View Single Post

Default 

September 22nd, 2009, 07:09
Originally Posted by Prime Junta View Post
"Spiritual successor" is a vague and nebulous term and ..
Thus my conclusion. If we're just looking at "getting similar game experience" as definition of "Spiritual successor", well, I had great multiplayer experience in BG, non would be in DA, so IMO, DA will never be a spiritual successor of BG to me.
Originally Posted by Prime Junta View Post
NWN and NWN2 was also based on D&D and is at least as complex in terms of combat.

Please explain.
Yes, both based on DND. No, pardon me for skipping details, I never imagine I can beat BG with my NWN-Barb-Hack-N-Slash playstyle.

Remember Jon irenicus? remember how you beat him?
/* spoiler */





Me and my friend see him weaving spell in his immune bubble,
my rogue friend think it might be a good idea to put some nasty traps under him since he's ignoring us.
what happen after the conversation is, well, he's dead by the traps as he lower his bubble, my party aren't even on the same screen when he dies.

This is what I call use your ability to beat a game.
It doesn't need to be open end/sand box/open world.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta View Post
Yup, it's easier than BG — although if you crank up the difficulty, it can become more challenging. NWN2 in Hardcore, especially. And you can always try different character builds — playing as a bard or rogue is much more rewarding in many ways than playing as a barbarian.
But it'll basically be the same, there isn't alternative way to finish the plot.
And there's still plenty of immunity gear to trivialize everything.

Relax… you don't have to argue with me, I'm a BG fanboy and my opinion is biased.
edit: and I'm really really disappointed when I play NWN.
TheNevers is offline

TheNevers

Traveler

#46

Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6