123 réponses à ce sujet

[Urgon]

bussinrounds wrote...

Urgon wrote...

Cimeas wrote...

I think looking back on the list, I might have put MotB a little higher, but the problem with it is that it's a wonderful campaign stuck on top of the crappy Neverwinter Nights 2 engine, with all it's numerous camera and systems problems.

I wonder if MotB had, says, been built on top of the Dragon Age toolset, I'm sure it would have been a much better game (obviously Bioware wouldn't let them do that, but just as a thought exercise).

A lot of the characters also lost something because they weren't voice acted imho.

I agree and disagree at the same time. MotB in DA:O engine would be an improvement over NWN 2 engine, but what i would really like to see is MotB in Infinity engine like IWD2. I would kill for such a port, and MotB in IE would be equal or even better than many "classics".

 Even better yet... in the ToEE engine.

   And yea, why would you want a d&d game in the DA engine which has those s***y MMO mechanics such as KOOLDOWNS and AGGRO ?

Game engine has nothing to do with the mechanics i think. Nothing stops an IE game having TB combat. I prefer IE from ToEE engine as the latter is more unstable and buggy. Maybe was that the game hadn't enough dev time, i don't know. But yeah, i wouldn't mind ToEE combat. On the other hand i wouldn't mind BG2 or IWD combat either. I like both equal.

[LTD]

^ I wish somebody would do this. I hear so much good about MoTB but it is literally impossible to play NWN2 thanks to the UI and camera angles out of some Cthulhian fever dream:l

[eroeru]

Me too. ToEE overall system sounds good. Or just make a whole new game out of it. Via Kickstarter, perhaps.

[Morroian]

EpicBoot2daFace wrote...

I agree with everything except ME2. It's not an RPG. Hallway shooter with dialogue.

Deus Ex HR is less of an RPG than  ME2. ME2 is barely an rpg though.

[Urgon]

LTD wrote...

^ I wish somebody would do this. I hear so much good about MoTB but it is literally impossible to play NWN2 thanks to the UI and camera angles out of some Cthulhian fever dream:l

I understand you. Don't bother with the OC and just start with MotB. Put the game on easy to minimize the hassle and play it. You won't regret it. As for the camera etc., all you can do is endure,and in enduring grow strong .

Modifié par Urgon, 08 avril 2013 - 09:01 .

[Cimeas]

Urgon wrote...

LTD wrote...

^ I wish somebody would do this. I hear so much good about MoTB but it is literally impossible to play NWN2 thanks to the UI and camera angles out of some Cthulhian fever dream:l

I understand you. Don't bother with the OC and just start with MotB. Put the game on easy to minimize the hassle and play it. You won't regret it. As for the camera etc., all you can do is endure,and in enduring grow strong .

Yeah, I set it to 3rd Person  Mass Effect/DA2 style for exploration, and then the top down one with infinite scroll (the non-locked one) for combat.  Persevere though.  The art style for MOTB is actually quite good, the academy in particular (and the forest) are pretty.  (or pretty for 2007, anyway).

[wsandista]

The "Tactical"(or whatever the mode is called) camera view in NWN2 isn't that bad.

[Urgon]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Seboist wrote...

RPGs are about recreating the P&P experience with stats,inventory, character customization(no not fluff like how they look),etc not LARPing as a self-insert or whatever fan fiction that only exists in the head of the player.

It sounds like we completely disagree on what an RPG is, Seb. I disagree wholeheartedly with your definition, but your final statement is most interesting.

I do agree that it's not about LARPing, especially as a self-insert (though there's certainly nothing wrong with putting oneself in a different situation and examining how you act). Most specifically--in the head of the player.

Exactly.

This is why I don't consider games like Skyrim or Dark Souls to be much of RPGs, because 90% of the roleplaying is going on in the player's head. This is why Bioware games are such good roleplaying games--because you're expressing your roleplaying through dialog and story choices.

(I just used your statement intended to bash Bioware to praise them, didn't I?)

But the game does not recognize it. Your choices have only cosmetic consequences at best and no consequences at worst. I agree that Bethesda's games are poor RPG's because they rely only on LARPing,
but the notion that your choices matter in Bioware games is mostly in your head as well.

[bussinrounds]

EntropicAngel wrote...

Urgon wrote...

But the game does not recognize it. Your choices have only cosmetic consequences at best and no consequences at worst. I agree that Bethesda's games are poor RPG's because they rely only on LARPing,
but the notion that your choices matter in Bioware games is mostly in your head as well.

I never claimed that they matter--in fact, I'd agree that they matter little. But what matters is having those choices.

 What good is having dialog choices when they lead to the same conclusion, or just a different cutscene that really has no impact on the game or gameplay ?

  If I'm gonna play a game focused on 'story elements', I want some actual meaningful consequences, otherwise I might as well watch a movie or read a book.  

[Jonathan28]

DE:HR should be first or second and ME2 should not be anywhere near this list, but otherwise, I agree.

Modifié par Jonathan28, 09 avril 2013 - 06:03 .

[Il Divo]

Urgon wrote...

But the game does not recognize it. Your choices have only cosmetic consequences at best and no consequences at worst. I agree that Bethesda's games are poor RPG's because they rely only on LARPing,
but the notion that your choices matter in Bioware games is mostly in your head as well.

In many cases, the game does recognize it. Simple example: injured Batarian on Omega in ME2, the ability to allow him to live or die, which is directly linked to the player's actions and we observe a consequence. 

The key point is that there is reactivity to the player's actions, even if it's not always resulting in dramatically different story outcomes. That's a separation from a game like Skyrim, which alot of people praise for emergent narrative or the ability to make up their own tale. You always play an unknown prisoner, which some people usually take as an opportunity to create their own backstory for said character which fuels their actions throughout the game, but since said backstory can almost never be acknowledged by the game world, there really is no reactivity in many cases.

The way I see it, the difference between headcanon and role-playing is whether there is an element outside my control to acknowledge my actions, not whether those actions result in dramatically different stories, as per the Witcher 2.

Modifié par Il Divo, 09 avril 2013 - 06:43 .

[Urgon]

Il Divo wrote...

Urgon wrote...

But the game does not recognize it. Your choices have only cosmetic consequences at best and no consequences at worst. I agree that Bethesda's games are poor RPG's because they rely only on LARPing,
but the notion that your choices matter in Bioware games is mostly in your head as well.

In many cases, the game does recognize it. Simple example: injured Batarian on Omega in ME2, the ability to allow him to live or die, which is directly linked to the player's actions and we observe a consequence. 

The key point is that there is reactivity to the player's actions, even if it's not always resulting in dramatically different story outcomes. That's a separation from a game like Skyrim, which alot of people praise for emergent narrative or the ability to make up their own tale. You always play an unknown prisoner, which some people usually take as an opportunity to create their own backstory for said character which fuels their actions throughout the game, but since said backstory can almost never be acknowledged by the game world, there really is no reactivity in many cases.

The way I see it, the difference between headcanon and role-playing is whether there is an element outside my control to acknowledge my actions, not whether those actions result in dramatically different stories, as per the Witcher 2.

I never said that Bioware are similar to Bethseda. While not my favorite company by any means, Bioware is leagues ahead from everything Bethesda has ever done. Bethesda does one and only one thing well. Exploration and level design. Everything else in their games are crap. If being able to walk around aimlessly killing things explore carries the game by itself to you, you are good. If not Bethesda's games are horrible.
Bioware allows you to define your character's personallity by offering choices, and then takes it back by having the game not recognise your choices. Compaire that to, let's say Mask of the Betrayer, who not only has a terrific story and allows you to roleplay your character with a ton of choices, these choices change the game and NPCs behavior constantly. You can literally experience the same story in two or three completelly diffirent ways depending or your ingame choices.

[bussinrounds]

Didn't Bioware say themselves that...due to their research shown, most ppl don't replay the games, so they don't want to create any 'extra content' that never gets seen/played ?

[bussinrounds]

If the game acknowledges your actions and has actual mechanics for it, you're "roleplaying", If you're going around making up s**t in your head and the game doesn't acknowledge it, your LARPing.(acting)

[Rawgrim]

The two Drakensang games were pretty cool. Linear story, but great cutomizing vallue for the party.