RANDOM VIDEO GAME NEWS THREAD!

[greylord]

I too prefer BG1 to DA2...any day of the week, and it's not nostalgia. It takes more than pretty graphics and alien elves to make a game good. Part of it is a DIFFERENT reason than many consider here however, it's because I consider BG1 and BG2 basically the same game, just made at variance with time. In otherwords, BG1 has the same engine as BG2, the characters progress directly from one game to the other, and just like those two work together I also consider ToB to basically be the BG3, it IS the third portion of the trilogy (even if a tad shorter then the other two chapters). So in that light, I simply see it as the same game tossed altogether.

 

That's influence a LOT by my wanting to play a character straight through starting at BG1 and then continuing all the way until the final battle of ToB!

 

Despite my twitch finger and FPS game fetish, along with normally going along with the rest of the world in game preferences of more TPS or FPS, which many would equate to pretty graphics equals WOW to us...it doesn't. There is a LOT of gameplay, and overall I think the BG series (in fact the entire IE engine set of games) has deeper gameplay overall than most of the recent games by Bioware.

 

That doesn't mean I don't love their current offerings (absolutely manic about ME2...one of the best games ever), but DA2 wasn't such a stellar job in my eyes...I'd prefer to replay the entire BG series anyday over DA2.

 

Personal preference.

 

Edit: And now, to try to keep in the mood of the thread, some video game news...probably already announced here earlier...here's a reminder though...not that I'm a big fan of the game...

 

Yakuza coming

 

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6338364/yakuz...all%3Btitle%3B3

Edited October 6, 2011 by greylord

[Volourn]

" There is a LOT of gameplay, and overall I think the BG series (in fact the entire IE engine set of games) has deeper gameplay overall than most of the recent games by Bioware. "

 

How so? In BG1, all you cna do with warrior types is choose to fight . In DA, you multiple different ways to attack. You also have dialogue skills that can influence questions/npcs 9and, yes, dialogue *is* gameplay).

 

BG1's game play is severely lacking comapred to BIO's newer games. It's gameplay is pretty damn shallow. You do nothing but click attack then watch your character do all the work. In DA series (and ME toa lesser degree and NWN to a larger degree as NWN is their best combat/character system by far), you have sorts of options in combat.

 

People who try to claim BG1 has deeper gameplay than BIO's newer games really don't know what gameplay actually means - it doesn't mean clicking on an opponent once and watching your character sdlaughter them all as you watch.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Volourn

[Tigranes]

I clicked stuff far, far less in KOTOR than BG1 because everything happened by themselves, because thats the only way that combat system can work with that camera.

 

I clicked and mashed more buttons in Jade Empire, but I was bored half the time because there was no thought involved. At least in BG1 I had to think about what I was doing more.

 

But good job selecting a single means of comparison and then running all the way to China.

[sorophx]

lol

 

"That's right, Neverwinter is shifting from the co-operative multiplayer game that was announced last year and into full-fledged, free-to-play MMO territory. In fact, it's shifting towards the action end of the MMO spectrum."

 

never saw it coming

[Volourn]

"I clicked stuff far, far less in KOTOR than BG1 because everything happened by themselves, because thats the only way that combat system can work with that camera.

 

I clicked and mashed more buttons in Jade Empire, but I was bored half the time because there was no thought involved. At least in BG1 I had to think about what I was doing more.

 

But good job selecting a single means of comparison and then running all the way to China. "

 

Don't get me started on KTOR. No way will you ever see me defend KOTOR's combat.

 

JE's combat was a lot betterb gameplay wise than BG1 since you actually had options in combat. Plus, if you felt trhe need to 'mash buttons' in JE, you wer eobviously playing it wrong. I certainly didn't have to smash it.

 

What was to think about in BG1 in comparison? Everything was obvious in comaprison. BG1 has subpar gameplay comapred to JE.

 

 

p.s. As for the new Neverwinter.. it's almsot likely gonna bomb. It has FAIL written all over it. I won't be buying it at full price and I'm a (former) DnD geek.

[greylord]

" There is a LOT of gameplay, and overall I think the BG series (in fact the entire IE engine set of games) has deeper gameplay overall than most of the recent games by Bioware. "

 

How so? In BG1, all you cna do with warrior types is choose to fight . In DA, you multiple different ways to attack. You also have dialogue skills that can influence questions/npcs 9and, yes, dialogue *is* gameplay).

 

BG1's game play is severely lacking comapred to BIO's newer games. It's gameplay is pretty damn shallow. You do nothing but click attack then watch your character do all the work. In DA series (and ME toa lesser degree and NWN to a larger degree as NWN is their best combat/character system by far), you have sorts of options in combat.

 

People who try to claim BG1 has deeper gameplay than BIO's newer games really don't know what gameplay actually means - it doesn't mean clicking on an opponent once and watching your character sdlaughter them all as you watch.

 

Is that all you did with your characters...NO WONDER you find it so dull. You do know there was more you could do...for example...why simply toss your warriors in the fight, they'll all fall asleep when your mage casts it from the myriads MORE SPELLS OPTIONS they, druids and clerics all had...on factors of 10 probably in relation to other games Bio has put out. Its when you count in the spellcasters and the various tricks you could try or do that you find all sorts of options in BG.

 

But it's not just about combat either. Thieves seemed to have a LOT MORE involvement with the dungeon itself. You constantly sent them out scouting to see what was ahead and constant detect traps, and then there was inventory management...wouldn't want to run out of arrows, or potions, or whatever.

 

If all you did was send people out by clicking on monsters to do battle, I think you probably missed out on a LOT of the gameplay. I can do that in any of the DA (simply click on an enemy and let all the party attack it like you describe how you played BG1) games as well...and actually they'll do better at surviving and progressing then you would in the BG series if you did that.

 

Edit: Also probably already in another forum, but I think this news is adequete for Video Game news...

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/05/us/obit-stev...1&hpt=hp_t1

 

Steve Jobs has died.

Edited October 6, 2011 by greylord

[Calax]

lol

 

"That's right, Neverwinter is shifting from the co-operative multiplayer game that was announced last year and into full-fledged, free-to-play MMO territory. In fact, it's shifting towards the action end of the MMO spectrum."

 

never saw it coming

Will include segments penned by R.A. Salvator

[sorophx]

I won't be buying it at full price

indeed, 'cause it's free

[Gizmo]

...dialogue *is* gameplay).

Agreed.

 

BG1's game play is severely lacking comapred to BIO's newer games. It's gameplay is pretty damn shallow. You do nothing but click attack then watch your character do all the work.

How is that shallow?

 

People who try to claim BG1 has deeper gameplay than BIO's newer games really don't know what gameplay actually means - it doesn't mean clicking on an opponent once and watching your character sdlaughter them all as you watch.

It can and does... And in some games it should.

 

The point of a PC is to build up a character that can handle themselves; One that improves with experience, (and behaves in keeping with their personal ethics, goals, and moral world view). In the case of a fighter, one that fights and need not be micromanaged to extremes. If I send a fighter out to deal with a threat, they should be able to hold their own; I should be able to pick their target and move on to other concerns. (I should not have to babysit an experienced fighter sent to deal with goblins or kobolds; Nor IMO, need utilize special attacks and options... In general (unless they are very unlucky) the skilled fighter should mop the floor with them without supervision.)

 

Part of the RPG gameplay (in addition to dialog) is building up the character so that they can do this; Improving their gear and combat skills in the case of a fighter... Improving their spells and power in the case of a mage. Why should I not be able to click a target for the fighter and let them fight? Why is that shallow in your opinion? I think a good fighter PC should do all the work ~that's what they are skilled at, and why you have them along; and this goes for thieves too... It is the thief's skill at locks & traps that should open the lock and spot the traps... not the player tinkering with minigames ~Doing so is a devaluation of the PC's role IMO.

 

**All that said... I do love the combat in ToEE, for the very thing you mention... Options and lots of them ~But its a different kind of game than BG1 or 2.

 

_____________________________________________________________________________

 

For Random game news...

is looking pretty sweet as a 2011 dungeon crawler in the style of 'Eye of the Beholder'. This will likely be my next RPG purchase. They hope to release it before years end. Edited October 6, 2011 by Gizmo

[Malcador]

Some guy collected a bunch of LucasArts background art - http://neurotech.imgur.com/

[Oner]

Awesome PS3 ad

[Morgoth]

Awesome PS3 ad

Who is Michael?

[Serrano]

He is you. He is me. He is all of us.

[Morgoth]

I seriously thought that Michael dude was that one kid with the broken jaw during the London riots that was first helped up and then deprived (robbed) of his PSP.

[Majek]

Awesome PS3 ad

Who is Michael?

I am.

[Zoraptor]

New King's Bounty game.

 

That makes three games I'm likely to pre-order in early 2012. If I don't end up pre-ordering BatmanAC that would be more than in this entire year.

[HoonDing]

It's a bit of an unfortunate title, considering there is also LOTR: War in the North comign out.

[Tigranes]

Excellent. It looks very samey, but hopefully they will not go half-arsed and make some real improvements to the formula.

[Gizmo]

New King's Bounty game.

 

That makes three games I'm likely to pre-order in early 2012. If I don't end up pre-ordering BatmanAC that would be more than in this entire year.

Looks good; I'm still early in King's Bounty: The Legend. I was playing last night.

 

** Is there any news on any plans to release Disciples 3:Resurrection in the States? (or just in English?)

 

I found this interview from July: http://www.hookedgamers.com/features/2011/...surrection.html

 

**Page Two looks grim. They screw with initiative, and there is no import feature.

Edited October 6, 2011 by Gizmo

[Volourn]

"Thieves seemed to have a LOT MORE involvement with the dungeon itself."

 

L0L Thieves. Didn't need them in BG series. And, scouting/ Scouting is for cowards. Didn't need it either.

 

All that can be done in BIO's other games. BG's gameplay is lacking. Big deal about spells since they exist in other BIO games as well and work as well if not better (NWN).

 

 

"Is that all you did with your characters...NO WONDER you find it so dull."

 

Outside of spellcasting, that's ALL you did. No power attacks, knockdowns, called shots, disarms, ewtc., etc. Just take your fight (or rogue) and fireaway. That's for 99% of combat. Only time I bothered to use magic was the actual challenging (ie boss battles and named adventurers) otherwise and it was just click party and get them to attack including your mage. That's not tatical. It exists in other games too but it's at its worse in KOTOR followed by BG1.

 

 

"I can do that in any of the DA (simply click on an enemy and let all the party attack it like you describe how you played BG1) games as well...and actually they'll do better at surviving and progressing then you would in the BG series if you did that."

 

Nah. You need to use your abilities in DA to surive more than likely outside of the easiest of battles. A lot easier to do so in BG1. Hell, I massacred the entire xfart village by doing exactly that. L0LZ

 

 

 

"indeed, 'cause it's free"

 

You still have to buy the actual game and I dunno if Botyher to do that. Still haven't purchased DS3 though I originally wanted to), F0:LV, or various BIO DLCs.

 

 

"The point of a PC is to build up a character that can handle themselves; One that improves with experience, (and behaves in keeping with their personal ethics, goals, and moral world view). In the case of a fighter, one that fights and need not be micromanaged to extremes. If I send a fighter out to deal with a threat, they should be able to hold their own; I should be able to pick their target and move on to other concerns. (I should not have to babysit an experienced fighter sent to deal with goblins or kobolds; Nor IMO, need utilize special attacks and options... In general (unless they are very unlucky) the skilled fighter should mop the floor with them without supervision.)

 

Part of the RPG gameplay (in addition to dialog) is building up the character so that they can do this; Improving their gear and combat skills in the case of a fighter... Improving their spells and power in the case of a mage. Why should I not be able to click a target for the fighter and let them fight? Why is that shallow in your opinion? I think a good fighter PC should do all the work ~that's what they are skilled at, and why you have them along; and this goes for thieves too... It is the thief's skill at locks & traps that should open the lock and spot the traps... not the player tinkering with minigames ~Doing so is a devaluation of the PC's role IMO."

 

You missed the entire point. You seem to want automation. I want tatics and actual gameplay. Why can't that fighter disarm, knockdown, parry, calleshsot, etc. their enemy? You cna't do that in BG. The fuighter just swings his weapon like a maroon. Like I said, weak gameplay. Plain and simple. It's plain and shallow. The difference is that in DA whicle you can put your NPC fighter on AI (or your PC0, he's gonna a host of talents during combats while the BG fighter is going to do the exaxct same thing over and over and over and over. LACK. OF. GAMEPLAY.

 

 

"Options and lots of them ~But its a different kind of game than BG1 or 2. "

 

No. No, it isn't.

[Tigranes]

Thieves/rogues weren't terribly useful in any Bio game, ever - sadly. I think BG2 still did it best since you could at least have some fun with scouting, traps, assassination, backstabbing, kits, Use All Items HLA, etc. Obviously, in KOTOR and NWN flanking goes out the iwndow because there is zero sense of positioning (how can you when people skate around the terrain half the time and you have no depth perception in the KOTOR camera?). BG1 thieves weren't essential but they at least had a bit more to do.

 

Otherwise, I can't refute Volourn, because I can't refute what he says he experienced in his personal playthroughs. But I don't mind.

[Gorth]

Thieves/rogues weren't terribly useful in any Bio game, ever - sadly.

I seem to remember that a thief was useful in Durlags Tower, but it's been a number of years since I played that one. Might just be my imagination.

[Zoraptor]

New King's Bounty game.

** Is there any news on any plans to release Disciples 3:Resurrection in the States? (or just in English?)

Apparently yes, if you don't mind DD, and releasing today (!). Will presumably pop up on other portals eventually.

 

If you haven't got the other 2 KB games laready they have a sale on them on at Gamersgate as well.

Edited October 7, 2011 by Zoraptor

[Gizmo]

Thieves/rogues weren't terribly useful in any Bio game, ever - sadly. I think BG2 still did it best since you could at least have some fun with scouting, traps, assassination, backstabbing, kits, Use All Items HLA, etc. Obviously, in KOTOR and NWN flanking goes out the iwndow because there is zero sense of positioning (how can you when people skate around the terrain half the time and you have no depth perception in the KOTOR camera?). BG1 thieves weren't essential but they at least had a bit more to do.

I don't understand that. I used my thieves all of the time; For setting traps, finding traps, scouting, and pick pocketing.. Often times for dialog as they usually had better charisma too. (*And how could one get through Durlag's Tower without them?)

 

Even in my earliest play through(s), I would [for example] split Imoen up from the party and investigate the "Friendly Arms Inn" upstairs rooms [solo], while the rest were downstairs at the table with Khalid and Jahiera; Its no good pilfering with an armored Paladin in tow, and one who would sooner turn them in than defend them from a victim.

 

Is it the view that they were not very useful so long as one's party barged into every house as a mob and did as they pleased? Who plays an RPG like that? (Why would they want to?)

**I found Backstabbing to be very useful.

_______________________________________________________

Icewind Dale ticked me off, because in that series... the AI is such that you could have the entire party hidden in an alcove at the edge of the map, and the thief could sneak through a labyrinth of hallways or canyons to the opposite edge, where if spotted even once (and I recall one time it did and the thief drank an invisibility potion on the spot!), be seen once and the entire mob does a conga line across the entire map through any twisting path ~straight to your spell casters wherever they are. It was nuts (and it was cheap IMO; The only time a Black Isle game disappointed me).

Edited October 7, 2011 by Gizmo

[Nepenthe]

Thieves/rogues weren't terribly useful in any Bio game, ever - sadly. I think BG2 still did it best since you could at least have some fun with scouting, traps, assassination, backstabbing, kits, Use All Items HLA, etc. Obviously, in KOTOR and NWN flanking goes out the iwndow because there is zero sense of positioning (how can you when people skate around the terrain half the time and you have no depth perception in the KOTOR camera?). BG1 thieves weren't essential but they at least had a bit more to do.

I don't understand that. I used my thieves all of the time; For setting traps, finding traps, scouting, and pick pocketing.. Often times for dialog as they usually had better charisma too. (*And how could one get through Durlag's Tower without them?)

 

Even in my earliest play through(s), I would [for example] split Imoen up from the party and investigate the "Friendly Arms Inn" upstairs rooms [solo], while the rest were downstairs at the table with Khalid and Jahiera; Its no good pilfering with an armored Paladin in tow, and one who would sooner turn them in than defend them from a victim.

 

Is it the view that they were not very useful so long as one's party barged into every house as a mob and did as they pleased? Who plays an RPG like that? (Why would they want to?)

**I found Backstabbing to be very useful.

Well, in BG1 rogues could do the archery bit quite well, and archery was quite lethal in the game. In BG2, you could get 99 % of what you needed from a thief from either Nalia or Imoen. Not sure it was so much a limitation of Bioware as a result of how the 2nd edition rules broke in the higher levels.