Tanuvein
-
Posts
345 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Tanuvein
-
-
45 min is often enough. It was about the time I needed to determine that Morrowind was complete garbage.
Really? The game really pays off once you get into it. There's not enough time in 45 minutes to get anywhere serious. Of course, its a much better game if you download a ton of mods to make it more to your liking.
There are many GREAT games that, had I only judged them by the first 45 minutes, I would never have played - KotOR 2 just the most recent.
Of course, sometimes I shouldn't keep waiting for the game to get started. 20 hours into Pool of Radiance before I stopped
-
My first on console was probably Dragon Warrior.
I'm not as sure about on PC, but I think it was Ultima Underworld.
-
You don't really need to have played the other two Bard's Tale games, they are quite old and had minor, if interesting, stories. The new one seems to have no connection.
In fact, if I remember right, the old Bard's Tale had that 'turn to page 36' stuff where you used a book for the all the in game text since it was cheaper that way, and had smaller file sizes.
A few corrections ? the Bard's Tale series was actually 3 games, Tales of the Unknown, Destiny Knight and Thief of Fate (four if you count the Bard's Tale Construction Set) and, huh?? What games were you playing, because I certainly don't remember any "turn to page x" stuff while playing Bard's Tale and I also don't remember them having minor stories. The plots weren't exactly stellar, but definitely on par with all of the other stuff that was released back then. I've got very fond memories of these games and I still play them now and again. Unfortunately Brian Fargo's new Bard's Tale doesn't have anything to do with the old series due to licensing problems.
Here's a link for more information on the original Bard's Tale series:
As I said, I didn't remember for sure, but I thought they required the book to supplement the story like a lot of other interplay games from the time. Its been about five years since I touched one of the bard's tales, but I still thought they did, like Dragon Wars (which used the same engine and came out after hte first).
And the stories were minor - nothing much happened during them and they weren't overly prelavent, at least in the first two. I am not sure if I played the third.
-
I tried it, but I found the controls quite counter-intuitive (or am I whining about something dumb because I didn't find the option to change them?), the graphics weren't quite up to date, and a lot of the actions(at least the animation) seemed slow and awkward. Add the fact that I don't know much about the series or the situation too to amount to a very... curious demo.
You don't really need to have played the other three Bard's Tale games, they are quite old and had minor, if interesting, stories. The new one seems to have no connection.
In fact, if I remember right, the old Bard's Tale had that 'turn to page 36' stuff where you used a book for the all the in game text since it was cheaper that way, and had smaller file sizes.
I really liked that Dragon game based on the engine - it took place on an prison called Purgatory. Good times.
-
Wow, all the official reviews I've seen rate it very highly. But seeing as you played only 45 minutes, I won't even consider this opinion yet. I find it odd you managed to get bored with a game that fast, especially an RPG. Heck, I thought the first hour of Torment was fairly boring - it was only hte premise that got me to play and see the gem that it is.
-
I actually paid money for DA. Bad me
-
If I remember right, you can also use the bronze orb to force him into you.
-
I hated Arthas, but I do agree his fall was well done. But there's no guarantee he won't try and redeem himself whenever Warcraft IV comes around.
Probably unlikely.
There is no Arthas to redeem anymore; there's only a sort of Ner'zhul/Arthas hybrid, the newly freed Lich King.
I know, that's what would make it so bad.
"I will defeat the evil will inside of me and become good again! Yay for goodness!"
I don't think it will happen though, either.
-
Don't have much to add, but I do find endings very important, and also agree that the freedom and choice of western RPGs often makes it hard to make a big cinematic ending like a Japanese RPG. However, most JRPG endings are horribly cliche - even the good ones - so that's fine.
Mafia did have a great ending, loved it. It had a lot of power behind it.
I also thought Vampire had a good ending (not near as good as Mafia, but that's irrelevant). I'm surprised people complained about it. My only complaint was all the fighting to get to that ending.
-
Everything on page three is GREAT (except maybe the Martian one, I haven't played it). Albion and Dungeon Master are also great and should be grabbed.
-
I hated Arthas, but I do agree his fall was well done. But there's no guarantee he won't try and redeem himself whenever Warcraft IV comes around.
I also like how they handled Illidain: The good guys hate him and say he's evil, but he's probably the most direct and good of them all. He rocks.
-
I'd have to say the old guy (Grumpo?) from Anachranox... because it actually was shocking, and it suddenly made a few things clear.
Its terribly sad that the second half of the story will never be released.
I weep
-
That's not what I meant.
He said that when you see a creature you are expected to kill it. All non-humans (minus a few cases) are automatically hostile, much like a random baddy you'd run acrossed in any other game. Of course they expect you to kill it, or it wouldn't attack you. Its just there for cannon fodder.
That's pretty much the purpose of all auto-hostile creatures in any RPG. To either find a way around it or find some way to make it dead.
Fair enough, if you use non-humans and the turn hostile, then dialog or another option is usually not a choice. But there should be an option to prevent it from becoming hostile, like stealth should be an option to bypass a creature. The Guardian in IWD2 was a boss battle and you were not required to fight it, things like this should be available to the player. Also in the BG games, bears were not hostile unless you went up to its face, then it would become hostile. So, you could see one but just skirt around it and you didn?t have to fight it. You had a choice to make that a combat encounter or not. But if a monster turns hostile, then yes you have two choices, run or fight. I?ll agree with that.
Almost all of the hostiles in Gothic and Gothic II give you the opportunity to run - they growl or raise their weapons a few times in your direction. You have about 2 seconds to retreat if you want.
You can also sneak past most things.
The world is largish, and only about 30% of it is required to be explored for the main quest. The rest is just some xp and nice loot from finding things. And its always good to explore.
Gothic doesn't really have 'bosses' other than the Sleeper in the first and dragons in the second, but it has some really tough rare enemies you can run across, like demon lords and black trolls.
Also, you can resolve almost all dialogue peacefully. If you want. But this is a game where, even if you are playing a morally righteous character, you can often beat the crap out of people without feeling bad.
-
If you are evil, you can be stealing your power from the last baddy to make you whole. You could also be doing it so that you won't end up a vegetable. Being a vegetable would suck, even if you are evil.
-
That's not what I meant.
He said that when you see a creature you are expected to kill it. All non-humans (minus a few cases) are automatically hostile, much like a random baddy you'd run acrossed in any other game. Of course they expect you to kill it, or it wouldn't attack you. Its just there for cannon fodder.
That's pretty much the purpose of all auto-hostile creatures in any RPG. To either find a way around it or find some way to make it dead.
-
Im now level 15 with 60% One-handed and 40 strength, and the combat control is starting to feel ok now. Not good, but adequate. I still dont stand a chance against Orcs or the thugs in the lighthouse.
But on gridning: its quite obvious that the devs expect you to kill every critter you see in order to gain exp a la mmorpg. If you dont, you cant beat the tougher enemies and make progress in the story.
Ala MMORPG? What?
Every RPG pretty much expect you to kill what you run across...
Anyway, I was level four before I left Khorinis this play through (NOTR though), and I didn't finish all the quest. I wanted to go check on Lee and the boys.
As for the bandits at hte lighthouse, they aren't too hard pre-NOTR. However, unless you are good with bows (or are a mage), you may want to use a scroll or two. Don't worry, you can afford it.
-
I found it funny and interesting... at the same time!
-
Concerning the debate of whether it has plotholes or if it is clear as to what exactly happened, i'm going to just say that the important aspect of PS Torment was that while playing (despite not knowing what exactly you did in the past) you really got the feeling that you would probably get what you deserved at the end. I do not doubt that.
My main grief with it is that in the end it just felt rushed. While the pace was fairly slow throughout the whole of the game (which i certainly didn't mind), suddenly you hit the fortress and you're going at a 100 miles per hour on the freeway just before the finish line. I was not allowed to enjoy fully as i should the ending of my quest and the thing that bothered me most, is that in the end i didn't get to interact with my companions as i would have liked to. That kinda killed it for me.
As to whether the story line is better than BG: I do not deny that it is in fact deeper, with much more morally ambiguous decisions and plotlines, but i get the feeling that for most people it's just: darker=better, deeper, more clever etc. Everytime i talk with someone about PS Torment i get the feeling that the sole reason they consider PS so much better story-wise than BG is the fact that it's darker and more twisted than BG (which of course goes along with the delight of most RPG players of playing it evil.... which i never quite understood... -not that i don't enjoy the occasional evil run in a good RPG
)You do get to interact with your body with at least one of the endings.
-
Give Arx Fatalis a try, plus all of the others mentioned. If you get Morrowind or NWN, though, make sure you have agood internet connection, because without mods, these games suck. For Morrowind you need mods to make it look good and for the world to actually be interesting. For NWN you need to download mods that act as their own game, because the OC for all but HotU suck.
However, Arx Fatalis is a cross between Gothic and Morrowind with Black and White casting, so you probably won't like that either.
-
I actually prefer the rather simplistic style of character development in Gothic/Gothic 2. Some games have me calculating stats, distributing points and choosing skills ad nauseum. Gothic/Gothic 2 didn't have the perfect system by any means, but at least it let me concentrate on the gameplay more than anything else.
Of course, a few more fighting skills wouldn't have hurt..
There are rumors that Gothic III will have more complex fighting skills (not VERY complex skills, just more than the last two) and that you will do some creation before start to represent the things you learned on Khorinis before you departed.
However, this is not certain. There was also rumors of the one guy cursing you and you losing abilities, but that doesn't really fit with the one guys personality (I'm trying not to name him here to prevent spoilers)
Anyway, unless you are using NOTR, you should have no problem with Bloodflies at level 3, unless you are a mage without any spells yet (since you have to get to the monastery, that is possible).
-
I have to question why two of those people are even in that article.
The other three are deffinitely fantastic though.
-
Anyway, to those who have Gothic II, I suggest getting NOTR. However, its overly hard, in my opinion. Farmers are stronger than you in it :\ I know Gothic II was too easy, but they went overboard in amping up the difficulty with the expansion.
-
Gothic 2 is more of a RPG for me than, for example, Planescape: Torment.
Flame Bait:
-Provocative material in an article that, intentionally or unintentionally, will make people angry and invite flames in response. See trolling.
-A controversial message that is almost guaranteed to attract flaming.
-An inflammatory message that is posted with the express purpose of provoking flame responses
"According to that, everything everyone says is practically flame bait
-
A lot of people definitely has have that confused. I should explain to them without using large words so that I won't tax their minds so early in the morning. Okay, maybe not tax my mind so freaking early in the morning. Damn buggering cold.
Character Creation starts prior to game play. At this stage you choose your race, gender, assign stats (either points or rolled), assign class and skills (if any), and the general look of the character. Some people go into more detail, rather in PnP or for their own gratification in a CRPG.
There are also two types of Character Development: Rules Base and Story Base. Character Development (Rules Base) is the process of the character "leveling up" and gain experience. He improves skills and abilities that he had at creation or choose a different path if he or she so wished. This is not character creation.
Character Development (Story Base) is the role playing aspects in which your character grows and becomes more knowledgable of the world around him or her and the current situation.
Gothic 2 has no character creation.
Correct.
I don't see this as a problem though, for the game.
What's the first RPGs you've played?
in Computer and Console
Posted
Eh, I'd say hte first is deffinitely an action adventure. However, Zelda II was more of a straight up RPG.