Unknown Pleasures 2009: Age of Decadence

Eyenixon said:
I don't think it stands along FO1 for one reason, and that's the fact that most of your options are restricted to killing things, one of the major components of VDweller's arguments is that there are varying approaches to specific situations. And the ending? <snip>

Really, "choice and consequence" is too overused. I said "a couple of big choices" that affect the main ending. For example, destroying the Orb. For example, choosing to cooperate with Herdrack and join the Temple. TOEE is in fact one of the few cRPGs I know that allows you to have an evil ending. Also, if you remember, FO1 and FO2 were basically "a bunch of slides" as well, with a cinematic sequence or two. Almost an identical approach.

In TOEE you're slapped with "Butcher of Hommlett" or "Defiler of Women", and a number of other reputations that affect reaction from NPCs ranging from an occasional line to attack-on-sight. Sure, you can slaughter ALL of Hommlett, but then you lose access to a whole number of stores, an inn, a LOT of quests (that net you at least two levels for an full 8-people party), one of the three (two in the original) blacksmiths who offer masterwork weapons, access to the only two clerics who can raise party members, the only cleric who can "forgive" a fallen paladin, some of the strongest NPCs, and an access to one of the endings - the ultimate "good" ending. You are not going to have people chasing around for you, because it's a different setting, and Hommlett is an isolated village with few contacts in the middle of nowhere. It'd take months before someone realizes what happened, and very few would care.

Then again, I'd like to see someone kill the whole of Hommlett. It's pretty challenging unless your party is really high level, considering Jaroo, Terjon, Rufus&Burne. If you're playing the Co8 pack, it's even harder, somewhat like clearing Navarro in FO2.

Decisions are not restricted to killing. There is a diplomatic approach. If you have high enough diplomacy, or bluff, or intimidation, you can negotiate with a lot of enemies - gnolls guarding the Moathouse, some of Lareth's guards, the Temple priests, Oolghrist, Scorrp, even Zuggtmoy (you can intimidate her and bind her as your servant for life iirc). All we're missing is the sneak option, but that's primarily because the sneak system doesn't work properly (although from what I hear sneak can work, but is incredibly buggy). Not much of a loss really, since not many D&D cRPGs did ever make a proper sneaking system.

I would say though that the dialogue system (not to confuse with a better written dialogue) is more versatile than in FO1/2, because we get more different skill check based on different situations, as well as stat checks and class checks, as opposed to just "speech" "INT" and "CHA".

In the end, it's not like I don't understand your point, I very well agree that in TOEE many times everything else takes a backseat to the beautiful and fun TB combat, but I think it would be improper to overlook the rest of the game just because of that. The aforementioned dialogue system, multiple endings, the great quest layout, especially in Hommlet and the Temple.
 
Eyenixon said:
I can put together a list too you know, and I don't think a list with Diablo 2 on it is exactly proving his point, and that's not his fault, it's probably yours for using it as an example.

Maybe. I wasn't really trying to prove his point, though. Just saying he obviously has more than five games inside his definition. I sort of wish I hadn't though. What's this debate about again?
 
Heh, I really like the way Vince D. Weller uses Bethesda as a negative example. Finally someone with balls.

While we're at it - can the Witcher be called an RPG according to the definition used in this short quote?
 
The Witcher is definetly a RPG. If it is a good one is a different question.

But it has a similarity to Planescape where you play the role of a single character and guide him trough the world. In Planescape you play the Namelesone (you have a lot more important decisions to make compared to other RPGs though), in The Witcher you play Gerald, a Witcher.
 
But it has a similarity to Planescape where you play the role of a single character and guide him trough the world.

Holy shit! It's almost like Super Mario Bros for the NES, in which you also play the role of a single character and guide him through the world! In Torment, you play the nameless one and do some things. In Super Mario Bros, you play Mario.

It all makes sense now!
 
Wooz said:
Holy shit! It's almost like Super Mario Bros for the NES, in which you also play the role of a single character and guide him through the world! In Torment, you play the nameless one and do some things. In Super Mario Bros, you play Mario.

It all makes sense now!
It's true. Incidentally, Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga is actually more of an RPG than the Witcher, because the former allows you to choose between two character classes: Mario and Luigi.
 
But in Mario you're playing those characters through the only one way that has been written already.

In the games like The Witcher, you're playing this main character, but You have to decide which ways he will go through, to finish the story (which has few different endings). And thanks to building up your character (stats, exps, etc), it's your decision on how this "role" you are playing, will be developed, and on the way of this development, the world is going to react differently.

The Witcher is considered an Action RPG, mainly because Geralt is still, designed to kill monsters. But you can try to change that during the game.

This game would've turned out to be a simple action game, but it hasn't. That's a good thing I guess.
 
Wooz said:
But it has a similarity to Planescape where you play the role of a single character and guide him trough the world.

Holy shit! It's almost like Super Mario Bros for the NES, in which you also play the role of a single character and guide him through the world! In Torment, you play the nameless one and do some things. In Super Mario Bros, you play Mario.

It all makes sense now!
A bit touchy arent we :p


If one does like The Witcher or not is one thing. I was just trying to make a example. No doubt that Planescape is a better attempt in "decisions" regarding your character.

But I think as a game The Witcher really makes a good job in "Role playing" Gerald from Rivia. It actualy contains a few more or less important role playing aspects.

All I wanted to say that sometimes a RPG can be about a "single" character you play or individual. Other times it can be about many archetypical characters like a fighter, mage or thief. Or it can be like Fallout which is not so much about classes but more about the stats.

In any case The Witcher is more of a "RPG" then Fallout 3 in my eyes.
 
Back
Top