NwN2 is just a completely different game. The OC was terrible, but Mask of the Betrayer makes you wonder just how far the series could have gone if they had started with that instead of the OC. MotB is easily on par with some of the infinity engine games, imo.
NwN2 is just a completely different game. The OC was terrible, but Mask of the Betrayer makes you wonder just how far the series could have gone if they had started with that instead of the OC. MotB is easily on par with some of the infinity engine games, imo.
I'm actually going through the expacs for NWN and NWN2 for the first time.
Should I skip the OC and go straight to MotB or is the OC worth it just for the character leveling progression?
You should play the OC at least once, since MotB is a direct sequel to the OC. After that feel free to forget that it exists. XP is a not a problem with the expansions. The main drawback is that you lose access to imported gear/items if you skip the OC, especially custom-made items.
Someone after my own heart. IWD has hideous character graphics. It was my first 3D game and my last for a long time. This game scared me away from 3D after experiencing the crappy graphics.
Yeh NWN is ugly I struggled with its looks back when I first played it and it hasn't aged well. That Hordes is amazing I love that campaign to bits
I much preferred the OC in NWN2 to MOTB which I frankly found utterly painful, I feel it would have been a lot better tho if like most obsidian games it didn't feel unfinished
The best part of character creation was being able to choose between a slim gnome or a fat gnome... The other games just did not include this... (Wizards ruled 3.5, so Rogue / Wizard elves 2 / 38) seemed to be the most powerful characters I would create...
Ignoring all the other comments on this for right now, I don't see how NwN is "ugly" compared to the BG series and the IWD series. From how they look, NwN looks beautiful. Don't get me wrong, BG's and IWD's are still beautiful, but graphic wise, NwN conquers them. I think you're just looking at how the graphics of newer games are compared to NwN which came out in 2002.
Ignoring all the other comments on this for right now, I don't see how NwN is "ugly" compared to the BG series and the IWD series. From how they look, NwN looks beautiful. Don't get me wrong, BG's and IWD's are still beautiful, but graphic wise, NwN conquers them. I think you're just looking at how the graphics of newer games are compared to NwN which came out in 2002.
Are we playing the same games? Beautifully rendered backgrounds in Baldur's Gate and the blocky stuff that is Neverwinter nights? You don't see any graphical flaws when it's isometric, or at least you don't notice them as much, hence why Isometric games like Baldur's Gate age so well.
3D games like NwN like to show you EVERYTHING and preferable up close, so you notice all those minor and major flaws. Just zooming in on my characters head or body in NwN reminds me of Lego.
Ignoring all the other comments on this for right now, I don't see how NwN is "ugly" compared to the BG series and the IWD series. From how they look, NwN looks beautiful. Don't get me wrong, BG's and IWD's are still beautiful, but graphic wise, NwN conquers them. I think you're just looking at how the graphics of newer games are compared to NwN which came out in 2002.
Say whAAAAA!?
I think NWN is butt ugly, and I'm still impressed at how nice Baldur's Gate looks after all these years.
NWN does have better graphics than BG, but it's still uglier. There's an excellent video here explaining the difference between graphics and aesthetics, and how better graphics don't make games look better.
Idk, I've been playing NwN for a long, long time and it just doesn't look ugly to me. Its your own opinion, not something you need to try and prove me wrong about.
I don't think that "ugly" is quite the right word here. Yes, the graphics in NWN are blocky, functional and generic. No they don't look like real life, even remotely. If you compare them to something like Skyrim or Dark Souls, they will absolutely come out wanting. But Ugly suggests that they don't have any aesthetic value what so ever, and that I don't agree with.
Baldur's gate is beautiful, for what it does. The static backgrounds are painted beautifully and are very impressive. However, you can't go around stuff or look behind it. It's very akin to a side scroller, but with a bit more depth (graphics only, not game play). I personally always hated the Docks district in BG2 and it's Esheresque look. The same for Waukeen's Promenade. And it is a direct result of that static view that path finding is so poor (at least one reason).
I think that comparing NWN to Baldur's gate is almost an unfair comparison. If you like to fully emerse yourself in the world and want to look at all camera angles, NWN is superior to BG. If you like walking around in a painting, Baldur's gate is superior to NWN.
Maybe it is because I started playing CRPG games back when hallways were four green lines narrowing in the distance. Maybe it is because I played Zork. Maybe it is because one of my all time favorite games is the Gold box Pool of radiance where the graphics were MUCH worse. I was OK with NWN accepting that I had to trade static painted backgrounds for more interactive, but less picturesque views.
One thing that made me go WOAH at NWN (Even though I just started playing it last year) was those moments where your character swings and your enemy raises their weapon to parry. IT WAS SO COOL. Reminded me of an early version of Kotor's auto-attacks.
Actually, why don't more auto-attack based games use those cool dodging and parrying animations like NWN/Kotor?
I'm not assuming that everybody else has to think this way, but I don't mind bad graphics at all. If good graphics were what I really cared about, I wouldn't even be playing video games; I would just take walks outside all the time (I still do take walks sometimes) The real world still has better graphics than any video game, including Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale.
One thing that made me go WOAH at NWN (Even though I just started playing it last year) was those moments where your character swings and your enemy raises their weapon to parry. IT WAS SO COOL. Reminded me of an early version of Kotor's auto-attacks.
Actually, why don't more auto-attack based games use those cool dodging and parrying animations like NWN/Kotor?
Oh thank the gods, I'm not the only one who flipped out when I saw that. When you're a kid and you're used to playing something like Baldurs Gate, then you suddenly bring up NwN and see all this amazing combat animation? Blows your mind right through the ceiling. Dark Souls does it also, but its not as fluid as NwN, when someone blocks you.in Dari Souls the animation kind of suddenly switches to a different animation. NwN doesn't do that (don't get my wrong, the dark Souls series is probably one of the best games I've ever played).
@CaerDares - have you tried Dark Souls 2? They did a bit better with the animation switching. Overall DkS 1 is a better game, but they definitely got a few things right in DkS 2 over the original.
If you think this is about playing games with "good" graphics then you're missing the point of the discussion. The point people are arguing is that you don't need "fancy" graphics to make a game that looks good. We can't know for sure what would have happened if the NwN crew had taken a more conservative approach graphics-wise, opting for aesthetic over what was considered "in" (or perhaps simply convenient or promising) at the time, but the fact is that many 2D games have aged really well compared to lots of 3D games and these days 2D is still an industry staple (in fact many games that use 2D, a 2D/3D mix or pseudo-3D are considered visual masterpieces).
Anyway it *might* have turned out better, especially considering all the horrible bugs that also came with it. Who knows.
Again, I want to say that the reason NWN looks the way it did was primarily because they wanted to (a) make a modular game that people could create their own adventures and (b) make it 3D. In that, I think what was done, for the technology of the time, it was amazing. People claiming that it is "Ugly as sin" maybe aren't giving credit where credit was due.
Could they have waited a bit until 3D technology had come along some? Yes. Might they have done something similar but with 2D graphics? Maybe, but I bet it would have been a lot harder to make it modular and approachable to even casual mod builders.
@CaerDares - have you tried Dark Souls 2? They did a bit better with the animation switching. Overall DkS 1 is a better game, but they definitely got a few things right in DkS 2 over the original.
Oh, yes yes yes. I absolutely love DkS 2. I love everything about it. I went completely braindead with the new healing system and everything, but after a while I got a hold of it. The game is so sexy.
I don't mind it in the same way that i don't mind other indie games with horrible graphic. But the graphic was one of the main focuses when it comes to NwN, it was one of the selling points. NwN has pretty horrible gameplay and story. and when the graphics age that bad, i really don't feel like playing it.
Minecraft already kind of proved that a game doesn't have to look good to be good.
And Planescape Torment proved that you can have shit gameplay, horrible combat and bad graphics. But Planescape Torment had an amazing story, atmosphere and environment.
Neverwinter Nights doesn't have good gameplay, doesn't have a nice story. The good points doesn't outweigh the bad ones. And when it came out, the 3D graphics was THE selling point of that game.
Comments
MotB is easily on par with some of the infinity engine games, imo.
Should I skip the OC and go straight to MotB or is the OC worth it just for the character leveling progression?
XP is a not a problem with the expansions. The main drawback is that you lose access to imported gear/items if you skip the OC, especially custom-made items.
I much preferred the OC in NWN2 to MOTB which I frankly found utterly painful, I feel it would have been a lot better tho if like most obsidian games it didn't feel unfinished
Don't get me wrong, BG's and IWD's are still beautiful, but graphic wise, NwN conquers them. I think you're just looking at how the graphics of newer games are compared to NwN which came out in 2002.
3D games like NwN like to show you EVERYTHING and preferable up close, so you notice all those minor and major flaws. Just zooming in on my characters head or body in NwN reminds me of Lego.
I think NWN is butt ugly, and I'm still impressed at how nice Baldur's Gate looks after all these years.
NWN does have better graphics than BG, but it's still uglier. There's an excellent video here explaining the difference between graphics and aesthetics, and how better graphics don't make games look better.
Baldur's gate is beautiful, for what it does. The static backgrounds are painted beautifully and are very impressive. However, you can't go around stuff or look behind it. It's very akin to a side scroller, but with a bit more depth (graphics only, not game play). I personally always hated the Docks district in BG2 and it's Esheresque look. The same for Waukeen's Promenade. And it is a direct result of that static view that path finding is so poor (at least one reason).
I think that comparing NWN to Baldur's gate is almost an unfair comparison. If you like to fully emerse yourself in the world and want to look at all camera angles, NWN is superior to BG. If you like walking around in a painting, Baldur's gate is superior to NWN.
Maybe it is because I started playing CRPG games back when hallways were four green lines narrowing in the distance. Maybe it is because I played Zork. Maybe it is because one of my all time favorite games is the Gold box Pool of radiance where the graphics were MUCH worse. I was OK with NWN accepting that I had to trade static painted backgrounds for more interactive, but less picturesque views.
Just my views.
Actually, why don't more auto-attack based games use those cool dodging and parrying animations like NWN/Kotor?
The point people are arguing is that you don't need "fancy" graphics to make a game that looks good. We can't know for sure what would have happened if the NwN crew had taken a more conservative approach graphics-wise, opting for aesthetic over what was considered "in" (or perhaps simply convenient or promising) at the time, but the fact is that many 2D games have aged really well compared to lots of 3D games and these days 2D is still an industry staple (in fact many games that use 2D, a 2D/3D mix or pseudo-3D are considered visual masterpieces).
Anyway it *might* have turned out better, especially considering all the horrible bugs that also came with it. Who knows.
Could they have waited a bit until 3D technology had come along some? Yes. Might they have done something similar but with 2D graphics? Maybe, but I bet it would have been a lot harder to make it modular and approachable to even casual mod builders.
Neverwinter Nights doesn't have good gameplay, doesn't have a nice story. The good points doesn't outweigh the bad ones. And when it came out, the 3D graphics was THE selling point of that game.