Magnum Opus

That's been my experience as well. I did play ME, but found that the NPCs were simply fire-and-forget. Actually, scratch that: they were just the "forget" part, since they were auto-firing. They couldn't die so that wasn't an issue, and they weren't necessary for any of the fights in the game, so controlling them was only an issue for me in one single mission where I had to "save the scientists". Any time I let the NPCs participate in that mission they'd end up killing the people I was trying to save, so I told them to go stand in a corner and keep quiet (as best I could, anyway; they didn't follow orders very well in that game, and the interface for doing so was clunky at best). One of the odd things about ME, though, is that I tend to remember the NPCs differently than I do with even the skeleton key model of characters that BG1 used. I remember Alora, Kivan, et. al. more clearly than I do Ashley, Kaiden n' Co. Probably because even on those brief, rare occasions that Alora & Kivan were in my party, I couldn't afford to just forget about them. ME was a game about me (Shep). BG was "us". ME's NPCs had more character development attached to them, more dialogue, but in the end it's BG's characters that end up sticking in my memory more strongly. Ultimately, I think of BG's NPCs as being with me for the entire adventure, while ME's characters are really only "there" on the Normandy or in other non-combat areas. That's a significant chunk of mindshare that ME's characters are losing, considering how much time is spent fighting. I find AI-controlled henchies ineffective the point of actually making the game harder, usually. ME was good in that I didn't have to pay attention to them at all, but that only meant they were useless instead of being a handicap. Would rather solo a game than cripple my own character's chances with AI controlled NPCs, in most cases.

Chalk me up as a Class 1 Moron, then.

Am thinking (hoping, really) is more than just smoke 'n mirrors, personally. More than ToEE's opening vignettes, but less than hope/hype might make of them. A genuine, if necessarily limited, improvement. BG only had the Bhaalspawn/Candlekeep thing going for its background; race was untouched by the story aside from suggesting Bhaal would get it on with anything that moved, and social class didn't even come up, I don't think. All I'm really hoping for from the origin stories in DA:O is a little more in the way of background info on the setting in general. Beyond that... *shrugs* The more meaningful they seem, whether because of the marketing or the way they're presented in the game, the more likely I am to at least try out other origins, but that's about it. Origins were never a main draw to this game for me, though, for the reasons already mentioned.

3 different antagonists places too much story emphasis on others, maybe? Bio's stories revolve around player, not antagonist, and that strokes player's ego. Bio's worlds revolve around player character, too. Have since BG2. When the sun literally rises and sets for the player (character), is very hard to go back to a more nebulous PC concept in favour of all the attention being shifted to the guy you're ultimately just going to kill anyway. Many people state that IWD's story wasn't as good as BG's. Me, am not at all convinced on that one. I think it's got more to do with the player's place in that story than the story itself. At this point, would think that the backlash against Bio doing that would ultimately be even greater than if they decided they weren't gonna do romances anymore. From a pure story perspective, would agree: defining static characters much easier than defining ones where some million or so unknown third parties are going to be bending, twisting, and breaking concept at every turn. Taking into account the player's ego, though... am thinking that maybe Bio's got the right of it (maybe), despite the inherent limits of the approach. Game stories aren't just about the story, after all. They're about the player in the story. Makes things kinda wacky. And, as I've heard remarkably frequently on the DA:O boards recently, it's just a game. Story, even in a Bio game, will play second fiddle. Lot of competing interests there.

Not quite the only one on the planet. I much preferred the more open style of NWN2's OC to the One Area-One Plot-Point method of MotB. If it weren't for the fact that the game as a whole chugs quite a bit, and that the camera has a way of driving me nuts, I'd still be playing the OC. Have given it a few retries when the mood strikes, but those technical issues keep driving me back, now that I already know how it turns out. MotB, though... once is enough for that style of game. Am having more fun with SoZ than with MotB, but those technical issues are still a bit of a hurdle. And just because this isn't a NWN2 thread... Haven't tried FO3 yet. Not sure if I will, either. Bethesda seems to be gettin' a little too shootery for my tastes. News that Obs is doing some work on it has kinda rekindled my interest, though. Maybe when the price drops.

Am not worried of that possibility in the slightest, to be honest. Have simply heard, many times over in fact, the position that "it's too late to change the game" as proof that this latest round of adverts isn't representative of the game as a whole (ie. sex and blood and blood and sex), and was wondering whether that was really the case in this instance. Still, game doesn't have to feature good combat (whether it's an action RPG or otherwise) in order to have a lot of it. That's largely academic though. I don't think either applies to DA:O. Not really, anyway.

Random question for the day: How much does it really take to change the character of a game? For an action game wanting to be a deep and varied RPG experience, very much. Content needs to be added. Systems need to be developed and implemented. NPCs need to be written. Interactions need to be conceptualized. But for an already mostly-finished deep and varied RPG experience yearning to let the action-RPG within free? Not quite so much, I'd think. Content in such a case needs to be cut, not added. Remove a joinable NPC. Drop a quest. Cut a bunch of areas. Such things are not trivial, but they're also things that I'd think would take a lot less time to do than adding things in, even if you've still got to make the resulting slash job look good in the end. Result would be a greater emphasis on the action part of the formerly deep and varied RPG. Heh. Me, I don't think the New Marketing's going to reflect the game as a whole all that well. Maybe that's just my preference for a more BG-ish type of game talking. And no, I'm not particularly impressed with the direction that's been taken either, but... *shrugs* Is not as if I haven't purchased stinkers before. Or enjoyed them enough for me to consider that purchase worthwhile. That's a worst-case scenario, mind; don't think DA:O's going to be a stinker. Not really sure what to think of it at the moment. If nothing else, it'll let me know what sort of meaning BiowarEA attaches to terms like "spiritual successor". Still lookin' forward to the game.

The obvious answer to this being, of course: "Like blood." Enjoy.

That many? Last game I can recall following that had that much shuffling at the top was PoR2. Just browsing the BioBoards these days, though, tells me you're not alone in your feeling that DA:O might be having an identity crisis.

Kinda gave up on Oblivion for a while myself, but not before I'd managed to get most of the NPCs surrounding... blast, what's that town called?... anyway, I kept finding enemies that were too hard for my character to beat, so I'd run back to town, and the monsters would follow me, and the local NPCs would engage, and by now, most of the town is probably dead. Am sure I've buggered up more than a few side quests in that one, but... ah well. Are always other towns, right? Might have to go back to that one and see if I can't make some more progress.

Heh. Anyone hoping for a Jane Austin from any video game needs a nerf bat upside the head. Bio makes some of the most story-heavy games out there but "subtlety" isn't their strong suit any more than world building is, and that tends to hurt the story sometimes, IMO. Maybe subtlety isn't even possible in game stories, though, except tangentially; too many people wouldn't pick up on it amidst the gaming if it was the point. Bio games are too streamlined these days to allow for many tangents, good or bad. I'd say you're right on track with your expectations, though (which is to say, they're in agreement with my own :D). Will be a bit more splattery than we're used to from BioWare, I think, but the camp factor will be off the charts, I'm betting. Game's gotta be epic, after all, and epic == BIG. Big swords. Big decisions. Big battles. Big personalities. Big hair. Am lookin' forward to it.

Bio has always been a bit heavy-handed with the melodrama when it comes to their storytelling, so the "night to remember" thing was just par for the course, but... wow. Did a lot of jumping around when I watched snippets from the video -- is times like this when I'm thankful I'm still on dial-up, otherwise I'd have been tempted to watch the video as a whole instead of in bits -- but is clear that this bit of PR isn't aimed at me in any way. Am no fan of the music, and the graphic depictions of face-eating/blood spatter are things I tolerate in games, rather than play them for. Certainly seems to be generating some kinda buzz, though, as far as videos go. Gotta give props to Marketing for that. Timing's pretty good too: disgruntled fans will forget all about this video as soon as the next bit of PR comes along, provided it isn't more of the same, but those who were attracted to this game by the video (or even all the hand-wringing surrounding the video) might just stick around to learn more.

Found the writing well done, but a little more obscure in places than I might have expected. Found the characters likable enough, too. Certainly less pronounced as characters than, say, a Bioware cast, which IMO tends to stick to the archetypes and extremely strong character traits -- all angst and high draaaama -- but they were likable enough. No one really sticks out, though... which can be considered a good thing, depending on your point of view. No over-the-top caricatures like a Minsc-and-Boo to resonate through the gaming ages. Bought the game twice myself, though. First time was because I wasn't at all certain I'd still be able to find the thing by the time I got a computer capable of running it, and the EE was because there was no way in heck I was going to be investing that much time and effort downloading a patch that size on a 56K modem. Don't regret either purchase, actually. With games that I like, I enjoy seeing a certain amount of that "making of" material, and seeing just how much the game has changed from one iteration to the next. Besides, is not like there's a ton of games on my plate these days, forcing me to choose which ones I can afford to buy or find the time to play. As for the console port getting canned... *shrugs* Wasn't going to get it anyway. No console. Unless this news is a sign that the entire company is going belly-up in its fishbowl, colour me ambivalent. Well... maaaybe I'll admit to seeing it in a slightly positive light -- the less resources they waste on a version of the game I don't want, the more resources they'll have to spend on a game that I do, right? Hopefully, anyway. Is a minor hope that. Mostly I'm just... *shrugs* Ok. Whatever.

Heh. Would prefer they did something with combat, personally, but story and characters are a good start. Didn't think I'd enjoy ME as much as I am, but that's not because I like the combat; is because the battles are few and far between, so there's more time spent on what I do enjoy. The more emphasis on story and characters the better.

Is why my response was notably on the "lukewarm" side of positive. *shrugs* F3 didn't manage to present itself well enough as a game I might enjoy for me to go out and get a copy; not sure if this one will either.

FO3 wasn't a shooter, it was a spork. Thanks for the response. Such as it was. The news that Obs is working on another Fallout game is good, though. I suppose.

"While Hines was careful not to reveal any details on the game, he did say that it will be "the same sort of experience", and..." So... game is still shooter?

Yeah, played this one. For an indie game, it's really quite well done, if a bit on the simplistic side compared to, say, a Bioware game. Or an Ultima, though the game still has that vibe about it. There are some interesting uses for skills. The automap will remain completely blank unless you put at least one point into Cartography, but there's a spell you can use to boost that skill if you don't want to do that. Downside is that the map will vanish when the spell wears off. Light as well becomes an issue, not only for seeing in naturally dark places but for combat as well; are modifiers that come into play for dark-fighting. I found the combat ridiculously easy, but then again, I was playing a mage-type and I've heard fighters are much harder, which I recall thinking plausible enough last time I went through. Acid slugs in particular would be trouble for fighters, I think. Fighting at range is really the only strategy you'll ever need, if you want to go that route. Graphics are nice. Music is very good. All enemies move at 1 square per turn, which is a bit odd. Some enemies are tougher than others, but all seemed pretty similar. Rather liked the looting. Treasure is scaled, but still interesting enough to be worthwhile. Watch out for crypts. Good for farming, but unless you know what's going on, you might end up with 30 poltergeists homing in on you. Not good, that. Story is a bit on the "thin, but overdone" side, I found. Thin, in that it doesn't really impact much of anything, overdone in that what plot elements there are have all been seen innumerable times before in RPGs. Amnesia. Long-lost brother. You know the drill. In that sense, is good that the story doesn't mean much. Dialogue is very colloquial, even long-winded at times compared to the stripped-down and optimized word counts Bioware et al. work with, but I don't mind reading, and there's not all that much the game has to say anyway. Quests aren't particularly involved... usually of the Fedex variety. Personal verdict is favourable enough to keep an eye out for Book II, and I actually expect to get that one when it comes out, but don't expect too much complexity. Do expect to see a few mechanisms that modern gaming has done away with or never really put to the test, such as that automap thing mentioned above. A very solid first game from a more or less one-person dev house, IMO. Well worth a looksee. Can see the game being a little off-putting for those not familiar with the older oldschool games out there. Try the demo first.

My hesitation about using a crack stems more from the "third party" nature of such things, and the possibility of picking up a worm, virus, or trojan along with the crack, far more than because I enjoy having software I've legitimately purchased bork up my system or because I'd feel guilty about altering the product in defiance of a questionable EULA. Is rather pathetic, too, since at one time I actually held fairly firm beliefs about that sort of thing, too. Congrats, Gaming Industry. What your DRMs have really managed to do is erode my determination not to resort to illegal measures to play the games you've made. Piracy is still a no-go for me -- will give up gaming entirely before I go that far -- but sheesh...

Drakensang. Haven't played it long enough to have formed many opinions. Looks very much like NWN in terms of layout.... which isn't bad, since it means I don't have to become familiar with a completely new screen design. Also picked up Mass Effect today; am hoping it'll be worth the $20 I paid for it, anyway, but I'm not expecting too much. Have installed, but the fool thing wanted internet access when I started it up; I gave it, but then the connection died while playing and I got a pop-up window saying so which caused the game to stop responding. That one'll require some fiddling just to get running properly, I suspect. Hope I won't need a crack or anything to beat it into shape, but if it comes to that... so be it.

I suspect you're right. Right now, at level 2, I'm having a blast with the game. The action-ified combat isn't as off-putting to me as I thought it might be, and the landscapes certainly are pretty, but leveling without the feeling of actually improving is something that's going to irritate me to no end, possibly spoiling the game for me. Already paid my $23.00 for the thing, so I might as well come away with a good impression.... whether the game really deserves it or not. Heh... That's the one I recall reading about somewhere. Knew I'd read about a re-balancing mod out there somewhere, but couldn't for the life of me remember what it was called or who wrote it. Thanks.

Oblivion (GotY edition; took forever to find it in the stores, oddly enough. Only found it on a fluke, too) I suspect I'll want some mods for this one, particularly in the interface category. Anyone got some good suggestions in this regard? Have only progressed to level 2 so I haven't had time to notice the level scaling issues that the game is supposed to have, but I'm sure I'll be looking around for something to deal with that too, eventually. Am not against mods that make NPCs look pretty, either.

That's pretty much the way it is with every game, though... has been for ages. You've got a picture of modrons with The Nameless One in the areas beneath Lothar's house in the promo material for Torment, you've got those hidden/cut elven grove areas in BG2 that I'm certain I remember seeing in the lead-up to that game's release... heck, I even remember scouring the Mages Guild of Myth Drannor in that third Eye of the Beholder game based on nothing more than the screenshot on the back of the box that showed some sort of electrical golem -like creature, but which (according to every game guide ever released and my own investigations into the binaries of that game) doesn't actually appear anywhere in the game. Cut content making its way into promo material is nothing new, I'm afraid.

"Usually" being the operative word. No denying that Bio's certainly better than most when it comes to the stability of the initial release, but like every other software development company in the known universe, they've had their share of problems. NWN1 for me was unplayable out of the box at release, and even though they flung enough patches at it to get it working wonderfully in the end, it did take a while. These days if there's a game that catches my eye, I'm going to sit on the purchase for a few months at least, just to make sure. DAO might be an exception to that rule.

Game is playable from start to finish, now? Even if cheating is included? Good. Hopefully my brand-spankin' new, decidedly middle-of-the-road computer will be able to handle it, which means that, despite knowing better, DAO might just end up being a "sooner" rather than "later" purchase. I know, I know, I should wait until the expansions are in and the game has been patched into a workable state, but... *sigh* Have been so few games that I've been even remotely interested in over the last five years or so, I might just indulge. Nothin' quite like that "new game smell" that comes from a fresh release, as opposed to one that's a year or two old. New hardware demands new eye candy. Even if the eye candy doesn't quite work the way it should yet.