Best RPG of the year - 2011 Top 10 Bitch and wine Thread!

[Bruticis]

All the butthurt about Witcher 2 is confusing me. Aren't we supposed to be listing what was the best of the year? I put the Witcher 2 and I didn't even like it that much but this is a best of the year poll, not a what's your favorite game poll.

 

[Vault Dweller]

...but saying that skills in The Witcher 2 don´t matter at all is a needless hyperbole.

But it's not. If you can easily play the game without them, they don't matter.

But it's not, so it's not.

You should work at Bioware.

Let me lower the reading comprehension check for you.

But it's not, because you can easily play the game without investing into skills.

Hope that helps.

 

[Reptilian Shapeshifter]

shame that between Deus Ex: Human Revolution and The Witcher 2 people are missing out on what was really the best RPG of 2011:

Dead Rising 2: Off the record.

non-linear gameplay, REAL choice and consequences to your ACTIONs (opposed to merely picking different dialogue options) and deep character customization and progression options make Frank West a much better RPG protagonist than Geralt or Adam Jensen imho.

Unless I missed my sarcasm check:

Even though I didn't think much of DR2 (vanilla), I agree that some of these games which are not officially called "RPGs" are actually better examples of role-playing than the those with official "RPG" labels. Saints Row is also in that category, with #3 having skills and gameworld-altering C&C, or so they claim. Not sure about dialogue options though.

 

[Vault Dweller]

And furthermore, though I haven't played Arcanum in ages so the details escape me, I'm pretty sure the character system was an optional "minigame", as VD puts it, that was in no way required to finish the game.

I'm pretty sure you're mistaken.

Well, 2 out of 3 ain't bad. Refresh my memory then. Which skills were needed to complete the game?

2 out of 3?

First, let's wait and see the comments. I don't recall the difficulty in Ultima 6, and I've never played Ambermoon, which is why I'm not commenting on your claims. Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

As for Arcanum, the game had a lot of tough enemies who'd tear your unskilled ass to shreds in seconds and a lot of high speech checks, so I'm not sure what your point is? Maybe you can do a speed run (literally)? Hire an army of followers who'd fight for you and level up automatically? Not sure it's the same thing as low difficulty.

 

[Havoc]

...but saying that skills in The Witcher 2 don´t matter at all is a needless hyperbole.

But it's not. If you can easily play the game without them, they don't matter.

But it's not, so it's not.

You should work at Bioware.

Let me lower the reading comprehension check for you.

But it's not, because you can easily play the game without investing into skills.

Hope that helps.

Let me lower my sarcasm.

It was a joke.

Hope that helps.

---

Still don't see the problem with a RPG that has broken combat mechanics (see Arcanum). Action RPG. TW2. Go to hell.

 

[Vault Dweller]

1: Fallout New Vegas: Old World Blues
2: Fallout New Vegas: Dead Money
3: The Witcher 2

You liked OWB more than DM? Why? Just curious.

Still don't see the problem with a RPG that has broken combat mechanics (see Arcanum). Action RPG. TW2.

Broken is one thing. A system that makes the skills optional or flavor-only is another. Gotta draw a line somewhere.

Go to hell.

Seriously? Is it some misguided national pride thing? Mah country made, so it can't be bad?

 

[Grunker]

The horse should remove the numbers from his post. 'less he's trolling of course.

 

[AlphaKennyBody]

lists posted so far

God, what a shitty year.

 

[made]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

Shannow wanted examples, I provided them. The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

I remember fucking up my first Arcanum character beyond belief while trying to get a hang of the char system and still finding it trivially easy, which lead me to believe you could play the game spending points wherever or not at all and still finish it. Doesn't make it any less a fantastic game, or indeed, RPG.

 

[Havoc]

Still don't see the problem with a RPG that has broken combat mechanics (see Arcanum). Action RPG. TW2.

Broken is one thing. A system that makes the skills optional or flavor-only is another. Gotta draw a line somewhere.

Go to hell.

Seriously? Is it some misguided national pride thing? Mah country made, so it can't be bad?

How about this... it works with the story. Geralt is already a guy that can kick ass. If he learns a new thing, he will kick even more ass.

Nah, not national pride. [JOKE]It's your ass. It needs kicking.[/JOKE]

 

[Ruprekt]

empty vote

 

[Vault Dweller]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

Because?

I remember fucking up my first Arcanum character beyond belief while trying to get a hang of the char system and still finding it trivially easy...

Fucking up your character still puts your points somewhere, so it's not a very convincing argument. Start a new game, don't distribute any stat/skill points, and then post your impressions. I don't remember it as an easy game, but would be curious to see the results of such a test from you or someone else.

How about this... it works with the story. Geralt is already a guy that can kick ass.

Does it make it a good RPG though?

 

[Havoc]

How about this... it works with the story. Geralt is already a guy that can kick ass.

Does it make it a good Action RPG though?

A great one.

 

[made]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

Because?

Because a game's subjective difficulty has no bearing on its genre classification.

 

[Serious_Business]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

Because?

Because a game's subjective difficulty has no bearing on its genre classification.

That's a very Serious claim

 

[Gregz]

All the butthurt about Witcher 2 is confusing me. Aren't we supposed to be listing what was the best of the year? I put the Witcher 2 and I didn't even like it that much but this is a best of the year poll, not a what's your favorite game poll.

I think the butthurt is mostly over how bad this year has been, and having such mediocre titles to choose from.

This may be the worst year of RPG ever. That's worth keeping track of for historical purposes.

 

[Kz3r0]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

Because?

I remember fucking up my first Arcanum character beyond belief while trying to get a hang of the char system and still finding it trivially easy...

Fucking up your character still puts your points somewhere, so it's not a very convincing argument. Start a new game, don't distribute any stat/skill points, and then post your impressions. I don't remember it as an easy game, but would be curious to see the results of such a test from you or someone else.

If you don't put at use any skill point you wouldn't even be able to use a weapon or get any followers, unless you use some special background, not that that would be enough, unless is a custom background that gives mastery in every skill.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

Because?

Because a game's subjective difficulty has no bearing on its genre classification.

It does if the game mechanics make the character system optional.

Take Doom, add a character system that increases health, damage, and duration of power ups. Add cutscenes, while you're at it. Does it suddenly become an RPG?

 

[dr. one]

But it's not. If you can easily play the game without them, they don't matter.

Does investing into skills make the game easier?
If so, skills matter.

Rolling makes the game ridiculously easy. So does Quen. So do bombs. So do daggers (at least, they do require a skill).

What do you mean by "ridiculously easy" anyway?
To me "ridiculously easy" means I can play the game essentially on autopilot, but from what I remember of my TW2 playthrough on hard, I wouldn´t characterize combat as such, even when using the roll-like-mad approach.

Investing into skills merely makes you an overpowered tank.

So the skills do matter after all.

It's as fun as maxing your skills in an editor and playing any RPG.

Ah, the fun card.

The thing is, if you choose not to invest into skills, you tailor your gameplay towards being more dependent on player´s reflexes and awareness of surroundings, as well as on resource management.
Investing into skills makes you less dependent on the above.
Granted, ideally in an action RPG players should need to take good advantage of all of the above to succeed (as happens to be G2:NotR´s case imo), at least on higher difficulty settings, but in The Witcher 2 investing into skills making players "overpowered tanks" is still not a matter of skill system as a whole, just few badly balanced ones. In Fallout: New Vegas you take Boone, in Arcanum you invest into Harm, in The Witcher 2 you boost Quen.
Speaking of being an overpowered tank, I think The Witcher 2 maintains difficulty on a proper level throughout its first chapter and I don´t think you become really overpowered till its end, they just fucked it up from chapter 2 onwards, because the skill income in later chapters wasn´t, maybe bar few exceptions, well countered with encounter design.
However, there are plenty of cRPGs which become easy once you develop your character(s) a bit and RPGs which maintain somewhat steady upwards difficulty curve are actually pretty rare.
The latest example I can think of would be BG2 with Sword Coast Stratagems and Ascension.

For instance? Rolling vs "standing your ground"? Self-imposed restrictions to increase difficulty, like not using Quen or not rolling or not upgrading your weapons are pretty lame, if you ask me.

I agree, but again, majority of cRPGs have this problem.
I´m going to play the fun card as well and say that, generally speaking, while self-restrictions don´t make a game´s system itself balanced any better, if they make the game more fun, why not go for´em?

My personal experience with TW2 was that, without restricting myself from skill investments, the game provided good challenge in its first half and while its second half was disappointing in this regard, I can´t say I minded all the ass kicking all that much .


At any rate, I more-or-less agree with the gist of what you´re saying, but I think you´re exaggerating some of the points.

 

[Shannow]

For what it's worth: While I don't agree that TW2 would have easily been playable by anyone without distributing skill-points (I found it reasonably difficult after I got the hang of the mechanics but before I'd levelled much on "normal". One of it's weaknesses is bad balancing and that it gets easier as you progress instead of more difficult.), I do agree that a game that doesn't require character development makes for a bad RPG.

Ultima 6 would be a prominent example. Ambermoon would be another. The only ability you "need" to train here is hit chance to a moderate degree otherwise combat becomes terribly frustrating and tedious, though not impossible. Everything else is optional. Hp/mp go up automatically at level up, much like in TW2 iirc. And furthermore, though I haven't played Arcanum in ages so the details escape me, I'm pretty sure the character system was an optional "minigame", as VD puts it, that was in no way required to finish the game.

Haven't played Ultima or Ambermoon (as I said, not oldschool) but as you describe it, hp/mp do go up. That's levelling, whether it's automatic or manual is irrelevant. (IIRC and unless it was changed in a patch, Hp/mp don't auto-level in TW2. You get it via skills (and items/potions).) And while Arcanum always offers many ways of doing things, they should all require some levelling. But like VD, I'd be interested if anybody ever tried a "normal" playthrough without levelling.

 

[Excidium]

RPG isn't even a genre anymore, it's a series of elements like changing clothes or upgrading abilities that are tacked on any game.

What a pointless argument.

 

[Kz3r0]

And while Arcanum always offers many ways of doing things, they should all require some levelling. But like VD, I'd be interested if anybody ever tried a "normal" playthrough without levelling.

Considering that the first thing you have to do is choose your race and background, and their impact is quite noticeable, I would say that playing Arcanum without character development is completely impossible.

 

[Serus]

Second, even if some old games were easy, what exactly would it prove?

The point that an easy RPG with a largely optional leveling system is still an RPG.

Because?

I remember fucking up my first Arcanum character beyond belief while trying to get a hang of the char system and still finding it trivially easy...

Fucking up your character still puts your points somewhere, so it's not a very convincing argument. Start a new game, don't distribute any stat/skill points, and then post your impressions. I don't remember it as an easy game, but would be curious to see the results of such a test from you or someone else.

How about this... it works with the story. Geralt is already a guy that can kick ass.

Does it make it a good RPG though?

Made is right. All you need in Arcanum are 2 good melee NPCs - in fact only one would probably work. You simply run in circles (in real time mode) when needed to avoid being hit - waiting for the dog or an ogre or anyone decent NPC to kill all enemies - it is easy. My guess is that a full playtrough without a single stat point distributed is possible and not too difficult. Believe it or not. As far as combat goes the character system in Arcanum is an unneeded mini-game if you play it like that. Same as in TW2 as you claim*. Perhaps there is some challenge in Arcanum but it is not in combat. Personally i don't remember any. Still a good game.

*Never played TW2, i was disappointed by TW1. I never touched the sequel.

And i can't understand all those morons who claim that all Polos defend/like polish games. There are several on Codex who dislike TW games. Im not directing this at you VD. Just complaining. Truly the Codex was slightly less full of retards when i joined.

And while Arcanum always offers many ways of doing things, they should all require some levelling. But like VD, I'd be interested if anybody ever tried a "normal" playthrough without levelling.

Considering that the first thing you have to do is choose your race and background, and their impact is quite noticeable, I would say that playing Arcanum without character development is completely impossible.

It isn't the point. Do it at random - or with closed eyes.

 

[Andyman Messiah]

1: Fallout New Vegas: Old World Blues
2: Fallout New Vegas: Dead Money
3: The Witcher 2

You liked OWB more than DM? Why? Just curious.

I like them both almost as much really. Story, atmosphere, skill checks, characters, all great, but Old World Blues have jokes and a more lighthearted tone and great voice actors and I'm a sucker for those things.

edit: not to say Dead Money (or Honest Hearts or Lonesome Road) didn't have great voice acting too, but... eh.

 

[Kz3r0]

Made is right. All you need in Arcanum are 2 good melee NPCs - in fact only one would probably work. You simply run in circles (in real time mode) when needed to avoid being hit - waiting for the dog or an ogre or anyone decent NPC to kill all enemies - it is easy. My guess is that a full playtrough without a single stat point distributed is possible and not too difficult.

Bullshit, without using stat points you can have only one follower, and ,obviously, no fighting ability.