Sword of Moonlight > Beginner and other Nonsense

The elusive/illusive ones (Seath & Guyra?)

(1/4) > >>

Holey Moley:
Formerly: What is the nature of irreality?

UPDATE: I recommend starting with Reply/post #6. It is the final word on this topic.

This is something I actually think about an awful lot considering the relative obscurity of the subject.

I constantly find myself thinking about fantasy in literary terms. Is good and evil really the ultimate dichotomy? What about reality vs. irreality? That seems far heavier and potent to me. And more interesting.

More and more this distinction seems to be the ultimate obsession of mankind. You think nowadays sure, the educated lot of us seem to gravitate towards a lifestyle that is split between these modes of being. Sometimes reality almost seems to be purely in the service of irreality. We live thousands of lives via artistic media, and we get actual life where we mostly keep ourselves alive, the more astute of our kind allocate a good portion of our free time expanding the frontiers that we have to thank for the relative safety of our day to day existence. The safety to enjoy all forms of irreality.

But that is a modern perspective. What about in ancient times. What about religions, superstitions, folklore, theatre, literature? It seems like irreality has always been with us. Even more so perhaps the further back that you go. At least that is until the recent advent of interactive video game virtual realities.

I think about Seath and Guyra in King's Field (forget about Dark Souls for a second) what is the relationship there? It seems to me like Guyra is reality, and Seath is irreality. It seems to me like the Moonlight sword is irreality and the Dark Slayer is reality. Seath is a deception, and Seath is nature, Seath is loved, Seath is adored. Guyra is Seath's opposite. Guyra is the ugly truth no one wants to acknowledge. Guyra is not a beautiful deception. Guyra is unnatural. Guyra is physical, the stuff of light and shadow, scientific. Guyra is despised, Guyra is hated. Like I say I think in literary terms.

What is moonlight? It's a kind of false light. It's a reflection. And what does it mean to slay darkness? It means to let the light in, to see things more clearly.

These are powerful metaphors anyway. And to my mind it's really great to think of Sword of Moonlight as a tool of irreality. I think you can if nothing else have a lot of fun with games where the swords are creators of worlds and exist like a weird hologram in the worlds they create... perhaps instruments of undoing. Not unlike Stormbringer in Michael Moorcock's many interwoven tales.

Moorcocks fiction intersects with the modern day world, or at least a fictional version of it. There's no reason the Moonlight Sword can't do the same. In fact there is ample evidence that the Moonlight is based on Stormbringer. You can easily hypothesize that the Moonlight sword is Stormbringer only by another name (as is so often the case) and if you really want to have fun, you can go as far as to declare Sword of Moonlight itself to be a facet of Stormbringer in the flesh in the here and now :drool:

Which brings about the question. Another name that has been attributed to Stormbringer is a familiar one to us in the west. We know it better than Osama Binladen. It's a name with a literary cachet. You guessed it, none other than old Satan himself :evil:

Did I just say Sword of Moonlight is satanic? Yeah I did, but not knee-jerk satanic. Satanic in a far richer literary tradition. Now hear me out. Satan is a concept we just can't let go to waste.... there's a lot of value there. And fundamentalist religious people won't be around forever.

So the back story for Seath and Guyra goes. I've read this on very authoritative looking Japanese websites anyway. I can't exactly quote the games themselves yet. A god, Valad I think, could be wrong, thought that the elves and dwarves had gotten lazy, and mankind was at endless war among themselves. Valad I think is an earth god, one of a trio, who was left to do everything, because the sea and sky gods got bored went to sleep or something. Valad decides the best thing to do is to split himself up into two dragons, Seath and Guyra. I like to think that Valad is something like Abraxas... Wikipedia says:

"The Swiss Psychologist Carl Jung wrote a short Gnostic treatise in 1916 called The Seven Sermons to the Dead, which called Abraxas a God higher than the Christian God and Devil, that combines all opposites into one Being."

Usually Abraxas has two serpents instead of legs. You can think of each serpent as being our friends Seath and Guyra. And so the back story goes Seath is designed to be a figure of worship, and Guyra is designed to be a figure of hatred. Through the synthesis of the two mankind would reunite as Valad saw in his wisdom that nothing brings men together better than worship and hatred.

Speaking of Jung. I also think a Jungian approach to games would work really well for SOM. I call it extreme first person. And I like to think of the worlds of King's Field really being virtual reality worlds that are a cross between Total Recall (PKD) and Jungian like psychotherapy... which apparently equals something like The Wizard of Oz. IOW: what if the NPCs in the game looked like your friends and family? It's like the screen where you get to name your party characters taken to the Nth power! And what are ancient myths, why do we still remember them, why because they are all psycho (-logical) dramas that's why! If you want to make a good story you have to structure it around psychological phenomenon that is personal. But that is another thread.

Again, why satanic?? Well like I said, I am firmly of the conclusion that good/evil is not it. In fact good/evil might even not be something that can even be teased apart. What I think is the ticket though is reality vs. irreality, and there is no good guy or bad guy there, it's relative, just like the taijitu structure of King's Field 2. And one reality can be another man's irreality. It's turtles all the way down in other words...

The word Satan is Hebrew if I am not mistaken. It means something like "the other team" so to speak. Or the opposition. If you have two competing realities they are each other's Satans so to speak. But we recognize that video games are not reality. That's pretty obvious to sort out from our perspective. Sword of Moonlight is a tool used to make virtual worlds. And a tool to destroy those worlds; from inside the game that is; think about it. You can even compare the Moonlight sword to Shiva at this point... the creator and destroyer of worlds :rainbow:

Now I want to quickly unify SOM and Megaten (another personal obsession of mine) real quick. The thing about gods and demigods, deities and devils in general. Their names are always simple things. They don't have proper names, and they don't have alien names, no they are named after their very nature. It's like Earthsea, the thing is its name, and can't be otherwise...

Christians have been conflating two of their favorite devils for a long time. They've almost succeeded in making Lucifer and Satan synonymous. But from a literary standpoint these are different figures for the most part. Lucifer-cum-Satan is a fairly contemporary invention. Now I have no clue the basis for these two in Christianity. I am not a religious person though I have my private fantasies that are not entirely divorced from traditions here on Earth. I tend to prefer religion that is good for the arts. I'm into anything with a Hell too, because I'm kind of keen on justice, and I like to think that any half decent god(s) would see the utility of a hell :evil:

The word Lucifer is Latin (Rome) and it just means light. Period. In the west we usually think of light as being the stuff of the good guys. Only christians would think to denounce light. Of course they've worked out that somehow a demigod can be transmuted, perverted, by their god, but what is the literary value in that?? We already have a Satan don't we? Yes we do. Maybe its just uncomfortable to have other godlike figures taking up space in the pantheon.

In fact christians never really liked the idea of angels or devils in the first place. It was a concession to a very popular religion of antiquity that now goes by the name of Zoroastrianism. It was dualist. It has two supreme deities at odds with one another. Not unlike Seath and Guyra and loads of other popular fiction. Wikipedia/Zoraster says:

 The religion states that active participation in life through good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay. This active participation is a central element in Zoroaster's concept of free will, and Zoroastrianism rejects all forms of monasticism. Ahura Mazda will ultimately prevail over the evil Angra Mainyu or Ahriman, at which point the universe will undergo a cosmic renovation and time will end. In the final renovation, all of creation—even the souls of the dead that were initially banished to "darkness"—will be reunited in Ahura Mazda, returning to life in the undead form. At the end of time, a savior-figure (a Saoshyant) will bring about a final renovation of the world (frasho.kereti), in which the dead will be revived.

Sound familiar? Of course christians would not accept Ahura Mazda as their mono-god. So to placate the Zorastrians we get two angels instead. One of light and one of dark, and you can guess which is Lucifer, and which is Satan. In fact angels are pre-Abrahamic religions. You guessed it, they are Zorastrian inventions. They are like the many gods of Hinduism, splinters of two root deities in this case. I'm not positive but I think most modern Hindus assume a single root deity.

EDITED: For the record, I am pretty sure that there are still adherents of Zoroastrianism around, and they probably do take it seriously. Wikipedia says they number in the tens of thousands.

Of course we all agree that once upon a time Lucifer was #1 angel in heaven, but that he had a falling out with the god. First of all angels don't have free will. They are like programs. Whether people do or not is beside the point. So this falling out could've been expected. And it is pretty easy to see why. If Lucifier is the embodiment of sugar spice and everything nice, then he's going to find fault in a god of all things sooner or later. Because a god of all things can't be 100% just all of the time. Sooner or later you have to crack a few eggs to make an omelet. So Lucifer ends up in hell as the story goes. Not put there, he chooses to make his home in hell. From hell Lucifer gets to be the executioner of enlightened justice that he always imagined himself to be. And that gives Lucifer a bad image. Does that remind you of anyone? *cough* *Guyra*

And what about god then? That statue of a maiden in KF2? Do many of god's followers ever start to look like satanists? Worshiping a maiden that turns out to be a serpent wearing a dress??? Many traditions believe nature itself is a deception. Gnostics, Buddhists. Statistically speaking they are probably right on the money. We live in a strange reality that by all rights should probably not exist. Did two Escher like realities simultaneously erect one another? And if so what the hell was the firmament for that process?? If you can't meditate long enough on that to cut your fellow man some slack then maybe that is the definition of evil that we are looking for...

Anyway, I bet this has been a long post. And I bet you are wondering what the hell conjured this up out of me. It's actually this...


For a long time people have been thinking. Video games are becoming more than just games. We need a new word to describe this nascent phenomenon that will soon begin consuming all of the arts and if we are not careful, reality as we know it.

I've always thought we should just ditch the goggles concept of 90s "virtual reality" and call it all VR. Because that's what it is. Even Tetris is a reality, goggles or no goggles, or piped directly into your brainpan. Its a reality. But it occurred to me this afternoon that we have a better word, if only for its brevity, in "irreality"...

And an abbreviation does not a word make. So I vote, as the art of video games matures, and as we begin to see all forms of storytelling media being developed with the same tools used to develop video games, because make no bones about it, it will just be a thousand times more economical to do so, and there will be a thousands times more people who will therefore be able to afford to do so...

We slowly begin to refer to this stuff as "irreality". The word itself is already strictly limited to the subject of fantasy, fantasy fiction almost exclusively. So there is no ambiguity in terms of terms like hallucination or surreality to be had :evils:


The End (of this post; please discuss)


PS: Why are movies etc. not irreality? Well they are. But they are not interactive. I think something has to be interactive and intuitive to strictly qualify as a(n) (ir)reality.

Aren't video games games? For the most part yes. But a game usually has a win condition. And its not appropriate to describe something as fine art and a game in the same breath. We are not at fine art yet, but we do have open ended games with no obvious win condition... and there is certainly no shortage of players who would seem to want their favorite games to go on forever and ever.

Can something be commercial and fine art at the same time? No not really, but in essence certainly yes. This website is squarely a non-commercial enterprise. So non-commercial games are not that hard to imagine. Free software itself is about as immaterial as things get.

Are "fine artists" allowed to take their audience into consideration? :censored:

Wolf:
Would you believe I was actually so bored I read through this while I drank my coffee?? You've got some wild stuff in there. Irreality has other names "fake, counterfeit, unreal, lie." Lemmings can believe the "irreality" that they are heading to a safe place when they jump off a cliff and swim out to sea, but that will not change the reality that their bloated carcasses will be fish food shortly.

The Sword of Moonlight, Guyra, Seath etc are silly half-baked clichés thrown together by some programmers who didn't really care. This fact is evidenced by the gaping plot holes and glaring inconsistencies throughout the KF trilogy. Any effort to make it meaningful, is just you projecting what you wish the world was onto a cheap set of meaningless drivel.

You've got some way off untruths... pardon me, irrealities about Christianity in there too. Christianity is not about Good vs Evil- that is ignorance spread by modern video game, atheist fantasy fiction and anime slop. It is about truth vs untruth. Why good is good is because it's TRUE. Evil is bad because its logic is based in untruths. The Latin "light" root in Lucifer is to remind how alluring a false light (evil) can be. False light that draws people away from truth - just like your arguments' logic, bent and distorted half truths that slowly lead to believing a monstrously distorted lie.

Satan is not a Hebrew term, but a generic arab term for the "prosecutor" who accused defendants in a legal trial. All the rubbish and hype that has been piled on the term through the years is not part of the original message of Christ. You see, when you call yourself a "Christian" you don't get plugged into a communal brain that makes you like every other Christian. Christians have the same flaws and dissension that all humans have (duh) so you can hardly fault Christianity for the behavior of people who profess to be Christians. The whole point of Christianity is that humans are generally ignorant hypocrites so why say Christianity is flawed when Christians act ignorant and hypocritical?

You have a great deal of prognostication in your post which, just like Jung's blather, is the wishful thinking of a mind so lost in itself that it thinks truth begins and ends with its comprehension. Other than a few fringe groups, who have been given an air of legitimacy by the internet's ability to spread 'fertilizer' on a mass scale, I see no general consensus or compelling evidence that the world is moving in the directions you propose. You've immersed yourself in the fantasy propaganda of fringe groups so much that you've lost site of reality. But just like with a Lemming, believing a lie does not make it true. It just justifies ignoring the truth until it's too late.

You should give up the irreality of the computer, go find a wife and spend your life building a good life for your family.  :saint:

Holey Moley:

--- Quote from: Wolf on February 09, 2013, 09:24:48 PM ---Would you believe I was actually so bored I read through this while I drank my coffee?? You've got some wild stuff in there. Irreality has other names "fake, counterfeit, unreal, lie." Lemmings can believe the "irreality" that they are heading to a safe place when they jump off a cliff and swim out to sea, but that will not change the reality that their bloated carcasses will be fish food shortly.
--- End quote ---

Yeah subjectivity is irreality too. But that's on a whole other level.


--- Quote ---The Sword of Moonlight, Guyra, Seath etc are silly half-baked clichés thrown together by some programmers who didn't really care. This fact is evidenced by the gaping plot holes and glaring inconsistencies throughout the KF trilogy. Any effort to make it meaningful, is just you projecting what you wish the world was onto a cheap set of meaningless drivel.
--- End quote ---

I'm not projecting, I am salvaging to see what more can be done with this. The beauty here is anyone can do anything. The only question is how do you make the most of things. There is a multiverse quality to From's games too. The later games don't even jibe with the trilogy if you try to marry them together. You can toss them out if you want but you can do it both ways and new ways too.

There is no single interpretation of a good story. That's why older games have a lot of appeal, holes and all, a lot more is left to the imagination. Not just graphically but often conceptually. I don't think its fair to draw conclusions about what the artists were doing. A lot of our most prized pop music doesn't present any kind of coherent message.


--- Quote ---You've got some way off untruths... pardon me, irrealities about Christianity in there too. Christianity is not about Good vs Evil- that is ignorance spread by modern video game, atheist fantasy fiction and anime slop.
--- End quote ---

Yeah don't forget literature contemporary and prehistoric, Hollywood, you name it. There is no truth in here. It's a website about video games. And not Christian video games though if someone wants to do that with SOM more power to them.


--- Quote ---It is about truth vs untruth. Why good is good is because it's TRUE. Evil is bad because its logic is based in untruths.
--- End quote ---

Yeah that is kind of the whole point of this thread aside from the idea of rebranding video games with the more holistic notion of irreality. And a lot of our fiction is modeled on Christianity which itself is modeled on other religions. People who consume a lot of media probably know more about Christianity than most people who go to church. If by know you mean mythology and not sexual intercourse (ie. know in the Biblical sense)


--- Quote ---The Latin "light" root in Lucifer is to remind how alluring a false light (evil) can be. False light that draws people away from truth - just like your arguments' logic, bent and distorted half truths that slowly lead to believing a monstrously distorted lie.
--- End quote ---

There is a pre-Christian Roman god called Lucifer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphorus_%28morning_star%29) not that it matters. Light is associated with enlightenment and justice. Don't ask me why. But it's that cultural baggage that literature is made of.


--- Quote ---Satan is not a Hebrew term, but a generic arab term for the "prosecutor" who accused defendants in a legal trial. All the rubbish and hype that has been piled on the term through the years is not part of the original message of Christ. You see, when you call yourself a "Christian" you don't get plugged into a communal brain that makes you like every other Christian. Christians have the same flaws and dissension that all humans have (duh) so you can hardly fault Christianity for the behavior of people who profess to be Christians. The whole point of Christianity is that humans are generally ignorant hypocrites so why say Christianity is flawed when Christians act ignorant and hypocritical?
--- End quote ---

There is nothing particularly Christian or anti-Christian in this thread except that popular culture is kind of suffused with this stuff for better or worse. It's our heritage. What can you do. These are archetypes that form a kind of hidden language that all of that fantasy fanfiction you denounce is written in.


--- Quote ---You have a great deal of prognostication in your post which, just like Jung's blather, is the wishful thinking of a mind so lost in itself that it thinks truth begins and ends with its comprehension. Other than a few fringe groups, who have been given an air of legitimacy by the internet's ability to spread 'fertilizer' on a mass scale, I see no general consensus or compelling evidence that the world is moving in the directions you propose. You've immersed yourself in the fantasy propaganda of fringe groups so much that you've lost site of reality. But just like with a Lemming, believing a lie does not make it true. It just justifies ignoring the truth until it's too late.
--- End quote ---

Wolf. Try to separate fantasy and reality for only a second. The subject of this thread is "What is the nature of irreality?" ... it could just as well read "what is the nature of fantasy?". If you interact with supernatural Christian beings or whatever that's groovy, if you take it on an article of faith for god knows what reason, that's fine too. But at the end of the day for most people we don't live in a fantastical world. That's what we read books and play video games for. We do it because that's all there is to do.


--- Quote ---You should give up the irreality of the computer, go find a wife and spend your life building a good life for your family.  :saint:
--- End quote ---

Now this is totally inappropriate behavior. In fact the entire post should probably be moved to the the holding area (http://www.swordofmoonlight.net/bbs2/index.php?board=3.0) as a prime example of how not to post. But as much as I would like to put that sub forum to use. I expected some backlash here from a Christian perspective (or whatever) so I will just leave it here if you don't mind.

Were these kinds of personal accusations leveled at any other user I would pull it immediately. Anyway let it be known there is no "religious" agenda to this website. Our fantasy is strictly fantasy. Hopefully no one will be killed over it or anything :coffee:


PS: Is it just me? Or do silly half-baked clichés not sound delicious? :evil:

Holey Moley:
Just to be clear. This thread posits a few things. And it intentionally does it in a heady way just to demonstrate how much freedom there is for exploration in King's Field alone. The title (King's Field) itself is so beautifully open ended. To my mind it refers to the mental realm of the individual. It's a virtual field where you are the king. Even if you are just a lowly adventurer and some other NPC is the king, unbeknownst to him, you are the king.

By few I mean 3...

1) People will be playing more video games. People live to play games. People make babies so those babies can play games. Everyone else twiddles their life away on Face**** and gets laid. The games will get ever more convincing and compelling. It's hard to argue otherwise. Video games are better than war games. People like games and story telling media in general. They allow you to live out other lives, simpler lives, and most of all consequence free lives.

Video games will become ever more popular. And you will probably want to play them with handheld game controllers. So much for prognostication.

2) Truth vs Untruth makes for more interesting games than Good vs Evil. In King's Field we have the Truth Glass. Very few games actually make the player question the story that is presented to them. Much less make it a theme. And ultimately truths are relative and often incomplete and sometimes  even malleable. This also adds an element of mystery.

And if you think of a well structured game as a kind of therapy, you can ask yourself how does the game help the player better understand themselves. What if anything does the player learn from their ordeal? So in a way a player is in search of truth. Even truths that they can apply to real world experiences. Not unlike Never Ending Story or Stuart Saves His Family (sorry, that one was on television the other day)

Finally how can we help gamers be better critical thinkers. Go onto GameFaqs and you will discover that this is an epidemic.

3) There is a lot of fun to be had in "breaking the fourth wall" and there is a lot of potential for that with SOM. It's kind of the next level after first person.  It's not something you do to drive crazy people crazier. Though if religion is any indication there is no shortage of people who will believe anything. It's just another tool in a story teller's tool belt. A way to layer on meaning and subtext and really get inside the player's head. When we are entranced by the game we are willing to suspend belief. It's a kind of nirvana where the only thing that separates you from the game is your bladder or stomach growling reminding you that this is not a dream.


EDITED: Who wants to place bets on how long before Apple announces its new iReality service? :doh:

Holey Moley:
I am rereading old topics tonight for ideas.


--- Quote from: Holy Diver on January 11, 2013, 12:21:12 AM ---Anyway, I bet this has been a long post. And I bet you are wondering what the hell conjured this up out of me. It's actually this...


For a long time people have been thinking. Video games are becoming more than just games. We need a new word to describe this nascent phenomenon that will soon begin consuming all of the arts and if we are not careful, reality as we know it.

I've always thought we should just ditch the goggles concept of 90s "virtual reality" and call it all VR. Because that's what it is. Even Tetris is a reality, goggles or no goggles, or piped directly into your brainpan. Its a reality. But it occurred to me this afternoon that we have a better word, if only for its brevity, in "irreality"...

And an abbreviation does not a word make. So I vote, as the art of video games matures, and as we begin to see all forms of storytelling media being developed with the same tools used to develop video games, because make no bones about it, it will just be a thousand times more economical to do so, and there will be a thousands times more people who will therefore be able to afford to do so...

We slowly begin to refer to this stuff as "irreality". The word itself is already strictly limited to the subject of fantasy, fantasy fiction almost exclusively. So there is no ambiguity in terms of terms like hallucination or surreality to be had :evils:
--- End quote ---

These are things I've grappled with for a while. I think I have an answer now, and its a lot more pedestrian I think, but good. It comes out of an essay I wrote for a Patreon account/whatever for myself and this work, that is now linked to on the Support page of this website.

Basically my concept now, and I think this is final, for the "graphic novel" equivalent of video games is "action adventure". Not action-adventure game, just plain action adventure. Like video->action game->adventure.

I think this is a new medium that permanently take the game out of games. If a game has game-like elements then it's not a pure action-adventure (it's an action-adventure game)


This works because anything that embeds you in a story is an Adventure by definition. And because its real-time and fully 3D (these are the base requirements for this medium) it will always entail Action.

If you want to shorten it, it just becomes Adventure. We'll know what people mean because no one in their right mind goes on adventures anymore!


Also, as for my stance on how to enmesh Sword of Moonlight as deep into literature as possible. My feelings are that the base world of King's Field must be literary. So it must be generated from literature. I think there are two main strains of modern literature and modern culture that are undeniable, the obvious winners.

I think that's religion pretty much, but especially the Abrahamic kinds. Full disclosure, I'm not religious, but I know when to admit defeat. And I think vampires. There has to be vampires. In fact I saw Shadow of the Vampire for the first time last night, and I watched Nosferatu again afterwards on Netflix to see if it was really anything like SOTV, because that's not how I remembered it at all...

And of course, if you have vampires you necessarily have the religions, because their weaknesses are crosses and stuff, and there is just no other way to explain that kind of thing. But the reason I focus down on these is not because I am a huge fan, but because I think the King's Field universe must be virtual, so my concept of it is is nothing in it is real. It's like if you took a library and put in in a blender and fed that smoothie to a super computer and asked it to turn it into the coolest thing it can!

That's pretty much it for me. My working concept, and I think final concept, is the super computer crunches all of the literature and decides to create the King's Field verse, which is like our world, since our world/literature is the input, but it isn't. All of the dragons and really everything in the universe is really just the dragon in revelations who falls down to earth, and actually is the earth. And the dragon is kicked down by the other dragons in heaven, which is something you can never see since its outside the creation. The dragons are angels, and there is really no distinction, the words are interchangeable. Their true forms are dragons. If they appear as men/women I believe they should not have wings, they don't need them, and that looks silly.

The red dragon that is all of creation / Sylval is kicked out of heaven by archangel Michael whose weapons are the Moonlight and Dark Slayer. Both of those weapons are pulled into creation by the dragon. And when the universe ends, everything happens in reverse, the dragons all coalesce back into Sylval, and try again to enter heaven, only to be kicked out again, so that a feedback loop is formed and every repeat of the cycle feeds back into the next.

After so many cycles the super computer has pretty much lost track of that the Moonlight and Dark Slayer were originally the Holy Spear and Grail from legends of Christianity that it read about in a lot of the literature that it used to initialize the universe. And the "true cross" is when the Moonlight and Dark Slayer are combined...

And this explains why crosses freakout vampires. Because after the initial formation of the universe everything eventually settles down, but the vampires still remain from the old world (they have ground up shards of the Dark Slayer that runs through their bloodstream, and that's what makes them immortal/magical like the old world)

My other rationale is I want to create a universe that is as compatible as possible with Hideyuki Kikuchi's novels, since I think they are perfect fits for King's Field. They have Fire, Earth, Wind, and Water when it comes to magic like King's Field. And I think his stuff is about a century ahead of its time, and so perfectly fit for the 21st century. He's basically obsessed with vampires since he was a kid, but does write other things.


PS: Vampires are not supposed to have shadows! But since that's really hard to do on a movie set most vampires in film have shadows. But games / digital media shouldn't have that problem at all.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page