Oblivion won't be the worst game ever.

[whitemithrandir]

I guess i haven't heard much about the combat. I heard it just dropped the dice rolls for the chance of hitting. As far as i knew there were automatic "neck strikes" that would cause paralyzing at high levels, but other then that...?

Can you clarify what you mean?

Beth has mentioned that you now need to hold down the "block" key at the right time to "block" attacks and you can play around with keys to execute combos and other such fluffy twitchy stuff, which, frankly, is unneccessary in my opinion.

I agree that Morrowind's combat was grossly lacking and improvements need to be made, but these improvements seem largely by and by superficial.

I won't pass critical judgement on it until I've played the game itself, of course, but that's my foresight based on what I've heard and what the devs have said on the subject, which, keep in mind, is very little.

 

[Elwro]

Beth has mentioned that you now need to hold down the "block" key at the right time to "block" attacks

Well, it's like that in the Gothics, but we've seen on the films that apparently Bethesda thinks it would be too hard for their target audience - you just press the block key and you block all attacks coming from the appropriate angle. You don't need to time anything.

 

[Perishiko]

Beth has mentioned that you now need to hold down the "block" key at the right time to "block" attacks and you can play around with keys to execute combos and other such fluffy twitchy stuff, which, frankly, is unneccessary in my opinion.

I agree that Morrowind's combat was grossly lacking and improvements need to be made, but these improvements seem largely by and by superficial.

I won't pass critical judgement on it until I've played the game itself, of course, but that's my foresight based on what I've heard and what the devs have said on the subject, which, keep in mind, is very little.

I can see where that could get annoying. Just like going from driving an automatic all your life just to switch to driving a stick shift. More of a pain in the ass then anything.

Glad i never really like melee combat much. I'm more of a hide in the shadows with my magic and shooting arrows kind of guy. (Everything i play in games normaly gets boosted in a good way. Just my luck i suppose.) Not to mention that with my alchemy i can now poison my arrows... just another boost for me.

I guess it's my choice in character that allows me to view these other things as mere problems for other people that won't effect me in the least. I just get shafted out of my levitation, not much of a biggy there.

Beth has mentioned that you now need to hold down the "block" key at the right time to "block" attacks

Well, it's like that in the Gothics, but we've seen on the films that apparently Bethesda thinks it would be too hard for their target audience - you just press the block key and you block all attacks coming from the appropriate angle. You don't need to time anything.

Well, supposedly their combat A.I. should make up for that. They said you move much slower while blocking and the enemies circle around you to get in a clean shot.

I guess that's all the insight i can give on that, there's really no proof to back me up besides promises.

 

[Solik]

I don't really think it's "twitchy" at all. It's real-time instead of turn-based, so choosing attack moves from a menu is hardly possible. And there seems to be more moves available than in previous TES games, so the input interface appears a little more complex. Kinda hard to tell without sitting down and toying with it, really.

 

[Vault Dweller]

However there were some such things in MW as well: Mountains you could only get over with high acrobatics or levitating.

There was no purpose in that, besides, acrobatics wasn't an alternative to levitation.

Telvanni towers.

See, that's the difference. In DF there were usually different alternative routes. For example, you could climb an air shaft, fight your way though some stairs, or levitate in some open area. In MW most things were linear, and these towers are a good example of that.

The language solution in DF was lame in My opinion...

It was, but something is always better than nothing, especially if that something provides an alternative way and is a foundation of a unique build.

Levitating? Acrobatics or potions.

A potion is still levitating, and acrobatics won't replace levitating completely.

Yes, VD, some options were lost, and I am not one to celebrate that, but there were still lots of options!

More like 80% of options were lost, but 20% still remained - Yay!

Better writing? A few maybe, overall I don't see that. I thought some of the guild quest were very fitting. Doing the pilgrimage for the tribunal temple, establishing trade between Tevanni and ashlanders, gebeldhirs bet, the "bad people" quest. and As I said, the background for the quests was far superior. Not being able to give up or decline quests was indeed a bad design decision. Although there were usually three or four quest lines per guild, so you could go some way even if you decided not to do a certain quest. E.g. I never did the "kill the false nerevarine" quest the temple gave me.

Background - yes, no doubt. Writing and overall quality - no. Granted, *some* quests were well done - it couldn't be otherwise in such a game, but overall the quality was poor. Both quests and writing were improved in Bloodmoon, but that's a different story

Only that the 30 guilds were really 5 archetypes. And that horses carriages or banks weren't huge gameplay features. Or that WW or V gameplay was minimal (and V were in MW). All nice to have but no game makers or breakers. Of course it helped that I could get all of that and then some back through mods

True, those aren't game makers or breakers but they add a lot nonetheless.

I understand, considering what you value most in games I can see how it was dissapointing. Though there is still a difference of a dissapointment and total shit.

No arguing here, but I've never claimed that MW is total shit, just a disappointment.

There we are different, I think a well painted background always adds a lot to the game, no matter what.

It's like 2D vs 3D. 3D adds a lot, but when poorly done it looks worse then 2D. At least that's how I see it. I remember thinking when I killed the Camonna Tong people at the Council Club that it was probably a mistake for my character because Camonna Tong won't let it slide...

 

[obediah]

So lot's of us want character-driven RPG combat. Otherwise known as TB, clusterfuck-friendly, boring, bland, "not even a mother fucking game".

Also, lot's of us want true action-RPG combat. Where player and character skill blend - so that connecting or dodging is up to the player and damage is affected by stats and gear. Skills unlock combos and other such. Otherwise known as twitchy, hard, exciting, immersive, and malt liquor.

Does anyone want the franken-zombie RPG-by-Action-RPG-by-Action bullshit that Oblivion is shaping up to be? Individual features are pulled from so many differnent points along the RPG -> Action spectrum that I find it hard to believe anyone could be happy with combat as a whole. I'm pretty sure it's a calculated move to throw enough random crap out there that everyone see something they like.

 

[Perishiko]

So lot's of us want character-driven RPG combat. Otherwise known as TB, clusterfuck-friendly, boring, bland, "not even a mother fucking game".

Also, lot's of us want true action-RPG combat. Where player and character skill blend - so that connecting or dodging is up to the player and damage is affected by stats and gear. Skills unlock combos and other such. Otherwise known as twitchy, hard, exciting, immersive, and malt liquor.

Does anyone want the franken-zombie RPG-by-Action-RPG-by-Action bullshit that Oblivion is shaping up to be? Individual features are pulled from so many differnent points along the RPG -> Action spectrum that I find it hard to believe anyone could be happy with combat as a whole. I'm pretty sure it's a calculated move to throw enough random crap out there that everyone see something they like.

I want it... but at the same time, it doesn't matter much for me.

As for a reason, i posted a little bit just recently on this thread. It seems like players that choose my kind of class should be pleasantly surprised with a wonderfull game.

I plan on playing what i always like to play in games. A magic/bow character. Everything i use has been actually upgraded without bad things(Sure, a little drop in levitation, not too bad though.) I can now add poison to my bow. I can also zoom in a little and have a chance of knocking people down with my arrows. Doesn't sound too bad on my side. Lucky me.

 

[Solik]

It's hard to say. I only saw the combat on the E3 demo, which had the PC overpowered. It looked like previous TES combat with intelligent move choices and non-auto blocking. I don't see how it's such a monster.

 

[elander_]

Your ability to select and manipulate those skills created the depth and interest in the game. In Oblivion, there's far fewer skills, but skills do more than just plug into a formula (for the most part). There's skill perks at multiple levels, which do things like unlock new combat moves or allow for investing and such. So, the choice between skills matters a lot more, but there's not as many skills to choose from.

Skills that use formulas is common rpg design. The best rpgs were done this way and good design is what makes good games.

Investing in stores is a nice adition for a change that has nothing to do with more swords and combat moves.

Which is better is entirely personal preference. Obviously the best system is lots of skills where all of them are deep, but perfect games would require near-infinite development time, and over-ambition leads to buggy Daggerfalls :p

You just have to play a classic rpg (not a mix) to see how people can do much better without needing a huge budget like Oblivion and 4 years of development.

Sure nobody cares if Oblivion will be just an action/rpg with a selection of both action and rpg elements. Daggerfall was also an action/rpg but the extra skills it had really added more deep to the game. Perks are a way to overcome these limitations but it still doens't replace the lost of core skills like climbing and languages which provide non-combat gameplay and should have been better developed.

It's abvious that the Oblivion devs will allways put things like soil erosion and patrick stewart voice cast as "essential" game features in detriment of rpg features. There is a line they have drawn about how much an rpg Oblivion will be and they will stick to it because they want to get the return for the money invested in producing Oblivion. This is a mass market game that tries to be enjoyable for everyone without focusing too much on a single aspect.

Edit: Except combat and graphics that is.

 

[obediah]

I plan on playing what i always like to play in games. A magic/bow character. Everything i use has been actually upgraded without bad things(Sure, a little drop in levitation, not too bad though.) I can now add poison to my bow. I can also zoom in a little and have a chance of knocking people down with my arrows. Doesn't sound too bad on my side. Lucky me.

Sounds good, I hope it works out for you.

I've always liked playing the archer/sniper. Even further off topic - One of the things I actually respected about Fable was that I totally couldn't pull the archer off. I'd run into 10 bandits with axes, pull out my bow, and they'd charge and hack me to shit while I hopeless msahed things trying to shoot back. Then I'd switch to a melee weapon and clean them up easy-peasy. It wasn't what I wanted, but at least it felt right.

 

[Foamhead]

People have the...and I know that this is unFUCKing believable, but people actually have the RIGHT to their own enjoyment, and don't have to justify it to you or anyone else.

Then what the fuck is your stupid ass doing here justifying it?

You know who the real losers are? Fucking RPG/PC snobs like yourself who think that they are so far above everyone else that they get to dictate what is fun and what isn't.

Dictate? Did someone told you to cancel your pre-order? Btw, real losers are those who can't take and accept any form of criticism aimed at what they worship. "Oblivion is holy and perfect, and I must carry my idiotic crusade anywhere where different opinions still exist"

As unreal as it may seem, people have different tastes in games and RPG's just like any other form of entertainment.

Exactly. So respect ours and fuck off.

And holy shit...get this,some people don't even like rpgs at all!

No, we don't. I admit. We hate RPGs. Will you leave now, after you cleverly forced this confession out of me?

I am not reciting some episode of Sliders or the Twilight Zone...people in this very plane of existance have tastes that are totally the opposite of your own.

Yes. Intelligence vs Stupidity. No, son, you are not on the side of the Intelligence.

Get a life.

Same applies.

Someone here suffers from "I didn't actually read the post" syndrome. I don't like the Elder Scrolls either, I just don't shit my fucking pants when someone else does like you obviously do. Unfortunately when you finally get around to moving out of your parents basement one of these decades you will learn that the world is full of people who like different things. You can't provide evidence for "this sucks" and "this is good" because opinions can't be qualified. It's unfortunate that kids like you are allowed access to public forums before you learn that just because you are incapable of understanding why someone may like something you hate does not mean you know something they don't or that they are mentally inferior to you.

The vibe I am getting is there are two type of rpg fans, those who like Fallout and those who like things besides Fallout. The hardcore Fallout fans pretend that they like "quality Rpgs" but in reality they only like Fallout and will never like or say anything positive about any game that is not an exact clone. They think every single game should be played from a 3/4 isometric view, must have turn based combat, must have dialogue trees and so on and so fourth. Well guess what, your tastes are not the only tastes that matter and you may as well not buy games anymore because no one is going to make a game just for you unless you wanna pay for it.

And for the record, here is the definition of a fanboy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fanboy

 

[funkbutter]

I guess i haven't heard much about the combat. I heard it just dropped the dice rolls for the chance of hitting. As far as i knew there were automatic "neck strikes" that would cause paralyzing at high levels, but other then that...?

Can you clarify what you mean?

Beth has mentioned that you now need to hold down the "block" key at the right time to "block" attacks and you can play around with keys to execute combos and other such fluffy twitchy stuff, which, frankly, is unneccessary in my opinion.

I agree that Morrowind's combat was grossly lacking and improvements need to be made, but these improvements seem largely by and by superficial.

I won't pass critical judgement on it until I've played the game itself, of course, but that's my foresight based on what I've heard and what the devs have said on the subject, which, keep in mind, is very little.

So you would rather right click the enemy and let your character beat him down for you, and hope that you block enough and crit enough?

I don't think that lodging the twitchier combat as a complaint is valid. The points you've made about the sheisty dialogue and meaningless choices in Morrowind are. We know the dialogue will carry over to Ob, but we don't know about the meaningless choices.

Maybe I've never played a game with meaningfull choices, could you cite an example of a meaningfull choice from another game you've played such as Arcanum, which you mentioned earlier so I have a frame of reference please?

 

[whitemithrandir]

Maybe I've never played a game with meaningfull choices, could you cite an example of a meaningfull choice from another game you've played such as Arcanum, which you mentioned earlier so I have a frame of reference please?

I'll do you one better: I'll cite you two choices your character can make, one detailing moral consequence and the other, game consequence:

In Planescape: Torment, you meet an old and decrepit man, who misses his daughter very very much. He asks you to find his daughter and tell him how she's been. Should you take the quest, you'll find that his daughter has become a prostitute and living a morally degrading life. You return to the old man, and he asks with great anticipation what news you've brought.

You can:

A. Lie and tell him you never found his daughter
B. Lie and tell him his daughter is doing just fine
C. Tell the truth about his daughter.

Depending on which choice you picked, the old man will react in a very emotionally impacting manner, illustrating consequences of a moral decision.

Another decision in Planescape: Torment comes when you come down to the pillar of skulls in baator. You may ask the pillar one question which it must answer, but to do so, you must sacrifice something of your own, be it your party members, a permanent portion of yourself (denoted by a heavy permanent stat and hp loss), or an item of great power. Depending on what choice you make, the gameplay becomes heavily altered changed for the rest of the game. (The powerful item isn't something silly like a sword or anything, but an item which lets you access a large part of the gameworld).

Yet another decision in Planescape: Torment comes when you meet a cult of undead who worship the silent king. If you should choose to investigate, you'll find out that their silent king, is, in fact, dead, and you have the choice of taking the place of this demogogue. Should you choose to do so, it counts as an alternate ending of the game. This is a good example of a decision that impacts plot.

Morrowind had no choices of this sort.

 

[whitemithrandir]

Someone here suffers from "I didn't actually read the post" syndrome. I don't like the Elder Scrolls either, I just don't shit my fucking pants when someone else does like you obviously do. Unfortunately when you finally get around to moving out of your parents basement one of these decades you will learn that the world is full of people who like different things. You can't provide evidence for "this sucks" and "this is good" because opinions can't be qualified. It's unfortunate that kids like you are allowed access to public forums before you learn that just because you are incapable of understanding why someone may like something you hate does not mean you know something they don't or that they are mentally inferior to you.

What a fucking load of bullshit. Totally pointless, totally off the fucking topic, and totally counts as a really really shitty attempt at insult. We here at the RPG Codex would kindly appreciate it if you DON'T RANT your insults and instead deliver them in a witty and intelligent manner. Thank you very much, motherfucker.

The vibe I am getting is there are two type of rpg fans, those who like Fallout and those who like things besides Fallout. The hardcore Fallout fans pretend that they like "quality Rpgs" but in reality they only like Fallout and will never like or say anything positive about any game that is not an exact clone. They think every single game should be played from a 3/4 isometric view, must have turn based combat, must have dialogue trees and so on and so fourth. Well guess what, your tastes are not the only tastes that matter and you may as well not buy games anymore because no one is going to make a game just for you unless you wanna pay for it.

Here comes the Codex Hive Mind theory bullshit again. Hey, GET A CLUE, MORON: NOT EVERYONE in the Codex shares the same opinions on which games are good and which games are not, there are just statistically predictable trends, such as:

Fallout is a good game.
Planescape: Torment is a good game.
Arcanum is a good game.
Daggerfall is a good game.
Morrowind is a piece of shit.
NWN is a piece of shit (Sorry Volourn)
Oblivion is looking to be a piece of shit.

Get your facts straight. Plenty of reasons have been posted here defending every single one of those decisions so take your fucking eyeballs out, polish them real nice, and READ.

 

[Solik]

The only one of those three things you mentioned about Planescape that seemed remotely interesting was the sacrifice thing. The first one just means, pick an option and read what some guy wrote in as what happens. Glorified Choose Your Own Adventure; nothing more, nothing less. Those moral choices almost always feel like some egotistical game writer preaching to me, too, if I happen to make the choice that he thinks is morally wrong while I think it's the best choice.

While the sacrifice choice is a fun choice, it's also the kind that would seriously piss me off; it basically forces extra play-throughs, because that sounds like it has major impacts on the game flow. And if you find out an hour later you made a choice that's resulting in you having less fun, and you saved over your game before that choice... you're just screwed. Bad game design.

 

[whitemithrandir]

The only one of those three things you mentioned about Planescape that seemed remotely interesting was the sacrifice thing. The first one just means, pick an option and read what some guy wrote in as what happens. Glorified Choose Your Own Adventure; nothing more, nothing less. Those moral choices almost always feel like some egotistical game writer preaching to me, too, if I happen to make the choice that he thinks is morally wrong while I think it's the best choice.

I disagree. I have no problem with subtle morally toned quest choices like the mutlitude offered in Planescape, because they were very well written, and not shoved down your throw in huge spoonfuls like in KOTOR or KOTOR II.

Also, making moral choices in Planescape: Torment altered your alignment. Telling the truth makes you more lawful, and lying, more chaotic, which also impacts the flow of the rest of the game, but that's not what I'm trying to illustrate.

While the sacrifice choice is a fun choice, it's also the kind that would seriously piss me off; it basically forces extra play-throughs, because that sounds like it has major impacts on the game flow. And if you find out an hour later you made a choice that's resulting in you having less fun, and you saved over your game before that choice... you're just screwed. Bad game design.

Not really bad game design. Since combat isn't a major part of Planescape: Torment, your gameplay isn't hampered by the choice you make at that particular instance; but the plot and general progression of the game will be.

 

[Tintin]

Here comes the Codex Hive Mind theory bullshit again. Hey, GET A CLUE, MORON: NOT EVERYONE in the Codex shares the same opinions on which games are good and which games are not, there are just statistically predictable trends, such as:

That's not true, at least it's not as little as that. You're seriously kidding yoursef if you haven't seen the new people who come here, then suddenly turn into patrick-stewart joking, oblivion hating, fallout loving, cynically replying, etc, clones.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't like the Elder Scrolls either, I just don't shit my fucking pants when someone else does like you obviously do.

Obviously do? Did you miss my conversation with Ghan a few posts back?

Unfortunately when you finally get around to moving out of your parents basement one of these decades you will learn that the world is full of people who like different things. You can't provide evidence for "this sucks" and "this is good" because opinions can't be qualified. It's unfortunate that kids like you are allowed access to public forums before you learn that just because you are incapable of understanding why someone may like something you hate does not mean you know something they don't or that they are mentally inferior to you.

It's a great, awesome, and very moving speech. Now apply it to yourself and be on your way. Or talk about something else where your hypocrisy is less obvious.

The vibe I am getting is there are two type of rpg fans, those who like Fallout and those who like things besides Fallout.

That's because you can't read. Please complain to your parents or your teacher. The fuckers are responsible for your education, you know.

The hardcore Fallout fans pretend that they like "quality Rpgs" but in reality they only like Fallout and will never like or say anything positive about any game that is not an exact clone. They think every single game should be played from a 3/4 isometric view, must have turn based combat, must have dialogue trees and so on and so fourth.

Yes, that's why I liked Daggerfall so much. Got anything else to say or you are done?

 

[Drakron]

Why when everytime I read the word "having less fun" I connect to "not able to PWN everything in range"?

 

[whitemithrandir]

Here comes the Codex Hive Mind theory bullshit again. Hey, GET A CLUE, MORON: NOT EVERYONE in the Codex shares the same opinions on which games are good and which games are not, there are just statistically predictable trends, such as:

That's not true, at least it's not as little as that. You're seriously kidding yoursef if you haven't seen the new people who come here, then suddenly turn into patrick-stewart joking, oblivion hating, fallout loving, cynically replying, etc, clones.

It's not our fault these new cattle are weak minded.

 

[Solik]

Having not played Planescape, I'm in no position to judge the quality of its moral judgments; I'm just speaking in general terms from a myriad of games. All too often, the game designer uses the excuse of "moral choice" to promote his own moral or ethical philosophy and show how bad all the others are.

But then, it's the Japanese who are most guilty of that, really.

 

[whitemithrandir]

Having not played Planescape, I'm in no position to judge the quality of its moral judgments;

You should

I'm just speaking in general terms from a myriad of games. All too often, the game designer uses the excuse of "moral choice" to promote his own moral or ethical philosophy and show how bad all the others are.

Which games would those be? The only games which moral choices were a bit too shovey lovey down my throaty were the KOTOR games. (I haven't played Cleve Blakemore's game yet, so I might just eat these words).

But then, it's the Japanese who are most guilty of that, really.

The only JRPG I've played was FF7. While it was a good storytelling slideshow, it wasn't a very good RPG.

 

[Drakron]

Thats shows ... Planescape have no morality outside the good/evil and law/chaos axis that is part of the setting.

The story is "you wake and up and dont remenber a thing ... and you cannot die either", the purpose of the game is finding who we are and why we cannot die as we see evidence of actions done by us in the past.

Fable is far worst with its good/evil paths that are so fucking obvious and un-rewarding (there is no point in being good or evil), if you bitch about JRPGs at least they try to show a point, unlike most WRPGs that are "kill and loot" without meaning beyond the usual good/evil christian morality.

 

[funkbutter]

Maybe I've never played a game with meaningfull choices, could you cite an example of a meaningfull choice from another game you've played such as Arcanum, which you mentioned earlier so I have a frame of reference please?

I'll do you one better: I'll cite you two choices your character can make, one detailing moral consequence and the other, game consequence:

In Planescape: Torment, you meet an old and decrepit man, who misses his daughter very very much. He asks you to find his daughter and tell him how she's been. Should you take the quest, you'll find that his daughter has become a prostitute and living a morally degrading life. You return to the old man, and he asks with great anticipation what news you've brought.

You can:

A. Lie and tell him you never found his daughter
B. Lie and tell him his daughter is doing just fine
C. Tell the truth about his daughter.

Depending on which choice you picked, the old man will react in a very emotionally impacting manner, illustrating consequences of a moral decision.

Another decision in Planescape: Torment comes when you come down to the pillar of skulls in baator. You may ask the pillar one question which it must answer, but to do so, you must sacrifice something of your own, be it your party members, a permanent portion of yourself (denoted by a heavy permanent stat and hp loss), or an item of great power. Depending on what choice you make, the gameplay becomes heavily altered changed for the rest of the game. (The powerful item isn't something silly like a sword or anything, but an item which lets you access a large part of the gameworld).

Yet another decision in Planescape: Torment comes when you meet a cult of undead who worship the silent king. If you should choose to investigate, you'll find out that their silent king, is, in fact, dead, and you have the choice of taking the place of this demogogue. Should you choose to do so, it counts as an alternate ending of the game. This is a good example of a decision that impacts plot.

Morrowind had no choices of this sort.

These examples sound a lot like the Baldur's Gate series, by, you said it BIOWARE. Some people think Bioware sucks, and a lot of their games (NWN, IWD) do in fact suck; BG stands out though. And you're right, morrowind did lack these types of things.

Morrowind has no dialogue trees, your character never acutally says anythhing, just like in Ob. Hopefully though, Ob will still have major choices to make, and things like becoming the grandmaster of the mages guild will actually mean something.

The example from Planescape: Tournament where you must choose something to sacrafice is strait out of the final conflict in Baldur's Gate: SOA. You have to open a series of portal doors to retrieve a tear from each one. If I remember correctly there were 7 doors each named after the seven deadly sins and each required you to make a choice. One of them told you a story and asked how you would react in the situation given and depending upon how you answered, your alignment was modified, you gained stat boosts, or lost stats. Another one had a Genie gaurding it. The genie had a sword with him that was, *rediculously* powerfull. The only way the genie could be freed was if someone offered him the sword as a gift, allowing him to unlock the bracers that bound him to the mortal plane. You had to have the bracers to open the door to get the tear. You could either give him the sword, freeing him, and he would give you his bracers but you would lose the sword, or you could pop him with it, loot the bracers from his dead etheral body, and open the door. Depending on what you did your alignment was modified. There was another door involving sacrafice of either yourself (Stats) or a friend - friend died and couldn't be resurrected... Yada yada yada, I loved that game.

Another example is that at one point in the game, your heritage as being one of the sons of Bhaal, lord of destruction or murder or somesuch, manifested itself and you transformed into a Tanar'Ris, a badass demon of asskickery. From that point on you can change into the "Slayer" once per day, at the cost of turning evil and thereby causing good aligned people/party members to shun you, so you couldn't get quests from good people or group with good people but you gained access to a lot of evil quests. Plus, if you were evil, the vampire quest line had an entire different spin too it involving you shacking up with the vampire queen instead of beheading her and staking the shit out of her. And I mean with a wooden stake.

 

[Drakron]

God damn it, IWD was done by Black Isle and its a fine game on my book.