Vampire - Bloodlines

tals · Post by **tals** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 2:38 am

This one missed my radar, mainly because the first game didn't appeal and then various negative comments (similar models, game in need of patching etc) put me off.

Is it worth having a look at, the last review I read (PC Gamer UK) said it would be a great game but was in real need of patching - have the patches improved the game?

Tals

Dhruin · Post by **Dhruin** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:21 am

To be clear, I was a fan before the patch.

The patch fixes a number of "critical" issues but does little/nothing for performance or minor issues like like some graphical clipping issues.

For me, Bloodlines is clear and away the best RPG in two years or so. The end is disappointingly combat-centric (and one of the final encounters is ridiculous), the main quest line is linear and it's clear there wasn't time to implement a wider range of NPC models and a zillion other little things.

However, some of the NPCs are among the most interesting ever, the dialogue and writing is simply brilliant (minor spelling gaffs aside), the atmosphere drips, the setting is interesting and for the first 2/3s or so, there are multiple solutions including multiple dialogue approaches.

If you have no patience for the smallest issues - forget it. If you can forgive some issues for other levels of depth - a must have. 1Gb RAM highly desirable.

moss_icon · Post by **moss_icon** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 6:01 am

definitely the best RPG since KotOR for me. i'd recommend it. yes it needs patching a little more (i had 3 proper crashes / bugs, one reminiscent of the daggerfall one where you fall through the landscape!) but the biggest issue is the final hours of the game, which are boring. before that though it is a great experience, i'd echo all that Dhruin wrote.

presumably you're in the uk, you can pick it up fairly reasonably 2nd hand off amazon.co.uk (or pm me and i'll sell you my copy for £15ppd if you like, i've finished it and can't see myself playing through again).

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:36 am

I'm in line with the thoughts here. I finished most of the game pre-patch and didn't have any major problems.

I do think the first 2/3 of the game is WAY better than that final 1/3. I can't condemn the game based on the final parts though -- just because the meat of the game was so damn good.

JCC · Post by **JCC** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:32 pm

I loved the first 1/2 to 2/3 of the game like most here, despite the fact that the game ran horribly and there were many evident flaws. The writing and quests/missions were just superb. Once you get to the sewers though, the game becomes much more linear and totally combat oriented and for me with my piss poor framerates, this meant it just became a chore to play. I ended up godmoding my way through the last 2 boss battles since I couldn't survive a few of the fights with my <1 fps framerate. The ending I got was disappointing. (Neat, but very short). So, I ended up with very negative feelings towards the game, but I did totally love the first 2/3 or so. Just flawed awesomeness up till then. I really wish Troika would finish a game just once before they released it. The writing is teriffic, but it's a technical nightmare.

noun · Post by **noun** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 12:54 pm

I think people are being far too kind on this game. Performance and patch issues aside, when a story-based game becomes a console game 2/3 of the way through, that's either a sign of 1) rushing to meet a deadline, or 2) poor design.

I'll echo the thoughts about it being an A game for the first 2/3s but the final third is so frustrating and so alien to the rest of the game, that I wouldn't wish that experience on any other RPG gamer. Teach Troika a lesson by not buying this game.

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 3:02 am

I agree mostly with Dhruin. I think Bloodlines used the engine much more effectively than Half-Life 2, so I'm willing to give some leeway in the bugs/performance. Clipping was annoying, but not unplayable. There were a few rough edges (same models), which was a shame.

The endgame runs you onto the rails a bit, but that's not too much of a problem. I liked the cinematic ending, and the game was much less constricting than Half-Life 2 IMO -- even at the ending.

I started to force my character into combat mode just in time for the end, and I think that helped my enjoyment of the game a great deal. Your character cannot be a jack of all trades. Pick a few focuses and stick to it.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 3:24 pm

I must be having a very different experience than you guys, performance-wise. My system is far and above over the minimum specs, and I've got nearly unplayable frame rates throughout the game. It's especially bad outside when raining or in any environment with numerous enemies; I've ground to a halt trying to get through the crackhouse with the zombies en route to Bishop Vick - the frame rate drops so low the game is in slow motion. Anyway, I've turned all graphics and audio detail to their lowest settings, but the game still plays horrendously. I really want to keep playing this game. Despite my technical problems, the game grabbed me right from the start (playing a Toreador and enjoying, BTW).

My system:

P4 2.4 ghz
1 gig pc 2700 ram
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128 mb
plenty of hard disk space

For those of you with acceptable frame rates, could you post your system specs and settings? For anyone with similar performance issues, did you find a fix anywhere? I've tried a million different things (switching my virtual memory/paging file to a separate hard drive from the game and the boot disc; using a HL2 config file; disabling AA and Ani manually on my vid card).

If anyone has any ideas, please let me know. I'd be most grateful!

none · Post by **none** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 3:53 pm

my system:

PIV 3.0gHz
1 gig ddr pc3200 RAM
9600xt 256MB

other than initial level loads, my framerates were quite good. i don't know the exact fps but there certainly wasn't any noticeable stuttering, even during combat or other graphic intensive moments. the only configurations i made was to turn off eax sound and lower the audio detail. good luck to you.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 4:14 pm

Kurth wrote: If anyone has any ideas, please let me know. I'd be most grateful!

My specs are WAY lower than yours. AMD 2600+, 1 GB of PC333 RAM, ATI 9700 Pro.

If you turn down the shadow options and lower the sound acceleration under DXDIAG one notch. That seemed to make a difference in my frame rates.

I think Valve fixed the sound quality / framerate stutter for HL2k, but it was not part of the Vampire patch for whatever reason.

ChrisGwinn · Post by **ChrisGwinn** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 5:16 pm

I seem to remember that my problems went away after I switched of the positional sound stuff.

Marik · Post by **Marik** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 6:16 pm

Like everyone says, the first two thirds of the game is just fantastic in terms of story, depth and awesome moments. You can really branch out and do your own thing - you get good and evil ways of solving tasks as well as choices between stealth, dialogue and other means to your nefarious ends. You'll have to think, use your skill points carefully and you'll meet some of the finest characters in an RPG since Morte, Minsc and HK 47.

The last third kind of catches you off guard if you aren't prepared for it because the pacing of the game goes straight out of the window. Instead of 40% puzzles, 50% dialogue and 10% combat against a variety of tough and interesting opponents, it jumps to 99% combat against hordes of worthless peons and 1% dialogue with few real options.

It isn't *bad* per se, but it is just such a letdown after the amazingly well crafted world of the first part of the game that it pissed off a lot of people. I've played through the game twice now and it really is great. It is just so annoying that the bad part had to come at the end.

Oh, and turn Hardware sound off. That fixes most of the fps issues with this game. My computer actually runs Vampire better than HL2 after I switched that little gem of a feature off.

Kurth · Post by **Kurth** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 10:18 pm

I don't see any option for "Hardware Sound" or "positional audio." I've turned off every bell and whistle I can find and have lowered all video options to minimum settings.

The only audio options I see are: "Environmental Effects" and "High Quality Audio," and they're both turned off. If there's something else I can turn off, please let me know.

This game is killing me!

Zarathud · Post by **Zarathud** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:28 am

Few problems with my specs: P4 2.0Ghz, 1Ghz RAMBUS and GeForce FX5950 Ultra.

Certain sound card hardware support is bugged in the Half-Life 2 engine, so you may get improvements by turning off high quality audio or turning down audio acceleration using dxdiag.exe -- it's a known issue with nForce audio. That's probably why I couldn't get the game to run on wife's computer, which is a P4 2.0Ghz, 512Mhz RAM, On-board nForce video. She has ZERO patience with technical issues, so I've lost another chance to hook her into gaming.

Marik · Post by **Marik** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:16 pm

The only audio options I see are: "Environmental Effects" and "High Quality Audio," and they're both turned off. If there's something else I can turn off, please let me know.

It was the "High Quality Audio" thing that fixed it for most people. If you still can't run it that sucks.

Maybe troika will actually get its act together and release a solid patch this time.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 12:22 pm

Marik wrote:
The only audio options I see are: "Environmental Effects" and "High Quality Audio," and they're both turned off. If there's something else I can turn off, please let me know.
It was the "High Quality Audio" thing that fixed it for most people. If you still can't run it that sucks. Maybe troika will actually get its act together and release a solid patch this time.

I also lowered the hardware acceleration for sound in WinXP under DXDIAG.

Just open a command prompt and type DXDIAG and the program should run. There are a series of tabs for video, sound, etc... -- just lower the slider bar under the Sound tab.

Terrified · Post by **Terrified** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:16 pm

Kurth wrote:My system:

P4 2.4 ghz
1 gig pc 2700 ram
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128 mb
plenty of hard disk space

For those of you with acceptable frame rates, could you post your system specs and settings?

My machine:
P4 2.4 ghz
512 MB Ram
ATI Radeon 9800 Pro 128 MB
Plenty of HD space

and it runs smooth as can be on my system. I have no idea how...

Post by **godhugh** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:23 pm

P4 2.4 GHZ
1 GB DDR-333
NVIDIA 5900XT 128mb
120GB SATA HD

After I turned off HQA I could bump the resolution up to 1280x1024 and it runs great. After a few hours it slows down, but I think we all know there's a memory leak in there somewhere.

JCC · Post by **JCC** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:13 pm

Turning off HQA I am sure works for some, but it definitely didn't help me an iota. I never tried the DX audio setting.

Smoove_B · Post by **Smoove_B** » Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:57 pm

godhugh wrote: After I turned off HQA I could bump the resolution up to 1280x1024 and it runs great. After a few hours it slows down, but I think we all know there's a memory leak in there somewhere.

Oh yeah, now I remember. When the game first came out we had this discussion already.

The people that were using the quicksave slots reported slowdown and decreased performance over time. I *never* used the quicksave feature and never had any frame rate / performance issues.

So...in summary. Avoid the quicksave.