Diogo Ribeiro

I guess that's fair. I assume that some of its problems can be traced back to a somewhat convoluted design process. It would have benefited from some more polishing and fixing, I think; something that would have made it truly shine rather than just ocasionally glitter. Still, for some reason, it's a game I find myself returning to once in a while.

It's always important to know your enemy and plan ahead, whatever combat model is being used. The thing with Wizardry 8, and phase based in general, it that you're locked into a sequence of actions with no way of altering them on the fly. While this happens with turnbased as well, in turnbased you have the element of turns, which allow you to act along the course of a sequence, from time to time... PB generally doesn't interrupt the sequence to give you control (exceptions could be coded, sure; and the only one I remember from Wizardry 8 was when deciding to move during the party's phase), it's automatic until the beginning of the next round. This leads to a lot more aggravation than any other combat model.

Well, basically, while it isn't the greatest story ever told (and even though it has its touches, I think it's only above average) the story will make a bit more sense if you played the previous games, 6 and 7, as they expose the Umpani and T'Rang races, as well as the Dark Savant's overal plot. Pretty interesting how they remembered the long time fans and made it so you could import your 10 year old save from Wiz7 into 8... There's three different beginnings depending on what you did in Wiz7 and if you imported those saves. The spaceship crash landing is actually a 'newcomer' beginning, for players new to the series, who do not have a 10 year old save stored away.

@Ellester: I mentioned it was more tedious because unlike the step by step approach of combat, movement and tactical planning of turnbased, phase based is a bit more automated (as players define actions and they get all executed automatically in the following phase... Making it a bit like IE combat, make decisions, let characters go, and sit back and watch it play out), and becomes a bit less tactical in the sense that, since you can't fully gauge enemy movement and actions, the actions you have decided at the beginning of the round may either be rendered useless or counter-productive. This means that a single wasted movement or slight error cannot be as quickly fixed, and entire battles may be lost because of one minor problem that we were unable to predict, or even powerless to avoid. While I don't care much for pause'n'play, at least it manages to give players a bit more of control over the situation. Other than that, it friggin' rocks.

The movement delay could be somewhat 'fixed' with changing combat speed. Actually, what I felt were the main problems in Wizardry 8 were the use of phase based as a combat model, which is definetely more tedious and less tactical than turnbased in some ways; and 'fusing' all the characters in the party in a single 'creature'. This worked in step-by-step, dungeon hacks of old; but it just breaks down in full 3D with 360

Slices of boiled eggs, mushrooms, some brie, mayonnaise, and Frosties. All shoved into a 1/4 of a baguette.

If Star Citadel isn't the Unreal-powered firstperson game, then that's another project. Somehow, Jade Empire for the PC doesn't really seem like it's going to happen. Not because it's not possible, but because I don't think there'd be much to gain. And wasn't there talks about them working on some more other NWN modules?

If there's going to be another Star Wars MMORPG, it should be like Furcadia, but with Ewoks and Wookiees taking the center stage.

Gay pirate romance options 4evah!

Agreed. Well, that is the point, I guess. There are more realistic, credible and graphical ways of depicting gameworlds, but do they make the game necessarily better? Sometime ago I found myself contemplating the possibility of making an IF game, but the reception to that kind of game seems so small that I'm left wondering if it would ever get off the ground. I suppose lush 3D graphics (or even well drawn 2D) would be more effective in gaining people's attention, but would the gameplay change? Would the story, locales, NPCs? I don't think so. Well I can't know for sure, since I've developed neither, but from the get go, the meat of the game would stay unchanged, but likely would be ignored if released as a graphical inferior game. I also agree with this. Wheter IFs or graphical adventures/RPGs, I wish there'd be more of them currently.

I'm not expecting much replies, but hey, it's life. In regards to expectations, preferences and favorite games, how do you feel about retro or minimalist games? By this I mean games which can be just as deep in gameplay as recent games (if not more) but have significantly older and more basic presentations, such as roguelikes and interactive fiction games. Do you feel the need to play more graphical games (in the sense that they must be extensively graphical), or can you abstract yourself from the presentation and just dive right into the gameplay? An example of comparison would be something like Diablo and Rogue. Would you be able to take the ASCI characters of Rogue (or other roguelikes) and just let yourself be immersed in the gameworld and focus on the gameplay, or would you need to have more well devised graphics like those of Diablo to be able to play? Would you be able to play any roguelike regardless if it used ASCI or graphical elements to support itself visualy? Another example would be an adventure game like Grim Fandango (graphical adventure) and A Mind Forever Voyaging (interactive fiction), or other IF titles. Do you feel like graphical adventures provide a better framework for their gameplay, or do you feel the opposite? Do you feel having to type directions and verbs to detract from the gameplay of a text-based adventure game when compared to the ease of use of a graphical adventure's interface, or do you feel interactive fiction does a better job (when the writing is good of course) of creating better mental imagery of its gameworld and characters? Just curious as to people's points of view on this.

Since you couldn't distinguish between both.

Maximus Trollus giving dubious moral lessons and casting aspersions. Joke of the *year*.

Funny how like in the past, you drag something back up then go to some other forum and accuse me of doing this instead. Yet, here you are again, doing the same. Hypocrite just isn't enough to describe you. And, as before, the "rant" was entirely justified. Do I need to point out the threads where this happened? Hardly. Then again, trolling has always been your defense against logic. You have much more in common with Exitium than I'll ever have, for the very simple fact that when I'm wrong I admit it. Something neither of you know how to do.

You're no computer. You're just someone who acts stupid and redundant most of the time in order to obey your Spam Lords.

Newsflash, dumbnut: I never said otherwise. Now before you go back to your selective reading, ask yourself why I'm not denying it's important. Hint: because the discussion was about how character and player skills are entirely different things, not about how player skill is always important to whatever game. Do you understand now or do I have to suffer trough another of your butchered sentences about how NWN rules and you win in spite of rarely leaving the losing side?

Congrats for making my point again by dodging the issue, as aways.

I think this should go into Off-Topic... But yeah, pretty bad.

Same thing. Player reflexes are something that belongs exclusively to the player, not the character. Or are you going to blabber on for the next ten pages about how every game ever made requires player skill (when you most likely mean control), and will dodge the issue of the differences between player and character skill in a game?

That must be why aiming was entirely dependent of me and didn't really rely on my characters' Perception scores OH WAIT

I'll admit I find something appealing in going from gimp to vorpal bunny from hell. Wheter it's from an action adventure (ie, Zelda) or pure dungeon crawling (ie, roguelikes) perspective, what gets me is the methodical development of the character, the thrill of exploration (specially in roguelikes, which tend to randomize things, making it a thrill time and again), and the combat. It's just another form of character growth as far as I'm concerned. Both story and H&K elements allow for character development in their own way, but while I appreciate both, I also tend to frown at H&K shadowing story and other roleplaying elements in most CRPGs, when there's so much you can do with story and roleplaying that get neglected in favor of phat lewt.

O'course, Metroid had always been a game that relied on player skill... Any concerns surrounding its jump from sidescrolling 2D into firstperson 3D were as minimal as whatever concerns may have been surrounding the same thing in regards to games like Metal Gear or Grand Theft Auto. The gameplay would remain the same, and the switch didn't tamper with it... Fallout, or any game that operates primarily on character skill being changed into a player reflex fest, or halfway combining player and character skill, affects some underlying gameplay elements of the game.

OLD.

I have been pwned. My internet rank and salary shall now be reduced accordingly.

If its anything like past exclusives, then "exclusive" is just another term for "wait a couple of months until you get a port to another platform".