Poor marketing and a lack of any sort of DRM probably killed FO sales. Not that I like DRMs, but I do seem to remember Diablo taking a CD key. CD keys, although easily cracked by pirates, are generally not cracked by the general public. I may be wrong, but it is a plausible explanation as to why Diablo sold more. The other, of course, could be cross platforming. They did have a version for Playstation I believe. Not sure how many units of that contributed to their big sales #s.
Forgive this rant, but....
- Thread starter Commiered
- Start date
Hmm back in 1997, 1998 I don't recall too many CD burners. Shit, the first burner I had cost $500 AU in 2000 so if there were any around earlier their cost would have been prohibitive for piracy! Doubt that lack of DRM hurt sales beck then. Interplay has always sucked at marketing. God knows how BG slipped out and made it as big as it did.
quant said:
SS2 is well... how about I use a term I mentioned before and call it an action RPG? Although I could as well call it a horror action/adventure with RPG elements.
IWD goes to the same basket as Diablo. Never liked either one too much... Although IWD2 DID at least attempt some meaningful dialogue interactions. Now that I answered your question, may I know why you ignored mine?
.................
In the end it does matter, in the criteria of "fun" you seem to stick to as much as in any other. See, I define a "fun" and involving game as a game that is a good RPG. I dislike h&s. Therefore I find PS:T or Witcher fun, and Sacred or Diablo not so much. Therefore, even though it is subjective, it is unfair to the gamers to label the games improperly: labeling FO3 an RPG is like labeling RE4 an FPS - an improper and misleading description.
ScottXeno said:
um, its nothing like oblivion. each time you press attack to swing your character's weapon the game rolls against your skills to see if your weapon strikes. it rolls chance of success for EVERYTHING just like a classic paper and pencil rpg. the only real difference is that oblivion isnt turn based, its a real time rpg where you time your attacks on the enemy. in that way its combat isnt much different in the most base fundamentals then grandia 2(which i thought was much better then any final fantasy) if you only have one character in your party.
Ausdoerrt said:
I would't try to categorize SS2 as there is no game which is worthy of being compared to it. I got some nearly equal shock moments in FO3 yesterday, FYI. Nearly, of course. Underscored. Maybe Dead Space will frighten me again. Hopefully.
Ausdoerrt said:
Aaaaargh! No it dosn't, how can you say such a stupid thing? Really, shame on you. Talk a 6er party creation which takes several hours before you even start.
Stop your stupid troll-talk, please. Here:
Ausdoerrt said:
See? You haven't the foggiest notion about what the IWD's are about. Not one fuckin' glue. I tell you what: they fill the niche, the niche between PST and BG. PST is a nearly maddening text bitch for sure, IWD's are for the real men only as they are neither about stupid overlengthy interaction nor anything, ANYTHING except fighting.
BG is actually the lengthy (story wise) hybrid of the two.
And no, it has nothing to do with grinding at all. It is about fighting. Highly strategical and tactical fighting and planning. Diablo is a click-fest and I have no idea why you are trying to compare these two. Maybe you played neither?
Ausdoerrt said:
Which one?
Ausdoerrt said:
RE4 is awsome.
ceacar99 said:
I think you misread what I wrote. I said it is an FPS with stats. The stats would constitute the 'rolling' for chance of success. It's still a first person game, and before you get all upset about the FPS you do use weapons like bows and long-range spells. I was merely pointing out that it falls into basically the same general category. I wasn't negating that the stats have some importance over success for the game, I was simply pointing out how it plays. It plays like any FPS would, through the eyes of whatever character you are playing.
Humor is such a subjective thing. Personally ... I found the constant cultural references in FO2 downright annoying and completely "in your face". They were about as subtle as a sledgehammer in flight.Commiered said:
And yet if find the very subtle humor in FO3 quite nice. Those old songs on GNR are well chosen for their subtle dig at the world. And the Ant-Agoniser brought a wry smile to my face (if not because it was such a sad pun). The feel of FO3 constantly reminds you that the world is a nasty place, but occasionally you will find humor in the world ... and it's not trying to smack you in the jaw.
quant said:
Actually, on the topic, I have seen some gaming sites classify it as a "3D Action" game, fyi. Besides, you asked for classification. Classification also generally has little to do with how good the game is wihin the given genre.
What does party creation have to do with a game being a grind-fest? And please, I do not take kindly to internet rage and personal insults.
I killed about 100 hours total on both IWD and IWD2 together, so thank you very much, I have a "fucking clue". They are definitely a bit less mindless than Diablo, but also most definitely overfilled with combat. IWD1 is a kind of annoying dungeon-crawler. Buff-clear dungeon-heal, rinse and repeat. May be fun, but in the same cathegory as Diablo.
Also, forgive my harsh words, but it is sad to hear that you think that PS:T is a "maddening text bitch" and boring, to the point of making me wonder why I am writing this, because you will most likely find it "maddening" to get through my post. No point in arguing about the value of dialogue, story an interaction in RPG.
Ausdoerrt said:
Alien Shooter 2 classification.
Congratulations, you just missed my whole point.
I keep meaning to reinstall PS:T and finish it.
But while I agree that IWD is too much combat, PS:T is the other unhealthy extreme.
Why make a game if your intention is simply to tell a story? If you make an absolutely wonderful game story, but the underlying game mechanics are deadful (PS:T = guilty as charged), wouldn't you make it into a book or something instead?
OK, maybe dreadful is harsh, but it's close. Up to the point that I quit playing, I'd engaged in fifty zillion dialogues, which were admittedly OK, but the combat I'd gotten into was a snoozefest. I don't think I found anything that didn't die in one or two hits to my lone protagonist with no party backup. Rubbish
But while I agree that IWD is too much combat, PS:T is the other unhealthy extreme.
Why make a game if your intention is simply to tell a story? If you make an absolutely wonderful game story, but the underlying game mechanics are deadful (PS:T = guilty as charged), wouldn't you make it into a book or something instead?
OK, maybe dreadful is harsh, but it's close. Up to the point that I quit playing, I'd engaged in fifty zillion dialogues, which were admittedly OK, but the combat I'd gotten into was a snoozefest. I don't think I found anything that didn't die in one or two hits to my lone protagonist with no party backup. Rubbish
The reason that Planescape: Torment works much better as a game than as a book and was designed as a game was that it didn't just tell one linear story, and the game wasn't really about the story. The game was much more about character interactions, your decisions and their impact on other characters (much less so on the game world, though).k9wazere said:I keep meaning to reinstall PS:T and finish it.
But while I agree that IWD is too much combat, PS:T is the other unhealthy extreme.
Why make a game if your intention is simply to tell a story? If you make an absolutely wonderful game story, but the underlying game mechanics are deadful (PS:T = guilty as charged), wouldn't you make it into a book or something instead?
OK, maybe dreadful is harsh, but it's close. Up to the point that I quit playing, I'd engaged in fifty zillion dialogues, which were admittedly OK, but the combat I'd gotten into was a snoozefest. I don't think I found anything that didn't die in one or two hits to my lone protagonist with no party backup. Rubbish
The Nameless One was a blank slate and you got to decide how he lived . You can't let a reader do that in a book (except in those choose-your-own-adventure books, which have many more practical limitations preventing Planescape: Torment's scope).
k9wazere said:
If I had to categorize PS:T, I'd say it's the European version of a Visual Novel with some RPG elements to it. The point of making it into a game is the same as the reason of why Visual Novels are not released in book format instead: it's like an interactive novel. You get to choose your own story and build it from bottom up. That's what makes PS:T, and to a lesser extent BG2 and Witcher, fascinating.
I personally didn't find the mechanics bad in PS:T, and the spells looked mighty cool (hehe kewl effects lolz/sarcasm), then again, not much complaint, since the game did not really force you to fight at all at ANY point of the game.
Ausdoerrt said:
That is certainly not a lie, lol. But then again it isn't a 3D Action game solely, is it? Wolfenstein 3D is 3D Action. Hell, even Panzers is a 3D action game to some degree. That is why fine categorization means shit. I am still not convenienced; for me SS2 is unique, as a couple of other titles.
Ausdoerrt said:
Ha! There you got it...but then again you didn't. It is not 'overfilled' with combat it is
ONLY about combat! You could call them soulless, story-wise; I would't disagree. Annoying is subjective obviously; and please, please stop to compare Diablo and IWD. That's just silly and stupid, except you are one of these rare persons who play all the IE games without pausing?
But then again you missed the point of thoese games, IMO.
Ausdoerrt said:
You misunderstood me, Ausdoerrt. I said 'nearly maddening' and I certainly didn't say 'boring', so please don't twist my words to which I stand. I loved PST for its uniqueness but I missed the pace from time to time.
Characters and Art...FTW! Story? Great! I wasn't able to finish it though, got stuck somewhere. Stupid strange portals...
Ausdoerrt said:
Call me a noob...didn't play that one.
Ausdoerrt said:
No. I didn't think it was a point worthy of responding (as I really don't belive in fine classification). I sure wanted to out me as an avid RE4 fan! Great game!
quant said:
Exactly WHY games like that shouldn't really be called RPG. I'm a little lenient to IWD though, because it does use D&D mechanics. About the pause... It doesn't change the fact that the game is a silly second-rate grindfest. Sure enough, there are a few challenging battles, but most of the time it doesn't even matter much if you actively use the pause or not. With all respect for Black Isle, it's not great gameplay-wise, and I won't go into other details, a discussion not for this thread.
Also think of Lionheart. A Diablo clone with SPECIAL and pause... A mindless grindfest after chapter 1, all the way through.
Just like I said, it may be fun for the people who enjoy action-RPGs for the sake of levelup and cool new items and grinding, but I personally prefer more substance. In these terms PS:T is much closer to what I'd like to see than IWD. I'd take a good Visual Novel over a good action-RPG any day; the best games IMO are those that manage to balance the two ends of the continuum without crippling either side too much. Seinarukana, Witcher, PS:T, FO1, to some extent BG2 and FO2.
Also, I do enjoy RPG games that are only about combat, but they are things like FF Tactics, Hoshigami, FFV, Battle Moon Wars.