Messages

Oh yeah, and I should mention that Dicky = Jack Sheehan. I call him Dicky 'cause I found out his real name is Richard

How did you discover that? I'm just curious.

Well, first I got your IP address, and figured out your Internet Service Provider - I rang them up, and seduced the secretary until she gave me her password to the client files - searched through and found the account which matched your IP address. However, the name was missing - but it did give an address. I rode the train down to Mayo, only to find it was the billing address - your rich Uncle Billy Johnson. After several hours of brutal interrogation, he finally submitted and told me your address. Rode the train back, found your house, but you weren't home. So I slashed the tires of whoever's car was parked outside and went to the pub, got drunk, and decided it would be really funny to download porn onto a cybercafe computer. Then I discovered there were firewalls in place to stop people from doing that, so I went onto AGS and found this post:

Well my real name is Richard Johnson but I just had to change it, I had far too many offers from international espionage agencies for work.

And this (The Great Dictator, 1940).

Yeah, his moustache makes me cry, too...

Maaan, being one of the first ones sucks. You get all the blame, and you're kept in the dark most of the time...


Oh yeah, and I should mention that Dicky = Jack Sheehan. I call him Dicky 'cause I found out his real name is Richard

My lawyer says I'm not allowed to approach him with potential lawsuits any more... I think you'll be fine.

Not remembering it doesn't make it any better or nullify his point. And did you not read back and make sure your section flowed?

At that point, 'flowing' didn't seem like much of an option.

_{Edit by Andail: Removed story spoilers. Even hidden, we're not supposed to disclose story elements.}

Damn, that's uncanny.

...
Do you compare every picture to Mr. Snuffleupagus, or is this an astonishing coincidence?

I always thought Chandler was the least real character.

I mean, come on, have you ever heard of a real person who's first name is Chandler?

I play a LOT of games and I often give up on games that are too long because I know there are plenty of other good games out there that will give me equal satisfaction without me having to invest so much time.

If that's not what you mean, then I doubt I can accurately answer your question.

That's exactly what I mean. Thank you!
Like I said:

... I only want opinions on the concepts. It's a given that people like well-written, involving plots with deep, developed characters and an original storyline.

In other words, let's say, hypothetically, that Shakespeare, Freud and Mozart all claw their way out of their respective graves and come to join the dev team to write, think up puzzles and compose music for the game. (Let's also say, hypothetically, that you're a gentleman of refined taste, and you think Shakespeare, Freud and Mozart are 'the bomb')

Now, the choice is that they can either make a long game (which is amazing in every way), or a longer game (which is equally amazing, except that there are less choices)
Note, that the amazingness of each game is equal on a technical level - I'm not saying that you'll find both the games equally amazing, I'm saying that both games are amazing to an equal degree. So, if you prefer longer games over choicier games, you might find the latter more amazing than the former.

Hmm...
I think I've only served to amazingly muddle the whole thing even further...

Psh, 'royal you' my ass...

I was talking about this PM.  Or maybe I'm misinterpreting what you said.  Direct quote from you:

Spoiler

[close]

Aha! You did misinterpret. I was saying that I forgot a small part of the previous paragraph. That doesn't mean I didn't read it, and it doesn't mean I walked in and went "Durrr, I rite storee!1!" without reading the whole 800 words...

Whoa there nelly.  ("Stallion," "high-horse," "nelly," get it?  ) Sorry you took that so seriously.  It wasn't just written to you.  The "you" was kind of the royal "you" but my comment was brought on from your post.  I wasn't calling you narcissistic
Sorry if I ruffled your feathers.  I guess I forgot that you're not one of the rough-and-tumble bunch I'm used to. 

My feathers are very much un-ruffled... I just felt like unleashing a foamy rant. Mandarb made it look like so much fun in the other thread...

_{Edit by Andail: Removed story spoilers. Although hidden, we're not supposed to disclose story elements.}

I no get it...

Maybe so, and I'll readily admit that I didn't grasp what FSi intended. And I don't blame him for that. I never blamed anyone for anything.

I screwed up. I'll admit that. I have enough self-esteem not to let that bother me.

What I don't like is when people start lecturing me. This is the 'AGS chain story' thread. I assumed it was about writing a story. Nobody told me that I'd spend 10 minutes writing, and 10 days listening about how I eat babies because I misunderstood something which could easily be misunderstood. That's not what I signed up for.

In your last post both games are damn long and offer a damn lot of choices, so which one do I pick? A long game with a lot of choices or a long game with a lot of choices? With numbers as large as in your last example the difference becomes kind of insignificant.

It's an exaggerated example, but that's basically what I mean. I'm not saying '2 hour game' versus '20 hour game', I'm simply asking whether length is better than choice, or vice versa.  The specific length and degree of choice in any two hypothetical games presented aren't important - it's about which you would rather play, given no other information except one is longer than the other, but the other has more choice.
It could be 2 hours versus 20 hours, or 10 minutes versus 20 minutes. That part isn't important

I can't believe that the guy who admitted to me in a PM that he didn't even read all of the 800 words that preceded his bit is suggesting more words.  How can you pick up on the intentions of previous writers if you don't even read the thing?!

What the bloody hell are you talking about? I read the thing three goddamn times. Why wouldn't I read 800 words? It's kind of important isn't it - I'm writing onto a story without actually reading it? And 800 words isn't exactly much. I could quote you the entire thing, about a week after reading it. I don't believe you - talk about misinterpreting what people say!

The point of the activity is to rely on others.  You can't be the totally narcissistic writer that you've already talked about in this thread.  You have to follow other's leads and then relinquish control to someone else.

Seriously, what the hell? I haven't a clue where you're coming up with this crap. You automatically assume that because I'm not you, I'm some kind of intellectually inferior, borderline mentally handicapped dick-waggler? I join a chain story, and then write on to it without reading anything anyone has written? Why the hell would I bother? You think I need you to explain to me the concept of teamwork?

I think you need someone to explain the concept of getting off your high horse. You see, when you're on a high horse, it's easy to look down and assume that people are stupider than you, because, well, you're so high up you can't really hear what they're saying. But the truth is, unless you actually listen to anyone but yourself, you can't really be the great judge of character you seem to think you are.

Now, don't get me wrong, I do love being judged by people, but it just sticks in my craw when the judge in question has his head lodged so far up his own arse he can't hear anything but his own gurgling bowels (and I know I switched hearing-metaphors half-way through and I apologise for that...)

Rant end.





Seriously though, it's just a bit of fun. Lighten up.
Why does it feel like the real detective story is in figuring out whose fault it was why the fictional one has succumbed to the laws of memetics...

I could've sworn it was some sort of polar bear cub lying on a rock...

Also, would you prefer:
a) a longer game with less choices/variations (and thusly less replay value)
or
b) a shorter game with more choices/variations (and thusly more replay value)

I prefer
c) A longer game with more choices/variations.

That completely defeats the purpose of the question

Maybe I should clarify this:

Say you have:
a) A game that takes 20 hours to complete, roughly, and has 200 plot/dialog choices, which could alter the course of the story
OR
b) A game that takes 40 hours to complete, roughly, and has 400 plot/dialog choices, which could alter the course of the story

Now, that's probably wishful thinking for any adventure game, but this is all hypothetical. The point is, they're both long adventure games, with a lot of choice, but one has more choice, and the other is longer.
Which would you prefer, A or B?

Personally, I always like a game with as much choice as possible. Games like 'Mass Effect' and 'Knights of the Old Republic' are the only ones I tend to replay, because it's like you've only seen a fraction of the story when you've completed it, as opposed to games like 'The Longest Journey', which I only really replay once I've forgotten the story...
(Plus, when you complete TLJ you get this feeling like "Well damn, it's over. Now what do I do?", whereas with ME it's like "Cool. Now I wonder what happens if you be a dick to everyone...")

Open with a joke. If she laughs, it's open season. If not, run.

Nicely said. And easily said, harder done. You have to be helluva creative to prepare a suitable joke, if you want to be funny and not just stupid.

That depends. When I say 'a joke' I don't mean "a guy walks into a bar and asks for a bloody mary..." kind of thing. I just mean say something funny. Making casual, witty comments to complete strangers is a time-honoured Irish tradition - it simultaneously conveys confidence, intelligence and humour, without coming off as contrived or assholeish (since it's contextual, it can't be rehearsed).
Besides, 'wit' is just like anything else - if you practice it, you'll get better at it.

Lots of metalheads around, it seems.

Maybe you should start your own awards, The AGS 'Red Cup' awards for crappiest, funniest, weirdest and most cliched games... Kinda like how the raspberries themselves are done independently of the Academy Awards, but are always sort of related...

Or you could've asked me whether it was a change of POV or not (which it VERY obviously WAS). Next time I decide to do a change of POV I'll put a big red banner before it, reading: ACHTUNG!!! ACHTUNG!!! POV CHANGED!!! or something.

Oh come on! There's a very big difference between a big red banner and NO INDICATION WHATSOEVER.

Most people would use italics, or a bunch of line breaks (or wait for a new chapter) or use some sort of literary device, like glancing into a mirror to describe a completely new character... What they don't do is suddenly change character point-of-view about 300 words into the story (and immediately after a previous character is introduced...)


Sorry if that sounds rude. My tone is actually really polite and friendly...

I vote next time we listen to that ridiculously foresightful stallion Emerald and raise the word count so each writer doesn't have to rely on each other so much to follow their intentions...