again thisis like taking sniper rifles out of games just because you dont like them whenin all honesty, they're not a detriment to any game play and they only add to tactics and things like that.

smerlus

It has nothing to do with not liking them for the last damn time.

Its the same reasonno oneadded an M1-Abrahms tank to Neverwinter Nights 2.

Some things just have no place.

That is probably the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

I hardly think that magic was the basis for sci fi. That is, perhaps, single handedly one of the most nonsensical thing perhaps ever to put on the internet. Sci fi has been around for, and has been independent of fantasy for just as long, if not longer.

So before you try to argue thatRed Bull isa magic potion in real life and get too retardedly off topic, I must say that incorporating magic into everything is simply unoriginal, andfrankly a sham and ignorant of the foundations of both sci fi and fantasy.

I do not mind games with magic, but I do mind if every gamehas magic.

Even some fantasy books, such as Ivanhoe would have been garbage if magic was in them.

In regards to healing and other uses it has, that can easily be replaced.

For the most part, magic destroys most sci fi universes to have it in it. No one would like D&D to have the odd tank or assault rifle in it. Sometimes universes just don't need it. And for the most part, to incorporate it into a sci fi game is simply a cop out for commercialtargetventures, tieing in with the developers choosingnot to think too indepthly about their game.

And to say that science fiction elements such as nanotechnology are magic are equally unfounded because such things do exist. Even if it didn't,the inclusion of that which is not real or not yet real does not make it magic. Even cybernetic arms and legs are possible right now. Its been done. Not well, but it has been done. It's notmagic. People who miniturize robots or develop robotic limbs for people are not magicians.

If people want magic in everything, then they are no more easier to satisy than a six year old. Thoughts and desires like that simply destroy gaming progression as there is no real reason to improve upon or change anything simply because people only want the same thing. Itspissing on all creative thoughteverywhere.

and you have to admit your one line about people playing the same way as a bit ironic, the way you're talking is you'd create a game that omits magic and forces everyone into a combat role... an option that availible in EVERY RPG ever created.

smerlus

magic is a combat role. and just because someone doesn't choose to use it in those rpgs doesn't mean it becomes omitted from the ENTIRE game. It's still a factor in them.

Obviously combat is in every rpg. But that doesn't mean that the same TYPES of combat need to be in EVERY rpg. And yes, adding magic would change the gameplay, but not every single rpg needs magic just to change up the gameplay. Perfectly suitable alternatives are available to change up gameplay, and not only that,there are options that are directly combat oriented either. Not every rpg needs someone who can cause earthquakes or bring lightning from the skies. The point of the topic was about the NEED to create a gameplay element that is simply magic superficially coated with a sci fi aura.

Sure it adds a new element to gameplay, but isit NEEDED because it's an rpg. You could throw a sudoku puzzle twenty times in the damn game, and that changes the gameplay element, but isit REQUIRED? Is it really necessary to throw a damnwizard inevery rpg just because its an rpg? Is magic the ONLY gameplay element nexts to guns/melee? To me its achincy thing to do a sci fi rpg. Sure magic in games is fun enough, but does it need to be inevery frickin game? No. It doesn't. That's absurd.

All I'm saying, and trying to generate feedback on what people think or want to be the case, is that having magic is not necessary in an rpg. Perhaps if cybernetic enchancements with robotic arms could shoot fireballs.

But frankly, incorporating magic into every rpg seems ridiculous. It would be saddening to think that people need the same thing all the time without any change. Seems rather static and not very unique at all.

Is that the extent on people's ideas on this?

Gamespot forums certainly aren't populated by the most indepth of users.

because people are nerdy wieners when no one can see their face. adds to the feel of the game as thyey pretend their character is who they really are. If people acted like how they named themselves online in reality, everyone would be lame out of the house. If everyone named themselves after how they acted or were in reality on their online games, it would be a lot more funnier. of course, i tell ppl ima ninja all the time and such, and tell my prophecy of doom to everyone. woot woot.

:|

Personally I don't think that immediate battlefield healing is necessary. That sounds more like shooter game than an rpg. Healing is an gameplay element yes, but it also affects tactical choices. It's alot easier to go into battle knowing that a mage's healing spell orfifty healing potions will make up for your lack of skill and/or tactics. Personally I don't think that takes away from fun, but simply adds a new element.Like what was said before, sci fi is not fantasy, nor vice versa. Nor is magic a set standard of both, or ofrpgs. The inclusion of magic dependson the universe, not on it being anrpg. Darklands was a fantasy game set in medieval times that had no definite magic, and is widely regarded as one of the best games of all time.

I've avoided Sci-Fi RPGs over the years because of the over reliance on fantasy RPG standards. Why MUST their be magic or an equivelant there of? Same goes for all RPGs quite frankly. But with Sci-Fi RPGs it just seems like they're taking a fantasy RPG and slapping on a futuristic 'skin' to make it Sci-Fi. Sure, you can explain it away why it works all you want (parasitic creatures, the force, mass effect, etc.) but it all comes down to the same thing, magic.

VilgeDuin

Personally, I agree. I think most sci-fi rpgs as are only superficially science fiction, but are inherently a fantasy rpg. You're essentially battling orcs and dragons in space while looking for one holodisk to rule them all. But none the less, examples are few and far between that try to adhere to its science fiction root. Most sci-fi rpgs usually have some equivalency to magic in them. But why? Is that what people want? LOTR in space? I don't particularly think so, but I think part of the reason for magic duping has been a commercial interest. It's hardly arguing,but fantasy rpgs are the leader in rpg gaming. Using magic in them though, is because of the world they are crafted in. There is ranged, melee, and magic attacks (ranged and magic being hand in hand in their roots). But these are because of one, the world they are in, and two, the technological limitations. In fantasy, being a non magic user means you must use earthly weaponry, and you want to find and use the strongest one. In sci fi, or even a modern day setting, melee is almost obsolete. Guns are prevalent, and guns are ranged, and melee is tactically obsolete. In fallout, I found that melee just didn't cut it at all after the early stages of the game. Dont bring a knife to a gunfight.

So perhaps the choice of magic equivalency was chosen to offer a wider variety of combat attributes available to a wider audience. Star Wars, arguablythe, or a least one of the leading cult following of sci fi has magic in it. But conversely, Star Trek did not. So that proves that the existence of magic or an equivalency to it is not required to makeit popular. After all, if you're going to be playing a sci-fi rpg, you should be realizing that the world is going to tend to be gun heavy. If you're not a fan of laser pistols, then a sci fi rpg probably isnt for you.

Myself, in the idea I am constructing, am feeling that combat can still offer a wider range within the universe of a sci fi origin. Laser weapons, bullet ammunition style weapons, bomb construction, vehicle combat (both ground and space), melee (both hand combat and knife-esque combat). Even droid construction and maintanence. But I feel that rpgs are more, or at least should be, more than just be combat oriented. Melee should be for more of an assassin/stealth choosing of gameplay. And perhaps other skills to compliment other skills. Perhaps a smart suit for melee people, but it only works as well as how stealthy you are and how versed in the technology of the suit you actually are. How well the technology actually works is based off the level of your skill set. Or demolition, the ability to craft and individualize a couple hundred bombs types. From explosive to chemical to biological to electrical. Or for the computer hacker, the ability to create viruses that are special to them, that can knock out security cameras, tounlocking all door, to making turrets fire on their own owners, depending on their level of skill.

There is a slew of potential combat orientations that one can choose. I just think that game designers are not thinking deep enough into the environment the RPG is based.I honestly think that there are more combat classes available to a sci fi rpg than in fantasy. But are gamers really ready for a much deeper involvement within a game? An interface that allows for more in depth actions and choices? To dwell closer to virtual reality?

:)

Damn, and I forgot one in Gauntlet Legends on N64

"Food is good."

:)