alanschu

Not sure how you'd make an entire tileset of acqueducts. Seems a bit overkill.

You've already made it perfectly clear that, even if the game has an excellent rules system, a fantastic setting, excellent graphical style, beautiful music, and AAA voice acting, you won't like it unless it is merely extensions of the original Fallout games. Thing is, you still aren't looking past the title. The second you see the name Fallout, you demand it to mirror its predecessors, and have already condemned the game because it won't (which is funny, because we still don't have any idea what the rules system is). It works out well for you though, as it's a win-win situation. If the game turns out like crap, you can come back here and go "see see" in some sort of justification of yourself being correct. But if it does turn out great, and you play it, and you enjoy it...then you win because you get an excellent game experience.

Speculation at best. Given Troika's track record, what makes you so certain that Troika could have lasted long enough to actually release the game? That's your failure. Poor Hades....can't even look past a title. That makes sense. I'm sure you didn't like KOTOR2 at all, for good reason....none of the original developers were involved! In fact, I think the majority of the developers of Fallout 1 weren't even around for Fallout 2. I agree with other sentiments....there is zero chance of making the Fallout fans happy. If it's not built with the Fallout engine, it will obviously suck.

I think, this is the worst case possible <{POST_SNAPBACK}> If that's the worst case possible, then things are looking up for the game.

Given that he's a Swede, they'd have to be a gift from Monsieur Forsberg.

I'm just curious, but how did you disable to auto-run? Or did you seriously walk around holding down the walk key? (Default shift?) In any case, I still can't see how you'd even be close to past Downtown, let alone beating the werewolf with level 5 Celerity (heh) so soon after removing the game and chastizing Troika about it. Though I guess it MIGHT be possible, given that your first attempt at the game didn't seem to be a very thorough one. I assumed you were actually doing sidequests though.

Which is but a testament on how bad 'roleplaying' computer RPGs have gotten considering Baldur's Gate is better then everything released this past few years. Make no mistake, the reason i choosed BG1 as the object of my argument is exactly that the game had many inherent flaws, yet, it succeeded in those elements which i consider pivotal of a great roleplaying experience. Truly, from your last reply you seem so stuck with game mechanics you have completely forgotten why those games need to be played to begin with. You ask me what difference is there between 'THAT' and an adventure game, or reading a (fiction) book, i say: there is none. They all serve a similar purpose. Their approach may be different, but they share the same goal. The issue here is that you cannot focus on how a particular medium goes about achieving this particular common goal and nothing else, because there is no value in that by itself. Seriously, what do you get out of those so called 'roleplaying options'? What does it mean to you to be able to be 'evil' or 'good' in itself? Torment is often slandered for lacking 'roleplaying options'. Please, feel free to explain to me the appeal of having options in itself, with no regard as to whether they are REALLY worth taking in the first place. I say Baldur's Gate offered a great level of freedom that i have yet to experience in an RPG since. The main quest literally doesn't start until you enter Baldur's Gate. Many people seem to be rather tired of the common 'save the world' plot scenario, and Baldur's Gate is often cited as one of the games that didn't follow this tired device. Why do you assume? Again, quit being so obsessed about game mechanics. The freshness i'm referring to applies to Bioware, not the game. The way Baldur's Gate is crafted is very natural and direct. Every other game they made since has a 'forced' quality to it, like they are trying too hard to please their fans whereas in BG1 they allowed themselves more personal freedom. Nonsense. Torment was such a successful attempt because the game was developed following the criteria of the developers themselves. The chemistry behind the group effort that produced this game is almost palpable. You see, in Torment options actually meant something, because whilst their number was relatively limited compared to 'some' games i could mention, each one of them offered as unique an experience as the developers were able to design. For comparison there was thousands of things you could do in Morrowind but none of them amount to jack. This is why i'm not at all impressed when you talk about 'roleplaying options'... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Morrowind is not a particularly good RP game either, given it's complete lack of substance and interaction. When I look at "roleplaying" though, I like to at least be given the illusion of making choices of some substance. As for the main plot of Baldur's Gate, I felt it was pretty clear that it got started once you were told to go and find Khalid and Jaheira. Maybe it was less obvious to you. Good luck entering Baldur's Gate prior to doing things such as clearing out the mines. I would have appreciated a bit more discussion with the party members, outside of "Gah, you still do not look for Dynaheir...DIE!" from Minsc (which was funny, because I actually had him go ape**** right when I got to the Gnoll Stronghold). I think the Good/Evil characters bitched and moaned when your reputation was not what they wanted. It was still a piss poor game if I wanted to play a murderous character. It's only fun avoiding the Flaming Fist guards that spawn on the maps with a low reputation for so long. I was never really able to play through Baldur's Gate in any different way. I felt that both Baldur's Gate 2, and Torment, did a much better job. While Torment did have a linear story (a very good one IMO), it still allowed you to play through that similar story in a slightly different way, particularly via dialogue. Baldur's Gate provided opportunities for me to play through aspects of the story in a variety of ways, and enjoy the story in that variety. It's why I've been able to playthrough it in its entirety many more times than the original Baldur's Gate. As for criticizing me for using the term "roleplaying options," the main reason why I did was because you were going on talking about how "RPGs are meant to be a roleplaying experience." So what exactly is a "roleplaying experience?" Given that it seems RPGs are meant to contain it, is it safe to assume that it's something at least relatively distinct to a game within the RPG genre?

I agree. In fact, I certainly do not think that old school RPGs are awesome RPG games. And I was including Baldur's Gate (which is a game I really, really enjoyed) as not being all that particularly different from them. It was a linear plot, that had some sidequests, and a ton of monster killing with map exploration. I was saying that if Lyric felt that this was a fresh approach, then he must not have played earlier games because it seemed be all it took to be defined as an RPG game. The reason why I said Lyric should have at least mentioned Ultima, was because he was the one harkening about older RPGs being better. All other games, especially from a more roleplaying point of view, I felt were rather junk. He used Baldur's Gate as his example...I considered it a poorer one. But I do think that Baldur's Gate was a better game than most RPGs. I would consider newer RPG games to be better. Though I'll let this go because you had the impression that I felt older RPG games were better. I also agree that Baldur's Gate is an excellent game, but I felt it was similar to them in terms of the linear plot and all that other stuff mentioned. Just on a really, really large scale. This was not directed at me...but I was too lazy to delete it from the post...even though it would actually have been less work to delete it, rather than explaining it.

The moment we've likely not been waiting for. How to get past the big bad wolf with a 1 dexterity, non celerity wielding malkavian. People that still want to play this game may want to avoid this video, as it contains some top notch secrets for how to survive the werewolf, which you may want to figure out on your own. This is the correct way. It can be pretty tricky, as you can see, and I barely make it through. It is definitely the most challenging part of the game IMO. Correct_Way.wmv This is the video of the not so correct way. It's a bit too slow, and doing it will get you killed. Though to be honest, I was a lot closer to success then I thought I would get. Not_Correct_Way.wmv This is the absolute stupid thing to do. It might seem like a good idea to start, but nope...it's bad bad bad bad bad. I'll forgive one attempt at most, but you should definitely never, ever try it more than once. Dumbass_Way.wmv All kidding aside, I was able to successfully get through on my first attempt, only getting hit once. And I was serious that I survived as long as I did in both failures. My "mad FPS skills" accounted for me holding down W, turning with the mouse, and tapping E to open the door. I seriously considered doing the scene a variety of ways, including running backwards, and using the keyboard to turn. The only real reason I didn't was because the chat with Nines was taking too long.

Possible. Not confirming nor denying for the sake of my age. :ph34r: <{POST_SNAPBACK}> How cliche.

And it consists of a handful of games...Baldur's Gate not being one of them. I'll stop throwing "PR" talk at you when you stop saying stupid, untrue stuff. What's the difference between that and an adventure game? Or reading a book? And how could I immerse myself in the world in a role I chose to play? How exactly could you play through the game ANY different than I? There certainly a plethora of options for each quest point Oh wait...there aren't. If you are using Baldur's Gate as a baseline for playing at your own pace, then literally every RPG is just as good. Pacing is moot in most RPGs, which let you (despite the fact that the hordes of bad guys are coming, or a meteor is coming, or whatever) wander aimlessly doing pointless little fun sidequests. You can play through KOTOR at your own pace as well. Freshness of it's approach? A world with a linear plot, sidequests, and tons of monster killing? I guess you didn't play RPGs before Baldur's Gate. You could have at least mentioned a game like Ultima, which actually granted the player the opportunity to do stuff other than quest (like bake bread if you wanted to!). Torment achieved it because you were actually able to play through the game in a relatively distinct way. In Baldur's Gate you could not. (Unless you consider doing sidequest X before sidequest Y as a "distinct" difference....but that wouldn't differentiate between the game and other games at all).

Vampire: Bloodlines Hades styles: Hades.wmv

but since in the past there was no law, that would mean boards that were equal had women that were qualified to be there. the new law forces companies to hire people, women, regardless of their qualifications. this will not create wealth, but it will create resent. taks <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It will also knock down systemic, sociological barriers.

Only if he can find a civilization that naturally makes an association that increasing something is actually decreases it.

Yeah, the Apple IIs were huge in the education arena. Especially if you were in grade school in the mid to late 80s.

If you have trouble counting down or subtracting single digit numbers, I can't help you there. Besides I can easily say the same thing that the only reason why you find a 3e CRPG easier than a 2ndEd one is because you are used to the fact that in most other console/PC RPGs ACs go up as they get better not down. Is it that surprising that you would find counting up more intuitive? With that said, it is still a trivial matter to convert AC in 2ndEd to 3e style (just subtract from 20)so that you can count up or forego THACO completely if that is your wish. Here's the point that YOU JUST AREN'T GETTING. Of course YOU have no problems with it now. You've already played it for so long. Stating that the 2nd edition rules are intuitive is akin to saying Hitler was a benevolent pacifist. It does not matter whether you think it's better or not. And of course you wouldn't have problems learning SPECIAL. It's an intuitive (i.e. Increasing something makes it better...OMG what a concept!) system. This is exactly what WotC claimed.. Almost certainly a marketing strategy to get more sales. I have yet to see the statistics. Get some people that don't know it and teach them the games! It's what I did! Then you are not a valid authority to talk to me about rule systems. Don't talk about something you know nothing about. If you are not familiar with them then you are wasting your time.. as well as mine's. I'm basing my statements on the CRPGs which have utilized the rule systems. Go ahead and be all elitist. You're just crying because an unintuitive ruleset that you prefer isn't the default ruleset anymore. All moot, when we're discussing CRPG games. And even though I don't actively play in PnP games, it doesn't take much to see which one has the basics that aren't contradictory to basic human interpretation. Seriously, go down the street and ask people at random. Ask them "This item has an armor rating of 4, and this item has an armor rating of 3. Which one is considered better armor?" Then come back here so I can call BS when you state that anything other than an exceptional minority (if any) say that an armor rating of 3 is better than an armor rating of 4. You CANNOT win this.

Macs I remember when I was in school. Our first computers where Macs that used some sort of DOS type software. No GUIs back then. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No GUI on a Mac? Are you sure you were using a Mac? Or was it an old Apple II?

Except modern RPGs aren't very good at rolepaying, wouldn't you say? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No worse than plenty of older RPGs. What "roleplaying" options really existed in Baldur's Gate? You could "play" evil....if you didn't mind fighting hordes of guards. Certainly didn't see much difference between classes or even gender however. Sounds like the Odyssey.

I highly doubt this. If this was the case, you wouldn't be griping about a 30 hour game, because it'd be much longer than that for you. I'd almost be willing to call you on this bluff, except that I know it'd be a boring game of NWN for me, plus I'm still working my way through Bloodlines to make some werewolf videos for you. Unfortunately there's not much I can do to prove otherwise, except that it puts your game completion times to question. I find it exceptionally difficult to believe you'd take 10 minutes to walk from the Empire Hotel to the Anarch bar. Your game time for NWN should also have also exceeded 30 hours by a pleasant margin....unless you skipped half of the game. Of course, it is an easy thing to say. Maybe you forgot to turn run back on in your Bloodlines game.

And wouldn't it be metagaming to run everywhere?

I think most of them are dead already! The horror documentary guy still lives, but I suspect not for long :D

Why are you stating all of the Mac stereotypes? What on Earth do you have against it? Are you trying to imply something about my Father, since you posted it in a thread where I mentioned that he was a Mac user?

Me too. And I'm only 24, almost 25.

Well, ignoring the fact that it's a multi-purpose machine. Otherwise, honestly, what's the difference between a PC and a console? For the record, it is possible to buy video cards and all that jazz for a Mac as well you know

I don't remember him saying that. I should do some investigating with respect to adding more to my sig.