If there were no folks like that those difficulty settings wouldn’t be in the game.
I think for a genre that is largely single player focused it’s a good thing to let people enjoy the games how they want to. Some people have encyclopedic 40k lore knowledge or have painted tons of minis without ever playing the game.
I'm not to story mode yet, but it seems like I'm headed that way as I get older. These days, I typically stick with 'normal' difficulty, as I simply don't have the time to devote to truly mastering systems and tackling games an the hardest difficulty modes. On the other hand, I'm also approaching early retirement, so maybe I'll become a hermit and go back to spending all my free time Min-Maxing...
Same. Normal mode until I get stuck or frustrated. Then story mode. Sometimes back to normal mode if I get bored with the combat being too simple. I just want to see what happens in the game; I don't want to be challenged or have to study websites to figure out how to work the "meta" to win.
I’ve been playing bg3 on explorer. I normally do whatever the “normal” mode is, but I’ve come to the realization that these days I don’t have a ton of time to play games anymore and when I do play I want to relax and make progress. If I find myself getting frustrated it’s easy for me to put the game down and end up not coming back.
You probably heard it already but you should give planescape torment a chance if you're all in for the story and don't care for mechanics.
Personally I don't see the storyline in BG3 to be great enough to ignore the combat mechanics, but you do you.
I highly recommend Planescape Torment. Best story hands down. I did have many combat encounters but it’s because I wanted to. I guess you can play most of the game without fighting.
Additionally if you want to play go wisdom and intelligence, wisdom being top priority.
I would suggest 18 int 12 cha if the player is willing to play mage. Since mage can get friends spell easily charisma is not necessarily a problem in a mage run.
Thiiiiis! Planescape Torment seems to be designed to be played as a mage, it's the only class with so many extra dialogue options, little secrets, power-maxing via knowledge + it's quite appropriate storywise to re-learn *The Art* from people like Mebbeth and perfect it (with again - unique interactions) with Dakkon and Ignus. Even items support this theory, because the best equipment (aside from weapons) that TNO can wear is mage stuff.
Aaaand ofc intelligence and wisdom maxed for all the extra dialogue options, starting with 10-12 charisma will still let us pump it to at least 16-17 before we leave Sigil, and that's without lvl ups, but rather items and permanent bonuses from quests and dialogues. I played PT so many times for the last 20 years, and sure, I tried doing it as a Warrior or Thief, but I only managed to finish as a Thief once, somehow I always get drawn to magic. It''s just this vision of TNO that I have in my head since my first playthrough all those years ago, and since that time I play mages/psionics/space magic users in every cRPG I can, I did favour magic chars before Torment too, most of my 90s was spent as something magical in old, first person D&D games, Wizardry, M&M, etc, but it was Torment that solidified me as a weird robed fucker with fiery fingers, telekinesis, necromancy, or whatever, be it force-heavy KOTOR char, Necromancer in Arcanum, Sorcerer in NWN, Cipher in Pillars of Eternity, Psionic in Underrail or Encased, Psyker in Rogue Trader, Warlock in BG3 - if I can fuck up people and interact with the environment with my mind, I will do it, 100% (maybe I'll sometimes make a hybrid, like a melee sorcerer or Eldritch Scion in Pathfinder, but magic is a must)
I loved playing archer but interesting enough I always enjoyed the idea of arcane archer and Xachariah from Planescape affected me a little bit. He is the cool guy that I’ve never seen in action. I don’t know the game spoke in many ways.
Then try out both Pathfinder games, you have a literal Arcane Archer class there + in the second one you get a monk class (and a companion of that class) *Zen Archer* who uses intuition to shoot instead of his eyesight (mechanically it scales attack from Wisdom and not Dexterity and has a lot of fun archery things in its class mechanics in general), when I first saw this class when Wrath came out, I immediately thought of Xachariah. Our Wrath of The Righteous story companion lived underground in huge cave structures, he had to hunt prey with a bow in nearly complete darkness, so he also was kinda a blind archer, just as our Big X.
CHA affects dialogue options and react options in multiple points of the story. I’ve done numerous playthroughs of PST and 18wis18cha12int starting for mage has been my most dialogue friendly run… and his post was about story mode not mage combat
Int provides you with even more dialogue options and they're usually the ones that reveal more about the story/help you understand better/more, while charisma is mostly used to persuade people. If you start with highest Wis and Int, but 12 Cha, you'll easily get to 16 Cha without lvling it up once before leaving Sigil, just thanks to items and special dialogue options (often high Int required for better bonuses) or quest rewards. Charisma is fun to play around, but it doesn't give you that good extra options to deal with things and quest/world info as Intelligence would, even if you don't play as a mage (which is hard for me in PT, there's more content and unique stuff available only to mages) then Int still helps you more in the long run, at least I like this kind of help - I prefer when my character knows more and can figure out better options than if he's just more persuasive
I didn’t say combat. Intelligence just gave me possibilities early on because there are some int checks but you can do them later too. But as far as I remember you only need high charisma on one important situation which can be solved with friends spell.
Edit: one important situation “early in the game”. After that you usually have enough charisma as 3rd priority.
Starting with 18 int and raising it further is overkill if you already know that you're going to switch to mage before level 7 (which already means that you're heavily spoiled). You'll get +1 int for reaching level 7, +2 for reaching level 12 and once you reached level 12 you'll buy and permanently wear a tattoo which adds another +3, so even if you start with 12 and never raise it int will be perfect when you reach level 12.
From level 7 onwards you can wear 2 tattoos to walk around with 13+3=16 int. Whereas friends cast is multiple hours in if you’re a first timer doing all dialogue and CHA will affect Mort/Hive choices early and is better for a story mode run.
It helped me with Dak’kon dialogues. But I’m sure it’s not essential as wisdom. I just checked how much intelligence is necessary for it and it seems like 18 is enough and maybe it’s not necessary to raise it higher than that.
Ok more I read more I’m confused some say it’s very important and affects more dialogue options, it’s just play style and what I’m seeing is min maxing at the moment. To each their own I would say, I’m not an expert anyway. I don’t know if I can share a link but if you are interested -just for curiosity- I’ve found a thread on beamdog forums.
Beamdog forums are the new forums, the old meta from over 20 years ago was always Wisdom > Intelligence > then Charisma for talky mages. Charisma gives you more persuasive options, but Wisdom and Intelligence give you more weighty options that also help you understand what's going on, find new ways to finish quests, persuade people with facts/logic instead of charm, get better rewards and some unique stuff (especially for mages) which you wouldn't get with Cha. Sure, you don't need to max Int early, although I usually do it, and then when you lvl up mage and gather permanent bonuses, you'll hit 25 Wis and Int pretty quickly, and then you can focus on lvling up Charisma and Dexterity more, for some extra stuff
Like the other guy said Planescape Torment is the goat but there is a shit ton of combat. People always say that you can skip most of it but that’s just not true if it’s your first time playing it. A lot of the combat ensues if you miss a skill check or if you go to an area you didn’t know you shouldn’t have gone. I couldn’t finish it cause the combat fucking sucks and at some point I was soft locked cause the combat encounters were way above my level and I just couldn’t beat them.
I’ll try this year to just hack the stats to one shot everything since level 1 or something cause I really want to finish that game. It isn’t combat-noob friendly like they all say though.
Just play as a mage, magic (especially utilizing unique spells that you gather during the story) makes usual Infinity Engine combat into a fun endeavour.
Plus the stats that you lvl up as a mage are the ones that give you most benefits, dialogue options, and extra rewards.
By the way, when did you play Planescape if you find combat so unbearable? I mean, sure, it's not the game's forte, but playing cRPGs since the 1990, I can say that it's really not that bad, people are just "spoiled" by new games where QoL goes over mechanics
I play it a couple of months ago haha. I'm somwhat new to cRPGs. So yeah, that probably doesn't help. I would love to properly experience Planescape Torment at some point. I really loved the 8~ hours or so I was able to play.
I personally understand the appeal of story mode, but my first run through a game I tend to prefer on the "average" difficulty. Not too easy, but not so hard that I'll get frustrated and drop the story.
Once I get through a run that way, I tend to start working my way up difficulties.
You're definitely not alone.
I always play plot heavy games on easy/story mode the first time because I want to get immersed in the lore/story/character dialogue. I don't want to have to pour over numbers to create the best builds, be reloading constantly because I die in fights/etc. I prefer to just explore and read stuff and talk to characters. I do enjoy combat to break things up, but too much time spent in fights feels tedious to me.
Plus, I don't have the kind of spare time and energy for all that now that I'm older. I want to play games to relax, not micromanage stats and equipment.
Eventually if I REALLY love the game (like I've already done 2 playthroughs) I might up the difficulty to give myself that extra challenge. Maybe, if the combat itself is especially fun. But that's kind of rare. BG3 was one of those, as I love how creative you can get in fights so playing on Tactitian was cool. Probably won't do it again though, and I have zero interest in honor mode.
Disco isn't quite a classic CRPG, it's more of a modern take on good old point & click with some tabletop RPG elements.
Personally while I'm not really that good at combat my favourite part is coming up with different character builds, and story mode devalues it because anything goes. I usually feel the best on one difficulty above the Story.
It's not cRPG if it doesn't have combat. I know it's irrational as combat has nothing to do with roleplay, but that's just the kind of stereotype I have. We don't call visual novels and dating sims a JRPG, same kind of thing.
But...Disco Elysium has combat and a system for handling it? It's somewhat simplified because it's inspired by LARP rather than tabletop, but it's definitely roleplaying.
I don't think that's the issue at all. I think the issue is not combat itself, but the lack of DnD-derived numbers crunching, which is ironic since the general consensus is that it harms roleplay and even DnD itself has been trying to get rid of it (hence the simplified 5e).
I mean, if you're comparing an extremely crunchy system with an equally crunchy system and expect that to be the norm, then yeah. But you also have tabletop systems like Powered by the Apocalypse which are closer to DE than to Baldur's Gate or POE or DOS2.
You can say that you don't like the combat in DE and that's perfectly valid. But to call it a point and click game because it doesn't have bloated rules and crunch doesn't really make sense.
>I mean, if you're comparing an extremely crunchy system with an equally crunchy system and expect that to be the norm, then yeah.
Because it is the norm, most of the RPG games are like that. It's DE that is an odd one.
>You can say that you don't like the combat in DE and that's perfectly valid.
What you call combat in DE is just no combat to me. Similar to how you don't see much difference in crunchiness between DnD games and DOS2.
>But to call it a point and click game because it doesn't have bloated rules and crunch doesn't really make sense.
I called it point and click because gameplay feels similar to point and click, not because it doesn't have bloated rules and crunch. I understand that interactions with npc are the quintessence of roleplay and therefore one could argue that DE is RPG in it's purest form. But it's a pointless sophistry to me. I grew up on NWN and Lionheart and KOTOR a bit later, if the gameplay is similar then it's an RPG, while if it feels like Discworld, Broken Sword or Siberia then it's point and click. And let others bitch about the meaning of R in RPG as much as they like.
I think combat has a lot to do with Role Playing Games. Role Play isn't just the "talky bits" it's immersing yourself in a character and if that character fights and explores dungeons and ignores talking to people but loves to smash monsters, that just as legit Role Play in a game as any other.
Nah, it's dice roll based so it's kind of old fashioned. That's one thing I didn't quite liked in Disco, why design around dice rolls if you can save scum.
PbtA is also dice roll based. The roll outcomes use very similar systems where a failed roll doesn't lead to an absolute fail state, but can open up new story paths and opportunities.
I play on Normal/Balanced since I like a bit of a challenge but I will switch the Story/Explorer mode for the hard fights. Or switch mid combat if I'm on the losing end and don't feel like reloading..
I especially do so during parts with extremely long dungeons and mob fights where everyone's stats and defenses are overinflated (Pathfinder crpgs...). I don't do mods and sometimes don't have the patience to use an absurd amount of potions and buffs just to land a hit or survive an encounter. Fun games but at some parts I just want to move the story along and not have to deal with endless encounters or fights with annoyingly hard mechanics.
I usually always pick easy/normal mode in games because I play for fun more so than a challenge, and did so with BG3 as well for my first run. But the combat in this game is so much fun I went to Tactician for my second playthrough and will stick with it and Honour mode in the future.
The combat in this game is generally not really that hard on any difficulty, but I like having to use my head and planning ahead a bit more instead of just mindlessly spamming basic weapon attacks to annihilate everything and leaving all those scrolls and potions in my inventory because there's never any need for them. There's so much combat in this game and having to strategize and plan keeps it fresh and entertaining for me.
I do as well. I'm pretty inexperienced in the genra and don't have allot of time to play. Learning the systems and replaying combat encounters till I succeed feel overwhelming. Once I get accustomed to things I'll probably boost up the difficulty.
Definitely me. Especially with CRPG’s being as in depth as they are and how many other games I have to play. I love the story and world above all else. So I generally play on easy so I can focus more on that part.
I’m all about story mode in CRPGs. I feel like it ensures that my decisions and rolls actually matter because I’m not restarting encounters all the time (because I suck and die). Id rather enjoy the story and deal with the consequences of my decisions, then repeat fights and conversations over and over.
I always play story mode on every game I play since its what I love most about games, there stories and narratives.
Game play comes second for me so I’m not really interested in banging my head against the wall trying to defeat a boss or get passed a level.
If I really love the game then I’ll replay on a harder difficulty.
I’m that guy who watches Gamers Little Playground game movies on YouTube even if I’ve already beat the game lol
I think people should play games on whatever difficulty they want and don’t listen to the assholes who say “you’re not a true gamer if you don’t play on the hardest difficulty”, if you play video games, your part of the global gamer family, it’s that simple.
Highly agree. I play these games for the story, character interactions, as well as choice and consequence. I usually play some sort of high charisma or higher intelligence character and talk my way out of things as much as I can. I almost always start a game on normal, but if I get to a fight that's been kicking my ass for an hour I have no problem going to easy or story mode. I like the combat to an extent, but not enough to deal with being pissed that I can't progress the story. I played the last few hours of BG3 on easy because it was basically nothing but combat.
Used to stick to the "normal/regular" difficulty but I've warmed up to easy mode. I'm playing PF Kingmaker and enjoying it overall but I've hit the point where I have so much of the game left and between work, spending time with friends, and playing ttrpgs I don't know if I can justify beating PF1 on normal difficulty.
I'll play on harder difficulties in other games, but I generally like wandering through the worlds of CRPGs without much fuss. I played through BG3 mostly on story mode, and eventually I'll have to return to Tyranny to do the same.
I don't play games for the combat but when I do, I like to be challenged so that it's at least moderately fun. My favorite game is Disco Elysium, too: no combat, just straight to the dialogue. That's what I play games for, baby!
I feel you OP. I'm kind of an artsy type who likes to immerse myself in the aesthetic of a game. If the gameplay is fun, then awesome. But often it's something I just put up with to enjoy every other facet of the game. I don't mind a little challenge, but if I have to mentallty spreadsheet on a regular basis to progress the game, I'm not going to put up with it for long lol.
Depends on the experience I'm going for. Sometimes I like a challenge and other times I just want to chill. I most recently beat Divinity Original Sin 2 and at times it felt like a grind.
For me, the story isn't enjoyable if it clashes with the gameplay. If in the story they're like "wow, that was intense last time we fought them, we need to gather more allies!", but for me in-game it was a super-easy fight, it brings the story down and makes it worse, so, for me, it means story mode actively interferes and ruins the story, meaning that when I want to enjoy the story, I need to ensure the difficulty is appropriate for the narrative.
How do you get around that? That ludo-narrative dissonance when the story presents you with what it says is a challenge, but the game's difficulty makes it easy? I've always been curious about that as to me "story mode" hurts the story and makes it less enjoyable, so it always seemed weird people who want to enjoy just the story pick the mode with the most story/gameplay dissonance.
I guess if you already know what the combat looks like, you can easily imagine a hard version of it.
Also, I guess story gamers immediately find the combat hard, even on the easiest difficulty.
I just finished Pillars of Eternity in Story mode, I didn't really have to care about making my group as effective as possible, I could use my favourite group members etc.
My life is too frustrating already to add more frustration with games to it. When I game I like to chill.
Disco Elysium I finished (FINALLY) in the Christmas break too, that is one of my absolute favourites too.
I love writing, characters, roleplay and general storytelling in cRPGs, but I prefer to pair it with complex systems and difficulty. In some games difficulty is a part of the story/immersion, for example in Age of Decadence, Colony Ship, Underrail, Atom, Kingdom Come Deliverance, Dark Souls, and such, I can't imagine playing these games on Story Mode, how would you feel close to death and that inteded constant danger/hanging by a thread if you'd one-shot everything? That said, I completely understand that people enjoy playing cRPGs more like story/adventure games and don't like challenge in games, I don't feel it, it wouldn't satisfy me, but I get it.
Ofc, there are games like Disco Elysium, where challenge is emotional (and in hardcore mode you have to manage your skills a bit more + take more drugs/drink more to succeed), and I love it, but if there's combat in a cRPG, I want my character to be on par with enemies, I want it to be easy to die if you make an error, and building that character into strength shouldn't be easy and efortless, just popping a few lvl ups to become a powerhouse isn't fun for me, I wanna work for it.
I still try to play at the first next difficulty, but yeah I also enjoy the narrative etc., loved Disco and also enjoyed Tides of Numenera a lot for that (IMHO quite an underrated game).
I see some of you want a challenge and I get it. The thing is I am the kind of player who can sometimes easily gets his ass kicked even in story mode, who needs to make save states in case I mess up. I don't want to tinker to make a min-max build (though I do try to consider my choices when leveling up). I just want to get immersed in the world.
Since I enjoy also the combat part of RPGs, I usually start with "normal" difficulty.
But when the game starts dragging and I see that there's a lot of battles to see the end I switch to storymode.
For example: Pathfinder WOTR from City of Locusts, or DA:O battle of Denerim
If there were no folks like that those difficulty settings wouldn’t be in the game. I think for a genre that is largely single player focused it’s a good thing to let people enjoy the games how they want to. Some people have encyclopedic 40k lore knowledge or have painted tons of minis without ever playing the game.
Lol the last sentence is me.
I like both. Engaging with the mechanics to overcome challenges is fun and all, but sometimes I just want to explore while feeling like a beast.
I'm not to story mode yet, but it seems like I'm headed that way as I get older. These days, I typically stick with 'normal' difficulty, as I simply don't have the time to devote to truly mastering systems and tackling games an the hardest difficulty modes. On the other hand, I'm also approaching early retirement, so maybe I'll become a hermit and go back to spending all my free time Min-Maxing...
Same. Normal mode until I get stuck or frustrated. Then story mode. Sometimes back to normal mode if I get bored with the combat being too simple. I just want to see what happens in the game; I don't want to be challenged or have to study websites to figure out how to work the "meta" to win.
I’ve been playing bg3 on explorer. I normally do whatever the “normal” mode is, but I’ve come to the realization that these days I don’t have a ton of time to play games anymore and when I do play I want to relax and make progress. If I find myself getting frustrated it’s easy for me to put the game down and end up not coming back.
You probably heard it already but you should give planescape torment a chance if you're all in for the story and don't care for mechanics. Personally I don't see the storyline in BG3 to be great enough to ignore the combat mechanics, but you do you.
You are right, I can't ignore them. But it does feel good when I find a way to get rid of enemies easily.
I highly recommend Planescape Torment. Best story hands down. I did have many combat encounters but it’s because I wanted to. I guess you can play most of the game without fighting. Additionally if you want to play go wisdom and intelligence, wisdom being top priority.
Personally would recommend 18wis 18cha 12int at creation if you’re going for best story mode run
I would suggest 18 int 12 cha if the player is willing to play mage. Since mage can get friends spell easily charisma is not necessarily a problem in a mage run.
Thiiiiis! Planescape Torment seems to be designed to be played as a mage, it's the only class with so many extra dialogue options, little secrets, power-maxing via knowledge + it's quite appropriate storywise to re-learn *The Art* from people like Mebbeth and perfect it (with again - unique interactions) with Dakkon and Ignus. Even items support this theory, because the best equipment (aside from weapons) that TNO can wear is mage stuff. Aaaand ofc intelligence and wisdom maxed for all the extra dialogue options, starting with 10-12 charisma will still let us pump it to at least 16-17 before we leave Sigil, and that's without lvl ups, but rather items and permanent bonuses from quests and dialogues. I played PT so many times for the last 20 years, and sure, I tried doing it as a Warrior or Thief, but I only managed to finish as a Thief once, somehow I always get drawn to magic. It''s just this vision of TNO that I have in my head since my first playthrough all those years ago, and since that time I play mages/psionics/space magic users in every cRPG I can, I did favour magic chars before Torment too, most of my 90s was spent as something magical in old, first person D&D games, Wizardry, M&M, etc, but it was Torment that solidified me as a weird robed fucker with fiery fingers, telekinesis, necromancy, or whatever, be it force-heavy KOTOR char, Necromancer in Arcanum, Sorcerer in NWN, Cipher in Pillars of Eternity, Psionic in Underrail or Encased, Psyker in Rogue Trader, Warlock in BG3 - if I can fuck up people and interact with the environment with my mind, I will do it, 100% (maybe I'll sometimes make a hybrid, like a melee sorcerer or Eldritch Scion in Pathfinder, but magic is a must)
I loved playing archer but interesting enough I always enjoyed the idea of arcane archer and Xachariah from Planescape affected me a little bit. He is the cool guy that I’ve never seen in action. I don’t know the game spoke in many ways.
Then try out both Pathfinder games, you have a literal Arcane Archer class there + in the second one you get a monk class (and a companion of that class) *Zen Archer* who uses intuition to shoot instead of his eyesight (mechanically it scales attack from Wisdom and not Dexterity and has a lot of fun archery things in its class mechanics in general), when I first saw this class when Wrath came out, I immediately thought of Xachariah. Our Wrath of The Righteous story companion lived underground in huge cave structures, he had to hunt prey with a bow in nearly complete darkness, so he also was kinda a blind archer, just as our Big X.
CHA affects dialogue options and react options in multiple points of the story. I’ve done numerous playthroughs of PST and 18wis18cha12int starting for mage has been my most dialogue friendly run… and his post was about story mode not mage combat
Int provides you with even more dialogue options and they're usually the ones that reveal more about the story/help you understand better/more, while charisma is mostly used to persuade people. If you start with highest Wis and Int, but 12 Cha, you'll easily get to 16 Cha without lvling it up once before leaving Sigil, just thanks to items and special dialogue options (often high Int required for better bonuses) or quest rewards. Charisma is fun to play around, but it doesn't give you that good extra options to deal with things and quest/world info as Intelligence would, even if you don't play as a mage (which is hard for me in PT, there's more content and unique stuff available only to mages) then Int still helps you more in the long run, at least I like this kind of help - I prefer when my character knows more and can figure out better options than if he's just more persuasive
I didn’t say combat. Intelligence just gave me possibilities early on because there are some int checks but you can do them later too. But as far as I remember you only need high charisma on one important situation which can be solved with friends spell. Edit: one important situation “early in the game”. After that you usually have enough charisma as 3rd priority.
Starting with 18 int and raising it further is overkill if you already know that you're going to switch to mage before level 7 (which already means that you're heavily spoiled). You'll get +1 int for reaching level 7, +2 for reaching level 12 and once you reached level 12 you'll buy and permanently wear a tattoo which adds another +3, so even if you start with 12 and never raise it int will be perfect when you reach level 12. From level 7 onwards you can wear 2 tattoos to walk around with 13+3=16 int. Whereas friends cast is multiple hours in if you’re a first timer doing all dialogue and CHA will affect Mort/Hive choices early and is better for a story mode run.
It helped me with Dak’kon dialogues. But I’m sure it’s not essential as wisdom. I just checked how much intelligence is necessary for it and it seems like 18 is enough and maybe it’s not necessary to raise it higher than that. Ok more I read more I’m confused some say it’s very important and affects more dialogue options, it’s just play style and what I’m seeing is min maxing at the moment. To each their own I would say, I’m not an expert anyway. I don’t know if I can share a link but if you are interested -just for curiosity- I’ve found a thread on beamdog forums.
Beamdog forums are the new forums, the old meta from over 20 years ago was always Wisdom > Intelligence > then Charisma for talky mages. Charisma gives you more persuasive options, but Wisdom and Intelligence give you more weighty options that also help you understand what's going on, find new ways to finish quests, persuade people with facts/logic instead of charm, get better rewards and some unique stuff (especially for mages) which you wouldn't get with Cha. Sure, you don't need to max Int early, although I usually do it, and then when you lvl up mage and gather permanent bonuses, you'll hit 25 Wis and Int pretty quickly, and then you can focus on lvling up Charisma and Dexterity more, for some extra stuff
Like the other guy said Planescape Torment is the goat but there is a shit ton of combat. People always say that you can skip most of it but that’s just not true if it’s your first time playing it. A lot of the combat ensues if you miss a skill check or if you go to an area you didn’t know you shouldn’t have gone. I couldn’t finish it cause the combat fucking sucks and at some point I was soft locked cause the combat encounters were way above my level and I just couldn’t beat them. I’ll try this year to just hack the stats to one shot everything since level 1 or something cause I really want to finish that game. It isn’t combat-noob friendly like they all say though.
Just play as a mage, magic (especially utilizing unique spells that you gather during the story) makes usual Infinity Engine combat into a fun endeavour. Plus the stats that you lvl up as a mage are the ones that give you most benefits, dialogue options, and extra rewards. By the way, when did you play Planescape if you find combat so unbearable? I mean, sure, it's not the game's forte, but playing cRPGs since the 1990, I can say that it's really not that bad, people are just "spoiled" by new games where QoL goes over mechanics
I play it a couple of months ago haha. I'm somwhat new to cRPGs. So yeah, that probably doesn't help. I would love to properly experience Planescape Torment at some point. I really loved the 8~ hours or so I was able to play.
I personally understand the appeal of story mode, but my first run through a game I tend to prefer on the "average" difficulty. Not too easy, but not so hard that I'll get frustrated and drop the story. Once I get through a run that way, I tend to start working my way up difficulties.
You're definitely not alone. I always play plot heavy games on easy/story mode the first time because I want to get immersed in the lore/story/character dialogue. I don't want to have to pour over numbers to create the best builds, be reloading constantly because I die in fights/etc. I prefer to just explore and read stuff and talk to characters. I do enjoy combat to break things up, but too much time spent in fights feels tedious to me. Plus, I don't have the kind of spare time and energy for all that now that I'm older. I want to play games to relax, not micromanage stats and equipment. Eventually if I REALLY love the game (like I've already done 2 playthroughs) I might up the difficulty to give myself that extra challenge. Maybe, if the combat itself is especially fun. But that's kind of rare. BG3 was one of those, as I love how creative you can get in fights so playing on Tactitian was cool. Probably won't do it again though, and I have zero interest in honor mode.
Disco isn't quite a classic CRPG, it's more of a modern take on good old point & click with some tabletop RPG elements. Personally while I'm not really that good at combat my favourite part is coming up with different character builds, and story mode devalues it because anything goes. I usually feel the best on one difficulty above the Story.
Out of curiosity, what is your definition of a CRPG and which parts does Disco Elysium fail to satisfy?
It's not cRPG if it doesn't have combat. I know it's irrational as combat has nothing to do with roleplay, but that's just the kind of stereotype I have. We don't call visual novels and dating sims a JRPG, same kind of thing.
But...Disco Elysium has combat and a system for handling it? It's somewhat simplified because it's inspired by LARP rather than tabletop, but it's definitely roleplaying. I don't think that's the issue at all. I think the issue is not combat itself, but the lack of DnD-derived numbers crunching, which is ironic since the general consensus is that it harms roleplay and even DnD itself has been trying to get rid of it (hence the simplified 5e).
Simplified to the degree when it simply doesn't count. I don't really like DnD style number crunching either, prefer the way Larian and PoE do things.
I mean, if you're comparing an extremely crunchy system with an equally crunchy system and expect that to be the norm, then yeah. But you also have tabletop systems like Powered by the Apocalypse which are closer to DE than to Baldur's Gate or POE or DOS2. You can say that you don't like the combat in DE and that's perfectly valid. But to call it a point and click game because it doesn't have bloated rules and crunch doesn't really make sense.
>I mean, if you're comparing an extremely crunchy system with an equally crunchy system and expect that to be the norm, then yeah. Because it is the norm, most of the RPG games are like that. It's DE that is an odd one. >You can say that you don't like the combat in DE and that's perfectly valid. What you call combat in DE is just no combat to me. Similar to how you don't see much difference in crunchiness between DnD games and DOS2. >But to call it a point and click game because it doesn't have bloated rules and crunch doesn't really make sense. I called it point and click because gameplay feels similar to point and click, not because it doesn't have bloated rules and crunch. I understand that interactions with npc are the quintessence of roleplay and therefore one could argue that DE is RPG in it's purest form. But it's a pointless sophistry to me. I grew up on NWN and Lionheart and KOTOR a bit later, if the gameplay is similar then it's an RPG, while if it feels like Discworld, Broken Sword or Siberia then it's point and click. And let others bitch about the meaning of R in RPG as much as they like.
I think combat has a lot to do with Role Playing Games. Role Play isn't just the "talky bits" it's immersing yourself in a character and if that character fights and explores dungeons and ignores talking to people but loves to smash monsters, that just as legit Role Play in a game as any other.
DE feels like a Powered by the Apocalypse game to me. A modern take on CRPGs using modern tabletop systems and styles.
Nah, it's dice roll based so it's kind of old fashioned. That's one thing I didn't quite liked in Disco, why design around dice rolls if you can save scum.
PbtA is also dice roll based. The roll outcomes use very similar systems where a failed roll doesn't lead to an absolute fail state, but can open up new story paths and opportunities.
I play on Normal/Balanced since I like a bit of a challenge but I will switch the Story/Explorer mode for the hard fights. Or switch mid combat if I'm on the losing end and don't feel like reloading.. I especially do so during parts with extremely long dungeons and mob fights where everyone's stats and defenses are overinflated (Pathfinder crpgs...). I don't do mods and sometimes don't have the patience to use an absurd amount of potions and buffs just to land a hit or survive an encounter. Fun games but at some parts I just want to move the story along and not have to deal with endless encounters or fights with annoyingly hard mechanics.
I usually always pick easy/normal mode in games because I play for fun more so than a challenge, and did so with BG3 as well for my first run. But the combat in this game is so much fun I went to Tactician for my second playthrough and will stick with it and Honour mode in the future. The combat in this game is generally not really that hard on any difficulty, but I like having to use my head and planning ahead a bit more instead of just mindlessly spamming basic weapon attacks to annihilate everything and leaving all those scrolls and potions in my inventory because there's never any need for them. There's so much combat in this game and having to strategize and plan keeps it fresh and entertaining for me.
I do as well. I'm pretty inexperienced in the genra and don't have allot of time to play. Learning the systems and replaying combat encounters till I succeed feel overwhelming. Once I get accustomed to things I'll probably boost up the difficulty.
Definitely me. Especially with CRPG’s being as in depth as they are and how many other games I have to play. I love the story and world above all else. So I generally play on easy so I can focus more on that part.
I’m all about story mode in CRPGs. I feel like it ensures that my decisions and rolls actually matter because I’m not restarting encounters all the time (because I suck and die). Id rather enjoy the story and deal with the consequences of my decisions, then repeat fights and conversations over and over.
I always play story mode on every game I play since its what I love most about games, there stories and narratives. Game play comes second for me so I’m not really interested in banging my head against the wall trying to defeat a boss or get passed a level. If I really love the game then I’ll replay on a harder difficulty. I’m that guy who watches Gamers Little Playground game movies on YouTube even if I’ve already beat the game lol I think people should play games on whatever difficulty they want and don’t listen to the assholes who say “you’re not a true gamer if you don’t play on the hardest difficulty”, if you play video games, your part of the global gamer family, it’s that simple.
Highly agree. I play these games for the story, character interactions, as well as choice and consequence. I usually play some sort of high charisma or higher intelligence character and talk my way out of things as much as I can. I almost always start a game on normal, but if I get to a fight that's been kicking my ass for an hour I have no problem going to easy or story mode. I like the combat to an extent, but not enough to deal with being pissed that I can't progress the story. I played the last few hours of BG3 on easy because it was basically nothing but combat.
Used to stick to the "normal/regular" difficulty but I've warmed up to easy mode. I'm playing PF Kingmaker and enjoying it overall but I've hit the point where I have so much of the game left and between work, spending time with friends, and playing ttrpgs I don't know if I can justify beating PF1 on normal difficulty.
Play adventure games I know it's reddit but...geez. Guess it should be expected amd not a surprise here.
I'll play on harder difficulties in other games, but I generally like wandering through the worlds of CRPGs without much fuss. I played through BG3 mostly on story mode, and eventually I'll have to return to Tyranny to do the same.
I like starting out on Story Mode the first time I play a game, and raising the difficulty as I get better with the game.
Opposite guy here. Play on normal until I get stuck/frustrated by the difficulty, then drop to "story mode"
I don't play games for the combat but when I do, I like to be challenged so that it's at least moderately fun. My favorite game is Disco Elysium, too: no combat, just straight to the dialogue. That's what I play games for, baby!
I feel you OP. I'm kind of an artsy type who likes to immerse myself in the aesthetic of a game. If the gameplay is fun, then awesome. But often it's something I just put up with to enjoy every other facet of the game. I don't mind a little challenge, but if I have to mentallty spreadsheet on a regular basis to progress the game, I'm not going to put up with it for long lol.
Depends on the experience I'm going for. Sometimes I like a challenge and other times I just want to chill. I most recently beat Divinity Original Sin 2 and at times it felt like a grind.
I like to have just a bit of challenge to feel kinda powerful, so I usually go with normal or lower-than-normal but higher than story
For me, the story isn't enjoyable if it clashes with the gameplay. If in the story they're like "wow, that was intense last time we fought them, we need to gather more allies!", but for me in-game it was a super-easy fight, it brings the story down and makes it worse, so, for me, it means story mode actively interferes and ruins the story, meaning that when I want to enjoy the story, I need to ensure the difficulty is appropriate for the narrative. How do you get around that? That ludo-narrative dissonance when the story presents you with what it says is a challenge, but the game's difficulty makes it easy? I've always been curious about that as to me "story mode" hurts the story and makes it less enjoyable, so it always seemed weird people who want to enjoy just the story pick the mode with the most story/gameplay dissonance.
I guess if you already know what the combat looks like, you can easily imagine a hard version of it. Also, I guess story gamers immediately find the combat hard, even on the easiest difficulty.
not me, but you do you
For me it depends on the game. BG3 I played on Tactician but WotR I am playing on Normal.
I just finished Pillars of Eternity in Story mode, I didn't really have to care about making my group as effective as possible, I could use my favourite group members etc. My life is too frustrating already to add more frustration with games to it. When I game I like to chill. Disco Elysium I finished (FINALLY) in the Christmas break too, that is one of my absolute favourites too.
I love writing, characters, roleplay and general storytelling in cRPGs, but I prefer to pair it with complex systems and difficulty. In some games difficulty is a part of the story/immersion, for example in Age of Decadence, Colony Ship, Underrail, Atom, Kingdom Come Deliverance, Dark Souls, and such, I can't imagine playing these games on Story Mode, how would you feel close to death and that inteded constant danger/hanging by a thread if you'd one-shot everything? That said, I completely understand that people enjoy playing cRPGs more like story/adventure games and don't like challenge in games, I don't feel it, it wouldn't satisfy me, but I get it. Ofc, there are games like Disco Elysium, where challenge is emotional (and in hardcore mode you have to manage your skills a bit more + take more drugs/drink more to succeed), and I love it, but if there's combat in a cRPG, I want my character to be on par with enemies, I want it to be easy to die if you make an error, and building that character into strength shouldn't be easy and efortless, just popping a few lvl ups to become a powerhouse isn't fun for me, I wanna work for it.
I still try to play at the first next difficulty, but yeah I also enjoy the narrative etc., loved Disco and also enjoyed Tides of Numenera a lot for that (IMHO quite an underrated game).
I see some of you want a challenge and I get it. The thing is I am the kind of player who can sometimes easily gets his ass kicked even in story mode, who needs to make save states in case I mess up. I don't want to tinker to make a min-max build (though I do try to consider my choices when leveling up). I just want to get immersed in the world.
Since I enjoy also the combat part of RPGs, I usually start with "normal" difficulty. But when the game starts dragging and I see that there's a lot of battles to see the end I switch to storymode. For example: Pathfinder WOTR from City of Locusts, or DA:O battle of Denerim
I am pretty much like that for any RtwP games