Mechanics that you want

[CT075]

On the topic of branching routes, I think the way Valkyrie Profile 3 did it is probably the most efficient (development-wise) way to go about with LG's idea. Basically, what 'route' you're on is determined by the MC's 'karma meter' (which could easily be replaced with a 'pick option A,B,C' menu) which leads to entirely different yet intertwining stories each with different events and different endings -

The 'A' path is a story about redemption and forgiving those whom you originally sought to have revenge against; you end up preventing a continent-wide war alongside a general who nursed the two current princes (who are feuding for the crown of the most powerful nation). The final chapter pits the party against the god who gave the MC his unholy 'sign away your soul' powers in the first place.

The 'B' path is a story about making necessary sacrifices for victory. You side with the nobler of the two aforementioned princes, killing the general and the other prince over the regular course of the story branch. The final chapter pits you against the MC's father, whom you originally set out to avenge (shenanigans happened, tl;dr to explain here); when the hell-god tries to take MC's soul, his father sacrifices himself instead, etc. etc.

The 'C' path is about how revenge will consume and destroy your soul. You side with the power-hungrier of the princes, killing both the general and the other prince along the way. Both this and the 'B' route involve picking a side instead of stopping the war. The final chapter pits you against the war god, who took your father to be heaven's warrior; the MC is punished for his crimes by being tortured in hell forever.

In all three scenarios, you encounter the same set of characters; what changes is the position from which you view them. For example, one chapter is about an exiled saintess and court magus who were both convicted of killing their predecessors. The 'C' and 'B' routes put you on respective sides of the feud with that person joining the party afterwards. The 'A' route shows it from a third party's view, revealing that neither of the aforementioned mages did the crime, instead it was the master's apprentice (gasp); both mages die at each other's throats and the master's 'son' joins your party.

tl;dr -

Think FE9 as if you had a choice about what to do once you found Elincia:

- Ike can transport her to Begnion ('A route') and play out FE9's regular events with a few differences (Tauroneo is not recruited, Geoffrey/Lucia/Bastian are killed in that one chapter because Ike doesn't arrive in time, etc.)

- Ike can take the Greil mercenaries and try to start a final resistance against Daein ('B route'). This brings him into contact with Geoffrey's remaining forces before you finally storm Ashnard's castle (Zihark is an unrecruitable enemy because Daein hired him, people like Tauroneo are fought as bosses)

- Ike can turn in Elincia to the Daein forces ('C route') and get a contract from them to conquer the rest of the continent. Tauroneo/Bryce/etc. join your party, Greil is not killed (because the BK is on your side), etc. You kill off most of FE9's player cast in return for playing certain important boss characters. The game ends with Ashera waking up and causing nuclear holocaust armaggedon.

A lord so broken (s)he makes Seth and Sigurd's lovechild look like Sophia?

oh yes please

Edited December 30, 2011 by Camtech

[Snowy_One]

While I don't have a problem with branching paths, you'd have to be a pretty bad person to follow the C-path in that example. Not only is Elincia put in a position where the player is outright expected to protect her (helpless damsel in distress who tries to be charming and meek), but turning her over to the badguys is... well, they're the people chasing you who kicked you out of your homeland.

That's the problem with a lot of good/evil type choices. They're so clear and telegraphed that the player doesn't need much of a brain to figure them out. It's like being presented with three choices. Kiss the kitten, feed the kitten, or kill the kitten and do nasty things to its skull. The player needs to be presented with multiple choices that all seem credible to their goal. Using your example, a better choice (IMO) would be.

1) Help Elincia get to Begnion to get aid.

2) Help Elincia start up a resistance group.

3) Hide Elincia in your group and try to sneak into Daien by acting like Daien soldiers.

IMO, the best system (in theory) was Jade Empires Open Palm/Closed Fist where you were supposed to choose between solving problems on your own, but making people rely on you, or making them solve them on their own and stand up for themselves. Sadly, it became a standard good/evil system, but the idea was way better at the least than 'good/evil'.

[Rewjeo]

Except that killing the kitten and doing nasty things to its skull doesn't help you. At first, the situation looks pretty hopeless for Crimea. Why not join with the winners? The GMs are mercenaries to begin with. Loyalty isn't something mercenaries are known for. The choice is between standing up for what you believe in and protecting your own hide, not being decent or a psychopathic kitten-torturer.

Now, this IS a video game, so going with the honorable decision seems more obvious... perhaps the paths could have something to do with difficulty? You could go for something not particularly moral, but it makes the game easier, or you could be the honorable type and get a harder game.

[General Banzai]

Karma systems are usually lame in any game series, and I can't imagine they'd be any good in a game series dependent on actually well-developed plot and characters. Remember, you are NOT Ike. Your decisions (other than tactical ones) are not Ike's decisions. Ike makes his own decisions and from those decisions we learn more about his character.

Look at the Elincia example. Greil goes and asks everyone in the mercenary band what they think they should do. From their responses, we learn more about their characters (and also Greil's character for letting them all speak their mind in the first place). In order to make that choice a decision/karma system, we would have to completely strip all of that away and also make Ike an amorphous blob who can go any which way.

While this isn't true for a lot of the early series, Path of Radiance is heavily character-driven, rather than merely plot driven. Ike (and other characters) do or say things based on their individual personalities which influence where the story goes. This is a better form of storytelling than the mere plot driven stories, where the people in the story might as well be painted sticks with faces and names. What you're all proposing to do is to completely compromise the plot for the sake of gimmicky gameplay options.

The best suggestion I've seen here is Snowy One's, where the decision is not "good" versus "bad", but rather in what WAY you decide to follow the decision that Ike and the rest of the mercenaries have already made based on their characters.

[eclipse]

I think it's more like "shaping" Ike's character. He starts with a basic personality set, and can then draw from that set to influence his decisions. This, in turn, influences his personality for the rest of the game.

[bottlegnomes]

I don't see what's wrong with giving people choices that are clearly good or bad. Half of playing video games is getting to indulge your id. Sometimes people just want to be terrible people, but they can't IRL, so giving them a choice to do so in a game just lets them get it out that way. Look at GTA. I'm willing to bet everyone who has ever played GTA has at one point just walked around killing innocent civilians for no other reason than they felt like it at the time.

Now if you want something more true to life, then yes, the choices should be more subtle.

Also, I don't see how letting the player make a choice like that would negatively impact the story so long as each is just as well written. And like said, they're mercenaries, though they don't really act like it. So why not go with the people that are going to get you more money and probably not cost you your lives. Besides, as is, Elincia and Ike are just big fuzzy balls of cliche.

Also, FE9 is no more character driven than say FE3, or really any other FE for that matter.

[CT075]

TBH, it was largely a spur-of-the-moment idea that I didn't really think through, but I will say that it was intended to be a largely immoral, not-good choice. I was thinking mostly that picking that choice would cause several of the GM's to leave the team and you'd end up fighting them as bosses defending Crimea (or something). My inspiration was mostly (as I mentioned) Valkyrie Profile 3, where the number of truly dead characters (keep in mind this is a game without perma-death, so you have to fulfill special conditions to kill someone off for good) makes the MC either more or less demented and twisted as the story progresses.

[General Banzai]

I don't see what's wrong with giving people choices that are clearly good or bad. Half of playing video games is getting to indulge your id. Sometimes people just want to be terrible people, but they can't IRL, so giving them a choice to do so in a game just lets them get it out that way. Look at GTA. I'm willing to bet everyone who has ever played GTA has at one point just walked around killing innocent civilians for no other reason than they felt like it at the time.

Fire Emblem is not GTA, nor should it ever be.

Now if you want something more true to life, then yes, the choices should be more subtle.

Never said anything about being "true to life". In fact, video games should NOT be "true to life".

Also, I don't see how letting the player make a choice like that would negatively impact the story so long as each is just as well written.

That's... a load of shit. You can polish a turd but it's still a turd. Slick writing is merely a way to embellish something that already exists. As Stephen King said, if you have a good story you can make up for mediocre writing, but if your story sucks no amount of writing will save it.

And like said, they're mercenaries, though they don't really act like it. So why not go with the people that are going to get you more money and probably not cost you your lives.

The fact that they don't act like typical mercenaries is what makes them interesting. Let's play a game with regular mercenaries. They get hired by the highest bidder and then they do what they're contracted, no questions asked. What a wonderful story. What drama. What compelling action.

Shinon and Soren would have no reason to exist in such a scenario, as they only existed to begin with to contrast the chivalric heroism of the rest of the gang.

Besides, as is, Elincia and Ike are just big fuzzy balls of cliche.

Elincia follows the princess line to the very letter, sure, but there's a reason she's not the main character. Ike, meanwhile, is the very opposite of cliche. He's the antithesis of any of the normal RPG character tropes.

Also, FE9 is no more character driven than say FE3, or really any other FE for that matter.

So wrong. If PoR were merely plot-driven, then Elincia would have been the main character. The Black Knight would not have existed, nor would Greil or even the laguz. Ike would have been an Ogma and said nothing one or two chapters after he joined.

[eclipse]

Uhhh. . .why are we suddenly discussing Tellius plot?

[Dark Sage]

Because Tellius plot is SERIOUS BUSINESS didn't you know eclipse?

I for one don't care for morality choice because if there is one thing I have learned, it is that most game developers think that players are CrashGordon and thus can only see the world through black and white. As such the moral choices end up being "Save a kitten from a tree and skip though fields of flowers" or "Kick the kitten and then rape, pillage, and burn." There is very rarely a form of subtle evil, it's the poorly written Chaotic Evil form of evil. Frankly I don't trust IS to do a moral choice system any differently from the other scrub RPGs that do this kind of bullshit.

Edited January 1, 2012 by Gafgarion

[bottlegnomes]

Fire Emblem is not GTA, nor should it ever be.

That changes what exactly? If the player wants to be bad and the game designer feels like giving him that option, I don't see why he shouldn't be able to do it and know what he's doing.

Never said anything about being "true to life". In fact, video games should NOT be "true to life".

Heavy Rain. Mass Effect 2. If you want actions to not have clear cut consequences, then that would make it more true to life than an option where the player knows what the outcome is going to be. That's exactly what you want.

That's... a load of shit. You can polish a turd but it's still a turd. Slick writing is merely a way to embellish something that already exists. As Stephen King said, if you have a good story you can make up for mediocre writing, but if your story sucks no amount of writing will save it.

Why can't each route have a good story? Seriously, you didn't even respond to the point. You just made some asinine statement about writing vs story and quoted Steven King to try and make it sound good.

The fact that they don't act like typical mercenaries is what makes them interesting. Let's play a game with regular mercenaries. They get hired by the highest bidder and then they do what they're contracted, no questions asked. What a wonderful story. What drama. What compelling action.

Shinon and Soren would have no reason to exist in such a scenario, as they only existed to begin with to contrast the chivalric heroism of the rest of the gang.

If you think you can't write an interesting story about a regular band of mercenaries, you're, to be blunt and rather rude, a fucking idiot. Look at The Hurt Locker. That's a story about regular soldiers, yet it's an incredible movie.

How about how Jiol existing to give Marth a figure to hate, kinda like the BK. How about Garnef kidnapping the four maidens giving Julian, among others, an actual reason to help Marth out.

Elincia follows the princess line to the very letter, sure, but there's a reason she's not the main character. Ike, meanwhile, is the very opposite of cliche. He's the antithesis of any of the normal RPG character tropes.

Care to actually explain? He's a young, idealistic boy who is thrust into a situation where he is in charge of people he is in no way qualified to lead, but thanks to the support of those around him, he is able to grow into a strong leader and unite an entire continent behind him to stop a calamity. Oh he's also the son of the greatest swordsman in the world. Who's that sound like? Roy, maybe? Or really about half of all RPG protagonists.

So wrong. If PoR were merely plot-driven, then Elincia would have been the main character. The Black Knight would not have existed, nor would Greil or even the laguz. Ike would have been an Ogma and said nothing one or two chapters after he joined.

Just because it's set up somewhat differently than every other FE suddenly makes it a completely different kind of story? I suppose you're going to say FE6 is plot driven as well, seeing as Ike and Roy are essentially the same person, and Guinevere and Elincia serve an almost identical role.

As for the Laguz, how about the whole thing with the Manaketes in FE3? There's a ton of stuff about why exactly Medius started the whole war and Gotoh and Chainey's views of humans.

Back on topic, I wouldn't mind seeing something along the lines of TRS with skills, where people learn them as they level up.

Edited January 1, 2012 by bottlegnomes

[General Banzai]

That changes what exactly? If the player wants to be bad and the game designer feels like giving him that option, I don't see why he shouldn't be able to do it and know what he's doing.

Giving someone what they want is not equivalent to making a high quality story.

Heavy Rain. Mass Effect 2. If you want actions to not have clear cut consequences, then that would make it more true to life than an option where the player knows what the outcome is going to be. That's exactly what you want.

Wrong, I want no choices at all.

Why can't each route have a good story? Seriously, you didn't even respond to the point. You just made some asinine statement about writing vs story and quoted Steven King to try and make it sound good.

I've explained why they both can't have a good story several times already. In order to make several different stories revolving around this choice then the story itself must be bare enough to accommodate those choices. Characters have to be undefined enough for the choice to become a choice to begin with. In PoR there is never any point in the story where the player believes Ike is even considering selling out Elincia, despite what Soren and Shinon advise. That's because his character is quite clearly defined. Having a well-defined main character will lead to a much better story than have a collection of stories based around an amorphous "good" or amorphous "evil" character, who act sheerly along those lines without any actual personality of their own BEYOND those lines. In effect, it reduces dimensions as the character and plot become slave to the decision made by the player.

If you think you can't write an interesting story about a regular band of mercenaries, you're, to be blunt and rather rude, a fucking idiot. Look at The Hurt Locker. That's a story about regular soldiers, yet it's an incredible movie.

What. The Hurt Locker is all about the main character's increasing instability in the face of the insane situations he's forced into as a bomb defuser. That's the entire point of the movie. He's not by any means a "regular soldier". Some of the supporting characters could be considered "regular soldiers" but that's because they contrast the main character and make his instability more apparent.

How about how Jiol existing to give Marth a figure to hate, kinda like the BK. How about Garnef kidnapping the four maidens giving Julian, among others, an actual reason to help Marth out.

Jiol's gone halfway into the game and Marth mentions him once or twice over the course of the game. Marth moves through the story on a predestined path, drifting from location to location on arbitrary quests set up by Nyna and Malledus and sometimes other supporting characters. Rarely, if ever, do we get the feeling that Marth is truly in control of his actions. The same goes for Sigurd, Leaf, and Roy. They go places because somebody came up and said "go here, you have to" and they said "okay lol". They sometimes utter vague speeches about their duty to their kingdom but these moments are fleeting. Compare to the new series heroes: Eliwood, Hector, Eirika, Ephraim, Ike. Typically these characters act on their own volition, even when other characters (Uther, Hayden, Soren) tell them to NOT do what they plan to do. Marth is never presented with an ulterior option. From the very beginning, Malledus and the King of Talys utter nonsense about Marth needing to go "claim his destiny". Nobody ever says "Just stay put, Marth, just stay in hiding." No, he's the last living descendant of Anri. He NEEDS to take the Falchion and slay Medeus. It's his birthright, destiny, whatever. This trend of being the sole inheritor of some sort of weapon or whatever, the only one able to defeat the great evil--it is this specific plot mechanic which creates the "plot driven" versus "character driven" story type.

Note how while Eliwood/Hector/Ike/etc are all eventually mentioned as being the ones with the birthright to use the holy weapons, this birthright is not made obvious at first, not until the story and the character's convictions have already been set in motion. Remember how Lyn just gets slapped with the Mani Katti right at the beginning of the game, with no explanation other than "the sword chose her"? Hopefully you agree with me that it was a lame, hackneyed plot mechanic. But when Eliwood and Hector acquire Durandal and Armads near the end of the game, when they have already set themselves on Nergal's demise, the device, while still cliched, seems by comparison more natural and less abrasive to our sense of reason.

And in FESS, we have the introduction of the bracelets. Eirika and Ephraim must keep the bracelets safe at all costs... but we don't know why until seven chapters in. The bracelets are only mentioned in passing before Eirika makes her decision to go to Grado and save her brother (despite Hayden's pleas for her to "rest and mourn... leave the fighting to the soldiers"). Marth is mentioned as the last living descendant of the Hero Anri in the INTRODUCTION to Chapter 1.

In Ike's case, the idea of destiny and inheritance is even more distant and less intrusive to the plot. Ike can wield Ragnell, sure, but that's not even necessary to Ashnard's defeat. When Titania explains that the Black Knight's armor is blessed and only a blessed weapon can defeat him, and then Ike asks what he did with Greil's sword, Ike replies that he just kept it around, not even thinking it was important. The idea of birthright and destiny factors less into Ike's story than anyone else's. At several moments Ike is offered opportunities to just leave Elincia, leave the war, surrender, join Daein, etc. But he doesn't. He refuses those opportunities even though mercenaries, as Soren explains, are supposed to be opportunistic.

Care to actually explain? He's a young, idealistic boy who is thrust into a situation where he is in charge of people he is in no way qualified to lead, but thanks to the support of those around him, he is able to grow into a strong leader and unite an entire continent behind him to stop a calamity. Oh he's also the son of the greatest swordsman in the world. Who's that sound like? Roy, maybe? Or really about half of all RPG protagonists.

Blunt. Unmannered. Gay (and at the same time, not effeminate at all). And as far as FE tropes go, he's a mercenary and not a noble.

[bottlegnomes]

Giving someone what they want is not equivalent to making a high quality story.

Good thing we're talking about video games, not books or movies. And care to explain. That sounds like an extremely close minded view of how to make a good story, kinda like the reason all those people say video games can't be art, though I'm guessing you feel that way, too.

Wrong, I want no choices at all.

Don't go into the video game industry. Also, FE8 has choices which greatly affect the outcome of the story. I don't remember you complaining about those.

I've explained why they both can't have a good story several times already. In order to make several different stories revolving around this choice then the story itself must be bare enough to accommodate those choices. Characters have to be undefined enough for the choice to become a choice to begin with. In PoR there is never any point in the story where the player believes Ike is even considering selling out Elincia, despite what Soren and Shinon advise. That's because his character is quite clearly defined. Having a well-defined main character will lead to a much better story than have a collection of stories based around an amorphous "good" or amorphous "evil" character, who act sheerly along those lines without any actual personality of their own BEYOND those lines. In effect, it reduces dimensions as the character and plot become slave to the decision made by the player.

Again, an incredibly close minded view of what makes a story good. Mass Effect 2 was praised for it's story and has an incredible amount of choosing that drastically affects the story.

What. The Hurt Locker is all about the main character's increasing instability in the face of the insane situations he's forced into as a bomb defuser. That's the entire point of the movie. He's not by any means a "regular soldier". Some of the supporting characters could be considered "regular soldiers" but that's because they contrast the main character and make his instability more apparent.

You haven't met any soldiers have you? A lot of them have some issues, and reasonably so. Sgt. James isn't that much different from a lot of soldiers, none of the characters are. That's why they're there, to show different kinds of people in the same situation. Black Hawk Down, Full Metal Jacket, Jarhead also work to show how normal soldiers can make a good story. The very nature of war and combat makes it easy to write a fairly good story about it. You have a conflict and characters guaranteed. What you do with it is up to you.

Jiol's gone halfway into the game and Marth mentions him once or twice over the course of the game. Marth moves through the story on a predestined path, drifting from location to location on arbitrary quests set up by Nyna and Malledus and sometimes other supporting characters. Rarely, if ever, do we get the feeling that Marth is truly in control of his actions. The same goes for Sigurd, Leaf, and Roy. They go places because somebody came up and said "go here, you have to" and they said "okay lol". They sometimes utter vague speeches about their duty to their kingdom but these moments are fleeting. Compare to the new series heroes: Eliwood, Hector, Eirika, Ephraim, Ike. Typically these characters act on their own volition, even when other characters (Uther, Hayden, Soren) tell them to NOT do what they plan to do. Marth is never presented with an ulterior option. From the very beginning, Malledus and the King of Talys utter nonsense about Marth needing to go "claim his destiny". Nobody ever says "Just stay put, Marth, just stay in hiding." No, he's the last living descendant of Anri. He NEEDS to take the Falchion and slay Medeus. It's his birthright, destiny, whatever. This trend of being the sole inheritor of some sort of weapon or whatever, the only one able to defeat the great evil--it is this specific plot mechanic which creates the "plot driven" versus "character driven" story type.

Note how while Eliwood/Hector/Ike/etc are all eventually mentioned as being the ones with the birthright to use the holy weapons, this birthright is not made obvious at first, not until the story and the character's convictions have already been set in motion. Remember how Lyn just gets slapped with the Mani Katti right at the beginning of the game, with no explanation other than "the sword chose her"? Hopefully you agree with me that it was a lame, hackneyed plot mechanic. But when Eliwood and Hector acquire Durandal and Armads near the end of the game, when they have already set themselves on Nergal's demise, the device, while still cliched, seems by comparison more natural and less abrasive to our sense of reason.

And in FESS, we have the introduction of the bracelets. Eirika and Ephraim must keep the bracelets safe at all costs... but we don't know why until seven chapters in. The bracelets are only mentioned in passing before Eirika makes her decision to go to Grado and save her brother (despite Hayden's pleas for her to "rest and mourn... leave the fighting to the soldiers"). Marth is mentioned as the last living descendant of the Hero Anri in the INTRODUCTION to Chapter 1.

In Ike's case, the idea of destiny and inheritance is even more distant and less intrusive to the plot. Ike can wield Ragnell, sure, but that's not even necessary to Ashnard's defeat. When Titania explains that the Black Knight's armor is blessed and only a blessed weapon can defeat him, and then Ike asks what he did with Greil's sword, Ike replies that he just kept it around, not even thinking it was important. The idea of birthright and destiny factors less into Ike's story than anyone else's. At several moments Ike is offered opportunities to just leave Elincia, leave the war, surrender, join Daein, etc. But he doesn't. He refuses those opportunities even though mercenaries, as Soren explains, are supposed to be opportunistic.

The thing about Jiol still doesn't change the fact that he fulfills a very similar role to the BK, just the BK's is more prominent.

As for Sigurd, no one else actually tells him where to go or what to do. He makes every decision on his own.

Ike's never mentioned to have the birthright to wield a holy weapon. He just happens to be able to. Gawain never actually used Ragnell. Pay attention. It never comes up that Roy's an heir to Roland. Roy also gets the SS near the end of the game after he's made up his mind to defeat Zephiel and the dark dragon, which he needs it for, so Roy's is less hackneyed and abrasive than Eliwood's and Hector's. Also, IIRC, one of the greatest stories in history starts out with the same hackneyed, abrasive plot device, King Arthur.

As for the bracelets, Levin tells Celice that he has to keep Julia safe for some reason that we don't find out for most of the game. The only reason Celice's legacy even comes up is because his dad was the MC of the game up until that point. And then, Sigurd's holy blood never came up as part of the story. The only reason Celice's did was because people started to look to him as a savior, which is in line with the idea of Baldo's descendents being the pinnacle of knighthood and chivalry.

Brush up on you FE9. The BK tells Ike his armor is blessed, not Titania. He's also the one who asks what Ike did with Ragnell, not "his father's" sword. Also, the fact that Ike had a random sword sitting around and didn't find out anything about it, when he met with a ton, very possibly literally, of people who would have been able to tell him about it just so the BK could make some big reveal about it doesn't seem like a terrible plot device?

Blunt. Unmannered. Gay (and at the same time, not effeminate at all). And as far as FE tropes go, he's a mercenary and not a noble.

Blunt, Hector, Sigurd, somewhat Leaf. Unmannered, again Hector, and somewhat Sigurd and Leaf. Don't even get me started on gay. There's nothing in either game to ever suggest he's actually gay. He just has a very close friendship with two other characters and doesn't fancy any of the female characters. I have similar relationships with some of my guy friends and I'm not gay. Ike's no more gay than Ephraim and Eirika are engaging in incest. As for being noble, he might as well be. He's the son of the most famous knight in all of Daein.

Edited January 1, 2012 by bottlegnomes

[General Banzai]

Good thing we're talking about video games, not books or movies. And care to explain. That sounds like an extremely close minded view of how to make a good story, kinda like the reason all those people say video games can't be art, though I'm guessing you feel that way, too.

Maybe video games don't typically have good stories because developers instead pander to the base instead of trying to come up with something that's actually... good. Look at more recent FFs. JRPG fans love them because the games pander to them. Outside observers, however, simply get repulsed.

Don't go into the video game industry. Also, FE8 has choices which greatly affect the outcome of the story. I don't remember you complaining about those.

That's right, because I actually began this discussion by stating that FESS did the choices thing as best as it could have been done for the sheer reason that the choice doesn't affect the plot at all, merely shows the same plot from a different perspective. Glen doesn't suddenly survive if you don't play Eirika's route. Grado doesn't fall if you don't play Ephraim's route. Everything happens exactly the same way whether you chose Eirika's route or Ephraim's route. The only real changes are Lyon's motivations.

Again, an incredibly close minded view of what makes a story good. Mass Effect 2 was praised for it's story and has an incredible amount of choosing that drastically affects the story.

Just because something is praised [by who? as wikipedia would say] for its story doesn't mean it's a good story. Look at my FF example above. You'll find a set of people specifically targeted by the game who will praise the game, and why not? It panders to them. But from an outside observer... And in any case, most of the decisions you make in ME are superficial. A few extra characters live or die but the main thrust of the plot carries on as normal. In doing so, Shepherd looks to be less in control of his actions; whatever he does doesn't really matter in the long run. I'll again point to FESS here. In splitting up the two routes, the game has a different main character, each with a different predefined personality, go with each route. In doing so, one doesn't get the feeling "Oh, had I picked to go to Grado instead of Carcino the exact same thing would have happened". One feels that what happens on each route is determined by Ephraim and Eirika's respective personalities rather than arbitrary whims of the plot. In doing this, FESS neither makes the plot seem blank and arbitrary (oh, if I go to Kingdom A I get the same basic outcome I get when I go to Kingdom B... for an example of this see the route splits in FE5 and FE6) nor does it make the characters seem blank and arbitrary (If Commander Shepherd is an ass rather than a nice guy it doesn't really change the overreaching arm of the plot).

Basically, FESS does the "two games in one" scenario we pipe dreamed about earlier in the thread. The two games are both written and progressed along a linear, well-developed fashion; your "choice" is simply a decision for which game you wish to play.

You haven't met any soldiers have you? A lot of them have some issues, and reasonably so. Sgt. James isn't that much different from a lot of soldiers, none of the characters are. That's why they're there, to show different kinds of people in the same situation. Black Hawk Down, Full Metal Jacket, Jarhead also work to show how normal soldiers can make a good story. The very nature of war and combat makes it easy to write a fairly good story about it. You have a conflict and characters guaranteed. What you do with it is up to you.

When Soren explains that mercenaries are "supposed to" work for the highest bidder and not ask questions, he presents an ideal that Ike and friends don't follow. The soldiers in Hurt Locker, Full Metal Jacket, and Jarhead are not ideal soldiers by any means (I don't include Black Hawk Down because it's not a very good movie). Those movies are accurate depictions of real soldiers because real soldiers are not ideal soldiers. If these movies were supposed to follow ideal soldiers, like how a supposed route in which Ike and friends join Daein would follow ideal mercenaries, then these stories would not be interesting. An ideal person by pure definition is not supposed to have internal conflict.

Now, let's say we have a route split where you joined Daein, but the whole time Ike is suffering within himself because he knows he did the wrong thing. Most of his friends (Boyd, Rhys, etc) have deserted him and he is forced to do despicable, murderous things to people he knows are innocent. That would make for compelling drama (hell, it's basically the beginning of FFIV), especially if we juxtapose Ike's character with the cold and merciless ones of Soren and Shinon. BUT Ike's internal conflict is caused by his personality already established at the beginning of the game. We can't have a story branch where Ike joins Daein and likes it, or even is apathetic towards it; not only is that absolutely boring, but it doesn't even work with Ike's character.

The thing about Jiol still doesn't change the fact that he fulfills a very similar role to the BK, just the BK's is more prominent.

Funny thing. I went to the FESD script to find the specific instances where Marth explains his hatred for Jiol and why this presses him on, but guess what? There aren't any. At all. He doesn't mention Jiol once, not even in the chapter where he FIGHTS Jiol. This is the closest thing we get to anything about Marth hating Jiol, from the map intro to Ch 14:

"Gra's betrayal of Altea years earlier had come as a shock, of course, until that day they attacked Marth's kingdom in the name of Doluna, Gra had been a trustworthy neighbor and ally. While the Altean army was out on an expedition, Gra struck from the rearm annihilating the Altean soldiers, killing Marth's father, King Cornelius and stealing Falchion, the blade of light. It was a crushing blow.

Much time had passed since that sad day, and much had changed. Now it was Marth's turn to descend on Gra Bastion, and face King Jiol, the man who had robbed him of his father."

It doesn't even mention how Marth feels about this.

As for Sigurd, no one else actually tells him where to go or what to do. He makes every decision on his own.

That's actually the opposite of true. Part 1 of FE4 is the worst at this. The first 2 or 3 chapters are Sigurd doing random tasks simply because he's received orders from offscreen shadowy bad guys to invade certain countries. Chapter 4 is simply Sigurd on the run and only in Chapter 5 does he do anything of his own volition. Then he dies.

Ike's never mentioned to have the birthright to wield a holy weapon. He just happens to be able to. Gawain never actually used Ragnell. Pay attention. It never comes up that Roy's an heir to Roland. Roy also gets the SS near the end of the game after he's made up his mind to defeat Zephiel and the dark dragon, which he needs it for, so Roy's is less hackneyed and abrasive than Eliwood's and Hector's. Also, IIRC, one of the greatest stories in history starts out with the same hackneyed, abrasive plot device, King Arthur.

La Morte d'Arthur is considered a good story not for the Disneyesque sword in the stone plot but rather the relationship between Arthur, Guinevere, and Launcelot.

Chapter 1 (Titled The Breath of Fate) of FE6:

Eliwood:

"I'm fine. I'm still alive, see? Now, Roy, I trust you know why I sent for you to return back home."

Roy:

"I am to take over your role of leading Pherae's military and join the Lycia Alliance Army."

Eliwood:

"Right. As you know, Bern has started to invade Lycia. We must follow the ancient pact and send out Pherae's military to defend our land."

Roy:

"Yes."

Real damn compelling. Compare to PoR, where Ike is set up to inherit the leadership of the Greil Mercenaries, but instead of simply saying "Yes" he protests, (rightfully) claims he's unqualified, suffers abuse from other members of the team who think he's no good, has to deal with desertions, and only accepts his role as leader when his father dies.

As for the bracelets, Levin tells Celice that he has to keep Julia safe for some reason that we don't find out for most of the game. The only reason Celice's legacy even comes up is because his dad was the MC of the game up until that point. And then, Sigurd's holy blood never came up as part of the story. The only reason Celice's did was because people started to look to him as a savior, which is in line with the idea of Baldo's descendents being the pinnacle of knighthood and chivalry.

From Chapter 6 (titled Light Inheritors... how much more obvious does it need to get?):

"Levin:

Celice, it's the will of the gods.

Your father was a victim of foul play. And now you must finish what he started.

You need to stay focused, Celice. You got me?

Celice:

...Yes, I do. If this is my destiny, I shall go forth wherever the gods lead me."

Brush up on you FE9. The BK tells Ike his armor is blessed, not Titania. He's also the one who asks what Ike did with Ragnell, not "his father's" sword. Also, the fact that Ike had a random sword sitting around and didn't find out anything about it, when he met with a ton, very possibly literally, of people who would have been able to tell him about it just so the BK could make some big reveal about it doesn't seem like a terrible plot device?

None of your corrections change my argument

Blunt, Hector, Sigurd, somewhat Leaf. Unmannered, again Hector, and somewhat Sigurd and Leaf. Don't even get me started on gay. There's nothing in either game to ever suggest he's actually gay. He just has a very close friendship with two other characters and doesn't fancy any of the female characters. I have similar relationships with some of my guy friends and I'm not gay. Ike's no more gay than Ephraim and Eirika are engaging in incest. As for being noble, he might as well be. He's the son of the most famous knight in all of Daein.

Sigurd and Leaf are blunt and unmannered? Yeah, no. Do note that I also believe Hector is a well-written character. And don't even get me started on your getting started on gay. Ike is so very different from ever other lord in the series (and indeed, nearly every other JRPG main character) in that he doesn't go around chasing whatever piece of tail he sees. Whether he's specifically homosexual or not is open to debate, but that wasn't the reason I brought it up. I bring it up because his cool detachment from intimate relationships is what sets him apart from the other FE lords. Meanwhile he's not cold or "..." like the Navarre. He doesn't make friends lightly and he keeps up a guarded appearance about himself fueled by his need to act the leader to his troops. His friendship with Soren, whether sexual or not, thus comes as one of the most subtle and well-developed relationships in the series.

[bottlegnomes]

Maybe video games don't typically have good stories because developers instead pander to the base instead of trying to come up with something that's actually... good. Look at more recent FFs. JRPG fans love them because the games pander to them. Outside observers, however, simply get repulsed.

Who says recent FFs have bad stories? Going by your own logic give some sources.

That's right, because I actually began this discussion by stating that FESS did the choices thing as best as it could have been done for the sheer reason that the choice doesn't affect the plot at all, merely shows the same plot from a different perspective. Glen doesn't suddenly survive if you don't play Eirika's route. Grado doesn't fall if you don't play Ephraim's route. Everything happens exactly the same way whether you chose Eirika's route or Ephraim's route. The only real changes are Lyon's motivations.

And changing Lyon's motivations changes his character. That's what you're complaining about.

Just because something is praised [by who? as wikipedia would say] for its story doesn't mean it's a good story. Look at my FF example above. You'll find a set of people specifically targeted by the game who will praise the game, and why not? It panders to them. But from an outside observer... And in any case, most of the decisions you make in ME are superficial. A few extra characters live or die but the main thrust of the plot carries on as normal. In doing so, Shepherd looks to be less in control of his actions; whatever he does doesn't really matter in the long run. I'll again point to FESS here. In splitting up the two routes, the game has a different main character, each with a different predefined personality, go with each route. In doing so, one doesn't get the feeling "Oh, had I picked to go to Grado instead of Carcino the exact same thing would have happened". One feels that what happens on each route is determined by Ephraim and Eirika's respective personalities rather than arbitrary whims of the plot. In doing this, FESS neither makes the plot seem blank and arbitrary (oh, if I go to Kingdom A I get the same basic outcome I get when I go to Kingdom B... for an example of this see the route splits in FE5 and FE6) nor does it make the characters seem blank and arbitrary (If Commander Shepherd is an ass rather than a nice guy it doesn't really change the overreaching arm of the plot).

Basically, FESS does the "two games in one" scenario we pipe dreamed about earlier in the thread. The two games are both written and progressed along a linear, well-developed fashion; your "choice" is simply a decision for which game you wish to play.

Reviewers, the public, and really everyone who's played it.

Read what you wrote about SS and Mass Effect. Both times you said your choices don't really affect the story or the outcome, just some characters' motivations.

When Soren explains that mercenaries are "supposed to" work for the highest bidder and not ask questions, he presents an ideal that Ike and friends don't follow. The soldiers in Hurt Locker, Full Metal Jacket, and Jarhead are not ideal soldiers by any means (I don't include Black Hawk Down because it's not a very good movie). Those movies are accurate depictions of real soldiers because real soldiers are not ideal soldiers. If these movies were supposed to follow ideal soldiers, like how a supposed route in which Ike and friends join Daein would follow ideal mercenaries, then these stories would not be interesting. An ideal person by pure definition is not supposed to have internal conflict.

I never said ideal. I said typical. All the characters from Jarhead, FMJ, and The Hurt Locker are very much typical soldiers. Also, care to explain how BHD isn't a good movie? I think there are a lot o people who'd disagree with you.

Now, let's say we have a route split where you joined Daein, but the whole time Ike is suffering within himself because he knows he did the wrong thing. Most of his friends (Boyd, Rhys, etc) have deserted him and he is forced to do despicable, murderous things to people he knows are innocent. That would make for compelling drama (hell, it's basically the beginning of FFIV), especially if we juxtapose Ike's character with the cold and merciless ones of Soren and Shinon. BUT Ike's internal conflict is caused by his personality already established at the beginning of the game. We can't have a story branch where Ike joins Daein and likes it, or even is apathetic towards it; not only is that absolutely boring, but it doesn't even work with Ike's character.

I never said you could t do that. I even considered suggesting that. I just said you would be able to write a good story where Ime sided with Daein. You proved my point. I just happen to think you could write a good story where Ike is a terrible person. You'd be hard pressed to disprove that.

Funny thing. I went to the FESD script to find the specific instances where Marth explains his hatred for Jiol and why this presses him on, but guess what? There aren't any. At all. He doesn't mention Jiol once, not even in the chapter where he FIGHTS Jiol. This is the closest thing we get to anything about Marth hating Jiol, from the map intro to Ch 14:

"Gra's betrayal of Altea years earlier had come as a shock, of course, until that day they attacked Marth's kingdom in the name of Doluna, Gra had been a trustworthy neighbor and ally. While the Altean army was out on an expedition, Gra struck from the rearm annihilating the Altean soldiers, killing Marth's father, King Cornelius and stealing Falchion, the blade of light. It was a crushing blow.

Much time had passed since that sad day, and much had changed. Now it was Marth's turn to descend on Gra Bastion, and face King Jiol, the man who had robbed him of his father."

It doesn't even mention how Marth feels about this.

I'd say how they phrased "the man who robbed him of his father" speaks to how Marth feels. But fair enough, it's not a particularly big point. I haven't read the script to 13 or 3 in a while, so I'll brush up on those before I mention it again to see if there's anything. But there is a lot between Marth and Camus and Nyna and Camus.

That's actually the opposite of true. Part 1 of FE4 is the worst at this. The first 2 or 3 chapters are Sigurd doing random tasks simply because he's received orders from offscreen shadowy bad guys to invade certain countries. Chapter 4 is simply Sigurd on the run and only in Chapter 5 does he do anything of his own volition. Then he dies.

Sigurd decides under his own will to invade, I don't remember the kingdom's name, to rescue Aideen. No one told him to. He also decided to take part in the Augustria conflict of his own will.

La Morte d'Arthur is considered a good story not for the Disneyesque sword in the stone plot but rather the relationship between Arthur, Guinevere, and

Point is a bad plot device can be used in a good story.

Chapter 1 (Titled The Breath of Fate) of FE6:

Eliwood:

"I'm fine. I'm still alive, see? Now, Roy, I trust you know why I sent for you to return back home."

Roy:

"I am to take over your role of leading Pherae's military and join the Lycia Alliance Army."

Eliwood:

"Right. As you know, Bern has started to invade Lycia. We must follow the ancient pact and send out Pherae's military to defend our land."

Roy:

"Yes."

Real damn compelling. Compare to PoR, where Ike is set up to inherit the leadership of the Greil Mercenaries, but instead of simply saying "Yes" he protests, (rightfully) claims he's unqualified, suffers abuse from other members of the team who think he's no good, has to deal with desertions, and only accepts his role as leader when his father dies.

Yeah, and he protests for all of 5 minutes and then it doesn't come up again. Real big difference.

From Chapter 6 (titled Light Inheritors... how much more obvious does it need to get?):

"Levin:

Celice, it's the will of the gods.

Your father was a victim of foul play. And now you must finish what he started.

You need to stay focused, Celice. You got me?

Celice:

...Yes, I do. If this is my destiny, I shall go forth wherever the gods lead me."

Fair enough.

None of your corrections change my argument

They show how much you actually know about PoR's story.

Sigurd and Leaf are blunt and unmannered? Yeah, no. Do note that I also believe Hector is a well-written character. And don't even get me started on your getting started on gay. Ike is so very different from ever other lord in the series (and indeed, nearly every other JRPG main character) in that he doesn't go around chasing whatever piece of tail he sees. Whether he's specifically homosexual or not is open to debate, but that wasn't the reason I brought it up. I bring it up because his cool detachment from intimate relationships is what sets him apart from the other FE lords. Meanwhile he's not cold or "..." like the Navarre. He doesn't make friends lightly and he keeps up a guarded appearance about himself fueled by his need to act the leader to his troops. His friendship with Soren, whether sexual or not, thus comes as one of the most subtle and well-developed relationships in the series.

I'd say they are. Just not as obnoxiously as Hector or Ike, though I will brush up on 4 and 5 before bringing t up again.

Also, about Hector. Funny how you didn't consider him a well done character in your "analysis" of FE7's plot. In fact, from what I remember, you said he was a poorly done character who had nothing more than middle school logic and motivation to back his actions.

The long about Ike being gay was nothing against his relationship. It was that you said he was gay which separated him from other JRPG protagonists, which he isn't. There are plenty of JRPG characters who have close relationships with male friends. Look at Ike and Hector, or Kain and Cecil, to name a few.

Edited January 1, 2012 by bottlegnomes

[eclipse]

Again, WHY are we discussing various plots when this is supposed to be about mechanics?

[Othin]

Someone proposed gameplay mechanics involving being able to control the progression of the game, so people are discussing whether or not that would negatively impact the story. It's as relevant as anything else, at least most of it is.

[bottlegnomes]

Someone proposed gameplay mechanics involving being able to control the progression of the game, so people are discussing whether or not that would negatively impact the story. It's as relevant as anything else, at least most of it is.

Yep. This pretty much hits the nail on the head. Over half this topic really has nothing to directly do with the topic idea.

[Rewjeo]

But other games' plots weren't written with the intent of story-important choices being made.

[Othin]

Yep. This pretty much hits the nail on the head. Over half this topic really has nothing to directly do with the topic idea.

Don't twist my words. There's nothing more relevant to this than discussing ideas and their implications.

[General Banzai]

Who says recent FFs have bad stories? Going by your own logic give some sources.

Well, according to a quick Wikipedia search:

"After release, director Motomu Toriyama [of FFXIII] felt that the lower-than-expected review scores for a main Final Fantasy series game came from reviewers who approached the game from a Western point of view."

And changing Lyon's motivations changes his character. That's what you're complaining about.

You don't change Lyon's motivations. The game does, and somewhat arbitrarily. Again, FESS is two games in one, and each game has a different villain.

Reviewers, the public, and really everyone who's played it.

Read what you wrote about SS and Mass Effect. Both times you said your choices don't really affect the story or the outcome, just some characters' motivations.

Quite the claim. Read what I wrote about SS and Mass Effect, and see where I quite clearly make the distinction between the two.

I never said ideal. I said typical. All the characters from Jarhead, FMJ, and The Hurt Locker are very much typical soldiers. Also, care to explain how BHD isn't a good movie? I think there are a lot o people who'd disagree with you.

Since the first four chapters of PoR establish Ike as an atypical mercenary, he can't simply become a typical one based on a play decision with it making any sense. And BHD is a nice action film. Not much else.

I never said you could t do that. I even considered suggesting that. I just said you would be able to write a good story where Ime sided with Daein. You proved my point. I just happen to think you could write a good story where Ike is a terrible person. You'd be hard pressed to disprove that.

You'd be hard pressed to prove that. I don't recall too many good stories where the main character is an unredeemable asshole.

Sigurd decides under his own will to invade, I don't remember the kingdom's name, to rescue Aideen. No one told him to. He also decided to take part in the Augustria conflict of his own will.

Prologue of FE4:

Oifey:

Sir, an envoy of His Majesty has just arrived from Barhara.

Filat:

Sir Sigurd, your efforts in this conflict have been quite impressive!

His Majesty is exceedingly pleased and has ordained you a Holy Knight of the Kingdom.

Sigurd:

I hardly deserve such a great honour! I pledge my allegiance to His Majesty.

Filat:

We gravely need your help in protecting these castles. You will be duly compensated.

Of course the sum will go down if the castles incur any damages.

Please continue to be vigilant in the ensuing battle.

Chapter 2 of FE4:

Upon gaining control of the Verdane Kingdom, Sigurd received orders from Barhara to preside over Evans Castle along the border.

He soon thereafter took Diadora to be his wife.

Grandbell's subjugation of Verdane caused quite a stir in neighbouring Agustria.

The lords of Agustria expressed strong anti-Grandbell sentiment.

The great King Imuka, who prized peace more than anything, was killed by an assassin.

King Imuka was succeeded by his eldest son, Prince Shagaal.

Grandbell's military was still far away to the east in Isaac.

And none too soon did the new king command the lords of Agustria to invade Verdane.

Under orders to hold Evans Castle, Sigurd once again found himself in the midst of conflict.

Chapter 3 of FE4:

While the troops rested at Agusty Castle, Sigurd worked to fulfill his promise to Eltshan.

He persisted in negotiations aimed to return administrative control back to Agusty.

However, the directive from Barhara to 'maintain a presence', and 'govern the people', never changed.

In a half year's time, the officials dispatched to Agustria became exceedingly reckless, and began to abuse the power they were entrusted with.

The discontent of the Agustrian people slowly began to take root.

Before long, a new conflict arose giving Sigurd great cause for concern.

Shagaal had been arranging a military force at Madino poised to challenge Sigurd in an attempt to regain control of the capitol at Agusty.

Meanwhile the notorious Orgahil Pirates north of Madino positioned themselves to take advantage of the ensuing chaos.

Sigurd had strict orders from Barhara to hold Agusty Castle at any cost.

Point is a bad plot device can be used in a good story.

Infrequently.

Yeah, and he protests for all of 5 minutes and then it doesn't come up again. Real big difference.

Chapter 4 of PoR:

Ike

I don't understand what my father's doing. Why put a new recruit like me in charge of something so important?

Rhys

You're going to succeed him as our commander one day. Don't you think he wants you to know how to lead?

Ike

Me? I don't... I don't know if I'm capable. And even if I am, that day's a long way off, right? I mean, I'm inexperienced. Weak. I'm nothing compared to my father.

Rhys

I'm not so sure about that. When I look at you, I see a young man full of promise. Commander Greil is a great man, but...I think you'll be every bit his equal.In time, you might even surpass him.

Ike

Don't be ridiculous!

Chapter 7 of PoR:

Greil

Tell me, Ike, are you getting used to the ins and outs of the mercenary life? The way we approach combat?

Ike

I'm definitely a better fighter. But I don't understand...Why would you put a recruit like me in charge?

Greil

What is it with all the complaining? You have a problem with authority?

Ike

Just give me a straight answer. I've only just started. I'm barely able to handle my own duties around here. I shouldn't be in charge of anyone.

Chapter 8 of PoR:

Ike

It's not your fault, Titania. They did what they felt they had to do They didn't want to lose their lives to an inexperienced commander.

Titania

Ike! Don't talk about yourself like that.

Ike

I'm not saying that to gain anyone's pity. It's the truth. But even so, I have no intention of giving up command of this company.

Titania

Ike? Then what will you--

Ike

I'm going to follow my father's wishes. I'm going to assume command. If everyone will accept me, that's what I'd like to do.

5 minutes? More like eight chapters (about a fourth of the game).

I'd say they are. Just not as obnoxiously as Hector or Ike, though I will brush up on 4 and 5 before bringing t up again.

Also, about Hector. Funny how you didn't consider him a well done character in your "analysis" of FE7's plot. In fact, from what I remember, you said he was a poorly done character who had nothing more than middle school logic and motivation to back his actions.

FE7's story bastardizes Hector's personality for the sake of petty drama. That doesn't detract from the fact that his personality is original and interesting. And even in my FE7 analysis I was less concerned with Hector himself than the fact that nobody who SHOULD be reacting negatively to Hector's actions actually does. ("Right on, milord!" "Hector won't kill Jaffar... for now? Doesn't that sound good, Nino?")

[bottlegnomes]

Don't twist my words. There's nothing more relevant to this than discussing ideas and their implications.

I was agreeing with you. It's not directly related to the topic title, like I said, but it is related.

Banzai, I'll respond when I get to an actual computer.

[Othin]

I was agreeing with you. It's not directly related to the topic title, like I said, but it is related.

Ah, never mind then.

[eclipse]

Someone proposed gameplay mechanics involving being able to control the progression of the game, so people are discussing whether or not that would negatively impact the story. It's as relevant as anything else, at least most of it is.

Then WHY is there discussion about plot details that have NOTHING to do with branching story paths? FE8's approach is relevant. I guess Gaiden might fall under this, though I'm not too familiar with the game. Ike's personality in FE9 isn't, as there was no branch to begin with. And what in the hell does FE4 have to do with anything?

Bow mechanics are understandable. Mounted vs. unmounted unit balance is understandable. Hell, even the original suggestion of branched stories is understandable, but I can't see how most of this recent discussion is relevant to branching story paths. If you guys wanna do that, make a thread in General FE, or PM each other.

[Othin]

Then WHY is there discussion about plot details that have NOTHING to do with branching story paths? FE8's approach is relevant. I guess Gaiden might fall under this, though I'm not too familiar with the game. Ike's personality in FE9 isn't, as there was no branch to begin with. And what in the hell does FE4 have to do with anything?

Bow mechanics are understandable. Mounted vs. unmounted unit balance is understandable. Hell, even the original suggestion of branched stories is understandable, but I can't see how most of this recent discussion is relevant to branching story paths. If you guys wanna do that, make a thread in General FE, or PM each other.

Do you think the people posting here are so foolish as to start talking about FE4 and FE9 entirely at random? Everything you see here (or perhaps almost everything) was brought up to prove a point about the implications of such a change to the gameplay mechanics. The relevance is clear in the posts where those parts of the discussion began; feel free to re-read it and see for yourself. It's clear that you haven't been following the discussion well, and certainly not well enough to tell people how to proceed with that discussion. I'm not going to bother explaining these things when you can see them for yourself and should have already done so before jumping into the discussion.

Edited January 1, 2012 by Othin