Scott Rouse hints 4E game

[Junai]

If TB, please make it TB / RT-with-pause -optional. I wouldn't pay money for a TB-game. You get good D&D TB crpgs for free with a good Commodore 64 emulator.

 

J.

 

If I could push you off a mountain I would.

Wasn't ToEE enough for you?

Holy crapparony Batman! Talk about rage rising..

 

How long do I have to replay iwd2 before I get a good snack again??

*sigh*

 

Gods of the Black Isle, bail me out!

 

J.

[H]

ToEE was amazing. Wish there were more games like that.

[Pop]

ToEE was a combat system wasted on an unbelievably awful game.

[H]

Combat system was the game.

[Promethean]

[quote name='H

[Humodour]

I couldn't handle ToEE. It was pathetic.

 

I say this as a massive Fallout, Torment, Baldur's Gate, etc fan.

[Volourn]

"So, action oriented games like NWN I or II, with simple and not challenging combat, are poor interpretation of D&D imho."

 

Except NWN and NWN2 weren't action oriented. Sure, they had lots of combat (as does 99.9% of all rpgings including FO, BG, PST, and so on); but they were not action oriented.

 

And, the combat was far from simple. They, like TOEE were definitely more 'complex' than the vast majority of RPGs. As for 'challneging'; that could mean anything depending what you really mean by 'challenging'. Is a game easy if you never die? is it hard if you come close to death but somehow pull through? Is it only hard if you die 9.765 times per battle? Is it consider challenging when you got to take advantage of overpowered items or do you consider games easy if you use those and still cruise there? Are games considered easy if you rest inbetween every battle so your party is in perfect condition for every single battle?

 

Questions, questions, questions.

 

I don't know much about 4E as I haven't played D&D at all in a couple of years but what I've seen/heard about it I'm not impressed. I'd be curious about a 4E video game depending on who was making it.

 

And, technically, Obsidian are 'partners' with Atari since the companies work on NWN2 together.

[Sannom]

As for 'challneging'; that could mean anything depending what you really mean by 'challenging'.

 

I think he means "challenging" like "Killing a dragon in BG 2 in normal settings was hard, why is it so easy in NWN 2 with hardcore settings???"

[Stephen Amber]

I liked the art and music for ToEE. And of course it's turn based play. However, there were maybe two memorable characters for me in the entire game. Lareth and the vampire knight guy who was a bad ass fighter and could join your party. And who then splits when you leave the temple for town to sell stuff. Which was utter bs... your henchman leaving on you arbitrarily.

 

Regarding 4e, I'm sure I will play them just as I have all the other d&d crpgs.

[Promethean]

ToEE is all about combat. Icewind Dale didnt have many memorable characters either.

[meomao]

"So, action oriented games like NWN I or II, with simple and not challenging combat, are poor interpretation of D&D imho."

 

Except NWN and NWN2 weren't action oriented. Sure, they had lots of combat (as does 99.9% of all rpgings including FO, BG, PST, and so on); but they were not action oriented.

 

I'm not saying that they're action-rpg like Diablo or Titan Quest. I'm saying that the combat is less focused on tactics if we compare those games with BG or IWD. If we talk about combat, those games in my opinion fall something in between BG and an action-rpg, just a little bit more tactical than, say, SW:Kotor. So, considering that D&D as a rule-system is focused on tactical and positional party-based combat, NWN I & II doesn't offer a great interpretation of the original rule system (especially NWN I where you ain't got a party in the SP game). Don't get me wrong: both games were good in themselves for what concerns the other aspects (story, dialogue, art and so on). I'm only talking about gameplay and combat, where a game like BG is still a superior interpretation of the original game system.

 

And, the combat was far from simple. They, like TOEE were definitely more 'complex' than the vast majority of RPGs.

 

True, but that's because the standard of difficulty and complexity (in terms of gameplay) of the last generation of CRPG is really low (allways compared to the classic of the golden age :D ).

 

 

As for 'challneging'; that could mean anything depending what you really mean by 'challenging'.

 

What I mean, as stated by the above poster, is that combat is easy :D. I mean, I killed both dragons in NWN II OC at first load playing hardcore. In BG2 I had to reload several times learning from my mistakes and studying the perfect strategy for my party. And Dragons were not the most difficult encounters in the game. The level of tactical challenge is really low.

 

I don't know much about 4E as I haven't played D&D at all in a couple of years but what I've seen/heard about it I'm not impressed. I'd be curious about a 4E video game depending on who was making it.

 

I think that the 4th ed. is better under a lot of aspects (less multiclass min/max, more balance between classes, simpler approach towards rules, especially if we compare it with the 3.5 ed.). But it's worse under other aspects (I do not like a lot the whole milestone/action points/at encounter power concept that is strange for a PnP Rpg). At the end I think that it's a matter of taste. But considering that I was never really impressed by D&D in itself, I think that at the end I will choose to play or not the next games considering the developer, just like you. But I still think that if Obsidian want to make a good CRPG with RT combat, they should develop their own rule system like Bioware have done with DAO.

Edited May 3, 2009 by meomao

[Stephen Amber]

ToEE is all about combat. Icewind Dale didnt have many memorable characters either.

 

 

I liked the major Icewind Dale characters. The heartstone gem druid, the lich with the astrolabe thingy, the long winded merelith/spooky little girl... yxonemei... IWDII on the other hand lacked good writing and the characters suffered for it.

 

Toee had almost no writing.

[Enoch]

Luckily enough, I never really cared much about the D&D rules, being it 2, 3, 3.5 or 4, it doesn't matter. It will never really fit into a computer RPG.

Agreed. I'm in favor of all credible, talented developers eschewing D&D releases. The underlying rule system is not very good, and it comes with the additional drawbacks that the existing fanboys and rules lawyers bring. I.e., when you're dealing with D&D, you spend way too much time on silly fan-service like getting everyone's favorite race/subrace/class/kit/monster/god/feat/ability/spell/item/famous NPC/whatever integrated into the game, and far too little time on making it an actually good game. Games like BG2, PS:T, IWD, and MotB were enjoyable games in spite of their D&D content, not because of it.

[Killian Kalthorne]

[quote name='H

[Promethean]

Oh? So what makes a CRPG?

[Killian Kalthorne]

At least for me what makes a good CRPG is a set of things in no particular order:

 

1) A precise and consistent rules system that governs game mechanics.

2) Strong character development, both in terms of story and game mechanics.

3) Well developed environs to explore.

4) Have the choices I make in game have meaningful consequences through out the game.

 

ToEE had the game mechanics right, but everything else wrong.

Edited May 5, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne

[H]

Combat alone doesn't make a great CRPG.

Fact: there were no good cRPGs in the 80's and the early 90's. Not a single one. Might and Magic, Wizardry and The Bard's Tale? Complete crap.

[Promethean]

Ultima

 

[Killian Kalthorne]

[quote name='H

Edited May 6, 2009 by Killian Kalthorne

[H]

Olde-skool Dungeon crawlers are still being developed, released and sold, mostly on handhelds. There is a place for them in the current market.

[Promethean]

Guess he is out of the handheld loop. Etrian Odyssey and Dark Spire are very successful dungeon crawlers and 7th Dragon is incoming from Japan I think

[Killian Kalthorne]

[quote name='H

[Tigranes]

O.K.

[Promethean]

[quote name='H

[Killian Kalthorne]

Where did I explicitly say that I was trying to talk for other people?