It's like a group of D&D high school virgins got together and made a video game

[Claudius]

Common if you can't make the difference between prude and child you have a problem. Prude is for adult, for a child bellow a certain age that means few. But I understand that non prude parents would not like that child bellow an age read or look at something prude people can't support.

I think you misunderstand me. I meant that by saying the game is not geared for children and then in the same sentence saying it is not geared for the usa that it sounds like you are saying the usa adult is like children.

For example I could say that my explanation is not geared for morons and also that it is not geared for non-native english speakers and it would sound like I was saying non-native english speakers were morons.

I do not believe this of course I am just making an example so you have an understanding of what I was trying to say. I have high respect for people of other nationalities and I understand that they have a different culture from the usa. And I don't think anyone is a moron for misunderstanding me whether they are english speaker or not!

Also prude is a derogitory term. If I am not comfortable with sexual material I don't care to be called a prude. It would be like if a called someone a sex maniac because they watched a film with sex content. I feel it is insulting to call someone a prude in my opinion.

A prude (Old French prude)[1] is a person who is described as being overly concerned with decorum or propriety. They may be perceived as being uncomfortable with sexuality, nudity, alcohol, drug use or mischief. It can also refer to a person that has little sexual experience, despite the fact they may want to engage in such behavior.

The name is generally considered to mean excessive modesty, and hence unflattering, and is often used as an insult. A person who is considered a prude may have reservations about nudity, participating in romantic or sexual activity, drinking alcohol or consuming other drugs, or participating in mischief. These reservations may stem from shyness or strict moral beliefs. Actions or beliefs that may cause someone to be labeled a prude include advocating or practising abstinence, advocating prohibition, advocating censorship of sexuality or nudity in media, disapproval of being topless in public, avoiding or condemning displays of affection, or exhibiting unusual levels of discomfort with sexuality, alcohol, drugs, or mischief.

in other words you might think someone IS a prude (or a sex maniac) but it is rude to say it

[Lady Dragonfly]

@phelot43

I, too found the game to be a bit of a socially-awkward teenage boys wet dream.

That is the best description of the crude "adult" aspect of this game up to date, imo.

@Kenrenk

I have tried to play Torment many times from its release to two years ago. I never succeed to get out of the beginning and continue the game. The beginning is awful for me, repetitive, obscure scenario that doesn't succeed one second to rise my curiosity. So I can't compare.

I can see why you like The Witcher much more. No surprise here. Torment is just a common "cookie-cutter D&D alignment type or liniar reputation scale CRPG", as per Xandax.

@Xandax

Nobody ever claimed the game where you carry around big weapons, in a fantasy world, slaying monsters and killing human and elves had realism when it came to womanising.
At least it isn't realistic in other aspects, so why demand it in this aspect?

I was under impression that the "realism" was perceived to be The Witcher’s strong point ("...this is the first game with balls, which shows a real medieval world") . Buck said, "I would imagine the team was going for realism here" when I complained about somewhat limited inventory. I personally don't see realism anywhere in this "modern fantasy" game (you and I are in complete agreement, here) and, frankly, I wouldn't expect much "realism" in a fantasy videogame anyway. I would like to see a more convenient interface instead, even if carrying a few more daggers and swords is less realistic to you and Buck than, say, carrying hundreds of heads, tails, tongues, plants, flowers, potions, meteorits, bottles of wine, mugs of beer, tons of food and heaps of other junk in a small pouch.

However, if somebody makes point that "the team was going for realism" in one aspect, one might expect the team would go for some realism in all other aspects as well.

As to swearing and womanizing in the RPG where racism, terrorism, ecology and genetic research are commonplace topics, term "cognitive dissonance" is used in a tavern by drunk bards and drunk dwarves, bosomy "babes" wear translucent modern underware and seductively undulate their bodies while discussing grave matters with Geralt, I assume all this to be a part of Sapkiwski "modern fantasy", faithfully recreated in the game (to those who are familiar with the novels: please correct me if I am wrong).

As the Gamespot (they gave the game high 8.5) sardonically stated in its overall positive review,

Swearing and bizarre word choices are another issue. One moment you're cruising along listening to fairly standard RPG conversations, and then you're hit with out-of-the-blue modern slang and "F" bombs. It's pretty jarring to hear the leader of your witcher band calling a female team member "babe," let alone to hear Geralt disgustingly grunt "Abso-f***ing-lutely!" Voice acting often lacks authority as well, which highlights these strange lines. Fellow adventurers look like grizzled warriors but sound more like high schoolers. The actor who voices Geralt tries too hard, like a kid attempting a deep, gravelly voice so he can fool the counter jockey at the corner store into selling him a six-pack.

Interactions between the sexes are also risqué in a corny way that would rev up only Beavis and Butthead. It's ridiculous enough that the side quests in every act let Geralt get horizontal with virtually every woman he meets, but it's just pathetic that each conquest is rewarded with a playing card that depicts the lovely lass in a come-hither pose. There isn't even any real payoff with these pics, either, given that the nudity that appeared in the European version of the game has been censored due to prudish Stateside sensibilities. (Thank you, Hot Coffee controversy.) At any rate, the sex is ludicrous and out of place, and is apparently there only to give game geeks hope that a fellow guy with lanky, unwashed hair and corpse-pale skin can score with hot babes.

Pretty much in line with teenage boys’ wet dream. I am yet to hear that somebody actually skipped the card collection.

Not the sexual content which proponents often wants to focus on, not that there are cut-scenes instead of wall of text, not the linearity of a story-driven game over a free-roaming one.
But the fact that your choices affected the story line more then just getting rewards X or Y and modifying an alignment/reputation attribute.

I realize that you are willing to close your eyes at all negative issues for the sake of the welcomed moral ambiguity, decent storyline and some difficult “choices” affecting it. That does not mean everybody else should close their eyes, however minor these flaws might appear to you personally. I also realize that you failed to comprehend fable’s point of view and reasoning concerning interactivity. That’s OK. We are all entitled to our opinions.

I hope the game developers pay at least the same attention to critical comments as to lavish praise though; otherwise they will never improve.
We all paid money for the game and my $50 support CD-Project no less than yours. For some reason, I don’t feel that my opinion is of any value. Oh well. Nobody likes critics.

[phelot43]

"Nobody ever claimed the game where you carry around big weapons, in a fantasy world, slaying monsters and killing human and elves had realism when it came to womanising.
At least it isn't realistic in other aspects, so why demand it in this aspect?
Besides, the majority of sexual content can be skipped or avoided and the "explicity" is - well to say the least non-existing. A few blurred scenes, some sound bits, and some few tarot cards depicting little more then you see walking down the street on advertisement billboards or in advertisement in prime-time television."

I always thought games were working towards being as realistic as possible, within reason, and so long as it is fun. My whole point isn't that the sex scenes are obscene or that they're distracting. My point is that it could have been done in a more mature and integral way. Right now its more of a joke, in a game that is, and correct me if I'm wrong, supposed to be serious. I could skip it, but I think it's sad to have to skip a feature that's lame when it could have been good.

"It looks far more to me, like something people focus on for the ones who either do not like the game or want to flaw it. "Oh the game is immature because it has *shudder* sex in it". The sexual content makes up so little, and basically the only ones I found you could not "avoid" where pre-game love interests, so they hardly jumped in the sack for a bunch of tulips."

Call me an old bastard, but I've gotten tired of people who just assume "this is as good as it gets nowadays." We gamers should nitpick and prod and poke games. Developers should know when something wasn't done right and they should be expected to try and improve it in the future. Look, the sex scenes are only a minor part of my qualms about this game. I have more issues with the awkward dialog and a few other things. All in all, I like this game, I'm playing it, I love the art style and music. I do think it's a breath of fresh air, but I also think it's not a Holy Grail of RPGs. Only my opinion.

"No an "evil" church is nothing new (however although I know the situation you refer to, the church in itself is not evil actually) and I seriously doubt any game makes you think of the impact on the "lives and minds of it's participants". It is a game, it is not a social experiement. Playing Planescape Torment, I did not contemplate my actions in the grand-scheeme of the universe either."

I'm very ghey for Torment so forgive me: I thought the characters were so well thought out and the amount of dialog you can have with them was truly amazing. I know it bummed a lot of people out, because of all the reading, but I loved it. It was also the imagination of having all these strange, but believable characters that set that game apart. I judge games not only by other games, but by other forms of media, because I think games can be more then just something you play for an hour and then quit out. Games were once an art form that combined so many different mediums of art such as music, sound graphics, gameplay, story, etc. all presented by a software companies core team. It was like a test of their mettle, today many aspects of games of simply outsourced...

Personally I hate when characters in video games are completely voice acted because it ALWAYS limits the available text that could have been if the dialog was simply written out. Voice actors need to get paid and they need a lot of time, as such you can't have them voice out everything you would HOPE to have in dialog. This, of course is a whole other argument for another time.

"However you do get presented with a choice in the exact situation you mention. Should I kill the evil person one, or the evil person two?
Rarely do you see this in other CRPGs, which always have one clear evil (give book to demon) or good (use book to banish demon) choice."

There are certainly some interesting choices... but it still seems clear to me what to choose most of the time. With Abigail for example: we learn all this dirt on the villagers then when we finally get to Abigail in the cave we suddenly learn that she's "evil" as well. It just seemed so awkward and out of place. I don't mean to say that she should be this Holy goody-two-shoes just that it semed almost an afterthought that "oh yeah, we should make her evil too, to make a riveting choice for the player." I just didn't feel it and it still felt like I was making a "good guy" decision by helping her. (I reloaded and ditched her to the mob, only to find that all the peasants died anyway, WTF kills them?)

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing to have a clear good and evil choice. Yes it's tired, but then having a blackguard kind of hero is too. It's all in how it's presented. I don't think the Witcher fails, but I just don't think it succeeds as well.

Anyways, I've typed so much and I feel quite emo right now :speech: I don't mean to offend anyone: If you like this game then good on you, I'm merely stating my opinion. And I think all this talk is only a good sign for the Witcher since it says that it's striking interest. Good day

[phelot43]

@phelot43
I can see why you like The Witcher much more. No surprise here. Torment is just a common "cookie-cutter D&D alignment type or liniar reputation scale CRPG", as per Xandax.

HAHA! I have just been placed in the shoes of a "The Witcher" fanboy. I am so obsessed with Torment, but am forced to realize that a lot of my qualms with The Witcher is only a matter of taste and (have I said it enough?) opinion. I guess that's the truth of a lot of things: some like it, others don't. Good day everyone.

[Lady Dragonfly]

HAHA! I have just been placed in the shoes of a "The Witcher" fanboy. I am so obsessed with Torment, but am forced to realize that a lot of my qualms with The Witcher is only a matter of taste and (have I said it enough?) opinion. I guess that's the truth of a lot of things: some like it, others don't. Good day everyone.

What you've just quoted above is my reply to Kenrenk. Look it up. The intended addressee is @Kenrenk, not @phelot43.
Unless you have multiple accounts and forgot to log out.

[phelot43]

What you've just quoted above is my reply to Kenrenk. Look it up. The intended addressee is @Kenrenk, not @phelot43.
Unless you have multiple accounts and forgot to log out.

What I meant by my reply is that I <3 Torment. It would seem that you don't. So, when I say I've been placed in the shoes of a The Witcher fanboy, I mean to say that it sucks when someone talks ill about a game that you like. I realize that I've been talking a bit of smack about The Witcher and thus, I see why some people adamantly defend it.

Anyways, sorry for my mix up. Sometimes that happens in this strange land called The Internet :laugh:

[dragon wench]

Part of why I'm really looking forward to playing this game is just to see first hand the issues being discussed here.
A couple of things occur to me though...
While I really do think the concept of post-sex trophy cards and such is immature, I'm somewhat surprised it has raised as much fuss, because in comparison to Fable, as just one example, where you were awarded evil points (desirable for those playing an evil character) for beating up and murdering your wife... the idea of trophy cards seems pretty banal.
The other thing to consider is this... Poland is not exactly the most egalitarian nation in the world when it comes to gender issues... I'm not saying this is an excuse, but I do think there may be a certain cultural context at work, both within the game, and within the novels it is based upon.

Anyway, I'll obviously see much better once I experience the game for myself, but it were just a couple of thoughts I had.

[Lady Dragonfly]

What I meant by my reply is that I <3 Torment. It would seem that you don't. So, when I say I've been placed in the shoes of a The Witcher fanboy, I mean to say that it sucks when someone talks ill about a game that you like. I realize that I've been talking a bit of smack about The Witcher and thus, I see why some people adamantly defend it.

Anyways, sorry for my mix up. Sometimes that happens in this strange land called The Internet :laugh:

I think you are still confused by my ever so subtle ~.
I regard Torment as one of the best RPG ever, even if Xandax might call it a cookie-cutter type RPG.
I like cookies. And cutters. Especially cutters. Oh yes... those naughty cutters...

[phelot43]

I think you are still confused by my ever so subtle ~.
I regard Torment as one of the best RPG ever, even if Xandax might call it a cookie-cutter type RPG.
I like cookies. And cutters. Especially cutters. Oh yes... those naughty cutters...

facepalm @ self.

Nevermind me... I'm gonna go check out some more Witcher pr0n.

Later berk

[Xandax]

<snip>
I was under impression that the "realism" was perceived to be The Witcher’s strong point ("...this is the first game with balls, which shows a real medieval world") . Buck said, "I would imagine the team was going for realism here" when I complained about somewhat limited inventory. I personally don't see realism anywhere in this "modern fantasy" game (you and I are in complete agreement, here) and, frankly, I wouldn't expect much "realism" in a fantasy videogame anyway. I would like to see a more convenient interface instead, even if carrying a few more daggers and swords is less realistic to you and Buck than, say, carrying hundreds of heads, tails, tongues, plants, flowers, potions, meteorits, bottles of wine, mugs of beer, tons of food and heaps of other junk in a small pouch.

However, if somebody makes point that "the team was going for realism" in one aspect, one might expect the team would go for some realism in all other aspects as well. <snip>

Why?
Realism in a game is never full or complete, realism is not fun in a game - well not complete realism.
Thus simply because one factor is realistic inspired does not mean everything else is should be "realism". That is pretty clear as we run around slaying monsters with big weapons etc.
Besides, as you say yourself the inventory is not realistic, it is simply "more" realistic compared to say - NwN for example, or Kotor or Oblivion from what I recall etc.
The world is also more realistic, due to all the "evils" of the gameworld isn't filtered out as it is in so many other games and it isn't black and white, it that does not mean it is completely realistic and that the entire game is a realism simulator.
Realism, like all other things implemented in a computer game runs on a scale. And expecting actual realism in the behaviour and attitude in the depicting of fictive people's behaviour towards a fictive mutant which women find fascinating and interesting, is quite different then a more realistic compared to many other game approach to inventory.

<snip>
Pretty much in line with teenage boys’ wet dream. I am yet to hear that somebody actually skipped the card collection. <snip>

Well, I'm one. After act II, I skipped the ones that weren't plot critical.

<snip>
I realize that you are willing to close your eyes at all negative issues for the sake of the welcomed moral ambiguity, decent storyline and some difficult “choices” affecting it. That does not mean everybody else should close their eyes, however minor these flaws might appear to you personally. I also realize that you failed to comprehend fable’s point of view and reasoning concerning interactivity. That’s OK. We are all entitled to our opinions.
<snip>

You're wrong - I do not close my eyes at all. I am however being realistic (in the actual sense of the world) and where others see problems, I would rather focus on the positives which I feel stand out compared to so many other games.
I'm realistic. CRPGs are currently in my book in a shamble. Dumped down, self-playing, no consequence games.
Along comes something which attempts to break the mold, and I would rather focus on what the game did (quite) well, instead of the things it did bad.

Oh, and I did not fail to comprehend fables point on interactivity, I just can't comprehend his position on how text can be the result of a more creative process simply because it's displayed as text, instead of cut-scene dialogue in case it is the same writing. Hardly anything to do with interactivity at all. This text I just written would be more "creative" simply because you read it instead of speak it out loud. So that is where our disagreement lies.

<snip>
I hope the game developers pay at least the same attention to critical comments as to lavish praise though; otherwise they will never improve.
We all paid money for the game and my $50 support CD-Project no less than yours. For some reason, I don’t feel that my opinion is of any value. Oh well. Nobody likes critics.

Oh I am sure they do. We even had a developer post in this thread, in the early part of it.
But this beeing a place where we can all write, I can write that I disagree, and would rather focus on where the game stands out in a hope we see more like that in the future.
There is something wrong with all games, and everybody does not like the same. That doesn't mean I'll stop posting what I like when others can freely post what they dislike.

[Xandax]

I think you are still confused by my ever so subtle ~.
I regard Torment as one of the best RPG ever, even if Xandax might call it a cookie-cutter type RPG.
I like cookies. And cutters. Especially cutters. Oh yes... those naughty cutters...

If you have a problem with me, it would suit you better to take it up with me, instead of twice mentioning my statement as a (sarcastic) comment used to reply to others. Better to go direct to the source then tip-toe around.

Besides the Dialogue and the setting, Planescape did little for CRPGs that wasn't already done by games like Baldur's Gate. There weren't any consequence, the dialogue, while lengthy (even wall of text-like at times), was as I recall still very limited.
So while I did enjoy parts of Planescape, outside good dialogue/story, it does not stand out in any way to me.
And that represent a problem, because I prefer game-consequences to just lengthy dialogue in RPGs. Reading a book is not roleplaying, but making choices, as your character would, and seeing them interact and affect the gameworld, that's what I like to see (on top of a good story).

[fable]

Oh, and I did not fail to comprehend fables point on interactivity, I just can't comprehend his position on how text can be the result of a more creative process simply because it's displayed as text, instead of cut-scene dialogue in case it is the same writing. Hardly anything to do with interactivity at all.

Xandax, I never suggested that a yes/no faux dialog choice was any more creative than a cutscene. If you go back and read from our exchange, you'll see where I repeatedly discussed the interactivity of three different elements, of which one was an extensive and highly customized dialog tree, vs. a cutscene.

[Xandax]

As much as I do not want to go into this again;

Xandax, I never suggested that a yes/no faux dialog choice was any more creative than a cutscene. If you go back and read from our exchange, you'll see where I repeatedly discussed the interactivity of three different elements, of which one was an extensive and highly customized dialog tree, vs. a cutscene.

Sorry, but you did.

<snip>
Sorry, but that is not correct. There is no more creativity involved in writing up some story elements and getting the innkeeper to tell it via text, then there is getting it shown as a cut-scene of the innkeeper telling it to you.

The answer is: Yes! <snip>

Basically - you define that the text is *automatically* and *magically* more the result of more creative process only because it is displayed as text and not a cut-scene.
That has been what I've been trying to address the entire time, with you contradicting me.

You can also have the exact same mechanics as voice/cut-scenes as you can via text. The problem is that many simply use cut-scene and forget about the actual dialogue conveyed. Text is not de facto and magically more creative then non-text. It is how the tool is used. Cut-scenes is a tool, like text.

[fable]

Sorry, but you did.

No, I did not. This isn't a return to that argument. This is simply an effort to prevent your misrepresenting the points I have presented. I've already stated what I wrote, and anybody can go back and read my content to see that. With respect, you don't get to redefine those.

[Xandax]

No, I did not. This isn't a return to that argument. This is simply an effort to prevent your misrepresenting the points I have presented. I've already stated what I wrote, and anybody can go back and read my content to see that. With respect, you don't get to redefine those.

I did not redefine, I quoted you contradicting me, when I said that text is not automatically more creative then the cut-scene, especially it being the same text. And yes, it is an easy read.
This text is not the result of a more creative process simply because it is text, compared to if it was a cut-scene of me saying it.

[fable]

I did not redefine, I quoted you contradicting me, when I said that text is not automatically more creative then the cut-scene, especially it being the same text. And yes, it is an easy read.
This text is not the result of a more creative process simply because it is text, compared to if it was a cut-scene of me saying it.

If you'll read up, you'll see that I stated the cutscene is inherently uncreative, and that various game design elements (I used three very different examples) are inherently more creative because of the possibilities they allow for interactivity. You never responded to any of this, though I restated it with detail at least three times, in different messages. That was one of the major reasons I stopped our argument. I never wrote that providing a text version of a cutscene is more creative than that same cutscene, as you just wrote, above. Nor do I believe this.

Re-read our discussion. See if what I wrote above isn't the case. Whether you agree with my expressed point of view doesn't matter, since that argument is done. All I ask is that you don't put words in my mouth. Thanks.

To everyone: I'll ask you what I asked Xandax, before. Is there anyone who has ever encountered a creative cutscene? Please remember in answering, simply using different camera angles while engaging in a dialog text tree is not a cutscene. That's a dialog tree with added visual content.

[cielaqu]

Answering is pointless unless you define what you mean by cutscene and creativity.

[fable]

Answering is pointless unless you define what you mean by cutscene and creativity.

If you'd read this thread before commenting, you would have seen that I'd already done so--explicitly in one case, implicitly in the other.

And yes, before you ask, I do expect people who comment to have read the thread. Although all comments are welcome, that is generally the way we do things here at GameBanshee, so that everybody joins in with the same understanding of what has gone before.

[cielaqu]

Yes, but you define these terms each time differently, as character interactivity or player interactivity.

[fable]

Yes, but you define these terms each time differently, as character interactivity or player interactivity.

I've defined what a cutscene is. I've given examples of the creativity a developer displays, including interactivity with the environment, party interactivity (when a party exists), broadly branching, detailed dialog trees, etc. There are more: the interface, inventory, character creation, quest design, etc. You may feel otherwise, but in my opinion creativity in game design isn't a matter of just one thing. It's a sum of many different factors. But I think most people have a good understanding of what isn't creative. Hence, my question.

So, to repeat: Is there anyone who has ever encountered a creative cutscene? Please remember in answering, simply using different camera angles while engaging in a dialog text tree is not a cutscene. That's a dialog tree with added visual content.