Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Va, USA
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Va, USA
Originally Posted by Rythok

And I just want to add that I think people overestimate the value of the word "role" in RPG. It is not specified in role-playing game that the role has to be chosen by the player.


Absolutely agree. However, and people differ on this, I prefer to choose the role in the game I buy, not have the game choose the role for me. I have played the others and enjoyed them, just not as much. Plus, the latter reduces replay options IMO.


Is reality just a fantasy?
Joined: Jan 2009
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2009
The Witcher, is, indeed, in my opinion also, the best RPG to come out since 2002(?) with the Neverwinter Nights/Gothic II/Morrowind triad. Drakensang came close, but it's kind of a different animal, that caters to different tastes, I think. I think Drakensang appeals more to hardcore roleplayers, while the Witcher offers up a much better story, realism and dialogue.

The Witcher, however, also has its flaws:

- Awful engine. Really, how good does your PC have to be to play a game? It's out two years ago, I have a PC and a laptop with good specs and graphics cards and I still can't play fluidly enough despite all the updates and the Enhanced Edition.
- Its stability and compatibility was horrid at first. Patches fixed this for the most part.
- lack of character creation & development. Sure, it's a tradeoff for an in-depth story with a great character, but it's still something I find quite important.
- Combat system. It was like a different take on Diablo. The combo's are nice, but it's still click for an attack. I wish they had made available a Legacy of Kain-type autoface all-keyboard OTS mode, because I really dislike the spot-hunting with mouse cursors, especially in my preferred OTS mode. Pause, scroll camera, wait for it, wait for it... click. That's very annoying.

I'm sure i'm forgetting a few minor gripes, but these were all very important things to me. In all honesty, The Witcher is still one of the titles I'd never want to get rid of, it is one of my favorite roleplaying games, but it's not the end-all to roleplaying games, it's not perfect, and it can be much improved upon.

In all honesty, while I usually dislike console games, I'm really curious about the console version of The Witcher... While they keep saying it's not an upgraded Witcher, I'm starting to believe that it really is.

Joined: Jul 2009
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2009
I don't like The Witcher.... I don't like anything about it. As a first thing, the fact I'm playing a pre-made character who already has his own story and personality kinda makes me feel like it's a japanese rpg.
As a second thing, I got bored fast of the dialogues and all. I don't know why... I just never got into the story.
As a third thing, I saw there's some sort minigame in which you win cards (actually very nicely drawn, however) by sleeping with random hot babes?? That's a bit too cheesy for an rpg with a supposedly good plot!

The graphics, as I recall, were pretty ok, however.

On a side note, MY favorite rpg was Neverwinter Nights 2.... the main storyline was just very silly, but, the dialogues and party interaction were awesome.



"I draghi sono draghi proprio perché gli uomini non possono nulla contro di loro."
Joined: Mar 2007
Location: Bielefeld :-p
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2007
Location: Bielefeld :-p
Well I think the Witcher was pretty good, but by no means the best RPG ever.

For me, this title goes without debate to Wizardry 8. It has the most perfect skillsystem in any RPG (a mixture of level-ups and learning-by-doing, but without the exploitation problems of Bethesda's games), it has a HUGE amount of classes, a very good combat system (the only problem whatsoever was the somewhat tricky issue of aiming spells since you never know your initiative for sure) and it has 100% gameplay, no cutscenes, no interruptions etc.
The balancing was also very good, difficult, but doable.
It was basically an open-world and you could do whatever you want, like in Bethesda's games.
Then it has random enemy encounters, so no game was the same, which led to incredible replayability.

Last but not least it has quite decent graphics (of course outdated today) and still runs on Vista without any compatibility issues.



Last edited by Ech_Heftag; 15/07/09 08:21 AM.

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam
Joined: Jan 2009
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2009
Well, I think games like Oblivion are just a giant sandbox. I liked Morrowind because it looked great and had very interesting content.. but Oblivion looked nowhere near as good as Morrowind (talking about the scenery, not the graphics). Even though I've never played Wizardry games, I never felt I'd like it, because of its focus on magic and it being first-person. In every game I play I try to go without magic, or as close to that as possible. And I need third person, I'm always annoyed by first-person games. I went third-person in Morrowind, even though that was not hard, what with the crosshair being in your main char's plexus and all. Being a combat-oriented character and having no worthwhile combat system (check out Drakensang's btw, THAT is a good RPG combat system), nor being able to see the character I'm controlling, would turn me off of a game. That is not to say it's not a good game, just that it wouldn't be my taste.

As for NWN2... what exactly did you like about that game? I'm a big fan of NWN, the original game is still one of my favorite games ever... And I think NWN2 was the most disappointing game ever. It suffered from the same engine problems as The Witcher, its graphics were awful, pathfinding was dreadful, the physics were silly, the conversation skills problem hadn't been addressed and was actually even made worse because it was a real party-based RPG, the AI was horrible, the voice acting was bleh, and the story was worse than the original one, etc. etc. The only thing I liked about NWN2 was the character creation system, save for the graphical problems with that. I would've preferred cartoony graphics over that. When Drakensang came out, it felt like what NWN2 should've been, because it had a solution for most of the big problems that NWN2 had, and there were loads. The only thing NWN2 did better was its character creation. That was it.

btw, my favorite RPG ever is Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn

Last edited by swordscythe; 15/07/09 10:19 AM.
Joined: Jul 2009
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by swordscythe

As for NWN2... what exactly did you like about that game? I'm a big fan of NWN, the original game is still one of my favorite games ever...



Well, I didn't think there was someone who actually thought the story of NWN was better than the story of NWN2. o_O; NWN's main plot was awful, in my opinion, it was like the basic story of a kid's cartoon. Now, a little kid maybe could find that plot vaguely interesting, but how about an adult?
NWN2's plot, while it too was very silly on its premise (chosen hero against generical big evil), managed to compensate it with the great dialogues and interactions. It's like the main plot there was merely the excuse for all the events, the emotions, the drama, etc.

I still agree about how the game was buggy, had bad AI, somewhat disappointing graphics, etc. etc. Everything, but the voiceacting - at last some of that voiceacting wasn't bad at all; I really liked Sand's and Bishop's a lot, for example.

And still, what can I say? With all its evident flaws, NWN2 really managed to involve me like no other rpg. I don't know how it managed to do so; maybe it was the good writing so that even the stupidest, useless and most pretentious thing a character would say, ended up seeming so charming.

And for some reason, it's really the only rpg in which above all others I felt I was playing MY own character. Morality, decisions, and all.

Drakensang doesn't come even close to that - it doesn't give you even the slightest superficial hint of choices, morality, decisions, or deep party interactions.



"I draghi sono draghi proprio perché gli uomini non possono nulla contro di loro."
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
Originally Posted by SheaOhmsford
Originally Posted by Elliot_Kane
The best single character RPG is The Witcher, IMO. Hands down win, no rivals. That's the level all others must compete with...


Hard to refute, but I still think it could be improved upon, and has been in some aspects in previous games. On one hand, the biggest thing in my mind, is the "role" in RPG. The ability to choose from multiple character classes, with different abilities, is crucial. And can't forget male or female...less important to some, more to others. It's one of the things I loved about DD and Diablo. Gameplay strategies had to be adjusted for each type of character build. You can't have this in Witcher, at least not nearly to the same degree. On the other hand, you certainly have choices that affect the story and gameplay, and the story is pretty much phenomenal.


Role playing is more about being allowed to play the character the way you choose than being able to pick things like class/race/gender, etc (Though those are never bad!). You may be restricted to playing Geralt, but you do have some choice of just how good/bad you want him to be.

I'll agree that that side of things could definitely be a lot better, but in terms of being able to make real choices that affect plot, story and outcome - which should all be absolute requirements of any game marketed as an RPG - I don't recall seeing better.

Which I suppose is a rather long and rambly way of saying that I agree with you, mostly laugh


Please click the banner...
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
Originally Posted by Lun-Sei Sleidee
On a side note, MY favorite rpg was Neverwinter Nights 2.... the main storyline was just very silly, but, the dialogues and party interaction were awesome.


You didn't mind the railway tracks? They frustrated the heck out of me! Too much 'go here, do this, then go there' with almost no room to do anything out of order. I hated that. HUGE improvement over the original (Completely execrable) NWN, I'll grant you, but I like to feel like I'm making the story, not that the story is making me.

***

Best cRPG of any type is still PS:T, IMO. Nothing since then has come close.

Last edited by Elliot_Kane; 15/07/09 12:59 PM.

Please click the banner...
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Va, USA
member
Offline
member
Joined: Mar 2004
Location: Va, USA
Originally Posted by Elliot_Kane
[quote=Lun-Sei Sleidee]On a side note, MY favorite rpg was Neverwinter Nights 2.... the main storyline was just very silly, but, the dialogues and party interaction were awesome.

You didn't mind the railway tracks? They frustrated the heck out of me! Too much 'go here, do this, then go there' with almost no room to do anything out of order. I hated that. HUGE improvement over the original (Completely execrable) NWN, I'll grant you, but I like to feel like I'm making the story, not that the story is making me.



Funny you should mention this. I have played NWN2 plenty (started it plenty anyway wink ) but always with a good character. I got bored and loaded it again recently, playing a shady, somewhat evil rogue type, goning the route of aligning with Axle and Moire. I was completely disappointed that I was still eventually awarded the Keep by Nasher. Not having read any storylines in the past on websites or what have you(I try to never do that), I was mildly PO'd. I thought I'd have to storm it and take it over in pursuit of the overall goal, and fend off the Greycloaks for the rest of the game. My point is, I should have seen it coming, given the parallels (railroad tracks)I had already encountered.

With all that aside though, I consider it a pretty decent game though. It sucked when it first came out, as buggy as it was, but I find it very playable now and fairly enjoyable. With the community and developer mods, and D&D party based rules, it still offers tons of variations for replayability.

***
Originally Posted by Elliot_Kane

Best cRPG of any type is still PS:T, IMO. Nothing since then has come close.


BG2 and PS:T are my all time faves.

Last edited by SheaOhmsford; 15/07/09 01:32 PM.

Is reality just a fantasy?
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Czech republic
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
Joined: Oct 2008
Location: Czech republic
D2 ist'n party-based RPG, but I wont mind if it would be similar to Drakensang by some degree.

IMHO Drakensang and Witcher are probably two best RPGs from last few years. Im not huge fan of big sandbox games like Oblivion (good by its own merits, but world is too shallow, bad dialogues etc.). Drakensang has some flaws - closing of old map areas, some NPCs are generic (but it can be said about almost all RPGs), level of realism and some quests could be better, some skills could have better and wider implementation. But it was still great game with some strong points - by far the best combat system of all RPGs nowadays (for example combat in Witcher or Gothic 3 was pretty bad), maybe best RPG system (from hardcore point of view), plenty of non-combat skills (its important for me, all Diablo clones allow to kill, explore and solve simple quests, RPGs should offer more), social skills to enhance dialogues, good story, some interesting NPCs and dialogues (it could be better, english translation has its flaws, but some NPCs and situations were great - and again, many RPGs could have better dialogues), little mix of heroic "bright" story and some darker themes (politics, corruption). And no stupid overstuffed and generic huge armors (expensive and mostly useless). rpg005

I could enjoy dark game. Fateful game where the world is heading to some terrible conflict or event. Game with troubled hero chased by his own decisions and... his own mistakes. Game when you will try to stop some madness, something out of reach - war between nations, eruption of huge volcano that would kill whole country etc. World driven by aloofness, greed, hate or lack of food - game when you will feel the value of life and value of virtues - to make friend, to cooperate, to be fairly-minded, to have responsibility, to build (not only kill), to know when to fight and when to talk. In dark world it should be hard for a hero to dont let it down in himself and other people.

For example hype about Dragon Age seems like anything but REAL dark game. It seems more like bloody "sandbox" to satisfy needs of mindless teenagers - they want to kill hordes of beasts, they want to have sex, they want to be big heroes (hero is mostly killer, no thinking about purpose of their deeds), they want to have super stuff anybody has (I am the best, i have super weapon +100), they want to see blood and naked girls (symbol of maturity?), they want to be bad guys because its "cool" (at least in games they can act freely and selfishly, no laws, no resposibility, no bonds to friends, no goal, no self-developing, everything is easy at hand etc.). Well its NOT dark world, its in fact childish fairy tale, only in dark setting.

So I agree with Alrik. All RPGs dont need dark setting. And if you want to do dark world, do it right, no virtual copy of fantasy cliché with more blood.


(Sorry for long post)


Note: Heroes should represent something, at least few virtues, right?

Joined: Jan 2009
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2009
Originally Posted by Lun-Sei Sleidee

And for some reason, it's really the only rpg in which above all others I felt I was playing MY own character. Morality, decisions, and all.

Drakensang doesn't come even close to that - it doesn't give you even the slightest superficial hint of choices, morality, decisions, or deep party interactions.


Really? I thought Drakensang actually did that better - they didn't have as many choices, but only because they left out the ones that really didn't matter. NWN2 was full of it, and, as the guy above me said, you can't really influence anything except your own abstract "alignment" thing. I've played good and evil characters, and even if you're a real dumb kind of superficial "torture ants" evil, it doesn't really change a thing. Let alone an evil person who hides his evil streak, you just magically become good, and if you do something evil then, everybody hates you. It's silly... Sure you have great character creation options, but you really can't be a profound character in NWN2. Definitely not as profound as, say, the Witcher.

Drakensang left no more options than NWN2 in that regard, but at least they were honest about it and didn't make a whole useless system around it. And you didn't HAVE to hoard conversation skills and charisma with your main char just to get people to do stuff. My favorite class is Ranger. Tough shit, buddy, you're not going to persuade a damn thing in the whole game, no matter who your party members are. Big fun.

Personally I thought NWN1's storyline was very simple, but it was fun and obvious. NWN2 is a mess. Its story is a mess, people keep trying to kill you when you're in the door of your own tavern, the party member's personal quests are annoying little distractions, the whole business with Shandra was transparant and boring... how many times did she get abducted again? How do the Githyanki get into the tavern and abduct her without anyone noticing, when I'm good enough to easily kill like 25 of them in one fight? They don't even have rogues, and I am a rogue. And you couldn't even pretend not to care about her, sheesh. Who believes a pint of fresh blood is the only way through a door? Blastglobes, anyone? Elanee wanted to sleep with me even though I never actually put her in my party after getting Qara. I got as much influence as possible with Khelgar but he still became a monk, because I was a Ranger... Grobnar keeps talking and singing to everyone's dismay, but he doesn't wanna sing me a song before my fight with whathisname? Sure knows how to pick his moments, that guy.

Meh, maybe it's just me. I never found a place in NWN2 that was anywhere near as interesting as Beorunna's well... or Port Llast.. or Luskan... in the original NWN. I thought Crossroad Keep could've been great... but it turned out not to be.

Joined: Mar 2003
A
veteran
Offline
veteran
A
Joined: Mar 2003
Why is no-one making colourful RPGs anymore ?


When you find a big kettle of crazy, it's best not to stir it.
--Dilbert cartoon

"Interplay.some zombiefied unlife thing going on there" - skavenhorde at RPGWatch
Joined: Jul 2009
P
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
P
Joined: Jul 2009
Quote
Well, I have read several comments at RPGWatch, whoch calöled Drakensang "refreshing" BECAUSE of so many "dark & grotty" RPGs nowadays ... I have serious difficulties remembering ANY "good alignment" RPGs in recent times - EVERYTHING tends to be "the darker, the better" nowadays.

In fact, we are getting flooded by dark fantasy settings, and even TDE was influenced so much by dark settings (which you can't see in Drakensang, by the way), that there have been erupted serious discussions whether the current, dark-influenced TDE is still the original, "real" TDE setting ! (TDE = The Dark eye).

Me, I have gained the impression that there are currently 2 groups of people trying to push and influence games into their directions, no mstter whatr other people say :

- gamers who want MP above everything else
- gamers who want a "dark & gritty" game above everything else.

Nowadays, I find myself as being in the minority, because I want SP-only games with a fairy-tale like setting. EVERYINE believes that this is complete crap and must be thrown out immediately !

"The darker, the better" is the current fashion in gaming, and if you manage to tell me 5 role playing games with "good alignment" fairy-tale like settings, you'll get 10 virtual rubber points from me ...


You know, the thing is is that this is true in every genre now-a-days, not even just RPGs.
Name just about any game that's come out recently that actually has an in-depth storyline and you can tell that in the end, regardless of a "karma" system, the backstory is terribly dark and evil.
I can name a few games right off the bat that aren't RPGs and count. inFamous and Resistance are two game series that fit into this greatly. You can play through the entire game and by the end, a terrible and dark thing will occur that just changes the entire mood into a negative one, with some plot "twist" like "Evil is coming" or just the entire game deals with evil all around.

A lot of games recently have this fake wedged in "karma" system where the player can be evil or good, but in the end it makes no difference. Nothing changes by the player being one way or the other.

It is refreshing to see new things where you can be truly good. That's a story-based thing that has left gaming in recent years. What ever happened to the games where in the end, you destroyed evil and the world was at peace? I haven't seen many of those games in the last 3-4 years.

Sorry, just thought I'd add that as I read this thread.

Last edited by Polantaris; 16/07/09 03:48 AM.
Joined: Jul 2009
C
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
C
Joined: Jul 2009
Originally Posted by Polantaris

It is refreshing to see new things where you can be truly good. That's a story-based thing that has left gaming in recent years. What ever happened to the games where in the end, you destroyed evil and the world was at peace? I haven't seen many of those games in the last 3-4 years.

I'd preferred not to see such games till the end of my life.

Joined: Jul 2009
P
journeyman
Offline
journeyman
P
Joined: Jul 2009
Why not? Why does everything have to be so negative? We're playing a game, not real life. Yeah, real life may be negative often, but why does our entertainment stay that way when we have a choice? Well apparently we don't have a choice anymore. I can't think of a single game that's new (and not a remake) that is positive at the end. Where through all your hard work, something actually changed. That's what an RPG is supposed to be about. Where you work to get something done, and in the end it gets done. But in recent RPGs you work and work and work and get nothing in the end. You break through legions of enemies and reach the final boss/supposed ultimate evil, you kill him, just to learn he wasn't the actual evil and you have to wait for a sequel that may or may not come. It's too based on being led into a sequel game. I feel like in recent games, I'm being laughed at. I do all kinds of things in the game and in the end, I feel unaccomplished. I did nothing. Where in old games, you worked and worked and worked and all that hard work was for the better. In the end your job is done, and you don't learn of some cliche stitched on bigger evil at the end of the game. In the end of the old games, you got your job done. But not anymore.

My question is, why is everything negative? What happened to the good in things? It doesn't seem to exist anywhere.

Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
I must admit, I like both types of games, depending on my mood. You can create a great game where the main character is a Paladin of extraordinary virtue and an equally great game where the main character is a low-down underhanded no-good scoundrel. Or you can create something where the main character could be either or neither at the player's choice.

Both approaches have a place at the table to me and I wouldn't want to see either vanish. Just as the Fantasy genre in literature has many divisions, all happily taking up shelf space, there is no reason why games cannot do the same.


Please click the banner...
Joined: Jan 2009
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2009
I think the prototypical lawful good 'hero' is not of this time. Society is more complicated than that now, and thus, the anti-hero is easier for people to relate to. Of course, the best choice is someone who can be either side of the spectrum, or anywhere in the middle. But it's a precarious balance between freedom of choice and good story, because a good game needs both, but that's extremely difficult to attain.

Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: London, England
If all of our heroes are cynical and deeply corrupt, what does that say about us and our society? Nothing good, surely...


Please click the banner...
Joined: Mar 2003
A
veteran
Offline
veteran
A
Joined: Mar 2003
Originally Posted by swordscythe
Society is more complicated than that now, and thus, the anti-hero is easier for people to relate to.


Okay, this reveals a lot about the people who want to play evil ones.

Even in our hopelessy corrupted and criminalized real life society, where murder and deepest corruption of the very sould can be seen every day even in the smallest supermarket, even there do exist a handful of "truly good" people. They might not be met in the most evil, corrupted supermarket around the corner - except for a short, as timeless as possible sneak-through in order to buy a few foodstuffs - buying ! remember that ! Not even stealing or snatching away from the handbag of the old granny nearby ! - but they are still there, lurking around the corners, hiding fom the darkest, corrupted evil that is called Politicians !

I think I have seen a few of them during the last days.


When you find a big kettle of crazy, it's best not to stir it.
--Dilbert cartoon

"Interplay.some zombiefied unlife thing going on there" - skavenhorde at RPGWatch
Joined: Jan 2009
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jan 2009
Still, I think there is too much going on, you can't solve every problem without creating more, you can be as good as you want to and never really make your area good... It's like Batman.. He's a prototypical hero, but he is not enough to ever make Gotham City a peaceful, quiet city... That's a village mentality. So he just does what he can. That doesn't mean he's an anti-hero, it just means it's not just about good and evil. Good people do bad things all the time. And to really make a difference, you have to sometimes descend into cruelty and crime yourself. What is good, and what is evil? That is the question nowadays. Would you kill an innocent person if you knew for certain they would end up killing your family? And would that be right? Become a murderer or lose everything dear to you. It's the choices you make. That's far more realistic (and interesting, IMO) than some random group who kills and maims for pure pleasure.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  Bvs, ForkTong, Larian_QA, Lar_q, Lynn, Macbeth, Raze 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5