NWN: The Emperor Has No Clothes

[Anonymous]

I am glad everyone is having such a fun time with NWN, scripting their adventures for the talking toilet and attaching a flush sound to the invisible object to make it fit with the scripting engine. Here is the news for you: the multiplay in this game is boring. Check that, I meant it is fucking boring. Spend all the time you want telling your clever fantasy stories, boys, because when it comes time to run them, they will suck. And here is why.

Five guys get together to go through a dungeon. Actually it's a carefully laid out, story-driven adventure over hill and over dale, through a town and into a dungeon. Fine so far. Early on, the party meet a NPC. Who will speak to him? One of us. But wait, not everyone was listening to or (actually) READING the dialogs. So we click through them again. What was that? Too fast? Fuck. This is taking forever. What do we do? Wait, I am re-arranging my inventory. Dudes, I am encumbered. Who can take this stuff off my hands? Are you listening? Hey, I'm getting fucking killed over here!? Oh man sorry, I was shopping, this armor sucks. Did you not hear my cries for help? No I did not. All the text is in the same window. Why can't it beep when you need help? And so on into ever-greater chaos. We all quit. True story. Happened just recently.

How can this be? It must be the fault of the MODULE DESIGNER! No fear among the smarty-pants quartertothree-ers. Oh no, they cry, my module is not so tedious, it is the height of inspiration and divine storytelling! No it isn't because listen up, and this includes you Ben Sones: the best type of adventure in this game is one where everyone gets to fight a lot of monsters. The more text you have, the more the game slows down, and the ... more .... boring ..... it ...... is. Because I am controlling one guy, and I am bored right NOW. And now. And again now. Oh I killed one monster, or a small group of monsters. Now I am bored again because thief-man ran over there because HE was bored, because we can't fight that golem until one other dillweed re-spawns because HE got bored and wandered off and got killed by a trap.

Hahaha! And so he should have! He is not a good role-player to do so and wander off unawares, and thus his comeuppance is served! Only through careful and coordinated cooperation of Ernie, Bert, and Mr. Hooper can the Snuffleuppagus be snared. But that is the whole problem, ladies and gentlemen: on a computer it does not work. Ever try to coordinate a group in Everquest? There you are camped, and the goal is common and clear and fucking simple. In NWN it is far, far worse because you have to FORCE yourself to spend most of your time just following people around in a group. The more story, the harder it is to stay together. The more fighting, the less plot. In EQ, you are fighting, and then you are fighting. You have leveled! You can run where you will. But in NWN you have to stay until storytime is over, and then you can only run in one direction.

After playing it for three hours, I can see what would have worked best: a series of scripted, set-piece combats against ever-tougher monsters where a balanced party is needed for success. Engage! Defend! Cast a spell! Cast a counterspell! Oh, a sneak attack by master rogue! All action-oriented endeavors. The computer is about action. The sit-down, talk-it-out, DM-led think-tank approach to medieval problem-solving only works face-to-face, because once you remove all that multi-person interaction, you realize how little there actually is to DO. Unless you are fighting nearly all the time. This is not a theory, citizens. It is now proven fact. Bioware has brought pen-and-paper multiplay to the PC, and it blows ass.

I can hear the reasoned yet gratingly verbose tones of the Brian Rucker Brigade: oh dear, this sort of wanton combat does not satisfy my need to explore the many complex interactions of a fictional world riven by factional strife in a dynamic setting using multivariable calculus! Guess what, gentlemen? While the pen-and-paper scenario is a truly worthwhile pursuit on a rainy Saturday afternoon, it does not work via networked computers because --I said it already-- it is not suited to a guy with a mouse in one hand (and the other in his pants, that's for you Met_K). Standing around together building storybook scenes in the midst of a desolate land sounds like a ripping good time, until you actually have to do it, and then it is nothing like what you thought it would be like, because you didn't think it would suck, but it actually does.

Mark my words, people: the "design-your-own" multiplayer experience, complete with or without cyber-DMs, is going to fall flat on its fucking face. Dead. You will not be able to play through a gripping adventure with your friends, because all you will be gripping by the end is your head in exasperation (and your cock, Met_K a shout out again). After all the hoopla about shared adventures and the pen-and-paper D&D finally comes to the computer, here is what you will have: a mod-able solo RPG game in which your are fatally, show-stoppingly stuck with a single player-character and one henchman, and a battle royale throwaway skirmish combat mode that won't last longer than the average beat-em-up in terms of popularity.

Wait for it. The GameSpots and RPG Vaults are all aglow with the solo game, which isn't so hot either, but at least it isn't terrible. Fuck, it's not even as good as Baldur's Gate. One. But it's 3D and the combat looks cool with the circling and slashing. No matter. The acid test is whether years from now, the boys and girls will be curled up in front of their computers reading text box after text box while cats purr in their laps and their compatriots all stand at respectful attention while they find out who Lady Desmerelda wants slain, or smoten, or delivered of a secret package. It ain't gonna happen. You'll see. The enthusiasm is gonna leak outta this one like any coital metaphor my homey Met_K wants to throw down.

This is the way the fantasy world ends, not with a bang, but in mind-numbing boredom. Goodnight, gents.

[mtkafka]

I agree that DMing NWN online like a pnp session seems nearly impossible, unless you're a great DM with great skills at handling the NWN interface WITH great players. PnP gaming is episodic, whereas NWN online is fit best for a fast pace with rarely a story. I think Bioware did AS good a job as they could with this game, but I think the problem with NWN is that for a mutliplayer game it leaves too much work for the player to make the game fun. Also the Real Time aspect of combat goes completely against the pnp feel of DnD. Where once one dungeon in a pnp session can last hours (or even days), can last mere minutes in NWN. This isnt really a fault of NWN, its more a fault of the dynamics of PnP gaming vs online pc gaming.

I think the real roleplaying experiences in online gaming only can take place in a predetermined place ala a persistent world type game. This leaves both the GM and players time to manage the real nuts and bolts of a tabletop feel, but it will still be a computer game, and not a pnp game feel. I actually think that with a turnbased battle system, it actually would be more engaging as an online pnp game. Having to decide round by round want to do by turns actually imo lends itself to more roleplaying... especially fleshing out the combat. Maybe NWN being too graphical in presentation takes away the pnp roleplaying aspect?

anyway, I cant judge the online experience too much since the online sessions I played were all pickup games... so its to be expected I would get hack n slash. Also, its still too early to lay this game to rest. I still thinks its a good step forward for a new type of online experience. Albeit i still think theres more to do to make this pnp aspect work online....

PS Legolas you leave Met K and Brian alone. They do nothing wrong to you. You act like they beat you up. You so mean. You should stick to EQ and camp with the uber dicks! :lol:

etc

[Kool Moe Dee]

<long crack-addled diatribe>

So do you normally light up before you game? Or do you just like to hear yourself talk?

[Murph]

I had a lot of experiences with online multiplayer games -- I didn't even know these guys -- in the beta. I haven't pulled myself away from the SP game yet since it went retail long enough to see how those hold up now.

But on a LAN, with friends, there's no doubt in my mind that it'll rock. Sorry, Legolas, but I disagree with everything you said, based on my own experiences. Especially the part where you said that, years from now, nobody else will be playing this game. I've been wrong before, but I'd be shocked if that turned out to be true.

[Bub, Andrew]

I truly wish all Trolls were this interesting. Scrape the muck away and there are some disturbing insights. Particularly this one:


here is what you will have: a mod-able solo RPG game in which your are fatally, show-stoppingly stuck with a single player-character and one henchman, and a battle royale throwaway skirmish combat mode that won't last longer than the average beat-em-up in terms of popularity.

This is actually what I most wanted and expected from NWN, so I don't find it "show-stopping". D&D can't work over the Internet, unless you're playing with close friends... and if you are, odds are you could probably play better in person. The best D&D sort of requires voice and eye contact. And frankly Murph, if you're on a Lan I'd still argue you're better off using dice and sitting at a table. The computer is too limiting to compete with the imagination.

This is why I was so disturbed by the single henchman limitation in the other thread. If all I wanted was modable Baldur's Gate, and if Legolas (if that is his real name) is correct, all I've got is modable Baldur's Gate, then I want a damn party. But what I ultimately want to do is play some dramatic off-beat modules filled with prose and unexpected stories. I like what Ben and Jason have been discussing and I can't wait to play their modules. Playing online never sounded particularly interesting to me.

Still, I think this Emperor is totally clothed. Thanks for the post anyway Mr. Golas.

(Desslock, can you still figure out who people are? This guy's a local, he knows us too well methinks.)

[Mark Asher]

I think Legolas has some valid points. I tried some multiplayer tonight in public games and none of it was satisfying. MMOGs do online RPGs better from the little I've seen.

I need to play more multiplayer to get a better feel for it, of course.

[Mark Asher]

"...and if Legolas (if that is his real name) is correct..."

First, isn't it obvious that Legolas is a screen name? Second, what difference does his name make?

[Bub, Andrew]

"First, isn't it obvious that Legolas is a screen name? Second, what difference does his name make?"

Third did you also think I believe he should be addressed as "Mr. Golas"? Because I did that too.

[Jason Becker]

This games been out like a week. Everybody is still getting used to the tools, and the DM client. But you have already judge the game and its future already? The potential of this game has barely started and some people want to write it off already.

Here's my rant now. This post is a perfect example of how pathetic our society has become in terms of wanting to be entertained. Its give me total and perfect satisfaction now or I'm gonna say it sucks. Tottally lame...

[Desslock]

>MMOGs do online RPGs better from the little I've seen.

Yep, and I think the original poster raises a number of good points. But all that they highlight is that multiplayer story-driven games lack the broad appeal of multiplayer games that focus exclusively on combat. It takes effort, and interest, to have a decent role-playing game session -- and it's difficult to have the necessary interaction without being able to freely speak to each other.

I don't think that multiplayer NWN works any better than multiplayer Icewind Dale, or BG2 -- but for gamers like me who loved those games in multiplayer, Neverwinter Nights is even better, because you can further customize the experience. It's just because there was so much hype, and accordingly anticipation, for Neverwinter Nights -- much of it focused on the multiplayer game -- that a broader range of gamers are trying it only to realize they don't have the patience or interest to deal with all the "downtime", busy-work, associated with RPGs. Add any complexity or depth beyond what the Diablo games provide and you're going to run into that 'problem".

But for gamers who've been waiting for the opportunity to play D&D on the computer (with compromises in freedom and linearity in exchange for a more visceral experience), Neverwinter Nights does the best job yet. I have much more interest in this style of multiplayer game than MMORPGs, but the latter type of games are much more viable with strangers -- like pen and paper D&D, you need a fun group of motivated players to have a good experience in multiplayer Neverwinter.

[Brian Rucker]

Hey, this the first time I've been mocked in the forums here. Cool! Do I finally get a t-shirt?

I was never that much interested in NWN because it's essentially the miniatures aspect of roleplaying not the imaginative aspect - the graphical and combat-focused engine will limit what's possible no matter how many mods and custom files are made. If I have friends to roleplay with around we'll play at a table. If I'm playing online, at this point, I'm much more into text-based environments with scores of roleplayers, that have to apply for the priviledge, online rather than a graphical environment with four or five guys. I mean, it could be fun for a while but it's really nothing I'd probably spend money on. And hardcore hack&slashers probably won't like it for the reasons Leggy states.

Somewhere in between the roleplayers and the munchkins, I'm sure there is a real market for it and only time will tell where it goes from here. I might even break down and try it out if I hear enough good stuff.

[Scott A.]

I think that modules built that want more NPC interaction over fighting are going to have to be very thorough in their use of the journal to keep all party members informed of the current game state, to try and avoid the issue brought up in the first post.

In my tabletop days, the responsibilty of talking to NPCs always fell to a particular player, chosen by the group, to be the representative. While everyone has a right to participate, I would think that having one person (high charisma? high persuade?) do all the talking up front would help the text aspect out. It then falls again on the module designer to have sufficient Conversations built that allow anyone with the quest to get "So, tell me about blah blah blah again?" options with the quest giver.

I think the one thing that's almost a requirement, however, for any mod that's not just hack&slash oriented, would be a hand picked group, who knew what they were getting into beforehand. Random people would certainly frighten me if I were trying to run a "serious campaign" in public space.

About the amount of fighting - some friends and I were talking about this yesterday. If I were making a module for tabletop PnP, for a 4 hour session, we might get into 5 big fights. If I were to port that module over to NwN for a 4 hour session, I might adjust the module to make sure there were at least 5 big fights every half hour. It is a video game, after all, and why the default module reduces official critter XP to 10% of its original value.

Hopefully we'll (or Ben, and we'll steal all his work) get good enough at the toolset that some good intelligent conversation-based mods will have less empasis on combat while still being enthralling to the average player.

[Anonymous]

I don't get what you're saying, or why you're blaming the game. The game speeds up the hack and slash of PnP, yes, but how is that a bad thing? You really like spending 5 minutes on a turn to figure out who hit what for how much, like a real PnP game?

If you're trying to do something the engine doesn't handle, then you could roll virtual dice (there's a console command for it) and see if they succeed. So, the game is not really limited by the engine, you just have to suspend belief which, if you've been playing PnP all this time, shouldn't be TOO difficult.

Example.. If a player wanted to bribe a guard to let his party pass, which is something the mission might not be coded for, the DM could pause the game, roll the player's charisma plus the bribe amount.. And if he succeeds, the DM could make the guard simply ignore him and subtract the gold from the player with a few mouse clicks.

Sounds to me like you're just complaining that computer gamers don't have the patience for a true PnP style game.. Which on the other hand, I WOULD agree with... Which is fine; password your server and know the people you're playing with aren't retards.

[Sparky]

Hey, this the first time I've been mocked in the forums here. Cool! Do I finally get a t-shirt?

Yes! And you get your choice of styles:

- "I'm With Wumpus"
- "Fuck Star Wars"
- "Coed Naked Qt3 Lacrosse"
Or one with the Royal Tenenbaums banner ad on it. REAL BIG.

[Mark Asher]

"First, isn't it obvious that Legolas is a screen name? Second, what difference does his name make?"

Third did you also think I believe he should be addressed as "Mr. Golas"? Because I did that too.

Ok, I didn't realize you were jabbing at him.

[Ben Sones]

A few things.

As a multiplayer experience, NWN is going to require a lot more work on the part of both the players and the DM in order to be fun compared to "jump in and play" games such as Counterstrike and Diablo. Which is true of tabletop gaming as well, for what it's worth. Mostly the people that are going to enjoy playing NWN multiplayer are people that already enjoy tabletop role-playing. If pen and paper D&D doesn't do it for you, then I'd guess that playing NWN online (especially with strangers) won't, either.

Running a good NWN game is also going to take work, even if you use somebody else's module. Some people, particularly people that are used to diving into Diablo and playing for half an hour, won't like that. And that's fine. I'm sure we'll see some hack-and-slash module designed to cater to a group of strangers that just want to team up and slog through a series of combats, but I'll grant you that the game doesn't cater to that very well (or at all) right now.

On the other hand, it seems a bit unfair to criticize the quality of the available modules when the game has only been out for, what? A week? Most people haven't even tried editor yet, or are busy playing the official campaign. All of the modules (and there aren't many) floating around out there have been cobbled together quickly by people that aren't used to the toolset yet. Do most of them suck? Yeah, they do. Including the one I threw together (although that wasn't really meant to be played for fun). Get back to me this time next month, and this conversation will be more relevant.

Bub: I agree that tabletop D&D is a superior experience. But many people don't know enough people locally that play. I just moved to a new town, and I don't know many people, let alone people that play D&D. I'm putting together a campaign with my old group from college (one is in LA, one in Boston, one in Austin... you get the idea). Tougher to do that with a tabletop game.

Legolas: Actually, I don't have much to say to you. You don't like it. That's fine. I'm not inclined to try to convince you otherwise. I do thank you for extending ME that courtesy, however, by explaining that I am wrong for liking NWN. Or was your point that I don't really like it at all, and that everyone that's having fun with the game is really just deluding themselves? If so, I wish more games sucked this badly.

[Anonymous]

I've been enjoying the single player game quite a bit. I'm still on the 1st chapter of the SP module, but it's been a hoot.

As for the multiplayer...I have to agree with the general sentiment of the first post. I've tried several pick up games, all of which ended up being too annoying to stick with. I also tried a couple of games with some folks that I've been playing EQ with for years. Even with people I know and know how to work with, the multiplayer gameplay just wasn't compelling at all. Maybe there will be some quality player made modules that will change this opinion, but I somehow doubt it.

My biggest complaint about multiplayer so far has been the "yawn" factor of the battles. Monsters seem to be geared towards the 1 person + 1 henchman mentality. When you have 6 people playing together, 2 with familiars and 2 with Summon Monster, suddenly you have to find a way to challenge an army. You have 2 choices for setting up an encounter: 1) swamp the party with a horde of critters hoping that a few monsters will live long enought to hurt someone or 2) have the battle consist of a boss monster that smacks down the party so fast that they can hardly respond. There seems to be a lack of things in the critter library that are challenging for a 6 group party + henchmen/pets to take down that also doesn't kill people in 1 or 2 hits.

Once again, this opinion might change once I've seen some high quality player made modules. For now, the multiplayer is uncompelling and totally unbalanced.

[Tom Ohle]

I'd like to think the people who were part of my E3 multi-player demo had a good time. But hey, I could be wrong, and my DMing skills could be absolutely horrible and useless.

[Bub, Andrew]

Ok, I didn't realize you were jabbing at him.

No problem. Heh, I even used to write "Anonymous, if that is your real name" at the old board... I hold screen names in only slightly higher regard than anonymous posters. Unless their a screen name that's been around a while with the same tone.

I love you Sparky.

To keep this thread on topic:
Brian Rucker wrote: "because it's essentially the miniatures aspect of roleplaying not the imaginative aspect"

This is brilliant and exactly what I've been thinking. I'm going to use this for a NWN column, hope you don't mind Brian.

[Anonymous]

The game we played was actually run by an experienced pen-and-paper GM who had played a lot of the NWN beta, and the five players (me included) were all old pen-and-paper buddies who spent more time than we want to admit publicly playing Twilight 2000 and other paper RPGs (together), so it's not like we don't know how to role-play. This is my whole point: in pen-and-paper gaming, there often isn't a lot that you, as the gamer, are actually doing. But the interaction between you and the other players, both through their physical presence and the fact that you are all drinking beer or Coke and probably occasionally petting the dog completely makes up for that. Separate the players, though, and give everyone his own screen and mouse, and all of a sudden the need to interact through a computer interface actually becomes cumbersome. You can try and use Roger Wilco or something (we did not but we will try it next time) but the conventions of CRPGs are all built on single-player gaming. The stupid dialog trees, "Poor soul, I will help you / Stupid fool, I will never help you! / Draw steel, ruffian! / Farewell" just don't work well with five guys standing around, even if all five of those guys have regulalrly sat in the same living room for years as part of the same Morrow Team. My friend Josh is a great role-player, but with a screen in front of him and a mouse in his hand, even he could not stop himself from wandering off to explore another part of the city because, well, standing around just got boring. It's not what computer games are built for. The pacing, as someone mentioned above, is all wrong. Mount Kafka may be onto something that a turn-based combat model might actually work better than the real-time one for multiplayer, because when a player has absolute freedom, he is going to want to use it absolutely all the time. It's just the way computer games are. And having the DM pause the game to make rolls and such is just awful. There is nothing quite as jarring as having total control and then having it taken away from you intermittently, unexpectedly, and suddenly by having the screen freeze while someone does something else. It sucks in Freedom Force m/p and it sucks here.

NWN actually demonstrates pretty convincingly what is compelling about the single-player CRPG experience, and how it is completely different from what works in multiplayer on the computer. It's almost a case study. I'm telling you: instead of opening a new set of worlds for m/p online gaming for years to come, the m/p NWN experience will wither to a few hardcore nuts not unlike the text-based MUSH crowd, and some slash-n-bash pseudo-Gauntlet. But the miraculous cooperative, shared, happy-fuzzy epic adventures with soaring stories ain't gonna happen, no matter how good your skripting skillz.

To Ben Sones: Hi Ben! I'm sorry your reading comprehension is so bad, that you can't decide whether I'm telling you that you are wrong for liking NWN, or that you actually don't like NWN in the first place, because neither one of those choices is correct. All I'm saying is that no matter how much time you spend crafting dialog trees and making the well talk so a man is trapped inside, it isn't going to translate into gameplay the way you think it is. No matter how much "work" the DM and players put into it, it's going to suck. In fact, the MORE "work" everyone does (better story, more choices, everyone controls themselves and doesn't wander off) will just make it clear how not fun it is to do this. But you'll find that out for yourself, I suppose.

If the whole point of playing NWN is that you'd rather be playing face-to-face D&D but you cannot, then how bad NWN is as a multiplayer game doesn't matter because you have no choice. Instead of having sex with a person, you can buy a blow-up sex doll and use that, but it's not so good either, according to Met_K. Again, you don't really have a choice. But the point I am making is that all the conventions of both pen-and-paper role-playing and single-player CRPGs totally unravel in a point-and-click multiplayer CRPG, and there's nothing you can do about it. Unless you just force yourself to sit in front on the screen, not touch the mouse for long periods of time, and repeat over and over to yourself, "I'm really having fun, I'm really having fun, I'm really having fun." Or you just like to compulsively make modules and adventures that no one will ever play. I know a lot of pen-and-paper guys do this, too. So in that way, the games are exactly alike.

[runesword forger]

An insecure one, too. I like the pre-emptive strikes against Qt3ers as the highbrow mafia.

As for his points... eh, a lot is solved by having good players and a good DM. I do think it's weird to slap a fast, realtime combat system onto an imitation of the pen and paper experience, but whatever. Personally, I think turn-based would've made a lot of sense in NWN multiplayer, even if it made the combats a bit longer. They would've been quick anyway with the calculations taken care of.

The text thing is always an issue, too. Maybe voice headphone sets in an expansion pack? Okay, I'm driving off the rails....

[Mark Asher]

I'd like to think the people who were part of my E3 multi-player demo had a good time. But hey, I could be wrong, and my DMing skills could be absolutely horrible and useless.

Didn't you ply them with alcohol? I rest my case!

Wish I'd been there, Tom. You did have the advantage of being able to talk to the players, though, didn't you? I think that's what the multiplayer game really needs. Having to read and type text messages slows things down too much.

[Bub, Andrew]

"NWN actually demonstrates pretty convincingly what is compelling about the single-player CRPG experience"

Ok

"All I'm saying is that no matter how much time you spend crafting dialog trees and making the well talk so a man is trapped inside, it isn't going to translate into gameplay the way you think it is. No matter how much "work" the DM and players put into it, it's going to suck. In fact, the MORE "work" everyone does (better story, more choices, everyone controls themselves and doesn't wander off) will just make it clear how not fun it is to do this. But you'll find that out for yourself, I suppose."

Except in single player, right? Seems that Ben will still be able to craft a good single player game, right? That's actually more than enough for me.

And Ben, I sympathize. I grew up in Irvine California and that's where my old D&D friends are. I've been in Milwaukee for 7 years and never bothered finding D&D players... there's something scary about D&D players after the age of 30.

[Mark Asher]

"This is my whole point: in pen-and-paper gaming, there often isn't a lot that you, as the gamer, are actually doing. But the interaction between you and the other players, both through their physical presence and the fact that you are all drinking beer or Coke and probably occasionally petting the dog completely makes up for that. Separate the players, though, and give everyone his own screen and mouse, and all of a sudden the need to interact through a computer interface actually becomes cumbersome. You can try and use Roger Wilco or something (we did not but we will try it next time) but the conventions of CRPGs are all built on single-player gaming. The stupid dialog trees, "Poor soul, I will help you / Stupid fool, I will never help you! / Draw steel, ruffian! / Farewell" just don't work well with five guys standing around, even if all five of those guys have regulalrly sat in the same living room for years as part of the same Morrow Team."

Interesting post. Please let us know what you think of it after trying Roger Wilco.

I'm still excited by the game. I'm just looking forward to mods that I can play on my own with a single character and a henchman. There seem to be a lot of people designing the mods like that.

And I'd like to try a regular group too. If the voice communications work, it should help a bit. A DM can then just tell the players stuff instead of forcing players to read a lot of text. In fact, a module designed to be played that way would require less work on the part of the DM making the mod -- you don't have to write all that NPC text.

I suspect I'll satisfy my multiplayer jones with MMOGs, though. In fact, I wonder if BioWare didn't err in perhaps making a D&D MMOG instead?

[Tom Ohle]

Sure, we had beer... but that doesn't matter :wink:

As for having the ability to talk to the players; I don't think it mattered. Basically what I was doing was telling people stuff like "It seems you guys killed something evil that had a head... maybe it was carrying that Head of Evil you're looking for."

To have a good multi-player experience, you're going to generally want to have a DM who created the module himself... or is at least extremely familiar with the module you're playing. At our press tours in March (April maybe?) the module I created had absolutely no scripting in it whatsoever, and it was a pain to DM--it was still fun, but having to jump from NPC to NPC was irritating. But one thing you CAN do is assign text strings to your quickbar slots. So instead of having the players wait around like fools while you type your dialogue, you could go in ahead-of-time and assign certain strings of dialogue to quickbar slots.

It's all about preparation for the DM. I'm not super familiar with PnP DMing, but I'd imagine it's a similar situation--if you're not totally prepared to DM that specific module, it isn't going to be an overly exciting experience for your players.

[Anonymous]

I'm going to be snatching up player made, single player modules left and right. I think that is where the true life of the game is going to be; the ability of the community to essentially make expansion packs. As long as the single player game continues to satisfy, I'm quite happy with the game. Multiplayer is nice, and it's what the game was marketted towards, but so far it's been the only part I feel is lacking.

There will undoubtedly be a decently sized multiplayer community for quite some time, but I don't think it's going to live up to the MMOG-style numbers that people seem to be expecting.

As for the combat, I think it could have been made 90% better with one little change to multiplayer: use Fallout's combat style. The game is all nice and real time while people run around and explore, but you run into a hostile and smack, you're in turn based mode. You have movement points, number of attacks, etc. It would capture the feeling of the D&D style combat much better, and encounters wouldn't last the split second that they do now.

[Anonymous]

Have at it, Bub. Just calling it like I sees it.

I hope NWN works out as it does have some neat ideas but it really isn't aiming at hardcore highbrow roleplaying mafia nutjobs like myself. (Of course, I don't think good roleplaying is really all that hard or weird but that's a topic for another forum).

[Brian Rucker]

Have at it, Bub. Just calling it like I sees it.

I hope NWN works out as it does have some neat ideas but it really isn't aiming at hardcore highbrow roleplaying mafia nutjobs like myself. (Of course, I don't think good roleplaying is really all that hard or weird but that's a topic for another forum).

That's what I look like when I forget to log in.

[Matthew Gallant]

You write a lot like Cliffy B., Legolas.

[Gordon Cameron]

Except in single player, right? Seems that Ben will still be able to craft a good single player game, right? That's actually more than enough for me.

Yeah, this in itself could be enough. I mean, that was what Adventure Construction Set was about way back in the day and I had a blast with that (though back then there was no internet with which to distribute one's adventures). Of course other CRPG's have editors (MW and DS, etc.) but NWN's seems to have a shallower learning curve, which could help.

[Mark Asher]

"It's all about preparation for the DM. I'm not super familiar with PnP DMing, but I'd imagine it's a similar situation--if you're not totally prepared to DM that specific module, it isn't going to be an overly exciting experience for your players."

That's important, but I think what Legolas was getting at is that the pacing that works for PNP is far too slow for online play. PNP stuff is very conversational, and even if the DM's busy with something, then you talk to your friends at the table, pick up a miniature and comment on the paint job, etc. Online you're focused on the PC and even having to wait 60 seconds can seem interminable, because staring at a monitor when nothing's happening is extremely boring.

Part of the slow pace of play is due to the text chat and messages. Things could be sped up a bit with voice chat. Really, though, I think the issue is the way playing a computer game demands your entire attention, which in turn makes players demand that the game constantly be interesting. Players just will not tolerate much dead time in computer games.

I think designing good NWN mods for group play will be quite a bit different from designing PNP adventures. The action's really going to have to be kicked up to Diablo-esque levels for it to be popular as a multiplayer game. Mods where the group has to roam around talking to NPCs a lot might alienate a lot of players.

[Jason Becker]

"I'm not super familiar with PnP DMing, but I'd imagine it's a similar situation--if you're not totally prepared to DM that specific module, it isn't going to be an overly exciting experience for your players."


Exactly, and any PnP gamer would know this. They would probably have plenty of crappy sessions they could tell about from their PnP days.

The complaining about the game that people just don't like the feel or whatever. Where you tottally comfortable when you first started PnP gaming? I doubt it. Slamming the games MP after just a week of release is just lame.


Ohh and the comments about getting the online RPG gaming from MM games is really laughable. The games out today are about as fro from role-playing as you can get. Their MM action camping hackfests.

[Mark Asher]

"Ohh and the comments about getting the online RPG gaming from MM games is really laughable. The games out today are about as fro from role-playing as you can get. Their MM action camping hackfests."

So what's wrong with playing an online RPG where you kill lots of monsters and get loot? That's the fun part, isn't it?

I'll give you this -- if you don't want to call those games "roleplaying" games, that's fine. In turn, I don't want to play a game where I have to spend a lot of time pretending I'm an elf and doing a lot of non-combat stuff. BTW, I read a message about a new NWN online campaign starting that's "roleplaying" and one of the things the DM is insisting on is that characters walk instead of running because that promotes more roleplaying. Ugh.

What I do want with an online RPGish game is something I can jump into quickly and have fun right away and maintain a persistent character. I'm not sold that NWN is that game yet.

[Philo Goodberry]

I've played through about 1/2 of Act One with two friends, using Game Voice. Other than playing through the prelude prior to starting multiplayer, I haven't played any single player.

We had a great time. The paladin is the designated talker, and he does all the NPC chats. It doesn't matter that I don't read the text, cause he tells us the top line summary. While he's chatting, I (the rogue) pop around looting all the chests, picking locks, etc. The monk does his Tai Chi, or whatever, and sells stuff as necessary (since he can carry all the heavy stuff). When we are ready to go, the Paladin, who knows the mission, can head out to the appropriate place, and the other two of us, use the stone of recall, then pop to the party leader location (which is free).

No muss, no fuss. Meanwhile, we give each other shit, mock the paladin, etc. The same as you would be doing in a live action game. We lose the physical comedy obviously, but as we all have kids, we can do this for an hour or two every other night or so, whereas we could almost never get together for a PNP session.

The three of us have played EQ, DAOC, and AO together, and I'd say the experience is about the same. We are still in the early glow of NWN, so it will probably tarnish like the others did. OTOH, given that we usually play one to two hour sessions, the MMP's become unplayable at high level. NWN might not. Or, it might. Or it just might get boring.

If the included campaign takes us forty hours or so, it will take a few months to get through, and be about the equivalent of how long we played any of the other three for. Due to our time constraints, we'd definitely be considered casual players in the online space, but NWN is serving our needs just fine.

I wouldn't play it without Gamevoice. But, I could say the same for any of the MMP's. Given our time and family contraints we find playing with gamevoice to be a perfectly acceptable PNP substitute.

[Ben Sones]

To Ben Sones: Hi Ben! I'm sorry your reading comprehension is so bad, that you can't decide whether I'm telling you that you are wrong for liking NWN, or that you actually don't like NWN in the first place, because neither one of those choices is correct.

Okay, but...


All I'm saying is that no matter how much time you spend crafting dialog trees and making the well talk so a man is trapped inside, it isn't going to translate into gameplay the way you think it is. No matter how much "work" the DM and players put into it, it's going to suck.

See, here is where you tell me that it sucks again, no matter how much I think, even from firsthand experience, that it doesn't. So I'd say the problem is less one of my reading comprehension and more one of your communication skills.

I have no problem with the fact that you don't like it. I don't think that DMed multiplayer modules are going to be everyone's cup of tea. And quite frankly, I don't think that DMed modules are the appropriate place for all the scripting and dialog trees. In my regular game, I plan to have most conversation trees that give you two choices: "Goodbye," and "I'd like to ask you something..." (the latter sends a server call to the DM, telling them to posses that character because a player wants to chat). I plan to use only those scripts that perform functions that I can't do on the fly. It's a time thing--I'd like to play at least twice a month, and I' like to spend the interveneing time on something other than game prep.

I'd also like to make modules designed to be played multiplayer without a DM, or solo. Those do require scripting. As Desslock said, they are functionally identical to playing BG I or II multiplayer, which I personally found to be an awful lot of fun. So again, I find your prediction that "it's going to suck even if you think it won't" puzzling. You've said that it does for you, and I believe you. Other people obviously disagree. I know a lot of people that enjoyed playing the BG games online. I can't think of a single reason why this would be any different (or at least any worse; it's significantly better in many ways, not least of which the fact that user-created content will probably be easy to come by).

And even if you are completely correct about multiplayer NWN failing to catch on in te mainstream (and I'm not convinced that you are), I'd still say that people will still be playing it years from now for the solo mods alone.


If the whole point of playing NWN is that you'd rather be playing face-to-face D&D but you cannot, then how bad NWN is as a multiplayer game doesn't matter because you have no choice.

Well, yeah. That's true. Although if it were so bad that it wasn't any fun, I'd rather not play at all.


Instead of having sex with a person, you can buy a blow-up sex doll and use that, but it's not so good either, according to Met_K.

All right, I'm about 85% convinced at this point that you, in fact, are Met_K, or possibly a cleverly constructed clone. But that's besides the point. While it may be true that I have no choice regarding the method by which I run my campaign, it does not necessarily follow that the NWN method is bad.

I'm not going to argue with you further, because you have obviously already made up your mind about two things: NWN sucks, and everyone that thinks otherwise is deluding themselves. There's not much I can say to an argument like that but "whatever." Time will tell either way, I guess.

[Doug Erickson]

I think Legolas' take on NWN's appeal is quite off. Yes, if you attempt to try to shoehorn a strict PnP campaign into NWN, it will probably suck, largely because the infrastructure doesn't support all the crazy segues and backstory DMs love to overdevelop. And that also assumes that everyone WANTS that aspect of PnP.

What NWN *does* allow for is great multiplay of IT'S OWN BREED. It may not replicate the PnP experience, but it's a hell of a lot of fun on its own terms, which is fast-paced cooperative AD&D 3E hack-and-slash with a bit of story and context thrown in for atmosphere.

I don't expect some fruity Gygaxian multiplane-spanning campaign full of politics and romance and elven intrigue or whatever. They can save that shit for Baldur's Gate 3 so the people who apparently found BG3's interparty dynamic so incredibly compelling that life without it is a shallow mockery of living can get their rocks off. And yes, the people that attempt to replicate the entire Lord of the Rings across a set of NWN modules will probably have a pretty unfun Internet multiplayer experience on their hands, no matter how badly they wish otherwise.

What I *do* expect is Tomb of Horrors or some other hackfest module type design that features good old-fashioned killing and looting and levelling and bragging. Y'know, like Diablo 2, but with a whole host of new environments and monsters and loot coming from the fertile minds of the people who appreciate hack-and-slash to the degree I do. Just because LoTR would suck as a NWN internet multiplay module doesn't mean that say, the Helm's Deep bit will as well.

And just because Baldur's Gate had a party and RTS elements doesn't mean that every single AD&D RPG that comes from Bioware should have likewise, fer chrissakes. There's quite a few great RPGs out there that don't have parties and sexxxy dark elves hitting on your non-fatty avatar, contrary to what the melodramatic reactions of a few around here might indicate. Personally, I like having a single character, since it allows me to really focus on them and chew up landscape minus constant bandboxing.

LAN play also works quite well, since you can do a good chunk of the things you'd do in a PnP session while the DM is masturbating behind his little screen, such as BS with your buddies. You can also communicate without the need to type, which allows for more frivolous conversation and less terse commands, which builds the social dynamic in which the real appeal of PnP lies. Y'know, a bunch of geeks just hangin' out, talking about what might be the geekiest thing conceivable: their lives in a world where they aren't geeks, plus stat management exercises.

NWN is a great, great hack-and-loot AD&D experience, which adequately replicates a lot of what I liked about the classic dungeon crawl modules, only in streamlined form. When you start trying to script a fucking fantasy novel, yes, it WILL get lame, just as Counterstrike might get lame if someone tried to cram a whole Tom Clancy novel into a mod. NWN is an incredibly fun way to hack monsters, collect loot, and get a bit of the good old AD&D atmosphere going on over the wire, along with pretty graphics and a questionable camera.

It is *not* a substitute for PnP, and I think Legolas' ideas that EVERYONE is going to try to replicate the PnP in their modules is incredibly silly. Survival of the fittest: the mods that don't work well under the game's core design logic, such as a port of any story-intensive, NPC-driven module, will fail. People will stop making them. What will work are quality hack-and-slash episodes, and I imagine they'll find a lot of clever ways to work around the limitations of the engine. Not every mod designer wants to the next Gary Gygax or Douglas Niles or R.A. Salvatore - some of them (like me) just want to make a good mod that'll give a group of gamers a good two to five hour campaign with some fun twists and surprises (that don't necessarily involve overwrought dialogue trees) and work their party tactics a bit.

Legolas assumes that everyone bought this game expecting to play through a Dragonlance novel at some point with their pals, which does the audience quite a disservice; not to say that a few swallowed the hype, and there's also quite a few of us having a great deal of fun with the game on its own terms.

[Mark Asher]

"It is *not* a substitute for PnP, and I think Legolas' ideas that EVERYONE is going to try to replicate the PnP in their modules is incredibly silly."

I don't think his idea was silly -- that's what a lot of people thought they'd be able to do with NWN -- take their PNP campaigns online. In fact a lot of DMs are making online versions of the PNPs from some of the comments I've read on message boards.

[Union Carbide]

As for the combat, I think it could have been made 90% better with one little change to multiplayer: use Fallout's combat style. The game is all nice and real time while people run around and explore, but you run into a hostile and smack, you're in turn based mode.

Which is all fine and dandy until you have more than one party (or the same party broken up into two sub-parties) working on different parts of a single quest. What happens to the other party when one goes into turn based mode?

[Ben Sones]

So what's wrong with playing an online RPG where you kill lots of monsters and get loot? That's the fun part, isn't it?

In some games it is. It doesn't have to be. Do you like any games (they don't have to be role-playing games) that don't involve hacking monsters and getting loot? Case in point.


I'll give you this -- if you don't want to call those games "roleplaying" games, that's fine. In turn, I don't want to play a game where I have to spend a lot of time pretending I'm an elf and doing a lot of non-combat stuff. BTW, I read a message about a new NWN online campaign starting that's "roleplaying" and one of the things the DM is insisting on is that characters walk instead of running because that promotes more roleplaying. Ugh.

Well, I agree--that does sound dumb. But I don't accept, via that isolated example, that combat is the only thing that can make an RPG compelling.


What I do want with an online RPGish game is something I can jump into quickly and have fun right away and maintain a persistent character. I'm not sold that NWN is that game yet.

I'm guessing it probably won't be. Sounds like you want to play a massively multiplayer game. Nothing wrong with that--go play one. But don't knock NWN for not being one.




I think designing good NWN mods for group play will be quite a bit different from designing PNP adventures.

Now that I agree with. I don't think it follows that "different" means "full of nonstop combat." Like I said before, I'm sure we'll get some modules like that, and I'm sure some of them will be fun. There are other possibilities too, however.


I don't think his idea was silly -- that's what a lot of people thought they'd be able to do with NWN -- take their PNP campaigns online.

I can't speak for anyone else, of course, but I'll give you my take on this. I do plan to run an online campaign. I do not expect it to work like a tabletop campaign. How could it? It's going to take a very different design approach. I have a running list of strengths and weaknesses inherent in any multiplayer NWN campaign, and the biggest (aside from the fact that players are not face to face--one very crucial difference that Legolas mentioned) is the fact that you can't improvise, at least not on a large scale. You can't create areas on the fly, so if the party decides that they want to go someplace you haven't prepared for, it'll have to wait until next week. Better to either keep the game more structured, or more focused--a campaign set in a single "hub" area where most of the action takes place, for instance. This solves a lot of problems, because you CAN improvise within the bounds of existing game areas.

Mostly I agree with Doug's statements. I think that DMs/module makers that fail to adjust their design approach to NWN's particular strengths and weaknesses will find that their games aren't much fun. But that doesn't mean that you can't run a fun, episodic campaign with persistent PCs and a storyline and recurring characters. You just need to alter your approach, and your expectations.

[Mark Asher]

I still think it's difficult to hold a computer player's interest if the action isn't cranked up significantly in a multiplayer game. Just spending 30 seconds looking at the screen while you wait for your party leader to talk to an NPC is aggravating, moreso if this is repeated periodically.

It's not that I don't think a DM can create a fun experience, but now having played NWN, my expectations that players could recreate the tabletop experience have been dashed for the most part. I think the best NWN multiplayer games will play more like a story-driven DM-controlled Diablo -- heavy on the action, light on the reading and NPC interaction.

[Ben Sones]

I still think it's difficult to hold a computer player's interest if the action isn't cranked up significantly in a multiplayer game. Just spending 30 seconds looking at the screen while you wait for your party leader to talk to an NPC is aggravating, moreso if this is repeated periodically.

Again, I agree--that doesn't sound like much fun. But you say that as though a long, scripted conversation tree with one player talking and the rest hanging around and getting bored is the only option. And I don't agree that filling the game with Diablo-style hack and slash action is the only solution (although it is a solution).

The problem here is not a lack of action, but rather a lack of interaction. One player is interacting with the game, the others are spectators. And you are right--that's bad design on the part of the module maker. As I said in my last post, scripted, tree-based conversations should be either short or infrequent in multiplayer modules. If you run conversations freeform, then anyone can participate, and that would probably be more entertaining for everyone.

Making sure eveyone has something to do most of the time will be key. But the one thing that few people have picked up on is the fact that, unlike a PnP game, you don't have to stick together. If you want to script out conversations and NPC interaction, encourage players to split up. One of the key strengths of NWN is the fact that players really can go off in all directions. I'm working on a module that depends on it, in fact. The game offers other possibilities, too. I have some ideas for things that you could only pull off with multiple DMs, for instance.

So is the game PnP on a computer? No, not really. But it's about as close as you come. In some ways its better, in others it's worse.

[Anonymous]

NWN is a great, great hack-and-loot AD&D experience, which adequately replicates a lot of what I liked about the classic dungeon crawl modules, only in streamlined form.

--snip--

Legolas assumes that everyone bought this game expecting to play through a Dragonlance novel at some point with their pals, which does the audience quite a disservice; not to say that a few swallowed the hype, and there's also quite a few of us having a great deal of fun with the game on its own terms.

The first paragraph above is EXACTLY how people described Baldur's Gate. NWN was supposed to be the anti-Baldur's Gate in this sense. Real AD&D role-playing, complete with a DM client. I mean, that was the whole goddamn point. If you say it wasn't marketed that way, then you are either deluded or are willfully denying the past, kind of like the Japanese.

Now, of course, as Doug's second quoted paragraph states, everything is crystal clear. It wasn't meant to be PnP on the computer, it was supposed to be just 3D Baldur's Gate that was more mod-able. No one thought it was bringing PnP to the desktop. That's crazy talk, and dangerous 'round these parts. The high priests of Qt3 would never be fooled by such fiddle-faddle. They saw all from the beginning, and knew.

Mark Asher summed up my point exactly, which is that the multiplayer experience in a computer game is paced completely differently from a face-to-face game. I mean, just dragging out the battleboard for a big fight starts all sorts of things going: shit, how many magic arrows do you have left? four I think. Man, do we even want to do this? Maybe we should just run. Fuck, those owlbears are coming back the other way. Gents, we're down to two Cure Light Wounds potions. Oh man, why did we open this damn door. Backs to the wall, men! The optimum online m/p pace is not the same. Look at what Philo Goodberry, if that is his real name, says he and his buddy were doing while the paladin talked to the NPCs: they were looting treasure. In other words, they were doing something, because it's a computer game and they had to have something to do. Fuck, they just let one guy read all the shit and then TELEPORTED TO HIM when he moved. Fine and dandy, except that's the antithesis of PnP. It's so obvious now, of course, that it doesn't merit posting about. That may have been the buzz on NWN messageboards, but no one here was fooled. Of course it's not PnP, and was never meant to be. Keep dreaming.

If you like non-stop hack-n-slash D&D adventure, don't want a lot of dialog or role-playing, and essentially want to recreate Diablo 2 with 3rd edition D&D rules, then yes, this is the game to buy. But that is a *huge* change from the way this game was billed.

One thing that I always wondered was how making a computer version of the D&D rules would make it a good role-playing game. The thing that makes D&D good is it's combat system: really, it's an excellent medieval/fantasy wargame. The 3rd edition rules actually clean up a lot of the combat (which was tortuous in earlier editions, thanks to unclear rules) and make it a great game for combat. Not all role-playing games are like this. Twilight 2000, Aftermath, and even Morrow Project (can you tell we were way into post-apocalypse games?) weren't good wargames because weapons were too realistic (i.e. deadly) for that. No one wanted to get into a gunfight in Aftermath, because someone was gonna die, and quick too. Role-playing was a big part of those games because any scenario based heavily on combat would be unplayable. Call of Cthulhu is probably the best role-playing game I've ever played, yet I have played many sessions of that where there wasn't a gun fired in anger. 3rd ed. D&D has such a good combat system that you don't have to role-play since combat can carry the game, and that is exactly what NWN demonstrates.

Murphy also seems to have a reading comprehension disability, since he said


you said that, years from now, nobody else will be playing this game.

I never said that, smart man. I said that few people would be playing it in multiplayer in a persistent, epic, PnP-style way that so many people (including some posting to this board) seemed to be speculating about when the game was first released. Maybe, but I doubt it. More likely, it'll be played as a 3D AD&D Diablo. And sure, there will be plenty of solo dungeons, so Bub can play all the single-player, single-character scenarios he wants. Maybe Ben will write some just for him.

[Anonymous]

The new 1.19 patch was just released. Just use the update function in the autoplay screen.

[Anonymous]

"And Ben, I sympathize. I grew up in Irvine California and that's where my old D&D friends are. I've been in Milwaukee for 7 years and never bothered finding D&D players... there's something scary about D&D players after the age of 30.

Yeah, well I don't know what your problem is, but obviously you never play make-believe with you kids if you have any, either. What the hell is wrong with adults playing D&D? As long as they are not doing it from their parents' basement and have jobs and normal social lives, what is it that you find scary? After all don't you review video games for a living? Are you over 30? Maybe you should not be the one to talk.

[Bub, Andrew]

NWN was supposed to be the anti-Baldur's Gate in this sense. Real AD&D role-playing, complete with a DM client. I mean, that was the whole goddamn point. If you say it wasn't marketed that way, then you are either deluded or are willfully denying the past, kind of like the Japanese. ... But that is a *huge* change from the way this game was billed.

I don't know man. I broke the story at Gen Con 2000 and I previewed the game something like 5 times over the years. I've interviewed Trent Oster and Drs. Ray and Greg a couple times each... never did I get the impression you got. Never did anyone say it was going to be "real AD&D role-playing, complete with a DM client" they said it was going to be as close as they could get to that. I was led to believe it would be Baldur's Gate with a 3D engine, a toolset, and a DM client... and that's what it is. Fancy that! (This is also why I was disappointed about the henchmen limitation. Based on interviews I thought you'd get a full 6 member party. That was wishful thinking on my part because Ray actually only said "You'll get to deal with henchmen, and they're like the NPCs in BG. You can even fall in love with one or two of them" - Dr. Ray at E3 2002.

Seems to me your expectations, like mine, were out of line with reality then. I also think you might have been misled by wide-eyed and non-analytical previewers who didn't listen carefully and reported potential rather than reality.


Yeah, well I don't know what your problem is, but obviously you never play make-believe with you kids if you have any, either. What the hell is wrong with adults playing D&D? As long as they are not doing it from their parents' basement and have jobs and normal social lives, what is it that you find scary? After all don't you review video games for a living? Are you over 30? Maybe you should not be the one to talk.

My daughter is two. Make believe pretty much entails me pretending to be a monster and chasing then tickling her or me pretending to enjoy tea out of her empty cups.

Hey, don't get defensive. There's nothing wrong with adults playing D&D, just the one's who play after 30 actually DO tend to live in their mother's basements ... like you suggest. I haven't found any like me (and Ben, and Jason Cross, and Jason Lutes, and presumably you) who've grown up. Ever been to Gen Con? Lovely people, just lovely, but it's amazing how many look like they never moved past High School. Or shaved. Or bathed. Heh... It's also amazing how many take on Tolkien names. The well-adjusted Post 30 D&D player is a rare find, and one I'd happily befriend! Anyway, I certainly didn't mean that as an insult to you man. I'd love to find the right players and get a game of Call of Cthulhu going on!


After all don't you review video games for a living? Are you over 30? Maybe you should not be the one to talk.

I do. Yes. And I am over 30. Yes. I review video games to supplement my writing business because I love video games and I love writing. I also do corporate communications and ad work, I review film, I write books, and I'm a stay at home dad. I shave and shower regularly too and my mom's basement is about 1000 miles away.

[Ben Sones]

As long as they are not doing it from their parents' basement and have jobs and normal social lives, what is it that you find scary?

The fact that many of them live in their parents' basements, don't have jobs, and lack normal social lives... ;)

[Anonymous]

Aftermath! I guess you are taking time off from the decade-long character creation process to post to this board. Not to mention that you are probably taking a break after your first round of combat in Twilight 2000, which you started in 1987.

Really, I'm amazed that anyone who has played those games can complain about anything taking too long. You would think that a former Morrow Project player could watch rocks erode and think it was too fast-paced.

[Dave Long]

Never did anyone say it was going to be "real AD&D role-playing, complete with a DM client" they said it was going to be as close as they could get to that.

Jesus H. Christ, Bub... talk about splitting hairs. This guy's made some valid points. I think we all can agree on that. But this is one of the most inane things I've ever seen you say.

All the previews I've read played the game up exactly as Legolas described. That's why I'm pretty surprised everyone's backing away from that now. The previews, which I assume were based on what Bioware said the game would be and hands on play, all claimed that this was PnP role-playing come to the PC. The problem seems to be that "as close as they could get to that" isn't all that close for some people.

--Dave

[Ben Sones]

I'm not backing away from it. And Legolas' complaint is not that the game fails to model PnP role-playing on the computer, but rather that it does that just fine and he finds the experience boring. You are splitting hairs, though, Bub. Every preview I've seen (including the two that I wrote) played up that aspect of the game. It even says as much on the back of the box.

And I agree that Legolas makes some good points, but I think he takes the argument too far. I think you can run the equivalent of a PnP game, with some alterations based on the medium. You can do plenty of other stuff, too--Diablo style dungeon crawls, or weird stuff like the Challenge module that BioWare made. It's pretty flexible.

But I think a lot of people are expecting to have a fun PnP style role-playing session with a bunch of strangers that they hook up with when they jump into the game, and that's a pretty unrealistic expectation. It doesn't make for very good games at conventions with actual PnP RPGs, why should it be any different here? If that's the sort of experience you want, play with people you know. Preferably a regular group.

[Mark Asher]

"But I think a lot of people are expecting to have a fun PnP style role-playing session with a bunch of strangers that they hook up with when they jump into the game, and that's a pretty unrealistic expectation."

I haven't given up on this yet, though I'm much more dubious about it now.

I think playing in a group doing a dungeon crawl will be a lot of fun. I'll be happy enough to do that and get some mods I can play offline by myself. Those will be enough to make me quite happy with NWN.

[Bub, Andrew]

Whatever Long, maybe I am inanely splitting hairs but I never got that impression so I am not disappointed that NWN isn't D&D in a box.

Maybe that's because I rarely read other people's previews. But I did cover this game extensively, from first announcement (I literally wrote the first story on it) and never once did BioWare promise anything they haven't delivered here. Maybe I asked better questions, or questioned the hype or something. For example, one of my very first questions to Oster was "Will the game support voice?" and he said he didn't think they were going to go that route. "No voice?" I thought. "How can you simulate D&D with no voice support?" The impression I got was that NWN was going to be Vampire: TM-R with better tools, rules, and game behind it.

Long: "The problem seems to be that "as close as they could get to that" isn't all that close for some people."

No, the problem is some people don't understand what is impossible when it comes to what a game can deliver effectively. Without full voice and I'd argue a video phone hookup to each player you simply cannot have NWN simulate D&D any better than it does. Legolas does have some excellent points, but most of them concerned things like alarms that ring when a friend is being attacked and other conveniences that would streamline the process.

Ok Ben, I just read the back of the box and it doesn't say that the game simulates the PnP D&D experience. But it does say you can create a universe, so that's false advertising right there.

I am misled! Woe unto me! :D

[Aszurom]

Ok... Time for me to jump in here and lay down the reality.

Over at insomniax.net, we play a fuckload of games. Basically, everything that ever got 4+ stars and can be played team-based or coop multi. We can trace this back to Dark Reign 1 or so. That's about when the group got together.

Anyway, so we know our multiplayer is the point. Now, there are some things we don't really dig about NWN, but they're minor in comparison to the complaints we had about other games. We played Diablo, D2, Dungeon Siege, and (whatever that diablo clone Westwood did... it was ok.) So, after having just come off a month of solid Dungeon Siege, and then taking a week off and then jumping into NWN with 6-hour sessions nightly since the game's release, I'd say the whole group of us is immensely pleased with the game.

We're playing it as a coop adventure, much like we played DS. However, we like this game MUCH more. Also, we're aspiring to reproduce some of the classic modules and also our own custom ones - why? Because we like a cooperative, tactical hack and slash. Also, we don't have to share the world with 1000 dweebs like in Camelot or EQ - and frankly we're about as tightly knit a group of online gamers as you're going to find.

However, I can see Leggie's points. Do I read the text? No, it's a pain in the ass. Even in single player, I just want to know what I have to go fetch and where to get it. This isn't like sitting down with Planescape Torment and savoring the story like a good novel. This is beer and pretzels and swords. That's what we wanted, that's what we got.

Now, we do recognize that there is a great potential to do much more with the game - and we intend to. At the moment, we're definitely getting our collective $50 worth out of this thing, and loving every minute of it. Do I get bored waiting on someone to go sell, or when a couple of people go get a piss-n-refill break? Yeah, but we're on Battlecom and we can talk and do other stuff. As far as what we'll continue to get out of the game after we've played the provided module, that depends on what we and the rest of the fans put back into it. I've got high hopes, and I'm not judging the ultimate potential on just what was provided out of the box... Quake didn't have CTF until somebody made it, remember.

*IX*Aszurom

[Doug Erickson]

"We're playing it as a coop adventure, much like we played DS. However, we like this game MUCH more. Also, we're aspiring to reproduce some of the classic modules and also our own custom ones - why? Because we like a cooperative, tactical hack and slash. Also, we don't have to share the world with 1000 dweebs like in Camelot or EQ."

Amen.

Reviewing a game based on expectations is ludicrous. NWN does a great job at providing an engaging and EXTREMELY EXPANDLE multiplayer AD&D 3E experience. It seems a few of you have had your eyes set on some sort of holy grail, and have mentally tailored every previous discussion about the game to fit your hopes of an online take on the PnP experience.

I have never gotten the impression that it would somehow replicate the PnP experience; for chrissakes, a little common sense indicates what an exponential (and probably fruitless) undertaking that would be. What I did expect - and received - was an evolution of D&D online multiplay, with a well-considered and accessible toolset that would allow myself and others to create loads of new content. The DM client is a nice plus, if you have a competent buddy, since it allows for a nice dynamic element and a load of unpredictability. But with the NWN engine, a module simply will NOT be fun unless its well developed in advance, and an online DM should not be the same beast as a PnP one.

A good online DM is a facilitator, not a pure creator, under the NWN scope - he gives monsters tactics, creates surprises, dispenses quests, and generally uses the strictly-defined, pre-existing hard content module to make sure the players are entertained. A certain large degree of flexibility is forfeit in order to keep the interface manageable and realistic, but any sane player should realize that such is the tradeoff of graphics versus pure imagination. There's no way for the DM to generate whole new areas and monsters on the fly, and if he did, they'd probably suck, since a couple paragraphs of description and several hundred thousand textured polygons of landscape are two VERY different beasts. A PnP DM can say "you wander into a moonlit graveyard"; a NWN DM has to make and plant each tombstone. One has the pure flexibility of imagination during the play period; the other has a mouse and a fixed GUI.

Once people realize this and use the client accordingly, I think we'll see some real works of genius. Perhaps it won't be PnP-style genius, but it'll be NWN genius, and that suits me fine. The game is delivering a fun, unique experience, and I'm really diggin' it. I'm sorry some folks can't see far enough beyond their expectations to appreciate it for what it is.

[Anonymous]

I broke the story at Gen Con 2000

You did what? Let me understand you - you found out that Neverwinter Nights would be published and broke the news that Bioware was trying to keep secret? You told the world? Investigative reporting?

[Mark Asher]

NWN was announced at Gen Con and Bub was there. Along with other writers. Like me.

[Rob O'Boston]

Its amazing. This is one of the threads I was talking about when I posted "When Game Message Boards Attack". Its like Legolas followed me back. The only difference is that besides Legolas, everyone makes a mature, thoughtful response. Thank God for Qt3.

I'm totally coming down on the side of liking and accepting NWN. I'm a little surprised that Mark seems so discouraged with the game. The game is so worth 50 bucks IMO. However, I generally wait to see where Wumpus and Chick come down on a game. Whenever they agree that a game is good, then its a great game.

[Mark Asher]

"Reviewing a game based on expectations is ludicrous."

I agree. But if I was reviewing the game, I'd have to comment on how crappy the multiplayer experience has been for me so far. Two nights and I've tried about a dozen different public games and all of them sucked. I really don't know what I'd say in a review about the multiplayer at this point. If the multiplayer's only good if you only play with people you know, that's not exactly a strength.

[Anonymous]

The game is so worth 50 bucks IMO. However, I generally wait to see where Wumpus and Chick come down on a game. Whenever they agree that a game is good, then its a great game.

I don't get it - do you own the game? If not, how do you know it is worth $50? If so, why are you waiting to see what Chick & Wumpus think?

[Mark Asher]

"I'm a little surprised that Mark seems so discouraged with the game."

I'm having a great time with the single player game. I've also had a bit of fun playing a mod or two offline. The multiplayer game for me so far hasn't been good.

[Rob O'Boston]

As evidenced by the debate on this board and other gaming boards, knowing whether a game is good or not is best left in the hands of the arcane masters. Whether I think a game is good or not is too subjective to have universal truth. Rather, we rely upon the collective 'we' to make the determination. In the case of Chick/Wumpus, I am simply making a shortcut through the use of the Yin/Yang of our religion. Is this clear my brother?

:wink:

[Rob O'Boston]

Mark, my enjoyment of the game mirrors yours. I really like the single player game, and my limited multiplayer has been just haphazard silliness. I figure in the future, after I'm done with or sick of the single player game, I'll download new single player games, or join a semi-regular group/guild to play multiplayer. And, I hope to DM a lot.

[Jason McCullough]

'I can hear the reasoned yet gratingly verbose tones of the Brian Rucker Brigade: oh dear, this sort of wanton combat does not satisfy my need to explore the many complex interactions of a fictional world riven by factional strife in a dynamic setting using multivariable calculus!'

God, I love this line. Can I get it on a shirt?

'Two nights and I've tried about a dozen different public games and all of them sucked.'

Well, *of course* public games are going to suck.

'BTW, I read a message about a new NWN online campaign starting that's "roleplaying" and one of the things the DM is insisting on is that characters walk instead of running because that promotes more roleplaying.'

I'm speechless.

[Anonymous]

And Legolas' complaint is not that the game fails to model PnP role-playing on the computer, but rather that it does that just fine and he finds the experience boring.

Ho ho! You are quite the Sophist, Sones. I did not say this. Please provide the textual evidence. I hope your modules provide your players with further examples of Sophistry.

For the record, the statement that the game models PnP "just fine" but that it is "boring" is an oxymoron for people who like pen-and-paper role-playing. Like me.



And, I hope to DM a lot.

Your switch to a 9-5 job has paid off handsomely!

[Tom Chick]

Just to briefly weigh in:

1) I'm reviewing NWN and have easily spent 70+ hours with it so far, single-player, multi-player, and with the tool set. You can mark me down as a bona fide NWN fanboi.

2) I'd like to state, for the record, that we here at Qt3 broke the news about Bub breaking the news about Neverwinter Nights. Until it was revealed on our message boards, no one knew anything about this. Asher and I are the Woodward and Bernstein of the gaming industry. And in case you're wondering, he's the one played by Dustin Hoffman and I'm the one played by Robert Redford. Thank you and good night.

-Tom

[Bub, Andrew]

You did what? Let me understand you - you found out that Neverwinter Nights would be published and broke the news that Bioware was trying to keep secret? You told the world? Investigative reporting?

Heh, sort of, but nothing so grandiose. I got the scoop about a day before the press conference Mark and I attended. I wrote most of the story then. I kept it secret but told my editor, Bill McClendon at Gamecenter (he can confirm this) that I would have a big story for him early that Thursday. I went to the press conference (with Mark and 300 other Gen Con people - 3E rules and the D&D Movie were announced there too) and got a few more details. I added them, wrote it up and sent it in just before I went to lunch with Mark and Krys Card (who wasn't the source). The story went up at noon CST that day, about 2 hours or so before Interplay could release the press document which meant GC had the story hours before anyone else could post it. Mark could have beaten me to the story, sure, but he didn't get the tip I did and I think he was reporting for CGW.

I could have deceived my source at Interplay (who isn't at Interplay any longer) and actually *broken* the story like some sort of amateur Woodward and Bernstein but I said I wouldn't, so I didn't, and my source has proven useful since then.

Anyway, CNet congratulated me *on breaking the story*. I got an email from the top (a guy named Brown, not Ken Brown of CGW) saying so and a lot more work from them until they shuffled off this Internet coil.

But I don't think that means I've scored my Investigative Journalism Merit Badge just yet.

EDIT: Changed Noon PST to Noon CST above.

[Ben Sones]

I agree. But if I was reviewing the game, I'd have to comment on how crappy the multiplayer experience has been for me so far. Two nights and I've tried about a dozen different public games and all of them sucked. I really don't know what I'd say in a review about the multiplayer at this point. If the multiplayer's only good if you only play with people you know, that's not exactly a strength.

So what specifically put you off in the multiplayer?

In any event, I'm not sure I like the idea of having only multiplayer games that cater to the "jump in and go" crowd, games that are shallow enough to be enjoyable even when you play with an ever-changing stream of perfect strangers. And not to put too fine a point on it, but we already have those. Lots of them. Is it such a crime that we don't have one more?

Not that we couldn't. There is no reason why NWN can't offer that, too. You could recreate Diablo, nearly to the letter, in this engine. But I'm glad it offers another alternative, too.

[Bub, Andrew]

"I really don't know what I'd say in a review about the multiplayer at this point. If the multiplayer's only good if you only play with people you know, that's not exactly a strength."

Why isn't it? It sounds like a strength to me. And I think it's why BioWare worked so hard to make sure they had a big single player game. This weakness you're talking about is inherant to a game like this, I think. Actually D&D has the same "weakness" really, doesn't it? Anyway, this is why I want to go through a Tom Ohle dungeon mastered experience. Find out what it's like for an experienced DM before I judge the game based on strangers new to the game.

[Ben Sones]

Ho ho! You are quite the Sophist, Sones. I did not say this. Please provide the textual evidence. I hope your modules provide your players with further examples of Sophistry.

I'm not sure that "sophistry" is the word you are looking for. But okay, here's what you said in your first post:


After playing it for three hours, I can see what would have worked best: a series of scripted, set-piece combats against ever-tougher monsters where a balanced party is needed for success. Engage! Defend! Cast a spell! Cast a counterspell! Oh, a sneak attack by master rogue! All action-oriented endeavors. The computer is about action. The sit-down, talk-it-out, DM-led think-tank approach to medieval problem-solving only works face-to-face, because once you remove all that multi-person interaction, you realize how little there actually is to DO. Unless you are fighting nearly all the time. This is not a theory, citizens. It is now proven fact. Bioware has brought pen-and-paper multiplay to the PC, and it blows ass.

Using my Sophistric Powers, I jumped to the conclusion that you felt that BioWare had modeled PnP role-playing but that it just wasn't fun (for you) on a computer when, well, when you said exactly that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the point of the above paragraph is that you feel they shouldn't have tried to make a PnP experience, that they would have been better off doing something tailored more specifically for the computer? I feel compelled to ask, because you've accused me of misrepresenting you twice now merely because I responded to things that you have stated in (seemingly) clear terms.

[Rob O'Boston]

Yes!!!! Chick's in! Now, just wumpus to go. Come on big W, fly baby fly!


Also, I may not have broken any stories (I was apparently busy at my 9-5 job??), but I can lay claim to the first 100+ post thread on the new and maybe improved (I miss my old blue screen with all the daily posts) Qt3 board. See the NWN Letdown thread.

[wumpus]

The game is so worth 50 bucks IMO. However, I generally wait to see where Wumpus and Chick come down on a game. Whenever they agree that a game is good, then its a great game.
Jesus. I hope you like buying two to three games a year, then.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure that "sophistry" is the word you are looking for.

My dearest Benjamin, it is said that if hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue, then sophistry is the tribute lies pay to the truth!



After playing it for three hours, I can see what would have worked best: a series of scripted, set-piece combats against ever-tougher monsters where a balanced party is needed for success. Engage! Defend! Cast a spell! Cast a counterspell! Oh, a sneak attack by master rogue! All action-oriented endeavors. The computer is about action. The sit-down, talk-it-out, DM-led think-tank approach to medieval problem-solving only works face-to-face, because once you remove all that multi-person interaction, you realize how little there actually is to DO. Unless you are fighting nearly all the time. This is not a theory, citizens. It is now proven fact. Bioware has brought pen-and-paper multiplay to the PC, and it blows ass.

Using my Sophistric Powers, I jumped to the conclusion that you felt that BioWare had modeled PnP role-playing but that it just wasn't fun (for you) on a computer when, well, when you said exactly that.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the point of the above paragraph is that you feel they shouldn't have tried to make a PnP experience, that they would have been better off doing something tailored more specifically for the computer? I feel compelled to ask, because you've accused me of misrepresenting you twice now merely because I responded to things that you have stated in (seemingly) clear terms.

Nowhere in anything you quoted did I say that NWN did PnP "just fine." It tried to include many of the elements of PnP, but the particular combination of game elements they ended up with (see my problems with following text, messaging others, etc.) just produced a mess. What they tried to implement didn't work AND the way it was implemented didn't work either.


Also, I may not have broken any stories (I was apparently busy at my 9-5 job??)

Aren't you the guy who traded his old accounting job for an internal accounting job with fewer work hours? If so that is more time to play NWN!!

[Mark Asher]

"I got the scoop about a day before the press conference Mark and I attended."

I was there for CGW and since they were doing an exclusive story on NWN, I knew about it weeks before it was announced. We were NDA'd of course.

I think Desslock knew about it before the magazines even.

[Jason Cross]

Even if everything "Legolas" (original!) complained about was true, um... I don't care. I played through the extremely long, well-paced, interesting, and satisfying single-player game. It was better than Baldur's Gate. I didn't miss having a party, because managing one guy cut out a whole hell of a lot of tedium. (I did kinda miss Minsc and Boo)

The BG games had god-awful multiplayer. Worse than NWN by a mile. It's not like those were bad games.

[Mark Asher]

"So what specifically put you off in the multiplayer?"

So far all the games I've joined have either been cases of mass confusion or chaos. Some are DMless and we run around and try to figure out what to do. In one I was killed and respawned in a jail and no one knew how to let me out. In another we went through a zone and a huge pack of monsters was waiting for us immediately on the other side. We couldn't even move forward. In another a pack of 8 of us fought a boss for literally 5-10 minutes. I felt like I was witnessing one of those giant fleet battles in MOO2 where the AI takes an eternity to move its ships.

It's also hard to join a game in progress and find the other players. Even if it's at the game's beginning, everyone's running around looking for potions and stuff, and some players get bored and wander off to look for something to fight.

I also wonder if the dynamic challenge code works right? Some games are advertised for levels 1-20, so you can have a wide range of characters. As a level 7 character, I can usually do nothing to the monsters. Maybe it's because other players are level 15 or something? I suspect that for public games, soon you will need to be at the level cap to be effective.

In the couple of games I joined with DMs, they would spawn in monster after monster until we were dead. One even spawned in three dragons for some reason.

I'm a bit discouraged from even looking for multiplayer games at this point. Not a single one has been fun.

[Mark Asher]

"I really don't know what I'd say in a review about the multiplayer at this point. If the multiplayer's only good if you only play with people you know, that's not exactly a strength."

Why isn't it? It sounds like a strength to me. snip

If you can only have fun playing with friends -- and I'm not saying that's the case, but it may be -- then your viable multiplayer options are quite limited.

Now, if you want to say that's a strong point, we'll just have to disagree.

[Mark Asher]

Just to briefly weigh in:

1) I'm reviewing NWN and have easily spent 70+ hours with it so far, single-player, multi-player, and with the tool set. You can mark me down as a bona fide NWN fanboi.

snip

-Tom

Tom, have you played public multiplayer games or just messed with it on your LAN, where presumably you can talk to one another? If you've done both, I'm curious to know how playing with strangers and using text chat worked out for you?

[Supertanker]

I'm a bit discouraged from even looking for multiplayer games at this point. Not a single one has been fun.

Is this a problem with the game or with the players? Without strong mods around, idiots will take over any public online game. There are only a couple of public servers I will play Day of Defeat or (used to play) CS on. I figure with a more complex game like NWN those problems will only be magnified, and so far that is the case. I've found a couple of public games that were fun, but they are needles in the haystack. Of course, this was a problem with PnP D&D also. Playing with my friends was fun, and playing with some random pack of weirdos at a game convention was not unless there was a good DM present.

[Murph]

So far all the games I've joined have either been cases of mass confusion or chaos. Some are DMless and we run around and try to figure out what to do. In one I was killed and respawned in a jail and no one knew how to let me out. In another we went through a zone and a huge pack of monsters was waiting for us immediately on the other side. We couldn't even move forward. In another a pack of 8 of us fought a boss for literally 5-10 minutes. I felt like I was witnessing one of those giant fleet battles in MOO2 where the AI takes an eternity to move its ships.

It's also hard to join a game in progress and find the other players. Even if it's at the game's beginning, everyone's running around looking for potions and stuff, and some players get bored and wander off to look for something to fight.

This sounds mostly like bad module designing. Not to say that makes for an invalid point, because your reasoning certainly stands -- I'd be bummed, too, if I were you -- but it sounds like you got sucky modules. My time in multiplayer has been limited since retail, but in the beta all we had was multiplayer, and I played through the first chapter multiple times with a lot of different people, and I haven't a single bad report.

[Mark Asher]

Bad players, bad mod design -- at the end of the day it doesn't matter because I can't find a good public game to play in. If I was writing a review, I'd definitely point out that. The reader could draw his own conclusions as to the cause, but the end result is that so far public games have been sucky.

Just to contrast this with Diablo II, there were plenty of bad games, but it was also easy to find good ones. It probably helped that there was no editor.

The multiplayer's been a bit laggy for me too. Nothing too horrible, but I've warped a number of times and my character will pause a lot. There don't seem to be any kind of predictive algorithms at work like the MMOGs use to disguise lag.

[Tom Chick]

Tom, have you played public multiplayer games or just messed with it on your LAN, where presumably you can talk to one another? If you've done both, I'm curious to know how playing with strangers and using text chat worked out for you?

Both. Playing on a LAN is, of course, a superior experience, even with a crappy mod (the single player campaign isn't too awful for MP, but it's not ideal). At this point, playing online mainly works if you approach it as a Diablo-esque experience: combat, level up, buy stuff.

The problem is that first person shooters, real time strategy games, and Diablo have conditioned us to think multiplayer means 'log on, jump in, enoy'. That's definitely not the case with NWN, and some of Legolas' points are certainly well taken. But NWN will require a bit more time for a) communities and b) well-done modules to come together. I have no doubt both of these things will happen.

As for communicating, the V menu works pretty well but typing isn't too odious. Combat moves a little too quickly for me, though, and I want to pause even during MP games, which shouldn't be a problem with a good group. My biggest MP problem was targeting spells without pausing and without accidentally hitting good guys (tip: move the camera to a direct overhead view).

-Tom

[mtkafka]

If the sales are good with NWN (which they seem to be), I really hope they switch to a non DnD roleplaying system AFTER the Star Wars game. Its not that DnD is bad, but for a crpg system it sorta lacks these days, due mostly to its imbalanced combat. There's various class balance issues in DnD that are more evident when played online. First off, casters are uselss if you can't rest and theres no way to regain spell's, whereas melee classes can just sip one of many potions for hp. Rogues dont have NEARLY the fun as a PnP class rogue does. Its more a limit because alot of DnD rogue skills are non combat based and NWN is mostly, not completely, a combat oriented game. Archery should be more deadly though I think its the problem with most crpgs in that you dont engage in combat til you're about 20 feet away (due to viewable areas and whatnut). Characters can get too powerful with better items than with skills, especially considering magic items.... Anyway, most of this could be modded, but some of it is so hardcoded due to its based on DnD 3e.

Overall I pretty much like NWN, but I just dont like alot of the DnD ruleset for a computer rpg anymore. Its the spellmem per 8 hours thing that annoys me the most, and the level based system is just so... old. In a pnp game alot of spellcasting in DnD is NOT combat based which is why i dont think DnD is the best crpg ruleset to use (since really, most crpg's ARE combat based). Dont get me wrong though, in tabletop DnD, spellcasters are VERY VERY powerful and fun (especially with non combat based spells- same with rogues), but playing a crpg version of DnD they just usually feel weak.

Anyway, I think there will be some good stuff released for NWN in the future either by Bioware or the fans. I'm pretty sure there will be a lot of modding going on for this game.

etc

[Jason Becker]

"So what's wrong with playing an online RPG where you kill lots of monsters and get loot? That's the fun part, isn't it?"

For the uber l33t dudes or whatever they call themselves maybe it is. For me camping a site to kill the same fricking things 100 times over is ohhh rather boring. If this is role-playing then anything is...

"If I was writing a review, I'd definitely point out that. The reader could draw his own conclusions as to the cause, but the end result is that so far public games have been sucky. "


After a single week? Here's a small clue Asher maybe...just maybe allot of the people don't have a freaking clue as to how to use the tools or DM client yet and/or are still getting a feel for the game. I mean what do people expect? To see the RPG equivalent of Counter-Strike or DoD after a week of release?

I can't believe their are guys here who are 'professional' writers judging the MP of the game as a bomb after a week or two of release.

I guess in the future I need to pay more attention to the writers names of some of the reviews for the gaming mags I get.

[Mark Asher]

"I can't believe their are guys here who are 'professional' writers judging the MP of the game as a bomb after a week or two of release."

Guess what. Most of the writers who are reviewing it have likely already turned in their reviews. Let's see....

Gamespot's review has been out for a couple of days at least.

So has Gamespy's.

IGN has a review up.

So does Games Domain.

The mags probably have their reviews submitted by now.

What do you want reviewers to do? Wait a couple of months for the fan community to learn the tools and start producing better mods? Wait for the morons to get tired of the game and stop playing it?

All I've said is that my experiences so far have been poor ones. Should I just continue playing until my views coincide with yours?

[Ben Sones]

No, but if I were reviewing it, I'd also try to put together a group of friends for a game or two, to see whether the suckiness that you experienced is an unavoidable aspect of the game's design, or merely bad luck in choosing random games to jump into online (whether because they feature poorly designed modules, or because they are full of idiots, or because you joined the adventure too late--in your case, it sounds like it might have been all three). I've had a lot of fun running (and playing in) several mini-modules with people I know so far. Actually, I've also had fun in several public games that I've played.

The thing is, any game that allows users to create their own content is going to end up with some bad content. It's pretty much inevitable. It's also going to end up with some really good content, however, so I'd be cautious about writing off the multiplayer experience too quickly. There's nothing wrong with pointing out that it's not the sort of game where you can just jump into any running game in multiplayer and have fun (because it isn't). But it's also not entirely fair to expect a Quake-like experience in multiplayer and, when you don't find one, blame the game. It wasn't designed to play like that.

[Anonymous]

"Your switch to a 9-5 job has paid off handsomely!"

BEST. CAREER. MOVE. EVAR.


Thanks for paying attention Legs. I think Bub mentioned that you know us pretty well. Is sinner under that blonde wig?

[Tom Ohle]

I don't think playing the campaign co-op with strangers is the thing to do. You generally don't have time to play through a whole game with those people, and even if you did, once you logged off that server, you'd likely never go back to it (unless you found some great people that you want to play with again).

It will take some time for some good multi-player modules to hit the servers, since good ones will likely take a fair bit of work. Hop on a Contest of Champions server to get a bit of an idea of how fun multi-player NWN can be--even against total strangers, it's a blast. It's more fun with friends, but what isn't? Nothing quite like trash-talking ;)

[Mark Asher]

Legolas,

Can you email me at [email protected]? Thanks.

[Jason Becker]

"All I've said is that my experiences so far have been poor ones. Should I just continue playing until my views coincide with yours?"

If you actually read what I've been saying I havn't actually said I think NWN MP rocks and you should think so too. Read the posts again if needed. Its been about not taking into account the factors I listed about why MP may still be crude for people and not the best expereience. Admitting it might take time for the MP to get going. Instead of just saying the MP sucks and Bioware screwed up. Anything thats going have a chance to be good will take time. Time tool learn the tools well, time to learn the DM client well etc etc etc. People who think the game is going to be this perfect PnP experience converted to the online world the instant they open the box and try it are just fooling themleves. Will NWN turn out to be great? Maybe for some yes, maybe for others not so good. But completely judging the whole thing flawed after one week? I do consider rather lame and disappointing for the 'professional' writers out there.


Thats my point.

[Anonymous]

I love this game! I'm not going to bother over-thinking the issue. Fun is fun.

Check out the screens of my Necromancer. I can't wait to play more of this on LAN! I won't post the pictures directly since I know most of you don't care, but here's some grabs.

http://users.techline.com/thomps23/necro2.jpg

http://users.techline.com/thomps23/necro3.jpg

http://users.techline.com/thomps23/necro4.jpg

[Mark Asher]

"Maybe for some yes, maybe for others not so good. But completely judging the whole thing flawed after one week? I do consider rather lame and disappointing for the 'professional' writers out there."

Jason, most reviews are written after a week or two with a game. Most reviews make judgements and pronouncements. That's just how the editorial side of this business is set up. I'll be the first to agree that the process is more rushed than I'd like, but it's likely most writers wouldn't want to spend much more time with a game anyway.

In my case I haven't written a formal review, just posted my thoughts about my NWN experiences on a message board. The single player's been good, but the multiplayer's been disappointing enough to make me think that NWN multiplayer just isn't ever going to be what I originally expected it to be. I think it can be better, but I don't think DM run games are going to be the panacea for online RPGs like I once thought.

I think the players will gravitate towards DM-run games that play like Diablo with a DM spicing up the action every now and then. I don't think story-driven, plot-heavy DM games will go anywhere.

That said, I always reserve the right to be wrong. :)

[Anonymous]

I've been playing on LAN with a friend and its been totally awesome.

[Anonymous]

I've been playing on LAN with a friend and its been totally awesome.

THAT'S SWEET DUDE!!!!

[Desslock]

>>"I got the scoop about a day before the press conference Mark and I attended."
>I was there for CGW and since they were doing an exclusive story on NWN, I knew about it weeks before it was announced. We were NDA'd of course.
>I think Desslock knew about it before the magazines even

Yes. Bub claiming credit for designing, developing, and then revealing the story of his internally developed game, Neverwinter Nights, and its inception is more Bub crazy-speak. I think he has a regular column of it.

[Bub, Andrew]

Yes. Bub claiming credit for designing, developing, and then revealing the story of his internally developed game, Neverwinter Nights, and its inception is more Bub crazy-speak.

Bah. It doesn't matter who knew what when, though I don't doubt that you did know it before anyone. The key is, you didn't publish it. Unlike Mark I wasn't NDA'd. I got the tip. I wrote the story. I sent it in. I saw it published hours before Interplay made the official announcement. My friends, that's the definition of "breaking the story" and CNet said as much to me. I didn't claim I deserved the Pulitzer for it, though a nomination would have been nice.


I think he has a regular column of it.

Actually, I have four.

[Anonymous]

I saw it published hours before Interplay made the official announcement.

You just said you sent it in after the press conference where it was announced.

[Bub, Andrew]

Good catch, I meant before Interplay sent out the official press release. (I said that earlier, too.)

[Mark Asher]

I saw it published hours before Interplay made the official announcement.

You just said you sent it in after the press conference where it was announced.

I await the reconciliation of Mr. Bub's contrary statements with pleasure.

[Mark Asher]

Good catch, I meant before Interplay sent out the official press release. (I said that earlier, too.)

So you "broke" a story by sending in the story after the official press conference?

Attaboy! Bravo! Woot!

[Bub, Andrew]

Yep, mine was the first news story regarding NWN to appear on the net or in print. As I understand it, that's what "breaking the story" means.

[Anonymous]

Yep, mine was the first news story regarding NWN to appear on the net or in print. As I understand it, that's what "breaking the story" means.

Only when the information is previously unknown. "Breaking the story" means bringing to light new information. You were at a press conference where the story was announced. If Michael Jordan holds a press conference to announce he is retiring, can a news network claim it "broke the story" because it got its web page updated first? No.


My friends, that's the definition of "breaking the story" and CNet said as much to me.

If CNet gave you credit for inventing flying cars, would you take it?


I didn't claim I deserved the Pulitzer for it

No, instead you brought up this ridiculous claim, unsolicited, twice ("I literally wrote the first story on NWN!") in an attempt to somehow bolster your credibility when discussing NWN, as though you are an expert because you went to a press conference. Guys like Desslock, if he knew about it months in advance, clearly were more informed than you but you don't see him posting stupid claims about "breaking the news" or being a big cheese game expert to support whatever opinion he has of the game. It's pathetic, man.

[Tom Chick]

This just in!

I'd like to break a story, if I may. Here it is: I just finished the single player campaign for Neverwinter Nights, the game introduced to the world by Andrew "Scoop" Bub!

Ph33r my 733t journalism skillz!

-Tom

[Jason McCullough]

Is this some sort of journalist infighting thing?

[Tom Chick]

Naw, we're just making fun of Andrew. Now leave us alone and go get your own colleagues to make fun of. Err, of which to make fun.

-Tom

[Mark Asher]

Is this some sort of journalist infighting thing?

It's like cock fighting, which is illegal, so you're guilty just for observing it.

People like you disgust me!

[Bub, Andrew]

Hi Jason,
Well, whatever all this is it's taken me completely by surprise and I think it's extraordinarily petty. I mean, Bruce Geryk... er... Guest does have a point. I can see where he's coming from. But I didn't mean it that way on a conscious level - I wasn't trying to bolster my credibility so much as prove that BioWare, from the start, didn't advertise NWN the way Legolas claims they did. As someone who once really wanted to be a journalist, that email from CNet's news department was something I was actually pretty proud of. I still am proud of it, maybe that's pathetic too. Fuck it, who cares?

Anyway, I'm pretty much done with this whole thing.

[Alan Au]

Personally, I think Bub's claim has been exaggerated, although it sounds more like a semantic misunderstanding than a conscious attempt to deceive.

I would consider "breaking the story" to mean "first to find out and publicize." It's hard to say whether being first to post on a website constitutes breaking the story. Then again, if nobody posts the news...

- Alan

[Desslock]

>Only when the information is previously unknown. "Breaking the story" means bringing to light new information. You were at a press conference where the story was announced. If Michael Jordan holds a press conference to announce he is retiring, can a news network claim it "broke the story" because it got its web page updated first? No.

Yeah, it's pretty silly. Andrew, even your revised claim is just wrong. I printed a story on the game without revealing its title the day before Gen Con http://desslock.gamespot.com/archives/199908/19990805.html, and followed it it up the next day with a more detailed announcement that was up, at GameSpot, long before your article. My first story also contains a cryptic reference to Icewind Dale, which was a couple of months away from being announced.

Essentially you're claiming credit for announcing a game that was announced at a press conference, and even that claim is wrong since major sites such as Gamespot (and GameSpy, as I recall), already had coverage online.

>- I wasn't trying to bolster my credibility so much as prove that BioWare, from the start, didn't advertise NWN the way Legolas claims they did

Well, sorry if this seems like pick-on-Andrew-day, but that's also wrong. The official press release announcing the game indicated that Neverwinter Nights would provide the "ultimate D&D experience", one which would create an environment akin to pen and paper D&D -- D&D in a box.

[Mark Asher]

"I wasn't trying to bolster my credibility so much as prove that BioWare, from the start, didn't advertise NWN the way Legolas claims they did."

"I don't know man. I broke the story at Gen Con 2000 and I previewed the game something like 5 times over the years. I've interviewed Trent Oster and Drs. Ray and Greg a couple times each... never did I get the impression you got."

How is that presenting proof? All it's doing is attempting to bolster your credibility, as Guest correctly pointed out.

"As someone who once really wanted to be a journalist, that email from CNet's news department was something I was actually pretty proud of. I still am proud of it, maybe that's pathetic too."

It was likely from Gamecenter, not CNET's news department. The "Brown" you mentioned had to be Michael Brown, who was the head guy at Gamecenter after Alice Hill left. Not that this really matters, but I thought you might like to know who sent you that email.

"Well, whatever all this is it's taken me completely by surprise and I think it's extraordinarily petty."

You had numerous opportunities to correct your original statement. You chose instead to dig yourself into a deeper hole with each new statement. Surprise! You've buried yourself.

What did you want? A free pass on your false claim?

[Toddy]

Who gives a fuck who announced what, who broke stories, broke wind, broke the next door neighbor's window with a baseball, blah, blah, blah. And as goofy as it is for Bub to take credit for breaking the story about Neverwinter Nights, it's equally goofy to write two dozen posts making fun of him for it, and essentially making rival claims regarding who wrote about the game first.

[Anonymous]

Who gives a fuck who announced what, who broke stories, broke wind, broke the next door neighbor's window with a baseball, blah, blah, blah. And as goofy as it is for Bub to take credit for breaking the story about Neverwinter Nights, it's equally goofy to write two dozen posts making fun of him for it, and essentially making rival claims regarding who wrote about the game first.

YAY!!! Brett Todd is back.

You're right Brett. I invented Canadian bacon. Pay me. Good night!

[Tom Chick]

Welcome here, Brett! Woo-hoo! Now stick around.

As for making fun of Bub, I'm allowed to, since Bub and I have a history. It involves a heist gone bad, a suitcase full of unmarked bills, and a swarthy Mexican beauty in Amarillo. But other than that, I'm not at liberty to talk about it.

I would like to point out that I refrain from correcting his grammatical errors and I don't contradict him when he trashes JRR Tolkein, so, well, that's a point for me.

-Tom

[Murph]

Wow. I feel sorry for Bub. I don't think he meant any harm, really. 'Spose I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

Anyway, I love Neverwinter Nights...Isn't that what this thread is supposed to be about?

I feel so sorry for all those poor joes who have gone out and bought but haven't been able to play it yet due to one incompatibility issue or another. Must totally suck.

[Mark Asher]

Just curious, but how has lag been for people in Internet games. It's been bad enough to annoy me. Since I've had DSL I can't remember a game I've played online that lagged as much.

It's not that the game is unplayable -- far from it -- but it's dang jerky. I think BioWare really needs to work on the netcode.

[Murph]

Not too bad, but it does seem like, occasionally, when I'm running, every now and then my character will shift, like he's being re-aligned with the server or something. Is that what you meant?

It's been pretty rare for me, mostly, but I haven't been playing online that much, either.

[Anonymous]

Who gives a fuck who announced what, who broke stories, broke wind, broke the next door neighbor's window with a baseball, blah, blah, blah.

If you are a professional, you should behave like a professional. End of story.

[Union Carbide]

Just curious, but how has lag been for people in Internet games. It's been bad enough to annoy me. Since I've had DSL I can't remember a game I've played online that lagged as much.

It's not that the game is unplayable -- far from it -- but it's dang jerky. I think BioWare really needs to work on the netcode.

Lag is bad in NWN for the same reason that it was bad when RtCW and MOHAA came out: Too many people running listen servers on crappy hardware/56k modems. Look for servers with "Dedicated" in the title and you'll have considerably less lag.

[Kyle Wilson]

Just curious, but how has lag been for people in Internet games.

I can't speak to that... I'm more impressed by the fact that the game lags in single player. I just finished the single player campaign, and noticed several incidents of my character popping as if he was on a bad UT server. This only happened a handful of times in ~60 hours of play, and the game is still lots and lots of fun, but it's pretty baffling.

[Anonymous]

Isn't it kind-of up to the person whether he enjoys the game or not? Hell, I'm sure you could hit Google and do a search for Daikatana only to find that there's a small hard-core community who just loves that game and thinks it's the next coming of jesus. Eye of the beholder, ya know.

Not really fair or even appropriate to try to tell someone that they are wrong for liking something. It'd be like me trying to tell you that you are wrong for liking tomato juice. You may love it, I may hate it, but I'm not going to convince you that you should hate it, too.

Not sure why you even care if other people like it. If you don't like NWN multiplayer, don't play it. No need to go on some sort of mission to show the world that the game sucks (in your opinion).

in short, let it go.

[Jason McCullough]

One of those poor fucks with incompatability problems would be me. SBLive, geforce 4, amd 2000, half gig of RAM, and I can't even get through the character creation screen without it doing a wierd lockup. The inteface freezes, but the sound continues to play. Yes, I have the latest drivers, and no, disabling all 3d sound nor turning directsound hardware acceleration changes anything.

I can play it with sound disabled, but that's a little too much cognitive dissonance for me. Christ, what happened? BG2 was bulletproof.

Back to Morrowind until the next patch.

[Jason McCullough]

Wait, scratch that: I can't get out of the character creation screen with sound disabled. Christ.

[Anonymous]

You're right Brett. I invented Canadian bacon. Pay me. Good night!

Oh puhlease. I invented the Canadian bacon-and-pineapple pizza.

[Desslock]

>Who gives a fuck who announced what, who broke stories, broke wind, broke the next door neighbor's window with a baseball, blah, blah, blah. And as goofy as it is for Bub to take credit for breaking the story about Neverwinter Nights

I definitely give a fuck about folks here breaking their neighbour's windows with baseball bats. Please provide those anecdotes immediately.

The only reason that nonsense was prolonged was because he kept reiterating his claim (and he was the only one claiming anything) in a misguided attempt to increase his credibility.

On the NWN compatibility front -- I've gotten a lot of email from people with AMDs complaining about crashes. No one ever tells me what motherboard they have, so it may be the pre-A VIA chipset problem again.

Stefan

[Mark Asher]

I have an AMD chip and I've only had one crash. The biggest issue I have is with lag in multiplayer games.

[Anonymous]

This is a riot. Bragging about being the first to turn in a story after a press conference. Oh, Andrew, we all defer to your grand journalistic skills. Quick, call Bob Woodward's agent!

The sweet, wonderful, and almost cute-in-a-puppy-dog-innocence way is how Andrew being so impressed with himself for this shows what a big-time journalistic success he is.

"Keep it up, Bub, you're hilarious!" as Wolverine would say.

[Aszurom]

I would just like to point out that it was ME who directed the attention of everybody then on the board - including the illustious Baron Erik Von Wolpaw to the existence and groovacious magnitude of Serious Sam.

If anybody here ever broke anything, by god it was me.

[Gordon Berg]

On the NWN compatibility front -- I've gotten a lot of email from people with AMDs complaining about crashes. No one ever tells me what motherboard they have, so it may be the pre-A VIA chipset problem again.


No problems here on my AMD (ECS motherboard with the SIS chip), so the older via chipset theory sounds like a winner. God knows I love to blame it for just about everything else.


Note to the Audience: If it seems like there's an unproportional backlash against Andrew in this thread, please don't focus on whether or not it's deserved, but instead upon the fact that you're merely watching history repeat itself -- these guys are transplanting behavior learned on another message board from long, long ago...

{edited to remove the redundant use of the word "merely" in the last sentence...Christ I suck as a writer}