Wrath of Dagon

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php?topic=338.0 How does this address FF7, Diablo 2, or System Shock 2? Among others on the list. I don't believe that they are, although I have to admit I'm judging them without having played them. Just because someone says a game is an RPG, doesn't mean that it is.

I didn't say anything of the sort, and AP looking similar and having a similar concept to ME is my own opinion, not one I borrowed from journalists. Why is stating my honest opinion whining? Anyway, I believe developers need to see why ME is a badly designed game so they don't repeat the same mistakes.

Does that exclusively encompass plot-related choice? What about gameplay choices? If the answer is yes to the first, that excludes a lot of games that many (most?) would consider RPGs, including Darklands and many of the old Gold Box games. Additionally few RPGs provide "real" choice - most simply provide the illusion of choice but still take you through the same essential story regardless of your choices. Not to knock them - I love RPGs (duh) but I think you may be misrepresenting the difference between, say, the level of choice in Mass Effect and the level of choice in other games. Well, they always provide some real choice, you may not have much choice in the overall story arc but at least you should have choice in doing individual quests. Plus a well executed illusion of choice still qualifies as choice so far as I'm concerned. One of the big problems with ME was that it failed to provide meaningful choices to the player because of the on-rails structure of the game.

Well, several games in your first list aren't RPG's, so it makes it kind of tough. To be meaningfully an RPG, the game has to be about player choice, I'll return with a more formal definition in a little bit. Edit: Found it: http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php?topic=338.0

I did say what I hated, in the same post I said it completely fails as an RPG, you need to read more carefully. I already explained it in that thread, again you're not paying attention. And Redfield, I don't need anyone to tell me what to do. Having an AP developer say ME is good concerns me, since it could mean we'll see the same kind of thing in AP.

Nice amounts of C&C? Did you play a special C&C edition? And I didn't say it wasn't an RPG, because technically it is, I said it completely fails as an RPG, though it does make an average cinematic shooter.

That's like saying "Because I liked it!" What was good about it? If that's considered good, AP better be 10 times better, because honestly ME completely fails as an RPG, is mostly on rails, is shallow and half-baked, and features some extremely amateurish design.

I wish people would stop being so obsessed with graphics. That's what's ruining games right now.

Name one. It's true, AP does look similar to ME both in concept and graphics. I'm hoping Obsidian knows how to do it right though.

IMO, RPG is about player choice, not combat, predefined character, or companions.

Can you promise a real RPG? *cough* ME *cough* Some of these reviewers are way too obsessed with graphics, and don't even understand what makes a game an RPG. Btw, is the character creation out of the box UE3, or did Obsidian have to make any modifications?

The reporter may just be talking out of his ass, but I always suspected AP is using whatever tools were created for ME, the characters and some of the screens just look too similar, and apparently you have to provide a lot of extra code for UE3 before you can actually build a game on it.

Hopefully the AI is good enough, I won't have to. I suspect that's true on normal difficulty or lower, but may not apply on hard difficulty, especially if AOE spells damage your own party. Also there are things like putting out a fire by invoking a storm, or spreading grease and setting it on fire, and AI may not be smart enough to do that on its own.

You can play the whole game in over the shoulder or in isometric, or switch whenever you like, it's your choice. Although it'll probably be difficult to micromanage combat in over the shoulder.

I think they use their own save file for that, it's the one they use if you restart the game with an existing character.

I didn't say I didn't believe them, I said I was skeptical, which isn't quite the same thing. The two of their games I had played didn't fit the statements I bolded. Also I recently had my fanboy heart broken by ME, which made similar grandiose statements in their marketing. All I said was I'd like some clarification and examples. Now that they showed a mission, I can understand one of the things they meant was they had a faction and reputation system, which sounds less vague and grand than a "a living world which responds to you".

To gain influence with Kreia, you had to accept her "lessons", which meant you had to agree with her cynicism, even when playing lightside. To gain influence with G0-T0, you had to get him early in the game, and then take him on a lot of missions, even though he was fairly useless in combat and had blackmailed his way into your party. If you didn't get enough influence with him, you'd never understand what that stuff on Nar Shadaa was all about.

What was the last great game Sega published? How's that different from other quests? There was a merchant on Yavin station. In K1 you could kill Juhani, side with either gang on Taris, side with one or neither of the Sith masters on Korriban, kill most of your companions. None of this stuff is world changing, just the usual RPG quests with localized consequences. Actually K1 did have something world changing, you could poison the shark on Manaan and make health packs rare and expensive. But this small stuff is not really C&C, let alone living, breathing world you're influencing.

Did you ever talk to your companions? The influence system was a poor substitute for C&C. All it did was force you to kiss your party members' asses to unlock content necessary to fully understand the story. It actually undermined roleplaying by making you behave contrary to how you'd normally want to, and provided no alternative reward. Plus it was pretty broken, especially in Mandalore's case.

Sega is a great publisher? Only compared to Atari. K2 a lot more roleplaying than K1? You mean like who shows up at the end to help you on Telos? I must've missed everything else.

Their 2 games that I completed, KOTOR2 and NWN2 didn't have that much of either, so I'm yet to be convinced.

If MotB did that, these claims would be more credible, but I haven't gotten to that part yet. From the Gamespot preview, it sounds like they're talking about factions and a reputation system, though perhaps there's more to it.

What seems too good to be true? The bolded portions:

Great, except for Rainbow 6 shots. And that's not Castro, that looks like a Middle Eastern guy.

Here's a quote from David Gaider on DA forums that hopefully clarifies the "low magic" thing (pretty much what I said before):