Torment:ToN - Review Roundup

I also think that, if you're using a skill to succeed at something, that should always be a better result than not having the skill. There can still be randomness and choice, so you can have 3 options, 2 for when you don't have enough of the required skill (one good result, one bad result), but if your skill is high enough for the 3rd option, then selecting it should be at least as good as the 'good result' (preferably better). Otherwise, why spend points in skills unless they're needed for combat (and in this game's case, combat is not required).

lol, yea, funny conversation… I never save scum either. Didn't realize so many gamers are so OCD, lol. That said, I will cheat, without shame…its my game, after all, so I just consider it my choice and preference. I'm not talking about Numenera here, by the way, (have yet to really play it in depth) but just rpgs in general. Like Dragon Age Origins. I hated how skimpy they were with money in that game, so I gladly cheated in all the money I needed to buy anything in the game. Same thing with Fallout 3, which I have recently been playing…the design of the game is way too cheap with money, in my opinion, at least in the beginning to mid stages. So I put in some mod cheats, so money is not an issue.

That is one of the main areas I will usually cheat because too often, I feel these games are way too chintzy in money, and I don't want to feel like I'm lacking in resources in these games, hell, I can feel like that already in real life! lol. So I will usually cheat in money, and become fabulously wealthy in the game world overnight in these rpgs, its just more fun that way, to me anyhow.

(the other annoying area in many of these rpgs is weight, I feel it is stupid how in some of these games, they restrict the weight so much. So I will usually mod out most of the weight requirements out of these games, weight is not a fun mechanic to me - I'm too much of a pack rat, lol)

Originally Posted by wolfing
I also think that, if you're using a skill to succeed at something, that should always be a better result than not having the skill. There can still be randomness and choice, so you can have 3 options, 2 for when you don't have enough of the required skill (one good result, one bad result), but if your skill is high enough for the 3rd option, then selecting it should be at least as good as the 'good result' (preferably better). Otherwise, why spend points in skills unless they're needed for combat (and in this game's case, combat is not required).

That's too predictable, IMO. It should have some cases where the result is better, some where it's worse or equal, too. Then again I don't look to RPGs to power-game them or min/max. I prefer some randomness and unpredictability more than anything. Dice-rolls, baby.

Originally Posted by Arkadia7
lol, yea, funny conversation… I never save scum either. Didn't realize so many gamers are so OCD, lol. That said, I will cheat, without shame…its my game, after all, so I just consider it my choice and preference. I'm not talking about Numenera here, by the way, (have yet to really play it in depth) but just rpgs in general. Like Dragon Age Origins. I hated how skimpy they were with money in that game, so I gladly cheated in all the money I needed to buy anything in the game. Same thing with Fallout 3, which I have recently been playing…the design of the game is way too cheap with money, in my opinion, at least in the beginning to mid stages. So I put in some mod cheats, so money is not an issue.

That is one of the main areas I will usually cheat because too often, I feel these games are way too chintzy in money, and I don't want to feel like I'm lacking in resources in these games, hell, I can feel like that already in real life! lol. So I will usually cheat in money, and become fabulously wealthy in the game world overnight in these rpgs, its just more fun that way, to me anyhow.

(the other annoying area in many of these rpgs is weight, I feel it is stupid how in some of these games, they restrict the weight so much. So I will usually mod out most of the weight requirements out of these games, weight is not a fun mechanic to me - I'm too much of a pack rat, lol)

I think in many games there is too much money, too much storage space and too much high level stuff. Having to carefully decide what to buy, what to equip and so on - it's part of the C&C thing. In short, limited resources is to me an important part in RPG's.

But yes. It's your game and you should play it like you want to, none of my business. So cheat away :-) !! (hope that means what I think it means in English). Or let it be an option, part of game difficulty.

pibbur who yet again must admit that sometimes he doesn't follow his own principles.

Originally Posted by pibbur who
I think in many games there is too much money, too much storage space and too much high level stuff. Having to carefully decide what to buy, what to equip and so on - it's part of the C&C thing. In short, limited resources is to me an important part in RPG's.

Yep, that is a type of C&C that is a bit overlooked nowadays, IMO. I really enjoy that as well.

Originally Posted by pibbur who
But yes. It's your game and you should play it like you want to, none of my business. So cheat away :-) !! (hope that means what I think it means in English). Or let it be an option, part of game difficulty.

Totally agree. More options to turn these types of things ON/OFF or generally tweak an RPG's settings more would be great.

I agree with pibbur. Money has rarely been an issue in rpgs. Infact I feel like they're pretty much throwing loot / money like there is no tomorrow. Well I do enjoy looting, but getting rich in rpgs is hardly a challenge. The most fun part is usually the begining when you're just trying to get by with low level gear and with little gold.

Imo gothic series handled pretty well the whole looting thing. You often discovered somewhat mundane items. The better loot was often well guarded or so expensive that it took some time to gain access to it. And since most armors were tied into guild progression, you had to put some work to gain access to them. Remember when you were promoted to a firemage first time? Didn't it feel AWESOME? Not only the title, but cool robe as well and runes too. And if you happened to loot some awesome weapon (dragonslayer sword for instance), your low level character often lacked strenght or dex to wield it properly.

I would also like to mention Arx Fatalis here. I remember that the loot progression in that game felt very rewarding. You began your game as a naked prisoner in goblin prison and you had to take out the first goblin guard with your bare hands or hacking him to death with a bone. How cool was that. Then bit by bit, you discovered pieces of leather armor and few lousy iron weapons.

Baldur's gate 1 did it pretty well too. Magical equipment wasn't that common untill late game. Early parts where your basic metal weapons (and armor / helmets if you're using a mod) can break due flawed iron was tons of fun. So you really wanted to upgrade your gear to magical gear, but it wasn't easy. You had to fight for it.

Finally managed to put a few hours in. So far, so good! Combat seems to have been phoned in by some developer with a hang over, but I wasn't expecting anything brilliant in that regard. I'm fascinated by the world and the characters I've come across, and there are certainly plenty of PST references.

@Dez: so true.

Another thing I liked with the Gothics was that you could go wherever you wanted, but there were areas where you early in the game had no chance of surviving unless running away. I still remember the triumph I felt the first time I managed to kill one of the raptors. That's the kind of achievements I like (unlike those on Steam, which so far have failed to interest me).

And in Baldur's gate (and most of the D&D games), at least early in the game, there was also the "problem" that your magicians could memorize only some of their spells. I found it a bit annoying back then, but it made the game pleasantly more challenging.

pibbur who finds the later Bethesda games leaving much to be desired in ths respect (He still enjoys those games very much, but for completely different reasons.)

I also think that there is generally too much money in games. Or: Not enough you can buy with it. Most recent example is Fallout 4, where I am running around with 60000 Bottlecaps and stopped collecting items for sale some while ago. There is not really anything I can buy with the money anyways.
Same goes with enderal, where I had over 59000 Gold in the end…but there was really nothing you could buy with it.

Originally Posted by GuybrushWilco
The complaints I am seeing so far: buggy on consoles, lots and lots of text, and little combat. It has always been advertised as a text heavy and combat light/optional game, so I'm not sure why anyone would expect anything else. )

Same reason that people coming to a RTwP combat product and expecting it to be "ugoigo" combat.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Same reason that people coming to a RTwP combat product and expecting it to be "ugoigo" combat.

Or someone coming to a RTwP combat product expecting it to work like RT combat? 😉

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Same reason that people coming to a RTwP combat product and expecting it to be "ugoigo" combat.

Well, there is still a difference between being text heavy and almost having like 10 battles in the whole game. I cannot confirm that number though, just read it in the forums, but it seems plausible to me having played 8 hours containing just the tutorial battle.

So I can completely understand people who expected something different.

Doesn't mean the game must be different to meet these expectations though I would have prefered it personally.

Yeah, there seems to be a lot of gearing and skills and what not for very little combat. I've only had two fights so far, yet I keep reminding myself to gear up. This is the kind of game where I might end forgetting about gear for a while due to the lack of combat, only to end up in some sort of road block situation where my character is nowhere near strong enough to win when a fight actually pops up.

Side note, but since you guys are talking about challenges in RPGs and resource management, you might want to check out Lords of Xulima for a modern take on this. It's not quite a story-based progression thing like Gothic, but it's certain a tightly balanced game for many hours.

If the combat is really as rare as people are saying then I'm starting to regret purchasing this game so quickly. Not that I need tons of combat, but I was definitely looking forward to some fighting because it looked so good in the preview videos.

There are too many fights in RPGs. I think it's pretty cool that the game puts them aside. C'mon, you guys have literally a ton of other RPGs in which you can fight as much as you want.

Originally Posted by JDR13
If the combat is really as rare as people are saying then I'm starting to regret purchasing this game so quickly. Not that I need tons of combat, but I was definitely looking forward to some fighting because it looked so good in the preview videos.

Were the models better made in the preview? Because they look awful, like they were lifted directly from 90s games. From my experience, the less combat the better. I enjoyed the crunch of combat in PS:T and never felt it was too much. I'm not finding it all fun here in contrast and would just skip it all if possible.

Originally Posted by GabrielMP_19
There are too many fights in RPGs. I think it's pretty cool that the game puts them aside. C'mon, you guys have literally a ton of other RPGs in which you can fight as much as you want.

I totally agree, personally.

But if you looked forward to the game, based on the setting and the story, and you like (and expected) a healthy dose of fighting, then you have a problem., And of course may regret buying it.

pibbur who doesn't.

Hmm, I don't like the sound of the combat infrequency. I have no problem with a game that is not designed around combat, but I can't help think that this style of game is the wrong vehicle for such an approach. So much of core experience is designed around exploration and development essentially for the advancement of combat ability. There needs to be enough combat to make that feel urgent.

I remember PS:T as being text heavy, which was great, but I also remember there being regular enough combat to make development feel important and satisfying.

Originally Posted by GabrielMP_19
There are too many fights in RPGs. I think it's pretty cool that the game puts them aside. C'mon, you guys have literally a ton of other RPGs in which you can fight as much as you want.

That's not the point. If combat is really as infrequent as people are saying, the developers should have at least made that more known. It doesn't seem like anyone was expecting the battles to be this sparse.