I'll give the credit where credit is due: this game has great characters and world-building. That alone is enough to make the game tolerable. But that's really the best I can describe it.
In terms of the gameplay, it's just awful, and that's not just my opinion. I don't know much about DnD, but AFAIK it gives the player a lot of options to basically make them feel like they truly inhabit a world, where they have as much free will as they do IRL. Looking at Planescape from that perspective, it is extremely linear. In fact, I'd even say it's more linear than the streamlined KotOR clones of the 2000s.
Most of the NPCs you talk to are lore banks. "Dialogues" with them are pure exposition dumps. In most cases, when you are given dialogue options, you have one or two. When there's more, in most cases the extra options are completely non-viable. For example, being aggressive will always get you killed, even when you're playing as a Fighter class, except for when you're dealing with bums and lowlifes. In my opinion, it would be best to just not have those options in the first place.
If you genuinely try to immerse yourself in the world and role-play as a sane, rational person, you'll just not move the story forward. In most cases, the most rational thing to do is not to speak to an NPC or not to do their quests. But the game still forces you to, while pretending like you have a choice. It ends up being the case of clicking every dialogue option until you find the right one, even if it makes no sense to you.
In between the dialogues, there's little to no actual gameplay. You run around talking to NPCs and occasionally fight. The combat is extremely simplistic and not fun. You start with no skills, armor or proper weapons, and several hours into the game you still have none of that. And even if you choose to play as a fighter (which is the class you start with), you're too weak to solve any significant problems in the game through force. The inventory management and the leveling-up are just as simplistic as the combat. The worst thing is, while being so weak, you still have to constantly run through hostile environments with respawning enemies.
Most people who praise this game will also acknowledge that the gameplay is flawed, and the main selling point here is the story. And this here is why I never take gamers' advice on story anymore. Most gamers don't read any good literature or watch any arthouse cinema; their idea of a great story is a Marvel movie. I've been conned into playing through the entirety of Star Wars: KotOR 2 by people saying it has a deep and philosophical story, which in reality turned out to be some vague ranting about the (clearly misunderstood by the writers) concept of the Force. I've been hearing the same things about this game, and it's written by the same writer. I'm not gonna spend 30+ hours on this one too just to be disappointed.
In my experience, great stories in video games tend to be great from the start. Take Deus Ex for example, a game in a pretty similar genre. Every piece of written content and every interaction with an NPC there carries substance beyond just world-building. Characters discuss relevant political and philosophical themes that engage the player intellectually and emotionally. All the books, newspaper clippings and emails carry valuable commentary on late-stage capitalism, militarism, autocracy, the co-option of technology by the powerful elites, philosophical musings upon the impact of technology on human identity and freedom, etc. I legit walk around quoting Deus Ex, because the quality of its writing is on the level of actual art. And this quality is consistently displayed from the very start.
But what actual substance did I get from 4+ hours of playing Planescape: Torment? Well, I learned a lot about Sigil, the city of doors, and the reputation of Pharod, and the warring factions underneath the city: the rat(-people?) and the undead. This is all superficial stuff. Where's the beef? And all that I had to learn between terrible gameplay segments.
I honestly went into it thinking "well, at least it won't be as bad as KotOR 2, because that game is broken", but at least KotOR 2 is built on the solid template of the first game. And, in fact, I can't really say Planescape: Torment is not broken. Perhaps, it's less broken, but I've encountered some instances of incorrect dialogue-chains, and one time I accidentally soft-locked the game. It was when you have to get Soego out of his room and snitch at him to Hargrimm. I suppose I must've gotten him way too far from his room, because then he didn't reappear in the "cutscene" where Hargrimm is scolding him. So the "cutscene" just stuck and there was no way out of it other than Alt+F4'ing out of the game. It's a good thing I saved right before that. Which btw the game often will not let you do for no apparent reason.
In the end, I felt like I did have some interest in continuing, purely out of curiosity based on the character relationships. But there was a segment where I did not know what I was supposed to do. I talked to all NPCs available, clicked on all dialogue options, and still had no clue. And I was so tired of the respawning enemies, that the very idea of running back and forth between these NPCs felt exhausting to me. I think, if this game truly had the amazing story everyone keeps raving about, I'd probably be willing to suffer through the horrendous gameplay, but clearly I am not.
In terms of the gameplay, it's just awful, and that's not just my opinion. I don't know much about DnD, but AFAIK it gives the player a lot of options to basically make them feel like they truly inhabit a world, where they have as much free will as they do IRL. Looking at Planescape from that perspective, it is extremely linear. In fact, I'd even say it's more linear than the streamlined KotOR clones of the 2000s.
Most of the NPCs you talk to are lore banks. "Dialogues" with them are pure exposition dumps. In most cases, when you are given dialogue options, you have one or two. When there's more, in most cases the extra options are completely non-viable. For example, being aggressive will always get you killed, even when you're playing as a Fighter class, except for when you're dealing with bums and lowlifes. In my opinion, it would be best to just not have those options in the first place.
If you genuinely try to immerse yourself in the world and role-play as a sane, rational person, you'll just not move the story forward. In most cases, the most rational thing to do is not to speak to an NPC or not to do their quests. But the game still forces you to, while pretending like you have a choice. It ends up being the case of clicking every dialogue option until you find the right one, even if it makes no sense to you.
In between the dialogues, there's little to no actual gameplay. You run around talking to NPCs and occasionally fight. The combat is extremely simplistic and not fun. You start with no skills, armor or proper weapons, and several hours into the game you still have none of that. And even if you choose to play as a fighter (which is the class you start with), you're too weak to solve any significant problems in the game through force. The inventory management and the leveling-up are just as simplistic as the combat. The worst thing is, while being so weak, you still have to constantly run through hostile environments with respawning enemies.
Most people who praise this game will also acknowledge that the gameplay is flawed, and the main selling point here is the story. And this here is why I never take gamers' advice on story anymore. Most gamers don't read any good literature or watch any arthouse cinema; their idea of a great story is a Marvel movie. I've been conned into playing through the entirety of Star Wars: KotOR 2 by people saying it has a deep and philosophical story, which in reality turned out to be some vague ranting about the (clearly misunderstood by the writers) concept of the Force. I've been hearing the same things about this game, and it's written by the same writer. I'm not gonna spend 30+ hours on this one too just to be disappointed.
In my experience, great stories in video games tend to be great from the start. Take Deus Ex for example, a game in a pretty similar genre. Every piece of written content and every interaction with an NPC there carries substance beyond just world-building. Characters discuss relevant political and philosophical themes that engage the player intellectually and emotionally. All the books, newspaper clippings and emails carry valuable commentary on late-stage capitalism, militarism, autocracy, the co-option of technology by the powerful elites, philosophical musings upon the impact of technology on human identity and freedom, etc. I legit walk around quoting Deus Ex, because the quality of its writing is on the level of actual art. And this quality is consistently displayed from the very start.
But what actual substance did I get from 4+ hours of playing Planescape: Torment? Well, I learned a lot about Sigil, the city of doors, and the reputation of Pharod, and the warring factions underneath the city: the rat(-people?) and the undead. This is all superficial stuff. Where's the beef? And all that I had to learn between terrible gameplay segments.
I honestly went into it thinking "well, at least it won't be as bad as KotOR 2, because that game is broken", but at least KotOR 2 is built on the solid template of the first game. And, in fact, I can't really say Planescape: Torment is not broken. Perhaps, it's less broken, but I've encountered some instances of incorrect dialogue-chains, and one time I accidentally soft-locked the game. It was when you have to get Soego out of his room and snitch at him to Hargrimm. I suppose I must've gotten him way too far from his room, because then he didn't reappear in the "cutscene" where Hargrimm is scolding him. So the "cutscene" just stuck and there was no way out of it other than Alt+F4'ing out of the game. It's a good thing I saved right before that. Which btw the game often will not let you do for no apparent reason.
In the end, I felt like I did have some interest in continuing, purely out of curiosity based on the character relationships. But there was a segment where I did not know what I was supposed to do. I talked to all NPCs available, clicked on all dialogue options, and still had no clue. And I was so tired of the respawning enemies, that the very idea of running back and forth between these NPCs felt exhausting to me. I think, if this game truly had the amazing story everyone keeps raving about, I'd probably be willing to suffer through the horrendous gameplay, but clearly I am not.
13 Comments
classic fallouts did have the best answer to this with the addition of vats though, gotta respect that
@tarnkappe yeah, it always made more sense to me that DnD-based games should have a turn-based combat. But I still haven't played classic Fallout games. Perhaps will give the original Fallout a try in the following days.
"And this here is why I never take gamers' advice on story anymore."
Amen!!
Amen!!
I think the separation of "characters", "worldbuilding" and "story" as three distinct buckets you can filter the writing of Planescape into is maybe why the game's opening didn't grab you, at least based on what you describe here. I think Planescape is actually quite like Deus Ex in how its various elements contribute to its theming, and I'm wondering if there is anything specific you attribute to you not getting the same feel. I personally reject the notion that the world building and character interactions in PST are just kind of chaff that aren't rich/meaningful textually/thematically in the same way the set design in one of these amazing arthouse movies you vaguely gesture towards isn't.
Speaking of, I find this sort of characterization of lauded game stories really vexing, for two reasons. 1. Put up or shut up about the amazing books and movies that clear anything games (at least in the CRPG tradition) have done. A couple movies and books that do what PST is trying to do but better, if you would. 2. This is highly anecdotal but I feel like PST fans/people who have written about the game are much more likely to find Marvel and the like grating rather than as some kind of storytelling standard, and as such I find the story being told about why people think highly of PST/other games of this era to be pretty unconvincing/like a weird sort of posturing.
No problem if you don't like the game, there are plenty of reasons (some of which you outlined) not to, and I am genuinely curious why the writing in PST felt insubstantial to you, but the whole "real art" thing really bothers me every time I see it anywhere. Feels smarmy and annoying.
Speaking of, I find this sort of characterization of lauded game stories really vexing, for two reasons. 1. Put up or shut up about the amazing books and movies that clear anything games (at least in the CRPG tradition) have done. A couple movies and books that do what PST is trying to do but better, if you would. 2. This is highly anecdotal but I feel like PST fans/people who have written about the game are much more likely to find Marvel and the like grating rather than as some kind of storytelling standard, and as such I find the story being told about why people think highly of PST/other games of this era to be pretty unconvincing/like a weird sort of posturing.
No problem if you don't like the game, there are plenty of reasons (some of which you outlined) not to, and I am genuinely curious why the writing in PST felt insubstantial to you, but the whole "real art" thing really bothers me every time I see it anywhere. Feels smarmy and annoying.
@slinky3 in any good piece of writing, characters and worldbuilding ARE part of the story.
Tbh your demands here are pointless and unfair:
1) If the story (the amount I have experienced) was any memorable and I'd given you examples of it and why I don't like them, it surely wouldn't be sufficient to you. Frankly, even if you came up with some sorta reasoning for calling those examples great writing, I probably wouldn't be convinced either. Your whole comment kinda comes off as a way to attack me, because it wouldn't really serve any other purpose.
2) The burden of proof really should be on you, not me. Since I didn't see anything notable in this game, I clearly couldn't talk about emptiness. But it would be refreshing to hear from you, because all I've heard so far is how it's a game about changing man's fate or something. If you have a detailed review, link it.
"This is highly anecdotal but I feel like PST fans/people who have written about the game are much more likely to find Marvel and the like grating rather than as some kind of storytelling standard, and as such I find the story being told about why people think highly of PST/other games of this era to be pretty unconvincing/like a weird sort of posturing"
For someone making this argument, your own Letterboxd ratings don't really make a good case. You rated Lord of the Rings higher than Taxi Driver; Into the Spider-Verse higher than Hero; Thor: Ragnarok higher than The Godfather; and Mean Girls higher than Star Wars ep. II. You're really not the person to have a discussion about art with.
Tbh your demands here are pointless and unfair:
1) If the story (the amount I have experienced) was any memorable and I'd given you examples of it and why I don't like them, it surely wouldn't be sufficient to you. Frankly, even if you came up with some sorta reasoning for calling those examples great writing, I probably wouldn't be convinced either. Your whole comment kinda comes off as a way to attack me, because it wouldn't really serve any other purpose.
2) The burden of proof really should be on you, not me. Since I didn't see anything notable in this game, I clearly couldn't talk about emptiness. But it would be refreshing to hear from you, because all I've heard so far is how it's a game about changing man's fate or something. If you have a detailed review, link it.
"This is highly anecdotal but I feel like PST fans/people who have written about the game are much more likely to find Marvel and the like grating rather than as some kind of storytelling standard, and as such I find the story being told about why people think highly of PST/other games of this era to be pretty unconvincing/like a weird sort of posturing"
For someone making this argument, your own Letterboxd ratings don't really make a good case. You rated Lord of the Rings higher than Taxi Driver; Into the Spider-Verse higher than Hero; Thor: Ragnarok higher than The Godfather; and Mean Girls higher than Star Wars ep. II. You're really not the person to have a discussion about art with.
@molochthagod
Your first line is exactly my point. That's the exact thing I'm interrogating about how you frame those things in your review. Nothing really to add there, glad we are on the same page.
As for your bulleted points, I didn't mean to attack any part of you or your review except for the specific portion I was clearly ornery about. I restate that I was genuinely curious about things you didn't like about the writing, and I believe there is plenty that could be said wrt my points that I would be receptive to. "I can't discuss the game because I don't remember any of it" kind of leaves us at an impasse, since just copy pasting a block of prose is meaningless lacking spatial/aural/other contexts. If you are genuinely curious in an exploration of the game, I like Noah Caldwell Gervais' video on PST and Numenera, but its been a while since I watched it.
The rest of your response is just wild (and I think kind of makes me look good/correct about your level of concern for how an audience should view you in relation to any potential detractors), but at least its way more fun than your review. I like when people pick two scores on a rating aggregate site and go to town, we all do it in our heads, right? I maintain my Fellowship rating but yeah mean girls is too high I agree.
Sorry if the way I worded my frustrations ruined any chance for talking about PST. Perhaps had I been more toothless and conciliatory, you would have conveniently remembered more about the game to talk about instead of what is now a whole review and 3 responses about nothing. In any case, have a good one.
Your first line is exactly my point. That's the exact thing I'm interrogating about how you frame those things in your review. Nothing really to add there, glad we are on the same page.
As for your bulleted points, I didn't mean to attack any part of you or your review except for the specific portion I was clearly ornery about. I restate that I was genuinely curious about things you didn't like about the writing, and I believe there is plenty that could be said wrt my points that I would be receptive to. "I can't discuss the game because I don't remember any of it" kind of leaves us at an impasse, since just copy pasting a block of prose is meaningless lacking spatial/aural/other contexts. If you are genuinely curious in an exploration of the game, I like Noah Caldwell Gervais' video on PST and Numenera, but its been a while since I watched it.
The rest of your response is just wild (and I think kind of makes me look good/correct about your level of concern for how an audience should view you in relation to any potential detractors), but at least its way more fun than your review. I like when people pick two scores on a rating aggregate site and go to town, we all do it in our heads, right? I maintain my Fellowship rating but yeah mean girls is too high I agree.
Sorry if the way I worded my frustrations ruined any chance for talking about PST. Perhaps had I been more toothless and conciliatory, you would have conveniently remembered more about the game to talk about instead of what is now a whole review and 3 responses about nothing. In any case, have a good one.
@slinky3 "Your first line is exactly my point. That's the exact thing I'm interrogating about how you frame those things in your review."
Oh, I misunderstood you, I thought you meant that I should've separated them. If it appeared in my review liked I did, then I gave off the wrong impression.
"kind of leaves us at an impasse"
I dunno whether you're lacking experience or wisdom to understand this, but these things are almost always an impasse from the get-go. It's generally a good idea not to comment on other people's reviews trying to tell them they're wrong or posturing, or should "shut up".
"a whole review and 3 responses about nothing"
I will repeat: the proof of burden is on you, and so far you haven't said anything of substance either. Only passive-aggressive remarks in my direction.
btw Noah Caldwell Gervais has some of the worst, most clueless and misconceived takes. If you genuinely consider his work anything more than wordy drivel, we clearly have nothing to talk about.
Good day to you, sir.
Oh, I misunderstood you, I thought you meant that I should've separated them. If it appeared in my review liked I did, then I gave off the wrong impression.
"kind of leaves us at an impasse"
I dunno whether you're lacking experience or wisdom to understand this, but these things are almost always an impasse from the get-go. It's generally a good idea not to comment on other people's reviews trying to tell them they're wrong or posturing, or should "shut up".
"a whole review and 3 responses about nothing"
I will repeat: the proof of burden is on you, and so far you haven't said anything of substance either. Only passive-aggressive remarks in my direction.
btw Noah Caldwell Gervais has some of the worst, most clueless and misconceived takes. If you genuinely consider his work anything more than wordy drivel, we clearly have nothing to talk about.
Good day to you, sir.
@molochthagod
Not trying to get in the last word or anything, it's clear neither of are interested in arguing more, but I do apologize for getting maybe a bit personal and specifically for saying "put up or shut up." Meant that idiom much more casually than it clearly comes across.
Not trying to get in the last word or anything, it's clear neither of are interested in arguing more, but I do apologize for getting maybe a bit personal and specifically for saying "put up or shut up." Meant that idiom much more casually than it clearly comes across.
@slinky3 okay, gotcha
this is just an unfair review of the story this would be akin to reading 20 pages of a 200+ page book and giving it your final thoughts, and I'll say this if i read my favorite book to only 20 pages it wouldnt be my favorite in fact i dont think i would like it that much.
Removed by a moderator
tarnkappe
7 months ago