So you're saying that stealing games from the owners and manufacturers of it doesn't mean less sales? Then why are people so pissed about things like Limewire? That's stupid. As well as off-topic.
Calling me stupid doesn't make you correct, didn't we already talk about that? The question is unprovable, anyway, because piracy is going to stay. And, yes, this is offtopic, but the whole arguing is offtopic, and since you did brought it up, here's my opinion on the subject:
there are a lot of different categories of gamers, for one thing. There is always that sincere group that doesn't pirate games at all. There is also the group that doesn't have a lot of money. Or the group that plays multiplayer all along. Today, most games have considerable lost their quality. There is a lot of really bad games out there. There is also a lot of complicated games as well. You don't really know what you are buying. You come to a store and see all those games, but you know that if you buy a game, it's done, you can't bring it back. It's a whole $50, too. So certain people pretty much don't buy games at all, except really rarelly.
Casual gamers don't care. They buy whatever is most popular and be happy with it. Casual gamers are usually low-informed and are not very keen to torrent since they have no idea what torrent is anyway. Of course there is a number of them that do pirate games. That is pretty much the main money-damaging group out there.
Now, considering we have piracy. The gamers that don't have money and don't buy games start to pirate games. Doesn't make too much difference since they wouldn't be buying those games in the first place. What they do do, though, is raise the statistics, raise the game's popularity, go on forums and discuss it, make mods for it, etc... they add to the popularity in general. It's like Windows. 80% have Windows. But how many of them have a legal one?
And all those casual people that do buy games begin to hear about the games from the pirating people as well.
Moreover, the group that plays multiplayer takes another approach. You can't play a game multiplayer if you pirate it. While it doesn't really makes sense to buy a game if you pirated it first for single player, it makes perfect sense to buy it later to get into multiplayer, and that is what a lot of people do.
Again, this is just my "opinion". I don't have any statistics with me nor do I think they are even possible considering how the quality of games changed...
I don't see any arguments. Claiming that role-playing-games are roll-playing-games based on NOTHING is an argument? Everything points away from you being right. I see no argument there. So far, I only see you sink down to insultings because you really have nothing else to say.
To the little mister spellchecker. You know, some of us has jobs and can not afford to waste our precious money earning time to check spelling in a forum full of moaning children.
You know, maybe people like you shouldn't waste your time on forums at all. You don't speak babelfish when you talk to people in person just because they waste your time, do you? It's called respect, you know. It's not so hard to add a few paragraphs. And it doesn't steal so much time. Write readibly, or don't write at all, that's what I say. A forum is a place of conversation like any other.
hey again people
OK i got some hits eh? gooood.
Ok role playing today still actually referres to "the role of the dice". And not playing the role of a character, hero, storyline instance of a character. THis is still the standard for modern rpgs.
It is only your opinion with which everyone else will disagree. Golden Axe is a Hack&Slash, just like Diablo, and neither of them are RPG's.
Quote from "bluthammer" »
If you look at it that way, then almost all games are rpgs then. I mean, even shooters you play with a set character. Just look at "Fear" for instance. In any case. The true title of "Rpg games" are more regocnised these days as games where you build a character up using experienced gained by kills or other deeds.
No, you are mistaking the definition of Role Playing here. Again. In FEAR, you cannot determine the color of your hair, your name, your gender, your clothes, nothing. They just give you a particular character and you are limited to him. In FEAR, you can only do what they ask you to do. Go forward, only forward, and shoot everything. You cannot go somewhere else. You cannot talk to your enemies or bribe them or avoid killing them.
RPG includes character development, dialogues, storyline, unlinearty.
"which is infact more like a life simulator than anything else." - that's what RPG's are, actually. Pretty much life simulators.
Diablo will never go MMO. If Blizzard make a MMO and calls it DIablo, it's not Diablo anymore, it's a game with the name "Diablo".
And I wouldn't mind if you divided your post into paragraphs, not very nice to read, you know.
To bluthammer
Ah, no, I don't know how about back then, but now, the "role" part refers to "playing your role". Which is why Diablo is not a full-scale RPG, there is no character development, dialogues, etc...
I consider DnD the one and only normal rip-off of Tolkien that is decent to look at, actually. (with the exception of the Serpent Rider universes, of course) You may not a agree, of course. I consider it quite substantial.
Diablo's universe never interested me. The demon theme didn't appeal to me much. I never cared for Diablo's lore, universe, storyline. I only appreciated the game itself.
There were plenty of hack&slash games before Diablo 1. Golden Axe and stuff: http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?game_id=7966&letter=G. A lot of them were on consoles, especially, which is why you never saw them. Diablo was the first popular game, but not the first game ever.
Nox was a very good clone of Diablo that didn't really steal that much of thing. Once again, it is only your opinion. I prefer Nox to Diablo, but Diablo is more replayable.
First RPG's were DnD. Diablo isn't even an RPG. It's a hack&slash thing.
Perhaps you are talking about the setting? But Diablo didn't revolutionize much. Fantasy Tolkien setting still prevails. Unfortunately. I hate elves too. Except Vulcans.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
there are a lot of different categories of gamers, for one thing. There is always that sincere group that doesn't pirate games at all. There is also the group that doesn't have a lot of money. Or the group that plays multiplayer all along. Today, most games have considerable lost their quality. There is a lot of really bad games out there. There is also a lot of complicated games as well. You don't really know what you are buying. You come to a store and see all those games, but you know that if you buy a game, it's done, you can't bring it back. It's a whole $50, too. So certain people pretty much don't buy games at all, except really rarelly.
Casual gamers don't care. They buy whatever is most popular and be happy with it. Casual gamers are usually low-informed and are not very keen to torrent since they have no idea what torrent is anyway. Of course there is a number of them that do pirate games. That is pretty much the main money-damaging group out there.
Now, considering we have piracy. The gamers that don't have money and don't buy games start to pirate games. Doesn't make too much difference since they wouldn't be buying those games in the first place. What they do do, though, is raise the statistics, raise the game's popularity, go on forums and discuss it, make mods for it, etc... they add to the popularity in general. It's like Windows. 80% have Windows. But how many of them have a legal one?
And all those casual people that do buy games begin to hear about the games from the pirating people as well.
Moreover, the group that plays multiplayer takes another approach. You can't play a game multiplayer if you pirate it. While it doesn't really makes sense to buy a game if you pirated it first for single player, it makes perfect sense to buy it later to get into multiplayer, and that is what a lot of people do.
Again, this is just my "opinion". I don't have any statistics with me nor do I think they are even possible considering how the quality of games changed...
And you don't participate in the storyline. At all. You just go and kill one ton of beasts after another.
It is only your opinion with which everyone else will disagree. Golden Axe is a Hack&Slash, just like Diablo, and neither of them are RPG's.
No, you are mistaking the definition of Role Playing here. Again. In FEAR, you cannot determine the color of your hair, your name, your gender, your clothes, nothing. They just give you a particular character and you are limited to him. In FEAR, you can only do what they ask you to do. Go forward, only forward, and shoot everything. You cannot go somewhere else. You cannot talk to your enemies or bribe them or avoid killing them.
RPG includes character development, dialogues, storyline, unlinearty.
"which is infact more like a life simulator than anything else." - that's what RPG's are, actually. Pretty much life simulators.
Diablo will never go MMO. If Blizzard make a MMO and calls it DIablo, it's not Diablo anymore, it's a game with the name "Diablo".
And I wouldn't mind if you divided your post into paragraphs, not very nice to read, you know.
Ah, no, I don't know how about back then, but now, the "role" part refers to "playing your role". Which is why Diablo is not a full-scale RPG, there is no character development, dialogues, etc...
I consider DnD the one and only normal rip-off of Tolkien that is decent to look at, actually. (with the exception of the Serpent Rider universes, of course) You may not a agree, of course. I consider it quite substantial.
Diablo's universe never interested me. The demon theme didn't appeal to me much. I never cared for Diablo's lore, universe, storyline. I only appreciated the game itself.
There were plenty of hack&slash games before Diablo 1. Golden Axe and stuff: http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?game_id=7966&letter=G. A lot of them were on consoles, especially, which is why you never saw them. Diablo was the first popular game, but not the first game ever.
Nox was a very good clone of Diablo that didn't really steal that much of thing. Once again, it is only your opinion. I prefer Nox to Diablo, but Diablo is more replayable.
I hate MMO's, I guess we will agree here...
Anyway, it's all a matter of opinion, my friend.
Perhaps you are talking about the setting? But Diablo didn't revolutionize much. Fantasy Tolkien setting still prevails. Unfortunately. I hate elves too. Except Vulcans.