D&D 5E Why D&D Can't Have a Good Video Game

GreyLord

Legend
It's difficult to compare Siege of Dragonspear to BG1, since the later was absolutely groundbreaking at the time. I think if BG1 where released today SoD would be considered superior, but it doesn't approach BG2 in terms of scale and ambition.

SoD does suffer from a design issue over the inability to backtrack, which is the fault of the plot, which attaches you to an army and makes you go where they go.

Currently downloading PF: Kingmaker. 45%...

The flaw for SoD to me was that the voice acting was so subpar to what we came to expect with the rest of the infinity engine games. The artwork was also not quite up to par. The dialogue itself wasn't really all well written. The story itself was okay, but the presentation, to me, was just so...so compared to what had come before. In comparison to other Infinity Engine games it wasn't all that great. Compared to many other RPGs that have come out, it probably is superior to many.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Derren

Hero
Outside of a few notable exceptions, every "major" traditional CRPG release in recent years (Pillars of Eternity, Divinity: Original Sin, Torment: Tides of Numenera, etc) has been crowd funded. Unless Hasbro/WotC suddenly decides to go that route with the assistance of a respected/competent developer, I highly doubt we'll see a D&D branded game akin to the old classics any time in the near future.

Pretty much this. Isometric RPGs are too niche for publishers to pick up on their own money. And the few publishers that still do action RPGs like Dragon Age and Witcher have the own IPs and dont need D&D.
 

Having tried BG recently, it doesn’t hold up well in modern terms. Slow plot, glacial advancement, overly random and deadly encounters, and awkward quest tracking.
And a whole mess of invisible subsystems you’re not warned about. Spent my time going through houses, like you do in every video game, and found myself killed by guards on sight with no warning that’s what the game did..
 


Ristamar

Adventurer
Having tried BG recently, it doesn’t hold up well in modern terms. Slow plot, glacial advancement, overly random and deadly encounters, and awkward quest tracking.
And a whole mess of invisible subsystems you’re not warned about. Spent my time going through houses, like you do in every video game, and found myself killed by guards on sight with no warning that’s what the game did..

A lot of people, myself included, made similar arguments in a recent D&D Computer Game Survivor thread. BG squared off against BG2 as the last two contenders. Unfortunately, BG2 still lost.

Not that BG2 isn't also obtuse and dated, but I had thought it was widely accepted as the ultimate CRPG representation of an epic D&D campaign.

At least Neverwinter Nights didn't win.
 
Last edited:

BookBarbarian

Expert Long Rester
A lot of people, myself included, made similar arguments in a recent D&D Computer Game Survivor thread. BG squared off against BG2 as the last two contenders. Unfortunately, BG2 still lost.

Not that BG2 isn't also obtuse and dated, but I had thought it was widely accepted as the ultimate CRPG representation of an epic D&D campaign.

At least Neverwinter Nights didn't win.

As a campaign NWN doesn't compare. As a Toolset it was amazing. The NWN persistent worlds were unlike any other Video Game I ever played.

So I kept voting for it...
 


SirGrotius

Explorer
It is a good question. I remember the SSI gold-box games fondly and the slightly derivative Wizardy series as being well done and capturing the D&D spirit. There seems to be something off in the new games, in that they fail to convey the IT factor to me, maybe they're not quite as mysterious!
 



Remove ads

Top