Feo Takahari

Originally Posted By: Desdén del Dramaturgo Not liking a writer and not thinking they belong in the English canon are two different things. I don't love Steinbeck, but he's definitely a great writer. Andrei Bely is great, but he's really not English canon, what with not actually writing in English and all. There are two reasons I don't quite understand what you're saying. First, how can a writer be great if their writing is a chore to read? (Surely you're not saying that they're great because of their moral lessons? Speaking personally, I have never read a moralistic book whose morals, if followed, wouldn't worsen the lives of both myself and those around me.) And second, what relation does the fact that an author isn't part of the "English canon" have to whether or not a particularly good translation of their work is worth teaching in schools? P.S. As for what I've read recently: "Sharp Teeth" by Toby Barlow. I can think of no other book remotely like it, so I can't recommend for or against it to any particular audience (it's bound to be polarizing), but I can recommend that any dedicated reader at least take a look at it and see if they like it.

On the other hand, I've seen posts from a lot of folks who've restarted the entire game from the beginning rather than do anything more to help Gladwell. And do keep in mind that while nobody else can replicate the stat bonuses of Gladwell's geas, there are other people who'll pay for several of the items Gladwell wants.

"Maus" by Art Spiegelman left me the most depressed I've been in my life. "Up the Down Staircase" by Bel Kaufman is occasionally depressing, but more often hilarious. (Student in an English class: "We study myths to learn what it was like to live in the golden age with all the killings.") Oh, and a collection of the world's "75 Best Short Stories" introduced me to 73 works I'd never read and 72 I'd never even heard of. About 10 were worth reading for someone like me who doesn't know how to interpret deep symbolism and hidden meaning. (Orson Scott Card said once that quite a few critics have based their careers on the idea that any book the general public can understand is meaningless drivel. I agree with him that those of us who are stupid should still be able to learn lessons from what we read, and would add that those of us who are stupid have the most need of the lessons in the first place.)

The cheats are the same in almost every game Spiderweb makes, actually. Try something from the G1 list.

I think they meant "prescriptions." P.S. Regarding the "incredibly strong clear metal," in G2 we found they're made from purified steel that's been treated with essence.

One thing worth noting is that the rebels apparently have enough of an understanding of the technology to modify it. In G1, Learned Pinner said that using canisters kills serviles instantly, but you can use canisters when playing as a servile in G4 and get no more ill effects than usual. As for how the technology originated, it seems to be a relic of the Sucia island civilization that invented Shaping, then destroyed itself in civil war. (For more information, get into that temple in G1 that requires you to touch a bunch of pylons first, or else find the "Conspiracy theory" entry in this forum and click on the link.)

What are the "rules" for this? That is to say, are there multiple messages depending on what creatures you kill, and if so, how many do you need to kill, and do the kills of the same creature have to be in a row, and so on?

Just a note: you can actually get a benefit from freeing the dragon. It tells you to examine one of the statues in the slith dungeon to the south. Walking up to that statue after being informed to search it gets you a hat that makes your ranged attacks more powerful (worth 2000 coins.)

Originally Posted By: Arch-Mage Solberg I'm reading 'The Indian and the Cupboard'. I read it years ago that's why I'm reading it again now. Did you ever pick up the sequels? They get to be rather . . . interesting. (The explanation in book 4 of how the cupboard got its powers is just plain weird.)

Uh, why were you attacking a little kid in the first place?

Has anyone else noticed that there aren't any gay characters in the Geneforge series? Granted, most games lack gay characters, but there were a fair number of them in the Avernum series. ("She's my friend. My very good friend. I don't know your reason for being in Avernum, but you're getting pretty close to mine.") It just seems a little surprising, all things considered. P.S. Since serviles are hard to make and tend to get killed doing the jobs considered unsafe for humans, the Shapers presumably tried to make serviles breed as frequently as possible. They therefore would have tried to prevent them from being capable of homosexuality. However, they also tried to make the serviles incapable of rebellion, so I hope to see a pair of gay serviles among the rebels in G5, if only as an example of how the Shapers haven't been as in control of the DNA of their subjects as they thought. (Maybe a genetic inhibition against homosexuality was deleted when the canisters rewrote thir DNA?) P.P.S. One thing we're definitely not seeing is a gay drakon--they probably only mate for the purpose of continuing their species, and I somehow can't imagine such self-centered, arrogant beings falling in love as we would understand it.

My favorite creation is the fyora, for its cuteness. It's less cute in G2, so there I favor that useless little swamp rat that joins you if you feed it. My favorite creation to actually use is the servile Heust Blade in G2--his AI sucks, but if you get him when you're at a low level and have him strengthen as you do, he becomes an absolute powerhouse whose ranged attack almost never misses. My favorite creations to kill are the battle alphas in G1, since they can kill me in one hit, but my high dexterity makes them unable to actually hit me. I also confess a fondness for serviles, particularly the G4 ones that look suspiciously like they were modeled on the protagonist of Ferazel's Wand.

Just for future reference, this is a good example of why it's often best to keep more than one save file. (I myself use a second save file whenever I'm in a dungeon where I can't go back to the entrance--there are enough of these that if I do get out again and screw up later on, I don't have to backtrack too far.) As for your specific problem, I don't know enough about computers to answer it, but it might be worthwhile to ask what happened to freeze the game. This might be an undiscovered bug.

As I think I mentioned earlier, Charles Dickens has some interesting stuff to say at the end of A Tale of Two Cities about the tendency of violent rebellions to become as bad as those they fight against. Then again, as I said earlier, a peaceful change in attitudes a la Martin Luther King Jr. is unlikely given how far the Shapers have to go. Sigh . . . There's a fine line between making a game that's morally complex and making one that drives you off your rocker trying to figure out what's the right path to take. Good thing I can't think of a real-life situation equivalent to this (though something may come up if we ever invent a truly intelligent A.I.)

Just started "Night Watch" by Sergei Lukyanenko. The forces of capitalized Good and Evil come to an agreement--for every life Evil takes, Good gets to save one. Naturally, things get ugly fast, with a lot more moral complexity than you might expect. Read. It. NOW!!

At this point, I'm not entirely sure what anyone is talking about anymore, and I might not be alone, considering that fewer and fewer people seem to be posting, but more and more frequently. That said, I think it might be worth pointing out that the attitude of the Shapers to their creations really isn't like that of the Nazis so much as, like Thuryl said in a previous topic, the Confederates in American history. They don't want to wipe out all rebellious creations, but they find it a violation of the natural order for a creation to rebel in the first place, and thus will wipe out any they can't "tame." There are good and bad masters, in the same way there were good and bad plantation owners, but they've bought into the same lie. In this sense, Krik (the playable servile in G4) is, if you have him help the Shapers, simply what they expect serviles to be. In theory, it would be possible for the Shapers to gradually realize that the serviles are equals, but in practice that'd made harder by the fact that the Shapers think of non-Shaper humans the way the Nazis thought of non-German whites--not vile enough to kill, but inferior enough to order around. Given how far they are from realizing equality to anyone, it would be highly likely that the majority of the Shapers would be impossible to negotiate with, and violence would seem to be the most likely hope for change, if not the best morally. The only question is whether Geneforge's rebels are the ones to bring them down. (I myself would say that the drakons are lining themselves up to be the new Shapers, but that if they were defeated, there might not be another chance to gain freedom for a long time. In other words, support the drakons now, fight them if you have to in the long run.)

Originally Posted By: Brock The Archmage I never liked Redwall. Someone has GOT to introduce you to the "Depthford Mice" series by Robin Jarvis. If you hated Redwall, it will be perfect for you.

Originally Posted By: Safey I think ultimely if you want peace and just you must follow the trakovite ending part way. I admit it don't support the banning shaper. However I think they can help bring the more moderates of both sides to the negotiating table. Eventually the extremist of both sides (shapers who remain intolerant and the drakons) will need to be destroyed. Returning, after a LOT of pages, to the original topic, I am hoping this is a possible ending of the final game. Since the Trakovites desire to eliminate the destruction that has come from Shaping, and both sides of the war are using Shaping to slaughter a lot of people, the Trakovites could decide to try and end the war first and deal with their long-term goals later. Sounds a bit talky for a computer game, I admit, but since the Trakovites are too weak to influence either side, you'd probably have to sabotage in some way the offensive capabilities of both the Shapers and the Rebels, sneaking past the best warriors of each and trying not to get chopped into hamburger if caught. Plus, if Spiderweb ever runs out of game ideas, they can do a Geneforge 6 with the extremist shapers trying to regain power like the Darkside Loyalists in A5. I'm also hoping that in the rebel ending you weaken the Shapers enough to force them to surrender, wiping them out completely only if you used too many canisters. (Judging from the game description, the rebels are completely annihilated in the Shaper ending.)

Originally Posted By: Nioca Originally Posted By: feo takahari One thing that might be relevant to all this is that the Takers/rebels/general kill-the-shapers fanatics get more and more "good" with each iteration, while the shapers get more and more "evil"--seemingly not because their attitudes and tactics change much, but because each successive game devotes a little more thought to why the rebels are rebelling in the first place. G2 in particular was great in showing the thousands of small ways the shapers abuse their authority for personal gain, and by G4, we learn that they're only helping endangered civilians when those civilians have a lot of money to give them. The question is whether G5 will complete the shift, or, having presented all the evidence, leave it up to the player to decide not merely which side to join, but which side is closest to justice. Feo, don't take this the wrong way, but what the heck are you talking about? The Shapers have been getting better with each consecutive game, and the Rebels have been getting worse. Heck, I didn't even support the Shapers and disown the Rebels until GF3 came out. In GF1, the Shapers were a bunch of irresponsible genocidal evil egomaniacs who couldn't give a crap about creations, whilst the Takers were world-weary freedom fighters with a decent cause, a conscience, and a new ally. Whilst my first choice would be with the Awakened, in Shapers vs. Takers, the Takers had my full support. In GF2, the Shapers were a bunch of genocidal evil egomaniacs with good intentions who couldn't give a crap about creations, whilst the Takers became desperate freedom fighters with a decent cause, and a new and dangerous ally that was leading them down the same road as the Shapers, but not far enough to be unfixable. Again, first choice lied with the Awakened, and again, in Shapers vs. Takers, I sided with the Takers. However, at this point, I was starting to become more hesitant. In GF3, the Shapers were a bunch of egomaniacs trying to keep peace and order (albeit poorly), while the Rebels became vengeful anarchists bent on unseating the Shaper regime at any cost, but still trying to play fair. At this point, I started suspecting that the rebellion was becoming less about freeing creations and more about extracting vengeance. It was very hesitant, but it was at this point that I started to side with the Shapers. In GF4, the Shapers became a bunch of egomaniacs enforcing peace, order, and responsibility, while the Rebels became a slavering bunch of bloodthirsty maniacs bent on unseating the Shaper regime to replace it with a Drakon one. This one confirmed my suspicions that the Rebellion no longer cared about freedom, and that they'd do anything to wipe the Shapers off the map. It also was when I realized that the Drakons are only a future generation of Shapers. Sigh . . . maybe you're right. What I was thinking of was that in G1, the Takers are the fellows who want you to assassinate Ellrah, which in my mind is as bad as when Martin Luther King Jr. was shot. In G2, it's made more clear that they're doing what they have to in order to survive. In G3, you begin to get a lot of quests to protect innocents from them, but I'd say they actually get better because if you choose their side, they can give good arguments for what they're doing. (Litalia in particular has a great backstory, which I won't give away here for those who've only played as a Shaper.) In G4, things turn around because now that you're playing a rebel, you get all the quests to save innocents from slaughter at the hands of the Shapers. (Remember that little lake just east of Turabi Gate where they chase down and try to slaughter those unarmed fleeing serviles?) As for my saying that the Shapers get worse, in G1 the only one you actually meet is Goetsch (sic?) so you never get to see their impact on the people around them. In the later games you always have the opportunity to order shopkeepers to give you free goods, magicians to teach you free spells, and military quartermasters to give away all their minimal supplies, because you are Shaper and everyone else is subordinate to you, even though you're just some scrawny kid who happens to be an apprentice. (Or, if you play Dakro, you're some low-IQ musclehead, or at least low Intelligence compared to Strength.) By G3, it's pretty clear why the serviles aren't the only ones rebelling.

One thing that might be relevant to all this is that the Takers/rebels/general kill-the-shapers fanatics get more and more "good" with each iteration, while the shapers get more and more "evil"--seemingly not because their attitudes and tactics change much, but because each successive game devotes a little more thought to why the rebels are rebelling in the first place. G2 in particular was great in showing the thousands of small ways the shapers abuse their authority for personal gain, and by G4, we learn that they're only helping endangered civilians when those civilians have a lot of money to give them. The question is whether G5 will complete the shift, or, having presented all the evidence, leave it up to the player to decide not merely which side to join, but which side is closest to justice. P.S. The later games also humanized the rebels more. By G4, we even had a drayk (Ozyss) who didn't make us want to kill him! P.P.S. To get a better example of the phenomenon I'm talking about, compare Golden Sun to its first sequel. The protagonists of the former game try to prevent magic from being reinvented for fear it will be used to enslave the world. The latter is played from the perspective of their foes, and shows multiple reasons why magic must be brought back, for the sake of humanity and the planet. Geneforge is more subtle, and doesn't present either side as completely right or wrong, but there's definitely a noticeable shift. P.P.P.S. By the way, I won't name anyone specific, but I would like to request that a few people posting here split hairs a little less. The best goal here is not proving one fictional side right or wrong, since each commits atrocities, but presenting compelling and truthful arguments for each, inasmuch as what we decide in our fiction is not without relation to what we decide in our lives, Grand Theft Auto notwithstanding.

Quote: Come to think it, when you see the title, "Final Fantasy"... It kind of implies that the first game in the series is also the last game in the series. That title came about because the first game was expected to be the last game (the company was going under.) For reasons I have yet to figure out, it became a major hit and revitalized the career of its maker. Though at least in my opinion, the series itself didn't get to be worth playing till around V (IV if you're generous and willing to put up with religious blather, II if you're really, really bored and willing to put up with blatant plot theft from Star Wars.) Then again, the argument could be made that it's not really a series so much as a generic term for RPGs made by Squaresoft, as they all but admitted by calling X's direct sequel X-2.

Comparing the styles, I'm guessing three (maybe four) different artists of varying skill levels. The one used for G3 happened to suck.

Originally Posted By: Ilya And final argument: if you were just a human, whom you would prefer to see as your superior - human or creation? I definitely would prefer human monarch/president/mayor/you name it. It seems like you are conflating "human" with "person" and thereby assuming that anything that isn't human isn't a person. I lack the necessary argumentative skill to oppose you on this, but I direct you to an excellent work of fiction called Metaplanetary by Tony Daniel.

What's pathetic isn't that, after the twentieth attempt to kill Monarch with my semi-revised character, I'm giving up and playing Bioshock. What's pathetic is that I'll probably end up buying G5.

Do keep in mind that you need both sword and pole to get Blademaster, which itself is a requirement for Lethal Blow. (Not that I ever got either, but that's because I didn't read the walkthroughs before developing my characters, with the result that I stunk at this game as usual with Spiderweb's output.)