Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 51
  1. #21
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    1,077
    I thought the Kayran was fine. The only thing they could have done better is show you were to go to deliver the final blow. I died a few times just trying to figure that out. Knocking his arms off was easy though, even without the trap you could craft.

  2. #22
    Activated Node creative42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    East Sussex
    Posts
    38
    Quote Originally Posted by db1331 View Post
    I thought the Kayran was fine. The only thing they could have done better is show you were to go to deliver the final blow. I died a few times just trying to figure that out. Knocking his arms off was easy though, even without the trap you could craft.
    I got as far as the QTE after just a few tries, but failed on that, then just couldn't get that far again, and frustration set in. I thought it was just a bit much for an early fight. I had no problems with any of the combat after that.

  3. #23
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Fumarole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    Only a handful of RPGs have good combat encounters, and they are mostly D&D ones.
    Out of curiosity, what's your take on The Temple of Elemental Evil's combat? With or without the Circle of 8 mod.

  4. #24
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Fumarole View Post
    Out of curiosity, what's your take on The Temple of Elemental Evil's combat? With or without the Circle of 8 mod.
    Combat system? Close to flawless. A great and accurate implementation of 3.5E. The combat encounters? Rather terrible. Got boring quite fast fighting similar enemies repeatedly. The Circle of Eight mod improves on this aspect, though still a long way off from the combat encounters of Baldur's Gate II (probably the best I've come across in any RPG).

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    Holy tapdancing Jesus Christ, a hardcore grumpy classic RPG guy praising a game with real time combat?

  6. #26
    Lesser Hivemind Node agentorange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    Holy tapdancing Jesus Christ, a hardcore grumpy classic RPG guy praising a game with real time combat?
    The fuck are you talking about? ToEE had turn based tactical combat.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    The fuck are you talking about? Baldur's Gate II had real time combat.

  8. #28
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus sabrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    GMT-7
    Posts
    3,301
    I've restarted Mass Effect a few times, but on my current iteration, I'm doing Insanity or whatever the hardest difficulty is. I die in one shot to snipers and it makes combat pretty infuriating sometimes, but I wouldn't have it any other way.

  9. #29
    Lesser Hivemind Node agentorange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    608
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    The fuck are you talking about? Baldur's Gate II had real time combat.
    You posted your response below Wizardry's comment about ToEE, without a quote from his comment about BG2.

    Also technically you are wrong on that count too, because the combat of BG2 is internally turn based.

  10. #30
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by agentorange View Post
    You posted your response below Wizardry's comment about ToEE and Baldur's Gate II, and the comment about Baldur's Gate II came last.
    oh hi, I fixed your post. Well half of it.

    Also technically you are wrong on that count too, because the combat of BG2 is internally turn based.
    Which changes next to nothing, really.

  11. #31
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus thegooseking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Three miles from the nearest bus stop
    Posts
    1,116
    I think ME3's options loses sight of the crucial fact that unless you're a foamy-mouthed fanatical playstyle purist (naming no names), what you want from the game isn't dependent on what type of player you are, but on what your preferences are. The difference is that what your preferences are might change from play session to play session -- or even within the same play session.

    I hardly think I'm abnormal in that when I'm gaming, sometimes I'll think, "ok, I'd like some action now" and sometimes I'll think, "oh, bugger off, action; I'm trying to get on with the story". The best game will be able to profile me based on my in-game behaviour and give me the type of gameplay I want, but I think that tech's pretty much still research. The next best thing is to give me a flexible choice in the matter at runtime, not to make me pigeonhole the gaming experience I want straight off the bat.
    Last edited by thegooseking; 11-11-2011 at 03:24 PM.
    "Moronic cynicism is a kind of na´vetÚ. It's na´vetÚ turned inside-out. Na´vetÚ wearing a sneer." -Momus

  12. #32
    Network Hub
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    408
    But can't you do that (sort of) in a lot of RPGs? If you are in the mood for some action, go out into the world and do a quest / mission that you know will probably involve combat, and if you don't want to be stabbing / shooting right know, chat up your party members, talk to some people, read the ingame texts (like the codex in ME, or the books in Baldur's Gate).

  13. #33
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    Holy tapdancing Jesus Christ, a hardcore grumpy classic RPG guy praising a game with real time combat?
    Have you played Baldur's Gate II? It has some fantastic encounters. They are incredibly varied, requiring you to change tactics for nearly every battle in the game.

    Quote Originally Posted by thegooseking View Post
    I hardly think I'm abnormal in that when I'm gaming, sometimes I'll think, "ok, I'd like some action now" and sometimes I'll think, "oh, bugger off, action; I'm trying to get on with the story". The best game will be able to profile me based on my in-game behaviour and give me the type of gameplay I want, but I think that tech's pretty much still research. The next best thing is to give me a flexible choice in the matter at runtime, not to make me pigeonhole the gaming experience I want straight off the bat.
    This if fundamentally anti-RPG. Your character can't automatically adjust depending on how you want to play. Your character can't suddenly switch from being the best archer in the land to the best backstabbing assassin in the land just because you, the player, want to do the next mission in a stealthy way. This is the same thing as having maximum statistics in everything, being a master of all, being able to do everything equally well so that you, the player, can decide what to do at any time without being impaired by the character you are controlling.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    This if fundamentally anti-RPG. Your character can't automatically adjust depending on how you want to play. Your character can't suddenly switch from being the best archer in the land to the best backstabbing assassin in the land just because you, the player, want to do the next mission in a stealthy way. This is the same thing as having maximum statistics in everything, being a master of all, being able to do everything equally well so that you, the player, can decide what to do at any time without being impaired by the character you are controlling.
    I think you're missing the point of the original argument, which to me does not imply anything about the capabilities of the character(s), but rather the type of situation you're presented with. The example given by the gooseking was that of being in either 'action' mode or 'story' mode, which is a very different kind of distinction than being in either 'master-assassin' mode or 'master-archer' mode. Being competent in or even have mastery of the skill most suited for the situation presented is not what's discussed. It's about being stuck in one action-to-story balance while a person with moods might want a more dynamic or mood-matched experience.

    Taking your argument as is, it seems like you advocate that a warrior should punch and shout and a mage cast and enchant. But isn't that a very narrow view on what a human (or elf etc.) being is capable of or interested in? I personally like my characters to have depth and breadth, so that I'm not impaired by them, but rather enriched.

  15. #35
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Car to Pol View Post
    I think you're missing the point of the original argument, which to me does not imply anything about the capabilities of the character(s), but rather the type of situation you're presented with. The example given by the gooseking was that of being in either 'action' mode or 'story' mode, which is a very different kind of distinction than being in either 'master-assassin' mode or 'master-archer' mode. Being competent in or even have mastery of the skill most suited for the situation presented is not what's discussed. It's about being stuck in one action-to-story balance while a person with moods might want a more dynamic or mood-matched experience.

    Taking your argument as is, it seems like you advocate that a warrior should punch and shout and a mage cast and enchant. But isn't that a very narrow view on what a human (or elf etc.) being is capable of or interested in? I personally like my characters to have depth and breadth, so that I'm not impaired by them, but rather enriched.
    How can you jump from your first paragraph to your second? The reason I wasn't missing the point is exactly why I don't narrowly view what makes a human. Therefore both of your paragraphs are irrelevant.

    If the player's character is a really dumb (low intelligence) grunt then you expect more action than dialogue. If the player's character is highly intelligent and charismatic and is good at talking their way out of confrontation then you expect more dialogue than action. There is no strict divide between story and action. That's just a simple BioWare deconstruction, as seen in the Mass Effect 3 leak where they've separated story cutscenes and cover-shooting situations into two distinct sets of mechanics.

    Breaking up RPGs into different components and treating them completely separately is what's made the genre feel artificial. Combat, dialogue, exploration, interaction, crafting, travelling, resting, spellcasting; these are all things that should tie together tightly and not sit as separate components that have no influence on each other.

  16. #36
    Obscure Node
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2
    I think every RPG should try to be Fallout. If it succeeds (and it's combat system is fun), then its publisher might loose a Fallout: Tactics.

  17. #37
    Lesser Hivemind Node DigitalSignalX's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    USA, Missouri.
    Posts
    934
    Pedantic arguing aside, can't we all agree that being able to either embrace or avoid combat at our (the player and the player character) whim makes for better games?
    All times I have enjoyed greatly, have suffered greatly, both with those that loved me, and alone.

  18. #38
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by DigitalSignalX View Post
    Pedantic arguing aside, can't we all agree that being able to either embrace or avoid combat at our (the player and the player character) whim makes for better games?
    Yes, but only if the character is speced in such a way as to allow them to avoid combat. You can't have a combat centric character being able to avoid combat situations as easily as a talky talky character.

  19. #39
    Obscure Node
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    24
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    Yes, but only if the character is speced in such a way as to allow them to avoid combat. You can't have a combat centric character being able to avoid combat situations as easily as a talky talky character.
    I'm with Wizardry on this one.

  20. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Wizardry View Post
    Have you played Baldur's Gate II? It has some fantastic encounters. They are incredibly varied, requiring you to change tactics for nearly every battle in the game.
    Really? Because I'm pretty sure hit-it-with-melee-weapon-until-it-stops-moving worked well on 99% of the enemies.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •