Neverwinter Nights 2 or Dragon Age?

[Llyranor]

I could care less which one turns out to be better, since I'll be getting both (unless one happens to delete your OS - but what do I know, I bought POR2).

 

What DOES matter, though, is which one I'll be picking to make my mod, which I'm preplanning for now.

 

In terms of toolset, it seems like DA will be more powerful, whereas NWN2 will be more accessible. It all amounts to how this balances out - how more powerful will NWN2 be than NWN, or harder (or even, easier, if Obs managed to pull it off) will it be to use? How easy will DA's terrain system be to use to render NWN2's tilesets obsolete? How much better will NWN2's tilesets be compared to NWN? Now, mind you, I'm not programmer, but I did manage to be able to use NWN's toolset for basic tasks (well, basic enough to make use of the more important aspects for me - dialogue and story). I didn't use mindblowing or overly complex scripts or anything. All in all, it'll depend on how the power and accessibility will balance out between the two toolsets.

 

Also, it'll also depend on how good the henchman system for NWN2 will work. Personally, I'd prefer party control, but on the other hand, having henchmen would mean that you would only directly control YOUR character (so that everything that happens in the game happens in YOUR character's viewpoint - so party members can't be used to initiate convos with randoms). Also, henchies would be a good excuse to implement more convos in battle. Give order, write up lots of possible responses for the individual NPC in a particular situation, and make it original. I'd probably be writing more in-combat dialogue whenever something storywise affects the battle if I had henchmen rather than controllable party members. I know you can give dialogue to your party members, but it feels kind of awkward when you give an order to yourself and respond to yourself.

 

In terms of MP gaming, NWN2 will probably win by default, as I suspect the DM client will be most powerful. DA says it'll include something similar, but it remains to be seen how much it will actually offer.

 

In any case, I'll have to play through both and assess, and try both their toolsets.

 

DA's system seems intriguing, though we don't know enough about it. I love BG2's battles. On the other hand, 3.5e is also pretty cool.

 

Either way, I would have preferred a toolset/DM-based TB online game. That would have made for very cool MP sessions.

 

TB

[Magnum Opus]

The term "Epic Story" usually refers to an epic scope rather than epic levels... i.e. a "save the world from super evil DOOM" story.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

*nods* But to do that, in the combat-oriented games that Bioware's put out, that Super Evil Doom is a high level beastie (or group of beasties) that needs to be killed. Occasionally, you might be given another way of getting around the problem (I've heard that HotU's boss was possible to defeat without actually fighting him), but most of the time, winning involves killing, and the things to be killed are always high level baddies, suitable for doing those epically bad things that our hero's Epic Story is countering.

 

Couple that with Bioware's "one Ding per hour of gameplay" design philosophy (or whatever the exact ratio turns out to be), Epic Story pretty much necessarily entails epic levels. Not necessarily "3rd edition DnD Epic Levels" mind you, but just getting into the upper echelons of the power structure for the system. Even vanilla BG2 let you get up close to level 20, and that was in the days of relatively slow level advancement.

 

I'm just afraid that when we're talking about Bioware, anyway, "epic story" really does equate with "epic levels" these days, that's all.

 

Incidentally, this is also something I hope that they can go back to with DA: slower level advancement. I like that occasional "Ding", certainly, but I also like getting to know just what my character is capable of, at any given level, before that next Ding changes his/her powers too much. There's a lot to be said for finding creative ways to use the character that you've got to defeat an enemy that you thought was probably beyond your power. BG1 was good for that.

[Llyranor]

Halo, Halo 2, and other great games like that.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

ROFFLES

[Mendoza]

I'd agree that mana based sucks if it regenerates even if, as in KotOR, it only regenerates outside combat. It just doesn't work well outside of Diablo-type games.

 

I'd like a system like Bloodlines though, as long as any mana potions are expensive enough that you've have to consider whether to buy them or not. Bloodlines was good in this respect, as disciplines were cheap enough that you could use them if you needed to, but expensive enough that you couldn't spam them. And there wasn't a vast amount of cash in game, so buying bloodpacks meant you couldn't buy something else.

[Althernai]

There was a great Bioware post about support for PWs and what it means. For example, they don't care if something they implement in a patch breaks a PW or not. They don't care if it makes PWs less stable. They won't go out of their way to fix PWs and they don't QA the game with any PWs in mind. Based on it, I think NWN2 will not support PWs -- just like NWN does not support PWs. If you can buiild it, good for you. If not, tough luck -- Bioware will not help you and I strongly suspect Obsidian will not either (though they may try to make life better for PWs in general). It is way too early to say if PWs can be made with DA.

 

Mana based system means nothing in and of itself. There are good mana based systems and bad mana based systems. D&D had (IMO, of course) one of the worst magic systems I can think of (I mean BG2 Mages and NWN Wizards); if it wasn't for Sorcerers I would have stopped playing arcane casters in both NWN and BG2 a long time ago. Again, wait and see what Bioware does with DA.

 

NWN2... I don't know. It somehow doesn't sound appealing to me. If I heard correctly, it does the exact opposite of what BG2 did for BG1 level-wise; correct me if I am wrong, but IIRC NWN2 will bring the level cap back down to 20. BG2 expanded on BG1; you got to use new combat abilities and fight different monsters. Sure, NWN2 will have a slightly different ruleset, but with the original being based on D&D 3.0 and the sequel on D&D 3.5, how different can they be?

 

To be honest, what really annoys me is the fact that in all likelyhood (if the game does well), they will make an expansion that raises the level cap again. I am willing to buy sequels and expansions to sequels, but not sequels that do not include considerably more content than the original.

 

BTW, I don't think DA and NWN2 will be competing with each other. DA will most likely be released quite a while after NWN2 -- but that is just my guess based on currently available data.

 

EDIT: Magic, not mana for D&D system.

[EnderAndrew]

My problem with a mana system in a vamp game is that it disregards White Wolf's rules. Why must D&D games strictly adhere to D&D rules, but when people take something like the Vamp or Shadowrun license, they throw the rules out the window?

 

I'll never understand.

 

I'm not crazy about D&D, but I'm putting stock in NWN:2 because I think Obsidian has better developers.

[Diamond]

Mana based system means nothing in and of itself. There are good mana based systems and bad mana based systems. D&D had (IMO, of course) one of the worst mana systems I can think of (I mean BG2 Mages and NWN Wizards); if it wasn't for Sorcerers I would have stopped playing arcane casters in both NWN and BG2 a long time ago. Again, wait and see what Bioware does with DA.

 

I think you have confused 2 systems. DnD had (and still has) slot-based system, not mana-based

 

 

 

And, on topic, I don't really see why everyone hates mana-based systems so much. If it is used it doesn't make game worse or better, but just *different*. Mana-based systems are just for fast-paced kind of games, like Diablo 1, 2 (if it used slot-based system, I'd shoot myself in the head).

Why *PUKES* and *2X PUKES*?

It's just different.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I'd agree that mana based sucks if it regenerates even if, as in KotOR, it only regenerates outside combat. It just doesn't work well outside of Diablo-type games.

 

I'd like a system like Bloodlines though, as long as any mana potions are expensive enough that you've have to consider whether to buy them or not. Bloodlines was good in this respect, as disciplines were cheap enough that you could use them if you needed to, but expensive enough that you couldn't spam them. And there wasn't a vast amount of cash in game, so buying bloodpacks meant you couldn't buy something else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In KOTOR it works, Jedi are not supposed to run out of force powers routinely. Actually my Guardian would run out if he went overboard. But while he was a very talented smuggler he wasnt really suited to be a Jedi anyway.

 

There is nothing flawed about the mana system, which is the case with slots in a CRPG. Which makes it a good choice. It's only whether or not Bioware can apply it properly that is the issue.

[Phosphor]

Thread pruned. Please stop with bickering over post counts and games utterly unrelated to this thread.

[Volourn]

"Couple that with Bioware's "one Ding per hour of gameplay" design philosophy"

 

I've never played a BIO game where it was a ding per hour. Maybe 1 per 1 1/2 hours at worse. And, I've yet to see another developer really do much better. Certainly not Obsidian/BIS; that's for sure.

 

 

"I'm just afraid that when we're talking about Bioware, anyway, "epic story" "

 

If you hate epic stories that much; perhaps you shouldn't play BIo games. Afetrall, BIO isn't going to stop making them. That's their preferred type of story and they ain't about to change it for you.

 

 

"There are good mana based systems and bad mana based systems. D&D had (IMO, of course) one of the worst mana systems"

 

I hope so so D&d and hence BG series is not mana based. The soceror is the closest it has to mana magic.

 

 

"Why *PUKES* and *2X PUKES*?

It's just different."

 

PUKE X3. Mana systems at best are toelrable (see BL); at worse they are outright terrible (see Diablo). KOTOR's 'mana system' is at the lower end of the scale.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

KOTOR's 'mana system'  is at the lower end of the scale.

See? That's what happens when you let 'em apply your almighty 'Rule 0' way too much.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It suited the games cinematic approach.

[Magnum Opus]

"Couple that with Bioware's "one Ding per hour of gameplay" design philosophy"

 

I've never played a BIO game where it was a ding per level. Maybe 1 per 11/2 hours at worse. And, I've yet to see another devloper really do much better. Certainly not Obsidian/BIS; that's for sure.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'll assume that your first statement there was meant to be "one ding per hour", instead of "one ding per level", but let me draw your attention to just a little bit more of my original statement: "Couple that with Bioware's "one Ding per hour of gameplay" design philosophy (or whatever the exact ratio turns out to be)...".

 

That last little bit there, helpfully italicized for your convenience, implies a couple of things: 1. That I'm not, in fact, certain that the exact ratio of Dinging per hours of gameplay in your typical, recent Bioware game is 1:1, and so quibbling over the exact number wasn't the intent of that statement in the first place, and 2. That it doesn't really matter what the specific ratio is, because whatever it turns out to be, it's too fast for my taste.

 

Furthermore, I wasn't talking about what other game developers are doing in their games, so I'm not sure why you're bringing that up. I was talking about Bioware because 1) They're the ones who are developing DA, 2) They're the ones whose Ding to Hours of Gameplay Ratio has changed (and from certain comments on the Bioboards, it seems to be a conscious, deliberate shift), and 3) They were the ones who gave me Baldur's Gate, another one of my favourite games that actually did get the Ding : Hours of Gameplay ratio right for me.

 

"I'm just afraid that when we're talking about Bioware, anyway, "epic story" "

 

If you hate epic stories that much; perhaps you shouldn't play BIo games. Afetrall, BIO isn't going to stop making them. That's their preferred type of story and they ain't about to change it for you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't believe I asked them to change their preferred type of story. I don't even believe I mentioned that I hated Epic Stories. What I actually said was that I'd prefer it if they slowed down the rate of character advancement. As has been mentioned, Epic Story doesn't necessarily imply Epic Levels, but I said that it was my fear that for Bioware, at least, that had become the case, and that it was my hope that DA would change this somewhat, since they keep mentioning that DA is going to be something of a throwback to their Baldur's Gate 2 days, a game whose Ding : Hours of Gameplay ratio was somewhat more to my liking... not as much as BG1, but still better than NWN. Whether they do slow down the Dinging is entirely up to them.

 

That aside, though, I haven't played a new Bioware game since I bought NWN. I don't plan on playing another one until possibly Dragon Age. They'll continue to put out the types of games that they want to make, and I'll continue to buy the types of games that I want to play. If the two happen to coincide, great, I know I'll get a technically superior (relatively speaking, anyway) PC cRPG at the very least. If they don't, I'm sure they're perfectly fine with the notion of not making my specific type of ideal game, just as I'm fine with the notion of spending my entertainment dollars on another company's game, or, failing that, on another medium of entertainment entirely. No loss for either of us.

 

*shrugs* That's just the way it goes.

[Volourn]

[Althernai]

I think you have confused 2 systems. DnD had (and still has) slot-based system, not mana-based

 

"There are good mana based systems and bad mana based systems. D&D had (IMO, of course) one of the worst mana systems"

 

I hope so so D&d and hence BG series is not mana based. The soceror is the closest it has to mana magic.

 

My apologies. That sentence should have read:

 

"There are good mana systems and bad mana systems. D&D had (IMO) of course, one of the worst magic systems." (Meaning, despite not being mana-based -- I wrote 'mana' where I meant 'magic'.)

 

I'll edit the original post for clarity.

[Volourn]

I disagree with that assessment of D&D's magic system; but at least it's clearer now. Anyways, no need to apologize. Errors occur.

[Diamond]

IMO, DnD magic system is good, as it fits the context.

Different game styles must have appropriate magic systems, would it be mana/slots or whatever.

No system is bad or good, it's the implementation and balance.

[~Di]

I'm really looking forward to Dragon Age, moreso than NWN2, because it's my hope that DA returns to BioWare's party-based, party-controlled, BGII roots.

 

NWN is a fine, fun game... well, by the time HoTU came out it was a fine, fun game. I expect NWN2 to be even finer and, er, funner! But right now I'm looking at DA to be THE big RPG in my future... if I live that long. Nobody at BioWare is talking about release dates, but the rumor is that it won't hit the shelves before late 2006 or 2007. Plenty of time to rachet up my expectations so they cannot possibly be met by mere mortals!

[Judge Hades]

I have learned to keep my expectations in the dirt.

[EnderAndrew]

Hades,

 

Neither NWN nor DA forces you to play a Jedi.

 

But with mods, you will likely be able to later.

[Judge Hades]

It has nothing to do with the whole Jedi thing. Neverwinter Nights was one of the biggest disappointments I have ever came across in computer gaming. After BG2 I expected something better and grander than that game. Since then computer role playing games have gotten progressively worse. You either get games that play themselves like Dungeon SIege or games that were so freaking easy that can be done with eyes close like KotOR.

 

Expect the worse out of life and you can never be disappointed.

[EnderAndrew]

When I saw that poster who gave KOTOR a 9/10 and then gave KOTOR:2 a 6/10 because KOTOR:2 was too easy I wanted to die laughing.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

When I saw that poster who gave KOTOR a 9/10 and then gave KOTOR:2 a 6/10 because KOTOR:2 was too easy I wanted to die laughing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It's all about experience. If KOTOR was your first game then you may well think it was hard. KOTOR II uses the same model as KOTOR so you dont have a learning phase.

 

I used to think BG was hard, till I played it the second time

 

None of the following IE games had the "hardness" of BG simply because I was used to how they worked by then.

[EnderAndrew]

I didn't think any of the IE games were hard to beat because I was familiar with the "twinks" inherent in the D&D rules.

[213374U]

I used to think BG was hard, till I played it the second time

 

None of the following IE games had the "hardness" of BG simply because I was used to how they worked by then.

BG had some tough ass battles, no matter how many times you played it. Sarevok was an endgame boss with a difficulty I haven't seen in any other CRPG(IE or not). Irenicus was a joke. Amelyssan was plain cheap.

 

I played BG only after beating IWD and BG2, so I was pretty familiar with the IE environment, and I still found it pretty challenging sometimes, even more in the higher difficulties.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

BG had some tough ass battles, no matter how many times you played it. Sarevok was an endgame boss with a difficulty I haven't seen in any other CRPG(IE or not). Irenicus was a joke. Amelyssan was plain cheap.

 

I played BG only after beating IWD and BG2, so I was pretty familiar with the IE environment, and I still found it pretty challenging sometimes, even more in the higher difficulties.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Invisible thief to scout the traps.

 

Couple of explosive arrows to clear out his friends. He didnt last long even in the first game.

 

I really wanted to go one on one with him, but he was too tough for that. But he was fodder for a party. The kobold commando's with fire arrows gave me more trouble than the end encounter

 

IWD II's was kind of tough depending on what you did prior to it. But it also had a very noticable pattern. If you stopped the casters early before they could fill the area with summons (once that happened you were on the defensive) and contain the bosses till their enchantments wore off it was actually very easy. Bit like playing Zelda, figuring out the pattern is most of the battle.

 

KOTORs end battle was actually quite hard. I didnt have any way to crack the tubes so I had to fight him 6 or 7 times. healing the same time as he ran off to heal.

 

Very cheesey and not the satisfying clash I was imagining it to turn out.