Best Changes Jeff has made to his games

[MrRoivas]

In your opinion, what are the best and most welcome changes or modifications that Jeff has made to his games as time has gone on?

 

For me, the two that immediately spring to mind are the new encumbrance system, and the support for higher resolutions.

 

For those whose have only been playing for the last couple of years, the old encumbrance system had your weight limit be based on the total weight of all items in your pack. Have too much stuff, or a few too many living tools, and your AP would go down the crapper. It basically meant that one had to constantly juggle items, as inevitably one would need to get stuff sell, make you go over the weight limit, and then have to drop stuff before every single battle. Are we having fun yet? In short, it was a real pain, and its lovely not having to do that anymore.

 

Fun fact. I do believe that the new encumbrance system was in fact suggested by someone on these boards during the development of G4, which was commented favorably on by Jeff.

 

The other change, support for higher resolution, is quite welcome as well. This might just be me, but playing the older games at 800x600 can be hard on the eyes. Having things be able to be in wide-screen now just adds to the goodness.

 

How about the of you?

[Enraged Slith]

The new system is actually the old system used in Exile 1 and 2. It might look a little different, but it's functionally similar.

 

Geneforge had the best system of them all, where reaching a certain carrying weight would cause your AP to loop around to 32. You weren't able to hit anything at this stage, but you could buff and heal your creations easily, and sit down and have a picnic in the middle of battle at the speed of sound.

[Arch-Mage Solberg]

I love the encumbrance system. It reminds me of times long gone with Exile: Escape From the Pit. My next favorite is the ability to move the screen with the four arrow keys while moving my characters with the main eight keys. My third favorite is the look of the games. Sure A6's screen is a bit clustered, but I like it just the same (At least it's not as small as E1's)! This is a list of my favorite things.

 

Post #474

[Masquerade]

My favorite thing that Jeff added was the ability to duel wield in A6. finally i can make the ass-whoopin name-taking ninja esque character I've wanted to make since the beginning! Just add liberal amounts of gymnastics, ripose, strength, agility and duel wielding into the character editor and cook until golden brown.

[Erebus the Black]

dual isn't new, it's reintroduced.

[Zummi]

How about the changes he didn't make for the best? You know, like DRM.

[The Ratt]

What DRM?

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: meAzuma

How about the changes he didn't make for the best? You know, like DRM.

Obvious trolling is obvious.

[Faithful]

While not a direct response to the topic, DRM is very important to me personally.

 

I am in no way trying to move this thread onto the topic of DRM, but only responding to the postings.

 

Jeff gives the impression on the Home Page that there is No DRM on his products, which is not exactly correct (unless something has changed from the News/Promises section which state; "No Obnoxious DRM!").

 

Here is the quote from the Home Page. I bolded the last three words for emphasis.

_____________________________________________________________

Welcome to Spiderweb Software, Inc. We are a small company, founded in 1994, that is dedicated to creating terrific games for Windows and Macintosh. Our promises to you: big free demos, a money-back guarantee, and no DRM!

_____________________________________________________________

 

This is a topic that is important enough for Jeff to mention it, so I think it is important enough for users to care about it; which I do.

 

Anyway, this would be the best change I would like to see on any program that carries DRM.

[Lilith]

It depends on how you define DRM. A single file not keyed to a specific machine that holds data on whether you've bought the game or not isn't really DRM in the sense that it's normally understood, I don't think.

[Micawber]

<snooze>DRM argument again</snooze>

 

Yes some of the favorite changes are reintroductions: encumbrance overhaul, area of effect spells, dual-wield.

 

Out of the newer changes, I'd probably vote for battle disciplines in A5. It's a really nice system and gives a strong incentive to buy combat skills for spell casters making them less one-dimensional.

 

I also liked the Arcane cloaks in A6. Actually I basically like anything that increases my damage output

 

It's going back a few years but introducing the quest list was useful as well. Not those popups in G4 though - they were annoying.

[Alorael at Large]

We've had this argument before. Basically, Jeff's registration system does require the owner to interact with Spiderweb once in order to have the full game and possibly twice if they aren't good at backing up or switch operating systems. It's not what would normally be recognized as DRM, as Thuryl says. Notably, it doesn't restrict your ability to do anything with the software, limit installations, or require an internet connection. It just requires some kind of communication with Spiderweb.

 

—Alorael, who thinks the dialogue system introduced in Avernum was one of the best changes. Some people still prefer the Exile system of entering a word (or four letters) to get a response, but the full dialogue system is much prettier, avoids some exploits, and often adds more depth and humor. It's not quite an innovation, but it was a good change.

[Sudanna]

Oh, god yes. That old dialogue system is the main reason I never bought any of the Exiles.

[Mea Tulpa]

Obligatory assertion that I can't stand the Avernum / Geneforge dialogue system, and I really loved the Exile one, which felt way more natural and less forced to me.

[Enraged Slith]

Originally Posted By: CRISIS on INFINITE SLARTIES

Obligatory assertion that I can't stand the Avernum / Geneforge dialogue system, and I really loved the Exile one, which felt way more natural and less forced to me.

The Avernum system grew on me, but I agree about the old one. The only problem with the old one was figuring out which word triggered the next dialogue string, but it was never a big problem.

[Khoth]

The best thing about the old dialogue system was having no idea what you were supposed to ask about and typing xxxx in the hope that you'd hit something useful.

[Goldengirl]

The best changes, in my opinion, have already been stated, so I'll just expand on why they're so great.

 

First, the encumbrance system overhaul was very much appreciated. It took a lot of tedium and annoying to and fro work out of the games, giving more time for the immersion that Spiderweb is famous for. Plus, it ended the endless requests for a pack mule, or pack ornk, that seemed to happen.

 

Second, the dialogue shift was a great change. Having started with the first Avernum trilogy and Geneforge 1 and 2, I was a little bit pampered. Going back to Exile, with its jarring conversation system that could be exploited to get to branches you weren't supposed to be at yet, well... that was annoying. Although I didn't really mind Nethergate's combination system, the latest communication branches are clearly the best.

 

Third, the removal of starvation was great. Sure, I understand that it's realistic, especially in a dangerous world like Exile... but so is using the bathroom. Having to stop at every town to pick up some more food, or worse, having to go back to town to grab more mushrooms after slogging through a dungeon, was really distracting. I was wary when I heard that Avernum V would be bringing back food as important; however, it was so toned down, and appropriate for the plot, that I didn't mind it at all.

 

Fourth, the quest list was a godsend. Beyond all of the minor annoyances, the lack of a quest list was the major reason I couldn't get into Exile and the first Avernum. When playing the games for the first time, I read everything; when on replays, I blow through the dialogue a little faster, since I've seen it already. This meant that I did okay the first time I booted up Avernum, and terrible for the Exile trilogy, as I'd already seen it all from the Avernum trilogy. Not having a quest list made the game unnecessarily stressful, as I'd wrack my memory for what I had to do next.

 

Fifth, I'd like to reaffirm the vote for battle disciplines. At a time when warriors could hit things, use an item, or run away, while mages and priests could cast a variety of spells unique to the battle, summon aid, heal and bless themselves, use items, hit things, and run away, it really made the obligatory warrior classes far more interesting and tactically relevant.

[Dikiyoba]

Changes I like:

+Current dialogue system

+Quest list

+Encumbrance and AP system from G4 on

+Slith and nephil PCs

+Return of dual wielding

+Battle disciplines

+Less restrictive trainer requirements in G3(?)-G5

+Useful battle creations

 

Changes I dislike:

-Separate inventory window

-Lack of children NPCs

-Massive enemy HP

-A6's item graphics

-Hidden zones/islands/divided map area in G3-G5

 

Dikiyoba.

[Dantius]

Why has no one mentioned this yet?

 

The linearity of later spiderweb games SUUUUUUUCKS! From pretty much G3 onward, you've had to follow a specific route and do specific quests to unlock a plot door to the next tiny area. Contrast this to the wide open "do anything you feel like" feel of G1 and A3 especially, and I find it shocking that people think that A6 is any competition to the earlier games. I really hope the wide open world map and no pointless quests to unlock later areas are brought back in Avadon.

[A less presumptuous name.]

My disagreements with Dikiyoba:

Originally Posted By: Dikiyoba

Changes I dislike:

-Separate inventory window

Dikiyoba.

[Triumph]

A6 seems a LOT less linear than, say...A5. A5 was one long giant tunnel with one dysfunctional Avernite settlement after another. I agree that the linearity is not so cool. I loved the open freedom of exploration seen more in the older games, but I felt like A6 was at least a step in the right direction compared to its predecessor.

[Masquerade]

Originally Posted By: Dantius

Why has no one mentioned this yet?

The linearity of later spiderweb games SUUUUUUUCKS! From pretty much G3 onward, you've had to follow a specific route and do specific quests to unlock a plot door to the next tiny area. Contrast this to the wide open "do anything you feel like" feel of G1 and A3 especially, and I find it shocking that people think that A6 is any competition to the earlier games. I really hope the wide open world map and no pointless quests to unlock later areas are brought back in Avadon.

I agree with you on that one and the A6 world feels miniscule when compared to the worlds availible to the player in the original Avernum trilogy. Heres to hopeing being a spy of avadon will open up all doors to us

[Mringasa]

G3/A4 were my introductions to the world of SW software, so the "new" encumbrance was a blessing. Having to go back to a safe spot, drop what I wanted to keep, then return to where I was at was a bit of a change from my usual gaming.

 

My absolute favorite change was the updating/upgrading of the graphics for G4 and G5. Eye candy is a bonus, but the smoother feel and all around better look made those two games my absolute favorite ones from SW so far.

 

And with G5 being my absolute favorite, being able to be a "real" Shaper was good stuff. Instead of pigeonholing myself, there were any number of good paths in the creation trees to make me happy whilst I looted and pillaged from one end of the game to the other.

 

One other change that was great, to me at least, was the side quest system in A6. Being able to explore and not burn myself on rewards was an excellent addition to the game.

[Enraged Slith]

Speaking of the linearity issue, I think it makes replaying the games much more trying. I never got too far in Avernum 5, but the necessity of slogging through the same parts over and over again with every new attempt makes it difficult for me to want to try. In Exile 2, I must have made over thirty or so parties where I would just go exploring and completely beat the first chapter of the game before getting bored and starting over. Maybe it had something to do with me being a kid at the time, but that never got old.

 

The Exile stat system was better too. I hate having my characters pigeon-holed into extremely finite roles. For instance, in Exile, you would just have big beefy fighters. Now you've got to make a choice between warriors that tank damage and warriors that deal damage. The one nice change, however, is not having to spend stat points on SP anymore. And speaking of spellcasters, I miss the huge list of overlapping and useless magic spells.

 

Dammit, I just miss Exile 2. I don't think it will work on my computer though.

 

The absolute one thing that has not changed over the years (and desperately needs to) is the way combat plays out. Jeff has gotten a lot better at making interesting encounters, but the system is always the same: bless/shield/haste everyone before the fight and then just run over the encounter before it has a chance to do anything fancy. This is boring. The combat skills haven't really helped, and have only further widened the distance between character types. I hear Jeff switched up the mechanics a little in both G5 and A6, but I haven't played either of them yet, so maybe I'm wrong.

[Student of Trinity]

Jeff did revamp blessing a lot in the last couple of games. In A6, in particular, you can only have a couple of blessings on at once, and so you have to choose which ones. He also nerfed Haste, and in comparison to that none of the other blessings was so critical, anyway.

 

The 'linearity' issue has been debated a lot. The bottom line is that you can have Spiderweb publish games often enough to stay in business; big world games where you can go anywhere at random; or games with any sense of plot and purpose. Choose two of three!

 

Jeff chooses one and three these days, because leaving out three will make a great first CRPG for a kid, but otherwise the market for that aimless kind of game saturated at least ten years ago, and the bar is higher today. People want to play through a coherent story, and it takes many times longer to design a game that gives a coherent story no matter where you go when, than to script out one plot line that everyone follows. Jeff does well to put in as many sidequests and plot branches as he does.

 

Having said that, anti-linearites might want to try A6. It has a chapter structure, with most of the chapters being quite large, and with pretty much total freedom within each chapter. So there are plot chokepoints that have to be passed in order, but only a few.

[Skomer]

Not having to carry arrows which weigh a pound each.

[nikki.]

Originally Posted By: Student of Trinity

Linearity stuff

Speaking as somebody who could not play A5 (mainly) due to the extreme linearity of that game (it really is just one long tunnel with forts and towns plonked along it), I'm actually really enjoying playing A6 at the moment. Yes there are chokepoints where you have to do a certain task, or be given orders to move on, but the area you're trapped in is pretty huge, and the chokepoints themselves make sense in the context of the game. It's definitely a step back towards the A1-3 style of doing things.

[Locmaar]

Originally Posted By: Dantius

Why has no one mentioned this yet?

The linearity of later spiderweb games SUUUUUUUCKS! ... Contrast this to the wide open "do anything you feel like" feel of G1 and A3 especially, and I find it shocking that people think that A6 is any competition to the earlier games. I really hope the wide open world map and no pointless quests to unlock later areas are brought back in Avadon.

A3 and G1 are quite as linear as A6 when you think about their quests. The main difference is that you can't run as many circles without hitting the major quests in A6.

[Student of Trinity]

I'm not sure about A3, which I've never played, but I think that's a good insight about G1.

 

If you're looking for the main plot, G1 can be a very frustrating game, because you get practically no clue about it until very near the end of the game. Until then, you are simply crawling through all kinds of crazy freaking dangers just to find a boat to get off the island. Yet the one boat that you can eventually find looks not a whit more seaworthy than something you and a few friendly serviles could have knocked together out of driftwood in three days, max.

[Dintiradan]

As a general rule, you can't manufacture your own MacGuffins.

[Alorael at Large]

I'm always baffled by the altar of the open world. A4 makes you take the sections of the game one at a time, in order. So do A5 and A6. But each one feels like it gives you more room to play with in each section. You're not painfully boxed in.

 

A3? You can wander wherever you want, for the most part, but you have to do the main quests in the right order, which means doing the regions in the right order. And in case you can't figure it out, the difficulty also funnels you in the right order. Maybe it's more elegant, but it's not all that immensely different. How many players really dash straight from Fort Emergence to Footracer? Why would you?

 

Or look at Geneforge 4 or 5. You're restricted in where you can go, but it doesn't seem to get the howls of rage. Because the zone structure makes blockades seem more reasonable, built into the system as they are? Because the roadblocks are built into the plot more convincingly?

 

And then let's go back to A2, one of the perennial favorites. Guess what? For three out of four chapters, you're locked into small areas, and you must go through them in order. Chapter 2 is a line, and it's my favorite part of the game. I don't think I'm alone in that. Most of the game is Chapter 4, but no one grumbles about how linear the beginning is. Nethergate follows the same model: first your home region, then north or south to the Ruined Hall and surroundings, then finally west into a wide open landscape.

 

—Alorael, who wonders if that closed-then-open setup might make the fans happy and deliver the difficulty control Jeff wants. Once you give people a sense of the game, the engine, and the plot, you can more safely give them more locations to explore freely while warning them that some are really hard. Make it clear where the plot goes and they can take the challenges as they choose.

[Lilith]

was it jeff who wrote approvingly about bioware's "intro, four planets, endgame" formula in the mass effect games or am i thinking of someone else

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

was it jeff who wrote approvingly about bioware's "intro, four planets, endgame" formula in the mass effect games or am i thinking of someone else

Not Jeff, but I do recall reading a post of that nature somewhere, and I don't follow many gaming sites. Maybe Shamus Young? I know a lot of people here read his comics....

[Enraged Slith]

Man, the worst part of KotOR - and only bad part, in my opinion - was the formulaic planet hop/dragonball hunt. I really hope it wasn't Jeff who praised that.

[Alorael at Large]

No, I don't think that was him, either. Jeff seems to be pretty clear on the model of "planet 1 with many sidequests, planet 2 with many sidequests, planet 3 with many sidequests, finale."

 

He's just missing the intro.

 

—Alorael, who has even less respect for Mass Effect 2's "intro, assemble party, win" model. While it might make sense to just assemble a team and deal with your enemies, that's really not the standard game model. You also usually don't get to shoot the archvillain in the intro as he's killing your parents, either. Maybe there's an untapped market in quick, viscerally satisfying games.

[A less presumptuous name.]

Originally Posted By: Alorael

Maybe there's an untapped market in quick, viscerally satisfying games.

I think someone beat you to this. They're called flash games.

[Dantius]

Originally Posted By: Raise your hand

—Alorael, who has even less respect for Mass Effect 2's "intro, assemble party, win" model. While it might make sense to just assemble a team and deal with your enemies, that's really not the standard game model. You also usually don't get to shoot the archvillain in the intro as he's killing your parents, either. Maybe there's an untapped market in quick, viscerally satisfying games.

You're missing the "punching reportersin the face" aspect. That was pretty integral to the game for me!

[Student of Trinity]

Could it be that people who complain about a game being too linear are really only saying that they don't like the plot?

 

Or, maybe more accurately: a game without a plot may not be as fun as a game with a good plot, but it can be more fun than a game with a bad plot. So if you don't like a game's plot, you complain that it would have been better with less plot.

[Mea Tulpa]

I don't think that's the case. If it were, surely people would have complained more about the linearity of A4 (whose plot was widely panned) than that of A5 (whose plot received mixed reactions). A4 is nearly as linear as A5 -- I think there may be one or two fewer choke points, but both have "straight line" moments. But I believe there were far more complaints about linearity in A5.

[Triumph]

Just brainstorming here. Perhaps this discussion of linearity is focusing too much on...reality and not enough on "feel." A3 gives the feel of exploring via a large, open world. Dark Waters of A2 is a big ol' tunnel, but it's utterly unknown and mysterious; it still has that sense of exploration of discovery. It just gives that experience by a different method.

 

By comparison, A5 frames its action in terms of exploring the frontier hunting for Dorikas...yet in reality there's limited room to explore (missing the model perhaps epitomized by A3), and it doesn't feel like venturing into the mysterious unknown (cf. Dark Waters in A2) because of the endless series of dysfunctional Avernite settlements. "I'm supposed to be exploring the wilderness. Oh look, another random town that won't let me continue further in the 'wilderness' until I help them." I didn't feel like I was really getting to explore.

 

/2cents

[Khoth]

I think part of it might be because in A4, we're in territory that we "know" from previous games is nonlinear. So although we're effectively forced down a tunnel (but not completely - nobody's making you kill all those chitrachs), it's the route rather than the cave that's linear.

 

In A5, we're in a totally new area, so we can see the tunnel for what it is.

 

It probably doesn't help that pretty much every area in A5 has either one town, or one town at the start and another at the end. A4 had more variety there.

[Mringasa]

There are very few games that don't have a linear plot. Especially in the modern RPG world. What they do have is a pile of sidequests, guild/faction employment and completionist type questing (I love virtual shinies).

 

Avernum and Geneforge both have a bunch of these things, but almost all of them are seeded along the main plot, so there's no real exploration necessary to find them. Without that exploration, the main plot/areas seem much more linear than say something like Oblivion where you can bypass the main story completely and spend hundreds of hours in sidequests, guilds and exploring the gameworld.

 

Since SW games aren't sandboxes, there is a very limited amount of non-linearity. GF5 has done it best so far imho, with multiple factions and the various missable quests if you align too strongly towards one or the other. This gives it an excellent game environment that reacts to you to a certain extent, thus reducing the linearity.

 

In any event, I have yet to see a good RPG, with a good story, that is totally non-linear. TES, Wizardry 7/8, and a few other good ones come to mind for non-linearity, but you still end up getting the same information/completing the same quest events, just with some minor modifications or differences depending on alignment, faction, or killing sprees.

[Locmaar]

I think this is more about choices and the impact your choices have on how the plot unfolds than linearity.

GF5, for instance, has a coupe of linear plots. Your choices affect which plot unfolds but make it no less linear.

[Mea Tulpa]

To be clear, linearity is totally distinct from plot. SoT was suggesting a correlation -- but we are definitely not talking about linear plots. The issue is basically whether you have significant freedom to explore the game world in the order of your choosing, if you are channeled from region to region, or if you are really escorted directly from one location to the next.

[Locmaar]

No, it's not. Say you're exploring an open world in an order of your choosing, without plot guidance there would be no indication for you to not go where you'd certainly die. You need linear plots for balancing games.

You saying we are 'definitely' not talking about linear plots does not make it so.

[Mea Tulpa]

I didn't say you weren't talking about linear plots, although maybe I could have been clearer. The point is that you could have a linear plot coupled with linear exploration, or a freeform plot coupled with relatively linear exploration, or a linear plot with freeform exploration, or freeform plot with freeform exploration. They are not tied together at the heel, and it is typically linearity of exploration that is discussed as far as Jeff's games go -- because that has varied widely, whereas the plot has consistently been linear with branches. Also,

 

Quote:

Say you're exploring an open world in an order of your choosing, without plot guidance there would be no indication for you to not go where you'd certainly die. You need linear plots for balancing games.

I believe the first Exile/Avernum game is a pretty good rebuttal of this point. Exploration is as free as in any RPG, but that does not make it unbalanced.

[Alorael at Large]

You can balance games by having the game as a whole scale to the player's party (or even skill). You can balance the game by scattering areas of different challenge levels all over the game world. You can balance the game by letting players figure out what they can handle by themselves (like A1).

 

Spiderweb games are certainly not nonlinear in plot, but they often offer more and more meaningful choices than mainstream games. How many games offer you your choice of final battles in very different locations? There are some, but they aren't common. How many give you different hub towns along the way? That's fairly limited. Geneforge has very open plots even though exploration is quite constrained.

 

—Alorael, who has always thought of the plot dichotomy as linear vs. branching. That's "one linear plot" versus "a couple of linear plots." What does a game look like that is neither of those? How can one make a game that has a completely open plot while still having something that's really a plot?

[Lilith]

Originally Posted By: Locmaar

No, it's not. Say you're exploring an open world in an order of your choosing, without plot guidance there would be no indication for you to not go where you'd certainly die. You need linear plots for balancing games.
You saying we are 'definitely' not talking about linear plots does not make it so.

Some people like going to places where they'll certainly die, and then finding a way to survive anyway.

[Mringasa]

You definately don't need linear plots for balancing, but it cuts down the amount of work necessary to produce the game, and thus the costs.

 

There could be a dozen plot trees to start a game, based on choices made at the very start, and each one branches to a totally different endgame. Each one would exclude portions of the others, be it in quests, areas or persons met. Then finish each one off with a completely different endgame. Your choice of massive battles with the other trees' components or maybe a diplomatic mission to each one. The complexity of a system like this would be horrifying, from a design and programming perspective consisting of one person.

 

Say an average SW game takes 100 hours to setup a plot tree. Then something of the sort outlined above would probably take 10000 hours for a solidly balanced story, difficulty and finale. It's possible, but the costs incurred, and probably hair replacement treatment after Jeff pulls it all out due to "issues", would be astronomical.

 

The best part about this though is that SW games, GF in particular, have more depth and nonlinearity than most large company produced products. You may move from section to section, or town to town, but in any SW game it's the journey there that gives them their replayability and enjoyment value.

[Earth]

Originally Posted By: Lilith

Some people like going to places where they'll certainly die, and then finding a way to survive anyway.

yeah by spending alot health and energy potions/elixirs.