Baldurs Gate 2: Capstone to the Golden Era of crpg's?

[aweigh]

There are many types of P&P experiences.

 

[dagorkan]

There are many types of P&P experiences.

That's true. There are good and bad experiences.

Good P&P isn't based on 'strong narrative' or 'characterization'

That's the kind of faggot heresy that has destroyed so much.

Yeah some PnP groups do play that way but that's not an excuse, they are the groups you get with egomaniac GMs and faggot LARPer players. Loud-mouthed masturbators. "I have this genius idea of an plot, an saga in thirteen chapters, I have to make sure the players don't get in the way of me telling it" and "I'm going to roleplay this crazy character, the GM and other players must respect my character and adapt the story to this unique product of my genius imagination".

Both groups are LARPing.

It's the worst of both worlds, and some guys here are seriously recommending it as CRPG design philosophy.

 

[Ratty]

You are. Many games did this before Fallout. Darklands is a prime example which is so much closer to a real pnp RPG that it isn't even funny.

That's actually true, and that's also why Fallout has very retro design, from turn-based combat system to isometric view. Fallout is essentially a throwback to design and mechanics of olden days in the days when the likes of Doom, Warcraft II and Diablo dominated the market, and everyone decided first-person and/or real-time was TEH FUTURE. But, you do realize that Fallout was conceived as a pen & paper simulator (first for the GURPS system, then with Interplay's proprietary SPECIAL after the agreement with Steve Jackson fell through), and its entire design is built around this basic premise? So while Fallout may not match your idea of what pen & paper experience should be like, do allow that lead Fallout developers already had years of experience with roleplaying games (most of them started roleplaying in 1970s, entered the industry in the '80s or early '90s and already had several CRPG projects under their belt by the time Fallout entered production; Tim Cain himself entered the gaming industry in 1982) and their vision is at least as valid as yours.

 

[afewhours]

Yeah some PnP groups do play that way but that's not an excuse, they are the groups you get with egomaniac GMs and faggot LARPer players. Loud-mouthed masturbators. "I have this genius idea of an plot, an saga in thirteen chapters, I have to make sure the players don't get in the way of me telling it" and "I'm going to roleplay this crazy character, the GM and other players must respect my character and adapt the story to this unique product of my genius imagination".

I've been *ducks for cover* seriously involved in LARPing before, and I can honestly say it doesn't work like this. For the most part, people just try and crack each other up with stupid accents. It's all a lot less serious than how the stereotype portrays it. If anyone *does* take the thing too seriously, they get laughed at until they leave.

And having a decent storyteller as a DM is a godsend. I had one guy who could raise the roof with Darkvision checks, for chrissakes, and he was part of the reason I got into P&P. Decent narrative and characterisation doesn't always have to be about wordy, middlebrow drama. Sometimes it's about pithy, amusing description and a stupid voice.

 

[Gladi]

There are many types of P&P experiences.

That's true. There are good and bad experiences.

Good P&P isn't based on 'strong narrative' or 'characterization'

That's the kind of faggot heresy that has destroyed so much.

Yeah some PnP groups do play that way but that's not an excuse, they are the groups you get with egomaniac GMs and faggot LARPer players. Loud-mouthed masturbators. "I have this genius idea of an plot, an saga in thirteen chapters, I have to make sure the players don't get in the way of me telling it" and "I'm going to roleplay this crazy character, the GM and other players must respect my character and adapt the story to this unique product of my genius imagination".

Both groups are LARPing.

It's the worst of both worlds, and some guys here are seriously recommending it as CRPG design philosophy.

Ah yes, I play wrong. Thr only reason I and my plazers have fun is because we are loud-mouthed egomaniac faggots. Or maybe only I am loud-mouthed egomaniacal faggot, my plazers are just a bunch of twinks.

Well played.

 

[Ratty]

Thr only reason I and my plazers have fun

Set your Plazers to Fun!

 

[Gnidrologist]

Why is it barbaric? Having not played one, maybe i was believing the wrong reasons for pnp rpgs to be fun, but from what i've heard on these and some other sources, it boils down to having vast range of options in how to shape your character and how to make your own story in highly interactive world. Which is what Fallout rpgs does most splendid.
Am i wrong?

You are. Many games did this before Fallout. Darklands is a prime example which is so much closer to a real pnp RPG that it isn't even funny.

Ok, Darklands is notorious game for it's inovative desigh, that alowes extreme freedom yada yada. Every person, who has been even remotely interested in crpgs know that.
But.
Could you list at least few more examples of superiour pnp like experiences in computer games? It seems, from what you say, that there has been plenty in the good ole days, as opposite to my previous, probably false assumption, that most oldschool crpgs are mostly dungeon hacking exploration games.

 

[afewhours]

Could you list at least few more examples of superiour pnp like experiences in computer games? It seems, from what you say, that there has been plenty in the good ole days, as opposite to my previous, probably false assumption, that most oldschool crpgs are mostly dungeon hacking exploration games.

WAAAAAASSSTELAND!

I'll let others with more knowledge take over now. I just wanted an excuse to say "Wasteland!"

Edit: and Star Trail, and Betrayal at Krondor, and various Ultimas and blah, blah, blah.

Edit Edit: Graphics are for losers: A Mind Forever Voyaging! Okay, it's not an RPG, but oldschool doesn't get better than this.

Edit Edit Edit: HILLLLSSSFFFAARRR. I have an inexplicable obsession with Hillsfar at the moment. I loved wasting time on that game.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Could you list at least few more examples of superiour pnp like experiences in computer games? It seems, from what you say, that there has been plenty in the good ole days, as opposite to my previous, probably false assumption, that most oldschool crpgs are mostly dungeon hacking exploration games.

WAAAAAASSSTELAND!

I'll let others with more knowledge take over now. I just wanted an excuse to say "Wasteland!"

Edit: and Star Trail, and Betrayal at Krondor, and various Ultimas and blah, blah, blah.

Yes, i've heard those names before. Do those games have branching storylines, dialogues with multiple variants of response, that are dependant on char's social skills, ways of completing quests in at least two different ways, which have different consequence. And so on..

I wont pretend i have good knowledge of the oldschool games. Paradoxicaly, i wasn't in to gaming until i hit 19 or 20, that's when i got my first home pc. And that's probably why i'm sutch a spoiled and ignorant retard in the crpg field, first games of the genre i played being those by BIS/Troika.
I've been trying to enjoy some more oldschool stuff like Wizardry 8, Might & Magic games Daggerfall etc. But in most cases i got bored at some point as the realisation came, that there aren't mutch to do besides nice character developement (combat skills mostly) to grind more xp, to slay more powerfull foozies and so on an so forth. I like to explore and don't mind cliche fantasy narratives, but if it's the sole substance of the gameplay, then sorry, not my cup of tea.

 

[cardtrick]

Yes, i've heard those names before. Do those games have branching storylines, dialogues with multiple variants of response, that are dependant on char's social skills, ways of completing quests in at least two different ways, which have different consequence. And so on..

Star Trail does, at least. Although the dialog is for the most part like Wizardry 8, with keyword choices, but everything else matches what you said. Plus it has the most absurdly detailed travel system I've ever seen in an RPG . . . it's like an Oregon Trail subgame embedded within an RPG, but it's pretty cool.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Yes, i've heard those names before. Do those games have branching storylines, dialogues with multiple variants of response, that are dependant on char's social skills, ways of completing quests in at least two different ways, which have different consequence. And so on..

Star Trail does, at least. Although the dialog is for the most part like Wizardry 8, with keyword choices, but everything else matches what you said. Plus it has the most absurdly detailed travel system I've ever seen in an RPG . . . it's like an Oregon Trail subgame embedded within an RPG, but it's pretty cool.

Sounds convincing. This will be on top of the ''old crpgs to try out'' list for me as from now.

 

[Brother None]

Sounds convincing. This will be on top of the ''old crpgs to try out'' list for me as from now.

I noted a bit back Fallout isn't actually my #1 cRPG of all time. Why not? Because Realms of Arkania II: Star Trail is.

From it's fun travel system, to its pretty good use of the detailed DSA RPG system, to its great atmosphere due to using different viewpoint modes (1st person in town, isometric in combat, just general fun for cutscenes), to its pretty damned good story, to its superior usage of party gameplay and combat (and I usually prefer single-player cRPGs to party)

It easily ranks above Fallout for me.

RoA I-III are all very similar and part of one story (the North Land Trilogy). I'd advise anyone who wants to try them to start with I and make a good party, as you can carry your party over into the next ones (and that makes the games a lot more playable, it's pretty tough if you start II or III with a new party, XP-raising special encounters notwithstanding). II is my favourite, but a lot can be said for the others.

 

[Jaime Lannister]

Fallout: SPECIAL, completely designed for a cRPG, every part of it is used to some extent in game.
Baldur's Gate: AD&D 2.0, not designed for a cRPG, many parts of it left out.

Fallout: "Jagged Alliance-lite" turn-based combat, adjustable speed slider, aimed shots, percent to hit shown.
Baldur's Gate: Real-time party based combat, required extensive micro and lots of pausing, mostly automated at the beginning unless you rest a lot to regain spells.

Fallout: Talking heads, well written, to the point dialog, interesting characters, different dialog options actually do different things.
Baldur's Gate: Unimmersive dialog, too many motherfucking words syndrome, thees and thous, bland fantasy archetypes, different dialog options that have the same effects.

Fallout: Like Deus Ex after it, there are combat, stealth and diplomacy options for most quests, choices have consequences.
Baldur's Gate: Combat-only quests, railroaded story, no choices.

Fallout: The story isn't top-notch, but it's unique and allows for exploration of a unique retrofuture setting.
Baldur's Gate: Chosen one must defeat ancient evil, ancient evil is chosen one's father. Baldur's Gate II actually beats both of these due to Jon Irenicus.

 

[ricolikesrice]

Sounds convincing. This will be on top of the ''old crpgs to try out'' list for me as from now.

I noted a bit back Fallout isn't actually my #1 cRPG of all time. Why not? Because Realms of Arkania II: Star Trail is.

From it's fun travel system, to its pretty good use of the detailed DSA RPG system, to its great atmosphere due to using different viewpoint modes (1st person in town, isometric in combat, just general fun for cutscenes), to its pretty damned good story, to its superior usage of party gameplay and combat (and I usually prefer single-player cRPGs to party)

It easily ranks above Fallout for me.

RoA I-III are all very similar and part of one story (the North Land Trilogy). I'd advise anyone who wants to try them to start with I and make a good party, as you can carry your party over into the next ones (and that makes the games a lot more playable, it's pretty tough if you start II or III with a new party, XP-raising special encounters notwithstanding). II is my favourite, but a lot can be said for the others.

i hate you for bringing up RoA in a BG thread (since the RoA "sequel" is a BG clone rather then a RoA sequel ).

gems like that just arent made anymore...... my absolute favourite "oldschool" cRPG, there s no better party-based cRPG gameplay-wise (story/writing-wise PS:T/MOTB are way better, but in gameplay RoA destroys them easily.... ), not even close.

 

[Binary]

Why is it barbaric? Having not played one, maybe i was believing the wrong reasons for pnp rpgs to be fun, but from what i've heard on these and some other sources, it boils down to having vast range of options in how to shape your character and how to make your own story in highly interactive world. Which is what Fallout rpgs does most splendid.
Am i wrong?

You are. Many games did this before Fallout. Darklands is a prime example which is so much closer to a real pnp RPG that it isn't even funny.

Ok, Darklands is notorious game for it's inovative desigh, that alowes extreme freedom yada yada. Every person, who has been even remotely interested in crpgs know that.
But.
Could you list at least few more examples of superiour pnp like experiences in computer games? It seems, from what you say, that there has been plenty in the good ole days, as opposite to my previous, probably false assumption, that most oldschool crpgs are mostly dungeon hacking exploration games.

Sure, I just don't understand why you divide games into either "pnp-like" or "dungeon crawls". There's a plethora of types "in-between":

- You'll possibly enjoy the open world and non-linearity of Ultima 6 or 7
- And the different solutions to different problems were present in the Quest for Glory series since 1989.
- The nicely written story of Betrayal in Krondor is also a nice one to try.
- The unexpected events (I call them "story rebounds") of Darksun 2 and Ultima 7 part 2 are very interesting.
- I'd also recommend the commercial side of the Starflight series

(The "dungeon crawl" percentage in the cRPGs above is minimal)

For a general classic RPG experience, the Magic Candle series represent a good balance between nice story, combat, enough dungeon crawling and party development.

Once again I insist: I'm not saying Fallout etc are bad games - far from it! I'm merely raising the point that brilliant games were made in the past, and many of the Codexers might not be aware of it when they say "[Fallout|PST|Arcanum] is the best game ever"

 

[Binary]

there s no better party-based cRPG gameplay-wise (story/writing-wise PS:T/MOTB are way better, but in gameplay RoA destroys them easily.... ), not even close.

Please explain where is any RoA superior "gameplay-wise" to the Magic Candle series?

 

[Jasede]

Ugh, Magic Candle. It sounded so good and played like crap. And it's fugly. Like, srsly.

(Translation: I couldn't get into it, unlike DSA/RoA which is accessible and fun, and doesn't look so hideous. Graphics whore? Yes, maybe, but the two games aren't that far apart, are they?)

Still agree that the past had more brilliant games.

 

[Xi]

Without a standard we have no way to relate to one another. We can all just blatantly like things, but that doesn't explain why we like those things. Is it a collection of features and the quality of their implementations? Is it good stories? Good Character customization and progression? Seems like none of us will agree until someone creates a standard for us all to follow.

 

[Gnidrologist]

Why is it barbaric? Having not played one, maybe i was believing the wrong reasons for pnp rpgs to be fun, but from what i've heard on these and some other sources, it boils down to having vast range of options in how to shape your character and how to make your own story in highly interactive world. Which is what Fallout rpgs does most splendid.
Am i wrong?

You are. Many games did this before Fallout. Darklands is a prime example which is so much closer to a real pnp RPG that it isn't even funny.

Ok, Darklands is notorious game for it's inovative desigh, that alowes extreme freedom yada yada. Every person, who has been even remotely interested in crpgs know that.
But.
Could you list at least few more examples of superiour pnp like experiences in computer games? It seems, from what you say, that there has been plenty in the good ole days, as opposite to my previous, probably false assumption, that most oldschool crpgs are mostly dungeon hacking exploration games.

Sure, I just don't understand why you divide games into either "pnp-like" or "dungeon crawls". There's a plethora of types "in-between":

No, i don't divide anything. It's just that from what i'm hearing about pnp gameplay experience from people, who appearently know the turf, is this: pnp alowes any kind of character to succeed in most various and non archetypical ways, which is superiour to most electronic incarnations of pnp gameplay, that mostly relies on combat and looting. But from what i've researched, very rare crpg managed to be on par with this plethora of types "in-between". Fallout for me did it. As well as PST, Arcanum and Bloodlines.
I don't mind some dungeon exploring and combat, especially when it's fun and challenging (like in Wiz 8), but i can't bear the game if it's main focus is just that.

- You'll possibly enjoy the open world and non-linearity of Ultima 6 or 7

These games are still in my priority list in the pool of ''old games, that have to be at least tried once'', but quite honestly, i'm not big fan of pure exploration. I like Gothic games for their sanbox/exploration moments, but only because there were also tight narrative and lots of concrete thing to do. If Ultimas are anything close to TES the model of role-playing, i'll pass.

- And the different solutions to different problems were present in the Quest for Glory series since 1989.

From what i've read, this is an adventure game. No?

- The nicely written story of Betrayal in Krondor is also a nice one to try.

I like nicely written stories. However, it's not the element that makes or breaks crpg. Story, if it's good, only complements a good crpg. Some action games have really good stories.

For a general classic RPG experience, the Magic Candle series represent a good balance between nice story, combat, enough dungeon crawling and party development.

However, if you read my previous posts, i really don't consider combat, story or dungeon crawling as something that differentiates the crpgs from other computer game genres. It's actually the proverbial pnp experience, that makes me interested. Like, having means to manipulate the npcs, having a say in the meaningfull affairs that affect the surrounding world etc.

Without a standard we have no way to relate to one another. We can all just blatantly like things, but that doesn't explain why we like those things. Is it a collection of features and the quality of their implementations? Is it good stories? Good Character customization and progression? Seems like none of us will agree until someone creates a standard for us all to follow.

Aaaw..
*sob*

 

[Brother None]

Once again I insist: I'm not saying Fallout etc are bad games - far from it! I'm merely raising the point that brilliant games were made in the past, and many of the Codexers might not be aware of it when they say "[Fallout|PST|Arcanum] is the best game ever"

It's odd to see the Codex accused of not looking back far enough...

That said, yes, you do have a point. But since this comes up anyway, I should note I never really like it when people talk of one best RPG "overall" (yes, I'm aware I did that myself, above). There are at least 3 or 4 different "eras" of RPG design which are so vastly different in design goals and major trends that direct comparisons are usually useless, unless you have an unchanging standard of RPG design which always means only one set of design choices is ideal (maybe most of the Codex does. I don't, variety is the spice of life)

 

[Xi]

Without a standard we have no way to relate to one another. We can all just blatantly like things, but that doesn't explain why we like those things. Is it a collection of features and the quality of their implementations? Is it good stories? Good Character customization and progression? Seems like none of us will agree until someone creates a standard for us all to follow.

Aaaw..
*sob*

Well imagine that you are playing a cRPG but never progressing your character. Never finding good equipment, gaining levels or stats, or even progressing a story. What's the point if this is the case? To me, this discussion is exactly that, it lacks progression because we have not declared any meaningful rules from which we can all follow. Rules that would allow us to understand and either agree/disagree with one another.

As it stands, we mostly misunderstand what is being said, and defying Occam's Razor, we never get anywhere after countless pages of controversial banter. Why not set a standard? Oh that's right, you would rather just cry.

*sob*

 

[thesheeep]

RoA I-III are all very similar and part of one story (the North Land Trilogy). I'd advise anyone who wants to try them to start with I and make a good party, as you can carry your party over into the next ones (and that makes the games a lot more playable, it's pretty tough if you start II or III with a new party, XP-raising special encounters notwithstanding). II is my favourite, but a lot can be said for the others.

You know.. that actually made me sad. Some time ago, I bought myself some very, VERY old PC to just play all the good ol' games without having to use DOSBox.

Started with RoA I, played through it over the course of a week. Then, I wanted to import my party to RoA II and was quite shocked that their portrais had been replaced with those of children. I just couldn't find a way to change it and make it work properly so I just stopped playing...

Anyway, why is Andhaira not dumbfucked yet?

 

[Brother None]

Started with RoA I, played through it over the course of a week. Then, I wanted to import my party to RoA II and was quite shocked that their portrais had been replaced with those of children. I just couldn't find a way to change it and make it work properly so I just stopped playing...

You quit because the portraits had been replaced?

Huh?

 

[Jasede]

It would have been fixed in RoA 3. Also I think you can change the portraits in the menu option, though there's a seperate bug where you can't, but then, a hex-editor can fix that. RoA 1 is very buggy so I had to hex-edit it a few times anyway (the ghost ship especially, disappearing plot critical key = win).

 

[cardtrick]

Started with RoA I, played through it over the course of a week. Then, I wanted to import my party to RoA II and was quite shocked that their portrais had been replaced with those of children. I just couldn't find a way to change it and make it work properly so I just stopped playing...

You quit because the portraits had been replaced?

Huh?

In fairness, the issue isn't that the portraits are children but that they're all the same, which is quite annoying. This is a very common bug when importing parties from RoA 1 to RoA 2, apparently.

This guy mentions a patch, which he can apparently send you if you ask. Hex editing as Jasede suggested would work too. Or just recreate your party in RoA 2; there's a special encounter for non-imported parties that levels them up to level 3 almost immediately, which is more than high enough to start the game. I feel like an imported party would actually be way over powered.