It is my -hope- that Gizmo will understand that I was challenging his logic
:foodndrink:
It's difficult, however, to find middle ground. I tend to stand towards the middle... but I am most definitely of the mind that there needs to be -more- realism in these games. The reason that RPG's are so convoluted, with so many stats and systems, is because they were ALWAYS attempting to establish a modicum of realism... even back in the PnP days. Everything was formulaic and well-played out... because the technology didn't exist to make games that really PUT you in the shoes of a warrior of Nirn, or a soldier of the Imperial Army... or any such thing.
The technology -does- exist, now, to at least present a plausible amount of realism... and yet we cling to these old concepts desperately, because they're all we've ever known.
We are not on opposite sides of the the coin here, (but we may be on different coins in some respects). I don't mind realism and good graphical depictions ~provided that it does not hinder the rest of the game.
If the level of detail means you can only have 3 NPCs on the screen, then I would rather halve the detail and double the NPCs.
With me, graphics play 2nd fiddle to a description. Tod Howard might disagree, but I would prefer to have a creepy text description of a decrepit (and inhabited) old mattress in FO instead of [or including, rather than just]... a disgusting texture put on the model. :shrug:
However... While I like FPP shooters and adventure games, I don't often prefer that in RPGs :shrug: It has nothing to do with the technology... I am just not looking for an RPG that tries to "really PUT you in the shoes of a warrior of Nirn, or a soldier of the Imperial Army... or any such thing". When I make a character, that PC has its own individuality, past and purpose in the game world ~and [to me] forcing one's self to be them personally... to pretend to be a warrior of Nirn, or a soldier of the Imperial Army, is to treat that identity as little more than a digital costume IMO. To me that negates to point of creating a character in an RPG; You don't have a Hamlet, or a Bilbo, Gandalf or a Lessingham, you have a fighter, or hobbit, mage or knight ~and its not the same to me. (In TES there is no reason to name your PC... Its not used, and the game expects you to use yourself as the PC).
This is part of why I tend to prefer third person (and multi-PC) RPGs over first person RPGs almost exclusively; and why I played Oblivion & FO3 in TPP whenever practical.
It reminds me of people fighting a war for so long, they don't remember why they're fighting. They don't even necessarily know who the enemy is anymore.
With Fallout, the "fight" was for game mechanics alone... There could be nothing else from it, (and we didn't get it); They said it themselves, that they did not want
that "fight", (to compete with the original story & dialog).
On the one hand, you have people who would take realism FAR too far, and destroy any semblance of 'GAME' about the thing. And on the other hand you have people who see any attempt to break away from traditional mechanics as being an assault on the RPG genre.
I'm on both side of the fence (Call me 'http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj125/Gizmojunk/Gro.png' :laugh:); I would want both (even though many would say that they are mutually excluding, and more of one equals less of the other). I feel that its possible to create a little redundancy in these games to please both sides.