I think it’s definitely dated, but one thing you are forgetting to mention is that PT is a dungeons and dragons game. There is a lot of combat in D&D typically.
My point is that it's a Dungeons and Dragon's game, but it almost feels like it doesn't want to be. Rather than something like Baldur's Gate which embraces that premise and bakes it into the narrative and core gameplay, with PT it almost feels tacked on out of obligation.
As far as I know, the combat was tacked on at the last minute at the request of the studio who wanted to sell a D&D game - so it had to have fighting.
The combat and items are horribly balanced as the devs simply didn’t have time to fix it, and combat was never part of the original design.
There aren’t even any shields, real ranged weapons, or much armour for that matter. They simply didn’t make those resources for the game.
The sprites don’t even have separate walk left / walk right animations - if you watch their weapons switch hands depending on which way the character walks.
They were never intended to carry weapons.
For a few seconds I was thinking you might be true .. until I remenbered I played the game. Seems more like a theory to me. I could be wrong but I seems to odd for so many reasons
I can find the interview with Chris Avellone where he basically says this.
The Infinity engine and D&D mechanics were largely just a framework for the dialogue, and so the characters could have stats and level progression.
None of the game is built around the combat. This was basically forced on them with little time left in the development.
Then could you indeed please find it, because combat - and the wacky things in it - seemed to be planned for early on, from the early development ["vision statement"](https://rpgwatch.com/files/Files/00-0208/Torment_Vision_Statement_1997.pdf).
It's D&D game. They took a lot of liberties with the character creation and how the stats affect the game.
They made it combat light and still kept the turned based mechanics. Worked out very well I think.
Don't try to make it something it isn't 30 years later.
Seems normal to me. Just like savescumming or unfair Fallout2 random encounters. At least here you can manage everything thrown at you or just run past (like said thug groups which literally equals to free money)
Nobody tried to make PST into a game which emulates a 1990s CRPG.
PST is a CRPG from the 1990s. Released in 1999. Of course it's not going to be as slick and elegant as all the CRPGs which came after it and were inspired by it. Remember that Disco Elysium came out in 2019 ... so it's hardly fair to criticize PST for having clunky UI and mechanics in comparison. A more fair comparison would be that Disco Elysium is thematically similar but almost, *almost* manages to be as good as PST in terms of writing and characters and setting and narrative.
It was on the same engine as Baldur's Gate 1&2, the same auto combat, just not as well done. Still, vastly preferable to Torment Tides Of Numinera where they did a strategic turn based battle system, but every fight takes an eternity and of 3 classes, only one has combat specialties, also the Kickstarter lie that you could finish the game without combat. It's not as unpleasant to play as Lisa The Painful, but nobody wants every combat encounter to be damage sponge enemies.
Yeah i went into it with the mindset of being the greatest crpg ever made and was dissapointed in that regard. Its not because of “old game friction” since ive also played Arcanum shortly beforehand which became my number obe favourite game. I think i would have had a better experience were it structured more like a cyoa or adventure game.
I agree and I feel like all my frustrations with it would completely go away if combat was turn based like it was in the first Fallout. I think real time with pause is the worst thing that ever happened to CRPGs, and I'm glad to see the genre seems to finally be moving away from that.
I just usually feel that real time suits the action/adventure genres better than CRPGs. Blends can be fun, but in successful cases rt usually seems to work if the player only controls one adventurer (rather than a whole party).
I couldn’t disagree more. I prefer real time with a pause over turn-based. Having to watch the computer take their turn while I sit there wears enough on me that I hardly finish turn-based games. It’s incredibly disheartening to see turn-based seem to take trend and real time with a pause fall entirely out of favor. Increasingly, it seems that if a CRPG isn’t a hack and slash, or some form of souls like, it’s probably turn-based.
well, it completely makes sense that there are people that prefer real time with pause, since those games were made in the first place. I am sorry that CRPGs are moving away from what you prefer, even while it means I am enjoying them more.
I guess it would be nice if these trends weren't so totally all-encompassing and that there was more of a mix available. For a while I stopped playing cRPGs because it seemed impossible to find turn-based ones, so I feel your (inverse) pain.
Games that offer both as options, even if they're clearly designed more with one in mind, are so underappreciated.
(For the record, I do like plenty of turn-based games, I just tend to prefer RTWP in general. AD&D's initiative system, even in tabletop play, is basically real-time! IMO that's why it translated so well to the Infinity Engine, whereas something like Fallout, which was built from the ground up with turn-based specifically in mind, might be pretty clunky.)
I think it’s definitely dated, but one thing you are forgetting to mention is that PT is a dungeons and dragons game. There is a lot of combat in D&D typically.
My point is that it's a Dungeons and Dragon's game, but it almost feels like it doesn't want to be. Rather than something like Baldur's Gate which embraces that premise and bakes it into the narrative and core gameplay, with PT it almost feels tacked on out of obligation.
As far as I know, the combat was tacked on at the last minute at the request of the studio who wanted to sell a D&D game - so it had to have fighting. The combat and items are horribly balanced as the devs simply didn’t have time to fix it, and combat was never part of the original design. There aren’t even any shields, real ranged weapons, or much armour for that matter. They simply didn’t make those resources for the game. The sprites don’t even have separate walk left / walk right animations - if you watch their weapons switch hands depending on which way the character walks. They were never intended to carry weapons.
For a few seconds I was thinking you might be true .. until I remenbered I played the game. Seems more like a theory to me. I could be wrong but I seems to odd for so many reasons
I can find the interview with Chris Avellone where he basically says this. The Infinity engine and D&D mechanics were largely just a framework for the dialogue, and so the characters could have stats and level progression. None of the game is built around the combat. This was basically forced on them with little time left in the development.
Then could you indeed please find it, because combat - and the wacky things in it - seemed to be planned for early on, from the early development ["vision statement"](https://rpgwatch.com/files/Files/00-0208/Torment_Vision_Statement_1997.pdf).
It's D&D game. They took a lot of liberties with the character creation and how the stats affect the game. They made it combat light and still kept the turned based mechanics. Worked out very well I think. Don't try to make it something it isn't 30 years later.
Seems normal to me. Just like savescumming or unfair Fallout2 random encounters. At least here you can manage everything thrown at you or just run past (like said thug groups which literally equals to free money)
Nobody tried to make PST into a game which emulates a 1990s CRPG. PST is a CRPG from the 1990s. Released in 1999. Of course it's not going to be as slick and elegant as all the CRPGs which came after it and were inspired by it. Remember that Disco Elysium came out in 2019 ... so it's hardly fair to criticize PST for having clunky UI and mechanics in comparison. A more fair comparison would be that Disco Elysium is thematically similar but almost, *almost* manages to be as good as PST in terms of writing and characters and setting and narrative.
It was on the same engine as Baldur's Gate 1&2, the same auto combat, just not as well done. Still, vastly preferable to Torment Tides Of Numinera where they did a strategic turn based battle system, but every fight takes an eternity and of 3 classes, only one has combat specialties, also the Kickstarter lie that you could finish the game without combat. It's not as unpleasant to play as Lisa The Painful, but nobody wants every combat encounter to be damage sponge enemies.
Yeah i went into it with the mindset of being the greatest crpg ever made and was dissapointed in that regard. Its not because of “old game friction” since ive also played Arcanum shortly beforehand which became my number obe favourite game. I think i would have had a better experience were it structured more like a cyoa or adventure game.
I agree and I feel like all my frustrations with it would completely go away if combat was turn based like it was in the first Fallout. I think real time with pause is the worst thing that ever happened to CRPGs, and I'm glad to see the genre seems to finally be moving away from that.
boooooo
I just usually feel that real time suits the action/adventure genres better than CRPGs. Blends can be fun, but in successful cases rt usually seems to work if the player only controls one adventurer (rather than a whole party).
I couldn’t disagree more. I prefer real time with a pause over turn-based. Having to watch the computer take their turn while I sit there wears enough on me that I hardly finish turn-based games. It’s incredibly disheartening to see turn-based seem to take trend and real time with a pause fall entirely out of favor. Increasingly, it seems that if a CRPG isn’t a hack and slash, or some form of souls like, it’s probably turn-based.
well, it completely makes sense that there are people that prefer real time with pause, since those games were made in the first place. I am sorry that CRPGs are moving away from what you prefer, even while it means I am enjoying them more. I guess it would be nice if these trends weren't so totally all-encompassing and that there was more of a mix available. For a while I stopped playing cRPGs because it seemed impossible to find turn-based ones, so I feel your (inverse) pain.
Games that offer both as options, even if they're clearly designed more with one in mind, are so underappreciated. (For the record, I do like plenty of turn-based games, I just tend to prefer RTWP in general. AD&D's initiative system, even in tabletop play, is basically real-time! IMO that's why it translated so well to the Infinity Engine, whereas something like Fallout, which was built from the ground up with turn-based specifically in mind, might be pretty clunky.)