Home ›
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
^^ I should use that when I teach people how to Magic.
The claymore is more useful than I thought, despite its slowness. I three-shotted the bell gargoyle and two-shotted its brother.
It really helps that Magic, for as much as I, y'know, have only had one game, is evidently a really cleverly-designed game. While the mechanics for cards alter the strategic and tactical implications of a scenario, they only ever do so in context of some kind of narrative element. In fact, Magic might be one of the strongest games out there right now when it comes to using mechanics to support narrative.
You missed the other one :c
> implying I didn't jump directly to reading that, making my post thereby having the forum land me at the end of this page
So I read that and it's stuff I'd agree with 100%. The only complication comes when trying to teach a more complicated game -- and some games get pretty complex. RPGs, having underlying systems comparable to their tabletop siblings, need some degree of explanation before someone can play with understanding.
That said, RPGs should still narrate and teach as simply and directly as possible, but the rules laid out in that article are much easier to implement for certain types of games as compared to others. If you look at, say, Zelda, you'll see that it's been using those rules since forever to teach players throughout the game. In fact, one of the interesting things about Zelda games is that their tutorials never really end -- the player learns throughout the entire game.
I think, by messing with the Zelda formula, Skyward Sword did this really well. It wasn't afraid to introduce a new mechanic or new, alien scenario when it was appropriate, giving just enough information for players to teach themselves.
One of my greatest anxieties, if I ever got to make the swordfightan' game I want to make, is that the system will leave players a bit confused. One of the things I want to convey is the manner in which learning to wield a sword is a journey of discovery, which makes it easy to create a simple tutorial or somesuch, but I'd still be worried that players would be overwhelmed by their options and the game would fail to convey the experience it's designed for.
"giving just enough information for players to teach themselves."
Wasn't Fi telling you something really flipping obvious every 5 minutes?
Yeah, there was a lot of "You got this item! Use it like this!" in the item description followed by Fi going "I detect a 97.54% probability that you have received an item, which you can use like this."
And yet it still took me five minutes to figure out how to use the beetle-arm.
Fi didn't usually have commentary on items, if I recall correctly. Most of the time, you were given an item, the description taught you how to use it mechanically and then you had to use it immediately. Fi sure did talk a lot, but that was mostly to keep you on track -- it was about being where your next objective was. Pretty much every Zelda game I can think of has used a small item description and then a practical, mechanic-based demonstration to teach the player about items.
I liked Fi. :<
Important personal news: Need a $100 textbook for homework due on Thursday. :<
Less important news: I'm reminded to finish Skyward Sword now. :<
^Can you try and borrow a book from a classmate? If worse comes to worse you COULD find a PDF online.
I liked Fi, too, even though her singing animation gave me the creeps.
That said, I liked Midna better and Navi is endearing via nostalgia (and was never really that bad to begin with). One of the great things about Navi, in fact, is that we technically begin OoT from her perspective; we get a short first-person sequence where she flies around Kokiri Forest, greeting people and bumping into objects. There's some characterisation in there, and we know the nature of our companion before we even know Link. OoT was cool like that.
The PDF file didn't have the key parts I needed. So, I'm hoping my classmate is feeling generous.
>That said, I liked Midna better
Midna's a better character, but I think there's an undeniable charm in the awkward way Fi grows to have affection for Link.
There's now a Mass Effect 3 poster hanging up where my Doctor Who poster used to be.
Need a hook to hang up the print I have of the SR3 as well to go underneath the print of Legion.
"This tropette abandoned the series, after growing up with it for so long, when Jason Griffith was still voicing Sonic. She came back to the series to see the hype for Sonic Generations... And had to do a double take when she didn't hear the Sonic voice she was used to. It hit her even worse when she remembered that he was a Sonic fan, just like she was, and he was the reason she wanted to be a voice actor... She exited the game, stared at a wall, and fought back tears for a half hour."
Translation:
And this is what happens when you don't have standards.
I'M GOING TO SEE IRON MAIDEN AND ALICE COOPER IN JUNE I'M GOING TO SEE IRON MAIDEN AND ALICE COOPER IN JUNE!
(has a heart attack)
Iron Maiden? Excellent! Weedly-weedly-woo!
I've seen 'em twice and it was a blast both times.
God for all the shit that happened today I'm super-excited now. Dunno if I'll be able to sleep.
I wished I hadn't missed on the Iron Maiden concerts that happened in Bogota. A couple of friends managed to go and enjoy it, much to my envy.
then again, we can spend quite a bit listing the things I regret >_>
why, yes, i just had a most annoying nightmare, how can you tell
Wires strapped to brain for pain stimulant test. I'm getting tiny shocks, alternating warm and cold water, intense light and pressure bands. Feels more funny than painful most of the time.
So, interesting practise session today.
I learned that descending strikes are, probably, the most biomechanically efficient no matter how you slice it. My biggest focus was fighting from Pflug, the guard which has the hilt of the sword at either side of the hip (and perhaps a bit forward) with the point towards one's adversary. Pflug is where you arrive after a descending strike from vom Tag, the standard opening guard. Both vom Tag and Pflug are effective at delivering descending strikes quickly and with low effort. Ochs, Pflug's inverse (sword held high, angled downward a bit to point at one's adversary) is much less efficient at dealing a fast cut, but the "unwinding" action provides a more powerful impact.
Didn't do much with Alber (sword held centrally, hilt at hip level, pointing downwards at an even angle), because that's essentially a defensive guard that provides strong counters. It's not at all efficient to fight offensively from.
The essential "rule" for guards is that if it's held high or highish and/or has the point aiming at one's adversary, it's offensive. If it's held low or lowish and/or doesn't have the point aiming at one's adversary, it's defensive.
There's something wrong with the link to this discussion or what?
I don't see anything wrong. What happened on your side?
When I clicked on the link in the main page I got redirected to a webcomic I don't even recognize.
Sounds like you've got malware. Check if any sketchy processes are running.
It's gone now though.
It could be random.