Which of these games should i get....

Frontlines Fuel of war? anyone?

 

Dragonage looks cool....

 

My dad seemed interested in Dragon Age so I might end up giving it a play.

 

Dragon Age is good, but nothing revolutionary. Prepare to micromanage and die a lot in the battles.

 

this kind of game is what torrents are for

 

Indeed. Which singleplayer game isn't...

 

I heard it's like oblivion but better.
Trufact?

It'd be nice to have a game that doesn't need 90 mods to become awesome. Nothing against bethesda, they make badass shit, but their games are missing something. (Magic arrows, I hate being a fucking ranger because I can't have magic arrows >:[)

 

I thought the skill system for oblivion was broken. There was the potential for "ruining" a character by picking shitty level-ups in the early part of the game. A lot of the mods made for it were designed to rectify this. Also leveling up summoning magic by spamming skeletons you were never going to actually use or jumping off a cliff and healing yourself to level acrobatics and healing magic was a big waste of time and was evidence of obviously broken gameplay.

Games like this don't even have to have great graphics or a cool storyline to entice me, they just have to have a skill system that is insightful and not completely broken.

 

magic generally sucks in games, its like "be this experienced and you get spell A, then B then C

if you are lucky you can improve spell A's capabilities by the time you get to spell C too

magic just doesnt feel magical, its like harry potter shooting awp bullets out of a wooden stick, if you are lucky you can have stuff like the "iron curtain" from c&c red alert too, but overall thats not very magical ether

 

I'm quite fond of good RPGs with magic involved. Diablo is one of my favourite games.

One of the things I don't get is why developers over complicate and RPG.

Diablo II has basically everything you need, does it well and is relatively simple.

You get a level, you upgrade your basic skill points, you get an upgrade to an old spell/ability or a new one, and you ration them out each level. And it works, it works so well that there's been a host of games of varying success who have done basically the same thing. Dungeon Siege 1 was a ripoff/homage of DII, but it had some new ideas, what was funny was how for DS2 they basically made a clone of diablo II and upped the graphics, but DS2 was a fucking awesome game, because it was D2 on steroids. Oblivion is an interesting stab in a different direction, and I'm all for upgrading things as you use them, but as you guys have said, they overdid it. Running and jumping really shouldn't be skills at all, they should be identical for everyone or based off your basic stats (strength endurance etc). And at the end of the day, I'd prefer to choose what I level up, but have advantages/incentives to using a particular skill.

One thing I'd like to see is an RPG that does Jack of All trades well, I know the saying is Jack of all trades master of none, but I've yet to play an RPG where you can actually do that. (DnD based RPGs support this more than other games, but I dislike their pseudo turn-based gameplay)

 

why cant magic be something that is a trait of how things work in stead of some weird stuff that you have manuals for that if you read them you are able to shoot purple lasers, or at some level you "unlock" these purple lasers

why cant magic be "magical"

like, you dont know exactly what will happen if you use it, when using really powerfull magic (and i am not saying "spells" for a reason, "spells" are retarded way of seeing magic imo they lead to people with no knowledge whatoever yelling something and killing everyone by doing so...) it might just be that you not only blow up your enemies, but turn yourself into a pile or maggots while at it

or for example when trying to condure an arrow into having water properties, you might just turn that arrow into glass

or you might turn that arrow, and half your hand into glass, potentially giving you an epic unarmed meelee attack from that way on, but the chance of getting damage from using it (its glass, it can break, but then again you can heal your arm by going to a glassworks)

or you might suddenly have an arrow that can talk, and gives you advice about how to fire it best, that keeps you company when you are loney or that gives you advice on taking out loans and filling in your tax form

or it might be an "evil" arrow, that wants to screw you over and starts yelling "whatch out, the enemy is here" when you come close to an enemy

magic has to be magical; unexplained bullshit should be expected to happen, it should be powerfull but with random downsides and it should be generically the total reversed from scientifical (like normal crafting and fighting, logic and solid end results)

 

Because that makes for bad gameplay.
Warrior hit's crap and it dies.
Archer shoots arrows at crap and it dies.
Mage casts a spell and something happens that he didn't intend. Mage ragequits.

 

as i said before, spells and spellcasters are a bad way to implement magic imo

at most i would allow a "magical" character that specialises in using magic to enhance his other fighting skills, for example this could be a guy with sucky skills besides being able to use the most powerfull types of magic with lesser drawbacks

or a guy that chose to use his perks into magic controle in stead of other skills

generally, i would for the rest let any character use magic as much as they want, if they dont want the randomness and drawbacks, they should keep the hell away from it and better specialise in weaker but more trustworthy science and crafting

 

Well mages are generally terrible at everything except casting spells. They can't usually put armor on or use powerful weapons, or any other weapons with great skill.

 

I like Dragon Age definitly better than Oblivion because i like RPGs with a long main quest that suck you in. Unlike Oblivion DA has no open world, you can't wander around freely in the game but you have to click on a map to get to a location.

Dragon Age is more like Neverwinter Nights 2 but with a far better story and better characters.

 

why cant they? what kind of bullocks elementary rule of magic prevents mages from putting slabs of metal over there heads?

not only is that way of using magic in games stupid, its also really silly and fun-compromising because you limit the possibilities that are possible

as i said, the common accepted rules of magic used in games is bullocks invented by the same "kind" of people that started to write american superhero comic books in the 70's

 

I never played NWN2.
I had NWN1, it was awesome-ish, but it dragged on for soooo loooong and I said before I had gripes with DnD RPGs (not tabletop, that's different) combat systems.

 

Battle in Dragon Age: Pause the game, send your warrior to the front, let your mages fire their spells, hope for good results in the miss and resistance check calculations, unpause for 2 seconds, then give new orders. Nothing like the battle in Diablo 2 and pretty close to DnD.

 

Ah yeah.
I did like Baldur's Gate, way back when.

 

oh wow, awesome

apparently dwarven fortress is gonna have magic similar to my ideas accourding to toadyone