Let's be honest, is Planescape genuinely good?1

nyarlothothep

I've started playing it, in the hive wandering around trying to complete quests, the initial premise is interesting but there are a few problems.

1. graphics are archaic, this isn't the fault of the game but I think the very nature of games is to utilise the latest technology. Back in the late 90s/early 00s these graphics were perfectly acceptable, the game would have been immersive back then, I remember getting immersed into Baldur's Gate but compare it to the world environments of Skyrim or Dragonage and it can't compete by the very fact that it's outmoded. This doesn't apply to games that have a nostalgic appeal, then it's different because you remember playing them when they looked amazing.

2. Too much reading. I would prefer if more of the dialogue was spoken. I find reading immersion breaking in some sense as I just want to read it all quickly unless the subject matter is interesting and I'm not a fan of descriptive prose.

3. Pre-made character, I prefer to define my own character and as a pre-made he looks bad, someone described him as a hobo dreadlocked dude.

4. Quests are awkward and difficult to complete, eg I can't find the cathedral in the alley of dangerous angles and again too much reading.

I'm willing to give this game more of a go, I can forgive the graphics if somehow the characters live up to their name, as hyped by the internet but am wondering if this is just another emperor's new clothes phenomenon.

Retr0gamer

If you are expecting a lot of combat in Planescape then you are playing the wrong game. It's all about the dialogue and the choices you make, the combat is kind of superficial.

As for the graphics, I really like them. The backdrops look great and are really detailed while the character models are very well animated. The cutscenes are looking a bit worse for wear.

Raphael

nyarlothothep wrote: »

I've started playing it, in the hive wandering around trying to complete quests, the initial premise is interesting but there are a few problems.

1. graphics are archaic, this isn't the fault of the game but I think the very nature of games is to utilise the latest technology. Back in the late 90s/early 00s these graphics were perfectly acceptable, the game would have been immersive back then, I remember getting immersed into Baldur's Gate but compare it to the world environments of Skyrim or Dragonage and it can't compete by the very fact that it's outmoded. This doesn't apply to games that have a nostalgic appeal, then it's different because you remember playing them when they looked amazing.

2. Too much reading. I would prefer if more of the dialogue was spoken. I find reading immersion breaking in some sense as I just want to read it all quickly unless the subject matter is interesting and I'm not a fan of descriptive prose.

3. Pre-made character, I prefer to define my own character and as a pre-made he looks bad, someone described him as a hobo dreadlocked dude.

4. Quests are awkward and difficult to complete, eg I can't find the cathedral in the alley of dangerous angles and again too much reading.

I'm willing to give this game more of a go, I can forgive the graphics if somehow the characters live up to their name, as hyped by the internet but am wondering if this is just another emperor's new clothes phenomenon.

1 and 2 are both problems of the games age, unfortunately. 2 is undealable with, but this site has some tips on prettying it up a bit, which might help with 1: http://www.destructoid.com/weekend-modder-s-guide-planescape-torment-220265.phtml

On 3, it's been a long time since I played PS:T, but I recall having the same annoyance. However as time goes on it went away for me, since you do get to define more of your personality & character - it's kind of like Mass Effect in that regard, where some of the character is written in stone, but a lot is defined by your version of him.

4 I got nothing on, don't really remember playing it that well.

IMO, it's been a long time for me, but I believe it was that good. The aging definitely makes it harder to play old classic games, however I don't feel it makes them worse. Just harder to get into.

Think I have a copy knocking around somewhere, might actually fire it up and see for myself...

nesf

Are you honestly complaining about the graphics?

Older PC RPGs are not going to be graphically impressive. I remember Baldur's Gate impressing me when it came out, it looks horrible to me today (mainly because my monitor is a lot bigger and has a lot more pixels). They're also, well, hard. There was less instant gratification in the genre back then and more thinking needed. This is either something you'll get over or you won't (and either way you're not wrong).

Restricted character generation was pretty normal. Mainly to stop newbies to the roleplaying system in question wasting 10 hours figuring out they'd made an unplayable character and to stop experienced players creating a very unbalanced character that would just breeze through all the content. The older early 90s RPGs with their "straight out of the rulebook" AD&D style character creation with you not being able to customise just roll all the "dice" again, could be a nightmare if someone didn't understand the rules of the system (which only got a cursory explanation in the rulebook and remember, no wikipedia or internet in general for most people!).



As for nostalgia, I play some modern games (e.g. Eador) that have graphics that'd have fitted in fine in the early 90s. I don't really care, they're turn based RPG/Strategy hybrids in the HOMM tradition so graphical quality isn't a big deal.

Raphael

Honestly, I reinstalled PS:T last night, started up once and there's no way I could have managed to play it. But I installed the mods to jack the resolution up from 640x400, and it looks gorgeous now. So graphics is a fair concern, but it's an easy one to allay because awesome mod communities.

With regards character generation, PS:T was around the same time as Baldurs Gate which has full character creation, and personally I prefer the latter. But the nature of PS:Ts story requires limiting options, so it's the price you pay for what you're getting for the game, which is story & characters.

Sarky

I'd like to see PS:T get the same treatment as Baldur's Gate enhanced edition. Cracking game.

Pushtrak

Sarky wrote: »

I'd like to see PS:T get the same treatment as Baldur's Gate enhanced edition. Cracking game.

Whatever about that, I think where hope should be placed in the short term is in the spiritual successor, Torment: Tides of Numenera.

nyarlothothep

Hmm, will play this game when I have more time, it does have a certain charm about it, I respect games with artistic integrity.

Raphael

Make sure and at least apply the mod that allows a higher resolution, and the one that scales up & centres the GUI. Makes an enormous difference.

Morte

1 is entirely personal preference. Personally I think 2D games like PST have aged much better than the early 3D games.

2 is entirely personal preference. I have no problem with it. Quite frankly if you don't like reading I wouldn't bother playing it as that's where all the good stuff is. NB I dont mean this as a snobby attack, I'm simply saying you've a valid personal preference which is at odds with the game experience.

3 In game terms and attitude he's a blank slate which you can mould and this is deliberately so. No big deal. Aesthetically I'd agree that his design is terrible and utterly unappealing. Poor when you're staring at him for two or three dozen hours pretending he's you.

4 Some of them are awkard which is annoying. And there were two bugged quests on my playthrough which I couldn't complete because I talked to people in the wrong order (not anything I said). They weren't game breaking and one was a tiny quest but it was irritating.

I do think PST's game mechanics have aged badly against its sister games (Baldurs Gate I&II, Icewind Dale I&II). The interface is more clunky and there's a few anoyances like a lot of the spells freezing the action. The NPC companions are very poor in combat compared to those found/made in the other games which is annoying. Grace for example is very defintely a cleric with the same spells. But as opposed to having a decent attack and excellent armour she has a pathetic attack and is really squishy. I found it very annoying that most NPCs used close combat weapons but couldn't stand toe to toe with regular goons. Simply clicking all attack on an enemy often asks for trouble and so unnecessary micro management is needed.

On the plus side PST has a fantastic set of characters and story. It's all very different from other games and very intriguing.

More than this PST is a landmark in the "video games as art" debate. Gameplay and plot intertwine adn feed off each other. For example, despite being the entire basis of a plot heavy game the decision to make your character immortal wasn't a story one! When they were starting out they wanted to minimise deaths as they figured players just reload anyway. So they decided to make TNO immortal. This then fed into the plot and in turn fed back into the gameplay as they designed puzzles around you being immortal.

PST's story is optimised as a game and wouldn't work as well in any other mdeium. This is an incredibly important step for games and a big departure from other game makers who are just wannabe film directors (Hello Hideo Kojima!). The character being a blank slate is justified as each player's TNO represents a different incarnation of this immortal man. And the plot develops depending on how you play the game. Depending on who you talk to and how you treat them, and this is dependant on what kind of person you are (ok, what stats you have ), you can find out plot points and twists much earlier than you otherwise would. A film or book's story structure doesn't change based on how you watch or read them.

So in summary? PST is absolutely not a case of Emporer's New Clothes. It's a landmark of gaming in the same way there's absolute landmarks in the world of film. But like these really old films large parts of it have dated and don't stand up to modern films. You can watch it and appreciate all of the really important stuff going on. There's no guarantee you'll defintely enjoy it though. You very well might but you also might not.

Polar101

Well, it was the only Infinite era game I didn't finish. It just never really grabbed me, but I think it was mostly because of the annoying interface and particularly poor combat (of which there seemed to be lot, and a lot of it seemed irrelevant to the game).

Saruman

I thought it was brilliant. I played and owned all of them as they came out and the only one I never finished was Icewind Dale because it was too combat driven.

Graphics wise, it was excellent at the time but not by today's standards.
I tried playing the BG enhanced version last year but just couldn't deal with it. Not just the graphics but the clunky interface too.

Original NWN is the best that I recall. Used to love playing it with this community on dial up internet.

nesf

Saruman wrote: »

I thought it was brilliant. I played and owned all of them as they came out and the only one I never finished was Icewind Dale because it was too combat driven.

This. Icewind Dale answered my musings about whether story was necessary if the combat was solid. :P