The quality of combat in Bloodlines and other games

[Xard]

Ranger, I'll write answer tomorrow unless someone else first writes why D&D is superior as turn based

 

'course iwd, a game built in less time by a largely rookie design team utilizing some other developer's engine, ended up being obsidian's greatest financial

HA! Good Fun!

That had nothing to do with it really, the story is what set's those two games apart. Plus the music, voice acting, production, design, art direction........

 

and gameplay and stability.

 

Why I brought IWD1 up is because I knew that apologists would rise up to defend Troika with arguments like "they weren't given enough time!", "Atari ****ed them over!" and similar.

[Kelverin]

Ranger, I'll write answer tomorrow unless someone else first writes why D&D is superior as turn based

 

'course iwd, a game built in less time by a largely rookie design team utilizing some other developer's engine, ended up being obsidian's greatest financial

HA! Good Fun!

That had nothing to do with it really, the story is what set's those two games apart. Plus the music, voice acting, production, design, art direction........

 

and gameplay and stability.

 

Why I brought IWD1 up is because I knew that apologists would rise up to defend Troika with arguments like "they weren't given enough time!", "Atari ****ed them over!" and similar.

TOEE wins in combat. Did IWD have any issues similar to troika? No they did not, so again what is the relevance?

[Gromnir]

"That had nothing to do with it really..."

 

is this 'posed to make sense? xard makes a comparison... points out that troika had a big opportunity, but did less with more... more time and resources.

 

'course it looks like you is arguing out o' boredom and w/o a point, so to continue would be silly.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Dark_Raven]

so you question xard's comparison 'tween iwd and toee development, but truth is you honestly got no reason or basis to question such a comparrsion.

What was the reason for the comparison? None as far as I can tell.

so, as a businessman, if you is a publisher would rather have bio develop your next d&d game, or .... somebody else?

 

HA! Good Fun!

No I would would pick bio everyday of the week and twice on sunday.

A slight alteration here. I would pick Bio minus EA to develop the next D&D game minus that ****ty 4E rules set.

[RangerSG]

so you question xard's comparison 'tween iwd and toee development, but truth is you honestly got no reason or basis to question such a comparrsion.

What was the reason for the comparison? None as far as I can tell.

so, as a businessman, if you is a publisher would rather have bio develop your next d&d game, or .... somebody else?

 

HA! Good Fun!

No I would would pick bio everyday of the week and twice on sunday.

A slight alteration here. I would pick Bio minus EA to develop the next D&D game minus that ****ty 4E rules set.

 

Well, I think 4e should be universally ignored. And I won't buy anything from any developer that uses it. But that's another issue discussed ad nauseum elsewhere

 

But yes, Bio was better as an independent developer, I fear. I'll grant that EA 'might' have recognized their errors of the past at this point and is letting Bio do it's own thing...but that won't last beyond what I see from DA when it comes out.

[Spider]

TOEE wins in combat. Did IWD have any issues similar to troika? No they did not, so again what is the relevance?

 

ToEE had a better combat system. But the encounter design was vastly inferior to IWD.

 

It also suffered from turn-based games old curse, combat turned into a crawl when there were many opponents on the screen. Even when they did things at the same time, it took ages for me as a player to get back in the action. Not as bad as some fights in Fallout, but it was still frustrating.

 

Somehow this same phenomenon never bothered me in Silent Storm, so either they had better encounter design, or I was just too enamored with the game to care.

 

Also, in ToEE, those damn cheating bugbears were annoying as all hell. I really hate those bugbears.

[J.E. Sawyer]

I have never before heard rule change was forced in IWD2

It wasn't.

[Volourn]

"But yes, Bio was better as an independent developer, I fear."

 

Youf ear this; but I doubt we know this yet since they haven't really made a game with EA outside of finishing up ME if I remember the timeline correctly...

 

 

"Troika delivered what they said they would a true representation of a classic pnp game."

 

Nah, not really. The only 'promise' they really delievered on with TOEE was being the closest to pnp DnD rules. Outside of that, not so much. They forgot the cardinal rule of all pnp pre amde campaigns like TOEE - ot's up to the DM aka Troika to 'fill in the blanks' and make the campaign worthwhile. NOBODY likes TOEE as written. People's fond memories of the pnp module are largely linked to how the campaign was ran by the DM, and what was added or ignored.

 

 

"Atari not extending the release date when the game was still a buggy mess"

 

They did give Troika an extension. They would ahve had to extend it indefinitely waiting for a 'perfect' version which likely would have been to expensive, and give no hope of getting a return of their investment.

 

 

"ToEE suffered an extremely steep learning curve. Where the heck were you supposed to go at level 1? I gotta blame the developers on that one. "

 

Nah. Talk to a couple of people in town (fi you can get past the subpar dialogue) woudl elt you where you ened to go. It's not like TOEE had lots of places you *could* go.

 

 

"Combat was better in TOEE"

 

Nope. Combat systemw as. Combat wa snot. "Oh look, another bugbear trying to trip my mage and suffers 3 AOOs!" R00fles!

 

 

"Dont know if you caught this battle, but probably my favoite combat encounter of any game I have played"

 

That battle was actually fun!

Edited August 31, 2008 by Volourn

[RangerSG]

Yes Volo, but MEPC already has "fiasco" written on it to many gamers.

[Hurlshort]

Yes Volo, but MEPC already has "fiasco" written on it to many gamers.

 

A few crybabies doesn't equal "many gamers". The game was critically acclaimed and has sold well. People who go on forums to whine about DRM are an extremely small percentage of the purchasing public.

[Volourn]

"Yes Volo, but MEPC already has "fiasco" written on it to many gamers."

 

Define 'many'?

 

Less than 1%? 2%? 5%?

 

ME is a hit, and many gamers played it and enjoyed just fine.

 

R00fles!

 

You, and a handful of malcontents don't constitute all that 'many'. L0L

 

Just like I cna be honest and say even though I loathed MW, most gamers who played it enjoyed it just fine. My opinion means crap on it.

[Nightshape]

yet at the same time utterly newb team manages to make IWD1 even in clearly shorter time, game vastly superior to Troika's big title in every possible way.

 

 

Game's failure was Troika's fault just like vanilla NWN2's shortcomings were OE's fault, not Atari's

 

 

edit: heck, IWD1 team alone annihilates all excuses from Troika's part. They just sucked at designing that game.

 

Not even comparative really... Different requirements from the development cycle.

[Nightshape]

And why should I cut it slack just because it used new engine?

 

Because engine development takes time, and is a different process fundementally as building an engine results in what could only be refered to as nothing at all in relation to gameplay.

[Nightshape]

"You don't have to, but you might when comparing a game on a brand new engine to one that has had 7? games."

 

so, is easier to work with an engine you designed or to try an work with some other clown's engine? some o' the iwd guys is still 'round. maybe you can pose question to them. regardless, am doubting that the iwd guys felt much compassion for tim and co.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

You can argue the toss from many perspectives, companies often licence engines because engine maintainance is seperate task to engine use. You also have to bare in mind the level of documentation coupled with an engine.

 

Developing a game engine and game along side each other genuinely can lead to problems, the engine technology needs to be ahead of the rest of the team.

 

When an engine is licenced it's usually comes with alot of documentation, it's easier to use someone else's technology, atleast initially it is, over a time period it actually makes more sense to develop in house technology.

 

ToEE is alot more ambitious than IWD. IWD isn't all that far from a professionally produce mod for baldurs gate, that's not to balk at the results, and it is more than a mere mod as it did feature engine improvements, but at it's core like alot of games they're existing on a level equivilent to mods, the extremities of which can be debated.

[Gromnir]

"You don't have to, but you might when comparing a game on a brand new engine to one that has had 7? games."

 

so, is easier to work with an engine you designed or to try an work with some other clown's engine? some o' the iwd guys is still 'round. maybe you can pose question to them. regardless, am doubting that the iwd guys felt much compassion for tim and co.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

You can argue the toss from many perspectives, companies often licence engines because engine maintainance is seperate task to engine use. You also have to bare in mind the level of documentation coupled with an engine.

 

Developing a game engine and game along side each other genuinely can lead to problems, the engine technology needs to be ahead of the rest of the team.

 

When an engine is licenced it's usually comes with alot of documentation, it's easier to use someone else's technology, atleast initially it is, over a time period it actually makes more sense to develop in house technology.

 

ToEE is alot more ambitious than IWD. IWD isn't all that far from a professionally produce mod for baldurs gate, that's not to balk at the results, and it is more than a mere mod as it did feature engine improvements, but at it's core like alot of games they're existing on a level equivilent to mods, the extremities of which can be debated.

 

 

*chuckle*

 

am understanding your pov, but you might wanna direct this to the obsidian developers rather than make as a reply to Gromnir. having no personal experience in such things we tends to defer to experts in the field... and at least one obsidian expert disagrees with you.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[newc0253]

huh, does anyone actually think the problems with TOEE were due to the engine?

 

personally i had no problem with TOEE's engine. i liked the turn-based combat. but even if Troika had magically been granted permission to make TOEE using the infinity engine, the game still would have blown because of its threadbare dialogue and story.

[Kelverin]

"Troika delivered what they said they would a true representation of a classic pnp game."

 

Nah, not really. The only 'promise' they really delievered on with TOEE was being the closest to pnp DnD rules. Outside of that, not so much. They forgot the cardinal rule of all pnp pre amde campaigns like TOEE - ot's up to the DM aka Troika to 'fill in the blanks' and make the campaign worthwhile. NOBODY likes TOEE as written. People's fond memories of the pnp module are largely linked to how the campaign was ran by the DM, and what was added or ignored.

They promised

[RangerSG]

"Yes Volo, but MEPC already has "fiasco" written on it to many gamers."

 

Define 'many'?

 

Less than 1%? 2%? 5%?

 

ME is a hit, and many gamers played it and enjoyed just fine.

 

R00fles!

 

You, and a handful of malcontents don't constitute all that 'many'. L0L

 

Just like I cna be honest and say even though I loathed MW, most gamers who played it enjoyed it just fine. My opinion means crap on it.

 

Tell me Volo...in what other industry could even one out of 100 products failing for people it was promised to work be acceptable? That's a fiasco. And you're willing to concede that 1 out of 20 might have failed? That's a disaster. Thanks for making my point. So next time you want to flame people with personal insults, you might want to do a little simple math before you post. Or do you like undercutting everything you say?

[Volourn]

"again it is almost exactly like the module"

 

Except the module itself explicitly tells DMs to tailer said module to their audience/players. I remmeber this because I bugged Troika quite a bit about stuff like this pre release. L0L And, I was laughed off with 'Don't worry, we added soem cool stuff!"

 

 

"Now you could argue they should have patched/fixed it anyway."

 

Nah. I don't blame Troika for that. Atari was the publisher so that's their call. From Atari's point of view the benefits of a patch just wasn't worth it cost wise. What's sad is that as Grom pointed out, Atari was EXCITED about TOEE's potential - so much so they were pumped up for sequels/expansions. Troika let Atari down.

 

 

"Tell me Volo...in what other industry could even one out of 100 products failing for people it was promised to work be acceptable? That's a fiasco. And you're willing to concede that 1 out of 20 might have failed? That's a disaster. Thanks for making my point. So next time you want to flame people with personal insults, you might want to do a little simple math before you post. Or do you like undercutting everything you say?"

 

Wrong. i was asking about your numbers. You say 'many' but that means nothing. Again, define 'many'. And, don't emabrass yourself, again. Thanks. Nor did I 'persoanlly flame' you.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Let's all keep this civil, eh?

[Shryke]

Let's all keep this civil, eh?

 

where's the fun in that huh

[Kelverin]

Credit where credit is due. I am the first one to bitch and complain about the combat system in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series, but I have to congratulate Obsidian for dramatically improving the options/challenges in the sequel

[Shryke]

Credit where credit is due. I am the first one to bitch and complain about the combat system in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series, but I have to congratulate Obsidian for dramatically improving the options/challenges in the sequel

 

i never had any problems with the combat

 

sure it was easy, but it worked well

 

though i did appreciate obsidian making it a bit more visually impressive in kotor2

 

i definitely preferred it to the boring buttonmash that was the combat in jade empire (leaping tiger spammed to kill anything, unless it was immune, then switch to weapon style and continue spamming)

[Volourn]

"Credit where credit is due. I am the first one to bitch and complain about the combat system in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic series, but I have to congratulate Obsidian for dramatically improving the options/challenges in the sequel"

 

Both KOTOR game shad crappy combat. They both were dumbed down wannabe NWN combat. Even the addittion of 'jedi styles' in KOTOR2 ended up being flatlined.

 

 

"i definitely preferred it to the boring buttonmash that was the combat in jade empire"

 

JE > KOTOR in every way espicially and including combat.

 

As for 'button smashing'... buttons mashing in JE gets you killed quick...but, hey, I'd rather 'button smash' then watch the computer fight for me, and win easy fights. Like I said, dumbed down NWN combat.

[Shryke]

"i definitely preferred it to the boring buttonmash that was the combat in jade empire"

 

JE > KOTOR in every way espicially and including combat.

 

As for 'button smashing'... buttons mashing in JE gets you killed quick...but, hey, I'd rather 'button smash' then watch the computer fight for me, and win easy fights. Like I said, dumbed down NWN combat.

 

were we playing the same game?

 

because seriously, i had it on the hardest difficulty and i won every single fight easily just spamming the X button

 

no chi strikes, no focus mode, no healing