Spill your blasphemous opinions on CRPGs here

[Bryy]

Which is why The Witcher is so refreshing from anglo-saxon based "high fantasy" with chivalrous paladins singing song for their maidens. To put it in a more blasphemous way:

 

- Tolkienesque, D&D-fantasy is the Fantasy that we wish to be

- The Witcher is the Fantasy of what we truly are

It's refreshing because it's bad instead of pretentious?

[Meshugger]

Only if you fail to see beauty in yourself.

[Barothmuk]

That entire series is as immature about sex as every other game is. I hate all the justifications people try to give for it. The absolute worst ones are "but they are only being true to the books" (so what?) and "but women were treated like cattle back then" (but it's a fictional world).

The implication here being games must whitewash the ****tiness of feudal societies?

 

The Triss sex scene in TW2 was so bad. It played out exactly like a wet dream of a high schooler.

And yet still more realistic then the sex scenes that are labelled "good" e.g. Mass Effect.

[Bryy]

 

That entire series is as immature about sex as every other game is. I hate all the justifications people try to give for it. The absolute worst ones are "but they are only being true to the books" (so what?) and "but women were treated like cattle back then" (but it's a fictional world).

The implication here being games must whitewash the ****tiness of feudal societies?

 

The Triss sex scene in TW2 was so bad. It played out exactly like a wet dream of a high schooler.

And yet still more realistic then the sex scenes that are labelled "good" e.g. Mass Effect.

 

1) No, the point is that "but that's what happened" is not a very good argument if what you are talking about is something that doesn't exist. I don't care how similar it is to a real world era.

2) So?

 

If you want to discuss sex in video games, that's fine. But if you transparently just want to pick a fight with someone that said something negative about a game you like, then I'm afraid that's not going to happen.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Bryy

[Barothmuk]

1) No, the point is that "but that's what happened" is not a very good argument if what you are talking about is something that doesn't exist. I don't care how similar it is to a real world era.

But for someone to make that point they'd have to be arguing against the claim you have made, i.e. that depictions of feudalism that show negative social attitudes (e.g. sexism) are in of themselves bad.

 

2) So?

People that usually complain about the sex scenes in the Witcher 2 usually hold the opinion that they should be handled more "tastefully" like ME1 supposedly did. I personally don't have too strong an invested interest in the existence of sex-scenes however I do loathe the puritan attitude that demands depictions of sex either be forbidden or completely sanitised.

 

If you want to discuss sex in video games, that's fine. But if you transparently just want to pick a fight with someone that said something negative about a game you like, then I'm afraid that's not going to happen.

I haven't played nearly enough of the Witcher series to call myself a fan of it (Only own the second one and even then have never had the time to properly finish a playthrough) I was merely pointing out what seemed to be an absurd argument. Edited March 31, 2014 by Barothmuk

[Bryy]

Yeah, that must be why I didn't like it. I must be a prude or religious. It can't possibly be due to my own tastes.

[Barothmuk]

You completely avoided the point.

 

For reference, I agree that the Witcher's depictions of sex are immature more often than not, I just find the arguments you provided to be quite poor.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Barothmuk

[Bryy]

The point of what? You said you don't disagree with me, but that my arguments are poor. So we both agree on the subject, albeit in different ways.

 

You then bring up that I clearly have a puritan attitude about sex, which is both not true and as lame a response as you are accusing me of giving. 

 

I'm sick to death of "puritan views" or "American views on sex" being used as a cop-out in discussion.

[Barothmuk]

The point of what?

My responses.

 

I was far more interested in gauging the reasoning behind why you believe depicting feudal societies as sexist is somehow negative.

 

You then bring up that I clearly have a puritan attitude about sex, which is both not true and as lame a response as you are accusing me of giving.

It may have been implied but I hadn't accused you of it yet.

[Bryy]

 

I was far more interested in gauging the reasoning behind why you believe depicting feudal societies as sexist is somehow negative.

I never said this?

 

What I said was that I don't understand why people think comparing real life to a fantasy world as justification is fine and dandy. 

[Barothmuk]

I never said this?

It was certainly inferred.

 

You pointed to arguments that "feudal societies were sexist" as an example of a poor argument to justify why the Witcher setting is sexist. It seems natural to assume that you must find depictions of feudal societies as sexist is a negative thing for games to do.

 

What I said was that I don't understand why people think comparing real life to a fantasy world as justification is fine and dandy.

Just because it's a fantasy setting that doesn't mean the creator can't allow the setting to conform to the material realities of the real world.

 

Of course, if one wishes to avoid settings that attempt to tackle depicting feudalistic societies accurately one could always turn to the various 'Renaissance Fair' style fantasy settings.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Barothmuk

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Carsomyr? The weapon that gave 50% magic resistance on equip and dispelled magic without save/resist on every hit? Carsomyr +5? +6 if you upgrade it? ...

Well it is a blasphemous opinion certainly.

 

My problems with Carsomyr is that it (1)only gets a damage bonus against Chaotic Evil opponents when it should be getting it against all Evil foes, (2)isn't very utilitarian as most of it's abilities focus on spellcasters, and (3)like all two-handers, it is beat out by dual-wielding when not using GWW.

[213374U]

^ On the other hand, it's a Ch.2 reward. The dispel magic clicky is useful in a pinch, too. Problem is NPC alignment is a bit all over the place in BG2.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

^ On the other hand, it's a Ch.2 reward. The dispel magic clicky is useful in a pinch, too. Problem is NPC alignment is a bit all over the place in BG2.

I'll agree with that, and will argue that it is the best anti-mage weapon in the game, but I still find that it could be easily improved.

 

As to NPCs, I think the "alignment corrections" component of the BG2fixpack does solve most of those issues, but I think having Carsomyr(and Purifier) gain the extra damage against all Evil targets would be optimal.

[Tagaziel]

1) No, the point is that "but that's what happened" is not a very good argument if what you are talking about is something that doesn't exist. I don't care how similar it is to a real world era.

The setting of the Witcher is based on the European feudal period, mixed with some elements of the Renaissance and it includes a lot of social elements from the period. I'm not sure why you claim the developers should avoid portraying unsavoury elements of the setting. The lower the social class, the worse the women's position tends to be, it's a sad truth. If it offends your sensibilities, well, deal with it.

 

2) So?

I find it funny that people get bent out of shape over a single sex scene that's actually very true to the character and the setting. You'd think Witcher 2 was the sequel to a world-class dating and sex simulator.

[Bryy]

I'm not sure why you claim the developers should avoid portraying unsavoury elements of the setting. 

Once again, I never said that. 

[Sarex]

I'll agree with that, and will argue that it is the best anti-mage weapon in the game, but I still find that it could be easily improved.

 

As to NPCs, I think the "alignment corrections" component of the BG2fixpack does solve most of those issues, but I think having Carsomyr(and Purifier) gain the extra damage against all Evil targets would be optimal.

 

In my latest play through I improved the hell out of it. Once I edited out the mistake of it being 1d10 instead of 1d12 I went on setting the magic resist to be +50%, instead of set to 50%. With the rest of the item my paladin was 100% magic immune, what is funny though is that sometimes the spells would still penetrate.

 

I really hope PoE will have a holy avenger type of sword for the Paladins.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Sarex

[Bartimaeus]

Some spells are not subject to magic resistance, just as some are not subject to saves, (though very few are both).

 

I always thought vanilla Carsomyr was ridiculously powerful. Maybe not for pure melee combat, but that's hardly ever challenging anyways when you've got your own spellcaster or two.

I like to play with Item Revisions, which nerfs it rather nicely against spellcasters, but increases its regular combat capabilities:

 

Special Abilities (once per day):
Dispel Magic: dispels all magical effects upon any creature in a 30 feet radius

Equipped Abilities:
Magic Resistance: +20% bonus

Combat Abilities:
Dispelling: removes all magical effects upon the target (save vs. spell neg.)
Holy: deals 3 additional points of damage against all of evil alignment

THAC0: +4 bonus
Damage: 2D6 + 4
Damage type: slashing
Weight: 10
Speed Factor: 6
Proficiency Type: Two-Handed Sword
Type: 2-handed
Requires: 16 Strength
Usable By:
Paladins

Edited March 31, 2014 by Bartimaeus

[Sarex]

Some spells are not subject to magic resistance, just as some are not subject to saves, (though very few are both).

 

I always thought vanilla Carsomyr was ridiculously powerful. Maybe not for pure melee combat, but that's hardly ever challenging anyways when you've got your own spellcaster or two.

 

Is dominate and confusion not subject to spell resistance? I thought magic resistance mean % to negate a spell being cast on you.

[Orogun01]

I hate that RPG nerds always bring up a complex series of numbers and stats whenever they are arguing. It's called the "blasphemous opinions" thread not the "blasphemous stats and mechanics" thead

[Bartimaeus]

 

Some spells are not subject to magic resistance, just as some are not subject to saves, (though very few are both).

 

I always thought vanilla Carsomyr was ridiculously powerful. Maybe not for pure melee combat, but that's hardly ever challenging anyways when you've got your own spellcaster or two.

 

Is dominate and confusion not subject to spell resistance? I thought magic resistance mean % to negate a spell being cast on you.

 

 

Second sentence first: that's correct, but some spells (or, to be technical, their effects) simply are not subject to it. As in, they will go right through regardless of what your magic resistance is. I couldn't say absolutely for dominate/charm, but I would guess that the standard mage/cleric variants are very likely subject to it. Any innate variants I would be less sure about.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Bartimaeus

[Sarex]

Second sentence first: that's correct, but some spells (or, to be technical, their effects) simply are not subject to it. As in, they will go right through regardless of what your magic resistance is. I couldn't say absolutely for dominate/charm, but I would guess that the standard mage/cleric variants are very likely subject to it. Any innate variants I would be less sure about.

 

I was ok with the mind-flayers, their attacks were psionic and I think that the spell counted amongst attacks too, but some high level casters still managed to dominate/confuse my paladin. If only I remembered which ones those were it would be easier to figure it out.

 

edit: now that I think about it they probably cast lower magic resist and I just didn't catch it.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Sarex

[Bartimaeus]

And Lower Resistance, as you might expect, is subject to neither spell resistance or saves. Um...probably. Honestly, I can't differentiate between Spell Revisions spells and what they used to be in vanilla anymore.

[TMZuk]

1. When I can see my protagonist constantly i'm far more connected to him, thus isometric and third person games are far more immersive to me than first person.

2. Games should never cater to the individuals who do not finish them, they should tell the story they wish without any constraints.

3. Accessibility is destroying the genre, constant pandering to the lowest common denominator destroys the game for anybody wishing for a challenge or cohesion.

4. On the whole games have devolved over the last twenty years, and the masses have cheered on this slide into mediocrity and championed degenerate design decisions, feature stripping and lack of content.

5. There can never be enough choice and consequence, my every playthrough should be different and unique. For instance Bioware's three different answers leading to the same result is truly degenerate design, easily discerned and making a mockery of interactivity, which should be the greatest strength of this medium.

6. The tyranny of loot collection is destroying good games, more need to have a viable and balanced economy.

7. Turn based combat is far more thrilling and involved than real time, the playing out of tactics, the wait for the results, the cruel fall of the dice and your enemies response, exhilirating.

8. Blank slate characters remain blank if the game does not acknowledge their actions, you may invent histories, habits and personalities for them but if the game does not acknowledge that then you may as well quit the game and use your imagination.

9. There is far too much combat in almost every game ever made, the thousands you kill on your quest do not empower the protagonist, they simply rob the foe of any potency and make them fodder. Ramp up the difficulty and make combat a gruelling deadly puzzle to be avoided at all costs, rather than a time sink and artificial barrier.

10. Apathy is death.

I agree with all of the above and just HAD to add one more entry!

 

11. Skyrim is the most overrated excuse for a cRPG made in the last three decades. (Seriously, a game that takes place in Skyrim and doesn't even recognize that my character is a Nord, deserves to die!)

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Skyrim is the most overrated excuse for a cRPG made in the last three decades. (Seriously, a game that takes place in Skyrim and doesn't even recognize that my character is a Nord, deserves to die!)

 

 

I've found it quite enjoyable. But it's definitely not an RPG.