5 ms·

Definitely. And it has to do with the MMOfication of everything. I'm playing Baldur's Gate 2, and the things you can do as a player in that game are just absur

by FD3SA 12y ago

Definitely. And it has to do with the MMOfication of everything. I'm playing Baldur's Gate 2, and the things you can do as a player in that game are just absurd. You can stop time. You can be permanently invisible and kill bosses without ever being detected. You can summon extremely overpowered monsters. It's honestly so refreshing to have unique abilities. World of Warcraft ruined a generation of RPG design because devs believed that everything had to be "balanced", whatever that means. So we have a bunch of uninspired game mechanics in a pretty shell. I'm glad to see there's people still acknowledging that games do not have to be fair or sane or balanced. Their beauty is in their madness. And yes, a wizard who can cast Project Image, Spell Immunity: Abjuration, Spell Immunity: Divination, Improved Invisibility, Time Stop, Abi Dalzim's Horrid Wilting, Power Word: Stun and Power Word: Kill is not comparable to a Fighter with a big sword, and he shouldn't be. Attempts to make the two "balanced" just become absurd, as World of Warcraft has shown.

PSeitz 12y ago
Yes, I love how unbalanced Baldur's Gate 2 sometimes is. I think this makes it actually a great game.
Qworg 12y ago
A player shouldn't have to play your game just to learn in the end game that their fighter isnt going to cut it and they'll have to reroll as a wizard. That sucks (and is bad game design). Things shouldn't be perfectly balanced, but all play styles should be equally viable.
- apalmer 12y ago
  I mean but one has to expect this. In what sane world is a wizard and a fighter going to be equivalent? I think the main thing as pointed out is that in seeking balance a lot of 'fun' or 'interesting' elements have to be thrown out.
  - saucetenuto 12y ago
    It's fine if your world is designed this way, but in that case you shouldn't be allowed to play as a fighter. Do it like Magicka, say, and offer your players their choice of wizards.
    - freehunter 12y ago
      On the other hand, there are things warriors can do that mages cannot. For example, in many fantasy texts, wizards are social outcasts and warriors are anywhere between accepted (but maybe not highly regarded) members of society all the way through respected members of the court. A warrior and a wizard might not make sense going head to head in combat, but they occupy different places in the social structure.
      - Qworg 12y ago
        In a tabletop RPG, you can represent this easily. I'm sad more games don't play with this social/physical power dynamic.
- aeze 12y ago
  I wouldn't said it's inherently bad game design, different people have different preferences. Here's a good blog post discussing such decisions. http://nethack4.org/blog/strategy-headroom.html http://nethack4.org/blog/strategy-headroom.html
- FD3SA 12y ago
  Low level wizards are incredibly weak, and are basically free kills for anything, fighter or otherwise. It's only if they survive into high levels that they become demigods. Most of the spells I mentioned aren't available till the very end of the game. This makes sense, as mastery of the Weave grants powers that are physically impossible to perform within the world's natural laws. Magic by definition is bending/breaking the rules of the universe, and as such it should feel like it if you spend the countless hours needed to master it and persevere to the end. It took me dozens of hours of reading the spell descriptions from scrolls to just understand how spells interacted and worked together. It would have been far easier to say "screw it" and go with a fighter or paladin that focuses on disrupting enemy magic users. But I stuck with it, and am glad I did because using the magic system in BG2 is immensely satisfying. It requires an absurd amount of knowledge and expertise. It rewards future time orientation, patience and planning over impulsive "give me whats best right now". Fighter and wizard wouldn't be very different if they were equally as effective from level 1 to level cap. They'd just be the same class with different variations of the same skills...which is exactly what happened in WoW. Furthermore, unless you're soloing BG2, you have a party of six consisting of a variety of classes. Therefore, you'd never have to re-roll as a mage, because there would be a mage in your party ready to make up for any magical shortcomings you may have as a fighter. Your role then becomes keeping him safe and taking care of the less magically inclined enemies. The MMOification I mentioned also has this issue of only allowing you the control of one character. This means all characters must be jack-of-all-trades, because otherwise someone will have to be stuck doing the less sexy roles such as tanking, healing or buffing/debuffing. Or in the case of the BG2 wizard, being completely useless for half the game. Multiplayer game design has a long way to go before it reaches the wonders achieved in the past decade in single player games. EDIT: I forgot to mention that enemy wizards also turn all of your strengths against you, because the player does not have any particularly special powers that enemies are denied. In fact, the player is at a far lower level for most of the game than enemies encountered and must rely on wits alone to survive most fights. There's a mod (Sword Coast Stratagems) that enhances enemy AI, and it is universally acclaimed as making BG2 into one of the most difficult games in existence. Every fight becomes a high stakes chess match...one small mistake leads to instant death. Aside from Dark/Demon Souls, I don't know of any games that come close to this level of tactical difficulty. I find these experiences to be immensely rewarding, and have a hard time playing mainstream games because they seriously lack this element.

by FD3SA 12y ago

PSeitz 12y ago

Yes, I love how unbalanced Baldur's Gate 2 sometimes is. I think this makes it actually a great game.

Qworg 12y ago

A player shouldn't have to play your game just to learn in the end game that their fighter isnt going to cut it and they'll have to reroll as a wizard. That sucks (and is bad game design). Things shouldn't be perfectly balanced, but all play styles should be equally viable.

apalmer 12y ago
I mean but one has to expect this. In what sane world is a wizard and a fighter going to be equivalent? I think the main thing as pointed out is that in seeking balance a lot of 'fun' or 'interesting' elements have to be thrown out.
- saucetenuto 12y ago
  It's fine if your world is designed this way, but in that case you shouldn't be allowed to play as a fighter. Do it like Magicka, say, and offer your players their choice of wizards.
  - freehunter 12y ago
    On the other hand, there are things warriors can do that mages cannot. For example, in many fantasy texts, wizards are social outcasts and warriors are anywhere between accepted (but maybe not highly regarded) members of society all the way through respected members of the court. A warrior and a wizard might not make sense going head to head in combat, but they occupy different places in the social structure.
    - Qworg 12y ago
      In a tabletop RPG, you can represent this easily. I'm sad more games don't play with this social/physical power dynamic.
aeze 12y ago
I wouldn't said it's inherently bad game design, different people have different preferences. Here's a good blog post discussing such decisions. http://nethack4.org/blog/strategy-headroom.html http://nethack4.org/blog/strategy-headroom.html
FD3SA 12y ago
Low level wizards are incredibly weak, and are basically free kills for anything, fighter or otherwise. It's only if they survive into high levels that they become demigods. Most of the spells I mentioned aren't available till the very end of the game. This makes sense, as mastery of the Weave grants powers that are physically impossible to perform within the world's natural laws. Magic by definition is bending/breaking the rules of the universe, and as such it should feel like it if you spend the countless hours needed to master it and persevere to the end. It took me dozens of hours of reading the spell descriptions from scrolls to just understand how spells interacted and worked together. It would have been far easier to say "screw it" and go with a fighter or paladin that focuses on disrupting enemy magic users. But I stuck with it, and am glad I did because using the magic system in BG2 is immensely satisfying. It requires an absurd amount of knowledge and expertise. It rewards future time orientation, patience and planning over impulsive "give me whats best right now". Fighter and wizard wouldn't be very different if they were equally as effective from level 1 to level cap. They'd just be the same class with different variations of the same skills...which is exactly what happened in WoW. Furthermore, unless you're soloing BG2, you have a party of six consisting of a variety of classes. Therefore, you'd never have to re-roll as a mage, because there would be a mage in your party ready to make up for any magical shortcomings you may have as a fighter. Your role then becomes keeping him safe and taking care of the less magically inclined enemies. The MMOification I mentioned also has this issue of only allowing you the control of one character. This means all characters must be jack-of-all-trades, because otherwise someone will have to be stuck doing the less sexy roles such as tanking, healing or buffing/debuffing. Or in the case of the BG2 wizard, being completely useless for half the game. Multiplayer game design has a long way to go before it reaches the wonders achieved in the past decade in single player games. EDIT: I forgot to mention that enemy wizards also turn all of your strengths against you, because the player does not have any particularly special powers that enemies are denied. In fact, the player is at a far lower level for most of the game than enemies encountered and must rely on wits alone to survive most fights. There's a mod (Sword Coast Stratagems) that enhances enemy AI, and it is universally acclaimed as making BG2 into one of the most difficult games in existence. Every fight becomes a high stakes chess match...one small mistake leads to instant death. Aside from Dark/Demon Souls, I don't know of any games that come close to this level of tactical difficulty. I find these experiences to be immensely rewarding, and have a hard time playing mainstream games because they seriously lack this element.