[Slightly OT] Neverwinter Nights A Failure? [Rant]

[MasterOfHeaven]

A couple of things here:
Regarding an NDA: I assume he's getting all of this from the beta toolset released to the public, so that's not a problem. Now, on to MoH's post:


While its true that any item can have any property (and I can't comment on the costs issue, haven't used the toolset yet), keep in mind that players can't make items, only DM's. Don't want to give your players access to an item with True Seeing on it? Don't give it to them. Simple as that.

Not really. Many people will not be playing with a DM. In fact, in a recent poll run by Bioware, 60% of people responded that they would only be playing the game in single player. For those playing without a DM in single or multiplayer, the issues are a valid concern.

You also misrepresent True Seeing a little. Bioware has specifically stated the spell DOES NOT reveal traps, though it does reveal hiden and invisible creatures. Exactly like the PHB spell? No. The stated reason is that illusions, by and large, are not in the game (too hard to make a GUI for them). In order to make True Seeing more powerful than the 2nd(?) level spell See Invisible, they had to give TS more of a kick. This is why it reveals hiden characters (which See Invisible does not).

Agreed. I had not read that response at the time I posted this, however it does not negate the other problems with the game. And personally, I think they should have just dropped True Seeing instead of allowing it to locate characters using Hide. Spells should not override skills like that, in my opinion.

Hong basically hit the nail on the head. Its hard to translate a game that takes place in your head to a CRPG. I agree that Biowares track record indicates that, while not perfect, the game will still be fairly adherent to 3e rules.

Maybe. However from what I've seen recently, this does not appear to be the case. Bioware has not adehered to the 3rd Edition rules in many places where they could have done so quite easily.

MoH speaks about 3e's finely tuned and balanced system and goes on to say NWN will destroy it. Hate to say it, but there are a lot of folks who would disagree about the finely balanced point. A lot of the splatbooks are decried as horribly unbalancing by a lot of people. I know, I know...apples and oranges since splatbook material isn't covered by the initial release of NWN. But I hope you see my point.

I see your point, however I disagree. The products given out by WoTC are mostly balanced, as long as you are using the errata for them. If you are only using the three core books, the game is almost perfectly balanced. If you are using third party materia,l of course, the situation changes, but I really don't take those into account.

Finally, MoH says blind faith in a company because they've done well in the past is a bad idea...I counter that judging a game before you have the final product in your hands is equally......questionable.
Teneb

As I said, I reserve final judgment to when I have the final product on my computer. However, that does not mean I should not judge the game based on what information I do have at the moment. Right now, from what I have seen, the game is not doing a good job of translating 3rd Edition rules to a CRPG, and I find that dissapointing given Biowares repeated promises to the contrary.

Claiming you should not judge a product before it's finished is like saying you should not address fatal flaws in an engine design before the completed product, else the engine will blow up in your face when it is finally done.

Leopold: I am not sure about that. Bioware reallly isn't designing this like an MMORPG. With EQ, you have to pay a flat fee every month to play, thus giving the designers and programmers the incentive to continue to fix and balance the game. There is no such payment plan for NWN. Once the game is done, it is likely the game is done for good.

 

[Pielorinho]

Pielorhino, your classification of anyone who complained about the True Seeing spell as a "hypercaffeinated 13 year old" is rather senseless and immature.

And if that had been what I'd said, I might agree with you.

As for your claim that "Bioware repeatedly stated they were following 3rd Edition rules as closely as possible," can you give me a cite on that? I know they've said they'd be using 3E rules in some form, but I don't recall them saying they'd be following them as closely as possible. Given the difference between PnP and computer, I'd be surprised by such a statement.

Daniel

 

[Pielorinho]

Claiming you should not judge a product before it's finished is like saying you should not address fatal flaws in an engine design before the completed product, else the engine will blow up in your face when it is finally done.
[/B]

MoH, if you were pointing out a way in which NwN might KILL people who buy the game, I'd think your analogy was better. Likewise, if auto manufacturers posted details about their engine designs on the Internet before making the engines available for purchase, and if random schmoes came onto the automakers' forums and posted semi-informed speculation about how the engine might not be optimized for fuel efficiency or something, your analogy would work better.

As it is, your analogy is hyperbole. Any of us who haven't played the game are fundamentally uninformed about any balance issues with the game; any balance issues contained in the game will lessen its fun, not send us bleeding and burning to the emergency room.

Of course, if your problem is that they're diverging from 3E rules, I'll agree with you -- that's beyond question. However, it's just too early to be making such sweeping statements about game balance or playability.

Daniel

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

Man... lost my post. It just _had_ to be the one time I didn't copy before I posted. Anyways...

Here is just one quote from Bioware on the issue:

The new Player's Handbook handles weapon proficiencies as Heroic Feats that the player can acquire. Basic weapon proficiency requires a single feat but from there it can branch out down a number of separate but mutually non-exclusive paths like Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Two-Weapon Fighting, etc.

There are three overarching weapon groups (simple, martial, and exotic) but you take most feats in a separate weapon type (longsword, battleaxe, dwarven urgrosh, etc). Some of the classes, such as fighters, automatically have basic proficiency in all simple and martial weapon.

Your best bet is to take a look at the new 3e PHB, as we'll be trying to follow that as closely as possible. Also, try the 3rd Edition Rules Discussion board just above, as many of the people there will have further insights into how it all works.

Practically my precise words. I can get more, and reference that one if you want. I had four or five such quotes in my original post, but I don't want to go and find them again unless it's neccessary. The fact is Bioware did say that they were going to try to follow the 3rd Edition rules as closely as possible on many occassions. As of right now, they don't seem to be living up to that promise.

As for my analogy, it's perfectly reasonable. The point is it's false to claim that judging something before it's finished is wrong, not that NWN is going to be a threat to the life of those who play it. Sorry you missed that.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Ok, I hate to say it.

But.....

So what?

All that release says is that they are following PHB which means they are following 3E rules for character creation. At no point is the DMG or any other 3E book mentioned. So anything they do with magic items will not be violating things since magic item creation rules are in the DMG.

You are making a classic error in assuming too much. At no point does this say they are following 3E rules it only says 3E PHB (ie character creation and advancement rules).

Man... lost my post. It just _had_ to be the one time I didn't copy before I posted. Anyways...

Here is just one quote from Bioware on the issue:



Practically my precise words. I can get more, and reference that one if you want. I had four or five such quotes in my original post, but I don't want to go and find them again unless it's neccessary. The fact is Bioware did say that they were going to try to follow the 3rd Edition rules as closely as possible on many occassions. As of right now, they don't seem to be living up to that promise.

As for my analogy, it's perfectly reasonable. The point is it's false to claim that judging something before it's finished is wrong, not that NWN is going to be a threat to the life of those who play it. Sorry you missed that.

 

[Pielorinho]

Well, you're looking at various issues:

1) Bioware is diverging from 3E rules. I agree with you here.
2) Bioware is diverging from 3E rules too much. This is a matter of opinion, but I think we have enough evidence on which to form an opinion.
3) Bioware is diverging from 3E rules in an unbalancing fashion. This is a matter of opinion, but I don't think we have enough evidence to form an intelligent opinion on this until we play it. Balance issues inevitably emerge during play; anticipating them ahead of time is extremely difficult.

Thanks for the citation. I notice that they refer to "heroic feats", a term that was dropped during 3E's development; this quote apparently comes from way early on in NWN's development process. However, I trust that you have some more recent quotes that state essentially the same thing.

At any rate, I interpret "as much as possible" to mean "as much as possible while still creating a fun, bug-free, balanced computer-game experience within a reasonable timeframe and for a reasonable expected profit." I don't know whether they'll adhere to this, but I can guess that they tried to keep this in mind. Their reason for getting rid of illusions makes sense to me; I hope that, once I start playing the game, their reasons for adding in skills such as taunt, discipline, and parry makes sense to me.

I still think your analogy sucks . Analogies, like words, have denotations and connotations, and you're responsible for both. Considering that you could have compared it to judging a book before you've read it, or judging a movie before it's been released, I think you intended the hyperbole in your analogy because you thought it'd make your complaints seem more urgent and noble.

Daniel

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

Yes, I do have other quotes I could provide. Thanks for not making me find them again.

Anyway, in my opinion, while it is difficult to anticipate balancing concerns, it is neccessary for a game to be good. All the best games I've played have been well balanced, and I am going to hold NWN to that standard.

As for my analogy, I highly doubt it makes my complaint "noble", and this is hardly "urgent". I am simply voicing my doubts about this game, and the fact I don't think it's going to live up the premise it set anymore. I do not take this game that seriously, however I find it dissapointing that Bioware is not holding more closely to 3rd Edition rules, which were playtested much more extensively than Neverwinter Nights will be.

You could claim that this is simply going to be lost in the translation between RPG to CRPG, but one of the things the Neverwinter Nights team has constantly raved about is how easy the 3rd Edition rules are to translate into a CRPG when compared to other systems.


So far I've seen several examples of spells that make no sense in regards to the changes they have undergone, and certain abilities have been powered up too much. For example, the Wizard familars are now much more powerful then they are in the PnP game. While I can understand increasing their powers a bit, since they do not share skills with their master anymore, the level of power they have now is ridiculous.

They fight well, they have powerful special abilities, and often have access to very nice skills that are not available for familars in the PnP game. And it seems to be too much, in my opinion. I have yet to see any logical reasons why these abilities and spells were changed/added, nor have I seen any evidence that this will balance out well in the game.

So, why shouldn't I be dissapointed? From what I've seen, Bioware is not living up to the premise of the game, and they have made several illogical decisions regarding spells, skills and abilities. If you have a logical, reasonable reason why I shouldn't be concerned about this, feel free to point it out to me.

 

[Pielorinho]

So, why shouldn't I be dissapointed? From what I've seen, Bioware is not living up to the premise of the game, and they have made several illogical decisions regarding spells, skills and abilities. If you have a logical, reasonable reason why I shouldn't be concerned about this, feel free to point it out to me.

Being concerned is one thing. Being disappointed is another. Declaring the game to be a failure is another thing still.

I'm concerned. I've not played the game, so I'm not disappointed with how it plays. And I'm nowhere near full of myself enough to suggest that the game is a failure before it's even been released.

I first saw this sort of premature condemnation in the years leading up to Starcraft. And it seems like every time one of my favorite game companies comes out with another game, it crops up again. It's not a big deal: it's just premature to condemn the game, to judge the game, before you've played the game.

Wait a month, and then tell me what you think about familiars' powers. Then I'll give your complaints weight.

Daniel

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

Hopefully the game will actually be out in a month. By the way, note that I put a question mark after the topic heading, and I have preceded just about all of my comments with "seems to be" "appears" "from what I've seen", and so forth. So I'm not condemning this game as a failure until I actually play it, but I'm concerned and dissapointed by what I've seen so far.

As for Starcraft... true, but Starcraft underwent an extensive beta test that ironed out many of the problems. The problem I have with the Beta Test Neverwinter Nights is undergoing is the fact that balance is not really a primary concern, from what I've seen.

It was in Starcraft, and it is in Warcraft III, which is why I think that game _will_ work out fine. I just don't see that happening with Neverwinter Nights right now. Hopefully I'll be wrong, but as of now it doesn't seem like it.

 

[El Ravager]

My biggest problem with these changes is not how they will impact the computer game, but how they will impact the 3E campaigns that I play in. I just know one of my DMs will play NWN and get the grand idea to put one of these items into their game without thinking at all about how it might not be balanced in a table top game. Then my rogue will be stuck being useless and unable to sneak attack people because all the villians will spend 1001gp and be immune to them

Seriously though, I really don't see the big deal in all of this. New supplements, whether from WotC or a third party, introduce new skills and magic items all the time and yet when we use them, we still call our campaigns '3E campaigns'. Do a few skill and spell tweaks really make the game that much less 3E? Perhaps, but I will have to see more of the game to really make that call.

=====
El Rav