Review RPG Codex Review: Darth Roxor on Disappointment, thy name is Pillars of Eternity

[DSW]

Somehow, these lost sheep learnt its lesson and started the same quest for money with knowledge of right direction in mind. They rummaged among nostalgia funs and silly hopers. Thus, modern “incline” titles are just scratching in shallow baskets for some money. The obvious overuse of word “whore” toward goddess, which helps in-game apostols, is the substitution, it is Obsidian’s way to say to its own fate “Fuck you, whore! You had betrayed us, und made lucky others!”

Betrayed us? They said they were making a BG clone from the start.

Of course, few indie people try to make game for themselves, not for money. They bring us short relief. However, nothing can change the nature of the man. For example, Mr.Vogel is already in a constant quest for money, you, VD, are on your way, and the only one Styg digging underrail, not yet derailed.

AoD is a cash grab now?

Anyway, the quote is from the Witcher review and wasn't meant to be taken seriously.

Fate betrayed Obsidian. Obsidian did not manage to make a cash grabber as Bethesda did. Substitution I have meant: Endurance is Obsidian. Whore is fate to build good CRPG. Obsidian put its relationships into game unconsciously. That is why Endurance is such a character. Like ass siting on cactus. The best characters are autobiographic one. You should disclose it in your review.


AoD is not yet cash grab. I hope that would not.


By the way, in AoD's quests I am fine to stick with any side by reasons provided. Quest writing explains everything good enough to side with somebody and move forth. In PoE I found myself willing leave quest undone, willing not to side anyone, but forget about quest and move forward. PoE quests are awful and boring because of uninspiring writing. It seems that everything on the place (setting, story, a lot of words), but something is wrong with motivations and backing. That is why I can not see heart or soul in that gaem.

 

[Grinning Reaper]

C&C is terribly overrated.

Maybe so, I didn't see anyone say anything positive about it in this thread at least, so I'm not sure who is overrating it exactly. Maybe "not very important" is a better phrase.

btw, I really like C&C, but I can see why it wouldn't matter much to people who never replay a game and are able to convince themselves that they're making choices in a game when they're really not.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Holy fuck, Vince, you really must be under a lot of stress lately to get into fights with Hover...

Some people have smoke breaks. I have Codex breaks.

C&C is terribly overrated.

Totally. Linear quests and storytelling are good enough for me too!

 

[muds_animal_friend]

C&C is terribly overrated.

WUT?! Above is the bestest PnP RPG system ever devised, and thus the obvious model for CRPGs to emulate. If only there was a studio out there someplace working on bringing this dream to life.

 

[almondblight]

Baldur's Gate actually had some decent stabs at C&C. Stuff like the merchants vs. the druids, the artist who stole the jewels to make his perfect sculpture, the priestess in that town near Baldur's Gate, helping a serial killer escape if you get caught and put in jail, etc. BG ended up failing on the promise of most of these (often, by railroading the player down one path or the other if they say "hey, let's talk about this a second"), but they were more interesting than the stuff in BG2 - deciding on Bohdi vs. the Shadow Thieves, or taking the portal back vs. the ship, felt like flipping a coin, and the game pretty much tells you that it doesn't matter either way.

For all its faults, there was a decent amount of potential in BG that, rather than being improved upon for BG2, was dropped completely.

 

[ROARRR]

Ok C&C:
->Beeing evil or good is a choice with a lot interesting consequences:
+had impact in the dreams and with it what kind of skill you get per dream

It does really? I never knew.

yep, check it out:
http://baldursgate.wikia.com/wiki/Dreams_(Baldur's_Gate)

 

[Jasede]

Holy fuck, Vince, you really must be under a lot of stress lately to get into fights with Hover...

Some people have smoke breaks. I have Codex breaks.

C&C is terribly overrated.

Totally. Linear quests and storytelling are good enough for me too!

You've become so strange lately, VD.

C&C is not a quality marker by itself. Its absence or presence does not necessarily facilitate roleplaying, much as you believe this to be the case. There can and have been and always will be strictly linear campaigns that differ only in details from playthrough to playthrough. Sometimes a cohesive narrative trumps freedom, especially when factoring in cost for the relatively small gain. You always do this. You've done this years ago and you still do it. You think the only good RPGs, the only merit in RPGs are choices and consequences.

Yes you dense old comrade, a linear story with good storytelling beat poorly implemented C&C every time, just like excellent combat can make up for a lack of C&C. I'd rather enjoy and excellent, linear story than a so-so written one that offers tons and tons of freedom. Why do you think I don't enjoy AoD?

Is C&C bad? No, it's great. Is it a must for an RPG? No. No, no, no. So many RPGs have no or none.


Also, you know what's sad? The RPGs with the most C&C I can think of that was made in the last decade are Dark Souls and Bloodborne. And none of that C&C involves clicking on some stale line of dialogue.And none of it involves the alteration of some flimsy, unrewarding ending slides - a type of C&C I've never been fond of in the first place. Make consequences part of the narrative; don't make them "Oh, you went for ending 3 in the quest? Okay, so you get this slide."

 

[Athelas]

Why do you think I don't enjoy AoD?

oh snap

 

[Ninjerk]

 

[Vault Dweller]

C&C is not a quality marker by itself. Its absence or presence does not necessarily facilitate roleplaying, much as you believe this to be the case.

Kinda hard to role-play when your move from A to B to C, when your input is either not required or purely cosmetic.

There can and have been and always will be strictly linear campaigns that differ only in details from playthrough to playthrough.

Have I ever claimed otherwise?

Sometimes a cohesive narrative trumps freedom, especially when factoring in cost for the relatively small gain. You always do this. You've done this years ago and you still do it. You think the only good RPGs, the only merit in RPGs are choices and consequences.

For me, choices and consequences are the very definition of role-playing. To play a role you need to have goddamn options and for the options to be meaningful, they need to have consequences.

I can enjoy a linear game, but the storytelling and characters need to be exceptional (see PST). I can also enjoy a linear game with excellent turn-based combat (dungeon crawlers and such). If a game doesn't have a good turn-based system or an exceptional story, it'd better have C&C. Ideally, it would have all 3, of course.

Yes you dense old comrade, a linear story with good storytelling beat poorly implemented C&C every time...

And I suppose you'd tell me now that BG games had good storytelling?

I'd rather enjoy and excellent, linear story than a so-so written one that offers tons and tons of freedom. Why do you think I don't enjoy AoD?

I must confess that I didn't lose any sleep wondering why that is, but your statement on linear storytelling certainly sheds some light on that mystary.

Is C&C bad? No, it's great. Is it a must for an RPG? No. No, no, no. So many RPGs have no or none.

See above.

Also, you know what's sad? The RPGs with the most C&C I can think of that was made in the last decade are Dark Souls and Bloodborne. And none of that C&C involves clicking on some stale line of dialogue.And none of it involves the alteration of some flimsy, unrewarding ending slides - a type of C&C I've never been fond of in the first place. Make consequences part of the narrative; don't make them "Oh, you went for ending 3 in the quest? Okay, so you get this slide."

Not sure what you're trying to say here. If it's some kinda clever AoD jab, then I'm afraid you didn't play much, if you think that the consequences are in the slides.

 

[fanta]

C&C is terribly overrated.

C&C-faggotry is a species of storyfaggotry. It is essentially the choice of which (mini-)branch of the story to take. And just as storyfaggotry in general, it can spice up an otherwise good game, but if made the main focus is not just overrated but destructive for gaming. It is no coincidence C&C became an IGN buzzword right after "immersive storytelling" and "emotional experience".

Totally. Linear quests and storytelling are good enough for me too!

I'm with you 100% here, provided the gameplay is good of course. Under certain circumstances a linear story can even be good in itself if one can believe that. They say that of some books.

 

[Vault Dweller]

C&C is terribly overrated.

C&C-faggotry is a species of storyfaggotry. It is essentially the choice of which (mini-)branch of the story to take.

It essentially isn't.

Totally. Linear quests and storytelling are good enough for me too!

I'm with you 100% here, provided the gameplay is good of course. Under certain circumstances a linear story can even be good in itself if one can believe that. They say that of some books.

They do, don't they? Unfortunately, most games are written by game designers not gifted writers, so we can consider ourselves lucky when we aren't subjected to lines like "I'm looking for my father, a middle-aged guy!", "I want to be a dragon!", or the classic "the president has been kidnapped by ninjas, are you bad enough dude to save the president?"

Even group efforts like WL2 hardly produce storytelling that can be compared to any decent book. So, hypothetically, yeah, it's totally possible to have a linear game with a rich and captivating great story. Are we going to see one anytime soon? I wouldn't bet on it.

 

[Jasede]

We've seen lots of great games with rich, captivating linear stories. This is all perspective. It's possible you don't play as many games as others. (Understandable.)

And yes, I am well aware how fedoras overrate schlock as well-written because they haven't touched a novel in their entire lives.


I am not gonna VD-quote your post but you're again missing the essential point. No, I don't think the BG games have good storytelling. I don't recall saying that. You're simply assuming that because I don't consider lack of C&C a bad thing. What BG games do have is good encounter design. I wish you'd try to see my perspective: there are other things that can make a game good that have nothing to do with storytelling or C&C. In fact, there are a lot of such things. Your viewpoint feels so narrow which means you're essentially going to be unable to appreciate a lot of good things because you view all their qualities through one lens when it'd be wiser to differentiate a little more.


You said it yourself: you can enjoy RPGs for their combat, or for their storytelling, not just their C&C. The point is that a lack of C&C can't be leveled against an RPG if it has other qualities to back it up. Who would ever hold a lack of C&C against Knights of the Chalice? Conversely, we don't complain much about the combat in PS:T as it has other qualities that overshadow it. I am trying to tell you that this is generally true. I don't even think we have different opinions in this but I do think you ride on this C&C horse too much.

You've been to P&P, right? Not every campaign is a C&C RPG. Sometimes, the group wants to do a dungeon crawl. Sometimes they just want to experience a compelling horror story. Saying that C&C is the most important RPG quality is a valid personal preference but certainly not true in a more detached sense.

 

[Lurker King]

C&C is not a quality marker by itself. Its absence or presence does not necessarily facilitate roleplaying, much as you believe this to be the case. (...) I'd rather enjoy and excellent, linear story than a so-so written one that offers tons and tons of freedom. Why do you think I don't enjoy AoD?

Also, you know what's sad? The RPGs with the most C&C I can think of that was made in the last decade are Dark Souls and Bloodborne "

 

[almondblight]

Unfortunately, most games are written by game designers not gifted writers, so we can consider ourselves lucky when we aren't subjected to lines like "I'm looking for my father, a middle-aged guy!"

Or: "I'm looking for my journal. Have you seen it?"

What BG games do have is good encounter design.

They do. Unfortunately, they're hidden amongst piles and piles of horrible encounter design.

 

[felipepepe]

I wouldn't say that Dark Souls has the best nor the most C&C, but definitely it has the most "natural" one. There are no quest logs, compasses or even NPCs patiently waiting for you until the end of times. It's all about your actions, exploration and performance.

Encountered a NPC many times during your journey? You become battle bros. Took to long to help a NPC in a jam? He went ahead alone and got himself killed. Fought badly by his side and he got too injured? He dies. Got Gud and killed everything while he didn't do shit? Now he feels bad for himself bro.

 

[Jasede]

Unfortunately, most games are written by game designers not gifted writers, so we can consider ourselves lucky when we aren't subjected to lines like "I'm looking for my father, a middle-aged guy!"

Or: "I'm looking for my journal. Have you seen it?"

What BG games do have is good encounter design.

They do. Unfortunately, they're hidden amongst piles and piles of horrible encounter design.

I am going to assume you refer to trash fights here. I would argue they have merit- they serve as a drain of your items and spells. Even the Goldbox games had that.

 

[fanta]

C&C-faggotry is a species of storyfaggotry. It is essentially the choice of which (mini-)branch of the story to take.

It essentially isn't.

I don't mean that the difference between branches must only be in the text displayed. If the C&C is well done, as it is in AoD, the gameplay will also differ. For example, on one choice you'll be sneaking through a palace, and on another fighting the guards (made up examples). The point is that, assuming we're talking about hyperlink-based-C&C, the choice is not made within gameplay. Even when it is well done it is more like choosing which module to run from the main menu of the game than a game itself. Do you want to play Infiltrate the Palace or Fight to the Death? Gameplay/enviromental based C&C as described by felipepepe is a thing of beauty. What I'm ranting against is hyperlink C&C only, with its most degenerate form being the AWESOME hyperlink design. The reader can see if he can spot it in the Figure 7 below.

Oh mighty adventurer, what do you choose?
1. Yes.
2. No.
3. [Perception 9/Wit 7] YOURG AME IS DUMB PLAY IT YOURSELF LOLOL JUST GIVE ME THE LOOT AND XP ALREADY

I agree fully with your second paragraph. That's why it's enough for the story and writing to not be moronic to be adequate for an RPG. I'm perfectly fine with The Merry Band's Quest for Booty and Booty.

 

[Vault Dweller]

We've seen lots of great games with rich, captivating linear stories. This is all perspective. It's possible you don't play as many games as others. (Understandable.)

And yet your top RPG list (had to refresh my memory) features Arcanum, PST (the only linear that did have a rich and captivating story), Wiz 6-8, RoA 2 (quite a few C&C there, buddy), Gothic, and a couple of Ultimas. Where's all them linear games with great stories at?

What BG games do have is good encounter design. I wish you'd try to see my perspective: there are other things that can make a game good that have nothing to do with storytelling or C&C.

Do you have some kinda reading comprehension problem? I've just told you that a good combat system (which isn't the case with BG, for the record) can easily carry a linear game, yet you keep going on and on about C&C.

I nominated Legends of Grimrock 2 as my game of 2014 because it had a great atmosphere, sandbox design, and the dungeon crawling elements (even though it's a RT system) because it did these things better than WL2 did C&C.

In fact, there are a lot of such things. Your viewpoint feels so narrow which means you're essentially going to be unable to appreciate a lot of good things because you view all their qualities through one lens when it'd be wiser to differentiate a little more.

Just because I prefer C&C doesn't mean that that's all I care about it in games or that I'm unable to appreciate other qualities in games. My point was that C&C tend to be better than linear progression and linear quest design because gifted writers are rare in the industry. I've never said that it's the only thing that matters.

 

[Jasede]

I am the one going on about C&C? Really?

I do agree with the statement on gifted writers, but I think you're missing a fair few because of your aversion to consoles. They're quite a few Jap games with very good storytelling, often elevated by good translations.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I am the one going on about C&C? Really?

How many posts about C&C have I made in this 87-page thread?

I commented on your "C&C is overrated", pointing that the opposite of C&C is linear design and linear storytelling. I didn't say "OMG! It's the most important thing EVAH, you fool!!!". I added that linear games are fine if they have good combat systems or great stories (pointing that the latter are rare), thus clearly stating that I don't look just for C&C in games.

Yet you went on about my perspective and how narrow it is and how I can't appreciate other things.

I do agree with the statement on gifted writers, but I think you're missing a fair few because of your aversion to consoles. They're quite a few Jap games with very good storytelling, often elevated by good translations.

I don't know much about that, so I'll take your word for it.

 

[HiddenX]

Choices in CRPGs cannot only be story-choices...

Characters can choose their stats and skills and equipment
Characters can choose their way in the gameworld
Characters can choose their next tactical move in combat
Characters can choose their next answer in dialogs
...

The player can choose character backgrounds, story branches, quests, factions ...

The more of these choices have an interesting impact on the game, the more interesting is the game IMHO.

 

[Jasede]

Get out of this thread and fill out some spreadsheet somewhere, nerd.

 

[HiddenX]

I'm not into Excel so much - I prefer Oracle databases...

 

[FeelTheRads]

Characters can choose their stats and skills and equipment

Lootfag

Characters can choose their way in the gameworld

Explorationfag

Characters can choose their next tactical move in combat

Combatfag

Characters can choose their next answer in dialogs

REAL RPG FAN!!!... er.. I mean storyfag