Roleplaying games vs Character

Many (computer) RPG's are pretty stupid regarding character choices.
Usually it boils down to making either a "Good" choice or an "Evil" choice, a splits "Evil" into "Egoistic" vs "Aggressive", but that is about the extent of 99% of player choice that impacts the game. And usually you are rewarded only for being 100% "Good" or 100% "Evil".

To me it would make a lot more sense to simply select a character alignment at the start and then the game sticks to it. Of course you could still have choice in dialogues, but these would then be more of a nuance of the character and would in general not influence the major conflicts in the game but only flavor your relations to individuals and situations.

To make it even more interresting I propose the following:
Have 4 main alignments (relation to others), one of which is choosen at character creation:

• Altruist - Totally selfless and will sacrifice a lot to help others
• Altruist with Egoist tendencies - Mostly helpfull but do look out for his/hers own interrests
• Egoist - Do not care for others, only for himself/herself
• Egoist with Sadist tendencies - Seeks to harm others, though not at great own expense.

Then have 4 subalignments (how the character comes to conclusions):

• Pragmatic - Considers the consequences of actions, do not abide rules and conventions.
  
• Emotional - Can act very differently to different situations, but have a hard time changing attitude.
  
• Idealist - Follows a set of ideals. There should be 2 different ideals for every primary alignment (out of 4-5), these should be interresting and display different choices in the context of the game world.
  

Now develop the 16 possible characters, and their motivations and build a game where one of these faces the same challenges and opportunities, and you will have a game with GREAT replayability.

Nosferatu

Wow, found an old song on an old flashdrive that i wrote like 12 years ago.
I am kind of impressed at my writing, and kind of embarrased at the same time.

But mostly baffled why the hell I didn't think of trying to seriously learn instruments earlier since I WAS interrested in songwriting.

anyhoo, here it is:

Title: Nosferatu
Artist: Limeatorium (Me, relaunched under this label)

In the hour of darkness he walks all alone
The silent guard in the graveyard of bone
Blue flames, undying, follow his path
Pray that you never will feel his wrath

Run.. run.. in the shadows he dwell
No one can hear you when you're screaming in hell
Nosferatu, Nosferatu
He is coming.. coming to get you

He is a breeder of his own kind
Those that he catches, to his fate he bind
Corrupting the life that he had.. and miss
Himself once betrayed by the vampires kiss.

Run.. run.. in the shadows he dwell
No one can hear him as he screams in his hell
Nosferatu, Nosferatu
He is coming.. coming to get you

A Beautiful Hypothesis

new song, written by me...

A Beautiful Hypothesis

=== Verse 1 ===

I don't need an excuse - to like you, just the way you are
I don't need a reward - to help someone in need
I don't need any threats - to do unto others what they don't do to me.
I don't need your belief - for I am not alone
Do you need to? - Good for you - We got so many things to do
But I don't need that - that Hypothesis

=== Ref. ===

I am Human, you are Human
We are many, we are one
The day will come when I will die,
all other days I won't.

By being there and asking why?
We'll build tomorrow if we try,
The story of Humanity goes on...
and we we did our part.

=== Verse 2 ===

I don't need an excuse - to make something of my life
I don't need a reward - to pledge myself to good
I don't need any threats - to do what needs to be done
I don't need your belief - but I believe in you
Do you need to? - Good for you - We got so much work to do
But I don't need that - that Hypothesis



=== Chord Progressions ===

Verses:
E B C# A  x3
E B A B
A B A B
A B - -

Ref:
E B C# G#
A E A B
E B C# G#
A B E B

On Forgiveness..

I have reached a milestone in my work on my ethical system, it can be summarized in one line, which however exist in two versions: theological and philosophically.
Personally I believe that the theological one better captures the emotional significance of the statement:
"God forgives those who cannot forgive themselves."
and the secular one:
"Only those who cannot forgive themselves, deserves forgiveness."

To elaborate.. What I mean by this is that the sufficient and necessary criteria for forgiveness is the inability to forgive oneself. By accepting that our actions and their consequences are permanent and that we cannot erase them, we need to compensate our mistakes by helping others in order to justify our moral well being.

People can get lost in feelings of worthlessness when brooding over how their actions through carelessness or ignorance have created suffering for others. It is here that the above statements are useful:
Because they affirm worth, to those that also need it.

On General Truths...

"All generalizations are false, including this one" / Mark Twain

I have paraphrased this into my own version which highlights what I believe is the key reason for the genious of the quote:
"There are no general Truths, but some are useful"

Obviously this quote is not a general truth (by its own definition), but even though it isn't, it is useful (implied by its own definition). This means that even if truth cannot be completely established, we can believe things are if it is useful and refer to this statement for justification.

It's not a general proof, but then again it doesn't need to be.

Subjective but not Arbitrary

Just because there are different perspectives, with no way to determine the optimal, does not mean that all possible perspectives are equal and that perspective is arbitrary.

Practical example:
The exact form of education in schools. Pupils have different ways to learn most effectively and the teachers have limited resources to vary their teaching. It may very well be that using any particular form of learning is inefficient for most pupils.

It is a mistake to believe that because of this: Teching methods are arbitrary.
Clearly it is a bad idea to (for example) punish and reward pupils solely by random chance, as this encourages no sort of behaviour and leaves all pupils in a state of passive feeblemindedness.

While a cynic might argue that this might be the objective of a given sort of society; this would hardly count as anything like a school as we know it.

NS2 NoCom project halt

Sometimes you have to face facts, and that is that I don't have sufficient time to pour into this project.

Programming? Sure. But playtesting and getting involved in NS2 classic to get an understanding of the core mechanics works? No, sorry.

Recap: a bit over 8 years ago I started playing natural selection and I loved it. Since then I have started up a family, went through 6 years of study at a university, learned programming and software engineering and developed myself in uncountable other ways.

My values has switched and with what time I have for recreation, I value other things higher than learning and getting into a multiplayer community.

I love games, but in the future I will most likely only focus on singleplayer experiences.


I will use whatever knowledge i gained through this project in my professional career, along with my newfound wisdom of when to quit. I will try to contribute some of my findings to the NS2 modding community, most likely as a small mod that others can use, but then I will most likely abandon NS2 from a players point of view.