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.

Best Role-Playing Game on PC at Gamespot :NWN. Horror !

evilmonkey

Liturgist
Joined
Dec 15, 2002
Messages
104
Location
the Ocean
but they love it CB - and think of the babies!

they placed WC3 as the PC game of the year - so that says a lot about the good people over at gamespot.
 

chrisbeddoes

Erudite
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Messages
1,349
Location
RPG land
Aribeth just plain SUCKS !

NWN single player story SUCKS so much


Oh god the i****s .


What else there is to say .

Oh i found it .


NOOBS
 

Greenskin13

Erudite
Joined
Dec 5, 2002
Messages
1,109
Location
Chicago
Well, I don't really care since no RPG this year really wow-ed me, but I haven't player Morrorwind yet.
 

Michael_Wolf

Educated
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
56
Location
Germany
He is late, but he is right!

The single player portion of NWN sucks! The official campagin is very linear, very combat-intensive and very boring. I loved the idea of having a D&D 3rd Edition computer game that was accompanied by a toolset to create my own modules, but NWN even failed in that respect. The major problem with NWN is that the 3rd Edition rules are very poorly incorporated into the game. Some important skills were dropped but some silly new skils (like parry) were introduced. Several feats are nonexistent in NWN or were changed to work with real-time combat. Ok, I can accept that NWN has real-time combat (MP with turnbased combat would not work), but it was poorly done. Considering what Bioware promised when they announced NWN and regarding what they released I can only say it is a shame. But I hope that some talented fans and perhaps the upcoming addon can help to make NWN fun nevertheless. By the way, I played the "Pools of Radiance" module (created by a fan, of course) for NWN with a friend and we had many hours of fun. It was very much like playing Diablo but it was fun.
But the single player portion of the game was one of the worst I've seen in years! :roll:
 

Rosh

Erudite
Joined
Oct 22, 2002
Messages
1,775
..which again all asks the question of "Five years for WHAT?!"

They've milked the publisher(s) that they've had, thrown around a lot of hype, and even try to deter bugs from being posted, paerticularly ones that would be vital for any GM to know about when they create their module.

Any obvious effort on the game is suspiciously missing, and the game shipped with a good number of bugs, and material that had to have the end-user put efforts into it to make the game better. Woe be the person who bought the game without ability to download any of BioWare's additions, or anything else to make the game worth the money, however ironic that statement is.

I adopted the bit in my sig because of this, and here's the most comical statement from Gamespud: "Neverwinter Nights is among the first computer games to use Wizards of the Coast's 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons rule sets, and while it takes a few liberties with the system, it does a good enough job of translating the occasionally labyrinthine Dungeons & Dragons rules into a surprisingly accessible role-playing game. This accessibility is one of Neverwinter Nights' most remarkable features, and although it belies the game's hidden depth--Neverwinter Nights lets you create many different kinds of characters in the single-player game and also features a full editor to let you build your own adventures--just about anyone with any interest in role-playing games can pick it up and start playing."

Translation:

"Neverwinter Nights is among the first computer games to take Wizards of the Coast's 3rd Edition Dungeons & Dragons rule sets, and while it skullfucks the system mercilessly to fit into their shitty real-time combat and pathfinding, it does a good enough job of translating the occasionally labyrinthine Dungeons & Dragons rules into a surprisingly accessible role-playing game pandered down to a level so even the most inbred moron could go back to the same mindlessly banal gameplay they have come to expect of BioWare, yet created by those who are BioWare's target market - the lowest common denominator. Thus, it almost guarantees that you'll be looking for a long time for someone with enough talent with design to create something good of the game, who also has the patience to run such a buggy product. BioWare is hoping that anyone with any sense of design, world cohesion, or can craft any NPC smarter than a rock (they ran out oof design ideas), cam make up for the crappy first-player module the game shipped with. Oh, let's not forget those mad development skillz when it comes to having modders out-program and out-mod the core development team (who love to use excuses about what they can and can't work on...while creating retarded FPS-like mini-games that have nothing to do with any serious role-playing mod). Go-go-BioWare!"

It's also pretty poor to judge a game by its editors, especially to make up for the shortcomings. The common excuse is that the editors make up for the rest of the game, in a surprising common act by the fanboys to the point of making me wonder if it was perpetuated by some hype(r) at BioWare, much like the gangraping of anyone who brings up critical bugs.

Want to judge something by its end-user possibilities?
In that case, might I please present the Best RPG for 2003:

mIRC!
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
11,475
Location
Behind you.
Michael_Wolf said:
He is late, but he is right!

No question about it.

The single player portion of NWN sucks! The official campagin is very linear, very combat-intensive and very boring.

I'm still annoyed that they had some good ideas, like the area frozen in time to wait for judgement, but then screwed them up be dropping a plethora of pointless monsters in that area.

Some important skills were dropped but some silly new skils (like parry) were introduced.

How about what they did to Bluff, Intimidate, etc? They combined it in to one skill.

Several feats are nonexistent in NWN or were changed to work with real-time combat. Ok, I can accept that NWN has real-time combat (MP with turnbased combat would not work), but it was poorly done.

I disagree. I think turn based would have been better for a number of reasons. Like you said, they had to fudge a number of rules. That's a given.

However, turn based would have make the DM tool so much easier to use. Turn based not only allows for more control and less time restricted actions for the player, but that benefit would have translated to a better and more flexible DM tool as well.
 

Michael_Wolf

Educated
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
56
Location
Germany
The problem is that most people thought that NWN is some kind of MMORPG without a central server and without monthly fees (and BioWare was encouraging those people by babbling about persistent worlds all the time :roll: ). You are right, turn-based combat in MP can work fine (for example: Fallout Tactics multiplayer :D ), when you play with a single party and lead by DM. Perhaps the game should switch to turn-based as soon as you are attacked or some of the players attacks someone/something (like in Fallout :wink: ). But when you play with several independent parties, turn-based is a bad idea. When somebody in area #1 starts a fight, everyone in the other other areas is frozen in place until the fight is resolved.
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
11,475
Location
Behind you.
Michael_Wolf said:
The problem is that most people thought that NWN is some kind of MMORPG without a central server and without monthly fees (and BioWare was encouraging those people by babbling about persistent worlds all the time :roll: ). You are right, turn-based combat in MP can work fine (for example: Fallout Tactics multiplayer :D ), when you play with a single party and lead by DM. Perhaps the game should switch to turn-based as soon as you are attacked or some of the players attacks someone/something (like in Fallout :wink: ). But when you play with several independent parties, turn-based is a bad idea. When somebody in area #1 starts a fight, everyone in the other other areas is frozen in place until the fight is resolved.

You know the funny part, the original NWN that was made by Steamfront back in the early 1990s for AOL.. was turn based.

You'd definitely have to have it so it did switch from real time, noncombat mode to turn based, combat mode, though. If it were turn based all the time, like FOT's TB MP, it'd just be frustratingly annoying.
 

Michael_Wolf

Educated
Joined
Dec 30, 2002
Messages
56
Location
Germany
You'd definitely have to have it so it did switch from real time, noncombat mode to turn based, combat mode, though. If it were turn based all the time, like FOT's TB MP, it'd just be frustratingly annoying.
You're right, of course! But as far as I remember FOT had a mode that changed from RT to TB and back, when no enemies were in range. Or am I mistaken. TB alll the time is more frustrating than even RT combat!
 

Saint_Proverbius

Administrator
Staff Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2002
Messages
11,475
Location
Behind you.
In mutliplayer, if you selected turn based, it was turn based the whole time. In single player, it worked like Fallout did.
 

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