Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Europa Universalis is a grand strategy game ostensibly set in the past.
But still a decent point.

 purplefood wrote:
Europa Universalis is a grand strategy game ostensibly set in the past.

Yes, I know.
It's the problem with copy-pasting too much


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's hoping I get money to support The Mandate before its kickstarter ends

 Melissia wrote:

xruslanx wrote:
Mass Effect was just generic sci-fi universe

Europa Universalis was just a "generic universe".

No, it's reality.

Skyrim was just a "generic fantasy universe".

You won't hear me defending the fluff behind Skyrim. I've never been into the mythology behind it, since it is very generic and instantly forgettable.

Baldur's Gate was just a "generic fantasy universe".

No...it's the Forgotten Realms. It may have its flaws but it wasn't just made up on t he hoof by a handful of devs.

Civ IV is likewise pretty "generic", too, really.

Well...no, it's set in alternate reality.

Oh, and guess what? All of these games tried to make you care, the very thing you decried earlier.

Europa Universalis certainly does not make you care neither does Civ. Skyrim doesn't *really* have NPCs (since the first person breaks the willing suspension of disbelief required to deal with NPCs). Baldur's Gate does though, I guess. But it's not an integral part of the game like it seemed to be in Mass Effect.

Mass Effect was a game that deeply appealed to adults as well as adolescents. Indeed, arguably it appealed to adults MORE-- it was far deeper than an "adolescent console" game.

Well I could be borderline-autistic and say that any video game with *charectors* in it is surely for children, since real men shun human interaction. Regardless, it utterly failed to have any effect on me. I forced myself to play through it for a few hours, hoping at some point I'd find a reason to stay of my own accord, but no. Every environment was instantly forgettable, every NPC was a fart in the breeze.

But it sold very well, so clearly a lot of people disagree.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:

Here's hoping I get money to support The Mandate before its kickstarter ends

Get a job, scrounger.

xruslanx wrote:
No, it's reality.

History is as generic and overdone as it gets. History games are about as generic, predictable, and forgettable of games as you can get.

xruslanx wrote:
You won't hear me defending the fluff behind Skyrim. I've never been into the mythology behind it

I can tell.

xruslanx wrote:
No...it's the Forgotten Realms.

Which is about as generic as it comes. Hell, DnD defines what it is to be a "generic fantasy setting". And there's really nothing wrong with that. Something being generic is irrelevant. What's important is how the story is told within the setting, something both DnD and Mass Effect do, and which I hope The Mandate does as well.

xruslanx wrote:
Well...no, it's set in alternate reality.

... just like Mass Effect, which is set in an alternate history where we found Prothean artifacts and had our tech level boosted massively as a result. Just like any game that isn't purely historical, actually.

xruslanx wrote:
Europa Universalis certainly does not make you care

In its little ways, it certainly did, just like Civ below it:

xruslanx wrote:
neither does Civ.

Ah, that's why they negative citizens are "unhappy", and are shown to be frowning, angry people instead of just numbers on a spreadsheet. In certain versions of Civ, they even had the citizens express happiness and joy in their own words! Yes, that's right-- Civ made you want to care about the little people heads that represented the populations.

xruslanx wrote:
Skyrim doesn't *really* have NPCs

You never played Skyrim.

xruslanx wrote:
(since the first person breaks the willing suspension of disbelief required to deal with NPCs)

What the hell kind of ideology is this?

First person perspective REINFORCES the willing suspension of disbelief, by having you see the world from the player character's perspective. Third person perspective breaks the willing suspension of disbelief by making you a camera floating above and slightly to the left of the character you're playing.

Furthermore, you can switch perspectives in Skyrim, making this a pathetic defense of your weird ideas about games.

xruslanx wrote:
Baldur's Gate does though, I guess. But it's not an integral part of the game

My ass it wasn't. It was a core part of the story and even part of the game mechanics from the very start! The game rewarded those who acted to non-hostile NPCs in a caring manner.

xruslanx wrote:
Well I could be borderline-autistic

Don't be hateful.

Really, The Mandate is looking to be a great game because of all the reasons you say it's going to suck!

ITT: People realising that taste and preferences are not a universal thing.

I for one am looking forward to "care" ... I just don't yet know for what or for whom.
I'll probably end up going my crew > the Empress > The Mandate > everyone else.

At least that's what I got from the events and solutions the character generation demo threw at me.

If/once the time comes, I'll prolly go Black Eagle for origin. (oh hey, look, a wild wiki appears!) I know the wiki says Prussian/Cossack, but personally I'm getting a distinct Spanish Conquistador vibe from the art, and I dig.
Anyone else already having plans for their character?

I'm really not a fan of quote wars, but if you insist.

 Melissia wrote:

History is as generic and overdone as it gets. History games are about as generic, predictable, and forgettable of games as you can get.

Right well this has veered into an ontological discussion. History can't really be defined as "generic" since...it's history. It actually happened, not for the benefit of game-makers but as a concequence of the times. You can't compare the setting of Europa Universalis to the setting of Mass Effect.

Which is about as generic as it comes. Hell, DnD defines what it is to be a "generic fantasy setting". And there's really nothing wrong with that. Something being generic is irrelevant. What's important is how the story is told within the setting, something both DnD and Mass Effect do, and which I hope The Mandate does as well.

It may be generic but it's an awful lot *deeper* than a universe created entirely to sell a single game. Clearly a universe that's been the setting of the biggest RPG in the world, and around a dozen cRPGs, has more depth to it than one created for a single franchise.

... just like Mass Effect, which is set in an alternate history where we found Prothean artifacts and had our tech level boosted massively as a result. Just like any game that isn't purely historical, actually.

Sci-fi is not the same as alternate history. Granted there is some overlap but Mass Effect is quite clearly sci-fi.

In its little ways, it certainly did, just like Civ below it:

No it didn't. EU was about conquest, destroying other religions and spreading your own, wiping out natives and colonising their land, etc. It certainly didn't have any of this "Wah wah empathy wah" nonsense that you get in games like Mass Effect.

Ah, that's why they negative citizens are "unhappy", and are shown to be frowning, angry people instead of just numbers on a spreadsheet. In certain versions of Civ, they even had the citizens express happiness and joy in their own words! Yes, that's right-- Civ made you want to care about the little people heads that represented the populations.

No, it made you care about the effects. That's a lot different from a game that focusses around the feelings of other NPCs.

You never played Skyrim.

Yes I did. The NPCs were gak, or they were if you were bought up on Baldur's Gate 2. Hell I can't even name a single one, I know there was that useless thane woman who just used to run into traps all the time, but I can't remember her name.

What the hell kind of ideology is this?

First person perspective REINFORCES the willing suspension of disbelief, by having you see the world from the player character's perspective. Third person perspective breaks the willing suspension of disbelief by making you a camera floating above and slightly to the left of the character you're playing.

It's not an observation, it's a fact.

In a 3rd person isometric game, the NPCs' charectors are based entirely upon their portrait, and their dialogue, both written and spoken. In a first person game however, you get their big ugly expressionless rendered face right in front of you. *That* breaks the willing suspension of disbelief, combined with the lack of any body language whatsoever. The more you see of other NPCs, the more you realise they're not real. This is actually a very established phenomenon, it's why The Elder Scrolls failed to dominate cRPGs before piracy killed off all the non-console alternatives.

My ass it wasn't. It was a core part of the story and even part of the game mechanics from the very start! The game rewarded those who acted to non-hostile NPCs in a caring manner.

Uh...no it wasn't. Baldur's Gate II was about rescueing Imoen from Spellhold, then kicking Irenicus' ass. At no point did the story require you to go around talking to your "crew".

xruslanx wrote:

Get a job, scrounger.

And with that you go on my ignore list, you nasty little man.

I think, or hope rather, that the above comment was meant in jest.

We certainly don't want people thinking that this is an acceptable way to communicate with other users on the site.


Please bear in mind that your tone and intentions might not be conveyed as you intend when you're communicating entirely through text.

 Palindrome wrote:

xruslanx wrote:

Get a job, scrounger.

And with that you go on my ignore list, you nasty little man.

Uh...it was meant to be a joke. I will amend my post above to give it a smiley.

 Palindrome wrote:

xruslanx wrote:

Get a job, scrounger.

And with that you go on my ignore list, you nasty little man.

No kidding... and that wasn't there when I quoted the post-- he edited that in, apparently feeling his post wasn't nasty enough!

edit: if it was a joke, it was in bad taste...

 Lynata wrote:
Anyone else already having plans for their character?

My first character looks like she'll be a Europan science-based captain.

I backed it back when it popped, but sadly unless something changes soon it doesn't look like it will make its funding goal. Hopefully it will gain more attention soon.

 Ahtman wrote:
I backed it back when it popped, but sadly unless something changes soon it doesn't look like it will make its funding goal. Hopefully it will gain more attention soon.

Schadenfreude

Melissia wrote:My first character looks like she'll be a Europan science-based captain.

Brains over brawns, huh?
I'd gladly accept some of your torpedoes. Unarmed, that is.

Ahtman wrote:I backed it back when it popped, but sadly unless something changes soon it doesn't look like it will make its funding goal. Hopefully it will gain more attention soon.

Historically, cash influx should see another peak in the last week - but I too am somewhat sceptical as to whether it will be enough. :(

It'd suck if the KS would fail because they were aiming a bit too high. I'm sure the game will still be published (it was greenlit on Steam last week), but if the funds from KS will stay away, I'm sure it'll impact development somewhere.

I wanna contribute to this, but I doubt I can run it, going by the fits the Character and Ship Builders give my computer.

 reds8n wrote:
I think, or hope rather, that the above comment was meant in jest.

Oh no, he is definitely on my ignore list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:
I backed it back when it popped, but sadly unless something changes soon it doesn't look like it will make its funding goal. Hopefully it will gain more attention soon.

Kicktraq isn't that accurate, there is usually a peak in activity during the final week but I doubt that it will make any of its stretch goals.

 Lynata wrote:
It'd suck if the KS would fail because they were aiming a bit too high. I'm sure the game will still be published (it was greenlit on Steam last week), but if the funds from KS will stay away, I'm sure it'll impact development somewhere.

Yeah, I hope they make it. I told a lot of my friends and there were many who likedit...

 Palindrome wrote:
Kicktraq isn't that accurate, there is usually a peak in activity during the final week but I doubt that it will make any of its stretch goals.

It isn't being quoted as biblical truth, but even without Kicktraq I could tell you that it isn't trending enough to hit its goal, and that is taking into account the peak at the end that often happens. As a backer I would love to be wrong.

Yeah, it's not looking good. Maybe they can break the trend, but...

To be fair back to that dude arguing with melissia it is a little un-realistic that somebody could down 100 ingredients, food and drinks without much problem in skyrim. I still enjoy the hell out of the game though. It's kind of amusing actually that your character can and will eat just about everything from plants to giant's toes to human flesh to human hearts and daedra hearts. I mean holy crap if you could ever bet somebody to eat something on a dare you can bet a skyrim player character would.

My main problem with video games is that they used to be about anything and everything and could be as stupid as you wanted or as creative. Now we have fitness games and call of duty :(. I suppose it's true though. Indie games and steam in general helps a lot with interesting titles. Just different opinions I guess.

Also for some people i'd like to say arguing with somebody doesn't usually end well in any case for any party. Has anybody after an argument back and forth said "You know what you're right. I know you called me a stupid pig-headed moron but I can see your superior logic." In the end people are very much about ego. You can throw proof at them or evidence but a damaged ego is the biggest thing. Nobody wants to feel stupid or bad or any other negative quality. You don't exactly have to support their opinion so much as give it a little respect. Sure some people tend to instigate fights more than others but they often make life a much bigger hell for the person that keeps this going.

-----------------

On topic i'd wouldn't mind playing this game.

Wasn't there a kind of similar game about trading in ship-to-ship where there were no rules pretty much? I can't remember the name of it but it was pretty popular. Basically the game included lots of trickery, deception and all sorts of good and bad things people are capable of.

Anyway my point is 'The Mandate' sounds an awful lot like that game too.

I might give this a shot if I have the money. I probably won't though.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Wasn't there a kind of similar game about trading in ship-to-ship where there were no rules pretty much? I can't remember the name of it but it was pretty popular. Basically the game included lots of trickery, deception and all sorts of good and bad things people are capable of.

Eve?

Wasn't Eve that game for people who really, REALLY like Microsoft Excel?

 Melissia wrote:
Wasn't Eve that game for people who really, REALLY like Microsoft Excel?

Only if you are a trader or dabble in PI. Otherwise its lots of time spent camping jump gates.

 Palindrome wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Wasn't there a kind of similar game about trading in ship-to-ship where there were no rules pretty much? I can't remember the name of it but it was pretty popular. Basically the game included lots of trickery, deception and all sorts of good and bad things people are capable of.

Eve?

Yep that's the one. I could be wrong though as my memory is often pretty bad heh.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

 Palindrome wrote:

 flamingkillamajig wrote:

Wasn't there a kind of similar game about trading in ship-to-ship where there were no rules pretty much? I can't remember the name of it but it was pretty popular. Basically the game included lots of trickery, deception and all sorts of good and bad things people are capable of.

Eve?

Yep that's the one. I could be wrong though as my memory is often pretty bad heh.

Was the game you were thinking of also an MMO? It could also be Freelancer if it wasn't an MMO.

 flamingkillamajig wrote:
To be fair back to that dude arguing with melissia it is a little un-realistic that somebody could down 100 ingredients, food and drinks without much problem in skyrim. I still enjoy the hell out of the game though. It's kind of amusing actually that your character can and will eat just about everything from plants to giant's toes to human flesh to human hearts and daedra hearts. I mean holy crap if you could ever bet somebody to eat something on a dare you can bet a skyrim player character would.

My main problem with video games is that they used to be about anything and everything and could be as stupid as you wanted or as creative. Now we have fitness games and call of duty :(. I suppose it's true though. Indie games and steam in general helps a lot with interesting titles. Just different opinions I guess.

Also for some people i'd like to say arguing with somebody doesn't usually end well in any case for any party. Has anybody after an argument back and forth said "You know what you're right. I know you called me a stupid pig-headed moron but I can see your superior logic." In the end people are very much about ego. You can throw proof at them or evidence but a damaged ego is the biggest thing. Nobody wants to feel stupid or bad or any other negative quality. You don't exactly have to support their opinion so much as give it a little respect. Sure some people tend to instigate fights more than others but they often make life a much bigger hell for the person that keeps this going.

-----------------

On topic i'd wouldn't mind playing this game.

Wasn't there a kind of similar game about trading in ship-to-ship where there were no rules pretty much? I can't remember the name of it but it was pretty popular. Basically the game included lots of trickery, deception and all sorts of good and bad things people are capable of.

Anyway my point is 'The Mandate' sounds an awful lot like that game too.

I might give this a shot if I have the money. I probably won't though.

Freelancer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freelancer_%28video_game%29

 Melissia wrote:
Wasn't Eve that game for people who really, REALLY like Microsoft Excel?

Its like microsoft excel with spaceships.

Mandate looks good though. Looking forward to it.

Man, I'd love a new Escape Velocity.

EVE's excel files included MISSILES though, and frankly that's a hell of an improvement in my book.

I backed it and spread the word on social media. I'm really hopeful for this one, it looks to be a blast.

For my first character I'm thinking a cold Romanov tactician from the Imperial family. After being scape goated and disgraced the prodigal child returns as a Corsair captain at cousin Annie's request... rebel in the making? Hardly, but a little off the books piracy to ensure that there's money and safe places for themselves and their crew should they be betrayed by the family again? Not out of the question.

I love hearing stories about things people have done in EVE. I couldn't get into it myself though.

Looks really interesting. Reminds me of a higher fidelity FTL.