A couple people said I need the patch....I did the patch. My understanding is I already ahve it. Maybe I screwed up the install. Pretty sure I ahve it.
Mostly, your character needs more Int. Thankfully there are potions for that.
You are being helpful to an extent. But I think one line of sarcasm is a fair response to several direct and indirect insults...like Moron and Dick for example.
Your tone was hostile from your first post. While it wasn't a good idea for Mystral to rise to the bait, you shouldn't have baited him. It was unkind. You told all
of us that we are fools who like to 'convince [ourselves] that [we] did something cool.'
Honestly, the option you're talking about, killing strike-breakers who happen to be the city's police, is not an option with verisimilitude. Yes, you could conceivably do that, and if you did it should actually split the loyalties much, much finer than the game lets it, but you have
to realize that it would make Tarant your enemy, right?
I suppose though if I want help I hsould just accept that the person offering the help has the right to call me a moron and a dick every other sentence.....
Stop that. Mystral called you a moron once because you were being sarcastic and rude, and the attitude continued when other, more level-headed responses attempted to show you the quest resolution you were looking for.
I have my reservations about the game.
We all do.
Sorry that me expressing that motivates you to attack me personally. My nature is to respond sarcastically/mockingly.
You attacked us all! I quote:
People just like to think its open ended so they can convince themself they did something cool .
Had you felt satisfied to attack the game, I'm not sure you'd've received Mystral's response of calling you a moron.
So lets just smoke that tomohawk and burry it.
Fine. It's your hatchet. Go smoke it.
The problem with open-ended games, to me, is they are dang near impossible to make. I'd prefer something linear...that admits to being linear...like Icewindale. If they work in some optionals, great. pretending that you can really choose your way through comes down to biting off more than you can chew. This particular maker had a habit of doing that...and it wasn7t exactly profitable.
They always bit off more than they could chew, it's true. Troika titles were full of promise, and all three of them were rushed out the door before they were completed. Arcanum is no less an example of this than either of its brethren.
This mostly was a problem of their business model, since working for third parties with specific demands while using such a small staff and bla bla bla with strong perfectionist tendencies meant they never actually completed a game properly, meaning their next project was also rushed, meaning they were in no position to demand more freedom the next time. Eventually, there was no next time.
As such, all their games are buggy, strong on promise and thick with content and interesting stuff, and sadly incomplete.
Part of the reason for this was because they wanted multiple approaches, more approaches than anybody had been able to manage before. This is why, in Arcanum, there are several quests which can be furthered by Conjuring Spirits, Seeing Contents, sneak thievery, bullying, gentle and intelligent persuasion, intelligent dialogue, brute force, and sometimes probably even technological know-how. (I haven't played through that approach enough to see how it helps. And hey, it's possible it doesn't.)
But it's true that eventually somebody will want an approach they didn't consider.
Honestly, your big problems with your approach are half yours, half theirs.
1) You want to do something which, 'realistically'*, would upset the whole city and turn it against you.
2) The game handles the fallout of this attack poorly. Very, very poorly. You should probably get killed, but it should be by guards, not orcs or journalists. (And if you're badass enough to take out all the city's guards, well... bravo, that's actually pretty cool. Hence 'probably.')
* I hate using that word in fantasy scenarios, but I can't find the right conjugation of 'verisimilitude' for that adjective.
I don7t need the maniacle crazy massmurderer option that has been worked into Baldur's and the like...doesn't a ppeal to me. Having it as an option may make them some money...
That's not really why the option exists. The option exists because PCs are wildcards who are supposed to be able to do what they want, and arbitrarily blocking off an area with 'invisible walls' or making NPCs invulnerable is cheap and irritating to players. Lord British was a gamer before he was a programmer, and he was famous for this sort of thing.
I do like the idea of having a middleground to walk. Where you can choose more freely. Unfortunately I have found that Arcanum still feels pretty set in its way. You can't really think to say what you would. I recognize that it takes a lot of programming to make that possible, to account for all the approaches that there might be and to have quest chains that can addapt and adjust...without breaking....
Planescape: Torment has the dialogue trees you want. I can only think of one occasion in Arcanum where you were allowed to agree to a quest and specifically say, in the dialogue option, that you were lying when you made the agreement. Other parts of the game may allow you to do this by acting against the agreement you made, or reporting the other party to the authorities, but the [truth] and [lie] tags on responses is genuinely helpful, and not an entirely artificial or stupid expansion of the dialogue trees.
And that's only the simplest example of Planescape: Torment's relative freedom of dialogue.
Arcanum tends to give options (note: tends
), but it does fall short in several places. Rather a pity.
I digress. Writing mods and/or coding games isn't really fun to me. I like looking through the story.
Eh. I'm just intrigued by the notion.
I like seeing it kinda flash by, check out the different systems/magic/combat...in Arcanum Tech is a system. A bit hands tied to look at the magic or tech, can only choose one on a single run through.
We'll get back to this in a second...
Going in to write a mod to add options I want, to fit how I want to play through with a character concept...Is the exact oposite approach a game designer should have to designing games...the exact opposite of what creating an open-ended game requires. Yo uneed to write for other people, not yourself.
I just think that an additional and genuinely interesting quest would be a boon to others. I'm not sure how much I'd even enjoy playing through a quest of my own design, as I'd probably spend the whole time picking apart my own work. However, other people might appreciate the added options.
They usually do, actually, if the options are any good.
Modding the aggro chagne for more realism is a good idea though and I agree wtih you there. It comes down to a lot of work.
I can't even promise that's possible, or I think it'd have been done by now. I can always hope somebody has the chops to pull it off.
I7d rather walk through a story knowing its a story being told by someone else than the false promise I can walk through an AI world with credible realism and choose my way according to the character concept I envisioned.
Your character concept wants to solve the world's complex social problems with a sub-par degree of intelligence. I'm sorry, but the problems in Arcanum aren't that simple sometimes. In this case, that's because the writers of the game wanted to tell a story, and you don't like their story here.
An example of this: "A bit hands tied to look at the magic or tech, can only choose one on a single run through."
Your hands are tied there because the story of the game requires the two to be essentially different. I assume you've stopped to read some of the books along the way, and have seen all the references to in-setting debates over the nature of the two forces?
Whereas some magical steampunk settings allow the free mishmashing of technology and magic, there's a strange trope they were exploring in Arcanum where technology and magic are opposed forces. It's almost a cliche, and often it's overplayed, but here it was central to the story and important to the game. To ask this not
to be reflected in game mechanics would actually be a pretty bad idea, since it would result in events taking place during your playthrough which literally would be impossible by the game setting's physics. (This is called 'Gameplay and Story Segregation.' It's a common fault they were trying to avoid, I think.)
Perhaps you don't like the Magic Vs. Technology trope, even as it's expressed here. I usually don't like it, but Arcanum's in-depth discussion of the trope fascinates me, so I'm willing to call it a problem of presentation elsewhere. It also came up in the movie Wizards, by Ralph Bakshi, but your mileage may vary with that film. (Most of my friends and I like it. Nevertheless, I suspect it's a bit niche.)
Look, when you want help, don't come in swinging at the people you're asking. Don't tell us we're 'convincing ourselves' of foolish notions amidst a series of other statements about the game where you refer to it as stupid and retarded.
If you dismiss this advice, and it's advice, don't expect everybody to remain civil. You acted like a dick from the first post, in direct violation of Wil Wheaton's rule. Don't. It's that simple. If you act like a nice guy, you are a nice guy. If you hurl insults every which way, you're not. So be a nice guy.