# Neverwinter Hate



## Darklone (Jul 10, 2002)

I bought that game after reading an article by some real famous guy (hint hint) that it's truely core D&D 3rd edition. 

Well, he lied. 

Did you enjoy the game? I think I got what I deserve for playing CRPGs...


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 10, 2002)

Uh, he didn't lie.

Most people I know find the game amazing... heck, read the posts in the Electronic Software forum here.


----------



## KnowTheToe (Jul 10, 2002)

I agree that the game is not a perfect match to 3E, but no one ever said it would be.  It is a close match that really cathes the feel of D&D 3E.  I am sorry you did not like it.


----------



## Ashtal (Jul 10, 2002)

I think it's as close to 3E as any computer game can be, IMO, and the changes made were necessary to help it work better in a computer environment.

And the Toolset is sweeeeeeeeeet!  I'm spending as much time these days learning how to make my own modules as I am playing the game proper!


----------



## Zerovoid (Jul 10, 2002)

I was also really disappointed in the game.  Even things from 3e that would be very simple to implement were left out, like climbing and swimming.  Also, alot of the combat feats have been changed or left out

I was all hyped up for this game, thinking that it was gonna replace table top gaming and such.  What a joke.  As far as story and narrative goes, its way below Planescape Tormet.  Its more like a version of Diablo that isn't actually as fun as Diablo II.

Monsters?  I kill them.  Guards?  I kill them.  Ouch, a trap!  Stupid chest! Bash! Bash! Bash!  More monsters?  I kill them...


----------



## vox (Jul 10, 2002)

*Not even close...*

I have to agree with the original poster. Well, actually I like the game well enough but it's like Baldur's Gate not like D&D. I understand that a computer game can't replace real rpg but the single-player game doesn't seem significantly more like role-playing than BG or it's ilk. In fact, something like Morrowind seems more like the feel of D&D to me.

For example, you can walk into a boss monster room, fight some, walk out, camp in the hallway next to his door for 8 hours and then step back in and fight some more, rinse and repeat. And I'm talking about supposedly intelligent, mobile villians.

Gaurds continue to gaurd castles even after everyone inside has been dead for weeks. Almost every "enemy" is fanatical--low level mage sycophants charge heavily armed fighters with abandon. Interior logic isn't very prevalent.

Another example, plots that you can see a mile away but can't really effect because they are part of the big story. For example, early on you may figure that someone may be a traitor to the city but you can't really act on it in a meaningful way. (Actually, I didn't try _all_ the ways you could attempt to act on it but from what I saw the plot was going to move inexorably on). 

Creative play is limited. Your thieves can't climb walls to get info so they can start a rumor-smear campaign against their enemies.  You can't knock people out and interrogate them or disguise yourself as someone else. You get a quest and you do X to get to Y to get to Z, here are some experience and treasure. You can't create magic items or swing from chandeliers. The world doesn't seem dynamic. You may find a fork in the road here or there but the roads come back together pretty quickly and you certainly can't step off the road and just wander the fields.

Now, admittedly I haven't finished the game but this is my impression so far (I'm about to start chapter 3). Maybe lots of possibilities open up later but if so why aren't they available early on?

--vox


----------



## d12 (Jul 10, 2002)

*the patch*

but I've always treated CRPGs like a "patch" for table-top roleplaying.  If you feel like some D&D on Tues but game night is thursday, you just fire up NWN and it calms the cravings until Thursday.  In this respect NWN is great.


----------



## Ashrem Bayle (Jul 10, 2002)

It sounds to me like some of you had unrealistic expectations. As I understand it, they wanted to do climbing, flying, and swimming, but couldn't get it to work with the engine.


----------



## Lazybones (Jul 10, 2002)

I would respectfully suggest that some of you are basing your judgments on the single-player game, which admittedly a lot like the Baldur's Gate series (with a little more railroading of the plot).  However, for me the game really shines in the multiplayer aspect, especially with modules that I design myself.  I've DMed about a half-dozen sessions now, and with the player interaction (limited only by typing speed, although I'm sure full voice interaction is only a few years off at this point) and my ability as DM to possess any NPC (although there's still a bug in the game dealing with this), the role-playing potential is a lot like PnP.  Plus it's nice to have the computer doing all of the math in the background, allowing my players and I to focus on the RP and on the visuals.  

My complaints are mostly related to bug and hardware issues, but I think that the game itself is pretty awesome.

LB


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 10, 2002)

Zerovoid said:
			
		

> *I was also really disappointed in the game.  Even things from 3e that would be very simple to implement were left out, like climbing and swimming.  Also, alot of the combat feats have been changed or left out
> 
> I was all hyped up for this game, thinking that it was gonna replace table top gaming and such.  What a joke.  As far as story and narrative goes, its way below Planescape Tormet.  Its more like a version of Diablo that isn't actually as fun as Diablo II.
> 
> Monsters?  I kill them.  Guards?  I kill them.  Ouch, a trap!  Stupid chest! Bash! Bash! Bash!  More monsters?  I kill them... *




I think your problem may be deeper than the game then, if you complain about A) Bad story and B) killing guards, in the same post.


----------



## Sigma (Jul 10, 2002)

You should go and find a copy of Pool of Radiance and play that for a while.  It'll make you appreciate NWN.


----------



## Pielorinho (Jul 10, 2002)

I really liked it at first, but I'm liking it less now:

-The gameplay is extremely repetitive.  It doesn't feel necessary to try out new strategies in the game.
-The game is easy.  I'm playing a bard, I don't summon creatures anymore (because I want all the XP for myself), and I've very rarely felt the need to rest or even teleport back to town.
-The AI is stupid.  
-The story is railroading.
-And, worst of all, the game is buggy.  I've almost finished chapter 2, but I'm going to need to replay the entire chapter because of a bug in it.

The graphics are great, of course, and the game seems well-balanced and reasonably true to 3E.  If I had a better Internet connection (mine waffles between 28.8 and 56.6), I'd get into the multiplayer aspect.  But I can't do that now, so I just have to be disappointed in the single-player aspect.

Warcraft, OTOH, has pulled me in hook, line and sinker.  Much better storyline, much more challenging gameplay, and the graphics are more appealing to me.

Daniel


----------



## Uller (Jul 10, 2002)

If you seriously expected NWN single player mode to come anywhere close replicating PnP D&D, you simply had greater expectations than are reasonable.  I've not played the game, and I've not invested too much time in the hype, but from what I've read, the single player mode is just a series of prepackaged adventures that are loosely strung together...now think about it...how interactive can that really be?  As a DM for a PnP campaign, could you concieve of creating an entire campaign of, say 10 adventures, completely in advance, including preplanning all NPCs reactions to the party?  If you could, you are a far superior DM than I.  Hell, I usually have no idea what the second adventure is going to be until we are about 75% through the first!

Now...in multiplayer mode, I see some real potential.  The DM could create an adventure and throw in some hooks to future potential adventures.   The DM can run the NPCs and when the session is over, ask the players what hook(s) they'd like to follow and create a new adventure.  Repeat until you've run an entire campaign.

But even this still has it's limitations.   When I DM a PnP game, invariably there are contingencies I haven't planned for.   The players do or say something I didn't expect or go off in a direction I didn't intend.  In order for me to let them(and I try to always give them a reasonable chance of success for reasonable actions), I have to create stuff on the fly.  In PnP D&D, this is usually quite easy...I don't know how powerful the NWN toolset is, but I doubt it will allow you to change/add to the map on the fly or even add in new NPCs.

For instance...I ran an adventure several months ago where the PCs were supposed to explore a cave complex where the main villian and his cohorts were supposedly hiding.  In order to add flavor, I told the Druid player that her PC was familliar with the location of the cave.   Her clan used it long ago as a place to seek shelter from the harsh winters in the region as well as a place to store food in the summer months.  This was before her birth, though so she had never actually been in the cave, but she knew where it was.   I did this merely as a vehicle to get the party to the cave quickly without incident as well as help the players feel tied to the setting.

I didn't expect the players to say "Well if she has heard so much about this cave, perhaps she is aware of some 'back' entrance that might not be very well guarded?"    I hadn't thought of this...I hadn't mapped the entire cave, just the relevant parts and from my description, it is a large and confusing complex.   So it seemed reasonable that the druid would indeed know that a back entrance would exist and might have a good chance to find one.   So I had her make a Wilderness Lore check vs. DC 25 (or something high, hoping she wouldn't find it) and she beat it.   So I "created" a back entrance on the fly that allowed the party to by pass one encounter and gain an advantage in a second.  

I don't see how you could reasonably expect to be able to do that in NWN.   So there is no way that NWN can replicate (or even come close) to the PnP experience.  While it may use a modified 3e rules set and have some powerful "DM" tools, it is still, at its heart, a Computer Game (probably a really really cool computer game, but a computer game nonetheless).  Until they have voice and the ability to allow the DM to quickly create new stuff on the fly, they will not replicate the PnP experience.  Period.


----------



## myrdden (Jul 10, 2002)

*Re: Not even close...*



			
				vox said:
			
		

> *I have to agree with the original poster. ...
> 
> For example, you can walk into a boss monster room, fight some, walk out, camp in the hallway next to his door for 8 hours...
> 
> ...




While this may be true for the single player game, the multiplayer game voids most of these problems.  That's assuming you have a decent DM who understands how to run the game properly (NWN I mean). 

The whole attraction and promise of NWN is not the single player game, but the multiplayer game.

Myrdden


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 10, 2002)

*Re: Not even close...*



			
				vox said:
			
		

> *
> Creative play is limited. Your thieves can't climb walls to get info so they can start a rumor-smear campaign against their enemies. You can't knock people out and interrogate them or disguise yourself as someone else. You get a quest and you do X to get to Y to get to Z, here are some experience and treasure. You can't create magic items or swing from chandeliers.
> *





You know, I just have to ask... what are you expecting from a computer game? A sentient AI to play personal DM for you? You can only do so much with static code, my friend.


----------



## Bagpuss (Jul 10, 2002)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> *-The game is easy.  I'm playing a bard, I don't summon creatures anymore (because I want all the XP for myself)
> 
> [snip]
> 
> ...




Actually summoning low-level creatures when you are high level means you get even more XP. Due to the weird method of calculating XP the game uses.

Say your 9th level and you use Summon Monster I to get a CR1 critter, the average party level now drops from 9 to 5. So what might have been an even CR 9 encounter now becomes a challenging one. So more XP is awarded. Unlike normal D&D this XP isn't shared out evenly, the 9th level character gets the lions share (about 9/10ths of it) and so get much more XP than if they faced it alone, sometime 2 to 3 times more XP for the same monster. (Now is this a Bug or a Feature of their XP system?)

The graphics are pretty poor when you compare it to Dungeon Siege, but that is party to do with it being an old graphics engine and the need to use tiles to make module design easy.


----------



## sfgiants (Jul 10, 2002)

While I agree that some of the previous posters were asking for way too much out of the game, the game was advertised and hyped as true Pen and Paper gaming (or as close as can be gotten). In actuallity it is just the first step in CRPG/PnP gaming combination.


----------



## Lazybones (Jul 10, 2002)

Just a quick note to Uller: While it's true that you cannot change terrain on the fly, it's relatively easy to spawn in new NPCs.  I even put a few extra custom NPCs (with simple "stock" scripts/conversations) in the module database so that I can spawn them onto the map if need be.  Players heading off into the wilderness where you haven't placed anything?  Spawn in a stock ranger who warns of a rogue monster in the region... and then run on a little bit ahead and plop one of the baddies down in their path.  Or if you don't want to do that much anticipation, you can just spawn a regular NPC from the existing database and possess it--voila! instant NPC that can respond to the PCs. 

That said, I also agree that NWN is just the first step.  I think once we get to full voice communication (though some people are already doing it with Roger Wilco or other such programs) and with the lessons learned from NWN, we'll have some pretty impressive stuff coming out of the pipeline 4-5 years from now.


----------



## Uller (Jul 10, 2002)

Lazybones said:
			
		

> *Just a quick note to Uller: While it's true that you cannot change terrain on the fly, it's relatively easy to spawn in new NPCs.  I even put a few extra custom NPCs (with simple "stock" scripts/conversations) in the module database so that I can spawn them onto the map if need be.  Players heading off into the wilderness where you haven't placed anything?  Spawn in a stock ranger who warns of a rogue monster in the region... and then run on a little bit ahead and plop one of the baddies down in their path.  Or if you don't want to do that much anticipation, you can just spawn a regular NPC from the existing database and possess it--voila! instant NPC that can respond to the PCs.
> 
> *




That's cool.  All the more reason to like it and all the more reason why the game was designed to be played multiplayer with a DM.  Just reading the FAQ on the NWN website, I got the feeling that the game really was intended to be played this way...that's its primary appeal...and that single player mode is just there to allow people to mess around with it to learn it and play it when they don't have anyone else to play with.  


> *
> 
> That said, I also agree that NWN is just the first step.  I think once we get to full voice communication (though some people are already doing it with Roger Wilco or other such programs) and with the lessons learned from NWN, we'll have some pretty impressive stuff coming out of the pipeline 4-5 years from now. *




Sounds like it.  I'll probably pick up NWN in a few months (or ask for it for a Christmas gift).


----------



## dagger (Jul 10, 2002)

I took this from a recent review of the game, it pretty much sums up my views as well.  A new patch did come out today though, go here for patch link.   www.bluesnews.com



Conclusion:

There's nothing really bad about Neverwinter Nights; and there's nothing else really good either. If you remove the Toolset, which, apparently, is not a priority to BioWare, NWN is a pretty mediocre game. The story is not as interesting as Baldur's Gate's, the gameplay is stifling compared to Morrowind, and the 3D engine is laughable compared to Morrowind and Dungeon Siege. The Toolset, and the people that will use it, are the only thing that gives NWN its worth. Hopefully BioWare will soon realize this and do more to support them.


----------



## Pielorinho (Jul 10, 2002)

Uller, I didn't expect NWN to come close to PnP gaming.  I've been playing computer roleplaying games since the first Wizardry game came out (earlier, if you count Lemonade Stand).  I was expecting an above-average CRPG.

And I think I got it, except for several major beefs.  

It's too easy -- this is a design flaw IMHO, not a feature of CRPGs.  
It's really railroading -- this is pretty standard for CRPGs, even though Planescape:Torment was much less railroading.
It's really buggy -- this is NOT a feature of CRPGs.  Especially egregious is a bug that prevents me from advancing at all in the game; many people, judging from the support forums on the official NWN boards, are suffering from similar bugs.

Still and all, I liked the game pretty well until I ran into the bug.  Once they patch the game to fix the bug, or once I've played the hell out of Warcraft3, I'll return to the game and finish it.  But right now, the bugginess has left a sour taste in my mouth.

Daniel


----------



## Uller (Jul 11, 2002)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> *Uller, I didn't expect NWN to come close to PnP gaming.
> 
> *




Then I wasn't really talking to you.  A few have eluded (or even stated directly) that they hoped for a replacement to PnP games from NWN.  Not going to happen...at least not for a decade or so.

From the sounds of things, the single player (or "official campain") is really substandard and that's too bad.  I'd hope that Bioware would realize that while the really hard core gamers (both PnP and CRPG) would likely play mostly multiplayer, a very large portion of the market still plays games primarily single player.  Yours truly among them...I play multiplayer games at work during lunch...at home, I generally only have 15-20 minutes at time to play a game and that doesn't work well for most multiplayer games.

A certain amount of railroading can be expected in any CRPG (or PnP RPG for that matter)...but you should still have lots of opportunities for side quests and there should be a variety of outcomes possible.  Oh well...


> *
> 
> I've been playing computer roleplaying games since the first Wizardry game came out (earlier, if you count Lemonade Stand).  I was expecting an above-average CRPG.
> 
> *




Lemonade Stand...was that on the C64?  I think I vaguely remember it...


> *
> 
> And I think I got it, except for several major beefs.
> 
> ...




Maybe...but it depends on how it is supposed to be played.  If the game is like most CRPGs where you can play, save, play, save, play, die, reload, etc, then it should be tough.  But if it is meant to be played like a PnP RPG (with no chance to "go back" to a saved game) then it _should_ be a tad easier than your average CRPG.  


> *
> 
> It's really railroading -- this is pretty standard for CRPGs, even though Planescape:Torment was much less railroading.
> 
> *




I've played a few games that do a good job of not railroading you.  What was that one from the early '90s?...Arena?  Something like that.  You could wander around anywhere in a rather large world and find all sorts of subquests and what not...I played it for hours and hours and completely ignored the primary mission...From the sounds of things, this could be achieved with NWN only if you have a DM willing to prepare the side adventures for you....


> *
> 
> It's really buggy -- this is NOT a feature of CRPGs.  Especially egregious is a bug that prevents me from advancing at all in the game; many people, judging from the support forums on the official NWN boards, are suffering from similar bugs.
> 
> *




Unfortunately, this is really SOP for the software industry.  We save money by having substandard QA and using bug reports from users and releasing lots of patches to serve as our "QA".  It is just cheaper that way, and since most companies do it, it is accepted by customers. 

Every company I've worked for (5 in the last 7 years) has done this...


> *
> 
> Still and all, I liked the game pretty well until I ran into the bug.  Once they patch the game to fix the bug, or once I've played the hell out of Warcraft3, I'll return to the game and finish it.  But right now, the bugginess has left a sour taste in my mouth.
> 
> Daniel *




Probably over time, the bugs will be fixed and the game will be improved.   Another reason why I'll wait until Christmas or so to get it.


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 11, 2002)

> but you should still have lots of opportunities for side quests




I don't know what game these people who complain about no side quests are playing... I'm only in chap 2, and I've probably spent 1/2 of my time doing side quests.





> What was that one from the early '90s?...Arena?




Yeah, Arena... And it's sequal Daggerfall. Great games. The sequal to daggerfall was released a couple months ago... called Morrowind. Check it out. It's great. Single player only, and takes a hefty system, but the game is great. Just as non-linear as the earlier ones.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Jul 11, 2002)

Salutations,

My only real complaint about the game is the pathing. They have made so many of these type of games, and pathing is still a serious issue. 

I played through with a sorcerer/paladin- and I got into trouble many times due to my familiar and henchman getting stuck in a doorway.

I understand that it is not an easy matter by any means, but why compound the problem by making maps with doorways with little sides that stick out- and rocks on the side of hallways.

It may look cool, but if pathing is a problem.. don't contribute to it.

FD


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 11, 2002)

First off, I'll agree that the single-player campaign isn't that great - I quickly became bored with it some way through Chapter 2.

Bugs happen, and they get corrected as soon as possible.  Some are major (the toolset corrupting saved mods, the chapter 2 bug), some are not so major.  I don't think they did as good a job on testing as they should have though.

Climbing, swimming, riding, et cetera aren't problems with the engine - it would have required a significant increase in the number of character models needed to be made - and would have delayed the game significantly longer.  And while I'm sure someone will come along and say "I'd rather wait for an unbugged game", your waiting doesn't put food on the designer's tables.  They put as in much as they could in the allotted time.  But eventually the higher-ups said, alright, have it done by June, we're shipping then.

Dagger, what ever gave you the idea that the toolset wasn't supported by BioWare?  Should I even mention the number of BioWare folk who post on the Custom Content, Scripting, and Toolset forums?  Get your facts straight.  BioWare has always been of the position that it would be the community that makes the game, and the single player campaign was only an example of what could be done.


----------



## Lazybones (Jul 11, 2002)

I think the distinction is that the publisher, Infogrammes, has stated that the toolset is an "unsupported add-on."  Bioware, the actual designer, has been 100% behind the toolset and in fact has just released a patch to fix the toolset corruption problems.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 11, 2002)

Lazybones said:
			
		

> *I think the distinction is that the publisher, Infogrammes, has stated that the toolset is an "unsupported add-on."  Bioware, the actual designer, has been 100% behind the toolset and in fact has just released a patch to fix the toolset corruption problems. *




Actually, from what I understand, Infogrammes thought the guy who e-mailed them was talking about the beta toolset.  As far as I know BioWare and Infogrammes both support it.


----------



## gregweller (Jul 11, 2002)

I think that if you approach this game with the attitude that 'of course, no CRPG can ever approach PnP games' then it will never work for you.  There will always be people that will say that computers or software won't develop sentient behavior even after it does (read Ray Kurtzwiel' s 'Age of Spiritual Machines). I think that what the real issue here is emergent behavior. This game has only been out for a couple of weeks, and besides modules coming out by the score, people are already hacking the engine to add functionality that was never originally intended (implementation of arrays in the scripting language, for one thing, 'pack-animals' for another). When you put something with this much potential into the hands of (already) a million plus people,  just wait and see what kinds of things people will create using the software. I think that a lot of people have turned PnP gaming into this nostalgic fetish-object. I have a sign over my desk at work that says 'Nostalgia is the irrational desire for limitations'. I think that says it all.


----------



## Luke (Jul 11, 2002)

This is pretty much a first step towards D&D roleplaying on networked computers:

- the plot behind the single player game doesn't hold a torch to Planescape:Torment.

- There are pathing problems, as when you're own party leaves you stuck in doorways. This was fixed between BGI & BGII. Presumably it'll happen in NWN as well...

- A genuine first-person perspective camera option would have been really great.

- the monster/AI is fairly brain-dead. The toolset doesn't support allocation of "attitude profiles" with "interactive memory" that  allows you to simply place creatures that will automatically respond to things you do in a semi-intelligent way.
Whilst the toolset has a flexible scripting language, there's a *huge* amount of effort required to lift general concepts like monster AI.

- Those hoping to find their pnp experience translated to the networked computer will be waiting for a long, long time - even after voice is standard. Playing in a modeled 3D world is great, but hugely inflexible compared to what the imagination can offer. Stop and think about how long it took Bioware to construct the single player modules. Check out the conversation editor for it using the Toolset.

That said, I *love* this game, and I really appreciate what Bioware has done!
A huge amount of money has been poured into the development of this first step, and possibly only it's success will see future further development.
The amount of effort required to do what they've done in the toolset for us is staggering (I do RPG development).

This was an extremely brave development on several fronts:

- They designed and started this project before the hardware capable of running it existed!!! That's a *huge* commercial risk.

- Nobody else has come even close to taking such a massive first step for us.

There's no question that the Bioware development team probably wanted to continue improving before releasing, but there are commercial realities that have to be faced. After all these years of very expensive development, you *have* to get some kind of commercial return before you continue to pour more money in.


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 11, 2002)

Genuine First Person was an issue some people complained about with Dungeon Siege, but the same thing applies. You don't really want it, as the game is made right now. I'm sure Bioware could crank out a hack in 10 minutes to give you genuine FPP, but remember... there is no sky... there is not top to trees in the forest... there is no roof to caves...

Besides, have you actualy stoped to look how out of scale you are with the surroundings? Buildings are huge compared to you. Doors dwarf over even humans. It would look really strange in FPP.

If Bioware had designed the game from the ground up to support FPP, that would be one thing... but they didn't. 

As for pathing... remember the one key difference between this and BG... Static, pre rendered environments that will always be the same. This allowed (I suspect) them to add things like nodes and pre-set pathways in the game, much the same as how 'bots in Quake 3 navigate. Not so with a free-form-ish game like NWN.


----------



## Darklone (Jul 11, 2002)

To clarify something: 

I was really upset that they changed several feats WITHOUT reason IMHO.

I do know the problems of computergames compared to tabletop games. But this arbitrary changing of game mechanics made nothing better.


----------



## Draconis Imperium (Jul 11, 2002)

I think after reading all the posts most of the people against NWN wanted a computer game thats thinks and act like a human DM. Unfortunately that can't happen unless everyone has a Cray Computer in their basement. Home PC's are not going to be sentient acting no matter how much programming goes on. Is the single player one dimensional, of course! I agree that the game was developed for the multi player community. I agree you might not be as flexable to create new territory on the fly but I think I might make a few modules to take this into account. Generic ones anyway to keep the flow. 
 Bugs Happen. Anyone who works on software know this is true. But a company worth is measured by how fast and well they respond to fix issues.

 I think the game has limitations also but I was also very happy with it and I think future mods will impliment much more D&D feel.

I don't ever remember Bioware ever stating they will not support it. I imagine they will if anything jump at the chance to add more since the sales for them have been awesome. 

Last but not least (IMHO) the posts sound very familiar to the 3E posts I read right after 3E came out. Pissing and moaning about what was left out and what was wrong. If you like it play it! If you don't, then shelve the game and find something else to play.

But I do like it and I can't wait to get my world into a module to see how it plays. 
Overall I would rate it a B+ overall


----------



## Tsyr (Jul 11, 2002)

Darklone said:
			
		

> *To clarify something:
> 
> I was really upset that they changed several feats WITHOUT reason IMHO.
> 
> I do know the problems of computergames compared to tabletop games. But this arbitrary changing of game mechanics made nothing better. *




Actualy, by and large, I think the feat improvements were good. Toughness, for example, is now actualy USEFULL. I'm thinking of using the NWN rule as an official rule in my games (With the proviso its a one time only feat, not stackable anymore).


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 11, 2002)

Darklone said:
			
		

> *To clarify something:
> 
> I was really upset that they changed several feats WITHOUT reason IMHO.
> 
> I do know the problems of computergames compared to tabletop games. But this arbitrary changing of game mechanics made nothing better. *




Which feats, specifically?  Far be it for me to presume to know why BioWare made certain choices, but I have been following this game's development for a good three years...

As Tsyr said, some of the changes were both necessary and needed, in my opinion.  Like Tsyr, I'm specifcally thinking of Toughness and Skill Focus.  Toughness is a near worthless feat, taken usually for prerequisites or for a little hardiness when you're a first level character.  Skill Focus has popped up as +3 in numerous places, even in products by WotC, so I think there's definite cause for reason there.

Any other feats?  I haven't gone over them all with a fine-tooth comb, and I'm generally interested which ones you're upset about, since you didn't mention.


----------



## Pielorinho (Jul 11, 2002)

I know bugs are part of the industry, but NWN is the buggiest game I've played since System Shock 2.

Basically, when a bug prevents me from advancing in a game, forcing me to start over (or even replay 10 hours' worth of the game), my interest in the game cools way down.

In System Shock 2, a boss creature near the end of the game was, due to a bug, invulnerable for me.  And in NWN, an important NPC has disappeared.

Compare this to Warcraft3, which crashes my computer about once every three hours of gameplay.  Sure, the crash is annoying, but if I save regularly, I won't lose more than about 10 minutes' worth of play.  And it doesn't ever prevent me from continuing in the game.

Major bugs are not standard for the industry, in my experience.  PS:T, BG, and BG2 had some system-crashing or fatal-error bugs, but nothing this bad.

On the other hand, I like several of the changes they made to the game.  I'm even considering using the rules for the domains of good and evil, in order to entice folks in my campaign to take these domains.

Daniel


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Jul 11, 2002)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> *I know bugs are part of the industry, but NWN is the buggiest game I've played since System Shock 2.*





Well, if you are worried about bugs- then you should always try to wait a couple months after a release date. Most of the troublesome ones will be patched by then. I don't like the idea, but it does not look like the nature of the computer games is going to change.



> Compare this to Warcraft3, which crashes my computer about once every three hours of gameplay. Sure, the crash is annoying, but if I save regularly, I won't lose more than about 10 minutes' worth of play. And it doesn't ever prevent me from continuing in the game.




To be fair, WC3 is not as complicated as NWN. Though- they seem to be able to get pathing to work correctly. haha.

FD


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 11, 2002)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> *Compare this to Warcraft3, which crashes my computer about once every three hours of gameplay.  Sure, the crash is annoying, but if I save regularly, I won't lose more than about 10 minutes' worth of play.  And it doesn't ever prevent me from continuing in the game.
> 
> Major bugs are not standard for the industry, in my experience.  PS:T, BG, and BG2 had some system-crashing or fatal-error bugs, but nothing this bad.*




Actually, WarCraft III has other MAJOR problems, which prevent MANY people from even STARTING the game.  There are a great many people (myself included) who have had complete system crashes that Blizzard is unable to replicate.  I finally fixed it, but I had to track the error down myself, because Blizzard tech support was useless.  At least Bioware was more responsive from what I saw.  And they're bringing out patches quickly.  As far as I can tell, Blizzard is waiting for people to fix it themselves.

If anyone's curious in regards to the WarCraft bug... apparently several standard Via on-motherboard sound chips are either unsupported or supported improperly, causing crashes shortly after game start.  I had to swap in a junky old Yamaha card b/c I can't afford to run out and but a good sound card right now.  On-board sound cards aren't exactly a non-standard configuration, so I find it bizarre that Blizzard hadn't managed to replicate this.  It's not like Via's chipsets aren't UBIQUITOUS.

As for the people who are complaining about the modularity and graphic repetition...  What were you expecting?  I really want to know.  If non-programmers are ever going to have a prayer of making their own mods, it NEEDS to be tile-based.  Besides, if the focus is role-playing, why all this griping about the visuals?  If it's all about the visuals, why play PnP games?


----------



## Draconis Imperium (Jul 11, 2002)

Canis said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Besides, if the focus is role-playing, why all this griping about the visuals?  If it's all about the visuals, why play PnP games? *






Amen!


----------



## Xar666 (Jul 11, 2002)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> *I know bugs are part of the industry, but NWN is the buggiest game I've played since System Shock 2.
> 
> Basically, when a bug prevents me from advancing in a game, forcing me to start over (or even replay 10 hours' worth of the game), my interest in the game cools way down.
> 
> ...




I think you may need to have your PC/PCs checked out.  I and many others I know have ran all those games and we never experienced a quarter of the bugs you mentioned.  PC games have to run on thousands of different configurations.  Sometimes they don't run on certain setups.

If you have that many problems with that many games, your PC is probably the culprit.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Jul 11, 2002)

The only problem I have with NWN (and it's a problem I have with just about all software nowadays) is that it assumes you have 'net access. How does it do this? By requiring you to download patches to get past bugs. Other games do the same thing. I had one game (can't remember what it was) that required you to log on so you could play the game.

Internet access should not be required to play a game you just spent $50+ on. In my opinion. That is. Heh.


----------



## Pielorinho (Jul 11, 2002)

Xar666 said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I think you may need to have your PC/PCs checked out.  I and many others I know have ran all those games and we never experienced a quarter of the bugs you mentioned.  PC games have to run on thousands of different configurations.  Sometimes they don't run on certain setups.
> 
> If you have that many problems with that many games, your PC is probably the culprit. *




Xar, these were definitely not my machine's issues.  I'll be a little more specific:

-In System Shock 2, there's a boss monster surrounded by three floaty things.  You have to shoot and kill the floaters before the boss becomes killable.  However, because of clipping bugs (I think) in the game, one of the floaters could become trapped behind a wall; since walls weren't killable, that floater became invulnerable.  If this was going to happen in your game, it would happen as soon as you entered the boss monster's level; there was about an hour's worth of gameplay on the level before you'd find out whether it had happened.  I played through the entire level twice, and it happened both times.  The company patched the game to fix this error, but it didn't fix it in savegames where it had already occured; I gave up in disgust.

-In Chapter 1 of NWN, there was a bug such that bard characters who switched out spells on leveling up were considered invalid characters and couldn't proceed to the chapter 1 finale.  There was a workaround to this, and they did patch it a week after I encountered the bug, but I had a couple of days in which I couldn't proceed in the game.

-In Chapter 2 of NWN, the barracks are completely deserted.  The barracks is well-rendered; it's just that the software somehow dropped that NPC, due to some play trick I did.  I've not found anyone else with this specific problem (that Aribeth is AWOL), but plenty of people have said that the game has dropped vital NPCs for them.  It's extremely unlikely that this is due to a conflict with, say, Windows 2000:  much likelier is that it's due to some action I took in the game.  Maybe I walked out of the barracks while a conversation window with Aribeth was open, or maybe I used my teleport stone while in the barracks, or something like that.  Some unusual action caused a blip in the game.

And NWN may be more complicated than Warcraft III, but I'm not sure that it's significantly more complicated than BGII or PS:T.  And I didn't encounter anything like this kind of bugginess in either of those games.

Yeah, I probably shoulda waited six months before buying the games.  I'm too much of a fanboy for my own good sometimes.

Daniel


----------



## Jeremy Ackerman-Yost (Jul 11, 2002)

Pielorinho said:
			
		

> *And NWN may be more complicated than Warcraft III, but I'm not sure that it's significantly more complicated than BGII or PS:T.  And I didn't encounter anything like this kind of bugginess in either of those games.*




Actually, it's a 3D engine that is modular for building and scripting by non-programmers.  It's almost definitively more complicated than the Infinity Engine.

I agree with you that the bugs are irritating, but look at WarCraft III.  The play hours of beta for that were astronomically high compared to NWN, and they still hadn't accounted for some very basic issues (see my earlier post).  Bugs come with the territory, unfortunately.  And I'd rather have the game in my hands than have to continue to listen to the smugness of the elitist, lucky-punk beta testers.

Oh, how I loathe them....


----------



## David Newton (Jul 11, 2002)

Complaining that Neverwinter Nights expects internet access is just plain silly. Probably the main feature of the game is its multiplayer aspect, and unless there is a LAN handy (something that I have, but not a lot of people have), playing multiplayer NWN requires the internet.

So far as other gaming software expecting internet access is concerned, in most western countries this is also not silly. It has reached the point where the internet has achieved mass market penetration, with substantial proportions of the population having internet access (indeed large majorities of some parts of that population). Since gamers have to own a computer in the first place, and almost everybody who gets on the net does it through a PC, expecting a gamer to have internet access is even more reasonable. Expecting someone to have a broadband connection would be silly, since only a tiny minority of people have them, but dialup connections to the internet are now very common.

The limit for dialup downloads is somewhere around 3 or 4 megabytes, any more than that and the phone line is simply tied up for too long, and the phone bill is too big, if the call has to be payed for. Therefore, putting out 20Mb patches for a game is ridiculous, but from what I have seen the patches for NWN so far have been smaller than the limit for dialup downloads I defined above.

It is a sad fact of life that software is so complicated these days that bugs occur. It is also annoying that final QA is often done on Joe Public, but it is the way things are. Unless sustained pressure is brought to bear on many companies by lots of people, that fact of life will not change.


----------



## Darklone (Jul 12, 2002)

LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> *Which feats, specifically?  *




Point Blank Shot e.g. 

If they put several feats together in one, you could as well join Ambidexterity and Twoweaponfighting...

And I miss Whirlwind!

Probably one of the things I hated most was that multiclassing is only possible with a mere 3 classes


----------



## Bagpuss (Jul 12, 2002)

Yeah but I can see why they have put together the ranged feats togther due to the limited 45 degree angle of the camera you can't see much beyond 30ft ahead. Therefore you only get about one shot off before you end up in melee combat. Therefore the value of ranged feats is much reduced.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Jul 12, 2002)

David Newton said:
			
		

> *Complaining that Neverwinter Nights expects internet access is just plain silly. *




Thanks!  



> *Probably the main feature of the game is its multiplayer aspect, and unless there is a LAN handy (something that I have, but not a lot of people have), playing multiplayer NWN requires the internet.*




Multiplayer doesn't enter into it. Some people... er... possibly, a lot of people, cannot proceed on the Single Player unless they can download a patch from the internet to fix it. Come to think of it, the system requirements on the side of the box don't say anything about needing a modem to play single player. Which *I* was very interested in playing. (Currently I have issues that need to be patched for me to proceed any further in the Single Player.)



> *So far as other gaming software expecting internet access is concerned, in most western countries this is also not silly. *




I realize that most people (supposedly) have internet connections of some sort. I also know, personally, quite a few people who don't have _any_ internet connection or don't have a clue how to do anything other than surf the web and send emails. I guess they are just SOL when it comes to buying software.

On top of which, some countries charge for local phone calls and thus the consumer is not only paying for the product but the patch they have to download via the internet. Heck, it takes the updater in NWN around 4-5 minutes just for it to realize that the patch file is not at ftp.infogames.com, but kept over at bioware. Dang thing acts like it's crashed. Only by going "Hmmpph, I'll let it sit and see what happens." did I finally realize that the thing just takes a very long time to figure out where the file is that needs to be downloaded so it can update my game.

I don't think it's right. I think it stinks. But I know the reality of the situation makes it necessary. That doesn't mean I have to like it.


----------



## Furn_Darkside (Jul 12, 2002)

Doc_Klueless said:
			
		

> *
> I don't think it's right. I think it stinks. But I know the reality of the situation makes it necessary. That doesn't mean I have to like it. *




I agree and I don't like it either, but until the consumer base puts a demand on better versions of releases by not buying buggy products.. well.. I don't see it changing.

You may want to consider sticking with console games for a while- due to their nature they have to put out a product as bug-free as possible. With the X-box, it seems they are getting a lot of pc games ported to them, Morrowind coming to mind.

FD


----------



## Henry (Jul 12, 2002)

Doc Klueless:

I'm fascinated by this, because where I live, EVERYONE I know who has a computer at all, has internet access - and roughly 25% of those have broadband access. If you don't have internet access, it's usually because you are running an older PC - one that would have NO chance of running neverwinter Nights.

Approximately two to three years ago, the internet reached a saturation point such that it was assumed that anyone buying current programs for a PC were going to have i-net access. If you don't, the market can no longer support you. Sad, but true.

And not to mean this in an insulting way, but even with the circumstances you described, I found it humerously ironic that this criticism was made on an internet message board.


----------



## Xar666 (Jul 12, 2002)

> *
> I found it humerously ironic that this criticism was made on an internet message board.  *




You rule.


----------



## Draconis Imperium (Jul 12, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *Doc Klueless:
> 
> And not to mean this in an insulting way, but even with the circumstances you described, I found it humerously ironic that this criticism was made on an internet message board.  *




Good Catch,

It didn't even occur to me!


----------



## Lily Inverse (Jul 13, 2002)

Truthfully, I have other problems with this game's internet requirement.  That bloody patcher seems to be nothing but trouble for modem users.  For one thing, it detects all current patches as one, single patch and downloads them all (All the ones you don't have yet).  If you didn't have the game from the get-go, that's a 45 meg download that has to be done in ONE shot.  Moreover, modem connections not being the MOST reliable, there's no guarantee of getting a good patch even if you DO manage to get the right number of bytes downloaded.

The fact that they do a real good job of obfuscating the place to download incremental patches for you to install yourself doesn't help.  Sure, if you're determined to find them you can, but most people I know don't have that kind of paitence with computers.


----------



## Raesene Andu (Jul 13, 2002)

Lily Inverse said:
			
		

> *Truthfully, I have other problems with this game's internet requirement.  That bloody patcher seems to be nothing but trouble for modem users.  For one thing, it detects all current patches as one, single patch and downloads them all (All the ones you don't have yet).  If you didn't have the game from the get-go, that's a 45 meg download that has to be done in ONE shot.  Moreover, modem connections not being the MOST reliable, there's no guarantee of getting a good patch even if you DO manage to get the right number of bytes downloaded.
> *




I'm pretty sure this isn't correct. It might be if you don't have any patches applied (although I think the download is only about 4.5 meg, not 45) but certainly when I just updated with the latest patch (1.2) it only downloaded that patch and no others. 

As to my thoughts on the game. I'd agree that the single player game is somewhat flawed, but I have yet to see a rpg with a resonable plot or script, or one that didn't try to railroad you into following a certain path (Dungeon Siege was a terrible game for plot, utterly mindless hack and slash if that sort of thing appeals to you and you were limited to a single path through the game (well the single player anyway, multiplayer was better, but again with a really stupid plot). BGII has propably the best story in a RPG game I've played, I really did enjoy that, I can't say the same about the NWN story.

However, NWN has a lot of potential, both as a multi-player game (which I don't really care for much), and the toolset which can be used to create you own modules (something I am quite enjoying at the moment). It is fairly easy to use, and even the scripting isn't hard to pick up (although I did have my brother give me a hand there  For someone who enjoys creating worlds, designing adventures, etc NWN is well worth the price (even at the $100 I had to pay here in Australia). The tileset is a little limited at the moment, but already there are some custom tilesets appearing on the net and I image there will be an expansion pack somewhere in the future with more tilesets, monsters, etc. Even the current limitations can be worked around, and with a few added visual effects and encounters you can create a really neat looking map.


----------



## Doc_Klueless (Jul 13, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *Doc Klueless:
> 
> And not to mean this in an insulting way, but even with the circumstances you described, I found it humerously ironic that this criticism was made on an internet message board.  *




Oh, you don't have to worry. I'm not insulted easily.  

I have not real problem downloading patches from the internet. I just don't like doing it. My main concern is for those who don't have an internet connection, have a slow internet connection (<56K which is quite possible. Phonelines someplaces are horrendous. Before I got cable modem at my old place, the best I could do dial-up was 24.4), have to pay a per-minute charge to make phonecalls (even if local), or don't have a clue how to do more than surf or use email (my mother is a good example of this.)  While the patches to NWN aren't very big, other games can have HUGE patches. That's just icky.

Back before I moved from SA, TX, I'd say about 10% of my friends/what-have-you didn't have internet access. Of that 90% that did, I'd say 50% of them are still clueless about the internet and what it can do for you.


----------



## Lily Inverse (Jul 13, 2002)

> I'm pretty sure this isn't correct. It might be if you don't have any patches applied



  It IS true when you don't have any patches applied.  I was referring mainly to modem users who waited a few weeks to get the game.  This situation will only get worse as time goes on, too.



> (although I think the download is only about 4.5 meg, not 45)



  Nope.  It said, and I wish I'd saved the actual transcript, "45.042 MB to download"




> but certainly when I just updated with the latest patch (1.2) it only downloaded that patch and no others.



  Well, yes.  But even if you're right on the size now, it's only going to get nastier and nastier.  In a few months I don't think the game will be even remotely patchable by modem users using YOUR figures.

Like I said, putting the patches in an easily accessible location on the web site would satisfy me on this point.  I downloaded the monster file above four times via the patcher, and each time it was corrupt.  I went to get it in the two pieces and applied the patch, and it went smoothly.  After this, *I* will not have any further troubles.  It's the late adopters who worry me.

Infogrames is ticking me off about a lot of points like this, actually.  I know I've got an issue not covered by their "automated support" but for some reason I need to waste twenty minutes in long-distance phone calls (not cheap) to get to talk to a real, live person when I know the issue is going to take quite a long time to solve just by talking with them.  This is just bad Customer Service.


----------



## Luke (Jul 15, 2002)

Tsyr said:
			
		

> *Genuine First Person was an issue some people complained about with Dungeon Siege, but the same thing applies. You don't really want it, as the game is made right now. I'm sure Bioware could crank out a hack in 10 minutes to give you genuine FPP, but remember... there is no sky... there is not top to trees in the forest... there is no roof to caves...
> *



Of course I really want it!! I want sky and treetops and forest! I *loved* flying and taking pot shots at land bound creatures whilst playing the later "Might and Magic" games (once I'd acquired the power of flying). The 3D engine had very little realism by today''s standards, but the flexibility for gameplay was awesome!

A very good point about sky, though, which makes me think that there will *never* be a FPP.

The fact that you are always "looking down at your feet" is actually a very clever approach to providing a consistent and easy approach to smooth 3D animation. This *hugely* reduces the amount of total possible floor coverage viewed, and hence guarantees you a minimal (at least manageable) polygon count for realistic 3D animation.

I've played with a tool called City OverSeer 3D, which lets you wander through a 3D world automatically generated from Campiagn Cartographer 2 files.
When I stand outside a city containing hundreds of buildings, and spin around on the spot, I get a very inconsistent animation rate. Basically, as I turn away from the city, I spin quite fast. As I spin the city into view, animation drops down to a couple of frames a second. This is because I can see an effectively huge floor space, and even a GeForce graphics card has trouble with the thousands and thousands of polygons that have to be processed. As I look at the city, I see the tops of hundreds of buildings, which can never happen in NWN.

Thinking back to what I know of 3D engine optimizations made of games like Doom, DoomII, and all those engines (massive amounts of pre-rendered calculations, requiring a *lot* of time to pre-process back at the factory, before the level is saved and ready to play), I should have expected this.

*Bioware's approach was, unfortunately, definitely the best decision.* Trying to get smart, and precalculate polygon optimization to support fully free camera movement (as with FPP), would make modules very slow to load (calculated as needed), or make them too large to distribute over the internet effectively for multi-player games (if compiled by the toolset).

Decisions not to support things like climbing and flying become more transparent. You really need to have everyone on the same level. There's a vague illusion of higher and lower ground when wandering around outside, but it's not really that real. I'd be pretty disappointed about being attacked from high above whilst I'm busy looking at my feet !! 

There are definitely ways to design module areas to minimise polygon count problems without massive pre-rendering calculations, but they would have made the toolset harder to work with and impose restrictions on layout.

It's the old argument of trade-offs. Bioware could have gone for true "6 degrees of freedom" flexibility, but they would have got caned by the gaming public for either the jerky animation, or for sacrificing graphics realism (love the way that tall grass waves in the wind!!!).


----------



## Darklone (Jul 17, 2002)

I have some questions which may be easy to answer... or impossible to realize:

How can I remove that silly take 20 thing for traps?

How can I customize races?

How can I build new feats or change existing ones?


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 17, 2002)

Darklone said:
			
		

> *I have some questions which may be easy to answer... or impossible to realize:
> 
> How can I remove that silly take 20 thing for traps?
> 
> ...




Take 20 you might be able to override via scripting, putting something in the OnUnlock event.  I haven't tried it, so I don't know.

Custom races and feats aren't possible yet, unfortunately.  Basically, the process involves opening up some of the data files with a tool called a "bif extracter", and editting the appropriate files.  You'd also have to edit the dialog.tlk file, which is messy.

All of this is moot however, because there's no way to get the options to show up.  Also, everyone is holding off on releasing tools because nobody knows when BioWare will, and what they will release.

Modifying an existing feat may be possible though, it depends on what you want to do with it.


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2002)

Learn how to read, that wasnt my comments but a review i agreed with. I also mentioned a patch had been put out.




			
				LightPhoenix said:
			
		

> *First off, I'll agree that the single-player campaign isn't that great - I quickly became bored with it some way through Chapter 2.
> 
> Bugs happen, and they get corrected as soon as possible.  Some are major (the toolset corrupting saved mods, the chapter 2 bug), some are not so major.  I don't think they did as good a job on testing as they should have though.
> 
> ...


----------



## dagger (Jul 22, 2002)

Does it have voice support yet? I might be willing to go ahead and pick this up if it does since i got friends playing it.

I use my headphone/mic combo a lot already on a lot of other games but I'm not a big fan of Roger Wilco and the other one. 

The Half Life is a good example of an excellent voice system.


----------



## Nyarlathotep (Jul 26, 2002)

*Voice Software*

Those of you who don't like Roger Wilco, might want to check out Teamsound. I used to use it when I was playing Tribes and it was an awesome program (for me at least). You can find it over at www.teamsound.com


----------

