Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Grimo88

BG2 and POE2 (not what you think)

Recommended Posts

Calling Dragonfall a glorified VN is rather nonsensical so let's agree to disagree.

 

i said 'sophisticated' VN bruv - but obv u know that and anyone who can scroll up knows that.

 

theres stuff made in renpy and flash with full rpg progression, grid based combat, card based combat etc. and dragonfalls lightish turnbased approach - balanced courtesy of a small amount of bespoke encounters and limited options for ur npcs - aint a million miles removed from them.

 

its. not. a. bad. thing. like i aint the type to use VN as an insult. if i ever get the chance, id like to try making one. i probably wont bcs life and laziness but whatevs.

 

I don't care much for your glibness but at least now we've established that you're full of hot air.

 

ROFLMAO. fam, u wrote that 'clever' little prelude about keeping a straight face to shove me on the defensive, so i chucked it back in ur face with interest. what did u think was gonna happen?

 

If u dont want to deal with the counterplay then dont make the play bruv. and certainly dont get on ur damn high horse afterwards when u started it.

 

*we've* established that you're full of hot air.

 

god, my sides. so ur idea of a comeback is to emulate either HRH elizabeth II or a rubbish chemistry teacher tryna control a group of unruly kids. good luck with that.

 

 

Thanks for making that point crystal clear.

 

and u even start preening at the end of ur own **** like ur manures just won 1st place at the rpg debatolympics.

 

sit down.

 

i aint here for a row, and i dont make out im ought but a clown talking in circles, chasing a thought like a dog chases its own tail, but i aint no doormat. if u got **** on ur shoes find someone else to wipe them on.

 

It would be manageable if it was just the docks, even with the warehouse fight, but the orc slog is uncalled for.

 

ye, i didnt mind the docks and moonlighting with the watch. a bit of low level, low concern d&d is my jam. the stuff with the orcs and old owl well would have worked better as side-content imo, an optional quest where u could try out ur comp and kit against hordes of idiot mobs and generally chill out.

  • Like 1

I AM A RENISANCE MAN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Bringing up someone's dad when you know nothing about them is in the wrong...we've all gotten a little tiffed at some pt, don't make it worse, just apologize and move on.

 

On topic, I've been itching to get back into Dragonfall. It's right up my alley (Neuromancer is my fav book - read it 5 times and have a cool hardcover anniversary edition) but I'm nervous DF will feel very archaic at this pt. Have you played it recently?

Edited by Verde
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Calling Dragonfall a glorified VN is rather nonsensical so let's agree to disagree.

 

i said 'sophisticated' VN bruv - but obv u know that and anyone who can scroll up knows that.

 

theres stuff made in renpy and flash with full rpg progression, grid based combat, card based combat etc. and dragonfalls lightish turnbased approach - balanced courtesy of a small amount of bespoke encounters and limited options for ur npcs - aint a million miles removed from them.

 

its. not. a. bad. thing. like i aint the type to use VN as an insult. if i ever get the chance, id like to try making one. i probably wont bcs life and laziness but whatevs.

 

I don't care much for your glibness but at least now we've established that you're full of hot air.

 

ROFLMAO. fam, u wrote that 'clever' little prelude about keeping a straight face to shove me on the defensive, so i chucked it back in ur face with interest. what did u think was gonna happen?

 

If u dont want to deal with the counterplay then dont make the play bruv. and certainly dont get on ur damn high horse afterwards when u started it.

 

*we've* established that you're full of hot air.

 

god, my sides. so ur idea of a comeback is to emulate either HRH elizabeth II or a rubbish chemistry teacher tryna control a group of unruly kids. good luck with that.

 

 

Thanks for making that point crystal clear.

 

and u even start preening at the end of ur own **** like ur manures just won 1st place at the rpg debatolympics.

 

sit down.

 

i aint here for a row, and i dont make out im ought but a clown talking in circles, chasing a thought like a dog chases its own tail, but i aint no doormat. if u got **** on ur shoes find someone else to wipe them on.

 

It would be manageable if it was just the docks, even with the warehouse fight, but the orc slog is uncalled for.

 

ye, i didnt mind the docks and moonlighting with the watch. a bit of low level, low concern d&d is my jam. the stuff with the orcs and old owl well would have worked better as side-content imo, an optional quest where u could try out ur comp and kit against hordes of idiot mobs and generally chill out.

 

 

I'm not your "bruv" and you should really take your own advice, sit back and read everything you've posted instead of piling up even more nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Bringing up someone's dad when you know nothing about them is in the wrong...we've all gotten a little tiffed at some pt, don't make it worse, just apologize and move on.

 

On topic, I've been itching to get back into Dragonfall. It's right up my alley (Neuromancer is my fav book - read it 5 times and have a cool hardcover anniversary edition) but I'm nervous DF will feel very archaic at this pt. Have you played it recently?

 

Neuromancer is one of my favourite scifi books as well. I don't think that you should go in DF expecting Neuromancer the game (in which case you're going to be disappointed). It's still Shadowrun so it's all about the blending of fantasy and cyberpunk. 

 

Dragonfall does hold up as a game and it certainly does have a traditional structure with a hub and quests. I was worried after playing Shadowrun Hong Kong that I wouldn't be able to go back and play Dragonfall but frankly it does work. You may miss some of the addition but it's still the best Shadowrun game made by Harebrained Schemes. 

 

I've been replaying BG and there is no denying that it feels like putting on some comfortable clothes after a long day but I guess that's only natural when you've played a game on and off for decades. 

 

I have yet to replay Deadfire (I was actually getting started when this thread made me go back to BG) so I don't know how it is going to hold up for me (the first run is always more memorable) but truth is I can't see myself replaying the first Pillars like I've been replaying the first BG in the last twenty years (but the only games I've played more than BG 1&2 are Fallout 1&2). 

 

Nostalgia is probably a factor and there is this element of comfort that makes playing it so effortless but there's also the fact that BG whether you're running the original with mods or the enhanced edition (with mods) still works in this day and age. 

Edited by gloomseeker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Resist the urge to get personal people, don't get sucked in. There is a lot of interesting discussion going on. Tripple, you are over the line. Someone always started it, pushed a button, whatever. 

 

Be the better man. The next step is pruning the thread. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bringing up someone's dad when you know nothing about them is in the wrong...we've all gotten a little tiffed at some pt, don't make it worse, just apologize and move on.

 

On topic, I've been itching to get back into Dragonfall. It's right up my alley (Neuromancer is my fav book - read it 5 times and have a cool hardcover anniversary edition) but I'm nervous DF will feel very archaic at this pt. Have you played it recently?

 

Neuromancer is one of my favourite scifi books as well. I don't think that you should go in DF expecting Neuromancer the game (in which case you're going to be disappointed). It's still Shadowrun so it's all about the blending of fantasy and cyberpunk. 

 

Dragonfall does hold up as a game and it certainly does have a traditional structure with a hub and quests. I was worried after playing Shadowrun Hong Kong that I wouldn't be able to go back and play Dragonfall but frankly it does work. You may miss some of the addition but it's still the best Shadowrun game made by Harebrained Schemes. 

 

I've been replaying BG and there is no denying that it feels like putting on some comfortable clothes after a long day but I guess that's only natural when you've played a game on and off for decades. 

 

I have yet to replay Deadfire (I was actually getting started when this thread made me go back to BG) so I don't know how it is going to hold up for me (the first run is always more memorable) but truth is I can't see myself replaying the first Pillars like I've been replaying the first BG in the last twenty years (but the only games I've played more than BG 1&2 are Fallout 1&2). 

 

Nostalgia is probably a factor and there is this element of comfort that makes playing it so effortless but there's also the fact that BG whether you're running the original with mods or the enhanced edition (with mods) still works in this day and age. 

 

 

While Dragonfall is flat brilliant, I think Hong Kong is right there with it. HK's only downside is the walls of text. I love reading, info dumps, descriptive text, etc, but HK goes way overboard. You just drown in paragraph after paragraph.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really enjoyed Dragonfall, and played it again when the directors edition came out.

 

However Hong Kong never really gripped me as much, even though i did enjoy what i played I have never felt motivated to go back to it since. Maybe I should fire it up again soon...


nowt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Blutwurstritter

The recent Shadowrun games are rather a part of the complement to the Pillars games in the set of rpgs in my opinion. They were actually carried by the story/setting/roleplaying  while the game mechanics are rather bland. I would not cite the Shadowrun games as examples for outstanding round based combat. And although i finished each of the recent Shadowrun games twice, i did so in spite of the combat mechanics and the decking/matrix mechanics. I really enjoyed the story and the setting which is a welcome alternative to all the sword and sorcery and fallout-like settings. 

I'd wish someone did a rpg with a similar strong focus on story telling, i.e. focused hubs with quality content, combined with good gameplay mechanics. Especially without any open-world time-sinks for which i couldn't care less. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Bringing up someone's dad when you know nothing about them is in the wrong...we've all gotten a little tiffed at some pt, don't make it worse, just apologize and move on.

 

On topic, I've been itching to get back into Dragonfall. It's right up my alley (Neuromancer is my fav book - read it 5 times and have a cool hardcover anniversary edition) but I'm nervous DF will feel very archaic at this pt. Have you played it recently?

 

Neuromancer is one of my favourite scifi books as well. I don't think that you should go in DF expecting Neuromancer the game (in which case you're going to be disappointed). It's still Shadowrun so it's all about the blending of fantasy and cyberpunk. 

 

Dragonfall does hold up as a game and it certainly does have a traditional structure with a hub and quests. I was worried after playing Shadowrun Hong Kong that I wouldn't be able to go back and play Dragonfall but frankly it does work. You may miss some of the addition but it's still the best Shadowrun game made by Harebrained Schemes. 

 

I've been replaying BG and there is no denying that it feels like putting on some comfortable clothes after a long day but I guess that's only natural when you've played a game on and off for decades. 

 

I have yet to replay Deadfire (I was actually getting started when this thread made me go back to BG) so I don't know how it is going to hold up for me (the first run is always more memorable) but truth is I can't see myself replaying the first Pillars like I've been replaying the first BG in the last twenty years (but the only games I've played more than BG 1&2 are Fallout 1&2). 

 

Nostalgia is probably a factor and there is this element of comfort that makes playing it so effortless but there's also the fact that BG whether you're running the original with mods or the enhanced edition (with mods) still works in this day and age. 

 

 

While Dragonfall is flat brilliant, I think Hong Kong is right there with it. HK's only downside is the walls of text. I love reading, info dumps, descriptive text, etc, but HK goes way overboard. You just drown in paragraph after paragraph.

 

 

I do agree but that's not what bothers me the most about HK.

 

The economy is a bit messed up in comparison to DF. In DF you had to gather money (very much like in BG2 SOA) but you still had some margin to spend money on gear and upgrades. In HK if you decide to branch out and get into cybernetics, matrix/decking upgrades and spells you will be running a very tight budget which at the end of the day is not fun (it's ok to be short on cash early on but there is some satisfaction to be gained from knowing that you will have more than enough in the endgame to get what you need and HK never allows that to happen).  

 

Still, I think that the reason why I prefer DF has more to do with the nature of the story, i.e. the fact that the main character's background story (which we only piece together as we're going through the game) feels a lot more directive than in DF (technically you're not even a shadowrunner). 

 

There is also the character of Duncan. In DF Monica didn't overstay her welcome, she took a backseat and allowed the main character to shine. In HK for better or worse you're stuck with Duncan and if you happen not to be very fond of the character it can be a problem (in DF Dietrich was a real mate but in HK I never felt like Duncan was more than some muscle that needed to be cajoled or kept in line). 

 

This brings me back to BG because as far as siblings are concerned in CRPG it's hard not to bring up Imoen. I'm sure many people disliked her especially in BG1 and only kept her around because she was incredibly useful if you werent playing a thief. As annoying as she could be she was allowed some growth in BG2 and ironically became more important after being taken away from the party. She also became more likeable as a character as you played through the game. These days I couldn't imagine going through BG without having her in my party (she's a Jester in my current BG game and it does suit her). 

 

In Pillars I believe that the character that stands out and sticks with you is Edér. He is such a nice guy and probably the easiest character to get along with. Playing the game I never question having Edér tagging along because he is such a likeable character and that's an important trait for a follower. Sure, a character like Durance may look a lot more interesting but if I had to pick between the two there would be no contest. 

 

I believe we can't underestimate the importance of having memorable characters in the party. Even if these days I tend not to keep him around it's hard to imagine BG without Minsc. 

 

I wish some NPCs from the first Pillars would have made a come back in Deadfire. It's a bit sad Kana didn't make it but I miss Zahua and Maneha the most. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 

 

 

Bringing up someone's dad when you know nothing about them is in the wrong...we've all gotten a little tiffed at some pt, don't make it worse, just apologize and move on.

 

On topic, I've been itching to get back into Dragonfall. It's right up my alley (Neuromancer is my fav book - read it 5 times and have a cool hardcover anniversary edition) but I'm nervous DF will feel very archaic at this pt. Have you played it recently?

 

Neuromancer is one of my favourite scifi books as well. I don't think that you should go in DF expecting Neuromancer the game (in which case you're going to be disappointed). It's still Shadowrun so it's all about the blending of fantasy and cyberpunk. 

 

Dragonfall does hold up as a game and it certainly does have a traditional structure with a hub and quests. I was worried after playing Shadowrun Hong Kong that I wouldn't be able to go back and play Dragonfall but frankly it does work. You may miss some of the addition but it's still the best Shadowrun game made by Harebrained Schemes. 

 

I've been replaying BG and there is no denying that it feels like putting on some comfortable clothes after a long day but I guess that's only natural when you've played a game on and off for decades. 

 

I have yet to replay Deadfire (I was actually getting started when this thread made me go back to BG) so I don't know how it is going to hold up for me (the first run is always more memorable) but truth is I can't see myself replaying the first Pillars like I've been replaying the first BG in the last twenty years (but the only games I've played more than BG 1&2 are Fallout 1&2). 

 

Nostalgia is probably a factor and there is this element of comfort that makes playing it so effortless but there's also the fact that BG whether you're running the original with mods or the enhanced edition (with mods) still works in this day and age. 

 

 

While Dragonfall is flat brilliant, I think Hong Kong is right there with it. HK's only downside is the walls of text. I love reading, info dumps, descriptive text, etc, but HK goes way overboard. You just drown in paragraph after paragraph.

 

 

I do agree but that's not what bothers me the most about HK.

 

The economy is a bit messed up in comparison to DF. In DF you had to gather money (very much like in BG2 SOA) but you still had some margin to spend money on gear and upgrades. In HK if you decide to branch out and get into cybernetics, matrix/decking upgrades and spells you will be running a very tight budget which at the end of the day is not fun (it's ok to be short on cash early on but there is some satisfaction to be gained from knowing that you will have more than enough in the endgame to get what you need and HK never allows that to happen).  

 

Still, I think that the reason why I prefer DF has more to do with the nature of the story, i.e. the fact that the main character's background story (which we only piece together as we're going through the game) feels a lot more directive than in DF (technically you're not even a shadowrunner). 

 

There is also the character of Duncan. In DF Monica didn't overstay her welcome, she took a backseat and allowed the main character to shine. In HK for better or worse you're stuck with Duncan and if you happen not to be very fond of the character it can be a problem (in DF Dietrich was a real mate but in HK I never felt like Duncan was more than some muscle that needed to be cajoled or kept in line). 

 

This brings me back to BG because as far as siblings are concerned in CRPG it's hard not to bring up Imoen. I'm sure many people disliked her especially in BG1 and only kept her around because she was incredibly useful if you werent playing a thief. As annoying as she could be she was allowed some growth in BG2 and ironically became more important after being taken away from the party. She also became more likeable as a character as you played through the game. These days I couldn't imagine going through BG without having her in my party (she's a Jester in my current BG game and it does suit her). 

 

In Pillars I believe that the character that stands out and sticks with you is Edér. He is such a nice guy and probably the easiest character to get along with. Playing the game I never question having Edér tagging along because he is such a likeable character and that's an important trait for a follower. Sure, a character like Durance may look a lot more interesting but if I had to pick between the two there would be no contest. 

 

I believe we can't underestimate the importance of having memorable characters in the party. Even if these days I tend not to keep him around it's hard to imagine BG without Minsc. 

 

I wish some NPCs from the first Pillars would have made a come back in Deadfire. It's a bit sad Kana didn't make it but I miss Zahua and Maneha the most. 

 

 

Duncan is certainly the weak link, but I think HK has the better party overall, at least the most fleshed out. None of them may match Glory, but the average is higher. HK certainly has the best missions out of the three. I like the Big Bad as well. Duncan gets a bit improved in the expansion as far as being a character, and really improves in combat with the Assault Canon. Matrix is certainly the best in HK.

 

The best sibling mechanic IMO is Dragon Age 2. Since family is the core of that entire story, their fate has the most impact. But, I love Dragon Age 2 in general for having the balls to deconstruct most of the sacred Bioware cliches, and see it as a flawed gem, unlike most. Certainly tops the retcon-filled, fanservice-laden power fantasy cliche storm that was DAI. Plus, DA2 Qunari are peak Qunari

 

Eder is an excellent bro. He is the only companion from PoE1 that really belongs in Deadfire.

Edited by AFA
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never played much of DA2 but I've got it sitting in my library and I did pick the DLC bundle when it was on sale a few weeks ago so I will definitely give it a proper try. I can't say I like what they did with the gameplay in the sequels but as a CRPG enthusiast I should really play it at least once to make up my mind. 

 

Before Pillars came out DAO was probably the closest we got to playing a game that felt like a modern BG. It's a pity they streamlined everything in the sequels (I really liked the possibility of having different builds in DAO, you could go full strength with a Rogue and make a very effective character that played very differently from your standard build). 

 

People are always criticising Mass Effect Andromeda but it's pretty much the same thing they did with Dragon Age Inquisition. Big open areas with a lost of time wasted roaming around picking up collectibles and going over the same objectives over and over again. The main difference is that Andromeda never got the support and DLC that would have properly wrapped up the story while Inquisition got a glowing reception. 

 

I may be wrong but I don't think anyone has mentioned Kotor 2 in this thread. I can't bring up the ME series without thinking about this game. You were talking about deconstructing clichés and Kotor 2 did exactly that with the source material. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Dragon Age 2 is actually brilliant. 

Edited by daven

nowt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah if you like the fact that every dungeon is identical because it uses the same assets, enemies appear out of thin air, gameplay is one-dimensional and requires little effort, and I ****ed Anders by accident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah if you like the fact that every dungeon is identical because it uses the same assets, enemies appear out of thin air, gameplay is one-dimensional and requires little effort, and I ****ed Anders by accident.

 

Hence why I said it was a flawed gem. Most of those problems come from it being rushed. The combat was the best of the 3 Dragon Ages, vs. the plodding combat of DAO and the watered down DAI. Also the best story of the three. If it had been given a year more in development, I think it would be one of the true classics. It ranks right there with Nier as the most underappreciated game of that era, at least for RPGs.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon Age 2 is actually brilliant.

In an Andy Kaufman sorta way, I guess.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah if you like the fact that every dungeon is identical because it uses the same assets, enemies appear out of thin air, gameplay is one-dimensional and requires little effort, and I ****ed Anders by accident.

 

Hence why I said it was a flawed gem. Most of those problems come from it being rushed. The combat was the best of the 3 Dragon Ages, vs. the plodding combat of DAO and the watered down DAI. Also the best story of the three. If it had been given a year more in development, I think it would be one of the true classics. It ranks right there with Nier as the most underappreciated game of that era, at least for RPGs.

 

 

The combat was absolutely the best of the three. Very solid, simple system. But it was completely wasted on the same tedious wave-based encounters. 

 

I keep a save file just before the Legacy DLC starts so that I can skip the awful base game and go straight to the DLC, which actually makes wonderful use of encounter and dungeon design. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dragon Age 2 is actually brilliant.

 

It’s actually not. Though while I found Dragon Age: Origins to be a slog after the battle of Ostagar, it wasn’t until Dragon Age2 ended that I fully realised it was a dud. There is something appealing in not knowing where the game is going, and something very disappointing in discovering it was going anywhere in the first place.
  • Like 1

h1dczBG.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Yeah if you like the fact that every dungeon is identical because it uses the same assets, enemies appear out of thin air, gameplay is one-dimensional and requires little effort, and I ****ed Anders by accident.

 

Hence why I said it was a flawed gem. Most of those problems come from it being rushed. The combat was the best of the 3 Dragon Ages, vs. the plodding combat of DAO and the watered down DAI. Also the best story of the three. If it had been given a year more in development, I think it would be one of the true classics. It ranks right there with Nier as the most underappreciated game of that era, at least for RPGs.

 

It had potential, but the fact that they tried to make it more console-friendly killed it. DAO combat was many times better and more tactical than this semi-arcade crap. This game barely had a concept of a build because everything was streamlined and made as simple as possible. The combat animations were just silly and occasionally resembled Devil May Cry more than an RPG title. It's underappreciated? Well, there was pretty much nothing to appreciate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Yeah if you like the fact that every dungeon is identical because it uses the same assets, enemies appear out of thin air, gameplay is one-dimensional and requires little effort, and I ****ed Anders by accident.

 

Hence why I said it was a flawed gem. Most of those problems come from it being rushed. The combat was the best of the 3 Dragon Ages, vs. the plodding combat of DAO and the watered down DAI. Also the best story of the three. If it had been given a year more in development, I think it would be one of the true classics. It ranks right there with Nier as the most underappreciated game of that era, at least for RPGs.

 

It had potential, but the fact that they tried to make it more console-friendly killed it. DAO combat was many times better and more tactical than this semi-arcade crap. This game barely had a concept of a build because everything was streamlined and made as simple as possible. The combat animations were just silly and occasionally resembled Devil May Cry more than an RPG title. It's underappreciated? Well, there was pretty much nothing to appreciate.

 

 

I haven't played DA2 enough to comment on your assessment but the thing about builds being non existent is a valid criticism. 

 

The same can be said about Inquisition by the way. Sure you have a little leeway when it comes to spending skill points but not any real builds to speak of. 

 

I did play a lot of DAO when it came out and there were at least three main options for building a Rogue. You could go full Cunning or full Dexterity or go for a mix of both. When Awakening came out the requisite for high level abilities made spending points in Dexterity more attractive but you could still work the numbers to maximise the efficiency of your build. I also remember trying a full strength Rogue only to realise it was a lot of fun and very effective. Plus being able to equip items with high strength requirements made for more variety when replaying the game as a Rogue. 

 

Sadly you can't experiment with builds in the sequels like that. 

 

It all boils down to too much streamlining in order to make the game more accessible. Sure, you can't go wrong when "building" your character in a game like Inquisition but there is very little fun to be had on that front if you are the kind of player who likes to try things out and figure out some nice little tricks that most people wouldn't even consider. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarcastic Hawke is the greatest protagonist ever.

 

Sarcastic rogue is the only way to play IMO. Really hits all the everyman protagonist notes.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sarcastic Hawke is the greatest protagonist ever.

He is good. But Renegade Shepard is the best.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...