Video Games: A (Sonic 3D) Blast From The Past

[Caligula_K3]

59 minutes ago, Slurktan said:

Its been easy to shit on Bioware because Bioware hasn't done anything actually original since Baldurs Gate 2.  They do the same basic plot over and over and over and sheep eat it up.

Strongly disagreed. I agree that at one point they were getting pretty formulaic with their plots (KOTOR I, DA:O and ME1 all have the same basic structure (go to four areas and get four things you need! Then go beat the final boss) but they've done a lot more interesting things since then. Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age 2 are in particular very unusual for Bioware games, even if DA2 has other problems. And Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age Inquisition are pretty different in terms of plot from what came before, even if not everything is well executed and I wish Bioware would rely less on the "end of the world" plotlines. But it's kind of crazy to suggest Bioware doesn't try anything new. Bioware more than most developers tends to switch things up between games (compare ME:1 and ME:2). This isn't always for the better; I wish they'd stop trying to fit the open world model onto their games. But very few of their games tend to be similar (DA:I and ME:A are probably the only two that come to mind, for me).

 

I just don't see why some RPG fans feel the need to criticize Bioware at every turn. No, not every game they make is great. Yes, Andromeda was at best mediocre. Other RPGs have come out that are better than what Bioware has produced recently: Divinity Original Sin 2 seems to be one, and The Witcher 3 another. But they do something fairly unique in modern video games: AAA budget action RPGs with a focus on character building and development, companions, and choices. The only types of games that are really comparable are the Witcher ones, and even they are doing something pretty different. It's possible to appreciate what Bioware does, even if you're more a fan of Baldur's Gate isometric RPGs, and to enjoy both Divinity: Original Sin 2 and Dragon Age: Inquisition.

[Melphis Amekia]

1 hour ago, Caligula_K3 said:

But they do something fairly unique in modern video games: AAA budget action RPGs with a focus on character building and development, companions, and choices. 

This is a huge dismissal of Japanese RPG's which cannot stand. I do agree Bioware is sort of unique for a Western developer, but they are hardly unique if you look at more than just the Western market.

[Slurktan]

3 hours ago, Caligula_K3 said:

Strongly disagreed. I agree that at one point they were getting pretty formulaic with their plots (KOTOR I, DA:O and ME1 all have the same basic structure (go to four areas and get four things you need! Then go beat the final boss) but they've done a lot more interesting things since then. Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age 2 are in particular very unusual for Bioware games, even if DA2 has other problems. And Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age Inquisition are pretty different in terms of plot from what came before, even if not everything is well executed and I wish Bioware would rely less on the "end of the world" plotlines. But it's kind of crazy to suggest Bioware doesn't try anything new. Bioware more than most developers tends to switch things up between games (compare ME:1 and ME:2). This isn't always for the better; I wish they'd stop trying to fit the open world model onto their games. But very few of their games tend to be similar (DA:I and ME:A are probably the only two that come to mind, for me).

I haven't played Andromeda so I have no idea if it follows the formula.  ME3 does follow it just under the guise of "gathering forces to fight".  I can't remember Inquisition too well but I seem to remember that being there as well.. But yes I was exaggerating a bit.

Regardless by my count Bioware has made 10 full RPGs since Baldurs Gate 2:(not counting Andromeda)  Kotor, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, ME, DA:O, ME2, DA:2,  TOR, ME3, DA I.

Knights, Neverwinter, Jade Empire, Mass Effect 1 and 3, DA:O (and maybe DA:I), the class stories of TOR all follow the gather 4 things plotline taken from Baldurs Gate 2.  Which makes at least 8 of 12 games including BG2 and Andromeda.

[Melphis Amekia]

2 hours ago, Slurktan said:

I haven't played Andromeda so I have no idea if it follows the formula.  ME3 does follow it just under the guise of "gathering forces to fight".  I can't remember Inquisition too well but I seem to remember that being there as well.. But yes I was exaggerating a bit.

Regardless by my count Bioware has made 10 full RPGs since Baldurs Gate 2:(not counting Andromeda)  Kotor, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, ME, DA:O, ME2, DA:2,  TOR, ME3, DA I.

Knights, Neverwinter, Jade Empire, Mass Effect 1 and 3, DA:O (and maybe DA:I), the class stories of TOR all follow the gather 4 things plotline taken from Baldurs Gate 2.  Which makes at least 8 of 12 games including BG2 and Andromeda.

You do realize pretty much everything in fiction ever has already done, from plotlines to characters to everything. Every (decent) writer learns that sooner or later and then they start using those tropes and plotlines to their advantage. The problem is not at all with Bioware doing the same basic plot, the real problem is the execution of those plots, which Bioware did with better or worse success.

[Inigima]

I beat Samus Returns. Really liked it. Best Metroid in a long, long time. Biggest complaint is that you spend an awful lot of time holding L to free aim and it's not super comfortable. Other than that, though, it's really good.

[Fez]

10 hours ago, Melphis_Amekia said:

This is a huge dismissal of Japanese RPG's which cannot stand. I do agree Bioware is sort of unique for a Western developer, but they are hardly unique if you look at more than just the Western market.

Very few Japanese RPGs have much in common with Western (or Eastern European) RPGs. They often are telling epic stories, and can have extremely well-developed stories, but the focus is much more of a pre-determined path that the player follows. There is rarely the opportunity to build your character in different ways through meaningful dialog choices; and the plots will almost never have different outcomes depending on player choice. It's a much more railroaded experience.

[Caligula_K3]

14 hours ago, Melphis_Amekia said:

This is a huge dismissal of Japanese RPG's which cannot stand. I do agree Bioware is sort of unique for a Western developer, but they are hardly unique if you look at more than just the Western market.

I really like JRPGs, but I can't think of any that do what Bioware do, as @Fezsays. It's a different kind of experience. But It's very possible there are games I haven't played that are more Bioware-esque.

 

 

 

[Jon AS]

11 hours ago, Slurktan said:

Knights, Neverwinter, Jade Empire, Mass Effect 1 and 3, DA:O (and maybe DA:I), the class stories of TOR all follow the gather 4 things plotline taken from Baldurs Gate 2.  Which makes at least 8 of 12 games including BG2 and Andromeda.

It's not really a plotline, it's a design structure. What those games do is giving you a hub (or 2, in the case of JE; and was it 3 or 4 with NWN?) from which you can do required and optional quests, once all the required quests are done you can move forward in the story or continue to spend time on optional content.

BG2 for that matter didn't have any required quest beyond "gather 15,000 gp" (which got reduced by 5,000 as soon as you had gathered 10,000), everything else was optional content.

 

The advantage of this structure is pretty clear: if for whatever reason one area or sidequest isn't working out, it can be easily cut with minimal repercussions for the critical path through the game.

The disadvantage is that if you stick to the structure too rigidly, it will feel formulaic. Which is why Bioware have consistently played around with it over the years, after using it very noticeably in KOTOR, ME1 and DAO. E.g. ME2's base structure isn't really different, but it feels very different because the content is split up by character as opposed to location.

[mcbigski]

War of the Chosen is a nice expansion.  Except when you re playing Iron man, all of your Specialists are dead, and you cant even replace the lost nanomed kits because you dont have any Viper corpses handy and Shen forgot how to build the vanilla med kit.

Got my last two specialists killed on a sabotage mission to stop the Avatar countdown clock.  Probably would have had one of them survive but when a rookie got Mind Controlled my Templar Major decided to panic and charge a heavy turret w his auto pistol instead of planting the damn x4 charges.  At least 2 guys got out alive and the fight continues...

Playing w the permanent Dark Events option is super fun and annoying too.

[Kalbear]

Phoenix Point is on sale this weekend for preorder for 20% off this weekend if you use the code EGX20, making it only $24. 

[Manhole Eunuchsbane]

7 minutes ago, Kalbear said:

Phoenix Point is on sale this weekend for preorder for 20% off this weekend if you use the code EGX20, making it only $24. 

Thanks for the heads up! The first X-com game might be my favorite turn based strategy game of all time.

[Caligula_K3]

4 hours ago, Jon AS said:

 

The advantage of this structure is pretty clear: if for whatever reason one area or sidequest isn't working out, it can be easily cut with minimal repercussions for the critical path through the game.

The disadvantage is that if you stick to the structure too rigidly, it will feel formulaic. Which is why Bioware have consistently played around with it over the years, after using it very noticeably in KOTOR, ME1 and DAO. E.g. ME2's base structure isn't really different, but it feels very different because the content is split up by character as opposed to location.

Yep. By ME1/DA:O the structure had definitely gotten overly formulaic, but there's nothing wrong with it per se. Just like some of the best Zelda games followed the same formula of "get three macguffins, have a plot twist, get another four-five macguffins." Sure it got old after a while, and some games thankfully changed up the formula (Majora's Mask, Breath of the Wild), but when it was executed well, it still led to great games (Ocarina of Time, Wind Waker, Twilight Princess). And some of Bioware's most critically acclaimed and fan-praised games follow the formula, like KOTOR and DA:O. While I'm happy they've been switching it up more recently, the structure itself doesn't make their games bad.

I finished Dark Souls 2. I have to admit that for the last third of the game, I basically just followed a walkthrough. I have no idea how you're supposed to know what to do and where to go for this part of the game... It really all did feel very sloppy and jumbled together. I still had fun with it, but it's definitely a cut below Dark Souls 1 and 3.

Now starting to try to figure out Crusader Kings 2. I've played Paradox games before, but this one seems especially complicated and hard to figure out. Wish me luck!

[Mark Antony]

 

[GallowKnight]

24 minutes ago, Mark Antony said:

 

Well, that certainly looks spectacular.

I'm not entirely sold on the prequel aspect of it though. I still think a story and characters mostly unrelated to the first one would be better and more interesting. Hopefully it will feature John Marston as little as possible

[Jace, Extat]

Getting in on a Franks campaign in Attila. Fucking Saxons burned my village.

[KiDisaster]

Played a bit of the CoD WW2 beta last night. I can confirm that it is a CoD game. Nothing really seems to have changed since Black Ops which was the last one I bought I think. 

I'll probably buy this one for the campaign (I heard the campaign in the last futuristic one was actually really good so I'm hoping this one will be as well) and to play some zombies with friends but I have no real interest in the actual multiplayer. 

[Corvinus85]

TW: Warhammer 2 was released yesterday. I hopped between Lizardmen and High Elves a bit, until I've settled on a campaign with the Lizardmen faction, Last Defenders, led by Kroq-Gar. There are a few features that I don't like about the game, comparing it with the first one, but they are small quibbles, and the game is still great. The factions once again have their unique play styles, and for the first time ever, you have a grand scenario within the campaign, the race for the Vortex, which could actually get you to lose the campaign, even if you are successful in the traditional aspects of a TW game.

And while I continue to deplore the use of DLCs to improve a game, part of me can't wait for those DLCs. My initial reaction to the first game was so-so, but I found that it greatly improved with the DLCs, and other tweaks they did via patches. I think I'll be able to say the same for this one. I especially can't wait for them to combine the maps in one grand campaign.

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

22 minutes ago, KiDisaster said:

Played a bit of the CoD WW2 beta last night. I can confirm that it is a CoD game. Nothing really seems to have changed since Black Ops which was the last one I bought I think. 

I'll probably buy this one for the campaign (I heard the campaign in the last futuristic one was actually really good so I'm hoping this one will be as well) and to play some zombies with friends but I have no real interest in the actual multiplayer. 

How is the game play in relation to Black Ops?

 

[KiDisaster]

24 minutes ago, Arch-MaesterPhilip said:

How is the game play in relation to Black Ops?

Keeping in mind that I haven't played Black Ops since however many years ago it came out, it feels pretty much exactly the same from what I remember. I'm sure there are some subtle differences but I'm not familiar enough with CoD to notice them.

[Arch-MaesterPhilip]

1 minute ago, KiDisaster said:

Keeping in mind that I haven't played Black Ops since however many years ago it came out, it feels pretty much exactly the same from what I remember. I'm sure there are some subtle differences but I'm not familiar enough with CoD to notice them.

That's good enough for me, everything after Black Ops was just two different. If it is as similar as you say I think I'll be happy with it.