Jump to content

Pshaw

Members
  • Content Count

    276
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Pshaw

  1. I'm going to say no. I don't think buying regents from a vendor adds anything but an annoying little bit of inventory management. I also dislike the idea of not being able to use spells I've earned through leveling. Now I would be ok with the idea of some of the highest level spells in the game requiring pricey regents provided they packed sufficient punch. I'm ok with having a spell I only use on bosses or other extremely tough battles because casting it is very costly. Still even in this scenario I'd rather the cost come from the character rather than an item in the inventory. The slayer
  2. Yes thats why i thought of a system like the one i posted. At hier leves you dont have more life per se (maybe some) but you can have more stamina to fight longer piriods of time. Because the damage system is about dodge, block, parry where your defence rating pairs with the enemys hit rate at hier level you are just better so you "Defend" against all their attacks and because you hit is better that theirs you kill them with one blow. if you fight hordes of enemies you will get tired for defending because against big number of foes, but still you can kill them becasue of the disparit
  3. Heroes of Might and Magic 2/3 were most likely what you were playing. The series has gone a bit downhill, at least to me, in some of the newer versions. However I think that latest game started getting it right again. I'm pretty sure steam has it fairly cheap by now, or at least I hope it does, so if you're looking for that sort of game it's a good place to start. If you're ok with older games I'd also highly recommend Age of Wonders II, preferably with the expansion Shadow Magic and the fan patch.
  4. Honestly the whitewolf rule sets are very easy to adapt to just about anything. Attribute + skill = roll that many d10's with the game master setting the threshold for success. I know that they also have a fey world setting which you could pilfer from as needed. It may not have been updated in a while at this point but you might be able to find a source book in the internet someplace. Might be a good place to start at the very least. Also you could try and adapt shadowrun by taking it out of the cyberpunk and into a steampunk setting. Thematically it's not too far off from what you're goin
  5. Personally I worry about a bloodied skin really standing out in the middle of combat with attacks and spell effects flying about. Also I think it would probably still be a lot of work to do that for each and every monster type in the game. I'm not against it persay, but if they did go that route I'd probably want it in addition to another way to tell their health level as blood on the clothing might be a bit too vague for my tastes. But I'm all for the second half if they can fit it in. I like it when in skyrim people comment on you looking sick or shop keepers tell you to get out if you'r
  6. Why is this a problem? Surely you don't complain about games that have nothing but humans. While I can't speak for Betraytheworld I personally I dislike when fantasy/sci-fi games have only humans for a racial option. As much as I love Fallout2 I would have loved to have access to ghouls, mutants, and robots as playable characters. In fantasy games where their are completely distinct races (as opposed to ghouls/mutants having once been human) it seems a bit bland for every race to look like a human variant.
  7. I honestly don't remember if all the races are set in stone yet but I'd like to see this as well if they're not. I always liked playing 'beast' races when available just because they had a bit more flavor than those closer to humans. I do especially like the idea of different morals and values from the differing cultures. That's also how I prefer to see monsters done as well. Rather than just having creatures that are inherently 'evil' and 'good' I like them to just be very alien in their thinking/morals. If a group of sprites and pixies decided to randomly attempt to kill my PC and party
  8. I'm not sure how many ways you can take a spiritually ascendant fist fighter and change how he's presented without altering that core principle of the class, which you said you didn't really want altered. The only thing to really change after that is their clothing and personally I don't mind if the monks are looking like European monastic monks with hooded brown robes or if they're Asian inspired monks wearing clothes inspired from that region. Really the issue is that if we see something vaguely Asian we assume their is a culture behind that look because that's the way it is in our world. I'
  9. I really liked how they did it in fallout 2. Where a enemy would be called crippled, injured, winded, near death, ect depending on how hurt they were. So if you had a bandit down to 90% he could just be called winded bandit when moused over. I'd say maybe even go so far to only have that appear when paused just to help keep things uncluttered. Then perhaps give access to a perk/skill that let you know the exact number of hit points for those who like to see behind the curtain so to speak. It would be cool to see it visually represent in the animations but I don't know how much time/money t
  10. A handful of time sensitive quests are good. So long as they're not also time sensitive in terms of when they're taken. If I need to take a quest right now or not at all, then it's got a timer that's just annoying. It makes me feel like my game has been hijacked. So long as they aren't also forced on me I'm ok with it. I can either take the quest and get right to it if I so choose or reload my last save and let it sit until I'm ready to take it.
  11. If orlan are anything like Mogwai then I have to play one.
  12. I like this idea. However as much as people like me and you would love this and explore everything there are a far larger number of people out there who won't to the extra exploration. 'So what?' you might ask, but sadly content that isn't used is wasted. So while I can get behind saying, 'hey man if it's not for you just skip it. No harm no foul.' from a developer standpoint you don't want to waste money on content people aren't going to see/use. Sadly we're living in a time when most people don't even complete the console games they buy let alone grand 40+ hour rpgs. I'd really like to s
  13. Well if it needs to run 4-6 months longer than estimated I wouldn't be upset. Any longer than that and I'd feel a bit let down. I'm sure they felt pretty confident in how long it would take them to put a game like this together and probably set the release date on how fast they thought they could get it done well with a little bit of wiggle room. Beyond just wanting to get it out ASAP I think that there are a few other things that would probably be a large factor in wanting The first is the budget. That 4+ Million we raised needs to go to pay the salaries for quiet a few people. If they ha
  14. I loved the world of morrowind but beyond that I wouldn't argue that it's better than oblivion or skyrim. While I do miss the spellcrafting from the earlier 2 games that's about the only thing I miss gameplay wise. Morrowinds world itself was a horrid randomly generated mess. Nothing but hills forming alleys across and an island filled with dust. The leveling system could and would punish you if you were not leveling up properly. The fact that walking around jumping non-stop and spaming crafted spells that did 1 damage on touch or illusion 1% for 1 second to boost your spell stats was an a
  15. I'm sorry.. I can't help but feel you've missed the entire point I was making with that particular argument. Unwelcome advances are not my concern, blatant disregard for consistent characterization is. If a character has shown a complete lack of empathy and an interest in nothing but the blissful feeling of bloody giblets rubbing against his skin then his priority should not be to disrobe a woman and make sweet love to her like the classiest gentleman in the known universe. He should be more interested in where he'll get the giblets for his next bath. Being a Player Character should not al
  16. I feel that when it comes to non-combat related skills/perks they shouldn't be tied to a class at all. Which is to say just because I'm a priest doesn't mean I should be unable to picklocks or disarm traps. Nothing about being a priest prohibits me from learning these things. As such I think classes combat potential (whether that be damage, survivability, healing, buffing, debuffing, ect) should be balanced against combat potential. Out of combat skills and perks shouldn't be tied to combat at all. Though I think you should have to choose between whether or not you are going to improve your co
  17. Because the higher quality the character models the easier it is to draw disparity between them and the "dead" flat 2d image with no movement, active shading, or depth. Well it depends how it's handled. While I know this game has no where near the budget of Diablo III all the objects that weren't a part of the background blended in perfectly. They were just skinned in such a way that was totally consistent artistically with the background. It's hard to notice some of the more subtle stuff when you're out hacking hordes of monsters to bits but if you run on out the fields of misery in ac
  18. While I do love when a JRPG has character portraits that change based on the dialogue I don't think such a thing fits in with this game. For example in a lot of JRPGs you'll get characters with portraits or full characters who have different expressions for a variety of emotions. Usually angry, scared, sad, embarrassed, ****y, ect. While I do enjoy these in JRPGs I think that with the tone of this game we won't be seeing simply drawn character portraits. I think it's more likely that they'll have fully painted portraits such as they had in Baldurs Gate and Icewind Dale. Changing the expres
  19. A mix of everything is best. Beyond that a high amount of monster types helps keep things from feeling grindy. I think mobs of enemies is probably the least appealing type to see over and over as they lead to that grindy feeling faster than a few more challenging monsters. Oh also boss fights that mostly consist of defeating a larger than average amount of monsters are boring and don't feel functionally different from the trash you need to clear to reach them. As such they shouldn't be done or done very sparingly because the last thing I want to do upon reaching the end of a dungeon is
  20. I'm ok with Forton. The idea of an elderly yet still hard as nails kung-fu master is cool to me. I'll admit that I'm not a huge fan of his concept art but that's just my personal preference in art not because he's 'ugly' or anything like that. I kind of consider him to be the Heihachi of this game he just needs to get that hair sticking straight up rather than leaving it down. Edit: I guess he'd need a bad ass mustache as well to pull of the Heihachi look.
  21. I like the idea about influencing factions relationships with other factions. I'm not entirely sure I'd want them to go so far to mini-game it where you could upgrade their weapons and give them funding and keep track of the territory they control and so forth. Not because I think it would be bad but because I think when you get in that in depth with this 1 aspect of the game I think story elements and overall content amount would suffer. As far as staged encounters where you can stumble across a battle between factions I think these are always good. It just helps the world feel more reali
  22. I'm ok with these sort of fetch quests or kill X quests so long as they're in the minority and non-story related. Really the place I don't want to see filler is in the amount of combat encounters. I'd rather have a battle last 10 minutes or so and do 3-5 of those per dungeon than have 20 1-4 minute battles. I just hate clearing pack after pack of monsters in a dungeon, it becomes drudgery, especially if they're just all the same sort of group over and over. So I would ask that they don't pad the game time with wave after wave of the same monster packs just to increase the game play length.
  23. I approve of this. I like having individual party members being able to innate dialogue as it gives companions more uses beyond combat. However if who does the talking is simply chosen by whomever reaches the NPC first I can see it leading to annoyance of have to single select your party spokesman constantly and sending them off to talk to each NPC before selecting the whole party to move out again. It's not a game breaker but it seems easy enough to design around as you've suggested by being able to set a primary representative for the party so I see no reason to not include it.
  24. I never kited in the BG games so I have no idea how well it works. I did however summon a fleet of 6 magic swords, send them into a room of enemies, shut the door and let them kill everything in site while I stood back safely with the party and just rested as needed. That said if I didn't want to cheese out those fights I simply would not. I feel the same way about kiting. Generally speaking somebody will at some point find the 'best' way to win fights at some point. However if I personally dislike that play style I won't do it regardless of it being the best or not. So even if you can kit
  25. Honestly even if this is the case it's indicative of what they're going for. I still stand by the fact that I think that scene or a scene like it has more visual appeal than any area or zone present in DA:O. This is a matter of personal opinion but I'd take the dated graphics of BG 1 & 2 (in terms of background design) over the narrow boring hallways of DA2. Further more I think these sort of stylistic graphics hold up far better over time than realism. Realism is only amazing until the next set of graphics cards are out. Morrowind was gorgeous at the time of it's release but if you pl
×
×
  • Create New...