Two Worlds - Razor1911/Silentgate View previous topic :: View next topic  


NFOHump.com Forum Index - PC Games Arena
Page 25 of 33 Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26 ... 31, 32, 33  Next
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Wed, 23rd May 2007 11:44    Post subject:
adaml75 wrote:
Well, yes, the game has its share of bugs, and it's rather simple, but I found it very addictive. Actually I think landscape looks great and is a large part of experience. I really like it, much more than Oblivion. It's not the best RPG of all time, but worth trying.


Could be fun I guess... It's just that running around with my ÜBER 2 handed wooden club, 1 hit killing any enemies in a 180 degree angle in front of me, sending them flying for metres just ain't so fun in the long run.
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Wed, 23rd May 2007 11:51    Post subject:
AnimalMother wrote:
Thats not ture


We know that!

This is Ture

Back to top
LexLuger




Posts: 285
PostPosted: Wed, 23rd May 2007 15:01    Post subject:
I am stupid and slow, I finished Two Worlds and I still dont understand why the game is called "Two Worlds"
can anyone explain?

Sun Tzu says: "Go to war, but first have lunch. The wise general would try the lamb, which is fresh and a great price".
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Wed, 23rd May 2007 15:06    Post subject:
I haven't finished the game, but one necromancer I talked about said something, that everyone else sees only half of the world, but necromancers they try to see the other half as well, therefore they call themselves Enlightened. Necros practice Taint magic, therefore Taint = 2nd world?
Back to top
JBeckman
VIP Member



Posts: 34997
Location: Sweden
PostPosted: Wed, 23rd May 2007 16:19    Post subject:
Don't know if this helps but one of the necromancers near Karga's clan base wanted a taint shot for a portal experiement to what he described as the 2nd world, unfortunatively the quest goes on beyond that and all in all he will need 21 taint shots over several quests.
(Only needed four more when the 1.3 patch was released and I decided to start over)

...But seeing what happened to his neigbour necromancers with the doll fetis hit might just have been another failuer in the end.
(That specific quest was quite fun and very unexpected.)

EDIT: The so called "Enlightened one" that preaches near Covengor also talks about this but I never got any usefull information from his ramblings.
Back to top
Sheezwack




Posts: 8
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 02:58    Post subject:
Firstly if you are complaining about the arrows then you simply suck at the game. I like that the arrows do a lot of damage because it adds the requirement for skill to the game. They are easy dodge and it's not hard to take out the archers first.

Next if you are having trouble, get the Aid or Freeze spell, with a bunch of stacked aid spells you can get a tonne more HP and even when the arrows hit you it wont take off heaps of health.

Overall the game isn't THAT buggy, it is very playable and enjoyable. I like the map and gameworld it is quite enjoyable, I like the horse riding as well, unfortunately the places where your horse stops annoy me most in the game.

For people that are having trouble riding a horse, don't hold down your move forward key! Just tap it once to increase your speed, the horse can be ridden at a trot. I suspect why most people dislike riding the horse is because they simply don't know how.

Lastly I think this has been explained before, the reason it was called Two Worlds is not because there are two worlds, but more the possibility of two different worlds depending on your actions (i.e are you good or evil). Something like that.

Also if you find the game too easy, just keep changing weapons and armor instead of stacking them, I like to do this to try out different things anyway.
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 03:34    Post subject:
Sheezwack wrote:
Also if you find the game too easy, just keep changing weapons and armor instead of stacking them, I like to do this to try out different things anyway.


Sometimes when I feel a piece of meat is too easily chewed I stop using my teeth and use my tongue instead! It's that much more challenging and fun!

You should try that too!
Back to top
TiHKAL




Posts: 2350
Location: The Pub
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 04:05    Post subject:
I guess i just don't understand the realism in an arrow doing 10x as much damage as a two handed weapon with a sharp edge. Either way I like the game! I suspect it isn't that people don't know how to ride the horses. It seems to me it's simply that you can't even ride your horse on all the main roads. It seems like little or no testing was done on the horse riding... When the ground is flat the horse is great, anything else and it sucks. Wait i take that back, it's okay going downhills too.

PC: i7-4790k @ 4.4, 32GB @ 2400, Nvidia 1080TI FE, 2 TB Crucial MX500 SSD
Nintendo Switch SX OS Pro / PS4 Pro 5.05 Hen/Mira / PS3 Modded / Wii Modded / 360 Pre-Wave4 mod
Back to top
Sheezwack




Posts: 8
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 04:58    Post subject:
Well if you want to make it realistic you would be dead at the first cave or shortly after Smile

Yeah alot of the main roads are a pain, ive found you have to either back up them, or get off your horse and whistle for it then get back on. I agree this is a big greivance! I still think most people would be holding down the move forward button to ride them, especially if they complain about horse combat because its pretty easy really.

Freudian: Yes its exactly the same thing isn't it Rolling Eyes

If you have ever worked on any sort of game or mod you will know that balancing is a very difficult task, but the unlimited stacking is a bit silly - but having said that the weapons keep changing throughout the game so weapons that I started off with simply aren't there to buy or loot anymore so I can't stack them infinitely.

Actually its not the armor or weapon stacking that makes the game easy IMO, its spells like Aid and Freeze and Field of fire
Back to top
Sheezwack




Posts: 8
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 05:01    Post subject:
tihkal: the arrows are probably more realistic than you think. Imagine getting peirced through the heart with an arrow, compared with a gash from a sword in full armor. It would have been good if the arrows do different damage depending where they hit on your body, legs/head/body etc - i don't think it does this.

Also sheilds should dramatically reduce arrow damage, I noticed they didn't seem to do that after a while - maybe a bug?
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 12:43    Post subject:
Targeting with a bow is my one big complaint, it is IMPOSSIBLE to hit enemy that is moving left or right, only if they're going straight for you.

Why? Because, if you don't keep you crosshair on them for 1-2 seconds (untill it turns green), no matter if you shoot in their direction the arrow will go some other way. So you have to keep the enemy targeted while it is moving, and that is normal, just like any other game. But when I finally do shoot my damn arrow, the enemy is already 2 meters to the front and my arrow misses him.

Simply said, you CANNOT shoot your arrow few meters to the right or left of someone, so that you can predict when will they walk into it. Why? Because your crosshair wont be on the target in that case, therefore it wont be green, therefore arrow wont go in the direction your crosshair is pointing. Stupid.
Back to top
adaml75




Posts: 204
Location: Burkina Faso
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 13:31    Post subject:
I remember that in Gothic 1 and 2 (I haven't tried 3 yet) your character was also overpowered at last parts of the game. I could kill everything, including big ugly dragons, without a problem. That was also the case in Fallout. I guess it's just very difficult to balance open-ended game. But I like the feeling of gradually getting stronger Wink

And I still think that autoleveling enemies in Oblivions weren't good desing choice.
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 13:39    Post subject:
adaml75 wrote:
I remember that in Gothic 1 and 2 (I haven't tried 3 yet) your character was also overpowered at last parts of the game. I could kill everything, including big ugly dragons, without a problem. That was also the case in Fallout. I guess it's just very difficult to balance open-ended game. But I like the feeling of gradually getting stronger Wink

And I still think that autoleveling enemies in Oblivions weren't good desing choice.


try playing a pure mage in NOTR, and you'll find the meaning of a hard game Razz melee is easy
Back to top
Sheezwack




Posts: 8
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 13:41    Post subject:
Yeah I don't like the idea of autoscaling mobs, they should be a fixed strength and harder as you get into the game - which for the most part of it seems to be how it is in tis game?

I don;t use the bow either, just spells and melee
Back to top
adaml75




Posts: 204
Location: Burkina Faso
PostPosted: Thu, 24th May 2007 23:24    Post subject:
BearishSun: You're probably right! I still haven't played NOTR... So many games, so little time Sad
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 02:02    Post subject:
Sheezwack wrote:
Well if you want to make it realistic you would be dead at the first cave or shortly after Smile

Yeah alot of the main roads are a pain, ive found you have to either back up them, or get off your horse and whistle for it then get back on. I agree this is a big greivance! I still think most people would be holding down the move forward button to ride them, especially if they complain about horse combat because its pretty easy really.

Freudian: Yes its exactly the same thing isn't it Rolling Eyes

If you have ever worked on any sort of game or mod you will know that balancing is a very difficult task, but the unlimited stacking is a bit silly - but having said that the weapons keep changing throughout the game so weapons that I started off with simply aren't there to buy or loot anymore so I can't stack them infinitely.

Actually its not the armor or weapon stacking that makes the game easy IMO, its spells like Aid and Freeze and Field of fire


I just don't get it, what's fun about playing a game when you can't take advantage of the games built in functions to the fullest extent???
Wherein lies the challenge then?
To start applying handicaps as soon as the game becomes too easy for you is lame.
Any "handicap" applied to you should be from the games own rules and not from the player having to tie his main hand behind his back just to make the game playable!


Last edited by Freudian on Fri, 25th May 2007 02:13; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 02:09    Post subject:
adaml75 wrote:
I remember that in Gothic 1 and 2 (I haven't tried 3 yet) your character was also overpowered at last parts of the game. I could kill everything, including big ugly dragons, without a problem. That was also the case in Fallout. I guess it's just very difficult to balance open-ended game. But I like the feeling of gradually getting stronger Wink

And I still think that autoleveling enemies in Oblivions weren't good desing choice.


Yes, but how about, as in Two Worlds, where you can get ÜBER at level 20 by just creating the worlds meanest wooden club? (As I became).

To become ÜBER at the end of games is not good either but THAT can be forgiven IMO.

I totally agree that auto leveling sucks. That's a cowards way of handling balancing and takes away A LOT of a games realism.

There is of course a way to solve the balancing issue... Like Dark Messiah did. Just don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful while still keeping it of course.
Make the skill of the players swordplay and aim count more.

Though then of course all the console fanbois would start crying about the game beeing to hard...
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 03:21    Post subject:
Dark Messiah was linear and in those kind of games it is easy to predict which difficulty of enemies, and what will player face. You can't do it nearly that easily in open ended RPGs.

It's pretty much impossible to handle there. I'll try to explain: So, you have a main quest in an open ended RPG, and you want to make it challenging. How do you do that? You can't without autoleveling. You can't know how many side-quests will the player complete, or how many enemies he will kill before finally taking on one of the main-quest missions. In the best case player will be just a few levels above your predictions, and he will skip through few missions fast, and then finally reach an equal opponent.

Other option would be to make the main quest SO hard that it forces you to level using side-quests and exploring(Pretty good option imho) OR make the story split in chapters which was done, very nicely, in Gothic 1 & 2(After certain part of the main story line, world is repopulated with new monsters(harder ones ofc, but they don't scale dynamically, and they are hand placed, and they don't change in level, they change in type), additional quests, and new & better items).

Majority of CRPG (C for Computer) fans seriously disaggree that there should be ANY twitch involved actions in an RPG game(like in Fallout for example). Making it more action oriented seemes like a bad choice for pretty much every RPG that did it(Morrowind>Oblivion, Gothic1&2>Gothic3, although gothic was always an action RPG, it had much more skill based combat in previous parts; and now Two Worlds).
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 04:16    Post subject:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.

Edit: Actually, there is a good example of the sort of balancing I'm talking about in an Action RPG.
Try the "indie" game "Mount and Blade".

And the bigger software companies couldn't crack that nut... Hilarious.
Back to top
Big_Gun




Posts: 3017
Location: My mother's womb originally. . .
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 05:40    Post subject:
Freudian wrote:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.

Edit: Actually, there is a good example of the sort of balancing I'm talking about in an Action RPG.
Try the "indie" game "Mount and Blade".

And the bigger software companies couldn't crack that nut... Hilarious.


Mount and Blade is freaking GREAT.
Some of the best money i have spent in a while on a game.
Back to top
AnimalMother




Posts: 12390
Location: England
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 06:08    Post subject:
Freudian wrote:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.

Edit: Actually, there is a good example of the sort of balancing I'm talking about in an Action RPG.
Try the "indie" game "Mount and Blade".

And the bigger software companies couldn't crack that nut... Hilarious.


Except Mount and Blade is a completely different type of game.

"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D

"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 12:28    Post subject:
Freudian wrote:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.


That's the same thing I said with making the main quest harder. Making the equipment less powerful will force you to do more side-quests and explore for experience.
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 12:38    Post subject:
AnimalMother wrote:
Freudian wrote:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.

Edit: Actually, there is a good example of the sort of balancing I'm talking about in an Action RPG.
Try the "indie" game "Mount and Blade".

And the bigger software companies couldn't crack that nut... Hilarious.


Except Mount and Blade is a completely different type of game.


You have interaction, you have questing, you have a character that levels and improves his/hers gear. It's an action RPG with a weak strategic element in it.
Stop talking bullshit.
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 12:38    Post subject:
BearishSun wrote:
Freudian wrote:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.


That's the same thing I said with making the main quest harder. Making the equipment less powerful will force you to do more side-quests and explore for experience.


No it's not.
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 12:46    Post subject:
Then I don't catch your drift, how about explaining it?
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 13:16    Post subject:
BearishSun wrote:
Then I don't catch your drift, how about explaining it?


Ok.

First off I recommend you try Mount and Blade Bearish. You should also try it Animalmother. It explains in some ways what I'm talking about. It's not a perfect system but much better than a lot of the opposition out there.
http://www.taleworlds.com/mb_download.html

So, the combat system/balancing I'm talking about:

Instead of making the weapons insane, as in TW you set the weapon damage to, for instance a scale of 3-60. You also add stuff as weapon speed, range and type of damage vs different sorts of armor. Thereby adding more depth to the combat.

Same goes with armor, you set a reasonable roof as to how much it can protect you.

Then you make sure that the best kind of gear can only be had in the most difficult of areas of the game.

With skills you don't let strength or a weapon skill affect the damage done too much.


What you do INSTEAD is that you implement a more challenging combat system that demands much of the player in ways of reflexes, timing and thinking. The system should be easy to learn but difficult to master.
Examples of combat systems could be the above, M&B, Jedi Knight series or even Dark Messiah. Though I would prefer even more refined systems.

So, you end up with a game that demands more of the players skill with reflexes, timing and strategic thinking instead of a game like TW that really only demands you to run around stacking wooden clubs together and 1-shotting your enemies with a 1 button same same and no different -strike.

I'm sure if you just be a little open minded for a change Bearish you would see that this is possible Wink
Back to top
AnimalMother




Posts: 12390
Location: England
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 16:55    Post subject:
Freudian wrote:
AnimalMother wrote:
Freudian wrote:
...Or, don't make gear and leveling THAT powerful... Problem solved.

Edit: Actually, there is a good example of the sort of balancing I'm talking about in an Action RPG.
Try the "indie" game "Mount and Blade".

And the bigger software companies couldn't crack that nut... Hilarious.


Except Mount and Blade is a completely different type of game.


You have interaction, you have questing, you have a character that levels and improves his/hers gear. It's an action RPG with a weak strategic element in it.
Stop talking bullshit.


There is no magic to balance, you can't fight in the towns, the battles occur on a different map to the 'exploration', you usually fight with whole groups of people on each side which is completely different to balancing for a single character vs multiple mobs.

Mount and Blade is based completely around the fighting, there isn't anything else to do apart from that.

"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D

"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 22:56    Post subject:
AnimalMother wrote:
Freudian wrote:
AnimalMother wrote:


Except Mount and Blade is a completely different type of game.


You have interaction, you have questing, you have a character that levels and improves his/hers gear. It's an action RPG with a weak strategic element in it.
Stop talking bullshit.


There is no magic to balance, you can't fight in the towns, the battles occur on a different map to the 'exploration', you usually fight with whole groups of people on each side which is completely different to balancing for a single character vs multiple mobs.

Mount and Blade is based completely around the fighting, there isn't anything else to do apart from that.



You Sir, are wrong.
Back to top
BearishSun




Posts: 4484
PostPosted: Fri, 25th May 2007 23:04    Post subject:
I just tried mount and blade, and yeah it's a freaking awesome game, but you simply cannot compare that

And Freudian, what exactly makes you think you're smarter than hundreds of professionals who have planned these games for months(by these I mean games like Oblivion, Gothic etc.)?
Back to top
Freudian




Posts: 364
Location: Din mamma!
PostPosted: Sat, 26th May 2007 01:01    Post subject:
M&B has an open ended gameplay, DM hasn't, both are action oriented RPGs that are fun as hell and has solved most of the balancing issues.
Use your imagination and figure the rest out yourself.
Back to top
Page 25 of 33 All times are GMT + 1 Hour
NFOHump.com Forum Index - PC Games Arena Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 24, 25, 26 ... 31, 32, 33  Next
Signature/Avatar nuking: none (can be changed in your profile)  


Display posts from previous:   

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group