RADNEN'S PROFILE

author=Lennon
I don't know man, I find it much better to somewhat not want to fight the villain. Tales Of games do this really well. I can't recall one of them where I actually flat out wanted to kill the main villain. I can see that working for minor villains but it's just lame when the main conflict is "I WILL KILL YOU".

Interesting. Perhaps I'll not include a main villain in my game. I think it's possible to create a game without an antagonist (that's a person), but still have it "feel" like there is an ultimate evil, or ultimate good.

The main character of my game is Konrad, aka "Blockman"


He's a time traveler from the past. His mission was to just "test" the time machines, but something went wrong and pushed him to another time and place. His name was just a colloquial nick-name, you actually get to name him however you want, later on when he gets amnesia. No - he doesn't start out with it, his amnesia is story-added at a later time in the game.

He's from a race of block-like people with a sharp intellect and a knack for consumerism, technology and blowing things up. His race of people are responsible for many bad things, even though you'll try to represent what's good in the universe. He is a dynamic character and will change emotions and feelings over time. You can choose what he says in most circumstances, but he has his own mind. He's not a silent type and has a cocky if not sarcastic attitude towards others. He may come off as shockingly evil in intent at the start, but I hope to flesh out the weaker more moral moments of his non-time travelling life as you make him explore the near and far.

post=Crystalgate
However, in RPGs there's often no reward for handling the fights better. Giving the characters the right equipment selection and other out of battle adjustment usually gives you advantages, but being clever during the battles is pointless.

This is why I like ARPG's like SoM or Chrono Trigger. You can get better with timing and what-not. Mario games are in constant motion. I think there's less "skill" involved on games that pause often or are turn based.

post=Darken
The point of that link is that the developers listened to the fan criticisms of the sonic the hedgehog games and actually made a decent game (as far as review ratings go).

Why didn't they hire an American writer like they did for Sonic?

I don't know, you tell me? I'm wondering why you are fixated on excusing garbage writing because it was "intended for japanese audiences."

"garbage writing" is a very strong term. I never said it was garbage, but you probably do, I don't know. All I know is that Sakamoto has been with Metroid for a very long time, so, its just strange to see why he'd "turn his back on the fans" and write something contrary to what the fans believed. All I've posited is that because he's Japanese he might have not received much in the way of American audiences expectations on who or what Samus represents. This is only a fair point. I've made little argument.

post=Darken
So you're basically saying that no one is allowed to express their opinions on why they do not like the change? You think this fan betrayal attitude is unnatural and should be forbidden?

I know my opinion is contrary to popular belief; I'll just let it sink in. It's a kind of controversial notion. I like to think of it as rational; when fans complain about a game its over for them, the dev's may not retract their changes, or recall a game, ergo, it's unnatural. Nothing is accomplished but vented steam. Have you ever seen fan reaction to a negative change go well for the future of that games fandom? No...

post=Darken
As for the audience bit, you do know Metroid is primarily for western audiences right? Metroid always sells more in the states, you think they just picked up a western developer by chance for the prime games? I'm guessing Nintendo wanted to get in on the Ninja Gaiden/God of War craze in the west by hiring Team Ninja.

Nintendo; not Sakamoto. Team Ninja was responsible for the creation of the game not the writing of Samus.