Whats so fun about Hack n Slash?

[metadigital]

... [T]he story will make a bit more sense if you played the previous games, 6 and 7, as they expose the Umpani and T'Rang races, as well as the Dark Savant's overal plot. Pretty interesting how they remembered the long time fans and made it so you could import your 10 year old save from Wiz7 into 8... There's three different beginnings depending on what you did in Wiz7 and if you imported those saves. The spaceship crash landing is actually a 'newcomer' beginning, for players new to the series, who do not have a 10 year old save stored away.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well that I didn't know (I guess I qualify as a very, very old fan ). That might have helped a bit: together with the ability to adjust the rate of combat. I guess I didn't realize I was playing the "Return of the Jedi" equivalent to the previous "A New Hope" and "The Empire Strikes Back"! :D

 

Still the matrices of friendly and enemy combatants, the phase-based combat and the length of indivual confrontations combined to make Wizardry 8 a game that endeavours to irritate the player, rather than entertain. Let me explain: methinks the game provides a slippery, narrow virtuous cycle (winning battles) that can easily turn into a vicious cycle (losing health and thence party members). Any tactical mistake are compounded into a strategic nightmare (dead/diseased party members increasing the relative combat stress on the remaining members). Knowing your enemy is one thing, but being ambushed by ten random encounters when you just want to get back to where you made a wrong turn is just frustrating, IMO.

 

And I just didn't feel compelled to overcome these issues to find out more about he story. A shame, really, because I was trying to like it.

 

Oh, well. I did like the idea of having a group able to use munitions (but not everyone).

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I guess that's fair. I assume that some of its problems can be traced back to a somewhat convoluted design process. It would have benefited from some more polishing and fixing, I think; something that would have made it truly shine rather than just ocasionally glitter.

 

Still, for some reason, it's a game I find myself returning to once in a while.

[Kaftan Barlast]

The only way I can endure hack n slash is if it would be FPS like action gaming like in Bloodlines(must have guns also), I just dont get the fun in "tactical isometric" which is why I never touched the Icewind Dale series.

 

 

Do you think one has to be a D&D pen and paper gamer and know the rules to appreciate the tactical parts?

[Archmonarch]

Not particularly. While I havent played much of D&D, I have played other PnP games and I personally prefer the social aspects, i.e. diplomacy, party interaction/manipulation.

 

Anyway, while the combat can be fun at times, it just isnt my perfect cup of tea, to adapt an old cliche. Some people simply prefer the strategy side of battle; I like to get it over as quickly as possible, so as to move onto other things. Everybody has their preferences.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The only way I can endure hack n slash is if it would be FPS like action gaming like in Bloodlines(must have guns also),

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

If you haven't already, you might want to check out Flagship Studios' Hellgate: London, an attempt at a roguelike FPS.

[Volourn]

Bloodlines' 'action' was horrid. It's a big part of why the game isn't in my top 10. Too bad too.

 

Anyways, 'hack n slash' games cna be found if the combat is fun and challenging which for the most aprt BL combat didn't have it; but IWD did for the most part (something IWD2 lacked). That said, a greta hns game can also include a decent story, and purpose for the PC other than just hacking...

[Kaftan Barlast]

I know we've been through this already but why do you think BL's action was bad? I had no problems with it at all, the close combat didnt offer fightergame-esque control but it was fully adequate. And the shooting; not hitting what you're aiming straight at it, is always annoying, but its wasnt as horribly frustrating as in Deus Ex for instance.

[Volourn]

Too easy. Too boring for the most part. And, utterly without imagination. And, oh, using melee weapons and watching enemies go all over the palce in ways that no human body can is just beyond gah. It's worse than JE or FO in that regard which are a lot more reasonable. There are some reasonable combat scenes in the game; but mostly it just bores me and I just wanna throiugh. The biggets problem is the combat requires absolutely no thinking what-so-ever. It's funny to since supposedly Bl is semi based on character skills; but all it comes down to is spamming the attack button.. At best, it was a reasonable timewaster in between the good parts of BL.

[metadigital]

I know we've been through this already but why do you think BL's action was bad? I had no problems with it at all, the close combat didnt offer fightergame-esque control but it was fully adequate. And the shooting; not hitting what you're aiming straight at it, is always annoying, but its wasnt as horribly frustrating as in Deus Ex for instance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But, I LIKED the combat in Deus Ex. Deus Ex:Invisible War wasn't as good, but the original was kewl, especially how you gained experience and allocated it for particular weapon categories: I like the pistol specialization, so I could use the tranquilizer darts (after all, I'm not a brute) on the innocent grunts and my silencer-equipped pistol with scope to take out the evil mechs. Last time, I went most of the game without high levels of electronics / lockpicking / computer aptitude in order to gain mastery of pistols asap; also added all weapon distance- and accuracy-upgrades to the pistol, so that it had a long range and 101% accuracy. :D

 

I thought the difficulty in aiming long distances was especially well done. (Okay, the "hostile reset" factor of the AI was a little silly, but I can suspend my disbelief by imagining my PC has to run-and-hide-for-a-set-time-before-returning in the time occupied by this game feature.)

 

What didn't you like?

[Diogo Ribeiro]

What didn't you like?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And the shooting; not hitting what you're aiming straight at it, is always annoying, but its wasnt as horribly frustrating as in Deus Ex for instance.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I think Kaftan is talking about how unintuitive a combat model that combines player reflexes and character skill is. Firstperson shooters tends to create a given expectation surrounding your reflexes, and the direct hit and damage of weapons of said games clashes - sometimes hard - with arbitrary numbers in the background telling you you didn't hit the enemy sitting smack in front of you. I found Deus Ex's system was a bit less satisfying than Bloodlines' system... Although the difference may be negligible for some.

[~Di]

I couldn't really be bothered to finish Diablo or Diablo 2 (both were gifts). I do not really know why, since I enjoy a fun, light-hearted action-RPG type romp... IWD, IWD2 to a much lesser extent, Wizardry 8 (sue me! I love it, okay? Love. It!), and such guilty pleasures as Divine Divinity, Sacred and even Dungeon Siege (Cool loot, dammit. I'm a sucker for pretty graphics and cool loot!). Didn't do Bloodlines... I hate Vampires... but have loved excellent RPG/FPS hybrids like Deus Ex and the Gothic series. I adore Baldurs Gate 2, my second favorite game of all time. And yes, since combat and combat tactics is THE major component of BG2, I guess it qualifies as a hack n slash, despite the fact that there is a very strong story/role-playing component.

 

I also love turn-based strategy classics like Civilization, the magnificent Alpha Centauri, and that ilk. My favorite game of all time is... Jagged Alliance 2. A true kill-'em-all hack-n-slash with guns instead of swords! But with the unfettered freedom and unlimited tactical potential that is a squad-based tactical game lovers' dream!

 

I think I've come to the conclusion that gaming addicts like myself can love several different types of games based on our moods and for varying reasons. There are games that touch my heart, that have deep stories that keep me playing hour after hour the same way a great novel keeps me turning pages. Planescape:Torment, Deus Ex and the KoTOR games are an example of what I call "interactive novel" games. Deep, richly satisfying, magnificent... with limited replayability, because the story IS the major component.

 

Then there are games like my Turn-based strategy epics and JA2, where tactics are the major component. No story at all, really. The point of the game is to test your strategy, your tactics, your weapons... your luck and skill... against the AI of the computer-created enemy. These games have unlimited replayability for me, since there is no story to tire of, and infinite tactics that can be tested and enjoyed.

 

The best hack-n-slash games, IWD 1 for example, have a semblance of story, and a semblance of tactical freedom one finds in a wonderful strategy game. Games like Dungeon Siege... well... cripes... sometimes you're just in the mood for gorgeous graphics and cool loot, y'know? We all need our guilty pleasures. Unless, of course, you're one of that rare, some would say nonexistant, breed that really does buy Playboy for the articles!!

[mkreku]

Too easy. Too boring for the most part. And, utterly without imagination. And, oh, using melee weapons and watching enemies go all over the palce in ways that no human body can is just beyond gah. It's worse than JE or FO in that regard which are a lot more reasonable. There are some reasonable combat scenes in the game; but mostly it just bores me and I just wanna throiugh. The biggets problem is the combat requires absolutely no thinking what-so-ever. It's funny to since supposedly Bl is semi based on character skills; but all it comes down to is spamming the attack button.. At best, it was a reasonable timewaster in between the good parts of BL.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't understand your reasoning. The combat in Bloodlines could be boring, if you made it boring. It could also be lots of fun, if you (for example) used the time-slowing skill (actually super-fast skill, but it looked like bullet-time). It was just as fun as you made it. And that's exactly the case with Jade Empire's combat too! If you abuse Jade Empire's substandard AI and just jump around all over the place (looking like a monkey on crack) you never lose a fight. Of course, the drawback is that the combat becomes boring. If you take the time to actually use the different skills you learn throughout the game and implement some tactics, the combat is more difficult but also more rewarding (= more fun). Different combat systems, yes, but they can be abused in similar ways.

 

So how can you be a complete fanboi over Jade Empire while whining your lungs out about Bloodlines? (I actually know the answer to this one, but I'd rather hear your explanation)

[Volourn]

"So how can you be a complete fanboi over Jade Empire while whining your lungs out about Bloodlines?"

 

Nah. I'd rather let you continue trolling and whining about how I'm a fanboy. Let's also ignore the fact that I like BL. I'm not gonna waste time expalinin' myself to someone whose already made up their mind.

 

Keep up the good work, troll.

[Kaftan Barlast]

brief moment of zen:

 

 

 

Hey, if a troll calls a troll troll, what does that make the troll?

[SteveThaiBinh]

The combat in Bloodlines could be boring, if you made it boring. It could also be lots of fun, if you (for example) used the time-slowing skill (actually super-fast skill, but it looked like bullet-time). It was just as fun as you made it. And that's exactly the case with Jade Empire's combat too! If you abuse Jade Empire's substandard AI and just jump around all over the place (looking like a monkey on crack) you never lose a fight. Of course, the drawback is that the combat becomes boring. If you take the time to actually use the different skills you learn throughout the game and implement some tactics, the combat is more difficult but also more rewarding (= more fun). Different combat systems, yes, but they can be abused in similar ways.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I agree and I think this is really important if your game is going to appeal to different kinds of players. I have little interest in combat and no experience of conbat-based games, so I found the combat in Bloodlines fine because it didn't require too much thought. However, if people who like fighting can find interesting ways to do it in the game, that's great. If you were required to get good at combat in order to advance in the game, I doubt I could have finished it and probably wouldn't have tried for long. Different strokes for different folks, maybe?

[Diogo Ribeiro]

brief moment of zen:

 

 

 

Hey, if a troll calls a troll troll, what does that make the troll?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The first of the two to be redundant?

[Cantousent]

*insert a multipage rant against Wizardry 8 here.*

 

Actually, the RPG I hated the most was Might and Magic 9, which completely killed the series. After plundering the franchise for what it was worth, they ended the series on a terrible note.

 

Anyhow, I like hack and slash. It's a great diversion. I like a wide variety of games, and what story might be lacking in a hack and slash title will undoubtedly be found elsewhere.

 

Finally, folks claim that hack and slash lacks a story. That's not always true. I loved IWD, which was a hack and slasher. Still, the backstory was quite good. Diablo had a backstory. The difference is, the player can largely ignore the story should that be his desire. Fair enough.

 

Bloodlines had a great story with lackluster combat and I think it suffered for it. I really wish Troika had done this game a long time ago. I'd like to see a sequel, but it seems unlikely.

[metadigital]

brief moment of zen:

 

Hey, if a troll calls a troll troll, what does that make the troll?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which one?

[~Di]

Might & Magic 9 truly did kill the M&M franchise. What a horrible, horrible disappointment to a series that I had utterly adored up until then.

 

No, I don't think that hack n' slash necessarily lacks a story. IWD sure didn't lack a story, and it was a true-blue hack n' slash... one of the best, if not THE best, ever made, IMHO. But a good hack n' slash needs more than story; it needs a variety of battle tactics. The story in a good hack n' slash simply provides the backdrop for the battle tactics. The battle tactics, if any, in a solid RPG provide the backdrop for propelling the story forward. If that makes any sense... which my posts so rarely do nowadays. :D

[Cantousent]

Made sense to me. hehehe

 

I mean, if the only thing a game offers is hack and slash, then I might or might like it. If a game sports hack and slash with a great backdrop, I'm almost certain to like it. :haksthumbsup: