If that's how it works, all games are overrated. Since no game is perfect.

The way I see it, the only games in which story should be more important than gameplay should be Visual Novels (which essentially have no gameplay in the usual sense). In any other genre, including (and perhaps especially) cRPGs, gameplay needs to be the most important thing.

It's no fun getting a nice new ability but being unable to use it because the game decided to throw a whole bunch of story sequences (or minigames, for that matter) at you.

Edit: If the combat were removed from Planescape: Torment, leaving just the story and things like puzzles and interaction with townspeople, would that make it a better or worse game?

BioShock franchise has a few interesting things to show, like relationship between girls and big daddies in the first, the city in the clouds in Infinite which is a breathtaking sight, and Elizabeth.

But gameplay wise, the games are really dull.

I consider minigames to be pointless gameplay that gets in the way of story and would be much happier if combat were simply removed from rpgs altogether, leaving me free to explore, interact and solve puzzles, but I don't see that happening anytime soon.

Total War Warhammer - Very Shallow and half full game.

Half content in game, the rest to make full game sold as DLC at overpriced prices for content that should have been in game in the first place.

And then those fanboys defend this game and go on as if it is the best game off all time.

If anything that makes Plancescape underrated, because the combat and gameplay is not as bad as people say. I played through the game 4 times in a row to test out the classes of the main char and I had a lot of fun with just the gameplay and combat. (you can get to crazy high levels solo, its awesome)

The way I see it, if you remove combat from an RPG, you can't really call the game an RPG any more; the resulting game is likely to be either a Visual Novel (if story is the only thing left) or a pure Adventure game (if the only thing left is exploration, interaction, and solving puzzles).

In other words, I think you should check out those genres I mentioned, as they are more or less an RPG minus the combat. I hear this site has a *lot* of adventure games for whatever reason.

Yeah, if he was talking about the real-time (which is the default mode) combat in Arcanum, I'd agree.
Because the combat is broken there.
But not in Planescape: Torment.

im going to have to go with witcher 3, which kills me to say it. waited a long time after release date to play it when I could clear my schedule and get immersed in it fully. Frankly, its boring me to tears, isnt fun and Im constantly having to fiddle with the controls to do the most basic game mechanics. drop dead gorgeous ...yes, but im leaving it to play something else.

It appears we have once again landed in the never ending debate between those that talk to every npc they find just in case and those that return to town just long enough to trade all that random junk for slightly better gear.

I understand your point about adventure games but I am not aware of any set in the recent worlds of bioware, zelda and other action heavy games. If you know of any, I'll definitely make the jump.

Assassins creed series. the day i can walk over those shin high ledges is the day i'll play another one

Hey hey hey! We don't support hate speech here. Arcanum is a fantastic game.

Hahah don't get me wrong, I love that game.
But I always change combat to turn-based when I start a new game.
The real-time combat is a total mess!

Every game that costs 4x as much as all the other games that were released around the same time, especially if they're downloadable then I find little justification for the price.

Sound like the last two Witcher games to me.