Cyberpunk Grave Digger



Pacing VS Character Development

Now my real problem is not when villain has for example, a motivation to be evil, but when this motivation actualy justifies his acts to the player, specially when it makes him closer to the player than the heroes.

I believe you're in the minority here. The Boss from MGS3 is one of the most beloved characters in the franchise, despite only appearing in one game.

e: on the other hand, people go crazy for kefka. But I think that's more attributable to what he accomplishes rather than this character.

Let's Examine: A Look at What Makes Games Great (or Not)

I don't think the prologue system in Wild Arms, which is not really present in any other games I've played, is any less specific than
"Why the first part of Cave Story works well (intro through Egg Corridor)"

Unless you were not referring to me. In which case go back in time and don't read this post.

Pacing VS Character Development

^^^ That's very possible. There are tons of stories about conflicts with nature, feelings, SpaceDracula, etc.

Actually, don´t know about you, but if someone broke into my house, murdered my family and I only escaped by some miracle or curse, I wouldn´t give a damn about the guy´s motivation or whatever, I would just care for a conflict, in fact I´d only care for a conflict :P

That's fine if it's the only motivation of the protagonist, but the outside observer needs to know more about the antagonist if he's going to care about him as a character. We may be motivated to wreck him if we identify strongly enough with the main character, but even something like murder can be written in a lot of different ways that flesh out the antagonist more.

Example: Darth Maul. Who is he. Why should I care. I know he's probably killed people. He tried to kill whoever else was in that movie and he has weird mind powers. Does he have any kind of character outside of being an asshole? Oh well. Bored.

Also, all of the games you mentioned, with perhaps the exception of Phantasy Star IV, are lauded for their gameplay, not story. And in Phantasy Star IV, the villian is a physical manifestation of hatred, which actually makes his design more interesting than Town Burner #29.

The reason you hate fighting Sigma now is because every X game after 3 and maybe four was awful. Maybe. That's certainly why I hate him. But beyond that, those games are badly written, but this does not mean anything other than they are badly written. Wily's character is simpler (jealous incompetent mad scientist) and therefore more easy to execute. This does not mean that characters cannot be more complex than caricatures, just that whoever writes the dialogue of the X series needs another job.

Let's Examine: A Look at What Makes Games Great (or Not)

Just throwing these out there~

Every Wild Arms game has a prologue system where you act out the story of each character. You play out each characters' scenario looking at the events and actions that led up to this character forming with this other group of people, rather than having it explained in a flashback or text.

A lot of people love the simulation sections of Act Raiser, including me, someone who normally hates sim games. Conversely, not a lot of people like the platforming/action stages. Why. WHY. WHYYYYYYYYYYYYYY

And, uh, let me see. I was going to suggest Valkyrie Profile's questionable design decisions, but that's basically the whole game.

North Korea fires artillery on South Korea

Weird. I see it now that I quote him again but it doesn't show up as an image or a link. OH WELL

North Korea fires artillery on South Korea

Dozens of shots only killed 2 marines?

Are all south koreans honorary marines? edit: Look how stupid I am. I didn't realize there were two more people killed.

Also what webcomic are you talking about Feldschlacht?

Scientific journal to publish article on theoretical precognitive abilities in humans.

Deja vu is just a memory anomaly, but I don't think it's generally thought of to be a precognitive thing.

The effects he recorded were small but statistically significant. In another test, for instance, volunteers were told that an erotic image was going to appear on a computer screen in one of two positions, and asked to guess in advance which position that would be. The image's eventual position was selected at random, but volunteers guessed correctly 53.1 per cent of the time.

That may sound unimpressive â€" truly random guesses would have been right 50 per cent of the time, after all.

My...My god. Who could have possibly predicted this! And it would only ever be fifty percent if you did around a million trial experiments. Call me when this whole thing is replicated.

North Korea fires artillery on South Korea

They do this dance all the time. Nothing will come of it.