This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
Yes, it has some goofy semi-scaling.
I thought that depending on the area enemies are supposed to stay within a relatively small range of levels. This hasn't changed, has it?
Food on
0
freakish lightbutterdick jonesand his heavenly asshole machineRegistered Userregular
This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
It's in the OP. As to equipment leveling, I don't know. Probably not.
Level scaling is retarded in my most humble of opinions.
If I choose to kill 32,000 rats just so I can go out into the wastes and Judo Kick centaurs to death, I should be able to, and not be penalized for it.
Similarly, I shouldn't be punished by not being given the turbo plasma rifle [replace with your own favorite endgame equipment] just because I want to do a low level run.
This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
Yes, it has some goofy semi-scaling.
I thought that depending on the area enemies are supposed to stay within a relatively small range of levels. This hasn't changed, has it?
I don't know exactly how it works, but there is a bit of scaling. Its not like Oblivion or FF8 scaling where monster level = your level though.
Level scaling is retarded in my most humble of opinions.
If I choose to kill 32,000 rats just so I can go out into the wastes and Judo Kick centaurs to death, I should be able to, and not be penalized for it.
Similarly, I shouldn't be punished by not being given the turbo plasma rifle [replace with your own favorite endgame equipment] just because I want to do a low level run.
Some items in Oblivion are not level scaled. For instance, Umbra and Sinweaver. You have to destroy Umbra to beat the game at level 1, but Sinweaver still kicks tons of ass.
DisruptorX2 on
0
freakish lightbutterdick jonesand his heavenly asshole machineRegistered Userregular
edited October 2008
Fallout 2 resolution patch updated again, and the links have been fixed.
This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
Yes, it has some goofy semi-scaling.
I thought that depending on the area enemies are supposed to stay within a relatively small range of levels. This hasn't changed, has it?
I don't know exactly how it works, but there is a bit of scaling. Its not like Oblivion or FF8 scaling where monster level = your level though.
The scaling depends on the area. One area may contain enemies of levels four to six. If you're level four, the enemies will more than likely be level four. If you're level eight, then they'll more than likely be level eight. If you come back to that area as a level 16 character, then those enemies will still be eight.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
Yes, it has some goofy semi-scaling.
I thought that depending on the area enemies are supposed to stay within a relatively small range of levels. This hasn't changed, has it?
I don't know exactly how it works, but there is a bit of scaling. Its not like Oblivion or FF8 scaling where monster level = your level though.
The scaling depends on the area. One area may contain enemies of levels four to six. If you're level four, the enemies will more than likely be level four. If you're level eight, then they'll more than likely be level eight. If you come back to that area as a level 16 character, then those enemies will still be eight.
Okay, that seems like a reasonable improvement. Does Bethesda have an explanation for why they implement scaling at all?
Probably to keep things a little challenging for the area you're in, Jurassic. I also made a typo in there with the numbers, but I'm sure you already figured out what I meant.
Dashui on
Xbox Live, PSN & Origin: Vacorsis 3DS: 2638-0037-166
This has been the game I've most anticipated since Bethesda first bought the Fallout license. I've been avoiding reading any previews, watching any videos or even looking at screenshots. Avoiding the presentation at PAX was a very difficult task. I want to be completely surprised when I get the game, but I have ONE question I'm afraid to go search out due to fear of learning too much:
The most disappointing thing about Oblivion, for me, was the level scaling, where enemies would level up as you did, and if I remember correctly, much of the good equipment wouldn't even show up in the game world until you reached a certain level.
Does Fallout 3 feature level scaling? This is all I want to know.
Sort of, but it's a non-issue, as it is not counter-intuitive like Oblivion was ("So, you're saying I should specialize in Alchemy if I want to be the world's best swordmaster?" Huh), and its far more limited. I got some early access due to a good friend, and I can tell you that there are areas that will be trivial at level 20 even as a non-combat build, and areas that will be impossible at level 1 due to super mutant infestation.
BTW, if you want an excellent skill, take Repair. IMHO, it's the best skill in the entire game.
When IGN was doing their Fallout 3 Preview week a will back, I seem to remember either and article or vid where Todd Howard talks about weapons. From what he said, I am surmising a few things...
1.) Weapons (and I assume, armor and other equipment) do NOT scale to your character: if you find a crappy rifle is some bunker early on in one game, and in other game get there near the very end, it will still be a crappy rifle.
2.) Crappy weapons can be made better via parts and repair skill. If you got what you need you could (in theory) improve that crappy rifle you found to a level that makes it better than what goes run-of-the-mill at the time.
Also, I seem to remember Todd saying at one point that some of the best weapons of the game can be found and used early on. The catch is that said weapons' ammo is scarce untill later, giving you the chance to use it early, but keeping it from becoming your mainstay untill late game...
There's Galaxy News Radio and Enclave radio - that's it.
GNR and Enclave Radio both play songs and radio-plays; both stations propagandize for their respective sides.
Sadly, no custom play-list management via Pip-Boy; I was hoping for this too.
I discovered about 15 radio stations in my playthrough. Some were just morse code, some were ancient distress signals, one was Chinese, one was a quest reward.
Interesting. Where'd you find all those? I haven't picked any up yet aside from GNR and Enclave.
Lots of them were from powering-on old radio towers. Some were just from wandering the wastes.
A lot of places have discussed this, but the good/evil situation has been overpromised and slightly underdelivered.
I'd say I'm suprised, but... I can't
I fear it will be overpromised and underdelivered for my entire lifetime.
The Witcher is the only game I can think of that did it well and that's because there is no blatantly obvious good or evil. There's just choices and consequences.
I've always thought if you go into the process with the idea that your going to create objectively "good" and "bad" paths you're doing it wrong.
I put in a vacation request for next tuesday with the intent of installing Fallout 3 immediately after work Monday night and playing it until about 4am then getting up and playing it all day Tuesday. I got waitlisted and was disappointed. Then I realized the game comes out Tuesday so I should be taking Wednesday off. Needless to say I put in a request for Wednesday. Haven't heard back though. I'm kind of glad we don't have to submit a reason along with our vacation requests :P
A lot of places have discussed this, but the good/evil situation has been overpromised and slightly underdelivered.
I'd say I'm suprised, but... I can't
I fear it will be overpromised and underdelivered for my entire lifetime.
The Witcher is the only game I can think of that did it well and that's because there is no blatantly obvious good or evil. There's just choices and consequences.
I've always thought if you go into the process with the idea that your going to create objectively "good" and "bad" paths you're doing it wrong.
No shit. That's why Fallout 2 is still held up as one of the best games in that aspect.
Goofy, shallow good/bad morality systems seem to be the new thing since (and including) Kotor. And lets not even get into how ridiculous it was for Bioshock to claim to have real choice.
The way this Todd guy describes it it sounds more like KOTOR where you just have a bar that goes up or down depending on what you do and so you're either bad, good or neutral. Fable 2 seems to have a good idea in that there are varying levels to your character, so you can be good but corrupt as a gambler, cheat who saves lives.
The idea of "evil points" is kind of suspect. The classic fallout games had a karma stat, which was more of a gauge of how NPCs saw you, and was therefore almost entirely based on who you personally killed.
When you fucked up in say, certain parts of the game and got a whole group of people massacred by angry villagers, you just felt awful, your "evil bar" didn't go up.
A lot of places have discussed this, but the good/evil situation has been overpromised and slightly underdelivered.
I'd say I'm suprised, but... I can't
I fear it will be overpromised and underdelivered for my entire lifetime.
The Witcher is the only game I can think of that did it well and that's because there is no blatantly obvious good or evil. There's just choices and consequences.
I've always thought if you go into the process with the idea that your going to create objectively "good" and "bad" paths you're doing it wrong.
No shit. That's why Fallout 2 is still held up as one of the best games in that aspect.
Goofy, shallow good/bad morality systems seem to be the new thing since (and including) Kotor. And lets not even get into how ridiculous it was for Bioshock to claim to have real choice.
Agreed. I point out The Witcher because it's the only game I know of that managed it in a game that is largely linear in nature and had a very strong and driven main plotline. And yeah, Bioshock had a lot of great things going for it but choice is definately not among them.
1.) Weapons (and I assume, armor and other equipment) do NOT scale to your character: if you find a crappy rifle is some bunker early on in one game, and in other game get there near the very end, it will still be a crappy rifle.
This is true. Sadly. I say sadly, because there is a lot of 5.56 bullets, but the pistol has a 3DMG rating. You do get an automatic, but it's impossible to snipe with, and uses up quite a bit of bullets.
2.) Crappy weapons can be made better via parts and repair skill. If you got what you need you could (in theory) improve that crappy rifle you found to a level that makes it better than what goes run-of-the-mill at the time.
All weapons start out needing some SERIOUS tlc. I have yet to get a weapon that is 50%. Repairing weapons is ENTIRELY dependent on your repair skill - I know, amazing - but I mean it is DIRECTLY linked: 25 repair skill, max 25% repair for any weapon. It is a PAIN in the ass to not have a 100% shotgun. You can of course find merchants to repair your weapons beyond what you can, but they GOUGE.
Also, I seem to remember Todd saying at one point that some of the best weapons of the game can be found and used early on. The catch is that said weapons' ammo is scarce untill later, giving you the chance to use it early, but keeping it from becoming your mainstay untill late game...
I have a mini-nuke in my inventory, as well as a rocket launcher and a grand total of THREE rockets. I am saving these for Mutant fights and when I can get my launcher repaired, as they do about as much damage as Frag Grenades, which certain people have an infinite supply of.
In regards to the "good/evil" debate:
Thats just from MY perspective. I haven't been given any real opportunity to do anything game changingly dastardly - I couldn't live with myself if I let a cash cow like Megato (as well as a free house) go up in flames. However I have gotten more bad karma than I have good, and I steal everything I can to get that rating up. So far the only indication in game I see of "ramafications" is the possibility of a bounty being placed on my head. Then again, though I'm looking at 10+ hours of game time, I haven't gotten anywhere in regards to the main quest.
So I finally went into EBgames to pre order the special edition and I must say I was suprised. It wasn't busy and the employees didn't hassle me about pre ordering, or buying a eb card or anything it was awesome. I stopped going there a couple of years ago due to that crap, I might have to start shopping there again.
Back to Fallout3 has anyone who has played it here been playing it on pc? If so are you using a gamepad or keyboard and mouse?
Sooo.... from reading a few comments already it seems like Bethesda has once again over-hyped the ever loving shit out of Fallout 3 and now the reality is it's not really as "open" and "thought provoking" or "moral balance" as they claimed it to be? And is that ending thing real?
The fact that you only get a set ending depending on your karma stat and not what your actions in the world were? I find that excuse of 'oh yeah but there's like a hojillion sidequests so they couldn't possibly do it all' a bit B.S. since there were a hojillion little actions you could do in FO2 which still ended up in the ending. Myron, anyone? Hell, all of New Reno.
My expectations were always very low so im' not terribly fussed to be honest--I don't think Bethesda has the balls to deliver something new and risky anymore--there I said it
I think its just time we except the fact that today, video games are all about the graphics and physics. To the exclusion of everything else.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
I think its just time we except the fact that today, video games are all about the graphics and physics. To the exclusion of everything else.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
I think its just time we except the fact that today, video games are all about the graphics and physics. To the exclusion of everything else.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
I think its just time we except the fact that today, video games are all about the graphics and physics. To the exclusion of everything else.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
Eh, rose-tinted glasses. Elder Scrolls: Arena didn't have graphics, physics, or a story, quests or character development. Ultima 9 was a contemporary of the Baldur's Gate PC games, and Ultima 8 predated them, and they sucked. I don't think the majority of Western RPGs (and probably JRPGs, I don't know) dating back to Wizardry I have been about story or writing so much as "check out this game engine/combat system". It's only rarely that you come up with a Wasteland or Planescape: Torment.
Also, I think exploration is as valid a focus for an RPG as writing, and it's also something you can pull off with just a graphics engine and physics. It's okay to have a game that gives you more setting than plot.
I think its just time we except the fact that today, video games are all about the graphics and physics. To the exclusion of everything else.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
Eh, rose-tinted glasses. Elder Scrolls: Arena didn't have graphics, physics, or a story, quests or character development. Ultima 9 was a contemporary of the Baldur's Gate PC games, and Ultima 8 predated them, and they sucked. I don't think the majority of Western RPGs (and probably JRPGs, I don't know) dating back to Wizardry I have been about story or writing so much as "check out this game engine/combat system". It's only rarely that you come up with a Wasteland or Planescape: Torment.
Also, I think exploration is as valid a focus for an RPG as writing, and it's also something you can pull off with just a graphics engine and physics. It's okay to have a game that gives you more setting than plot.
Ever play SSI's mid 90s AD&D offerings? Great stuff. Or the Gold Box games from 88-91?
DisruptorX2 on
0
FalloutGIRL'S DAYWAS PRETTY GOOD WHILE THEY LASTEDRegistered Userregular
edited October 2008
whats fallout
Fallout on
0
freakish lightbutterdick jonesand his heavenly asshole machineRegistered Userregular
edited October 2008
Pretty much just Guitar Hero with guns. Nothing S.P.E.C.I.A.L., really.
I think its just time we except the fact that today, video games are all about the graphics and physics. To the exclusion of everything else.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
Eh, rose-tinted glasses. Elder Scrolls: Arena didn't have graphics, physics, or a story, quests or character development. Ultima 9 was a contemporary of the Baldur's Gate PC games, and Ultima 8 predated them, and they sucked. I don't think the majority of Western RPGs (and probably JRPGs, I don't know) dating back to Wizardry I have been about story or writing so much as "check out this game engine/combat system". It's only rarely that you come up with a Wasteland or Planescape: Torment.
Also, I think exploration is as valid a focus for an RPG as writing, and it's also something you can pull off with just a graphics engine and physics. It's okay to have a game that gives you more setting than plot.
Ever play SSI's mid 90s AD&D offerings? Great stuff. Or the Gold Box games from 88-91?
I thought the Gold Box stories were bad, even when they had books that went with them. Pool of Radiance was definitely an exploration-heavy game, and the sequels had plots that fit into 30-40 short paragraphs in the instruction manual. I can't really think of what SSI game from the mid 90s is being referred to here. The Dark Sun games? They were okay, but again, I don't know that I would hold them up as an example of something that was so much better written than, say, the Witcher. The 3D Ravenloft/Menzoberranzan games? Even worse.
I was playing SSI's RPGs before they got the D&D license, and all their plots were, generally speaking, drek. I think a few of them were almost literally "An evil wizard has taken over the land, and it's up to your party to put an end to his tyranny." These games were generally saved by their pacing, or having enough interesting stuff lying around in the game world, rather than the sheer awesomeness of their plots or character depictions.
Posts
Yes, it has some goofy semi-scaling.
I thought that depending on the area enemies are supposed to stay within a relatively small range of levels. This hasn't changed, has it?
It's in the OP. As to equipment leveling, I don't know. Probably not.
If I choose to kill 32,000 rats just so I can go out into the wastes and Judo Kick centaurs to death, I should be able to, and not be penalized for it.
Similarly, I shouldn't be punished by not being given the turbo plasma rifle [replace with your own favorite endgame equipment] just because I want to do a low level run.
I don't know exactly how it works, but there is a bit of scaling. Its not like Oblivion or FF8 scaling where monster level = your level though.
Some items in Oblivion are not level scaled. For instance, Umbra and Sinweaver. You have to destroy Umbra to beat the game at level 1, but Sinweaver still kicks tons of ass.
The scaling depends on the area. One area may contain enemies of levels four to six. If you're level four, the enemies will more than likely be level four. If you're level eight, then they'll more than likely be level eight. If you come back to that area as a level 16 character, then those enemies will still be eight.
Okay, that seems like a reasonable improvement. Does Bethesda have an explanation for why they implement scaling at all?
Sort of, but it's a non-issue, as it is not counter-intuitive like Oblivion was ("So, you're saying I should specialize in Alchemy if I want to be the world's best swordmaster?" Huh), and its far more limited. I got some early access due to a good friend, and I can tell you that there are areas that will be trivial at level 20 even as a non-combat build, and areas that will be impossible at level 1 due to super mutant infestation.
BTW, if you want an excellent skill, take Repair. IMHO, it's the best skill in the entire game.
1.) Weapons (and I assume, armor and other equipment) do NOT scale to your character: if you find a crappy rifle is some bunker early on in one game, and in other game get there near the very end, it will still be a crappy rifle.
2.) Crappy weapons can be made better via parts and repair skill. If you got what you need you could (in theory) improve that crappy rifle you found to a level that makes it better than what goes run-of-the-mill at the time.
Also, I seem to remember Todd saying at one point that some of the best weapons of the game can be found and used early on. The catch is that said weapons' ammo is scarce untill later, giving you the chance to use it early, but keeping it from becoming your mainstay untill late game...
Lots of them were from powering-on old radio towers. Some were just from wandering the wastes.
I fear it will be overpromised and underdelivered for my entire lifetime.
The Witcher is the only game I can think of that did it well and that's because there is no blatantly obvious good or evil. There's just choices and consequences.
I've always thought if you go into the process with the idea that your going to create objectively "good" and "bad" paths you're doing it wrong.
I put in a vacation request for next tuesday with the intent of installing Fallout 3 immediately after work Monday night and playing it until about 4am then getting up and playing it all day Tuesday. I got waitlisted and was disappointed. Then I realized the game comes out Tuesday so I should be taking Wednesday off. Needless to say I put in a request for Wednesday. Haven't heard back though. I'm kind of glad we don't have to submit a reason along with our vacation requests :P
No shit. That's why Fallout 2 is still held up as one of the best games in that aspect.
Goofy, shallow good/bad morality systems seem to be the new thing since (and including) Kotor. And lets not even get into how ridiculous it was for Bioshock to claim to have real choice.
When you fucked up in say, certain parts of the game and got a whole group of people massacred by angry villagers, you just felt awful, your "evil bar" didn't go up.
Agreed. I point out The Witcher because it's the only game I know of that managed it in a game that is largely linear in nature and had a very strong and driven main plotline. And yeah, Bioshock had a lot of great things going for it but choice is definately not among them.
In regards to the "good/evil" debate:
Back to Fallout3 has anyone who has played it here been playing it on pc? If so are you using a gamepad or keyboard and mouse?
Christ, I sound like a NMA fanatic.
Back in my day, games didn't have much but isometric sprite graphics, so could focus so much more time on story, quests and character development.
Today tho, Its like they make a huge game world as photo realistic as possible, then 3 weeks before launch they go " Oh fuck we need a story so we can sell this shit "
This comment is not about fallout 3, but gaming in general anymore.
Fallout, in 1997 terms, has very good graphics.
I did not state otherwise :whistle:
Eh, rose-tinted glasses. Elder Scrolls: Arena didn't have graphics, physics, or a story, quests or character development. Ultima 9 was a contemporary of the Baldur's Gate PC games, and Ultima 8 predated them, and they sucked. I don't think the majority of Western RPGs (and probably JRPGs, I don't know) dating back to Wizardry I have been about story or writing so much as "check out this game engine/combat system". It's only rarely that you come up with a Wasteland or Planescape: Torment.
Also, I think exploration is as valid a focus for an RPG as writing, and it's also something you can pull off with just a graphics engine and physics. It's okay to have a game that gives you more setting than plot.
Ever play SSI's mid 90s AD&D offerings? Great stuff. Or the Gold Box games from 88-91?
Its the radioactive shit that showers everything when an A-Bomb is dropped.
my cum sock, slobberknob
I'd say Rock Band is like Guitar Hero with Fallout.
...wait, what?
I thought the Gold Box stories were bad, even when they had books that went with them. Pool of Radiance was definitely an exploration-heavy game, and the sequels had plots that fit into 30-40 short paragraphs in the instruction manual. I can't really think of what SSI game from the mid 90s is being referred to here. The Dark Sun games? They were okay, but again, I don't know that I would hold them up as an example of something that was so much better written than, say, the Witcher. The 3D Ravenloft/Menzoberranzan games? Even worse.
I was playing SSI's RPGs before they got the D&D license, and all their plots were, generally speaking, drek. I think a few of them were almost literally "An evil wizard has taken over the land, and it's up to your party to put an end to his tyranny." These games were generally saved by their pacing, or having enough interesting stuff lying around in the game world, rather than the sheer awesomeness of their plots or character depictions.
With Huns.