Isaac wrote:Says who?
Says my opinion which is why I bothered to chime in at all. I thought that was pretty obvious.
Isaac wrote:
And you accept it along with the caustic demeanor and insults do you? You read and cheer him along, is that it ~insults and all?
(I am assuming so, seeing that you've included a mild one of your own.)
What I agree with is that you aren't really providing anything other than your opinion that you are trying to represent as fact when it clearly isn't and trying to claim a victory where there is none to claim.
Anurias wrote:I disagree with Azel on plenty of things on this forum, but in this case what I see is him saying that your 'arguments' (and I use the term loosely) are simply personal opinions with no factual basis. Which is completely true.
The "Which is completely true." goes with " your 'arguments' are simply personal opinions with no factual basis." So I don't know what you are saying is "never true of anything." As for the mass consent doesn't establish a fact, I never claimed it did. What I claimed was a fact was that there was a 'mass consent of an opinion' which is a verifiable fact by checking statistics.
Isaac wrote:This was never about personal enjoyment ~you are being almost as bad a he is with assumptions. What leads you to say, "You may not personally enjoy the game"?
The word 'may' indicates that I'm not sure if you enjoy the game or not. It is being used because you don't outright come out and say that you don't enjoy the game, but your comments up till this point have been indicative that you don't like the game. It is entirely possible that there has been a misinterpretation of your level of enjoyment of the game, but in all honesty that really comes down to how you have represented yourself here.
Isaac wrote:
Tell me this... If I had instead stated that Bethesda makes mediocre shooters (which is equally true btw ~and Tod Howard would smugly agree)... would you take that as non-enjoyment?
Claiming that Bethesda makes mediocre shooters is an opinion regardless of who says it. There is no verifiable information in that statement, only what the person saying it thinks in regards to the subject matter. Doesn't really matter who agrees or disagrees with that, it's still the opinion of the person stating it. As to whether it translates to non-enjoyment on the part of the person making the statement. Could be... could not be. That depends on the person making the statement. I've played plenty of games that I thought were mediocre but still enjoyed, I've also played games in genres that I didn't like at all and hated playing regardless of if they were a good or bad (opinions) game in the genre. It's more about 'how' it's said than 'what' is said.
Isaac wrote:I'm not arguing that any of these games are bad ~not even FO3... Observing that TES is a poor RPG doesn't make it a bad game ~it points out that it's a poor RPG.
It's a poor RPG 'in your opinion.' However, the fact that it was won awards that come from votes by people that play games of the genre it would seem that the mass opinion is in contradiction to your opinion. Does that mean it should change your opinion? Not necessarily, but it does show statistics of opinions that point to more people disagreeing with your opinion than there are agreeing with it. That (the statistics, not the opinions) is a verifiable fact.
Isaac wrote:
I have to ask [to know who I'm typing to]: If 150,000 people all attested that Skyrim was the best RPG ever made ~would that make it so? If 300,000 people attested that the previous group was wrong, would that, make that suddenly true?
To this I have several questions but in the end those questions really don't matter because again this scenario is based on opinions. The 150,000 people that claim it's the best are of the opinion that it is, and the 300,000 people that claim otherwise are of that opinion. The only thing here that is a fact are that this one group of people thinks the game is the best, and this other group thinks the game isn't the best. Which group you'd be in depends entirely on what you think. Neither side is true or false because both sides are opinions.
Isaac wrote:
How about if the poll wasn't about RPG's but was about the shape of the Earth? [round or flat]
If the masses think it's flat... does that make it flat? This last is rhetorical; not seriously asked, nor needing a genuine answer. What the argument distills to is not the masses' opinion of RPG, but their definition of RPG.
I'm going to answer this anyway because of how ridiculous it is to as this scenario even rhetorically. You are changing the question from one about opinions to one about facts. Fact, the Earth is round. This has been proved and is undeniable, anyone saying it's flat needs to go get an education since it's completely verifiable. Whether someone thinks something is good or bad is opinion, not verifiable information since everyone can have a different opinion and all right and all are wrong simultaneously. Bringing this up in your arguments does absolutely nothing to support your case.
Now if you want to go into the argument distilling into the masses' definition of RPG I'll just say this. All definitions are defined by the masses. As evidenced by changes throughout history of definitions of anything changing over time. They change by the masses changing the way they communicate. In all honesty, the earliest form of RPG I know of (not to be confused with the earliest form of RPG ever, because I don't know what that is) is Dungeons & Dragons, which is now referred to as a 'Paper & Pen RPG'. The Elder Scrolls games mirror more of what is in D&D than many modern RPG video games. In most modern RPG video games that I've played you get pre-generated characters that have their own history and destiny and all you're really doing is playing a game that plays out like a book. In D&D you generated your own character with race, stats, skills, history and started the game at a set point in your character's life with the freedom to do anything you chose. The DM had a campaign for you to follow, but if you chose to ignore the campaign that was between you and DM what happened. TES does the same thing, they start you off at a point in the game with no set history for your character. You get to make that up yourself. They give you a campaign and call it the main quest line, and you can choose to accept it or turn away from it. It's quite literally a D&D game that you play by yourself and Bethesda is your DM.
Does TES match up with something like say Final Fantasy? Nope. They are both RPGs, but they are different forms of them from different eras of the definition of RPG; a definition that changed over time by the masses using RPG as a term for a game that is better described as a video game novel.
Isaac wrote:
So I'll ask you. Do you think that the masses' definition of RPG [at its core] means: An engine that [best effort] simulates what one would see if they were personally there (in the fictional game world)?, ie. 'stream of consciousness play' like Bethesda tend to make; or that that part was irrelevant to being an RPG, where it could exist in the game or not; [and does exist in plenty of first person games that are not RPGs]. If that is their opinion, does that make it true?
Do you think that a mass opinion indicating that a purely text based RPG couldn't be an RPG ~or a really good one? And would this make that true ~in your opinion, because they said so?
At present I believe that the mass definition of RPG is any game where you assume a role that is not your own. IE You're a sword wielding barbarian on the plains facing off against a horde of orcs hungry for your manflesh, or the role of a specific named character in a story that has a definitive plot and direction with a set ending that can not be changed like that of a book. RPG is a very broad category these days which is why you often find other terms also associated with it like MMORPG for example. Still an RPG, but of a particular subset of RPG.
Isaac wrote:
I don't believe that mass opinion dictates anything but popularity; and a popular 'RPG' might not even be one.
Is
Doom RPG, an RPG?
(And listen to that guy's reasons in the video, do you agree with them ~that that makes it an RPG? )
As for whether Doom RPG is an RPG or not... looks a lot like games like Might & Magic which are considered RPGs. So yes, I'd agree that it's a conversion of a First Person Shooter to a Role-Playing Game.