Obsidian dumbs "downer"

[roshan]

It was this

 

We’re aiming for a more focused campaign and a tighter storyline.

 

http://www.gamebanshee.com/interviews/maskofthebetrayer1.php

 

How can the expansion be more focused when main game was almost completely linear?

[Sand]

It was this

 

We

[Hurlshort]

The whole roshan question was just a query. I mean, I still find it hard to understand why you would join the Obsidian forums if you aren't a fan of their work and then immediately jump into an argumentative thread. You did clarify your intentions in another post, and I haven't questioned your identity since.

 

One of the developers pointed out that most of our criticisms are just personal preferences. I was simply stating mine. The roshan bit was just an afterthought. I'm no Lou Gutman, so I'll concede.

[Xard]

It was this

 

We

Edited May 30, 2007 by Xard

[roshan]

One thing to think about was whether NWN2 was even a game at all. I think what distinguishes games from other media is that games have victory and defeat. The way I see it, victory exists when defeat exists. You cant "win" watching a movie, neither can you "win" by reading a book. On the other hand, pretty much any game I can think of has defeat in some form or the other - whether kiddie games like tag or hide and seek, board games like chess, scrabble and monopoly, card games(even solitaire), first person shooters, RTS, choose your own adventure books, CRPGS and so on and so forth.

 

So, if I never had any sort of realistic chance of losing NWN2, was I even playing a game?

[Sand]

Yes. You get killed.

 

You lose.

 

Reload or start a new character.

[Cantousent]

Oh, MountainWest is Eldar. There, it's solved. Just don't use your different alts in the same thread to reinforce your points.

 

As for the initial post, I think it's a red herring. There are any number of reasons to agitate regarding what we know about the expansion. I'm with you on that. The basis of the first post, however, was just wrong from its premise to its conclusion.

[roshan]

It was this

 

We

[Xard]

One thing to think about was whether NWN2 was even a game at all. I think what distinguishes games from other media is that games have victory and defeat. The way I see it, victory exists when defeat exists. You cant "win" watching a movie, neither can you "win" by reading a book. On the other hand, pretty much any game I can think of has defeat in some form or the other - whether kiddie games like tag or hide and seek, board games like chess, scrabble and monopoly, card games(even solitaire), first person shooters, RTS, choose your own adventure books, CRPGS and so on and so forth.

 

So, if I never had any sort of realistic chance of losing NWN2, was I even playing a game?

 

Apparently I'm not meta so I can't just dig up some link, but I'm sure there must be name for that kind of arguing

Edited May 30, 2007 by Xard

[Sand]

Oh, MountainWest is Eldar. There, it's solved. Just don't use your different alts in the same thread to reinforce your points.

 

As for the initial post, I think it's a red herring. There are any number of reasons to agitate regarding what we know about the expansion. I'm with you on that. The basis of the first post, however, was just wrong from its premise to its conclusion.

 

Everyone is Eldar. That hardly counts.

[Xard]

It was this

 

We

[roshan]

Yes. You get killed.

 

You lose.

 

Reload or start a new character.

 

Yes, but I never had my entire party die on me - the game simply was too easy. Thats why I mentioned realistic chance.

[Diamond]

Apparently I'm not meta so I can't just dig up some link, but I'm sure there must be name for that kind of arguing

More of a flawed premise mixed with appeal to emotion (directly resulting from bitterness).

[Xard]

One thing to think about was whether NWN2 was even a game at all. I think what distinguishes games from other media is that games have victory and defeat. The way I see it, victory exists when defeat exists. You cant "win" watching a movie, neither can you "win" by reading a book. On the other hand, pretty much any game I can think of has defeat in some form or the other - whether kiddie games like tag or hide and seek, board games like chess, scrabble and monopoly, card games(even solitaire), first person shooters, RTS, choose your own adventure books, CRPGS and so on and so forth.

 

I mean, if challenge defines what's game, then KotOR 2 wasn't game at all. Yet KotORs belongs to my all time favorite GAMES list.

 

NWN2 was ten times harder than KotOR 2 and if K2 is game, then so is NWN2

 

Apparently I'm not meta so I can't just dig up some link, but I'm sure there must be name for that kind of arguing

More of a flawed premise mixed with appeal to emotion (directly resulting from bitterness).

 

Edited May 30, 2007 by Xard

[Sand]

Yes. You get killed.

 

You lose.

 

Reload or start a new character.

 

Yes, but I never had my entire party die on me - the game simply was too easy. Thats why I mentioned realistic chance.

Then you haven't been playing on the hardcore difficulty setting with a better AI mod.

 

I have had plenty of total party wipeouts with the new AI mod I placed in the game. Use the tools that is out there to make the game more fun. If you don't, well that is your own damn fault.

[MountainWest]

Would I like to see combat much more difficult? *shrug* I'm not a min-maxer or a munchkin player.

 

I think a only a very low percentage of the people asking for more difficult combat cares about having the best possible character. I know I want more difficult combat because it would force me to consider what tools I have at my disposal - spells, items and so on. I want a tactical approach to combat. If just plain mindless clicking lets you win a battle, that's what you'll do. Especially with the rest and auto-ressurection-feature present in NWN2 - features that makes battles win or lose and nothing in between.

 

In a CRPG I don't much care about the combat personally. To me, it's about the story and the characters. Combat is just a small part of the story, even if it's a major part of the design.

 

There's two problems with this quote (which I happen to agree with):

 

1) There's *a lot* of combat in RPGs. Personally I'm finding it harder and harder justifying to myself doing something that's just not fun, just to get rewarded a cutscene every hour. That said, a truly great story will have me fighting through waves upon waves of goblins. PsT, for example, is my favorite RPG to date and it has abysmal combat. But as it is, great stories aren't the norm. Well written? Yes. But a hundred games later, no matter how well written, it's no longer fun to start out as an unknown who ends up traveling the world and ultimately saves the world from the ultimate evil. It's been done. Time to move on.

 

2) Great story doesn't rule out great combat. Both in one package shouldn't be a far-fetched dream in a world with 6 billion potential developers.

 

I can see where some people would prefer to have combat be more difficult, though. Do I think resting makes the game easy? Yes. I just rest in inns and maybe once in a dungeon.

 

Crippling oneself would be an option in a game with fun combat - I do it in FPSes. Crippling oneself so that you can click on the same waves of goblins is hard to justify.

[roshan]

Yes. You get killed.

 

You lose.

 

Reload or start a new character.

 

Yes, but I never had my entire party die on me - the game simply was too easy. Thats why I mentioned realistic chance.

Then you haven't been playing on the hardcore difficulty setting with a better AI mod.

 

I have had plenty of total party wipeouts with the new AI mod I placed in the game. Use the tools that is out there to make the game more fun. If you don't, well that is your own damn fault.

 

There were no AI mods at release. If a mod makes defeat possible, then its a game. But I dont think that nwn2 as released by Obsidian was a game. "Playing" it to me was much like flipping the pages of a book.

 

I might try it in the future though - who knows, I might get something out of it yet.

[Gromnir]

"a more focused campaign" and "tighter storyline" is simply developer speak for short... betrayer is gonna have a much shorter story arc than nwn2. no surprise there as betrayer is an expansion, no?

 

am never sure what people mean when they says "non-linear," but we suspect that people expecting a really big and open game world with lots o' sub-quests that is complete tangential to critical path is gonna be disappointed by betrayer. for chrissakes people, motb is an expansion to a 40 hour game. what is you expecting? typically an expansion is more streamlined than the original game offering. even for an expansion that were as big as Throne o Bhaal, which had considerably more hours o' gameplay than is usual for expansions, the gameplay were far more "linear" than were the case in bg2. you wanna tell a compelling story in motb and has a real big and open-ended game world offering much player freedom with an expansion? right. expansions is free money for developers and publishers... is different than sequels, so don't expect a sequel.

 

as for the rest of roshan's grumblings... *shrug*.

 

roshan is a nutter when it comes to ps:t. EVERY obsidian/bis offering since ps:t has seen fergie or some other representative o' the developer reassure fans that there wouldn't be as much dialog as ps:t... or as much character interaction as ps:t, or as much darkness as ps:t. now we know that 'ccording to fergie ps:t was a wonderful commercial success, but other bis/obsidian folks has pretty much admitted that such a claim is utter bs. no biggie, we all know that ps:t didn't sell well regardless o' roshan's fanticsim or fergie's dissembling. so then, is it any surprise that obsidian developers always makes sure that we is reassured that release X will not be another ps:t, another failure? ps:t, right AND wrong, gets held out as both high and low waterline for various aspects of crpg development. ps:t is the extreme and is thus useful as a measure stick.

 

consider: if fergie had claimed that there would be a great deal more character interaction in motb than in FO (another interplay/bis/obsidian offering which roshan seems to hold in high esteem,) would anybody be impressed? would you has any notion o' just how much character interaction motb were offering if fergie had said >fallout?

 

 

motb is gonna be an expansion. is gonna add new spells, feats, monsters, prestige classes and an included campaign that is gonna be brief, but hopefully improves 'pon some shortcomings o' the nwn2 oc. is NOT a sequel. is free money for obsidian and atari and they ain't gonna try to rewrite the history o' nwn2 with this offering. will they makes same mistakes they made with iwd expansion? probably not. even so, if you is expecting nwn2 to correct all flaws you seen in nwn2, then you is clearly delusional. accept the reality oh what is an expansion.

 

...

 

there is some other stuff going on in this thread, but is all rehash... nothing new. our complaints 'bout nwn2 ain't changed since last time we discussed, so we got little new to add.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited May 30, 2007 by Gromnir

[Sand]

There were no AI mods at release. If a mod makes defeat possible, then its a game. But I dont think that nwn2 as released by Obsidian was a game. "Playing" it to me was much like flipping the pages of a book.

 

I might try it in the future though - who knows, I might get something out of it yet.

This is the mod I use for the smarter AI: http://nwvault.ign.com/View.php?view=NWN2H...tail&id=141

 

Also Obsidian have made substantial improvements to the AI with their support of the game, but what they really need to do is implement Tony K's work in the main game. Seriously, placed enemy duergar in the game and NOT let them use their enlarge and invisibility abilities?!?!?!

Edited May 30, 2007 by Sand

[Xard]

"a more focused campaign" and "tighter storyline" is simply developer speak for short... betrayer is gonna have a much shorter story arc than nwn2. no surprise there as betrayer is an expansion, no?

 

am never sure what people mean when they says "non-linear," but we suspect that people expecting a really big and open game world with lots o' sub-quests that is complete tangential to critical path is gonna be disappointed by betrayer. for chrissakes people, motb is an expansion to a 40 hour game. what is you expecting? typically an expansion is more streamlined than the original game offering. even for an expansion that were as big as Throne o Bhaal, which had considerably more hours o' gameplay than is usual for expansions, the gameplay were far more "linear" than were the case in bg2. you wanna tell a compelling story in motb and has a real big and open-ended game world offering much player freedom with an expansion? right. expansions is free money for developers and publishers... is different than sequels, so don't expect a sequel.

 

At least I'm not expecting that, since it's not reasonable. I'm hoping for little bit more freedom in choosing areas where to go next and wider area design. I'm not waiting for another Fallout or Oblivion. And it looks like those things are going to happen

 

edit: I agree with Sand. That could be integrated in official patches

Edited May 30, 2007 by Xard

[J.E. Sawyer]

Also Obsidian have made substantial improvements to the AI with their support of the game, but what they really need to do is implement Tony K's work in the main game. Seriously, placed enemy duergar in the game and NOT let them use their enlarge and invisibility abilities?!?!?!

Yes clearly this is an appropriate challenge for a party of three 2nd level characters.

[Xard]

Also Obsidian have made substantial improvements to the AI with their support of the game, but what they really need to do is implement Tony K's work in the main game. Seriously, placed enemy duergar in the game and NOT let them use their enlarge and invisibility abilities?!?!?!

Yes clearly this is an appropriate challenge for a party of three 2nd level characters.

 

That's why I think you guys should do some revising, polishing etc. for situations like that. But that is good core for future AI updates IMHO

[Sand]

Also Obsidian have made substantial improvements to the AI with their support of the game, but what they really need to do is implement Tony K's work in the main game. Seriously, placed enemy duergar in the game and NOT let them use their enlarge and invisibility abilities?!?!?!

Yes clearly this is an appropriate challenge for a party of three 2nd level characters.

Hey, if you guys didn't want to use the critters you put in the game to their fullest ability, which they would logically have, then you should have been good DMs and not put them there in the first place. Frankly, Mr. Sawyer, I would have used goblins in the starting areas instead of Duergar. Goblns are numerous, weak, and easily controllable for the Bladelings and Githyanki to bully to become their shock troops. The duegar I would have used in the underground parts of the Duskwood. It would have made more sense and would have worked better given the back story used for those goblins.

 

Oh, and it was 3 third level characters, or 2 third and 1 second, or 2 third and 1 first, depending on if you play a race with a ECL.

Edited May 30, 2007 by Sand

[mr insomniac]

If a player wants to go out and get a mod to make the game more challenging for themselves, so be it. More power to them. If you restart the game numerous times trying out different character builds or whatever, I can see where it gets tedious, but not everyone does that.... so who cares if the duergar don't use all their abilities. As a player I know there will be tougher challenges ahead, since I haven't even left my own village yet. Let those enemies use all their abilities. Let those fights be challenging. I'd be disappointed if they weren't. The duergar battles were fine as they are cuz they got me used to moved the camera around and controlling my party, during a combat situation, in ways that the tutorial just doesn't accomplish (cuz there is no risk at all in the tutorial).

[Sand]

Without the duergar using there full abilities there was no risk to begin with.