"They're" many games we universally agree on, like The Elder Turds series, to name but one.
Are they're any games that are universally agreed on here or do you just prefer trolling each other?
Are they're any games that are universally agreed on here or do you just prefer trolling each other?
Are they're any games that are universally agreed on here or do you just prefer trolling each other?
Codex top 20:
1. Fallout
2. Planescape:Torment
3. Arcanum
4. Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines
5. Fallout 2
6. Baldur's Gate II
7. Mask of the Betrayer
8. Deus Ex
9. Morrowind
10. Gothic 2
11. Ultima VII
12. Wizardy 8
13. Jagged Alliance 2
14. Temple of Elemental Evil
15. Daggerfall
16. Wasteland
17. Realms of Arcania: Star Trail
18. Wizardry 7
19. Baldur's Gate
20. Neverwinter Nights
Fallout 2, chap. I vehemently disrecommend F1 and BG1 to new players. Morrowind is a hiking simulator not a rpg but I agree that new player should play that dumber-than-dirt game if only to get a perspective. Anyway, this is the RPG shortlist, of course.BG2
Are they're any games that are universally agreed on here or do you just prefer trolling each other?
I wouldn't call it universal but most people here seem to like Planescape Torment, Arcanum, Vampire The Masquerade Bloodlines, Baldur's Gate 2,Fallout 1and Morrowind.
That would be a fine description to BG, if it wasn't for the fact that this extremely general description that could be applied any game ever made. Or am I wrong? Please enlighten me with your insight, some examples would not hurt.BG was shit. The main feature was the handpainted backgrounds which made the game/series truly beautiful and one of a kind when it comes to graphics. The rest? Crappy RT combat? Dutifully following a linear path devoid of anything resembling an active choice? Dumb "farmboy/girl discovers that he/she is special and has special powers" plot featuring the epic battle between you and retarded assassins who can't kill a lvl 1 character? You fight enemies matching your level, level up, move to the next pretty map, fight tougher enemies, level up, move to the next map, and so on until you beat Sarevok in his fancy "I'm a villain mwahaha" spiked armor.Exmit said:Whoever thinks BG series are shit needs to go throw himself into the pits of sorrow and die
The Durlag's tower added atmosphere to pretty background, raising the overall quality. BG2 went epic, adding some meaningless choices here and there, which made it a fun action adventure game, kinda like throwing in meaningless choices has made ME2 a neat little shooter. The Throne of Bhaal was a dull linear BG-like game, which completed the circle.
But hey, I'm glad that you've enjoyed it.
Infinity Engine Real-Time with Pause? Or perhaps you just mean the character statistics system, which is just limited DnD with shitty combat application due to the awful real time system. Variety of buffs + pre-buffing and items is nice I guess.BG series is good due to gameplay, not stories.
BG is actually shit.
Any game? Is every game an action-adventure RPGs with crappy real-time combat, linear, choice-less storyline that revolves around a boy/girl coming of age and discovering that he/she is special and clearing up maps RTS-style?That would be a fine description to BG, if it wasn't for the fact that this extremely general description that could be applied any game ever made. Or am I wrong? Please enlighten me with your insight, some examples would not hurt.BG was shit. The main feature was the handpainted backgrounds which made the game/series truly beautiful and one of a kind when it comes to graphics. The rest? Crappy RT combat? Dutifully following a linear path devoid of anything resembling an active choice? Dumb "farmboy/girl discovers that he/she is special and has special powers" plot featuring the epic battle between you and retarded assassins who can't kill a lvl 1 character? You fight enemies matching your level, level up, move to the next pretty map, fight tougher enemies, level up, move to the next map, and so on until you beat Sarevok in his fancy "I'm a villain mwahaha" spiked armor.Exmit said:Whoever thinks BG series are shit needs to go throw himself into the pits of sorrow and die
The Durlag's tower added atmosphere to pretty background, raising the overall quality. BG2 went epic, adding some meaningless choices here and there, which made it a fun action adventure game, kinda like throwing in meaningless choices has made ME2 a neat little shooter. The Throne of Bhaal was a dull linear BG-like game, which completed the circle.
But hey, I'm glad that you've enjoyed it.
The usual retarded arguments, as expected. Only a handful of cRPGs have combat that is more tactical than the Baldur's Gate games. Compared to Fallout and Arcanum its combat system is godly. Other than that, I'm not sure where the "action" comes from, and clearing maps is something players do in the vast majority of cRPGs. "Linear, choice-less story-line" was something that existed in 95% of the genre at the time Baldur's Gate came out, including some of the most praised 80s and 90s cRPGs. It's not a sin to make a game that doesn't cater to modern storyfaggotry.Any game? Is every game an action-adventure RPGs with crappy real-time combat, linear, choice-less storyline that revolves around a boy/girl coming of age and discovering that he/she is special and clearing up maps RTS-style?
The usual retarded "counter-arguments", as expected. The game was as tactical as any game with party members. Now, BG2 did raise the stakes with mage battles and challenging enemies, but BG was piss-easy and you didn't need to use any tactics. So, while the system itself (DnD) is obviously tactical, but the tactical aspect was lost during the implementation of the system and the overall design.
Pre-rendered 3D graphics. No hand drawing there. Except maybe some photoshopping.
I feel they got some undeserved recognition because somehow this belief that they're hand drawings came out.
No Infinity Engine game had hand drawn graphics. They've got great graphics, sure, because Interplay had awesome artists in that period, but they're not hand drawn.
Indeed. I think the Icewind Dale graphics look the least pre-rendered out of the Infinity Engine games. Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II, especially in the towns and cities, look very much pre-rendered. The outdoor zones also look like they have copy & pasted trees and rocks. Planescape: Torment looks less pre-rendered than Baldur's Gate and Baldur's Gate II, but it looks more like touched up pre-renders than Icewind Dale. All in all, the Infinity Engine doesn't give a damn how the images are made as they are merely images. I'm sure a variety of techniques were uses for different zones and for different games. I'd say there isn't any clear cut answer to whether the graphics are pre-rendered or not. They are probably both.Pre-rendered 3D graphics. No hand drawing there. Except maybe some photoshopping.
I feel they got some undeserved recognition because somehow this belief that they're hand drawings came out.
No Infinity Engine game had hand drawn graphics. They've got great graphics, sure, because Interplay had awesome artists in that period, but they're not hand drawn.
One could argue touching small details of rendered objects in Photoshop can be called "drawing" too. Atleast that's what I do aswell in my game - though I don't call it handpainted. Still, working on this feels much more like working on a painting than "oh well, I do mapping". So people saying these backgrounds were painted are atleast not totally "wrong". And I am not to blame them, some of the maps truely look fantastic, I have some particular map from IWD in mind where I really have no clue how they did things so detailed that it looks like a painting.
Here - this is not a very spectacular area per se (corridor grinding in fact :D ) but I am in awe how the ice etc. looks more like brushstrokes than a rendered object.
So, give the people a break who aren't that familar with graphic content creation.