Divinity Divinity: Original Sin 2 - Definitive Edition

[Luckmann]

Bull. Shit. D:OS1 didn't have anywhere near this much bloat in terms of numbers. There's even mods specifically for tuning it down to D:OS1-like numbers. I can't vouch for D:OS:EE, because I never finished it, but D:OS1 didn't have anything nearly as bad as this.

Both were bloated and items had to be swapped every lvl. Im not sure how to compare bloats to say that one was worse than other.
Maybe you didnt swap armor every few lvls in dos1 but physical dmg reduction was huge.

Yeah, nah, no fucking way did you need to change gear every second level or anything like that; gear in D:OS1 was OK for a long time, and even if there were uniques that were trashy, it was nothing like in D:OS2 - not anywhere close. It's entirely possible to argue that there was a degree of bloat, and it definitely used the same (bullshitty) standard of leveling encounters even when it makes little sense (i.e. a human guard doesn't just stay as a human guard, they all somehow increase in power as the game progresses; the orcs are a perfect example of this, since you meet some already at level 1-2, and then meet the same associated force of orcs later and they're suddenly much higher level).

But while I think that's a shit way to level encounters and I prefer a much flatter curve that is modified primarily by means of attributes and statistics (i.e. you should get extremely little health unless you actually increase your health-giving characteristics, etc.), I don't think it's necessarily bloat, especially not when this strategy is endemic, and it is certainly not on a level even vaguely comparable to D:OS2, especially by the late game.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Mark Richard]

I don't mind the armour system. You'd think the best strategy would be to gang up on a single enemy until they're dead, but in a big scrum its better to drain their armour and move on to the next target. Once armour is gone, enemies become malleable and can be charmed, stunned, and generally kept out of the fight. Outright killing them often ties up too many resources.

 

[circ]

so if you thought DOS 1 was kinda..miuh? is this game worth playing? too much stupid shit? or is it just graphical upgrade more of the same?

 

[Iznaliu]

But.. that'd mean they'd have to admit that they were wrong to make it that way in the first place.

They'll do that... ...when announcing D:OS 3.

 

[Malpercio]

Yes you can.

And this whining about everyone is bi is like an oldman using spying glass to discover every neighbour is privately amoral. Or Fallout New Vegas playing taking a secret bachelor perk and discovering there are too much gay people around him. That's the best implementation of that thing in a heroic adventure game. None of companions are defined by their sexuality, apart from Red Prince no one has any love story included. But if you want to - OK, have a romance with whoever. The game is whimsical enough for it to be OK. This approach wouldn't work in something more serious and dramatic like, say, Dragon Age game where characters are supposed to be more realistic. There cop-outs like that look cheap compared to the rest of the plot. In DOS2 you can have a roleplay sex with a seductive lizard. They are not making any point or push any agenda by allowing you to bone a snobbish skeleton, they're doing the same thing as when they allow you to make head puns to a head on a stick 10 times in a row.

Divinity 3 should feature only realistic romances, no one will want to fuck you and all the women will cuck you with Chad. Then maybe the Codex will be happy.

 

[Reapa]

let's go back to the rock and see it at 440 baldur's gate 2. not because it's a classic, but because it's based on a solid system that has been worked on for tens of years and proven to be enjoyable. forget about the rtwp combat system and focus solely on character power progression:

1. the most obvious difference between d&d and all this new wave shit in terms of itemization is the simplicity of weapon upgrades in general. a +1 weapon will be a clear upgrade from any normal one. no maybe, no random foggy percentages, no numbers and/or stats bloat, no bullshit. yes, you won't get to improve your gear all the time, on every character in your party and they won't all shine at any given time throughout the game. but they don't have to. it's a fucking party based game, ffs. whether your next upgrade will benefit your mage or your ninja or your healer doesn't matter. the party as a whole will benefit from every upgrade and you as the player will get your shitty dopamine when you get it.

so what the fuck happened??? how and why do we go from simple straightforward itemization to random shit with either huge numbers bloat and/or cosmetic differences between 2 weapons of the same type like 5-2423 dmg vs 224-2143 dmg? did i win? is this an upgrade? should i alt tab to my calculator? is it necessary for me to not know at first glance what is and isn't an upgrade to enjoy your shitty game? am i supposed to go by item level like with world of warcraft? is this some kind of stupid illusion of choice and versatile itemization? are you randomly generating a billion items to brag about your game having a billion items like numenera brags about its word count?

let's go over possible reasons for this shit:
a) it's a huge game that takes a million hours to beat and without stupid random itemization and numbers bloat one would spend most of the time without getting any upgrades. /obviously not the case
b) the player base can't be expected to click twice in a row without a huge reward for that effort. /riiight
c) skyrim fucked us. we're not gonna sell shit without full voice acting in all major languages of the world. we're also not gonna sell shit without at least a big world if not open. we will never be able to fill that world with any meaningful content and if we hit 1% with npcs and enemies we can call it a success. but there is simply no way we can sell a 99% empty world without everyone refunding within the first 5 minutes so we'll need to fill it with something. something that can be generated automatically. like items. let the morons gather shit till they throw up. they shouldn't have made skyrim a success. fuck them all! we're not the ones to blame. /bingo

now, as long as you morons keep paying for shit like this, point c) will forever kill any chance of you getting any decent itemization in your games. deal with it, you are to blame.
full voice acting should not be a selling point but a huge warning sign of wasted resources! steam reviews should always be not recommended based solely on this point even if everything else seems okeyish. unless it gets done with microsoft narrator, this crap will always cost a shit ton of money the more content a game has.

2. crafting was once, a long time ago, in a very different game, something special. you went to a tanner with some human skin a made a piece of armor only the most vile people would want to wear. you recognized the potential of tough enemies' scales or chitin to make some special armor that was either lighter and/or harder to penetrate. you found pieces of renowned gear and put them together to wield the power that made other adventurers famous in the past.

when did we start going through people's garbage to gather smelly fish and used underwear? or "craft" sticks out of logs?

let's go over possible reasons for this shit:
fuck that, it's point c) all over again! you can't fill the world with special stuff without it becoming not so special. it's filler and you deserve it. it's no coincidence that you find crafting materials roughly the same way you find gear.
you should have informed yourself before buying the game and you should have thought about the consequences of you buying skyrim and oblivion when you did. the butterfly effect is real. especially when a huge number of people does the same stupid thing at the same time. the real world does have reactivity.

3. long animations in turn based game coupled with 2x-3x more health in the form of armors on top of health bloat will make for a lengthy game without much solid content. the longer it takes to get through the combat, the less text you need to put into the game and do voice overs for. it's very important that you never really feel overpowered so you have an incentive to keep going through the trashcans.
there doesn't seem to be a reason for the botched initiative mechanic, but looking at the trend it's probably also tied to the voice overs.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Malpercio]

Shitty itemization has been a stable in Larian's games. Not even trying to defend them, just pointing out it's not a recent thing for them.

Itemization is forever fucked in modern games, because half of the playerbase who plays these games doesn't even seem to know what "itemization" means.

 

[imweasel]

Itemization is leaps and bounds better in Skyrim... which is really saying a lot.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

let's go back to the rock and see it at 440 baldur's gate 2. not because it's a classic, but because it's based on a solid system that has been worked on for tens of years and proven to be enjoyable. forget about the rtwp combat system and focus solely on character power progression:

[snip]

1. Skyrim's got nothing to do with it (voice acting even less so). It's clearly inspired by Diablo II and other clickfests of old. Larian's been doing this shit since their debut 2002. I agree that it doesn't fit as well in a turn- and squad-based RPG of the Original Sin series, but it's such a defining feature for Larian that I doubt they'll ever drop it. Love it or hate it (most likely the latter).

2. Baldur's Gate / D&D isn't the be-all and end-all (shocking, I know). You have other old games with robust crafting systems rather than quest-based crafting. For example, once again, Diablo II. The old-school Runescape (I'd say they took a lot of hints from this one in terms of crafting). NWN was also much more "crafty" than its other D&D predecessors. And, once again, Larian's been doing this in some shape or form since 2002.

But frankly, despite Larian's love of crafting, it remains a non-essential system for those who like it. It wasn't 'required' to beat DOS1, and it's even less robust in DOS2.

Oh yeah, and BTW, the only consequences of buying Oblivion and Skyrim are 1) getting two shitty games and 2) giving money to a company that cares fuck-all about games and gamers.

3. Personally, I think it has more to do with them wanting to 1) reduce the chore of healing/resurrecting your characters after every battle, however minor (remember DOS1); 2) retain some degree of challenge even when your characters are completely overpowered. As we all know, it had its side effects, but at least they tried. They could've easily copy-pasted DOS1 with a new storyline, sold the same number of copies, and kept everyone 'happy'. Thankfully, Larian realizes that there's value in change and experimentation when making a new game, rather than rehashing a successful formula over and over.

So there's no need to tinfoil hats. Some games are just more compat-focused than others. And frankly, DOS2 has a plenty of text and story as is, compared to some other "modern RPGs".

 

[Lacrymas]

There are much better stories to be found in books, so read those if all you want is story. Despite my raving constantly about writing, even I realize that mechanics > story in 99% of contexts. The story, at the most fundamental and non-negotiable level, has to provide a logical backdrop for the mechanics, nothing else. No "deep" "philosophical" "character development" (because they can't do it either way), no "relationships" *shudder* and no convoluted messes that make no sense however you slice them. If you can write a good story, then do it, but don't put it on priority number 1 and exclude everything else to the point of this medium becoming a parody of itself. Which is a line I'd say D:OS2 manages to cross and be gleeful about it.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Story is hardly priority #1 in DOS2...

Unless, of course, shagging lizards and skeletons is supposed to be an example of "deep character development"

 

[Lacrymas]

And because it's not priority number 1 they hired 7 writers and Chris Avellone to do the writing. It's also not priority number 1 because the combat mechanics don't make sense and actively contradict one another. The main story might not have been the priority, it's as "kooky" and pointless as ever, but the micro-structures of the narrative, like dialogues and such, clearly were. If the combat mechanics AND the story weren't the first priority, what was it? The "simulation"? Where you can kill the entire island and nobody bats an eye? Fallout 1 had better simulation than that.

The reason the story doesn't feel like their main focus, even though it was, is because it's not very good. It looks like a very low-effort thing, "become a god" is hardly Shakespeare. The writers just couldn't do it better because they aren't good writers. Surprise, surprise.

 

[Reapa]

let's go back to the rock and see it at 440 baldur's gate 2. not because it's a classic, but because it's based on a solid system that has been worked on for tens of years and proven to be enjoyable. forget about the rtwp combat system and focus solely on character power progression:

[snip]

1. Skyrim's got nothing to do with it (voice acting even less so). It's clearly inspired by Diablo II and other clickfests of old. Larian's been doing this shit since their debut 2002. I agree that it doesn't fit as well in a turn- and squad-based RPG of the Original Sin series, but it's such a defining feature for Larian that I doubt they'll ever drop it. Love it or hate it (most likely the latter).

2. Baldur's Gate / D&D isn't the be-all and end-all (shocking, I know). You have other old games with robust crafting systems rather than quest-based crafting. For example, once again, Diablo II. The old-school Runescape (I'd say they took a lot of hints from this one in terms of crafting). NWN was also much more "crafty" than its other D&D predecessors. And, once again, Larian's been doing this in some shape or form since 2002.

But frankly, despite Larian's love of crafting, it remains a non-essential system for those who like it. It wasn't 'required' to beat DOS1, and it's even less robust in DOS2.

Oh yeah, and BTW, the only consequences of buying Oblivion and Skyrim are 1) getting two shitty games and 2) giving money to a company that cares fuck-all about games and gamers.

3. Personally, I think it has more to do with them wanting to 1) reduce the chore of healing/resurrecting your characters after every battle, however minor (remember DOS1); 2) retain some degree of challenge even when your characters are completely overpowered. As we all know, it had its side effects, but at least they tried. They could've easily copy-pasted DOS1 with a new storyline, sold the same number of copies, and kept everyone 'happy'. Thankfully, Larian realizes that there's value in change and experimentation when making a new game, rather than rehashing a successful formula over and over.

So there's no need to tinfoil hats. Some games are just more compat-focused than others. And frankly, DOS2 has a plenty of text and story as is, compared to some other "modern RPGs".

so you're blaming everything on incompetence and laziness. fair enough. i was going for resource management as a cause for the crap they keep pushing.
diablo 2 is a very different game. it's a hack and slash. it's repetitive as fuck on purpose and all that keeps you going is character power progression by means of both stats and itemization. and diablo 2 does itemization very well for the purpose it has. there's several sets you hunt for and a lot of uniques, all powerful by the time you are supposed to get them. and crafting is there to make your items even more powerful. yes, you go through the same maps over and over again and keep fighting the same enemies, but you're playing a slot machine.
dos 2 has no reason to rely on slot machine mechanics and it doesn't work with dos 2. enemies do not respawn. the game doesn't end with a restart on a harder difficulty. it's not sold as a hack and slash and we neither expect it to be one nor want it to be one. i am aware dos 1 did the same shit and was criticized for the same shit at the time. ignoring that criticism can be explained with incompetence and/or laziness, but i'm gonna assume they did it for financial reasons, because i don't want to believe a game dev will go out of his way to crap on his own game, they way they did, out of pure ignorance, with all the feedback on the issue and all the RPGs that came before.
i have explained this in another post in another thread: you don't use random number generators and procedural generation of anything for the sake of it sounding "cool". you use it when and where it's needed for a purpose.
random loot in dos1 and 2 servers no purpose.
fallout 4 for example was meant to be played for thousands of hours. bethesda is not stupid. they know there's a modding community out there that keeps the game alive for much longer than the content inside the game. so they went ahead and implemented a system of random loot and random respawning enemies and radiant quests, so people can still play it long after the main quest is over if they feel like it. and they do because of the modding community.
whether it was as successful as expected or not, is of absolutely no importance. the design decisions were based on solid assumptions.
now, what makes larian think i'm gonna replay dos 1 or 2 even once so they need to implement an itemization system that makes it less repetitive when everything else is as static as it gets? nothing. they did it because it's easier both on the creativity side and on the financial side to just throw random crap at me. unless there a dos nexus and a dos loverslab i don't know about.
and as a side note, D&D IS the be-all and end-all. failing to acknowledge that fact doesn't scratch D&D, it just makes you look like a moron. if you're going to to get inspiration for your mechanics it's objectively smarter to look at the most solid ones out there first and then at the rest. and of course spend a thought or two on how well it suits the game you're gonna make as explained above. you're free to fail at that and free to ignore all criticism but you won't see me praise your crap for the balls it took to push a brainless experimental system.

 

[Lacrymas]

i am aware dos 1 did the same shit and was criticized for the same shit at the time. ignoring that criticism can be explained with incompetence and/or laziness, but i'm gonna assume they did it for financial reasons, because i don't want to believe a game dev will go out of his way to crap on his own game, they way they did, out of pure ignorance, with all the feedback on the issue and all the RPGs that came before.

You'd be surprised. Swen is the one who keeps pushing for random items, it's not due to time constraints or budget concerns. They hired 4 studios to do VA for fuck sake. If they can do that they can pay a handful of people to design hand-placed items. He just thinks he knows better than everyone else and is more stubborn than a mule.

 

[Reapa]

i am aware dos 1 did the same shit and was criticized for the same shit at the time. ignoring that criticism can be explained with incompetence and/or laziness, but i'm gonna assume they did it for financial reasons, because i don't want to believe a game dev will go out of his way to crap on his own game, they way they did, out of pure ignorance, with all the feedback on the issue and all the RPGs that came before.

You'd be surprised. Swen is the one who keeps pushing for random items, it's not due to time constraints or budget concerns. They hired 4 studios to do VA for fuck sake. If they can do that they can pay a handful of people to design hand-placed items. He just thinks he knows better than everyone else and is more stubborn than a mule.

that's a shame

 

[Ausdoerrt]

so you're blaming everything on incompetence and laziness.

Not so much laziness, but more as Lacrymas put it, "knowing better". Some of these things are just so ingrained in the studio's works, it's moot to hope it will change. Not saying this is good or bad, this is just the way things are.

diablo 2 is a very different game. it's a hack and slash. it's repetitive as fuck on purpose and all that keeps you going is character power progression by means of both stats and itemization. and diablo 2 does itemization very well for the purpose it has.

Divine Divinity was, for all intents and purposes, a Diablo clone with a few twists. They've been essentially working of the same basic concepts ever since. That's why I mentioned that it works worse in the OS series than their earlie action RPG titles.

with incompetence and/or laziness, but i'm gonna assume they did it for financial reasons, because i don't want to believe a game dev will go out of his way to crap on his own game, they way they did, out of pure ignorance, with all the feedback on the issue and all the RPGs that came before.

I think they pretty much had a crapload of money to make this game, and the interviews read like they made exactly the game they wanted to.

now, what makes larian think i'm gonna replay dos 1 or 2 even once so they need to implement an itemization system that makes it less repetitive when everything else is as static as it gets? nothing. they did it because it's easier both on the creativity side and on the financial side to just throw random crap at me. unless there a dos nexus and a dos loverslab i don't know about.

To be fair, random loot does serve a purpose. Static loot tends to restrict build creativity a bit, since you know that, for example, there are barely any magical exotic weapons in TOEE, so you're unlikely to invest into one. And they were definitely going for a "combat simulator" type feel with this game. Whether you think they succeeded is another matter, since we're talking intentions here.

Same can be said for the modding side of things - they spend a lot of effort on that modding toolset that came with DOS2, and I think they're hoping to replicate the success of NWN.

and as a side note, D&D IS the be-all and end-all. failing to acknowledge that fact doesn't scratch D&D, it just makes you look like a moron. if you're going to to get inspiration for your mechanics it's objectively smarter to look at the most solid ones out there first and then at the rest. and of course spend a thought or two on how well it suits the game you're gonna make as explained above. you're free to fail at that and free to ignore all criticism but you won't see me praise your crap for the balls it took to push a brainless experimental system.

That's, like, your opinion, man. Anyway, all I was trying to say is, Larian probably wasn't inspired that much by D&D in terms of itemization and crafting. And that Baldur's Gate is not necessarily the best/only representation of D&D (it uses the second edition, FFS).
---------------------------------------

And because it's not priority number 1 they hired 7 writers and Chris Avellone to do the writing. It's also not priority number 1 because the combat mechanics don't make sense and actively contradict one another. The main story might not have been the priority, it's as "kooky" and pointless as ever, but the micro-structures of the narrative, like dialogues and such, clearly were. If the combat mechanics AND the story weren't the first priority, what was it? The "simulation"? Where you can kill the entire island and nobody bats an eye? Fallout 1 had better simulation than that.

The reason the story doesn't feel like their main focus, even though it was, is because it's not very good. It looks like a very low-effort thing, "become a god" is hardly Shakespeare. The writers just couldn't do it better because they aren't good writers. Surprise, surprise.

Well, you said 'story' in your post. If you meant 'writing', then that's a whole different discussion. Just in case - no, these aren't the same thing.

 

[Lacrymas]

There are no 'builds' as such in D:OS2, so there's nothing to restrict the creativity of. Even if you could make builds, random items just make it so you can't even choose what you focus on because you don't know what items the RNG will throw at you. I just can't fathom how random items can ever be useful in the context of such an RPG.

 

[Murk]

There are no 'builds' as such in D:OS2, so there's nothing to restrict the creativity of. Even if you could make builds, random items just make it so you can't even choose what you focus on because you don't know what items the RNG will throw at you. I just can't fathom how random items can ever be useful in the context of such an RPG.

What?

Did you actually play the game?

 

[Reapa]

so you're blaming everything on incompetence and laziness.

and as a side note, D&D IS the be-all and end-all. failing to acknowledge that fact doesn't scratch D&D, it just makes you look like a moron. if you're going to to get inspiration for your mechanics it's objectively smarter to look at the most solid ones out there first and then at the rest. and of course spend a thought or two on how well it suits the game you're gonna make as explained above. you're free to fail at that and free to ignore all criticism but you won't see me praise your crap for the balls it took to push a brainless experimental system.

That's, like, your opinion, man. Anyway, all I was trying to say is, Larian probably wasn't inspired that much by D&D in terms of itemization and crafting. And that Baldur's Gate is not necessarily the best/only representation of D&D (it uses the second edition, FFS).

i'm not one to get into a fight over the differences between different D&D editions. i just don't have a clear picture of all the changes in my head to make any arguments. i know i liked both baldur's gate 1 and 2 and neverwinter knights 1 and 2 and neither had mechanics that bothered me.

one of the points i made was that larian may not have drawn inspiration from d&d for their mechanics, but should have. especially when going for turn based. i don't see how randomization will make build planing better. if you're gonna plan your builds based on available uniques and their power, good for you. if any of them lack weapon representation, it's probably better to supply the game with these instead of pucking all over the game. implementing classes that have no good itemization was, if true, a failure of the game that could be avoided. it's not something you have to work around by making everything suck. it's got nothing to do with the system.

i didn't read any interview, but did nobody think to ask why they went with randomness again? maybe i'm missing something. maybe they have a sound reason. maybe i was playing the game all wrong. although it's more likely i was just playing the wrong game. maybe it's a game for people who like slow turn based combat even with a speedhack and gathering trash from hundreds of trashcans. but i'm drifting off.

many games failed to replicate diablo 2. most of them because of itemization. even diablo 3. if you don't understand the importance of memorable items even in a system based on random ones, you're gonna fail at it. it's just not enough to color legendaries orage and make them rare if they won't have unique features. memorable unique features. strong unique features that have such an impact that it makes sense to call them legendary. it's good that some of the items in dos 2 featured spells, but they were not even unique.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

i don't see how randomization will make build planing better

Because you'll more likely have decent gear for any build, and won't build your character around some super-weapon you know exists in a static location. That kind of crap spoils the fun. Crafting serves a similar purpose, actually.

if any of them lack weapon representation, it's probably better to supply the game with these instead of pucking all over the game. implementing classes that have no good itemization was, if true, a failure of the game that could be avoided. it's not something you have to work around by making everything suck. it's got nothing to do with the system.

There's literally no RPG I know with static itemization that ever succeeded in providing good gear for every build imaginable. And since the character development system in DOS2 is quite varied and not based on static classes, there's a tradeoff that had to be made.

although it's more likely i was just playing the wrong game. maybe it's a game for people who like slow turn based combat even with a speedhack and gathering trash from hundreds of trashcans. but i'm drifting off.

Perhaps you were. I remember "turn-based is too slow" was the argument used by Beth-tards when Bethes-dunce turned Fallout into the pile of steaming crap it is today. I like turn-based being slow and deliberate, dammit, and please let's keep it this way. There are way too many twitch-fests on the RPG market as is.

many games failed to replicate diablo 2. most of them because of itemization. even diablo 3. if you don't understand the importance of memorable items even in a system based on random ones, you're gonna fail at it. it's just not enough to color legendaries orage and make them rare if they won't have unique features. memorable unique features. strong unique features that have such an impact that it makes sense to call them legendary. it's good that some of the items in dos 2 featured spells, but they were not even unique.

Fair enough, DOS2 actually does fail at providing interesting uniques. Or, rather, there are cool uniques, but they rapidly lose value due to the level scaling. So it's more of an issue with level scaling, I think. The system was quite similar in DOS1 and worked just fine, because there wasn't such a difference in power between character levels.

Also, that last part is false. For example, one of the first uniques you get are the Teleport Gloves, whose only real value is the spell. Ditto the cursed helmet that gives you the Purging ability. Sure, there were non-uniques with spells, but they mostly made sense (like boots with Uncanny evasion or wands/staves with offensive spells).

 

[Reapa]

i don't see how randomization will make build planing better

Because you'll more likely have decent gear for any build, and won't build your character around some super-weapon you know exists in a static location. That kind of crap spoils the fun. Crafting serves a similar purpose, actually.

if any of them lack weapon representation, it's probably better to supply the game with these instead of pucking all over the game. implementing classes that have no good itemization was, if true, a failure of the game that could be avoided. it's not something you have to work around by making everything suck. it's got nothing to do with the system.

There's literally no RPG I know with static itemization that ever succeeded in providing good gear for every build imaginable. And since the character development system in DOS2 is quite varied and not based on static classes, there's a tradeoff that had to be made.

although it's more likely i was just playing the wrong game. maybe it's a game for people who like slow turn based combat even with a speedhack and gathering trash from hundreds of trashcans. but i'm drifting off.

Perhaps you were. I remember "turn-based is too slow" was the argument used by Beth-tards when Bethes-dunce turned Fallout into the pile of steaming crap it is today. I like turn-based being slow and deliberate, dammit, and please let's keep it this way. There are way too many twitch-fests on the RPG market as is.

many games failed to replicate diablo 2. most of them because of itemization. even diablo 3. if you don't understand the importance of memorable items even in a system based on random ones, you're gonna fail at it. it's just not enough to color legendaries orage and make them rare if they won't have unique features. memorable unique features. strong unique features that have such an impact that it makes sense to call them legendary. it's good that some of the items in dos 2 featured spells, but they were not even unique.

Fair enough, DOS2 actually does fail at providing interesting uniques. Or, rather, there are cool uniques, but they rapidly lose value due to the level scaling. So it's more of an issue with level scaling, I think. The system was quite similar in DOS1 and worked just fine, because there wasn't such a difference in power between character levels.

Also, that last part is false. For example, one of the first uniques you get are the Teleport Gloves, whose only real value is the spell. Ditto the cursed helmet that gives you the Purging ability. Sure, there were non-uniques with spells, but they mostly made sense (like boots with Uncanny evasion or wands/staves with offensive spells).

nonononono, turn based is not too slow as a combat system. it's morons that make turn based games with overly long animations that make it too slow. let's not muddy things up like that.
planing a build is by its nature based on static stuff. you don't plan a fighter without knowing in advance what attributes he's gonna have. your argument of knowing stuff in advance when planing a build is incoherent. and i'm not saying random gear is making it impossible, i'm saying it doesn't help. it just doesn't matter enough to make random itemization the "goto" system.
and don't be a retard. there's a finite number of available classes. and a finite number of builds that stand out enough to be viable and it's never a matter of gear. if you can't make a spear wielding thief that summons angels and meteors because there's not a weapon in the game to allow that, maybe you're not supposed to make a thief that wields spears and summons angels and meteors. random itemization won't change that anyway. random itemization is planed the same way static itemization is. it just makes more items with slightly different numbers automatically. in other words, it fills the game world with samey trash.
the last part is not false, you just didn't understand it. i was saying the spells on the gear are not unique to the gear. there's a teleportation spell in the game. several even. puting that on gear doesn't make it special enough. for unique itemization you need unique effects. effects that are not covered by anything else in the game.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Well, I didn't feel like DOS1/2 was any slower than any other turn-based RPG I've played lately.

As for builds and items: You can totally plan based on the knowledge about the ruleset that the game provides you with - when you create your character etc. Knowing what static gear a game does or doesn't have is prior knowledge one wouldn't have without playing the game first or reading a walkthrough. That's what I call "spoiling the fun".

There also aren't clearly defined "classes" in the game, just general archetypes you can mix&match. Random itemization allows you to mix&match more freely, because you have a chance of finding gear for any slot with any types of bonuses, so you can have a full-armored mage, for example. And you can totally make a thief using spears, with summons and fireballs in DOS2 - and you're likely to find decent enough gear to take him through the game. Admittedly, the "thief" part will be limited, because spears in DOS2 are crap and don't have any special skills associated with them.

And finally, let's not pretend RPGs with static itemization aren't also full of trash. They are. I had bags full of them in IE games, and many more sold to vendors. Hundreds of basic "+1" weapons and armors, small healing potions that are useless by end-game, etc. etc. Sure, in DOS2 you may not have that handful of outstanding "uniques", but at least there's always a chance to find treasure in a heap of trash.


P.S. Would it kill you to use capital letters?

 

[Reapa]

Well, I didn't feel like DOS1/2 was any slower than any other turn-based RPG I've played lately.

As for builds and items: You can totally plan based on the knowledge about the ruleset that the game provides you with - when you create your character etc. Knowing what static gear a game does or doesn't have is prior knowledge one wouldn't have without playing the game first or reading a walkthrough. That's what I call "spoiling the fun".

There also aren't clearly defined "classes" in the game, just general archetypes you can mix&match. Random itemization allows you to mix&match more freely, because you have a chance of finding gear for any slot with any types of bonuses, so you can have a full-armored mage, for example. And you can totally make a thief using spears, with summons and fireballs in DOS2 - and you're likely to find decent enough gear to take him through the game. Admittedly, the "thief" part will be limited, because spears in DOS2 are crap and don't have any special skills associated with them.

And finally, let's not pretend RPGs with static itemization aren't also full of trash. They are. I had bags full of them in IE games, and many more sold to vendors. Hundreds of basic "+1" weapons and armors, small healing potions that are useless by end-game, etc. etc. Sure, in DOS2 you may not have that handful of outstanding "uniques", but at least there's always a chance to find treasure in a heap of trash.


P.S. Would it kill you to use capital letters?

i don't know what turn based games you've played recently but my most recent game was dungeons of chaos. not only does it come with a speed slider, but also basic automation of character attacks for those in your party that you feel are safe enough to let them cast/attack on their own. and even then i upped the speed to 5x with cheat engine once i got used to the game and felt comfortable enough with my planing and execution.

for example: i would start a tough fight with no automation, use priest to buff and set him on automatic to cast a minor damage spell over and over again till he was needed for healing. i would use oveclock spell with my mage as long as mana would allow it and then let him cast normal damage spells on his own till his mana regenerated enough for more overclocked spells. i would summon some allies with my druid and sorcerer and then let them cast damage spells as long as my summoned allies were still alive. i would move my marksman closer to the enemy for more accuracy and use a few strong shots then let him fire at will. i wouldn't turn autopilot on for my knight so each "round" i could re-asses the situation and make adjustments if needed.
THIS IS TURN BASED!
not useless micromanagement of each character whether your input is needed or not. not repeatedly looking at overly long animations that serve no purpose what so ever. it doesn't take too many braincells to foresee what your mage will do if you tell him to cast magic arrow. he's gonna cast magic arrow. you know it and don't need to see how he casts it and how the arrow flies. you don't need to see how your enemy scratches his butt after being hit by it. all that is implied once you give the order. turn based combat is not about flashy crap and special effects. it's about strategy and tactics. the animations aren't even a good feedback system. they may sometimes let you know whether you hit or not, depending on the game, but you still need a combat log for everything else that matters. so they are completely useless beyond the very basic feedback of hit or miss which can be achieved at very high speeds.

i know there aren't any classes per se in dos 2. that's also a very valid criticism point against the game's mechanics. it's like party based skyrim with each party character being good at everything. i played 2 lone wolves (retarded as that term is when you can have 2) summoners that could teleport themselves and others with several teleport spells each + ranged weapons and skills + high level damaging spells, healing, buffs, stuns and debuffs. each one's inventory was filled with high end legendaries all the time cause i went out of my way to explore and rummage through all the garbage i could find with max luck skill before doing any quests and fighting.
i was saying if a game doesn't have the equipment to allow this kind of degenerate crap, it's a good thing. if teleport was for example a unique ability of some legendary gear, you'd have to decide which character would equip it, instead of letting each of your party members learn it and use it whenever and with whomever you need to infight. as a side effect, it would make your characters more memorable. you'd always know which of your characters it is that can cast that or the other important/situational spell and maybe make sure to position your party accordingly.
and while we're at it, this fucking game gave each possible build the same fucking tactical spell. archer can teleport, mage can teleport, fighter can teleport, rogue can teleport FFS!!!! what builds are there to plan? they all do the same fucking stuff! unless you call a fighter/mage/rogue/archer/summoner with 4 types of teleport a build that needs random itemization to get all attributes increased on every piece of equipment, your argument doesn't really stand.

yes, other games have their own trash. but with IE games it's mostly on bodies of enemies. some of it was treasure, like gems. and the rest wasn't even supposed to be picked up. unless you were some kind of bum you wouldn't loot all enemies because there was no chance of finding anything special on trash enemies. most trash enemies i remember had some basic armor later +1 later +2, a basic weapon later +1 later +2 and a few coins. you'd pick up the magic ones (+1/+2) to sell and be done with it. you wouldn't spend your time looking at every piece of shit going through the whole list of variables searching for a marginal advantage in either magical or physical armor, a net gain in skill points or a spike of points in one of the skills to replace the legendary you got from the last big boss you killed. if you don't see how this crap is inferior, i give up. keep eating shit and liking it.

i do use capital letters. afaik there's a convention on the use of capital letters over the internet. unless it's a formal email, you're free to skip all rules of capitalizing letters. as a romanian i learned in school to use capital letters only with names and at the start of sentences in romanian but also capitalize nationalities and languages and the I in english and then every fucking noun in german. you can't imagine how sick i am of these incoherent, insane rules.