I'm an older gamer (46) and I have some views on this. I played D&D when I was younger for many years. I played AD&D 1st Edition and 2nd Edition. I knew those games inside and out. This colours what I am going to say.
I played Pathfinder Kingmaker and I gave up in the first act. I found the combat far too hard for someone with zero knowledge of the tabletop game. I've read various guides and so forth and they all rely on knowing the mechanics inside and out. The game itself feels great but it really is a lot to get your head around if you don't play Pathfinder. If this had been based on AD&D 1st or 2nd Edition I think I would have been fine. I haven't played Wrath of the Righteous but I expect this to be similar.
BG3 on the other hand I have really enjoyed playing so far. The mechanics are as alien to me as they would be if I had never played AD&D but I never feel that I am being punished for it.
Originally Posted by Wormerine
Originally Posted by Sozz
The problem with a lot of games that claim to be replayable is that you usually have all the information after one playthrough, the only thing that makes a second playthrough of a game really meaningful is if you don't get all the information about the story just from playing through it the first time.
To me a good game with replayibility allows to approach the same content from a different perspective, but it doesn't prohibit players from experiencinf most of the content in each playtrhough. Fallout: New Vegas is the golden example for me - an order of doing stuff, whom we ally with and whom we destroy can change in each play through, plus each play through wil have different flavour based on the build we run. I prefer linear-ish, but complex and flexible game, over multiple exclusive, but rigid paths.
As long as I can replaying the game and do enough of the things differently, I will be happy. To me reactivity is there to create ilusion of choices, not to force players to do multiple play throughs. I don't think the player should feel like they are missing something major, if they don't do multiple playtheoughs.
I've probably played BG2 more times than any other game. I must have played it through entirely maybe 20 times. It probably does what you say about F:NV even better. The core plot is the same each time and the outcome doesn't really change. The side quests though make a big difference and the party you choose makes a massive difference as well. I still haven't gottten around to an all evil party yet but that is on my list!
