PS Torment and endings...

[Magnum Opus]

After all, how much do we really learn about the first incarnation? He fought in the Blood War. He did something horrible, or many horrible things, and later came to regret them. He petitioned Ravel to grant him immortality, and then was murdered by Ravel to see if she succeded, ending his independent existence and ushering in the second incarnation.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And that is the only crime of the Nameless One that has any bearing on the story, his "crime against nature" that led him to seek for a way to forestall death. That's why the crimes that led him to seek out Ravel have nothing to do with the story, and don't require explanation other than from a purely academic standpoint. He could have murdered millions in his first incarnation, but none of the elements of the story reflect the consequences of that crime. We don't see scores of relatives coming to avenge their loved ones; we do see Shadows coming after him, the victims of his "immortality" that was the consequence of his determination to avoid death.

 

The only consequences that are dealt with in the game are those caused by his decision to have Ravel extend his life, to give himself time to atone. The point at which the pseudo-immortal Nameless One's story begins (ie. Planescape Torment's story) is when he decides that he's got to avoid the consequences of his former life. Everything that happens before that point, if detailed, would have just served as a distraction from the game at hand, background information that had no bearing on current events.

[Lcaus Scuks]

I played BG1&2 tosc+tob and I didn't find the story that good, I just don't see how was story-telling amazing, was it the voice that keeps telling you what happens ?

Try to write the story of BG1&2 using short sentences and try to sumarize the story for PS:T, imo BG's story is child's play compared to Torment. I agree that the BG games are more appealing than PS:T because as I said Bioware makes good RPGs for the masses and PS:T is for people who understand it and want to understand it, it's for people who don't want battle after battle to make you feel important. I always considered the events from BG a little too rigid, for example I could have killed Ironicus in Spellhold because the devs left protection from magic scrolls in the game and that makes me invincible in this fight but wait a second, after I hit Ironicus with 1 HP over and over again he doesn't die (as stupid as that might seem) because the story has to go on, he says "damn you all" (I was the only one left alive) and gates out; I actually killed the mad wizards who were "helping" me (I even played solo) because the devs forced me to release them in order to fight Ironicus; if I go there without help and I'm protected from magic Ironicus says that I should have fled when I had the chance and tries to kill me over and over again. If I get help from the mad wizards and kill them because I don't want their help (where did Bioware get that idea ?) and I'm of course protected from magic, I can laugh at Iron because all his spells are useless, in the end he tries to hit me with his fists :D. There are too many forced events in the BG games, places and situations where you die without any reason (for example the wall trap in Spellhold), the devs are forcing you to do what they want and I say this because I've played the BG games 6 times and I think they are good games (close to 9/10), maybe the first BG gets more credit because there weren't many RPGs like that in 1998 but I wouldn't call it one of the greatest 10 games even made, when I played Torment I thought "BG is weak" and "why aren't there more great games like this ?" but then it hit me: because they don't appeal to the masses like Diablo and BG, Torment kind of games are for a select category of people and again RPGs don't appeal to many gamers like FPS and RTS games.

P.S. Watch Memento and see if's an accessible movie for everyone like Titanic.

[Kaftan Barlast]

You consider this a flaw; I consider in-depth knowledge of the first incarnation's actions to be unimportant, even harmful to the atmosphere. We're unlikely to proceed any further given that difference of opinion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

That I can agree with.

 

 

 

 

 

..and 2001 has a kickass ending.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Is it a BIS curse? Who can tell? Stay tuned with us as we unravel another part of the mystery in our next episode of the bone-chilling terror series "Their Games Felt Rushed Towards Their Endings". :ph34r:

[Antagonist]

Huh ?

 

The game felt rushed after Ravel, but contrary to KotOR II they managed to connect all the dots at the end despite having to endure countless dungeon crawls to get there.

[GreenKnight]

No ... there's nothing rushed in PS: T ... and even if it feels rushed after you get out of Ravel's maze, that's only because the 'worlds' (planes) and cities you visit then are smaller than Sigil ...

 

Once you get out of Ravel's maze, the game acceletates its pace, it gets faster ... but not rushed.

 

And the ending, very much unlike the KotOR ending, does not leave any questions open. Everything is tied together; every party members fate gets an explanation, and even if TNO's original crime is not explained in detail - everything gets a solution.

 

And please don't tell me anyone that it was in any way relevant to the story what TNO's original crime has been ... it's enough to know that it was so horrible that the Planes still suffer, and that he merits his condemnation to the Eternal Blood War.

 

And yes ... I do not know if PS: T is the best CRPG ever ... but I'm quite positive that I've never seen anything as touching and as well-conceived as PS: T in a RPG ... never. Not yet.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Huh ?

 

The game felt rushed after Ravel, but contrary to KotOR II they managed to connect all the dots at the end despite having to endure countless dungeon crawls to get there.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

My point is basically that. Towards the ending we're treated to either a much lesser focus on story or a growing focus on combat areas which serve no purpose other than to delay progress and give an artificial challenge to players. Sometimes both. In BIS titles, or titles made by former BIS devs, like Fallout 2, Planescape, Vampire Bloodlines, and KoTOR2, its there. On differing levels, but there nonetheless.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

No ... there's nothing rushed in PS: T ... and even if it feels rushed after you get out of Ravel's maze, that's only because the 'worlds' (planes) and cities you visit then are smaller than Sigil ...

 

And because roleplaying takes a hit. And because most, if not all, subesequent areas are inflated with mostly unecessary combat. This isn't rushed in the "glitch" and "unfinished content showing up where it shouldn't" sense, it's rushed in the "ok, it's near the end, let's just make the player kill a couple of hundreds of things so it gets labelled as epic and challenging".

 

Once you get out of Ravel's maze, the game acceletates its pace, it gets faster ... but not rushed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Different perspectives. It's your prerogative to have that one, and it's mine to have a different one. To me, if a game who averages a healthy dose of combat and roleplaying suddenly drops most of its roleplaying and focuses much more on combat towards its end, it's a signal of not enough balanced development. The focus becomes uneven, and the way to end feels much more less developed and rushed.

[EUIX]

They never tell you about his crime for the same reason they do not tell you his name. In the moment of revelation he wouldn't be TNO anymore but Brianna for instance. It would totally destroy the mystery that surrounds the character in replays.

 

Imagine Stanley Kubrick had given a detailed explanation about the ending of 2001.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

2001 does have a ending, read 3001.

 

The only name for TNO that is plausible is Adahn, but even that is a pretty thin theory.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

3001 is the ending to Arthur C. Clarke's vision of how 2001 would have continued, not Stanley Kubrick's.

 

While Arthur C. Clarke was writing the book, Kubrick was himself writing for the movie himself. I would not take 3001 into account when watching Kubrick's film, nor will I ever watch 2010 as a sequel to his film. 3001 is the end of Clarke's vision, and 2010 is the film version of Clarke's sequel to his book.

 

Clarke's 2001 and Kubrick's 2001 are not exactly the same and should not be considered as a single entity.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes thats true, but they still have the same characters and themes. If you want to find out what happened Bowman or Hal, you have to read 3001. Personally 3001 was a let down.

[Spider]

No ... there's nothing rushed in PS: T ... and even if it feels rushed after you get out of Ravel's maze, that's only because the 'worlds' (planes) and cities you visit then are smaller than Sigil ...

 

Once you get out of Ravel's maze, the game acceletates its pace, it gets faster ... but not rushed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I seem to recall someone on the design-team acknowledging that some areas in Torment were rushed. If memory serves that was Curst and Undersigil (the sewers that were just meaningless unless you wanted to do some XP farming). And in all honesty, I think it showed. Those areas just seemed... unpolished.

 

I didn't feel everything after Ravel was rushed though, just those specific areas.

[Ivan the Terrible]

Curst was rushed, without a doubt.

 

But given the amount of dialogue already present and how long the game had already been delayed, I can't say I blame them. Better to have a rushed Curst than a cancelled Torment.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Better to have a rushed Curst than a cancelled Torment.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

True. Note that I didn't question the possible reasons behind it, I'm sure they were good or even out of necessity. Just saying what in there feels rushed to me.

[GreenKnight]

This isn't rushed in the "glitch" and "unfinished content showing up where it shouldn't" sense, it's rushed in the "ok, it's near the end, let's just make the player kill a couple of hundreds of things so it gets labelled as epic and challenging".

 

(...)

 

To me, if a game who averages a healthy dose of combat and roleplaying suddenly drops most of its roleplaying and focuses much more on combat towards its end, it's a signal of not enough balanced development. The focus becomes uneven, and the way to end feels much more less developed and rushed.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Okay. I see your point. And I cannot deny that both Undersigil and the so-called 'Prison area' beneath Curst didn't contribute to roleplay at all ... which is most unfortunate since it's mandatory to get through that boring and combat-heavy 'Prison area' ...

 

I am more forgiving with Undersigil. I know that the devs wanted to make it part of several sidequest that were cut from the final version, or weren't even ever implemented ... but, fortunately, the player is not forced to go there.

[EUIX]

A lot of stuff was cut from Torment. Undersigil was supposed to be bigger, the whole Yemeth pendant angle was dropped, when you are in the Buried VIllage there is a guy that talks to a voice in the walll there was supposed to be more to that. And I think the Mosaic tomb was supposed to lead somewhere.

 

Originally all of SIgil was planned (Lady's Ward, Baazar, etc) but they all got axed.

[Lcaus Scuks]

The players who get to know the game can see that it's rushed for Christmas, it's not visible the first time, it's not near as visible as KotOR 2 but the problem is there, it could have been much more.

[alx1078]

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 )

[Spider]

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 )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For me, darker definitely doesn't equal better. And as such, that isn't why I think Torment had a better story than the Baldur's Gate series. Torment's story is better because it's smarter, more well written, less cliche and connected with me on a whole other level. In some places it made me furious, in some it actually made me cry.

[Tanuvein]

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 )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You do get to interact with your body with at least one of the endings.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

For me, darker definitely doesn't equal better. And as such, that isn't why I think Torment had a better story than the Baldur's Gate series. Torment's story is better because it's smarter, more well written, less cliche and connected with me on a whole other level.  In some places it made me furious, in some it actually made me cry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The whole over the top darkness is one of the reasons I was never fussed on the game. It just tried too hard in that respect.

[Ivan the Terrible]

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 )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

For me, it isn't that the story is darker, though I do like a dark story.

 

For me, it's the fact that Torment seemed to come up with it's story and mostly have it make sense, compared to BG which often wanted you to accept new plot developments that were strained, at best. Between the two, BG's plot made a whole lot less sense.

[Lcaus Scuks]

(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 )

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It was nice to play evil after doing all those good things the first time, but after that I realized it's not as satisfying, it's the only game where I feel like I have to play good (I usually want to be evil) and from what I remember there are 2 tears which give +1 Con only for lawful good characters and there's Vhailor with +3 Str for very lawful players. In the end it's a pleasure to be equipped with all those items and tattoos (they are useful for a 40+ level mage) obtained by doing good things and some which can be used only by lawful good characters. The game is best played by a very lawful good (there are very few times when you have to be -1 good +1 evil or -1 law +1 chaos to get important bonuses) mage with both speciaizations.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Being good isn't mandatory to have an

[Ivan the Terrible]

Being good isn't mandatory to have an

[Sarjahurmaaja.]

"Really, what would a Chaotic Evil character do at the Fortress of Regrets? Give himself over to the Blood War willingly? Destroy himself utterly to avoid the 'agony' of living forever? Neither seems particularly logical from a self-absorbed bastard point of view."

 

Well, Practical Incarnation did go to Fortress of Regrets, so I guess ending the agony really is worth the cost.

 

edit: I don't think it was supposed to be at all pleasant having your 'mortality' removed from you.

[Tanuvein]

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.