Replayability and PoE - a reality check

[IndiraLightfoot]

Hi, peeps!

 

I'd like to discuss some fundamentals on replayability. What makes you play a game over and over again?

In many ways that's one of the best yardsticks for measuring how good a game really is.

(Disregarding, of course, all those games that are brilliant, but only meant to play once or pehaps twice or thrice, and also disregarding multiplayer aspects, like those fantastic persistent worlds on NWN1 servers.)

I'll narrow it down more, and let this discussion be about CRPGs and PoE specifically, since I intend to identify some of the criteria for making PoE a true replayability beast of a game.

(Otherwise, the replayability in the Civilization series is still unrivalled for me. "Just one more turn...".)

To identify which factors that have made me replay CRPGs, I need not look much further than to Obsidian Entertainment and the late Black Isle Studios. In short, some of their games have been so fantastic and replayable that I merrily became a backer of PoE as soon as I heard about the game, and I know that I share that with thousands of others that jumped on their KS campaign with glee.

 

So, which CRPGs have I replayed the most times?

Which CRPGs do I still replay despite them getting old and have lost some of their graphical lustre?

For me, there are two replayability leviathans:

-BG1+BG2 (vanilla: a dozen times, the whole thing, and early cease and desists, 30 or more)

-the NWN2 series (vanilla: over 20 times, MotB: nearly 10 times, SoZ: twice)

 

It's so bad that I'm not entirely sure how many times I've re-played them. It must be said that several times, I've just played the first few levels of the game and then tried another party, another character.

What is it then that these two game series have that made them tickle my fancy so much that I still get giddy just by firing them up. My heart begins to race when I start the character creation, or when I meet Daeghun by the fireplace, or when I start my journey in Candlekeep. Why is this?

I'm old enough too. This isn't some teenage obsession first love either. I was 30+ for both these games, I had played almost all CRPGs before them, and still I loved them to bits.

 

Here's my attempt to identify those magical ingredients, and try to ascertain if Poe has the potential to become a replayability beast:

 

1) Fantastic character creation and character development systems. No surprise here, really. They were based on my favourite PnP RPG: D&D, so I was sold already from the get-go. I prefer the 3.5 ed over the 2nd ed, though, when it comes to CRPGs. I probably got a lot of extra immersion inherited just for being the classes, races and systems that they were. Still, when I try them today, not playing PnP D&D very much anymore, I must say that the freedom in the 3.5 ed, and the amount of fun you have making unique characters there is unsurpassed. Success in this regard, and you have one heck of replayability already, IMHO.

PoE version: They had to come up with a new system, so it may take a while for me to get used it. It's clearly inspired by D&D.

Room for improvement in PoE: Right now, like others have pointed out on these forums, plenty of the classes feel restrained in themselves. I know that Josh's goal has been to make each an d every class feel distinct, and particularly so in combat. However, I reckon, he's already nailed the distinctiveness, and he would do well to diversify each class already for the beginning. There should be like three mini-setups (mostly to do with combat, but not exclusively) to pick for each class form level one.

For instance, the ranged-weapon ranger, the single weapon ranger, and the dual-wielding ranger.

 

2) Interesting, fun and memorable companions. When thinking about this, I had first underestimated the importance of them, since I have replayed the BGs and the NWN2s several times without them (in BG: pick mp and make an entire party), in NWN2: go solo or SoZ). But. by comparing to many other promising CRPGs, which I didn't replay at all almost, the companions turned out to be super-important!

NWN2 actually has the best companions overall by far, and this has made me replay that series so much more. Stil the ones in BG are pretty great as well, great enough for me to want them around. I always picked new combos of party companions, and I rarely maxed out the party. I wanted to hear their bantering, their comments about the world, and hear more about them and their relation with my player character.

PoE version: We haven't tried any of them, since the beta don't want to spoil anything. Thank god!

Room for improvement in PoE: I can't tell yet. 

 

3) Challenging and varied combat. This goes without saying. Both NWN2 and BG had so much combat, and still I kept coming back for more. Admittedly, plenty of areas were grindy, and some not even that well designed, but as soon as I had my particular party coming along in even the worst designed places in those games, it was still fun enough, good enough. And this all comes down to an engaging combat system, with varying styles of fighting off your enemies, and with a rich bestiary to beat.

PoE version: Josh & Co are clearly aiming for nothing less! This far, it seems their monster compendium will live up to the highest of expectations. However, combat, as it stands, needs a pretty big overhaul before even matching non-replayability-beast CRPGs. The beta forums are crammed with discussions of what's not working, so I needn't go there.

Room for improvement in PoE: To make the combat so much fun that you'll replay the game just because of it's there is no mean feat, especially for a system that don't inherit a lot of good will, like a D&D one would. As you well know, I am a proponent for combat xp, and one of the reasons for that, is that I reckon it would enhance the replayability value of the game, both as an incentive to do combat at all, but also for exploring the game in varied ways, and get rewarded often enough for the time you put in. Still, getting a high replayability value for a CRPG combat needs much more than that. It needs combat that is engaging and intuitive (including mechanics and UI elements). In this regard, we already know it will be RTwP, and as such, it actually have to work as a RT CRPG (it's easy to forget after all those people in the beta pausing heavily in the beta, but it's true.) Right now it's far from ready. The combat skills/abilities have to be much more readily available when you start combat. This is a UI issue, and it would solve a lot. Furthermore, a rhythm of combat is lacking. In NWN2 and BG (the latter being better combat-wise) had that goldilocks pacing in spades: melee attacks, ranged attacks and spells harmonized, and still the possibilities in combat felt complex and almost endless in RT! 

 

4) Great atmosphere, plot rhythm and story branching. Also, in atmosphere, I include ambient sounds and lighting, and music. Like a good music score, I find myself going back to NWN2 and BG just to take a listen again. They are that good (well, there are always parts of the story that aren't perfect. In NWN2, you had moments in Act I and especially 2 that were bland. And personally, I found the wild goose Irenicus chase at the start of BG2 tiresome and annoying.) Both these games also dared to have various tempos going, and have plenty of plot threads running at the same time. Combat got varied with longer story breaks, a few puzzles, etc. This is also like plenty of good music scores. They are varied in composition. Interestingly, though, NWN2 and BG, had quite a bit of linear quest passages, and some railroading at that. It's easy to forget in many debates on these forums that even the best games had those issues, and still they were great. So, why is that? My guess it has once again to do with the story

and a varied plot rhythm.

PoE version: The ambience and music is really promising. The few quests we've been testing in the beta are simple, but they are that way in order to not spoil anything of the finished game. All I can say is that the rhythm in the beta isn't good at all. The small outdoor maps, the encouragement of inn rest spamming (means toing and froing between maps), the rather dull quests, it all ends up like a compressed humming.

Room for improvement In PoE: The real game is hopefully already much better than this. I'd say, however, right away, that everything in each map can't be an encounter, story-wise, exploration-wise or combat-wise. It will most likely ruin the game rhythm. Even worse, with looting and crafting items replacing kill-xp, you'll get this precious story and atmosphere interrupted by Diablo-stuff: collecting crafting items, craft, later, have a stronghold hub, do some money sink stuff there. I didn't like the stronghold in vanilla NWN2 (except for that cute adventuring party that stopped by from time to time), and I didn't like its crafting. It may be the stuff that pushes this game over the edge, so please OE, be careful with this. In plenty of articles, and in the updates, so much have been about the combat. I really hope that there will be heaps and heaps of story added to all this. 

 

That's all I had to say for now on replayability. Which are your suggestions of making sure PoE becomes a game that you can play over and over again in years to come?

Edited September 1, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[PrimeJunta]

I only really have two items on my list: branching story--however it's been achieved--and rich character creation. There are a few games I've replayed that don't have either, but that's because they just hang together so exquisitely that I couldn't point to any particular feature that makes them so.

 

Re P:E, it's too early to tell. As it is, there's IMO more or less as much variety in character creation as there was in BG1 or either IWD, although probably not as much as in BG2. I thought the fact that there were several ways to resolve most of the quests was extremely promising; many of them also felt like they would have repercussions down the road.

 

I thought the overall rhythm of the beta was quite OK actually. I didn't to-and-from from the inn much at all; I kipped there when I was in town anyway, e.g. reporting back from the ogre cave. Nor did I think the wilderness map was all that small; the main issue with that is that run speed is too fast which makes it feel smaller than it is.

[swordofthesith]

Re P:E, it's too early to tell. As it is, there's IMO more or less as much variety in character creation as there was in BG1 or either IWD, although probably not as much as in BG2. I thought the fact that there were several ways to resolve most of the quests was extremely promising; many of them also felt like they would have repercussions down the road.

 

 

Big up to Josh & Co. for this. Myself, I am pretty pumped to tackle the main storyline. I have the feeling they have whipped up something special for us IE enthusiasts. 

[Odd Hermit]

I feel like the classes desperately need better/more talent choices - and higher talents to level ratio - for build tinkering to be part of replay value. Without more substantial, gameplay changing talents there's just a roughly optimal build for most classes at the moment.

 

Attributes also need some work. Perception and Resolve are obvious duds for most classes, and Intelligence is for some as well since not all classes have enough AoE or duration based abilities to benefit from it. So it's all feeling pretty cookie cutter at the moment.

[Sarex]

In my experience I have found that story is the weakest reason for replaying a game. It's never that different when you chose to replay it.

 

The best reason to replay is gameplay, ie. trying out different classes and trying to find the best way to play a game. Sadly it seems that these things have been deemed degenerate...

[IndiraLightfoot]

I feel like the classes desperately need better/more talent choices - and higher talents to level ratio - for build tinkering to be part of replay value. Without more substantial, gameplay changing talents there's just a roughly optimal build for most classes at the moment.

 

Attributes also need some work. Perception and Resolve are obvious duds for most classes, and Intelligence is for some as well since not all classes have enough AoE or duration based abilities to benefit from it. So it's all feeling pretty cookie cutter at the moment.

Agreed. Luckily, I'm confident they are fixing stuff like this as we speak. A major gripe with combat right now is something Mutonizer wrote about a couple of days ago: 

Most skills are based on a percentage chance to work as intended, whether blocking, an AoE or extra damage and what not. The resulting combat gets a bit messy and hard to really be strategic about, since micro RNG stuff decides whether stuff happens or not, and then it only happens at the effect of a certain percentage, instead of just let RNG affects variations of damage, like in die rolls, and have effects go full on or not work at all.

 

Josh & Co want to avoid hard counters, IIRC, like those wizard battles in the BG series, but still I fell that combat replayability would be enchanced if all the skills used had but a few clearcut outcomes:

-full effect/AoE/damage (die roll)

-half effect/AoE/damage (die roll)

-no effect/AoE/damage (die roll)

This would be easier to strategize as a player when combat unfolds. I am very curious how combat feels in the next patch. If it works decently, I will jump right in and try how it all feels with regard to issues like this.

[IndiraLightfoot]

In my experience I have found that story is the weakest reason for replaying a game. It's never that different when you chose to replay it.

 

 

Sure, the number of stories you get out of these kinds of games soon get a bit old, but personally, if I replay it for the Xth time, and I still tolerate the story archs, plot branches, and so on, it really helps getting the combat challenges and a fantastic FF-book all rolled into one. The absolutely best stories, for instance, the Lord of the Rings, have an uncanny ability to survive multiplpe read-throughs, and even reward you with more stuff to contemplate for every reading. But, yes, the story alone, no matter of how good, would not be enough. These are games we're talking about there, so great gameplay is pivotal for replayability.  

Edited September 1, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[mutonizer]

I'll just add a quick personal opinion on this:

 

Not so much character creation but character development. That was (and still is as I play IE games around once or twice a year usually) a huge factor in my playing again. The sheer amount of ways to develop parties is staggering.

 

Mods. Without them, I'd have stopped playing a long time ago but with them, especially the ones really focusing on AI (like SCS, etc) and the like, the replayability of the story itself wouldn't have carried me this far. With them however, it makes combat (which, let's be fair, is a HUGE part of the game) insanely interesting and challenging, therefore making "story" aspects feel like a breath of fresh air where you finally go "phew, that's a welcome sight!" instead of just skipping through them. At least that how it affects me.

As an added note, this is why I really hope there will be a mod very early after release to add combat experience. I really want that choice between: Risk (of fighting versus trying to avoid a fight) and Reward (XP vs not expending resources)

 

Companions? As long as they are NEVER forced upon you, I'm 100% fine with them and yes, they can be quite interesting, really helping in shaping up your character's story. NWN2 drove me nuts however and I cannot count the amount of times I started a new game, all high up on anticipation, only to immediately close the game and uninstall it soon as I was reminded how stupid and annoying that dwarf was an hour in and how he did NOT fit with my character concept whatsoever....

 

Story? Not really. I mean sure, it WAS there, and still is, but the surprise effect is gone after the first time. That said, it doesn't prevent you from enjoying it and it's still great, but come on, maybe one replay, maybe two if you're really pushing it, but after that, you pretty seen everything the game can offer on that front. I mean it's a crucial aspect but to me, not really for replayability (long term that is, as in, 20+ play-through of BG1&2/IWD/etc and still playing them years later)

Edited September 1, 2014 by mutonizer

[PrimeJunta]

The best reason to replay is gameplay, ie. trying out different classes and trying to find the best way to play a game. Sadly it seems that these things have been deemed degenerate...

Trying out different classes and trying to find the best way to play a game is now degenerate. Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Mutonizer, good points: Especially about the importance of AI and AI mods. OE would do well to really make the AI shine. And yeah, one annoying companion that's forced on you can very well drive anybody crazy. I detested Zhjaeve, for instance, and her "Know that...". Thankfully, in Poe this will never be the case.

 

A good story, then, cannot really make or break replayability, but it can give a replay a golden wrapping and a very nice atmosphere. We're getting somewhere here.

 

EDIT: And I like I hinted at above, this thread is about genuine replayability, as opposed to just one more replay. It's about the stuff that crazy people like me do on rare occasions - playing a single player game dozens of times.

Edited September 1, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Wintersong]

Varied classes is important. Even if I won't bother with wizards and such. I expect combat to be fun because if there is going to be much combat... well, it better be fun! Story is important too. Specially if there is some branching (that it may lead to same result or not, isn't that important as the branching itself). And as combat, it better be fun/good. If I have to read walls of texts, I expect them to not make my eyes bleed.  I love nice companions. I like them with their own opinions, stories... they are part of my party so I want to care about them as much as I care about mine.

 

The very beginning of the game will determine how much I bother with replaying. May sound weird but that's how I roll.

 

No matter how awesome combats, companions and classes are, if I find myself hacking to the gate of fun because at the beginning there is only my railplot... my replays will be quite limited. Mostly because to be really able to try new stuff, you have to beat some mandatory content that may actually take a while. Mandatory content is not bad per se as long as it part of an offer ("Must do A, B and C but I can tackle them in any order...").

 

Baldur's Gate has one of the best starts. You can do lots of stuff there that won't take that much time anyway or you can skip all of it and start "the real" thing (after a cutscene). From there, you are free to go many places and tackle stuff as you decide. It's limited by the plot and such, but at least you have options about it. Want to spend time hunting bears with Imoen? Want to explore some maps before doing any main plot quests? Want to rush to Jaheria and Khalid? Want to rush to the mines? Want a pair of crazy evil dudes before anything else?

 

Baldur's Gate 2 is a sequel but... uff. Not a short dungeon with more than a few encounters just before you can start having choices. But as I said, it's a sequel.

 

Neverwinter Nights 2 is a game that I love but makes me rolls my eyes about its beginning. We have a skippable tutorial, which is ok (I tend to play it to max the uses of my background/race). But then the real thing starts and... go defend the village. Ok, so far so good. Now go to the swamp and do stuff. Er... ok. Now to go to the road (Inn). There I go... find new NPC, more action. Now go to the outpost. I go, have some more NPC action before I reach it and then, finally, things start to give me some choices. Still limited but at least I start getting some. Later at the city things blossom and it's ok. But before that, I have a few hours (YMMV) of railplot. Yes, I like combat, I like to develop my initial relationships with the NPCs,... but I look at Baldur's Gate beginning and I sigh. And even if Khelgar won't say anything about my character being a drow AND a monk, he is still awesome (and a kick ass monk).

 

Dragon Age Origins. I still prefer BG's beginning but at least in DAO, each race plays different at the beginning. And even same race can allow a different experience in your intro even if the ending result is still the same. Then there is a railplot before you can do your own stuff but at the very least, the intros are worth the time and don't hurt replayability to me. The Origins part is one of the best things I have played in any cRPG.

[Lioness]

What I planned was at the first playthrough stick with an Adventurer party (custom made characters, IWD style) and leave Companions, including interactions and their side quests (?), to a second playthrough. _{Assuming of course, the game gets to a stage where I'd want to play through it at all}

[Sarex]

Trying out different classes and trying to find the best way to play a game is now degenerate. Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

For there to be a best way to play a game, there needs to be a bad way to play a game. You remember what Josh said about there being a bad way to play a game, yeah there won't be one.

[Silent Winter]

I've replayed BG1+2 a bunch of times since discovering them about 4 years ago.

NWN2 OCx2, MOTBx2 (so far - not had it that long)

I've replayed Final Fantasy 7,9+10 a couple of times each - mostly nostalgia there.

 

What makes BG(1+2) so replayable for me has already been mentioned but I'll reiterate:

Playing different characters - both RP and Mechanically.  Character creation is nice but it's the character development I like - learning how to use that class's potential.

Companions+their quests - having different groups along (not just different characters but different combinations) makes it a new adventure.  The banters (and adding BG1 NPC mod makes this true for BG1 too) are great.

Story - must be good enough not to get boring on a repeat, but it's not so based on a super-twist that it loses something on a replay (there are minor twists here and there).

Mods - BG has some great mods (among some rubbish ones) including NPCs, minor quests, alternate paths for existing quests.

 

What I'm looking for in PoE:
Distinctive classes to make replays interesting.

Great well-written companions that interact with each other as well as the PC.

Good story that ties the whole questing thing together.  ([The Dude]: It really tied the room together[/The Dude])

Modability as far as adding quests, dialogue and companions is concerned.

[Silent Winter]

 

Trying out different classes and trying to find the best way to play a game is now degenerate. Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

For there to be a best way to play a game, there needs to be a bad way to play a game. You remember what Josh said about there being a bad way to play a game, yeah there won't be one.

 

Well, 'Best' is not the opposite of 'Bad' - there can be degrees of 'good' resulting in a 'best' out of a good bunch.

Optimum tactics for this particular party may not be the same as optimum tactics for that one, etc.

 

So if I play a party of druids like they're a party of rogues, I may not do too well.

[TheisEjsing]

I find that what makes me come back to replay IE games, mostly BG games, is the companions. Combat isn't hard when you have played the games enough, but all the companion setups and their comments on missions and each other. I enjoy hearing fun lines I had forgotten or brand new ones with party setups I haven't played before.

[mutonizer]

For there to be a best way to play a game, there needs to be a bad way to play a game. You remember what Josh said about there being a bad way to play a game, yeah there won't be one.

Which, to me, pretty much leaves everyone with, at best a "meh" way to play which serves only to make people who don't really care feel good about themselves, and people who care, feel frustrated about the whole thing.

Personal preference of course and a lot of people just don't care so I understand why you'd want, to sell more products, make things easier for people who don't really care much. It's just a bit annoying when you actually do care

Edited September 1, 2014 by mutonizer

[Sarex]

Well, 'Best' is not the opposite of 'Bad' - there can be degrees of 'good' resulting in a 'best' out of a good bunch.

Optimum tactics for this particular party may not be the same as optimum tactics for that one, etc.

 

So if I play a party of druids like they're a party of rogues, I may not do too well.

 

I am reiterating on what Josh said. As for the degrees of 'good', the problem with that is that if you lack the bad, the best is just not that noticeable.

[Silent Winter]

 

Well, 'Best' is not the opposite of 'Bad' - there can be degrees of 'good' resulting in a 'best' out of a good bunch.

Optimum tactics for this particular party may not be the same as optimum tactics for that one, etc.

 

So if I play a party of druids like they're a party of rogues, I may not do too well.

 

I am reiterating on what Josh said. As for the degrees of 'good', the problem with that is that if you lack the bad, the best is just not that noticeable.

 

fair enough - I guess it depends on whether we're getting 'win button' or 'you can win with any characters but it'll be really tough with some setups'

[PrimeJunta]

For there to be a best way to play a game, there needs to be a bad way to play a game. You remember what Josh said about there being a bad way to play a game, yeah there won't be one.

Hu?

 

Have you actually tried playing the beta badly, e.g. select all and zerg rush? You will be killed dead.

 

Also, that's not what Josh said. Josh said his goal is "no bad builds." That is not the same thing at all as "no bad way to play."

 

Ideally, we'll be able to make all kinds of creative builds and then experiment with them to find out what's the best way to play them. (Ideally. This is currently not the case, except to a certain extent with some particular classes. We will see how it shapes up as more talents are added.)

[Azrael Ultima]

For there to be a best way to play a game, there needs to be a bad way to play a game. You remember what Josh said about there being a bad way to play a game, yeah there won't be one.

There needs to be a worst way. But that doesn't necessarily mean "bad". Just that it isn't as good as the best.

The worst saint is still a saint.

[Utukka]

 

 

Well, 'Best' is not the opposite of 'Bad' - there can be degrees of 'good' resulting in a 'best' out of a good bunch.

Optimum tactics for this particular party may not be the same as optimum tactics for that one, etc.

 

So if I play a party of druids like they're a party of rogues, I may not do too well.

 

I am reiterating on what Josh said. As for the degrees of 'good', the problem with that is that if you lack the bad, the best is just not that noticeable.

 

fair enough - I guess it depends on whether we're getting 'win button' or 'you can win with any characters but it'll be really tough with some setups'

 

I'll be extremely suprised if any build is 100% viable(can beat the game) when I'm running the game on hard + path of the damned + expert mode + trial of iron. They are aiming for the difficulty level of old IE games, again, I will be extremely suprised if they can nail that level of difficulty while still having EVERYTHING be viable.Try playing BG2 on insane with a "weak" nonmetagamed party and come report back on the body count. Even in BG2...a "bad" character could still be quite effective if used properly.

 

I used to play countless #'s of playthroughs with randomly generated parties on insane + difficulty mods/fixpack etc(made the game even harder). Everything about them was random, name, attributes, class...all of it. The body count was extremely high but you'd be suprised on how many still beat the game/made it quite far.

 

I fully expect that PoE will be along the same lines regardless of what philosphy they might be preaching. Insane difficulty + "no bad builds" just doesn't seem attainable in my mind. I can't wait to run fully random parties through in PoE and watch the chaos unfold. The level of randomization I'll be able to employ in PoE is going to be staggering.

 

Also...there could easily be a huge gap between builds...who knows what unforseen consequences of itemization, talents, monster diversity, and class abilities will bring into play.

Edited September 1, 2014 by Utukka

[Gromnir]

indira's recollections do not match Gromnir's. in more than one place we has noted how little variation bg combat offered. bg2 were much different. but once you could summon skeletons and lob fireballs, the challenge o' bg were effective dead.

 

and interesting companions? bg? really? coran got more development than most. he even had something o' a bg2 board fan club led by a poster known as lanfear. bg coran were quite effective as a ranged combatant, but other than encouraging us to kill wyverns, he had one significant dialogue encounter that revealed that he were an unrepentant, deadbeat dad. coran were one o' the better developed companions. really, am not making this stuff up to make bg sound worse than it actual were.

 

bg were the right game at the right time for many folks, but it is difficult to be effusive with praise for bg if one is honest about it. 

 

we played many cpgs with disturbing frequency. bg were not one o' those games. d&d fans hadn't had a decent game in years-- were more than a few "are d&d crpgs dead" articles written in print magazines and internet opines. we suspect that there were more than a few d&d fans that played diablo but were wanting something a bit more... substantial. bg gave folks what they wanted at the right time, but am not gonna hold up bg as some kinda benchmark for crpg goodness. 

 

*shudder*

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Guilhem]

In my view, having an atmospheric and memorable experience - in the case of games, let's characterize it as well-written narratives in an immersive setting with engaging characterization - is far more important than replayability.

 

I have played Torment twice and Knights of the Old Republic II only once. Yet in my, admittedly, sentimental estimation these two games are the high point of my computer-based gaming experience.

 

I have spent countless hours playing Baldur's Gate II and even more time playing Neverwinter Nights 2. In terms of replayability - value for money, if you will - they would have to rank at the top among the cRPGs I have played. Yet neither of them has left as deep and as lasting an impression upon me as Torment or KOTOR II.

[Karkarov]

Also, that's not what Josh said. Josh said his goal is "no bad builds." That is not the same thing at all as "no bad way to play."

Amen.  I have only wiped in the beta from the cheese ball encounters with the bugged guys that can one shot you when I either A: didn't know they were there yet.  Or B: my lock down tactics just had bad luck and RNG decided they all grazed or got resisted.  That said it is because I understand the underlying system of the game and I know how to play to my parties strengths.  If I were just zerging it all I would have wiped more times than I care to imagine.

 

As for Indira's OP I agree with your core reasons for replaying though not how they apply to the IE games.  In all honesty I find the combat highly repetitive in all of them, nor do you ever "have" to use different tactics.  The same basic strategy used to kill 5 goblins is just as effective against 5 plate armor wearing mercenaries.  The same plan to kill one mage is normally just as effective against every other mage.  Additionally, call me old fashioned, but when I read "character development" I don't think "leveling up, stat choices, talent points, skill selection, blah blah" I think about how their story and personality develop over the course of the game.  Something the IE games were very hit or miss on.  Some NPC's were great like how Jaheira developed from BG1 through the end of BG2: ToB.  Others made me want to punch someone in the face.... like Aerie.

 

For me there are three reasons I primarily replay a game.

 

1: I really liked the story/plot and want to experience it again, irregardless of it's linearity or lack thereof.

2: The plot had branching elements and it is impossible to see it all in one go and I want to see what else was there.

3: Tons of room of character build options and I just want to experiment with something else.

4: The gameplay, it is simply fun to play the game regardless of it's story or character/build elements.

 

To me most of the IE games only really hit on 1 maybe 2 of those points depending on the game.  So I can't say I have replayed them tons, cause I haven't, maybe 3 times for BG1-2 and 2-3 times for NWN2, the rest I only beat once and never touched again.  Personally I am hoping Eternity can top that by having a story that really is not linear and has real branching options to it (NWN2 is the only IE game I feel like managed that on any level), has more fun gameplay than the IE games did, and a stronger story.