BioWare saved the genre from certain death

[deranged]

Oh and BG had better combat than FO and Diablo.

Only when playing F/M/T, otherwise it was a choice between a boring, non-interactive fighter-type or a spellcaster that runs out of spells very fast.

You can also have a party of 6 (5 + your character) in that game. Don't know if you tried that before soloing...

 

[Vault Dweller]

BG was an RTS with stats thrown in. Literally.

I wouldn't go so far - it had strong RPG elements, but they were painfully outdated when it came out.

BG started as an RTS, which is a well known fact (at least if you were around when the game was announced). Bio pitched it to Interplay, Interplay suggested to turn it into an RPG. That's why the game looks, plays, and feels like an RTS and has a pause. If I recall correctly, it even got an RTS of the year award.

As for the "strong RPG elements", the ONLY elements the game had were the character system to level up your characters and "kill it / fetch it" quests.

 

[janjetina]

Oh and BG had better combat than FO and Diablo.

[Intelligence] So, you prefer watching the game being played to actually playing it?
Fallout had infinitely better combat , with interesting weapons, flavorful enemies, short and descriptive encounters (also, contrary to the dumbfucks' opinion, it is not all about the eye shots, particularly not on lower and middle levels). Comparing Fallout's combat with BG's chore consisting of respawning skeletons and being forced to watch the action against boring DnD monsters unfold is a sin. (BG 2 improved significantly on encounter design, but nothing can fix that system).

BG had DnD stats under the hood, but the only thing they governed was combat, and RTWP is more about watching the combat than participating in it. Battleground Infinity indeed.
Non-combat application of stats was nonexistent (CHA influencing merchant prices doesn't count). Dialogues were filled with Bioware trademark fake choices.

It did have a story and the setting though, PC and NPCs with their place within the story and the setting as well, and these are RPG elements, but overall world reactivity was low, so I wouldn't go so far to claim that it's not a RPG, but it is a RPG lite (or a RTS-RPG hybrid) and represents a huge step backwards compared to Fallout.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

BG was an RTS with stats thrown in. Literally.

I wouldn't go so far - it had strong RPG elements, but they were painfully outdated when it came out.

BG started as an RTS, which is a well known fact (at least if you were around when the game was announced). Bio pitched it to Interplay, Interplay suggested to turn it into an RPG. That's why the game looks, plays, and feels like an RTS and has a pause. If I recall correctly, it even got an RTS of the year award.

As for the "strong RPG elements", the ONLY elements the game had were the character system to level up your characters and "kill it / fetch it" quests.

What about dialogues, choices and reputation? They were outdated and often poorly made, but there were some occasions to avoid combat, get better reputation and on one occasion, siding with certain character in one location, allowed to receive quest from him half of a game later. Also, compared to which pre-Fallout cRPGs?

You can also have a party of 6 (5 + your character) in that game.

A party of 6 banal-shit-boring characters that can't do much interesting things due to lack of skills, special attacks and defences and other stuff that makes combat more interesting.
There's no grappling, no knockdown, no defensive fighting, no charging, shields provide all around protection, no rules for polearms, no flanking, no attack from rear (that's stuff from DMG) - banal shit boring.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

Only when playing F/M/T, otherwise it was a choice between a boring, non-interactive fighter-type or a spellcaster that runs out of spells very fast.
I remember having to add special abilities to my character to be actually able to enjoy the combat a bit.

Well-yes-I-guess if you are soloing otherwise you are always going have those classes and maybe a few more as well.

[Intelligence] So, you prefer watching the game being played to actually playing it?
Fallout had infinitely better combat , with interesting weapons, flavorful enemies, short and descriptive encounters (also, contrary to the dumbfucks' opinion, it is not all about the eye shots, particularly not on lower and middle levels). Comparing Fallout's combat with BG's chore consisting of respawning skeletons and being forced to watch the action against boring DnD monsters unfold is a sin. (BG 2 improved significantly on encounter design, but nothing can fix that system).

BG had DnD stats under the hood, but the only thing they governed was combat, and RTWP is more about watching the combat than participating in it. Battleground Infinity indeed.

Huh? With the IE you always have control. Every second is an attack of opportunity. You do way more watching in FO.

Having control over six characters gives you more control than eye shot vs arm. Called shots did little for FO 3 and wouldnt have been a deal for 1&2 if single player TB combat with shitty NPC tactics wasnt so boring. BG had better combat than the Gold Box games so it handled the D&D stuff as well as any game till ToEE and I would take IWD 2 over ToEE if it has as many mods to buff the AI. I cant think of any battles in FO 1 or 2 that tops the best in BG and I liked FO's battles. I just dont think BG gets enough credit for its combat. Compared to FO the roleplaying was a decline. The combat was way ahead of its time.

 

[janjetina]

BG had better combat than the Gold Box games

If there was any doubt whether you were a troll, or a genuine poster, none would remain after reading that sentence.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

There's no grappling, no knockdown, no defensive fighting, no charging, shields provide all around protection, no rules for polearms, no flanking, no attack from rear (that's stuff from DMG) - banal shit boring.

but it had weapon speed so that tops the Gold Box games. You might like 4th edition D&D. The 'powers' are the only thing I like about it. I just hate the name 'powers'. I'm thinking about learning the Pathfinder system that supposedly combines 4e powers with 3e muulticlassing.

 

[deranged]

Though I consider BG a mediocre game and far inferior to BG2, mainly due to the mind-numbing 'exploration' part hapenning at the pace of a snail, combat was quite enjoyable.

The only fault I could find is the inability to accurately control the the movement of your party in-combat. Nothing more frustrating than spending time micro-managing through a tough encounter and see it in ruins within seconds because your mage decided to follow the most obscure and illogical way-point to cast that fireball.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

BG had better combat than the Gold Box games

If there was any doubt whether you were a troll, or a genuine poster, none would remain after reading that sentence.

So you honestly believe Pool of Radiance had better combat than BG or are you just saying it was better for its time and dont want to begrudge a classic? PoR was my fave game ever but reality is reality. BG had much better combat.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I have found PoR combat more enjoyable, mainly due to personal involvement of the player (manually moving counters and declaring attacks) instead of just watching.

There's no grappling, no knockdown, no defensive fighting, no charging, shields provide all around protection, no rules for polearms, no flanking, no attack from rear (that's stuff from DMG) - banal shit boring.

but it had weapon speed so that tops the Gold Box games. You might like 4th edition D&D. The 'powers' are the only thing I like about it. I just hate the name 'powers'. I'm thinking about learning the Pathfinder system that supposedly combines 4e powers with 3e muulticlassing.

I talked about stuff from 2nd ed DMG. Also, for powers and other stuff like that, there is Player's Options: Combat & Tactics, which is much more suitable for a computer game and Player's Options: Skills & Powers.

 

[Black]

BG had better combat than the Gold Box games

If there was any doubt whether you were a troll, or a genuine poster, none would remain after reading that sentence.

He admitted he's a nigger, give him a break.

 

[Volourn]

"young Dwarfs/"

Don't be ignorant. 100 years is nothing to a race that leaves 400+ minimum. Unless they changed that too for 4E since I ignore it.



" it even got an RTS of the year award. "

And? Last i checked, it sure won a few CRPG awards too. *shrug*



"Non-combat application of stats was nonexistent (CHA influencing merchant prices doesn't count). Dialogues were filled with Bioware trademark fake choices."

Why don't they count? They surely do. It may not be as cool real dialogue skills but chr effecting merchants is an example of non combat application of stats. Dyumbass.

And, BG certainkly had real dialogue choices, and C&C. Idiot.

I'm not saying that BG is tip top of rpgness as it isn't (it's easily worse than BIO's other games) and certyaionly doesn't match up to FO2; but it certainly is a RPG despite its 'origins'.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

I have found PoR combat more enjoyable, mainly due to personal involvement of the player (manually moving counters and declaring attacks) instead of just watching.

What the fuck does that mean ? Manually moving counters?? What PoR were you playing? All you had was attack and guard. You could sweep low level monsters and thats about it for fighters while mages had less than half of BG's spells and thieves couldn't even stealth scout. You didnt have bystanders either. BG had everything PoR had and more... with combat. Otherwise PoR was a better game. Its still my GOAT.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

"young Dwarfs/"

Don't be ignorant. 100 years is nothing to a race that leaves 400+ minimum. Unless they changed that too for 4E since I ignore it.

I stand corrected. Bruenor's death made me more sensitive to their mortality besides Dwarves dont exactly value longevity.

 

[Twinkle]

Diablo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BG.
Diablo 2 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BG2.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

What the fuck does that mean ? Manually moving counters?? What PoR were you playing? All you had was attack and guard.

One had to move them with arrows which was more precise - in BG one clicks a destination point.
As for the attacks - one pointed target for every attack which is more involvement than clicking and watching the fighter fight by himself.

thieves couldn't even stealth scout.

IE stealth is broken anyway, it's just a poor man's invisibility that allows to walk before a group of enemies in a broad daylight.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

One had to move them with arrows which was more precise - in BG one clicks a destination point.
As for the attacks - one pointed target for every attack which is more involvement than clicking and watching the fighter fight by himself.

The ability to enter and exit combat and use RTS tactics trumps that. I don’t know why its important to have control of each attack when neither game had special attacks. Besides you could set the game to pause after every round which would give you just what you wanted.

You could at least bring up the -10 hp before death and bandage system. That’s the only thing I missed when playing BG.

IE stealth is broken anyway, it's just a poor man's invisibility that allows to walk before a group of enemies in a broad daylight.

That’s not a problem until you are higher in lvl by then there are enemies that will sniff you out. Before that point it works well adds something to the game that a lot of party based RPGs lack.

 

[PorkaMorka]

I'll skip commenting on POR vs BG, but there is really no comparison between the best combat encounters found in the Gold Box series and BG1's combat.

I was essentially on autopilot throughout BG1 except during the Sarevok fight, due to imbalances with player archery and poor/boring encounter design.

In addition to being substantially more tactical, the Gold Box games were also more challenging, it was common to have to replay battles several times to get a win.

Additionally, the fights were larger in scale, something that has really diminished over time as fancy graphics have made it imperative on level designers to limit the number of creatures on screen in any particular battle. In POR this may have been 30 Goblins with clubs, but later in the series it was large numbers of tactically interesting monsters with a variety of special abilities, and you really felt that you were involved in a battle at times, not just a small fight.

Normally BG gets a lot of bonus points when compared against a turn based game, for keeping the pace of combat brisk, but Gold Box games also benefited from limited time wasted on animations, just enough animation to provide feedback to make combat satisfying and informative, so one of BG1's typical advantages is minimized due to the excellent pace of the Gold Box games.

BG1 combat vs Fallout combat is a much more fair comparison, which BG1 probably wins. You can't expect BG1 to have any chance when compared to a full series with some of the most enjoyable and best paced turn based tactical combat ever.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

One had to move them with arrows which was more precise - in BG one clicks a destination point.
As for the attacks - one pointed target for every attack which is more involvement than clicking and watching the fighter fight by himself.

The ability to enter and exit combat and use RTS tactics trumps that. I don’t know why its important to have control of each attack when neither game had special attacks.

Because it gives more connection to what PC does - it's active, unlike watching the character attack by himself.

You could at least bring up the -10 hp before death and bandage system.

True.

That’s not a problem until you are higher in lvl by then there are enemies that will sniff you out. Before that point it works well adds something to the game that a lot of party based RPGs lack.

Err...
No. It's before you reach any skill in stealth that allows reliably t reliably stay hidden in shadow for more than 2 rounds, which has nothing to do with level of enemies.
And I don't recall seeing enemies that "sniff you out" in BG1.
Anyway, anyone should be able to "sniff out" someone who prances before their eyes unless there is a total darkness.

 

[MetalCraze]

BG had better combat than the Gold Box games

If there was any doubt whether you were a troll, or a genuine poster, none would remain after reading that sentence.

Or he can just be dumb.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

PorkaMorka??

What was your issue with player archery?

 

[janjetina]

Majority of the combat encounters in BG were dealt with as follows:
0. Set the auto-pause options to pause on spell cast, on character's target destroyed
1. Pre-buff the characters (stoneskin etc.), let mage/sorcerer use Melf's minute meteors
2. Gang up on one enemy (de-buff him if necessary)
3. Watch the fight unfold and press space to unpause a few times
4. Once the enemy dies, repeat 2-4

Only character that sometimes needs to use tactics is the mage / sorcerer, to debuff opposing spellcasters or cast AOE. For tougher fights (Sarevok) you can abuse Monster Summoning.

So, most of the combat is spent watching boring encounters. That's what you do in RTWP. With turn-based combat, you get the chance to react to each enemy action. In RTWP, you get to watch.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

So, most of the combat is spent watching boring encounters. That's what you do in RTWP. With turn-based combat, you get the chance to react to each enemy action. In RTWP, you get to watch.

So what you basically say is that you're retarded.

 

[janjetina]

So, most of the combat is spent watching boring encounters. That's what you do in RTWP. With turn-based combat, you get the chance to react to each enemy action. In RTWP, you get to watch.

So what you basically say is that you're retarded.

Go back to 4chan, dumbfuck.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

So, most of the combat is spent watching boring encounters. That's what you do in RTWP. With turn-based combat, you get the chance to react to each enemy action. In RTWP, you get to watch.

So what you basically say is that you're retarded.

Go back to 4chan, dumbfuck.

With you around this feels EXACTLY like 4chan, fuckbulb.

I'll give you some pointers: you say "BG" and then list Melf's Minute Meteors which are not in the game(nor there is any wizard of high enough level to use them); you try the whole DURRRR HUYRRR IS SO SIMPLE but then admit that you still need to debuff and cast AoE fucking up your entire pathetic abortion of an argument; you clumsily force the point you tried to make(ITZ ALL JUST WATCHING), and then you deliver the punchline(our punchline, you thought that was a perfectly logical conclusion ) by stating that if encounters in "BG" are too easy/simple, ALL games which use rtwp are too easy/simple.

Do you watch anime, perchance?