![]() When given a game that fits into the second category, I see two options. Prime examples of this design are TES III - V. The second group includes games that attempt to create a very open-ended experience where the player makes their own character that is more or less thrown into the game world without any fanfare. ![]() The character's motivations, however, tend to be better defined than the next group. The player is more than able to create their own version of each character, and their versions can drastically change the outcome of a story. To ground this thought, some examples would be the Mass Effect or the Witcher games. The first group is comprised of games where the player picks up a more or less predefined character, and experience that character's journey. Personally, I compartmentalize cRPGs into two general groups. ![]() To want roleplaying to be "manifested in-game" and not simply in the mind of the person playing the game. It is absolutely reasonable for a player to want high-quality writing, and a game world that actually responds to the player choices in a significant way. Mitya: "Roleplaying is supposed to be manifested in-game and not just limited to your brain, well at least in my opinion and at least if a game is to be considered a proper RPG."īefore starting, I do just want to defend Mitya's position. (There is a highly condensed version at the very end, for those short on time) While I recognize that no one really asked for this, and it's a bit of a read, which is an understatement, I'll admit, I thought I'd elaborate on my thoughts about a few quotes.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |