Review KotOR first gushings at GameSpy

[Jed]

You suck at spotting trends. It's that simple.

You just straight up suck. Even simpler.

On the other hand, you're great at jumping on marketing bandwagons, so go blow your money on some more shitty Bioware games, the most predigested white bread mush of the C"R"PG industry.

PS- Your name is laughably pretentious.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

BIo's games are not automated. And,m neither are they are"simple" or "no brainer'.

I'm sorry but one look at some of the quests in BG2 and that argument falls to the ground. Need i remind you of the terrible excuse for a quest that was saving Nalia?

Isaea Roenal: "Hi there, you've met me before, and if i didn't matter then, i'll matter now, as i'm taking Nalia here.".

Nalia: "Don't!"

Roenal: "Too late!"

PC: "D'oh, i can't attack you in the middle of the street even if you have very few people with you, and even if i've been attacked and attacked plenty of others in the street, but i can banter endlessly! Beware as i shall get you for this!"

Roenal: "Yeah right."

Some guy: "Oy there, i'm random Joe #4, and curiously, i've just watched everything from the backstage! Now, i've read the script and after realizing i hate Roenal's guts, its my duty to inform you that you'll have Isaeas' house open to you, without guards, and another random NPC that'll spill his guts for you at the Docks - without added costs! Farewell!"

Or how you didn't even had to read Mazzy Fentan's note or the diary of the Umar Hill ranger, you just had to pick them up to have your map updated (not to mention gaining experience for picking up a book)? Or of how some items, like books or documents, couldn't be read and only had in their description explaining on what they could be used (incidentally, like Roenall's documents, or the Harper necklace which stated something similar to "Perhaps this can be used in a place of the building where only Harpers can go?")? Or of how, troughout the game, you were presented with dialogue choices which, no matter which one you choose, the response of NPCs was always the same, thus eliminating any point in choosing answers? And into NWN, where we have buttons that are there to decide for us what statistic we want to raise? Or about the different-coloured dialogue lines blatantly screaming they should be used for added information? Or about the town portal, er, Stone of Recall? I've sold NWN already, but i might just buy it again just to compile a list of automated, hold-your-hand features.

Anyone who thinks TOEE is compiictaed just isn't very smart. In fact, I feel that TOEE holds the player's hand too much.

How exactly? I'd like to be given examples.

BIo makes good games for people who want good games.

Bio makes games that they know will sell, wheter that makes a good or bad game. If they're good, that's a different question. And i'll answer it now, they aren't.

As for publishing, how can you say BIO had better publishing. NWN, and TOEE both had the same publisher yet BIO is still making patches for it (and not simply because it has more bugs); while people had to gnash their teeth for a TOEE patch. Perhaps it's because BIO cares about their games' quality much more than Troika apparantly does.

Nice try, but in case you've been living under a rock, you know damn well Atari's publising rights with Troika were different from those with Bioware. Not only that, Troika have stated that the patch had to be allowed by Atari. Bio *always* had better publishing than Troika. Troika were ass-raped in game decisions by both Sierra (for the multiplayer) and Atari (for the removal of game content). Where were Bio screwed in publishing? Even if not beneficiated, it still was handled much better than Troika's.

BIo's games surely live up to its nameake genre than Troika's does. In fact, NWN is much closer to a real role-playing game than anything else made by either BIO, or Troika. Period.

You're certainly entitled to your opinion, as utterly wrong as it may be. Though i find it curious you've said in the past that NWN wasn't that great, and that you've said Arcanum was fantastic, yet, now state Arcanum isn't better than NWN. Not to mention the sheer absurdity of the entire comment. Have you been drinking?

Milking a proven franchise? Oh... You mean like Troika is trying to do with TOEE, and Blodlines? Hmm...

Not really. Troika worked with D&D once, and is now moving on to White Wolf property. Bioware worked with the same franchise in more than one game. Notice the difference?

EDIT: To be more direct, tell me this. Who is milking more a franchise - the company that uses the same franchise for 3 games (BG, BG2, and NWN) and 4 expansions (ToTSC, ToB, HoTU and SotU), or the company that only uses the franchise in one game and moves on?

 

[Volourn]

RP: Here it goes.

1. Good. There are examples of simple quests in BG2. There are also many examples of simple quests in TOEE. Your point? Even the so called complicated quests in TOEE are nothing more than completing one quest, and moving to the next. *yawn*

2. Example of simpliicty? You get all the options you'd wnat pretty much in TOEE which is a good thing; but in the end they don't matter ince you cna win fights by just selecting straight up attacks. *yawn* Or, how about the over bloated help scrrens which are, imo, just simply not needed for anyone with have a brain - espicially since they really explain nothing for the most part.

3. I think it's obvious that BIO producses high quality games. Poorly made games tend to stop selling very quickly no matter how much hype precedes them. As for whether one like a certain game, all opinion, nothing more.

4. YOU must be living under the rock if you missed the reason why BIO switched publishers for NWN from Interplay to Atari. BIo was most certainly screwed by Interplay 9or vice versa depending on who you get the infof rom). And, it's not like Atari has been a greta publisher for BIO. NWN is patched because BIO patches it. And, they ahve to change quests, and all sorts of things because Atari and co. demanded it just like Troika. So, sorry, Troika doesn't have the market corned on uncaring publishers. Perhaps, BIO has the wherewithall to overcome publishing problems as eveidneced with their quick move from Interplay to Atari in mid development.

5. Ahh.. Wrong. Perhaps, you should read what i write instant of skimming. I stated, quite clearly, that Arcanum is better than the NWN OC. The NWN OC was okay; nothing more; but NWN the game's entire pakage is great. Arcanum is a fanatstic game which is easily better than NWN OC; but is nowher enear as good as the entire NWN package. Have you been drinking? Capiche.

6. Troika has mad eit very clear that if Atari gives the ok; they'll gladly make more D&D games. The ball, as they say, is in Atari's court. So what if BIO has worked on multiple games with the same franchise. I think BG2, and NWN sold well; not just b/c of D&D but because people enjoyed BIO's previous efforst. I wonder what would happen if the develoepr who wokred on POR2 would make another D&D crpg? I doubt they'd be miliking nothing but losses. Not to mention, BIOhas, and is making games with different IPS incudling 3 games in creation with their own IP. Troika has amde exactly one, and have yet to make or plan 9at leats annoucned) anothe rgame made based on their own rules, setting, etc.


WOW! That was fun.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

RP: Here it goes.

::types furiously::

1. Good. There are examples of simple quests in BG2. There are also many examples of simple quests in TOEE. Your point? Even the so called complicated quests in TOEE are nothing more than completing one quest, and moving to the next. *yawn*

There's a difference between a simple quest, and between a quest that's handled for you. A simple quest takes little effort to do, but its done *by* you, by your own effort; a quest that's handled *for* you, is a quest that has its more significant (or potentially significant) aspects handled by the game, and leave little to no input on your behalf.

2. Example of simpliicty? You get all the options you'd wnat pretty much in TOEE which is a good thing; but in the end they don't matter ince you cna win fights by just selecting straight up attacks. *yawn*

And how is *that* holding your hand? You're given a plethora of options - wheter you use them or not, they're there to be used as you see fit. Does the game hold your hand because there is an option to use simple attacks? Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

Or, how about the over bloated help scrrens which are, imo, just simply not needed for anyone with have a brain - espicially since they really explain nothing for the most part.

Wheter someone has half a brain or a full one, the help is there for people who want to know more about game aspects. Not only that, you only read them if you want, its not like the game is holding your hand for having them there.

And the help screens aren't helpful? Try reading them, please. But here, a quick question - if they (the screens), in your opinion, don't help players, then what is this holding of player's hands?

3. I think it's obvious that BIO producses high quality games. Poorly made games tend to stop selling very quickly no matter how much hype precedes them.

High quality games != high quality CRPGs. In fact, i've said time and again, Bioware has great production values, hence why the graphical and sound aspects of their games are well above other CRPGs.

As for whether one like a certain game, all opinion, nothing more.

Just as it is opinion stating one game is better than the other?

4. YOU must be living under the rock if you missed the reason why BIO switched publishers for NWN from Interplay to Atari. BIo was most certainly screwed by Interplay 9or vice versa depending on who you get the infof rom). And, it's not like Atari has been a greta publisher for BIO. NWN is patched because BIO patches it.

Good on you. Though, where does this invalidate anything i said? Sorry, but it doesn't. I didn't even mentioned Bio switching publishers, and one of the reasons why i didn't mentioned it is that, aside the cancelation of the Witch's Wake series, Atari didn't did anything that hampered the game in any visible way. In fact, the WW was not part of the game itself, so its not even a problem for the game itself.

And, they ahve to change quests, and all sorts of things because Atari and co. demanded it just like Troika.

And which changes were more detrimental for the games at hand? Certainly not the ones in Bioware's games.

So, sorry, Troika doesn't have the market corned on uncaring publishers. Perhaps, BIO has the wherewithall to overcome publishing problems as eveidneced with their quick move from Interplay to Atari in mid development.

Perhaps people buy more of their games which ends up being a safeguard for them and their publishers, which already know their games will sell and so small changes will be insignificant.

And again, you completely dodge the issue. Troika's games had botched publishings. Bioware's didn't.

5. Ahh.. Wrong. Perhaps, you should read what i write instant of skimming. I stated, quite clearly, that Arcanum is better than the NWN OC. The NWN OC was okay; nothing more; but NWN the game's entire pakage is great. Arcanum is a fanatstic game which is easily better than NWN OC; but is nowher enear as good as the entire NWN package. Have you been drinking? Capiche.

Sorry bud, i think you should lay off the insinuations i'm not paying attention when its you thats actually either not paying attention or have a short memory. You stated:

Posted: Thu Nov 20, 2003 4:27 pm:

In fact, NWN is much closer to a real role-playing game than anything else made by either BIO, or Troika. Period.

So perhaps you should lay off the sauce and make a differentiation betwen a game and a package/product in the future. I'm sure you know the difference between a game and a full product which might include things beyond a game. Not only that, technical programs don't make a game be more or less of an RPG.

6. Troika has mad eit very clear that if Atari gives the ok; they'll gladly make more D&D games. The ball, as they say, is in Atari's court. So what if BIO has worked on multiple games with the same franchise. I think BG2, and NWN sold well; not just b/c of D&D but because people enjoyed BIO's previous efforst. I wonder what would happen if the develoepr who wokred on POR2 would make another D&D crpg? I doubt they'd be miliking nothing but losses. Not to mention, BIOhas, and is making games with different IPS incudling 3 games in creation with their own IP. Troika has amde exactly one, and have yet to make or plan 9at leats annoucned) anothe rgame made based on their own rules, setting, etc.

So it was Bioware that was milking the AD&D/D&D license. Thank you for understanding.

WOW! That was fun.

Sure was, Vollie.

 

[Vault Dweller]

FO is not Troika. Stop lying.

He-he, that's why when I said "throw in Fallout" I added "to piss people off". :wink: But yes, it is in my book. It's funny how in the movie industry movies are associated with people who made them not with the studios, why games are treated differently? Look at that way: the fact that Interplay produced Fallout doesn't mean that they could produce another game of that caliber, while the fact that Tim Cain made Fallout means that he could do it again given proper resources, Arcanum proved that.

Arcanum is a great game

Indeed it is

And, no TOEE is NOT better than NWN OC

Why not? Sure there are some bugs, but the combat and graphics are superb. While ToEE won't win role-playing and story-telling award, it's a great dungeon crawler, that is much better then very lame NWN OC.

and the simple fatc that overall TOEE'S combat is easy.

Compared to what? NWN? BG1? Fallout? Wiz?

As for Bloodlines, nothing about the game interests me. It's a 1st person shooter with big boobies with talk about role-playing; but nothing to back it up.

May be you are right, may be you are wrong, it remains to be seen, but like I said even if Troika drops the ball on this one, I doubt it would be worth than KOTOR.

It still stands: BIO3 Troika 1, and BIo may add a 4th if KOTOR works out.

Quality vs Quantity. Choose wisely :wink:

It wasn't publishing, and marketing that amde BIO into one of the top game devlopers; and probably the top crpg dveloper (unless you count Blizzard as one as well); but quite frankly by making games people wnat to play

There is a difference between doing what sells and doing what you believe is good. If every company would try to make games that sells, we'd have never played Fallout, PS:T, Arcanum, and any TB game. Sometimes it's good when somebody doesn't take the easy road.

 

[Volourn]

VD: If that's the case then I guess you'd have no problem with Obsidian or that other company nwhich I cna't think off claiming they "made" FO as well. True, it's the people who make the game; but Troika on their boxes isn't claiming that Tim Cain helped make FO; they are claiming that Troika did which is a flat out lie. Liek i've said beofre, only 3 people who worked on FO worked on TOEE - two fo them being graphic designers, and one being Tim Cain. Mr. Cain had a lot to due with FO's gretaness; but last i checked, he didn't do it alone. And, TOEE proves that he can be a substandard game.
So far, to me, Troika is 1 for 2.

Why not? I cna't think of one npc I met that I actually give a dman about. Not one. I also can't think of exactly one quest that I found more than "okay". There's a problem there. NWN OC as far from perfect ir is, has more than feq uests, and at least some characters that are memorable and actually add to the game.

TOEE is easy compared to NWN, BG1, FO, Wizardry, heck you name it, it's almsot a gurantee it's eaiser at least out of games I actually like. Though KOTOR is really starting to fall into that easy combat syndrome which I hope changes quick. Anyways, that's another topic..

Doesn't matter if I'm right or wrong about Bloodlines. The bottom line is Troika better do something to actually make it sound like a crpg; not a boobie shooter. You doubt it be "worth" or do you mean 'worst"? HAHA! Well.. Despite my complaints about KOTOR; I can say one thing - it is a rpg. So far, that can't be said of Boobielines.

Sure, I'll take quality over quantity anyday. Once again, BIO wins. The Bgs eries beats Arcanum in sp. NWN beats it for the total apckage. TOEE isn't even worth mentioning in this regard.

I have a feeling, that whether you like BIO or their games or not; it's obvious theyfeel their games are good. And, please stop the tb nonsense. TB does not automatically equal good game or worst yet if you Tri good crpg.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The bottom line is Troika better do something to actually make it sound like a crpg; not a boobie shooter.

Somehow, i doubt you'll be shooting boobies all over the maps

 

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

Arcanum?

I think I've noticed a trend with all the new Bio-loving rejects that are rearing their ugly heads in the last few weeks: Pretentiousness of name is directly proportional to overzealousness of defense of Bioware.

Really? I've noticed another trend. If you post in this forum with a Wasteland or Fallout avatar, you're a jackass.

*checks examples in this thread*

Yep. Pretty much seems that way.

 

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

*rubs his eyes*

Do you honestly think Fallout was all Tim Cain? Fallout 2 was a fine RPG, and Cain was gone by then. There were a ton more people involved in Fallout than just Mr. Cain--Troika's initial shoddy products prove that fact pretty damn readily.

For the record, I'm not here to defend Bioware. I hated BG2, and NWN was the RPG equivalent of Counter-Strike. I think KOTOR is a good game, though, and I like IWD and BG1. Bioware's not my favorite RPG dev. crew by any means though... I think that award would either go to old-school Black Isle, (ie, pre-Lionheart), or maybe Jeff Vogel's Spiderweb Software.

My only guilty pleasure I deserve to be flamed for is my SquareEnix (formerly Squaresoft) obsession. The rest is fine, in my opinion.

 

[Volourn]

RP, darn, that would have made it a 99.9% guarantee of me buying it.

IWD has nothing to do with BIo other than the engine used. Please get your facts straight or go home.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

:shock: You... you would shoot boobies?? ...sicko.

 

[Volourn]

I didn't say what type of gun... :wink:

 

[Vault Dweller]

Do you honestly think Fallout was all Tim Cain? Fallout 2 was a fine RPG, and Cain was gone by then. There were a ton more people involved in Fallout than just Mr. Cain--Troika's initial shoddy products prove that fact pretty damn readily.

1. I never said "all Tim Cain", but he was in charge.
2. FO2 was a sequel, i.e. more of the same. However, it wasn't as good as FO1, Tim Cain's absence was noticeable thus proving my first point.

My only guilty pleasure I deserve to be flamed for is my SquareEnix (formerly Squaresoft) obsession. The rest is fine, in my opinion.

You deserve to be flamed for coming here and stating that Troika is far inferior to Bio (it's your opinion, it's not a fact), making that crack about credibility, claiming that Bio made IWD, and making that ridiculous post about Arcanum.

 

[Volourn]

Wrong. FO2 was indeed better than FO1; but you ar eright that it was 'more of the same". And, no, Cain was not in charge. That honour belongs to Brian Fargo, I believe.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I didn't say what type of gun... :wink:

Aahh, very well then :wink:

 

[Sammael]

Quite frankly, both Troika and Bioware suck. Troika produced Arcanum (which can be roughly defined as "great premise, incredibly horrible execution") and ToEE (which is not a role-playing game any more than Diablo is). Bioware, on the other hand, produced BG1&2 with the help of BIS (and both games were quite fun), and ToB and NWN without the assistance. Throne of Crap is a munchkiny hackfest with a hackneyed, hole-filled plot (even if we ignore the FR continuity issues, which is somewhat difficult to do). NWN was a glorified D&D Diablo clone with a semi-decent toolset.

With BIS as good as gone, my conclusion is that there are no decent PC RPG companies left on the North American continent.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Quite frankly, both Troika and Bioware suck.

OMG u r t3h n00b!

Troika produced Arcanum (which can be roughly defined as "great premise, incredibly horrible execution") and ToEE (which is not a role-playing game any more than Diablo is).

That ToEE is no example to be had in what constitutes roleplaying is somewhat of a given. But saying it's comparable to Diablo in terms of a lacking roleplay is, well, an ignorant statement. Dialogue is present, for one. That alone makes it superior to Diablo as far as interaction and roleplaying go. Secondly, you can roleplay. No, not as good as how i would've liked, and it certainly is not the best roleplaying game i've ever played, but it has roleplaying.

Throne of Crap is a munchkiny hackfest with a hackneyed, hole-filled plot (even if we ignore the FR continuity issues, which is somewhat difficult to do).

While we're at it, can i be told some? I've heard in the past that there were some, but unfortunately due to my lack of knowledge in FR nowadays, i was wondering if you could shed some light.

With BIS as good as gone, my conclusion is that there are no decent PC RPG companies left on the North American continent.

That means all you capitalist hicks have now outlived your usefulness, and can now be sunk! MWA HA HA!! ::presses red button::

 

[Vault Dweller]

VD: If that's the case then I guess you'd have no problem with Obsidian or that other company nwhich I cna't think off claiming they "made" FO as well.

Depends. Imo, 4 people can take a credit for a game: producer, lead designer, lead programmer, and art director.

True, it's the people who make the game; but Troika on their boxes isn't claiming that Tim Cain helped make FO; they are claiming that Troika did which is a flat out lie.

I never saw any ref to Fallout on Arcanum or ToEE boxes. May be I missed it, show me where.

Why not? I cna't think of one npc I met that I actually give a dman about. Not one.

Hey, man, don't blame your emotional problems on somebody else

TOEE is easy compared to NWN, BG1, FO, Wizardry, heck you name it, it's almsot a gurantee it's eaiser at least out of games I actually like. Though KOTOR is really starting to fall into that easy combat syndrome which I hope changes quick. Anyways, that's another topic..

I don't recall a game with challenging combat lately. All these games are easy if you know what you are doing.

You doubt it be "worth" or do you mean 'worst"? HAHA! Well..

lol, my bad, although you are the last person I'd expect to point out the typos. Your own posts are like puzzles where you have to rearrange the letters.

And, please stop the tb nonsense. TB does not automatically equal good game or worst yet if you Tri good crpg.

No, it doesn't, I used it as an example of good things that don't sell well that certain companies would never think of doing.

Wrong. FO2 was indeed better than FO1

Bigger? Yes. Better? No. What are your reasons, out of curiosity?

 

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

You deserve to be flamed for coming here and stating that Troika is far inferior to Bio (it's your opinion, it's not a fact), making that crack about credibility, claiming that Bio made IWD, and making that ridiculous post about Arcanum.

Let's analyze this.

1.) Troika < Bioware. Yes, it's my opinion. It's backed by a truckload of fact, though. (SEE: Sales, Profitability, Reviews, General Consensus.)

2.) Credibility. This is one of the most biased game sites I've ever visited. The gay little cracks at the end of every news item aren't clever, they're just indicative of one seriously bitter asshole.

3.) Bioware didn't make IWD, but it's their engine, and they've got their name all over it. I was unclear on that, now I've got it. Sorry.

4.) Arcanum. I didn't enjoy Arcanum in the least, and have routinely steered my friends away from buying the game (we once saw it for $2 at Goodwill--even at that price I didn't recommend it). You can hem and haw about how if it had this much more time or this much more money it'd be more mainstream and a true classic or whatnot... but it didn't. It was (and still is) buggy. Its combat engine is a nightmare, even in TB. Its characters are bipolar--either very strong and interesting or Morrowind-level dull. It had cool music, but it wouldn't play half the time and didn't vary much at all from place to place. The interface is unessecarily overwrought and complicated. So many of the game's ideas seem half-baked... like take Fate Points, for example. Excellent idea. It gives the lone gamer the capacity to play DM for a second to "fudge" their roll or whatnot to keep on playing. When it comes to execution, though, it was terribly unbalanced, almost to the point of some choices being worthless while some were exploits. Why the hell would you ever want full HP/Mana when you're hit for half your health by a creature with four attacks? Why would you want your next hit to be critical when a critical wouldn't do much but end an even fight faster? Why would you select any of those options when you can get a Critical in Pickpocketing, and steal some extremely powerful equipment--such as, a man's robes (!) effortlessly?

Fate points would have been neat if there had been less "Debug Mode" abilities and more "player alters the world around him" options, perhaps special dialog options that appeared when you had enough points that allowed you to bypass a difficult encounter, or make the encounter much easier, or get access to a map of a buired treasure, or something. But that didn't happen.

I guess the problem with Arcanum, for me at least, is that... gameplay didn't beget gameplay. There were a bunch of fantastic ideas that could have led to even more gameplay in Arcanum... and instead they just edited some hex values in your save. Whoopee. I'm using a trainer within the game rules.

 

[Volourn]

Sammael, huh? Last i checked, TOB is as mucha BIS game as BG1, and BG2 are. To say otherwise is a lie. I like how you give credit for the two BIO games you seemingly like; but say BIS ahd nothing to do with the ones you don't. Go figure. Stop being such a fanboy, and stressing how great IWD2 is when it is no better than TOEE other than the fact it has less bugs. As for Arcanum goes, you simply underrate it. It's a great game. Period.

VD:1. No, it takes everyone in the credits to make agame. It's a team effort. period. They all have their roles to play.

2.Hmm.. Are you sure? Ok, maybe I'm wrong here 9it happens once anwhile and so I guess I'm the liar ); but it mostc ertainly states it on the games' websites.

3. I have many emotional problems. I think most of us on the net do. Comes with the territory.

4. I found NWN OC to be just fine combat wise. And, most older games were pretty easy too. Very few games are challegning; but one such as TOEE which has obviously had most of its resources focued on combat; I'd have thought it be more challenging then it is - that's not to say thre is no challenging encounters at all; they're just too few and far between for my taste.

5. Actually, I'm the first person to do. Conideirng how my mispellings; I am quick to point out that others' typing can be as horrible as mine once, and awhile.

6. Huh? Many tb games so well. Just look at the FF series. Case closed.

7. Bigger, and better. Reasons? Simple. Vastly improved joinable npcs, more interesting towns, much better side quests (the drug one is one of my favorites in any game). Now, this sin't to rag on FO1 since both FOs are in my top 4 crpgs ever so no biggy.

 

[Voss]

Let's analyze this.

1.) Troika < Bioware. Yes, it's my opinion. It's backed by a truckload of fact, though. (SEE: Sales, Profitability, Reviews, General Consensus.)

Hmm.
Sales- Yes... but then again toss in advertising, why people buy things and all the other factors, it doesn't really back up an idea that one company is greater than another.
Proft- Maybe, though I'd like to see some accounting sheets from both companies- success doesn't necessarily equate to profitability or vice versa. It depends on the costs involved, as well.
Reviews- Opinions!
Consensus- More opinions! Huzzah. And consensus implies that gamers everywhere got together and decided that they like it. No. There are people that like it, and people that don't. In both cases, actually.

In any case, why are you jumping into the random bio-bashing fray? Like drive by shootings in any American city, its just something that happens- nothing to get excited about unless they nail someone you care about. So why are you taking sides?

2.) Credibility. This is one of the most biased game sites I've ever visited. The gay little cracks at the end of every news item aren't clever, they're just indicative of one seriously bitter asshole.

Aww. Passive-agressive gay bashing. How grade school of you. Anyway, since I've yet to see anyone say people at the Codex don't have biases, I'm not sure what you're point is.

And, for the record, there are *two* seriously bitter assholes that do the news posts.

4.) Arcanum. <snip>

So you didn't like Fate Points?

Right, so you didn't like it- fair enough. But I'm unclear as to how stating your opinion on a game is going to convince people that their opinions about Bioware are wrong.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Let's analyze this.

1.) Troika < Bioware. Yes, it's my opinion. It's backed by a truckload of fact, though. (SEE: Sales, Profitability, Reviews, General Consensus.)

Ghandi < Hitler. Yes, it's someones opinion. It's backed by a truckload of facts, though. (SEE: Killings, Popularity, Neo Nazi reviews, General Consensus).

2.) Credibility. This is one of the most biased game sites I've ever visited. The gay little cracks at the end of every news item aren't clever, they're just indicative of one seriously bitter asshole.

One of the most biased, eh? So i'm sure we can trust Gamespot or IGN, who blatantly support big-name companies even if their titles suck major donkey balls; and we can also dismiss when people in the industry actually post here and talk to us. It's because we're such assholes, i guess. Then again why are we biased? Because we like some games better than others? Because we can present facts as to why less-selling and less-hyped games are better in some aspects that higher-selling and more-hyped games, in fact, in aspects that matter to a CRPG?

Why the hell would you ever want full HP/Mana when you're hit for half your health by a creature with four attacks?

Because it might be a good idea to get myself into full health and try to cast a Haste spell for the next round, or a disabling spell on the creature before exertion ends my game?

Why would you want your next hit to be critical when a critical wouldn't do much but end an even fight faster?

And what if it isn't an even fight, and i'm trying to cause a critical to kill the monster faster? Or if i'm under the influence of, again, a haste spell, am close to dying, and i know my next strike won't kill the beastie, so i use a Fate point to make my critical sap away more than what i can take in an effort to kill it?

Why would you select any of those options when you can get a Critical in Pickpocketing, and steal some extremely powerful equipment--such as, a man's robes (!) effortlessly?

While i don't think being able to steal people's clothes was exactly a stroke of genius, i can see myself spending a Fate point in a situation like this if i'm roleplaying a pacifist. I may not have enough statistics to convince someone to give me an item, so i use a Fate point to get the item without resorting to killing.

 

[MF]

Godwin's law!!!
Exit(0)

Oh, no wait.
Bioware doesn't suck. It's a nice company providing quite a few Canadians with income. Apart form that, I couldn't care less. Their games don't appeal to me.

I do care about Arcanum, however. It is one of the best games I ever played. Of coutrse it lacks in the execution. But it doesn't impede on my enjoyment of the game. If you don't like it, the most likely reason I can imagine is that you thought there was too much diaologue in it. Speaking to Gilbert Bates, for example, might be long winded for someone with ADD. For those people, hitting a spacebar every 3 seconds and frantically clicking a mouse might be a better idea. Or better, yet, go out and exercise. Use some Ritalin, Dextrostat, or another psychoactive stimulant.

 

[Vault Dweller]

VD:1. No, it takes everyone in the credits to make agame. It's a team effort. period. They all have their roles to play.

I disagree. People who are in charge, people who make decisions, people who take risks are directly responsible for a project, any project. If it fails, it's their fault, if it succeeds, they are to be praised. I'm not sure whether it's right or wrong, but that's what I believe in.

Very few games are challegning; but one such as TOEE which has obviously had most of its resources focued on combat; I'd have thought it be more challenging then it is - that's not to say thre is no challenging encounters at all; they're just too few and far between for my taste.

I agree with you that it was very easy, but then again I saw many posts complaing about fights being too difficult. Don't forget that what's easy for DnD veterans could be very difficult for casual players. Anyway, I hope that AtG would be more challenging.

6. Huh? Many tb games so well. Just look at the FF series. Case closed.

That's an exception, I think. You know that the industry thinks that TB is obsolete and RT is what the people want. Do you remember the reaction to ToEE?

Vastly improved joinable npcs, more interesting towns, much better side quests (the drug one is one of my favorites in any game). Now, this sin't to rag on FO1 since both FOs are in my top 4 crpgs ever so no biggy.

Rephrasing Tim Cain, FO1 was about exploring ethics of a post-apocalyptic society, while FO2 focused on finding a bigger plasma gun. Some things about FO2 are good, some things are not, the second half (after the VC) is screwed up.

 

[Voss]

Ahh!
Not Against the Giants, please...

Even worse story than TOEE. Just one direct line of bodies from the starting point, through three giant lairs, the underdark, a drow city up to a silly little demon bitch-goddess. With a spider-shaped spaceship tossed in for good measure.