newc0253

i really don't get all the complaints about Witcher's combat: although it has a timing aspect, it's relatively easy to master; has plenty of strategic elements; and the animations themselves are the best i've seen in a CRPG - certainly better than NWN's or Oblivions. (before folk start moaning, no, the strategic aspect of combat doesn't come from swordplay but from knowledge of monsters + potions + magic). i guess a legitimate complaint might be lack of variety: Geralt's a swordsman, so maybe there's lots of folk bitterly disappointed that they can't play Geralt as an archer or a dual-wielding halbred specialist. but is that really such a major failing? btw, i said earlier that the hardest combat in the game was the barghest fight. i lied: fighting the is.

support? i heard he was there, man. i also heard that he keeps a herd of feral pigs at his house, and if he finds out about anyone breaching the DRM, he feeds them alive to the pigs and then puts the whole thing on youtube. true story.

i've been rethinking the 6hr thing since i finished Spore (the first RTS i've played in a long time) and decided to play Civ 4 (which is maybe the first turn-based game i've played since Civ 3). playing those games, i can see there's definitely an overlap between world-builder games and CRPGs that Hinterland would naturally seek to exploit: both genres appeal to building up a character/civilization and both can be strong on exploration (replaying Civ, i'm reminded how the most appealing part of the game is early on, uncovering the map). so, yes, a 6hr game is fine for the strategy genre. but it's still no more than a small mod for an RPG, though. whether Hinterland will successfully appeal to CRPG fans depends on what it feels most like. the more i read, the more it looks to be a strategy game with RPG elements, rather than a CRPG with strategy elements. that ain't a bad thing, though. 1e D&D always promised a strong world-building element once you got past 9th level and i reckon a lot of folk who liked the Stronghold sidequests in BG2 or the Crossroads Keep element of NWN2 liked it because it tried to make good that aspect of the game. we'll see if Hinterland pulls it off. p.s. Portal wasn't a long game but it definitely took me longer than 3hrs.

I would like a link to that exact quote please? actually, his exact words were 'if you don't buy MoW, we'll shoot this dog'. and he even provided a picture of the dog: (yes, it's the same dog that national lampoon threatened in 1973. the dog is now very, very old).

i dislike DRM as much as the next person, but silly anti-DRM hysteria is worse. folk need to chill is all.

yeah, once you're past the creature stage, the actual physical evolution of your creature stops, which is a shame. your conduct towards other tribes & civilizations still matters to the bonuses you get, but you're no longer controlling your creature (until maybe the space stage, when you're flying round your spaceship). yeah, you can keep playing after the progress meter fills up.

ah, so now you're responding to my replies to other posters? it's nice to have fans. but who said anything about 'rightful'? not me. maybe it was another poster you're confusing me with. Tethyr? Some of the BG series took place there, but so what? Part of SoZ takes place in Chult. Does that make it IWD2? otherwise Tigranes talked about a game with 'a fresh story, setting and characters'. a BG3 with new story, setting and characters is a game with minimal connection to the original. so why call it BG? Because i like the BG series and would hate to see an inferior sequel, obviously. was that not clear? i thought it was pretty clear myself...

the week of the biggest financial crisis in 70 years and that's your best argument for making BG3? profit? i sure hope someone's paying you to be a cheerleader for corporate greed, though, because it'd be thoroughly dumb if you were just sitting next to a computer somewhere, being a [edited by SteveThaiBinh] on your own private dime. you don't pay attention to the names of games? boy, i'd sure hate to be the guy manning the counter at your local game store: ME: "hey fella, what do you want?" YOU: "i want to buy that new game" ME: "which one? we got hundreds of them" YOU: "that new one, with the dragons" ME: "do you know the name?" YOU: "no, i don't pay attention to names or marketing ploys. i only care about quality" ME: "yeah, that's great, but you still have to tell me what it's called before i can sell it to you" YOU: "uhh..." bottom line, folk who claim names are irrelevant are talking [edited by SteveThaiBinh].

two questions: first of all - how is that BG3? aside from the name, which is a marketing decision. what's the connection to the BG series? by your own admission, it doesn't have the same location, story, setting, or characters. it has the same gameplay, but so do most D&D games, broadly speaking. you might as well call it IWD3 or NWN3, for all the difference it would make. the second question - what is the point of calling that game BG3? besides a crass marketing exercise to fool clueless n00bs into buying another game? the Bhaalspawn saga is over. done. finished. they could always try and come up with a way to tack on a prequel or a sequel but, let's face it, it would suck ass and wouldn't be the same. so why bother?

sloth? greed? those were sins, last time i checked. you mean you're interested in a BG game in name only? i think Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance and Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance 2 should be right up your street then. *shrug* i'm just saying it would be a dumb idea. i'm not sure why that should offend your delicate sensibilities, though. really, who could have guessed that arguing against BG3 would get your panties in a bunch? so not calling the next D&D game 'BG3' would be like ... suicide? get back to debate class, kid. you need the practice.

*shrug* either you liked them or you didn't. but if you liked them, it's hard to understand your enthusiasm for a completely unconnected storyline sharing the same name. and if you didn't like them, your enthusiasm for a BG3 unconnected to BG1 and BG2 is even more mystifying. who said anything about entitlement? yes, that's just what the fans are crying out for - a plot with loose connections and/or references! hey, you know what would be even simpler? if they don't bother to make it in the first place. either that or make a good D&D game but don't call it BG3. i would have thought both those things were simpler than making BG3.

uh, no. the very act of calling a game BG3 is to claim a connection with BG1 and BG2, something beyond simply being another D&D computer game. the name itself is a promise to the customer. if there isn't gonna be a connection, though, then why bother to claim it in the first place? other than to sucker n00bs into buying it? that's why calling a game BG3 is such a crock: either they purport to continue a storyline that's utterly concluded (and thereby tarnish it) or they admit the name is only there for marketing purposes. either way, the BG name is only being used by the publisher as a shameless bid for more cash. why anyone who claims to be a fan of the original BG series would want to condone their favourit series being turned into an empty branding exercise is beyond me.

it's great that you keep trying to push that utterly semantic distinction, but have you noticed that nobody is buying it?

yeah, that fight is easily the hardest in the game. everything after that is relatively straightforward.

Nowhere as effective a brand name, though. how about: Baldur's Gate 3: Baldur's Gate In Name Only or maybe: Baldur's Gate 3: Nothing To Do With The First Two Except The Name or perhaps: Baldur's Gate 3: Just Buy This Already, You Clueless N00b.

i dunno because i registered my copy. but i suspect the game has a sufficient amount of built-in content to keep things ticking over ... it'd maybe get repetitive after a while, but then it does that eventually anyway.

you think i could be assed to read all four pages of this thread? trust me, your prose ain't that scintallating.

NWN2 is completely and utterly different from Baldur's Gate. There's hardly any relation to gameplay at all. It is completely wrong to compare the two. NWN2 and BG are both D&D games. that's comparing apples with apples, afaic. but i otherwise fail to see the logic of the original post. just because SoZ is yet another 'spiritual successor' (bleeah) to BG, how does it make sense to publish a game called BG3 but otherwise with no connection to the original series, except maybe a geographical one?

eh, Witcher played fine for me the first time. i'll definitely replay it but not just yet. actually, i recall hearing that owners of the original could get an upgrade to the enhanced edition? or was that just the crack pipe talking?

quick question: is there actually any additional areas or story in the enhanced edition? or is it just enhanced in other ways?

it's good that Atari have fans like you, Vol, to defend their bottom line.

That's not a ringing endorsement really? i thought HOTU was great, and Daggerford was very good too. but if you disliked HOTU, then i think my taste in CRPGs is probably little assistance as a guide.

with a hugely popular genre like FPS, there's more opportunity to exercise choice because there's more options. the competition among titles and the huge rewards for a successful game means that publishers are willing to invest more in order to get a hit, and drives developers to be more innovative. the downside is that fans of well-written FPS like Half Life or Bioshock are still outnumbered by muppets who will shell out for any old piece of crap so long as it has pretty graphics (hi there, Crysis!). to an extent, the fact that i don't play FPS regularly works in my favour as a consumer because i can cherry pick the best ones and ignore the dross. i try to do the same with CRPGs but it's obvious the choice is more limited.

I think the biggest factor that stops consumers having an impact is because, well, consumers are weak. i agree 'consumers are weak' is a factor, but the deeper explaining factors are that (i) consumers simply aren't a uniform bunch and (ii) CRPG fans aren't exactly spoiled for choice. first up, folk who like CRPGs with good writing are a minority. they're a minority of the folk who buy CRPGs generally (action CRPGs and fantasy MMORPGs are the biggest sellers) and they're an even tinier minority of game purchasers in general. secondly, since there's not that many CRPGs being made, CRPG fans are hardly in a position to exercise much leverage. so what if Oblivion has lousy writing? it was also the first CRPG in a few months, and when otherwise playable CRPGs are few and far between, most CRPG fans were gonna buy it regardless. so, yes, consumers are weak but because it's mostly because we're really talking about fans of story-driven (as opposed to action) CRPGs, and that tiny segment of the market is truly starved for choice.

why not? Daggerford was probably the best 2nd best NWN1 mod ever made, after HoTU. like so many things you say, that makes precious little sense. just because you refuse to purchase games electronically, i don't see how that could make you uninterested in a professionally developed NWN2 mod. it's not like we get more than 1 of those in any given year, if we're bloody lucky. i mean, if it suddenly became available in physical form, would you suddenly become interested? most people would have been curious all along. no. i'm just amazed that something as big and as complex as a full-blown NWN2 expansion pack has managed to race ahead of a simple little premium mod.