SoZ - win or fail?

[Deleted member 7219]

The NWN2 OC is ridiculously linear, though, and how many instances of real C&C are there?

Maybe you should play the game instead of asking stupid questions.

 

[Radisshu]

The NWN2 OC is ridiculously linear, though, and how many instances of real C&C are there?

Maybe you should play the game instead of asking stupid questions.

Maybe you should shut the fuck up. I've played the game several times, and I've yet to encounter deeper C&C than BG2 has.

 

[MetalCraze]

Well you can choose between good guys and bad guys in Neverwinter (aka Neverwinter guards and thiefs) which won't matter a shit because you will go to trial anyway, and trial won't matter a shit because you will have to fight anyway and then you will get a fortress managing which won't matter a shit because you will have to fight same hordes of enemies in the end anyway.
NWN2 OC was the reason why Obsidian was called lesser Bioware up until MotB came out.
Also Obsidian stays true to the rule that every second Obsidian's game is shit. So maybe this means that AP will be a good game.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Or you just could learn to read you know. Anyway - using the predictable reply when there are no arguments, aye?

Arguments towards what? One sentence where you ask if you should quote Volourn?

Also, I don't need to learn to read. I'd need to learn some psychic abilities to go inside your illiterate head and find out what your gibberish actually means.

Holy crap! You get exp for living through boring fights. That surely makes them more interesting - just like in mmorpgs.

And I'm the one who needs to learn to read? 'Worthwhile's meaning is not the same as 'interesting's, cockatrice.

Or actually being able to face something that isn't generic exp meat. But good combat design is not what we here at Obsidian do well.

So you would want a lot of well thought out, complicated, and god knows what else RANDOM encounters? They are not called "random" just for the fuck of it.

So why not make them much less frequent? It could be just the same thing. Instead of avoiding them because they are boring.

No, it would not be the same bloody thing. I said numerous times before that the number of encounters should be decreased, you stupid piece of shit - maybe you'd finally note it if your reading comprehension wasn't be at the point of an orangutan - but at the same time the evasion mechanics should be kept.

There is nothing except grinding in those encounters?

And how is 'grinding' (which is, at the roots, basically just killing stuff) different to 'flexing combat skills'? 'Grinding' is used to talk about something in atrociously big amounts, yes, but the 'grinding' is easily avoidable, which I'll repeat for the... oh wait, I already lost count how many times I said that.

holy crap you can help people for no visible result or find useless loot. That's some fun there.

Ok, I understand. No matter what the overland map would feature, you'd hate it anyway.

So what makes SoZ encounters any different?

You are not assaulted by monsters that die in one hit and at the same time can't land a single one on you?

Yes - not too many. I think you nearly got it.

So, according to your grand logic, there should be a limited number of global encounters, that eventually ends when you find them all or there should be a small number of 'special' encounters that would get old soon, because you'd be stumbling upon the same mob of goblins whose clan you'd threaten to kill again and again.

In BG your characters at least could die. Like forever. And not be resurrected via retarded coin of life if you don't have cleric (alive) in the middle of the battle.

In Torment you can get 'raise dead' usable 3 times a day right at the start in the Mortuary. What a fucking stupid game.

i m not sure what your stance on the NWN2 OC is but i personally DID enjoy it for what it was ( no great, but an okay game) - a lot of people however saw it as the next big crime since oblivion....

Well, I approached the OC hoping that it would be better than nwn1 (because that's what all the reviews by that time were saying, while nwn1 bored me, and I just stopped playing around the moment when Aribeth turns evil I think), but I got to the uh... orc caves? I think and quitted, because it was the same boring hackfest like nwn1. I dunno, maybe the OC gets better later, but the parts I played didn't amuse me at all. Although I'm definitely not 'hating' it and calling a crime against humanity

i m really interested in reading why SoZ deserves to be cRPG 2008

And what else came out in 2008 that was worthwhile?

given in all things the codex likes ( choices & consequences, important of non-combat skills, atmospheric world, etc. etc ) SoZ barely matches or is even inferior to the OCs of both NWN games.

SoZ has worse importance of non-combat skills and a less atmospheric world than nwn1? I think the only 'skill checks' I found in nwn1 were some speech skills (intimidate, diplomacy etc) thrown somewhere in between the absolutely fucking dull fights. Agree in the c&c department though, the consequences of actions I found so far are minour to say the least, but then again, Betrayal at Krondor is in my top 3 best RPGs ever list, and it doesn't have any c&c. And as for atmospheric world, well, the only thing I can remember from the world in nwn1 were some corridors and the burning city of Neverwinter.

the only things i could come up is that SoZ gives you a full party instead of being forced to party with fucktards and that instead of big boring dungeons full of trash combat & trash loot .... you get an overland with plenty of tiny boring dungeons full of trash combat & trash loot.

Well, the full party is a huge plus for me. I thought I'm gonna eat my shoes thanks to the absolutely fucking annoying creature named "Neeshka" in nwn2. As for the dungeons, well, many of them kind of scream "PLEASE DEVELOP ME FURTHER" and I wish at least some of them were multileveled, but I like exploration in my RPGs, and just the fact that there are a lot of the locations to stumble upon and most of them have actually something unique to it, even though they are relatively small, also gives positive points in my book.

 

[racofer]

Still waiting for a definition of "SoZ".

 

[Deleted member 7219]

Still waiting for a definition of "SoZ".

Define "definition".

 

[racofer]

Define "define".

 

[Radisshu]

Well you can choose between good guys and bad guys in Neverwinter (aka Neverwinter guards and thiefs) which won't matter a shit because you will go to trial anyway, and trial won't matter a shit because you will have to fight anyway and then you will get a fortress managing which won't matter a shit because you will have to fight same hordes of enemies in the end anyway.

Yeah, exactly. Pretty much the only things in NW2 that actually comes back to bite you in the end are your influence scores. And that only affects who joins up with you at the end fight, unless you choose the patented Evil Option.

BG2 has tons of C&C in the side quests, and several ways that you can fuck up completely, at least with the NPC quests.

 

[MetalCraze]

I'd need to learn some psychic abilities [...]

This is called intelligence.

And I'm the one who needs to learn to read? 'Worthwhile's meaning is not the same as 'interesting's, cockatrice.

Worthwhile means not useless and boring, which can't be said about SoZ.

So you would want a lot of well thought out, complicated, and god knows what else RANDOM encounters? They are not called "random" just for the fuck of it.

Troika managed to do that 11 years ago (also thanks to -normal- combat) and the number of encounters wasn't in the range of "spamming" no matter what your outdoorsman skill was. But who needs that shit today, right?

No, it would not be the same bloody thing. I said numerous times before that the number of encounters should be decreased, you stupid piece of shit - maybe you'd finally note it if your reading comprehension wasn't be at the point of an orangutan - but at the same time the evasion mechanics should be kept.

Oh so that was you who have said that number of encounters should be decreased numerous times and it was me who wrote you "you just suck at the gaem!!" as the answer? Damn what an unexpected plot twist.

And how is 'grinding' (which is, at the roots, basically just killing stuff) different to 'flexing combat skills'?

You know - like having an interesting combat where you need some skills instead of using your sorc as a bait for dumb NPCs which for some reason decide that mage must die first at any price and chase him while rangers and rogues make short work of them with their bows.
OK it isn't happening always, but enough times to notice.
And as a whole - the combat is just boring and terrible NWN2 way. Combat encounters are just copy-pasta.
But the worst thing is that I want to get anything out of it besides boring combat and useless loot - like f.e. fun - but I'm not getting anything.

Ok, I understand. No matter what the overland map would feature, you'd hate it anyway.

In BG2 combat encounters had some meaning to them. Like f.e. during the rest bandits could've attacked you and you even had some dialogues with them during which they could've wound or even kill one of your cohorts and you had to fight them unprepared. Encounters like this happened only once in BG2 but did the job - and if only SoZ had combat encounters with just some variety to them - they could've been so much better. And I would've liked such combat encounters. But I can't stand obvious copy-pasta.

You are not assaulted by monsters that die in one hit and at the same time can't land a single one on you?

Yes very noticeable difference.

So, according to your grand logic, there should be a limited number of global encounters, that eventually ends when you find them all or there should be a small number of 'special' encounters that would get old soon, because you'd be stumbling upon the same mob of goblins whose clan you'd threaten to kill again and again.

No according to my logic there should be much less combat encounters and enough number of "special" encounters all of which (with a good design) you won't see just in one playthrough (like it was in FO1/FO2). Can you say that you hated FO1/FO2 encounters and they were boring?

In Torment you can get 'raise dead' usable 3 times a day right at the start in the Mortuary. What a fucking stupid game.

Combat is the weakest part of Torment but Torment has everything else at a high level of quality and combat was not the main focus of the game. But it is in SoZ. And SoZ has weak storyline, poor dialogues that lead to the same responses and boring characters.
How will you fanboi-defend these things btw?

And what else came out in 2008 that was worthwhile?

And that was my point about SoZ (and FO3) that I wrote in the other thread. You just like it because you didn't have any enjoyable RPG for so long that any mediocrity will do. And this is the case with SoZ.

 

[Darth Roxor]

AAAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH *repeated head-to-desk*
^my reaction after reading more of Skyway's bollocks. I wonder why the fuck do I even keep responding to this senseless shit.

This is called intelligence.

Or lack thereof. I can imagine that only another retard like you could understand some of the stuff you post, just like cavemen communicated with 'ughs'.

Worthwhile means not useless and boring, which can't be said about SoZ.

And getting wagons of xp is suddenly useless? Makes sense.

Also, allow me to quote a lexicon definition of worthwhile, because apparently you're using words that you do not understand

Worthwhile - adjective. If something is worthwhile, it is important or useful or you gain something from it. Now, tell me where does it say that something worthwhile needs to be 'interesting'.

Oh so that was you who have said that number of encounters should be decreased numerous times and it was me who wrote you "you just suck at the gaem!!" as the answer? Damn what an unexpected plot twist.

Oh yes, I didn't say about decreasing the number of encounters. Never. No sir.

Two changes would need to be applied to the random encounters:

1. Making less of them (yes, in the current state there *are* too many of them, and I imagine that I'd be pretty frustrated without a ranger)

Yes, there are definitely too many encounters as a whole

I said numerous times before that the number of encounters should be decreased

Here you go, thrice in this very thread. :declineofreadingcomprehension:

In BG2 combat encounters had some meaning to them. Like f.e. during the rest bandits could've attacked you and you even had some dialogues with them during which they could've wound or even kill one of your cohorts and you had to fight them unprepared. Encounters like this happened only once in BG2 but did the job - and if only SoZ had combat encounters with just some variety to them - they could've been so much better. And I would've liked such combat encounters. But I can't stand obvious copy-pasta.

I don't remember having such an encounter a single time in BG2 and I played through it 3 or 4 times, but no matter. These are more 'scripted events' than 'random encounters', but yes, it wouldn't hurt SoZ to have them.
'Fight them unprepared' - because in soz you begin every random encounter with +10 to all saves, attack rolls, damage, skills and attributes, right?

Yes very noticeable difference.

Hmmm, let me see.
BG - you take one fighter and hack down the 'encounter', while the rest of the party chills in the shadow of a tree and plays poker.
SoZ - you actually have to use all party members, and some of the mobs require high level aoe spells to beat, just because of their sheer numbers. More often than not healing spells also need utilizing.

Yes, I think the difference is noticeable.

No according to my logic there should be much less combat encounters and enough number of "special" encounters all of which (with a good design) you won't see just in one playthrough (like it was in FO1/FO2). Can you say that you hated FO1/FO2 encounters and they were boring?

FO2 not, FO1 yes. FO1 encounters were as much 'bland and boring copypasta' as those of SoZ, FO2 was better in that regard because it featured the easter egg random encounters, but apart from that, all the rest was 'you encounter an enclave patrol/remnants of the Master's army/aliens/raiders/slavers/highwaymen' which mostly ended in exiting the map, because they were an absolute waste of time. And as for non-combat encounters? Wow, FO1 sure shines here. You can meet a family of refugees with no dialogues or use at all, or a travelling merchant who sells nuka-cola and flares. GREAT, ISN'T IT?

Combat is the weakest part of Torment but Torment has everything else at a high level of quality and combat was not the main focus of the game. But it is in SoZ. And SoZ has weak storyline, poor dialogues that lead to the same responses and boring characters.
How will you fanboi-defend these things btw?

So you say that Torment's combat sucked, but it was a story-driven game so it's ok, while SoZ's storyline and dialogues suck and it's very very bad for the game even though it's a combat/exploration oriented game? Everyone loves double standards.

And dialogue options that lead to the same responses is just blatant lies.

Also, I don't find the combat to be 'absolutely terrible'.

And that was my point about SoZ (and FO3) that I wrote in the other thread. You just like it because you didn't have any enjoyable RPG for so long that any mediocrity will do. And this is the case with SoZ.

Yeah, fo' sho'. I played through the Witcher, Betrayal at Krondor, Motb and Fallout 1 over the last 2-3 months. I totally didn't have any enjoyable RPGs to play and thus I need to swallow the mediocrity that is SoZ. I see much sense in your post yet again.

SoZ is GOTY for me, because it's the best thing to come out this year that I played. Witcher EE is only a patch (even if a big one, but still just a patch), even if it's better than SoZ, so it doesn't count. Didn't play FO3. King's Bounty I played only the demo, and even though I liked it, I didn't play it all to have a proper opinion. Can't think of any big rpgs to come out this year, thus SoZ takes the prize, because while being far from perfect, it's enjoyable to me.

 

[Jaesun]

Keep up the Good Fight Darth Roxor.

 

[Radisshu]

AAAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH *repeated head-to-desk*
^my reaction after reading more of Skyway's bollocks. I wonder why the fuck do I even keep responding to this senseless shit.

I'm on your side, Darth, I am, but I don't think arguing with him is going to do any good.

 

[thesheeep]

PLANE TICKETS

 

[Erebus]

Keep up the Good Fight Darth Roxor.

What, you mean someone other than these two is actually following this ridiculous "debate" going absolutely nowhere ?

 

[Kaiserin]

Oh well, I seem to have been misunderstood. I've played the NWN2 OC and I hated it on account of the bland series of fights with bandits. It's just boring, and something feels wrong with it. MoTB was pretty fun though...

I didn't buy either of them, and I'd prefer not to pirate SoZ if it's a decent game. But, in order for me to make that decision, I have to know if SoZ is worth the price of both NWN2 and the expansion.

 

[ricolikesrice]

Oh well, I seem to have been misunderstood. I've played the NWN2 OC and I hated it on account of the bland series of fights with bandits. It's just boring, and something feels wrong with it. MoTB was pretty fun though...

I didn't buy either of them, and I'd prefer not to pirate SoZ if it's a decent game. But, in order for me to make that decision, I have to know if SoZ is worth the price of both NWN2 and the expansion.

if you hated it on account of "bland series of fights with bandits" thats pretty much was SoZ is about. i m guessing you enjoyed MOTB because it had atmosphere, great writing, a good story and real choices and consequences. SoZ has little of that - so you can freely pass i think.

 

[Andyman Messiah]

Keep up the Good Fight Darth Roxor.

What, you mean someone other than these two is actually following this ridiculous "debate" going absolutely nowhere ?

I am, and it's exactly for the same reason I'm following VD vs everyone in the Fallout 3 thread. I applaud Darth's resilience, he truly is fighting the good fight (in case everyone thought I was joking as usual) but cracking Skyway is a long and very unrewarding journey.

That said:

In BG2 combat encounters had some meaning to them. Like f.e. during the rest bandits could've attacked you and you even had some dialogues with them during which they could've wound or even kill one of your cohorts and you had to fight them unprepared. Encounters like this happened only once in BG2 but did the job - and if only SoZ had combat encounters with just some variety to them - they could've been so much better. And I would've liked such combat encounters. But I can't stand obvious copy-pasta.

I know Darth already threw this garbage over the railing like a sack full of bleeding genitals, but I just have to chime in.

They're called scripted events and happened if you ran through the docks district or some other seedy part of the town. They were almost never accompanied by any dialog, and those that were quickly died out after the third encounter.

And then there were the enemiess hostile right from the start and respawned with great alacrity, to give you a couple of shit experience points or to prove that you're badass. Is that any difference from NWN2 or, heck, NWN1 or BG1? Nope. I don't like shit enemies either but, eh, comes with the rpg. And it's easy to avoid them.

I ran into the one, good example when I was romancing Jaheira (you know what the say about elven chicks, right?) and the guide (I don't have patience) required me to camp out in the wilderness. Oooh!! Sure enough, bandits attacked! Oooohh!!! And for once they jumped me, held Jaheira hostage and made me negotiate her release (damaging me for a whooping 10hp) before I could kill the fuckers. Oh... But that was the only interesting bandit attack in the entire game.

edited for clarity, making sense and drug use.

 

[Volourn]

"SoZ has little of that - so you can freely pass i think."

The scary thing is that MOTB had better combat than SOZ. LMAO



"They are worthwhile. You get wagons of undeserved xp for them."

They need more than just xp to be worthwhile. You get xp for EVERYTHING in D&D. The point of it should be fun ie. worthwhile. They should actually add something of merit of entertainment value.


"As in, you should be able to face various undead, various greenskins, various giants, various bandits, various reptiles, various elementals, various beasts and animals? "

All these encounters require one type of tatic - zerg them. No use of spells needed, no thinking. Just reskinning of the same exact battle. *yawn*


"That depends on the playstyle. When I finally meet some encounter it's not exactly a walk in the park most of the times, and a prayer or recitation here and there sure helps."

No. It ha snothing to do with playstyle. That's a cop out.


"Again, depends on the gameplay. I enjoy an encounter every now and then, because I'm not getting bugged by them constantly"

I would hate these enocunters even if they were rare. They're THAT boring.


"And how is that missing in the game?"

I'm not saying it was. I'm just posting some of the goals for random encounters. SOZ has this in abundance. Most random encounters should NOT be easy.


"You mean like that guy who tries to scam you to buy his supposedly mithril and magic junk? Or that woodsman who you can heal? Or the mob of plagued people you can heal after a diplomacy check because they don't trust you? Or all the supply crates, dead bodies with gold, trees with hidden stuff etc? Are they not random non-combat encounters?"

Simply not enough.


"Like that pirate captain with his crew at the seaside near Neverwinter that you can rob blind, let go or kill and get an alignment shift? Like earth elementals and shambling mounds on the swamp and water elementals on the shore?"

Like goblins, and wyverns pretty much besdies each other and not attacking one another. NEWSFLASH. To wyverns, all humanoids are worthy of being attacked - not just PCs.


"Subjective. Personally, I found the trash encounters in BG (gibberlings, xvarts) to be a nuisance and nothing else."

You are a moron.


"No wonder they lack challenge and are boring to you if you hacked and slashed your way through all of them. If you fought all the encounters on your way, I suspect you were leaving Samarach at like, level 12."

HA! I quit the game at level 9, and I was nowhere done the first area. All this proves is that those who had hide skills for the map were actually HANDICAPPING themselves. That's poor design.

Your logic is that I should be rewarded for NOT having a skill? that. does. not. compute. It wouldn't be that way if the combat was actually hard, and the player would actually feel the need to avoid encounters.

I said this before: but, imagine a scenario where your part is weak after exploring an actual dungeon and just wants to get back to town as the next fight can kill them so the goal is to avoid them. In that situation, YOU would have been rewarded 'cause of your skills, and my party would be in oops land. Now? When i see an encounter, it's just a nuisance, and I *yawn* out of boredom. I should NOT be bored.


"And just how many of these would it be possible to implement? Not too many. The goblin one would happen once - great, twice - ok, thrice - falls into repetitiveness. "Special" random encounters are nice yes, but it's hard to invent a lot of them, and getting them for pnp is a real damn lot easier, because pnp sessions are relatively smaller than video games, and you can invent and modify the encounters as you see fit, while in a video game they can only be programmed."

All of them. And, nowher edid I claim you should have half a dozen 'special goblin encounters'. And, i just gave a small sampling; not an exhaustive list.


"Name a game that did it good then, 'cause I don't believe I remember a single one."

the problem isn't that any of these games do it perfectly. The problem is that SOZ does it so horribly, i t is worse than all of those combined. That's really sad when SOZ is supposed to be about exploration,a dn combat yet games whsoe focus is elsewhere actually do those better. LMAO


"mob of ghasts that can paralyze you in a second, that would also be 'your last'. "

HAHAHAH! Ghasts are pathetic. I simply turn these punks (if I even bother to waste it). And, if that don't work, they can't hit my ridiculous AC. And, if they do the save is so low as to be pathetic. *yawn*

"Let me ask you a question then: On what levels were your party members when you quitted, and where were you in the game? Fresh on the sword coast, a bit through the sword coast, long on the sword coast, somewhere at the end?"

Basicallly answered this above; but I'll repeat. Level 9 still in the first main map area. I simply can't be bothered to play the game. And, yeah, yeah. i knhow. It gets better 10 minutes after the part I quit. This seems to happen A LOT to me when i dislike a game others like. L0L


"Worthwhile - adjective. If something is worthwhile, it is important or useful or you gain something from it. Now, tell me where does it say that something worthwhile needs to be 'interesting'"

In a game that should be fun, i would think 'fun' would be the main focus of 'worthwhileness'. Getting XP does NOT make the actual combat worthwhile or fun.


"1. Making less of them (yes, in the current state there *are* too many of them, and I imagine that I'd be pretty frustrated without a ranger)

Quote:
Yes, there are definitely too many encounters as a whole

Quote:
I said numerous times before that the number of encounters should be decreased "

WUT? I musta missed these magical quotes (too much spamming back and forth going on easy to miss them); but inbetwene telling us we 'suck at the game'; you actuall AGREE with one of our major gripes - that ther eis simply too many random encounters. 'Nough said.


"'Fight them unprepared' - because in soz you begin every random encounter with +10 to all saves, attack rolls, damage, skills and attributes, right?"

No. Nor do I need to. That be overkill. I dare you to play NWN OC, NWN2 OC, the BGs, TOEE, or any other known D&D game without buffs and see how far you get. Not far because their 'easy' encounters are more challenging than SOZ's 'hard' ones. I simply don't bother to buff for SOZ barring the odd mirror image for my mage when teh enemy decide to try to rape him despite the fact he's using a measily longbow and their being smited by a greats word weilding barbarian with great cleave, and power attack.. Morons.


"BG - you take one fighter and hack down the 'encounter', while the rest of the party chills in the shadow of a tree and plays poker.
SoZ - you actually have to use all party members, and some of the mobs require high level aoe spells to beat, just because of their sheer numbers. More often than not healing spells also need utilizing."

L0L But, no.


"So you say that Torment's combat sucked"

PST's combat is superior to SOZ's. There's actual creativity going on there even if the combat itself isn't hard.

 

[Darth Roxor]

They need more than just xp to be worthwhile. You get xp for EVERYTHING in D&D. The point of it should be fun ie. worthwhile. They should actually add something of merit of entertainment value.

Read the definition of worthwhile again, maybe even four times while at it, and tell me where does it say it needs to be 'fun'.
Someone tells you to travel 10 miles through a desert and after that he'll give you 10 mln dollars. Interesting? No. Worthwhile? Yes.

No. It ha snothing to do with playstyle. That's a cop out.

You are a moron.

I kneel before your speech skills

HA! I quit the game at level 9, and I was nowhere done the first area. All this proves is that those who had hide skills for the map were actually HANDICAPPING themselves. That's poor design.

Basicallly answered this above; but I'll repeat. Level 9 still in the first main map area. I simply can't be bothered to play the game. And, yeah, yeah. i knhow. It gets better 10 minutes after the part I quit. This seems to happen A LOT to me when i dislike a game others like. L0L

So all the time, you are bitching about the piss easy encounters in Samarach, which is, the starting area? I have no further questions then.

Your logic is that I should be rewarded for NOT having a skill? that. does. not. compute. It wouldn't be that way if the combat was actually hard, and the player would actually feel the need to avoid encounters.

I would really love to know where did this conclusion come from.

WUT? I musta missed these magical quotes (too much spamming back and forth going on easy to miss them); but inbetwene telling us we 'suck at the game'; you actuall AGREE with one of our major gripes - that ther eis simply too many random encounters. 'Nough said.

There are too many of them, yes, but I'm not whining about them because "BAAAAAAW I CAN'T AVOID THEM". There are too many of them, because primo, it's VERY unbelievable that the roads of the Sword Coast are so friggin dangerous that you can't walk five steps without spotting a band of trolls, and secundo, people who take less (note: less, not NONE) of the encounter avoiding skills should have a little bit easier time with it. So, yes, I agree that there should be less encounters, but at the same time, I stand by my point that you just plain and simple suck at the game, because you totally and utterly neglect key skills (while the really "crucial" ones are only hide or move silently and survival, which means you didn't even bother to give one of the party members two skills, even though it was stated many, many, many times that they all will be needed on the map before the game was released). If taking certain skills to avoid hardships is 'bad design', than I suspect you are one of the people who diss MotB's spirit meter, aka the 'retard countermeasure', because it doesn't allow too frequent resting, lowers stats later on, if used improperly can be a pain in the arse and it's forced upon you. Boo fucking hoo.

PST's combat is superior to SOZ's. There's actual creativity going on there even if the combat itself isn't hard.

Nowhere have I said that Torment's combat is bad.

 

[NiM82]

So all the time, you are bitching about the piss easy encounters in Samarach, which is, the starting area? I have no further questions then.

They don't really get any more interesting/harder later on though, so his point still stands. Given how big a time sink Samarach is, I also think he's justifiably able to bitch, it's not exactly a tutorial area, it's a good chunk of the game and a big timesink. Why make it piss easy anyway (if they did), surely as it's an expansion everyone should be familiar with the combat model already from the OC?

If you avoid the majority of the crappy encounters, that's a good portion of the game gone, get bored looting the ghey micro dungeons and that's another huge chunk, what's left? Not a lot, a couple of boring story related elements and a bit of underdeveloped trading. Not much point in playing at that stage.

 

[Darth Roxor]

They don't really get any more interesting/harder later on though, so his point still stands.

I found them to be a lot more challenging than the ones on Samarach.

Why make it piss easy anyway (if they did), surely as it's an expansion everyone should be familiar with the combat model already from the OC?.

First encounters should be rather easy, because you don't have a good party by then

Also, that's a bit of a flaw in design. I think some of the encounters should be a little bit scaled to your level, or Samarach should be divided into two chapters, because the random encounters are more or less 'challenging' at the start of the game, but when you achieve level 6 or 7 they are a walk in the park. Same problem on the Sword Coast, while the encounters were challenging at first (I arrived there at level 9), now most of them hardly pose a threat at all (level 12), and the only ones that are more or less troublesome are those that severely outnumber you (but then again, it's also a 'natural course of action' that 'regular' stuff stops posing a threat when you rise in power).

 

[Volourn]

"Read the definition of worthwhile again, maybe even four times while at it, and tell me where does it say it needs to be 'fun'.
Someone tells you to travel 10 miles through a desert and after that he'll give you 10 mln dollars. Interesting? No. Worthwhile? Yes."

It's about context. A game should be fun. If something isn't fun in a game than it is most certainly not worthwhile. It's like saying a quest that gives you 5gp when you are 15th level is 'worthwhile'. LMAO Random encounters in SOZ do not add to a worthwhile experience. Period.


"I kneel before your speech skills "

Good.


"So all the time, you are bitching about the piss easy encounters in Samarach, which is, the starting area? I have no further questions then."

Starting area? You are a moron. You start the game at level 4, and I finished playing at level 9 still in this 'starting area'. Samarach doesn't fit the profile of a starting area since it is a huge part of the game. Candlekeep in BG1 is the starting area. Vault 13 in FO1 is the starting area. In SOZ, the starting ara is the ship and the beach area when you first land.


"I would really love to know where did this conclusion come from."

Easily. people who don't have the hide skill seem to have an easier time with the game since they basically get free xp. ie. they're being rewarded for not having a skill. LMAO


"So, yes, I agree that there should be less encounters, but at the same time, I stand by my point that you just plain and simple suck at the game, because you totally and utterly neglect key skills (while the really "crucial" ones are only hide or move silently and survival, which means you didn't even bother to give one of the party members two skills, even though it was stated many, many, many times that they all will be needed on the map before the game was released)."

What a fuckin' idiot. How cna I suck at a agme that I find fuckin' easy? I have surivial. I don't need hide because only pussies hide from easy encounters. The problem here isn't having key skills, it's that the encounters are too many which you fuckin' agree with. Get out of SOZ's ass.


"If taking certain skills to avoid hardships is 'bad design', than I suspect you are one of the people who diss MotB's spirit meter, aka the 'retard countermeasure', because it doesn't allow too frequent resting, lowers stats later on, if used improperly can be a pain in the arse and it's forced upon you. Boo fucking hoo."

MOTB had some issues, and it isn't perfect; but the concept is bad. However, SOZ's encounters most certainly are. Dumbass.


"First encounters should be rather easy, because you don't have a good party by then"

More fuckin' idiocy. Samarach is not a 'beginning' area. What a moron.


"because the random encounters are more or less 'challenging' at the start of the game"

No. No, they aren't.

 

[janjetina]

Easily. people who don't have the hide skill seem to have an easier time with the game since they basically get free xp. ie. they're being rewarded for not having a skill. LMAO

This is incorrect. A succesful Hide check doesn't preclude you from atacking the enemy group. It only ensures that that they won't notice and attack you. Given the high frequency of the potential random encounters, high Hide skill is a must have for a group leader.

Anyway, my impressions after finishing the game:

Good points:

+ overland map concept, with the exception of the random encounters frequency, skill checks associated with overland map, potential for modability is great
+ group dialogue system and associated skill, race, alignment and class checks
+ trading
+ endgame area and associated skill checks
+ love for underused skills
+ group skills and associated training are a nice touch

Bad points:
- random encounters are a little too frequent (once your Hide skill is good enough, it doesn't matter) and too bland - more special encounters are needed. Skill checks associated with encounters should be more diverse instead of the same options that don't make much difference over and over,
- "shallow" dungeons and cities - it's not that the dungeons were too small, the problem was lack of content, exploration, skill checks and interesting encounters. Some dungeons just cry to be modded. Except for trading, only West harbor, Port Llast, Neverwinter, the Keep and final area had more than a single generic quest. There is one good side to small dungeons though - it eliminates the possibility of NWN 2 OC Orc caves rerun.

Neutral points:
0 choices and consequences are present, but they are too few and what's worse, too far between
0 the game lacks text. It's better than Asswind dale in that area, but that's not saying much. If we compare it to Fallout, it fails. What text is there is well written, not a PS:T or MOTB material, but coherent sentences that make sense in the game (unlike say, Foblivion). Unfortunately, the number of talkative characters in the game was low, and the dialogue trees weren't deep enough.
0 Combat and AI are better than in previous NWN 2 games, but not much better. AI is still retarded, and for the puppet mode to be enjoyable the game lacks an auto-pause option, that was available in Infinity engine games.


I rate the game 7/10. It's good, between great and meh. It's great in breadth, but shallow in depth. A little better than the NWN 2 OC, better than The Twitcher, much worse than MOTB. Overland map and skill checks almost everywhere are to be used in the future games. This game can and hopefully will be modded to an extreme.

 

[Volourn]

"0 Combat and AI are better than in previous NWN 2 games, but not much better."

No, no, no. It's worse. Much worse.

 

[janjetina]

AI casters are much better in their spell selection. I remember in MOTB Gann's favorite spell was Body of the Sun (which prompted attacks by other party members, so they proceeded to buff and hack each other to pieces). Scaled AI casting mode was competent in SoZ. That was a huge improvement, as you were actually able to let AI handle easier battles, while in MOTB you absolutely had to micromanage, not due to opponents' strength, but to your companions' AI idiocy.