Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Completed Geneforge

Repressed Homosexual
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
17,867
Location
Ottawa, Can.
Well Jeff sure likes to make big huge ruins full of tedious combat. It got a bit much after a while.

A similar game to the first 2 Fallouts, except that the ratio of socializing/city quests to dungeon crawling is akin to that of Fallout 3 instead.

And of course this is a game with the Fire Emblem syndrome, meaning that one has to reload after any faux pas involving the death of a creation.

All in all I still love these games a lot, so much originality, good atmosphere, good descriptions whenever entering a new area. A bit cheesy but not that much.

Anyhow I went with the Shapers and did their deed, which got me their best ending.

The challenge got pretty damn ridiculous at some point, especially when reaper turrets where involved, and Sholai warriors with swords shooting multiple rays of electricity at the same time. But I still love that I was often able to find creative ways to overcome the obstacles I found in the dungeons. I guess it's a huge part of the appeal.

I mainly want to know, does it get better as far as the ratio of socializing/dungeoneering goes?

I bought the Geneforge saga and started 2. Already I feel like I'm going to like it more, it seems a bit better written and better paced, and I hope there's more emphasis on stuff other than big ruins.

Apparently 3 is a total turd?

And I guess there is no way to magnify the text or screen? Because it seems that especially with the later games everything got so super tiny.

The first one had reasonably sized Arial, don't know why he decided to change that.
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Geneforge 2 is a bit better about balancing dungeon crawling and other game interaction, so I think you'll enjoy it. Geneforge 3 isn't horrible, but it's definitely the weakest in the series. It's slammed because it's much more linear and has much fewer choices and paths through the game than the previous games. Shaping is also broken as fuck (Vlish rape everything).

Nice to see the Codex turning some more people in the direction of Spiderweb. Give the Exile games a try, too. Not quite the same as Geneforge, but good combat makes for a solid dungeon crawl. Cool lore as well.
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Humanity has risen! said:
I'll wait until Jeff releases his remakes of Avernum 1-2-3.
Eh. Exile has a lot more gameplay options then Avernum (more spells, more skills, more traits, more weapons, more potions, more effects, more monsters)
 

SuicideBunny

(ノ ゜Д゜)ノ ︵ ┻━┻
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
8,943
Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Torment: Tides of Numenera
dunno bout geneforge, but avernum 6 is quite nice in the socializing to dungeoneering ratio department mainly due to the many special encounters which make combat and dungeon exploration much less tedious.
 
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
6,207
Location
The island of misfit mascots
There is C+C, that increases greatly the more you go - the final Geneforge game is one of the most plentiful games for C+C ever made. The games mostly get better each iteration, aside from G3 - a lot of folks have a soft spot for G2 as well, but it would be difficult to go back to that having played G5 first (G5 is probably the overall best).

Having said that, it isn't a series that's well-designed for playing them all back to back. After the first couple, the games get quite huge (even the second one is pretty large), and they are all similar (marginal improvements each time, that add up) in graphics and mechanics. If you try playing them all back to back you're likely to get bored - I'd recommend playing G5 if you're going to try one, or play G2,4,5 but play something else in between to break the mechanics up a little.
 

mountain hare

Scholar
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
236
Humanity has risen! said:
Well Jeff sure likes to make big huge ruins full of tedious combat. It got a bit much after a while.

Well, Sucia has been abandoned for 200 years.

And of course this is a game with the Fire Emblem syndrome, meaning that one has to reload after any faux pas involving the death of a creation.

Huh? I never worried if my creations died in Geneforge 1, I just created new ones.

All in all I still love these games a lot, so much originality, good atmosphere, good descriptions whenever entering a new area. A bit cheesy but not that much.

Geneforge 1 is my favourite precisely because of the atmosphere.

Anyhow I went with the Shapers and did their deed, which got me their best ending.

You should try non-Shaper endings.

The challenge got pretty damn ridiculous at some point, especially when reaper turrets where involved, and Sholai warriors with swords shooting multiple rays of electricity at the same time.

Augmented Sholai are *insane*, and Reaper turrets aren't too fun either. Did you try assaulting the Inner Crypt? That's the challenge dungeon of the game, and also contains the best belt.

I mainly want to know, does it get better as far as the ratio of socializing/dungeoneering goes?

The later sequels take place in more populated areas, so I guess so.

I bought the Geneforge saga and started 2. Already I feel like I'm going to like it more, it seems a bit better written and better paced, and I hope there's more emphasis on stuff other than big ruins.

Geneforge 2 is pretty damn good. Where are you up to?

Apparently 3 is a total turd?

If you've played Geneforge 2, then Geneforge 3 is more of the same, except with fewer factions,a lousy boat system, and forced linearity. Linearity is OK when the story motivates you to play, but unfortunately, the story in GF3 leaves a lot to be desired.

And I guess there is no way to magnify the text or screen? Because it seems that especially with the later games everything got so super tiny.

The first one had reasonably sized Arial, don't know why he decided to change that.

Can you increase the resolution?
 

Lightknight

Liturgist
Joined
Nov 26, 2008
Messages
705
And of course this is a game with the Fire Emblem syndrome, meaning that one has to reload after any faux pas involving the death of a creation.
By Fire Emblem you mean the game series that gives you at least one new potential recruit per map ? And by Geneforge you mean the game series where its actually counterproductive (at least in first few games for sure) to keep your old creatures alive ?
I dont get your point.

Eh. Exile has a lot more gameplay options then Avernum (more spells, more skills, more traits, more weapons, more potions, more effects, more monsters)
Given that the spells and monsters in Avernum are way too same-y and unimaginative already, and you say there was more of it in Exile - i'd say that it was a move in the right direction.

The games mostly get better each iteration
But the combat mechanics stays shitty in each and every one...
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Lightknight said:
Eh. Exile has a lot more gameplay options then Avernum (more spells, more skills, more traits, more weapons, more potions, more effects, more monsters)
Given that the spells and monsters in Avernum are way too same-y and unimaginative already, and you say there was more of it in Exile - i'd say that it was a move in the right direction.
All of the spells were different in Exile. And they were awesome.
 

Fowyr

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Mar 29, 2009
Messages
7,671
ElecTriCotter said:
All of the spells were different in Exile. And they were awesome.
I concur, especially about "awesome" part, because not all spells was really different. But they was so versatile and fun... Fields, various summonings, protection, area damage spells... And fucking quickfire. Name me one game besides M&M6-M&M8, where you may destroy most of the map with one spell, given the time.
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Fowyr said:
ElecTriCotter said:
All of the spells were different in Exile. And they were awesome.
I concur, especially about "awesome" part, because not all spells was really different. But they was so versatile and fun... Fields, various summonings, protection, area damage spells... And fucking quickfire. Name me one game besides M&M6-M&M8, where you may destroy most of the map with one spell, given the time.
Mass paralysis + quickfire = :thumbsup:
 

mountain hare

Scholar
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
236
Fowyr said:
ElecTriCotter said:
All of the spells were different in Exile. And they were awesome.
I concur, especially about "awesome" part, because not all spells was really different. But they was so versatile and fun... Fields, various summonings, protection, area damage spells... And fucking quickfire. Name me one game besides M&M6-M&M8, where you may destroy most of the map with one spell, given the time.

In Exile 2, I assaulted one of the major Empire strongholds, and used charm foe to create my own army, which then captured the rest of the fortress. Good fun. Charm foe is horrendously overpowered in Exile, having a permanent duration.

Force barriers are also fun. An easy way to defeat the Doomguard is to just box it in with force barriers.

The wide range of spells was the primary strength of the series. It's a shame that the game proper window was 1/5th of the screen.
 

Mangoose

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
24,717
Location
I'm a Banana
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity
ElecTriCotter said:
Geneforge 2 is a bit better about balancing dungeon crawling and other game interaction, so I think you'll enjoy it.
Are 4 and 5 even better in the combat/interaction balance, or more of the same? I've tried the series multiple times, but I just don't enjoy combat, at least in the first few hours when there is little complexity.
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Mangoose said:
ElecTriCotter said:
Geneforge 2 is a bit better about balancing dungeon crawling and other game interaction, so I think you'll enjoy it.
Are 4 and 5 even better in the combat/interaction balance, or more of the same? I've tried the series multiple times, but I just don't enjoy combat, at least in the first few hours when there is little complexity.
5 is good, 4 is okay... probably not as balanced as 5, at least in the early section of the game.
 

mountain hare

Scholar
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
236
roladka said:
Reload when your creations die? Really?

Yeah, I was a little stunned to. The whole point of creations is that they are disposable.

In Geneforge, there are only two times you would ever try to keep your creations alive.

1. Vlish in Geneforge 3, since they are easily the best creation, despite being only second tier.

2. Any top tier creation (eg. War Tralls in Geneforge 5), as there aren't any better creations left to shape.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
3,520
Doesn't it actually take more essence to upgrade a creation after it levels up than to upgrade a creation immediately at summoning time? At least, thats what seemed to be the case when I tested it once in Geneforge 1.

Humanity has risen! said:
Just dled the demo for the kicks, it doesn't work on Windows 7, and I'm not going back to XP.

They all work fine on Windows 7. You are doing something wrong.
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
Overweight Manatee said:
Humanity has risen! said:
Just dled the demo for the kicks, it doesn't work on Windows 7, and I'm not going back to XP.

They all work fine on Windows 7. You are doing something wrong.
He's talking about Exile, which doesn't work on Win7.

About remaking creations, I occasionally did it when playing as a Guardian, as it was often not worth it to make a new creation after a older one died (unless it's a higher tier or something).
 

Elzair

Cipher
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,254
mountain hare said:
roladka said:
Reload when your creations die? Really?

Yeah, I was a little stunned to. The whole point of creations is that they are disposable.

In Geneforge, there are only two times you would ever try to keep your creations alive.

1. Vlish in Geneforge 3, since they are easily the best creation, despite being only second tier.

2. Any top tier creation (eg. War Tralls in Geneforge 5), as there aren't any better creations left to shape.

I don't know how it is in the later ones, but when I played Geneforge 1 I think I remember creations levelling-up, which meant that if a creation died you would lose their increased stats.
 

mountain hare

Scholar
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
236
Elzair said:
mountain hare said:
roladka said:
Reload when your creations die? Really?

Yeah, I was a little stunned to. The whole point of creations is that they are disposable.

In Geneforge, there are only two times you would ever try to keep your creations alive.

1. Vlish in Geneforge 3, since they are easily the best creation, despite being only second tier.

2. Any top tier creation (eg. War Tralls in Geneforge 5), as there aren't any better creations left to shape.

I don't know how it is in the later ones, but when I played Geneforge 1 I think I remember creations levelling-up, which meant that if a creation died you would lose their increased stats.

You're correct. Every time a creation level's up, they gain a +1 to all statistics. If you level them up by keeping them with you and allowing them to gain experience, they also gain 2 (?) skill points that can be invested in any stat. However, this costs essence (as if you were adding those points when you initially create the creation).

The problem is that leveling up low-tier creations is not worth it, as the upper tier creations have *much* higher starting levels when they are Shaped. They also have higher base hitpoints, higher damage multipliers, and better resistances (in later Geneforge sequels).

Ergo. A freshly minted Drayk will be far more effective that a fyora you have kept alive for the whole game.

You also need to remember that you will likely be increasing your skill in X shaping, and also finding extra points of Create Y. So you will likely be able to create the creature at a higher base level anyway, and that base level will exceed the level your previous shaped creation gained via XP.

The XP penalties to your PC for keeping creations around is pretty small, so there is no harm in leveling up low-tier creations, until a higher tier creation becomes available. But I wouldn't bend over backwards to do it, since they aren't going to be able to hold their own against drakons, gazers, war tralls, and rotties. I tried to keep cryoas and vlish alive throughout Geneforge 5, but once I got to the Dera Reaches, they were severely outclassed.
 

ElectricOtter

Guest
coldcrow said:
Levelled up Rothdizons are the stuff of legends in G5.
Pffft, you could get Clawbugs very early on and they'd steamroll everything until the Mera Fen.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom