Hertzila
-
Posts
82 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Hertzila
-
-
I've been playing Divinity: Original Sin 2 with a group and I have to say, I doubt I'd enjoy playing it much on my own. The only reason I even bought it was because my friends invited me to join in their campaign.
The combat controls are a bit too finicky and loose, resulting in collateral damage every now and then. The narrative design has a bit too much homour in it for my tastes. The main plot has not really gripped me and we're basically following the quest log in search of loot.
However, playing as a group, it's a fricking blast. Instead of being aggravating, the occasional friendly fire has been a slapstick comedy generator, a couple of exceptions aside. Stupid or bad humour moments are far more enjoyable when you can laugh about it in a group. While the game's own stories have not really gripped me, my groups own adventures and misdeeds have been pretty fun. The writing in stories is not the best but I find the combat and puzzle design to be great.
It helps that the slight finickyness aside, the combat is actually quite enjoyable. Playing around with afflictions and elements is engaging and offers a tactical side of combat I don't see often. Especially with a full four custom characters with a variety of skills. There aren't any limits to skill use either, which means that teleports are actually most useful for puzzle solving.
-
Witcher 3 is an rpg to me. It has roleplaying, even if it gives you a certain character. It's the minimum of roleplaying you can get in a game that defines it as an rpg for me.
Zelda, for example, is not an rpg. Though it gives you a certain character, you don't get to roleplay him even a bit. Zelda is one of the greatest exploration/adventure/dungeon crawling series ever, though.
Although the dialogue options were limited, I felt I did more roleplaying in a non RPG like Zelda BOTW than in typical JRPGs like the Tales series. There were some dialogue options in the game that would make Link sound like a jerk
Well, JRPG's have always been more about telling a story with gameplay intersecting at other points, be they with turn-based or brawler (?) combat systems. The Persona series of games are the only JRPG's where I don't think this applies (that I have played).
-
1
-
-
D:OS2 being hailed as RPG of the year (so far) also has a lot to do with the competition being quite lackluster in 2017. AFAICS, there were two possible contenders (on PC; no idea about console-only titles),
2017 has been a super strong year for RPG so far, especially if you have a PS4:
Nier:Automata
Nioh
Persona 5
Horizon Zero Dawn
Zelda:Breath of the Wild (Switch/Wuii exclusive)
Out of that list, Zelda: Breath of the Wild is pretty much the #1 game of all time now, Persona 5 was called a GOTY candidate and Horizon Zero Dawn was said to be the new The Witcher 3 at release.
:D There is only one RPG on that list and its jRPG.
Well, there's three if you count Action-RPG's. I would, but to each their own.
You could add FF12:TZA there too, if you count Remasters.
As far as Deadfire's success goes, I fully expect it to beat the original, but aside from that I have no idea. I hope that it goes on to rival D:OS2 on the RPG market, but I'm not expecting it to make near as much of a splash as D:OS2 did.
-
I'll just repeat what I said last time: I'm not opposed to a mechanics-neutral walk toggle, be that a "walk/run everywhere" button or a Divinity: Original Sin 2 style "walk short distances" toggle in the Gameplay menu (or somewhere). I'll most likely never touch that (in favour of running everywhere) but some people seem to really like the option and it seems harmless and easy enough, so why not.
However, the moment you start introducing mechanical differences to it is the moment I vote against it. Introducing something like fatigue penalties for running too much or trap-spotting penalties or, Magran forbid, guards getting pissy and bothering you for running everywhere is not something I want to deal with. Sure, it might look weird, but so do a lot of things when you start looking for it. Why should a player be forced to move slower than they can if they are just moving somewhere?
-
Witcher is the text-book definition of adolescent power fantasy, so I think the 'people don't see what they don't want to see' is more prevalent in this context. To quote Mr. Katarack, let's keep it real.
I'm not denying that Witcher has an aspect of adolescent power fantasy in it, but I think reducing it to just adolescent power fantasy is ill-informed. Almost every cool and badass character can be reduced to just adolescent power fantasy if you strip enough aspects from them and miss / remove enough content from them. This goes double for video game characters, since gameplay being enjoyable tends to drive the design side and being extremely successful in combat tends to be cool and badass.
There's plenty else in The Witcher than just Geralt being a successful witcher. If you don't like it, fair enough.
-
Surviving is the whole point of the character. He's undefeatable, nothing can ever bring him down. In game rhetoric about a non-existent future in a non-existent world hardly qualifies as 'not winning'. He's a badass without any real weaknesses and always wins in every single way that is relevant to an adolescent boy.
Disregarding the fact that not being killed is not the same thing as being undefeatable, I hope you realize that this applies to basically every video game player character there is, including The Watcher of PoE. The few player characters that are defeated and killed number in single digits, I'd claim. In every other case, the PC is a murder machine and mastermind extraordinaire, depending on the exact game mechanics, that is never defeated. At worst, in a few cases, they may not win the mission, but they will not be defeated.
-
2
-
-
Witcher didn't succeed through any game-play merits, it succeeded because it is the very definition of adolescent power fantasy; you play an experienced character that wins every time and gets every chick, and everyone who is "good" likes and respects him while people who are "bad" hate him because they can't beat him. In other words, the shameless use of cheese on top of cheese is what made the Witcher sell so well. Beneath the cheese it's merely an ok game with an ok plot and an ok setting. All other reasons for its success are mere rationalizations; Geralt is a badass and that is the long and short of it.
Thus, as long as PoE tries to be a game for mature audiences, I highly doubt it will ever capture the large masses. It's a niche title and I'd like it to stay that way. If more people start buying the game, good, but if Obsidian begins to cater for the masses then they'll lose many of their current customers, including me.
Did we see the same story? Geralt is continually being called an outdated idiot working on a field that is going to eliminate itself, and he should really either modernize or quit, or die. He's told these things by his friends, collegues, acquaintances, enemies, rivals, clients, basically everybody. Being the stubborn fool, he just continues working. He also keeps running into various pick-your-poison scenarios. Sure, if by "wins every time" you mean that he survives a lot of crap thrown his way, sure, but I doubt it's really a victory if all the choices are bad.
-
2
-
-
It's not hard even for a single C# programmer to write such mod during one year to make it good. (avarage salary 70k USD per year)
[CITATION ******* REQUIRED]
Also, there is a fundamental difference between a mod doing it and the devs doing it. To put it bluntly, a mod can afford to be awful, simply not work and even afford to fry your computer, thanks to the simple fact that it's an unofficial mod. An official mode will rightly be complained about if it doesn't work 100% of the time and it will rightly be torn apart if there are any serious problems in it.
-
7
-
-
I think I say it more like one game doesn't change the prevailing trend.
I'm not particularly interested in PvP, but I would like an RPG these days to actually try focusing on co-op/roleplaying for MP instead of some horde mode. It seems no one, even fans, considers that as a possibility anymore when thinking of MP.
Emphasis mine. There exists a CRPG that has, if not focuses, on co-op multiplayer. Two in fact, since D:OS has a sequel. So claiming that there isn't a single one that focuses on co-op is just false.
It's not the prevailing trend, but considering how much time that feature assumes people have, I doubt such a trend would survive for long.
-
1
-
-
I'm not particularly interested in PvP, but I would like an RPG these days to actually try focusing on co-op/roleplaying for MP instead of some horde mode. It seems no one, even fans, considers that as a possibility anymore when thinking of MP.
You say that as if one of Divinity: Original Sin's big features wasn't multiplayer co-op.
-
I don't see it going quite that mainstream. It's not really a game that absolutely anyone can get into, you know? Nor is it a MMORPG or E-sport (thank Eothas). But of course, the more successful it is, the better for the RPG genre as a whole, so let's hold thumbs.
Shame about Andromeda. I was also surprised at the early reviews. I was expecting them to worship it.
If you want a beautiful triple AAA RPG, go buy Persona 5
I pre-ordered, so yeah, hehe, I'm kind of devastated.
Me as well, after the demo seemed promising. I expect to still enjoy it, but it seems like it won't be the pure quality time I was hoping.
Still, I kind of doubt that it's a sign of mainstream disappointment in their RPG's.
And witcher 3 probably sold a significant part of its sales on console.I definitely think that there is potential for deadfire to have a bigger market presence on the PC market then witcher. Again look how successful baldurs gate 2 was.
The major difference is that at BG2's time, a major CRPG shared shelve-space with flight simulators and hardcore shooters (think Rainbow Six 1). It was a different time, when a highly complex game was the norm rather than the exception.
The Witcher series didn't really gain its popularity until TW3 was released. While the other Witchers were action-RPG's as well, the third was most so of the bunch and action-RPG's are a popular non-niche genre.
-
While I can see why you might want it, I have absolutely no interest in it. I don't play PoE for its combat and I have no real interest in a duel multiplayer setup, especially when it's real time with pause.
More importantly, internet multiplayer is time-consuming as ****. If they were to implement any kind of net multiplayer, it could easily add a lot of work into the mix and would almost certainly delay the release. It's just not worth it.
-
8
-
-
I highly doubt PoE will get anywhere near the attention and fame the Witcher has gotten. The sad truth is that CRPG's are a relatively niche game type and one of the prime reasons The Witcher managed to gain its fame is that it's an Action-RPG with a... whatever you would call the Arkham games combat system, as its main combat mechanics.
Sure, I hope and kind of expect Deadfire to gain a major position as a CRPG, but I kind of doubt that it will ding the mainstream radar at all, or at most it will gain a few curious glances.
-
I can imagine games where I would love this feature, but I'm not sure if PoE is among them. We'll see in the beta if there is enough flair in Deadfire's combat to justify instant replay but I kind of doubt it.
-
im not bagging out first person shooters by the way. My 2 favourite games at the moment are Pillars and Doom.
Doom is frickin awesome. Highly recommend you try if you havent
Doom is great, both the new and old. I'm actually more of an older style FPS guy than RPG guy. Deus Ex: The Original is my "BEST GAEM EVAR" rather than Planescape: Torment or either Fallout.
However, I don't think their quality or success matters to Deadfire. Neither does Call of Duty's, or Skyrim's. I highly doubt Witcher's does either. They're all for differerent demographics with various degrees of overlap. I'd expect Obsidian to realize that and stop themselves from overreaching. Or at least I'd hope so.
-
Going by Industry Facts: The average age of the American video game buyer is 35, and 73% are 18 or older. Of course, who knows how they count video game buyers. They might count a person who once bought an Angry Birds microtransaction as a video game buyer.
Still, it would point towards the vast majority of video game players, including those that play the big AAA stuff, to be adults.
-
2
-
-
Check out the Pillars of Eternity Reddit and search for "Q&A". You should find transcripts of the various Q&A streams.
You miss out on the visual content of the streams, but if listening to English is not for you, maybe the text format is better.
-
1
-
-
Chill out dude. No need to get Argo. This is a forum where people have differing opinions. I don't get angry at you when you have a different opinion then me and vice versa.
Yes? We all have different opinions and the ability to voice those here. In my opinion, considering Skyrim and Witcher to not be RPGs is silly.
-
I wasn't saying anything positive or negative about CoD or Skyrim. I love Skyrim, and I don't play FPS games but have nothing against CoD. I was simply noting a distinction in targeted audiences vs CRPG's like Pillars and stating an anecdotal account of my personal observations about demographic overlap between CoD and Skyrim.
I suppose I should have clearly directed my complaint at firkraag888 rather than the people here generally. Apologies.
-
The Q&A streams from Obsidian's Twitch channel might be your best bet. I remember reading the information too, though I forget where.
Cliff notes version: They are toying with replacing the long-term health pool with a simpler injury system, where if your guy gets knocked out, they will gain an injury and having 3+ injuries when knocked out will kill / maim the guy. The regenerating per-encounter endurance will stay.
Most of us here are voicing our concerns about it. In my case, the injury system seems too discrete and lacking in depth compared to Pillars' health pool.
-
1
-
-
As much as I like boarding hate trains and bashing people for their preferences, can we stop? I hate Call of Duty as much as the next non-military shooter guy, but I don't think that is the point here. Whether Skyrim or Witcher are RPGs (hint: they absolutely are and suggesting they aren't is an extremely stupid idea) shouldn't really matter for Deadfire, should it?
Steamspy, from which I assume the Steam sales numbers are from, does count backers. Strictly speaking, it measures owners, not buyers. Valve doesn't release sales numbers and GOG doesn't either to my knowledge. GOG also doesn't have a Steamspy equivalent.
Adding to that, since backers can choose to use GOG rather than Steam (like I did), it's hard to deduct the actual number of buyers vs. backers.
-
1
-
-
Good to see I was wrong and they aren't reinventing the wheel with this. Are they still keeping the Rest to replenish system or are they changing it?
As I understood it, they're switching to a sort-of mana-based system where the mana, in this case the Empower resource, is replenished by resting. Each class has an Empower resource associated with it that can be used to buff class abilities in a major way.
It's still per-rest, but it's no longer directly associated to a specific ability like, say, a Wizard would have 4 spells of a given level per-rest. Now it's just X Empower points that can be used however.
-
The easiest solution would be to give a per-encounter amount of ammunition for throwable weapons. So you don't have unlimited missiles like you'd have with launcher-type ranged weapons but you still abstract out the long-term ammo management. Whether you prefer launchers or throwables, you shouldn't have to buy your ammo separately and keep a massive stock of it.
-
Stealth should be hard, it should require rogue-like training, get bonuses from light or leather armor, and yes huge penalties for carrying giant 6 foot long glowing broadswords. It should be easier to stealth at night, easier to stealth when near other objects in the game world (trees, bushes, crates, structures, etc). Sight-cones are good too, or hearing and sound checks from enemies. If all this means the rewards for stealthing (better sneak attacks, access to rooms or buildings others can't easily get to, etc.) have to be stronger, because fewer characters can stealth easily, that would be ok with me.
I'm okay with most of these and it seems the devs have taken most of the book from Commandos / Shadow Tactics, so most of these are also in the game. The only missing feature for me is a full-on party split so the rogue can scout buildings while the rest of the party is waiting outdoors for the rogue to open the door.
However. Equipment and weight penalties are too much micromanagement. It can work in solo stealth, where there's just one character to manage, but with a party, constantly messing with inventory to make sure your characters have the proper stuff equipped is too much. This is not a stealth game after all. The occasional "Noisy" is enough for me.
I don't know if equipment will influence anything though. I hope it does. At the moment (PoE1) heavy armour vs. light armour is just a question of damage reduction vs speed. Stealth would add another factor to that.
That would, at most, mean every character packs two suits and switches them around when necessary. I don't think adding stealth as a factor to armour is going to do much for the balance between them.
Deadfire vs Divinity OS 2
in Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
My only issue with Original Sin 2 so far has been the camera, more specifically the maximum zoom level. Mostly during exploration, the zoom level seems too close to the ground for a good overview. Since the camera is also tied to the terrain and will follow it up and down, a couple of times the camera has decided to do an extreme close up of my character's face or feet if the elevation change was large enough. Not a big issue and thankfully almost non-existent during combat (at least so far, I'm about 50 hours in), but an issue still.
I also don't get the gripes about the armor system. Yeah, it doesn't really make sense in the fiction compared to a damage reduction system like PoE or even ol' D&D Armor Class and conceptually, I still like armor as damage reduction the most. But holy crap does it work for the gameplay.
Usually in RPGs, I find most bosses to be completely immune to every status effect under the sun to stop players from cheesing through it, which usually renders most Crowd Control characters mostly pointless since the enemy you'd most want to CC cannot be CC'd. From what I've heard from a couple of friends, in Original Sin 1 the cheese was in full smell and every fight was basically "CC till you win". I'd have expected DOS2 go the route of every other RPG there is with immunities to prevent this, even if status effects and crowd control would then be rendered pointless and non-viable.
But thanks to the armor system presenting a direct obstacle to CC that you need to break down first, Original Sin 2 can nerf the cheese without making it pointless. Sure, some enemies still have a few immunities but they are almost never blanket immunities, so crowd control stays useful even against bosses. Since most CC is blocked by armor, you still need to deal enough damage to break through before you can apply it. Maybe after that you can CC the boss to infinity but you still have the challenge of breaking through the armor first before that can happen.