Also, most of us when we start a new game, we start up with the class that we always used in past games; reason why I found it hard to play Torchlight II; my class is missing.
I think it's quite low to make fun of someone trying to explain him/herself in a second language, I can imagine Romans might have been doing it in their Empire and time, and it seems it's Americans' and English' turn in this century and Mandarin may be just behind the corner, either way, being a non-native English speaker, I could quite easily understand what @pablomni wanted to say, so next time when @HahaCHarade and @Adul won't be able to understand an English text by non-native, they might consider educating themselves first instead of acting ignorantly towards others.
I thought the person was obviously a master of the English language. He speaks it better than I can. I was actually just quoting the chicken farmer from Napoleon Dynamite. I don't troll here, I save them for the High Moor.
@Zafiro, that's a great thread, man, I'm not sure how I missed it.
I like a lot of what you say there, but, I don't like how you seem to just shove arcane magic to the side as almost an afterthought, and you imply that it's always evil.
Where is the good, wise, wizard in your analysis, the Jungian archetype of the "Wise Old Man", as exemplified in Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda, Gandalf, Belgarath, Zeddicus, and so many others from the human collective unconscious as defined by literature?
However, I, in my first rpg incarnation, way back when I was 17 years old and in high school, did struggle with the idea of "arcane magic is selfish and evil" vs. "divine magic is sanctioned and protected by God". I started as a mage, and then dual-classed to cleric before I even made second level, due in large part to my already self-projecting nature into "the Game", or, as I like to call it, "the Dream", vis a vis my evangelical Christianity, which automatically deplored and vilified any and all arcanery.
Now, in my maturity, as I have evolved into a skeptic and an atheist, I identify very closely with wizards, and often feel torn between that calling and being a bard, because of my real-life devotion to the power of music. (I believe that music is as close as you can get to magic in real life. That, and religious ceremony, although the two things are connected.)
And then, even other times, I feel drawn toward playing clerics when my childhood devout faith bestirs my mind and emotions once again, and still other times, I feel drawn toward playing a druid, or a cleric of Sharess, because of my love of cats
I've always played good aligned characters in games from the C64 in the 80s to PC games in the present. Only after I've played a game I might try the evil options, but it feels weird to do so. Everyone knows the difference between right and wrong whether you're 15 or older. I can never understand why people would play evil characters on their first play through with a game.
There's usually little advantage to being evil, and the evil options in dialogue are usually the typical 'jerk' response that will close off beneficial options. If you go on a killing spree, you can't talk to anyone. You might kill characters required for quests. The store prices go through the roof, and you eventually get flaming fist mercenaries after you (a nice challenge though).
The only exception seems to be in Hell, where you benefit from whatever choices you make.
One thing I find a little comical is that if you think about it, testing the game mechanics is probably the most 'evil' thing you can do. I have slaughtered so many random NPCs due to testing. I have laid waste to Candlekeep many MANY times to test builds out. I even killed Gorion a few times, because I wanted to find out if it was possible. If you think about it, anybody who has thoroughly tested out the game is in some way like Irenicus. His dungeon is literally filled with science experiments, and you could imagine that he likely tested his new spells on harmless living subjects as well, to further study these spells' effects. If you think about it, we get the numbers and see an artistic rendering of what these spells do, but technically, Irenicus, and all of these characters in the games don't. When he casts a fireball, he sees bodies exploding, guts flying, smoldering corpses, crispy, smoking blackened flesh, in other words, KFC everywhere! Imagine what he was like when he first learned the disintegrate spell. ''Hmm, so when I utter these words, I can turn most things, including people, into dust.'' Imagine the psychological impact that would have on anyone if that ability was suddenly gained. The same applies to finger of death or power word kill, i.e. the ability to effortlessly snuff out the lives of most people. Think about the epic battle he has with the shadow thieves and cowled wizards. Disintegration, lightning strikes, explosions, instant death attacks, and so on. Basically flesh, blood, hair, and bone flying everywhere. The major difference is that for most of us, we're just playing a game. In fact, it's a rather simple game if you think about it, considering the answer 99% of the time is kill the enemy. In real life, it's a LOT more complicated.
I remember when I first played NWN, I made a paladin and took the disarm feat, thinking that was going to see a lot of use. How pointless it was. In real life, you disarm an opponent, he/she'll likely give up or flee. In NWN, they always fight you bare-handed.
That being said, my RP characters are usually always LG or CG.
Also, what defines Irenicus as a villain is his lust for power in a context where there are no discernable limitations, where you can just keep going, endlessly, violating every last thing that is sacred, shedding every last bit of your humanity (despite the fact that he was originally an elf lol). There's also his lust for revenge, which is also impossible for the player to seriously roleplay, because the same hatred and sense of betrayal is impossible to know apart from our own personal experiences that will reflect this to only a limited degree, the rest being purely the stuff of fantasy.
I must confess, I also found the original post almost impenetrable to my understanding. But now that Jalily translated it for me, I'll say that when I was younger, it was nigh-impossible for me to play evil characters, because it is so unlike me at all. Now that I am older, and I have experience writing and DM/GMing, I find it easier to get into the mindset as far as writing or playing them, but I still don't like to do so. I just prefer playing Good characters because playing Evil characters is... tiring for me. I can get into the mindset fairly easily, but staying there is hard work.
The vast majority of characters I roll for Baldur's Gate are purely to try something new.
The first guy I rolled was in BG2 and was a Paladin and he was terrible because I didn't understand AD&D stats. Second guy, I made a Kensai that I dual-classed to thief. Seems like a big leap, right? Takes a bit of meta-game knowhow to get that to work correctly. I had done a bunch of reading about how the game works between rolling those guys because I was confused on how the AD&D system worked.
I do not associate with my video game avatars. Never have. Apparently this makes me different from a lot of the community around this site.
Hmmm indeed life can change in course of 15 years. That said, my approach to gaming or character creation or the way i play those characters did not change much (if at all). Only difference - a bit less time to do it!
When i run into BG1 for the first time, i was 15 and just started highschool. Now i'm married and have a kid well on the way (still in the oven though ).
I never played evil characters back then as it did not help to develop a powerful character. Now i'm definitely going to try out more evil approach, not focused on powergaming that much (or at all).
Of course outdated graphics bothers me, we all move forward and get spoiled. But The reasons i like BG are the same as 15 years ago and the reasons i never fully enjoyed IWD that much and still not enjoy NWN at all are also the same.
It's just less time to have fun and smaller drive for powergaming in my case (also i understand game mechanics much better now, so easier to non-powergame).
Playing BG2 in my early teens I was very opportunistic, now I just seem to run around Faerun doing errands for people, being nice It was more fun in the old days.
I think it's quite low to make fun of someone trying to explain him/herself in a second language, I can imagine Romans might have been doing it in their Empire and time, and it seems it's Americans' and English' turn in this century and Mandarin may be just behind the corner, either way, being a non-native English speaker, I could quite easily understand what @pablomni wanted to say, so next time when @HahaCHarade and @Adul won't be able to understand an English text by non-native, they might consider educating themselves first instead of acting ignorantly towards others.
I don't want to be beating a dead horse, but I can't see any smugness or ridicule in their posts. It simply says they didn't understand..
That's an interesting question (and come on, it was understandable, you guys should be more flexible^^)
The problem isn't that it wasn't understandable, the problem was that it could be understood in different ways. I read that post several times and understood it differently each time.
But to the point. When I started playing the game I would ALWAYS play a good character and exclusively make good decisions. But as I grew older I tried different approaches, partly because as a student of politics (with a hefty dose of moral philosophy) the differing outcomes of differing moral decisions interested me, and partly because - after the gazillionth playthrough - I simply wanted to try something else and see, what else the game had to offer.
When I played the BG series at about 15 or 16 years old, I looked at and perceived things like a teenager. Today at age 30, married, separated, and with my firstborn already having a child, the way I analyze things has changed radically since back then. While I would not have accepted the Machiavellian dictum that "the end justifies the means", I believed in self interest above the common good and that being a "rational actor" (game theory) who sought the best and most optimal decision was the best course for me. I think that when I sit down to play this wonderful game again, my gamer profile is much different from 15 years ago when I played for the first time. What do you people in the community say about it?
DILEMA DE 15 AÑOS: ¿Mantendrías tu Clase, lineamiento? ¿o cambiarías tu perfil por otro distinto?
Cuando jugue a los BGS tenía alrededor de los 15 o 16 años de edad, la forma en que miraba las cosas y las percibía eran iguales o acordes a las de un adolecente. Hoy con 30 años, casado, separado, con un primogénito entre mis filas y con ya ganada experiencia en lo laboral, la visión y el análisis de las cosas cambiaron radicalmente a como las veía en aquel entonces. Aunque no quisiera aceptarlo la maquiavelica frase de que "el fin justifica los medios" hace mella en muchos ordenes de la vida y en donde prevalece el interes individual por encima del bien comun, en que el "actor racional" (teoria de los juegos) es aquel que busca la decisión mas óptima y óptima es la decision que mas me conviene..... Creo pensar que al sentarme a jugar esta maravilla de juego de nuevo, mi perfil de jugador podría distanciarse mucho de lo que elegi hace 15 años cuando lo jugue por vez primera. Ustedes gente de la comunidad, que opinan al respecto?
DILEMA DE 15 AÑOS: ¿Mantendrías tu Clase, lineamiento? ¿o cambiarías tu perfil por otro distinto?
Cuando jugue a los BGS tenía alrededor de los 15 o 16 años de edad, la forma en que miraba las cosas y las percibía eran iguales o acordes a las de un adolecente. Hoy con 30 años, casado, separado, con un primogénito entre mis filas y con ya ganada experiencia en lo laboral, la visión y el análisis de las cosas cambiaron radicalmente a como las veía en aquel entonces. Aunque no quisiera aceptarlo la maquiavelica frase de que "el fin justifica los medios" hace mella en muchos ordenes de la vida y en donde prevalece el interes individual por encima del bien comun, en que el "actor racional" (teoria de los juegos) es aquel que busca la decisión mas óptima y óptima es la decision que mas me conviene..... Creo pensar que al sentarme a jugar esta maravilla de juego de nuevo, mi perfil de jugador podría distanciarse mucho de lo que elegi hace 15 años cuando lo jugue por vez primera. Ustedes gente de la comunidad, que opinan al respecto?
When I played at the BGS had around 15 or 16 years of age, the way that you looked at things and perceived them they were equal or according to a teen. Today with 30 years, married, separated, with a first-born among my rows and already gained work experience, the vision and analysis of the things changed dramatically to as saw back then. Although I would not accept it the Machiavellian phrase that "the end justifies the means" makes dent in many orders of life and common prevails where the individual interest above the well, in which the "rational actor" (game theory) is one who seeks the decision more optimal and optimal is the decision that more suits me... I think think that to sit and play this game wonder again, my player profile could distance itself much of what I chose 15 years ago when it played for the first time. You people in the community feel about?
i have played 3 complete BG-BG2 campaigns--& several incomplete games... i tend to chose class/alignment because i want to see how they work w/in the game.. 1st go through was as a True Neutral Fighter...this was done so I could play w/ the 'best' NPC's available, regardless of alignment... 2nd go through was Neutral Evil...i played a Cl/MU & enjoyed it thoroughly...had fun trying to keep my reputation low w/out getting swamped by bounty hunters/flaming fisters...i hypocritically donated a fair amount of money to churches @ various points in this game... 3rd go through was as a Paladin, because i'd not beaten the game in the 'default mode'... all were equally enjoyable for different reasons, LG was probably the easiest... i have played d&d extensively throughout my life & don't gravitate to any one alignment...the only 2 alignments i stay away from are CG & CE...CN probably gets the most play, but i've had a blast playing a LE anti-Paladin & a LG monk...it's all about the character
It was great to share this experience with you, I appreciate your opinion who contributed to this discussion, whether or not a review. The reason why I decided to publish it in English (and ask my sincerest apologies to those I offended with my bad translation) was because I wanted to know and understand the different views that may arise from people in different parts of the world. All conditioned by our environment, parenting, housing, culture, heritage, language, tradition, etc.. A game that does not stop being a virtual reality but at the same time express our sincere lot of inner self by consuming whole hours of our lives playing it. Machiavelli's phrase "the end justifies the means" is a sad reality that we often see in the actions of people, even when it's really just a self-justification for us with something we should not look at others. BG is a team game, where my decision is not up to me alone, but my decision depends on what the other players do, I am constrained by them and they for me.
The decisions end up being the decision by two or more players. Each player has two or more options. Each option has a payoff. Each reward depends on what the other.
Many times in life, we are faced with these situations, conditioned by the other players (family, friends, coworkers, etc.) Where individual interests looking to be in first place ever. But we can not ignore our altruistic side and community. Selfishness and Altruism result in an internal struggle in the subject. Altruistic behavior may actually derive self-interest. Consider that all rational action is motivated by self-interest and that ultimately is motivated by the pleasure it gives to the subject. Some are made by a sense of duty and pleasure needs. But here also the altruistic aim is to provide the opportunity for selfish pleasures. If anyone had selfish pleasure of the first order, no one could have altruistic motives of the first order. Although the idea was self-interest makes the world go round, is refuted by some forms of behavior where not helpful if you have a return and then can not be explained by the long-term self-interest. Personally, I must admit that it would seek an alignment is good because my tendency (same as 15 years ago) but it does not mean that you can decide on the course of the game, sacrificing some NPC or other reward if it means saving my skin, even when cooperating means greater reward. Seek above all to have up his sleeve a "dominant strategy". Is that what you change from 15 years ago.
Fue grandioso compartir esta experiencia con ustedes, agradezco quienes aportaron con su opinión a esta discusión, ya sea una crítica o no. El motivo de porque decidí publicarlo en inglés (Y pido mis más sinceras disculpas a quienes ofendí con mi mala traducción) fue porque yo quería conocer y entender las distintas opiniones que pueden surgir de las personas que están en distintas partes del mundo. Todos condicionados por nuestro entorno, crianza, hábitat, cultura, legado, lengua, tradición, etc. Un juego que no deja de ser una realidad virtual pero que al mismo tiempo expresa mucho de nuestro más sincero ser interior al consumir horas enteras de nuestras vidas jugándolo. La frase de Maquiavelo “el fin justifica los medios” es una triste realidad que la vemos a menudo en el accionar de las personas, aun cuando en realidad es solo una auto-justificación para hacernos con algo que nos conviene sin mirar al otro. BG es un juego de equipo, donde mi decisión no depende de mí únicamente, sino que mi decisión depende de lo que los demás jugadores hagan, estoy condicionado por ellos como ellos por mí.
Las decisiones terminan siendo la decisión de dos o más jugadores. Cada jugador tiene dos o más opciones. Cada opción tiene una recompensa. Cada recompensa depende de lo que haga el otro.
Muchas veces en la vida, estamos frente a esas situaciones, condicionados por los demás jugadores (familiares, amigos, compañeros de trabajo, etc.) donde los intereses individuales buscan estar en el primer lugar siempre. Pero no podemos dejar de lado nuestro lado altruista y comunitario. El Egoísmo y Altruismo dan lugar a una lucha interna en el sujeto. Quizás la conducta altruista derive en realidad del propio interés. Consideremos que toda acción racional está motivada por el interés propio ya que últimamente está motivada por el placer que da al sujeto. Algunas se hacen por un sentido del deber y no necesita del placer. Pero he aquí que también el objetivo del altruista está en brindar la ocasión de placeres egoístas. Si nadie tuviera placeres egoístas de primer orden, tampoco nadie podría tener motivos altruistas de primero orden. Aunque la idea de que el interés propio hace girar al mundo, se ve refutado x algunas formas de conducta servicial donde no si tiene una devolución y entonces no pueden ser explicadas por el interés propio a largo plazo. En lo personal, debo admitir que buscaría un alineamiento bueno porque es mi tendencia (igual como hace 15 años) pero no quiere decir que pueda decidir en el transcurso del juego, sacrificar a algún NPJ u otra recompensa si eso significa salvar mi pellejo, aun cuando cooperar signifique una mayor recompensa. Buscaría por sobre todo tener bajo la manga una “estrategia dominante”. Es eso lo que cambio con respecto hace 15 años.
Playing BG2 in my early teens I was very opportunistic, now I just seem to run around Faerun doing errands for people, being nice It was more fun in the old days.
Opposite for me really. I was the classical do-gooder and now I'm just sort of a jerk mostly (at least, Nalia's aunt never survives any of my playthroughs. Bitch). The way I play BG and other RPGs is really quite different nowadays since, well, I was 11 when I started and I'm 23 now and quite a different person. But I've always tried to act authentically in RPGs trying to best imagine how I would act if planted into that world since I find that the most immersive way to play the games.
As @Shin pointed out in the previous page, some players play rpgs with a deep personal involvement, identifying themselves with the PC, but some other players play just for fun, just to relax, so not every move you make in the game can tell something about the gamer/person you are.
It's not possible to generalize, but it's surely interesting to see how different people live their experience in rpgs.
As I said before, I usually identify myself in the PC a lot, and from a certain point of view that's good, because I have a deeper experience of the game, but in the same time, playing this way I'm not able to see all the possibilities the game can offer; it has pros and contros
Comments
I thought the person was obviously a master of the English language. He speaks it better than I can. I was actually just quoting the chicken farmer from Napoleon Dynamite. I don't troll here, I save them for the High Moor.
I like a lot of what you say there, but, I don't like how you seem to just shove arcane magic to the side as almost an afterthought, and you imply that it's always evil.
Where is the good, wise, wizard in your analysis, the Jungian archetype of the "Wise Old Man", as exemplified in Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda, Gandalf, Belgarath, Zeddicus, and so many others from the human collective unconscious as defined by literature?
However, I, in my first rpg incarnation, way back when I was 17 years old and in high school, did struggle with the idea of "arcane magic is selfish and evil" vs. "divine magic is sanctioned and protected by God". I started as a mage, and then dual-classed to cleric before I even made second level, due in large part to my already self-projecting nature into "the Game", or, as I like to call it, "the Dream", vis a vis my evangelical Christianity, which automatically deplored and vilified any and all arcanery.
Now, in my maturity, as I have evolved into a skeptic and an atheist, I identify very closely with wizards, and often feel torn between that calling and being a bard, because of my real-life devotion to the power of music. (I believe that music is as close as you can get to magic in real life. That, and religious ceremony, although the two things are connected.)
And then, even other times, I feel drawn toward playing clerics when my childhood devout faith bestirs my mind and emotions once again, and still other times, I feel drawn toward playing a druid, or a cleric of Sharess, because of my love of cats
The only exception seems to be in Hell, where you benefit from whatever choices you make.
One thing I find a little comical is that if you think about it, testing the game mechanics is probably the most 'evil' thing you can do. I have slaughtered so many random NPCs due to testing. I have laid waste to Candlekeep many MANY times to test builds out. I even killed Gorion a few times, because I wanted to find out if it was possible. If you think about it, anybody who has thoroughly tested out the game is in some way like Irenicus. His dungeon is literally filled with science experiments, and you could imagine that he likely tested his new spells on harmless living subjects as well, to further study these spells' effects. If you think about it, we get the numbers and see an artistic rendering of what these spells do, but technically, Irenicus, and all of these characters in the games don't. When he casts a fireball, he sees bodies exploding, guts flying, smoldering corpses, crispy, smoking blackened flesh, in other words, KFC everywhere! Imagine what he was like when he first learned the disintegrate spell. ''Hmm, so when I utter these words, I can turn most things, including people, into dust.'' Imagine the psychological impact that would have on anyone if that ability was suddenly gained. The same applies to finger of death or power word kill, i.e. the ability to effortlessly snuff out the lives of most people. Think about the epic battle he has with the shadow thieves and cowled wizards. Disintegration, lightning strikes, explosions, instant death attacks, and so on. Basically flesh, blood, hair, and bone flying everywhere. The major difference is that for most of us, we're just playing a game. In fact, it's a rather simple game if you think about it, considering the answer 99% of the time is kill the enemy. In real life, it's a LOT more complicated.
I remember when I first played NWN, I made a paladin and took the disarm feat, thinking that was going to see a lot of use. How pointless it was. In real life, you disarm an opponent, he/she'll likely give up or flee. In NWN, they always fight you bare-handed.
That being said, my RP characters are usually always LG or CG.
Also, what defines Irenicus as a villain is his lust for power in a context where there are no discernable limitations, where you can just keep going, endlessly, violating every last thing that is sacred, shedding every last bit of your humanity (despite the fact that he was originally an elf lol). There's also his lust for revenge, which is also impossible for the player to seriously roleplay, because the same hatred and sense of betrayal is impossible to know apart from our own personal experiences that will reflect this to only a limited degree, the rest being purely the stuff of fantasy.
The first guy I rolled was in BG2 and was a Paladin and he was terrible because I didn't understand AD&D stats. Second guy, I made a Kensai that I dual-classed to thief. Seems like a big leap, right? Takes a bit of meta-game knowhow to get that to work correctly. I had done a bunch of reading about how the game works between rolling those guys because I was confused on how the AD&D system worked.
I do not associate with my video game avatars. Never have. Apparently this makes me different from a lot of the community around this site.
When i run into BG1 for the first time, i was 15 and just started highschool. Now i'm married and have a kid well on the way (still in the oven though
I never played evil characters back then as it did not help to develop a powerful character. Now i'm definitely going to try out more evil approach, not focused on powergaming that much (or at all).
Of course outdated graphics bothers me, we all move forward and get spoiled. But The reasons i like BG are the same as 15 years ago and the reasons i never fully enjoyed IWD that much and still not enjoy NWN at all are also the same.
It's just less time to have fun and smaller drive for powergaming in my case (also i understand game mechanics much better now, so easier to non-powergame).
But to the point. When I started playing the game I would ALWAYS play a good character and exclusively make good decisions. But as I grew older I tried different approaches, partly because as a student of politics (with a hefty dose of moral philosophy) the differing outcomes of differing moral decisions interested me, and partly because - after the gazillionth playthrough - I simply wanted to try something else and see, what else the game had to offer.
thank you very much for translating properly.
DILEMA DE 15 AÑOS: ¿Mantendrías tu Clase, lineamiento? ¿o cambiarías tu perfil por otro distinto?
Cuando jugue a los BGS tenía alrededor de los 15 o 16 años de edad, la forma en que miraba las cosas y las percibía eran iguales o acordes a las de un adolecente. Hoy con 30 años, casado, separado, con un primogénito entre mis filas y con ya ganada experiencia en lo laboral, la visión y el análisis de las cosas cambiaron radicalmente a como las veía en aquel entonces. Aunque no quisiera aceptarlo la maquiavelica frase de que "el fin justifica los medios" hace mella en muchos ordenes de la vida y en donde prevalece el interes individual por encima del bien comun, en que el "actor racional" (teoria de los juegos) es aquel que busca la decisión mas óptima y óptima es la decision que mas me conviene..... Creo pensar que al sentarme a jugar esta maravilla de juego de nuevo, mi perfil de jugador podría distanciarse mucho de lo que elegi hace 15 años cuando lo jugue por vez primera. Ustedes gente de la comunidad, que opinan al respecto?
i tend to chose class/alignment because i want to see how they work w/in the game..
1st go through was as a True Neutral Fighter...this was done so I could play w/ the 'best' NPC's available, regardless of alignment...
2nd go through was Neutral Evil...i played a Cl/MU & enjoyed it thoroughly...had fun trying to keep my reputation low w/out getting swamped by bounty hunters/flaming fisters...i hypocritically donated a fair amount of money to churches @ various points in this game...
3rd go through was as a Paladin, because i'd not beaten the game in the 'default mode'...
all were equally enjoyable for different reasons, LG was probably the easiest...
i have played d&d extensively throughout my life & don't gravitate to any one alignment...the only 2 alignments i stay away from are CG & CE...CN probably gets the most play, but i've had a blast playing a LE anti-Paladin & a LG monk...it's all about the character
Yes, you can. Could you help me with another text?
I answer all the opinions expressed here.
The reason why I decided to publish it in English (and ask my sincerest apologies to those I offended with my bad translation) was because I wanted to know and understand the different views that may arise from people in different parts of the world. All conditioned by our environment, parenting, housing, culture, heritage, language, tradition, etc.. A game that does not stop being a virtual reality but at the same time express our sincere lot of inner self by consuming whole hours of our lives playing it. Machiavelli's phrase "the end justifies the means" is a sad reality that we often see in the actions of people, even when it's really just a self-justification for us with something we should not look at others. BG is a team game, where my decision is not up to me alone, but my decision depends on what the other players do, I am constrained by them and they for me.
The decisions end up being the decision by two or more players.
Each player has two or more options.
Each option has a payoff.
Each reward depends on what the other.
Many times in life, we are faced with these situations, conditioned by the other players (family, friends, coworkers, etc.) Where individual interests looking to be in first place ever. But we can not ignore our altruistic side and community. Selfishness and Altruism result in an internal struggle in the subject. Altruistic behavior may actually derive self-interest. Consider that all rational action is motivated by self-interest and that ultimately is motivated by the pleasure it gives to the subject. Some are made by a sense of duty and pleasure needs. But here also the altruistic aim is to provide the opportunity for selfish pleasures. If anyone had selfish pleasure of the first order, no one could have altruistic motives of the first order. Although the idea was self-interest makes the world go round, is refuted by some forms of behavior where not helpful if you have a return and then can not be explained by the long-term self-interest.
Personally, I must admit that it would seek an alignment is good because my tendency (same as 15 years ago) but it does not mean that you can decide on the course of the game, sacrificing some NPC or other reward if it means saving my skin, even when cooperating means greater reward. Seek above all to have up his sleeve a "dominant strategy". Is that what you change from 15 years ago.
Fue grandioso compartir esta experiencia con ustedes, agradezco quienes aportaron con su opinión a esta discusión, ya sea una crítica o no.
El motivo de porque decidí publicarlo en inglés (Y pido mis más sinceras disculpas a quienes ofendí con mi mala traducción) fue porque yo quería conocer y entender las distintas opiniones que pueden surgir de las personas que están en distintas partes del mundo. Todos condicionados por nuestro entorno, crianza, hábitat, cultura, legado, lengua, tradición, etc. Un juego que no deja de ser una realidad virtual pero que al mismo tiempo expresa mucho de nuestro más sincero ser interior al consumir horas enteras de nuestras vidas jugándolo. La frase de Maquiavelo “el fin justifica los medios” es una triste realidad que la vemos a menudo en el accionar de las personas, aun cuando en realidad es solo una auto-justificación para hacernos con algo que nos conviene sin mirar al otro. BG es un juego de equipo, donde mi decisión no depende de mí únicamente, sino que mi decisión depende de lo que los demás jugadores hagan, estoy condicionado por ellos como ellos por mí.
Las decisiones terminan siendo la decisión de dos o más jugadores.
Cada jugador tiene dos o más opciones.
Cada opción tiene una recompensa.
Cada recompensa depende de lo que haga el otro.
Muchas veces en la vida, estamos frente a esas situaciones, condicionados por los demás jugadores (familiares, amigos, compañeros de trabajo, etc.) donde los intereses individuales buscan estar en el primer lugar siempre. Pero no podemos dejar de lado nuestro lado altruista y comunitario. El Egoísmo y Altruismo dan lugar a una lucha interna en el sujeto. Quizás la conducta altruista derive en realidad del propio interés. Consideremos que toda acción racional está motivada por el interés propio ya que últimamente está motivada por el placer que da al sujeto. Algunas se hacen por un sentido del deber y no necesita del placer. Pero he aquí que también el objetivo del altruista está en brindar la ocasión de placeres egoístas. Si nadie tuviera placeres egoístas de primer orden, tampoco nadie podría tener motivos altruistas de primero orden. Aunque la idea de que el interés propio hace girar al mundo, se ve refutado x algunas formas de conducta servicial donde no si tiene una devolución y entonces no pueden ser explicadas por el interés propio a largo plazo.
En lo personal, debo admitir que buscaría un alineamiento bueno porque es mi tendencia (igual como hace 15 años) pero no quiere decir que pueda decidir en el transcurso del juego, sacrificar a algún NPJ u otra recompensa si eso significa salvar mi pellejo, aun cuando cooperar signifique una mayor recompensa. Buscaría por sobre todo tener bajo la manga una “estrategia dominante”. Es eso lo que cambio con respecto hace 15 años.
It's not possible to generalize, but it's surely interesting to see how different people live their experience in rpgs.
As I said before, I usually identify myself in the PC a lot, and from a certain point of view that's good, because I have a deeper experience of the game, but in the same time, playing this way I'm not able to see all the possibilities the game can offer; it has pros and contros