I love their Adventure Path conversion that is basically straight up a single game worth of content per act. Although the way that the way that they implemented the rules is basically like having a DM that is your partner’s ex.
For a generous definition of “these days”, check out the pillars of eternity games. They’re very good and clearly a love letter to Baldur’s gate. Unfortunately the team is now making a Skyrim-like for some reason, but I hope they come back and finish the main game story sometime.
There’s also that solasta game that’s DND 5e but on a smaller budget from a few years ago.
I’ve been wanting to check out Rogue Trader now that that’s out. I loved Kingmaker and Wotr from Owlcat (with the caveat that I always disable the crusade and kingmaking modes…)
Its pretty solid but… limited. You can tell just by looking at the map that they intend to fill it out with DLC over the next couple years. Which is honestly on brand for a TRPG based game especially a games workshop IP.
Is it bad that I dont consider it all that bad since expansion modules have been a thing in RPGs for decades and DLC are just a further evolution therein?
As long as the base game justifies the price I don’t mind as much. I thi the practice is worse when you don’t get a full story and it feels like “pay 40 dollars to see the end!”
I usually catch these on sale anyway. I’m the worst type of customer for Owlcat for sure.
Oh its fine on that front, id say it probably has a out as much content as Pillars of eternity. Though I do suspect they will give more endings in time, but that is moreso owlcat being full of perfectionists than anything else.
I couldn’t with Baldur’s Gate. I don’t know what the hell people are doing playing turn based games in 2024, I hate that so much. I hope elder scrolls doesn’t take too many cues from BG3
If I’m playing a table top game I understand it HAS to be turn based. It’s a necessity. But with a video game, turn based is outdated and slows combat to a crawl, and makes it about guessing and mathing instead of actual fighting skill. I personally hate it and the moment I went into my first battle in BG3 and saw it was turn based, I turned it off and never went back
Not liking it does not mean it’s outdated. There’s a lot of us that like it as the success of XCOM and BG3 show. We’re allowed to like things that you don’t.
I’m of the exact opposite opinion. Take the last two Pathfinder games. So much complexity about what you can and can’t do within melee (5 foot step, melee spell prep gets AOO, have to prep then step in, etc.), but it’s all wasted because the CPU can trigger those same actions faster than a human possibly can, and do it across many combatants simultaneously. It ends up being about building stats/feats that win instead of tactical combat.
It’s a shame you turned it off the first time you realized it was turn based. I have a friend that hated turn-based combat. BG3 made it so he nopes out of real time combat in his favorite games prior to BG3.
For me, turn based is top tier RPG.
Edit: that said, Elder Scrolls is more of a simulationist immersion game and does not need real time turn-based combat.
My first TES game was Arena. I’m familiar with the way it used to be (and still wish we had Thaumaturgy and Mysticism). I still think those games were simulationist immersion games. No other series would let you essentially live a life as a burglar in a fantasy world. I don’t think being simulationist immersion games precludes them from having stats. I do think it means they wouldn’t really be the same if they were turn-based (which is what I was talking about).
Edit: when this posted I saw that I typed “real time” instead of turn-based in my last comment. So I guess I did indicate I wanted turn-based combat, but this was a mistake.
I see where you’re coming from, though when they were using attack rolls to determine hits and was essentially real-time-turns I think I still disagree with your definition. I don’t have a good counter to your point, I just don’t agree on the words used now =P
So aside from Baldurs gate 3, who’s actually making good RPGs these days?
Owlcat is.
Wrath of the Righteous, and Rogue Trader are great RPGs
I love their Adventure Path conversion that is basically straight up a single game worth of content per act. Although the way that the way that they implemented the rules is basically like having a DM that is your partner’s ex.
Interesting. I’ll check that out. Thanks
For a generous definition of “these days”, check out the pillars of eternity games. They’re very good and clearly a love letter to Baldur’s gate. Unfortunately the team is now making a Skyrim-like for some reason, but I hope they come back and finish the main game story sometime.
There’s also that solasta game that’s DND 5e but on a smaller budget from a few years ago.
Inexile though its been a bit since wasteland 3 and owlcat games.
I’ve been wanting to check out Rogue Trader now that that’s out. I loved Kingmaker and Wotr from Owlcat (with the caveat that I always disable the crusade and kingmaking modes…)
Its pretty solid but… limited. You can tell just by looking at the map that they intend to fill it out with DLC over the next couple years. Which is honestly on brand for a TRPG based game especially a games workshop IP.
Is it bad that I dont consider it all that bad since expansion modules have been a thing in RPGs for decades and DLC are just a further evolution therein?
As long as the base game justifies the price I don’t mind as much. I thi the practice is worse when you don’t get a full story and it feels like “pay 40 dollars to see the end!”
I usually catch these on sale anyway. I’m the worst type of customer for Owlcat for sure.
Oh its fine on that front, id say it probably has a out as much content as Pillars of eternity. Though I do suspect they will give more endings in time, but that is moreso owlcat being full of perfectionists than anything else.
Falcom usually doesn’t disappoint.
I couldn’t with Baldur’s Gate. I don’t know what the hell people are doing playing turn based games in 2024, I hate that so much. I hope elder scrolls doesn’t take too many cues from BG3
It’s playing a tabletop RPG on your PC… of course it will be turn based. if you haven’t played live DnD before, you should give it a try!
If I’m playing a table top game I understand it HAS to be turn based. It’s a necessity. But with a video game, turn based is outdated and slows combat to a crawl, and makes it about guessing and mathing instead of actual fighting skill. I personally hate it and the moment I went into my first battle in BG3 and saw it was turn based, I turned it off and never went back
Not liking it does not mean it’s outdated. There’s a lot of us that like it as the success of XCOM and BG3 show. We’re allowed to like things that you don’t.
Bro would hate chess
that’s the point. Play something else if that’s not your style. It’s not pointless.
Bummer you are so negative towards turned based. It’s my favorite type of combat. 😆
I’m of the exact opposite opinion. Take the last two Pathfinder games. So much complexity about what you can and can’t do within melee (5 foot step, melee spell prep gets AOO, have to prep then step in, etc.), but it’s all wasted because the CPU can trigger those same actions faster than a human possibly can, and do it across many combatants simultaneously. It ends up being about building stats/feats that win instead of tactical combat.
It’s a shame you turned it off the first time you realized it was turn based. I have a friend that hated turn-based combat. BG3 made it so he nopes out of real time combat in his favorite games prior to BG3.
For me, turn based is top tier RPG.
Edit: that said, Elder Scrolls is more of a simulationist immersion game and does not need
real timeturn-based combat.Go play Morrowind and come back and say that it’s a simulationist immersion game again.
It is now but it’s roots were deep in RPG stats beforehand.
My first TES game was Arena. I’m familiar with the way it used to be (and still wish we had Thaumaturgy and Mysticism). I still think those games were simulationist immersion games. No other series would let you essentially live a life as a burglar in a fantasy world. I don’t think being simulationist immersion games precludes them from having stats. I do think it means they wouldn’t really be the same if they were turn-based (which is what I was talking about).
Edit: when this posted I saw that I typed “real time” instead of turn-based in my last comment. So I guess I did indicate I wanted turn-based combat, but this was a mistake.
I see where you’re coming from, though when they were using attack rolls to determine hits and was essentially real-time-turns I think I still disagree with your definition. I don’t have a good counter to your point, I just don’t agree on the words used now =P
Roleplaying games shouldn’t be about player skill, the whole point of having character skills is that they can differ from player skill.
Did you ever try Baulders Gate 2?
Never heard of the series till the new one really, maybe vaguely a while back