My CRPG rant
Al
days of Betrayal at Krondor, Ultima 7, Shadows over Riva, etc. But recently,
things seem to have gotten lackluster. I bought BG the day it came out,
played it for a month, and just sort of gave up a few days after I reached
the actual city of BG. I tried Icewind Dale, but there was little strategy
in that game other than the usage of spells, and because of the way spells
are treated in AD&D, most times I don't even use them. Mages are reduced
to powerful, short-term archers. Most other spells are useless, either
because the monsters have magic resistance or your party doesn't. The AI
seems braindead a lot of times and the game is notably more linear than BG.
Of course, this is just all me, and there are hundreds of posts here from
people who genuinely love IWD, and my hat's off to them.
Planescape. What can I say. The story is the only thing that kept me playing,
I can't say the experience was entirely that memorable, probably originating
from my distaste with the engine and the game mechanics. The way the NPCs
added to conversations was great, but I wanted more random scripted
sequences that had genuine impact on gameplay, not playful banter between
characters. There was little incentive to travel to visited places to
purchase expensive items, to discover what happened after old quests or
to discover new ones. Other than the tattoo parlor and perhaps the buried
village, there was no reason to go backwards at all. The world just didn't
seem alive to me. It felt just like what it was, ultimately, a story, not
a world. I loved playing U7 and BaK because I got to explore the map,
discover new places, make new allies and enemies. In PS:T, the amnesia
plotline took center stage, and seemed to steal the spotlight from everything
else. Again, this may be because of engine limitations, and ultimately,
is just my personal opinion.
I played Fallout 2, and while I loved the mechanics, the engine failed me.
Early on, combat was repetitive and had little room for tactics (bash until
it goes down). Most of the skills didn't seem all that balanced or varied
enough, some having limited application in rare, designer-planned scenarios.
And overall, it was too damn nonlinear, but not nonlinear enough for me
to be engulfed into the game world (a la Daggerfall). No scripted events
other than jarring, you're-not-in-fallout-anymore scenes. The story led
nowhere, ultimately degenerating into a massive fed-ex quest. And from
what I heard of Fallout 1, the engine faults are even more glaring. In
any case, once I'm done with my current batch of games, I'll return to
Fallout 2 and give it another try.
I'll wait and see how BG2 does, but I don't believe I'll end up getting it,
neither will I get the new Pools of Radiance. I'm more excited about
Neverwinter Nights than the Infinity-engine games, but regardless, AD&D
is really beginning to turn me off with its simplistic, often obtuse
mechanics. Arcanum and W&W hasn't really caught my interest. The only
crpg that I'm truly excited about is Morrowind, and that's years off.
I'll also probably have to get a Pentium 4 and a Voodoo 9 to support it.
Am I alone here?
--
Al
http://members.home.com/ajyi
You can always procrastinate tomorrow!
Miles Lippincott
Al wrote in message
>I bought BG the day it came out,
>played it for a month, and just sort of gave up a few days after I reached
>the actual city of BG.
I think most people had that experience, but many of us managed to get a
"second wind" and finish it. In general, these games are pretty darn long.
Some people can play a game for 100 hours and think it's too short where
others of us start to lose interest around 40 hours.
>I'll wait and see how BG2 does, but I don't believe I'll end up getting it,
>neither will I get the new Pools of Radiance. I'm more excited about
>Neverwinter Nights than the Infinity-engine games, but regardless, AD&D
>is really beginning to turn me off with its simplistic, often obtuse
>mechanics
If you didn't like IWD, PT, or BG, then stay away from BG2. As for Pools,
don't forget that it uses the new 3rd edition D&D rules, which some feel are
better suited towards use in a CRPG. We'll have to see how it's
implemented, of course.
In general your rant seems to indicate that you may have just moved on from
CRPG's. Was there any recent release that you did like?
Miles
Sam Lowry
really
> a completely different genre, and one I've got no experience in. I'm sure
> someone else will be happy to enlighten you, if you don't already know
what
> they are.
>
I played Asheron's Call for awhile hoping for the kind of "virtual world"
experience described in the original post. I was hoping for an something
akin to Daggerfall, just with real people walking around whom I could
approach and speak with "in character." What I got, instead, was packs of
Kewl DOods telling me to go f- myself, because I was invading their
"camp"-site where they awaited the respawn of yet another quest item that
they could pass along to some newbie member of their guild.
MMORPG are less about roleplaying than they are about economics and the
basic tenants of supply and demand. It was fun for about a week or so, but
then I was glad to cancel my subscription and will never go back.
Morrowind is the only game of its kind currently in development. Until then,
we have some games that help fill the void, but none that can qualify as a
truly "virtual world." If Deus Ex wasn't so linear and mission-based it
might qualify. When I'm doing the missions I begin to get that feeling of
exploration and world interactivity that I got when playing Daggerfall.
Another game that captures that feeling quite well is Omikron. These two
games might help pass the time until Bethesda's completes their magnum opus.
--Lowry
Knight37
[snip anti-RPG rant]
>Am I alone here?
Pretty much, yeah. Try a new hobby. Strategic games, maybe?
Knight37
Eric Liebl
games. The current crop of games are certainly different from Serpent Isle.
However, if you liked Wizardry 7 at all you should like Wizards and Warriors
equally. Also, Arcanum looks like it it will have a lot of free form
play...less linearity...like the first Fallout.
Everquest is a totally different beast...its fun but its like 95% combat
oriented. Its very detailed, the world is very large, and changes are very
good you will never see all of it (only the most dedicated will see
Veeshan's Peak). If you like the social aspect of gaming tho EQ has a lot
of that...I made a lot of friends leveling up my level 60 warrior and theres
always one more item you end up searching for to make your character
"perfect". Its not really a casual exploration game though (many places a
player can wander to can get you killed), and you can't intereact with the
environment at all...except for opening doors. The game was very exciting
for the first 30 levels or so. Post level 45 its really an item and
experience point hunt.
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
"Hong Ooi" <hong...@maths.anu.edu.au> wrote in message
news:if48qscglkmfdbvki...@4ax.com...
> On 23 Aug 2000 16:43:51 GMT, aj...@nospam.home.com (Al) wrote:
>
> >I remember when I used to be absolutely obsessed with crpgs, back in the
> >days of Betrayal at Krondor, Ultima 7, Shadows over Riva, etc.
>
> [snip massive good-ol'-days post]
>
> Let's see now: you've rubbished just about every (C)RPG that this group
> considers paragons of the genre. I think there'll be people who agree with
> you on _some_ of the points you made, but I doubt there'll be anyone who
> agrees on _all_ of them. Except maybe Thrasher, but he's a troll.
>
> Basically you seem to prefer large, open-ended games where there's no
> pressure to do anything except explore the landscape and interact with the
> environment. That's fair enough, but as you say, I don't think you're
going
> to find a lot of games that satisfy that description in the near future.
> The exceptions are possibly NWN and Arcanum, because these games will
> feature editors that will let you build your own adventures. However that
> will require substantial work, whether by you or third parties, and
there's
> no guarantee that the resulting modules themselves will be what you're
> looking for.
>
> What you might want to try is a MMORPG like Everquest or UO. They're
really
> a completely different genre, and one I've got no experience in. I'm sure
> someone else will be happy to enlighten you, if you don't already know
what
> they are.
>
>
> --
> Hong Ooi | "I used to use my real name many years ago.
I
> hong...@maths.anu.edu.au | got just as much disrespect then as I do
now."
> http://www.zip.com.au/~hong | -- T.
> Canberra, Australia |
Eric Liebl
buggy RPGs I'm not holding my breath for Morrowind. I bet the game is two
years from being published and theres nothing worse than bugs to ruin a good
game. I don't even want to think about that game until it hits the shelves
and has been reviewed.
--
^ +~+~~
"Fair winds and following seas." ^ )`.).
)``)``) .~~
-Eric ).-'.-')|)
eli...@ix.netcom.com |-).-).-'_'-/
~~~\ `o-o-o' /~~~
~~~'---.____/~~
"Sam Lowry" <slowry@information_retrieval.com> wrote in message
news:8o17ds$pa6$1...@slb3.atl.mindspring.net...
> > What you might want to try is a MMORPG like Everquest or UO. They're
> really
> > a completely different genre, and one I've got no experience in. I'm
sure
> > someone else will be happy to enlighten you, if you don't already know
> what
> > they are.
> >
Ykalon Dragon
>
> I remember when I used to be absolutely obsessed with crpgs, back in the
> played it for a month, and just sort of gave up a few days after I reached
> neither will I get the new Pools of Radiance. I'm more excited about
> Neverwinter Nights than the Infinity-engine games, but regardless, AD&D
> is really beginning to turn me off with its simplistic, often obtuse
> crpg that I'm truly excited about is Morrowind, and that's years off.
> I'll also probably have to get a Pentium 4 and a Voodoo 9 to support it.
>
> Am I alone here?
>
> --
> Al
> http://members.home.com/ajyi
>
> You can always procrastinate tomorrow!
Judging from what I've read at the Ironworks you should give W&W a
second chance. Loks to me like a game that you can compare to both
Daggerfall and Wizardry 7.
Hong Ooi
>I remember when I used to be absolutely obsessed with crpgs, back in the
>days of Betrayal at Krondor, Ultima 7, Shadows over Riva, etc.
[snip massive good-ol'-days post]
Let's see now: you've rubbished just about every (C)RPG that this group
considers paragons of the genre. I think there'll be people who agree with
you on _some_ of the points you made, but I doubt there'll be anyone who
agrees on _all_ of them. Except maybe Thrasher, but he's a troll.
Basically you seem to prefer large, open-ended games where there's no
pressure to do anything except explore the landscape and interact with the
environment. That's fair enough, but as you say, I don't think you're going
to find a lot of games that satisfy that description in the near future.
The exceptions are possibly NWN and Arcanum, because these games will
feature editors that will let you build your own adventures. However that
will require substantial work, whether by you or third parties, and there's
no guarantee that the resulting modules themselves will be what you're
looking for.
What you might want to try is a MMORPG like Everquest or UO. They're really
a completely different genre, and one I've got no experience in. I'm sure
someone else will be happy to enlighten you, if you don't already know what
they are.
Hong Ooi
<slowry@information_retrieval.com> wrote:
>
>MMORPG are less about roleplaying than they are about economics and the
>basic tenants of supply and demand. It was fun for about a week or so, but
>then I was glad to cancel my subscription and will never go back.
Oh, I'm aware of the general feeling about MMORPGs, but I didn't want to
put the OP off them without having first-hand knowledge. Besides which,
he/she didn't actually mention that they wanted to roleplay in-character;
just that they wanted to beable to wander around and do vaguely RPG-ish
things. So you never know, maybe those KeWl D00dz might not be as big a
turn-off as you think. :)
Brian H.
Al <aj...@nospam.home.com> wrote in message
news:62624B4F2D9EE099.399D6533...@lp.airnews.net...
> I remember when I used to be absolutely obsessed with crpgs, back in the
Led Mirage
<eli...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>I don't mean to be a nay sayer but with Bethesda's track record on late and
>buggy RPGs I'm not holding my breath for Morrowind. I bet the game is two
>years from being published and theres nothing worse than bugs to ruin a good
>game. I don't even want to think about that game until it hits the shelves
>and has been reviewed.
The game maybe 2 years from publishing, but Pathesda would push it out
the door regardless.
mr bernard langham
> things seem to have gotten lackluster. I bought BG the day it came out,
> played it for a month, and just sort of gave up a few days after I reached
> the actual city of BG.
I may be one of the few people in this newsgroup who broadly agree with the
thrust of your post. I find the American hack-n-slash RPG experience to
leave a great deal to be desired. Nevertheless I have played most of them --
but only because my local video shop offers them for a few dollars a week.
Oddly, I enjoy Japanese console RPGs, which, while they are notorious for
their endless repetitive combats, actually work for me because the fights
are very cleverly paced, like a piece of music, and becomes a sort of
stream-of-consciousness mantra, almost a meditational thing, whereas the
stories and the characters -- I just *love* the stories and the characters.
Squaresoft games have made me weep openly more than once. YMMV.
>I tried Icewind Dale, but there was little strategy
> in that game other than the usage of spells, and because of the way spells
> are treated in AD&D, most times I don't even use them. Mages are reduced
> to powerful, short-term archers.
The strategy-without-answer in IWD (as in BG) was to equip your entire party
with missile weapons, load up on arrows and bullets, and use no other weapon
ever at any time whatsoever. The fiercest enemies simply wither in a hail of
flying death, usually before laying a paw on your party. Very dull.
> Of course, this is just all me, and there are hundreds of posts here from
> people who genuinely love IWD, and my hat's off to them.
Indeed. I enjoyed IWD more than BG, which drove me to distraction with its
horrible voice acting and sophomorish plot. Then again, I believe I am in a
minority as far as this NG goes on that one as well :)
>
> Planescape. What can I say. The story is the only thing that kept me
playing,
The story was really rather good though, you must admit. Unlike many gamers,
I was not brought up on a diet of television. I like reading, I like
thinking, and I liked PS:T.
> I'll wait and see how BG2 does, but I don't believe I'll end up getting
it,
> neither will I get the new Pools of Radiance.
More of the same, without question.
>I'm more excited about
> Neverwinter Nights than the Infinity-engine games, but regardless, AD&D
> is really beginning to turn me off with its simplistic, often obtuse
> mechanics.
I love the idea of NWN -- an online system for creating and sharing the
roleplaying experience. I am saddened that it is tied to AD&D mechanics,
which I strongly dislike. I would be very reluctant to put time into GMing
and creating a world in which the clunky "I am a fighter" "I am a thief" "My
alignment is chaotic neutral" "My Good priestess has the same spell list as
yonder Priest of Satan" stereotypes obscure true character development and
believable social dynamics.
But then, I have despised D&D since the early '80s, when I discovered
RuneQuest, an elegant, deep and thoughful RP system with an entrancing
gameworld built around it whose vast and intricate history makes LOTR look
like "See Spot Run" ;)
D&D has always been and will always be the Macdonalds of pen-and-paper
roleplaying systems. It's big, it's stupid, and lots of people use it. It
made complete sense to me when TSR was bought by WofTC. Again, am I in a
minority in this NG perchance? Let me guess :)
> Am I alone here?
Probably. But don't let that worry you.
I have always played computer games seeking the "other" -- the complete
translation into a different world, the virtual experience which matches the
feeling of place one gets from reading a work of great imagination (like,
ok, LOTR). Computers so far have always failed me. I keep looking.
However, some games have come rather close. I *strongly* recommend that you
play Outcast. It's not an RPG (since it takes place over a short period of
time, there's no room for stat building) -- but it creates a vivid,
beautiful, memorable other world. You will find it linear (although it makes
some attempt at non-orthogonal plot development), but it has that sense of
place in spades. The world it creates lives and breathes in a marvellous
way. I was sad to leave it once the game was complete. That to me is the
mark of a great gaming experience.
The kind of game you are looking for, I think, belongs to the pre-mass
market days of computer gaming, when games were largely written in their
spare time by people with University degrees, inquiring minds, and a
thoughtful predisposition. Many old Unix roguelike rpgs featured extremely
open-ended and non-linear design. I think the reason things have changed is
very largely to do with the fact that the target audience of games has
changed, and the kind of people who write them also. Barring some amazing
renaissance in humanity at large, I can't really see things improving.
Still, we can hope.
>^..^<
Bernard
--
mr bernard langham . blueboy@(diespamdie)ii.net . perth, western ashtraylia
cassetteNET/DIY lo-fi punkarama/indie vs major FAQ http://ii.net/~blueboy
--
"Feel free to cite, sample, steal, sell, reference, borrow or plagiarize
anything that I have created, thought or said. Information wants to be free
and intellectual property is both anachronistic and wrong" -- Meme #96
Al
inscribed:
>On 23 Aug 2000 16:43:51 GMT, aj...@nospam.home.com (Al) wrote:
>What you might want to try is a MMORPG like Everquest or UO. They're really
>a completely different genre, and one I've got no experience in. I'm sure
>someone else will be happy to enlighten you, if you don't already know what
>they are.
Except there's no story. My guess is that they're just MUD derivatives,
that is, lots of mindless fun and socialization, but no continuous quest
or plotline.
Al
message inscribed:
>Al wrote in message
>In general your rant seems to indicate that you may have just moved on from
>CRPG's. Was there any recent release that you did like?
I enjoyed the action-RPG hybrids, except for Diablo 2, which I suspect I
wouldn't enjoy that much.
Al
message inscribed:
>"Al" <aj...@nospam.home.com> wrote in message
>news:62624B4F2D9EE099.399D6533...@lp.airnews.net...
>
>> things seem to have gotten lackluster. I bought BG the day it came out,
>> played it for a month, and just sort of gave up a few days after I reached
>> the actual city of BG.
>
>I may be one of the few people in this newsgroup who broadly agree with the
>thrust of your post. I find the American hack-n-slash RPG experience to
>leave a great deal to be desired. Nevertheless I have played most of them --
>but only because my local video shop offers them for a few dollars a week.
>
>Oddly, I enjoy Japanese console RPGs, which, while they are notorious for
>their endless repetitive combats, actually work for me because the fights
>are very cleverly paced, like a piece of music, and becomes a sort of
>stream-of-consciousness mantra, almost a meditational thing, whereas the
>stories and the characters -- I just *love* the stories and the characters.
>Squaresoft games have made me weep openly more than once. YMMV.
True, but it's hard for me to get into console RPGs because of the truly
simplistic dialogue, on SNES at least, to the point of being corny almost.
My guess is that things are a whole lot better on the third and fourth
generation consoles.
>>I tried Icewind Dale, but there was little strategy
>> in that game other than the usage of spells, and because of the way spells
>> are treated in AD&D, most times I don't even use them. Mages are reduced
>> to powerful, short-term archers.
>
>The strategy-without-answer in IWD (as in BG) was to equip your entire party
>with missile weapons, load up on arrows and bullets, and use no other weapon
>ever at any time whatsoever. The fiercest enemies simply wither in a hail of
>flying death, usually before laying a paw on your party. Very dull.
Not as bad as it was in BG, though. In IWD I was often far away from stores
where I could purchase massive amounts of arrows, so towards the end of
certain dungeons I found myself conserving, to varying degrees of success.
Having your thief chasing around salamanders with nothing more than a +2
dagger is scary sometimes...
>> Am I alone here?
>
>Probably. But don't let that worry you.
>
>The kind of game you are looking for, I think, belongs to the pre-mass
>market days of computer gaming, when games were largely written in their
>spare time by people with University degrees, inquiring minds, and a
>thoughtful predisposition. Many old Unix roguelike rpgs featured extremely
>open-ended and non-linear design. I think the reason things have changed is
>very largely to do with the fact that the target audience of games has
>changed, and the kind of people who write them also. Barring some amazing
>renaissance in humanity at large, I can't really see things improving.
>
>Still, we can hope.
Indeed.
Justin Krenz
mr bernard langham wrote:
>
<SNIP>
>
> I love the idea of NWN -- an online system for creating and sharing the
> roleplaying experience. I am saddened that it is tied to AD&D mechanics,
> which I strongly dislike. I would be very reluctant to put time into GMing
> and creating a world in which the clunky "I am a fighter" "I am a thief" "My
> alignment is chaotic neutral" "My Good priestess has the same spell list as
> yonder Priest of Satan" stereotypes obscure true character development and
> believable social dynamics.
>
I would agree with you if you were speaking of 2nd edition AD&D, but
3rd edition does much to eliminate the lack of uniqueness among
characters. Each character now gets to choose skills and feats.
Characters are no longer the basic "I'm a lawful good fighter" because
one fighter can have different skills and feats compared to another
fighter. If you haven't looked at 3rd edition D&D, I suggest you do.
After reading through the new 3rd edition Player's Handbook, I came to
realize how pathetic 2nd edition actually is.
t
same goes for Torment, except, Torment had a great story that I enjoyed, and
improved graphics.
Personally I'm looking forward to Wizards and Warriors, and Pool of Radiance.
They seemed to be more of old school style rpg that I had came to enjoy with
modern improvements. Still, I wish someone would come out with a truely
interactive environment where the only interactivity isn't limited to combat/and
dialogues. The only game that came close was Fallout series, but even then, most
of their interactivity is scripted... I want a crpg where every random conflict
is resolved like what you read in books or seen in movies.
One thing I like about multiplayer games, is the cooperation between different
players. In starcraft, I love playing co-op maps where its you and a couple
other players versus the cpu. I wish the same can be say for mmrpgs. It would
be so cool, if the cpu treats the world like a rts game. The cpu is constantly
acting and reacting to players - trying to win by defeating the players. And the
players will be like individual units, working together trying to defeat the cpu
by conquering dungeons, defending outposts/towns, solving quests, killing major
mobs...
Seems like, my vision is still decades off. Its gonna take some true innovative
designs to pull it off...
kromm
>
>>> Am I alone here?
>>
>>Probably. But don't let that worry you.
>>
>>The kind of game you are looking for, I think, belongs to the pre-mass
>>market days of computer gaming, when games were largely written in their
>>spare time by people with University degrees, inquiring minds, and a
>>thoughtful predisposition. Many old Unix roguelike rpgs featured extremely
>>open-ended and non-linear design. I think the reason things have changed is
>>very largely to do with the fact that the target audience of games has
>>changed, and the kind of people who write them also. Barring some amazing
>>renaissance in humanity at large, I can't really see things improving.
>>
>>Still, we can hope.
>
>Indeed.
>
>--
I have good news and bad news. First the bad news:
To borrow Interplay's slogan. "By university graduates for university
graduates." has become "By 20ish, 30ish marketing strategists, for
junior and high school students."
Now the good news:
High school students will eventually move on to post secondary
education. They too, will desire a more "in-depth" gaming experience.
Computer games are one of the fastest growing segments of the
entertainment industry. As supply is working to keep up with the
growth in demand, I believe we can expect greater product
differentiation in the future. PST may very well be a "not half-bad"
first attempt in providing CRPG alternatives.
Positive sales results in a title like PST may indicate there is a
market for more "in-depth" CRPGs and encourage futher development of
more complex titles.
kromm
Hong Ooi
>I just found a piece of toast from Hong Ooi with the following message
>inscribed:
>
>>On 23 Aug 2000 16:43:51 GMT, aj...@nospam.home.com (Al) wrote:
>
>>What you might want to try is a MMORPG like Everquest or UO. They're really
>>a completely different genre, and one I've got no experience in. I'm sure
>>someone else will be happy to enlighten you, if you don't already know what
>>they are.
>
>Except there's no story. My guess is that they're just MUD derivatives,
>that is, lots of mindless fun and socialization, but no continuous quest
>or plotline.
Well, make up your mind. Past a certain point, storyline and nonlinearity
must conflict with each other. There are very few games that manage to
combine a compelling plot and open-ended gameplay. One of those that
succeeded was Fallout, and you've already rubbished it.
Hong Ooi
<scor...@IHATESPAMhome.net> wrote:
>
> I would agree with you if you were speaking of 2nd edition AD&D, but
>3rd edition does much to eliminate the lack of uniqueness among
>characters. Each character now gets to choose skills and feats.
>Characters are no longer the basic "I'm a lawful good fighter" because
>one fighter can have different skills and feats compared to another
>fighter. If you haven't looked at 3rd edition D&D, I suggest you do.
>After reading through the new 3rd edition Player's Handbook, I came to
>realize how pathetic 2nd edition actually is.
To Bernie, it is an axiom that popular things are bad, hence 3E will be
bad.
mr bernard langham
>
> To Bernie, it is an axiom that popular things are bad, hence 3E will be
> bad.
Obsessed.
Hong Ooi
<blu...@diespamdie.ii.net> wrote:
>
>"Hong Ooi" <hong...@maths.anu.edu.au> wrote in message
>news:m5edqs0nr43b4mal9...@4ax.com...
>>
>> To Bernie, it is an axiom that popular things are bad, hence 3E will be
>> bad.
>
>Obsessed.
Deal with it, Bernie.
mr bernard langham
> >news:m5edqs0nr43b4mal9...@4ax.com...
> >>
> >> To Bernie, it is an axiom that popular things are bad, hence 3E will be
> >> bad.
> >
> >Obsessed.
>
Should I send you a signed autograph perhaps?
Rick Russell
You'll get no argument from me about Baldur's Gate or IWD. I liked
them well enough, but I feel they were crippled by the AD&D game
system. Can't speak to Planescape, as I haven't played it.
In article <62624B4F2D9EE099.399D6533...@lp.airnews.net>,
Al <aj...@nospam.home.com> wrote:
> I played Fallout 2, and while I loved the mechanics, the engine failed me.
> Early on, combat was repetitive and had little room for tactics (bash until
> it goes down).
What changes would you realistically expect to enhance tactics?
Granted, I can envision new weapons like glue guns, smoke grenades,
flamethrowers or stun rays which would add to the combat tactics (like
spells in BG/IWD). But in a science fiction world with deadly
long-range projectile weapons, I can't see a lot of room for tactics.
> Most of the skills didn't seem all that balanced or varied enough,
> some having limited application in rare, designer-planned scenarios.
I have to disagree on this; almost all the problems in the game are
addressable from a fight, tech or talk standpoint. Almost all the
skills contribute to one of those capabilities. The few that don't fit
in have interesting and often entertaining elements. Fallout 2
definitely wins points on flexibility.
> to be engulfed into the game world (a la Daggerfall). No scripted events
> other than jarring, you're-not-in-fallout-anymore scenes.
True, the scripted sections could have been smoother.
> The story led
> nowhere, ultimately degenerating into a massive fed-ex quest.
Don't all quests ultimately amount to "kill this" or "bring that" or
"punch those buttons in the right order"? It's difficult to see where
else CRPG quests should go. Even most paper RPGs ultimately fall into
the "fedex" category ("Kill the guardians of the temple of
Jereg. Obtain the sacred scroll of Rapalla and return it to the halls
of the Purple Mage.").
At least Fallout adds "repair that", "pickpocket that" and "win that
contest" to the list of possible quest objectives.
> any case, once I'm done with my current batch of games, I'll return to
> Fallout 2 and give it another try.
One thing the skills do add is replayability. Playing a talk/tech
character is very different from playing a two-fisted martial artist
or a gunslinger.
My favorite character in Fallout 2 was named Kane. He was a HTH combat
expert with high intelligence, very low luck and the "Jinx" trait.
Rick R.