I also generally enjoyed playing through the OC in NWN when I first played it probably because I bought into Bioware’s hype that it would be just as good as BG2 (hah!). It wasn’t quite as bad as it’s being portrayed here, although I couldn’t get through it a second time. I still shudder at having to open barrels and crates when playing that game. Talk about overkill.
I actually liked SoU more than I did HotU mostly because of the desert theme that I thought was done really well. Granted, the end boss gave me absolute hell with my bard.
And I think a distinction needs to be made in regards to Icewind Dale’s story. Icewind Dale’s story reminded me of a typical D&D adventure and that together with the amazing theme/setting is what made it stand apart for me. The story wasn’t bad (I quite liked it); there just wasn’t much of it.
It really isn’t as bad as it’s being made on this board. It wasn’t good per se, but it wasn’t the travesty of gaming that you’d think it was by reading some of the comments here.
The biggest sin of the OC was that it was too long, bland, and the Aurora Engine tilesets just didn’t have enough variety or oomph to support the story they were trying to tell. There were a couple of setpiece encounters that were pretty good and the Aribeth story was decent, but overall the best thing that can be said of the OC was that it was a good resource in the editor to teach yourself how to put together areas and dialogue trees.
I played the OC a couple of times and I enjoyed it for what it was. Again, not a great story, but certainly no worse than many other videogames. The expansions were much better, but that’s a pretty low bar to pass.
Pogo
3304
To be fair, opening barrels and crates to search for items has always sucked, and will always suck, in any game ever made. It’s not immersive, and if a game actually throws something important into a barrel, that means you’re searching every fucking barrel in the game just to find something else important.
Reward me for being a smart player or something, don’t reward me for crawling around like an OCD asshole.
copet
3305
Anyone else have a bug in NWN where when you choose your character’s skin/hair color, no matter what it bugs out and turns into some silver surfer-esque color? :(
I suppose I’m the only person left in the world who actually liked 2nd Ed rules. :(
Nah, I like 'em. They aren’t streamlined for easy play, but they’re deep. It’s not the best system in the world, but if you know what you’re getting into backwards and forwards then you can get a heck of a lot out of the experience.
2nd edition isn’t terrible, but 3rd is much better in a lot of important ways and certainly more approachable for people who weren’t steeped in D&D from a young age. (Or were, but are a lot younger than me.)
And really, the NWN1 OC is that bad.
Thraeg
3309
I liked them plenty at the time, enough to enjoy playing with them for a solid decade or so, but 3E just made too many improvements for me to want to go back.
2nd < 3.0 < 3.5 < Pathfinder.
I haven’t played 4 yet, but I own the books and reading through them doesn’t fill me with goobery happiness.
Also, even if NWN1’s OC weren’t as awful as I make it out to be (which it is), it is not necessary to play it to get to the good stuff - i.e., the expansions and modules, and it will occupy tens of hours in which one could be playing the good stuff instead.
I’m one of the few that played the OC of NWN 7 times (I played each expansion multiple times, too). I didn’t find the NWN OC to be bad; I think the reason is that I was more focused on developing my characters (they were all different classes) and how the gameplay changed with each than I was on story and dialogue. I love a good story but there’s something to be said about giving a player enough development options to freshen the game for different characters.
It’s clear, though, that the NWN OC was the worst of BioWare’s stories from the BG era onwards.
Well, I got into pen & paper D&D while the 2nd Edition rules were the latest, and the ones everyone used. And while 2nd edition was fine for pen & paper D&D, that was because when you’re sitting there and having adventures around the DM, it doesn’t matter that you have nothing to look forward to when you level up. The adventure is the thing that matters. So what if you level up and the only thing you gain sometimes is some hit points? Leveling up and gaining new abilities and being able to do more things didn’t seem to be a priority when designing 2nd edition rules. And that makes sense in a pen & paper setting.
But when that is translated to electronic games, then that sort of thing starts to matter a lot. Especially when you compare to other CRPGs that do it so much better. Like Fallout: I would just get so lost in that manual when I first got it, planning out all the perks I would get, and thinking about the advantages and disadvantages of various traits that I could pick. Leveling up was something to look forward to every time, and it was always interesting. In D&D 2nd edition games, I couldn’t care less about leveling up unless I was a wizard or sorcerer. It just didn’t involve making any interesting decisions usually, and there wasn’t much to look forward to in most levels, especially at lower levels.
3rd Edition changed that a little. I actually looked forward to leveling up so that I could pick new things and add points to existing skills I had. Plus it also improved the Pen & Paper experience too, just because it was a lot easier to explain the rules to new people who joined.
So now I’m curious: Why did you like 2nd Edition better? Although that’s not what you said. Maybe you just meant you like 2nd Edition, even though you like 3rd edition and later better? If so, I can sign onto that.
Agreed. The OC is ridiculously dull but the game is worth it for the expansions.
Wish GoG had gone with something else though. NWN seems anti-climactic after putting up “cream of the crop” titles like Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape: Torment. :)
I’d actually love to see older games up, specifically the Wizardry series.
Still, NWN is an excellent deal!
You got that right: we all expected another BG2.
But about IWD: that game had GAMEPLAY to save it. Or rather, it’s focal point WAS the combat gameplay which did not disappoint. The NWN OC had a terrible story, terrible writing, and on top of that, dull gameplay.
Icewind Dale hooked you with it’s challenging battles.
Aside from that it had one of the greatest musical scores ever produced and beautiful graphics with very memorable locales. NWN’s graphics looked dated at release, like the rest of the game: dull, lackluster, barely competent. While Baldur’s Gate 2 and IWD 1 and 2 still impress on an artistic level. And the story did not drag the game down one bit, it was decent enough.
Tony_M
3317
Amen.
And it also spoils the whole “treasure hoard” thing. I’d rather find one room with 5 chests full of loot than have the same loot distributed in barrels in the corner of every rat infested basement.
Tony.
Pogo
3318
Yeah that’s a good point, too. It does really dull down the excitement of finding big scores of stuff when you’re finding little things all the time.
maxle
3319
Man. This thread made me reinstall IWD/HoW, except apparently I can’t save my game for some reason. Ugh.
Farscry
3320
I’ve been waiting and waiting in hopes that the Wizardry collection ends up on GoG. I’d even be happy just with Wizardy 6, 7, and 8. :D
Anyone know if that’s looking possible anytime soon?
Oohh, Wizardry 8, yes please. One of my favorite RPG’s ever.
