Obsidian Entertainment - Tim Cain Joins?

I don't get it.
I felt that both Dragon Age's and Alpha Protocol's gameplay was about killing (or getting past) the exact same generic enemies the exact same way over and over again until you reached the end. Maybe it's because I haven't played NWN in ages, but I think I remember that at least it had a lot more variety, more challenge and far more exciting character development (and no f*ing irrelevant minigames).
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
693
Personally, I think both Alpha Protocol and Dragon Age 1 run rings around NWN (as a campaign game, not a multiplayer DM facility) so your point rather falls flat for me.

I disagree with this comment we all know the user created modules are 10 times better than the campaign.:biggrin: Cant deny the original campaigns were a afterthought though.
 
Joined
Oct 1, 2010
Messages
36,185
Location
Spudlandia
I'm pretty sure Dhruin is referring to the original content. I haven't played much of Alpha Protocol, but I agree 100% that DA:O was a better single-player game.
 
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
39,138
Location
Florida, US
Yeah, I mean seriously as a single player game Neverwinter Nights was just terrible. It a pretty engine and great toolset which led to great user created modules and content, but I think the original NWN campain is the worst thing Bioware has ever produced.

Aliens RPG (another Onyx based game) was an action oriented game, more in the veins of System Shock and BioShock than a true RPG.

I'm pretty sure the Aliens RPG was basically meant to be "Mass Effect meets Aliens". But then I guess this will lead into a debate as to whether or not ME is a RPG or not or some such…

Regarding the Onyx engine, again I feel the need to stress that a good engine can be use for vastly different kind of games (again just look at the versatility of the UE3 or the Gamebryo engine). I'd have no trouble believing the Onyx engine could be used for a Baldur's Gate kind of game for instance - not that I'm saying Obsidian will make such a game at this point in time - but I don't feel the engine is the issue here, it's more that publishers wants games to be action oriented and if you want to survive as a developper, you need your game to be published.

Also I don't feel we have enough technical knowledge about the Onyx engine to claim that it is a "console based" engine or whatever. All I know personally is that it felt very stable and pretty.

-Sergorn
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
207
I don't get it.
I felt that both Dragon Age's and Alpha Protocol's gameplay was about killing (or getting past) the exact same generic enemies the exact same way over and over again until you reached the end. Maybe it's because I haven't played NWN in ages, but I think I remember that at least it had a lot more variety, more challenge and far more exciting character development (and no f*ing irrelevant minigames).

I can't comment on AP, but improved monster/enemy variety coupled with the need for different tactics would have gone a long way to improve DA:Os combat. But combat was already very simplified(compared to say D&D combat mechanics) and rarely what I would call a deeply tactical experience(EG from a magic PoV level drain, curses, petrification, confusion, ect ect would have been welcome - IMO). If Bioware even bothers making "DA3" and combat is a priority I hope they make it a little more tactical/challenging. Bloated HP monsters don't really do much for me.

-EDIT-

For the record, I liked DA:O. Only, I thought it had a lot more potential than the content that was actually delivered… As an example - Skill, speech, talent and stat related checks were poorly implemented/conceived and underutilized in DA:O. What I find funny was Bioware's fix - In DA2 they were gone as you just had Hawke checks. Hawke is not bound by meaningless meaninglessness.

By golly rogue Hawke is a rogue and despite the fact that no known knife throwing skill/ability is present in game s/he is deadly accurate at the 360º jumping knife chuck.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qVDFPcjYK2A

-EDIT #2-

Oops, this is really OT now. I thought this was a different thread altogether. ><

As for Obisidian and the now hired Tim Cain... Good luck to both of em. Hope they deliver on a MoTB or FONV level, whatever that game might be... Unless it is a facebook game!?!
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 28, 2010
Messages
380
I don't get it.
I felt that both Dragon Age's and Alpha Protocol's gameplay was about killing (or getting past) the exact same generic enemies the exact same way over and over again until you reached the end. Maybe it's because I haven't played NWN in ages, but I think I remember that at least it had a lot more variety, more challenge and far more exciting character development (and no f*ing irrelevant minigames).

I you think you missed the point of AP altogether and you are only remembering the (very limited) good parts of NWN. Yes, it had more enemy variety and the D&D ruleset brings inherent advantages - maybe that's enough for you. For me, apart from a shockingly bad campaign, it didn't have a party - which basically made it akin to a hack'n'slash - and introduced a number of BioWare's worst tendencies. The now-trademarked linear corridors, the "find the four Waterdavian creatures" approach, the story really being about someone else (often the female - Aribeth/Bastila <-- same character anyway) and so on.

It was also ridiculously easy, being tuned for a single character with limited tactical options.

I disagree with this comment we all know the user created modules are 10 times better than the campaign.:biggrin: Cant deny the original campaigns were a afterthought though.

My original post specifies the campaign. ;) I definitely think the mod and DM facilities were a tremendous achievement but how can you use the work of modders when comparing to other games?
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
I you think you missed the point of AP altogether and you are only remembering the (very limited) good parts of NWN. Yes, it had more enemy variety and the D&D ruleset brings inherent advantages - maybe that's enough for you.
Maybe (I admit I am very fond of NWN for irrelevant reasons) but I'm not so sure. I understand AP's strength was in the way it unraveled the plot by keeping the user involved as much as possible. At that it was certainly superior. I'm not certain at what extend that can be considered gameplay though, and I understood that blackcanopus' original comment was purely about gameplay not plot development.

(Its level design was a lot more confined though… linear corridors? that's AP! NWN had at least a few relatively open spaces.)

Even though you only talked about its main campaign, I think if several good mods made for NWN prove anything, is that a better core gameplay does exist and you can see it emerging in its "shockingly bad" campaign, even if it's severely undermined by it.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
693
I know a lot of people will disagree with this but, after much thought over the years, plot, character interaction et al are all "gameplay" to me. I don't see any point in separating them. Case in point, given the "gameplay" is the same between the NWN campaign and a "good" mod, doesn't that prove the importance of the plot, character interaction and so on? The "core gameplay" isn't what has changed.

Anyway, I'm not here to argue about NWN. :)
 
Joined
Aug 30, 2006
Messages
11,842
Location
Sydney, Australia
I know a lot of people will disagree with this but, after much thought over the years, plot, character interaction et al are all "gameplay" to me.

I agree especially when the game put actual importance into choice&consequence like Obsidian tends to do.

-Sergorn
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
207
I thought the original campain of NWN2 was very good personally, except perhaps for the first hours in the city of Neverwinter were it dragged down a bit, the rest was rock solid though.

In any case it was lightyears ahead the crapfest that was the NWN1 OC.

-Sergorn
 
Joined
Dec 12, 2008
Messages
207
Back
Top Bottom