EA Announces Open-Ended RPG

With the success of Bethesda's Oblivion featuring so prominently in the headlines of late, EA's announcement of 'Project Gray Company' comes as little surprise. From the Gamespot blurb: "The action takes place in a massive open world where you can go anywhere you want, and the characters in this world are powered by an incredible simulation [artificial intelligence] based on the same technology used by the makers of The Sims 2. The story of the game is built around a series of Story Quests. You can choose to follow specific Story Quests, embark on a range of other types of quests, or set off on your own adventures in the massive open world environment."

Comments

Yeah, that's pretty open-ended, alright.

[Tackhead]

From TFA:
> No platform, price, or release date was announced for the game.

Yeah, that's about as open-ended as it gets.

Re:Yeah, that's pretty open-ended, alright.

[Odiumjunkie]

The project is being developed with the working titly "Duke Nukem Forever".

Re:Yeah, that's pretty open-ended, alright.

[Anarke_Incarnate]

Mod Parent UP

Re:Yeah, that's pretty open-ended, alright.

[Odiumjunkie]

I misspelt "title". Instant /. death. HEAD SHOT. PEDANTRY is on a killing spree.

EA

[kryten_nl]

You'll never beat my lvl 60 'EA develloper' with his 'Improved Lack Of Sleep', 'Tolerance For Low Wages' and his special 'Transform Coffee To Code'....

Re:EA

[gstoddart]

You'll never beat my lvl 60 'EA develloper' with his 'Improved Lack Of Sleep', 'Tolerance For Low Wages' and his special 'Transform Coffee To Code'....

You misunderstand. The coffee isn't actually turned into code -- it's merely a catalyst in the process. The coffee is turned into energy and urea, with the energy from the reaction used to power the hamster wheel.

It's the hamster wheel which does the actual creation of code. :-P

Re:EA

[mypalmike]

My Level 72 "EA Executive" beats your "EA Developer" every time. All those who fool with my "Business Suit of Uninformed Late Redesign" will feel my wrath.

Re:EA

[EvilSporkMan]

Very good, except a catalyst isn't changed by the reaction for which it is a catalyst.

Re:EA

[gstoddart]

Very good, except a catalyst isn't changed by the reaction for which it is a catalyst. [wikipedia.org]

Gak! I've been Grammar Nazi'd!!!

=)

Re:EA

[rkanodia]

I'm afraid that you were attacked by a Semantics Nazi, not a Grammar Nazi; your mistake was not in choosing the wrong form of, or position for, a word, but in choosing a word with a different meaning from the meaning which you intended.

If it makes you feel better, I can play the part of the Grammar Nazi by mentioning that "Nazi" isn't a verb. Toodles.

Re:EA

[OK PC]

Very funny comment, truely worthy of recognition in the archives

Re:EA

[jthill]

English not your first? You can noun verbs, and verb nouns.

Re:EA

[gstoddart]

I'm afraid that you were attacked by a Semantics Nazi, not a Grammar Nazi;

Nobody expects the Inquisition!!

your mistake was not in choosing the wrong form of, or position for, a word, but in choosing a word with a different meaning from the meaning which you intended.

From a pure chemistry definition, sure. However, our good old pal Webster's has this to say:

1 : a substance (as an enzyme) that enables a chemical reaction to proceed at a usually faster rate or under different conditions (as at a lower temperature) than otherwise possible
2 : an agent that provokes or speeds significant change or action

There is some fluidity to the meaning of the word. And, besides, it a joke, not a chemistry class.

If it makes you feel better, I can play the part of the Grammar Nazi by mentioning that "Nazi" isn't a verb.

In English, any word (or, in this case, acronym) is a half-step away from being verbed, merely by using it as such and conjugating it correctly (enough ;-). Even if it's not according to Hoyle, as it were.

You can be LASERed, TASERed, and RADARed. You can be spiked, boxed, penned, egged and pied. You can sure as shit be NAZId.

It's a wacky language if you're daring enough. ;-)

Re:EA

[Maserati]

But we'd all really rather you didn't.

Re:EA

[Lucractius]

if you do then ill verb your noun till you can never verb again!

Re:EA

[KDR_11k]

Also, [noun]'d is a reference to Trogdor where you can get arrow'd or sword'd.

No multiplayer!

[willith]

As long as it's not multiplayer, I'll give it a look when it comes out. I've sunk ~60 hours into Oblivion over the past month or so, and the primary thing that keeps me coming back is that I feel like the focus of the story (which I am, because it's obviously a single-player game) instead of one more $CLASS, grinding out levels. Yeah, Oblivion has great graphics, ten billion sidequests, and a crazy-detailed gigantor world to play in, but the biggest plus is the fact that I don't have to share the game world with other people--no 1337-sp33k, no chat spamming, no people out of character, no griefing, and none of the other jackassery that plagues every MMORPG in the universe.

Re:No multiplayer!

[DerekLyons]

Yeah, Oblivion has great graphics, ten billion sidequests, and a crazy-detailed gigantor world to play in, but the biggest plus is the fact that I don't have to share the game world with other people--no 1337-sp33k, no chat spamming, no people out of character, no griefing, and none of the other jackassery that plagues every MMORPG in the universe.

On the other hand - without other people, it's not a RPG. It's just clicking on a keyboard.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Anonymous Coward]

You obviously haven't tried that new MMORPG out of Andromeda.

I hear it was coded by just two guys.

Re:No multiplayer!

[startled]

As long as it's not multiplayer, I'll give it a look when it comes out. I've sunk ~60 hours into Oblivion over the past month or so,

I'd kill for a co-op option for Oblivion.

Re:No multiplayer!

[ruckc]

Incorrect, RPGs can be played single player, I.e balder's gate, diablo.

The correct statement should be its not an ORPG or MMORPG because there are no other people.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Jack9]

The inference is that those aren't RPGs either. I tend to agree. Without other people to observe and react to it, it's like trying to roleplay. Much like throwing food at someone's open mouth for an hour is not NECESSARILY the same as saying they are being fed. It's a subtle line and I dont expect everyone to agree on new subdivisions.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Pausanias]

On the other hand - without other people, it's not a RPG. It's just clicking on a keyboard.

Aaah, the age-old discussion about what is an RPG. To some people, a computer RPG is a game you play with other people where you all pretend to be in a made-up world. To other people, a CRPG is a game where, like a book, there is a clear story and a clear protagonist---the player.

The first group of people are transfers from tabletop RPGs. They don't see the point of pretending to be a paladin/ninja/timelord without having the occasional irreverent out-of-character fun or computer equivalent of drinking beer with buddies.

The second group of people are folks who want a story above all else, and usually want to be the focus of that story. They don't like OOC talk, and for them the ideal game isn't about being with other people---it's more like reading a good book.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Postmaster General]

The first group of people are transfers from tabletop RPGs. They don't see the point of pretending to be a paladin/ninja/timelord without having the occasional irreverent out-of-character fun or computer equivalent of drinking beer with buddies. The second group of people are folks who want a story above all else, and usually want to be the focus of that story. They don't like OOC talk, and for them the ideal game isn't about being with other people---it's more like reading a good book.

If I were the dead king (voiced by Patrick Stewart) in Oblivion, I would have this (with much thee's and thou's inferred) to say about that post: "Mod it up!" But, getting back on topic ... In regards to the actual article, I believe there are already enough MMOG's around to keep the masses satisfied for a while. The games industry has been lacking in the single-player area for a while, and if EA did not agree with that, and did not think they could make a profit from it, then they probably would not be announcing this game.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Rolan]

Those two are certainly not mutually exclusive. I fall into both those categories.

Re:No multiplayer!

[yfkar]

Why do you have to have other people? Can't an actor play a role alone?

Re:No multiplayer!

[Jack9]

You have asked a philosophical question.

I dont _believe_ an actor can play a role alone. If there is no one to observe an actor, how can it be judged they are playing a role? Am I playing the role of me or am I just being me? Let's not forget the multitude of roles that spawned The Method (acting). Can I troll alone? Perhaps I'm just playing the role of an annoying /. troll (that one scares most people off).

FYI, I think that "Can a person play a role alone?" is a complex question without a clear answer. It continues to pique my interest.

Re:No multiplayer!

[DerekLyons]

Incorrect, RPGs can be played single player, I.e balder's gate, diablo.

If they are single player - they are not RPG's, no matter what the box says. Calling a tail a leg does not make it so.

Re:No multiplayer!

[DerekLyons]

Aaah, the age-old discussion about what is an RPG. To some people, a computer RPG is a game you play with other people where you all pretend to be in a made-up world. To other people, a CRPG is a game where, like a book, there is a clear story and a clear protagonist---the player.

There's no debate or discussion. Without other players present, in meatspace or cyberspace, you aren't playing a role - period. Decades of marketdroidspeak have caused some folks to consider a tail as a leg - but that doesn't make it so.

The first group of people are transfers from tabletop RPGs. They don't see the point of pretending to be a paladin/ninja/timelord without having the occasional irreverent out-of-character fun or computer equivalent of drinking beer with buddies.

Incorrect. Many role players find such things distasteful - as they are outside of the role.

The second group of people are folks who want a story above all else, and usually want to be the focus of that story. They don't like OOC talk, and for them the ideal game isn't about being with other people---it's more like reading a good book.

It's fascinating that somehow these people are roleplayers in your eyes - even though they are not playing a role.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Jackmn]

There's no debate or discussion. Without other players present, in meatspace or cyberspace, you aren't playing a role

But you are playing a role of whatever character you are playing in the game. Actually, if you define an RPG as simply being a game in which you take on a role, then just about every videogame out there is an RPG.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Keill]

Exaclty... I've had this argument with soo many people over the years - (and still have it now and again with my friends), that it's almost rediculous...

Since I've played a lot of games over the years, and lots of RPG's - be it tabletop D&D to Oblivion, and games such as Zelda to FPS's and RTS's, and had and heard so many different descriptions of different styles of games over the years, that I've come up with (what I think) would be a pretty fair description of what an RPG should include that makes it different, from, say an adventure game etc.

The first thing to understand, is that if you take the term 'role-playing game' literally, then pretty much most computer games ever made would count - so that can't be the case...

However, there is one game from which we can take as being the overall 'standard' as to what an RPG is and then compare it to others and see what it is about that game that makes it an RPG, and so help 'nail down' the definition...

That game, is, of course, Dungeons and Dragons...

So what is there about dungeons and dragons that specifically makes it an RPG? Is it the fact that you play a role of a character throughout the game? yes - but it's only a start - otherwise Tomb Raider, (playing the role of Lara Croft) would count, aswell as umpteen other games which we don't call RPG's too...

The next point is that the characters you play develop over the course of the game - and we're not talking items or gear here - but the characters abilities and skills... (Which is normally closely linked with the game and plot etc.). This is closer, but there are still a few other games like that which I wouldn't call an RPG - however, most of them would count as Adventure games... (Such as Zelda etc.).

The final point, and the crux of the matter for me, is that the player has some control and influence over HOW the chracter develops (skills and abilities etc.) over the course of the game... This to me is the essence of any RPG, and is what makes an RPG what it is. The more depth in this area - the 'more' of an RPG it is... So, yes, to me, World of Warcraft is an RPG - but only just - (because of the talent points) - though the new version of Star Wars Galaxies is not - (since the character development is all on rails)...

Well - thats my take on the matter....

Re:No multiplayer!

[jasen666]

So we've all been lied to since the 80's? Damn Nintendo and Sega, they tricked me into thinking their single player role based games were RPG's! All those hundreds of titles, all single player, all lies.
Oh no, it goes back even further! I played D&D RPG games on my C64. Damn you Commodore! You tricked me.
Since RPG's didn't actually exist until the late 90's, apparently. These game companies have been smoking crack 25 yrs ago to think they knew what an RPG was.
Wait, maybe they considered having your friends over to watch your TV as you played to be the audience, so therefore you were performing a role for someone. Aha, the loophole.
What if I'm schizophrenic and I believe that the NPC's are real people? Then I'm performing for an audience, and it becomes a real RPG to me.

Seriously though, I do not think the presence or lack of an audience is what makes an RPG.

Re:No multiplayer!

[jasen666]

Is it the fact that you play a role of a character throughout the game.

the characters you play develop over the course of the game

the player has some control and influence over HOW the chracter develops (skills and abilities etc.) over the course of the game

That's how I define an RPG. Audience is not a consideration.

Re:No multiplayer!

[Jack9]

I think an RPG requires an audience. Schizophrenia comes in a wide variety of severities...

Re:No multiplayer!

[Anonymous Coward]

Schizophrenia != Multiple Personality Disorder

Re:No multiplayer!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hacker != Cracker right? How does this type of post help when 2 people already have a common lexicon that differs from yours or someone else's?

Re:No multiplayer!

[DerekLyons]

Actually, if you define an RPG as simply being a game in which you take on a role, then just about every videogame out there is an RPG.

And that's precisely the problem. Like so many other terms related to computers, decades of marketspeak have rendered the term essentially meaningless.

Re:No multiplayer!

[NichG]

As I see it the main reason other people are even folded into the idea of an RPG is that at the time tabletop RPGs were developed - and that is where the term and genre of game originated - the only way to have any sort of satisfying interaction between a player's character and their world was if those interactions were 'calculated' by humans. That is, the other players and the GM.

As game AI gets better and programmers actually take that sort of thing into account, you can very much approach that sort of dynamic in a CRPG. It won't be AS rich or open-ended, but its clearly something above and beyond the very first attempts at CRPGs. When the world in-simulo provides an increasingly convincing audience, I think that should even satisfy the hard-line view that an audience is needed for role-play. The computer thats running the game is the audience.

Otherwise we could easily get into Descartian arguments about 'well how do I even know the other players are observing me? I can't prove they're real!' sorts of things, which I think is for the most part unproductive.

Or to put it another way - if the player feels like they're immersed in a role, then its roleplaying. The audience may be necessary to invoke that feeling, but whether its a real audience or a very well simulated one doesn't matter so long as that feeling is produced.

Re:No multiplayer!

[ryarger]

And that's precisely the problem. Like so many other terms related to computers, decades of marketspeak have rendered the term essentially meaningless.

And as you say, saying that this is so, does not make it so.

A role, from Dictionary.com:
      1. also rôle A character or part played by a performer.
      2. The characteristic and expected social behavior of an individual.
      3. A function or position. See Synonyms at function.
      4. Linguistics. The function of a word or construction, as in a sentence.

I think it's fair to assume we are all using the first definition here, but feel free to pick your favorite.

"A character or part played by a performer." Ok, what is a performer? One who performs. It does not say: "A character or part played by a performer in the presence of an audience."

Is an actor playing a role if they video tape themselves, alone in a room? Are they a playing a role if no-one ever sees that tape? The moment someone views the tape, has history changes and they have gone from not having played a role, to having played a role?

I highly doubt that lo these 25 years ago, Richard Garriot thought to himself "Even though this here Akalabeth was inspired by my love for RPGs I know it's not one, but what the hell, I want to sell it and get rich so I'll market it as an RPG! Mwhahahaha!!!"

Re:No multiplayer!

[DerekLyons]

And as you say, saying that this is so, does not make it so.

In this case, yes it does.

A role, from Dictionary.com:

The moment someone whips out a dictionary and cites an irrelevant definition, rather than presenting an arguement, is the moment I know I'm dealing with a clueless idiot. When the follow up it up with sophmoric rhetorical questioning, I know they don't even rise to that level.

I highly doubt that lo these 25 years ago, Richard Garriot thought to himself "Even though this here Akalabeth was inspired by my love for RPGs I know it's not one, but what the hell, I want to sell it and get rich so I'll market it as an RPG! Mwhahahaha!!!"

A statement that has precisely nothing to do with the question at hand. Typical.

Re:No multiplayer!

[ryarger]

The moment someone whips out a dictionary and cites an irrelevant definition, rather than presenting an arguement, is the moment I know I'm dealing with a clueless idiot. When the follow up it up with sophmoric rhetorical questioning, I know they don't even rise to that level.

While I appreciate your attempt at intellectual conversation, you seem to miss where I pasted all the definitions there were and invited you to pick the one you thought was most relevant. Or perhaps you think that dictionaries in general are "irrelevant"?

You're welcome to try again, or we can leave it as is and I'll file this as an entertaining "I have no actual argument".

So now the only question that remains is...

[Lead Butthead]

So now the only question that remains is how to plug humans into that and form the first matrix.

Re:So now the only question that remains is...

[Spy der Mann]

So now the only question that remains is how to plug humans into that and form the first matrix.

Oh, that's an easy one! It just requires 3 easy steps.

1. Program an AI architect.
2. ???
3. 010100000111001001101111011001100110100101110100!!

Dev Diary

[Doytch]

I saw the Dev Diary on the site yesterday. If the vibe I got from that is indicative of the rest of the team, there really is no hope... There's over a half-a-minute long intro that has NOTHING to do with the game.

Not to mention that the art screams LOTR...the orcs, the towers, good God.

I really hope to be proved wrong though.

Re:Dev Diary

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't help but to notice that the Production/Audio, Animation, Modeling and Art are staffed almost entirely by people of asian decent. Is this a trend in the business?

Re:Dev Diary

[Multivitavim]

It's increasingly a trend in the world. Look at current populations and growth rates. What fraction of DVD players are made by those of Asian decent? T-shirts? Call centres?

Seems acceptable to me.

$10 says it's Madden-based...

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

$10 says it's Madden-based. Here are the initial classes:

  - Quarterback - Needs high wisdom
  - Lineman - Needs high strength
  - Wide Receiver - Needs high dexterity
  - TV Announcer - Similar to a "half-orc"
  - Cheerleader - Basically put in for the usual "dark elf" player

Re:$10 says it's Madden-based...

[Anonymous Coward]

Your football analogy just ostracized 99.999% of slashdot readers. The remaining 4 voted +1 funny.

EA to release half finished game

[Goldberg's Pants]

"But this game isn't finished. There's virtually no script, no ending, nothing."

"Ah screw it, call it open ended and ship it."

I'm tired of being the hero

[Jakuta]

I want a game where I can dominate, be evil, have minions and basically rule with an iron fist. Some of my fondest memories are of evil groups at tables. Isn't anyone tired of wearing the white hat? Wouldn't you like to match wits with a truly diabolical foe? Just my own meandering thoughts... *sigh*

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[techpawn]

Like Evil Genius?

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[neuraljazz]

Join the Republican Party.... they seem to be needing some new blood. :-)

-NJ

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Elad Alon]

Have you ever considered becoming a school teacher?

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Anonymous Coward]

Join the Republican Party.... they seem to be needing some new blood. :-)

Which is ironic, since they're so good at spilling other people's.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[mrmagos]

I'm surprised you have never heard of Dungeon Keeper. It sounds right up your alley.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Dan Ost]

Actually there was a computer version of Birthright (a board game loosely coupled to D&D) that
was actually pretty good in that respect. It was loads of fun to erode the economies of your
neighbors and provoke wars so you could sweep in later and pick up the pieces.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Surt]

Just wait for DK3.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Garrett Fox]

Working on it, though at the moment it's just text-based.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Anonymous Coward]

Time to break out a copy of Fallout 2 and become a slave-trading, town destroying, child killing bastard.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[staticdaze]

I particularly enjoy the KOTOR games in this regard. I admit the story is fairly linear and all conversations have hardcoded outcomes (though numerous), however those games have some really fun evil shit in them. You could doom the survival of a planet, make families kill each other, and kill almost anyone who gave you lip. I think at the end of KOTOR 1, it was me, HK-47, and one other person (another robot?). Every other potential member of my crew either ran away for good or died by my hand :D

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[alexgieg]

Yeah, shame on then for having ended slavery and for removing dictators from power. An evil party like no other, no doubt about it.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[KDR_11k]

Yeah, shame on then for having ended slavery

I knew those politicians were old fucks but I never knew they were old enough to have done that.

Re:I'm tired of being the hero

[Jakuta]

That's kewl, when you have a working copy of the text game let me know I loved MUD so I can test if you like!

This it's website?

[Drey]

I think I found the website for it.

If its from EA..

[tont0r]

It will either be based off the harry potter license, LOTR license, or whatever other movie license they can get their slave driving hands on.

it gets worse

[JeanBaptiste]

They got John Madden to design it, and every player is Brett Favre.

SQ4 ref?

[Rob T Firefly]

There was a gag software ad way back in "Space Quest IV" with the same idea.. (imagine the following read aloud in that awesome Gary Owens narrator voice)

Narrator: It's here at last! With a combination of SAI--Simulated Artificial Intelligence--and VRAI--Virtually-Real Artificial Intelligence--we at MaxThis! Software have created a simulated simulator experience that's unlike anything you've ever simulated playing before. With SimSim, you can create a simulated environment in which you can create any simulated environment you want!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Don't be hatin'

[KingSkippus]

no 1337-sp33k, no chat spamming, no people out of character, no griefing, and none of the other jackassery that plagues every MMORPG in the universe

...And no camaraderie, no sense of accomplishing something (even if it's only virtually) with other people, no real community, no socializing, no making of real friends from parts of the country (and the world!) that you've never been to and would likely probably never have gone, no chatting about that cool quest you ran last night with someone who was there, no sharing of jokes, no showing off some creativity and imagination (and being shown!) with people who appreciate it, and so on.

To each his own, I suppose, and if you don't like MMORPGs because you can't see past the actions of a few people, more power to you. But I think you've grossly mischaracterized the experience of playing one. Some of us recognize those things that you mentioned for what they are: a small price to pay for a much cooler experience hanging out with new friends than just sitting around the house playing by yourself for ~60 hours in a month. I mean, I have nothing particularly against single-player RPGs; I grew up on them. But when all is said and done, they are all just games, and after you've sunk your time into them, there's not much you can say you've gotten from the experience other than, well, fleeting amusement at the cost of possibly massive amounts of time spent. Personally, I'd rather risk a little "jackassery" if it means coming away from the experience with real friends, which is a lot more than just time sunk into a game.

Now that I've played an MMORPG, I doubt that I'll ever play much of any game that's not an MM* game. Of course, that's just my 2 cent's worth, YMMV.

Re:Don't be hatin'

[Anonymous Coward]

> there's not much you can say you've gotten from the experience other than, well, fleeting amusement at the cost of possibly massive amounts of time spent.

Most people outside of Slashdot would probably view that as an apt description of MMORPGs, or indeed gaming in general. Not that there's anything wrong with fleeting amusement, but online gaming is no substitute for face-to-face social interaction.

Re:Don't be hatin'

[XenoRyet]

Most of what you describe as the advantages of MMO style games is socalizing. That's all well and good, and it is a valuable use of time, but it doesn't have to tie in with your gaming time.

Socializing of any kind comes with the risk of "jackassery", and I would have to say it's more prevalant in MMO's than in other settings, but as you say, it's a small price to pay for the positive aspects you can gain. However, even neutral socalization can get in the way of enjoying a game, and some people would prefer to keep the two seperate for that reason. A little jackassery in the wrong place can totaly spoil a gaming session, perticularly if you like game-world immersion. And immersion in an MMO is nigh on impossible.

You mentioned that single player RPG's are just games. Well, despite the fact that there are real people on the other end of some of the characters, MMO's are also just games, at best. At worst they're glorified chat clients. You seem to be trying to use the fact that there are other people interacting with you to justify 60 hours a month in front of your computer. That's unnessisary, one should spend 60 hours however one wants, solo, socialy, whatever. Neaither way is better than the other. Personaly, when I want to game, I'll game, when I want to socalize, I'll go down to the coffee shop.

Re:Don't be hatin'

[Arker]

because you can't see past the actions of a few people

Unfortunately it's not just a few people. It's a very large part of the population of every big commercial mud today. Where on a traditional, nonprofit mud these folks get taught better, and if they won't listen, they get banned, on the new wave of fancy commercial graphical muds, the business side gets in the way of that. Many times the jerks are even catered to, since there are a lot of them and they're putting money in the coffers.

Re:Don't be hatin'

[Anonymous Coward]

no sense of accomplishing something (even if it's only virtually) with other people,

Funny, my main complaint about MMOs is that I get no sense of accomplishing anything, period.

NPC: Please help me, PC1! You must slay the dragon and save the town!
PC1: OK. [goes off, returns] The dragon is dead!
[30 seconds pass]
[dragon respawns]
NPC: Please help me, PC2! You must slay the dragon and save the town!
PC2: OK.
PC1: Uh, didn't I just slay that dragon? Shouldn't the town be safe?

Re:Don't be hatin'

[KingSkippus]

You must be playing the wrong game, then. Or maybe I just happen to be playing the right ones. The one I happen to spend most of my time in is City of Heroes, and the people there are great. Almost every person I've run across in these games have been exceptionally nice people. And, as I said, I have a few good friends outside of the games now as a result.

Are there idiots? Sure. But to say that they're all idiots (or even to imply that most of them are) is just plain wrong, and as I said, a gross mischaracterization of these games.

And any company that tries to make money by deliberately catering to idiots will soon find themselves broke and out of business. (Or advertising their junk on late-night informercials.)

Re:Don't be hatin'

[Arker]

Unfortunately, I don't think Sony will be going broke any time soon.

But it's not just about 'jerkhood' in the sense that some folks are just jerks in ways that are jerky no matter what the context. It's a bit deeper than that.

Different people play these games for different reasons, and different things matter to them. What one group sees as simply playing the game, another may see as exploiting, and destroying the game for them. Good mud admins work very hard to keep the various groups (4, in one famous analysis) in a sort of balance, where none of them destroy the game for the others. The graphical muds I've seen seemed to be run by admins who either didn't understand this, or else were simply overruled by their suit wearing superiors, I'm not sure which... but at any rate... glad to hear you're enjoying city of heroes. I've heard some good things about guild wars too.

Re:Don't be hatin'

[alexgieg]

Not really. For instance, in World of Warcraft you have the option of choosing a role-playing server, where there're strict behavioural rules enforced by Blizzard's staff. Also, even if within the rules you find some other kind of idiot there, you can easily "/ignore" him for good. And if both things aren't enough, there're tons of addons you can install to increase even more the immersion experience. Other than those, don't forget to enter a "strict role-playing" guild if you wanna full immersion, or an "in character prefered" one if 100% isn't required. Ask around and you'll find many good ones.

Oddly enough...

[Anonymous Coward]

The "Lord of The Rings" games started out with the "Tiger Woods Golf" codebase.

(+1 Informative - I'm actually not kidding.)

Re:GTA:SA

[badboy_tw2002]

See Postal. You get to burn, kill, maim, destroy the innocent all because you've had a very bad day. Even after people are down you get to pin them down and put a bullet in them, or roast them and get to hear them moan in pain as they're burning. Then see Postal 2, which brings in the "slap stick" you refered to. The first one kind of turns your stomach, the second is pretty stupid. I guess it depends on the reaction they were going for.

On the other hand, I think maybe some of the Mafia type games (Mafia, GTA, the latest one being the Godfather), are pretty good at defining "evil". The games have rules like "don't kill civilians", where various penalties apply when you knock off some guy walking down the street, but hey, halve the fun is blowing people up. Its true you're not really fighting innocent cops in GTA:SA, but the drug thing is wrong. Half the missions are about taking "turf" and delivering "packages" which may or may not be drugs. They don't come out and say it, but its there. In Godfather, you're constantly shaking innocent business owners down for money. That's pretty bad insomuch as you're commiting acts of violence and tyranny against the helpless. These aren't criminals, just regular folks. You don't want to kill them, just scare them a bit, but if you need to mow down joe average to get your way, so be it. I'd say the moral scale for that game are solidly in the black.

As for the "genocide" simulator, yeah, Civ is as close as you get. But then, when you think about it, most evil dictators don't see the results of their acts right up close and personal, and definately aren't taking too much part in the direct execution of their orders.

Fable...

[Cyno01]

I remember Fable being like that. If you went the evil route, people would cower in fear as you passed and you could be such a bigger badass than if you were good. Plus you grew horns and stuff. Hell, when i went through it on evil, after i got the sword of Aeons and waited through the credits i just went through and massacred towns. In that save, i own every piece of property avaliable in the game. As for actually commanding minions, theres some game thats on the tip of my tounge, but for the life of me i cant remember right now.

OMG! No Designer Specified in the Title!

[Alzheimers]

How can a game this revolutionary possibly succeed without the lead developer's name in the title?

I mean, you can't just go all willy nilly with "open ended" gameplay without a Sid Meyer's, by Will Wright, or even a Peter Molyneux Presents in the title! How else will we be able to distinguish it from the thousands of other X Tycoons, Sim-X's, or Virtual-X's of the world?

A game like this...needs provenance!

Where have you gone, David Crane?

Isn't an open ended RPG...

[Anonymous Coward]

...normally known as a bazooka, or a recoilless rifle?

"EA games - absorb everything"

[Avatar8]

EA hasn't had an original idea EVER.

They rely solely on abosorbing existing studios, their talent and their customer base usually driving off 25% or more of the customers.

They ruined the Ultima series, they ruined Ultima Online and I have yet to hear about any EA product that didn't have major issues at release.

F*#$ you, EA!!

My condolences to the employees you abuse, the ideas you crush and the great games that you never allowed to be because they did not meet your schedule.

Never, ever will EA get another penny from me.

Fable...Good and Evil, online.

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm. That would be interesting. A MMORG were you can be either GOOD or EVIL. Then let both sides have at it. It has potential. Oh, and no I don't think the present political environment has anything to do with it. One, games can be developed anyware. And two there's been plenty of time to develop such a thing.

Not true...

[ElboRuum]

They had plenty of original ideas... of course you have to go back to 1982-1989 to find them all.

Re:Not true...

[Slithe]

I have never played it, but I have heard that Deathlord was a unique, fantastic game. I heard that players had to work damn hard to outsmart the game, since it ofen outsmarted the player and his preconceptions. I would have linked to the Home of the Underdogs page on Deathlord, which features the above review and screenshots, but I decided against it because of legal concerns (if you have ever been to HOTU, you know what I mean).

Or they could re-open old wounds

[DoctaWatson]

and make this an Ultima title.

This is original?

[ElboRuum]

You know I've heard of this before... Oh yeah, "open-ended RPG" is just another name for this other thing called "life", or was it "Grand Theft Auto"?

New sub-genre

[owlman17]

We now have the MSORPG, Massively Singleplayer Offline Role Playing Game. Probably like Oblivion. Oh wait...

Experience?

[Kurayamino-X]

Electronic Arts has some experience with epic, open-ended role-playing games from publishing the last few installments of the classic Ultima series
Ahem, let my try and summarise my reaction to this...
HA! AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAA*breath*HAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAH-*choke* *die*
I don't even have to read the rest of the article after the opening line, yes they have experience, they have experience DESTROYING THE FUCKING SERIES. anyone that calls ultima 8 and 9 "Open ended" and anything other then trading 7's gameplay for better graphics and shorter dev times is talking out of thier ass, but hey, I suppose if the rest of gaming journalism is doing it, they should to.

Re:Experience?

[halivar]

Hey! I liked 8. It was the game that got me interested in the Ultima series. But you're right about one thing: 7 was the shining silmaril to EA's Morgoth.

Re:GTA:SA

[DerekLyons]

In short, the closest thing you're going to get to the game you're asking for is probably Civilization or some such, where you can be an evil dictator "from above," without actually seeing your evil deeds enacted. Actually getting down-and-dirty in a game? Not in the U.S., not in the current political climate.

Here's a free clue for you, (as you need one badly) - that attitude far predates either the current political climate or the current Administration. But I understand your motivation - taking cheap shots is far easier than actually engaging your brain and bothering with pesky facts.

Hmm may be interested

[malf-uk]

As long the player doesn't have to keep going to the toilet every 15 minutes or have quests to make woohoo with 3 different ghouls.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Oh yeah...

[shihonage]

powered by an incredible simulation [artificial intelligence] based on the same technology used by the makers of The Sims 2 Looking forward to pushing the entire settlement into the pool and removing the ladder.

Re:Jumpy much?

[DerekLyons]

So I'll say it again; this time try to read what I've written instead of looking for ways to be offended. In the U.S., in the current political climate, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to successfully secure funding, create, and sell a game wherein the player is dedicated to committing truly evil deeds.

I *did* read what you wrote - and replied to what you wrote. And what you wrote was wrong - it's not the current political climate, the inability to be 'truly evil' goes back decades. The current 'anti-free expression' is but the current manifestation of something far deeper and older.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion