Witcher... here we go again.

[NiGHTMARE]

I wouldn't really say it's fair to call the Witcher an "action RPG". Chapter 1 probably fits that bill, but chapters 2 and 3 mainly involve wandering around a large city, talking to people, chosing sides in local politics, investigating a crime (there's multiple ways to solve it, and multiple outcomes depending on what you've found out... plus people will be less inclined to help if you accuse them of being the guilty party!). In fact, the "inter-connectivity" between the various inhabitants of the city are more complex than those of the people of Athkatla in BG2, there are long term consequences to your actions and your decisions (do you side with the order of racist, holier-than-thou knights, or the non-human terrorists/freedom fighters?) and in general there's probably less "action" than there is in Fallout. I can't comment on later chapters, as I haven't gotten that far yet.

 

As for not having any companions, there are several places in the game where you fight side-by-side with other characters, and it's not really a problem in terms of role-play because there are several characters that fill the companion's role in terms of banter and backstory, even though they don't travel with you.

 

BTW, I always find it funny how the RPG purists forget that many of the oldest, most classic CRPGs were in fact "action RPGs" (Zelda, the Eye of the Beholder trilogy, and even some of the earlier Ultima's, for example), and a very large percentage of the earliest pen'n'paper roleplaying sessions were dungeon crawls.

 

 

Oh, and there *are* stats in the Witcher, but admittedly it's actually quite easy to not realise it . Try pressing 'k' sometime, and you'll see.

[Avenger]

The Witcher is admittedly an action rpg.

 

I don't know why do you deny that.

 

The SSI games were not action rpgs.

Fallout isn't an action rpg.

 

The difference between action rpg and non action rpg is the twitch element.

If the character's success depends on the player's physical stats, then it is an action rpg.

[Domi]

As for not having any companions, there are several places in the game where you fight side-by-side with other characters, and it's not really a problem in terms of role-play because there are several characters that fill the companion's role in terms of banter and backstory, even though they don't travel with you.

 

Unless you prefer to role-play as travelling with a party... One of the best features of the BG-style games imo is that element of travelling as an inter-related band of characters. I would actually want the games to expand on the party element (I have heard really cool suggestions such as growoing party sinergies, or bonuses one character gives another, or even something as simple as having your party named....) rather than eliminate it. I guess, I am just not a fan of a lonely heroine.

[Lord Ernie]

I'm with Nightmare here... Yes, you can call The Witcher an action RPG because its combat is twitch-based, but arguably all real-time combat is twitch-based; this isn't exactly true for the NWN or BG series (although, again, one could argue that pausing at the right time requires reflexes), but many other games (Jade Empire, for instance) come with real-time combat.

 

Also, calling the game an Action RPG demeans the best feature in the game: the dialogue, story, and interactivity. You can feel the results of your actions, usually in some unexpected way, several hours afterwards, which makes for interesting roleplay. Even though the dialogues are translated, the voice-acting is of high quality, and mostly each and every one of the NPC's comes with its own, highly individual personality.

 

Plus, I'd give the game a big cheer if only for its more mature subject matter, where war is ugly, nobody is of completely pure intent, and good and evil are covered in gray blurs.

[NiGHTMARE]

The Witcher is admittedly an action rpg.

 

 

I don't know why do you deny that.

 

Because it's not?

 

The SSI games were not action rpgs.

Fallout isn't an action rpg.

 

Last time I checked spending most of the game walking around shooting and hitting things constitutes "action" . Let's face it, if Fallout were made into a movie, one that was 100% true to the original game (heck, let's say for the sake of argument the actual Fallout writing team wrote the screenplay), it'd be a sci-fi/action movie.

 

Of course, the very definition of "role playing game" is itself somewhat debatable. A lot of people seem to think that if a game has a fantasy setting and fantasy races/monsters, it's automatically an RPG, but then what about sci-fi games like Knights of the Old Republic? Plus, if simply placing yourself in the shoes of some bloke/woman (or group of blokes and/or women) and wandering around killing a bunch of fantasy/sci-fi creatures is enough for a game to be classed as an RPG, then games like Half-life and Quake are RPGs!

 

To me, the very phrase "role playing" is really a major clue in what it should involve: playing a role. That means being able to make decisions more involved than "should I explore generic dungeon A now, or leave it until after random tomb B" or "should I kill the tough monster first, or leave him 'til I take out the weaker ones?", interact with (and prefferably actually be able to influence) other characters, solve problems more complex than "those orcs killed my puppy, make them pay!", etc. In games such as the Eye of the Beholder trilogy, you simply can't do any that; there are perhaps half a dozen characters to speak to in the entire game, and even in those situations you have at most two choices in what you say; frequently, you have no choice in what to say at all. Other than the game being square-based and involving a party (which has precisely zero interaction between members, I might add), there really is little difference between EoB and, for example, Hexen... and Hexen is literally just Doom with fantasy creatures and a handful of stats thrown in (it even uses the Doom engine).

 

The difference between action rpg and non action rpg is the twitch element.

 

Erm, no? the distinction between an action RPG and a non-action RPG is how much of the game is devoted to killing stuff, and how much of the game is devoted to character interaction and non-combat related quests. In the Witcher, you can spend literally hours not fighting anything, just walking, exploring, and talking, and there are a large number of quests that don't (or at least, don't have to) involve violence. In Fallout 1 and 2, I can't think of any parts where you can spend more than 20 minutes or so not in combat (at least not without standing around doing absolutely nothing), and almost all quests involve killing something or someone.

 

If the character's success depends on the player's physical stats, then it is an action rpg.

 

The fact one poster in this thread didn't even realise the Witcher *has* stats is a big clue to how little they matter in that game. On the other hand, Fallout gets very difficult very get quickly if you don't put at least a small amount of thought into how you level up your character.

[jester]

If there are shades of grey that would be great. the major downside apart from the fact that every game i have played thoroughly skimped on the evil department, BG2 was a nightmare in this department for me, I couldn't even convince my CN characters to go to Spellhold, let alone the evil ones. So there is no evil choice that is not stupid or suicidal.

 

I know this may not be popular, but I never liked games with predefined classes. You want to be a ranger, go get some ranger abilities and act like one. Just like an alignment picking a class for a level 1 character doesn't make much sense to me. My ideal game would feature trainers to further your skills, levelup only in skills used (Tagged XP), dialogues that are non-trivial. (1-1-2-1-4-4-I love you Charname) and less obvious critical paths through the game.

 

I am certain the Witcher doesn't deliver on any of my wishes, but what the heck no game does....

[eSqr]

I've said that Witcher doesn't have skill/stat checks in dialogues, not that there's no stats at all

 

or I wanted to write that but as always writing while being half asleep wasn't good idea:)

[NiGHTMARE]

jester: with the right fan-made mods, Morrowind and Oblivion can get pretty close to your ideal game. Their levelling up and training is already quite similar to what you describe in that there are trainers, only skills you actually use improve (unless you use the aforementioned trainers, and even then there are limits), and, while there are classes, they impose no restrictions on what you can and can't do; they simply allow certain skills and attributes to improve faster than others... plus you can create a completely customised class during character generation if you so desire. There are also countless mods for both games that allow you to tweak the class, levelling, and training system in various ways.

 

Dialogue is admittedly pretty lacking in these two games, but there are mods that can help to alleviate this problem. I particularly recommend the various LGNPC mods for Morrowind, which add perhaps thousands of new lines of dialogues throughout the entire game; both games also have numerous companion mods available, some of which have large amounts of banter. Multiple paths through individual quests are also few and far between in the two most recent Elder Scrolls games (Morrowind is slightly better than Oblivion in this regards), but again there are many quest and dialogue mods that can help.

 

I myself have been experimenting with removing classes from D20/3rd Edition D&D. Most class features can be changed into feats easily enough (just make sure they have appropriate prerequisites), though providing a balanced means of improving HP, saving throws, base attack bonus, etc, and increasing spell slots, etc is a bit more tricky. So far I've almost eliminated the need for the barbarian and monk (as well as some of the additional classes, like knight and scout) to be separate from the fighter class .

[Guest!]

In Fallout 1 and 2, I can't think of any parts where you can spend more than 20 minutes or so not in combat (at least not without standing around doing absolutely nothing), and almost all quests involve killing something or someone.

 

It was perfectly possible to go through the game without hurting a soul and not missing anything, just about every quest had non-violent solutions that didn't entail combat and more often than not diplomacy was more rewarding than shooting.

I agree with Avenger, the difference between an "action RPG" and a "RPG" is the twitch. In Fallout, even if you chose the combat-heavy path, the gameplay was much more similar to that of a turn-based strategy game (it was TBS, actually) than that of action game (I'm thinking stuff like Bloodlines here). If hitting stuff were what makes an action game, than pretty much every game released, except perhaps Tetris, would fit into the category. Considering the issue the other way round, I'd say that what differentiates RPGs is the way the player can influence a reactive gameworld.

[Kulyok]

I particularly recommend the various LGNPC mods for Morrowind, which add perhaps thousands of new lines of dialogues throughout the entire game; both games also have numerous companion mods available, some of which have large amounts of banter.

 

By the way, I've heard about various NPC mods for Elder Scrolls series(surprisingly, I think I've got all or nearly all games - Oblivion, Morrowind, etc), and I wondered if anyone actually played them, and, if yes, how good are they?

 

And, because we know that *every* single NPC mod out there has its share of "wonderful believable personalities" and "couldn't find a single flaw", an example: standard Bioware BG2 NPC dialogue: better or worse? Keto NPC: better or worse? Your 'average' BG2 NPC mod: much better?

[Domi]

It's a good question, as well as a companion question of what the hell one needs to purchase/download to turn Oblivion in some sort of a BG-like game, ie a game with a bunch of companions and lots of inter-party interactions?

[jester]

Well just look at the quantum leaps BG2 took when the modders chimed in and made the game the lasting success it is praised as now. Surely it had a good platform, from what I am told compared to hardcoded weirdness à la PST, but everything from the spellslinging lovemachine (Sit Anomen, I mean the other guy) to every glitch and oversight ironed out. Thus compared to a well rounded experience with mods I would NOT recommend to anyone to play the completely unmodded game. Sim's Virtue was a quantum leap for me personally, but it is hard to name all the improvements which make BG2 actually that replayable, be it the amazing number of NPCs in all classes and flavours, romances, interparty banters and not to forget DBG to help you get past the Jon's lovenest.

 

I am all for strong opinions about games. Sadly there seems to be no real evolution to better games. Perhaps the tastes of CPRGers just seem to differ too much.

[Avenger]

Deny it as you want Nightmare

It is still an action rpg.

The only thing I can come up to rationalise your shortsightedness is that you think an action rpg is an rts. But nah, action rpg's are hybrids.

Jade Empire was also one.

How this game differs from Jade Empire? (I didn't ask Domi, but if you ask her, she would say less role playing more action).

It had strong role playing elements but it was also real time action with little strategy much more twitch.

You simply can't say that a game with 'Innovative Real Time Combat' plus 'Role playing' isn't a role playing action game.

Or you can say that, but it makes you look silly.

[Simbriant]

If there are shades of grey that would be great. the major downside apart from the fact that every game i have played thoroughly skimped on the evil department, BG2 was a nightmare in this department for me, I couldn't even convince my CN characters to go to Spellhold, let alone the evil ones. So there is no evil choice that is not stupid or suicidal.

 

Well, I think developers have the reason for that as being this: A true villain would kill your grandmother, make slaves of children, eat babies without batting an eye, etc., etc. You get the idea. Not many people really want to play as that character type.

 

There are two games I know of where you can truly play an evil character. One is an RTS RPG and the other is sort of a Action RPG.

 

The first one is one of the Ogre Battle games. You could actually be a bad guy by being a lousy hero--liberating a town and then let it get taken over again many times, join forces with a demon, and then steal an enchanted sword. Of course, the demon ended up possessing the player at the end of the story and ruled the world with an iron fist after it was conquered.

 

The other game is Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines. This game was made by the same wonderful people that made Fall 1 & 2 but it played more as an Action RPG though. You could play an evil character if you really wanted to, but you would get blown up in the end for it.

[KIrving]

By the way, I've heard about various NPC mods for Elder Scrolls series(surprisingly, I think I've got all or nearly all games - Oblivion, Morrowind, etc), and I wondered if anyone actually played them, and, if yes, how good are they?

 

And, because we know that *every* single NPC mod out there has its share of "wonderful believable personalities" and "couldn't find a single flaw", an example: standard Bioware BG2 NPC dialogue: better or worse? Keto NPC: better or worse? Your 'average' BG2 NPC mod: much better?

 

I think it took quite a while to make companions in Morrowind that didn't end up getting stuck in doors, drowned, killed by cliff racers or left behind during various teleports. Fortunately some of those issues seem to be fixed but the game doesn't tend to lend itself to npc survival, let alone good dialogue.

 

I tried one npc mod known as Imperial boyfriend (I think he had a name but he made such an impression on me that I didn't remember it.) I spent most of the time concerned that I would end up cleaving him with my dai-katana whenever we fought off a rat. Also he wouldn't talk much until we got to certain plot points and so I got bored and left him in Balmora.(It would be easier if you could put them in your pack and get them out when you needed them. )

 

Apparently there are some good mods with quests and romanceable companions for a male pc. 'Laura Craft','Witch girl Adventure' and 'The White Wolf of Lokkan Mountain' or something like that.(Actually I think the last one has male and female companions and romances.) I haven't played them myself (downloads are big for dial-up) but they seem to be recommended a lot.