Troika's Games

Remove all ads!

It is really interesting to compare the games created by Troika in their short history.

Aranum was incredibly creative, with a rich setting, interesting story, and endless character possibilities. However, the combat system was somewhat broken and never really hit a sweet spot: it was too hard for about five hours and boringly easy for the rest of the game.

On the other hand, ToEE has an incredibly balanced and detailed combat system, but the rest of the game was boring and poorly implemented. I guess they were using an old module as a basis, but one dull dungeon isn't exactly a grand adventure. Also, npcs weren't developed and dialog was lifeless.

How did the same group make these two games? I know Troika also created Vampire:Masquerade, but I havent played the game.

[ August 09, 2007, 14:24: Message edited by: Taluntain ]

 

A game with the sheer creativity of Arcanum and the combat system of ToEE... now that would have been a winner!

While I agree that Arcanum's combat (everything about the game's interface, really) was broken, but I don't think ToEE was "boring" or poorly implemented. It wasn't the most original setting (but then again Greyhawk is the "standard" D&D setting for a reason), but the dungeon was well-designed, and had some interesting quests. Playing the sub-temples against each other is a lot of fun. I've not played Bloodlines either, but from what I've seen it seemed very different from both of Troika's previous games.

Although it seems remarkable that a developer could make radically different games, take a look back the old companies. Take Access for example. They made Echelon (a flight simulator) and Countdown (an espionage adventure game) less than 2 years apart, then another year later created Links, one of the most famous golf simulators ever. And while LucasArts became famous for their adventure games in the late 80's and the 90's, they started making flight simulators as well. SSI, usually associated with the D&D CRPGs of 1988-1995, were really specialised in wargames. Westwood started making first-person party-based CRPGs and then single-handedly popularised the RTS genre. I could go on and on. And remember that in all those cases the companies did not have different groups working on different games - the same people who programmed the adventure game were also coding the simulator at the same time.

 

Definitely a matter of opinion here. I did not find ToEE to be boring. In fact, I found it to be a nice break from the Bioware style of D&D. Nothing wrong with Bioware's style, just was nice to see a D&D CRPG implemented in a different way. The ending was a bit of a let down, but the idea of delving into this temple/dungeon teaming with hostiles and the intrigue within the different factions was pretty cool if you ask me. My advice would be to play through the game as neutral. Or at least without a paladin. That way you'll have the option of working with some of the elemental factions instead of just killing them outright. Having a paladin precludes this option if you don't want him/her to fall.

With the name of the game being centered around THE temple, I did not expect much else than the one dungeon that made up the game and I don't know why one would expect anything else. No, it was not a large, multi-region adventure like BG2, but it was never meant to be. ToEE was supposed to be the old classic module, executed as faithfully as possible on a computer and nothing else. For those of us who know and remember the old module and others like it, this game was great (aside from the bugs, but those can be fixed with patches and mods).

I find it interesting that you described the combat system as "balanced" since one of the most common complaints about this game is that the CS is flawed. Many new players feel that their low level characters tend to miss more often than what their stats would dictate.

And isn't that other game called Arcanum? Don't know... never played it.

Anyway, that's my opinion on the matter and I assume that is why you posted this thread-- to instigate dialogue.

 

For starters you should definitely play Arcanum!

I think in my initial post I was a little bit too polarizing. I don't actually think ToEE is boring at all, but the setting is definitely bland compared to the world of arcanum, in which magic and technology coexist in a precarious balance.

I'm interested in your statement about people's complaints about ToEE. Doesn't the game show detailed description of dice rolls and modifiers. How did these rolls differ from what people expected per D&D rules. Other than the bugs ofcourse, which is what I was getting at with the poorly implemented comment.

 

I loved the combat system in ToEE. The game was just brimming over with potential, but alas so much of that potential was unrealized.

From what I understand, budget contraints resulted in a lot of the less than professional voices you hear in the game. Characters like Elmo were embarrassing. I hated the voice, and the whole premise of going against a great evil because he'd "like to buy some ale," just made my cheeks hurt.

I also agree that being confined to a single dungeon for the majority of the game was something of a turn off for me in a computer game (probably funner in a few P&P sessions). The dungeon was very well done, detailed, and filled with a lot of great encounters, but I got tired of leaving town to return to the same place over and over and over (and over).

The modding community has done wonders to improve the game, and squash a lot of the bugs.

 

I loved TOEE once it was modded by Co8. It's a fun turn based game, that feels very true to old pen and paper DnD. It is definitely sad this game was rushed to market, and a perfect example why Atari was delisted from NASDAQ and facing bankruptcy.

TOEE's engine had great potential! It would have been cool to have other modules released periodically, either based on some of the golden oldies, or even new modules. I'm really looking forward to trying Keep on the Borderlands once Co8 is finished!!

 

Vampire the M did much good, it is a lot better than the 7.7 gamestpot gave it. The combat was good, not great, but good. Ik kept you on your toe's but no foe was to hard. It looks a bit like Dues ex2.

Vampire is a shooter rpg hybrid. And yes that means compromising. The shooter part is not Half life 2, and the rpg part is no BG. But good enough.

The character building is not D&D, but what is. 7 or 9 races with own spells (some overlap) and male or female. A few shops whit only the needed things. Leveling is done with a skilltree that is very well done. Skills and feats are linked for boosting one other. The view is a bit like Oblivion 3rd person or 1st.

The atmosfear is great. The feeding on victems is super. The story is not BG, but what is, and better than Oblivion's. I would say great. the most questy part is in the beginning, later its get more combatical. The rpg part is stronger than de shooterpart. It even has stealth parts in it. (If you play a certain race, nosferatu, you are disfigured so you cannot walk the streets.)

I believe that the game runs on de half life 2 engine. However the game was extremly buggy until the patches came. it is unplayable whitout the patches. The bugs and the combat gave it a full 10 points less than it deservers.

But hey, I do not want to kill using a somersault double axle 15 feet in the air whit a sword 2,5 meter long. I do not want to be a rambo that blast his way trough. The combat is good enough.

It is open ended but linear, norrow linear. Voice acting is ok, music is okay. It has proper savegames, and not a waypoint system. You can make rpg choices, and side whit two factions.

The magic is based on blood and is part of the skilltree system. One race is more magical, one is more beastly.

One race is so nice to play. The malkavians hear voices and speak in ridles and metafors. Asylum material

A 7.7 at gamespot.com. I had more fun whit this game than I had with eiter KOTOR. 7.7 I still cannot believe it.

So, go get it.

As for arcanium, i do not know it.

ToEE is nice, very nice but a bit to much 3.5 to make it playable.

 

I have kind of an old system right now. One of the reasons I'm thinking about Arcanum is that I just replayed it, lol. But when I upgrade, Vampire:Masquerade is definitely on the to-play list.

 

Just to be picky, but neither is BG2, It is just one large town and a couple of "sub quests" outside of the town. You even have to talk to specific persons to unlock them, pretty much just like ToEE. BG1 on the other hand!

Other than that, I have played ToEE and Arcanum and love both of them. Not tried Vampire the M, mainly becose I am not a fan of the setting at all.

 

The problem of Arcanum wasn't that the interface was bad (though it was; you could put a suit of plate in a belt slot); the problem of Arcanum wasn't the bugs (even though they were legion); the true problem of Arcanum was the hideous imbalance between the two sides (Tech and Magick). F'r instance, the most powerful spell of the Temporal Magick school could stop time in the current area; there was nothing in the Tech side that could reach even 1/4 of the power (comparatively speaking). Also, combat was particularly difficult for gun users: guns had wide damage ranges (5-25, that sort of thing) and had low RoF (even the supposedly faster ones); plus, many enemies engaged a sort of 'Turbo mode' (ran extremely fast towards you) the moment they spotted you, which didn't help matters one bit.

There was a community pack which improved things somewhat for Tech players (added some new schematics, improved some of the existing ones, improved ranged damage), but even with it the game is seriously slanted towards Magick.

 

Arcanum's combat was horrible - utterly utterly horrible. I almost gave up during one of the early dungeons (dwarvern mines?) because of just how horribly horrible the combat was. The rest of the game was good enough to allow me to mostly forgive that, but I don't think I could ever replay. Having to go and do that dungeon again ... *shudder*

V:tM didn't impress me that much, and that plus crappy performance on my system means that I didn't get far. I intend to get ToEE when I see it cheaply.

 

Arcanum could have been awesome if the combat system wasn't so horrible and unbalanced. The way it is I enjoy combat in Lionheart a lot more (and it's totally hack and slash).

I haven't finished Arcanum yet but playing a clever diplomat who is also a half orc makes levelling up a real pain (although I must confess it has been rewarding at times).

I never played ToEE but I read a lot of interesting comments and I intend to give it a try some day.

Vampire is a really nice game (it's beginning to show its age though) and it's thoroughly enjoyable (provided the setting doesn't turn you off).

 

Arcanum's combat engine had one fatal flaw: the turn-based mode auto-activated only when an enemy tried to attack you, rather than just sense you (like it was in Fallout). This wasn't a problem with ranged-fighting opponents, but unless you were quick/attentive enough to press the 'start TB' button, you could find yourself surrounded by melee enemies (who went 'Turbo' and made a beeline for you in RT mode).

Anyway, despite its glaring faults, I still love Arcanum the best out of Troika's offering. Mainly due to the fact that steampunk games are so damn rare (and steampunk RPGs even moreso).

 

and dexterity is such an overpowered stat in the turn based mode. after maxing your speed, you always go first and usually finish the enemy off before their turn. Even gun users are powerful after maxing dex (and gun users suck compared to mages and fighers). real time combat is more difficult but reminds me of watching a seizure

 

Arcanum combat was bad, but there is worse. Much worse.
You didn't play the game for the combat (although there was a lot of it) you played for the Roleplay. For creating a character that had hundreds of ways to make their mark on the world.

Note: I think the magic system was one of the most unusual I've come across in a RPG. You could knock yourself out by overuse.

 

I never played V:tM, but both Arcanum and ToEE had potential, they just failed in many ways, for arcanum the balance of magic vs tech was insanely bad, magic was so overpowered, the graphic and story of the game however was very good.

ToEE I guess was spoiled in a way by games like BG, ToEE simply felt small and simple compared to other CRPG's. Two towns, a couple of outdoor areas and two dungeons. Allthough i did find the its translation of pnp to crpg one of the best, if not the best and its graphic was good, the music was a bit over the top imho.