Favourite way(s) of playing

[Night Goat]

Main quest to stop the ancient evil is always there and there's nothing urgent about it ever. In fact, it's the last thing i ever do in any of those ancient evil games.
(and why is evil so fucking ancient?)

Exile III. 17 years ago, one guy made a game where the world becomes more destroyed the longer you wait. It's a great idea, but aside from that one game and its remake I don't think it's ever been done.

 

[Stoa]

Miss Scarlett in the Library with the dagger.

 

[bloodlover]

That's just like giving your game a time limit. Even if the player still has plenty of time to solve every side-quest, in the back of their minds people will still think about that time limit.

What about making ageing a way of passing time? Or maybe give that sense of urgency just in certain main story quests?

 

[Night Goat]

It's not the same thing as having a time limit, because the game can still be completed if towns have been destroyed and NPCs have been killed. It's fun to see the world crumble around you. You don't run out of time and have to load a much earlier save, as I presume happens in games with time limits.

 

[bloodlover]

And how is the world being destroyed affecting the gameplay then? I assume you are just missing side-quests and random NPCs?

 

[Zombra]

17 years ago, one guy made a game where the world becomes more destroyed the longer you wait. It's a great idea, but aside from that one game and its remake I don't think it's ever been done.

Well ... Star Control II.

 

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

I always start with a spellcasting class and do the edgy path.

Always full on offensive spells with damage augmentations. I tend to ignore summoning/defenses completely as that makes the game more exciting.

 

[Zombra]

Always full on offensive spells with damage augmentations. I tend to ignore summoning/defenses completely as that makes the game more exciting.

I don't usually do spellcasters unless it's party-based, but perhaps interestingly I tend towards full summoning with no personal offense

 

[deuxhero]

Really depends on the game. In solo games I generally go for jack-builds and uber specialization in party games, but that's just basic sense.

I generally focus on magic when its an option I guess

 

[Corporate_Jew_Master]

Always full on offensive spells with damage augmentations. I tend to ignore summoning/defenses completely as that makes the game more exciting.

I don't usually do spellcasters unless it's party-based, but perhaps interestingly I tend towards full summoning with no personal offense

Never enjoyed summoning or support casters. Demonology like in DnD with mixed spell and power selection of that sort is fun though.

In general, edgy/villain choices in videogames are usually written in a bad but hilarious way. Far more enjoyable than playing realistically, at least for most games.

 

[taxalot]

I am a story and writing fag. If there are dialog options or stats, those are usually the first ones I will go after (Intelligence & Charisma, for exemple).
Also, I have been used to playing a barbarian/paladin for years and I'm now switching my gameplay style, usually going for something I will find more difficult to play. I mostly now default to mages, and for variety's sake switch to thieves once in a while or even rangers.

Sometimes, this doesn't end well though. I did a BG1+2 run last year and god... and that part where your character ends up in this dream world and has to fight a Bhaal incarnation or something... There was absolutely no way my thief could defeat that. No way. I tried everything and eventually had to resort to cheats. I guess changing classes take some getting used to, sometimes.

 

[Urbanolo]

Sometimes, this doesn't end well though. I did a BG1+2 run last year and god... and that part where your character ends up in this dream world and has to fight a Bhaal incarnation or something... There was absolutely no way my thief could defeat that. No way. I tried everything and eventually had to resort to cheats. I guess changing classes take some getting used to, sometimes.

You could have just set up traps in the candlekeep library. Or chain backstab him with the ring of invisibility. Traps were really broken in BG 2, yet almost nobody used them.

 

[DosBuster]

High as a fucking kite and I'm a story fag so Int + Cha.

 

[Waterd]

I generally try redesign the system so there is actually a challenge, so it really depends in the game. If there is a way to create a ¨time limit¨ i generally do so. I generally play the games with a long list of rules of things i can´t do, as to actually have a challenge and try to make most of my actions be decisions instead of obvious actions.
for example if explore or not, the answer is always to explore, so i try to add a cost to explore or just forbid myself from exploring, if it´s not a decision, I try to remove the possiblity of even doing it.

 

[Grauken]

Mostly play a goody two-shoes, even on replays when I'm attempting to be actively evil

In single-character games I mostly go for tanks, in multi-character games for the most generic combo of 3 tanks, 1 thief, 1 priest-type guy and 1 caster for massive damage infliction

 

[Rahdulan]

Until just a few years ago I found myself playing a lot of stealthy characters and exploring every nook and cranny in games. Sadly nowadays, whether due to my ever increasing apathy towards video games or simply rehashed games getting made left and right, I'd summarize my approach with the following image:

Now I play however mood hits me.