a matter of taste, but a matter of
> > > > intelligence.
> > >
> > > Oh yeah? Post the "I'm smarter than all you stupid people" quote,
> > > please.
> >
> > Maybe you missed it. It's the part that goes something like "people
> > like me who use our brains all the time...". Unless you're an idiot,
> > you couldn't have missed the insulting tone, so I'll assume you're
just
> > being purposefully obtuse.
>
> Maybe you're reading too much into that... Naw, not Neo. He wouldn't
do
> that... Oh wait, he always does that. Nevermind.
>
> And is that a direct quote? Or are you putting words in his mouth like
> you tend to do?
Its Semi-Direct. I mentioned I use my brains, but I never said "People
like me" (I'm pretty sure I didn't, anyway) or "All the time" indeed.
if I did it all the time, I wouldn't watch anime.
>
> > > Which ones are those? Which Console RPGs don't lead you around by
the
> > > hand? I know of Saga Frontier, but that got panned just because of
> > > that.
> >
> > Non-linearity isn't the only way that a game can require thought. In
> > fact, even non-liearity doesn't necessarily make a game any more
> > complex.
>
> Ok, you still haven't answered the question.
Its a bad tendancy he has. Rather than prove you wrong by answering
these types of questions, he instead tries to prove that what you're
looking for isn't an important trait.
In short, he can't answer it, he's too biased. If his current favorite
isn't at the top of EVERYONE'S list, he becomes a real ass.
> Which Console RPG's
require
> complex thought, require more than just reading a story and walking to
> the next plot point?
Xenogears :) On the first disk, you were occasionally required to fight
and jump and hop and skip and run to the next plot point :) and on
Disk 2 you were required to put up with slow text speed to the next plot
point... or was it to the next boss fight?
> I know your precious FF's don't fall into that
> catagory. Lufia did, but you'd never admit that it was more complex
that
> FF.
Wouldn't doubt it, I don't really think it was either.
>
> > > Actually, when I watch anime, I ONLY watch good anime. Most anime
> > > seems derivitave and boring to me.
> >
> > Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
>
> Yeah, Princess Mononoke and My Neighbor Totoro are pieces of crap,
aren't
> they? *sigh* Neo you know NOTHING about what I do or do not watch. Do
not
> assume. It makes you look like an ass. And you do that well enough
> already.
Another of his tendancies. You make a negative comment about anime, he
assumes you either havent seen it, or only seen really bad ones. Some
time ago I called Ninja Scroll "Boring" and he said "Thats it, you
haven't seen it" Oh yes, despite that I mentioned some things about the
show that I would not have known had I not seen it (You can't tell Ninja
Scroll has a sex scene simply by looking at the box, because the box
doesn't mention it, and neither does the Viz Catalog).
ZFP can get rediculus to the extreme in this department, as I just
proved.
>
> > > And which complex western cartoons should I be watching? Is Batman
> > > (one of the few genuinley good cartoons left) supposed to be
complex?
> > > Because it isn't.
> >
> > It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
>
> Well, its pretty simple. Most episodes fall into the typical "Villian
> appears, Batman almost loses to villian, beats villian" catagory. Very
> little character development.
Oh man, now ya done it, now ZFPs gonna respond with a barrage of "It
went over your head" comments. You oughtta see his responses to my
mentions of the scripting problems (like how Batman just randomly
appears at the EXACT location the badguy is at, even when there is no
way in hell he coulda been there or even known where the villain is).
>
> > > Mindless fluff... You do have a skill for putting words in peoples
> > > mouths, Neo.
> >
> > Can you think of another way to interpret the claim that games and
anime
> > require no thought and are merely a break from more complex
activities?
> > That was Jame's original sentiment, after all...
>
> Well, it doesn't take much complex thought to watch a cartoon/movie.
> Sorry. It generally doesn't. Movies and anime that require complex
> thought are very rare. And the same goes for console games. Not that
they
> aren't fun. Hell I love them. But they aren't that complex in general.
It doesn't matter. He views it as a negative comment... probably
because I doubt he's ever really gone into truly complex stuff and
has missed the more complex moments of simple stuff like He-Man.
Try claiming FF is a cliche and pointing out all its tired old rehashes.
He calls He-Man (which derives nothing I've noticed) about as cliched as
Superman (Not saying much... there aren't all that many Superheroes,
much less any direct Superman clones) yet refuses to admit that FF and
other console games tend to use typical story conventions (Like the
relunctant hero who becomes personally involved).
ZFP is rediculus.
On a side note, I've noticed he never admits he is wrong, preferring
instead either to bitch about how "Stubborn" you are, or instead simply
claims you're not worth it and runs away.
He also holds grudges. I have quite a few times jumped peacefully into
a thread to comment on something, and each time he opened with an
offensive comment, usually either a claim of trolling, or a claim that I
just want attention.. oh wait, thats a claim of trolling. So, anyone
he's bitched at in the past is now a troll just for talking on a thread
that involves him?
He seemingly never responds to anyone he can't fight with. When I made
it clear that I had peaceful intentions on all three of those occasions,
he simpyl stopped responding to me, but now that we're at each other's
throats again, he's constantly responding to me.
>
> --
> -David
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you missed it. It's the part that goes something like "people
> > like me who use our brains all the time...". Unless you're an idiot,
> > you couldn't have missed the insulting tone, so I'll assume you're
> > just being purposefully obtuse.
>
> Maybe you're reading too much into that... Naw, not Neo. He wouldn't
> do that... Oh wait, he always does that. Nevermind.
Nope, not in this case. I've dealt with James before, and that
arrogant tone isn't just something I'm imagining.
> And is that a direct quote? Or are you putting words in his mouth like
> you tend to do?
I posted a direct quote for you once already, but I guess I'll have to
do it again:
"people like me who usually only go for really complex stuff (...)
occasionally take breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we
tackle smething that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a
cartoon."
Thus, he presents games as simply a break from the "really complex
stuff" that "people like him" usually go for.
> > Non-linearity isn't the only way that a game can require thought. In
> > fact, even non-liearity doesn't necessarily make a game any more
> > complex.
>
> Ok, you still haven't answered the question. Which Console RPG's
> require complex thought,
I'd say most of them, actually. The junctioning and materia systems
both rewarded clever management, FFT and FF5 were similar, but moreso,
BoF3 had you juggling various masters, Xenogears had one of the most
complex stories yet...
> I know your precious FF's don't fall into that catagory. Lufia did,
> but you'd never admit that it was more complex that FF.
The dungeons were, sure. The combat and storyline were far simpler,
however.
> > Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
>
> Yeah, Princess Mononoke and My Neighbor Totoro are pieces of crap,
> aren't they?
Are you claiming they were derivative and boring then?
> *sigh* Neo you know NOTHING about what I do or do not watch. Do not
> assume. It makes you look like an ass. And you do that well enough
> already.
You claim you only watch good anime. You then claim most of the anime
you've seen is derivative and boring. Good anime is not derivative and
boring. Something here sure doesn't add up...
> > It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
>
> Well, its pretty simple. Most episodes fall into the typical "Villian
> appears, Batman almost loses to villian, beats villian" catagory. Very
> little character development.
Very little character development? We must not be seeing the same
episodes...
> > Can you think of another way to interpret the claim that games and
> > anime require no thought and are merely a break from more complex
> > activities? That was Jame's original sentiment, after all...
>
> Well, it doesn't take much complex thought to watch a cartoon/movie.
> Sorry. It generally doesn't. Movies and anime that require complex
> thought are very rare. And the same goes for console games. Not that
> they aren't fun. Hell I love them. But they aren't that complex in
> general.
Then perhaps you, like him, are watching and playing the wrong games and
anime. Any cartoon/movie with a more complex plot and any sort of
deeper themes and meaning will require some thought, just as any good
game will have enough depth that it requires, or at least rewards the
more thoughtful players.
-ZFP
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
>
> boring.
Nope, not "most". The good stuff, and even a lot of the bad stuff,
can often be pretty unique. It certainly shows more effort at
innovation and creativity than most mainstream entertainment in the US.
> I'll nit-pick what I know of Evangelion and Slayers, for example: Eva
> derives from the bible :)
That's not what "derivative" means in this context.
> > It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
>
> Oh please, its made up of the typical "Apply/Subtract any real
> ascience or logic as is conveniant for the plot" routine that just
> about anything outside of a well-made book does.
Anything outside of well made ANYTHING does this. Books don't have a
monopoly on good storytelling.
> I can interpret it merely as the truth. Look and you'll see. Games
> hold you by the hand and force you on a premade path.
Except for all those that don't...
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8bomlr$14a$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Then you're not watching good anime, it's just that simple.
> >
> > Yup, now yer being an arse about it. Yea, most anime is derivative
and
> > boring.
>
> Nope, not "most". The good stuff, and even a lot of the bad stuff,
> can often be pretty unique. It certainly shows more effort at
> innovation and creativity than most mainstream entertainment in the
US.
What is good and bad is totally a matter of opinion, so, I've seen
unique things that bored me (Not always from Japan BTW... in this
case I'm referring to The Rocky Horror Picture Show) and some rather
typical stuff that had me for awhile (Slayers.... But NOO, I just HAD to
see Volumes 5, 6, 7, and 8... and ruin the series for myself in the
process) and some stuff that had me just for its uniqueness (Ranma
1/2... up til bad writing and rediculus dubbing took over).
Now I'm slightly hooked on Gundam Wing (as if you didn't know that)
but it seems like it'll evolve into a typical giant robot show.
More attempts at innovation that mainstream US stuff is definaely true,
and you know what? You can blame your friends at Disney for that!
> > I'll nit-pick what I know of Evangelion and Slayers, for example:
Eva
> > derives from the bible :)
>
> That's not what "derivative" means in this context.
The Evangelion stuff was a joke, fool. I was rather serious about the
Slayers stuff (whcih you snipped).
>
> > > It's not the no-brainer that most western cartoons are.
> >
> > Oh please, its made up of the typical "Apply/Subtract any real
> > ascience or logic as is conveniant for the plot" routine that just
> > about anything outside of a well-made book does.
>
> Anything outside of well made ANYTHING does this. Books don't have a
> monopoly on good storytelling.
Thats why Cartoon storylines are never well-written yet books, by my
experience, constantly are (except the Dune Sequels and Tolkien).
Outside of the afformentioned sequels and how the Ring just
coincidentally turned out to be an evil device after being totally
harmless in The Hobbit, I haven't seen such bad writing done much in
books (I've heard Wheel of Time does it though).
>
> > I can interpret it merely as the truth. Look and you'll see. Games
> > hold you by the hand and force you on a premade path.
>
> Except for all those that don't...
Ah, the game of "Let's be generic and avoid examples" you're getting
pathetic, ZFP.
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
NonDeskript
wrote:
> In article <MPG.13499a346...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> > Well, its pretty simple. Most episodes fall into the typical "Villian
> > appears, Batman almost loses to villian, beats villian" catagory. Very
> > little character development.
>
> Oh man, now ya done it, now ZFPs gonna respond with a barrage of "It
> went over your head" comments. You oughtta see his responses to my
> mentions of the scripting problems (like how Batman just randomly
> appears at the EXACT location the badguy is at, even when there is no
> way in hell he coulda been there or even known where the villain is).
See, but this doesn't bother me about Batman. One of the things about
Batman, as illustrated in Frank Millers "The Dark Night Returns", one of
the definitive Batman stories, is that he basically is billy bad ass. He
always wins, one way or another, and he always is one step ahead of the
bad guys. He's a master athlete and a master detective. The best there
ever was :) That is what makes Batman :) And its what makes moments when
he screws up so much harder for him, because he just doesn't accept
failure :) But this is a whole different discussion ;)
> Try claiming FF is a cliche and pointing out all its tired old rehashes.
> He calls He-Man (which derives nothing I've noticed) about as cliched as
> Superman (Not saying much... there aren't all that many Superheroes,
> much less any direct Superman clones) yet refuses to admit that FF and
> other console games tend to use typical story conventions (Like the
> relunctant hero who becomes personally involved).
Actually, there are direct Superman clones, the most blatant ones being
Liefield's Supreme and Jim Lee's Mr. Majestic, but that again is a
different discussion ;)
--
-David
NonDeskript
> In article <MPG.13499a346...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> > Maybe you're reading too much into that... Naw, not Neo. He wouldn't
> > do that... Oh wait, he always does that. Nevermind.
>
> Nope, not in this case. I've dealt with James before, and that
> arrogant tone isn't just something I'm imagining.
Well, he seems to think it is, and so do I. Maybe you're wrong this time,
Neo...
> > And is that a direct quote? Or are you putting words in his mouth like
> > you tend to do?
>
> I posted a direct quote for you once already, but I guess I'll have to
> do it again:
>
> "people like me who usually only go for really complex stuff (...)
> occasionally take breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we
> tackle smething that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or a
> cartoon."
Ok, so he likes complex stuff. Not everyone does. These are simple facts.
He said that video games and cartoons don't take much complex thought. In
his case, that seems to be true. He never put down anyone else. You just
took offense because he isn't challenged by the same things that you seem
to be.
> Thus, he presents games as simply a break from the "really complex
> stuff" that "people like him" usually go for.
And...? This is bad because why?
> > Ok, you still haven't answered the question. Which Console RPG's
> > require complex thought,
>
> I'd say most of them, actually. The junctioning and materia systems
> both rewarded clever management, FFT and FF5 were similar, but moreso,
> BoF3 had you juggling various masters, Xenogears had one of the most
> complex stories yet...
But none of that was necessary to play the game. You didn't have to
juggle materia to complete FF7. You could just walk from plot point to
plot point.
> > I know your precious FF's don't fall into that catagory. Lufia did,
> > but you'd never admit that it was more complex that FF.
>
> The dungeons were, sure. The combat and storyline were far simpler,
> however.
Combat in any FF game is simple too. Attack, Magic, Item, Run, or special
ability, rinse, repeat. Woo that was complex.
> > Yeah, Princess Mononoke and My Neighbor Totoro are pieces of crap,
> > aren't they?
>
> Are you claiming they were derivative and boring then?
No, I am claiming these as examples of the good anime that I DO watch, as
opposed to the anime that I don't watch because it bored me to tears.
> > *sigh* Neo you know NOTHING about what I do or do not watch. Do not
> > assume. It makes you look like an ass. And you do that well enough
> > already.
>
> You claim you only watch good anime. You then claim most of the anime
> you've seen is derivative and boring. Good anime is not derivative and
> boring. Something here sure doesn't add up...
I only watch good anime. I have seen bad anime, but I don't watch it.
Just like I saw an episode of Ally McBeal yesterday, but I don't watch it
and will probably never see another one.
> > Well, its pretty simple. Most episodes fall into the typical "Villian
> > appears, Batman almost loses to villian, beats villian" catagory. Very
> > little character development.
>
> Very little character development? We must not be seeing the same
> episodes...
Oh? What changed about Batman's character in the entire time the show was
on? What character had substantial development and change that wasn't
erased in the next episode?
> > Well, it doesn't take much complex thought to watch a cartoon/movie.
> > Sorry. It generally doesn't. Movies and anime that require complex
> > thought are very rare. And the same goes for console games. Not that
> > they aren't fun. Hell I love them. But they aren't that complex in
> > general.
>
> Then perhaps you, like him, are watching and playing the wrong games and
> anime. Any cartoon/movie with a more complex plot and any sort of
> deeper themes and meaning will require some thought, just as any good
> game will have enough depth that it requires, or at least rewards the
> more thoughtful players.
And perhaps you are an elitist egomaniac in love with your own voice...
--
-David
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Nope, not "most". The good stuff, and even a lot of the bad stuff,
> > can often be pretty unique. It certainly shows more effort at
> > innovation and creativity than most mainstream entertainment in the
> > US.
>
> What is good and bad is totally a matter of opinion, so, I've seen
> unique things that bored me (Not always from Japan BTW... in this
> case I'm referring to The Rocky Horror Picture Show) and some rather
> typical stuff that had me for awhile (Slayers.... But NOO, I just HAD
> to see Volumes 5, 6, 7, and 8... and ruin the series for myself in the
> process) and some stuff that had me just for its uniqueness (Ranma
> 1/2... up til bad writing and rediculus dubbing took over).
>
> Now I'm slightly hooked on Gundam Wing (as if you didn't know that)
> but it seems like it'll evolve into a typical giant robot show.
Your tastes are SO screwed up. You praise mindless action like He-man,
then bash well-made mindless action like Ninja Scroll. You bash
something like Eva for being derivative and unoriginal, then get hooked
on Gundam Wing which, as much as I like it, is nowhere near as original
as Eva. Keep in mind, this is not simply a matter of what you do and do
not like, it's the fact that what you do and do not like is totally
inconsistent with your statements regarding anime.
> > Anything outside of well made ANYTHING does this. Books don't have a
> > monopoly on good storytelling.
>
> Thats why Cartoon storylines are never well-written yet books, by my
> experience, constantly are (except the Dune Sequels and Tolkien).
Just goes to show how limited your experience is...
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> > Nope, not in this case. I've dealt with James before, and that
> > arrogant tone isn't just something I'm imagining.
>
> Well, he seems to think it is, and so do I. Maybe you're wrong this
> time, Neo...
Not this time, no. I can direct you to threads with ample evidence of
his arrogance if you'd like.
> > I posted a direct quote for you once already, but I guess I'll have
> > to do it again:
> >
> > "people like me who usually only go for really complex stuff (...)
> > occasionally take breaks from it because its hurting our head, so we
> > tackle smething that doesn't take much thought, like a video game or
> > a cartoon."
>
> Ok, so he likes complex stuff. Not everyone does. These are simple
> facts.
> He said that video games and cartoons don't take much complex thought.
> In his case, that seems to be true. He never put down anyone else. You
> just took offense because he isn't challenged by the same things that
> you seem to be.
I took offense because he unfairly dismissed games and anime as mindless
entertainment while presenting himself as somehow above those who enjoy
them. This isn't the first time he's attacked fans of games and anime,
you know. He's made plenty of comments about gamers being out of touch
with reality, and he sparked quite a debate when he claimed people just
watch anime for the nudity.
> > I'd say most of them, actually. The junctioning and materia systems
> > both rewarded clever management, FFT and FF5 were similar, but
> > moreso, BoF3 had you juggling various masters, Xenogears had one of
> > the most complex stories yet...
>
> But none of that was necessary to play the game. You didn't have to
> juggle materia to complete FF7. You could just walk from plot point to
> plot point.
All these games rewarded thinking and clever strategies.
> > The dungeons were, sure. The combat and storyline were far simpler,
> > however.
>
> Combat in any FF game is simple too. Attack, Magic, Item, Run, or
> special ability, rinse, repeat. Woo that was complex.
Every RPG in existance can be reduced to this. The difference is that
FF7 and 8(and 5 and T) allowed far greater flexibility when managing
your characters and a far wider range of abilities than a more
traditional RPG like Lufia.
> > You claim you only watch good anime. You then claim most of the
> > anime you've seen is derivative and boring. Good anime is not
> > derivative and boring. Something here sure doesn't add up...
>
> I only watch good anime. I have seen bad anime, but I don't watch it.
This is just semantics. You may not follow a series you don't like, but
you just can't see something if you don't watch it.
> > Very little character development? We must not be seeing the same
> > episodes...
>
> Oh? What changed about Batman's character in the entire time the show
> was on? What character had substantial development and change that
> wasn't erased in the next episode?
Change? Not too much of that, I agree. Development? There was plenty
of that. Gargoyles is probably the best example of this sort of thing
in western cartoons though.
> > Then perhaps you, like him, are watching and playing the wrong games
> > and anime. Any cartoon/movie with a more complex plot and any sort
> > of deeper themes and meaning will require some thought, just as any
> > good game will have enough depth that it requires, or at least
> > rewards the more thoughtful players.
>
> And perhaps you are an elitist egomaniac in love with your own
> voice...
No, you have no grounds for such a claim. It is more elitist to suggest
that games and anime are merely a break from the more complex things you
usually enjoy than to suggest that any good game or anime will have
enough depth to require some thought.
And I suggest you stop pouncing on me any time you think you see an
opening and take a look at the people you're defending. Doane was not
simply submitting his own "top 10" list, he was making VERY dubious
claims about the gameplay of various fighting games. James was not
merely stating his preference, he was simply making more sweeping,
unfounded generalizations about games and anime. These people are not
worth defending.
NonDeskript
Ok, I'm skiping the rest of your nonsese because you are, as usual, full
of it.
> No, you have no grounds for such a claim. It is more elitist to suggest
> that games and anime are merely a break from the more complex things you
> usually enjoy than to suggest that any good game or anime will have
> enough depth to require some thought.
Uh huh, and telling someone that the cartoons they watch and games they
play are "wrong" is not elitist? Telling someone that their tastes in
games is "wrong" is not elitist? Telling someone that they don't play
games right is not elitist? Criticizing games you have never played
simply because of the genre is not elitist? Claiming that all games must
cater to your skill level is not elitist? These are all things that YOU
do :)
> And I suggest you stop pouncing on me any time you think you see an
> opening and take a look at the people you're defending. Doane was not
> simply submitting his own "top 10" list, he was making VERY dubious
> claims about the gameplay of various fighting games. James was not
> merely stating his preference, he was simply making more sweeping,
> unfounded generalizations about games and anime. These people are not
> worth defending.
But your claims that they are wrong is just as wrong as anything they
say. Trust me, I know how undefendable an ass Doane is, but that doesn't
mean you are any better.
--
-David
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
>
> Ok, I'm skiping the rest of your nonsese because you are, as usual,
> full of it.
That's a clever way to avoid addressing points you cannot reply to.
> > No, you have no grounds for such a claim. It is more elitist to
> > suggest that games and anime are merely a break from the more
> > complex things you usually enjoy than to suggest that any good game
> > or anime will have enough depth to require some thought.
>
> Uh huh, and telling someone that the cartoons they watch and games
> they play are "wrong" is not elitist?
I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt. Obviously, claiming
games and anime are simply mindless entertainment is flat out wrong, so
either he's wrong, or his opinion is simply based on a poor sampling of
the subject matter.
> Telling someone that their tastes in games is "wrong" is not elitist?
Who said that? If you're talking about Doane, it wasn't his tastes
that were the issue, but his VERY dubious claims regarding the gameplay
of various fighters.
> Telling someone that they don't play games right is not elitist?
If you're referring to Muskie, his half-assed game reviews tend to
display gross ignorance of the games he's discussing. You can't
condemn a game for poor gameplay when it's obvious you didn't even know
what all the buttons are for. You can't bash a game's storyline when
all you've seen is the first cutscene.
> Criticizing games you have never played simply because of the genre
> is not elitist?
I've never done that, actually. I've expressed a lack of interest, or
perhaps asserted that a game is not the "best game ever made", but I've
never passed judgement on the quality of a game I've never played.
> Claiming that all games must cater to your skill level is not
> elitist?
Actually, I said games should cater to ALL skill levels. I fail to see
how that's elitist in any way.
> These are all things that YOU do :)
Not all of them, no, and what I ACTUALLY do isn't the least bit elitist.
> > And I suggest you stop pouncing on me any time you think you see an
> > opening and take a look at the people you're defending. Doane was
> > not simply submitting his own "top 10" list, he was making VERY
> > dubious claims about the gameplay of various fighting games. James
> > was not merely stating his preference, he was simply making more
> > sweeping, unfounded generalizations about games and anime. These
> > people are not worth defending.
>
> But your claims that they are wrong is just as wrong as anything they
> say.
No, not at all. The claim that "games and anime are just mindless
entertainment" is easily refuted, as are claims like "custom combos are
just button-mashing".
> Trust me, I know how undefendable an ass Doane is, but that doesn't
> mean you are any better.
But I am...
...and no, thinking I'm better than Doane does NOT qualify as elitist.
Mold is better than Doane.
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <MPG.134af6fc8...@news.pdq.net>,
> NonDeskript <ten...@knuf.rd> wrote:
> >
> > Ok, I'm skiping the rest of your nonsese because you are, as usual,
> > full of it.
>
> That's a clever way to avoid addressing points you cannot reply to.
My, the hypocrisy stacks up.
>
> > > No, you have no grounds for such a claim. It is more elitist to
> > > suggest that games and anime are merely a break from the more
> > > complex things you usually enjoy than to suggest that any good
game
> > > or anime will have enough depth to require some thought.
> >
> > Uh huh, and telling someone that the cartoons they watch and games
> > they play are "wrong" is not elitist?
>
> I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt. Obviously, claiming
> games and anime are simply mindless entertainment is flat out wrong,
so
> either he's wrong, or his opinion is simply based on a poor sampling
of
> the subject matter.
And since I'm mostly judging from the bigger name animes, Its obviously
not poor sampling, but I'm obviously not wrong either (Because if it
was one of the few choices you're giving me, it can't be true).
>
> > Telling someone that their tastes in games is "wrong" is not
elitist?
>
> Who said that? If you're talking about Doane, it wasn't his tastes
> that were the issue, but his VERY dubious claims regarding the
gameplay
> of various fighters.
>
> > Telling someone that they don't play games right is not elitist?
>
> If you're referring to Muskie, his half-assed game reviews tend to
> display gross ignorance of the games he's discussing. You can't
> condemn a game for poor gameplay when it's obvious you didn't even
know
> what all the buttons are for. You can't bash a game's storyline when
> all you've seen is the first cutscene.
And unless he specifically stated that this was the case, how the hell
would you know? Remember, when I called Ninja Scroll boring, you got
into a hissy fit and claimed I had never seen it despite undeniable
proof to the otherwise.
>
> > Criticizing games you have never played simply because of the genre
> > is not elitist?
>
> I've never done that, actually. I've expressed a lack of interest, or
> perhaps asserted that a game is not the "best game ever made", but
I've
> never passed judgement on the quality of a game I've never played.
Zelda 64, Quest 64... I don't rmemeber what you judged Zelda from, and
you hated Quest simply because it got bad reviews...
Oh wait, you said QUALITY games... Better look for non-64 examples
("N64 has no good games" already!... biased, aren't I?)
>
> > Claiming that all games must cater to your skill level is not
> > elitist?
>
> Actually, I said games should cater to ALL skill levels. I fail to see
> how that's elitist in any way.
>
> > These are all things that YOU do :)
>
> Not all of them, no, and what I ACTUALLY do isn't the least bit
elitist.
You only go trying to force your opinions on others, and then slap all
sorts of labels on them when they won't succumb....
>
> > > And I suggest you stop pouncing on me any time you think you see
an
> > > opening and take a look at the people you're defending. Doane was
> > > not simply submitting his own "top 10" list, he was making VERY
> > > dubious claims about the gameplay of various fighting games. James
> > > was not merely stating his preference, he was simply making more
> > > sweeping, unfounded generalizations about games and anime. These
> > > people are not worth defending.
> >
> > But your claims that they are wrong is just as wrong as anything
they
> > say.
>
> No, not at all. The claim that "games and anime are just mindless
> entertainment" is easily refuted, as are claims like "custom combos
are
> just button-mashing".
Then refute them! Why do you never bother to refute them if its so
obvious? Gasp! Maybe its because you CAN'T!
>
> > Trust me, I know how undefendable an ass Doane is, but that doesn't
> > mean you are any better.
>
> But I am...
Undeniably elitist.
>
> ...and no, thinking I'm better than Doane does NOT qualify as elitist.
> Mold is better than Doane.
Doane's been more correct than you often. Some of his viewpoints are a
little questionable, but hey, thats the human race for you.
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8bot9d$8pa$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Nope, not "most". The good stuff, and even a lot of the bad stuff,
> > > can often be pretty unique. It certainly shows more effort at
> > > innovation and creativity than most mainstream entertainment in
the
> > > US.
> >
> > What is good and bad is totally a matter of opinion, so, I've seen
> > unique things that bored me (Not always from Japan BTW... in this
> > case I'm referring to The Rocky Horror Picture Show) and some rather
> > typical stuff that had me for awhile (Slayers.... But NOO, I just
HAD
> > to see Volumes 5, 6, 7, and 8... and ruin the series for myself in
the
> > process) and some stuff that had me just for its uniqueness (Ranma
> > 1/2... up til bad writing and rediculus dubbing took over).
> >
> > Now I'm slightly hooked on Gundam Wing (as if you didn't know that)
> > but it seems like it'll evolve into a typical giant robot show.
>
> Your tastes are SO screwed up.
I've also become a big fan of the phrase "elitist ass" so... elitist
Ass... err, Arse.
> You praise mindless action like He-man,
Which isn't always mindless...
> then bash well-made mindless action like Ninja Scroll.
Well-made with a bad soundtrack.
> You bash
> something like Eva for being derivative and unoriginal,
> then get
hooked
> on Gundam Wing which, as much as I like it, is nowhere near as
original
> as Eva.
Outside of actually lacking the brooding, relunctant hero with a dead
mother and all....
> Keep in mind, this is not simply a matter of what you do and
do
> not like, it's the fact that what you do and do not like is totally
> inconsistent with your statements regarding anime.
"I should care when argueing with someone who's just as inconsistent"
is what I SHOULD say, but its becoming too much of a cliche, so...
What inconsistencies? I like good comedies, no inconsistency there,
since comedy really does not require the same things required in other
anime genres like Sci-Fi.
I usually like a show at first, but then loath it when it starts
to get dull (Slayers, Voltron, Ninja the Wonder Boy.. all three fit the
description, good for an episode or two, drivel afterwards).
Ah well, I don't know a damn thing about your tastes in anime (or
anything for that matter) so I can't argue inconsistency...
>
> > > Anything outside of well made ANYTHING does this. Books don't have
a
> > > monopoly on good storytelling.
> >
> > Thats why Cartoon storylines are never well-written yet books, by my
> > experience, constantly are (except the Dune Sequels and Tolkien).
>
> Just goes to show how limited your experience is...
Huh, coming from a guy who mostly reads books by mainstream
Sci-Fi/Fantasy authors (And I didn't think there were such
things as mainstream authors).
James The One and Apparently Only
cap...@maine.rr.com wrote:
>
> Now there we go. I expect Zippy to respond to this one, but I've used
> up all time time I've allotted myself to be goofing on usenet today.
> Time management is a bitch.
Admittedly, I didn't expect ZFP to respond. I know him to well. The
only logical decision he ever makes? when his opponent is completely
clear and any attempts at manipulation would be obvious, he amscrays.
> ----------------
> Captain Calzone
> The One and Only!
> (THANK GOD!)
HEY! That is MY phrase!
> ----------------
> "USENET is like Tetris for people who
> still remember how to read"
Nah, Usenet isn't THAT simplistic.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
Disregard this, I'll probably be getting some BraveStarr tapes
soon enough.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Now there we go. I expect Zippy to respond to this one, but I've
> > used up all time time I've allotted myself to be goofing on usenet
> > today. Time management is a bitch.
>
> Admittedly, I didn't expect ZFP to respond. I know him to well. The
> only logical decision he ever makes? when his opponent is completely
> clear and any attempts at manipulation would be obvious, he amscrays.
Actually, since this post wasn't a reply to any of mine, I didn't notice
it until just now. If he had actually addressed any of the points I'd
raised elsewhere, instead of simply restating his own, I might be more
inclined to reply to it.
-ZFP
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
>
> My, the hypocrisy stacks up.
Not really, no.
> > I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt. Obviously, claiming
> > games and anime are simply mindless entertainment is flat out wrong,
> > so either he's wrong, or his opinion is simply based on a poor
> > sampling of the subject matter.
>
> And since I'm mostly judging from the bigger name animes, Its
> obviously not poor sampling, but I'm obviously not wrong either
> (Because if it was one of the few choices you're giving me, it can't
> be true).
You ARE wrong, actually, and it's because of your rather poor sampling
of anime. There was that entire thread of anime fans demonstrating your
ignorance that you could refer to if you REALLY need a reminder...
> > If you're referring to Muskie, his half-assed game reviews tend to
> > display gross ignorance of the games he's discussing. You can't
> > condemn a game for poor gameplay when it's obvious you didn't even
> > know what all the buttons are for. You can't bash a game's storyline
> > when all you've seen is the first cutscene.
>
> And unless he specifically stated that this was the case, how the hell
> would you know?
He critisisms of the combat system proved he didn't know what he was
doing. I wasn't the only one who noticed it either.
> > I've never done that, actually. I've expressed a lack of interest,
> > or perhaps asserted that a game is not the "best game ever made",
> > but I've never passed judgement on the quality of a game I've never
> > played.
>
> Zelda 64, Quest 64... I don't rmemeber what you judged Zelda from, and
> you hated Quest simply because it got bad reviews...
Quest sucked, it's a well-documented fact. I DID play Zelda, actually.
> > Not all of them, no, and what I ACTUALLY do isn't the least bit
> > elitist.
>
> You only go trying to force your opinions on others, and then slap all
> sorts of labels on them when they won't succumb....
I force my opinions on those who try to force theirs on me, and I slap
labels on the people who deserve them. If I throw a lot of labels
around, it's because I make a habit of putting trolls in their place.
> > No, not at all. The claim that "games and anime are just mindless
> > entertainment" is easily refuted, as are claims like "custom combos
> > are just button-mashing".
>
> Then refute them! Why do you never bother to refute them if its so
> obvious? Gasp! Maybe its because you CAN'T!
No, it's because it's already been done, or have you already forgotten
that entire thread? I'm not going to bother repeating all of that just
because a troll like you doesn't know when to cut his losses and run.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
>
> I've also become a big fan of the phrase "elitist ass" so... elitist
> Ass... err, Arse.
Stop pretending to be British. What you claim to enjoy and what you do
enjoy don't add up, and it's not "elitist" to point that out.
> > You praise mindless action like He-man,
>
> Which isn't always mindless...
It is.
> > then bash well-made mindless action like Ninja Scroll.
>
> Well-made with a bad soundtrack.
Well-made all the same.
> > You bash something like Eva for being derivative and unoriginal,
> > then get hooked on Gundam Wing which, as much as I like it, is
> > nowhere near as original as Eva.
>
> Outside of actually lacking the brooding, relunctant hero with a dead
> mother and all....
If you don't think Heero, Trowa, and Wu Fei are brooding, and if you
don't think Quatre and Wu Fei are reluctant, then you obviously aren't
watching Gundam Wing. The fact that they all seem to be orphans really
doesn't help your case either.
> > Keep in mind, this is not simply a matter of what you do and do
> > not like, it's the fact that what you do and do not like is totally
> > inconsistent with your statements regarding anime.
>
> "I should care when argueing with someone who's just as inconsistent"
> is what I SHOULD say, but its becoming too much of a cliche, so...
>
> What inconsistencies? I like good comedies, no inconsistency there,
> since comedy really does not require the same things required in other
> anime genres like Sci-Fi.
None of the shows in question are comedies, so that's meaningless. You
didn't like Slayers though, and it's a pretty good comedy...
> I usually like a show at first, but then loath it when it starts
> to get dull (Slayers, Voltron, Ninja the Wonder Boy.. all three fit
> the description, good for an episode or two, drivel afterwards).
None of these shows really changed significantly after their first
episode or two, so there's no obvious reason you should've stopped
liking them.
> Ah well, I don't know a damn thing about your tastes in anime (or
> anything for that matter) so I can't argue inconsistency...
You can't defent your own inconsistent tastes, no.
> > Just goes to show how limited your experience is...
>
> Huh, coming from a guy who mostly reads books by mainstream
> Sci-Fi/Fantasy authors (And I didn't think there were such
> things as mainstream authors).
First, you claim games and anime consistantly aren't well written, then
you claim that books are. Now, you state you didn't think there was
such a thing as a mainstream author...
Okay, I think you've dug yourself a big enough hole. I'm done with you
now.
sega...@my-deja.com
i always felt console rpgs are more like a book mixxed with a movie and a
slight puzzle just to wake you up, to goal is always set in the game and
you basically sit back and watch the story unfold and make a small
decision now and again(should i ride the blue choocooboo ro the red
choocooboo? for example) stuff that splits the story off into a differnt
yet predetermined direction, its just a or b, theres nothing else to it,
to me an rpgs story should be effected by everything you do....but thats
only in a perfect world, i still enjoy console rpgs very much so its all
good i guess
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8brlpu$bo5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Your tastes are SO screwed up.
> >
> > I've also become a big fan of the phrase "elitist ass" so... elitist
> > Ass... err, Arse.
>
> Stop pretending to be British.
I'm nbot, I just can't stand the word "ass"
> What you claim to enjoy and what you do
> enjoy don't add up, and it's not "elitist" to point that out.
Telling them watching what they want, however, IS elitist.
>
> > > You praise mindless action like He-man,
> >
> > Which isn't always mindless...
>
> It is.
Not always. Teela's Quest, there.
>
> > > then bash well-made mindless action like Ninja Scroll.
> >
> > Well-made with a bad soundtrack.
>
> Well-made all the same.
Having a better sountrack is much more important for mindless
entertainment.
>
> > > You bash something like Eva for being derivative and unoriginal,
> > > then get hooked on Gundam Wing which, as much as I like it, is
> > > nowhere near as original as Eva.
> >
> > Outside of actually lacking the brooding, relunctant hero with a
dead
> > mother and all....
>
> If you don't think Heero, Trowa, and Wu Fei are brooding, and if you
> don't think Quatre and Wu Fei are reluctant, then you obviously aren't
> watching Gundam Wing. The fact that they all seem to be orphans really
> doesn't help your case either.
I actually only had the chance to see the first two episodes, but I
recorded eps 2-5.... Hiro never borrded over anything, he was just a
militaristic prick. Unless those others are the original Japanese names
of characters I'm unfamiliar with them.
>
> > > Keep in mind, this is not simply a matter of what you do and do
> > > not like, it's the fact that what you do and do not like is
totally
> > > inconsistent with your statements regarding anime.
> >
> > "I should care when argueing with someone who's just as
inconsistent"
> > is what I SHOULD say, but its becoming too much of a cliche, so...
> >
> > What inconsistencies? I like good comedies, no inconsistency there,
> > since comedy really does not require the same things required in
other
> > anime genres like Sci-Fi.
>
> None of the shows in question are comedies, so that's meaningless. You
> didn't like Slayers though, and it's a pretty good comedy...
I remember you not thinking all that highly about Slayers long ago, but
anyway...
In Slayers' case, It was more like fantasy with alot of pure comedy
episodes. First it was a strait comedy, then it became a dark fantasy
cliche, then comedy again, then was reallyl lame dark fantasy up until
volume 8, where is had a BIT of comedy.
Thats why I hate Slayers: The writers don't know wether the show is
supposed to be really, really funny or really, really dark.
I do, however, like the tape "SlayerS: Dragon Slave" because not only
have they CONSISTENTLY kept it comedy, but the jokes were hilarious, to
boot.
I haven't watched any except the final episode of Slayers NEXT yet
though, and that final episode represented more of the reasons why I
usually don't like certain animes.
>
> > I usually like a show at first, but then loath it when it starts
> > to get dull (Slayers, Voltron, Ninja the Wonder Boy.. all three fit
> > the description, good for an episode or two, drivel afterwards).
>
> None of these shows really changed significantly after their first
> episode or two, so there's no obvious reason you should've stopped
> liking them.
Slayers did. After the initial tape, it became more of a fantasy, and
then rally dark fantasy, then comedy again for two tapes, then dark
fantasy. I'd call switching genres a major change.
Voltron I didn't really "Stop liking" I just got rather sick of watching
it every day and broke the routine. Besides, the pattern "Form Voltron,
Form Sword, Kill enemy" got dull.
You've seen Ninja the Wonder Boy? Anyway, that show was more like
something that I could mock (Or that should be on MST3K) than something
I could sit through quietly, epseically after you realise all the
backlground songs are really, really in tune with the fighting (A witch
girl turns into a chariot and the song sings "I can be a chariot" enough
said). Also, being a
Bunch-of-episodes-put-together-and-disquised-as-a-movie type tape didn't
help.
(Even funnier is the back of the box... the description is totally
wrong, and one snapshot is from another show altogether!).
>
> > Ah well, I don't know a damn thing about your tastes in anime (or
> > anything for that matter) so I can't argue inconsistency...
>
> You can't defent your own inconsistent tastes, no.
I have three minds and I change them daily :)
>
> > > Just goes to show how limited your experience is...
> >
> > Huh, coming from a guy who mostly reads books by mainstream
> > Sci-Fi/Fantasy authors (And I didn't think there were such
> > things as mainstream authors).
>
> First, you claim games and anime consistantly aren't well written,
then
> you claim that books are. Now, you state you didn't think there was
> such a thing as a mainstream author...
>
> Okay, I think you've dug yourself a big enough hole. I'm done with you
> now.
No hole. Books in general aren't mainstream in a world where the
population would rather do something they can understand (Watch a movie)
than something that takes effort (read a book).
>
> -ZFP
>
> Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
> Before you buy.
>
--
---Tasty, Shiny Random Statement of the Day:
Whats sucks is that BraveStarr tapes are really
hard to find. Needless to say I haven't seen
the show yet (Much to my continued sorrow).
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8brl0u$aq4$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
to.
> >
> > My, the hypocrisy stacks up.
>
> Not really, no.
Actually yes, since you've also snipped points you were unable to reply
to.
>
> > > I was just giving him the benefit of the doubt. Obviously,
claiming
> > > games and anime are simply mindless entertainment is flat out
wrong,
> > > so either he's wrong, or his opinion is simply based on a poor
> > > sampling of the subject matter.
> >
> > And since I'm mostly judging from the bigger name animes, Its
> > obviously not poor sampling, but I'm obviously not wrong either
> > (Because if it was one of the few choices you're giving me, it can't
> > be true).
>
> You ARE wrong, actually, and it's because of your rather poor sampling
> of anime.
NEws report: Despite evidence to the otherwise, ZFP still holds his
claim that its not animes fault, its James's fault for looking at some
of the big-name animes...
> There was that entire thread of anime fans demonstrating
your
> ignorance that you could refer to if you REALLY need a reminder...
That entire thread also mentioned animes I never heard of, therefore,
not-so-mainstream (For information, if its been translated, subbed and
dubbed, and its popular and there are more than seven tapes, its
"Mainstream" in my book).
>
> > > If you're referring to Muskie, his half-assed game reviews tend to
> > > display gross ignorance of the games he's discussing. You can't
> > > condemn a game for poor gameplay when it's obvious you didn't even
> > > know what all the buttons are for. You can't bash a game's
storyline
> > > when all you've seen is the first cutscene.
> >
> > And unless he specifically stated that this was the case, how the
hell
> > would you know?
>
> He critisisms of the combat system proved he didn't know what he was
> doing. I wasn't the only one who noticed it either.
I haven't seen any of his, but I've seen that the guy is an arse so
I'll take your word for it.
>
> > > I've never done that, actually. I've expressed a lack of interest,
> > > or perhaps asserted that a game is not the "best game ever made",
> > > but I've never passed judgement on the quality of a game I've
never
> > > played.
> >
> > Zelda 64, Quest 64... I don't rmemeber what you judged Zelda from,
and
> > you hated Quest simply because it got bad reviews...
>
> Quest sucked, it's a well-documented fact. I DID play Zelda, actually.
Ah, so you're no longer the elite one here? So ZFP, who's your
brilliant leader who decides all your opinions for you now?
Yea, you DID play Zelda... AFTER bashing it a few times, and you made
some rather ignorant comments ("You never fight humans, only monsters"
come to mind?).
Mind you, these are both overpowering crap (Because I'm a biased little,
err, I mean because the N64 has no good games) but judging them based on
nothing but weords written on paper (Or on screen) and then trying to
force our opinions around without any experience yourself is wrong.
>
> > > Not all of them, no, and what I ACTUALLY do isn't the least bit
> > > elitist.
> >
> > You only go trying to force your opinions on others, and then slap
all
> > sorts of labels on them when they won't succumb....
>
> I force my opinions on those who try to force theirs on me,
And even those that don't... Me and Bits and Doane and Miller and
Joe...
> and I slap
> labels on the people who deserve them. If I throw a lot of labels
> around, it's because I make a habit of putting trolls in their place.
Heh, I'm gonna have to compile a book, "The most innacurate things ZFP
has ever said"
Truth is you succeed in looking about as bad as you like to make me
look. You've jumped all over completely peaceful posts simply because
you've argued with the poster before, yet the people who have been
slanged by you haven't really done anything outside of speak their
beliefs.
Stuck in Communism or are you under censorship from the government?
>
> > > No, not at all. The claim that "games and anime are just mindless
> > > entertainment" is easily refuted, as are claims like "custom
combos
> > > are just button-mashing".
> >
> > Then refute them! Why do you never bother to refute them if its so
> > obvious? Gasp! Maybe its because you CAN'T!
>
> No, it's because it's already been done, or have you already forgotten
> that entire thread?
Which thread? Do you mean the one where you kept saying "I don't have
to prove anything because its obvious"? If thats the one... then yer
gonna have to narrow it down a bit more.
> I'm not going to bother repeating all of that just
> because a troll like you doesn't know when to cut his losses and run.
Fine, You wouldn't be able to repeat 90% of all threads you've been in
anyway.
And using internet slang doesn't help you, either.
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8brskt$ivt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> > > used up all time time I've allotted myself to be goofing on usenet
> > > today. Time management is a bitch.
> >
> > Admittedly, I didn't expect ZFP to respond. I know him to well. The
> > only logical decision he ever makes? when his opponent is completely
> > clear and any attempts at manipulation would be obvious, he
amscrays.
>
> Actually, since this post wasn't a reply to any of mine, I didn't
notice
> it until just now. If he had actually addressed any of the points I'd
> raised elsewhere, instead of simply restating his own, I might be more
> inclined to reply to it.
I'll take your word for it, although our story has too many holes in it
for me to fully buy it (You don't notice it but now that I responded
to it claiming you ran off you suddenly notice it?). Again, I'll take
your word for it, since its a possibility (especially if you trace
your arguments the same way I do... by looking for your own E-Mail
adress in Deja's Power Search sorted by Date).
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
Well, I'm bored, and you're determined to dig an even deeper hole for
yourself, so I guess I'll help out.
> > What you claim to enjoy and what you do enjoy don't add up, and it's
> > not "elitist" to point that out.
>
> Telling them watching what they want, however, IS elitist.
Well, your sentance structure is terrible, so I have no idea how to
reply to this.
> > It is.
>
> Not always. Teela's Quest, there.
He-Man is mindless crap, cheaply produced to sell toys.
> > Well-made all the same.
>
> Having a better sountrack is much more important for mindless
> entertainment.
Not like He-Man had a soundtrack worth mentioning either...
(of course, weren't you the guy who claimed nothing, not even Yoko
Kanno's work could compare to a Mega Man soundtrack? LOL!)
> > If you don't think Heero, Trowa, and Wu Fei are brooding, and if you
> > don't think Quatre and Wu Fei are reluctant, then you obviously
> > aren't watching Gundam Wing. The fact that they all seem to be
> > orphans really doesn't help your case either.
>
> I actually only had the chance to see the first two episodes, but I
> recorded eps 2-5.... Hiro never borrded over anything, he was just a
> militaristic prick. Unless those others are the original Japanese
> names of characters I'm unfamiliar with them.
In other words, you haven't really seen Gundam Wing. All of the
characters are shown at least briefly in the first few episodes, and the
dub retains all the original names. Yes, Heero does brood. He goes
around asking the relatives of one of his victims to kill him at one
point. So much for your dislike for derivative, unoriginal anime...
> > None of the shows in question are comedies, so that's meaningless.
> > You didn't like Slayers though, and it's a pretty good comedy...
>
> I remember you not thinking all that highly about Slayers long ago,
> but anyway...
I tend not to enjoy that sort of comedy.
> In Slayers' case, It was more like fantasy with alot of pure comedy
> episodes. First it was a strait comedy, then it became a dark fantasy
> cliche, then comedy again, then was reallyl lame dark fantasy up until
> volume 8, where is had a BIT of comedy.
It was always a cliche, even when it was straight comedy.
> Thats why I hate Slayers: The writers don't know wether the show is
> supposed to be really, really funny or really, really dark.
The series that flip-flop back and forth are often the best, like Eva
or Fushigi Yuugi.
> > None of these shows really changed significantly after their first
> > episode or two, so there's no obvious reason you should've stopped
> > liking them.
>
> Slayers did. After the initial tape, it became more of a fantasy, and
> then rally dark fantasy, then comedy again for two tapes, then dark
> fantasy. I'd call switching genres a major change.
I don't recall it ever switching genres.
> Voltron I didn't really "Stop liking" I just got rather sick of
> watching it every day and broke the routine. Besides, the pattern
> "Form Voltron, Form Sword, Kill enemy" got dull.
That pattern was obvious from episode 1. If you liked the series at
first, there's no reason to stop liking it later.
> > First, you claim games and anime consistantly aren't well written,
> > then you claim that books are. Now, you state you didn't think there
> > was such a thing as a mainstream author...
> >
> > Okay, I think you've dug yourself a big enough hole. I'm done with
> > you now.
>
> No hole. Books in general aren't mainstream in a world where the
> population would rather do something they can understand (Watch a
> movie) than something that takes effort (read a book).
I already have enough proof of your ignorance, so you really didn't need
to provide more. Games haven't been anywhere near mainstream until just
recently. Strangely enough, recent games are alomst universally more
complex than older ones. On the other hand, authors like Steven King,
Danielle Steele(?), etc. have been popping up on bestseller lists for
years. And you accuse gamers of being out of touch with reality?
Also, you claim anime and games are never well-written, yet from the
sound of it, most of what you watch is just entertaining fluff like
Voltron, Slayers, and to some extent, Gundam Wing(not to mention western
stuff like He-Man). When something more complex and well-produced comes
along, like Eva, Macross Plus, Ninja Scroll, or even western stuff like
Batman, you bash it. Yep, it's pretty obvious that what you CLAIM you
like, and what you actually prefer are two different things...
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > Not really, no.
>
> Actually yes, since you've also snipped points you were unable to
> reply to.
And I'm often critisized for it. Why should he be treated any
differently?
> > You ARE wrong, actually, and it's because of your rather poor
> > sampling of anime.
>
> NEws report: Despite evidence to the otherwise, ZFP still holds his
> claim that its not animes fault, its James's fault for looking at some
> of the big-name animes...
No, it's your fault for now knowing what you're talking about.
> > There was that entire thread of anime fans demonstrating
> > your ignorance that you could refer to if you REALLY need a
> > reminder...
>
> That entire thread also mentioned animes I never heard of, therefore,
> not-so-mainstream (For information, if its been translated, subbed and
> dubbed, and its popular and there are more than seven tapes, its
> "Mainstream" in my book).
If you ADMIT to judging anime based on such a limited subset of the
medium, then you're basically admitting you don't know what you're
talking about. I doubt you've even scratched the surface of mainstream
anime, and it's obvious you have a very tenuous grasp of what you HAVE
seen(Kiki is just typical children's crap? Macross Plus is just like
Ranma? LOL!).
> > Quest sucked, it's a well-documented fact. I DID play Zelda,
> > actually.
>
> Ah, so you're no longer the elite one here? So ZFP, who's your
> brilliant leader who decides all your opinions for you now?
I'm just pointing out that there's no real problem with dismissing a
game that is universally regarded as bad.
> Yea, you DID play Zelda... AFTER bashing it a few times, and you made
> some rather ignorant comments ("You never fight humans, only monsters"
> come to mind?).
Did I say that? Either way, it seems accurate...
> > I force my opinions on those who try to force theirs on me,
>
> And even those that don't... Me and Bits and Doane and Miller and
> Joe...
Few of those debates revolved around opinions. "I don't like anime" is
an opinion. "All anime is simple and poorley written" is not.
> > and I slap labels on the people who deserve them. If I throw a lot
> > of labels around, it's because I make a habit of putting trolls in
> > their place.
>
> Heh, I'm gonna have to compile a book, "The most innacurate things ZFP
> has ever said"
>
> Truth is you succeed in looking about as bad as you like to make me
> look. You've jumped all over completely peaceful posts simply because
> you've argued with the poster before, yet the people who have been
> slanged by you haven't really done anything outside of speak their
> beliefs.
When their "beliefs" are ill-founded or flat-out wrong, I feel compelled
to point it out.
> > No, it's because it's already been done, or have you already
> > forgotten that entire thread?
>
> Which thread? Do you mean the one where you kept saying "I don't have
> to prove anything because its obvious"?
If that was the one where a dozen or so posters were already proving
your ignorance, yes.
> > I'm not going to bother repeating all of that just because a troll
> > like you doesn't know when to cut his losses and run.
>
> Fine, You wouldn't be able to repeat 90% of all threads you've been in
> anyway.
>
> And using internet slang doesn't help you, either.
You're not making any sense again...
James The One and Apparently Only
neo_zo...@hotmail.com wrote:
> In article <8btuum$tn8$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
> James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Not really, no.
> >
> > Actually yes, since you've also snipped points you were unable to
> > reply to.
>
> differently?
Is he the one criticizing you? No?
If someone shot your brother and you wanted revenge, you wouldn't simply
shoot a random guy would you? no, you'd shoot the guy who shot your
brother.
>
> > > You ARE wrong, actually, and it's because of your rather poor
> > > sampling of anime.
> >
> > NEws report: Despite evidence to the otherwise, ZFP still holds his
> > claim that its not animes fault, its James's fault for looking at
some
> > of the big-name animes...
>
> No, it's your fault for now knowing what you're talking about.
Yes, my friends, you heard him right, its now your reporter's fault
for "Now" knowing what he's talking about and he (ZFP) admits it!
>
> > > There was that entire thread of anime fans demonstrating
> > > your ignorance that you could refer to if you REALLY need a
> > > reminder...
> >
> > That entire thread also mentioned animes I never heard of,
therefore,
> > not-so-mainstream (For information, if its been translated, subbed
and
> > dubbed, and its popular and there are more than seven tapes, its
> > "Mainstream" in my book).
>
> If you ADMIT to judging anime based on such a limited subset of the
> medium, then you're basically admitting you don't know what you're
> talking about.
Oh yea, animes been being translated since the 60s and there are
hundreds out now, maybe thousands, and this is a "Limited" subset? HA!
> I doubt you've even scratched the surface of mainstream
> anime, and it's obvious you have a very tenuous grasp of what you HAVE
> seen(Kiki is just typical children's crap? Macross Plus is just like
> Ranma? LOL!).
Unable to bear truths again I see?
>
> > > Quest sucked, it's a well-documented fact. I DID play Zelda,
> > > actually.
> >
> > Ah, so you're no longer the elite one here? So ZFP, who's your
> > brilliant leader who decides all your opinions for you now?
>
> I'm just pointing out that there's no real problem with dismissing a
> game that is universally regarded as bad.
All the reviews I've seen of it have given it either a good or an OK,
actually, never a downright "Bad"...
I would mention a negative comment about the 64 again, but you've heard
it enough.
>
> > Yea, you DID play Zelda... AFTER bashing it a few times, and you
made
> > some rather ignorant comments ("You never fight humans, only
monsters"
> > come to mind?).
>
> Did I say that? Either way, it seems accurate...
Its not. As Adult Link you eventually have to fight these theif girls.
Besides, there's always Gannon...
>
> > > I force my opinions on those who try to force theirs on me,
> >
> > And even those that don't... Me and Bits and Doane and Miller and
> > Joe...
>
> Few of those debates revolved around opinions. "I don't like anime" is
> an opinion. "All anime is simple and poorley written" is not.
And who's saying "all"?
>
> > > and I slap labels on the people who deserve them. If I throw a lot
> > > of labels around, it's because I make a habit of putting trolls in
> > > their place.
> >
> > Heh, I'm gonna have to compile a book, "The most innacurate things
ZFP
> > has ever said"
> >
> > Truth is you succeed in looking about as bad as you like to make me
> > look. You've jumped all over completely peaceful posts simply
because
> > you've argued with the poster before, yet the people who have been
> > slanged by you haven't really done anything outside of speak their
> > beliefs.
>
> When their "beliefs" are ill-founded or flat-out wrong, I feel
compelled
> to point it out.
Then point it outb without being a bitch.
>
> > > No, it's because it's already been done, or have you already
> > > forgotten that entire thread?
> >
> > Which thread? Do you mean the one where you kept saying "I don't
have
> > to prove anything because its obvious"?
>
> If that was the one where a dozen or so posters were already proving
> your ignorance, yes.
A dozen? If we think of the same post, it was probably about three
or so, and at least two of them were simply flaming me for not liking
anime and none of them really did any "Proving" outside of giving
say-so, never backing up their comments.. .except whoever made that long
list (Though that list did have innacuracies... Minky Momo didn't have
villains? HA!).
>
> > > I'm not going to bother repeating all of that just because a troll
> > > like you doesn't know when to cut his losses and run.
> >
> > Fine, You wouldn't be able to repeat 90% of all threads you've been
in
> > anyway.
> >
> > And using internet slang doesn't help you, either.
>
> You're not making any sense again...
If I remember correctly, "Slang" was improper use of a word, therefore,
"Troll" is slang.
neo_zo...@hotmail.com
James The One and Apparently Only <jim_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > And I'm often critisized for it. Why should he be treated any
> > differently?
>
> Is he the one criticizing you? No?
So? If people are going to accuse me of snipping points because I can't
answer them, I see no reason not to make similar accusations.
> > No, it's your fault for now knowing what you're talking about.
>
> Yes, my friends, you heard him right, its now your reporter's fault
> for "Now" knowing what he's talking about and he (ZFP) admits it!
You know perfectly well that's not what I meant, but just in case, I'll
correct my typo:
No, it's your fault for NOT knowing what you're talking about.
> > If you ADMIT to judging anime based on such a limited subset of the
> > medium, then you're basically admitting you don't know what you're
> > talking about.
>
> Oh yea, animes been being translated since the 60s and there are
> hundreds out now, maybe thousands, and this is a "Limited" subset? HA!
Since you haven't even scratched the surface of THAT subset, and since
you haven't seen ANYTHING not released in the US, yes, your experience
is quite limited.
> > I doubt you've even scratched the surface of mainstream
> > anime, and it's obvious you have a very tenuous grasp of what you
> > have seen(Kiki is just typical children's crap? Macross Plus is just
> > like Ranma? LOL!).
>
> Unable to bear truths again I see?
It's far from the truth, and it's just more proof that even when you're
talking about things you HAVE seen, you still don't know what you're
talking
about.
> > Did I say that? Either way, it seems accurate...
>
> Its not. As Adult Link you eventually have to fight these theif girls.
> Besides, there's always Gannon...
Gannon's not human, of course...
> > Few of those debates revolved around opinions. "I don't like anime"
> > is an opinion. "All anime is simple and poorley written" is not.
>
> And who's saying "all"?
You, last I checked:
"Thats why Cartoon storylines are never well-written"
> > When their "beliefs" are ill-founded or flat-out wrong, I feel
> > compelled to point it out.
>
> Then point it outb without being a bitch.
I treat people as they deserve to be treated.
> > If that was the one where a dozen or so posters were already proving
> > your ignorance, yes.
>
> A dozen? If we think of the same post, it was probably about three
> or so, and at least two of them were simply flaming me for not liking
> anime and none of them really did any "Proving" outside of giving
> say-so, never backing up their comments.. .except whoever made that
> long list
There was more than one long list, and most only started flaming you
when it was obvious you were ignoring any proof that you were wrong.
> > You're not making any sense again...
>
> If I remember correctly, "Slang" was improper use of a word,
> therefore, "Troll" is slang.
Since this IS the internet, using internet slang hardly counts against
me.