Flatfingers wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 8:35 pm
TGS wrote: ↑Mon Aug 07, 2017 6:01 am
Well the beauty of Star Citizen is the same intended beauty of Freelancer and that is... freedom. Freedom to do what you want. To follow a storyline, or not. To partake in certain activities, or not. With Freelancer's storyline it was hard because it was a linear storyline. I suspect much of the same in SQ42 (The single player campaign of SC) but you could literally skip that entirely if you wanted.
I'm all about freedom of choice. Feel free to put it all in there, but make it optional. It is when things are no longer optional that I tend to have a problem with it. Especially in the context of forced 'tutorial' concepts, missions and content. That drives me mental. Though I will absolutely play the crap out of SQ42 when it comes out. Just the ability to walk around the Stanton (Idris) will be amazing I reckon.
Did you read Chris Roberts'
Death of a Spaceman in which he basically said, "I'm making the game I want, and my game has permadeath"?
To my mind, that increased risk, which Roberts made very clear is NOT optional,
decreases freedom. To avoid loss, people will play it safe. They'll do what they're told to do.
What do you think?
While I respect your view and even appreciate it to a degree, that is a matter of perspective. Where you might see it as reducing freedom I see it as offering choice. Meaningful choice. By adding weight to the decisions you make. Sure you might choose to play it safe, but you've made that choice. You have the freedom to do so. It is when you don't have that choice that you are not really free.
While you could argue that you have more freedom without that risk, do you? What can you not do if you do not have the risk of death? The answer as I see it is... nothing. You can still do everything even if death has no consequence. The addition of choice is never a reduction in freedom, even if that choice appears to limit you. As long as it is a choice, you are still just as free as you were before. The only thing limiting your freedom then is... you. You choose to play it safe? You might be somewhat limited in what you can do and where you can go. But you've still made the choice.
I'm funny in that respect as I do not like roguelikes, I do not like building up and potentially losing it all to a mistake. I have ragequitted EVE a couple times over the years because I lost a lot of stuff and UO once because I lost a lot of stuff. It was never because my freedom was reduced though. I made mistakes or I got caught with my proverbial pants down. But I still had the choice, I could have done something different, taken a different route requested help moving stuff.
I repeat
addition of choice is never a reduction in freedom. Ever. Playing it safe to avoid dying might have reduced freedom, but you still made a choice that you didn't have to make. You could have lived dangerously and had all the freedom in the world. Sure you take on more risk, but flipping it around where death is a non-issue and doesn't affect you negatively at all isn't magically giving you more play area or more things to do. It's simply taking away the need to make that particular 'tough' choice.