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.

Nox: Opinions?

Mister Arkham

Scholar
Joined
Apr 24, 2008
Messages
763
Location
Not buried deep enough
Clockwork Knight said:
Now, if only you people could say what makes it so awesome, that would be nice

Terrible, hackneyed premise that the game is self-conscious about in a somewhat Written-by-Ron-Gilbert fashion? The story is pretty standard in terms of fantasy games, but there's some genre deconstruction serving as an additional through-line that manages to keep things entertaining if not exactly clever. The game also never tries to do anything distinctive or new with the Diablo gameplay formula and instead distills it, which makes it a nice kind of popcorn game that you can pick up and put down whenever you have a couple of minutes. Playing as an absolute fucking moron can be kind of fun.

Ultimately I wouldn't say that any of these make the game AWESOME per-say, but it's certainly still a fun little hack-n-slash.
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459
Clockwork Knight said:
Now, if only you people could say what makes it so awesome, that would be nice

Hack n Slash mechanics are pretty fun, the game utilizied some cool features like point of view, sight range, facing direction, and had rather nice graphics too (like a dirtier more mechanically inclinded baldur's gate in many ways, graphically that is). Also had 3 rather distinctive classes each with their thing to do.

Calling the game an RPG is somewhat of a stretch as it is much more of a guantlet like hack'n'slash through actual levels/stages.
 

Multi-headed Cow

Guest
Nox singleplayer campaign wasn't that good, Nox "Gauntlet" mode that was patched in is pretty good, Nox multiplayer is/was cool as all hell.

Overall a pretty good game.
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
7,953
Location
Cuntington Manor
Surprisingly, I enjoyed it when I played it years ago. Very fast paced and you need to be on the ball, especially with some of the later enemies who can kill you very quickly. If memory serves, one monster that pretends to be a chest is a real piece of work.

I played the game as a warrior, and my work was cut out for me. Don't discount the Chakrams though, but don't waste them; very effective weapons, especially against bosses.
 

Darth Roxor

Rattus Iratus
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,961
Location
Djibouti
Clockwork Knight said:
Now, if only you people could say what makes it so awesome, that would be nice

- Three very diverse classes, each of them plays very differently and has some unique levels, which is gud for replayability.

- Shitloads of different phat loot.

- Pretty neat dungeons with lots of secret areas, which encourages constant wall bashing exploration.

- A pretty diverse bestiary with many monsters requiring different approaches.

- Traps and secret areas often need some logical thinking to get to/through.

- Resource management is imperative, since gear tends to break extremely fast (especially as a warrior), and it can be fixed only at traders (who are often very, very far away). Nox was quite possibly one of the only games to introduce item durability properly, since it wasn't just a pointless moneysink.

- AWESUM VOICE ACTING!!!
 

ksjav

Scholar
Joined
Aug 27, 2009
Messages
292
Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Codex USB, 2014
Darth Roxor said:
- AWESUM VOICE ACTING!!!

Sarcasm?
I thought nox's voice acting was nothing short of queefing for the most part.
 

Hobo Elf

Arcane
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
14,127
Location
Platypus Planet
What really sold me on Nox were the towns. They felt very lively and they were full of secrets so exploring them was loads of fun (this applies to the dungeons as well). I played it a long time ago, and I loved every second of it. Talking about it now makes me want to install it again.
 

Elzair

Cipher
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
2,254
This thread is TL;DR, so someone might have already asked this question, but why is Andhaira allowed to start topics again? Does anyone actually think his behavior will change?
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459
Hobo Elf said:
What really sold me on Nox were the towns. They felt very lively and they were full of secrets so exploring them was loads of fun (this applies to the dungeons as well). I played it a long time ago, and I loved every second of it. Talking about it now makes me want to install it again.

I remember being shocked to find that the NPCs were actually viable in combat and that they helped and contributed to fighting off a particular invasion. Archers shooting from walled off guard posts with guards patrolling around and actively chasing and, surprisingly, managing to best the enemy (unless they got over-run or a particularly powerful necromancer was there).

Rolling with a cadre of Fire Knights was pretty pimpin' too ;)
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
3,520
Darth Roxor said:
- Resource management is imperative, since gear tends to break extremely fast (especially as a warrior), and it can be fixed only at traders (who are often very, very far away). Nox was quite possibly one of the only games to introduce item durability properly, since it wasn't just a pointless moneysink.

Annoyingly, you usually actually want the weaker items. A flimsy sword might wear out twice as quick as the sturdy ones, but since its considered a lower level item it costs 10x less to repair. I suppose it makes logical sense but it doesn't make a good case for the items being useful.

Also, shields are useless, while staffs are the best warrior weapon for 60% of the single player game. Staffs get a really strong strength bonus since they are two handed and block weapons better then shields.

Item balance is fine in multiplayer though, where you never have to worry about that shit breaking and players camp the stronger weapon spawns just like they would in an FPS.
 

Darth Roxor

Rattus Iratus
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,961
Location
Djibouti
Overweight Manatee said:
Also, shields are useless, while staffs are the best warrior weapon for 60% of the single player game. Staffs get a really strong strength bonus since they are two handed and block weapons better then shields.

Except that staves deal like half (or even less) the damage most one-handed warrior weapons do, not to mention they can block only weapons, while with a shield you can even block an incoming fireball.
 

Hory

Erudite
Joined
Oct 1, 2003
Messages
3,002
Mikayel said:
I remember being shocked to find that the NPCs were actually viable in combat and that they helped and contributed to fighting off a particular invasion. Archers shooting from walled off guard posts with guards patrolling around and actively chasing and, surprisingly, managing to best the enemy (unless they got over-run or a particularly powerful necromancer was there).
The best segment was like that, defending against an attack from the orcs (or such). Made me wish the entire game (and other games) were more like it. The combat had a very lively feel to it rather than the overdone "fighting a small group of monsters alone in a small room or corridor".
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
3,520
Darth Roxor said:
Overweight Manatee said:
Also, shields are useless, while staffs are the best warrior weapon for 60% of the single player game. Staffs get a really strong strength bonus since they are two handed and block weapons better then shields.

Except that staves deal like half (or even less) the damage most one-handed warrior weapons do, not to mention they can block only weapons, while with a shield you can even block an incoming fireball.

IIRC staves had slightly lower base damage but their strength bonus was stronger then almost everything else early on, which led to them having about equal or higher damage. Some of the larger weapons may do a bit more then a staff, but they also swing a lot slower while the staff sits comfortably in between the small and larger weapons.

Shields were useless because they took a second of doing nothing to set up. Since they can only block projectile spells there was no reason not to take that second to side step and have it miss you entirely. Staves let you go toe to toe with any blockable melee opponent and you took no damage as long as your staff didn't break, since they could block instantly after an attack.
 

Darth Roxor

Rattus Iratus
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,961
Location
Djibouti
Overweight Manatee said:
Shields were useless because they took a second of doing nothing to set up. Since they can only block projectile spells there was no reason not to take that second to side step and have it miss you entirely.

Side-stepping might have been tricky with multiple fireballs and slowdowns heading your way (Hello, Castle Galava!), while with a shield, you could stand in some strategic place, block all incoming enemy fire and use berserker charge to quickly dispatch the casters one-by-one. Plus, the shield could also deflect all these pesky spells like disarm and stun back at the enemy iirc. Shields definitely had their uses, but they pretty much became obsolete the moment you got a warhammer/greatsword, though.
 
Joined
Sep 4, 2009
Messages
3,520
Those spells were generally so fast that you didn't have any chance to wait for the shield to come up unless you were really far away. War Cry canceled them out really nicely. It's possible I'm overestimating the time I remember those shields taking to set up, though.

I do really dig the warrior vs wizard fights. The warrior has to kill his enemy fast, he only has 1 chance to cancel their spell effects and 1 chance to do his charge. If he wastes both of those then the wizard dominates. Also, standing behind doors with a warhammer to surprise rape them the instant they came through was fun :lol:
 

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