A Thought on PST

[WouldBeCreator]

So, PST is my all-time favorite RPG and probably one of my five or ten favorite games ever. Etc. etc. But prompted by the thought of replaying it (this would be I think my fourth playthrough), it struck me that the game has a fairly major flaw in it -- or, it seems so to me.

We've been debating a lot about role-playing and meaningful choices in other threads. I imagine that's been going on here for years. It occured to me that one thing PS:T really drops the ball on is letting you go through with significantly different builds to experience significantly different games.

That's not just because there aren't many meaningful thieving opportunities or enough difficult combat to make the fighter / mage difference important. It's not even that there aren't cmeaningful class-specific quests or anything.

It has more to do with the game's structure and its reward system. The prime (only?) reward in the game is the story. Everything is secondary to that for a player, since there's no point in power-gaming it at all. The problem is that getting the story is just a matter of INT, CHA, and WIS. DEX, CON, STR have almost no role in getting you story, aside from a few very minor instances. Unlike FO, where you have a meaningfully different experience playing as a moron, in PS:T the aren't different stories, just more story or less story. And there's a specific way to play to get the most story.

The only meaningful choice seems to be on alignment, and even there your choices are always outside the main story arc and don't develop the game's main reward (TNO's history). So sometimes I play as a jerk, though that seems to get you less plot and less of a satisfying plot, and sometimes as a nice guy. But that's really the only difference.

At bottom, I think that's because the *play* in PS:T -- from the combat, to the talk trees, to the "puzzles" -- is so rudimentary that the only reason I'm playing it is to experience the multimedia story. I suspect that's why PS:T isn't my #1 game of all time -- it's not really much of a game. Just a great book that you play.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Yeah, the fact that it's kinda linear is why it's not as good as FO series in my humble opinion (although people say my opinion sucks).

 

[WouldBeCreator]

Yeah, the fact that it's kinda linear is why it's not as good as FO series in my humble opinion (although people say my opinion sucks).

I find the characters and story so much better than FO's that it wins out, but gameplay-wise, you're right, of course.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

The characters are phenominal, you'll get no arguments here on that.

 

[Tris McCall]

We've been debating a lot about role-playing and meaningful choices in other threads. I imagine that's been going on here for years. It occured to me that one thing PS:T really drops the ball on is letting you go through with significantly different builds to experience significantly different games.
That's not just because there aren't many meaningful thieving opportunities or enough difficult combat to make the fighter / mage difference important. It's not even that there aren't cmeaningful class-specific quests or anything.

I think of it as get-back for all the games in which I'm forced to play a fighter just to survive the waves of enemies. For once, I'm rewarded for playing a talker, rather than an axe-swinger!

But, seriously, this is all true, and it probably explains why I've never re-played the game. I'd hate to play a dumb or unwise Nameless One. That wouldn't be a rewarding experience at all. It's certainly not the experience the developers want you to have.

The depth of PS:T is in the story-art, not in the gameplay. I guess in strict terms that makes it an inferior game to a few others (Arcanum? Fallout? SoA?). But the experience of playing PS:T is so rich, and so thought-provoking, that it easily overwhelms any quibbles I have about its linearity.

 

[Spazmo]

That's all very true. What's distressing about this is that PST has probably the best story in any RPG ever. I don't expect debate on this point, but if there is, I move it be ignored. But if PST has the best story of any RPG, but comparatively little freedom, and yet still has a great deal of replay value (I've managed two complete playthroughs with two more serious attempts), does that mean that this is the model to follow for a story rich RPG?

I say no. The only reason PST is as linear as it is in terms of character development because the player is TNO. Imagine if you played PST as anyone and instead of being TNO piecing together your own history, you were following TNO through the planes as he's figuring out his backstory. I don't know why you'd be pursuing TNO, but the point is that you can have the richness of PST's story without it's constraints.

 

[WouldBeCreator]

I disagree. The strength of PST is having the character predefined and having it on a rail. You can't have a story that layered, nuanced, and woven together and still give the player meaningful freedom. I'm sorry to those who think otherwise, but it just ain't possible. To pull something like that off would simply require too many good writers, and getting that many good writers willing to cooperate that thoroughly is incredibly unlikely. Moreover, I'm not even sure that if you had that many good writers they would be able to plot out the various permutations in a way that would permit a story to be as rich as PS:T's but also flexible.

We'll see what Avellone and Co. come up with for NWNII, since they'll have to be flexible. Game writers get better at the technical side with time, so that means Avellone has all his brilliance plus new skill. But, of course, he's saddled with the godawful setting, potentially a bad engine, and different market pressures. So, we'll see.

 

[Zomg]

Well, another element of PS:T is the roleplaying, or more specifically the ability to consequentially evoke a coherent (and even evolving) personality, moral character, intellectual stance, etc. for your incarnation of TNO. That's a fundamentally "rewarding" activity.

The big trick of PS:T, which makes the amnesia cliche so attractive, is that the backstory lets the designers have it both ways - the character is fundamentally yours, yet you have a history with many, many plot hooks.

 

[Section8]

I doubt it's a game I'll ever replay. I'm struggling just to get through it once. It's kind of like a virtual representation of swimming laps in a sewage tank, because at the end of each lap you get to play out a superbly written fragment of interactive fiction.

 

[aboyd]

We'll see what Avellone and Co. come up with for NWNII, since they'll have to be flexible. Game writers get better at the technical side with time, so that means Avellone has all his brilliance plus new skill. But, of course, he's saddled with the godawful setting, potentially a bad engine, and different market pressures. So, we'll see.

I'm hopeful about NWN2. Even if the main content isn't PST-worthy, Avellone's influence is already having good effects. Have you seen the revised dialogue editor? There were screenshots floating around somewhere, IIRC. The editor now allows the developer to see the flow of the dialogue much more easily. I imagine that the dialogue will be better simply because creating the dialogue trees will be more about writing and less about fighting the interface. So, my hope is that the OC is good. But if it's not, then I do have some hope that the mods will be 10x better, dialogue-wise. That's not a hope I had for the original NWN. I tried so many mods and never felt happy with any of them.

-T

 

[Jora]

Unlike FO, where you have a meaningfully different experience playing as a moron, in PS:T the aren't different stories, just more story or less story. And there's a specific way to play to get the most story.

The reverse could be said about Fallout. In that game playing an intelligent non-combat character is possible, but there isn't much content made for that kind of build. Combat is the main feature of the game and there isn't much for non-combat characters to do. Sure, you can finish the game without killing anyone (that's technically possible in Torment too), but I would have liked to not miss the best parts of the game.

Oh, and I think PS:T has some of the best role-playing options ever, so in addition to having an incredible story with incredible characters, it's a great RPG too.

 

[bryce777]

I think it is ridiculous to say that PST is a game on a rail, so to speak.

A game like icewind dale II is on a rail and you literally fight a bunch of mobs basically in a specific order.

In PST you have quite a bit of freedom of exploration,a nd there are many areas that can be gotten to at various points in the game.

You can't go anywhere or do anything, but you have PLENTY of opportunity to explore. Exploration is a gameplay point, whereas absolute nonlinearity is more of an ideal point. Well, gameplay points always win out in the end because they make a game more fun to play.

On the idealistic scale you could argue that morrowind beats PST in this respect, but since there is nothing to really do with your freedom, it is pointless.

I also do not believe it is fair to say that you have different stories in fallout whereas you just reveal more in PST.

I mean, you could just walk right to the master's vault in fallout, but that would be stupid.

In PST there is a story arc, and it makes sense tonot have every single area available from the very beginning. The only complaint linearitywise that I think is at all legitimate is that the temple area of the city is locked off at first; however, sometimes, if youw ant to have story development over time you simply do need to have some areas locked off and in many cases it would make no sense to go certain places until you knew to do so....

 

[Jora]

Torment isn't more linear than most RPGs (Baldur's Gate 1&2, Icewind Dale 1&2, Gothic 1&2, Neverwinter Nights, Arcanum, Bloodlines, Knights of the Old Republic 1&2...)

 

[Gnidrologist]

But it'a more linear than Fallout.
There's the main difference between the two and why I doubt I'll be replaying PST anytime soon if at all.
In PST you follow the story while in Fallouts you're making your own every time you play. I agree that the main plot in both Fallout games could be regarded as completely linear except the ending in F1, but there goes another core difference between two games. In Fallout you are changing the face of the wasteland by roleplaying all kinds of quests in different locations that are in no way relevent to the main story or your supposed main goal in the game while in PST your only purpose is to reach the main goal. Subquests are just for fun and additional xp while in Fallout those are making the whole content.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

I still haven't gotten out of the Morgue. I made the mistake of NOT taking the "Break his neck quickly" option in dialogue and instead decided to attack the dude who questionedmy presence. As a result, I had to fight everyone in the whole damn place and the combat really, really sucks.

No wait, that's not true. I survived that part. I got killed down in the bottom tomb, the one with some screaming blue ghost woman whom I couldn't remember, by an ogre or something. Then I kind of meant to start again but somehow or another the giant bitmaps I'm walking on didn't engage me enough.

 

[Jora]

Yes, the Fallout games are more non-linear than PS:T but I don't think linarity is that important when evaluating the (role-playing) qualities of a game. Non-linearity is just a plus.

In Fallout you are changing the face of the wasteland by roleplaying all kinds of quests in different locations that are in no way relevent to the main story or your supposed main goal in the game while in PST your only purpose is to reach the main goal. Subquests are just for fun and additional xp while in Fallout those are making the whole content.

I disagree heavily with this. Fallout is about changing the world in significant ways and affecting the lives of entire tribes and peoples, while Torment is much more focused on the characters and changing the lives of individuals. You're in absolute control of TNO's personality which is shaped by how you deal with other characters (your companions and those that are part of sidequests). Every decision you make in Fallout and Torment is important but the nature of the games is just different.

 

[Gnidrologist]

I didn't say there's no meaningfull choices in PST, did I? I was talking about differences on how the plot is building up in both games.
Although choices in PST are mainly those of choosing between good or evil path thus changing the life of person so I agree with you on that. But even BG gives you that choice.
I still think that from a role playing view Fallout gives you more options that makes replay value higher than Torment's. I really don't remember what significante alternate paths aside from evil ones I could take on the secon playthrough.

 

[Kairal]

A bit irrelevant but anyway... I find that I'm really not interested in replaying Torment primarily because of the ending. The knowledge that the Nameless One would be better off not looking for his mortality is a bit depressing.

 

[Jora]

Gnidrologist:

You said that the sidequests weren't meaningful in Torment which I disagreed with because they help to define TNO's personality and role in the world.

Baldur's Gate offers very limited choices and can't be compared to Torment where the role-playing options are many, more varied and better thought-out.

The choices aren't only about good and evil, but also about law and chaos. Lying and acting strangely can make you more chaotic, for instance. In addition to moral choices there are also many attribute checks in dialogues.

 

[bryce777]

Well, the biggest thing is that in every sidequest interesting informationa nd background either about the nameless one or the setting itself were provided.

I don't think the sidequests were by and large better in fallout, and definitely not just because at the end of the game you get a little closing vignette saying you saved the whosits.

 

[Gnidrologist]

The choices aren't only about good and evil, but also about law and chaos. Lying and acting strangely can make you more chaotic, for instance.

However it didn't affect your relations with NPCs if I remember correct. Only ability to use particular items. NPC x didn't know about your evil/chaotic/good/lawfull actions, he treated you just the same at any time. Well, except Vhailor. Karma in Fallout actually affected how you were treated buy people.
Agree on all of the rest.

I think comparing Fallout and PST isn't the thing to do all in all. The emphasis are very different. Torment is story driven and story heavy whereas Fallout is more about doing things.
I still stand on the Fallout having higher replay value point, but that's not taking anything away from Torment.

 

[elkston]

.
.
.
At bottom, I think that's because the *play* in PS:T -- from the combat, to the talk trees, to the "puzzles" -- is so rudimentary that the only reason I'm playing it is to experience the multimedia story. I suspect that's why PS:T isn't my #1 game of all time -- it's not really much of a game. Just a great book that you play.

Now you realize what I have been saying from day one. PS:T is vastly overrated.

What's distressing about this is that PST has probably the best story in any RPG ever. I don't expect debate on this point, but if there is, I move it be ignored.

The story is only one peice that makes a game interesting. Its the only thing PS:T had going for it (and even then, I didn't think it was all that). I can still think of dozens of RPGs that are more fun to play.

I think comparing Fallout and PST isn't the thing to do all in all. The emphasis are very different. Torment is story driven and story heavy whereas Fallout is more about doing things.

Yes. You said it perfectly. Fallout is more intersting and engaging because you are actually doing things. Don't let PS:T get off scott-free on this point. Make it accountable. Maybe it isn't the "Greatest RPG Ever".

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I'd hate to play a dumb or unwise Nameless One. That wouldn't be a rewarding experience at all.

You can't play a dumb Nameless One, at least not in the same sense as one would play a dumb character in Fallout, as all stats are set to 9 at the begining and this allows for standard dialogue. Playing an unwise Nameless One isn't entirely unrewarding storywise, as long as Intelligence and Charisma take its place, but it's true that optimally both of them and Wisdom are what provide a better storytelling.

I wonder how it would have fared if it were a straight out adventure game.

 

[Atrokkus]

However it didn't affect your relations with NPCs if I remember correct. Only ability to use particular items. NPC x didn't know about your evil/chaotic/good/lawfull actions, he treated you just the same at any time. Well, except Vhailor. Karma in Fallout actually affected how you were treated buy people.

That doesn't really matter, actually. Alignment system, especially a DnD one, is a pretty messed up concept to begin with. Mainly, it's just a reference for the player as to what TNO considers himself to be. It can and should not really affect npcs, because npcs may know your alignment and overall character only through direct actions towards them -- usually dialog choices. How else can a person read your alignment? Through magic only.
The only relevant stat here would be reputation (Fallout's karma), and especially the reaction modifier of each particular npc. The latter was present in TOrment in concept, implemented through dialog scripts (just as in many other rpgs), while the former did not matter much in the context of the game.

That proves that Torment is indeed RPG, and not an adventure-game. At least in my book.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

Adventure games don't tend to have combat.