Jump to content

Ffordesoon

Members
  • Content Count

    553
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Ffordesoon

  1. Universe mystery types of things or horrible reality of the world and the eldrich horrors that slumber below types of things? Grown-up things. So, both.
  2. I have vivid memories of playing the IE games at a young age with my cousin, who was older and Knew Things. And when I say I "played with him, I mean that what I did most of the time was watch him play. Cut to now, and I'm playing through the IE games by myself for the first time. So I have fond memories of the IE games, especially Torment, but I am acutely conscious of each game's flaws in a way I wasn't and couldn't have been as a wee lad. I think this is probably the best position to be in as a backer, because I can be objective about my experience with the games now without having to s
  3. A suckerpunch happens when you don't see what the hell you could have done differently, you have no way of figuring it out without consulting a guide, and you can't come back to it later for whatever reason. I'll give an example that happened to me in BG1 (TOTSC, to be exact): the fight with Karoug in Balduran's ship. It is bulls**t, and the reasons why are legion. 1. Unlike regular wolfweres, Karoug can only be hurt by approximately five specific weapons, none of which the player has a reasonable chance of acquiring without metagaming knowledge. 2. You have to have taken specific
  4. No. The NPCs in BG1 were cardboard cutouts with whom you could have no meaningful interaction. If you had said Baldur's Gate 2 I'd have let it slip, but saying BG1 has meaningful interaction with NPCs is like saying a soggy piece of cardboard is the best piece of literature since Don Quixote. You, uh, you know I wasn't responding to you, right? I didn't say it had "meaningful interactions with NPCs," and rjshea didn't describe a game like that. He described BG1, which has interactions with lots of companion NPCs, most of which aren't very deep, but which are deeper than IWD's nonexistent NP
  5. There's probably a satisfying middle ground between the two character-building extremes of BG2 and IWD that would satisfy the need for tailoring your party and allow meaningful interactions. For example, allow the player to build a primary PC from the ground up, then provide a pool of side kicks that you can tailor to a more limited degree. The known character types of your possible side kicks allow the game designers to configure interactions, while you still get a lot of customization choices about your party makeup. You wouldn't even need to start the game with the side kicks--they could ju
  6. The combat's pretty lame, no question. The BG and IWD games are absolutely better from a pure mechanical perspective. However, I hardly think the "great story, bad game" argument holds water, because it always seems to be predicated on the combat being a bit crap. There is a lot more to the game mechanically than just the combat, though, and it shines in many of those areas as well. The puzzles you solve wholly through dialogue trees, for example, or the death mechanic, or the way the game organically opens and closes options to you based on your ability scores. And it's not as if
  7. No, he said Totment was a horrible game. Didn't you ever play Playernscarp: Totment? It wasn't very good.
  8. He'd probably call them g├╗ryg-nuardhs or something. (I kid, Josh!)
  9. The key to making things transparent without makimg them handhold-y is, I think, is to always make the player the one who investigates. The problem with Rey's examples is that the player's companions are doing the work for her. If there's a mystery to be solved, I want to be the one to solve it.
  10. Personally, I want their next Kickstarter to be SF-focused, and hopefully based in space opera traditions. That's a subgenre that gets a weirdly small amount of attention in RPG-land, even allowing for KOTOR (which is Star Wars, and thus more fantasy than SF) and Mass Effect (the RPG-ness of which is debatable). Even the Japanese don't go near space opera enough in their games. The Mandate might scratch a little bit of that itch for me, but good lord, look at the amount of high and low and dark and epic fantasy games that are being funded! One isn't going to redress the balance! Two wo
  11. Where did I compare the IE games to any RPG today, let alone an MMO? I said the trinity existed in the IE games. Why it should be a bad thing that it exists in this game too puzzles me, especially since the game simply cannot be designed around the trinity and live up to its design goals (every party is viable, six fighters, etc.) What is the concern here? Where is it coming from? I do not understand how you get "MMO" from any of what's been said so far.
  12. So how, then, do you know it's true of PoE? Because they used some words that sound kind of like MMO words (even though they didn't originate with MMOs) in an update? You can have a trinity party in the IE games. You can presumably have one in PoE. One of the oft-stated design goals of PoE is to allow you to build your party however you like and have it be, if not optimal, beatable. How could that work if the design was based on the MMO-style trinity?
  13. I'm sorry, but the idea that there was no "trinity" in the IE games is patently false. I can't tell you how many fights in BG1 I won with Khalid and/or Minsc tanking and everyone else in the back shooting arrows or throwing bullets, and I'd have Jaheira heal Khalid if his health got too low. And if you're wondering where the DPS is, it's the arrows, which would always do more damage per second than a fighter. Tank, healer, DPS. And I won like eighty percent of the fights this way. And, for that matter, what is buffing if not another form of healing? Yeah, it may not directly be healin
  14. THIS. THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS x1000. Also, traps. Can my traps guy (who, right now, is Yoshimo) not take ages to find every single trap, and sometimes never find them? I totally support having traps in the game, and I totally support having a trapfinding skill, but my God, does it have to be so binary with every trap? Like, maybe not every trap is created equal. Maybe some traps are more obvious to the trained eye than others. This could be another thing to hint at in-game as well: "Don't go into the F***ing Scary Dungeon Of Scariness, friend! There be traps and tricks the loi
  15. Nathan Grayson is a big fan of New Vegas. The guy who wrote the New Vegas review is no longer with the site.
  16. Would be awesome. No idea if we'll see it, seeing as this screams "out of scope" to me, but it would be nice. Certainly, an SCS-style mod that makes all enemies act "narrative-friendly" would be appreciated.
  17. If giving the player more options to deal with a spell that's game-breakingly powerful without nerfing its overall power level sounds like it would make the game easier, that's because it just might. It would also give the player more tactical options and make the game more fun without diminishing the impact of the spell. More granularity in dealing with foes only leads to more satisfying encounters, IMHO.
  18. @Stun: Yes, but there are ways to design around the hard counter that make it more of a soft counter. Here's a few off off the top of my head: another character can shove a stunned or held character out of the way, or maybe carry them to safety in exchange for getting rained with blows, or have a fighter guard a certain ally and take hits for them. And maybe stunning would have a set duration in seconds rather than being subject to a saving throw. This is a game with full party control. Teamwork is important. Why not codify that in the mechanics?* * - Yes, I know, the IE games
  19. Sure. But if all you have is rules and tools without genuinely dangerous foes that do lots of damage, then what you get is "fake complexity". "Oh look, you can use fireballs to do massive damage against the ice monsters, this game is so sophisticated!" Except it isn't because the ice monsters do piddling damage against you and you could just as easily take them out with standard attacks. This is a major problem with games today. Well, sure. Biggest problem with the Bioshock series is that you only need to use all your tools on harder difficulties - and even then, it's sometimes not
  20. But those spells don't kill characters outright. What's more likely is that they'll nerf them a bit so they can only be cast on one character at a time, which is fine by me. Also, they'll be probably be counterable with lower-level spells. This is, of course, speculation, but my point is that those spells aren't literally all or nothing, and death spells are. It's hard to get more all or nothing than life and death.
  21. It's worth noting that all this talk of death spells is academic. Why would a game inspired by the IE games that caps at Level 12 have death spells anyway? There are valid arguments in favor of death spells, to be sure, but they've gotta save something for the sequel/expansion/continuation/thingy.
  22. Oh, I wish I could like this a hundred times! I hate dungeons where it's like, "Oh, look, more orcs." Augh, why are the orcs there? Literally all you have to do is say to me, "Well, orcs live in caves in this world," and suddenly I'm back in your story. It's amazing how many games - even RPGs, the genre of worldbuilding and deep lore - don't do this, though. OH HAI IMMA ORC is fine in a first-person shooter, but every time I see it in an RPG, I want to punch. Hell, for me, there doesn't even have to be an explanation! I'm playing Bravely Default right now, and a ton of the dungeons hav
×
×
  • Create New...