@aria said in The Work Thread:
goddammit, let me be excited about one thing in 2020
Excitement is one thing.
You were hyperventilating.
I was saving your life.
(Note: I am super-excited for you, though, that sounds really freaking awesome and I hope you get it. Many kudos your way.)
@WTFE said in MSB: The meta-discussion:
I have no experience with it. We're talking the past tense though; any particular reason?
It was around the time that SWOFA became less vitriolic that IGU faded away. IGU was a place where the hate was forbidden, and posters were encouraged to try to come up with solutions for problems. Problems would be reported, but it was substantially more civil than here even.
@Roz said:
Do people lie on the internet? Do people get preyed on? Absolutely. But I don't think that it's actually true that the majority of people you might make friends with on the internet are more likely to be vastly lying about their identity.
Ack! The grammar!
Shading grants people greater license to conceal or misrepresent the truth. It's easier to lie, so it's probably more likely. That alone does not mean that you should eschew meeting others via the internet.
I mean, people lie in person too. All the time. It happens.
Try BSG: Unification? Small place. Space is fun. And the game is very pretty and well set-up.
@The-Tree-of-Woe said:
Fallout 4's real problem is that it was made for a more dedicated type of gamer. The kind of gamer who posts five page long rants when someone says "this game is really hard. Why this game so hard?" that attack your dedication to gaming, your intellect, and your sexual prowess.
By "dedicated," do you mean "gamer who will avoid his/her responsibilities in order to play the game"? Who will abjure human contact, normalcy, and sexual congress for a game?
I have never found an open-world game difficult to learn. Ever. I find them difficult to continue at times because the gameplay and story get boring, or I lose motivation with the character I put together.
@Scissors said in Why do you play? (Or not.):
I have no clue about BSG (except everyone's girlfriend is a Cylon), but since it's YOU who recommended it, I'll go take a look soon.
Thanks.
It's a good game, seriously. @faraday's code here takes a lot of things into consideration, and they aren't insignificant. For instance, there's a command that allows you to roll someone else's pool. So, people can participate by proxy, if allowed to.
Did you know that many states have licensing and permit requirements for ATVs?
Might want to look into that. Nothing will discourage that little shit more than a juvenile record.
@bored said in Strange Game Dev Inquiries from surreality (condensed):
Again, while you insist on continuing to read my reference to a very common and obvious MU trope as a personal accusation that HEY GUYS SURR IS CORRUPT, I can't help you.
You're not very good at gaslighting; no one's buying it.
Your truism isn't a truism. It's neither Polonian nor remotely anecdotal. Your statement regarding snowflakes may be true for you and some others, but it clearly isn't for others. You can accept that people will push back against your version of existence or not, but you ought to accept that people's hackles will arise if you suggest that special snowflakes are going to be staff's friends or staff themselves.
That said, I'm a bit leery of the idea myself. In my experience, games that have mundanes (non-narwhals) and specials (narwhals) attract staff favoritism accusations and acts. I agree with you there. I'm willing to give @surreality and @Coin the benefit of the doubt, of course, but I'm wary.
Coming up with a system will be difficult and require careful balancing.
@Cobaltasaurus
My partner is pulling a 4.0 GPA in classes she didn't really study during her undergraduate program. Frankly, the fact that she pulled a 4.0 GPA in Organic Chemistry makes me very, very afraid of ever considering leaving her.
@surreality said in What MU*s do right:
... "Do not make staff care about your TS" is a rule I would really like to see propagate.
Talking about TS and propagation at the same time tickled me in a way that made me say oh yeah that's nice.
If another student is discouraging you, kick them in the genitals. If it's a teacher, report them.
Shitty attitudes really don't have a place in education, at any level.
@Thenomain said in Innovations to the form (Crowdsourcing?):
That is, we are agreeing now.
Watching you and @faraday discuss this sort of stuff is making me excited in the wrong, but right way.
Keep talking. Please. If this is where the hobby shifts into a new space and place, I want to be there.
@Luna said:
@HelloRaptor Oh snaps. But I loved Skyrim.
I think I may need to be story invested in DA. This is my first foray into the series. Also, it could be that I feel massive guilt at fucking around when I have grown up shit to be doing.
This is likely your issue. It's not as bad as starting with ME3, but you lose an awful lot if you don't play DA:O or DA2.
Just a reminder: DA2 brought in Varric, Hawke, and Corypheus. They are sort of important in DA:I.
@surreality said in Course Corrections:
I don't think it's necessary to, say, uncreate bats just so people won't make gunpowder from guano (though if someone wants to do that, that's their call and I support their right and choice to make it), or perhaps more accurately, I do not feel it should not be necessary to go that far in order to be able to say: we really don't want to go in that direction with this game/do not want to drastically change the game world in the ways that idea would inevitably change it.
My objection to taking such a stance is how horridly insipid it is relative to the development of modern firearms, which took almost 1,000 years. Plus, gunpowder existed, but was seldom used during the late medieval/renaissance period of European history, from which much of fantasy seems to be lifted from. (For example, full suits of plate armor did not exist until after cannons were used in the Battle of Crecy, 1346.)
Now that I've played DA:I, I would probably say that I liked DA:O better. And I fucking hated DA:O's Fade nonsense -- that shit could've been edited right the fuck out, seriously.
DA:2 is an entirely different experience. Not that it wasn't pleasing, but it's very clear that BioWare (under pressure or not) wanted to move away from DA:O's tactical play.
Why did I like DA:O more? Because I gave a shit about my elf from the slums. I gave a shit about my slaughtered family. I had a reason to hate Arl Howe.
Why did I like DA:2 more? Because I gave a shit when Bethany died. I gave a shit when Merrill (bless her heart) lost everything that mattered.
I really don't give two shits about my Inquisitor. She has no backstory. And who am I supposed to feel for among the Inquisitor's compatriots?
Right. The writing in DA:I is the weakest, in my opinion. And that shreds the shit out of my enjoyment. Everything else is cool as fuck: the open-ended feel, the multitude of "adventures," the strategic task setting for my advisors, and so on.
@Arkandel said in Course Corrections:
If I want epic high fantasy then guns just don't fit in that. It's not that they'd be overpowered, it's that thematically I want magical singing swords, not muskets.
If the magical singing swords are demonstrably more powerful and easier-to-use than a musket, no one's going to want one. Except for the crazy dude that gets his head chopped off by a villain with a magical singing sword.
No, that's how shit's done in real life.
People still do a lot on paper by hand. Architects. Engineers. Drafters. Surveyors. Politicians. You name it. You probably do it. And you will never convince me that working out mathematical problems is easier with a computer (absent the use of calculation programs).
Computers are tools. When those tools are broken or unavailable, the world does not stand still. I want my kids to have the basic skill of hand-writing something. If everything gets digitized, they will not be required to practice.
On top of that, many kids are fucking morons when it comes to computers.
@Ghost said in Course Corrections:
IC development cannot upset the logical power level of a game.
I want to hook on this because this is really what I've been getting at. This really should just be the cardinal rule.
When I get my dark fantasy game up and running, I don't care if someone wants to try to make a flintlock rifle, but I will tell them they are starting from scratch. I may even give them a rough estimate of how long it would take, time-wise, to get there: probably around a decade of constant experimentation and time-spending. Assuming they are okay with that, they can certainly bring their device to a battle, and it'll make a lovely weapon for the 15 seconds it takes for a mage to locate and explode them with a lightning bolt or for an ogre to absorb the bullet right before he bites the PC's head off.
And when they complain about why I would insist on making the process so realistic, I would not hesitate to tell them that if they want to remove the "fantasy game" shackles then they have to stop fantasizing about how awesome firearms might be in a world of demons, dragons, magic, and gods.
I want my kids to have basic hand-writing skills because it's considered proper in my circles -- and from a recruiting and etiquette standpoint -- to send hand-written notes of thanks for various occasions.
I want my kids to have basic hand-writing skills because, in locations where one does not have a computer, being able to communicate by written note is essential. This includes many non-office venues, like farming, construction, maintenance, etc. Many doctor's offices still rely on a physician's hand-written notes, despite calls for -- and regulations requiring -- the digitization of such things. Those physicians simply prefer scanning the information in after the fact, rather than input into a computer.
And, let me tell you, those fuckers can't hand-write worth shit.
So, no, I'm not being false, nor is my statement false. My opinion may be wrong, but it is equally grounded in experience.
@WTFE said in Suitable system for a gritty fantasy game:
I can see how FS3 would suit a game that's oriented toward battles and, in particular, large battles. For that, I would likely withdraw any objections I have to FS3. Thing is, the games I've seen it used in weren't oriented to large battles.
So, FS3 might not be good for them. We get that.
Do you have any suggestions on what to use? Frankly, I don't think one exists. I think you have to go homebrew because everyone has their own idea as to what sort of fantasy world they want to create. A Final Fantasy game is going to need different code and systems than a Witcher game, for instance.