![]() |
Quote:
I did finish BGII anyway, I just didn't feel utterly gutted after it was over in the way I did with planescape. Quote:
Quote:
I think for me the M&Ms hit a really good mix of open sandbox and individual handcrafted. I could go anywhere right from the off (barring getting killed to DEATH all over the place) and had a lot of freedom, but the world's weren't autogenerated and empty. I think the first couple of Gothics were the only other thing that had that same kind of feeling, and it's something that for me makes a big contribution to immersion over and above any plot or characters. |
Quote:
Sorry but I just don't see that. The crpg market hasn't exactly been flooded with first-person sandbox RPGs yet. Look at what's been released the last few years, as well as the biggest titles this year. (IE. Storm of Zehir, Drakensang, Dragon Age) Those types of party based RPGs still outnumber the "Daggerfall types'. |
Quote:
Plus, I was talking of movements rather than absolutes. At the time of baldur's gate the rpg market was dominated by the broad category of party based rpg (fallouts, planescape, BGs, M&Ms etc) and only daggerfall doing anything sandboxy. Since then the party based rpg market has dried up substantially (drakensang & Dragon age hopefully being the reversal of that trend) while more developers have tried to get a sandboxy element (not just bethesda but the sacreds, fable, not to mention all the industry energy targetted at the MMO sandbox market, heck even the gothics are more first person single player go where you want sandboxy, particularly the third one). To my mind, at the time the BGs did what they did (admittedly very, very well) that style of game accounted for the bulk of the rpg market. Since then diablo clones & sandboxy FP SP games have grown while traditional party based have shrunk. |
Quote:
Quote:
Well I guess anything can be "sandboxy" if you want to be that ambiguous with it. I don't think most people would consider Sacred or Fable to be sandboxy though. The Gothic games definitely had some sandbox elements, but they were still much more tightly driven than a true sandbox game. Party based RPGs haven't shrunk as much as other types have simply grown. We just have more parity now, which is a good thing. It's not a case of one being more dominate than the other, although there are still more party-based RPGs than first-person sandbox games. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Those points are true, but again, very ambiguous. It's very easy to be less sandboxy than a Bethesda game but more sandboxy than Baldur's Gate. :) Quote:
Most definitely. I think the trend that you're actually recognizing is that there are now more crpgs that have you controlling a single character rather than a party. It's more about the single protagonist in general, not the camera view. Whether it's 1st person, 3rd person, or something in between. The true first-person sandbox is not a main archtype though, definitely more of a niche category. Unfortunately Diablo clones are stronger than ever, which doesn't bode well for the genre imo. I too hope that Dragon Age does well enough to stimulate the interest for more games of that type. |
Quote:
Quote:
I was thinking of archetypes more in the sense of frames of reference for categorising games rather than all games fitting completely into set moulds. Few games are completely sandboxy, all games make a decision as to how sandboxy they want to be given the trade-offs for trying to be sandboxy. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think they've really worked the niche thing though. NWN has seemed so heavily community based what with all the modding that they've got a hugely loyal niche base from which to try and lure in users from a broader spectrum. |
Quote:
I don't think camera view really has much to do with the shift to single protagonist at all. The proof being so many party-based games in the past that used a first-person view, and with great success. M&M, Wizardry, Bard's Tale, Lands of Lore, Etc. It's also already been proven that those games can be successfully developed with modern graphics. (IE. Wizardry 8) I tend to think the single character shift has more to do with story based reasons. Perhaps the devs feel it's easier to flesh out a great story with the player having direct control over only a single entity, rather than multiple PCs. |
Quote:
I think that the direct control business is probably pretty secondary to the story though, the tendency of BG / PS:T to have one main protagonist & others joining the plot already covers a lot of the story benefits of not creating a whole party of people without fleshed out backgrounds, the choice of party based vs single protagonist based then just has more impact on combat dynamics than plot flexibility. |
Quote:
The developer-story theory is just a suggestion. To be honest, I don't think anyone could accurately pinpoint the reason for the shift, and I don't personally believe either way is more beneficial to a crpg having a great story. Well this conversation has taken way too much time away from my current gaming experience, Vampire the Masquerade:Bloodlines. Speaking of a great story……;) |
Quote:
I ought to revisit it as a malkavian at some point, I gather the tweaks for the madness are done brilliantly. |
Ventrue, first playthrough. The game is great so far. My only complaint is how sometimes you run into a dead end in a dialog tree, and are forced to choose an option with no way to back out of it.
|
Quote:
VtM is another one like Torment for me, full of flaws but full of such unique charm and innovation that the flaws even became kind of endearing. |
| All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:36. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by
DragonByte Security (Pro) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2022 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright by RPGWatch