StillLife

I'm not really blaming the lack of difficulty on the exsistence of queues, but if they're present and usable more than 10% of the time, then the game probably is too easy. Because if you're basically just watching your characters do stuff without you, it's not really that interactive of a game in my book. It's expected to watch an enemy perform their actions in any game, regardless of the time scale. When you're waiting long periods of time while your characters are doing something without your direct input prior to each of their actions, that's when it becomes boring for me. It is quite different from waiting for your turn to come up in a turn-based game. I don't know, I just like for a game to require my control regularly during combat moments. For example, I prefer RTS' where you have to frequently direct your units in the course of a battle, over one's where you just kind of send a blob of units at the enemies forces and watch what happens. Apparently that isn't as important to some people, so maybe it's just a weird quirk of mine. I have trouble believing most of you truly prefer the queue based combat in KOTOR or NWN over every other CRPGs combat model though.

Yes, constantly inputting commands is more engaging than shoving them all out at once, sitting back and watching things unfold for a minute or two. Requiring constant feedback from the player is not a gimmick, that's how games with moderately interesting combat generally work if you haven't noticed. Removing the need for input from the player for long stretches of time is not fun or interesting. Should be a pretty basic concept to grasp. Otherwise, there might as well just be an auto-resolve function so combat can be entirely skipped in all but the most challenging of battles and the inactive watching part is entirely removed. The queue is a side-effect of combat that is most likely too easy.

But...that's not what it's called or how it's pronounced. The name is foolish. People will most likely stop with the puns about it sure, there can only be so many bad puns before they lose their luster. The name will still always be a ridiculous beacon of cute, over-sincerity gone awry though. That doesn't mean the system still won't be great. Didn't you make like two threads poking fun at the name btw? Well, I was thinking of the old Intellivision pads which I think may have come first, but wouldn't swear to it. I've bought and followed every Nintendo system since the NES was released and didn't realize they were the first to use the analog stick for games. That is pretty cool then.

My point was that if there's even a queue system in place, the combat is probably too damn easy and simple, otherwise, why have it? Look at KOTOR for example. 90% of the time in that game I queued up a max amount of moves for all my characters and just kinda floated through combat. force power, force power blaster shot, super blaster shot, sit back, yawn Also worth pointing out that even if there's just an illusion of continued interactivty by having the player enter their next moves individually, at least they're constantly engaged and fully focused on whats happening. Look at WOW for example, which doesn't allow you to queue anything. If that game had boring queues, far fewer people would probably be able to stomach the combat for very long. Though it would be good for gold farmers. As for your FO comparison, there were other factors you always had to keep in mind, like distance you wanted the character to the enemy, limited number of action points, staying out of companion's line of fire, using a burst or single shot, using drug buffs, etc. Using queues in that game without having an expert knowledge of it would've been suicide, same with JA2, or Silent Storm for example. Real-time, regardless of if you can pause or not doesn't allow for the same tactical complexity of turn-based combat. So it at least needs to be fast-paced, exciting, and not a boring automated affair to compensate. The simple pause and select thing was fine for Baldurs Gate, no need to pander to lazy or impatient gamers by catering to them any further than that. Fortunately the queue thing doesn't seem to have caught on outside BioWare and Obsidian. Hopefully this will be the last game that utilizes it. And it's also for people who don't like turn-based which is why it sucks in both respects. Pseudo turn-based with queues completely nullifies the tactical complexity you'd get from a full TB game, but also succeeds in eliminating the reflexive advantage of real-time. So who's it good for in reality? It's good for people who don't like being challenged by games, which kinda defeats part of the purpose.

Pre-planning actions more than two in advance, when in the thick of combat shouldn't even be feasible if the game is appropriately complex and challenging. It's a mechanic for people who don't really like to think and react on the fly when it comes to combat, and games shouldn't be based around those people. Volourn, that's like saying no one is forcing you to use some Uber Sword of Unbalancing you find in the game, decent character builds, or health potions if they make the game too easy. Outside of difficulty setting choices, it's the developers job to keep things from being too easy for the player.

Now you can't accurately assess that. You being over it != most people being over it. I doubt most people even know of the new name yet. Ipod manages to sound like a fancy gadget, Wii sounds like a touchy feely high school art project. I'm not sure they actually invented the two-button controller and directional pad, nor the analogue stick as a device for playing games, but popularized it for home consoles for sure. Anyway, I see your point, but I still stand by what I said. The importance of quality and inventiveness in games still overrides gimmicky new ways to interface with them IMO. I'm still waiting for someone to get rid of the traditional right analogue stick for modern controllers and put a a touch pad similar to what you find on laptops on there. It would bring the precision a little closer to what you get with a traditional mouse.

Screens look adequate enough. I hate queuing actions in RPGs to begin with. What a horrible, horrible way to suck players right out of the game and make them feel like they're watching battles rather than engaging in them. <_< I understand pause is a necessary side effect of trying to have controllable party members in real-time, but there's no excuse for the queue crap to begin with. Unlimited queues are asinine.

I haven't played PnP since I was 13, almost 15 years ago now, so you got me there. But I guess I'm kind of lazy when it comes to a CRPG, I don't want to have to do much of the imagining, I want to create my character directly through choices in the game - not in my head. Might be why I utterly despised the IceWind Dales. Hating the combat and monster choices didn't help much either I guess. Sorry, but that just doesn't make much sense to me. You'd rather have absolutely no freedom, then a decent amount of freedom? It probably would have been better that way, I just personally wasn't put off much by the way it did end though. @Llyranor: I agree with most of what you wrote.

A previous incarnation over whom you had no control. You could claim that you had no control over being a spawn either, which is true. However even though you were a spawn , your ultimate destiny was still in your own hands. Ditto for KOTOR II. Your just facilitating the outcome that was already written from the start in PST. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Damn SP, had to hit me up twice on that one huh? I don't know, having a predetermined fate didn't bother me much I guess as long as the role-playing opportunities within the game were nice enough. I'd much prefer that over meaningless character creation where you don't really get to define your characters actual personality much(Oblivion). A combination of the two like in Fallout is probably the most fulfilling though. But you love JRPGs right? How can you hate on PS: T for not allowing you to create a character or choose your own destiny when most of those games don't either?

Nah, seperate entities. Jessica(?) must have been the one that did the "Wahey there!" things on the main BIS page. KK took over after she left or whatever. Don't remember what her original job was there.

Excuse me? Are you saying PS3 and 360 are NOT distracted by hardware? That's the only thing they talk about with those systems. They never mention the new and innovative way you'll be able to play games. Only that they have X speed processor or new cell technology or blue ray or whatever. None of that has anything to do with the actual games. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Nope, I didn't mention them as I guess I haven't been following either of 'em that much. Still, I was speaking more of how you interface with games and the necessity of change in that area, not their technical performance. Nintendo makes more...unique and potentially interesting games than anything Sony or Microsoft have ever crapped out. They should put all their focus on that, and try extending the appealof their games to different age ranges, rather than getting caught up in trying to push out new hardware gimmicks. What's been keeping me from really having a completely positive outlook on them for the last several years at least, is the fact they fall into this habit of marketing their products as cute toys rather than digital entertainment. Naming their new console a "Wii" is just a step back into that old habit that's limited their success with broader audiences in the past.

Maybe, but it still didn't erase what your character did through the course of the game. One of your previoius incarnations had signed a contract though, sealing your fate to serve in the Blood War eventually, no matter what. I guess they could have given you a choice to keep trying to escape it, but the sense of closure wouldn't have been as good IMO. It still doesn't mean everything you did through the course of the game ceased to matter.

If someone has a terminal illness, and no matter what, they're going to end up dead in a couple months, that doesn't mean that regardless of what they do, they'll just be someone who's going to die from a disease. They could be a ruthless, vengeful bastard in their last days, leaving a trail of destruction and sorrow in their wake, or a kind, noble soul that tries to leave a positive mark on the world before they go. Those actions and choices are what define who a person is, not where they end up, or whether or not they can change their destiny. So it's false to say the choices you make that define who your character are pointless, even if you have an inescapable fate lying ahead of you. Often, the journey is more important than the destination.

That kinda backs up my point though. Right now developers tend to pick a popular genre and just make a game that falls in line with it. We need more games that don't even attempt to conform to traditional genres. Like GTA, Animal Crossing, Europa 1400: The Guild, The Sims, etc.. You don't really need new hardware interfaces to make innovative games, though it could help I suppose. Does the innovation of DS games come only from the fact is has a stylus and dual screens, or could it be that Nintendo has deliberately tried to make more unorthodox games for it to seperate it from the more traditional library of games the GameBoy offers? That's a good point. I forgot Nintendo is looking more to appeal to people who don't play games rather than avid gamers. Refining the actual controls could be a great way to do that. But perhaps a lot of people just aren't interested in games because the current mainstream genres just aren't all that interesting to the average person.

GTFO! Do you just mainly prefer fantasy?

I'm all for mature content in games, but a game that presents me with options like that is just a bit too much.

Wrong. It's greatest strength was allowing you to define who your character was in meaningful ways. That's why you can't just compare it to a linear work of fiction and leave it at that. Sorry. You lose. I echo LoneWolf's assessment on soap operas too, they are terror incarnate. Please don't abuse PS:T with such an inhumane comparison Volourn. BTW(not directed at you Volourn), how is being stuck with a bunch of Gauntlet and Final Fantasy clones any better than being stuck with more games that are similar to the classics mentioned in this thread?

The question was phrased appropriately enough that I said maybe. I don't think there's anyway in hell I'd buy one from a store, but ordering one could be a possibility if it looks good enough after release. "Excuse me, I'm trying to get ahold of a Wii." It could very well fail to live up properly to that capability though. But yeah, it might be pretty cool if it does. Though I think innovation primarily needs to come from actual games - not the hardware, which Nintendo seems to get pretty distracted by.

I loved Warriors of the Eternal Sun too. Was a great little console game for its day. Pretty interesting story too. Baldurs Gate: Dark Alliance was craptastic though, so were all those other clones that used that engine. They should have all been released as budget titles given how mind-numbingly simplistic and dull they were - even in multiplayer.

Onboard video is usually a bit of a pain in the ass to disable once you have to upgrade to a new card. Rarely are they worth a damn even new anywyay; the chips are primarily for noob computer users who only want basic multimedia features. If that's all you're expecting out of the machine, it should be fine. I'm unfamiliar with that particular chipset though. Maybe try Googling it? Edit: Looks like Mkreku knows what he's talking about.

Change is good...sometimes, but it doesn't always mean things are changing for the better. Fallout, BG2, and PS: T all upped the depth of role-playing possibilities and non-linear story interaction in a video game. Unfortunately, it didn't seem to catch on fast enough so the genre reverted back to the older, simpler ways. Modern RPGs resemble action games more than they do role-playing games. I guess you could consider that "change", but not progress, which is what is important in my book.

Oh boy, some funny stuff in this thread. :D I can picture the commercial now: We see an ordinary, middle-aged man slinking around the house reading an unkown magazine, watching something on TV, behaving rather curiously and panicked anytime his wife enters the room. Finally the man consults with his wife. "Honey, I've got to talk to you about something. Look, I've been trying to shrug it off, and hide it from you for a long time, but everywhere I look it's all I can think about. I've come to realize I...I can't live in denial anymore. I've got to get my hands on Nintendo's Wii."

Hmm...careful, you'll have old Jefferson hopefuls everywhere renewing their crazed obsession for what never came to pass. Unless that was a hint. OMG, do a FO3 storyline expansion for NWN2 plz!