Preview RPGDot on E3 RPGs

[LlamaGod]

Mages are cool in Gothic 3, things are different and the setting is way more fleshed out.

 

[Claw]

Huh? What do you know about mages in Gothic III? They announced that magic is "lost" somehow which doesn't bode well for mages.

 

[Dhruin]

Since you start G3 with some abilities (unlike G2), I believe this is just a story device so Mages don't start off all uber with dozens of spells.

 

[Lady Armageddona]

Oblivion is the only game on the list that I'm dying to play. The rest hold middling to little interest for me.

Gothic 3 could be good, but I like playing mages and mages are seriously gimped in those games at the beginning.

If Ubisoft revealed that they had a developer for Might and Magic X, that would really get my attention. MM is my favorite series of all time. I enjoyed all of the games to varying degrees.

If Oblivion ditches the crap style dialogue, introduces some real dialogue and memorable NPC with a good story and a lively world, I'd play that. Otherwise - All hail the sequel to the dead-est RPG ever Morrowind 2.

Gothic 3 could use a normal combat (only reason I have not played G1&2 was the crap combat)

NWN2 could be somewhat good.

As for M&M X, it is pretty much taken for granted that Ubisoft would revive the M&M games as well, not only HoMM. There is rumored to be a 2nd MM game in production, mentioned in the annual report recently, and the producer confirmed it is not the chineese HoMM Online, so it must be it. On the other hand, Ubi is not known for its RPGs, so I'd prefer that they do something good. Like a Prince of Persia or Splinter Cell style game, but I pretty much doubt that will happen.

 

[LlamaGod]

Huh? What do you know about mages in Gothic III? They announced that magic is "lost" somehow which doesn't bode well for mages.

From what I know, you have to choose to become a Mage and when you do spells can only be cast in certain ways. Such as needing to be at a source to cast the spell from (i.e. near fire to create a fireball).

Probably will be some any-times, but the best stuff needs a source.

 

[Claw]

How do you know?

From what I read, only some very powerful spells like Summonings are limited to special locations. The matter with "lost magic" appeared to be a different matter entirely.

Gothic 3 could use a normal combat (only reason I have not played G1&2 was the crap combat)

AHA! Finally I got one of these mysterious foreigners who had trouble with Gothic's combat.
So... WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM?
Gothic's combat was simple, intuitive and a world of fun compared to Morrowind, for example. I have no idea what you call "normal" in a First Person RPG.
The only gripe I had was that the whole control system behaved sluggish and couldn't keep up with the pace of combat.
I don't know how you can judge the combat system of a game you didn't play anyway.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I couldn't get a hang of Gothic 1, but Gothic 2's combat was far more intuitive. The difficulty scale was definitely too high at the beginning, but it's something you had to get a hang of, and once you did, it was very enjoyable. The big issue with the combat in Gothic 2 was that, as I said, it was scaled too difficult, especially at the beginning when a wrong move can get you killed at the very start of the game. The game should be much more forgiving of your mistakes early on by putting you up against some very simple opponents to practice against, perhaps in a training ground or sparring room to teach you how to block and parry and when to strike, like a tutorial of sorts, to help you to get the hang of it, and the early monsters shouldn't be so damn hard.

It's kind of like how Guild Wars does it. Each time you learn a new skill, chances are you'll need to use it in the area you learned the skill, against opponents that you can counter against, or use the skill effectively on. The monsters in the area usually have 3-4 spells that they often use and the skills you learn are invaluable to the area you're in, so you learn the value of a skill by using it. E.g. "Mantra of Flames" is learned in a location filled with fire-damage monsters, so as a mesmer you learn how to use it to protect yourself, whereas Maelstrom is learned in an area with plenty of group casters that you can use it against to dispel/disrupt, and likewise lightning damage spells come into play when you go up against armored foes, who go down fast (25% more damage from lightning).

Gothic 3 could implement a similar system where skills are learned specific to their early locations, to help you figure out the moves and their value, rather than through trial and error (reload and save).

 

[NeutralMilkHotel]

I loved the difficulty of Gothic 2. It was a fun challenge. And I liked the combat as well. Alot of people complain about the awkward controls, I would agree but I got used to them in probably an hour or two of playing.

 

[Jinxed]

IMO, the combat was not difficult as long as you stayed on track. Just a few steps towards the wrong bush and you could have ended up fighting giant beasts from hell.

 

[Ellester]

Everything on this list is in the category of “might be good”. Oblivion, NWN2 and Gothic III. Graphics don’t give me a hard on, we’ll see if these games are fun or not. Oblivion needs to show it’s not as boring as Morrowind. NWN2 needs to prove it’s better than kotor2 and Gothic III needs to prove that its not making a Morrowind wanna be game by making the game so large.

That being said I will buy all three if good things are said about them upon release.

 

[Volourn]

Gothic series has awful combat. It's not fun, it's not intuitive, it's definitely simple and reptive. Nor was it hard. Just plain boring. Being better than MW's combat proves NOTHING!

 

[Lady Armageddona]

Gothic 3 could use a normal combat (only reason I have not played G1&2 was the crap combat)

AHA! Finally I got one of these mysterious foreigners who had trouble with Gothic's combat.
So... WHAT IS YOUR PROBLEM?
Gothic's combat was simple, intuitive and a world of fun compared to Morrowind, for example. I have no idea what you call "normal" in a First Person RPG.
The only gripe I had was that the whole control system behaved sluggish and couldn't keep up with the pace of combat.
I don't know how you can judge the combat system of a game you didn't play anyway.

Well, if you call a normal combat system one, where I am running for half an hour real time trying to hit a meat bug, and in this half an hour I circled the Old Camp at least twice chasing the stupid thing, I am an S-Bahn and you can ride me free of charge.

This happened in a demo of Gothic that I played. Now I remembered that there was a demo of Gothic 2 released recently, I might try out that to see if the combat is still crap there (I ain't touching no game that has this crappy combat)

I agree, however, that Gothic combat is better than MW's since every single thing about MW was crap. Shit even.

PS - Did I mention that the 2nd thing I largely disliked about Gothic is the controls. No, they are not awkward. They are impossible. For a game that has never been released on consoles, Gothic (1) feels largely too much like a console port. A bad console port.

 

[Claw]

Well, if you call a normal combat system one, where I am running for half an hour real time trying to hit a meat bug, and in this half an hour I circled the Old Camp at least twice chasing the stupid thing, I am an S-Bahn and you can ride me free of charge.

I am sorry, I wasn't aware someone could be so extraordinarily bad at it. The only time I had any real trouble hitting a meat bug was before I found a sword, and even then it didn't take more than a few tries.
On the other hand, maybe the demo was bugged.

PS - Did I mention that the 2nd thing I largely disliked about Gothic is the controls. No, they are not awkward. They are impossible.

Impossible for you, easy for me. Strange, isn't it.
The only really irritating part are the vendor controls.

 

[Fresh]

Gothic's combat is great fun!

There I said it.

 

[Flarnet]

Given their previous track record, who actually thinks that Oblivion will ship this year? I mean really.

 

[Claw]

I might hope GIII ships first, lest it be overshadowed by Oblivion's practically guaranteed success.

 

[Lady Armageddona]

Well, if you call a normal combat system one, where I am running for half an hour real time trying to hit a meat bug, and in this half an hour I circled the Old Camp at least twice chasing the stupid thing, I am an S-Bahn and you can ride me free of charge.

I am sorry, I wasn't aware someone could be so extraordinarily bad at it. The only time I had any real trouble hitting a meat bug was before I found a sword, and even then it didn't take more than a few tries.
On the other hand, maybe the demo was bugged.

I very much doubt that the Gothic v1.7 (or whatever) Demo was bugged. And I could not hit the bug, cause the stupid controls were really impossible.

PS - Did I mention that the 2nd thing I largely disliked about Gothic is the controls. No, they are not awkward. They are impossible.

Impossible for you, easy for me. Strange, isn't it.
The only really irritating part are the vendor controls.

Gothic 1 is largely unplayable with keyboard. A joystick would do much better work, but I suppose JS are not supported.

Anyway, Gothic 2 indeed remedies the controls. To some extent.

 

[Fresh]

Gothic 1 is largely unplayable with keyboard.

It might be unplayable with keyboard for you, which raises the question whether you also have trouble handling mobile phones, remote controls and the like. :mrgreen:

 

[NeutralMilkHotel]

If you think Gothic 1's controls are impossible for a keyboard you must be complete shit at adaptation...

 

[Stark]

Gothic 1 is largely unplayable with keyboard.

alot of Gothic 1 players who completed the game just fine, myself included, would disagree with that silly statement.

 

[Lady Armageddona]

Well, what can I say? Ya lucky bastards ... Glad you enjoyed the game ...

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Actually, I just outright hated the combat system in Gothic 1. A joystick might have helped it, considering it was so damned arcade-ish. Even with a joystick, though, I still would have hated it.

 

[Shagnak]

I thought the controls were TEH CRAP also.
But...there was so much else that was excellent.
Yet another game I have always intended to finish...

 

[LlamaGod]

The big issue with the combat in Gothic 2 was that, as I said, it was scaled too difficult, especially at the beginning when a wrong move can get you killed at the very start of the game. The game should be much more forgiving of your mistakes early on by putting you up against some very simple opponents to practice against, perhaps in a training ground or sparring room to teach you how to block and parry and when to strike, like a tutorial of sorts, to help you to get the hang of it, and the early monsters shouldn't be so damn hard.

You're missing the point. The point is your character sucks and monsters are badasses and are good at killing people like you. monsters arnt the usual fantasy types as they have actual threat.

The combat in Gothic 2 was okay if you did what I did, try to cheese it with bow shots and then just smash Left and Right and the attack button as fast as possible and you'd do the quick slashes left and right and eventually get a critical and win.

 

[crpgnut]

@Lady A:

I agree that Morrowind's dialogue could have used some work. What amazes me about that is the books were all well written and then we'd have to settle for NPCs that knew almost nothing. If some of the books were replaced by NPCs who told those stories I think the game would have been much better. It'd have been cool to see bards in taverns relating the Adventures of King Edwards, rather than reading several pages of text.

Other than dialogue, which isn't super important to me, I loved Morrowind. Planescape Torment had great dialogue, yet I hated that game. It was too much like reading a book.