Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Sacred_Path

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1328

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Sacred_Path

  1. Sacred_Path
    I like your skepticism about Garriott's game, lolz.
  2. Sacred_Path
    Yes, other: reading and controlling minds. An actual working "enchantment" school of spells that makes merchants and other NPCs open up to you.
  3. Sacred_Path
    Then I shall not disclose it to you. In that case you should be forced to kickstart a ****load of games. Because despite having enough money to buy more games, I simply don't find much in the way of great games in this my very most beloved genre.
  4. Sacred_Path
    Two questions I have but haven't received an answer yet: 1) Will all content be available and viable in single AND multiplayer? Will it be viable to be a blacksmith/ fisherman for some time in single player? 2) RG has said in several interviews I've watched (something along the lines of): "In the first week, if you want to learn swordplay, go for it. If you want to learn magic in the second week, you can do that". Does that mean any form of respeccing? Or is he simply talking about a classless system? The other thing I'm worried about is how silly the technology in the game will be. Looking at some sketches on the website, I'd say pretty silly.
  5. Sacred_Path
    I'd say they'll get to ~3mil around the end of the campaign, and then by upping their pledges people will lift it to ~3.5mil.
  6. Sacred_Path
    I know what you're getting at. Like in your AP example, I've restarted Lionheart several times with different characters. Character creation is fun, so I enjoy that, even though the game is also pretty much broken. OTOH, I only played through it once, because the game as a whole simply isn't fun enough to make me stick with it. This is unacceptable.
  7. Sacred_Path
    Are you implying that people simply look at things from different angles, harbour deep-seated grudges for no good reason, hype things on ground of weird subjective preferences, and like to randomly bash other people's preferences because they have nothing better to do? Surely not on the internet. One interesting thing in that thread: "a masterpiece is something endlessly repeatable and endlessly enjoyable." That's hyperbole, but I'd say that what I said about succeeding on different levels, is what makes "masterpieces" potentially more endearing in the long run than others. BG2 has good replay value because it does a lot of things right, and you can find something new to enjoy for a long time. It would be interesting to hear how many times PrimeJunta has played through PS:T (and did you do it with a low WIS, low INT, low CHA fighter?).
  8. Sacred_Path
    I do not get the appeal of throwing in some weird change of location in CRPGs, much less forays into other planes. I didn't enjoy the shift to the Underdark in IWD1&2 and BG2. I didn't get why we needed to leave the atmospheric Chult behind for the dull Sword Coast in Storm of Zehir. I'd rather the effort to create that art, monsters, items etc. went into expanding the prime theater of the game.
  9. Sacred_Path
    We're only expecting the devs to resolve issues that we as a species haven't resolved yet. Nothing more difficult.
  10. Sacred_Path
    That's a suggestion that has popped up in this thread. Actual starting vignettes, at least those in ToEE that I was thinking of, only provide a backstory for you. Or, more accurately, they introduce your character into the story and lead to your first quest.
  11. Sacred_Path
    I'm afraid I can't follow. How does it go against roleplaying if you know and have decided on your character's background? So basically you want to make up your own background, and not be limited by the choices given by the developers? Ok, I can see some merit in that. But I have to say, I don't think broad backgrounds limit your chance to make up most of the background of your character. Examples of what backgrounds I would like to see: "Raised by a soldier": +1 STR, bonus to swords, polearms and thrown weapons "Alchemist's apprentice": +1 INT, bonus to alchemy I think these do not limit your roleplaying in any way, but contribute to it. You may still be an intellectual, or a lithe person, who was raised by a soldier. You may have worked as a lumberjack, a goldsmith or a carpenter. You may have been an alchemist's apprentice, but you're still a lump of a man and he simply couldn't find anyone else.
  12. Sacred_Path
    Well ****. *Puts on reading specs on top of his regular specs* Sooo. I thought you were arguing for a gradual discovery of the character's past over the course of the entire game, including retroactive stat modification. But it seems, you're really arguing for a prologue or starting area, wherein parts of your stats are defined, while the rest would be defined at a classical "character creation" menu on startup. Did I get it right? If so, I'd be fine with that idea, even though I don't really see much gained compared to classical character creation. Unless you really want to drag it out for a longer time than just a prologue, against which I have some reservations that I already described above. This is NOT to say that I'm totally against stat/skill boosts to happen at certain times in the game, either through dialogue or other means, but not to such an extent that it (re)defines your entire character. And of course we seem to agree that simple story elements that you learn about your character's past over the course of the game are ok, nay, it's a good thing if your past is getting constructed as you go.
  13. Sacred_Path
    True, I was thinking of a strictly "diplomat" run. this would be kind of a nice subversion of the usual "kill trackers" in CRPGs
  14. Sacred_Path
    I have to agree with this. However, I think I've narrowed down why I have such a problem with the concept of a pacifist CRPG run: while other approaches rely on all kinds of ressources (healing, casting buffs, casting offensive spells, using active abilities), diplomacy is usually handled by a single (passive) skill. It has already been adressed in a number of threads that choosing the "right" dialogue to get a positive outcome should be more difficult, but I still thinks this favors diplomacy too much compared to other approaches. Therefore, I think a diplomat should have to make use of active abilities and/ or magic to help his performance. A simple example would be a spell that raises your charisma to superhuman proportions (mebbe the equivalent of a shiny sparkly aura and a messianic quality to your words).
  15. Sacred_Path
    I... do not get the point I fear. While that would be sort of satisfactory to me, and sort of satisfactory to you, it does have 'sketchy' written all over it. It makes me think though... background traits in TES obviously only have to pertain to you. In, say, Arcanum you also were the only one with a 'background' IIRC. Should henchmen and companions in P:E have backgrounds? In the case of retroactivity, should you be able to choose a background for them upon their joining? I do think this would be kind of cool, as a way to simultaneously define and learn about your character's past. It could be general enough to fit in with any backgrounds you picked. If your background was, say, "raised by a soldier" (bonus to combat skills), you could still have an alchemist friend or a shady contact, while any kind of character also might have fought in a battle as a draftee.
  16. Sacred_Path
    said chanter should also be an homage to another, allegedly fictional, "chanter".
  17. Sacred_Path
    I think that depends. If the spoils are great, I think you'd find people willing to penetrate some monsters' lair with you, especially if others have succeeded at such tasks before. If you as their commander proved to be completely inept, that might change things, but then there's game logic. Why would people ever even bother to take up arms in a group of six, to wade through myriads of enemies and ultimately face a super powerful villain? Wouldn't they just stay at home and accept things? I'm p. sure that a lot of mercenaries didn't break ranks all the time when were to take up positions to protect, say, crossbowmen.
  18. Sacred_Path
    I would agree that BG2 managed to do something well at every level; and that therefore it's worth a recommendation to every RPG player. And this is actually what I feel a game that is supposed to be a "masterpiece" must deliver. In the case of BG2, I think none of its parts were so fantastic that many people would call it that; but it's a close contender for the title.
  19. Sacred_Path
    I enjoyed Icewind Dale's story, but that probably mostly was due to the atmosphere. Kuldahar, the Oak, the cult of Auril... it's one of those games that make you feel cozy in your chair. BG's story on the other hand... it all starts with the first hook of the story. You're supposed to hunt down Gorion's killer. Thing is, I didn't even care at all. The prologue definitely wasn't enough to ingrain that "child at Candlekeep" feeling into me, and why I should go look for a powerful assassin who killed an old man I had travelled with for some seconds when there was a whole open world waiting, I never quite got that into my system.
  20. Sacred_Path
    do I get it right that you want to discover the protagonist's past over the course of the game, but with an element of choice? I'm against that for several reasons, the first being that I like to create characters, which includes knowing said character. It strains my credulity to not know what I've done before and discover that piece by piece. This might not be a problem if someone isn't into roleplaying though. The other thing is I'd like my background to influence my character's stats and this would be silly to gain in retrospect.
  21. Sacred_Path
    When people call something a "masterpiece", don't they usually mean that more universally than "this might be ****, but I liked it"? I think yes. I don't think so. I'd like to hear more about what people thought about games in general, not just about the aspects that they liked the most. The most interesting quote in this context probably came from PrimeJunta, where he said that, if the combat was done i.e. more in the vein of other IE games (which means that the combat would have been more interesting), it would actually have diminished his enjoyment of the game, because he feels that this would have gone against what he calls the game's "dream logic" (I hope I remembered the details right). To me, this means one of two things: 1) He's wrong. or 2) this is a really highly subjective preference, but interesting nonetheless. No, that autism quote came about in a different context. It was my retort to the claim that "you can't make a game [/RPG] that appeals to different kinds of gamers at once!". I meant that most people who play games can enjoy a good story, and their enjoyment of the game is enhanced by the quality of the story, no matter if they actually bought the game because things go pew pew pew. OTOH, people who love a good narrative should be put off by bad combat mechanics; at least, that would be my first guess. But as the example above shows, that is not always the case. But that is probably so rare and so highly subjective that it can merely be called an oddity. I pretty much agree. that sounds reasonable. @Karkarov https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekp97D7gCZ0
  22. Sacred_Path
    see, you don't know me at all. g'night
  23. Sacred_Path
    o rly, I've heard that the combat was whack-a-mole, the setting was silly and the narrative was driven by color coding since this is the thread where we bash everything people like: I'm currently in a playthrough of Wizardry VII, and damn was that one ambitious game. Some key features have never been used again in Western RPGs TTBOMK; like NPCs actually competing with you for treasure, and thereby possibly closing off content that you can't access anymore if you're too late. For a mechanics ****, or IOW a gamist, there are many interesting ideas. And what's even more interesting, it tries to avoid many pitfalls that modern games still walk right into. Still, I won't call it a masterpiece, just to then try and relativate it by saying "well it's for gamists!". The story is very simple and lackluster, and the setting was definitely not created with people of 18+ years in mind. And even on the mechanics side, there are things that are rough/ failures in the details. Oh, and the sound is grating. It was definitely one of the best, if not the best, RPG on the market at the time of its inception (1992), and it still holds up very well. If it had all the trappings and the accumulated experience of the industry in 2013 under its hood, I probably couldn't tear myself away from it. But that doesn't mean I can turn a blind eye to its shortcomings. g'night
  24. Sacred_Path
    The Glinkie Letters lol
  25. Sacred_Path
    Uhm, it can be done very well; only, in most cases, to different degrees. Take Icewind Dale: it didn't have a particularly strong story, but an atmospheric one, and I enjoyed that. I don't think I would have enjoyed the game as much as I did if it had featured as lackluster a story as Diablo. Still, the main draw for me was the relatively interesting combat and party building. The good portrayal of an AD&D setting was another bonus. I think, in regards to "kinds" of gamers, we should state the following: - most people are not one-trick ponies - most people are not idiots - most people don't suffer from autism and therefore most people will recognize and evaluate such different aspects of a game as story, mechanics, and setting, and they may all contribute or subtract from their enjoyment of a game. If a game's story and dialogue are so ridiculous I constantly have to facepalm myself, it ruins my immurshun and I probably won't play that game for long. The other point being, CRPGs are a niche product as is; you don't want to narrow down your consumer base even more by saying "combat and setting are **** in this game! Hope you like the story!". Even companies that have reached their goal of being able to finance their game (say through Kickstarter) usually attempt to placate any fears. Look at Tides of Numenera; while they cater to storyfags by saying that combat can be resolved by "other means", they still want to have that aspect in there, and in a way enjoyable to their audience (which is why they leave the combat system open to discussion).
×
×
  • Create New...