Gaming Confessions & Blasphemy

Mantid wrote:

But I have an excuse: I made it all the way to a certain cave full of undead near the end of the game and lost my save file. Never got around to playing through almost the entirety of the game a second time.

You know what gamers need? A big saved game repository for this kind of thing. I got a few chapters through the longest journey and misplaced my save, and now I can't find a steam compatible save close to where I was. You see collections of saves for individual games, but not a collection like you would for mods, FAQs or cheat codes.

Mantid wrote:

I have never finished Buldur's Gate 2.

+1

I got through the Underdark, even managing to survive the Mind Flayer Lair, which was one of the most infuriating experiences of my gaming life, and required me to take advantage of every rule-abusing bug-abusing trick I possibly could. After that, at 250+ hours, I just petered out, and never went back to it.

ahrezmendi wrote:

I got through the Underdark, even managing to survive the Mind Flayer Lair, which was one of the most infuriating experiences of my gaming life, and required me to take advantage of every rule-abusing bug-abusing trick I possibly could. After that, at 250+ hours, I just petered out, and never went back to it.

Oh wow, I feel for you. Especially since the Mind Flayer lair is utterly optional....

Yeah, and I knew it was optional, but it was the principal of the matter. My party was all level 18+, I had Artifact quality gear on all of them, was able to cast some of the most powerful spells in all of D&D, and I would die in the first round of combat most of the time. I couldn't let that slide!

I think what caused me to peter out was the system more than anything. D&D 2nd Edition at that high a level is, very much by design, about abusing the rules. Enemies can either destroy you in 1-2 rounds, or you destroy them in 1-2 rounds, and that's really all there is to it. The early parts of BG2 were much more interesting, so much that I've played the first 50% of the game at least 3 times, but once you hit the mid to late teens the power levels get out of control.

And particularly mind flayer powers. Those are just brutally hard to counter, I always had a hard time with them. Honestly, I don't think I ever finished that part of the game without cheating.

Yes, I confess!!!! I use cheats in Baldur's Gate! Ctrl+Y, crtl+J and ctrl+R. And I'm not (too) ashamed of it.

Scratched wrote:

I've no problems going to a guide if the game is incapable of communicating what I need to do, provides poor facilities to learn it, put pieces of a puzzle together, or if I'm just having a brainfart, etc. By default I don't want to be led by the nose, but gentle nudges in the right direction.

I think this would make for the best piece of DLC.
An optional, purchasable layer that allows you to summon hints, bread-crumb trails, full walkthru's, tips on how to beat enemies, counters of collectibles in an area, etc.

It will take you out of the game, but you can turn it on and off at will. hey, you payed for it.

Hobbes2099 wrote:
Scratched wrote:

I've no problems going to a guide if the game is incapable of communicating what I need to do, provides poor facilities to learn it, put pieces of a puzzle together, or if I'm just having a brainfart, etc. By default I don't want to be led by the nose, but gentle nudges in the right direction.

I think this would make for the best piece of DLC.
An optional, purchasable layer that allows you to summon hints, bread-crumb trails, full walkthru's, tips on how to beat enemies, counters of collectibles in an area, etc.

It will take you out of the game, but you can turn it on and off at will. hey, you payed for it.

That's a dangerous path really. Sure, it could be fine, a purchasable guide, but given that many companies are out to sell as much of everything as they can I feel it would be a short step to deliberately making things obtuse in games to encourage that additional optional purchase. Some people love it when a game is working against you, but that could motivate developers to make games that are not enjoyable without that.

And of course, there's the options of guides written by random people on the internet.

I don't see how that isn't already an issue. Some studio could easily make a game that isn't enjoyable (or even possible) without the Brady guide or whatever, the guide being digital and overlayed on the game is secondary.

This was a feature in the Monkey Island SE games, and I thought it was really cool.

ahrezmendi wrote:

I don't see how that isn't already an issue. Some studio could easily make a game that isn't enjoyable (or even possible) without the Brady guide or whatever, the guide being digital and overlayed on the game is secondary.

This was a feature in the Monkey Island SE games, and I thought it was really cool.

Right but in MI it was in the base game (I assume), not something they would charge extra for.

Free of charge? Sure, fine, I guess. It would be a nice feature they could roll into 'director commentary' type features. Just so long as it doesn't mess with the design of the base game. There's a difference between just following instructions and working something out for myself. I guess it would be like Ikea charging extra for assembly instructions on a complex bit of furniture.

Scratched wrote:

Just so long as it doesn't mess with the design of the base game.

This is the part I disagree with. Guides already exist, development studios know they exist, they even have a hand in making them. Having the guides be available as, oh say, part of the Steam overlay is no different. So if studios aren't currently making games that are unplayable without the guide, then how does anything change?

Didn't like Braid or Supermeatboy at all.

Absolutely despised Demon's Souls.

Can't stand JRPGs.

Oh and I hate kittens and rainbows.

EvilShawnAndrich wrote:

Absolutely despised Demon's Souls.

Can't stand JRPGs.

Oh and I hate [snip] rainbows.

You really are the evil twin of Shawn Andrich, especially for hating rainbows.

IMAGE(http://www3.telus.net/public/me8428/files/gwjcia.png)

Mantid wrote:

I have never finished Buldur's Gate 2.

I'll do you one better. I have BG2 and Icewind Dale 2 from GOG, and I've never finished either of them.

MeatMan wrote:

I'll do you one better. I have BG2 and Icewind Dale 2 from GOG, and I've never finished either of them.

I'll do you 3 better - I've got the original BG2 CE, Icewind Dale, Icewind Dale 2, AND Tales of the Sword Coast and I've never finished any of them.

On the other hand, I've completed Planescape: Torment 3 times, so I figure that makes up for any transgressions, both past and future.

Eleima wrote:
ahrezmendi wrote:

I got through the Underdark, even managing to survive the Mind Flayer Lair, which was one of the most infuriating experiences of my gaming life, and required me to take advantage of every rule-abusing bug-abusing trick I possibly could. After that, at 250+ hours, I just petered out, and never went back to it.

Oh wow, I feel for you. Especially since the Mind Flayer lair is utterly optional.... :(

It's optional?!?!

I found myself in the Underdark and figured it was just part of the story! I'm proud to say Baldur's Gate is one of the very few series I've completed. I'm also a long time DnD Dungeon Master which I think helped.

On the other hand - I never completed the two original Fallout games.

Also, even though I have a Megaman tattoo, I haven't played one since Megaman 8 in 1998

ahrezmendi wrote:

I don't see how that isn't already an issue. Some studio could easily make a game that isn't enjoyable (or even possible) without the Brady guide or whatever, the guide being digital and overlayed on the game is secondary.

This was a feature in the Monkey Island SE games, and I thought it was really cool.

I guess this could happen if the numbers properly aligned; ie. is there a public percentage of online consoles? I'm sure the numbers will spike with the PS4 and the (ugh) Infinity, but what are the numbers for current gen consoles?

You could design your game complicated/challenging enough to make walkthru-DLC a must, but if enough users are still permanently offline, you're just shooting yourself in the foot due to poor sales or people looking up strategy guides everywhere else and the DLW (downloadable walkthru's from now on) would be DOA for every title.

This reminds me of last week's podcast (great job as always, btw);

Always on mechanics are pure DRM. Ubisoft was among the first to try it out with Assassin's Creed (can't remember which). It added ZERO value to the users and only provided frustration with their auto-quit-too-bad-you-didn't-save-how-dare-you-pirate-our-game-you-thief feature.

Last week's SimCity fiasco might seem more of the same, but SimCity at least tried to design some mechanics and gameplay around always-on.

As time goes by, I think always-online will evolve into mostly-online; expecting the user to always be online, but not be as harsh when their connections eventually drop. Autosaves, batch synchronization, etc.

I'm guessing that while the first few games that could be designed around a haha-made-you-buy-our-DLW-sucka! mentality, would only be the first few iterations. Eventually we could see game design level out, resulting in actual benefit for customers that aim for 100-collection, Achievement/Trophy collectors, and actual customer-focused benefits.

mrwynd wrote:

Also, even though I have a Megaman tattoo, I haven't played one since Megaman 8 in 1998

I got that game for Christmas when I first got a PS1 instead of MegaMan X4. I couldn't believe the voice acting.

mrwynd wrote:

On the other hand - I never completed the two original Fallout games.

Pish posh! I've never completed ANY Fallout game. Ever! In fact, although I've fired up all of them (except for New Vegas), I must've played less than an hour of Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout: Tactis and Fallout 3 combined.
Ouch.

Eleima wrote:
mrwynd wrote:

On the other hand - I never completed the two original Fallout games.

Pish posh! I've never completed ANY Fallout game. Ever! In fact, although I've fired up all of them (except for New Vegas), I must've played less than an hour of Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout: Tactis and Fallout 3 combined.
Ouch.

What no Brotherhood of Steel either? It was actually the first Fallout game I ever played.

ahrezmendi wrote:
MeatMan wrote:

I'll do you one better. I have BG2 and Icewind Dale 2 from GOG, and I've never finished either of them.

I'll do you 3 better - I've got the original BG2 CE, Icewind Dale, Icewind Dale 2, AND Tales of the Sword Coast and I've never finished any of them.

On the other hand, I've completed Planescape: Torment 3 times, so I figure that makes up for any transgressions, both past and future. :D

I'll go even better. I own all of those and never put more than an hour in any one of them! Big huge complicated RPG's are something I like the idea of much more than I like playing them apparently.

Tanglebones wrote:
UMOarsman wrote:
JillSammich wrote:

Speaking of not being able to get through a game without a strategy guide...

I've started Baldur's Gate several times and can never get past the first city... Not even with a guide. I have been tempted to boot it up again and just cheat my way through to see the story, but I really want to play it legit. I just, can't.

This. Very much this.

Honestly? Just skip to BG2. It's got a better story, better characterization & better engine.

BG2 has a better story? I don't agree with that at all, but I might just have my blinders on. I found the story of 1 much more engaging, while BG2 had a lot more and cooler content.

BG2 felt playable, difficult at times, but still playable. BG1 felt unforgivingly hard.

"Here's your group of low level characters, you've just met an ogre mage."

Reload

I also recall BG1 still in the era of hardcore RPGs where you could get screwed over. I recall two occasions where I had to revert to a save from two hours ago because I encountered an enemy that your entire party needed a specific spell/potion to get past and I didn't have it.

I don't recall the BG games being hard at all... I must be weird.

trueheart78 wrote:

BG2 felt playable, difficult at times, but still playable. BG1 felt unforgivingly hard.

"Here's your group of low level characters, you've just met an ogre mage. wolf"

Reload

FTFY

Dakuna wrote:

I don't recall the BG games being hard at all... I must be weird.

It was if you went off the beaten path. If you didn't go where the game told you to go, you'd encounter things well above your level.

BG2 was only hard in the optional areas, like the Mind Flayer Lair or a couple of the Dragon fights.

ahrezmendi wrote:
Dakuna wrote:

I don't recall the BG games being hard at all... I must be weird.

It was if you went off the beaten path. If you didn't go where the game told you to go, you'd encounter things well above your level.

BG2 was only hard in the optional areas, like the Mind Flayer Lair or a couple of the Dragon fights.

Although I don't know whether the original Bard's Tale games were considered difficult, I remember being able to use wandering off the beaten path to my advantage in The Bard's Tale II. Wandering monsters would ocasionally offer to join your party, without any kind of battle, regardless of the relative power difference between them and your party members. I remember picking up a pretty strong wizard (who could summon fire demons, w00t!) this way, via a high level dungeon that you could access very early on in the game.

ahrezmendi wrote:
Dakuna wrote:

I don't recall the BG games being hard at all... I must be weird.

It was if you went off the beaten path. If you didn't go where the game told you to go, you'd encounter things well above your level.

BG2 was only hard in the optional areas, like the Mind Flayer Lair or a couple of the Dragon fights.

Yes, the Mind Flayer lair was balls. It's the only thing I saw in either game I would say that about though.

Crossing over form Shawn's front page about Sweaty Palms of the Swarm; I realized how much it frustrated me to play SCII;

There is this high when you win a StarCraft 2 ladder game, particularly against a competitive and challenging foe, that few games can evoke quite so keenly. It is this raw thing that makes you want to pump your fist and bare your teeth. It is the reason I push the Play button to begin with, because even in the face of error and incompetence, StarCraft 2 makes you feel like a winner when you win.

I was with you up to that point.
I hated SCII multiplayer every game.

Every game felt like a final exam I knew I didn't prepare for enough. I hated imagining a frustrated Day9 narrating my every slow, poorly coordinated move.

I felt observed and scrutinized from the first second where I stumbled to get my 5 probes to start mining minerals. Building a vespian gas extractor always felt too late.

The few games I won, I felt like an archaeologist that had somehow discovered a forgone civilization that had encountered a keyboard and mouse for the first time. Someone worse than me. I was never better than anyone, they just had to be terrible in order to lose.

I just realized how much I hate this game.
Not really, the game I really like, and still watch Day9; but playing it... playing it made me feel terrible!

Man, between this and my frustration regarding FPS; it seems I'm beginning to hate all games.
Just to make me feel better about myself;

I loved Mark of the Ninja and can't wait for the Special Edition, I'm really enjoying the Tomb Raider reboot, can't wait for Supergame's Transistor and look forward to all upcoming AC franchises, even if I don't care AC4 will be set in pirate times (damn it! did it again!!!!)

I dislike the Zelda series. I really don't like the Mario Bros series after Super Mario 1. f*ck Metroid, and f*ck you, too, Doom.
Although I do appreciate the influence they had on video games. Sort of like Black Sabbath- hate the band but love the influence.

I also must say, I don't remember the stores for the Halo titles I played, I think Inigo and I paid attention to Halo 2 but that might have been it. Gears of War might have had a story, I didn't pay attention to it.

Why was there no sequel to Star Wars Republic Commando? I really enjoyed it, was I the only one?

Dakuna wrote:
ahrezmendi wrote:
Dakuna wrote:

I don't recall the BG games being hard at all... I must be weird.

It was if you went off the beaten path. If you didn't go where the game told you to go, you'd encounter things well above your level.

BG2 was only hard in the optional areas, like the Mind Flayer Lair or a couple of the Dragon fights.

Yes, the Mind Flayer lair was balls. It's the only thing I saw in either game I would say that about though.

I'm not sure if I had more trouble with Mind Flayers or with Beholders.