On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 19:22:28 -0400, Metal Guru <MetalGuru@IsItYou.com>
wrote:
https://gaming.amazon.com/home
Shhh! You're gonna steal rms's thunder when he gives away his spare
key.
;-)
(mine too, for that matter. What do you have against thunder anyway?;)
https://gaming.amazon.com/home
On 6/28/2023 6:26 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 19:22:28 -0400, Metal Guru <MetalGuru@IsItYou.com> wrote:
https://gaming.amazon.com/home
Shhh! You're gonna steal rms's thunder when he gives away his spare
key.
;-)
(mine too, for that matter. What do you have against thunder anyway?;)
It scares my stuffed animals.
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 6/28/2023 6:26 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jun 2023 19:22:28 -0400, Metal Guru <MetalGuru@IsItYou.com>It scares my stuffed animals.
wrote:
https://gaming.amazon.com/home
Shhh! You're gonna steal rms's thunder when he gives away his spare
key.
;-)
(mine too, for that matter. What do you have against thunder anyway?;)
And you? ;)
https://gaming.amazon.com/home
Ooh nice! I kept meaning to try BG II as it's supposedly better than
BG. While I didn't like BG combat, I loved the NPC party members
banter. Who can forget "Go for the eyes BOO!"
On 29/06/2023 00:12, Justisaur wrote:
Ooh nice! I kept meaning to try BG II as it's supposedly better than
BG. While I didn't like BG combat, I loved the NPC party members
banter. Who can forget "Go for the eyes BOO!"
I much preferred BG:I, in part because of the novelty and in part
because you started at a level one whereas in BG:II you started at, I
think, level seven or eight. That's when I think the cracks start
showing in D&D with just how powerful characters can be.
I much preferred BG:I, in part because of the novelty and in part
because you started at a level one whereas in BG:II you started at, I
think, level seven or eight. That's when I think the cracks start
showing in D&D with just how powerful characters can be.
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 10:13:42 +0100, JAB <no...@nochance.com> wrote:
On 29/06/2023 00:12, Justisaur wrote:
Ooh nice! I kept meaning to try BG II as it's supposedly better than
BG. While I didn't like BG combat, I loved the NPC party members
banter. Who can forget "Go for the eyes BOO!"
I much preferred BG:I, in part because of the novelty and in partI can agree with that one. D&D combat - and that's largely what CRPG
because you started at a level one whereas in BG:II you started at, I >think, level seven or eight. That's when I think the cracks start
showing in D&D with just how powerful characters can be.
focus on - is designed for tactical combat, but past a certain point
the spells (and characters in general) just start to become so
over-the-top powerful that it loses its lustre. All a DM can do is
throw more monsters at the party (or amp up the monsters hitpoints unrealistically) in order to keep some semblance of balance. The
original conceit was that - once your PCs got to a certain amount of experience - reaching the 'name levels' - the game would switch over
to a more strategic bent, with the PCs gaining castles and armies of followers they could then send out to battle for them.
And I agree "Baldurs Gate II" suffers from this, although I'm not sure
it's entirely the fault of the D&D system as much as the setting. Even
for a story where the protagonist turned out to be a demigod, the
original game felt a lot more grounded because there was a lot less
sorcery involved. But BG2 took that and just increased everything to ridiculous amounts, with magical prisons and magical hidden elf cities
and +5 swords for everyone. But that's arguably less because "D&D" and
more because the Forgotten Realms is so stupidly, unrealistically over-magicked in the first place.
"Baldur’s Gate 3 has more cinematic dialogue than three times all three Lord
of the Rings novels combined. It has 174 hours of cinematics, making it more than twice the length of every season of Game of Thrones combined."
https://nitter.net/Wario64/status/1674439790668943361?s=20
rms
On Friday, June 30, 2023 at 5:52:09?AM UTC-7, rms wrote:
"Baldur’s Gate 3 has more cinematic dialogue than three times all three Lord >> of the Rings novels combined. It has 174 hours of cinematics, making it more >> than twice the length of every season of Game of Thrones combined."
https://nitter.net/Wario64/status/1674439790668943361?s=20
Holy cut-scenes Batman!
I was interested in 3 before, but now I'm rethinking that.
I'd rather pay for some editorial discretion: a more concise, better
paced, streamlined experience. I may not get 100 hours of gameplay out
of it, but the ten or twenty hours I do play will probably be more
fun.
On Fri, 30 Jun 2023 18:24:27 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson ><spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
I'd rather pay for some editorial discretion: a more concise, better
paced, streamlined experience. I may not get 100 hours of gameplay out
of it, but the ten or twenty hours I do play will probably be more
fun.
If a game I play only lasts for 10 hours I am going to feel like I
wasted my time. The reason being, I must first check reviews. Then pay
for it. Download it and install it. Then I have to get over the
learning curve before I can even really start playing and enjoying the
damn thing. Then its over 10 hours later? That is likely just two or
three play sessions for me! No thanks.
The sweet spot is maybe 40-80 hours for me. But the game can have
more, even much more of my time, if I am really enjoying it. I don't
need to play every game under the sun.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 297 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 113:26:23 |
Calls: | 6,662 |
Files: | 12,209 |
Messages: | 5,336,106 |