|
On June 09 2011 04:41 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 03:54 True_Spike wrote:On June 09 2011 02:36 ChinaWhite wrote:
^^ This reminds me of the other main thing that really really really gets on my nerves with newer releases - the lack of mutally exclusive quests / factions.
If the Dark brotherhood hates the thieves guild, I should not be able to to become grandmaster of both (unless i do something clever to manipulate the situation).
The trend seems to be 'players must be able to access all content in one play through'
Same applies to being able to max all skills, it just continues to remove interesting choices.
Morrowind got it right, New Vegas to some extent too. The Witcher 2 did it better than any game I've ever seen. An entire Act (meaning setting, dialogs, characters, quests, overarching plot) differs upon your choice and every little action seems to affect the surrounding world. Most reviewers failed to mention that and criticised the game for being "short" (that is ~30 hours long for a plot-driven game). It seems it doesn't matter how the content works, as long as there's lots of it people seem to be happy - which I find surprising. People heavily criticised DAO for 'only' being a 50-60 hour long game, compared to BG2 being an (apparently) easy 120 hour game. They seemed to expect to get the same amount of content in a fully-voice-acted 3D game as you'd get in an almost dead-silent 2D game, which is just laughable at best. There are also a lot of people that just don't want replayability. They want to see everything in one playthrough, and they want to spend 100+ hours on it. I think they're idiots, and developers trying to cater to them are ruining the overall quality of games, but sadly, they seem to have the loudest voice.
Indeed. One thing that gives me a little bit of hope is how heavily DA2 has been slammed for being dumbed down / streamlined (same thing), as well as the generally lack of quality. I just dont know why they had to do it when DAO did so well......
|
Didn't like Oblivion, only thing I enjoyed in that game was walking through the forest.
|
BG2 is the greatest RPG ever though
|
On June 09 2011 04:51 Original exxo wrote:
BG2 is the greatest RPG ever though
Planescape Torment? I guess it depends on Taste, BG2 is one of my favourites also
|
I never found BG1 or BG2 to be very fun gameplay wise. Games like NWN and DAO with much less clunky controls and stuff were simply more enjoyable. It even made Planescape extremely hard for me to enjoy, though I did beat it.
The Witcher 2 and Morrowind/oblivion are more interesting to me nowadays as opposed to DA:O where everyone just makes a circle around an enemy and attacks over and over and over with the occasional spell.
|
On June 09 2011 04:41 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 03:54 True_Spike wrote:On June 09 2011 02:36 ChinaWhite wrote:
^^ This reminds me of the other main thing that really really really gets on my nerves with newer releases - the lack of mutally exclusive quests / factions.
If the Dark brotherhood hates the thieves guild, I should not be able to to become grandmaster of both (unless i do something clever to manipulate the situation).
The trend seems to be 'players must be able to access all content in one play through'
Same applies to being able to max all skills, it just continues to remove interesting choices.
Morrowind got it right, New Vegas to some extent too. The Witcher 2 did it better than any game I've ever seen. An entire Act (meaning setting, dialogs, characters, quests, overarching plot) differs upon your choice and every little action seems to affect the surrounding world. Most reviewers failed to mention that and criticised the game for being "short" (that is ~30 hours long for a plot-driven game). It seems it doesn't matter how the content works, as long as there's lots of it people seem to be happy - which I find surprising. People heavily criticised DAO for 'only' being a 50-60 hour long game, compared to BG2 being an (apparently) easy 120 hour game. They seemed to expect to get the same amount of content in a fully-voice-acted 3D game as you'd get in an almost dead-silent 2D game, which is just laughable at best. There are also a lot of people that just don't want replayability. They want to see everything in one playthrough, and they want to spend 100+ hours on it. I think they're idiots, and developers trying to cater to them are ruining the overall quality of games, but sadly, they seem to have the loudest voice.
This is to be honest quite off topic but I feel because it is about RPGs that are quite similar to TES then it warrants a small amount of discussion.
+ Show Spoiler +I didn't find DAO a 50-60 hour game. I did a lot of the stuff (70% around) and scraped 30 hours. There were fuck all places to visit, and half of the places you could visit were fairly shallow and just meandering collections of similar looking rooms. When I realised I was near the end of the game and I just had to traipse around the city I was like WTF??? Seriously you need to play BG2 and realise that every hour of that game is a completely awesome, brand new experience. You go to crazy places, like an arena for captured prisoners run by mind flayers, or a whole city underwater, the massive underdark, the gnome illusionist's tent, the forest of werewolves and druids, the several different temples and the underground spider lair. The several dragon lairs. The castle with a room of doom containing multiple adamantium golems. You simply can't compare the breadth of imagination and wonder of a game like BG2 with DAO, it was horribly stunted and uninspiring. In DAO, I have horrific memories of going EXTREMELY slowly around a retarded dwarf fortress to do RETARDED errands.
Also the dimensions of the game were paper thin. It didn't take any effort at all to slaughter that game. There were no truly difficult enemies. Even the dragons and that hardcore knight were complete pussies compared to the stuff you fight in BG2. Try to play Baldur's Gate 2 and beat every potential enemy you come across without being a ridiculously high level. That is a truly rewarding experience. And there weren't many spells or skills to learn. Just pay one iota of attention to all the multitude of things you can do in Baldur's Gate 2 and seriously try to argue that DAO had even a 10th of the character development potential that BG2 has. DAO had huge sequences where for example you have to fight those waves of skeletons attacking the town. Boooo-ring and really really slow and repetitive. That basically never happens in BG2. It's a really fast paced game but still pushes way over 100 hours.
PS the bad guy in DAO (I'm talking the weird speaking orc guy not the dragon which was also very boring) is pure awful in comparison to the amazing bad guy 'John Irenicus' from BG2.
|
|
|
On June 09 2011 02:54 tooleman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 02:47 ChinaWhite wrote:
^^ Has to be PC, mods wont be able to fix the console version That's another thing I don't quite understand. What exactly do the mods do for the game? I played oblivion and morrowind on the console so I am quite oblivious.
Mods turn Oblivion from an average game to an amazing one....they totally fix everything broken with the game. Seriously I'd give Oblivion like a 6/10 with no mods but easily 9.5/10 with mods. That's how big of a difference they make with the game. Hopefully they make vanilla Skyrim more playable instead of relying on the community to fix the game like they did for Oblivion -_-. But I'm getting it on the PC regardless.
|
|
|
^Very smart chap, always good to hear what he has to say.
|
He always gives great interviews because he's always honest in his opinions. I guess we can expect Rage 2 to be made with the PC in mind first and foremost, he sounded discontent about the way consoles affect quality of his product on the PC.
|
I'm mostly just looking forward to the hour content. I've been looking for a game I can easily spend over 100 hours in since I played FFVII in my most recently play through many years ago.
If the 300+ mark is anywhere near accurate I'm going to enjoy myself greatly.
I've found the most fun in these games simply wandering around stealing from people and looting caves/dungeons and killing lots of stuff. With over 150 fully rendered dungeons (as in not randomly generated, giving possibilities to nifty things like mini story lines hidden throughout the caves and such) there is going to be SO much to just explore.
|
As long as the game is good (read: the story back on morrowind-level and not the cheesy good vs. evil of Oblivion) I don't care whether it's a port. Modders will patch the game up well enough before long.
|
On June 09 2011 06:19 maartendq wrote:As long as the game is good (read: the story back on morrowind-level and not the cheesy good vs. evil of Oblivion) I don't care whether it's a port. Modders will patch the game up well enough before long.
This. Everything else can be fixed. The incredible thing about Morrowinds story was that most of it was hidden, you could complete the main quest and not truely understand what you had done, or why you had done it, it really rewarded delving deeper.
|
On June 09 2011 01:14 DrainX wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 01:11 FeUerFlieGe wrote:On June 09 2011 00:49 Polis wrote:On June 09 2011 00:34 deathly rat wrote:Also, the scaling of monsters levels was to make sure the game continued to be challenging, not to make the game easier to play. They have since refined the system such that new areas are scaled but areas already discovered are set, this is so you can feel you power growing. All this has been innovative stuff from Bethesda. I really think you are missing out on the context here. That sucks because there should be areas that are above your level, heck play Gothic2:Notr, and tell me how the feeling of danger, and planning forced by good hand placement of enemies can be archived with level scaling. Level scaling also makes gaining levels pointless. The level scaling system I think will give the player the illusion of progression, while still giving them the freedom to choose where they want to explore next in the game world. One thing I hate about games with higher level areas, and lower level areas, is it feels like I'm being guided down a strait path with little choice of where I can go next. As long as there is the illusion of progress, then I should be fine. Now the only thing I'm hoping isn't scaled are the dragons. I want them to be a real challenge, or something I run from if I'm not high level enough. Having highlevel and lowlevel areas doesn't force you down a certain path. It just makes some places harder than others. You will have to be smart and take risks if you want to reap the reward from the harder areas early on. I don't want the game to trick me. I want to trick the game.
God this is such a great point! Figuring out how to rob the Vault or killing superior foes with abusive tactics was so much fun in Morrowind. In Oblivion you could sneak better and poison your weapons, but it always felt so railroaded. You always had a shot at doing anything without really putting too much effort into it. To do some cool things in Morrowind early I had to steal like a raven, sell it all, buy a few choice items, then pull off something awesome to reap massive rewards = Awesome! Being able to actually be rewarded for being creative and abusive is what a sandbox should be about, not wandering about in some safe little playground. Thanks for expressing what annoyed me about Oblivion. And saying that mods fix this is not true for me. Mods are too much of a hazzle as they usually mean you have to start over, and update the game every time a new "better" version comes out, having to risk losing your game to bugs, and also having to delve too deeply into how the game works. Having to evaluate every different ruleset and decide upon which fits me best just feels so flaky and artificial. It`s kind of the same as level scaling actually: Tailoring the game to your playing style. All of the magic dissapears for me when I have to use console commands to debug my character or to add some quest item that suddenly went POOF! back into my inventory or some stupid shit like that. If the basic game mechanics do not work properly out of the box, I probably will not enjoy it. 
Fallout NV was pretty good when it came to scaling and having difficult areas, made it kind of easy though, but fun! I loved trying to get to New Vegas as fast as possible, escaping Deathclaws, dodging those giant bug things using all my stealth boys and just running for my life so that I could quickly advance in the big city, buy a giant ass gun and go back to wreak havoc on the Deathclaws in the quarry :D
|
New Vegas did a lot of things right (god I'd love to see skill checks in dialogue in TES games), it's actually a flawed masterpiece in many ways.
|
On June 09 2011 06:13 N3rV[Green] wrote:
I'm mostly just looking forward to the hour content. I've been looking for a game I can easily spend over 100 hours in since I played FFVII in my most recently play through many years ago.
If the 300+ mark is anywhere near accurate I'm going to enjoy myself greatly.
I've found the most fun in these games simply wandering around stealing from people and looting caves/dungeons and killing lots of stuff. With over 150 fully rendered dungeons (as in not randomly generated, giving possibilities to nifty things like mini story lines hidden throughout the caves and such) there is going to be SO much to just explore.
150 dungeons would be awesome...the best thing about bathesda games is the size of the worlds and how much there is to explore. They've defiiently come a lot closer than any other developer in making open, free world RPG's where you can just spend hours exploring random shit and actually have fun doing it. I love Bioware games and all but choosing a good and evil choice from a dialogue box doesn't make for an open world game :X
|
can I get this video on a site please where the stream doesnt stop every 5 sec T_T
|
I should really think about pre-ordering. It's looking like the game will be close to 20gigs? and would put a toll on my bandwidth for the month if I got it online. Then again, why would i need internet if I had it? lol!
I'm just really eager to see what exactly the perk system will look like, and what the scaling regarding mobs will be like. And mountain-climbing sounds fun to me too. ^^
|
On June 09 2011 06:23 Grend wrote:Show nested quote +On June 09 2011 01:14 DrainX wrote:On June 09 2011 01:11 FeUerFlieGe wrote:On June 09 2011 00:49 Polis wrote:On June 09 2011 00:34 deathly rat wrote:Also, the scaling of monsters levels was to make sure the game continued to be challenging, not to make the game easier to play. They have since refined the system such that new areas are scaled but areas already discovered are set, this is so you can feel you power growing. All this has been innovative stuff from Bethesda. I really think you are missing out on the context here. That sucks because there should be areas that are above your level, heck play Gothic2:Notr, and tell me how the feeling of danger, and planning forced by good hand placement of enemies can be archived with level scaling. Level scaling also makes gaining levels pointless. The level scaling system I think will give the player the illusion of progression, while still giving them the freedom to choose where they want to explore next in the game world. One thing I hate about games with higher level areas, and lower level areas, is it feels like I'm being guided down a strait path with little choice of where I can go next. As long as there is the illusion of progress, then I should be fine. Now the only thing I'm hoping isn't scaled are the dragons. I want them to be a real challenge, or something I run from if I'm not high level enough. Having highlevel and lowlevel areas doesn't force you down a certain path. It just makes some places harder than others. You will have to be smart and take risks if you want to reap the reward from the harder areas early on. I don't want the game to trick me. I want to trick the game. To do some cool things in Morrowind early I had to steal like a raven, sell it all, buy a few choice items, then pull off something awesome to reap massive rewards = Awesome! Being able to actually be rewarded for being creative and abusive is what a sandbox should be about, not wandering about in some safe little playground.
I love audacious moves like you describe, killing things you shouldn't kill etc. But I don't know what you are talking about saying you can't do it in Oblivion, there are several people you can do that with. Granted none are as impressive as the god who sits there floating in that temple, Vec or something, but there are still some pretty high profile and difficult enemies you can kill in cheeky ways. In fact on a hard difficulty level almost all the bosses require some incredibly clever usage to beat. For example the head of the guild that fights the mages guild is an absolute monster badass. That being said I am all for a game which brings more of this into play. More epic enemies that you can attempt to fight if you are brave enough and get rewarded nicely for your efforts  .
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
