Something was lost when combat moved from tell to show

[Bustamonte]

People love to complain about "grinding" aka actually playing the game, in blobbers.

Yet I went on a blobber tear a while ago and came to a realization. Sure, there is more combat. Way, way more. But mainly it's also much faster combat and more challenging.

Just compare bard's tale to baldur's gate. In baldur's gate I guess you don't fight too many actual enemies. Maybe a dozen or two for each map. But it's sooo fucking slow. And there's really not much worry you will lose. The worst that can happen is you have to press pause and then do some kiting.

There's all kinds of whizbang cool FX and you can choose out whatever cool spells and gear you want, but in essence all of those DnD features are wasted. You're all dressed up to experience some icy hot tactical combat and there isn't any. You basically just run your character away from the enemy until it's dead. Over and over and over. And some of these combats take forever to run down the foe. You can do it all in your sleep, and it really is a very boring grind.

Contrast that to Bard's Tale I and the early Wizardries. A few skeletons and a mage appear. Every time a combat comes up you are very careful unless you have been in that area many times before. One mistake and you could lose a party member easily. This is true for the majority of the game. You have to carefully weigh your options then choose the ones that are enough to take them out, but not wasteful of precious resources like spellpoints.

You choose your options, and the resolution is quite quick. If you choose carefully and have enough power you are fine, otherwise you quickly find yourself in trouble.

In the later wizardries the combat gets slower, though. I noticed that this corresponds to the amount that's shown onscreen as well. There seemed to be an impetus for always having more. More groups of monsters, more animations, more sound effects and so on. The combat itself went from a challenge into a mummer's show where they try to entertain you, and they drag things out a long time. Even some of the earliest fights are so slow, against creatures that use sleep over and over again for example.

There's something simple and pure about these original RPGs. Combat is quick and lethal, and yet much more engaging most of the time.

 

[Severian Silk]

PnP is slow too. Doesn't keep people from playing it though.

 

[octavius]

Just compare bard's tale to baldur's gate. In baldur's gate I guess you don't fight too many actual enemies. Maybe a dozen or two for each map. But it's sooo fucking slow. And there's really not much worry you will lose. The worst that can happen is you have to press pause and then do some kiting.

There's all kinds of whizbang cool FX and you can choose out whatever cool spells and gear you want, but in essence all of those DnD features are wasted. You're all dressed up to experience some icy hot tactical combat and there isn't any. You basically just run your character away from the enemy until it's dead. Over and over and over. And some of these combats take forever to run down the foe. You can do it all in your sleep, and it really is a very boring grind.

That's not my experience. But then it's nearly 20 years ago since last time I played BG1 vanilla.

BG1 is a very bad example of a game with slow "show" combat, especially since you can use AI scripts to make the easy fights last only a few seconds.
There's a ton of games with slow, boring overhead combat, yet you can't come up with a better example than BG1?

 

[Infinitron]

I remember way back during the Wasteland 2 Kickstarter, there was some oldster Wasteland 1 fan who posted about how he couldn't get into Fallout back in the day because the combat was too slow.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

*snip*

Just compare bard's tale to baldur's gate. In baldur's gate I guess you don't fight too many actual enemies. Maybe a dozen or two for each map. But it's sooo fucking slow. And there's really not much worry you will lose. The worst that can happen is you have to press pause and then do some kiting.

There's all kinds of whizbang cool FX and you can choose out whatever cool spells and gear you want, but in essence all of those DnD features are wasted. You're all dressed up to experience some icy hot tactical combat and there isn't any. You basically just run your character away from the enemy until it's dead. Over and over and over. And some of these combats take forever to run down the foe. You can do it all in your sleep, and it really is a very boring grind

I just got done playing quite a bit of Baldur's Gate 1. Your descriptions of it are not how I experienced it. Strangely, it was fairly difficult at times to survive too. I was never bored, how could I be? My group mates kept dying and I kept running low on cash. Then again, I never reloaded a savegame unless my main died and I never tried to get my main to die (just to reload). It's just hard for me to reconcile what you say with what my experience was. It's at odds.

This is not the first time someone has a diferent opinion than me, so I'm not saying you're wrong. (The fights are longish.) Another poster here--Grimwulf?--summarized JA2 vanilla as grindy and popamole. I however loved JA2. It's probably my favorite RPG ever, mostly because of its fights and resource management.

What I will say is JA2 had a better UI and more tactical fights than BG and I'll leave it at that.

Contrast that to Bard's Tale I and the early Wizardries. A few skeletons and a mage appear. Every time a combat comes up you are very careful unless you have been in that area many times before. One mistake and you could lose a party member easily. This is true for the majority of the game. You have to carefully weigh your options then choose the ones that are enough to take them out, but not wasteful of precious resources like spellpoints.

If you excluded the name of the game I could easily think you were describing Baldur's Gate. /Sigh.

You choose your options, and the resolution is quite quick. If you choose carefully and have enough power you are fine, otherwise you quickly find yourself in trouble.

In the later wizardries the combat gets slower, though. I noticed that this corresponds to the amount that's shown onscreen as well. There seemed to be an impetus for always having more. More groups of monsters, more animations, more sound effects and so on. The combat itself went from a challenge into a mummer's show where they try to entertain you, and they drag things out a long time. Even some of the earliest fights are so slow, against creatures that use sleep over and over again for example.

There's something simple and pure about these original RPGs. Combat is quick and lethal, and yet much more engaging most of the time.

Maybe your problem is you don't like combat which lasts a while. And I will acknowledge there's some kiting in Baldur's Gate. For me, I often was confronted wiht an enemy my fighters couldn't handle. The other issue was because of repeated deaths and low cash, I was finding it hard to be fully equipped with everything. Still, I thnk I understand somewhat what you're trying to say. You want quicker fights which're still deadly. I tend to like longer fights, so maybe that's why I disagree.

EDIT: I've played up through about the 4th or 5th chapter in Baldur's Gate. I had to stop playing because of comptuer problems. But basically I had complaints about the game. Mainly, it was very hard because I would never reload unless my main died. I tried to fight through every loss, you know? That's how I play. I lost one of them permanently. The game pushed me to my limits after losing so many. I also came to dislike the respawn rates and the unreliability of resting. I was close to quitting but I fought through it and went to the random areas which had monsters to make cash. I eventually made it and recovered a great deal of everything I'd lost. It's a long story. Sufficie to say, I prefer a struggle in games. I got it.

 

[Bustamonte]

I just got done playing quite a bit of Baldur's Gate 1. Your descriptions of it are not how I experienced it. Strangely, it was fairly difficult at times to survive too. I was never bored, how could I be? My group mates kept dying and I kept running low on cash. Then again, I never reloaded a savegame unless my main died and I never tried to get my main to die (just to reload). It's just hard for me to reconcile what you say with what my experience was. It's at odds.

This is not the first time someone has a diferent opinion than me, so I'm not saying you're wrong. (The fights are longish.) Another poster here--Grimwulf?--summarized JA2 vanilla as grindy and popamole. I however loved JA2. It's probably my favorite RPG ever, mostly because of its fights and resource management.

What I will say is JA2 had a better UI and more tactical fights than BG and I'll leave it at that.


If you excluded the name of the game I could easily think you were describing Baldur's Gate. /Sigh.


Maybe your problem is you don't like combat which lasts a while. And I will acknowledge there's some kiting in Baldur's Gate. For me, I often was confronted wiht an enemy my fighters couldn't handle. The other issue was because of repeated deaths and low cash, I was finding it hard to be fully equipped with everything. Still, I thnk I understand somewhat what you're trying to say. You want quicker fights which're still deadly. I tend to like longer fights, so maybe that's why I disagree.

Low level DnD is all about missle weapons and sleep spells. If you understand this 'secret' then it is extremely hard to fail in BG 1. Especially since you can just run around in circles firing arrows and sling bullets ad nauseum and kill any enemy.

It's also hard to argue that a game with no positioning is really very tactical.

I like long combat in JA 2 for example. Also in the later wizardries IF there is some challenge and interest to it.


I just find it odd people talk about the grindy combat of these old games, after playing them freshly and seeing the combat is actually fairly tense most of the time.

In BT III the combat is super grindy though.

But I don't mean to pick on just BG 1 I just used it as a typical more modern example. You could also choose NWN II for example. Endless pointless hordes of boringness. And each horde takes a ridiculous amount of time to kill - and you do so in the most boring manner.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Low level DnD is all about missle weapons and sleep spells. If you understand this 'secret' then it is extremely hard to fail in BG 1. Especially since you can just run around in circles firing arrows and sling bullets ad nauseum and kill any enemy.

It's also hard to argue that a game with no positioning is really very tactical.

I like long combat in JA 2 for example. Also in the later wizardries IF there is some challenge and interest to it.


I just find it odd people talk about the grindy combat of these old games, after playing them freshly and seeing the combat is actually fairly tense most of the time.

In BT III the combat is super grindy though.

But I don't mean to pick on just BG 1 I just used it as a typical more modern example. You could also choose NWN II for example. Endless pointless hordes of boringness. And each horde takes a ridiculous amount of time to kill - and you do so in the most boring manner.

I used sleeping a little bit but I don't think my casters were high enough for it to make a big difference. Part of the issue is I don't understand BG all that well so I was winging it. And I hate to read guides. I don't use cheats either. In fact, I can't see myself playing these games any other way. If I'm not experimenting, I'm not having fun.

Positioning does matter in places in BG1. Just because I had some kiting doesn't mean I was always kiting, you know? (Kiting is slower and not always practical.) For example, if enemies are flinging arrows at me I try to keep my weaker members away from them, sometimes using obstacles (like walls) as shields. That gives me crucial time of my fighters go down. And if you're kiting them in a limited manner you have ot make sure it's your stronger members who're exposed first. I also many times had to keep a member with low hitpionts away from enemies in close quarters. I did that several times and it required strict management of positioning and some spell casting--differing with the types and numbers of enemy.

But I do agree there's probably too much kiting in BG. And the respawning and rest system have to be adjusted--it very nearly forces you to reload savegames. For me that's game killling. But I want to be careful about using a broad brush. I wonder how mnay of you who cast negative stances on these games haven't played htem for a long time?

JA2 definitely has more tactical fights IMHO. I reflected on this many times while playing BG. This was back in September 2015. A lot of it comes down to better UI--assisting in tactcal choices--in JA2 and the fact I don't think BG uses cover to teh same extent as JA2. Still, BG DOES have some tactics. It was fun enough for me to keep playing.

EDIT: I guess my main beef with the OP is dismissing BG as easy or something. It was anyting but easy for me. Maybe it's easy for someone who's already played it and knows its secrets. And also I didn't feel it was boring either. I was always busy trying to keep my head above water level. If there's one single thing which almost made me quit, it's neither of those things. Instead it's being repeatedly pushed to a point where I simply could not afford anything and was forced to salvage the area like a rat. I wasn't just losing money to repairs or potions or armor or whatever. My party members kept dying. It's expensive to raise them. I lost items. I did almost quit. And yet that struggle made it more meaningful afterward.

 

[DraQ]

...when combat moved from tell to show

It has?

 

[Bustamonte]

...when combat moved from tell to show

It has?

What's the difficulty here? In blobbers they describe what happened in text. In games today you see animated whizbang nonsense that can go for minutes without anything happening.

 

[DraQ]

...when combat moved from tell to show

It has?

What's the difficulty here? In blobbers they describe what happened in text. In games today you see animated whizbang nonsense that can go for minutes without anything happening.

Keyword being nonsense.
The meaningful information is just as dissociated from what happens on the screen as ever if not more - floaty damage numbers, cooldown indicators, flashy effects inadequate to actions they represent. They are telling, not showing, tokens, symbolic information instead of things they try to represent - or no longer even try.

 

[octavius]

I doubt modern games are worse than Ultima IV. Now that's a game with glacial combat. And there's nothing you can do about it.

 

[Trashos]

You are taking a fault of the infinity engine (allowing kiting) and you are reaching conclusions based on what is more or less a bug. Your argument is baseless.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying, you just have to support it better.

 

[Bustamonte]

Keyword being nonsense.
The meaningful information is just as dissociated from what happens on the screen as ever if not more - floaty damage numbers, cooldown indicators, flashy effects inadequate to actions they represent. They are telling, not showing, tokens, symbolic information instead of things they try to represent - or no longer even try.

Obviously the combat is NOT SHOWN AT ALL IN A BLOBBER. THAT IS THE WHOLE POINT. It's shown explicitly in more recent games.

Wow this is fucking retarded, please leave the thread.

 

[Bustamonte]

You are taking a fault of the infinity engine (allowing kiting) and you are reaching conclusions based on what is more or less a bug. Your argument is baseless.

I don't necessarily disagree with what you are saying, you just have to support it better.

There's no argument involved, it's a fact that the combat is slower. You can measure the combat, it's not in question.

Kiting is an example of the shitness of more modern combat but it's nothing to do with the basic premise of the thread which stands on its own.

But it is an example of why slowing down combat is bad. The longer combat is the more filler there must be. BG takes makes it painfully clear because the filler part is so bad, but the same thing applies even to later blobbers - the same fight is being drawn out over a much greater time, usually to ill effect.

 

[octavius]

But it is an example of why slowing down combat is bad. The longer combat is the more filler there must be. BG takes makes it painfully clear because the filler part is so bad,

Most of which is optional and has to be sought out.
There are several things you can do to avoid the "filler combat" or make it quicker in BG1:
1. Don't play the game.
2. Patch and mod the game to make it more challenging.
3. Don't seek out the "filler combat". Nearly all of it is optional.
4. Use the AI scripts so that the "filler combat" is over in seconds.

Or you can be a retard and complain about about "filler combat" in BG1 20 years after it was released.

 

[Bustamonte]

Most of which is optional and has to be sought out.
There are several things you can do to avoid the "filler combat" or make it quicker in BG1:
1. Don't play the game.
2. Patch and mod the game to make it more challenging.
3. Don't seek out the "filler combat". Nearly all of it is optional.
4. Use the AI scripts so that the "filler combat" is over in seconds.

Or you can be a retard and complain about about "filler combat" in BG1 20 years after it was released.

Ironic you call me a retard. Everything I said whooshed right over your head didn't it.

I said nothing about filler combat that is your own inane complaint about blobbers.

What I said is that in games like BG the same combat that would take 20 seconds in an old blobber is drawn out for severeal minutes. This turns every combat into boring filler combat. That's the only kind of combat there really is in BG 1.

Not because of the encounter design but because the combat is artificially slowed down. It's shown instead of told.

You and DraQ must have gone to the same ESL classes together.

 

[octavius]

I said nothing about filler combat that is your own inane complaint about blobbers.

Huh? What inane complaint about blobbers? The only game I've complained about in this thread is Ultima IV.

What I said is that in games like BG the same combat that would take 20 seconds in an old blobber is drawn out for severeal minutes. This turns every combat into boring filler combat. That's the only kind of combat there really is in BG 1.

Do you even know what "filler combat" is?
And do you know what AI scripts are, and how to use them so that "filler combats" take less than 20 seconds?

Not because of the encounter design but because the combat is artificially slowed down. It's shown instead of told.

The ironic thing is that your point is only valid about non filler combat (at least regarding BG1). Filler combat is just as quick as blobber combat. It's the set pieces that are slow in BG 1, not the filler combat.

 

[Bustamonte]

Huh? What inane complaint about blobbers? The only game I've complained about in this thread is Ultima IV.

Do you even know what "filler combat" is?
And do you know what AI scripts are, and how to use them so that "filler combats" take less than 20 seconds?

The ironic thing is that your point is only valid about non filler combat (at least regarding BG1). Filler combat is just as quick as blobber combat. It's the set pieces that are slow in BG 1, not the filler combat.

I never said anything about filler combat. Holy christ learn to speak english. You are hopeless.

 

[octavius]

I never said anything about filler combat.

 

[Bustamonte]

Holy shit

The fucking autism. I try to actually discuss RPGs and this is my punishment.

Can you just not grasp the concept.

What I am talking about is a 2 second combat stretched out for a much longer time.

What you are talking about is "trash combat" which is EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE of what I am talking about. In fact I am arguing that this "filler combat" in blobbers is much better than the combat in more modern RPGs that is much more drawn out.

When I say filler (I NEVER said the term "filler combat" I said, specifically, that the combat had no more real content. It was just the same thing drawn out longer. In fact it's worse in BG because it's less tactical than in BT. Things like kiting are a consequence of this. They have to have more for you to "do" as they show the combat very slowly (six seconds for each whack).

 

[octavius]

So why use the word "filler" when it's usually used for "filler combat" aka "trash combat"?
If you want to discuss properly then use correct, non ambigious terms.

 

[Endlösung]

Blobber combat

is not played against ai fo a reason.

 

[Zombra]

A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
D)efend
D)efend
[Enter]

A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
D)efend
D)efend
[Enter]

A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
D)efend
D)efend
[Enter]

A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
D)efend
D)efend
[Enter]

A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
A)ttack
D)efend
D)efend
[Enter]

Gee, this is so fast! I sure am glad I'm not playing JA2.

 

[Konjad]

I don't remember a cRPG where combat was ever well described, unless you count "FurryFaggot does 12 damage to AnalInfestation, AnalInfestation dies". Dwarf Fortress has well described combat, but it's not cRPG. Blobbers are fucking shit, I prefer combat even in Baldur's Gate, where at least some minimum positioning and tactics are required, whereas in blobbers there isn't even that.

 

[Bustamonte]

Your positioning doesn't matter at all in BG. You just choose what monster to wack, what spell to cast or run away.

JA is slower but JA actually has more going on. BG does the same thing, just painfully slowly.

You do the same shit as a a) b) c) d) choices above except you have to manually click on every guy you want to wack and pause to run away or change targets.

 

[Space Insect]

Your positioning doesn't matter at all in BG. You just choose what monster to wack, what spell to cast or run away.

JA is slower but JA actually has more going on. BG does the same thing, just painfully slowly.

You do the same shit as a a) b) c) d) choices above except you have to manually click on every guy you want to wack and pause to run away or change targets.

If you knew anything about the AI scripts, you would know that you don't have to click on each person you want to attack manually.