What is it about BioWare...

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I'm wondering that myself. I'm 29 and quite liked BG2.

Yay, i'm not alone Though i'm younger, i'm 22.

 

[Astromarine]

I "liked" it, but not enough to even go halfway with it. My wife reached the end fight, and realized it was unwinnable with the party she had selected... Bioware is Company Non Grata in our house currently.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I didn't thought BG2 was overly difficult, even if admitedly, some parties were hard to work with... somehow, i still fail to see how my 6 Half-Elven female Bards failed in the fight against Amelyssan...

Honestly, though, it had its fair share of difficult times. I think the last fight was though despite whatever parties i made. Thats why i had about 4 spellbooks filled with scripts, various wands, protective items, and a custom party (no in-game recruitable NPCs).

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

But considering Bioware managed to save the D&D license from the mudhole it was in, when it was still a young company, speaks volumes of their ability.

I would say that if the D&D license were actually hurting, BG wouldn't have done anything in terms of sales at all. The license is what carried that game, not the other way around.

I also know how some will say things like "the Infinity Engine sucked", "whatever thing i didn't liked sucked", etc. Personally, i won't criticize a company that harshly because i have no right to criticize a company if i'm not involved in the same medium they're in.

I disagree with this statement, because it's basically the same as saying you shouldn't be upset because the doctor misdiagnosed your cancer because you're not a doctor. If I'm paying for something, I expect something done well. If I have a house built, and it leaks when it rains, I'm certainly going to criticise the roofers even though I'm not a roofer.

This isn't to say i won't point out a companies' mistakes - but i won't go as far as bashing them because somehow my personal expectations were not met, i think i'm fairly above that.

Fairly above what? Expectations as a consumer?

I see people criticize the Infinity Engine on various levels when the only criticizable thing there i can see is the pathfinding, hands down.

That's because the pathfinding is the most obvious thing to point out. It's the one thing that even the people who swear by the IE games agree is a problem. There are a number of other things that you could point out, like what a resource hog the game is - and definitely was when it was released in 1998! You could point out how poorly written it was so that it was nearly impossible to impliment later additions and changes to the D&D system because it's a mess of spaghetti code. You could point out that because it's a real time engine, which is impossible to convert to turn based due to the poor coding, they fudged a lot of the rules in 2E. I could point out that the gamestate was so poorly done for multiplayer that when one player goes shopping or talks to someone, everyone else is thrust in to that same screen.

If you wanted to bash the Infinity Engine, there's a hell of a lot more than just the pathfinding that you can bring up.

But about NWN... What could've failed? I don't think it might've been the fact that they were working with 3D. AFAIR, their first game was "Shattered Steel", a Mech game, which i think was 3D... of course, 3D in '97 and 3D in 2002 is somewhat different. It was a mess, true - internal staff alocation, things done in a hurry...

They also built Aurora from the engine they used in MDK2, which was also 3D.

Of course, I think the main problem with NWN being 3D is there's really no good reason for it being 3D. Can you swim? Nope! Can you climb? Nope! Even the terrain of the game is flat.

For instance, many people bash the game but don't comment the fact they (Bioware) are farly new to the industry. They're no Interplay or Sir-Tech, hence why awards like Outstanding Achievement in Programming, wheter right or wrong, are understandable, given their "newness" to the industry.

I doubt that since a lot of the review sites have refered to BioWare as TEH BESTEST ROLL PLAYIGN GAME MAYKER EVAR. Being new to the industry really only means that you should be smart enough to stand on the shoulders of giants, which they haven't ever been able to do.

I remember how it was said a system similar to Fallout would be used... at least, while not exactly the same, i think it worked - Wisdom for a higher insight into the persons' reasons, Charisma for a higher persuading, etc. Its certainly much better than whatever Morrowind or BG2 presented.

It would have only been better if that insight from Wisdom did something.

[Player]: [Insight] OMFG! Desther, j00 R teh 3n3m13!
[Desther]: h4w h4w h4w! How d4r3 j00 s4y th4t! H4w h4w h4w!
[Fenthick]: KTHXBYE

And nothing ever happens from that. Ever.

Now, if you could use that insight to pre-empt Desther stealing the cure, because you know he's a rat because you have that high Wisdom, thus changing the events of the story, then you could claim it's better. However, putting in events that reflect your attributes that in turn don't do a damned thing is pointless, and a waste of time even bothering with that scripting. It's almost like, Hey, your character is insightful.. Who cares! and just keep on unfolding the static, linear plot where your character is just a mostly pointless buffoon that no one listens to!

Im not here defending Bioware of their obvious shortcomings on some matters. But all this hatred towards them seems... farfetched and derived solely from "they didn't do what i want, so they suck" type of arguments, not mentioning some ludricuous reasons out there...

They didn't do anything good, so they suck. That's what it boils down to, not what anyone wants here. It's the fact that they've done nothing towards advancing the genre, and they've managed to become successful at holding any advancement of the genre back. They're released three games since Fallout and Fallout 2, and two games since Planescape: Torment. None of them have even come close to the role-playing mechanics of those games.

Even when they're made a stab at doing those mechanics, they've managed to botch them with a half assed implimentation - which NWN is loaded with such as the attributes affecting dialogue choices but not affecting the game's story or being hired to kill someone for money doesn't shift alignment unless you ask for the money up front, which is evil. ,

Maybe its just me, but i think NWN doesn't represent the overall quality of Bioware, nor it epithomizes the end of said quality.

I think it represents how little they care for quality.

 

[Elwro]

I know its entirely built from scratch, but then again so was Morrowind, that had a superior engine.

I thought Bethesda bought the Immersion (or how is it called?) engine from someone.

Than again, both BG2 and NWN are simple games for children from kindergarden when compared to PS:T.

Hmm, if i played PST and BG2 and enjoyed them both (though i preffered PST much more in terms of role-play), what would that make me, in terms of age? :shock:

Ekhm, I was talking about the dialogues only. No offence meant entirely! I ALSO enjoyed BG2, it was fun to play if one needed a nicely drawn hack requiring no thinking (everyone sometimes needs that). But many dialogues concerning quests in BG2 and NWN follow exactly this scheme:

NPC: I wanna give you a quest
PC: 1)Sure thing!
2) Depends on how much you pay me [+subnodes]
3) Die you blasphemous fool!

*after the quest*

NPC: OK, thx and all. 'twas quite good that you've done what you've done. You want your reward or not?
PC: 1)No way, I'm attempting to reach Lawful Good and I'm still a few points away [this second part not in BG2 of course].
2)Sure thing!
3)I want more and you're gonna give me!
4)Die you blasphemous fool!

I got an impression that there's not much more dialogoue in NWN, apart from generic messages of guards etc. Only a few special people have something interesting to say, and even than the best (or only) thing you can do is listen to them.
BG2 was better than NWN when it comes to dialogue, but the PC also didn't have many options to react. In fact there were usually only one or two sensible reactions. Anyone who is able to read would know how to make a best conversation in BG2. In PS:T you had to actually use your brains (sometimes, I admit, your PC actually used his Wisdom instead of yours ).
So anyway, no offence meant in the kindergarden reference.

And MW has more text than PS:T... too bad it's not so well written and the the dialogue sysem is so net-browsery...

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

@Saint_Proverbius:

I'd have to disagree with the line about D&D and Bioware. The D&D-licensed games for PC, prior to BG1, were going downhill. Al-Qadim didn't pleased many people, because it was more "arcadey"; Menzoberranzan didn't manage to exactly immerse the player in its Drow-infested gameworld; Deathkeep... *shiver*... and should i mention Iron and Blood? Or Descent to Undermountain, for that matter? :shock: With the quality of the D&D license gradually sinking since 93/94, i'd say BG brought in back into the spotlight. Perhaps it may have done it after the trail of Diablo, but did it, regardless. The license was what carried it, but it was also what carried those other games to their doom. If Bioware hand't made BG1, i wonder where the license would be now... possibly acquire by Blizzard so they could downgrade it to Diablo-like proportions, i'd wager.

On that expectations thing... what i meant was, that everywhere i go, all i see is people criticizing various games because they didn't managed to meet their expectations. Im not against having expectations around a game, but seeing unnecessary, rude, and flaming comments against a developer because X fans wanted Y thing but got Z thing instead, irks me. That's all. If what was promised wasn't delivered, its fair to criticize. But thats where the fairness ends regarding flaming atittudes. I for one, would never call the developers mother******s, or tell them to go f*** themselves. I think thats uncalled for. Not mentioning the janitor jokes

On the real time issue... i had a debate with other users on various forums. I know that it makes perfect sense to have combat in TB mode when the game in question comes from a PnP system. I know it has to be TB because that how it works in PnP, otherwise the players and specially the DM would lose track of what happens. However, how many people would have the time and patience to click endlessly in a game just to make it move? The real time factor of the engine makes it so combat doesn't become boring. One thing is being with your RP group, chucking dice and looking at spreadsheets and really RPing - the other is having a game replicate it. If it replicates that, then whats the point of PnP? TB combat has good examples - FO or Arcanum, for one - but the fact is i can't expect every game to copy PnP in everything. Neither would i want it. I don't want to make PnP = PC RPGs. They are distinct, and thats why i like them. I was never worried about the RT aspect of BG, specially because pausing allowed me to take the same precautions and make strategic decidions i could do in PnP. If i wanted exact copies of its gameplay, i'd dump my PC and go to PnP. I agree it might've brought some errors and contradictions, but it think it might've been for the best - like i said, i for one, would not want to click, watch virtual dice being rolled, click, click to open a virtual spreadsheet, click to compare values, click to write value to be subtracted from enemy goblinoid, etc, etc.. I know it works in FO, for instance, but somehow can't see it working on BG. It might've worked though... i also never tried the TB simulation of the game by pausing after every action, so i wouldn't know.

And while i also agree that not much was made on their behalf to further the genre, i don't think it has made it go back either. There's really only a handfull of titles out there which actually furthered the genre on the PC, and yet, people sometimes don't play them. In PST you have 100% control over your role in the game, given the circumstances. Yet, Diablo2 is hailed as a great RPG and the only role there is that of a mute adventurer. Go figure

"[Player]: [Insight] OMFG! Desther, j00 R teh 3n3m13!
[Desther]: h4w h4w h4w! How d4r3 j00 s4y th4t! H4w h4w h4w!
[Fenthick]: KTHXBYE"

I'm almost tempted to sig that

@Elwro:

And MW has more text than PS:T... too bad it's not so well written and the the dialogue sysem is so net-browsery...

Yes i disliked that... i thought text-parser based on keywords had already been dealt with.

 

[Astromarine]

Too late.

 

[Astromarine]

as for the RT issue, the arguments on both sides are well-known. I can point out that more boring than TB is NWN's RT, where you tell someone to hit something and wait for 6secs*number of rounds it will take. But I'll just say one thing. Buy ToEE. Look at their implementation of the 3.5 rules, and compare them with NWN. I can't be sure, because the game isn't out yet, but I'll eat my hat if it doesn't turn out being more fun than NWN combat.

 

[Walks with the Snails]

I remember how it was said a system similar to Fallout would be used... at least, while not exactly the same, i think it worked - Wisdom for a higher insight into the persons' reasons, Charisma for a higher persuading, etc. Its certainly much better than whatever Morrowind or BG2 presented.

It would have only been better if that insight from Wisdom did something.

[Player]: [Insight] OMFG! Desther, j00 R teh 3n3m13!
[Desther]: h4w h4w h4w! How d4r3 j00 s4y th4t! H4w h4w h4w!
[Fenthick]: KTHXBYE

And nothing ever happens from that. Ever.

Now, if you could use that insight to pre-empt Desther stealing the cure, because you know he's a rat because you have that high Wisdom, thus changing the events of the story, then you could claim it's better. However, putting in events that reflect your attributes that in turn don't do a damned thing is pointless, and a waste of time even bothering with that scripting. It's almost like, Hey, your character is insightful.. Who cares! and just keep on unfolding the static, linear plot where your character is just a mostly pointless buffoon that no one listens to!

Yeah, that was probably the worst thing about the OC. Everybody talks about Persuade being such a great skill, but all it's good for is squeezing a few extra gold pieces out of people when you do stuff for them. Nothing you ever do makes a bit of difference. It's rather funny sometimes how far they go to make everything fit into their railroad story and leave you no options. I was astounded they actually let you redeem Aribeth, but in the end that made no difference, either. It was funny, she wanted to knock boots at the end because I always stuck by her, but in the end she said there wasn't enough time for that (nevermind I could have dozed off about 10 times in a row right there with no game effect), and she demurred when I suggested she might be able to help kill the big bad. So if there was a corpse lying in her cell, it really wouldn't have made the slightest bit of difference, big surprise.

I mean, can't they at least make a miniscule effort to let the player affect things? Why can't I expose Desther, even if it just means the cult has to change its plans slightly but still get the same end result? Why can't I talk Aribeth down so she doesn't flip out? It's not like her fight was really that significant (though I did wonder how a blackguard managed greater dispelling and harm), and you could just throw in another goon in her place if it makes you feel better.

 

[Walks with the Snails]

However, how many people would have the time and patience to click endlessly in a game just to make it move? The real time factor of the engine makes it so combat doesn't become boring.

Did you ever fight the white dragon? I've talked about it elsewhere, but that was extremely boring. Load up with immunity items, then leave the game running for 15 minutes while you get enough 20's to bleed through its hit points. Likewise, I find fighting hordes of weak enemies (which is 90% of the fights) more boring than the infamous ants in Broken Hills in Fallout 2. It's especially bad if you're low level and have just one attack every round. You just sit there waiting desperately for it to be all over. Swing, miss. Wait six seconds. Swing, miss. Wait six seconds. Swing, hit. Wait six seconds. Swing, hit. Hooray, one out of 8 enemies went down. Wait six seconds. Swing, miss. All while you're just sitting there.

 

[EEVIAC]

I know its entirely built from scratch, but then again so was Morrowind, that had a superior engine.

I thought Bethesda bought the Immersion (or how is it called?) engine from someone.

You mean NetImmerse, which is now called Gamebryo. Its the same engine that Freedom Force and DAoC use. Also in slightly related news, Firaxis' remake of Pirates! will use the same engine. I have no idea whether it will be first or third person but the engine is obviously versatile.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Great opinions here, regardless :D

I'm gald i found this site. I still don't agree with all the unnecessary Bioware flames, but this seems like a good place. :D

And yeah, i also didn't appreciated that Attribute thing... its nice to know your dialogue can help you affect the outcome of things, the problem starts when it doesn't let you affect it, or only does it marginally

And damn, you got the sig first o_O Oh well, next time

 

[Vault Dweller]

With the quality of the D&D license gradually sinking since 93/94, i'd say BG brought in back into the spotlight.

I'm with Saint on this one. It was definitely the other way around. As for the quality, BG series are not the best example of D&D's potential.

If Bioware hand't made BG1, i wonder where the license would be now...

BG1 did not have the effect of a game revolution and did not start D&D revival. ToEE might do that though :wink:

what i meant was, that everywhere i go, all i see is people criticizing various games because they didn't managed to meet their expectations

I know, people are never happy and looking for a chance to bitch about anything. But you should separate stupid complains from a serious, well-pointed and well-deserved criticism. Otherwise you'd playing a lot more games like FOBoS and NWN.

However, how many people would have the time and patience to click endlessly in a game just to make it move? The real time factor of the engine makes it so combat doesn't become boring.

A boring combat is a poorly designed combat. Period. Like I said on other forums, it's as boring to kill 20 rats in real-time as it's in turn-based combat. RT combat is good in 2 cases: you control one character (Diablo, FPS, etc) or you control an army (AoE, Warcraft, etc). The rest should be reserved for TB because ... it's too long to mention and deserves another thread, probably a sticky one too. The best example is X-Com: we all played it in TB and then in RT, unfortunately. If you didn't see a difference, I can't explain it to you.

I was never worried about the RT aspect of BG, specially because pausing allowed me to take the same precautions and make strategic decidions i could do in PnP.

That is simply not true. A pause feature does not equal to and substitute all the complexity of TB combat.

think it might've been for the best - like i said, i for one, would not want to click, watch virtual dice being rolled, click, click to open a virtual spreadsheet, click to compare values, click to write value to be subtracted from enemy goblinoid, etc, etc

What are you talking about? Any combat requires some numbers crunching and values comparisson. What makes TB so special is the tactical and strategic aspects of it.

In PST you have 100% control over your role in the game, given the circumstances.

In PS:T you have no role, you follow a linear storyline, a damn good storyline, but a storyline nonetheless.

Yet, Diablo2 is hailed as a great RPG and the only role there is that of a mute adventurer. Go figure

Diablo2 does a great job as an action RPG and provides tons of character development scenarios via skills combinations and it has much better character system then Morrowind, for example.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I'm with Saint on this one. It was definitely the other way around. As for the quality, BG series are not the best example of D&D's potential.

The problem with that line of thought is that i don't see where the D&D licensed RPG interest was between 94 and 98. All interest in it was either relieving the oldies (Gold Box), or waiting for something new. And while BG isn't exactly the best example of D&D's quality, its certainly not the worst.

BG1 did not have the effect of a game revolution and did not start D&D revival. ToEE might do that though :wink:

I'm anticipating ToEE as well, and i wonder how D&D will be portrayed.
As for BG1 not being a game revolution... it wasn't, because Diablo1 had appeared previously. Had it been the other way around, i wonder how it might've turned out. As for the D&D revival... i think that the anticipation behind BG1 might've led to the revival of interest in D&D-licensed products, but if no D&D-based game had been released then, or until now, i wonder where it would be now. Some years ago, D&D licensed products were various, and each new offering gave us something with quality. But what some even considered great series (like EotB or PoR) went downhill somewhere. I couldn't bare to play PoRD, and when i imported my party in EotB games, it felt cheap So i also never considered all of the D&D based games before BG to be all good.

I personaly think that any game at that time, based on D&D would've sold a lot. It happened to be BG1. I regard Bioware as a company that re-introduced the D&D-based electronic RPG's into the PC mainstream community. Now, wheter if that was good or bad, we could speculate - alot :D But even if it hadn't been them, it could've been anyone else.

A boring combat is a poorly designed combat. Period. Like I said on other forums, it's as boring to kill 20 rats in real-time as it's in turn-based combat. RT combat is good in 2 cases: you control one character (Diablo, FPS, etc) or you control an army (AoE, Warcraft, etc). The rest should be reserved for TB because ... it's too long to mention and deserves another thread, probably a sticky one too. The best example is X-Com: we all played it in TB and then in RT, unfortunately. If you didn't see a difference, I can't explain it to you.

I remember playing XCom I know what you mean. Its just that i liked TB in Fallout, and XCom now that you mention it But again, i see that BG derived a bit from Diablo's combat idea, of RT. They shouldn't have based themselves too much on it, i agree - they could've at least try to make it the other way around, fully TB, with options to simulate RT. However i also see there (at the time) a company trying something they weren't sure would work. I'll admit, if i was the head of a fairly new and unknown company, i'd give what the audiences wanted. Its not so much as ass-kissing, its more of a way to gain some income and fame until i could do what i truly wanted (of course, Bioware still hasn't dropped the D&D license, which i also dislike... they're milking it for all its worth, kinda like Konami did with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles license... God, what a dark period of my pre-teenage life... don't ask).

That is simply not true. A pause feature does not equal to and substitute all the complexity of TB combat.

I didn't said it equaled or substitued it - i said that, as a battle system, it worked. It may not have worked as a variation of TB, but it worked as a battle system.

In PS:T you have no role, you follow a linear storyline, a damn good storyline, but a storyline nonetheless.

Er, you follow a linear storyline in pretty much every game. The fact it has a beginning and an end makes it linear. What you do while going the distance however, is what stops making it linear (or not). I said my role because i get to choose for the character - like i do in any worthy PC RPG. I'm never my own character in a PC RPG; i'm always stuck with pre-defined races, skills, classes, etc. When i say my role, i'm talking about how i have my virtual persona react - in this case react as if i was in its place.

Diablo2 does a great job as an action RPG and provides tons of character development scenarios via skills combinations and it has much better character system then Morrowind, for example.

Somehow, i got bored to death with Diablo 2 :shock: It never felt that much of an RPG, but rather a glorified version of Rogue - a more recent version of good old Hack'n'Slashes (or Action/RPG). A good version, mind you, but i don't catalog whats an RPG simply based on customization only. The fact i'm mute in the game didn't helped much. And since i also found the customization of D2 fairly simplified, it didn't helped much. I personally prefered MW's customization, but thats just me i guess...

 

[DrattedTin]

MW's customization is deceptive. While on the one hand it seems like the skills are amazingly diverse, you should realize by the end of the game that all non-combat skills are relatively worthless (with the exception of the slightly-bugged alchemy skill).

Diablo provides a lot more variety in combat, hands down.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I really only like MW's customizatin because i can make different characters every time i play. I don't have to take the typical class if i want, its pretty much like Arcanum on that matter. And i don't like the skills of Morrowind because they're diverse - i like them because i like th idea of getting better at something the more i use it.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I'd have to disagree with the line about D&D and Bioware. The D&D-licensed games for PC, prior to BG1, were going downhill. Al-Qadim didn't pleased many people, because it was more "arcadey"; Menzoberranzan didn't manage to exactly immerse the player in its Drow-infested gameworld; Deathkeep... *shiver*... and should i mention Iron and Blood? Or Descent to Undermountain, for that matter? :shock: With the quality of the D&D license gradually sinking since 93/94, i'd say BG brought in back into the spotlight. Perhaps it may have done it after the trail of Diablo, but did it, regardless. The license was what carried it, but it was also what carried those other games to their doom. If Bioware hand't made BG1, i wonder where the license would be now... possibly acquire by Blizzard so they could downgrade it to Diablo-like proportions, i'd wager.

Isn't NWN Diablo-like proportions? The only thing even remotely stopping the comparason directly is the player can say stuff back to the NPCs - but then again, the player can't say anything that would affect anything, so being able to say stuff back is well.. Pointless? I mean, let's face the facts here.. NWN is about the closest thing to Diablo in terms of design that we've seen in a long time on the D&D front.

Act 1 through 3 basically copies the design from Diablo 2's Act 2 when you think about it. The only difference is that in all the item collecting you do in Act 2 in Diablo 2, you do get that cool ass Horadric Cube before you're off to clear the palace and fight Dural.

As for the slipping sales of D&D games in the mid-1990s, check out IWD2's sales figures. They're not pretty.

Not mentioning the janitor jokes

Well, if BioWare were janitors, I can see them doing things like coating a linoleum floor with vegatable oil and then patting themselves on the back for giving the floor the shiniest wax job ever. Nevermind the fact that you can no longer walk on the floor because you'd slip and fall now, it's shiny! The shiniest thing they've ever waxed!

On the real time issue... i had a debate with other users on various forums. I know that it makes perfect sense to have combat in TB mode when the game in question comes from a PnP system. I know it has to be TB because that how it works in PnP, otherwise the players and specially the DM would lose track of what happens. However, how many people would have the time and patience to click endlessly in a game just to make it move?

It's more than that. There are many, many things you just can't do in real time that you can do in turn based. 3E impilments a hell of a lot of rules which just aren't possible in real time without ignoring them or fudging the hell out of them.

The real time factor of the engine makes it so combat doesn't become boring.

Yet the fact you spend most of that time just watching isn't boring. Funny that.

They are distinct, and thats why i like them. I was never worried about the RT aspect of BG, specially because pausing allowed me to take the same precautions and make strategic decidions i could do in PnP.

tactical decisions.

Er, you follow a linear storyline in pretty much every game. The fact it has a beginning and an end makes it linear.

The above statement isn't true. It's how you get from the beginning to the end that makes it linear or not. If you have to do the events in a set order, one after the next, that's what makes it linear. If you're free to go through the events with the order you make for your character, then that's not linear.

NWN's acts can be considered non-linear with the exception that the difficulty of each is scaled to be consecutive. You can try to deal with the rich man's sector of Act I first, but you'll probably die quickly.

However, compare this to Fallout, where you can do either Mariposa or the Cathedral in any order you choose. If you find Mariposa difficult, you probably will find the cathedral difficult also.

What you do while going the distance however, is what stops making it linear (or not). I said my role because i get to choose for the character - like i do in any worthy PC RPG. I'm never my own character in a PC RPG; i'm always stuck with pre-defined races, skills, classes, etc. When i say my role, i'm talking about how i have my virtual persona react - in this case react as if i was in its place.

You you do things makes it multi-tiered, or multi-pathed. BioWare doesn't even attempt to do things this way.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Isn't NWN Diablo-like proportions? The only thing even remotely stopping the comparason directly is the player can say stuff back to the NPCs - but then again, the player can't say anything that would affect anything, so being able to say stuff back is well.. Pointless? I mean, let's face the facts here.. NWN is about the closest thing to Diablo in terms of design that we've seen in a long time on the D&D front.

True, true... but then again, like i said, many people, including myself, play RPGs on the set notion that they might not trying to be innovating, and may just be trying to be entertaining. I know that, if a company gets a license as heavy as D&D, they shouldn't botch it up. I think it just depends on what you're after. Since i'm pretty much after everything in terms of RPGs i can stand playing an RPG wheter it focuses more on combat or RPing, or customiztion, etc.. As much as i absolutely love Troika's Arcanum, its epicness to me doesn't exactly reach BG2's. Of course, for that matter, BG2's customization and open-endness is extremely basic when compared to Arcanum's. I just think there are different ways of making players feel they are in a certain setting, and many games do it many ways.

Act 1 through 3 basically copies the design from Diablo 2's Act 2 when you think about it. The only difference is that in all the item collecting you do in Act 2 in Diablo 2, you do get that cool ass Horadric Cube before you're off to clear the palace and fight Dural.

That's one way to look at it... :shock:

As for the slipping sales of D&D games in the mid-1990s, check out IWD2's sales figures. They're not pretty.

IWD2 had even less roleplay than BG2... though it did have some very good battles. And i think the AI there was somewhat superior. I think it suffered half of the Fallout syndrome; when Tactics came out, it was considered the combat-only version of Fallout (which isn't exactly far from the truth), a bit the same like IWD.

Well, if BioWare were janitors, I can see them doing things like coating a linoleum floor with vegatable oil and then patting themselves on the back for giving the floor the shiniest wax job ever. Nevermind the fact that you can no longer walk on the floor because you'd slip and fall now, it's shiny! The shiniest thing they've ever waxed!

Hmmm... yeah It was funny, but... damn. Janitors.

It's more than that. There are many, many things you just can't do in real time that you can do in turn based. 3E impilments a hell of a lot of rules which just aren't possible in real time without ignoring them or fudging the hell out of them.

I believe you

Yet the fact you spend most of that time just watching isn't boring. Funny that.

I actually found the combat less boring the more it went along. And i don't mind looking at it, i have to look at it in Wizardry also, and i like it. Now don't get me wrong, i don't like just *looking* at the battles, i like being a part of them. However, again, like i said, i just feel some games do it differently, or/and have different takes. When i play Arcanum, there's never that sense of emergency of trying to cast enough protective spells before a Wail of the Banshee, or the eminent danger of having to choose a spell that'll bypass the enemy mages' barrier before he activates it. Note that this isn't saying that Arcanum's combat is bad; i'm merely saying that the differences between TB and RT give out different feels of battle.

Though i think you actually have to look at combat in a lot of RPGs. Excepting D&D of course.

The above statement isn't true. It's how you get from the beginning to the end that makes it linear or not. If you have to do the events in a set order, one after the next, that's what makes it linear. If you're free to go through the events with the order you make for your character, then that's not linear.

... Nice point, i admit. Thanks for your input on that 8) Given i'm going on an extensive reading and appraisal of the RPG genre, that definetely helps :D

You you do things makes it multi-tiered, or multi-pathed. BioWare doesn't even attempt to do things this way.

A shame, that.

 

[Voss]

Hmm.
Bioware.
I have such mixed feelings about them.
I found BG 1 and 2 entertaining. With annoying aspects...being railroaded onto the main line of the quest annoyed me, even when there were clearly other ways of handling things, and the big good/evil distinct consisting of a handful of minor fed-ex or go there and fighter someone type quests was just sad.

I dislike NWN for many reasons : AI, boring repetitive combat, the camera perspective, the lack of any meaningful role, the fact that I knew that Desther was the big bad of chapter 1 approximately 1 minute into the chapter and couldn't do anything about it, lousy henchmen, lousy henchmen AI, 1 player party game, the game optimized for fighter and rogue types (I have an issue with bows and spells at 5 paces)

Still for some bizarre reason I picked up SoU (lack of anything resembling an RPG lately, I think). There were a few improvements- lack of treasure barrels every 5 feet, better henchling control (inventory and trap wise anyway- I find the henchman AI to actually be worse), some quests that aren't totally predefined choice-wise and some actually have multiple solutions (I haven't tried the evil path on many yet. I need to do that- I did get railroaded into the main quest though: objected to doing it, objected 5 more times, couldn't refuse anymore and was forced to accept), and a couple just nice things- offending a farm hand and later being ambushed by him and some friends, some consequences for actions- descretating holy objects tends to be bad.

As for the bad aspects of SoU- henchman AI is sadly worse than it was- particularly when there are multiple opponents. My henchman will run between several different opponents (taking Attacks of opportunity to do so) to take one swipe at them, then run to another. You can tell them to defend and not attack unless you attack or are attacked, but they run off and attack (and trigger) enemies anyway. The rehash, in chapter 1 of the OC "plot"- your place of training is attacked (and your mentor gets his butt kicked by KOBOLDS- what a powerful mentor you have) and you have to recover the 4 artifacts that were stolen.

Admittedly the villains are a bit more interesting and you do have different options with some of them- you can buy off the dragon, persuade it (yes, persuasion has an actual effect), or kill it (with the help of an absurdly powerful artifact you get off the other villain, which disappears from your inventory when you leave chapter 1 so you might as well use it)

Anyway, I'm rambling a lot, so I'll sum up:
Bioware definitely needs to improve their games. And it doesn't look like KotOR is going to do it...NWN in SPACE. WIth extra helpings of railroading! You MUST be 1 of 3 classes, but you MUST become a jedi. But don't worry, you'll want to use the +5 double lightsaber of frost while dual-wielding +3 short sabers of righteous smiting. Because, of course, the camera forces ranged weapons to be at the approximate range of 10 paces anyway. And magic lightsabers R0X0R. And of course, it is set 4000 years before the movies so that theres lots of Sith to have lightsaber duels with. Because thats all anyone wants to do in Star Wars anyway.

 

[Elwro]

- I did get railroaded into the main quest though: objected to doing it, objected 5 more times, couldn't refuse anymore and was forced to accept),

My goodness! Who could expect that?

- descretating holy objects tends to be bad.

Heh, so you did spit on the statue? :D

Thanks very much for your post, I think it was the best review of SoU I've read yet.

 

[Voss]

I did spit on the statue..
there is also another in the Interlude that you can loot.
Specifically take the two rubies from the eyesockets, which really reminded me of the original cover of the 1st Edition players handbook.

I did expect to get stuck with the main quest...but on the other hand, I was annoyed that I had the pointless option of refusing 5-6 times, only to be stuck with it anyway.

There was a funny moment however, when you find a diamond in a pile of rubble, but a rat snatches it and takes off down the hallway. It actually spawns a rat near the rubble, so a rather bizarre chase ensues. The rat was very fast and moves to the other side of the pillars in the room, so even if you have a bow handy it isn't necessarily as easy as one might think with the NWN engine (pause and click, I mean, you still have to move for line of sight). The bloody thing kept dodging around pillars.

The basilisks were *very* disappointing. I remember being scared to death of them when I ran into the in BG1. The way one would be if you ran into something that can turn you to stone. But with the temporary petrification they were just another monster to hack and slay.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The basilisks were *very* disappointing. I remember being scared to death of them when I ran into the in BG1. The way one would be if you ran into something that can turn you to stone. But with the temporary petrification they were just another monster to hack and slay.

:shock:

Basilisks don't have a permanent petrification ray anymore? I'm so not gonna get SoU this month....

 

[Voss]

That as of the last comment I read in the official forums anyway. When I actually fought them I made all 8 saves anyway, so it didn't come up.

And the effect is goofy- a bright red cone thing. No idea why. I was expecting eye-beams or something. Or even just the eyes flashing.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I did expect to get stuck with the main quest...but on the other hand, I was annoyed that I had the pointless option of refusing 5-6 times, only to be stuck with it anyway.

That sounds almost like a console game. No, wait, that's definitely like one. It seems rather silly they'd give you the option to say NO, but not the choice. All they'd have to have done is set it up in a manner where it's an offer you can't refuse deal. Just make the point of how the player will do such and such, or really bad things will happen to the town, the player, everything.

 

[Sabotai]

:shock:

Basilisks don't have a permanent petrification ray anymore? I'm so not gonna get SoU this month....

I had the same shock when encountering the Trolls for the first time in NWN. I didn't have fire or acid with me and thought "how the hell do I get out of here?" but to my surprise the Trolls died anyway. Lame.