GammaHamster

Yeah, good job, Obsidian. Now each encounter is a self-contained event, with no effect on bigger picture. So oldschool and IE-like.

You can safely consider yourself "traditionalist" with such attitude. Just because we are very vocal against many features of newer games doesn't mean we can't get any enjoyment from them. it's a common misconception, most of us have no problems playing modern games, we just cannot close our eyes to their flaws.

Tragic, but what does this have to do with this discussion?

I pity you.

Yes, lack of balance is a problem because every character is played by a human and no one wants to feel left out. In a party-based video-game you play for entire party, you are both the fighter and the mage. That little difference makes your entire wall of text pointless.

Am i the only one dumb enough to try to counter Kangaxx's impisonment spell by transforming my fighter into a green ooze? It actually worked, btw.

Just one? Ok.....The Kangaxx fight. You either had to guess correctly, or else you had to come online/use the strategy guide to get the step-by-step How-to. if you didn't, you lost one party member per round, until there was no one left and it was Game Over. I still don't get why is this bad and should be fixed. Kangaxx fight was awesome. Personally, I find it immersion-breaking if you can't improvise your way through a fight. If you need to do a fight a dozen times to learn exactly what an enemy is going to do, how would the characters realistically ever survive that encounter? I realize that's not a concern for everyone, but it annoys the hell out of me in games. I actually find it a bit immersion breaking when characters CAN improvise their way through any fight in books and movies. Everything just seems too easy for them. I like death and reload mechanics in video games because it can somewhat show how dangerous the situation is. They won't survive. In game lore you always hear about how supposedly no adventurers ever returned from red dragon cave/underdark, etc. Well, those poor **** who don't have a player with save/load function watching over them will be among those who "never came back". Think of player as representaion of luck or divine intervention.

Just one? Ok.....The Kangaxx fight. You either had to guess correctly, or else you had to come online/use the strategy guide to get the step-by-step How-to. if you didn't, you lost one party member per round, until there was no one left and it was Game Over. I still don't get why is this bad and should be fixed. Kangaxx fight was awesome.

Pff, no true scotsman fallacy.

And how design that removes a possibility of choice is any better?

I don't remember it sucking in any of the IE games. I remember countless times facing a tough fight, dying and reloading only to pick a new set of spells. I see, i died and had to reload = game sucks. IE games encouraged preparing for a fight. But you had to know what to expect in the fight to properly prepare for it. So what? Why is this a good reason to remove preparation at all?

I don't remember it sucking in any of the IE games. I remember countless times facing a tough fight, dying and reloading only to pick a new set of spells. I see, i died and had to reload = game sucks. IE games encouraged preparing for a fight.

I don't remember it sucking in any of the IE games.

Does this mean extremely long cooldowns? I surely hope so, it will suck to have mages turned to archers that instead of arrows shoot sparkly crap every 2 seconds.

I am so glad that we, savage europeans, have enlightened americans to teach us about classic rpg's.