480 réponses à ce sujet

[PoopyStuff]

Who cares about tactics.

your party is immortal.



one person gets away, everyone survives.

[Bryy_Miller]

Yes, yes, we've heard that before. Repeating it over and over is not going to make your point any more valid. It was better when you actually backed up your argument, we like that in these parts. 

Modifié par Bryy_Miller, 08 octobre 2010 - 08:11 .

[casedawgz]

RinpocheSchnozberry wrote...

CoS Sarah Jinstar wrote...

Wow, just wow. Maybe you should stick to Half life if number crunching is too "boring" for you. I absolutely love people who want every game, to be as deep as a run of the mill first person shooter, lets get to the action already right? right? Sad.

I hardly consider having a voiced protagonist being "more connected", in alot of ways you're actually less connected from a role playing element, but then again I keep forgeting, you don't want a roleplaying game, you want an action game with a decent story.

Haha!    Half Life is a run of the mill FPS?  I think you are totally out of touch.    Also, there are plenty of RPGs that would love to have the story, setting, and characters of the Half Life series.  There's nothing sad about wanting more story more quickly.  That is what an RPG is all about.


In the end, all the number crunching ever amounted to was a vehicle
to take the player to the story.  That vehicle changing, becoming
lighter and more flexible.  Get used to it.  [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/grin.png[/smilie]  

Role playing = making choices in your Hawkette's story.

I hardly consider having a voiced protagonist being "more connected", in
alot of ways you're actually less connected from a role playing
element, but then again I keep forgeting, you don't want a roleplaying
game, you want an action game with a decent story.

You're the one on the side of "More numbers!  More combat!  More loot comparison!"   I'm after more time with the story of Hawkette's rise to power and you're after combat mechanics.  So who is the one that wants an action game with a decent story?  

Don't get me wrong, I do want action!  It should be like ME2's action sequences.  Quick, fun, well paced, and full of bodies flying and monsters roaring and sweet locations.  But the story comes first.  The action serves the story.  It always has, and it always will.  It's just about to serve the story better.

Half-Life 2 is, to me, still the game to which all other games must aspire.

[tmp7704]

PoopyStuff wrote...

Who cares about tactics.
your party is immortal.

one person gets away, everyone survives.

Between free save/load if someone died and optional ability to resurrect dead people, harping on this point is rather disingenous. Or short-sighted.

[Bryy_Miller]

Eh, Half-Life 2 was fairly cookie cutter. It was good, and amazing, but fairly paint-by-numbers. I felt that it did not utilize it's full potential.

[Sylvius the Mad]

tmp7704 wrote...

Between free save/load if someone died and optional ability to resurrect dead people, harping on this point is rather disingenous. Or short-sighted.

The reload option happens outside the game, so that's not really relevant.

Resurrection is relevant, though permanent death was certainly possible in BG, and resurrection was expensive.

The inability to die in DAO bothered me far less than the inconsistency with which the detah mechanic was applied.

[Lyssistr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Between free save/load if someone died and optional ability to resurrect dead people, harping on this point is rather disingenous. Or short-sighted.

The reload option happens outside the game, so that's not really relevant.

Resurrection is relevant, though permanent death was certainly possible in BG, and resurrection was expensive.

The inability to die in DAO bothered me far less than the inconsistency with which the detah mechanic was applied.

I'd say getting chunked was not BG's strongest point and is not part of what I missed in BG when I played DAO.

For resurrection, it costs only if you go to a temple. There's a spell and if I remember well, a resurrection rod.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Lyssistr wrote...

For resurrection, it costs only if you go to a temple. There's a spell and if I remember well, a resurrection rod.

You couldn't be high enough level to cast the spell in BG unless you had the expansion.  And even that wouldn't fixed being chunked.

[Lyssistr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Lyssistr wrote...

For resurrection, it costs only if you go to a temple. There's a spell and if I remember well, a resurrection rod.

You couldn't be high enough level to cast the spell in BG unless you had the expansion.  And even that wouldn't fixed being chunked.

if by BG you refer solely to BG I, maybe so, can't recall that I haven't played BG I as much as I have played BG II. 

Getting chunked was not BG's best part imo, I certainly didn't miss it in DAO.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Yes, BG means BG1.

I've played BG far more than I've played BG2. I disagree with many of BG2's design decisions, and consider it the inferior game.

[Lyssistr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Yes, BG means BG1.
I've played BG far more than I've played BG2. I disagree with many of BG2's design decisions, and consider it the inferior game.

In my view the only bit where BG1 outdid BGII was Sarevok as the last boss. I still replay BG II every few years. As far  BG I is concerned, I never found replaying it fun and the only time I finished it was back on release time.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Whereas, I never neven made it into chapter 3 of BG2.

[Tiax Rules All]

This thread is too big for me to read at this point but to respond to the thread title:
How about a little BG2 style?

The more BG2 style ANYTHING you put into the game the better. God I love that game. I' m trying to force my way through awakenings right now before starting up another BG trilogy playthrough.

[Ortaya Alevli]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Whereas, I never neven made it into chapter 3 of BG2.

You can complete, what, about 95 percent of the game before concluding Chapter 2 anyway, so there's a good chance you didn't miss a lot.

[Tiax Rules All]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Whereas, I never neven made it into chapter 3 of BG2.

Sylvius, no man, no don't say bad things about BG2 I mean how? BG 1 was great and BG 2 was the best game ever. Thats just how it is.... thats just how it is

[Lyssistr]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Whereas, I never neven made it into chapter 3 of BG2.

When you have spare time, go back & finish it, very much worth it imo. If you don't like SoA, ToB is also very good and can be played without finishing BG II:SoA iirc.

I consider BG I to be quite a free-roaming game and these sort of games are not my cup of tea. BG II is more story driven to a degree but for me it has the right balance between freedom, plot, sideplots, RPG elements etc. Almost like a golden cut(*).

(*) Only thing I'd like to see in BG's is more ability to skip combat using e.g. charisma, then it'd be perfect for my tastes.
 

[Lyssistr]

Ortaya Alevli wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Whereas, I never neven made it into chapter 3 of BG2.

You can complete, what, about 95 percent of the game before concluding Chapter 2 anyway, so there's a good chance you didn't miss a lot.

That's an overstatement, there's allot to see in Ch 3 and what follows.

[Vaeliorin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vaeliorin wrote...
I want turn-based with a grid.  Does that make me even older?  I think BG1 was too new-fangled.

(I, admittedly, know that I'm actually a couple years younger than you, but still...had to be said.  )

Good point.

I don't remember - did you ever play Wizard's Crown?

Nope, that was a bit before my time.  We didn't have a computer until 1984 (Wizard's Crown came out in 1985, apparently) and I certainly wasn't the one picking which games we bought at the time, seeing as I was only 7.  Most of what I played from that era where adventure games (as that's what my mom liked and bought.)

Anyway, the reason I went looking for a C=64 emulator was because the C=64 had the best version of Ultima IV.  And ever since I watched a YouTube video of the opening menu screen last week I desperately want to play it.

I interestingly found a Flash version that's apparently the complete game.  I haven't messed around with it much, but I did read the Book of History.

[PoopyStuff]

if there were some consequences for having your hitpoints drop to 0.

that would be nice..



as it is now, if I have all my fingers broken but 1 at the end of a fight, my hand regenerates and I can fight again right after.



in a sense, you have 1 character, a shared hitpoint pool.

as long as one characters hitpoint pool doesn't hit 0, everyone goes back up to 100.



WOW anyone?

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I don't remember - did you ever play Wizard's Crown?

Nope, that was a bit before my time.  We didn't have a computer until 1984 (Wizard's Crown came out in 1985, apparently) and I certainly wasn't the one picking which games we bought at the time, seeing as I was only 7.

I asked because, given your preferences regarding combat, Wizard's Crown could well be your favourite game of all time.  No other game has ever done turn-based tactical combat like Wizard's Crown.

I interestingly found a Flash version that's apparently the complete game.  I haven't messed around with it much, but I did read the Book of History.

Whoa.  That's the PC version with the fan-made 256-colour patch.  I've never heard the music quite like that before, though; it's clearly been redone to sound more symphonic.

[Sylvius the Mad]

PoopyStuff wrote...

if there were some consequences for having your hitpoints drop to 0.
that would be nice..

There are consequences.  Those injuries aren't trivial (at least until you get Cleansing Aura - then they're trivial).

[Vaeliorin]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vaeliorin wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I don't remember - did you ever play Wizard's Crown?

Nope, that was a bit before my time.  We didn't have a computer until 1984 (Wizard's Crown came out in 1985, apparently) and I certainly wasn't the one picking which games we bought at the time, seeing as I was only 7.

I asked because, given your preferences regarding combat, Wizard's Crown could well be your favourite game of all time.  No other game has ever done turn-based tactical combat like Wizard's Crown.

Hmm...I'll have to see if I can find a version of it somewhere.  It would at least be something interesting to have a look at.

I interestingly found a Flash version that's apparently the complete game.  I haven't messed around with it much, but I did read the Book of History.

Whoa.  That's the PC version with the fan-made 256-colour patch.  I've never heard the music quite like that before, though; it's clearly been redone to sound more symphonic.

Sometime when I have the time, I mean to play through it (or at least try.)  I really am not a fan of the style of character selection (seeing as I wanted either a druid or paladin and ended up with a bard) and I'm a bit surprised that the guards don't react to anything I say to them (not even "Hello."  I tried swearing at them, as I recall a lot of older games having funny reactions if you swear, but even that didn't get a response.)  Granted, the only Ultima's I've played are 2, 7 apparently (I have "The Complete Ultima VII", and I recall that I played it, but I don't remember anything about it), 9 (which I played for a short period, died repeatedly, and gave up on because I dislike player-skill based combat), and Ultima Underworld I & II (again, which I know I've played, but don't recall anything about.)

I really should install those and see how they are.  My only concern is that there's a 3.5" floppy in the box (it's my floppy, not something that came with the game) that I have no idea what it is, and I don't have a floppy drive in my PC (because I honestly can't recall the last time I used a floppy for anything.)

Anyway, more on-topic, actual (non-story related) character death always seemed kind of meaningless to me, as all it ever meant was a reload.  With DA, I often played on after someone went down.  Granted, the injuries didn't end up being particularly meaningful because of all the injury kits you get (most games I easily had 20+ injury kits by the end of the game) but it was nice in theory.

[tmp7704]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

Between free save/load if someone died and optional ability to resurrect dead people, harping on this point is rather disingenous. Or short-sighted.

The reload option happens outside the game, so that's not really relevant.

Not relevant to what, the ability to play the game as if the death never happened? I'd disagree. To the point where i'd say the auto-resurrection after the battle is very much simple acknowledgment "death" in a computer game is very much meaningless due to these out-of-game mechanics, and perceived just as minor annoyance that tends to make the player merely mutter angrily and reload/redo the encounter. Similar why some other combat-focused genres also have largely moved from static health pool + health pack to auto-regenerating health.

(the other reason is, there's school of thought that auto-regeneration allows the players to experiment more and risk stunts in individual encounters they'd otherwise shirk from in fear of death... which tends to make the game more enjoyable)

Modifié par tmp7704, 09 octobre 2010 - 02:10 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vaeliorin wrote...

Hmm...I'll have to see if I can find a version of it somewhere.  It would at least be something interesting to have a look at.

You create a full party of 8 characters.  It's a classless and levelles system where you buy everything from skills and abilities to hit points by spending XP.  And in combat characters, in addition to losing hit points, can also suffer injuries or bleeding (and different weapons are differently likely to cause these various effects).

There's not much to the game aside from combat (and some puzzles) - it was criticized at the time for being too "hack-and-slash", which is why I find the label today so amusing.

Sometime when I have the time, I mean to play through it (or at least try.)  I really am not a fan of the style of character selection (seeing as I wanted either a druid or paladin and ended up with a bard)

It's fairly easily gameable (your class is determined solely by the virtue you choose last, and you're never given the same option again once you've chosen against it), but I always liked trying to adopt a character first and then seeing what I ended up with.

If you ever play the game a second time, pick humility.  The starting location for Humility really blows.

Granted, the only Ultima's I've played are 2, 7 apparently (I have "The Complete Ultima VII", and I recall that I played it, but I don't remember anything about it), 9 (which I played for a short period, died repeatedly, and gave up on because I dislike player-skill based combat), and Ultima Underworld I & II (again, which I know I've played, but don't recall anything about.)

Ultima Underworld is one of my all-time top 5 games.

You'd probably dislike the combat (though there is very little mandatory combat in the game).

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 09 octobre 2010 - 04:39 .

[ErichHartmann]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Whereas, I never neven made it into chapter 3 of BG2.

That's insane.  BG2's storyline blows 1 out of the water.  Sounds like you only care about the mechanics.