Looking for a recommendation

Forums > Game Talk > Looking for a recommendation

doo (4) on 11/5/2007 5:51 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

Hello!

Never posted here before but have used the site for a long time, it having the only reviews I trust. So I'm sorry my first post is a begging one, but here we go...

Short request: I'm looking for an immersive, open ended game that I get can utterly lost/engrossed in.

In more detail: The only game that has ever provided the above for me is Morrowind, which I kinda stumbled on by accident and ended up playing for years. I loved how I could do whatever I wanted and the world was detailed enough and believable enough that it took me a very long time to get bored doing it - I could explore in a very open and free-roaming way and discover unique and interesting (and useful) things. I could STEAL (this was important and is what got me hooked) which alone kept me occupied for months.

All the things I loved were not part of the main quest - I was pretty indifferent to the main quest and played for a good six months before I even started it. Then a good few more months before I bothered completing it. I'm not really bothered about 'grand narrative'. I think story-telling is important but what immersed me was less the main plotline and more the incidental stuff - the politics between the Houses and the Guilds and that sort of thing - the 'micronarrative'. But what allowed me to engage with that micronarrative was the stuff I mentioned above - the exploring, the stealing and so on. The fact that I would take a mission and end up wandering off to explore half way through. Things which erred more toward 'emergent gameplay' I guess (by which I mean making my own fun, setting my own tasks etc.). And every time I returned to Balmora I felt like I was home - very weird to feel like that in a game (to actually feel it, not just know intellectually 'this is my house' but feel like I was home despite having no house there (though the roof of some tavern did become my home)).

As I say, Morrowind succeeded in allowing this because the world was convincing and complex enough. The design was beautiful. I don't mean the graphics as such but the way the limited polygons were used, the way the architecture made sense in the context of the various cultures and the way that made sense in relation to the politics. This went right down to the objects inside a yurt - they made sense, they felt like they should be there and had a reason to be there. It all just hung together very well.

Incidentally, I think all those things Morrowind got right Oblivion got wrong. The world was not convincing and wandering off and stealing and just exploring were not fun at all. There was nothing worth finding or thieving and nowhere really interesting to go.

I've tried other RPGs - all the 'classics' and everything which gets described as 'open' or 'free' in any way. Baldur's Gate, NWN, Fallout, Gothic, KoToR, Deus Ex, Theif etc. (and Arena and Daggerfall of course) and none of them have come even close to having it. I see that they're very high quality games in their own way but they just don't have that open-ended, free, emergent feel to them.

Funnily enough, the only thing which came close to providing the same sort of feeling was STALKER. Again, it had (pretty extreme) flaws and was, overall, a bad game. But I enjoyed it. I enjoyed the true sense of freedom, the desire to explore and see what's around the next corner. Going somewhere purely for the sake of going there and having a look. Again, a big (but not sole) part of this is that the world they created worked. It lacked the life that Morrowind had and, as I say, was quite deeply flawed, but it did provide something of that freedom and immersion I'm looking for (though on nowhere near the scale Morrowind did).

So, there you go, I'm looking for something where I can explore, steal, make my own stories and feel like I'm really in a living breathing world. Doesn't necessarily have to be RPG or fantasy based at all - I'm not a particular fan of either thing in its own right (though both are of course perfect for making you feel transported somewhere else).

Something non-linear, free, open but where narratives exist (i.e. not a God Game or similar).

I know this is a tough thing to ask for but thank you in advance for any suggestions and apologise for my meandering ramble.

Love and Pies, Doo.

St. Martyne (3648) on 11/5/2007 6:55 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

[Q --start doo wrote--] So I'm sorry my first post is a begging one, but here we go... [/Q --end doo wrote--]

No need to be sorry. For what's it worth, it's the most nicest and coherent "begging post" I have seen in a while. :)

[Q --start doo wrote--] I've tried other RPGs - all the 'classics' and everything which gets described as 'open' or 'free' in any way. Baldur's Gate, NWN, Fallout, Gothic, KoToR, Deus Ex, Theif etc. (and Arena and Daggerfall of course) and none of them have come even close to having it. I see that they're very high quality games in their own way but they just don't have that open-ended, free, emergent feel to them. [/Q --end doo wrote--]

Most of them I wouldn't consider to be open-ended, but Fallouts and Gothics certainly are. Which parts of those franchises have you played? Gothic 3 has a vast world with a sense of traveling and... well, vastness you can't easily get away from. However it's extremely bug-ridden too.

[Q --start doo wrote--] So, there you go, I'm looking for something where I can explore, steal, make my own stories and feel like I'm really in a living breathing world. Doesn't necessarily have to be RPG or fantasy based at all - I'm not a particular fan of either thing in its own right (though both are of course perfect for making you feel transported somewhere else). [/Q --end doo wrote--]

Well, first of all there's a lot of games released before 1995 that featured an immersive world, and ability to do whatever you like. Ultima series is the most notable example. If vintage graphics doesn't shy you away, I'm sure you'll definitely would want to give Ultima VII a go. And do not forget about excellent Part Two Serpent Isle which is a bit more linear, but nevertheless features a whole new world to explore.

On the second note, I think you would love to (if you haven't already) turn attention to space simulators. There's a lot games out there that features the same escapists gameplay you were referring to. You know, where you set your own objectives and try to explore the world/universe around you. Without venturing too far away in the past I can suggest X series. Freelancer, Freespace 2, Space Rangers are excellent games too. And of course you can't go wrong with the classics: Privateer, Elite 2: Frontier, Privateer 2 and Star Control 2. I''m not sure SC2 is an exact match for your preferences, but it's an amazing game and a very big one too.

What else? Might & Magic series is also a good example of open-ended gameplay. Although you can't break into people houses, there still will be a lot of things to occupy your time and effort. MMVI and MMVII are about the only games I've played that really gave me "that" feeling of setting my own tasks before me and making stuff that actually matters.

If nothing here suits your tastes you can still have GTA series. It does have a lot of stuff to do, I'll give it at least that.

doo (4) on 11/5/2007 7:28 AM · Permalink · Report

Thanks for the response St Martyne. Definitely thinking along the right lines there.

In no particular order...

I've tried several Ultimas and they never really worked for me, I think something in me just doesn't like intensely D&Dish things - I had similar problems with Baldur's Gate. I also seem to need a first person view if I 'am' the main character in games-with-action (third person is fine in adventures).

Gothic just didn't seem a convincing world (it was Gothic 3 I tried). Huge and free, yes, but it just seems like they'd thrown everything they could think of in there. Didn't seem like a world which could really have evolved to be like that.

I've played and usually enjoyed the spacey simulators - I never liked Elite but I very much enjoyed Freelancer, Privateer and Freespace. But they lack that sense of interacting with 'real' people and situations and I feel very much like I'm playing a game rather than exploring a world.

Might and Magic... I played these a long long time ago and they were fun for a while but it's a different sort of fun. I don't think they have the detailed cohesion and immersion I'm looking for (and again, I have that firstperson mental barrier to overcome...). Looking at the later ones maybe they're worth a pop... I think I'll dig out MMVII and see where it takes me.

I should've mentioned the GTAs, they're pretty close but I've played them. They certainly have that emergent thing going on (I'd spend way more time roaming around on motorbikes finding things to jump than doing missions) but they're a little bit thin in the fleshed out game world stakes.

I don't mind old graphics at all (I've had a recent spree of playing all the classics I missed out on first time round) but .... older games are less likely to be first person which seems to be emerging as a criterion I didn't mention.

Thanks for the interest and effort. It's definitely got me thinking in more directions which is very helpful. I'll give Might and Magic a go, I'm a bit wary of party-based games (which it seems to be?) but I'm not going to find anything that matches all of my criteria :D

The Fabulous King (1332) on 11/5/2007 8:13 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

I would have never considered some of those games you mentioned to be open-ended.

Ultima's are D&D? How? Perhaps you're thinking of Gold Box games. I just have to say this that Ultima 7 did some of the things right that Morrowind did wrong - by making all the NPC's actual living persons and thus giving the world's micronarrative a lot more depth than Morrowind did. Though nothing can beat Morrowind's books.

Other than that, you've then pretty much named every game that can be considered open-ended RPG. At least anything I know or have played.

Darklands could be considered an open-ended game, imo it's quite similar to Elder Scrolls games (big world, lots of cities, history, allows you to play after completing the main quest) and it also is the first RPG that sports real-time with pause combat (6 years before Baldur's Gate), but it could be a bit boring if you're spoiled with Morrowind and Stalker.

Have you tried Arcanum (review coming soon)? Oh right, isometric perspective. Pretty fine and ambitious RPG nonetheless.

Bloodlines is kinda open-ended (or non-linear... depending on your definition... according to RPGCodex it's non-linear because of choices and consequences) and it's first-person viewed.

I can only think of games now that I haven't played: Omikron and the Shenmue series. I heard they was supposed to be open-ended.

If you haven't played Gothic 1 or 2 (you just mentioned 3), then when you get sick of GTA you might try them. They still provide exploration fun.

I've heard that The Witcher is semi open-ended.

You didn't mention System Shock. That game (actually both games) is one of the finest examples of gaming art - it combines gameplay and narrative in such a way, that it's hard to distinguish between the two (kinda something like Fahrenheit wanted to do). Everything I've played so far by Looking Glass are great as the greatest games ever. Though Ultima Underworld II remains my favorite game by them, because of the locations it took me to.

If all else fails go for Legend of Zelda or Super Mario 64. Big worlds. Lots of exploration.

Or Myst series. First-person view, ambient music, lots of puzzles, but always the feeling of exploration and narrative.

Which reminds me of Simon the Sorcerer 3, haven't played it but it looks open-ended - youtube video.

Are there really so few open-ended games in the industry? I get this feeling that these couple of posts have listed the majority of games considered to be open-ended.

I really would wish to know of another open-ended game myself actually.

Hmm... perhaps I'll try that Ecco the Dolphin game - animal simulation is supposed to be an open-ended game, right?

doo (4) on 11/5/2007 10:25 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

Thanks Mr. Irishman. I suppose I'm looking for a specific sort of openness. Which is asking for a lot when the openness field is pretty limited to start with, like you say.

Perhaps I'm confused about D&D. I know playing Baldur's Gate the weapons had stats that meant absolutely nothing to me and I remembered Ultima having a similar feel. Might be a false memory as it's ages since I played one.

It's hard to put my finger on exactly what I mean. I think I liked Morrowind's grittiness. It didn't (in some ways) feel like a typical RPG, the only RPG-ish thing one really experienced in playing was 'levelling up' and that didn't scare me off because it fit well with everything else. If a game emphasises magic too much or has too many abstract stats (i.e. stats which rely on external knowledge) and stuff like that, it really puts me off. I want the game to be situated conceptually within its own logic - i.e. I can wander around and learn from doing, learn both what can and can't be done and also how everything works. And ideally for there to be no artificial 'boundaries' - things which should work (the system's own logic implies they should/would) but don't because they've not been coded for.

Which is broadly why the lack of personality of the NPCs in Morrowind didn't bother me - it wasn't necessary. (Of course, it could have been necessary had the game been structured slightly differently. Just in the case of Morrowind the NPCs were fleshed out enough).

I loved System Shock, absolutely agree with what you said. It's a masterpiece in melding gameplay and narrative (the product being immersion).

Myst, eesh, I'll take that as an insult :)

Zelda 64 and Mario... not my cuppa tea. Never been able to identify why but Nintendo games (excluding gameboy) never did it for me.

Witcher, again, doesn't look like my kinda thing. Seems to be more of the NWN ilk where it's too much (for me) about spells with pretty effects and overly bombastic storylines (which I realise might sound odd given that I enjoyed Morrowind). Hard to explain but there's something which doesn't quite sit right.

Gothic... I should perhaps give this/these another chance and get my hand son one of the others. One thing which put me off (it's a tiny thing but matters a lot) was the camera - it does that floaty-gradually-go-to-where-I'm-pointing thing which I really hate. I'm sure I can tweak than in the ini somewhere though.

You've mentioned a few games I've not heard of so I'll spend some time looking into those - thanks!

In the hope that it might help a bit more and also just for the sake of interest/discussion I'll list a few of my all time favourite games:

Populous (first game to really really hook me) Civ II (masterpiece, still play this every now and then) Soul Blade/Soul Edge (so fast and so fun, better than its sequels despite what everyone else in the world thinks) Morrowind (give me back my life) Delta Force 2 (guilty pleasure but the most fun I've ever had in online gaming, cost me a fortune in dialup bills)

Possibly interesting that MW is the only remotely narrative (in the traditional sense) game on the list...

All pretty mainstream though, so I'd welcome having my eyes opened to something a bit more fringe.

St. Martyne (3648) on 11/5/2007 10:59 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

The reason I loved Baldur Gate partly lies in its approach to the D&D rules set. It doesn't require any involvement from the player he doesn't want to provide. So if you have no idea what THAC0 means, just forget about it and use Armor Class as your only criterion. At some points I've just picked a weapon and an armor with fancier description. I still was able to complete it without problem and I appreciated the fact that the game did offered something for those people who do care about stats without actually restricting other gamers in any way.

And, yes, Ultima is about the only classic franchise that as stats-less as it can possibly be. It was actually a part of the problem in Ultima VII, where everything should have been evaluated either by its sell price or by performance in battle.

I want the game to be situated conceptually within its own logic - i.e. I can wander around and learn from doing, learn both what can and can't be done and also how everything works. And ideally for there to be no artificial 'boundaries' - things which should work (the system's own logic implies they should/would) but don't because they've not been coded for.

Once again most of the true open-ended RPGs doesn't actually force in one or another. The reason behind creating open-ended games actually lies in what you describe. That is -- not limiting the player to a certain sets of rules and behavioristic characteristics, leaving him the option to emphasize whatever part of the gameplay he feels more inclined to.

So if you care little about magic or stats. Disregard them and concentrate your efforts on stuff that you really care about. It would work in most of the open-ended RPGs mentioned here, primarily because of their open-endedness.

Morrowind characters were not fleshed enough for any concept or gameplay. If they spoke little that wouldn't have been a problem. But once they speak in great chunks of text, you'll immediately notice that it's they're not living beings - just notice boards to guide you along the way. It includes even the main questline characters.

I loved System Shock, absolutely agree with what you said. It's a masterpiece in melding gameplay and narrative (the product being immersion).

And BioShock have taken on its on a whole new level, filling that unique narrative with actual meaning and content.

Myst, eesh, I'll take that as an insult :)

Myst-like adventures actually make a huge emphasis on exploration. Try realMYST and all the 3D sequels, and maybe you'll see.

Zelda 64 and Mario... not my cuppa tea. Never been able to identify why but Nintendo games (excluding gameboy) never did it for me.

What can be the problem? They are games for little kids. Who can actually take them seriously?

Bombastic storylines are something more applicable to Final Fantasies, but not to NWN. The first NWN is a classic example of light Action/RPG game. It's pretty linear and doesn't have the sense of any open-endedness to it at all. NWN2 is a slightly different story. While it still follows the "World Map" kind of approach, it actually creates a believable world full of optional stuff that may substitute the lack of open-endedness for some people.

doo (4) on 11/5/2007 11:25 AM · Permalink · Report

With Myst I just disliked the whole premise/story and the puzzles were both too easy and not really (for me) grounded in the game-world. I am never convinced by the idea of abstract logic puzzles being used as a means of overcoming some real world problem. I am hard to please, I know.

I dislike using magic myself in games but enjoy hurting wizards. This is the one thing which made Oblivion playable for me, I had a whole guild of them to abuse. So you're absolutely right, if a game is open enough the inclusion of magic is a good thing.

I didn't really like Bioshock (didn't finish it because of this). It seemed for me to have lost everything that made its spiritual sequels special, becoming a very linear FPS with a very thin premise.

I disagree to an extent about Morrowind's NPCs. Your criticisms are accurate but at the same time I feel they were diverse and interesting enough given the nature of the game. Certainly had more life to them than those in Oblivion, despite the lack of routines and AI to speak of. I think it comes down to what I said before, they were very much only 'sketched out' but because they fit so well (in terms of design) with their surroundings and culture it worked - it left space to imagine and did nothing to disrupt that. They could certainly have been better though, aye.

Perhaps Morrowind (and Stalker actually) worked for me because they were both at the same time alien and familiar. Whereas traditional RPGs tend to be only familiar (they're essentially set in Medieval Europe with fantasy creatures (with which we are all culturally familiar) thrown in).

St. Martyne (3648) on 11/5/2007 11:54 AM · edited · Permalink · Report

[Q --start doo wrote--]With Myst I just disliked the whole premise/story and the puzzles were both too easy and not really (for me) grounded in the game-world. I am never convinced by the idea of abstract logic puzzles being used as a means of overcoming some real world problem. I am hard to please, I know. [/Q --end doo wrote--]

Yes, I too found myself unable to perceive Mysts anything else but collections of fancy locations to explore in firtst-person. And when it came to actually solving puzzles I usually expressed my discontent in less than appropriate words.

[Q --start doo wrote--] I didn't really like Bioshock (didn't finish it because of this). It seemed for me to have lost everything that made its spiritual sequels special, becoming a very linear FPS with a very thin premise. [/Q --end doo wrote--]

I've already had my share of BioShock defending. Still, however, in what way the premise of System Shock seems to you "thicker" than that of BioShock? And what has actually BioShock abandoned that made SS's so special?

Perhaps, you're right. Then I absolutely must ask of you, if you have tried the king of all the late 90's RPGs - Planescape: Torment. As far as unique settings go, this is by far the most. Not as open-opened as most of the titles we have mentioned so far, but still has its share of difference-making choices.

Also, you might find Pathologic interesting. I believe it was a featured game last week.

The Fabulous King (1332) on 11/5/2007 1:12 PM · Permalink · Report

[Q --start doo wrote--] Perhaps Morrowind (and Stalker actually) worked for me because they were both at the same time alien and familiar. Whereas traditional RPGs tend to be only familiar (they're essentially set in Medieval Europe with fantasy creatures (with which we are all culturally familiar) thrown in). [/Q --end doo wrote--] So a setting plays an important role for you. Well there really ain't that many games with interesting settings, and if their setting is interesting then there is even a lesser chance of them being open-ended.

St.Martyne recommended Planescape Torment, which is a linear game with lots of choices and consequences (meaning that the outcomes, the meanings behind the main story, the fate of the characters can all turn out to be different depending on your choices). But it's certainly one of the most interesting settings and a fine example of good writing in story-oriented games (some say the only story-oriented game with good writing...but opinions are funny things) and definitely an example of (albeit a different one than System Shock) art games.

Another interesting setting, though very similar to Morrowind, is Ultima Pagan. But if you've played Morrowind then you probably have enough of mushroom inspired worlds. And this game ain't open-ended either.

Whatever St.Martyne said about Darklands doesn't mean that you are not allowed to try it, the historical Holy Roman Empire is still a bit more interesting world that your above average fantasyland, even if only for a few hours. Though I agree with his "no reason" statement, after a while it gets a bit boring.

I just remembered a game: Sea Dogs (though I played it's sequel which was called Pirates of the Caribbean), that's a pirate trading game. Ship travel was my favorite part, the weather effects and the sunset.... anyway, it's certainly an open-ended traveling/trading game.

You also mentioned a couple of strategy games, though it's an area I'm pretty clueless in, I did enjoy Hearts of Iron very much. There is a certain fun, in seeing whether your homeland would have survived the Second World War II with your leadership. The game itself is just one big map. I guess it's pretty open-ended also, cause theoretically you could form out of your homeland "the greatest empire ever the world has seen".

Myst IV was one of the most visually and musically pleasing experiences of my life. Nasty puzzles though (so you could get the feeling of the Dig while playing it). Just had to say something to counter the anti-Myst sentiments here.

And Neverwinter Nights series ain't nothing special, while I disliked the first and enjoyed the second, and it was because the second one satisfied my niche cravings in RPG's, it certainly ain't a must-play series.

St. Martyne (3648) on 11/5/2007 11:25 AM · Permalink · Report

[Q --start Drunken Irishman wrote--] Darklands could be considered an open-ended game, imo it's quite similar to Elder Scrolls games (big world, lots of cities, history, allows you to play after completing the main quest) and it also is the first RPG that sports real-time with pause combat (6 years before Baldur's Gate), but it could be a bit boring if you're spoiled with Morrowind and Stalker. [/Q --end Drunken Irishman wrote--]

Darklands provided everything one need for an openended game except for one thing. The reason to it. Why would anyone want to explore the world? Just for the sake of it? But how am I supposed to make all those choices? I ended clicking on stuff randomly waiting for the game to start unfolding in a natural flow. It never happened. Every choice I made during playing I made out of simple guesses. One need reason and a goal for a world to exist.

[Q --start Drunken Irishman wrote--] Bloodlines is kinda open-ended (or non-linear... depending on your definition... according to RPGCodex it's non-linear because of choices and consequences) and it's first-person viewed. [/Q --end Drunken Irishman wrote--]

According to the one and only true definition (which, by uncanny circumstance happens to coincide with mine :)). Open-ended != non-linear. Open-ended games must base all of their gameplay designs on the choice of the player. That includes -- where to go, what to do, how to resolve situations and pretty much everything else. So if game incorporates only one aspect of that in its design, then it still not open-ended.

In case of Bloodlines, multiple quest resolutions are not enough to make up for the lack of ability to traverse the grounds of LA in any order one could possibly want.

[Q --start Drunken Irishman wrote--] I can only think of games now that I haven't played: Omikron and the Shenmue series. I heard they was supposed to be open-ended. [/Q --end Drunken Irishman wrote--]

I wouldn't call Omikron open-ended, because there's actually not that much to do instead of progressing the main storyline and, secondly, because the hunger for exploration saturates itself very quickly when confronted with the locations that look exactly the same.

As for Shenmue. It's a tough one. Because in the end all of its open-ended features resulted in a fighting game and fork-lifter simulator with about 30 minutes of nothing-doingness in between those two sessions. I personally would have loved to see Shenmue as a generic adventure instead of all the revolutionary stuff it artificially applied to itself.

It was still great and unusual. You owe to yourself to try it out, DI. And with nullDC around you don't even need a console to do it.

[Q --start Drunken Irishman wrote--] Which reminds me of Simon the Sorcerer 3, haven't played it but it looks open-ended - youtube video. [/Q --end Drunken Irishman wrote--]

The game literally made me sick. Its open-endedness manifested itself for me in ability to click the Quit button before it was too late.

[Q --start Drunken Irishman wrote--] Hmm... perhaps I'll try that Ecco the Dolphin game - animal simulation is supposed to be an open-ended game, right? [/Q --end Drunken Irishman wrote--]

It's not an open-ended game. And certainly not an animal simulation. But serves well as a Zen experience for a couple minutes. Have you played Wolf and Lion?

doo (4) on 11/5/2007 3:01 PM · Permalink · Report

Thanks for all the constructive replies!

Still, however, in what way the premise of System Shock seems to you "thicker" than that of BioShock? And what has actually BioShock abandoned that made SS's so special?

I played SS a long time ago and only played very little of Bioshock so my opinions might not be balanced, but: I remember SS as scaring the life out of me and making me feel (Stalker managed this though in a different way) like I was fighting for my survival. Bioshock just felt arcadey, with generic enemies rushing at me. It could've been a real twisted and ambiguous dystopia but instead it was... I don't know, I didn't feel anything really - no particular relationship with the place, just a showy shooter with black and white moral choices. Perhaps it's just that Bioshock was more explicit (I just mean more graphically 'realistic') than SS and left less to the imagination, I don't really know why, I just found it very unengaging and quite dull.

I have tried Planescape Torment recently. I can't remember why I stopped playing, I will certainly give that another pop as you're bothing recommending it.

And I'll have a go at Darklands too. Despite there being no reason it might keep me occupied for a while. I'd never heard of that one.

Omikron I've played.Agree with what St. Martyne said about that. Very interesting game and was at least partly successful.

Also tried Simon the Sorceror. Didn't like any of that series, including 3. Seemed to have similar humour to the Monkey Island games and they irritate the hell out of me. Always loved Broken Sword, myself. Everyone says I'm wrong.

Pathologic looks really interesting. I'll definitely give that one a try.

Sea Dogs sounds like fun too, so I'll be trying that one also.

(looks like I'll be busy for a while already)

Funny you mention Hearts of Iron, Mr. Irishman, I've been trying to play that recently and I'm pretty much totally lost. It's so freeform that I don't really know what to do. The game moves so slowly (even on top speed) that I spent the first hour or so just staring at all the screens. Then I spent the next several hours arbitrage trading on the world markets making a lot of money and not really knowing what to do with it. Itching to get involved in the war but not really knowing quite how and in what order to do things. Given your recommendation I'll give that another go when I'm in the mood for a bit of strategy.

I reviewed the Dig a while ago. If you like it, you might want to read my review and then hate on me a bit.

Thanks again for all the constructive replies. I'll definitely be trying Pathologic, Sea Dogs and Darklands.