D&D Computer Games

[Festivus]

I loved ToEE. It's great provided:

1) You have the three patches.
2) You know where the dungeons are, and avoid most of Hommlet.

Otherwise it sucks.

I rather enjoyed Hommlet... as a Chaotic Evil party.

I would have loved to have seen the TOEE game engine coupled with the ease of the NWN1 toolset. It would have totally rocked.

 

[kolikeos]

Could the kneejerk bashing of games people clearly have never played stop?

WoW is a modified turn-based game -- actions can only be performed every 1.5 seconds, other than movement and is rich in lore. Those quaking over the thought of a button-mashing game future should be embracing it, not parroting an uninformed terror of it.

OK, I did not play much WoW, but I did play Diablo 2 from beggining to end and it is a click-fest.

 

[Jhaelen]

OK, I did not play much WoW, but I did play Diablo 2 from beggining to end and it is a click-fest.

Two very different games! But neither would be a good model for a CRPG that tries to capture the D&D feeling. It's decicive that you're able to pause the action to plan your moves and actions, IMHO.

 

[jdrakeh]

. . . I did play Diablo 2 from beggining to end and it is a click-fest.

Absolutely. And, IMHO, not a very good one. I, ironically, much prefer the original Diablo. I think that the sequel tried too hard to sell itself as something other than a click and kill game when that was 98% of the actual play. The original had no such pretensions.

 

[Imp]

I would like to see a version of NWN or a tactics-RPG based on 3.5 where you could take multiple characters of your own design through various user-designed quests and campaigns. (As far as I can tell, NWN2 supports full control of your party, but they're henchmen included in the mod, and you can't take them with you when you're done.) That would be a great RPG.

Diablo II is plenty fun for what it is.

 

[DemonKing]

Well everyone has their own opinions, but for me the best D&D *computer* games are those where one player controls their own party (ala BG, IWD, Gold Box, Eye of the Beholder). I love the feeling of developing an efficient "team" and trying the game through with different options.

Yes NWN was a decent hit but I believe more of that was to do with BG fans buying it than on its own merits (The SP game and party "control" was atrocious). Yes there is a big multi-player component but if you'ld rather play D&D on a tebletop with friends than over a computer than you're SOOL with NWN. Also remember that Atari didn't actually come up with the NWN concept - it was gifted to them when Interplay collapsed.

NWN2 is a small step in the right direction, but the control is still pretty awful compared to previous party based D&D games. Also the pace lagged in parts where you're staring at Talking Heads for 10 minutes at a time (that damn dragon wouldn't shut up!).

TOEE had a great combat engine but not much else - and it suffered from a lack of challenging encounters anyway due to the designers slavish devotion to the original (and not very good) module. It would have been much better suited to an original campaign built from the ground up, IMO.

Frankly I would rather anyone other than Atari had the license based on their track record.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Well everyone has their own opinions, but for me the best D&D *computer* games are those where one player controls their own party (ala BG, IWD, Gold Box, Eye of the Beholder). I love the feeling of developing an efficient "team" and trying the game through with different options.

Exactly. My ideal game would take the ToEE 3.5 game engine and run some better-designed modules, and then have a tool kit that allowed designing your own adventures.

NWN/NWN2 are good, but they haven't achieved the party feel in single player mode that ToEE, BG, IWD, or the Gold Box games allowed. And -- IMO -- D&D is all about the party.

 

[Steel_Wind]

Too multiplayer focussed? How can a D&D game be too multiplayer focussed?

Forgive me if I'm wrong but all the Monster hits for D&D have historically been single player PC CRPGs (ala Baldur's Gate, Eye of the Beholder and Gold Box series). I'm sure if someone could produce a decent game in the vein of those titles it would be pretty popular.

NWN/NWN2 are good, but they haven't achieved the party feel in single player mode that ToEE, BG, IWD, or the Gold Box games allowed. And -- IMO -- D&D is all about the party.

The big difference is that in D&D you're meant to have one character.

And that's why there is no pleasing gamers with the latest version of a computerized D&D game. Like D&D itself, the game means different things to different people all at the same time - and each insists their version is the One True Game.

If you design in a way to exclude some of the fans - they bitch. If you attempt to design the game inclusively for all of them - the compromises necessary to do that necessarily restrict somebody's favored style of play and they bitch.

No party control? They bitch. Party control? They bitch again. Multiplayer? The SP fans bitch. No multiplayer? The MP and PW fans bitch. Include tilesets to make it easily moddable? Players bitch about boxy designs and the sameness of it all. Ditch tilesets to make it look good (but hard to mod) and guess what?

The community bitches again, wring their hands and leave the community in droves.

Make it like Planescape Torment? Yes, others will bitch too (I honestly thought PS:T was a dreadfully dull game and one of my least favourite computerized D&D titles ever *shrug*).

There is, literally, no pleasing everybody with a computerized D&D game. Sometimes, designers need to politely smile when fans express their desires, nod agreeably and pretend to pay attention...

While actually ignoring most of what the fan on the street says he or she wants. Because you can be certain most of them didn't think it through, and that some other fan will think everything just suggested is the Worst. Thing. Ever.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

Party control has always been an essential element for a CRPG based on D&D, and I've played D&D CRPGs since Death Knights of Krynn. I couldn't stand it if it was single character only control in a single player game, probably why I didn't bother with NWN1, but went out and got NWN2 because it had reasonable storyline and some party members that were memorable (but not as memorable as the Torment gang, or some of the BG2 gang). Yeah single player really does matter to me, since I can't get others organized to do something multiplayer on a regular basis.

 

[Thurbane]

If I could have any D&D CG that I could wish for, it would be a ToEE engine (with all bugs worked out), good storyline, and that offered both SP and MP modes, with extra players controlling one or more additonal characters...

...oh, and maybe a "Random Dungeon Generator" feature like Dungoen Hack...