What are you Playing Now? I name all the operations that go down in Taipei.

[BruceVC]

8 hours ago, kanisatha said:

Which is what makes him an ok tank, but not so much a damage dealer. And that's why I cut him whenever I play a tank myself. But my typical PC is a fighter/rogue or a fighter/wizard.

I've played BG1 in particular sooooo many times but have yet to play it even once with the canonical party. Now you've got me hankering to give it another go with the canonical party.

 

9 hours ago, Wormerine said:

Generally I am in favour of letting go suboptimal employees rather then killing them.

Eh, everytime I play BG1 I end up running the cannonical party, so Khalid was always in my party. I stick tower shield on him, as he is as good at getting swing at, as any other. I just suspect he isn't an optimal choice, though I never personally cared for such thing, with BGs being mostly forgiving.

You guys make some good points about Khalid and his STR but things like weapon proficiency and items to boost strength should mitigate that. I dont know if you  get Gauntlets of Ogre Strength in BG1 but I have already found Gauntlets of Weapon  Expertise which I had  given  to Kivan which I will   transfer to Khalid

I also did some research now on Beamdog about Khalid and there are mixed views on him but many people enlist him in there party for various reasons so I will keep him, Im use to him now and  once I get use to party members I dont like to change them 

So you guys dont have to worry, Khalid isnt going to become Wild Dog food

Edited July 31, 2022 by BruceVC

[Bartimaeus]

4 hours ago, Humanoid said:

a rock > rusty nails in your scrotum > slow, agonizing death by necrotizing fasciitis  > IE games

I loved (most of) them once upon a time, but I cannot and will not ever play them again. Unless they're remade with smaller parties with turn-based mechanics.

The amount of combat in the IE games would make turn-based gameplay untenable (unless you want BG1 to last approximately 200 hours in a utterly miserable slow slough where each battle with every random wolf takes a couple of minutes instead of 10 seconds like it does via RTwP), so you can throw out 90% of that as well. I don't really see how the IE games would benefit from being turn-based, particularly because they kind of already are - enemies generally operated in a (albeit somewhat chaotic) turn-based manner, it's the player that can bend and break the rules by operating outside of that structure with micro-managed movement, reactive targeting, intelligent ability sequencing, concerted character tactics, etc., .

[Humanoid]

2 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

The amount of combat in the IE games would make turn-based gameplay untenable (unless you want BG1 to last approximately 200 hours in a utterly miserable slow slough where each battle with every random wolf takes a couple of minutes instead of 10 seconds like it does via RTwP), so you can throw out 90% of that as well. I don't really see how the IE games would benefit from being turn-based, particularly because they kind of already are - enemies generally operated in a (albeit somewhat chaotic) turn-based manner, it's the player that can bend and break the rules by operating outside of that structure with micro-managed movement, reactive targeting, intelligent ability sequencing, concerted character tactics, etc., .

Yeah, simply modding in a different combat system isn't going to be enough. Besides the raw amount of tedious combat, which would be tedious regardless of combat system, basically these days the biggest number of party members I can stand to control is probably ...two. I don't imagine any old RPG can be realistically adapted like that. But two more for a co-op partner makes four and that's basically the only reason I find games like Larian's or Solasta playable. Am I a Nardgrog or something like that? Probably.

The alternative for larger parties would probably be a system designed from the ground up such that not only do you not *have to* control your party members, but you *cannot* do so. It sort of mirrors my position on self-driving cars actually: I don't want a car that *can* drive itself, I want one where it *must* drive itself.

[majestic]

10 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

Not playing with a full party completely breaks the game balance of Baldur's Gate entirely due to AD&D's terrible level progression wherein all else being equal, a level 7 fighter will defeat a level 5 fighter probably 99% of the time. I usually play with 5 characters, but I use a mod that reduces all quest XP to half in order to compensate. Level 10 is...what, about the time you're ready to start the Bodhi/Shadow Thieves stuff before going to Spellhold? I'll power game a little, but I ain't power gaming THAT much and for that long, .

Well, in that case the point is kind of moot. It's not really required anyway, but if you artificially deflate experience values your DC experience will vary greatly.

10 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

I'd probably place PST and BG2 equally, though for very different reasons. I don't know where I'd place BG1/IWD2; my first inclination was to place BG1 above it since I have much more fond feelings for the BG series than the IWD series, but every time I actually play BG1, I get like halfway through before I quit, so I guess I'm not too sure.

I'll freely admit to not being able to judge BG1 fairly insofar as it has way too many useless side areas that I can't ignore, so I waste significant amounts of time in the wilderness, and since I already finished the game once, I'm usually nope, I'm outta here either before Cloakwood or after entering Baldur's Gate. I also don't really enjoy the hands-off story telling of either IWD or BG1 and prefer the IWD2 and BG2 way of being more directly engaging.

It's not as bad in BG1 as it is in IWD. I'd be more inclined to sit through IWD's dungeon slog if everything was a little more engaging, but you're directing a group of nondescript adventurers through a bunch of locations on a relatively small scale group of quests that sometimes tell stories about those locations - like Kresselack's Tomb and Kresselack's problem with the Priestess of Auril - but I always find myself not caring an iota for any of them.

The nice visuals, the music, the mood and, indeed, the writing - nothing of it is in service of anything interesting. IWD2 on the other hand improved on these aspects. Yes, the characters are still a bunch of nondescript nobodies I don't care a fig about (in what is one of life's little ironies, building the characters is more fun in IWD2, so that helps too, even if I actually don't like 3E that much), but everything else is better. In IWD, you talk a bunch with the villagers of Easthaven, and are then off, and the game gracefully kills your only point of attachment, then gives you a new one (who is boring as hell) and kills him off quickly too. In IWD2, you spend some significant amount of time in Targos getting to know everybody, shore up defenses, then fight off the incoming attack and go on a counter offensive. It is much more engaging than trying to help Kuldahar with its bunch of numpties (except Oswald, but he's not doing much in IWD).

It's combat is - for better or worse - equally sloggy, but it feels more dynamic and interesting due to the encounter design and some fresh ideas (war drums, exploding kegs, fortifications, etc.). Even if it makes no difference in the long run, I want to save that bridge and rush for the enemies wanting to destroy it. In IWD, by the time I reach Kresselack, I'm done with the game. Screw Kuldahar, who cares if they get snowed in.

8 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

(Funnily enough on pure gameplay I 100% agree with HoonDing on order, though I'd probably put the self mutilation before BG1 and have an entire lower category for SCS)

I don't really see where IWD's gameplay would rank significantly above IWD2's. They're both full of endless trash fights (funny how some of us expected something different from Pillars of Eternity, talk about not learning from experience) and IWD2 is just smoother in almost every way and isn't just "go to this dungeon, kill everything in it" all through the game. IWD2's Ice Temple and Dragon's Eye time loop might get old after going through them once, but IWD's Kresselack's Tomb gets old the first time you're there. Never mind Dragon's Eye and its five ginormous levels, and then there's still more and more and more to slog through. Ugh.

Yeah, no, let me walk through empty wilderness please.

33 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

The amount of combat in the IE games would make turn-based gameplay untenable (unless you want BG1 to last approximately 200 hours in a utterly miserable slow slough where each battle with every random wolf takes a couple of minutes instead of 10 seconds like it does via RTwP), so you can throw out 90% of that as well. I don't really see how the IE games would benefit from being turn-based, particularly because they kind of already are - enemies generally operated in a (albeit somewhat chaotic) turn-based manner, it's the player that can bend and break the rules by operating outside of that structure with micro-managed movement, reactive targeting, intelligent ability sequencing, concerted character tactics, etc., .

We had that exact argument on this forum like seven years ago, and there were (are still, probably) posters who believe that any and all RtwP game would be significantly improved by simply slapping a turn based mode on the existing encounters.

Baffling, really. Can you imagine going to rescue Dynaheir in BG1 with turn based combat before your party has any significant amount of area of effect capabiities? Fighting off 200 gnolls by taking turns where only like two of your party members have any realistic chance of hitting them? That would be awesome indeed!

Edited July 31, 2022 by majestic

[Bartimaeus]

@Humanoid

I guess it depends on whether it's singleplayer or multiplayer. My experiences with multiplayer CRPGs have suggested that probably exactly one is the optimal amount each player controls, with a maximum of two if it's only a two-player game. In singleplayer, I would probably personally prefer 3 if they're characters I control all of the time. But you're right, the game has to be designed as if those limitations are law, because otherwise you can get something like the Baldur's Gate AD&D experience where playing solo means you level up approximately every five minutes and you become a god that destroys practically everything without effort for most of the game...until you come up against the hard level cap and the game starts to catch up with you with nowhere for you to go.

6 minutes ago, majestic said:

Well, in that case the point is kind of moot. It's not really required anyway, but if you artificially deflate experience values your DC experience will vary greatly.

See above: I would say playing solo makes all balance and progression moot much more than a quest XP reduction mod intended to make a 5 member party more balanced, but people apparently do that and think it's fine, .

There really is a lot of worthless trash in BG1, between near empty wilderness areas and low quality quests being everywhere from beginning to end of the game. You'd think by the time you get to the city of Baldur's Gate, the game would ease up on a lot of that, but it doesn't. I honestly don't remember much about IWD, except that it was atrociously boring with no reason to care about anything even like ten hours into the game, so I just stopped playing and ejected it from my brain.

[majestic]

22 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

See above: I would say playing solo makes all balance and progression moot much more than a quest XP reduction mod intended to make a 5 member party more balanced, but people apparently do that and think it's fine, .

Particularily true in IWD where playing on insane difficulty doubles the experience gain. Harder start, much easier rest of the game. Power creep is less problematic than in BG2 because regular mages are useless due to the limited scroll availibility, but if you play the EE and take a sorcerer with you, even that become moot. Mind, the game experience significantly improves when you can just fireball your way through Kresselack's tomb, but it doesn't make the game as such more interesting.

Edited July 31, 2022 by majestic

[Zoraptor]

1 hour ago, majestic said:

I don't really see where IWD's gameplay would rank significantly above IWD2's.

I found IWD2 to have the same basic problem that PoE had, perhaps unsurprisingly- everything felt over designed.

I'd actually agree with IWD2 having a smooth gameplay experience, it's just that to me that is pretty much synonymous with, well, being boring. Which is the worst sin possible for entertainment, far worse than merely being bad.

[Bartimaeus]

1 minute ago, Zoraptor said:

I found IWD2 to have the same basic problem that PoE had, perhaps unsurprisingly- everything felt over designed.

I'd actually agree with IWD2 having a smooth gameplay experience, it's just that to me that is pretty much synonymous with, well, being boring. Which is the worst sin possible for entertainment, far worse than merely being bad.

We just got out of Irenicus' dungeon, and...hey, there's an illusory wall in the main room of this inn, wonder what's inside! Oh, instantly blown to smithereens by an epic-levelled lich, what great design. And by "great design", I mean "terrible design", but it was funny and memorable, and it can be easily avoided until later...so maybe not terrible design.

[Humanoid]

I recall now that I did attempt to play IWD2 with a party of two back in the day. Got pretty far before it became too hard, so I added two more party members to finish up the second half of the game. Both D:OS games I played in co-op Lone Wolf mode. BG3 unfortunately lacks that functionality (at least it did the last time I checked) so it had to be a 2x2 setup. In For The King we traded off the third character slot every session.

For PoE2, I haven't tried it since turn-based mode was added. When it was new, I attempted a Story Mode difficulty playthrough but it turns out Story Mode is actually still too hard if you play through with the AI controlling everything and - probably the biggest factor - you never equip any gear beyond the starting gear.

Having to go through the rigmarole of character creation affects things too. I got through Shadowrun Returns alright for example, but Wasteland 2 never got off the ground because by the time I finished creating my party, I no longer had the energy to play.

[Zoraptor]

47 minutes ago, Bartimaeus said:

We just got out of Irenicus' dungeon, and...hey, there's an illusory wall in the main room of this inn, wonder what's inside! Oh, instantly blown to smithereens by an epic-levelled lich, what great design. And by "great design", I mean "terrible design", but it was funny and memorable, and it can be easily avoided until later...so maybe not terrible design.

Yeah, that I rather like. Technically it's probably bad design being able to stumble on a lich so early, but meh. It's interesting, and gives you something to aim for.

I love the Piranha Bytes games where you spend 1/3 of the game running away from overgrown domestic fowl. Is it great gameplay? Again, maybe not in the technical sense and it's probably deeply annoying if you're playing because you want to feel awesome from the start. OTOH, once you start dealing to the overlarge turkeys and start beating up the mutant porcupines or velociraptors you actually feel kind of awesome, and like you made an improvement. If you're stuck fighting the 20th perfectly balanced encounter for lvl 10 parties and 'anticipating' moving on to the 20 perfectly balanced encounters for a lvl 11 party on the other hand... I literally can't imagine anything more pointless.

[Wormerine]

2 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

I found IWD2 to have the same basic problem that PoE had, perhaps unsurprisingly- everything felt over designed.

Considering bad rep IWD2 seems to have I was surprised how much I enjoyed it when I was finally able to play it thx to GOG fixes. That said it's is hardly surprising as it feels like Josh designes games just for me. I can't understand how PoE1&2 don't trump every other cRPG on the market.

2 hours ago, Bartimaeus said:

We just got out of Irenicus' dungeon, and...hey, there's an illusory wall in the main room of this inn, wonder what's inside! Oh, instantly blown to smithereens by an epic-levelled lich, what great design. And by "great design", I mean "terrible design", but it was funny and memorable, and it can be easily avoided until later...so maybe not terrible design.

I do like that, the same way I like FromSoftware design. Allowing people to find and run into enemies they are not able to beat early on, helps to highlight their raise to powers, while RPGs that keep experience smooth kinda make progression irrelevant. There is balance to me made - Kingmaker IMO went the other way, making it at times difficult to find content you can complete and with timer threatning to punish you for wasting time I found that game to be just a misarable experience throughout. In BG2 it was just - oh, wow, I am not ready for it. [Reload a save from before entering the room] Will be back later. It also helps that those encouters were memorable, so one would remember where to return, unlike the kingmaker full of samey combat arenas on the minimap.

[Sarex]

2 hours ago, Wormerine said:

I can't understand how PoE1&2 don't trump every other cRPG on the market.

The gameplay is boring and the story is not interesting enough on its own to carry the game.

Edited July 31, 2022 by Sarex

[uuuhhii]

2 hours ago, Wormerine said:

Considering bad rep IWD2 seems to have I was surprised how much I enjoyed it when I was finally able to play it thx to GOG fixes. That said it's is hardly surprising as it feels like Josh designes games just for me. I can't understand how PoE1&2 don't trump every other cRPG on the market.

I do like that, the same way I like FromSoftware design. Allowing people to find and run into enemies they are not able to beat early on, helps to highlight their raise to powers, while RPGs that keep experience smooth kinda make progression irrelevant. There is balance to me made - Kingmaker IMO went the other way, making it at times difficult to find content you can complete and with timer threatning to punish you for wasting time I found that game to be just a misarable experience throughout. In BG2 it was just - oh, wow, I am not ready for it. [Reload a save from before entering the room] Will be back later. It also helps that those encouters were memorable, so one would remember where to return, unlike the kingmaker full of samey combat arenas on the minimap.

new system require a lot of study and atmosphere need a lot of investment to enjoy

deadfire did end up with a much better system than just copy table top rule like many old and new rpg still does

but that was not easy to sell

[kanisatha]

When it comes to the IE games I guess I'm an outlier here. For me it is:

BG1 > BG2 > IwD2 > IwD1 > PsT

I know, I know. I'm a herectic. BG1 beats BG2 for me because: (a) It's the very first RPG I ever played, so strong nostalgia; (b) I much prefer low level to high level D&D; (c) I like exploring open areas; and (d) I very strongly prefer melee combat and don't care at all for D&D spellcasting and spell-battles.

On the other end of my comparison, I have always had a hard time understanding the attraction of PsT. Firstly, there is the whole bastardized 2e rules and mechanics which I hate. Combat, and especially melee combat, is gawd-awful. And Chris Avellone is the most highly overrated RPG writer of all-time, and I find his writing and his characters to be pedantic, superficial, and boring (including in PoE1).

[Please don't flame me ]

[majestic]

34 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

[Please don't flame me ]

So this is basically you right now:

Don't worry about getting flamed.

[kanisatha]

13 minutes ago, majestic said:

So this is basically you right now:

Don't worry about getting flamed.

Ok I'm confused by this, or missing something. Did I say something that is equivalent to what this guy is saying?

[Hawke64]

I know that I have played and completed IWD (except "the expansion within the expansion" part, got burnt out at that point), but I cannot remember much about the game. I think, once the party turtled in a room and fireball'ed the incoming hordes of enemies and the wizard had a cat familiar. And there was an ice dragon at the end? Can't recall it being too difficult, though. My party included the MC and 5 pregenerated companions and I did not min-max (much).
BG1 and BG2 certainly were more memorable and engaging (especially those sweet HLA).
My PST playthrough is in progress. I've started it some time ago and will pick up again eventually.

[Wormerine]

1 hour ago, kanisatha said:

Ok I'm confused by this, or missing something. Did I say something that is equivalent to what this guy is saying?

It's from Die Hard3 where Bruce Willis' character was forced to walk with the sign into a black neighbourhood. aka. mouthing CA on this forum is asking for trouble.

[Hurlshort]

Don't sweat it @kanisatha, I also prefer BG1 to most of the other infinity games. It was my original introduction to D&D, it is a simple and fun low level adventure, and it doesn't overstay its welcome. I've played it through to completion more than once, which is rare. PS:T, on the other hand, always loses me halfway through. It's a weird world and I lose interest in it, despite liking a few of the characters. IWD never appealed to me so I never played the sequel. BG2 is second to BG1, but they are both really enjoyable. But it does that thing where the main quest seems super urgent, but then every companion is like, "we need to go take care of my stuff, even though your childhood friend is locked up with a psychopath." 

[kanisatha]

2 hours ago, Wormerine said:

It's from Die Hard3 where Bruce Willis' character was forced to walk with the sign into a black neighbourhood. aka. mouthing CA on this forum is asking for trouble.

Aha! Thanks! It's about my CA reference!

As someone who has a very minimal online presence and a literally zero SM presence, I often don't get memes and other similar references.

Edited July 31, 2022 by kanisatha

[Mamoulian War]

After almost 11 years, I decided to visit Atelier Totori again on my PS3, and start my second second playthrough of the game. I wanted to finish everything, what the game has to offer and achieve all prerequisites for the True Ending. I was able to get all the missing playthrough trophies, but unfortunately, I must have missed some character event, and as a result I was awarded with Rorona's Who's the Teacher? ending instead. It was a lot of busywork, especially getting 500,000 money, but thankfully, it is transferred together with the equipment to New Game+, so all subsequent playthroughs will be more easygoing .

 

I am little bit sad, due to the time spent on planning of all of the in-game events during last two weeks, which I spent with the game, but well, at least I was able to finish all tasks in my Adventurer's License and defeat all of the super-bosses   Hopefully next time, I will have more luck

[LadyCrimson]

I don't even remember if I finished BG2. All I remember is ticking off the mage cops early when you reached some town and getting my butt kicked. And not really liking the graphic/map overhaul that made exploration feel ... smaller or more claustrophobic somehow. Something about map FoV maybe.
==============
I keep thinking about Stray. The short "main plot" didn't bother me at all, but the game just needed a little more to do on the side, something to make lingering in the world/areas more interesting. More collectables to hunt for, extra side puzzles, simple quests (fetch or not, just something). After that first town the linearity became more all encompassing, with not even a "collect music sheets" type aspect for new areas. If they'd had more to do like that, to make it a tad more than just virtual tourism, I would've given it an 8.5 instead of a 7.  Ah well...maybe they'll make another cat game with the lessons learned and improve it. I think Stray showed there's a huge indie market for a cat-game that isn't just a one-note pixely joke type of game.

Edited August 1, 2022 by LadyCrimson

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I'd rather play a boring or bad videogame than get rusty nails in my scrotum. So BG2 > IWD2 > BG1 > PST > IWD. I haven't played any of them in years and probably won't anytime soon though.

I haven't really played anything in a while and went into the depths of my steam library and am going to install Expeditions: Viking. I remember liking the first game but never getting around to this.

[Gorth]

On 7/31/2022 at 2:26 PM, BruceVC said:

So you guys dont have to worry, Khalid isnt going to become Wild Dog food feature in the sequel

 

Felt like flexing my FPS skills a bit last night and dusted off Killing Floor 2. Splattering zombies all over the place just never gets old (as long as you don't binge play it). Also helps they put out new maps (and guns) every once in a while.

[Malcador]

ME3 Omega DLC was fun. I realize the Citadel DLC isn't going to be much of anything as I only came out of ME2 with 3 squadmates