Broken
Toys
Random comments about
games and tractors
Today on “People Unclear On The Concept”…
…1UP (by way of “Games for Windows”, formerly “Computer Gaming World”, and I’m all out of parentheticals) posted a review of Neverwinter Nights 2. The reviewer disliked it – not because of weak dialogue or heavy system requirements or a clunky user interface. No. The reviewer disliked it because in his opinion, D&D is obsolete.
A revelatory, polarizing experience that — in the wake of newer, better alternatives — makes you question the very notion of “RPG by numbers.” It foists Wizards of the Coast’s latest v3.5 D&D system (a molehill that’s become a mountain at this point) onto your hard drive with stunning fidelity, then tacks on dozens of artificial-looking areas vaguely linked by forget-table plot points you check off like grocery to-do’s.
These may well be valid points, but I’m not sure that in this case the reviewer is the target audience for this game. And frankly, considering Obsidian’s reputation for quality dialogue and storytelling, I’d expect considerably more than a few snarky asides in the midst of how superior you feel you are to the D&D ruleset addressing what appears to be a weak effort by them in this regard. That’s what I would want to see in a relevant review, not cracks about “OMG, not hit points and armor class AGAIN!” in, um, a licensed D&D product.
Perhaps the next review can be a negative review of “Company of Heroes” because, really, haven’t we seen ENOUGH Germans in World War 2? Wait, I know, how about a review of Civilization 4, which complains about how you can’t zoom in like in Dynasty Warriors and fight the battles yourself. That would be AWESOME.
As seen in a Quarter to Three thread, where the reviewer responds and his editor lets us all know how handsome a devil he is.
Update: The review’s been pulled from 1Up’s web site. To quote GfW’s editor, Jeff Green:
It’s not the score that got this thing pulled. ( For all I know that score is still valid. ) It’s also not the opinion of angry fanbois that got it pulled.
It’s the issue of tone/fairness brought up in this thread. And that was the fault of the Ziff Davis editors—meaning, among other people, me. I stand by Peckham. You can throw your rocks at me.
| Print article |
about 3 years ago
If you aren’t a fan of the genre, you really shouldn’t review the game.
about 3 years ago
If you’re a review editor, you shouldn’t assign a review of a game using a licensed IP if you know the reviewer dislikes the IP. And if you don’t know, you’re shirking your editor job.
about 3 years ago
D&D license or not, i don’t understand why the numbers and math still have to be all up-front and in your face when we’ve got computers which can take care of all of that behind the scenes stuff, and let the players focus on immersing themselves in the World.
what’s the point of transferring the D&D World to computers if it’s just using the same system already available in the books of the pen&paper game?
it’s almost like filming a modern television show on old black & white cameras.
we’ve got color TVs now. you’re not limited by the technology anymore, so don’t hold back.
if players really preferred to stick to those in-your-face numbers and formulas, they could just get their friends together around a kitchen table on a Saturday night.
what about players who want to take advantage of what the computer can offer?
who want the same level of immersion pen&paper games provided, without any of the hassle of numbers and math?
about 3 years ago
Well, it’s not like anyone else makes games of a identical nature instead of inventing something new or anything.
I think you missed the point Scott was making, Kohs.
about 3 years ago
The point of keeping the system like it is is because if you don’t, then you’re using D&D’s settings, but not its mechanics. And some people want those mechanics.
about 3 years ago
what\’e2\’80\’99s the point of transferring the D&D World to computers if it\’e2\’80\’99s just using the same system already available in the books of the pen&paper game?
Because it is the license that they are trying to make a game based upon? Because it is the expectations they have based on the game they are trying to make a sequel of?
about 3 years ago
To paraphrase: Kohs, the game’s not for you.
about 3 years ago
Kohs said:
I think you answered your own question, Kohs. Black & white is still used in photos and film to create mood, or to evoke a style. Likewise, the mechanics of the D20 system are exposed to the player because it sets the D&D mood. Just like b&w doesn’t work for all films, exposing the mechanics wouldn’t work in all games. But for games based on D&D, I think it’s what the target audience have come to expect.
about 3 years ago
All of this talk about “well this is D&D and D&D is this way.” No great games ever come out of just making what is expected. I’m waiting for someone to take the principles behind D&D and translate them into a game that doesn’t feel like you’re more part of a spread sheet than a game.
Personally I don’t think D&D 3.5 makes for a good video game either. Sometimes I have a hard time thinking that 3.5 makes a good pen’n'paper game. If it wasn’t for the fact that my D&D pen’n'paper groups were all friends I doubt we would be playing still.
While there is plenty of other pen’n'paper out there it is hard to convince everyone buying new books that may last a single campaign… where as D&D 3.5 does have a derth of available content widely publishes.
about 3 years ago
you can still retain the mechanics without having them in plain sight.
was the point of D&D/AD&D/NWN to concentrate on numbers and formulaic mechanics?
or was it to immerse yourself in Roleplay in a fictional Fantasy World?
somehow i doubt the mood set by D&D had anything to do with numbers, math, or dicerolling.
from what i understand, the mood was set by the decisions made, and descriptions of those decisions, by the players and DM, and how those decisions played out against the game-World.
i would’ve figured the “target audience” would expect the designers of a CRPG version of D&D to use the C to it’s fullest potential so that the RP is enhanced in the G.
how many D&D fans played because they were excited about the numbers?
explain to me how they ever enhanced immersion or Roleplay?
the numbers, it seems, were a neccessary “evil”. their only function was to settle disputes on the outcome of events.
they can still do this, but the computer can handle all of that, leaving the players free to immerse themselves in the game-World.
so i’ll say again, if players want to handle the numbers and formulas themselves, they can play the already existing pen&paper version of D&D.
i realize that my position on this isn’t popular among D&D fans or old school pen&paper people. and it’s unlikely i’ll change anyone’s minds. but i stand by my claim that regardless of the license, “numbers and math, do not an RPG make”.
about 3 years ago
Looks like they pulled the review.
about 3 years ago
What do you mean by not having them “in plain sight”? If you mean not showing every single roll of the dice, that’s fine. If you mean not showing people their own stats and modifiers…no. I will not mince words, I fucking hate it when I’m kept in the dark about my own abilities. I hated it in EverQuest, I hate it in City of Heroes, and I’ll always hate having to do trial and error to figure out how things work.
about 3 years ago
was the point of D&D/AD&D/NWN to concentrate on numbers and formulaic mechanics?
or was it to immerse yourself in Roleplay in a fictional Fantasy World?
This depends almost entirely on which DM you have. (Personally, for me, it was always about numbers and mechanics. I like mechanics. This is why I design them)
Anyway, the point of NWN was to capture the Tabletop experience as much as they could. That’s the unique selling point of the franchise.
about 3 years ago
So, does this mean Ebert shouldn’t review movies based on video games? He’s not a fan of the genre, really.
about 3 years ago
i mean exactly what i said.
hide the numbers.
instead of hard numbers, you’re shown things through visual representation or worded descriptions.
you aren’t told that sword has a damage output of 50-120 (+5 vs Orcs).
instead, you’re told that the sword is well crafted and sharpened, and also coated with a substance poisonous to Orcs.
why do you “fucking hate it” when you’re kept in the dark about your character’s abilities?
why would a lack of numbers keep you in the dark?
what if everything which the numbers represent were still communicated to you, just not through numbers?
you wouldn’t be in the dark then.
when the math is out in the open, players can crunch numbers, min/max, and game the hell out of the system.
you’re saying you hate trial and error?
so you’d rather know everything right up front?
do you read the last page of novels first to see if you’ll like the story?
do you search for spoilers to movies your considering seeing?
where’s the fun in knowing how EVERYTHING works?
well of course. you’re a game designer.
there will always be more players than designers.
so i’d venture to guess that many more D&D sessions (speaking worldwide) focused on the Roleplaying rather than the mechanics.
i understand that the point of NWN was to capture the tabletop experience.
all i’m asking is why capture the EXACT same experience in a different format?
wasn’t it already working well on the tabletop?
why transfer it to the computer at all?
to offer a 3D environment skinned over it?
is that really worth the price of admission?
the computer offers something which the tabletop could not. i can’t understand why they would transfer the “experience” to the computer without enhancing it to the potential level the computer offers.
about 3 years ago
I hate not knowing the numbers because if I have to make a choice (and I often do), I’d like to know what those choices actually mean. It’s good to know that Weapon Specialization lets me hit harder, but how much harder? And Weapon Focus makes me more accurate, but how much more accurate? Is the extra damage worth the feat, or should I take Alertness which makes me better at Spot and Listen (but how much better, and why take it instead of Skill Focus: Spot and Skill Focus: Listen)? And so on, and so forth.
You can’t compare the mechanics to the story, because the fun in knowing how everything works is avoiding the frustration of getting your ass handed to you on a silver platter and never being able to figure out what you’re doing wrong because you’re confronted with “this makes you hit harder” or “this makes you more accurate” or “this makes it easier to dodge arrows fired from yellow frilled lizards standing to your left” and no idea how to weigh any of it against any other choices I could’ve made.
I don’t want to spend time dinking around with experimenting with swords to see which hits harder, I want to just get the numbers and get back to the interesting bits.
about 3 years ago
It’s still a valid criticism. That doesn’t mean that you need to agree with it. I don’t think it’s even neccessarily an editorial mistake. If anything, it’s a good choice because it challenges gaming conventions.
about 3 years ago
If you aren\’e2\’80\’99t a fan of the genre, you really shouldn\’e2\’80\’99t review the game.
This is one of my pet peeves about reviews in general. The only possible audience for such a review is people who want validation for hating the genre, and unless you’re unusually talented at being snarky, they’re probably bored about two paragraphs in.
Get someone who knows and likes the genre. Maybe then you’ll get some meaningful criticism.
about 3 years ago
Yeah, I have to go with “it isn’t FOR you,” Kohs.
It IS for me, and is for the most part exactly what I wanted from it.
The silly part about your complaint, to me, is that putting the numbers IN the game is what lets me focus on the story. I can quickly compare two swords, pick the one I want, and get back to paying attention to the story. I don’t have to go off into the woods and hack up wolves until I know which one is better. That’s not fun, to me.
about 3 years ago
Arguing about hiding or showing the numbers in a 3.5 Ed D&D game is like discussing the merits of showing nutritional information on McDonald’s food. It’s irrelevant, the people who like it don’t give a shit and it completely misses the point on why these games can be fun.
As someone who has played enough of the single player game to have two lvl 10+ chars. the D&D ruleset is the LEAST of this games issues.
about 3 years ago
Some folks dig stats.
Actually, let me rephrase that. The human mind CRAVES stats. Maybe not in full mathematical purity, but we’re hard-wired to categorize, compare, and contrast everything. And to do that, we often assign them some kind of value, either consciously or subconsciously.
And even if you hide those details, some folks will get obsessive about digging those details back out again, especially if it’s a competitive game. Just go onto the boards of any MMO and see the depths to which players will go to extract every bit of statistical data out of the game that they can.
So D&D is just more upfront about it. I believe that’s the hallmark of RPGs in general. I feel if you hide all of those, you’ve not got a better RPG – you’ve got Doom. A perfectly fine game, but not one I want to play when I have a hankering for some RPG action.
And isn’t the original Neverwinter Nights still significantly leading in sales over Oblivion? I’m sure the extended time in the market and lower system requirements are a big part of that, but I also think that this indicates that a whole bunch of people don’t mind the stats.
In the end, I think it was an okay rant (one I disagree with, but still decent editorial material). But it didn’t belong masquerading as a review.
about 3 years ago
I like numbers me.
Then again, I also like old black and white movies. I don’t think Bilko was improved by remaking him with modern actors and in colour, but Elephant Man really won out because it was shot in B&W. Then again, I know people who liked the new Bilko and thought Elephant Man sucked…
“It takes all sorts”
about 3 years ago
If you have to do the movie comparision regaring this issue, it more strikes me as giving a bad review due to finding the villain unsympathetic or something.
As for the hiding of numbers, you have to remember they are there to show relative strengths and weeknesses, something you in RL have trained for your entire life (I can probably lift that, but not that and so on). Computers might be able to simulate this in another way some day, but it would require some kind of new sensory input if you want it as intuitive as in RL. Just “hiding” them would put you at a dissadvantage against what you can normaly acomplish.
about 3 years ago
Kohs, well, the D&D games have allways been aimed at people who like the stats side.
The actual problem with NWN2 is the camera, the UI, the AI and the gameflow, all of which make it afaik unplayable.
But the mechanisms of the game itself do precisely what they say on the tin.
about 3 years ago
After playing a great deal of NWN2 over the last two days, I fail to see how NWN2 ‘shoves the numbers in your face’ – they’re about as hidden and in the background as a system based on D&D could be. The only time they’re really ‘in your face’ is when levelling up, and even then all you have to do is mash the ‘recommend’ button and you have a decent character. (I stopped worrying about customizing my characters a while ago, the ‘recommend’ stats are almost always good enough. The game really isn’t even hard enough that you have to micromanage your spellcasters either, which is the only other “d&d rules r hard” system.
As for hiding the d&d numbers beyond that – well, DDO did that unintentionally, and it was immensely frustrating for us and the fans, as they’d have to check the SRD, and still then guess whether we were working like the SRD. There’s just no way to summarize all the stats in D&D into a set of words like ‘better, slightly better, awesome, the best!’, and anyone who has actually tried to rank tiers by vaguely descriptive terms can tell you that it’s well nigh impossible for someone to reverse engineer the rankings without numbers to back it up. Is ‘superior’ better than ‘quality’ is better than ‘peerless’ is better than ‘well-crafted’? nobody knows! Just give everyone the numbers, and they’re all happier, the only ones who disagree are ones who haven’t actually tried to do it.
about 3 years ago
Ok, kinda derailing here, but Kohs, do you even *like* MMORPGs or CRPGs? Have you ever played and liked *any* of them? I see you making the same complaints on several different MMO blogs and it seems like you really just want to be playing a totally different game from a totally different genre or possibly designing your own game.
Maybe you and Abalieno should hook up. =P
about 3 years ago
He’s evangelising in the wrong place.
That’s all.
about 3 years ago
“No great games ever come out of just making what is expected.”
Actually, I think Blizzard has made a fortune doing exactly that.
about 3 years ago
hmm interesting. I have met people that still play D&D 1st ed., because it is the free-est and has the least rules. If you don’t know what you can do, just tell the GM “hey I want to do this” and he rolls a die and says “you fail” or “ok”.
Of course, i think those people are crazy
But I can see their point in wanting to push all the decisions 3.5 comes with onto a DM, even an electronic DM. Especially those that are more into the adventure and role playing, but don’t want to go LARPing with a bunch of emo vampires. 
about 3 years ago
Actually that review reminds me of the reviews of Final Fantasy: the Spirits Within. Most of them were just complaining about how stupid videogames were, just shoot everything in sight, etc. None of which had anything to do with the movie, which had nothing to do with the games, which have nothing to do with FPS.
about 3 years ago
Reminds me a bit of Desslock’s yearly panning of UO, way back when.