Gromnir

ok, let us get focus back a little. regardless of what levels you thinks is best, is there an appropriate rate of leveling in a d&d crpg, and does size of your party somehow alter that rate? HA! good Fun!

low and high levels is both extremes. we can talk 'bout how kewl it is to has lethal combat that has you on edge for every roll of dice, but who wants to be the guy who gets killed by the goblin with the pointy stick... and then have to sit out the rest of the gaming session. sure, such stuff can happens at any level, but it happens LOTS at low levels. at high levels... well, the opposite is the case. dice mean almost nothing. the results of combats is predestined. you got right equipment and correct spells for an encounter? yeah? then there ain't no mystery who is gonna prevail. 4-12... seems like the sweet spot for d&d rules. HA! Good Fun!

"I almost always feel as if the only point of the early game is to get the characters enough levels to be viable in the mid to late game." the first 3 levels of D&D is lethal. 'less you got some mechanic likes in ps:t wherein resurection and dying is somehow part of ordinary gameplay. you typically gotta cheat to keeps a low-level party alive. a single critical from a goblin with a bone knife will kills almost any 1st or 2nd level mage. and criticals is not all that uncommon. is ways to deal with low levels, but d&d, played straight and 'ccording to the book makes first 3 levels mighty tough on players... and the dms trying to keep 'em alive. HA! Good Fun!

I take it no one listened to your ideas at the DA forums about that? I was in favor of your idea, but don't remember if I ever posted about it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> seems that the no-win encounter were deemed unfit for gamer consumption by the powers that be at bio. *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

does number of party members make a difference? level up 1 an hour 'posed to level 4 or 6? HA! Good Fun!

"Regarding the Gargantuan dragon, I don't know. It could be a cameo, or there could be a "trick" to lower its CR. " agreed. deus ex machina is hardly unknown in in crpgs (the orb in nwn to helps with klauth is a particularly useful example,) and one might prefer if the Dragon in a 20 hour game were simply an npc beyonds reach... is maybe the character who gives you THE quest or somesuch. that being said, if you gots a dragon in a game, some people is gonna wanna have a chance to fight/kill it, no? HA! Good Fun! ps we would love it if Dragon were in game and fightable... but only as an arse kicking lesson. would love for once there to be an encounter in game where the measure of succes were not how quickly or easily defeated, but simply how little hurt you took before escape. but back to the topic at hand...

gamer definitions is... fluid. is likes getting 10 of us to agree 'bout what is immersion or what is even a crpg. we prefers when people simply describe what it is they wants using features from existing games as examples,

nwn allowed players to reach 'round level 18 or so in 50+ hours. too many? many of you were thinking so. one reason given for fast levels in nwn were fact that you got only 1 character to improve... as 'posed to 6 in the ie games. reasoning goes that it is taking no more time from game to level 1 character 18 times in nwn than it is to level 6 characters 10 or 12 times in BG2. number of level opportunities for a player in nwn is probably actually less in nwn than bg2... maybe even in bg1. does that make a difference? the majority of posters on the bg2 boards did complain that levels were too slow in BG1. alternatively, perhaps there is a leveling speed that is simply too quick for you to be able to maintain illusion that your character is a D&D character? the 1 character v. 4 or 6 character explanation not mean much to you? nwn2 will allow you to reach level... well, we don't know what level you will be able to reach. however, we has been told that a Gargantuan red dragon is gonna be part of game... something to show off capabilities of obsidian's engine tinkering. is it possible that after 20 hours o' gameplay our party o' four mights be able to battle such a beastie? assume for a second that such a confrontation is indeed possible in nwn2. is level 20 in 20 hours too many? so, how many is too many... levels that is. take some gameplay time period at random... say, oh, 20? yeah, 20 is a nice complete arbitrary choice. how many levels should a d&d crpg character be able to gets in 20 hours, and does size of you party make a difference? HA! Good Fun!

am working on puting together a list of useful email addys for game magazine writers/editors. is tougher to track these guys down than we first thought. HA! Good Fun!

well, first thing tomorrow Gromnir is gonna send off emails to every internet gaming magazine we can gets an email addy for... asks them if they know the truth behind the rumors that the nwn2 oc will only be 20 hours long... reference the german gaming magazine article. emails is wasteful to get developers or publishers to do something, but perhaps we can puts the people at gamespot and ign to good use for a change. please join Gromnir in his reasonable efforts to shed a teeny-weeny bit o' light on this issue. HA! Good Fun!

based on what evidence? Gromnir likes some josh ideas, but the fates conspire to put him in a position other than where we could ever see what he does with those ideas... *shrug* 'course it not matter to josh what Gromnir thinks of him. if j.e. peers and potential future employers thinks highly of him he gots no reason to be concerned 'bout what Gromnir and other fans thinks of his skills... am just saying that we gots very little material we thinks we can use to honestly judge his skills as being anything other than adequate... am not even sure that he would argue that. HA! Good Fun!

you know, Gromnir has never been able to decide if josh is any good at the craft of making games. circumstances has surely conspired 'gainst him, but is still hard to say much 'bout his design skills so far. his portions o' iwd were ok, but not our favorites... but that were his first game. HoW? we gave him some serious heat over HoW, but sounds like fergie hamstrung HoW development from day 1. iwd2? never finished, but again, what fergie wanted from iwd2 were simply to get a product out the door... am recalling that josh had a single day to come up with basic story. BG3? FO3? josh may have some good managerial skills... we assume so if fergie brings him in to try and gets nwn2 out by september, but is a shame we never has ever gotten a chance to see what josh could do with actual game design... and circumstances that not seem stacked 'gainst him. HA! Good Fun!

Sucks to be you then Play time is play time. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> well, we think that it is worth noting that replays is rarely as fulfilling as first plays... is not simply that play time is play time. first time we encountered ravel and her triumverate of guises, we were honestly moved... were shocked that such a fantastic character could get worked into a crpg. second time were still okie dokie, and so were third, but never is it like #1. see, that is the problem with the notion o' replay value. is not likes you honestly is playing a whole different or new game when you replay most games. is not that the second 20 hours is gonna be near as good as the first 20... and that is assuming that the first 20 is good... which given the substantial cuts that has had to be made recently sounds kinda iffy. HA! Good Fun!

that is the only rational thing you has said so far in this thread. congrats. HA! GoodFun!

As a potential customer I can say one thing, 20 hour game isn't worth $50. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you and vol has accounted for probably a third of all the posts we can recall that we simply discount as too ridiculous to have been constructed by sane people. in that regard we must thanks the both of you, as you has helped convince Gromnir to stay away from recreational drugs. that being said, vol is temporary inching ahead of vis on the Gromnir WACKOMETER 2006 scale. the suggestion that asking fergie for clarification 'bout gameplay hours constitutes arrogance on our part is something we finds... baffling. am not thinking that we could gets vol to name another product or service for which Gromnir questioning the makers/providers 'bout qualitative or quantities aspects would constitute proof of arrogance... or even evidence of unreasonableness. ... am taking that back. is some cults and fringe religions that gets real twitchy when you ask'em where the money is going

Well if you are going to do some chopping it's best done in the middle where it's less noticable. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> with kotor2 we knows that lucas moved up the release date by a full fiscal quarter. nwn2, on the other hand... am having far less sympathy for obsidian this time 'round. sounds like there were some bad planning involved and now they gotta scramble and scrape to try and reworks things so they not end up with a troika kinda product come september. no battle plan survives first contact with the enemy... and the enemy for obsidian is time. am getting that no 'mount of planning coulda' saved them from having to make adjustments... but this is sounding like substantial adjustments... right after ferret leaves. HA! Good Fun!

true... and we thinks deg is coming in with some missing info. now the theoretical game that would have been 40 hours but were reduced to 20 to give 2x as much gameplay value is an interesting theoretical question (though he is wrong,) but the game and situation that inspires this and other recent threads is not theoretical... is nwn2. the reality is that nwn2 had X number of areas and Y content planned for release.... but josh informs us that X and Y values both had to be REDUCED so that quality of game could be maintained while still being able to reach target release date. were no magic distillation process... were some unpleasant butchers work, trimming away what they coulds to maintain integrity of game. josh ain't sure that game is as ittle as 20 hours... but we ain't talking 'bout girth as 'posed to length type arguments. is simply less nwn2 than there were but a short time ago. HA! Good Fun!

regardless, it takes somebody only 5 minutes to tell us if fergie did say 20 hours to germans, and what he meant by it. is no different for Gromnir than if we were buying those steak knives... got simple kinda questions that seem reasonable from consumer pov. HA! Good Fun!

2 choices is easy... and it not results in half gameplay time. typical is it you see your meaningful choices where? you likes to bring up fo. such choices occur at end of game, or at end of an optional and tangential side-quest. why? 'cause you not have no bifurcation issues. your non-linearity is an illusion, and it only seems possible w/o addition of playable content. HA! good Fun!

It's a hypothetical, Gromnir, used originally in an attempt to both clarify various stances on the debate, and in an attempt to get you to answer whether or not replayability is an accurate measure or substitute for arbitrary, linear length. Quit being obtuse. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> lord knows we ain't being the obtuse person here... am actually trying to be very patient with you. the bifircation issues (not literal infinite, but that is title it gets,) is real and makes your suggestion highly impractical... and functional impossible. you won't listen to Gromnir explain, so we suggest getting a biowarian or obsidian (likes chrisA if he ever dcides to discuss this issue on boards rather than in interviews,) to go into why it is not possible. non-linearity is an illusion... 'specially if you thinks that story is important. you can fakes it by having optional tangential side-quests, but those adds additional gameplay time. HA! Good Fun!

Then we aren't talking about the same thing. I'm not speaking of a hypothetical NWN2 single-player campaign that consists of 20 hours and withholds content, such as quests, NPCs, or items, until you've beaten it multiple times. What I was hypothesizing was a campaign where *every* choice led to a different branch, to the point that it is *impossible* to get all the content in one game, as the game is different (perhaps not radically, but enough to make each play-through feel different) each time you play it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> go talks to the developers and ask 'em 'bout the infinite bifurcation myth. HA! Good Fun!

Yes. Dungeon Siege II tried that manipulation tactic. In DSII, players had access to more party members on the second and third play-through. Royally ticked me off. I paid my money... I don't want to be forced to trudge through the same game 2-3 times to get all the content I've paid for. If I choose to play a game more than once it's because I enjoyed the game enough to do so, not because the developer withheld content from me in an attempt to force me to do so. That tactic always annoys hell out of me, and makes me cross the developers who pull it off my future 'buy' list. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> *sigh* Di, don't take this the wrong way (you should know that I'm not being spiteful), but I'd like to ask you a question: How many time have you played through Planescape: Torment, choosing slightly different options each time through (as it is extremely difficult to do the exact same thing each time)? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you ain't pretending that we counts each additiona play through of ps:t counts as a new running of clock on hours of unique and different gameplay, is you? ... now that is strange. trying too hard to make a point. bg2 is an example of what we thinks deg is talking 'bout... and no, we ain't suggesting you needs 80-100 hours to pull off, but as we brought up moments ago, the stronghold quests, while unique to a particular character type, were existing in same areas and locales as basic critical path and tangential side-quests... the problem is that those quests still take lots of time and effort to create. biowarians were asked why they has not returned to this kinda approach... ahy they has in fact gone the opposite direction and tried to allow any character type to be able to access as much of game as possible on first playthrough and there answers make some sense: additional content is expensive to make... wanna give people as much of it as possible 'cause most people only play through games once anyway. so you honestly thinks the obsidian folks is gonna create 60 or 80 hours of content and then hide it in a 20 hour game? *shrug* HA! Good Fun!

Gameplay can be increased without adding hours in a linear fashion. Suppose that NWN2 only has 20 hours of gameplay on the first play-through, but each subsequent play-through, due to different consequences, choices, and dialogue options, offers an additional 20 hours of gameplay. Would that, then, be bad? The single-player campaign would still only offer the 20 hours that are attributed to Feargus, but would include multiple, different 20 hours in replays. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> give us an example. we has always heard 'bout these games using current graphics that coulds multiply quality gameplay hours using the exact same areas and models 'n such, but we ain't never seen nobody pull off, has you? again, takes charwood... 'cause length not matter, right? give different dialogue options and outcomes is what made charwood a goodly nwn quest. now somehow adds more quality dialogues that results in double gameplay time. the additional dialogues and different outcomes in charwood as they currently exist adds how much genuine additional time of game play? you people want a good story... good story fits into your notion of quality... but you want the dvelopers to create an area so elastic that simply change dialogue options results in doubling of gameplay? don't be silly. the dialogues may take loads of time to write, but they not take that much time to read anyways. you ain't fuctionally doubling gameplay hours simply 'cause you play 2x to get a couple different dialogue options. if that were the case then bio coulda' claimed that bg2 had a thousand hours of gameplay... gotta play each different character type to get each different stronghold. HA! Good Fun!

"When you think about it, for a good majority out there, the new engine and revamped toolset is worth $50 alone. " we has thought 'bout it. bio and interplay thought 'bout it and changed their minds a couple times as they made nwn. the only clear answer we got is that you is complete wrong... 'cause if nwn is any indication, a "good majority" of nwn2 purchasers will never use any aspect of nwn2 other than the sp oc. the overwhelming majority of 2million+ nwn1 purchasers never used anything other than the sp oc... and that is a conclusion admitted to by the biowarians on more than one occasion. why is you thinking that nwn2 purchasers will be different? HA! Good Fun!

see, this is the nuttyness of people. "EVEN then, that's not a fair question, since had Bioware only made a mod lasting a few hours, " you brought up hours. and we is always amazed at the folks that thinks that gameplay can be increased w/o hours. sure, throw in a few extra dialogues that not actually increase gameplay is possible, but the more developers add for you to do in a game area, the longer your gameplay time can be extended. bio used tiles and fixed character models... so what would they has added to charwood with substantially more developer hours that would not have potentially increased gameplay hours. add to 1007 table? is that the kinda thing that woulda' improved charwood w/o giving more gameplay hours? HA! Good Fun!