[JR Jansen]

Ugh, here we go again, This thread is giving me a migraine. Anyway

To Thoran

Did you actually read the post ? I mean, you guys still start a new match every 30 minutes. I know that you think this is inconcicential but real warfare doesn't stop with one battle. The battle takes place, parties rethink strategies and the next battle commences. This is somewhat simplified but it's the general idea. They do not start a new war, they are still trying to win the current one. You guys basically start a new war every 30 minutes.

Uhuh and next you are going to say voleyball hasn't got time out periods. In tennis, they play a few games and then have a rest period. In this period the players can comunicate with their coaches, not verbally but watch a tennis game and you'll see that the players sometimes look to the crowd because their coach is there to give them advice and communication doesn't have to be verbally. Baseball uses hand gestures too. But keep trying, you might find one that actully is just like how you guys play. But remember, exeptions always exist. And it's not a detail. We're talking about strategies to win a battle you're in and the ability to rethink (either by yourself or by your coach) with an amount of time that is long enough to actully come up with a good strategy and not having to make a decision in the blink of an eye.

Yes, but again, a real war doesn't finish with one battle. You guys start one, play it out or stop after 30 minutes and start a new one. A new war so to speak. You aren't trying to win the one you have been playing, you start a new one.

I do see your point when you say that the whole point is that you tally these seperate games and go for an end score, like in volleyball, but the point is that you can't stop during a played battle if it turns ugly.


To Kharn

I do agree that killing is a part of an rpg, but again, just a part. Fps games are made for killing, that's the difference.

You talk about storylines. Fps games might have storylines but how do they change because your character is different. Rpg's ussually change because you character is different. Dialogue changes because of the race/class/gender, etc. Quest might be open only if you have a good or bad allignement. How many of these changes are there in an fps game. Probably not that much.

Again exeptions always exists and to alot of hardcore rpg players, Diablo isn't considered as one.

To Scholarcs

I suppose it depends on what you see as an fps game. This sounds more like a strategical combat game. You can shout commands, etc. Even if it is first person and 3D it isn't always an fps you know.

And money ? What is that used for ? Buying better equipment i guess. If you can buy stuff and have team mates then it sounds to me more like a strategical combat game then an fps.

To Redblueflare

Then don't use it as an example.

Indeed, you always switch to the weapon that is most effective. Let's take the BG sereis for instance. Golems for example. Some needed magical weapons, some needed magical blunt weapons wich wouldn't be so obvious when looking at their names. The various types of oozes and slimes are another categorie in wich it wasn't that abvious what could kill them.

Maybe you did.

[ 02-17-2002: Message edited by: JR Jansen ]

[ 02-17-2002: Message edited by: JR Jansen ]