Brahs, I want to Arcanum and Planescape

Click here and disable ads!

Shit maybe throw Fallout 1 & 2 in there.

So I want to play through these games and have tried to start them up a few times but I just can't take the combat/game system.

I know. I am a heretic who should burn.

Still are there any saves or tips or something to make it more bearable for someone who was raised as a console kiddy. (I just built a PC capable of gaming last year).

I wasn't raised with comp games. I was raised with the 64 and Snes.

No.

So, you want to play those games, but you don't want to play those games.

psyduck.gif

I am Hamburger Helper in disguise.

No I just hate isometric combat but I want to see what so called true choices and consequences look like.

HD remake with action gameplay?

(I am going to try to give PS:T a 3rd go. Downloading some "2012" version with some community mods installed or some shit.)

Just play. Personally I'd start with Arcanum since it's got the most user friendly UI, controls and character system.

The tips for that game is simply- play a mage, build up your force to get the Disintegrate spell which will OHKO anything except the final boss. So it'll help you no matter what combat situation you end up in.

Now stop bitching and play.

BRO JUST ACT LIKE YOU ARE RELLAY HARDCORE AND PLAY KOTOR A FEW TIMES

Yes.

Fallout combat is more fun.

But there is Skyrim with 100s of hours of gameplay and the ME3 demo is released. I think that is choices and consequences enough. And you can play them with joypads.

You'd have to describe what in particular you don't like about them for me to try to give any kind of useful advice. Or you could just try not killing anything.

I can tell you what he does not like. Because I had to actually overcome the exact same problems when I played them. Graphics. Yeah yeah I am a graphics whore. Especially when I played NWN/2 BEFORE playing these games. Its really difficult for people like me to go backwards some time in graphics for something as good as pure gold mechanics/story integration. The reason I would say is tragically the loss of a lot of fine visual details.

its even harder to play games like M&M, when you consider that the FPS perspective does not compare to the FPS perspective as I know it for Role play element games. Its hard to believe but people are like that. Its like asking me to use the old dial phones without buttons. I could, but dude, its painful. I accept that this complaint is not really a serious issue, but its a matter of mindset. Our minds are really set because of culture we grow up in.

I would be REALLY grateful if somebody ports PS:T, BG into NWN2 engine. But that's to much of work and would take some time to do.

Same for Fallout. If someone could actually put the same game into a better looking engine (like the engine used for Blood Bowl (guess which one is it)) I would be happy.

These games are good as they are. But they can definitely become slightly better for my generation audience with a GRAPHICS ONLY (and probably AI) overhaul.

Why would you EVER want that? The 2D backgrounds of PST and BG are some of the prettiest graphics in any game, and the control system isn't based on a slow-to-respond 3D clusterfuck either. You need to chill and enjoy the abstraction IE provides.

You've tried the IE widescreen/high resolution mod, right?

Kiddies these days have no taste for art direction :1eyedking:
Saying that NWN2 has better graphics than Arcanum or Torment merely because it's 3d is pretty

Actually I don't mind the graphics that much. The clunky UI though is hard to get through.

Not to mention I personally don't like any kind of isometric style. Then again I wouldn't say no to an HD port either.

My main problem though had to be combat.

Comrade Goby: So, are you having a specific issue or are you just not a fan of the combat systems in general?

What other RPGs have you played?

I'm surprised at you, Captain. Have you abandoned The Dark Project for Deadly Shadows too?

What improvements would that make? Translating Torment into 3d would be especially pointless, considering the amount of animations and custom content required to even approach what the descriptions accomplish quite well through text alone.

I have NOT abandoned Thief (Horror). But i would be happy if I could play that with a newer engine. I think you are confused about what I am saying.


At your second point?

Why have graphics at all? Why not just text?

Oh, you're not trolling?

What improvements do you see, what specific advantages does Aurora have over IE that would make BG and PS:T substantively better games?

I am not an artist. But I am sure Aurora with its 3D can make better designs than IE if done by intelligent people. Just because faggots use Computers does not mean abacus is better.

Maybe. I've seen some pretty talented people produce good looking NWN mods, but I personally don't think they can compare to PS:T or BG. Maybe it'd be different if a major studio with time, talent and money took a whack at it, but I'd rather just see one design a better engine than trot out what I felt was a horrible one.

More to the point, the actual playability of the games probably don't stand much to gain by that kind of conversion. UI and widescreen issues have been addressed for those games by modders. I may be biased, but I have a hard time believing that somebody would find an IE game less playable due to its graphics--objects are generally distinctly designed, there's never any question (in my mind) about what's being represented, and besides that, it's pretty.

I guess that the fixed isometric perspective could be a hang-up for somebody, but I also find that hard to imagine--if you can play Diablo or any of the hack and slash games that took their cues from it and were designed to be viewed from a very similar angle, I suspect you can play an IE game just fine. There are limitations to isometric, I admit, like walls getting in the way, object hunting on occasion, and artificially limited sight range, but do you think those are major disincentives to play? That they ruin the core game--or at least what it could be, if it were 3D?

Choosing graphics rather than text is a different question than choosing to translate text into graphics. When the text is from Planescape: Torment, it's inevitable that something will be lost in translation, even if the animators include everything in the descriptions. Minor example from the dialogue with Ingress:

That is not good writing.

That's not the point. Is it worth the time and effort to have all of that animated? What's the point of trying to improve the graphics of a text-heavy choose-your-own-adventure game?

Dude we are only talking about those things that are WORTH animating. So come back to the point.

No, but you claimed "it's inevitable that something will be lost in translation, even if the animators include everything in the descriptions", and then posted a rather mediocre example of descriptive writing - one that would lose nothing were it to recreated with sound and visual animation.

Ah, I see. That was poorly phrased; the example was meant to qualify 'if the animators include everything in the descriptions'. Ingress's teeth are a good example of something that would require a disproportionate amount of work--a decent amount of animation for just one sidequest.