But your saying playing a game inside a box is great as long as it has a good story line?
How on earth can that be enjoyable?
The big RPG problem.
- Thread starter Teki187
- Start date
But your saying playing a game inside a box is great as long as it has a good story line?
How on earth can that be enjoyable?
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 9,262
- Location
- Saudi Arabia né Donegal
I think Oblivions major problem was that it was empty. The surrounding countryside felt like more of a wasteland the the Capitol Wasteland in Fallout 3 ever did.
But its finding a balance between long life and short term fun.
Perhaps games should come with 2 options, casual and hardcore.
With differing aspects of the game.
I.e. Casuals get a more stream lined, simple and shorter game and hardcores get more complex, open world, longer game?
Not a mention of Morrowind yet? (unless I missed it).
That game hit the nail on the head for me, unsupassed to this day for it's atmosphere and levelling system.
Strangely the fogging and limited view distance helped Morrowing immensely, In Oblivion it seemed like you could travel for ages, turn around and almost always see the capital city.
That game hit the nail on the head for me, unsupassed to this day for it's atmosphere and levelling system.
Strangely the fogging and limited view distance helped Morrowing immensely, In Oblivion it seemed like you could travel for ages, turn around and almost always see the capital city.
Morrowind was great, mainly due to the modding community IMO. And their was some issues, like if you had acrobatics as a main skill, you had to basicaly constantly jump everywhere to level it.
morrowind did have some great silly little things that made it fun to play though, like while wondering arround near the starter town i found a corpse of a wizard, i read his journal about his wonderfull new scroll he made, he thought it would work great. What the scroll did was give you insane acrobatics, allowing you to jump into the air and take a good 30 seconds to fall back down. The problem was, the acrobatics buff ended before you landed, and without that skill you take insane fall damage and die
hence the wizard corpse on the ground.
morrowind did have some great silly little things that made it fun to play though, like while wondering arround near the starter town i found a corpse of a wizard, i read his journal about his wonderfull new scroll he made, he thought it would work great. What the scroll did was give you insane acrobatics, allowing you to jump into the air and take a good 30 seconds to fall back down. The problem was, the acrobatics buff ended before you landed, and without that skill you take insane fall damage and die
hence the wizard corpse on the ground.ah! couldnt have said it better my self... walking through some canyons and little critters attacking you, with a 100ft view distance thanks to fog, felt like you was in the canyon for a lifetime when you got out of it lol
...... due to being on a dell rig with a x300 radeon that should be able to run that game
guess what ima go install ags
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2006
- Posts
- 9,262
- Location
- Saudi Arabia né Donegal
As I said, I just find the whole game to be very engrossing, regardless of the size of it's box. Mainly this is because the story is quite good and the characters are fun. Fair enough there could have been a larger world but it would have been superfluous to the story, especially one as defined as The Witcher.
Ultimately all games are in a box, in the Witchers case it's a small box crammed with quality material whereas, for example Oblivion, it was a huge box with some good quality material as well spaced out with so much filler. Fallout 3 is an example of a large box stuffed to the gills with excellent material.
I guess it's all down to personnal preference but I don't think you should judge the Witcher, or any game, on the size of it's box.
Last edited:
Because as soon as you include a open world like oblivion/fallout 3 for RPGS, you instantly assume there will be a fast travel option. Which shouldn't be included at all.
Horses were included in oblivion but with very little point, i started the game saying "i wont use fast travel" but shortly after when i realised it took me 30mins to get from one side to the other i thought sod it and used the fast travel, if the system wasn't there i'd actually have to use my horse.
RPGS are meant to be EPIC on scale, not completed in 6 hours.
Sadly i never managed to get into Morrowind, possibly because at the time i couldn't run the game in full glory and when i could, it was too dated to enjoy.
I can agree with you to a certain degree on that aspect, but the fogging was an excuse to reduce draw distance and i think having the ability to see everything in the "open world" at once is a good thing, it just needs to be tuned better.
My favourite rpg and come to think of it probably favourite game of all time is Final Fantasy 7, It had just about everything that an rpg should have, engrossing storyline, great characters, great plot and graphics that at the time were pretty good.
Just goes to show if the timing is right and the rest is all there, sometimes, just sometimes you end up with an absolute classic
Just goes to show if the timing is right and the rest is all there, sometimes, just sometimes you end up with an absolute classic
fast travel was one of the main things that killed oblivion for me, it may sound stupid but part of my enjoyment of morrowind was planning my rout via stilt strider and ship but in oblivion you were either forced to walk or use fast travel, the amount of idiots i saw saying "if you dont like fast travel then dont use it" really annoyed me too because it was the only option
Dragon Age and a certain german RPG (the name of which escapes me as im at work but i downloaded the german demo on) are my hopes for the PC rpg market.
Improvements to BG2? Easy - the loading system. Much prefer the no loading and seamless world of Arcanum for that aspect.
Improvements to BG2? Easy - the loading system. Much prefer the no loading and seamless world of Arcanum for that aspect.
I think a first person, skill based BG2 with modern graphics would completely rip apart the RPG industy.
Perhaps you are misinterpreting what they mean by Castle.
It's an entire city based within castle walls. Within that there is the Temple Quarter and the Trade Quarter, along with Old Vizima and a big Swamp map.
Sewers, Cemeteries, various caves and crypts, and and entire section of the game taking place quite a distance from Vizima.
The game is bigger than you think!
Sure, it's not free-roaming like Oblivion/Fallout 3, but then it was never designed to be, and it's linearity is not as constricted as you think.
One of the most satisfying games I have ever played.
But its just one location!? Oblivion had 1 castle, with the same amount of quarters, but had the outside world.
This game feels like i'm trapped inside the castle and the outside world doesn't exist.
Where are the other towns, castles, camps, other environments?
I thought the witcher was based on a polish book, so that entire book is based in a castle?
Lol!
You can't keep comparing it to Oblivion, it isn't structured in the same way.
Funnily enough, being based on a book, you have chapters, with the setting shifting as you go along.
Not wanting to spoil the natural unravelling of the storyline, here is a good way to get an idea of all the places in the game:
http://mikesrpgcenter.com/witcher/maps.html
Also, the storyline in The Witcher is far more involved than Oblivion.
You have a main storyline with proper characters that you interact with throughout the game and have proper relationships with. Each main area also has it's own internal storyline, which moves the main plot along, but still keeps things varied.
Oblivion had a main storyline (the gates, which was so mind-numbingly dull) and then a bunch of disjointed quests taking you all over the place. And then some guild missions, which were about the only interesting things in the game. I'm sure the extra content/expansions improved this, but my initial 20 hours of Oblivion were so dull, I just gave up then and there.
You have a main storyline with proper characters that you interact with throughout the game and have proper relationships with. Each main area also has it's own internal storyline, which moves the main plot along, but still keeps things varied.
Oblivion had a main storyline (the gates, which was so mind-numbingly dull) and then a bunch of disjointed quests taking you all over the place. And then some guild missions, which were about the only interesting things in the game. I'm sure the extra content/expansions improved this, but my initial 20 hours of Oblivion were so dull, I just gave up then and there.
Bethesda intended for the community to add to Oblivion (and indeed Morrowind for that matter). It's the reason why they provided tools to do exactly that.
If you think the point of Oblivion was just to focus the main story and you didn't tinker with any of the community built mods available, and were unhappy as a result, then I'll take this opportunity to remind you that you still owe me £50 for the laminated osprey housing I built at the foot of your pond.
If you think the point of Oblivion was just to focus the main story and you didn't tinker with any of the community built mods available, and were unhappy as a result, then I'll take this opportunity to remind you that you still owe me £50 for the laminated osprey housing I built at the foot of your pond.