Has anyone tried Daggerfall Unity, the mod remaster/remake thing? Is it worth trying?

He is absolutely wrong though. The other user gave plenty of arguments, go play the game and see it for yourself.

(checked)
Oh so (you) are just pretending to be retarded. Reported

God damned that is so fucking stupid.

you realize LARP means live action role play and what you are talking about is role playing game?

I found rare footage form charlottesville va

It's interactive storytelling. It's not a fucking game. Chess is a game. Wargames are games. Dungeons and Downies is not a game.

He gave no arguments whatsoever, he just repeated what he thinks the game is like and used the same words erroneously again.

Randomly generated means things are generated in runtime completely at random. Procedurally generated means they are generated from a specific seed and algorithm that has a set of rules deciding how it generates to meet certain parameters.

If you revisit the same dungeon twice in Daggerfall, even in different playthroughts, you're gonna see it has the exact same shape, the same corridors, doors and floors. If it was randomly generated, every time you played the game it would be different.

Please, learn to make the distintion between these things and learn the meaning behind the words you use so we don't all devolve into buzzwords.
There's a lot of cool shit on why procedural generation is pretty cool, namely that you can "save" an entire dungeon just by saving the seed used and re-use it when you need to load it later, which is quite ingenious and something you'd never have with random generation.

Daggerfall is indeed quite shit with how bland and repetitive dungeons get and it could use some proper handcrafting of proper dungeons that actually look like the buildings and caves they were supposed to be, but that's still no reason to butcher the english language.
Then again, Oblivion had fixed dungeons too and nobody liked those anyway. :^)

You have reading comprehension problems. Go back to my post, look at the reply chain, delete this post.

By your own retarded definition, simple card games like Poker and Blackjack are not games. Not even Monopoly.
Or any turn-based game, or any strategy or city-builder or literally anything that's not a fast-paced shooter.
I get that you have your personal taste and it's important you know what you like, but you don't get to override the meaning of words just because of your personal opinion.

Games are activities you enjoy for leisure that have a set of rules you play around with.
That's it, that's the whole definition of what constitutes a game.
Joy and amusement comes from seeing what you can do while bound by those rules and striving for whatever objective the game says is the end goal, which might or might not include competition with other players.

Your preference for "action, meat, visceral feeling, skill, and excitement" are personal preferences and a reason for liking some games over others. But they aren't part of the definition at all. It would be like saying that "all sports require a ball" just because there's a lot of them that do, while sprinting, swimming and swordfighting don't.

Just accept that some people like calculating probabilities and see excitement in taking actions for which they know there's risk of failure that they can calculate and prepare for. Or that some people like telling stories but it's more fun when they are bound by rules that bind the stories of all players together and set consequences for their actions.
Just accept some people like different things than you do. :^)

By your own retarded definition, simple card games like Poker and Blackjack are not games. Not even Monopoly.
Or any turn-based game, or any strategy or city-builder or literally anything that's not a fast-paced shooter.
I get that you have your personal taste and it's important you know what you like, but you don't get to override the meaning of words just because of your personal opinion.

Games are activities you enjoy for leisure that have a set of rules you play around with.
That's it, that's the whole definition of what constitutes a game.
Joy and amusement comes from seeing what you can do while bound by those rules and striving for whatever objective the game says is the end goal, which might or might not include competition with other players.

Your preference for "action, meat, visceral feeling, skill, and excitement" are personal preferences and a reason for liking some games over others. But they aren't part of the definition at all. It would be like saying that "all sports require a ball" just because there's a lot of them that do, while sprinting, swimming and swordfighting don't.

Just accept that some people like calculating probabilities and see excitement in taking actions for which they know there's risk of failure that they can calculate and prepare for. Or that some people like telling stories but it's more fun when they are bound by rules that bind the stories of all players together and set consequences for their actions.
Just accept some people like different things than you do. :^)


Kay.