NWN 2 has arrived...

[Gorilym]

...IMO, who cares?

You tell me, you're the one who quoted sales figures in the first place...

 

Some of my favourite games didn't sell well at all.

Same here. In fact, in the last 5-6 years pretty much the only worthwhile additions to my game library have been of the low-budget-but-high-quality niche variety - such as the strategy games made by Paradox.

[Miloch]

You tell me, you're the one who quoted sales figures in the first place...

It was originally a response to Lord Ernie's assertion that graphics are what sell games, and storylines don't matter. I guess my final argument was that it's neither, if you look at something like Pokémon at 20m+ copies (and I'd like to see you defend the graphics or storyline of *that* ). Marketing hype is what sells games unfortunately.

[Gorilym]

It was originally a response to Lord Ernie's assertion that graphics are what sell games, and storylines don't matter. I guess my final argument was that it's neither, if you look at something like Pokémon at 20m+ copies (and I'd like to see you defend the graphics or storyline of *that* ).

I know virtually nothing of these Pokémon games, but judging from the Wiki screenshots the graphics aren't too shabby - for a GameBoy game.

 

Marketing hype is what sells games unfortunately.

Certainly, but flashy graphics tends to make the job of the marketing department that much easier.

[Domi]

Well, sucky graphics is definetly not the way to go though. I mean, take Arcanum... it's unplayable to me singulary because of the graphics. I'm sorry, I can't take a character seriously if he looks like a pin.

[Miloch]

...if you look at something like Pokémon at 20m+ copies (and I'd like to see you defend the graphics or storyline of *that* ).

I know virtually nothing of these Pokémon games, but judging from the Wiki screenshots the graphics aren't too shabby - for a GameBoy game.

So you'd play Pokémon if you had a GameBoy? I have Palm Pilot games from a decade ago with better graphics (hell, even the 1989 GameBoy Tetris has better graphics). Certainly with a better storyline. Or I should say, *a* storyline - I don't think there is such a thing in Pokémon. That whole franchise makes me nauseous, though my nausea doesn't stop them from selling 155m+ copies collectively. (You just had to try defending Pokémon didn't you? I guess I shouldn't've goaded you into it... )

[Gorilym]

So you'd play Pokémon if you had a GameBoy?

I've said no such thing. I only said that the graphics of that game (judging from a few screenshots) don't seem to be below par for their (low-tech) format and date of release.

 

I have Palm Pilot games from a decade ago with better graphics

These Pokémon games are about a decade old as well, so what's your point? Furthermore, a Palm Pilot is hardly directly comparable to a Game Boy.

 

(hell, even the 1989 GameBoy Tetris has better graphics).

To say that the (black & white) Game Boy version of Tetris (which I actually owned a copy of back then) has better graphics than... anything beyond Pong and perhaps Space Invaders, indicates to me either an aesthetic sensibility à la dada, (not that there's anything wrong with that) or a dire case of stubbornness.

 

Certainly with a better storyline. Or I should say, *a* storyline - I don't think there is such a thing in Pokémon.

I wouldn't know, clearly you're more familiar with the franchise than I am.

 

(You just had to try defending Pokémon didn't you? I guess I shouldn't've goaded you into it... )

Yep, there's nobody to blame but yourself.

[Miloch]

I have Palm Pilot games from a decade ago with better graphics

These Pokémon games are about a decade old as well, so what's your point? Furthermore, a Palm Pilot is hardly directly comparable to a Game Boy.

That was my point. I'm comparing two games from a decade ago. And as far as screen size and resolution and even progression of B&W to colour, they are pretty similar.

(hell, even the 1989 GameBoy Tetris has better graphics).

To say that the (black & white) Game Boy version of Tetris (which I actually owned a copy of back then) has better graphics than... anything beyond Pong and perhaps Space Invaders, indicates to me either an aesthetic sensibility à la dada, (not that there's anything wrong with that) or a dire case of stubbornness.

Maybe so. Unfortunately my 'aesthetic sensibility' considers graphic on the right to be crappy and cheesy. I don't care if graphic on the left is B&W and dated.

Certainly with a better storyline. Or I should say, *a* storyline - I don't think there is such a thing in Pokémon.

I wouldn't know, clearly you're more familiar with the franchise than I am.

No. I'm just going by the "storyline" on Wiki (if that can be called a storyline).

 

Do we really want to continue this (and don't say "I started it" )? My point was a crappy game can vastly outsell any number of good ones, and there's no accounting for taste in game buyers.

[Lord Ernie]

Of course any succesful franchise can sell games, even crappy ones. Why would there otherwise be so many (and bad) games based on movies, which tend to be released (and rushed) alongside those movies showing in theaters?

 

Another very good example are indeed the Pokemon games; leaving aside the graphical issue (the graphics are like that, it's Pokemon, for crying out loud) or the quality or (non)existence of storylines, these games have sold millions of copies because they were based on a succesful franchise. And, I believe, because they were made for multiple portable game devices, rather than say an XBOX or a PC. They are also cleverly designed, and play into the whole 'bragging' issue with its intended crowd ("Hey, I caught Pikawhatever yesterday!"). This, however, does nothing to discount the fact that graphics are a strong figure in selling games. The Pokemon games have the graphics one would expect from a game of that franchise; if they didn't, and had all sorts of dissimilarities with the series, it would have hurt sales.

 

In any case, the issue is not whether I, or you, believe graphics sell games. The fact is that publishers, the ones that handle the money in the game industry, believe so. Any grandscale game has millions and millions of dollars behind it, and they will have it designed as they see fit if that ups the sales.

 

In other words, stop buying short-duration, graphic-heavy games with bad storylines people!

 

(Note, yeah, you already do, else you probably wouldn't be visiting this place. I'm not saying what should be, namely quality storyline, interaction, character development, and plenty of playtime selling games, I'm saying what is).

[Gorilym]

Do we really want to continue this (and don't say "I started it" )?

No, I think this dead horse has been sufficiently flogged. Besides, I think Lord Ernie's post nicely sums things up.

[Gabrielle]

People need to get off the eye candy bs games. Oh looks its pretty! My uber ATI 7950 Platnum card can do such and such frame rates with it! WoWsers!

 

But eye candy isn't the only issue. Games are made these days are what I call throw away games. You play it once and throw it away and play the next new game that comes out. Usually games of this sort are lacking in story, character development, etc but they have cool graphics though! Which is what a lot of console games are like and sadly pc games are following the trend.

 

I was hoping that NWN 2 would have followed the greatness of the BG series and it didn't. I judge a games greatness by my playing it from start to finish without getting bored. I got 3/4 throu NWN2 when I got bored and started over with a new character build, got bored with that one, started over again and haven't played it since then. NWN 2 is not a bad game, but its not great. More time spent on the story, the characters in your party and the romances and it could have been great.

 

The last great game I played was VtM: Bloodlines. Excellent story, great character stories, excellent game world. A shame that Troika went under, they could have made some more great games.

[Loké]

Just to add something-I bought the pokemon games when I was younger, and enjoyed them greatly. Not because of the hype, but because it was kinda like a rpg; you took low level bottom-of-the-food-chain animals, and under your guidence and care they became top-of-the-food-chain-you-really-don't-want-to-get-into-a-fight-with-me animals, and they could learn a variety of different skills, so no too pokemon was (potentially) the same.

 

Couple that with the fact certain ones had natural strengths and weakensses against other types, and you got a game that had a surprising amount of depth.

[Bri]

Well, I finished NWN 2, and let's just say that I wasn't too impressed overall. (Some spoilers to come)

 

 

 

 

 

The sad thing is there were several things I really did like about it, even if they were little things.

 

For example, I liked the 'deity' choice one could pick at the start of the game. Admittedly, it has no further affect on play, but it did help me 'customize' the character I had in my mind's eye.

 

Another bit I was pleased with was the 'Epithets' one earned as they went through the game. Of course, I view this as deeds, and whatnot the character has earned...his history in one. So if I export the character to another game, it's not like he would be a blankless slate.

 

And I did find myself liking the bit with the bard contest, as well as the trial scene. For that matter, though I'm not as big on graphics (many role-player's aren't), I admit I liked the mountain 'climb' in Act III. It actually seemed like my character was going up a mountain path rather than a glorified path...

 

However, the characters themselves...were fairly bland, overall. It would have helped if they had included some kind of quest for all of them. Not to mention that the current idea of romances seemed to be just a few dialogues worth

 

There is also the fact that when/if my character gets access to Raise Dead/Resurrect, they should be able to go back and bring back someone who happened to have fallen by the wayside...such as Amie in the prologue. Yes, one doesn't have that experience at the start, but by the final acts of the game, my character definitely had access to those spells, and logically there was no reason I couldn't raise her.

 

Finally, when I get a sequel to a game, I tend to assume that they will at least include what they had before...and expand on it. However, NWN 2 had some prestige classes like the Shifter not included. Of course, I figure they will have it in their next supplement.

 

Ah well, at least I will eventually have some good fan-built mods to look forward too...

[Twani]

For me, NWN (and NWN2) has never been about the official campaign (which, save for perhaps HotU (I liked the Kingmaker premimum as well, but apparently that makes me horribly weird) have always sucked)- it's always been about the fanmade modules and the toolset. There were some great modules for NWN, and I had a good time running adventures for a group of friends online.

 

NWN2's OC wasn't nearly as bad as NWN's... it was probably on par with SoU, I guess. Good parts and bad parts. I did like some of your NPC companions, and the overall plot wasn't too bad... but the fact that it seemed specifically designed for a certain kind of character was more obvious then it usually is. The middle of the game seems to fall apart utterly if you're playing evil. That bugged me.

[Domi]

Well, I bought it today, so as soon as my new system is finally operational I'm taking it for a spin and a look at the modding possibilities

[berelinde]

No! Don't say that! You have to finish IWD2 NPC Project!