Last game you finished, tell us about it

Originally Posted by RedSocialKnight
I thought the idea of having separate "friendship" and "rivalry" advancement paths for companions was pretty cool. I'm pretty sure they're not keeping that, though.

I didn't particularly like that. It made me look in the Internet to what responses in each quest would give friendship or rivalry with whom, making me sometimes pick an option my character wouldn't pick so I didn't upset someone in my group, or when going for a quest, looking in the Wiki first to see who would get approval or rivalry there. I hated that.

Originally Posted by wolfing
I didn't particularly like that. It made me look in the Internet to what responses in each quest would give friendship or rivalry with whom, making me sometimes pick an option my character wouldn't pick so I didn't upset someone in my group, or when going for a quest, looking in the Wiki first to see who would get approval or rivalry there. I hated that.

That's been an issue for me with Bioware games dating all the way back to BG2.

I used to do that too Wolfing, but then I started to get sick of picking an option I wouldn't so decided to go without whatever feels most right for me, even if that has negative influence on my companions. Later on, I replay the game trying to pick all the "right" options to get positive influence on my companions.

Originally Posted by purpleblob
I used to do that too Wolfing, but then I started to get sick of picking an option I wouldn't so decided to go without whatever feels most right for me, even if that has negative influence on my companions. Later on, I replay the game trying to pick all the "right" options to get positive influence on my companions.

That's a problem for me as I never replay RPGs (too many games in my queue), so I have to experience what I can in the one playthrough.

Actually that's the thing I like most about RPGs: Chose an action according to your hero's character and deal with the consequences. I don't aim for "best" consequences but for playing my hero coherent. These consequences also need to be coherent though.

Originally Posted by Morrandir
Actually that's the thing I like most about RPGs: Chose an action according to your hero's character and deal with the consequences. I don't aim for "best" consequences but for playing my hero coherent. These consequences also need to be coherent though.

Me too, as long as the consequences for your actions are clear. But when things are like …
"I like pizza with:"
- Ham (Alice likes you +5, Ben hates you +10)
- Pepperoni (Joe likes you +10, Alice hates you +5)
- Mushroom (Joe hates you +5, Ben likes you +5)
Which is bad already because the results in parenthesis are unknown to you, but is especially really bad when it's not only to see who your character will sleep with, but when combat options change depending on if a character likes you or not. If Alice likes you she heals for 25% more, but if she hates you she does 25% more fire damage. If it touches my combat tactical options then I won't be leaving things to chance.

Dude. Who the fuck is Alice?

Originally Posted by Moriendor
Dude. Who the fuck is Alice?

Someone who like hams but hates pepperoni? it all started when she was 5 years old, as a tavern owner her father used to keep lots of cured meats hanging from the ceiling, to offer little pieces for his favorite customers. One day she thought it would be funny to hide the pepperoni from his father, except that that same day, the thugs hired by the town's evil moneylender came to ask for a loan payment overdue from his father, or if he didn't have money at the time, they would give him an extra day to pay if he gave them the pepperoni. But alas! the pepperoni was nowhere to be found and, without money or pepperoni, they killed him right there in front of his wife. When Alice came later that day with the pepperoni in hand, her mother blamed her for the death of her husband, Alice's father, and banished little Alice from the family at such a young age.

She likes ham though because it tastes funny.

Originally Posted by wolfing
*snip*

Bioware has the wrong people doing their writing.

I recently replayed both Dragon Age: Origins/Awakening and Dragon Age 2:

Dragon Age: Origins/Awakening
Overall, I still think it's a fantastic game. The sheer scope of it is very impressive, especially considering the massive impact origins have. It really makes a huge difference, and I strongly recommend playing either Dwarf Noble or Human Noble, as their personal struggles work out much better than the usual world saving scenario that many RPGs use.

There are a few drawbacks tho:
- Darkspawn are boring compared to the political struggles of Ferelden. It reminds me of the white walkers of A Song of Ice and Fire - they start out interesting and threatening, but are easily forgotten most of the time.
- DLCs really are required. I don't know if there's a bargain bin price for them now, as I owned them all already, but I wouldn't play it without it. Many of the most interesting items, armors and locations are found in DLC specific areas.
- Mages have a vast majority of the useful and fun abilities. 3x Mage + Shale is probably the ultimate party on the highest difficulty. Either that or 3x Mage + Leliana if one of the Mages is an Arcane Warrior (tank), so you can unlock chests etc. It's improved in Awakening, but Awakening is rather short compared to Origins.

Dragon Age 2
Well, it's not a bad game. It just doesn't live up to the Dragon Age name, and it feels more like a prelude to DA: I than a stand alone game. However, I do like the concept: Seeing changes in an area over a longer period of time than a short adventure. That also leads to a more realistic rise to power, as it takes quite a few years instead of weeks.

Unfortunately, the development time was way, way too short and the supposed changes in Kirkwall are lacking to say the least. At any rate, it's still a fun game, but it does have quite a few drawbacks:
- The re-use of locations is famous, and there's really not a lot more to say about that.
- Combat is actually challenging on the higher difficulties, but often for the wrong reasons. It's very obvious that the game was designed for console, and that the highest difficulty was simply added to satisfy the PC audience, without being properly tested/adjusted to the PC. It's a mess. It really needs a proper tactical view, and the waves style combat doesn't exactly help. It's especially bad when an Arcane Horror or Sarebaas pops up and kills the whole party in about 1 second.
- The ending is terrible. I realize that it triggers DA: I and so on, but it's still extremely bad. Put it in a novel or a short intro movie in DA: I or something, don't use it as an ending for an RPG. The ME3 ending seems worse because the game is overall quite a bit better than DA2, but I honestly feel the DA2 ending is the worst of the two by quite a margin. In fact, it's probably the worst ending I've seen in any major RPG.
- They got the companion gearing all wrong. They simplified the wrong aspect. If they wanted to reduce the number of items/clutter, remove things like rings/belts and so on and convert to a Gothic style complete armor setup. Basically, keep the stuff that has an impact and remove the stuff that's basically number tweaking. Note: Overall I'd prefer if they just kept the complexity, but I'm simply pointing out that if something has to go in the name of simplification, let it be the stuff without a major impact.
- Mages are, yet again, mandatory to the point where they can fill every roll but tanking. In DA: O they could even tank, so it's not quite as bad as in DA: O. I'm guessing the removal of regular healing spells in DA: I is intended to be a remedy for this particular issue.

Finally, I have to point out that I enjoyed a lot of the more "casual" aspects of Kirkwall. Varric and Isabella are especially good in this regard, in that they give an impression of actually having lives of their own, going to the pub, having other friends and so on. I like this social aspect. They had something similar going on in the Citadel, which worked out great, except for the fact that it felt a bit awkward considering the human race was about to get wiped out. In DA2, time isn't of the essence in the same way, so it's fine to add such features.

All in all, my biggest drawback with both games, however, is the darkness of it all. There's too much depression going on, not enough happiness. I guess that's why I'm drawn to characters like Varric and Isabella. Why do RPGs always have to be so damn "dark and gritty"?

KotOR 2

Well, I finally got through it.

The ending was too drawn out - and the droid planet was pretty awful. But the game is still good.

I went Dark Side for once, just to try it - and I didn't care for it. But that's my own fault - and I should have known better than to play like that. It probably had a negative effect on my overall impression of the game.

Overall, it was very much an Obsidian game - like Vegas, NWN2 and so on. The world was mostly bland, the writing pretentious, the humor awful, the mechanics great, the C&C strong, the ambition admirable, the polish lacking, and so on.

I definitely like KotOR better, but this wasn't bad at all.

7/10.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
KotOR 2

Well, I finally got through it.

The ending was too drawn out - and the droid planet was pretty awful. But the game is still good.

The droid planet is actually part of the restoration project. It was cut from the actual game, along with a lot of other things. However, I suspect the droid planet was cut because it simply wasn't good enough, and not due to a lack of time. It's the main reason I don't even install the restoration mod anymore; the droid planet is the most boring part of the game.

Originally Posted by Maylander
The droid planet is actually part of the restoration project. It was cut from the actual game, along with a lot of other things. However, I suspect the droid planet was cut because it simply wasn't good enough, and not due to a lack of time. It's the main reason I don't even install the restoration mod anymore; the droid planet is the most boring part of the game.

Yeah, I know it's part of that project - and I regretted installing it every step of my way on that planet.

But I'm hoping it added something good as well, though I can't be sure - as I've never played much of the original release.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
Yeah, I know it's part of that project - and I regretted installing it every step of my way on that planet.

But I'm hoping it added something good as well, though I can't be sure - as I've never played much of the original release.

It does, but I still don't think it's worth drudging through that factory for it. They should split the two, as the rest of the restored content is more along the lines of "cut due to time constraints", whereas the HK factory is most likely cut because it was shit.

Finished original sin. Probably the longest game I played in recent years. I started out very nice, 9/10, with obviously the combat and leveling up the strong points.

But that lasted only for so long before I needed a better reason to do what I did (running around killing everything). The story didn't ready captivate me and I clicked through most dialog, then again I do that with most games these days.

All in all a solid 7 for me.

Similar for me. I've finished D:OS this week and it started great. (Except the confusion about how Scarlett's AI and stuff works, for I wanted to "simulate" a classic single character game.)

I've mentioned it somewhere else, biggest problem for me is the lack of immersion, which is most important for me in an RPG. Reasons why I couldn't immerse:

• Lack of body type customization: I had to play as a bulky mage, which didn't fit for the character I wanted to play.
• Art Style: All in all too cartoony for my taste.
• Really poor picturing of a city (Cyseal). There are like 7 houses. That's just not like a city looks. Baldur's Gate is how a city looks.
• Larian "humor" and atmosphere: I just don't like the sneaking thing, the talking chests and wells, monsters like the gobline sentinel, intelligent talking animals, robots with remote control etc.
• Repetitive dialogs: When speaking to unimportant NPC (guards etc.), you get the same dialog for each. Same questions, same answers. Also when you're talking to important NPCs (Arhu, Icara, Waver of time,…) they don't have much to tell despite there's stuff going on in the world they should have to say something about.
• "Magic" abilities of profane characters: When there's a fighter type character, he should just fight. In D:OS they can bring down opponents several meters away. I don't like it that when you fight the typical orcish warrior, they set you aflame from afar. Being able to do things like this without a magical background just doesn't have a valid explanation.
• Too shallow companions: I've played with Bairdottir and Madora, which should have been companions with a "background, their own story to tell, their own goals and their own personality". While all of this was somehow there, they still semmed very shallow.
• Location dependent daytime: Instead of the originally announced day-night-cyles, in some outdoor regions it simply gets dark night when you walk in. It get's light again, when you walk about. Of course this feels artificial.

There are some more weak points besides lack of immersion, and some really strong points. All in all I quite enjoyed it, would rate it 7/10 as well. In my book that's the same score as Blackguards, Demonicon, Mars: War Logs, Shadowrun Returns (Dead Man's Switch) and Risen 3. That was a little disappointing to me as I had expected a much better experience.

Yes I missed immersion as well, but more through an interesting story, characters and locations. I don't really care for customization, believable cities etc

Finished deponia. I used a walkthrough for more than 70% of it and feel reaaally bad about it I love the huzzah song, can't get it out of my head.

Spoilers if you listen to the lyrics too closely:
http://youtu.be/pcDkBH6BYyk

I wasn't planning on playing the sequel as i have enough of adventures for a while. Though ending was better (easier) and it is kind of open…

I finally finished Drakensang: The River of Time + Phileasson's Secret. Another wonderful gaming experience from a studio that is no longer. Too bad. Once again, lots of charm, and an almost completely bug free gaming experience. Such a pleasure to play (except for certain grindy combat areas).

Also played Crysis for the first time. What was a fun romp, sneaking up on North Koreans in the first half, took a turn for the worst with buggy allied tank driver AI that wedged me in multiple times requiring reloads, and glitchy tank and VTOL vehicle controls and responses. I had to abandon using the tank in the last segment entirely. Then I was hit with a buggy secondary objective not completing, and a bugged out boss fight that required multiple reloads. "Use the tach cannon", she told me, when the monster was immune. Frustrating. I was happy when it was over, sadly. However the graphics were really superb at times. I was especially impressed by the inside of the carrier and the facial animations of some of the military people. Amazingly realistic. This game is a great graphics tech demo, but sadly failed for me because of gameplay bugs.

Originally Posted by Thrasher
I finally finished Drakensang: The River of Time + Phileasson's Secret. Another wonderful gaming experience from a studio that is no longer. Too bad. Once again, lots of charm, and an almost completely bug free gaming experience. Such a pleasure to play (except for certain grindy combat areas).

The so far last classic TDE RPG in existence…
Glad you enjoyed it!