Jump to content

Ignatius

Members
  • Posts

    163
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ignatius

  1. Whatever negativity is sent Josh Sawyer's way is easily counter balanced by Roguey over on the RPG Codex. Yes, I know that's an inside joke.
  2. Obsidian fired the lead designer of NWN2 because he wanted to make all of the female NPCs romanceable so Chris Avellone drop kicked him out the third floor window and he went runing and crying to Bioware where they let him make all the romance he wants.
  3. I was expecting a new cRPG designed by Tim Cain and Josh Sawyer, so far so good. /fanboy And I agree that there's nothing wrong with adjusting the rule set for a game setting. As fun as the DnD rules in BG2 could be, at times it got to be pretty irritating, namely the hard counter wizard battles, spell mechanics that required constant resting which made it all feel a bit cheesy or made you not want to cast spells most of the time, insta-kill spells that wore out your reload key, very little in the way of tactical positioning (because enemies just went where ever they wanted to). When I think back to my best times with BG2/IWD, these are not the things I think about.
  4. Good stuff. And yes, definitely would love to see a blog post with more detailed analysis of Arcanum, if you have the time.
  5. With Josh reinventing the wheel, you have to expect this will take some time.
  6. Josh is torturing me with all these hints and murky answers. I get what he's saying, but without specifics to relate to, he's only giving us half the equation here. So I read this stuff and it's like... uhhh yeah, sure that makes sense I guess. I really hope we hear something about all of this today. Then again, they might not even be close to nailing the system down, so... my agony could go on for a few more months. Arrrgh!!!
  7. I've always been pleased with Wasteland 2's progress and their updates. Not a ton of them, no, but when they give an update it's always thorough. =/
  8. My ideal would be that the passives are interesting enough and interact with stats in a way that is compelling. So that building your stats in a certain way open up varying play styles within a class. For example, passives/traits that rely on certain stat thresholds. Perhaps a passive that increase Rapier damage/attacks per round that rely on increasing whatever the equivalent DEX stat is? A lot of problems with stat systems of old is that from the get-go you were pigeon holed into a set group of stats and just mindlessly increased those the entire game with no outside influences governing a shift in what you want to achieve with your character. It's just straight up min/maxing with very little room for differing approaches. If Josh does manage to avoid dump stat systems, it would create more options for players, which is great. The worst situation, and what everyone seems to be afraid of is that the system relies on some form of herp-derp put point here to increase damage system. Which is dreadfully dull. The vague explanation actually reminds me of Diablo 3, which is quite honestly terrifying. And I agree that the stats need to feed into the fantasy of these games, having these all encompassing stats waters down the classes. But we know so little after all. Waiting for mega Sawyer post explaining himself here, lol
  9. Yeah, someone needs to hit him up on Formspring for further clarification, I'm a bit dense and can't quite figure out what he's trying to say here. Unified stat systems like that kind of scare me since they went for something like that in D3, and it really mucked things up, I think.
  10. Most excellent. 10/10 would read again. Love the wizard. He feels like a hedgewizard, perhaps part of an ambush party v. party battle somewhere in the wilderness. I can see it.
  11. Combat is a small portion of what makes an RPG. Game play is more quests, exploration, making choices, solving problems, and of course, if the need arises, killing a dragon. These things are what make an RPG, and it is these elements that are most important. The story only serves as a vehicle to take you to interesting places, but once you get there, the game play takes over and the designers have to make it work.
  12. I hated that Connor scene so much. I quit my evil character shortly after that, for fear I create any more horrendous displays of melodramatic voice acting. Here are my top two moments of deep emotional impact when it comes to cRPGs. 1. Killing the red dragon on the mountain top and getting the Belt of Ironfist for Khelgar so he can prove himself to his clan. It was a hard fight and winning it made me proud. Then we went and clobbered the giants with Khelgar's newly acquired power. 2. Killing Yxunomei in IWD. I even saved a screenshot after the battle, I was so overwhelmed and full of glee at the victory I had but barely and quite miraculously pulled off. *sniff* Raw emotion right here. Are you listening, Obsidian!?
  13. True, the fetch quests at the start of that game are atrocious, but once you've gotten through them... oh, MAN. Tactical RPG combat BLISS!!! The Temple backdoor fight is the single most enjoyable battle in any RPG I've ever played. Just thought I'd throw that out there for anyone scared off by the mention of fetch quests. If you like really well done turn-based RPG combat, then you owe it to yourself to pick this one up, and get the Co8 community patch too, of course. BG2 is the king of cRPGs. How can you have not played it?
  14. I agree. Please make Project Eternity a good game, Obsidian!
  15. FO: NV is allowed a few zaniness since the FO series has always been a bit quirky/light with the heavy dark post-apoc, this game however, I don't even know how you imagine a gangam dance would make it's way in unless the team had spent 18 months sniffing glue.
  16. We've all been playing and enjoying so-called unrealistic games for such a long time, I doubt anyone really cares. If the game is fun, you'll believe anything.
  17. Thank you. I wanted to mention this but couldn't be bothered. It's reassuring to know I'm not the only one who feels this way. Realism is neat and all, but a game must survive based on it's own internal logic and what makes the game most fun not necessarily the most real. I think bending any rule system to meet the expectations of hyper-realism is just a recipe for disaster when you end up including a lot of elements and variables that really don't need to be in there. There's a reason Chess has survived as long as it has, and it certainly isn't realism. But don't worry, Sawyer has said many times he's not one to put realism before fun game play.
×
×
  • Create New...