Torment So is Tides of Numenera actually worth a damn?

[fantadomat]

Too much text, and unlike PS:T the text exist for the sake of text. Reducing word count by 2/3 would make it bearable, maybe.

The worst thing is that the text is pointless and empty of meaning.

 

[ilitarist]

I don't remember Arcanum having such boring sleep-inducing walls of text as seen in biowarian desecendents like NU Shadowrun, but I can be wrong. Maybe Arcanum has such a good exploration gameplay (in parts) or simply to the point dialogue with so much C&C that I didn't feel the boredom. Idem for Gothic and Deus Ex.

Damn, I've played that russian plague simulation (what its name? the one that is getting a remake) and while it's full of dialogue, it never bored me. Nor felt like a book in electronic form like NU Shadowrun feels.

You're talking about Pathologic (or Mor. Utopia in Russian). Indeed, it had that magical realism about it.

While I hated some of Shadowrun's attempts to feed me life stories of minor NPCs it had decent gameplay all the way through. And stories where actually fun.

TToN had OK gameplay for the first hour or so. You had a limited "mana" or whatever it was called. You used it for everything - persuasion, stealing, noticing things and fighting. You could restore it with consumables and resting. Resting costs money and advances some quests so you don't want to rest as much. And it feels like a breeze of fresh air. Now you're ok with failing some interactions, because most of them are not important and you save "mana" for important ones.

However starting from mid-game resting is free, there's no reprecussions for resting, your base stats allow you specialize your guys so you almost never even have to use mana, and you have much more mana than before. *Everything* became trivial except combat and there's very little combat in the game.

And those walls of text. Oh god. They tell obvious things with 10 times as much words as needed. All the NPCs tell you the same things - but it's not like Morrowind because they tell you those things in a slightly different way. At least in Morrowind you saw you won't get anything interesting from the NPC.

 

[ilitarist]

Also in some ways Pillars of Eternity is better sequel to Planescape.

It lets you define your character through that character system. TToN has tides which do fucking nothing at all. There's a big cosmogonic mystery to solve in PoE (and the second one is in the expansion) and it's not as dumb as the cop-out you get in TToN. There's enigmatic Nemesis that works more or less OK in TToN - however PoE villain remains dignified and interesting even on his deathbed while Numenera villain does not, both of them. Both games have interesting subversions of standard fantasy world - PoE tries to be more realistic and pseudohistorical having a rich lore - while TToN goes batshit insane and incomprehensible, it's a kitchensink of cheap tropes, it's a world where completely *everything* is possible and thus nothing is interesting. Original Planescape was closer to this than to PoE "historical" fantasy but it knew its limits. PoE also has memories (they're even interesting enough for me to remember some 2 years later while TToN is blank just a few months later) and a big question - which, unlike TToN one, has some significance IRL.

And finally PoE has too much dialogues too but it's closer to Planescape than to TToN.

 

[Iznaliu]

It lets you define your character through that character system

PS:T arguably doesn't really do that, depending on what you mean by "defining your character through that character system".

 

[Lady_Error]

It's not as bad as everyone claims, but could have been much better.

- Too much filler text
- Bland companions for the most part
- Too short and the playthroughs are not different enough to replay it IMO

 

[2house2fly]

I own the game but can't really be bothered to get around to it. I want to build a character specifically around combat stats knowing there's maybe a dozen combat encounters in the whole game just to see how badly that fucks me over in the dialogue department.

 

[Florian Gheorghe]

I own the game but can't really be bothered to get around to it. I want to build a character specifically around combat stats knowing there's maybe a dozen combat encounters in the whole game just to see how badly that fucks me over in the dialogue department.

There is a lot of combat in the game, but you need to experiment a little.
I do get it that you guys hate the game because it has the Torment name, but I do think that everyone should give it at least a play. I don't own a lot of games because I don't have that much time to play them but TToN is one of them and I invested over 200 hours in it. And I still consider it to be the best game InXile did, it still has bugs sure, but for me, it's far better then Divinity : Original Sin 1 or 2. Why? Because I really hate in D:OS that you need to follow a certain path in order to advance because the enemy will be a lot more leveled up them you ( It's not that opened when you can't really go where you want). In TToN I can focus on how to resolve things different then the other play.
What I want to say in the end is that people that really played TToN reached the conclusion that is has its moments, it could have been much better but it's not trash.
I really like that Larian did voiced every line in D:OS2 , that is the only thing that makes me play the game from time to time ( reading a lot on the screen is not recommended for my stupid eyes) but it's a chore to play each time because of the stupid journal that don't help that much.
In TToN I don't have to think about the enemy being to damn hard to beat, I can focus on the story and different decisions, and there are a ton of those to be made!

 

[fantadomat]

It's not as bad as everyone claims, but could have been much better.

- Too much filler text
- Bland companions for the most part
- Too short and the playthroughs are not different enough to replay it IMO

The game is the avatar of mediocrity. Even the codex couldn't be bothered to get angry at the game. To hate it is a waste of time and passion.

 

[Lady_Error]

The game is the avatar of mediocrity.

It's still better than 90% of the mainstream crap out there. At least it offers true C&C and some interesting ideas.

 

[Turjan]

Whether you like the game or not depends very much on your tolerance for purple prose and NPCs and objects being lore dispensers. Most of that lore doesn't matter. Others already made it clear that there is too much of this, including many repetitions, which make sure you don't miss any info snippets by telling you the same thing a tenth time. On the other hand, I actually liked the meres (basically text adventures), which probably helped.

The setting is okay, though not overly exciting. The locations vary from pretty good to boring. If what you enjoy about games most is the fights, forget about it. The number of fights will vary vastly according to your play style, but there are large stretches of the game where there will be hardly any. The point that many of the fights are avoidable is true, but that should normally not be an issue during a first playthrough, unless you read spoilers on the internet or reload umpteen times. Personally, I didn't mind that, as fights in this game take long and are not very exciting.

Don't take any statement like "there are no fights" literally. While you can avoid pretty much most of the fights, there's one fight where your PC has to get through without any companions, and then you better have something on your character to pull his weight.

I'm sure you can see most of what the game has to offer in one playthrough. This would require reloads though. Of course, you can't really experience all NPCs in one playthrough. As some NPC story arcs may mean they are dead weights for a while , and as NPCs only develop in your party (stats and story arc), you need at least 2 playthroughs for this purpose alone. Technically, you can swap them in for story purposes, too, but that again needs you to have read spoilers.

In the second half of the game, you basically win all challenges. A few of them are fun to figure out nevertheless.

In my opinion, most games have problems with their endings, and this one is no exception. It's worse than usual. It tries in some way to mimic PST, but it doesn't work. You basically have only bad options. I suppose this was meant to be a "difficult" decision, but it's not fun in any way. The game fails at making sure you have some personal responsibility here (you may or may not), and it's always bad to have to make a decision based on what you are rather than what you did (player input). Of course, there's always the "screw the world" option, and if you don't like the world anyway, you will probably be okay with that one. Oh, and your choice should mechanically match your personality (dominant tide(s)) in some way.

All in all, I liked the game enough that I didn't feel any regret to have backed it. I didn't really pay much attention to the original promises, either, so the cut content was more or less something I heard of the first time when I heard it got cut, so there was not much reason to get disappointed for me. I didn't believe that "new PST" talk anyway (call me jaded), so I had no expectations to be crushed. I liked PoE better though.

A good indicator whether you like the game or not is playing through or watching the very first intro sequence. If that one infuriates you, you better play something else.

 

[fantadomat]

The game is the avatar of mediocrity.

It's still better than 90% of the mainstream crap out there. At least it offers true C&C and some interesting ideas.

Yeah bug i don't play that 90%....frequently. The game was meh,i finish it and i didn't hate it or felt that it is a waste of bandwidth. I wouldn't have liked it if i was a backer.

 

[Iznaliu]

At least it offers true C&C

C&C needs to be worth making, as the player needs to be interested enough in the relevant plot points. T:ToN doesn't do too well with this from what I've heard, making it the ultimate example that C&C is the means to an end, not an end in itself.

 

[Grape_You_In_the_Mouth]

For the story and roleplayability, yep.

 

[GrainWetski]

I liked it enough to finish it, and I'm not even a huge fan of the original PS:Torment.

Exactly.

 

[ilitarist]

At least it offers true C&C and some interesting ideas.

What's the C&C in Torment?

The only choices I remember was the way you're dealing with Erritis and the final decision. Apart from that it either looked like there are no noticeable conseqences or the choice was between progressing and not progressing. Like helping that little girl to come home had interesting consequences but it wasn't like there was choice in helping her - not helping her meant I want to rush through the game and don't care about the world at all. Same with quest with reincarnating lady. Same with quest with the serial killer.

 

[Turjan]

At least it offers true C&C and some interesting ideas.

What's the C&C in Torment?

The only choices I remember was the way you're dealing with Erritis and the final decision. Apart from that it either looked like there are no noticeable conseqences or the choice was between progressing and not progressing. Like helping that little girl to come home had interesting consequences but it wasn't like there was choice in helping her - not helping her meant I want to rush through the game and don't care about the world at all. Same with quest with reincarnating lady. Same with quest with the serial killer.

What consequences do you expect? Large branching story arcs? Is losing a party member that you probably leveled several times and maybe bought nontransferable equipment for not a consequence? That the game is too easy doesn't change a thing about the point that these are examples for reactivity. It just means the game is in need of some balancing.

Another example that immediately comes to mind is the decision how you open gates in the Bloom. The number of fights you have to go through differs vastly depending on how you approach that. In principle you could list all the instances where you have an option to avoid fights.

 

[ilitarist]

What consequences do you expect? Large branching story arcs? Is losing a party member that you probably leveled several times and maybe bought nontransferable equipment for not a consequence? That the game is too easy doesn't change a thing about the point that these are examples for reactivity. It just means the game is in need of some balancing.

Another example that immediately comes to mind is the decision how you open gates in the Bloom. The number of fights you have to go through differs vastly depending on how you approach that. In principle you could list all the instances where you have an option to avoid fights.

Ah yes, opening gates in the Bloom was OK one.

What do I want? Decisions that I would care about. The ones that make you think even if choices are obvious. In the last couple of years only Tyranny had presented me with interesting choices. Maybe also Witcher 3 Not France expansion and Banner Saga. There were also several interesting ones in Mass Effect Andromeda - certainly more than in TToN, and recent BioWare is known for its forced moral dillemas (Dragon Age Inquisition was bad in that regard).

 

[ilitarist]

PS:T arguably doesn't really do that, depending on what you mean by "defining your character through that character system".

I really liked how PS:T used D&D alignment system. It felt like the game tells you who you are. Later implementations tend to be more binary and obvious. And they come to odds with gameplay. E.g. in other D&D games many classes have aligment limits, most obviously Paladins. I remember getting into a drinking contest in Temple of Elemental Evil and having to pay for indulgince to become a functional Paladin again. I guess it's OK but then it makes for a game about a very specific role you play, you don't experience dillemas but try to figure out the right answer for your characters. Or Mass Effect 1/2 which was just evil: you have some interesting choices and problems to solve but they're always clearly good/evil, or rather Star Trek good/bad Hollywood cop good. And if you try to judge every occasion on its own you suffer because you need a specific number of moral points to unlock persuasion options. So you have to be very consistent in your approach. Might as well have a choice in the beginning and never bother again. Thankfully they turned it back in ME3 and MEA has no social skill at all, just "personality" which seems to affect flow of some dialogues but doesn't change much... And it's still more noticeable than TToN tides.

Or how I hate their implementation of morality, those tides that affect nothing at all. And in-universe they're regarded as the most important thing ever. Arrgh! Arrgh!

 

[Luckmann]

So is Tides of Numenera actually worth a damn?

No.

 

[Somberlain]

It's better than nothing.

Spoiler

Or is it?

 

[fantadomat]

It's better than nothing.

Spoiler

Or is it?

Only if you have a backlog of good rpg games.Once the game finishes you can enjoy the nostalgia for the good old games.

 

[Iznaliu]

And if you try to judge every occasion on its own you suffer because you need a specific number of moral points to unlock persuasion options

At least that's not as bad as KOTOR 2 needing arbitrary morality points to unlock prestige classes.

The only choices I remember was the way you're dealing with Erritis and the final decision. Apart from that it either looked like there are no noticeable conseqences or the choice was between progressing and not progressing

I believe one of the special gimmicks of T:ToN was that failing gave you different options; try failing some more (you already failed by playing the game in the first place)

 

[ilitarist]

In KotOR 2 it makes perfect sense for you to strife to be either good Jedi or good Sith. Normal person would be a shit Jedi and shit Sith. But IRL game worthy Shepard would look like a madman who regards every issue in the same way, either everything makes him angry or nothing does.

 

[Iznaliu]

In KotOR 2 it makes perfect sense for you to strife to be either good Jedi or good Sith. Normal person would be a shit Jedi and shit Sith. But IRL game worthy Shepard would look like a madman who regards every issue in the same way, either everything makes him angry or nothing does.

The issue is that leaves no room for effective decision-making; you always pick the decision that is either totally selfish or totally selfless; they might of as well just made the decisions for you.

 

[Commissar Draco]

In KotOR 2 it makes perfect sense for you to strife to be either good Jedi or good Sith. Normal person would be a shit Jedi and shit Sith. But IRL game worthy Shepard would look like a madman who regards every issue in the same way, either everything makes him angry or nothing does.

The issue is that leaves no room for effective decision-making; you always pick the decision that is either totally selfish or totally selfless; they might of as well just made the decisions for you.

You can pick neutral answers or even balance them and RP game as grey/fallen Yedi instead; choices and consequences in this case not being allowed to take YEDI/SITH prestige classes.