Review Discworld overhypes KOTOR

[Rosh]

Allright! Fresh meat.

/me stretches and cracks his knuckles.

This should be amusing, although it seems we have someone who needs to rely on straw man arguments as much as DemonKing.

First, let me just point out TheDiscworld's problem. Naive in the industry, then makes outlandish claims, says they like NWN in reply to a claim about how NWN was..fuck, here's the quote. Try not to miss the point this time:

However, the difference is the hours spent in Neverwinter Nights seem to suck you in and gives the game more meaning. Your time is spent well and everything you do seems to have an affect upon the world that you inhabit. This is the way RPG's are meant to be and every hour seems richer and fuller than other RPG's such as Baldur's Gate for example.

You put NWN above other games and also use the claim that everything you do in the world makes a difference. Considering this is about the OC, and the OC doesn't save the world state between the chapters, I'd say you're full of shit. Or we could point out that other games actually let you play into the world, rather than what amounts to following a preset script. Other games that have been out for years allow you to play into how you wish and what you do is really taken into account. Ultima 4-7, Gothic, Fallout, PS:T, then there was a few others that were a bit noteworthy, but I'll make this brief in deference to your attention span. Congratulations on looking like a real dumbass, now.

Yes, then I would say that you were a media whore, Ross. You don't know what you're talking about, show little clue of game dsign, and keep making genre-wide claims, some laughable to an extreme. Just because you were evidently born in the 80's doesn't mean the 70's didn't exist.

So your homework is to do some research about what you're attempting to talk about before you further contribute to your position as both a media whore and problem in the industry.

 

[Jed]

No pathfinding problems? Goddamn if I had nickle everytime I got stuck on a party member... I couldn't take that astromech droid anywhere; he'd always get stuck on something. I hated having to switch between party members just to try to keep them together. Ironically, the only time I didn't have trouble with pathfinding is when I used "master speed." So much for Bioware's BESTEST AY-EYE EVAR! How many times did I have to cycle through my party because they were just standing around doing nothing during combat. Give me a trip-happy bugbear anyday; at least he's doing something.

TB forever!

 

[Transcendent One]

My character in KotOR would constantly get stuck when there are obstacles in his path, whether NPC's or other crap. I don't remember how many times I had to manually steer my character when the idiot would get stuck because there's a table between him and the opponent. The crappy mix of action and classical RPG combat doesn't help.

 

[Volourn]

Hmm.. Pathfinding in KOTR wasn't too bad on my end. No worst, or better than any other game I'e played...

 

[triCritical]

Pathfinding was as bad as you would expect from Bioware. However, it wasn't as magnified as with the other games because of how unimportant tactical placement was. I think KotOR would have played a lot better as a FP party based game like Wizardry, or Might and Magic. In that case people would not see the glaring weaknesses in the combat.

 

[Volourn]

Thank god it was not FP. Just tack on another weakness to it. FP is awful; espicially for combat. Disgusting!

 

[Jed]

How is it not FP? It's FP with a bad camera and your avatar sticking out in front of you, but it still bascially plays the same. The game would have been vastly improved with a REAL freelook.

 

[Volourn]

When I think FP; I think where all you see is the area in front of your character. That just feels off to me.

 

[triCritical]

When I think FP; I think where all you see is the area in front of your character. That just feels off to me.

I guess it all depends what you grew up with. But what feels more natural playing FP, or playing a character that is supposedly you and staring at his ass all day long? Party based FP games typically weak combat, so it would have been a really good fit for KotOR. The benefit would be that it added the immersion bonus, which IMO would have really worked well for a game that was already suffering from those problems.

[sarcasm]

Of course it would not have had all the cinematic combat effects, which probably raised it from the 72% score it deserved to the 88% score it got on most gaming rags! Never underestimate the ability for a game to get ratings based on l33t combat moves.

[/sarcasm]

You know A modest proposal didn't need sarcasm tags.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

But, this just isn't a problem. Having to click the mouse more times than in other games barely detracts from the gaming experience. Since when did we judge the quality of a game on how many times you click the mouse button?

Because it's cumbersome and results in down time for the player. That's the important thing to consider. Any time the interface is so unwieldy that it requires that many more operations to accomplish something than the standard with no additional benefit, it's a problem. Imagine if a first person shooter required four steps to reload a gun or an RTS which required four steps just to start up a unit queue. Same thing here.

I liked having my inventory filtered into sections that could only be useable by that particular body part. Instead of having to trawl through my whole inventory I could see straight away the only items which could be equipped for example by my hands instead of having to look through armour other things, I found it simplified matters even if it did take a few extra mouse clicks so what?

Less than halfway through the game, you'll still be scrolling through your inventory, though since you're talking about a single column of weapons/armor that'll only display five weapons/armor at a time. This is on par with tabbing through NWN's inventory box, which was tiny compared to a lot of CRPGs which give you a rather large inventory box to pick from.

 

[TheDiscworld]

Don't take my word for it, here is the dictionary: the science and art of disposing and maneuvering forces in combat or the art or skill of employing available means to accomplish an end. Temple of Elemental Evil is tactical, XCom is tactical, Jagged Alliance is tactical. KOTOR's gameplay consists of clicking on one of the enemies choosing one of the very few available feats producing similar effects, unlike ToEE, waiting till the enemy dies, then picking another one. I'm not saying it's very bad, but it's not tactic

But X-Com and Jagged Alliance aren't RPG's of course they're going to be infinitely most tactical. By it's very nature RPG games are always going to be limited in the amount of tactical thinking that goes into combat as the games are so much more than just combat.

Like I said compared to what? If it was the first computer game ever then yes, may be, but it's not. Like Saint pointed out, there is big difference between using the standard "4 clicks" system that also displays all items in a visually accessible manner and "13 clicks" system where you also have to scroll up and down to locate something.

Compared to nothing. As far as I was concerned it did the job very well. End of.

Did you notice by any chance that for a SW game, KOTOR focused to much on swords? The ranged weapons were hardly as effective and they had a penalty for close range which is kinda ridiculous. Were you surprised when your lightsaber was deflected by every other sword and even some tribal sticks? Did you find it odd that 4,000 years ago everything, and I mean everything, looks exactly like in the movies, including the design of your ship? 4,000 years is a looong time.

But the focus of Star Wars has always been on the lightsaber as opposed to ranged weapons. The Jedi Knight games were distinctly poor until you got hold of a lightsaber so I see no problem in focusing on melee combat over ranged combat. Granted it was strange how the swords managed to deflect the lightsaber. And even though it was set 4000 years before the films it's still got look and feel like a Star Wars universe or there would be no point in having the license. What's the problem with it feeling like the movies? Surely that's a good thing.

 

[Rosh]

But X-Com and Jagged Alliance aren't RPG's of course they're going to be infinitely most tactical.

Hahaha, clueless of the tactical genre as well as what makes up a game, it seems.

By it's very nature RPG games are always going to be limited in the amount of tactical thinking that goes into combat as the games are so much more than just combat.

No, to those in the know, a combat engine is different than a game genre. You see, you could kludge X-COM's combat into a CRPG and it may very well fit. Those elements are not like an OR gate.

Compared to nothing. As far as I was concerned it did the job very well. End of.

End of your pitiful "gaming journalism career"? As far as I am concerned, you can stop posting your ignorant opinions as fact, media whore.

But the focus of Star Wars has always been on the lightsaber as opposed to ranged weapons.

And then BioWare removed what made it so great.

Granted it was strange how the swords managed to deflect the lightsaber.

Really?

And even though it was set 4000 years before the films it's still got look and feel like a Star Wars universe or there would be no point in having the license. What's the problem with it feeling like the movies? Surely that's a good thing.

Wow...you must be British nobility because that sure was one hell of an inbred remark you just made. Just forget all common sense before you post, eh?

It would be like BioWare creating a Forgotten Realms campaign set far in the past and just miss Netheril or a number of other setting aspects, including having a modern Waterdeep, etc. Are you able to grasp that example, or shall I have to dumb it down further in deference to you?

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

But X-Com and Jagged Alliance aren't RPG's of course they're going to be infinitely most tactical.

JA2 actually is. They call it role-playing strategy, but it's really a modern day setting, open ended dungeon crawler.

By it's very nature RPG games are always going to be limited in the amount of tactical thinking that goes into combat as the games are so much more than just combat.

Actually, most CRPGs, especially D&D ones, are mostly combat oriented. That's because the D&D rules are mostly combat oriented.

Compared to nothing. As far as I was concerned it did the job very well. End of.

It may have worked, but it certainly didn't work well. It definitely didn't work as well as any recent CRPG dating back to the mid-1990s.

 

[Vault Dweller]

... Temple of Elemental Evil is tactical, XCom is tactical, Jagged Alliance is tactical.

But X-Com and Jagged Alliance aren't RPG's of course they're going to be infinitely most tactical.

Did you miss ToEE reference on purpose?

By it's very nature RPG games are always going to be limited in the amount of tactical thinking that goes into combat as the games are so much more than just combat.

No, "the amount of tactical thinking" is limited only be poor design. For example, KOTOR has only 3 :!: active combat feats (critical strike, power attack, flurry). They all have similar effects ie direct damage directed at one opponent at any given time. You pick one attack and stick with it untill you are bored with its animation and want to watch something different. In comparison, ToEE offers you Cleave and Combat Reflexes (granted, these are passive skills, but it's up to you to position your char properly to take max advantage of these feats), Feint, Trip, Spring Attack, Whirlwind, Combat Expertise, etc. All of these have different effects that you chose depending on each particular situation and that's what makes ToEE tactical.

Like I said compared to what? If it was the first computer game ever then yes, may be, but it's not.

Compared to nothing. As far as I was concerned it did the job very well. End of.

Common, you can't do that. You can't ignore years of gaming design and development. What? Are you running out of arguments? Compared to 90% of games KOTOR's inventory is crap. Are you going to pretend that IE (infinity Engine) games inventory wasn't more convinient, accessible, and extremely easy to use? Regardless of your personal likes and dislikes, you have to be objective. Personally I like how ToEE handled items descriptions, but I also realize that IE games descriptions were more convinient for most people.

But the focus of Star Wars has always been on the lightsaber as opposed to ranged weapons.

No, it wasn't. In the movies only a handful of people had lightsabers, the rest relied on good ol' ranged weapons that were nerfed in KOTOR. Jango Fett didn't have a lightsaber but gave Obi Wan a run for his money, etc.

The Jedi Knight games were distinctly poor until you got hold of a lightsaber so I see no problem in focusing on melee combat over ranged combat.

And that what shows your poor understanding of RPGs. It should have been a player's choice what weapon to use. An RPG is not a shooter that focuses on one type making another useless, it's about choices.

Granted it was strange how the swords managed to deflect the lightsaber.

Strange? Major understatement. Out of curiosity, why that wasn't mentioned in the review if you thought it was odd? Or do you believe that you should mention only the positives blown out of proportions?

And even though it was set 4000 years before the films it's still got look and feel like a Star Wars universe or there would be no point in having the license. What's the problem with it feeling like the movies? Surely that's a good thing.

If they wanted to make a game that feels exactly like the movies, they should have set KOTOR during the movies timeline. If they wanted to tell a different tale like they claimed they should have made a game that actually feels like 4,000 years ago.

 

[Volourn]

VD, thanks for calling NWN tatical as it has basically all those feats as well though trip is termed knockdown; and doesn't have feint; but has other feats as well. *Note; I'm not saying that NWN is more tatical than TOEE; just that it basically has the same list of eats. It's the extra optionslike a more solid 5' step that gives TOEE the tatical edge.

As for him missing out on the TOEE; that *may* have been on purpose as he wa sjust poitning out the other two games you listed weren't role-playing games.

That all said, Discworld, as much as I like KOTOR and am a BIO fanboy( :wink: ); its inventory is god awful and its combat is extremly simple - fun; but definitely nowhere near a tatical masterpiece.

 

[Spazmo]

The main tactical advantage ToEE has over NWN is twofold--first, it's turn-based. We've been over why TB is more tactical many times. Second, you control multiple characters. This allows you to form plans and such more effectively than when you control only one PC.

 

[Voss]

Its mostly the view that makes it more tactical. Isometric is always going to lend itself to tactical play better than a 'floating behind the character' view.
TB and character control are significant factor though.

The argument that 'its an RPG so the combat has to suck' doesn't hold water though.
Bad, reviewer, bad. And given bioware's large teams, I doubt very much that what the combat team is doing impacts significantly on the writing/design teams. So it isn't a this or that trade off.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Its mostly the view that makes it more tactical. Isometric is always going to lend itself to tactical play better than a 'floating behind the character' view.

I disagree with isometric view being the most important tactical component, let alone an important factor (if it's static, anyway). A 3D, third-person fully scalable and rotating free camera can do the same thing, if not better. Pure isometric also isn't as good as a 4-way isometric possibility (meaning, the possibility to see between 4 different isometric views). The best example i can remember now regarding my 4-way isometric display would be Final Fantasy Tactics, with limited zoom and scalability, but with 4 different isometric points of view.

 

[Vault Dweller]

VD, thanks for calling NWN tatical as it has basically all those feats as well though trip is termed knockdown; and doesn't have feint; but has other feats as well.

First, "basically" doesn't count, second, many things like AoO don't work properly in RT even with teh pause, and third, I was trying to start with basics for our tactically-challenged friend from the Discworld. Imo, different attacks/defense options is the first requirement as that's what add tactical depth. That's the main difference between chess and checkers. There are more requirements, of course, but for the purpose of the conversation the first one was enough. Nice try though, Volourn :wink:

As for him missing out on the TOEE; that *may* have been on purpose as he wa sjust poitning out the other two games you listed weren't role-playing games.

When a person is given 3 examples, and instead of discussing one that fits the most he focuses on 2 that aren't as good, that clearly shows where this person stands. Besides, I agree with Saint, that JA2 is a dungeon crawler and fits the conversation for all intends and purposes.

combat is extremly simple - fun; but definitely nowhere near a tatical masterpiece.

It's nowhere near tactical anything. It doesn't make it a bad game though.

 

[EEVIAC]

I disagree with isometric view being the most important tactical component, let alone an important factor.

I agree with Voss. Isometric works because it displays the greatest depth of view, due mainly to the rectangular shape of our monitors. You want so see your character's actions as well as the effects on the enemies. Its not so much a problem with melee combat but with ranged combat I often find myself in the "pocket" trying to get as much distance as I can.

 

[Elwro]

[ Are you running out of arguments? Compared to 90% of games KOTOR's inventory is crap. Are you going to pretend that IE (infinity Engine) games inventory wasn't more convinient, accessible, and extremely easy to use? .

Well, we don't know if he played any IE games at all.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

No, it wasn't. In the movies only a handful of people had lightsabers, the rest relied on good ol' ranged weapons that were nerfed in KOTOR. Jango Fett didn't have a lightsaber but gave Obi Wan a run for his money, etc.

Right. In the original trilogy, there were only three people that used lightsabers in the entire thing, and one died after the first movie. Everyone else used blasters except Palpatine.

VD, thanks for calling NWN tatical as it has basically all those feats as well though trip is termed knockdown; and doesn't have feint; but has other feats as well. *Note; I'm not saying that NWN is more tatical than TOEE; just that it basically has the same list of eats. It's the extra optionslike a more solid 5' step that gives TOEE the tatical edge.

Well, after two expansion packs, sure. NWN has a lot more combat options for melee now, but all it had was power attack and knockdown when it came out.

 

[Vault Dweller]

[ Are you running out of arguments? Compared to 90% of games KOTOR's inventory is crap. Are you going to pretend that IE (infinity Engine) games inventory wasn't more convinient, accessible, and extremely easy to use? .

Well, we don't know if he played any IE games at all.

Then any other PC game: Diablo, Arcanum, Fallout, Wizardry, Throne of Darkness, Lionheart, Daggerfall, Morrowind, Revenant, etc. It's hard to think of a game that didn't use such a system. Gothic was very similar but less painful. So unless it was his first game, he should have seen and known better.

 

[Elwro]

Well, of course he should. But sometimes I think that review sites hire total CRPG newbies.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Light sabers were probably among the coolest, and most attractive aspect of combat in the original trilogy, which is why lightsabers have such a great impact on our experience of the Star Wars movies. That said, the lightsabers defined the combat aspects and as such, people tend to equate Star Wars to light sabers.

However, to suggest that the focus of the movies was more on lightsabers than on any other form of combat would be a distinctively and indubitably fallacious method of reasoning. Your absorption of the movie != the movie. Critical reasoning would show that the movies paid as much attention to star fighters (the X-Wing and Tie Fighters come to mind), blasters and large armies (Stormtroopers versus the Rebel Alliance) almost as much as lightsaber combat.

Granted, an entire portion of the first film was devoted to Luke's mastery of the lightsaber but one must recall that the focus of this part of the movie was not on lightsaber combat, but rather on the development of Luke as the protagonist and his mastery of the force, of which lightsaber combat is but a portion of.

Ultimately, Bioware could have done a better job with KOTOR by implementing a much more balanced combat system putting a lot more focus on ranged weapons than they did, and making it so that lightsabers are as much as a rarity in the Star Wars universe as they should be. What's the point of having lightsabers when every stupid grunt walks around with a cortorsis weave vibroblade? It's like having a +5 Holy Avenger in a D&D campaign in which every bandit in the game has a +5 weapon of their own to fight you with.