D&D Computer Games

[Asmor]

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 favorite computerized D&D titles ever *shrug*).

That is a fine and justifiable opinion, to which you are entitled.

On an unrelated note, I'd like to introduce you to my friend Hammer and his friend Blunt Force Trauma.

Just kidding. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I can certainly understand your opinion, the amount of text required to play it borders on reading a novel, and that's not something that really meshes with what one would likely expect to be an action RPG.

 

[paulsometimes]

Wizards almost needs to keep some creative control, IMO. The people in the company are D&D players, are D&D fans, and I'd like to think that they know a quality flick or game when the see it, and they also know what a stinker looks like.

I have to object here, at least partially. While I don't think it was your intention, there's an implication in this that non-D&D fans wouldn't know a good D&D movie. A good movie is a good movie regardless of what license it may be based upon. I know plenty of non-D&D players that enjoy good fantasy movies and would enjoy a movie even if it had D&D in the title, so much as it was a good movie.
For myself and many of my friends, memorable characters going through an interesting story are all that's required. License names and special effects aren't required and certainly aren't enough on their own to support a movie.

 

[Asmor]

I have to object here, at least partially. While I don't think it was your intention, there's an implication in this that non-D&D fans wouldn't know a good D&D movie. A good movie is a good movie regardless of what license it may be based upon. I know plenty of non-D&D players that enjoy good fantasy movies and would enjoy a movie even if it had D&D in the title, so much as it was a good movie.
For myself and many of my friends, memorable characters going through an interesting story are all that's required. License names and special effects aren't required and certainly aren't enough on their own to support a movie.

You have a valid point, but I think Kamikaze Midget's point still stands; Wizards should actively try to keep crap like the first D&D movie from being made (haven't seen the second, but I suspect it's not much better). Regardless of whether you're a D&D player or not, that movie was awful in every sense of the term, and I can't imagine that it did anything good for D&D as a brand.

 

[Aegir]

Wizards should actively try to keep crap like the first D&D movie from being made (haven't seen the second, but I suspect it's not much better).

Then let me enlighten you: it was still dreck, but Oscar-worthy compared to the first.

 

[Scott_Rouse]

I have to object here, at least partially. While I don't think it was your intention, there's an implication in this that non-D&D fans wouldn't know a good D&D movie. A good movie is a good movie regardless of what license it may be based upon. I know plenty of non-D&D players that enjoy good fantasy movies and would enjoy a movie even if it had D&D in the title, so much as it was a good movie.
For myself and many of my friends, memorable characters going through an interesting story are all that's required. License names and special effects aren't required and certainly aren't enough on their own to support a movie.

This goes without saying IMO.

A good movie combines many elements including the right budget, story, script, cast, director, cinematography, special effects, studio, distributor, etc.. If the movie is based on an existing story or other intellectual property with a built in fan base it must remain true to the the original work and meet the expectations of the fans. You can achieve this in one of two primary ways. Have a director/writers/producer who totally get the property because they know it (really do and not just think they do) or surround themselves with people who know it (and listen to these people). In many notable cases movies have failed because they did not do hit on the above elements. Part of the reason The Lord of the Rings Trilogy was so successful was it had most of the right elements in place to be a block buster. It will be interesting to see how The Hobbit does as Newline changes the mix.


In some ways the movies without the baggage of a built in fan base may be the easiest to make. Imagine how hard it would be for someone to make a critically acclaimed movie based on the Star Wars Universe at this time.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

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.

I'm not sure as I never looked too closely at the toolset, but I think it's quite possible to create your own henchmen in your campaign and then write a script to export/import them.

I suspect you could even make a henchman out of a character you create. I guess it was just never tried.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

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.

No computer game will ever be able to replace D&D in all its glory. But if your gaming party is not available, NWN is the next best thing. No WoW or ToeE or BG ever came as close to the real D&D experience as NWN.

Also remember that Atari didn't actually come up with the NWN concept - it was gifted to them when Interplay collapsed.

NWN isn't Atari's creation. Or Interplay's. Bioware made NWN, just as they made the BG line.

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!).

10 Minutes? Can't remember 10 minutes. But remember that this is not Diablo. There is supposed to be some story in there. And it wasn't even near Torment.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

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.

Of course it is all about the party. A party of several characters, each played by a human being. The BG line was great as a computer game, Torment had its moments, too, but they were, essentially, single player games.

D&D is all about more than one player.

For me, NWN was always the game I played when I wanted D&D but there was no P&P session scheduled.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

No party control? They bitch. Party control? They bitch again.

Not if it is optional. NWN2's is optional, you can still make one single character and play with others on some module or persistant world.

Multiplayer? The SP fans bitch.

Huh? Let them bitch. No one's putting a gun to their heads to play with others.

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.

I think NWN2 did well in that regard: despite the fact that it had tilesets, you could make things look way better by morphing things.

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*).

I liked it until I ran into a dead end, no walkthrough could help me, and the last save that I could have used to play through was quite old.

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.

They still should listen to people, and then decide whether it makes sense and makes it a better game. The worst thing you can do is smile politely, nod agreeably, pretend to pay attention and just ignore most of what the fan on the streed says he or she wants. Because if you design your games on some remote mountaintop, you might have a rude awakening when the game tanks, the critics tear it to pieces, and few people buy it (and most of those who do assault your mountaintop to lynch you).

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You have a valid point, but I think Kamikaze Midget's point still stands; Wizards should actively try to keep crap like the first D&D movie from being made (haven't seen the second, but I suspect it's not much better).

It is much better. It may not be a blockbuster, and the story really could be better, but I thought it was enjoyable. And the best thing is that it may actually call itself a D&D movie.