Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
This topic has been locked 
, and correct me if I'm wrong, but do they have ANY experience with developing RPGs??? They usually make strategy and management games...
LOL, guess I'm late to the party, lucky me. The point still stands though, paradox is a terrible company and they will no doubt find ways to mess this up. Seems like they already have. 
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
stop ranting and go play it and have fun
And even though Paradox really didn't have anything to do with the original, their games are typically quite good. Love me some Crusader Kings or Stellaris for example.
I do think that the OP has a point about business practices and maybe they could prioritize fixing their games post launch a bit more than they do...milking them with paid DLC. They put out a LOT of Stellaris DLC before fixing some of the end game performance issues. Embarrassing really.
yeah the first one has been on my list for a long time, supposed to be great if buggy without fan patches, I'll get around to it sooner or later.
Bloodlines patched with the extras is masterpiece of game. The sequel does in no way ruin the original game, it will always be there. So just play Bloodlines 1, it will not make you mad about Bloodlines 2 if you're intelligent.
All you're doing right now is missing out.
Also Vampire the Masquerade: Redemption is really cool too.
Still, Bloodlines 2 looks great. Only disappointed about first-person only but that could have (hopefully) changed.
For us nostalgic players, its a good nostalgic memory for sure, but I reckon that most new age gamers, would hate it and complain about it... I even think they might consider it too complex, even when it "for its time" was a very simplistic ARPG... like.. it was over simple.. but it had fun enough gameplay and a good story..
If you want my opinion.. (and I love the game) it should not even be called a RPG, because it does not rely on or use many RPG elements, it has more in common with modern Action Adventures, than Action RPG´s and cRPG´s.
If they wanted to do the tabletop any justice, they would have made a proper cRPG within the lore.
I also think RPG is a scale, and not a yes/no thingy. There are many ways to roleplay a certain character, and there are many interactions between your abilities and skills and what you're able to do.
The game sure could use more branching narratives, but considering the amount of branching available through skills and clans and disciplines it's understandable.
no game has infinite budget... and it's certainly more of an RPG than any bethesda game by far.
I'm playing an amazing VN right now (possibly the best I ever played: "the life and suffering of sir brante". It has a lot of truly amazing choices, which both punish and reward you, and a ton of branching narratives...
but it would 100% not be possible to do something like that with a game that requires models and animations and VA.
maybe in 20 years when AI can easily create video game sections
Anyone below 30 is a new age gamer in my mind
That being said, RPG is not a scale.. there are actual mechanics and features, that needs to be included for it to be an RPG.
An example.
There needs to be a statsbasing
That is why ie. TES games are RPG´s and why GTA is not. (to list an obvious comparison)
There are ofc some mechanics and features that overlap, when it comes to Adventure and RPG.. But now a days, people forget the tabletop heritage and instead thinks "RPG" is a matter of "playing a role" with that argument, just about any game is an RPG.. even E.T. on Atari...
Player agency, stories told, companions, etc. are actually a very important part of RPG´s, the same goes for items and inventory (albeit, this have breached out)
Control over character(s) is important, it is vital, that we can change and affect, not just with stats.. this does not mean you "need" to create the character yourself, albeit that is always a nice have, but in some cases, playing a premade set one, but being able to change its stats/personality/development over the games lenght, is vital.
We could go on and on and on... But lets just say, that the line between actual classical RPG elements and simplistic Action Adventure elements, are on a grey line today for many people.. (just look at any AA forum, like RDR2 and you will see people believing, they are playing a hardcore RPG, despite it not even have core RPG elements... it is not a RPG)
I love The life and suffering of sir brante, but it is not a RPG, it is a Visual Novel, one with player agency ofc.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2582166856
I would go as far, as to say, that tlasosb, does have many different genres, that it tries to pull inside its visual novel, but at heart, its an adventure visual novel, with player agency & strategy.
We are all biased.
But as I said, the mechanics involved for something to be an RPG (in a techical sense) is not really debatable, that is clearly defined, most people just don´t care about that and rather just put their own subjective opinion on it.. (I am playing Sonic, so I am role playing) ie....
But again. A matter of bias for sure. if we go deeper into the debate, we could just try to define, what types of mechanics and features, we would like (that eliminates, all the talk about genre)
I disagre.
Unless you want everything to be free form, but then everything is relative and we could argue that this game might be a racing game, because it has a car you can drive.
The point here is. There are some actual specific mechanics and features, you need to label it "ie RPG" and other genres, that has nothing to do with bias.. bias is, that I think my RPG´s should include all that the classical have (more akin to tabletop) but in reality, even a game like Cyberpunk 2077, is an RPG (atleast if we look at the mechanics and features) it is ofc more than just that (since it is a bard) but the point is.. it is not an action adventure, since it actually has the statsbasings etc, that RPG´s have.
But if you wanna go Decartes mode, then we could basically go far far off.....
This discussion is 100% reliant on how does one define RPG.
If one defines RPG as a game where you play a role, then COD is an RPG because you play a soldier.
If one defines an RPG by its mechanics, then if it has X, Y and Z mechanics then it's RPG, and if it's has X and Y then it's not.
No game, even tabletop, as unlimited freedom. not even real life. not even out imagination has ultimate freedom.
BUT
the more one is free to make choices, and the more freedom those choices take away from you, the more I would say a game is an RPG.
are you able to choose your species? yes - > more RPG. no -> less RPG
In SKYRIM you're able to choose your species but it changes nearly nothing. in WITCHER 3 you're not able to choose. (on other parameters W3 is more RPG than skyrim though)
does choosing your species limit what you can do? yes -> more RPG. no -> less RPG.
In dragon age origins and inquisition choosing your species changes a lot and some things. like you're only able to romance solas as a female elf, which make sense. these games are mor of an RPG than SKYRIM in which choosing your species changes nothing but some small bonuses
Thus speaks the word of Cthulhu. I won.