| |
Site Navigation Main News Forums
Games Games Database Top 100 Release List Support Files
Features Reviews Previews Interviews Editorials Diaries Misc
Download Gallery Music Screenshots Videos
Miscellaneous Staff Members Privacy Statement
|
 |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote: Originally posted by corwin
I'm amazed that not one person in this thread has mentioned Gothic 1&2!! Not since the old Ultimas has there been such variety in NPC interaction and creativity. MUD sticks to mind!! I think the time required to do this is the sticking point. Time is limited and mass appeal comes first in most cases. Pity though. I think RG/LB would really enjoy the Gothic series.
Not true IMHO, if we talk about NPC interaction. NPC's in Gothic (2) got an interesting Day/Night cycle, but the dialog options are as few as many other story medicore games. MUD, was no complicated NPC, just plain annoying in a funny way. I've seen this "follow the main character" in many other games. Don't get me wrong, I'm very pleased with Gothic (2), but it's certainly not for the (missing) complex dialogues, but more for the immersive enviroment.
Regarding PST, it had very twisted and long dialogues, but almost every characters was standing on the same spot day and night doing nothing. If You don't like this over used concept "Who am I" story, PST was plain boring. The story or stories (Who knows how many uninteresting side stories almost every NPC tried to introduce you to in PST) was long and twisting, and yes you often needed to choose your lines carefully to get the hidden experience points, but don't worry if you missed it the first time, you could often try again. PST was standing or falling depending on if you like the story or not, it didn't have much else to offer. Battles were way to easy and unbalanced. _________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:25 am |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
PS:T did offer a very unique setting, with unique and diversed characters. And had a focus on PHILOSOPHICAL questions/scenarios and puzzles. Although the overall story didn't appeal much to me (although it's NOT a very usual story), I still found it to be an interesting game.
Battles were NOT the main focus of the game. _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:45 am |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote: Originally posted by Hexy
PS:T did offer a very unique setting, with unique and diversed characters.
Oh Yes a flying talking skull, A memory erased main character with the deep name like "nameless". Yes, very unique. Perhaps it make the game worthwhile for you, but I can't find that interesting. I no it's a matter of taste, but it didn't appeal to me.
And had a focus on PHILOSOPHICAL questions/scenarios and puzzles.
Like I mentioned before, if you like this twisted world, I guess You will be alright with this game, otherwise the game have nothing else to offer
Battles were NOT the main focus of the game.
No, obviously not, just like many other aspects in a good CRPG that PST also not had in focus.
_________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 1:24 pm |
|
|
Myrthos
Spoiler of All Fun

Joined: 07 Jul 2001
Posts: 1926
Location: Holland |
It had NPC's with a decent background that influenced the story, not something one sees too often. It gave you the option at every discussion to fight your way or to talk your way out of things, either choice resulted in other options opening or not.
NPC's had an agenda of their own at times, especially Vhailor could make things complicated with his odd sense of what was right and wrong. It had quests that went beyond the 'fetch this for person x'.
It had this and many other things in focus as a GOOD RPG should have. _________________ Kewl quotes:
I often have an odd sense of humor - Roach
Why quote somebody else, think of something yourself. - XeroX
...you won't have to unbookmark this site, we'll unbookmark you. - Val
Reports Myrthos for making me scared and humbled at the mere sight of his name - kayla |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 1:40 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote: Originally posted by Myrthos
It had NPC's with a decent background that influenced the story, not something one sees too often.
I do, maybe not in diablo, dungeon siege or other RTS's, but in Arx, Gothic, Baldurs Gate 2, wizardry 8, NWN and many other decent CRPG's.
It gave you the option at every discussion to fight your way or to talk your way out of things, either choice resulted in other options opening or not.
Not in every discussion, but in "some", yes, but the flaw with most discussions were, that there was a retry possibility, if you missed the correct line the first time (without reloading). But , Yes the idea of a big mouth or a big sword is interesting enough, but it do not necessary make the story better.
NPC's had an agenda of their own at times, especially Vhailor could make things complicated with his odd sense of what was right and wrong.
Story wise a nice touch, no doubt
It had quests that went beyond the 'fetch this for person x'.
Right, but it's not unique at all for this game only.
It had this and many other things in focus as a GOOD RPG should have.
If You all for this story related stuff in PST I'm sure it's a blast, but what many other things did it have in focus? Or is this enough to call it a complete GOOD RPG?
_________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:04 pm |
|
|
Myrthos
Spoiler of All Fun

Joined: 07 Jul 2001
Posts: 1926
Location: Holland |
Nothing any game does is unique and has not been done before. Games are good or bad by having the right combination of things. As there is no such thing as a universal truth, there is also nothing of a universal definition that makes a CRPG good or not.
Eventhough you and Arhu (and some others) had a blast getting into a discussion about what defines an RPG, I belief it's all about ones own personal experience, regardless of what arbitrary points one assigns to something.
I apparently did not find the same things in the games you mentioned than you did, or atleast not to the same extend.
For me PS:T is still ranks high when it comes to many things, including NPC interaction. As all games it has it's flaws but they are easily outweighed by it's merits. As a contrast I didn't liked Gothic for example and could not get immersed into it, so it's probably still a good game, but not for me. _________________ Kewl quotes:
I often have an odd sense of humor - Roach
Why quote somebody else, think of something yourself. - XeroX
...you won't have to unbookmark this site, we'll unbookmark you. - Val
Reports Myrthos for making me scared and humbled at the mere sight of his name - kayla |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 2:53 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
Hehe Myrthos, I though You wouldn't let me push you this easy.
I'm actually agree with you in your last post regarding your philosophic considerations. And Yes, a game can't be labeled good or bad, just because You and I do or don't like it.
And regarding PST contra Gothic (2), as you self do mention, I just got the opposite feeling regarding those games, no problem in that, it propably just keeps more game designers alive!
Yes, I know a few of us tried hard, to define a tool, which could determine every CRPG's strong and weak sides, without leaving to much space for the reviewer for his/her biased opinions or experiences. The intension was to give any gamer reading a review with this tools, a good opportunity to decide for them self, if this game could fall in his taste or not.
PST: The Idea of long complex Dialogues, good. Fight or talk choice, good. More complex scripted NPC's, also good. I like the sound of it all, the tools for an interesting story is there, but my problem was just I didn't like the story very much. Well Interesting Character development, complex combat, Some gameworld interaction (manipulation), Immersive gameworld could have compensated a little for that, but for me it failed in all these categories as well, like someone said before it was not this games main focus. This game did only focus on Story related stuff. _________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:03 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Oh Yes a flying talking skull, A memory erased main character with the deep name like "nameless". Yes, very unique. Perhaps it make the game worthwhile for you, but I can't find that interesting. I no it's a matter of taste, but it didn't appeal to me.
It's not only the story that is quite original, I meant the 'world' it's played in.
As for battles. No, I don't believe they define how 'good' an rpg is, rather how 'enjoyable'. A fight heavy game should have good combat. Look at Diablo. Nice combat and all, but not much of an rpg. Same with other games like 'Evil Islands' and whatnot.
Besides, Planescape had the ol' faithful pause-in-combat thing, which automatically makes it very nice. The only thing was the clumsy characters/poor A.I.
Uniqueness? There are several games that have something unique. It depends on how far back you want to look. Arcanum, anyone? Morrowind? Arena? Deus Ex? Fallout? All have something slightly unique.
There are not many really immensive gameworlds, sadly, only a handfull.
As for NWN, I hope you were joking. _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:10 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote: Originally posted by Hexy
It's not only the story that is quite original, I meant the 'world' it's played in.
Is Gothic, Morrowind, ARX, Wizadry not original worlds as well, just to mention a few.
As for battles. No, I don't believe they define how 'good' an rpg is, rather how 'enjoyable'. A fight heavy game should have good combat. Look at Diablo. Nice combat and all, but not much of an rpg. Same with other games like 'Evil Islands' and whatnot.
We agree then
Besides, Planescape had the ol' faithful pause-in-combat thing, which automatically makes it very nice. The only thing was the clumsy characters/poor A.I.
We agree again except for the little word "only"
Uniqueness? There are several games that have something unique. It depends on how far back you want to look. Arcanum, anyone? Morrowind? Arena? Deus Ex? Fallout? All have something slightly unique.
I kind of agree, but I'm not sure that Myrthos and I discussed the term "Unique" in the same way.
There are not many really immensive gameworlds, sadly, only a handfull.
As for NWN, I hope you were joking.
Joking about what??? The discussion was about games where NPC's did influence the story. Even though NWN did not have it's strongest focus on this topic, even though the expansion S.O.U. do it better, it still is a fact that some NPC's in NWN did influence the story, and I'm not only talking about the bad end boss. Maybe PST do it way better, but in the end it's a matter of taste.
_________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:27 pm |
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor


Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
Gothic and Morrowind are most certainly not as unique as PS:T. They are just variations of the old medieval fantasy setting. Unique in their own way, sure. But not on the same level. Arx? Well, the underground thing is rather new. But in other ways, it's just the same old. Goblins, humans, trolls and the ordinary stuff with an evil god (just like Gothic AND Morrowind, heheheahahahe, see what I mean?).
As for the battles thing, I though you said a good rpg had them? Whatevah...
As for NPCs, it depends on how you mean. Every RPG has NPCs crucial to the story line, of course. But party-NPCs? Not likely in NWN. _________________ Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:51 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote: Originally posted by Hexy
Gothic and Morrowind are most certainly not as unique as PS:T. They are just variations of the old medieval fantasy setting. Unique in their own way, sure. But not on the same level. Arx? Well, the underground thing is rather new. But in other ways, it's just the same old. Goblins, humans, trolls and the ordinary stuff with an evil god (just like Gothic AND Morrowind, heheheahahahe, see what I mean?).
PST got a lot of well known creatures too, and mostly undead or divine/deamon ones. It's sure some years ago now since i played PST, but i still recall the old mediaval faithful sword and armour and fireball for that matter. If we talk creatures, I agree Gothic and ARX did have many traditional creatures within, but so did PST. Regarding creature I think Morrowind, got most of the never seen before creatures.
As for the battles thing, I though you said a good rpg had them? Whatevah...
No, I didn't say (or ment) exactly that, I said if the story didn't appeal to you (like PST didn't to me), the game could still have been interesting if many other gaming features had been good, among them combat.
I guess a really good story can carry many gamers through a game leaving a good impression, no matter if the rest is below medicore.
As for NPCs, it depends on how you mean. Every RPG has NPCs crucial to the story line, of course. But party-NPCs? Not likely in NWN.
No NWN didn't have any story crucial party NPC's, but BG2 did, and to a very minor extend Wizardry8, MMIX. PST did have this feature almost as good as BG2, and I'm not critisizing them for having made some more out of this feature.
_________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Wed Jul 02, 2003 9:02 am |
|
|
Jaz
Late Night Spook

Joined: 20 Jan 2002
Posts: 9708
Location: RPGDot |
For me, a 'good' CRPG is one I like, a 'bad' CRPG is one I don't like, regardless of the reasons for my decision. _________________ Jaz |
Wed Jul 02, 2003 4:47 pm |
|
|
corwin
On the Razorblade of Life

Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 8376
Location: Australia |
You mean there are BAD RPG's? I must have been lucky then, I've never played one. OR, is it that I read so much here that I know what to avoid!! Keep up the great work guys; it's appreciated by all of us who have saved money following your suggestions. _________________ If God said it, then that settles it!
I don't use Smileys, I use Emoticons!!
 |
Thu Jul 03, 2003 2:10 am |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon

Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote: Originally posted by Jaz
For me, a 'good' CRPG is one I like, a 'bad' CRPG is one I don't like, regardless of the reasons for my decision.
Hehe, the easy way out!? But if You want to tell about the game to a friend, You probably would need a little more explanation than that, unless he/she fully trust your judgement without any questions. _________________ Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
Thu Jul 03, 2003 8:27 am |
|
|
Jaz
Late Night Spook

Joined: 20 Jan 2002
Posts: 9708
Location: RPGDot |
When I discuss games with friends or customers (I'm the games salesperson at our store), I don't classify them as 'good' or 'bad'. I recommend games depending on a customer's preferences, my own experiences (if possible) and the reviews/reports I've read/heard. Even though I'm not a fan of sports games I feel able to counsel a customer on those we have available. And if they're undecided I don't shy back from installing and testing the games in question together with them. _________________ Jaz |
Thu Jul 03, 2003 1:12 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat Apr 20, 2019 9:27 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|