Delterius Posted September 17, 2012 Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) Yeah, the encounters could've been better, especially in the later parts of the game. But like you've said, the system was really amazing. If done properly, it'd be a real treat. I wouldn't dare dispute that. But I think that at this stage of the campaign, changing the scope would be unwise. Using both systems would be even worse. Edited September 17, 2012 by Delterius
Phinelete Posted September 17, 2012 Posted September 17, 2012 (edited) I had no idea anyone believed Temple of Elemental Evil to be such a paragon of combat. From my (admittedly mostly forgotten) memories, it was OK... but compared to something like Baldur's Gate 2? It's not even close -- BG2 was way better. I could have lived with turn-based, but I prefer real time with pause, especially if they implement the "Pause on Condition X" mechanic from the Infinity Engine. Melee combat is much more satisfying - weapon reach, grapple, coup de grace, attacks of opportunity, etc. etc. And that's only a start. He might think BG2 was better, because BG2 had better enounter design - each fight was different because of the variety of enemies thrown at you. ToEE wasn't as good in that regard, but its combat system was SO superior it's not even a contest. The combat system in BG2 was restrictive, offered zero depth and was boring as hell. Edited September 17, 2012 by Phinelete
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now