[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

I have been using exclusively the strategy mode straight from the start (I tried the character mode but I don't think I can use the mode throughout the game or even in one map). Seeing some people claims that they have no problem, there must be some problem with my setting/environment. The first thing struck my mind is the mouse: I am using a very primitive serial mouse with no middle button/wheel at the moment since my wheel mouse is broken. I need to hold down x key and hit end key often to deal with camera and it feels more annoying than when I played the official campaign with my late wheel mouse. I couldn't see if the reason of the annoyance is the mouse or the strategy mode since the mode didn't exist when I played the OC. I have already slowed down the turning speed of the mouse and sped up the scrolling speed in the setting but I am now inclined to conclude the mouse is the main problem. Well, I am going to buy a mouse myself eventually but it will take time since I want to check how it fit to my hand.

 

That said, I still feel "no problem" is overstatement...this may partially come from how much we were happy with NWN camera modes. In my case, I haven't played much of NWN and NWN2. I'd like to look down the party from a farer distance, which may allow me just click on the map and wait the characters move to the location as in Infinity Engine and, above all, I simply want to forget about the camera once I set it up to my liking. I know it is probably not fair to compare NWN2 with the Temple of Elemental Evil and Infinity Engine, where the maps are 2D but I feel I am experiencing the demerit of 3D engine rather than enjoying it at the current state of implementation (BTW, oddly, I liked the 3 dimensionally visualized giant frogs, gelatin cubes and magic missile effects in ToEE, for example). This reminds me of the claim of J.E.Sawyer in which he says that the modern game engine is not well-fitted to PnP mechanisms while back. I basically agree with him except that he has gone too far by insisting that the PnP style tactical combat simulation gameplay be intrinsically inferior. It would have been much clearer to me if he had said that making a good role-playing game with a solid tactical combat simulation on modern engine is not cost-efficient and difficult to realize in the current state of game industry. Then again, considering the circumstances, I think MotB designers did a real great job and, as I have already written, basically I am enjoying the game. After all, my part of complaints are just the other side of a coin: Different from other NWN works, the content is good enough for me to keep interested in the game, which makes me all the more annoyed by some "accessibility" issues.

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

Ugh, I wish to eventually get to play it. This is more of a discussion for the Witcher thread, however.

 

Oops, sorry for dragging yous to off-topic area. I guess it's time for me to go back to MotB experience.

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

And that's surprise?

To me, yes. A story-driven European RPG from a namless developer gets equal or more scores than those of popular FPS games from the users in such sites are not what I expected.

 

It has boobs and blood, of course Gamespotters and Gamefa...qqers love it.

Haha, I must admit: Sex sells. Watching the game-ranking, I am now convinced that the designers implemented the "f**k-them-up" feature as a ploy to penetrate into American market with this low-budget advertisement. In the Witcher's case, however, it seems to have more charm than that feature since, judging from some of the reviews I read, some reviewers definitely have their brains on their shoulders. It makes a great difference when it is the only feature of the game or it is just an optional addition to deeper and/or interesting content. Then again, everything comes with cost: in the future, a game with this kind of "feature" may become called a "Polish/European game."

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

Both MotB and The Witcher has been receiving praise (and criticism), especially from hc roleplaying groups.

 

So what's the difference?

Non-professional scores by not-so-dedicated RPG fans - the Witcher seems to be getting higher average scores from users even in sites such as Gamespot.

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

[...] I feel this is going to be the best game by Obsidian but, at the same time, the direction may not be so good business-wise.

Perhaps, but Feargus once stated that besides having a healthy mix of console/PC and own IPs/third-party franchises in development, Obsidian always intends to have one PC hardcore-RPG in development too, even if that means they have to fund it largely from their own pockets. I find this attitude admirable, because they're actually aware of the risk of not always making 100% profitable games.

I found taking such comments seriously is amiable...just kidding. I guess I read too much of cynical dialogs of a certain NPC. I may be suffering this post-Troika syndrome. I wrote about the commercial side since I noticed the unexpected popularity of the Witcher. Between the Witcher and MotB, you can see the "professional scores" are not that different but non-professional ones are dramatically different. Furthermore, even codex seems to like the Witcher. I'd like to see the reason with my own eyes but my hands are full with MotB at the moment and I am not going to buy the Witcher near future.

 

Yeah, too bad about the engine. Imagine what obsidian could have done with a Morrowind expansion for instance.

I wonder if I even need to point this out but you took that part totally about of context. The comment about Morrowind was only about the content related with religions/social beliefs not about the engine. Oblivion may look better but its content was toned down to a generic and simplistic everyone's fantasy world.

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

Finally I became able to my hands on Mask of the Betrayer. Despite of all the nuisances, this game has a charm. I have to say that I have been hooked to the game till I finished the first chapter. I stopped there only because of the necessity outside of the game. Probably, this could be my best among other Obsidian works. I couldn't finish the original campaign because I was not happy with the content but so far I found MotB worth more than all the money I spent on both the OC and the expansion. Of course, I noticed a few things which probably put off those who are not hardcore RPG players but, for me, the most important part is the content.

 

If there is solid content, I don't mind some inconveniences such as camera angles which persistently tries to focus on odd things. Probably the most of the average gamers are not happy with reading the dialog texts on the small window while the camera showing a roof of a huge building or legs of their characters. I, myself found this breaks immersion at times outside the annoyances of adjusting the camera every now and then. In trying not to miss a thing, I need to rotate the camera in every single room which I enter... I feel Obsidian is still struggling to adopt themselves to the 3D realm.

 

As for companion NPCs, they have their own agendas/beliefs and seem to be interesting enough.

At the moment I am accompanying Gann, the Dove and Safiya. I am not sure of Safiya but she reminds me of the elven druid in the OC somehow. Gann is a character of Chris Avellone as he spoiled that in his well-intended but too early entry in his blog here. The Dove reminds me of Fall from Grace somehow but most likely written by J.E.Sawyer.

In the OC, there are sober characters and funny ones but I feel they are spread thin. MotB seems only to have sober ones but they are much more interesting than ones in the OC, IMO. I fell a possible problem with them may be that the pacing in the plot and the revelation of the mysteries of the characters ending up being not well-calculated. I am still in the early part of the chapter 2 and have already a devote and two royal characters, who are giving away too early, I feel. This may be good for making characters distinctive but bad for keeping them mysterious. Some characters may be expectable but I'd like some of them not to be so. This may be a response to the complaints on the OC, about which some people complained of the unexpected betrayals, though.

 

The setting is much more interesting than usual "fantasy" settings. Various religions, philosophy, and the world-views play as a bridge between individuals and the world, nicely combined with NPC agendas including the companions. This reminds me of Planescape: Torment but more to the direction of TES: Morrowind, which is a melting pot of various factions and religions, making the setting more extroverted.

 

I like the new enhancement system, which may not be so royal to D&D formula but I am enjoying the freedom of shaping equipments to fit my liking.

 

There are many things to be solved in different ways and a lot of opportunities for the role-playing. It is a shame that it would be difficult to balance the net experience points, which may be related with some people complaining on the difficulty as well as the spirit-meter.

 

I don't have experience enough to judge spirit-eater mechanism but judging from the manual, it doesn't seem to be so bad. I feel it's more like an purer incarnation of the Bhaal spawn curse/blessing in Baldur's Gates: the chosen one setting where the protagonist happens to have this power and it depends on him/her whether he/she embraces it, rejects it, or tries to find a better use of it. The concept is good but the possible problem is that it definitely adds yet another thing to be micro-managed and once it becomes a micromanagement, the magic of immersion will be dispelled and there would appear silly mini-games where the players forced to play... I think I found a way to deal with the meter but glancing at the spirit-meter occasionally while exploring the maps throughly is becoming a routine. My protagonist is a silver-tongued rogue and I wouldn't like to be penalized by my play style.

 

Combat is moderately challenging at the normal mode, means just about. I prefer puppet mode so I can say nothing about the AI but, so far, the spell effect is too shiny for me to see what is going on at times. I know the effect is well-intended but even the strategy mode doesn't help. I blame the D&D system for the obsessive level of the usage of the bombarding spells, though.

 

So far, I am very happy with the game but I cannot but feel that, combined with the new (3D camera) and old micro-management routines, some well-intended implements may end up with just annoyances for the majority and partially even to myself. Then again, a part of me makes me feel guilty when criticizing such a game crafted with conscience.

 

Probably, my comment is disorganized but I'd like to spend my time on playing the game rather than writing this. I just wanted to say that I am enjoying the game. I feel this is going to be the best game by Obsidian but, at the same time, the direction may not be so good business-wise.

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

I think they are honest words but...

 

"Fans probably hate to hear this, but at the end of the day, developing games is a business."

 

"The majority of people who buy an expansion for a game like NWN2 are pretty hard core gamers and role-players and we thought they'd appreciate an atypical story."

 

I thought these lines were the comments from a person who knows what kinds of games are likely to get the score of 90% and that he was not working on such games. For example, I personally like the idea of "Patron of the Arts" but I don't think the majority find it appealing...unfortunately.

 

There must be more efficient ways to balance the efforts of the designers and the presentation of the completed products to satisfy both hardcore RPG fans and new comers. At the moment, I am checking the reputation of the Witcher by CD project. At the moment, despite rather disappointing scores of the critics, the game seems to be well accepted even by the folks at major game sites such as Gamespot.

[Mask of the Betrayer Redux]

Basically, I think any system should be trough to yield the desired results whatever the design purposes may be. Unfortunately, some Obsidian home-baked mechanisms don't seem to fit some of AD&D mechanisms at times despite of the effort of the design team. And yet, personally, I value their effort since I find AD&D system dominant enough to clog up the creativity of the designers. I'd like to wait how Alien RPG turns out, where they have much more freedom in this respect.

 

However, I have a question: Both influence system and spirit-eater mechanism are ambitious but at the same time, to my eyes, they seem to be rather game-y, giving an impression that they are unnecessarily complicated as a story-telling mechanism. I'd like to know why Obsidian choose to implement these kinds of mechanisms rather than simply utilize tags in dialog/quest systems, taking an approach which is probably more akin to interactive novels.

 

Just for the record, I have to confess that I haven't played MotB although I will when I find more time.

[Mask of the Betrayer]

Since I

[Roger Ebert: Games are an inferior medium]

*Shrugs* What should I say? The argument represents a rather common view of modern arts. The author seems to be ignorant of postmodern art discussions. However, I am sure that not many but some game designers, especially some of those ex-Orign and/or Looking Glass Studios are conscious of postmodernism.

[New stuff on F3]

I don't think it's unreasonable for someone to cite the Fallout feel of a game. How often have we heard folks say that they thought a game in one genre had the feel of a game in another? While it might be subjective, the phrase certainly has a place. Not only that, but what provides the "feel" of a game might not be the same for everyone. In fact, I doubt it is the same for everyone. I couldn't cite everything that creates the Fallout "feel" for me. What I can say is that the demo certainly had a good Fallout feel, but that doesn't mean everyone will see it the same way. If we use the word "feel" at all to discuss these games, and most of us do, then we should exhibit a certain charity when anyone uses it. That's true even in cases where we don't agree with the person's views.

Honestly, I have no idea from where you picked up this since I didn't write that being subjective is unreasonable which would make literary criticism worthless. Rather, I am a person who tends to find an attitude of assuming objectivity without sharing our experiences by far unreasonable. Usually, about which do we "discuss" how we feel and exchange our subjective opinions?: materials which let share our experiences such as literatures and films. There are nothing wrong with that the content of some games enable us to do so even if they are still mostly considered as escapist entertainment. Personally, I'd like to see something like independent films in the gaming industry.

 

I'm not sure if you're identifying Hitman as a shooter, but Hitman is pretty ho-hum as far as shooting mechanics go and generally doesn't require much aiming skill (mostly because your targets are moving very slowly). Hitman is a fun game because screwing around with AI is so entertaining. It's one of the same reasons why the Thief series games are so popular. If I recall correctly, Thief: Deadly Shadows (worst title ever) used no time limit on its lockpicking minigame, but guards would continue to walk around in real-time while you were working on the lock (as they would in Splinter Cell). Personally, I really like systems like that because it encourages me to either a) scout appropriately and ensure that no one's going to interrupt me or b) work like a furious madman to complete the game as fast as possible. You still have the option of doing everything at your own pace, but you run the risk of being interrupted unless you do appropriate recon first.

I'd go further than that:

 

The lock-picking "mini-game" in Thief:DS has its own place in the whole game mechanism and the feel which lets the player in the shoes of the thief who needs to watch his hands while assigning a part of his attention to listening to the footsteps of the guards. The lock-picking min-game itself is not that complicated at all but the players need to do the task quickly and correctly. IMO, this is totally different from KotOR racing game at that the process is a kind of ritual which lets the player feel and plan like a thief in an imaginary world. Making the players feel wrapped in imaginary worlds has been an important factor of games such as Thief and System Shock series. The design philosophy is somehow important in RPG in new generation platforms, I think. There are no difference between more traditional content and the new one as a point: If a theme is chosen, the creators have to think what would be the best way to stimulate the players senses using tools at their hands. Thief series demonstrated what the sound effects could do, for example. If someone says that the first person/near first person games have immersion factor, I'd agree but if designers are not always conscious of what they would like the players to feel and how to archive it, then, they won't be able to make games like those.

[New stuff on F3]

As for the lockpicking, I much rather have it be based on my character's skill in lockpicking for I am playing the character and not me. In a CRPG character skill needs to take precedence over player skill in nearly all aspects.

So I take it you would also like combat to be resolved with a single die roll? After all, there's an extraordinary amount of player skill required to resolved the combat mini-game in RPGs.

 

I tend to cheat a lot in my games so I don't even have to worry about combat, as its usually the least enjoyable part of the game for me. Having the option to skip the whole process would be nice.

Well, aren't we talking of Fall Outs not Temple of Elemental Evil?

 

Giving the wide birth of mini-games corresponding to how we put points on our characters is one of the charm of it. However, of course, even the mini-games have to give us an illusion that the world have the integrity and the feel for us to use our characters as a media to interact with it, which is my point.

[New stuff on F3]

I think natural is pretty relative, but I get what you're saying. I didn't think Oblivion's persuasion minigame felt natural, but I did feel the lockpicking fit.

The feel or immersion are subjective, too. However, personally, I find looking Glass Studio veterans tend to take building immersion or the feel seriously. About BIS games, somehow I liked the art-direction of IWD series. The most part of it didn't have "interactions" such as mini-games, though. I am looking forward to Bioshock to see how the integrity of the game-mechanics and the art-style will turn up in the "new generation" graphics.

[New stuff on F3]

Good Point, Gorth. Minigames should be implemented in a natural way so that it doesn't destroy the feel, if I rephrase what I wrote.

[New stuff on F3]

I think minigames are great, mostly because I think most CRPG mechanics like lockpicking are absolutely boring and terrible in every way. The minigames should definitely be good (and I think the Oblivion ones had some major problems), but the ol' "roll a die to see if you've spent enough points over the last 20 hours of gameplay" mechanic is incredibly dull to me. At least combat has enough instances of those checks and other variables that it's a robust game, but lockpicking (as an example) on its own is brainless and uninteresting.

I kind of agree with this but, IMO, putting mini-games is not the only solution. At least, I think these skills/abilities should be differently treated. For example, with time limits, which requires some turns or action points in security checks, it would add some tactical essences to isometric turn-based games. The player should think beforehand if his/her lock-picking character enough skills to open locks or disable devices before the character gets caught or the situation goes wrong. I think Jagged Alliance 3 or 3D was planning to make a system in which better skills require less time. I prefer this approach in top-down style tactical simulations.

 

In first person view, I personally like Thief: Deadly Shadows lock-picking and still remember how the series showed how important the immersion factor is even in the lowest-rated work. Even if there is a minigames, I would like to see them implemented in a way which doesn't break immersion. I totally agree with you about the persuasion minigame in Oblivion, which was a very good example of how to break immersion.