Is MotB worth it...

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Emotional Vampire, play this game already.

 

[Forest Dweller]

Play the OC for a few hours until you get bored of it. Then, after you've gotten familiar with the game mechanics, start the MotB campaign.

This. You can try out the OC and if you're not liking it just jump into MotB anytime. Personally, I don't regret playing the OC. It was just a very average experience. So give it a shot; you may end up having enough fun that you'll play it all the way through. And if not, just quit, read a plot synopsis, and start playing MotB. In case you were wondering, the game will let you level to 18 if you're not carrying over a high-leveled character. My OC character was 19. Meh.

 

[Kron]

The OC is completely forgettable, and you can easily play MoTB without having completed it previously.
If you do play the OC, remember to plan your character build ahead, for a character that will end up being lvl 30+.

 

[MetalCraze]

All game mechanics aside, it's an amazing game. The amount of C&C, the story, the characters. LARPing retard's dream come true.

Fixed. Because this is the only way you can call "gamers" who don't care about a -game- in their game.

 

[Xor]

It's great, play it. The OC isn't really bad, either.


Also, get TonyK's AI, it makes combat bearable.

 

[Risine]

Considering you'll have to play with NWN2 engine... that's really not worth it, even if the story is a little above what we have seen since BG/Planescape/Fallout period - ok, that's far from difficult to be a little above the recent action/RPG/FPS productions-, except The Witcher, play the Witcher instead, you won't be disappointed, thats the best surprise for years.

 

[Reject_666_6]

Read the first few parts of my LP. If you like the writing in those parts, you should play it. If not, there's no need to force yourself.

 

[Volourn]

motb IS AWESOME.

 

[DriacKin]

All game mechanics aside, it's an amazing game. The amount of C&C, the story, the characters. LARPing retard's dream come true.

Fixed. Because this is the only way you can call "gamers" who don't care about a -game- in their game.

How is this any different from PS:T, Arcanum, Bloodlines, or Anachronox? All of which are games which you claimed to enjoy.

 

[~*´¨¯¨`*·~-.¸-AIN'T]

And if you complain about the OC, be sure to complain about BG series in the same sentence. Since they're essentially on the same level.

Except BG had much better encounter design, better overall game mechanics, and a less annoying interface.

To OP: why should you have to play a shit game in order to play a great one? Just start with the great one and pretend you played the other one.

 

[Xor]

And if you complain about the OC, be sure to complain about BG series in the same sentence. Since they're essentially on the same level.

Except BG had much better encounter design, better overall game mechanics, and a less annoying interface.

Subjective. You have to admit they are very similar games overall - epic quest, dungeon crawling, D&D combat system, rtwp, archetypal companions, etc. Which one you enjoyed more is going to come down purely to taste.

 

[Gragt]

Orcs cave vs Firewyne Dungeon: which is worse and why?

 

[OSK]

MotB is, hands down, the best RPG released since the fall of Troika. The only valid complaints against the game all stem from the use of the shitty NWN2 engine.

except The Witcher, play the Witcher instead, you won't be disappointed, thats the best surprise for years.

You're Polish, aren't you?

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

And if you complain about the OC, be sure to complain about BG series in the same sentence. Since they're essentially on the same level.

Except BG had much better encounter design, better overall game mechanics, and a less annoying interface.

Except the mechanics are largely the same, being DnD. There, the difference goes down to preference between AD&D and 3rd Ed. Personally, I prefer 3rd Ed.

The encounter design itself relied actually more on having auto-buffed enemies. And again, most of BG2 encounters are exactly the OC level. And both have hilariously bad AI, Tony K's excluded.

I still fail to see the difference between the interfaces, since both are largely identical. Particularly now post-SoZ. Not to mention interface in a game where you mostly act while paused is surprisingly irrelevant.

Personally, I place NWN2 OC above BG2 due to better dialogue, a handful of quests and Ammon Jerro.

 

[fastpunk]

@EmoVamp: Well, you should definitely play MotB, as so many in this thread have recommended.

About the OC, keep in mind that unlike MotB, it's typical high-fantasy stuff with only a few outstanding features. And if that wasn't enough, Act 1 (which is quite long) feels really barren and lifeless. It basically fails to pull you in, so the first part of the experience is about as fun as standing still and staring at a brick wall. After that it gets going. It starts mixing it up, story picks up speed, the Crossroad Keep management part is very enjoyable, and there are some interesting set pieces and battles towards the end too. But to this day, I cannot understand why Obsidian added the filler that is 80-90% of Act 1. Basically, the OC is like an obese person, it badly needs to be put on a diet and get rid of excess fat.

So play it if you feel that starting off with a level 20 char is gay, just know what you're getting yourself into. It's enjoyable, but only after the filler first part.

 

[Emotional Vampire]

Is MotB worth it, considering I will need to play NWN2 original campaign first?

Is it a compulsive thing?

Definitely. Both because of the story and because of char development(Level 20 Monk/whatever, that's my plan)

But what do you know, someone on Codex pointed out something important: Epic Levels. I fucing HATED these in ToB. Are they so obtrusive, too? Fat Inn Keepers holding +5 Swords under the table? Being attacked by demigods left and right? That's so fucking retarded. Does the setting ease this up, since it's magicalwitchland so everything is magicalwitchy?

EDIT: Oh, and you might want to pick up Baldur's Gate 1/2 again, just for the heck of it.

I was thinking about doing solo duo LP of entire saga for some time. There are two BG LP threads but one went nowhere and the other is just "lol i turn on cheats and instakil every1". But that's a big game, with a big sequel.

 

[Zomg]

But what do you know, someone on Codex pointed out something important: Epic Levels. I fucing HATED these in ToB. Are they so obtrusive, too? Fat Inn Keepers holding +5 Swords under the table? Being attacked by demigods left and right? That's so fucking retarded. Does the setting ease this up, since it's magicalwitchland so everything is magicalwitchy?

Nope, it's as bad or worse than BG2/ToB from what I can remember. They put in epic levarls to get back-of-the-box appeal for Aspie kids that want to plan out and achieve their retarded 30-level build but they also want to do a normal human-scale story, so the campaign and the lewt and monsters don't really match.

 

[Gay-Lussac]

Thanks Lockkaliber, I think it's eBay for my MotB copy then. No idea what happen to my NWN 2 disks. I may have used them as coffee coasters in an attempt to claw back some of their purchase value.

May I direct you to the bay of pirates matey?! HARR

 

[Wyrmlord]

I don't think people acknowledge the real problem with MotB.

Since you get pretty much all the party member soon into the onset of the game, and they are all high level characters...

you have half a dozen people already equipped with high level spells across various classes, and skillsets that already are duplicated across their many classes.

Since you fight as a party, 75% of the work is done for you with an equipped premade party of three other people, and your only incentive with respect to any choices of your own character is for what accounts for 25% of what makes the difference in the fight.

I mean, Gann and Safiya doing meteor bombardments and taking care of 90% of the enemies, just so I have a single Monk/Cleric/Sacred Fist to punch the hell out of the lone few people remaining in battle?

Of course, premade characters in RPGs is something we have taken so much for granted, it makes us ignore the entire set of problems it comes with. I mean really, the whole idea of having party RPGs, just to strip away all the variety, planning, and choices that come with it was the worst thing to happen to post-1998 RPGs.

And we are surprised that devs would rather make action RPGs...

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Kaelyn can solo this game. Where's your point Wyrmie? The real problem with MotB? Shouldn't have a party?

 

[JarlFrank]

More like, have more balanced encounters. Don't start at epic level. Make combat less trivial. Or give the recruitable NPCs less powers.

Generally, make combat more challenging by good design.

 

[~*´¨¯¨`*·~-.¸-AIN'T]

Except the mechanics are largely the same, being DnD. There, the difference goes down to preference between AD&D and 3rd Ed. Personally, I prefer 3rd Ed.

The encounter design itself relied actually more on having auto-buffed enemies. And again, most of BG2 encounters are exactly the OC level. And both have hilariously bad AI, Tony K's excluded.

I still fail to see the difference between the interfaces, since both are largely identical. Particularly now post-SoZ. Not to mention interface in a game where you mostly act while paused is surprisingly irrelevant.

Personally, I place NWN2 OC above BG2 due to better dialogue, a handful of quests and Ammon Jerro.

*shrugs* I dunno. I find combat in BG to sometimes be actually fun and even sometimes challenging. In NWN2 it was always boring and always easy. Since combat is such a large focus for both games, the fact that I find BG's combat better for the most part makes it a better game to me.

Also yeah....just see Racofer's post in every thread relating to NWN2 to see why its a terrible interface/camera system/all that. I think he definitely overstates some of the problems there, but there's absolutely no doubt in my mind that BG was overall much less annoying in this area (which isn't so much a plus for BG as a minus for NWN2).

Also, even though there are some overall bad areas as far as boring filler combat in BG2, there's nothing even close to the orc caves, which were pretty much the epitome of bad encounter design mixed with a boring combat system.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

More like, have more balanced encounters.

Make combat less trivial

Balancing encounters seems to be pretty difficult at higher levels. There's quite a power-gap between a well built character and a badly done one. I remember a lot of complaining about the ridiculous high difficulty of MotB back when it was released.

Don't start at epic level.

Ah the evil epic levels. Where should they have continued the story, lvl 3?

Or give the recruitable NPCs less powers.

Less than the shitty equipment they come with, or the ridiculously small spell selection Safya comes with? What do you mean with powers?

Generally, make combat more challenging by good design.

I don't know, that would cause outrage, most players can't even handle the spirit meter.

 

[Jasede]

@ Emotional Vampire
Personally i think Mask of the Betrayer is not worth it. The plot is weird and stuff and thingies, but the gameplay sucks so very much there is totally no sense in making it a role playing game. Maybe an adventure game or something would have been better, there were good ideas and stuff in there, but it is totally meh as a game.

Planescape Torment!?!

 

[Kron]

Planescape Torment!?!

NO.
Not even near.