|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Dark Souls II - What they can do to make it better @ Kotaku

Default Dark Souls II - What they can do to make it better @ Kotaku

December 28th, 2012, 05:12
Originally Posted by vurt View Post
It's already in the game, it's called "leveling up". I found the game very (too) difficult before leveling up my character quite a bit..

And yes, i really believe an "easy mode" from the start without much challange (no need to level up even) could really have lowered the overall score from reviewers, in fact i'm 100% sure it would.. It sounds to me like you havent played the game and therefore don't get it.
And I really believe it would have no effect on the score with the possible exception of giving them a slight increase esp since with easy mode, they can throw in a hard mode as well. But that is beside the point. And why would you assume people that are modding the game or want an easy mode want a no challenge mode? I personally hate god modes in games.

The people on cheat engine forums seems to want a range of thing, from slightly easier to a lot easier to god mode. I have read post from many people that have played the game(I already stated earlier I have not) that they like the game but quit as it was too hard, if it was a little easier (not super easy i.e no level up easy) they would really love the game. For me I don't care if some people want god mode, some want very easy, some just less hard.

Its the idea people seem to have expressed in this thread that people can't possible like to play a game differently than me,that Dark Souls only value is the strong difficulty, when I clearly see people who are modding the games difficulty liking it very much. And many people expressing they would like the game who have played it only lower the difficulty. I know I don't like dieing a lot, Dark Soul based on reviews and videos looks neat and I would like to try it, but a less hard version, which I can try because of the mods which is cool, I am use to having to mod games, never played a game I did not want to mod, I am picky.

Its like I said with TES mods, some people mod there games to something that turns some of my fav games into horrible monstrosity's that I would never want to play. People have there own taste, some gamers are simply not able due to disabilities to play Dark Souls at is normal difficulty, some don't want to. Adding a easy mode(and you can throw in a hard mode at the same time) I don't think hurts the game but only helps it, esp with the complementary hard mode.

I am free because I choose to be so-me
Last edited by Kefka; December 28th, 2012 at 05:36.
Kefka is offline

Kefka

Kefka's Avatar
Watcher

#101

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 06:29
They should have put an easy mode in monkey island too, one were you didn't have to solve any puzzles that would have made the game way "better". Sarcasm mode off.

Favourite RPGs of all time: Wizardry 6, Ultima 7/7.2, Fallout2, Planescape Torment, Baldurs Gate 2+TOB, Jagged Alliance 2, Ravenloft: The stone prophet, Gothic 2, Realms of Arkania:Blade of destiny (not the HD version!!) and Secret of the Silver Blades.
bjon045 is offline

bjon045

bjon045's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#102

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Sigil
Posts: 946

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 09:15
Kefka, if you haven't played the game i don't think you're even entitled to an opinion. You wouldnt understand the core game mechanics without even trying the game first. And again, the difficulty is adjustable, like i explained. I'm now 40, my reflexes and patience is nowhere near what it was 20 years ago, i still loved the game. I'm glad there wasnt an easy mode, it would have made me played it that way ( i rarely play on hard or impossible, i stick to easy or normal for most games), and i probably would have found it to be a rather dull game.

SiiiiLENCE the DISCOOOORD…
vurt is offline

vurt

vurt's Avatar
Serial Modderer

#103

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The land of rape and honey
Posts: 1,616

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 11:44
Allright.

Enough about the difficulty.

You people who think the challenge is the game, that the difficulty is what makes Dark Souls good, you don't give the game enough credit.

I like the game despite its difficulty. So, what's so good about it? What made me play it well over 100 hours (138 hours to be exact - just checked) even though I hated dying and having to repeat the same fights over and over?

Well, for one thing, the combat is very satisfying. Which is a good thing, because there is so much of it. It's often wonderfully slow, deliberate and heavy. You really feel the weight of the weapons. I spent a lot of time wielding larege, unwieldy weapons that my character didn't have enough strength to use effectively. That's no way to play if you just want to beat the game, I know. But that's how I often play games - inventing my own difficulty, rather than having the game dictate it.

Those of you who enjoy the difficulty seem to assume that a sucky gamer like me would prefer simpler "klick on a monster to attack it" gameplay, but that's not the case at all. I love the combat as is. I want to be involved in every swing, I just wish my character could take a few more hits before dying.

But foremost I love tha atmosphere. And to me, atmosphere is everything. (As everything in a game contributes to the atmosphere.) It's so heavy and mysterious. I love the look of the combat too, which is just as important as the combat mechanics. The design is wonderfully restrained, without the ridiculously flashy fireworks and visual effects plaguing most other games.

I'm an explorer kind of gamer. I like to enter a mysterious world, interact with it and discover things about it. There are rather few NPCs in Dark Souls, but they are wonderfully designed. The Crestfallen Warrior is my favourite. He reminds me of Xan, the depressed mage in Baldur's Gate. There is something very sad and poetic about these characters. A bit like Planescape Torment, really. There should be more characters like these in games.

The world of Dark Souls is not very large, but it's well designed. And I like how clues and information is sparse and scattered, making you guess and wonder. Not unlike the worlds of Myst and Riven.

My favourite part of the game is the painted world of Aramis. It was a real joy to discover it, hidden away in a magical painting as it is. That's the kind of thing that makes exploring worth while. The place is forlorn, snowridden and beautiful. This also happened to be the section of the game where my skill best matched the difficulty, so I didn't have to spend more time there than I actually wanted to.

All of the game is not that well designed. I pretty much hated the outdoors of Anor Londo, for instance. You have to traverse large, rather empty distances each time you die, which you do very often on those roofs. And the architecture makes no sense.

But on the whole, Dark Souls is poetry. And I agree that the cahallenge is part of the poetry too. It really is. My point is that the challenge should be suited to the player's ability, in order not to destroy the poetry. Because if you feel that the game is too difficult, then it is too difficult for you.
Mr Smiley is offline

Mr Smiley

Mr Smiley's Avatar
Watchdog

#104

Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 158

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 12:14
And now a few words on the difficulty itself.

Many have stated that the difficulty is an inherent part of the design of Dark Souls, essential to the experience the developers intended for the player. (Prepare to die, right?) And I agree.

But what is difficulty in a game like this? How do you measure it? Actually, it can be easily measured in deaths and attempts.

Take any given obstacle in the game. This is a game where death is a natural ingredient; you are supposed to die and retry. How many times should you die and retry before you overcome a particular obstacle? What experience did the developers intend?

I don't know. But let's assume that if you defeat a particular enemy on the first try without dying, then the game is too easy for you, because the developer's intention was for you to experience three or four deaths there. Then, if you die ten times, the game is too hard for you, for the same reason.

My point is that the developers can't possibly control the player experience, because it's individual. Nor should they. The difference between interactive entertainment and movies, is that a game lets the player control their own experience to some extent, while movies are all about the director controlling the experience.
Mr Smiley is offline

Mr Smiley

Mr Smiley's Avatar
Watchdog

#105

Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 158

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 12:54
You have to refer to the whole of the experience. You might beat a boss on first attempt but struggle ten times for another.

Besides, the video game industry does not aim at the satisfaction of every customer but the majority of them. It is enough a game to be difficult for the majority of the customers.

Most of the times, in video gaming, the difficulty is inflated through cheap tricks.

It is not about difficult things to do, it is about making anything difficult.

Same thing as for taking a bent with a car:

with a formula one, taking a lightly curved bent is easy.
With a broken steering system car, taking the same lightly curved bent is difficult.

Usually, video games put players in difficult conditions to inflate the difficulty.
ChienAboyeur is offline

ChienAboyeur

SasqWatch

#106

Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,049

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 13:07
Some of the reasoning and justification for not having an easy mode in this thread is laughable at best.

Review scores are going to plummet because of an easy mode? LOL. Give me a break.
Fluent is offline

Fluent

Fluent's Avatar
RPG Fiend
RPGWatch Team

#107

Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 2,179

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 13:34
Originally Posted by Fluent View Post
Some of the reasoning and justification for not having an easy mode in this thread is laughable at best.

Review scores are going to plummet because of an easy mode? LOL. Give me a break.
I'm 100% certain it would. It affects the whole experience in a much bigger way than, let's say, in Skyrim. The difficulty / balance is too vital for the experience, it's very easy to understand why there isnt any difficulty settings, but if you havent played it you wouldn't understand. If you did play it I'd like to hear how you would implement an "easy mode" without altering the experience too much. If you don't have an argument it's you who's "laughable"..

Same could be said for a game like Super Meatboy, it just wouldnt have scored very high with an easy mode, no doubt. Sometimes there's a reason why difficulty is left out, there's a lot more to it than what you might think. Perfecting the difficulty and combat in this game must have been some serious piece of work, an artform in itself i would say.

SiiiiLENCE the DISCOOOORD…
Last edited by vurt; December 28th, 2012 at 17:42.
vurt is offline

vurt

vurt's Avatar
Serial Modderer

#108

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The land of rape and honey
Posts: 1,616

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 14:30
I haven't seen a single game which has managed to get difficulty levels right. Except Diablo but that's because they are part of the game, you're meant to play through one after the other until you reach the hardest one.

Each game to have them is in some way messed up because of them.
GothicGothicness is offline

GothicGothicness

GothicGothicness's Avatar
SasqWatch

#109

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,183

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 14:44
Originally Posted by vurt View Post
I'm 100% certain it would. It affects the whole experience in a much bigger way than, let's say, in Skyrim. The difficulty / balance is too vital for the experience, it's very easy to understand why there's isnt difficulty settings, but if you havent played it you wouldn't understand. If you did play it I'd like to hear how you would implement an "easy mode" without altering the experience too much. If you don't have an argument it's you who's "laughable"..

Same could be said for a game like Super Meatboy, it just wouldnt have scored very high with an easy mode, no doubt. Sometimes there's a reason why difficulty is left out, there's a lot more to it than what you might think. Perfecting the difficulty and combat in this game must have been some serious piece of work, an artform in itself i would say.
A simple stat change. You take less dmg or deal more, something along those lines. I see no reason to believe that multiple difficulty settings would hurt the game, only help it. Have Very easy to nightmare, and it would all be done via stat change. And its not relevant how much this alters the experience, those for many it would simply make the experience more like those of others with better reflexes,etc. For the disabled gamer it might make it playable yet still very hard. Or an easy mode might greatly change how the game feels to play, but that is not the point other people get different things and play games in different ways.

The cheatforum folks and other random people I have seen across the net, seem to indicate there is some(perhaps quite small) demand for an easy mode. That is a vague term as some want actual easy and some just want not quite so damn hard. But its is easier to type easy mode and then all the other stuff each time.

I am free because I choose to be so-me
Kefka is offline

Kefka

Kefka's Avatar
Watcher

#110

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 17:11
Originally Posted by Kefka View Post
A simple stat change.
It's already in the game, it's called "leveling up". The mobs and bosses doesnt scale, so that's your "easy mode" right there. Yeah, you have to grind, but the combat is so great that you probably won't mind it.

SiiiiLENCE the DISCOOOORD…
vurt is offline

vurt

vurt's Avatar
Serial Modderer

#111

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The land of rape and honey
Posts: 1,616

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 17:52
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
(addressed a bit out of order):
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I like that Dark Souls does what it does well - but it's just not enough for me. Again, I guess you just really like combat - because no matter what you claim, that's basically all Dark Souls is.
I´ve already said that I like the game for its combat, level design, exploration and atmosphere.
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
You don't seem to understand the concept of content gating.
It doesn´t matter whether the content in question is an area, a quest, or an item.
Level scaling that affects the existence of an item in the game world is a form of content gating. One item seems like a minor thing, but when this design is applied almost across the board it largely gates "bundles of content representing progress". I prefer when the item bundle is tied to exploration, not character level.
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
It might suit you to own up to reality and just accept that Dark Souls have certain strengths and not certain other strengths. I mean, honestly, you're trying to paint a picture of Dark Souls like a game with a ton of story and lots of meaty NPC interaction. You're pulling all you can from the game that resembles what I'm looking for - and you're fully aware that those things won't suffice.
I´ve already said in response to your "narrow gameplay" comment that it´s "combat AND exploration" and in response to one about the game´s qualities ("blast from the past with strong visuals and a great combat system") I´ve added "AND great level design, rewarding exploration, unique atmosphere", which is why I thought it would be obvious that the points I´ve made about story elements or puzzles weren´t supposed to paint them as something as major as combat.
I haven´t said "there´s a crapload of puzzles, period". I described what I consider the game´s puzzle elements too, so even if you disagree about some of the stuff being puzzle element, at least you knew what I was talking about.
Since you have barely played the game, I pointed out that NPCs have more to say than what you´ve experienced. I didn´t say the game is filled with huge story arcs and I´ve given you an example of what I consider a mini story. I don´t care whether that´ll suffice for you or not.
Speaking of which,
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Let me guess, you don't get even get much of a story about the guy in question?
A small bit of background. No details on motivation.
It´s just an NPC you crossed path with a few times. He had his own story, you got a glimpse of it. Some others give a bit more background or motivation, or you can infer such, but in general this game doesn´t spill all the beans in this regard (and it´s a part of what gives it a distinct character).
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Could you describe some of the puzzles? Because if there are actual puzzles or riddles - I might reconsider playing it.
"There are even few traditional ones" should tell you there probably isn´t much of what you´d consider "actual puzzles or riddles".
Spoiler

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Ehm, why don't you think the puzzles in Skyrim fit organically into the gameworld? There are plenty of those.
They usually scream "puzzle time!", where something more complex would fit (Labyrinthian) there isn´t and, considering the overall volume of Skyrim´s content, "plenty" is a stretch, if I discount repetitive and arbitrary pillars and claws.
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I believe I've already conceded that you find items, and I don't think mentioning that those items expand your arsenal changes anything. That's what items and spells do in RPGs.
In Dark Souls they do it to a more significant degree than in many other RPGs and none are level scaled.
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Yes, you could strictly categorize a lot of things as a lot of things. But I think puzzle in quotation marks will suffice for anyone not stubbornly ignoring the facets of boss fights that resemble puzzle solving - if only partially. Looking at the wiki, the boss fights are not at all just regular fights - they seem to ALL have unique mechanics that you couldn't possible learn through playing normally until the encounter. So, you're not being truthful - or the wiki is a liar. Which is it?
The boss fights have unique mechanics and the encounters are unique largely because you meet them once per playthrough.
The other enemy types or groups also have unique mechanics and when you meet them for the first time you need to "learn" them too. Sometimes environments you have to fight them in make a difference too.
The principle of fighting normal enemies and bosses is the same.
You observe how they act and try to act accordingly. Sometimes you can use environments to your advantage.
The bosses tend to be more dangerous than normal enemies, that´s what makes them bosses and, as I posted earlier, overcoming them boils down to tactics, common sense and good eye (mostly to catch their "tells" and such). You don´t need a special item, a special spell or pulling three levers hidden in shadows to defeat them. Some spells or weapons may make fighting them easier, just as fighting normal enemies.
That´s what my general impression of Dark Souls´ boss fights is.
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Even with those events, I'm willing to bet they're rare and that story is, indeed, quite sparse. But you're not going to acknowledge that, are you?
Never claimed otherwise.
These events and NPCs are nevertheless an important part of the game and a major component of the atmosphere. Also, I´ve found Onion head or Solaire to be more memorable characters than any in, say, you guessed it, Skyrim.
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I'm not particularly impressed when a narrow design is executed well, because I care more about the overall experience - and I tend to be bored by narrow designs.
Yep, apparently you´re a quantity>quality guy .
Last edited by DeepO; December 28th, 2012 at 18:56.
DeepO is offline

DeepO

DeepO's Avatar
deep outside

#112

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Prague
Posts: 2,315

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 18:30
Originally Posted by vurt View Post
It's already in the game, it's called "leveling up". The mobs and bosses doesnt scale, so that's your "easy mode" right there. Yeah, you have to grind, but the combat is so great that you probably won't mind it.
I hate grinding, even games that have some of my fav combat like the Beth's Fallout's and Oblivion I hate grinding in(and they have my fav action rpg combat ever). The only games I can think of where I actually like the grind are the Final Fantasy's.

But for DS it does not matter because there are mods for the game to make it easier, without having to go the hard route and grind. Another thing, I think there should be in games is a console, if Dark Souls had that I could just auto level my way up to the point where the difficulty is not so bad. But that is another issue(i.e pc games actually having pc options).

I am free because I choose to be so-me
Kefka is offline

Kefka

Kefka's Avatar
Watcher

#113

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 21:17
Originally Posted by DeepO View Post
Lots of stuff from DeepO
This can go on forever, and it's really nothing but an exchange about subjective tastes that are hard to articulate precisely without entering the mind of the other side.

That said, I think I have a good idea of why you like Dark Souls - and I can certainly understand why a lot of people would like it.

I'll assume you have a similar feeling about why I'm not a big fan of it, though I respect the design even if it's narrow.

I'm not going to buy that I'm wrong about the game or that I'm missing some super vital elements, but since I'll probably have a go at it again at some point - I'll find out and report back. I can probably survive you thinking that I'm making unfair and totally incorrect assessments about it until then - or I'll just have to die

As for quantity > quality - I'm actually really, really greedy and I want both. That's why I'm so hard to please. That's also why I wasn't very fond of Morrowind and Oblivion - because both suffered from not having enough quality to match my demands.

I don't think I have the stamina to enter into another huge exchange about why I think Skyrim has a lot of quality considering the quantity - so let's agree to disagree about that. Beyond that, I'm a huge fan of broad freeform and non-linear gameplay, so naturally I'm even more inclined to appreciate a game like Skyrim, which is entirely unmatched in that department - as far as I'm concerned.

It's the one game that's close to the kind of design I used to dream about when I was a kid and imagining what the future of gaming would be like. I was so naive to expect anything even remotely like the dream designs I came up with - but Skyrim is actually surprisingly close to matching a dream for me. No other game in the world has managed to do that - so far.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#114

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,257

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 21:44
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post

It's the one game that's close to the kind of design I used to dream about when I was a kid and imagining what the future of gaming would be like. I was so naive to expect anything even remotely like the dream designs I came up with - but Skyrim is actually surprisingly close to matching a dream for me. No other game in the world has managed to do that - so far.
Surprised you did not like Morrowind or Oblivion, as the basic idea is the same(if perhaps less refined). And like Skyrim you can customize those games to your taste. Of course you can do so with SR as well and as that game is already closer to your taste so there would be less to mess with. But still there are more mod options already in place for OB and MW. How do you feel about Beth's Fallouts?

I am free because I choose to be so-me
Kefka is offline

Kefka

Kefka's Avatar
Watcher

#115

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 22:04
Originally Posted by Kefka View Post
Surprised you did not like Morrowind or Oblivion, as the basic idea is the same(if perhaps less refined). And like Skyrim you can customize those games to your taste. Of course you can do so with SR as well and as that game is already closer to your taste so there would be less to mess with. But still there are more mod options already in place for OB and MW. How do you feel about Beth's Fallouts?
I said I wasn't very fond of them, but I wouldn't say I outright don't like them.

Both games had massive issues that were not possible to solve to my satisfaction - and I can't really include mods that were released years later.

Morrowind had an incredibly poor combat system and awful model animations. It had a very dull dungeon design - where everything looked the same. It had a dreary presentation with an awkward topic based conversation system.

Oblivion had poor NPCs and mostly subpar writing, dull level design, pathetic level scaling, immature technology in terms of streaming content and so on.

All TES games until Skyrim had boring character systems with an even more boring leveling experience.

Skyrim solves or improves upon all those issues and is much, much more refined as a combined experience. Some issues remain to a lesser extent - and the biggest problem is the level scaling and a lack of balance. The mid-late game is super easy without mods - even on Master difficulty.

But the vanilla game got me absolutely enthralled for 80 hours or so. The combined experience simply floored me - and it represents the first time the TES formula truly worked in all the important ways. Well, to me anyway.

Fallout games?

I like Fallout 3 a lot - but it needs mods to work properly. It's inferior to Skyrim in most ways - but it does have similarly fantastic exploration. They really crammed a ton of unique content into the various locations - even if the post-apoc setting makes everything look and feel the same.

I'm not a fan of New Vegas - because I think it's a buggy mess, and I think it's downright embarassing in terms of the visual aesthetics and polish. There are SO many misaligned textures/meshes and clipping errors, etc. It was also more directed and less freeform than FO3 - or at least it felt that way. I do like the improved mechanics a lot though, but you can get much better in FO3 with mods - so that doesn't help much. I also think the western setting was a mistake - and I already don't care for the post-apoc setting in general - so that's doubly bad.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#116

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,257

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 23:38
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I said I wasn't very fond of them, but I wouldn't say I outright don't like them.

Both games had massive issues that were not possible to solve to my satisfaction - and I can't really include mods that were released years later.

Morrowind had an incredibly poor combat system and awful model animations. It had a very dull dungeon design - where everything looked the same. It had a dreary presentation with an awkward topic based conversation system.

Oblivion had poor NPCs and mostly subpar writing, dull level design, pathetic level scaling, immature technology in terms of streaming content and so on.

All TES games until Skyrim had boring character systems with an even more boring leveling experience.

Skyrim solves or improves upon all those issues and is much, much more refined as a combined experience. Some issues remain to a lesser extent - and the biggest problem is the level scaling and a lack of balance. The mid-late game is super easy without mods - even on Master difficulty.

But the vanilla game got me absolutely enthralled for 80 hours or so. The combined experience simply floored me - and it represents the first time the TES formula truly worked in all the important ways. Well, to me anyway.

Fallout games?

I like Fallout 3 a lot - but it needs mods to work properly. It's inferior to Skyrim in most ways - but it does have similarly fantastic exploration. They really crammed a ton of unique content into the various locations - even if the post-apoc setting makes everything look and feel the same.

I'm not a fan of New Vegas - because I think it's a buggy mess, and I think it's downright embarassing in terms of the visual aesthetics and polish. There are SO many misaligned textures/meshes and clipping errors, etc. It was also more directed and less freeform than FO3 - or at least it felt that way. I do like the improved mechanics a lot though, but you can get much better in FO3 with mods - so that doesn't help much. I also think the western setting was a mistake - and I already don't care for the post-apoc setting in general - so that's doubly bad.
So I guess you feel you just can't go back to those game, because all those issue are solved via mods now a days? I mean somethings I never even dealt with, for example I never played Oblivion with the horrible level scaling people speak of, there where decent mods out whiten weeks of its release that solved that also I should mention I never play Beth games at release I always wait a bit so there are some decent mod choices. But you may wish to consider going back and trying OB or MW, things are much better now in regards to the issues you mentioned.

As for the Fallouts I like both about the same. I thought some things New Vegas did a bit better other things 3 did a bit better and with mods things just about evened out. Still annoys me though how Obsidian managed to make New Vegas with worse graphic than Fallout 3(from a technical perspective, personally I really like the western motif much more than D.C waste but that is an artistic thing).

Also the western thing is where most of the Fallouts take place, 3 is the exception. 1,2 and NV all had kind of a western vibe, not that this matter if you don't like that motif of course.

I am free because I choose to be so-me
Kefka is offline

Kefka

Kefka's Avatar
Watcher

#117

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 23:49
Originally Posted by Kefka View Post
So I guess you feel you just can't go back to those game, because all those issue are solved via mods now a days? I mean somethings I never even dealt with, for example I never played Oblivion with the horrible level scaling people speak of, there where decent mods out whiten weeks of its release that solved that also I should mention I never play Beth games at release I always wait a bit so there are some decent mod choices. But you may wish to consider going back and trying OB or MW, things are much better now in regards to the issues you mentioned.
I'd go back to Morrowind if the issues were fixed, but they're not. There are no mods that fix the models, animations, combat system or dialogue system of Morrowind. No mods that I'm aware of, anyway.

As for Oblivion, there are some mods that fix some of the issues - and I have gone back to it for that reason. I completed it with a lot of mods a year or so ago, and it was ok. Nothing compared to Skyrim, though.

As for the Fallouts I like both about the same. I thought some things New Vegas did a bit better other things 3 did a bit better and with mods things just about evened out. Still annoys me though how Obsidian managed to make New Vegas with worse graphic than Fallout 3(from a technical perspective, personally I really like the western motif much more than D.C waste but that is an artistic thing).

Also the western thing is where most of the Fallouts take place, 3 is the exception. 1,2 and NV all had kind of a western vibe, not that this matter if you don't like that motif of course.
To each his own. I never liked the post-apoc setting at all - but found Fallout 3 the best implementation of it. Probably because it had the most "sci-fi" feel of them all - and I like sci-fi a lot.

Yeah, I think New Vegas is vastly inferior in terms of overall aesthetics and world design. When you add all the visual glitches and bugs - it becomes too much for me to appreciate. Which is sad, because I really liked the writing and found the story somewhat appealing - if a bit dull at times.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#118

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,257

Default 

December 28th, 2012, 23:59
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I'd go back to Morrowind if the issues were fixed, but they're not. There are no mods that fix the models, animations, combat system or dialogue system of Morrowind. No mods that I'm aware of, anyway.

As for Oblivion, there are some mods that fix some of the issues - and I have gone back to it for that reason. I completed it with a lot of mods a year or so ago, and it was ok. Nothing compared to Skyrim, though.
Well them let me enlighten you! There is one major mod that drastically changes MW combat system, models and animation. Though the Dialogue system is still mostly the same except for a lot of voice acting being added(don't know what % done at this point). To me the lack of voice acting is one of the things that drastically ages MW anyway. I like the basic system, if only there was voice acting, so it did not feel like I was on Wikipedia.

Anyway the mod is MorrOblivion its actually an Oblivion mod, but its very polished. It has all the quests from MW in fully playable form. Voice acting, radiate A.I, its simply amazing. There now even in the beginning states of making Skywind and Skyblivion using the Skyrim engine to play Oblivion and Morrowind. I think they may already be in a early alpha state, not sure though. Either way checkout MorrOblivion @ http://morroblivion.com/

I am free because I choose to be so-me
Last edited by Kefka; December 29th, 2012 at 00:37.
Kefka is offline

Kefka

Kefka's Avatar
Watcher

#119

Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 99

Default 

December 29th, 2012, 00:05
Originally Posted by Kefka View Post
Well them let me enlighten you! There is one major mod that drastically changes MW combat system, models and animation. Though the Dialogue system is still mostly the same except for a lot of voice acting being added(don't know what % done at this point). To me the lack of voice acting is one of the things that drastically ages MW anyway. I like the basic system, if only there was voice acting, so it did not feel like I was on Wikipedia.

Any the mod is MorrOblivion its actually an Oblivion mod, but its very polished. It has all the quests from MW in fully playable form. Voice acting, radiate A.I, its simply amazing. There now even in the beginning states of making Skywind and Skyblivion using the Skyrim engine to play Oblivion and Morrowind. I think they may already be in a early alpha state, not sure though. Either way checkout MorrOblivion @ http://morroblivion.com/
Wow, for real? I've been actively looking for something like that for a long time. I asked around here several times - and I'm surprised I never heard of it before.

Sounds really interesting - and I'll definitely check it out. Thanks for enlightening me!
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#120

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 14,257
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Dark Souls II - What they can do to make it better @ Kotaku
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:37.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch