Forked Thread: GTS 2009 D&D Seminar - 4e video game

[ferratus]

The biggest problem with NWN 2 is the fact that it makes even strong computers whimper. The bugs have largely been ironed out by now.

I think if I was to make a D&D 4e video game, it would either have to be turn-based tactical game closely related to the rules, or else it should be a full on action RPG. The reason I eventually dropped NWN, and why I hate WoW is because I dislike gameplay that largely revolves around clicking things repeatedly.

 

[Kaodi]

I wonder if this time around we will finally get a decent Eberron game.

I mean, now that the Forgotten Realms has been rendered sort of unrecognizable, there would no longer be as big a reason to put a game in that setting for reasons of familiarity.

And it also may explain why there has been no word on a game if they are waiting to announce it after the release of the setting, though that is pure speculation on my part.

Would be pretty nifty...

 

[fnwc]

For the most part the people who play NWN don't care which edition of D&D the game use. They are not D&D players but NWN players. Some of them (more than you likely think) probably didn't even know that there is a PnP version of "NWN". And those people would be very upset if the next NWN game suddenly changed everything.

I'm not sure I agree with you. Most people know what D&D is, even if it's only a vague idea. Although I can see how people who are only familiar with NWN might be upset if their game were turned upside down -- which it would, considering the radical changes from 3E to 4E.

The PnP customers and CRPG customers are two different groups without much overlap. And while 4E is already established on the PnP market it is entirely untested on the CRPG market.

I think the PnP and CRPG group overlap a lot more than you think. Of course, the CRPG group is much larger, but I have a feeling most D&D players have played some kind of CRPG.

Just because a 4E game is unestablished in the CRPG market doesn't mean they shouldn't make a game out of one. If that were true, we would still be playing 2E gold box games.

Also 4E needs a new engine or at least a very heavily upgraded Aurora (NWN 2) one. Also the game must keep up with the graphic development.

This is true. If they do a new 4E series of games, I would prefer that they scrap the NWN2 Aurora engine, because it sucks. The loading times are frequent and long, and I don't find the graphics to be particularly compelling.

 

[fnwc]

I wonder if this time around we will finally get a decent Eberron game.

I mean, now that the Forgotten Realms has been rendered sort of unrecognizable, there would no longer be as big a reason to put a game in that setting for reasons of familiarity.

Forgotten Realms has been the historic setting of choice when it comes to CRPGs, especially recently. We have the Baldur's Gate games, the NWN games, the Pool of Radiance Games, the Icewind Dale games, etc.

Compare that to Planescape (Planescape: Torment), Greyhawk (Temple of Elemental Evil) and a handful of others.

Anyone remember the Birthright game?

*succeeded* *succeeded* *did not succeed*

 

[Kaodi]

Well, I will not deny that Forgotten Realms is the odds on favourite for getting the go, but the fact remains that it will have to surrender its death grip on the CRPGs eventually. In the same way that there was a transition to a slew of setting to dominance of FR, there will eventually be a transition away from FR.

Setting is not proof against sucking, game quality is. Unfortunately, ToEE was terribly buggy (though I am told that fully patched it is a great game), and all Eberron has gotten is the gimmicky Dragonshard and DDO. It does not take a genius to tell that the reason the latter three games did poorly was not because of their setting. After all, setting did not help the new Pool of Radiance from being bad, either.

Though, I think it is a little ironic and humourous to speak of FR as the historic setting of choice, when the FR that was the setting of choice is now a hundred years in the past.

 

[Herobizkit]

Well, what I would LIKE is a game that is turn-based using squares, but with the ability to use real-time for the less challenging encounters (much as you would have in a BG-ish game featuring random monsters). You would also have maps to explore and plenty of space in the middle to go exploring -- but not too much, because wandering around for too long results in loss of focus. You would have things tighten up again close to the end, and the pace of the game would accelerate as you neared the final fight.

The Magic of Scheherazade, an old NES game, used a similar tactic - in the Overworld screen, you maneuvered your character with the d-pad and fought in real-time arcade action and, in some random encounters and important boss fights, it would "fsssh" and take you to a turn-based combat screen similar to most early RPG's of its time (most notably Dragon Warrior). You could even hire Mercenaries that would add extra attacks during these turn-based combats.

It would be interesting to see that again...