Arcanum vs Baldur's Gate 2 (including ToB)?

And yet all squad tactical games are still being compared to X-Com(1994). All space trader sims are still being compared to Elite(1987). First Person Shooters are still being compared to Doom(1994). M.U.L.E.(1983) is still brought up in economic game reviews. The list goes on and on.

Spell effects in RPGs are nothing but fluff. Wether or not the fireball looks cool or not has not effect on how well that spell works.

And they're actually a useful implimentation of the combat system. They actually do something.

I'd rather control my character rather than have it automated to do something like that.

However, if you'll notice in Arcanum, lighting levels, surface features(like grass or cobblestone turf), and various other factors play a role in how well you can prowl. This is another great example of how the graphics in arcanum are more than just something pretty to look at.

In fact, you can even shoot out lights to darken an area, to give yourself a better chance at successfully prowling around.

Again, fluff.

Cutesy little technicolor chainmail has no baring on how the game is played, does it? You'd think something like that would make a player stand out in some way, but it doesn't. There's no gameplay edge or consequence for that.


_________________


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Saint_Proverbius on 2001-09-17 08:52 ]</font>

 

Arcanum...One of the best games I ever played...Until that f***ing thing happened...My save (lvl 28 kickass techie) corrupted...go crazy...Need one week to play again...but that magic was gone...now I played just I wonder if Ican begin to enjoy it again...bugs really really kill me...goddam'it ...

 

I'd rather play Rogue-based RPGs than Diablo. Think the same sort of thing with a more complex character system, more depth and literally thousands of unique monsters, the only catch is the fact it doesn't have flashy graphics.

As far as the rest of the argument it's fairly irrelevant. Graphics are nice, but not essential, and more armour types and sprites is purely a production decision. Don't get me wrong, I like seeing my character sprite change with each piece of armour I get, but if it doesn't, I don't care a great deal.

 

more on graphics

Agian I have to simultaniously agree and dissagree with you. That cutesy technicolor armor doesnt make any difference in how the game is played but niether does a graphic showing a certain type of armour graphic in Arcanum. What does matter is what those armours do for the characters wearing them. My only point was that BG2 has more variety in graphics than you were giving it credit for.

Why are graphics important? In my opinion they can be very important depending on the situation. X-Com is one of the greatest squad combat games ever made in my opinoion. I didnt play it until PC Gamer put it into one of its demo CDs last year, long after the graphics were out of date. I've played newer games with better graphics but they were not as fun because the gameplay was not near as good. However, imagine if X-Com was updated with the most modern graphics without changing any of the gameplay features. I guarantee you it would become even more enjoyable game. BG2s graphics really added to the envoronment of the game along with sounds and music. This raided the fun value for me as compared to BG1. I think Arcanum would capture me more if it's environment was enhansed by better art and graphics.

 

Welllllllll i think to say one is better than the other is somewhat shortsighted

graphics goes to bg2 hands down , dont think there would be much controversy there , and IMHO the graphics of the environments go to bg2 aswell . the backgrounds are well drawn and non repetetive and esp in towns i can navigate myself around much easier , buildings dont look like clones of eachother with different signs

freedom - absoloutely arcanum , the ability to move anywhere on the worldmap and not just fixed point xyz is very refreshing . same goes for ways of completing quests .

quests - id say arcanum simply because of the scope for completion of quests , but bg2 is close behind because arcanum has alot of fed-ex quests which irritate me and for a large part they were eliminated in bg2 over bg1.

plot - im not particularly far through but IMHO it goes no question to bg2 , and especially ToB . I was hanging on every development in the story , esp because the environment was so immersive . As a previous poster pointed out the plot has nothing to do with freedom , open-endedness or anything else . its simply the story of your character and the world around him . Bhaalspawntastic .

tech - arcanum =)

magic - BG2 , i just like the traditional spells and the variety more . 16 colleges is nice but the fact that you only get 5 spells in a college precludes the gradual buildup of power and having some truly impressive spells .

character generation - arcanum no doubt

character development - again arcanum , classlessness owns!

There is no "better" game . I like both for different reasons . Chill .

(And to think this is going to happen all over again and 3-way when pool of radiance is released)
<Casts body of fire and is immune to flames>

 

It matters if you know the stats of the armors, that is if you plan on sizing up someone.

Palette shifting the colors isn't variety.

 

Fallout is de best!!!!

 

Evangelion- Rei Ayanami too!!!

 

it's me again

Again, my original point had nothing to do with gameplay, I was only referring to the look of the game as in how good would a screen shot look if I had never played the game. But since you brought it up, I'm not sure I get how you can "size someone up" better in Arcanum than BG. I didnt have any problems figuring out who would be a bigger challenge in BG based on what they looked like. Maybe I'll find it easier in Arcanum when I start playing it again (I stopped playing after I got frustrated with my character and didnt feel like playing through the beginning all over again just yet).

 

Is the concept of intertwined graphics and gameplay too complicated for you?

 

I like Baldur's and I like Arcanum too. But there are some points that I like somethings at Baldur's that Arcanum cannot handle e.g. the map notes, and vice versa.

My POV. :smile:

 

Excuse me?!

Is the ability to answer a question to back up your own position too difficult for you? Throught out this whole debat I've kept an open mind and have allowed for the possibility that I might be wrong on some points or missed features of Arcanum. If someone can point out something new to me I will appreciate the info. Thats been my general attitude about the whole thing (it is only a game after all)

What I've noticed about you is that when someone calls you on something instead of proving them wrong or accepting you're wrong, you insult them. I figure this can mean either you are so stubborn you won't accept you might be wrong, you are so stuped you cant back up your own points, you're 12 years old and can't handle intelligent conversation, or all of the above. Again, I may be wrong but to change my mind you have to PROVE IT.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: FenderAxe on 2001-09-21 10:40 ]</font>

 

I think I've done just that several times by pointing out that the graphics actually play a role in the gameplay of the game. That's what graphics should do.

If my armor is lighting me up like a goddamned christmas tree, there should be some sort of effect in the game that reflects that. If I'm walking on stone, that should affect how much noise I'm making. If I'm under a streetlamp, I should have trouble prowling around.

In other words, BG graphics are meaningless other than showing where you are and BARELY showing what you're doing. I'd rather have graphics that provide a function in the game, rather than having flashing, technicolor chainmail.

Once again, if graphics don't affect the gameplay, they're nothing but fluff.

What Arcanum's have over BG's is simple.

1.) More Sprites. This includes character sprites, monsters, etc.
2.) More frames of animation. This includes hit locational death animation, prowling graphics, and so on.
3.) Real time lighting that affects gameplay. It's harder to fight, especially with ranged, in the dark. It's harder to spot prowlers in the dark.
4.) Tiles that affect noise. The harder the turf, the more noise you'll make. Monsters home in on noises. The noisier you are, the better they'll hear you. This also affects prowling.

It's funny that you claim to have an open mind, yet you can't see how the interactive nature of Arcanum's graphics are better, then your only counter point is techicolor strobe chainmail.

You know, parrots are attracted to shiny objects. People should have a few extra layers of cognitive ability that allow them to handle substance over shininess.

 

Okay, all you aspiring lawyers, what next? Are y'all going to be arguing the meaning of "is"? :roll:

St. P, I think that your above post is what FenderAxe and others have been looking for...an absolute definition of how graphics should affect gameplay. It was a good post, except for all the insults.

I think that statement got things off track. It's just fluff, after all. :smile:

Oh, I forgot. One area that BG2 gets better is that you can tell when someone wears a helm, which does affect gameplay, because helms stop criticals. I can never tell if anyone wears one in Arcanum. I know that some armor types in Arcanum inculde helms on their sprites, but they do that whether someone is actually wearing one or not.

All that being said, St. P's argument stands. Arcanum's graphics do affect gameplay more than BG2 -- though, since I don't prowl, I've only seen lighting affect my to hit.

I saw a previous argument talking about how all the NPC's of BG2 look and act the same--we're talking about people in taverns and such, you know, the average, everyday citizen. Guess what. Same goes for Arcanum. Most of the responses and looks of average citizens are canned. So what? Can you imagine the resources it would take to make EVERY individual in these huge games look and speak differently? If they are non-essential personnel?




_________________
"Rule 1 on page 1 of the book of war is 'Do not march on Moscow'. Rule 2 is 'Do not take your land armies into China'." -- Montgomery

"The grim fact is that we prepare for war like precocious giants and for peace like retarded pygmies."

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Wookie7 on 2001-09-21 14:34 ]</font>

 

Meh...alright, prettiness, functionality.
BG 2 versus Arcanum.

Backgrounds:
BG 2 wins for prettiness. Very well drawn, lovely stuff. I cannot tell a lie. Tavern graphics somehow look VERY samey, though.

Arcanum, however, using a TILE system, as opposed to 'bigarse rendered picture' system, makes it so much easier to churn out user mods. Replayability, baby. You can pretty much mold any environment using their tiling system. Sure, it isn't as nice to look at. But...saying that it is NEEDED for immersion...that's debatable. Grow an imagination. I wouldn't turn away nice graphics, but I wouldn't start foaming without an eyecandy fix, either.

The look-nice=plays nice school of thought...I figger that the eyecandy starved kiddies nowadays would take one look at Fallout, then scream, stumbling away in panic, babbling and crying until they trip over their PS/2 with their copy of FF XIV Illegal Jap import edition plugged in(hail the modchip! hail!), then instinctively start playing, drooling mentally. Palov would be proud. Hey! It's pretty! IT DOESN'T MATTER IF I CAN'T UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S PRETTY!
'AH PLAZ DIS'ERE GAME 'CAUSE IT SHURE IZ PURTY! UH-HYUCK!'

Characters:
Now, I know that BG is played from a higher up perspective, Arcanum from a closer one.
A summary, first:
BG: Functional, yes. Pretty, no.
Arcanum: Prettier and more functional. HOOAH.

Therefore it would be that bit harder to make out features in BG. However, there is no excuse to go all funky on the character models. Heck, you'd think they recognised that their models looked AWKWARD. The elfsies look like gangly, weak limbed things as opposed to 'I have pretty hair and I can kill you, so shut yo mouth.' The humans look like beefy versions of the elves, and dwarves and halflings look like extras from the dungeons and dragons movie at best, and short humans at worse.

http://www.gamebanshee.com/screenshots/ ... shot24.jpg
Allowing for graphics corruption, the mage looks BARELY distinguishable as a humanoid, more as a variety of shrubbery, or possibly a strange growth on the floor. Note how the iron golems, for a pre-rendered thingie, look like they've been skinned by a none-to-competant halflife modmaker.

http://www.gamebanshee.com/screenshots/ ... nshot7.jpg
Ugh. Alright. I know some are wearing platemail, and some robes, and some leather. But well defined? Hah! Fuzzy city. You'd be hard pressed to tell if they're wearing helms or just have REALLY BAD HAIR. Yeah, mighty fine effort on showing helm changes, but if it looks like crap, why bother? The flails and maces look absolutely horrid...and that dwarf...I could put a fat goblin covered all over in chocolate caramel and sporting a mullet next to him, AND YOU WON'T BE ABLE TO TELL A DIFFERENCE.

http://www.planetbaldursgate.com/bg2/me ... 60200b.jpg

I'd pass on bashing the clipping caused by the fog(stinking cloud?). I'd just say it looks awful. Again, note somewhat incomprehensible models, texturing, etc. Prizes to those who can say who's male and female. Or humanoid.

As for combat...well, yes, I can see them swinging their sword and all that. But you get ZERO HIT REACTIONS. You hit a monster with an axe, and he hits you back, and YOU BOTH DO NOT REACT. This is a result from ad&d's system, and to prevent death from staggering attacks(realtime! wee!), but you'll be lying if it doesn't look damned funny to ya.
And when you initiate attacks....the guy in question goes next to the target walking briskly just like he does when he goes up to the store counter(at least arcanum's running animation looks suitably businesslike), pauses slightly, then starts swinging. Attack animations pretty much took the same time, too. Swing two handed axe, stab with dagger, you'll be doing it at the same speed. If someone has the same weapon, but a higher rate of attacks, it's amusing. You'll be stabbing once, then waiting there looking stupid while he stabs at the same speed you did, CONTINUOUSLY...until you get your attacks counter refilled, then you stab once again quickly, then wait.
Was it that hard to slow down the stab animation for lower level chars? You swing a slow axe in arcanum, you'll be seen swinging it SLOWLY.

Surreal, stupid, take your pick.

Critical hit results...
Beheading? Natch.
Limbs falling? Nada.
Generic dramatic death animation? Sorry, we're all out.
Funny red chunks falling all around and what passes for a spray of blood appears in the middle, while the defeated character disappears? YES! IT'S LIKE THIS FOR ALL LIVING CREATURES! TRUELY, WE ARE ALL THE SAME UNDERNEATH, AT LEAST IN THE WORLD OF BALDUR'S GATE!

 

Is this the part where I need to dust off the canoe before you cry me a river?

Tact only goes so far with some people. When you explain something several times politely, and they either don't get what you're saying, or don't want to get it, a swift kick in the chops can help the learning begin.

Well, it'd look just a bit stupid if that Nice Suit looked like Leather Armor, wouldn't it?

Like I said before, and I've already established that I'm not keen on repeating myself, Arcanum has dozens of armor types. BG just has four. The fact you can visible change from your combat gear to your city clothes and have it visible to the user is a bit of a plus, don't you think?

After all, you are wearing a suit, and not leather armor.

Now, if you're playing a game, and you had to kill either the guy in the platemail, and the guy in the suit, and you're lower level than both, which one would you pick? If you're using an armor damaging weapon, and they're wearing Dread Armor, you know that armor damaging aspect is pretty much nullified.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Saint_Proverbius on 2001-09-21 15:33 ]</font>

 

wow, that's cool discussion I missed :-(. But, nevertheless, let me say my opinion.
First, I like Arcanum much more than BG2. BG2 is just another AD&D game, the main difference between BG and Krynn trilogy (also an AD&D cRPG, produced about 1988 by SSI) is that BG has better graphics and more quests. And is much more boring. Because the greatest flaw of BG series is that I enter town, do some sightseing, talk to people, browse thru shelfs in the shops, go into tavern and open quest log. When I saw this for the first time I couldn't f..king believe it. It looked like every citizen gave me his Very Special Quest, something like 'help my cat go down the tree' or 'take my dirty clothes 2 the laundry'. boring, boring, boring. On the other side Arcanum also has many quests, but they are interesting, complicated and u can do them many different ways. Arcanum has also much bigger world I can freely explore, much better RPG system and the best character creation/evolution I've ever seen. But, on the other side, I just LIKE AD&D... I know this system very well, and every AD&D based game is something that fits me. That's right, BG has much more spells than Arcanum, but I don't think anyone should use more than 20-30. Have you ever used for example 'hold portal'? I don't think anyone did . Next thing is graphics. Well, you told almost everything about it, so I won't repeat that... St. Proverbius's side suits me better... Especially I agree with that fluffy stuff... If you have two cars, one bright and shiny but slow and the other not-that-shiny but fast, i'd rather choose the second one. Graphics in Arcanum plays gr8 role n gameplay, in BG it's just shiny upgrade to visual side of game. Yes, visual side is very important, but afterall it's just addition-ADOM (my favorite rouge-like) is much better than BG... In my opinion, of course .
But the main advantage of Arcanum is that I jumped into rich, interesting and LIVING world, which reacts to my actions in many, many ways. Also I liked scenario more - in BG averything was clear, in Arcanum everything is... not so clear. Well, maybe It's beacause I know almost everything 'bout AD&D, but It's not everything. Planescape was great, BG is not. So - in my humble opinion - Arcanum wins. It's almost as good as Fallout2 was, and slightly better than Fallout1.

 

Once again, I'm still attmepting to make way through BG1, but not getting very far as frustration and boredom are ruining the game.
I have to strongly agree with Saint, graphics that you can interact with are far superior to 2 dimensional paintings, these paintings in BG1 actualy make it difficult to traverse towns quickly, sometimes I can't tell if I'm looking at a shadow that a 2 dimensional building is casting or it's actualy the side of the 2d building. The meat of the original Baldur's seems as if it takes place in towns, towns where there are many citizens who have only one line of dialogue, dialogue that is inane and the few that actualy do offer quests or important information, are difficult to find again as they tend to look like and blend in with everyone else. I find the interactiivity with towns and people in Arcanum to be interesting, easy and rewarding, as almost everyone in Arcanum has something to offer, rather the location of an ancient temple, training, gambling, or quests, most are easily distinguishable and are worth interacting with, wherein BG it feels that most of the time you're wasting precious hours of your life clicking on the town's inhabitants.
The spell system in BG is terrible, memorizing only three spells to take into battle, leaves you retreating from half finished combat and having to camp to memorize more, I have found myself camping more than playing, as well, I am now in a town where if I camp in the street, I am forced awake and told to find an inn, which means slowly traversing a 2d painted map to enter one, go back and and fight for a few more rounds then go back to the inn.
Even though I have control over the characters in BG it seems many a time during combat sequences that my commands do not register, those whom I tell to heal others, ignore me, and severly injured players (who should've been healed by the AI anyway) fall to their death.
The other thing that drives me to tears in BG is the quest journal, it's a mile long page of enteries, there's no way to tell wich ones you've completed, untill you read further down and find another 'journal- cluttering' entery that says you've completed them. How many that played BG1 found themselves rereading the whole journal over and over again just to refresh their memory on one particular quest? I'm still at the begining of BG, I imagine that journal becomes enormous after awhile.

I keep bringing BG1 into this thread as it uses the same game engine that BG2 does, there has been a reworking of the interface, but it appears that the combat system remains the same and 2d paintings still rule the game.

 

this is BS

humm.....this is the first post i open up and this is the post to make me turn away.

Saint_proverbius - i already dislike you, can't you just stfu? to completely bash one game due to your love for another is BS, have an open mind. if you think BG2 was such trash, why did it get such high reviews everywhere?

i was looking for some good forums for arcanum and i definitely don't like this after reading this post.....anyone care to direct me somewhere else without this BS? i'd really like to play this game and also get some advice w/o biased BS opinions from arrogant cock-eyed SOB's.

if anyone cares to direct me to some other Arcanum BB's, please email me at jpaik80@hotmail.com

thanks

jason

 

geez do not take out all yer frustrations on one person, This thread is for us to say what we want about the topic and that is just what he is doing even if you think it a crak'a shit. Personally I played Baldurs gate for ages, and I had immense fun with that game. And the flaws that Saint stated never even came to my mind. So what if he thinks that it's a shitload? It's his opinion and that is what's this post about. At least he's bringing something to the thread unlike you. Personally I don't think a person that throws shit at the entire forum after reading one post is reliable in any of his/hers opinions. Read the other posts you will definetly find something worth yer time. I love Fallout. So if some says it sucks, do I leave the forum? Gimme a brake.

_________________

Anime Otaku
Morning Musume
Aikawa Nanase
Don't be Baka
Arigato Gozaimasu!

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Jinxed on 2001-09-22 00:50 ]</font>