TMZuk

That looks like it'd make for some super compelling gameplay bro. So fun. Ehh..? What has fun and gameplay got to do with it? We are discussing women's plate armour. Troll somewhere else, please.

I must disagree. In my opinion, New Vegas has an excellent story, as does Fallout 1 and 2. Fallout 3 has a very weak story, and is at the same time extremely linear. Notise i didn't even mention Fallout 3? It was intentional. That game was crap from start to finish in my opinion. Others may disagree. As for the other Fallouts, it depends to what you consider story in a game. Some people consider setting or atmosphere and characters part of the story. In these parts Fallouts were excelent. But story? No. The first Fallouts had good individual stories for each area, but the game's main story was... what? Find the waterchip, you find it and traces of an evil horde enemy, go kill the master, the end. The story is as basic as it goes. I don't mean that as a critisism as the game's focus was elsewere for the start. But i haven't seen anyone say that he played Fallout for the story, or that the story was the best thing about the game, as i have seen people do with PS:T and MotB. Okay, I take your point about Fallout 1 and 2. But then you can include BG in that list as well, the story was a very basic vengeance tale, combined with "fulfill your destiny". Regarding New Vegas I must still disagree. Yes, it ends with the Second Battle of Hoover Dam, no matter what. But how you get there, whom your allies is and why you fight, that is a great tale, and especially as the play throughs can wary so much, it's almost like a different game. MotB was epic as well, one of my all time favourites. PS:T ~is~ my all time favourite. But in my opinion, New Vegas was the proof that you could take a non-linear story with many branches and many options, place it in a sand-box world, and still create an epic tale. The best of two worlds.

I must disagree. In my opinion, New Vegas has an excellent story, as does Fallout 1 and 2. Fallout 3 has a very weak story, and is at the same time extremely linear.

Same as a suit of amour made for a man. At any rate, a suit of plate, historically, had to be fitted to the person who would wear it, unlike chain and brigandine, which were more flexible. Go to 3:45 on this video. It's from a training-session in Hamburg, Germany a few years ago, and the smaller of the two is a woman.

The magic system is nice. The new careers they added really rubbed me the wrong way though so whenever I try to pick up the rule book I remember "Eh, that's written by the people who thought putting in random starting careers that dictate the players background was a fantastic new thing to do". To me they just missed the whole point of having generic careers that could be anywhere in the Old World, leaving it up to players and GM to flesh out the characters. I know, I could just ignore those handfull of careers and use the rest of the system, but as I said, it rubbed me the wrong way I actually agree with that. They did some strange things with several of the careers. However, I didn't think the career system in 1st edition was perfect either, so we basicly play with a set of house-rules regarding the various careers.

I've not seen a mass grave, and I'd rather not ever. I ~have~ seen more dead people than I care for, and few of them were particularly pleasant. Most of them just looked horribly ~dead~. I doubt any video-game will ever be able to carry that sensation across. Not do I want it to. However, as Obsidian has stated, it would be interesting to explore more mature themes than usually done in CRPGs. And I believe that along that line of thought, a more ~believable~ approach to killing and death would be an interesting avenue to walk. The usual glorified mass murderers that is a typical RPG player character is a trope I'd like to see dissapear.

Well, that would depend on how difficult it is. And how common it would be for the corpses to turn undead. And how powerful said undead would be. Personally, I find the laissez-faire manner in which killing and death is treated in most RPGs annoying. I'd like to see a bit of morality and ... realism (Darn, I said it. The silliest term to use about a fantasy RPG mechanism ) introduced. The ability to bury the dead would be a beginning.

It depends on the length of the story-arc. But, I'd love to see a timer on the corpses. First they reduce to be decaying husks, savaged by carrion-birds and wolves. Then they become bones, and finally they vanish. AND, I'd love an option to bury the corpses. In fact, it would be super-cool if there is a chance that unburied corpses turn into vengeful undead, attacking the PC when he or she return to the area.

Oh wauw! That just looked fantastic!

I'm in awe! Those Darklands inspired pages are just amazing! Darklands was for years my favourite CRPG, in spite of the lack of a solid story-line, and NPCs. Simply because it oozed atmosphere. Very, very cool to include these!

Sigh... Why do some people like to misuse the word spyware? Learn what spyware actually is before throwing it around. You're just making yourself look incredibly stupid. I do? Well, in my opinion, it is you who sound "incredibly stupid". I am well aware that Steam and Origin do not technically fall under the category "spyware". But before you start spewing insults, then perhaps you should ask yourself a question or two. Steam is not needed for Fallout: New Vegas or Skyrim to function. Yet it is demanded that it is activated for you to play those games. Origin is not needed for Mass Effect 3 to function. Yet it ~has~ to run for you to play. So what does it do? It monitors how you play the game, how many games you play and what type of games you play. Even when you play offline, you still have to go online to receive updates, and while you download, the information is uploaded. Furthermore, it adds nothing to the game, whatsoever. It just insists that it ~has~ to sit there. It is making it a hassle to actually play legal games, and thereby encouraging piracy. In short: It spies on you! So learn how to read between the lines. But if it'll make you happy, you can also call programs like that bloatware!

... Just get it from GOG? I avoid spyware like Steam and Origin like the plague anyway.

I wonder what it is about those damned kill-points that makes the same people post the same things again and again and again? To those of you who love them, and who fume because they won't be there, I hate to break the "news" to you: We were a number of people who loved the IE games but hated the kill-points. Did that stop us from playing the IE-games? No. So how about you get over yourself already and move on? I LOVE that kill-points are out. But I am damned sure that there will be other features which I'll dislike. I am also pretty sure I'll play the game anyway!

The "He hates classic rpgs because he dislike Baldur's Gate 2 / combat-XP / etc. etc." posts are quite amusing. What is a classic RPG, I wonder? I consider Call of Cthulhu a classic RPG. Guess what? No XP at ALL there. In fact, that goes for all the games that employs the old Basic Roleplay system. EG Runequest and Stormbringer. These are games from the eighties, and certainly Call of Cthulhu it would be hard to ~not~ consider a classic. Warhammer Fantasy Role Play. Another game from the eighties which I consider a classic. This system does employ XP, but only quest and role play XP. G.U.R.P.S. Only quest and role play XP. Not a classic? I beg to differ. Now the only systems I remember from the "classic" days, that did have XP per kill was D&D and Rolemaster. Rolemaster was tedious and slow in the extreme, with countless tables and what not. And it gave XP for every damn thing, from rowing a boat, to jumping a gorge to killing a goblin. It could perhaps be used by a computer, but please, no! Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, as it was called back then, was a very popular RP-system in the eighties. It is the system BG and BG2 emulates. And while I loved those games for the exploring and the plots, I really disliked and still do dislike the XP per Kill mechanic. It seems to me that most of the classic games did not have XP pr. kill. Not the ones I've played, anyway. But in the end, it dosn't matter much, one way or another. If the game has what I consider the core of a good RP: Exploration, character development, great npcs and companions and an interesting main quest, I could care less what the mechanics are like!

I found NWN2 a buggy monster with a terrible UI, and awful effects to boot. It was also rushed and unfinished, leaving a "this could have been so much better" feeling in me. That being said, the campaign was way better than the travesty of a single-player campaign that was NWN1. NWN2 had interesting companions, and a far better story line. And, NWN2 had the Mask of the Betrayer expansion which were downright amazing. Amongst the very best of CRPG campaigns ever. So I lived with the terrible mechanics, because first and last, it was an RPG to me, where NWN1 was mindless hack and slash.

Mhm. Something along those lines. I never played the Ultima games, but I loved the tone they used in the BG games.

Uh. This is a hard one. In no particular order: NWN2: Bishop. For being a vile SOB, and sticking to it to the end. Dragon Age: Origins: Morrigan. For being a snarky, sarcastic b****, and still have emotions and doubts. Baldur's Gate 1 & 2: Jaheira. For being a bossy, tyrannical, lovable, endearing, irritating and utterly loyal companion. Planescape: Torment: Morte. For being sarcastic, nasty, obsessed with women, deep, surprising and astonishingly well written. Baldur's Gate 1 & 2: Minsc and Boo: For bring an entirely new dimension to the "really stupid barbarian with a two-handed sword" cliché. There are others. These are just on top of my head.

I'm going through this thread with something like disbelief. Does anyone think that posting toxic hatred will change one damn thing in the game? I seriously dislike combat-xp, feeling that they cause grinding and give life to the tired old trope that Roleplay = Killing Stuff. On the other hand, I ~also~, as I have voiced more than once, seriously dislike crafting. Now, crafting will be there. It was, if I remember correctly, a stretch-goal even. Does that mean I should start spewing vile remarks and drag peoples name through the mud? I think not! I have voiced my dislike, and presented my arguments. If enough people agrees it might cause a change. Otherwise, I'll live with it! So I suggest mature behaviour when posting, or the forums will end up as infested as Bioware's.

I am unable to choose which feature I want more than others. In fact, most of the things listed in the poll I see as pros. There's a few of them where I can debate how well they were implemented. And I don't like the crafting system at all. That being said, I dislike crafting in general. By and large, Arcanum is definately one of the better games to be inspired from. A classic, and thankyou to GOG for making such a gem available. But, I'd rather see a poll where more than one option is available.

Just enjoy it. Then he can give his thoughts when done. In my opinion, the game has weaknesses and strenghts, the greatest asset being the setting and the atmosphere, while it is lacking in character depth. Curious what Chris Avellone's conclusion will be.

If you want the game to be believable then you should gain most Exp outside of combat training ceasesly to become the best of the best at you skills. So in keeping with your goal we should do away with Exp in quests and spend our days training in the mountains Well if both B and C are true then it sounds like there was no challange at all in your given scenario. If they are doing a task that is so incrediable easy to them why are they being awarded at all. I think we should award them for eating pie while we are at it. A seems to be the only choice where you don't imply that its a walk in the park. Yay for picking a simplified example apart and missing the point entirely. I shall attempt to make it more simple: Any quest could be resolved in number of ways. If succesfully resolved, a violent approach should not automaticly be worth more than a non-violent approach.

Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay. 2nd edition. Fatepoints. Deadly combat. Many, many classes. Call of Cthulhu. Simple and lethal combat. No classes, just skills. My two favourites.

I dislike killpoints with a vengeance. I never reward killpoints when being a PnP GM. Never, never, never. And if they are bad in PnP campiagns, they are worse in CRPGs. They are bad because they encourage the player to hunt around every corner of the world, simply looking for something to kill! XP should be rewarded for roleplay and for acomplishing something. If your character wishes to escape captivity, he or she could be faced with three options: A: Kill Everyone Now! Self-explanatory, I believe. B: The Fools are Blind and Deaf! Your character could sneak past the God of Guards, he/she is that good! C: What A Bunch of Suckers! The Devil would be afraid negotiating with your character. So, why should one of these options be worth more, xp-wise, than another? You as player design a character. The game should present an equal number of opportunities for all designs. There should of course also be situations where either guile is useless, violence is futile or stealth pointless. That forces the character to rely on companions for certain situations. What I love about many oldschool games, like FO and FO2, Arcanum and similar games, is that a quest only have a goal, not a set approach. Get rid of killpoints, and we are, in my opinion, one step closer to the feeling of the game being believable.

I'm presently making my way through Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magicka Obscura. I haven't played it before, and it is astounding how much more reactivity a game has when you do not have to worry about VA. Just a small detail like everyone recognizing your character's gender adds so much to the atmosphere. So I hope Obsidian keeps VA down.

I've been training swordfighting for seventeen years. I've fought with all sorts of equipment, good and bad. I've had a knife snap while blocking, that looked good, felt good, but was made by an amateur. I've taken an axeblow on the helmet, that was so hard that two layers of 1,5 mm steel was dented, and I praised my decision that I was not going to settle for a helmet made in a week by an amateur, but instead paid 300 euros for one that was made by a professional. Where did your friend get the steel from? Did he mine the iron himself? Did he have his own bloomery? Have you tested the helmet? In the late middle-ages, Danish armourers had to take a pistolshot to the chest, wearing the breastplate they had just forged. You can see those armours in the armoury of Copenhagen. They are not "legendary" items. They are simply armours ordred by professionals and made by professionals. Funnily enough, none of those soldiers forged their own armour. The fact is that crafting feels "unbelievable" in FRPGs. That's why I dislike them, and that's why I hope it isn't implemented. Wether I use it or not, it will make it harder to suspend disbelief.