Asking for a favor from the Hivemind

[Raghar]

So it looks like Anthony Davis left this thread with his tail between his legs.

Poor anthony, he asked only about advice, and he received it.

 

[Zed]

The Codex is the drug that every developer needs. Just don't overdose.

If Obsidian are lucky, their Q/A has been infected with some Codexitus. Like, The Codex critical judgement has planted some critical-thinking seeds in their minds.

 

[Roguey]

"Tuning is literally never finished"

Uh huh. And serious tuning hasn't even begun.

Besides, you haven't played the beta. Opinion invalid.

What opinion have I expressed?

 

[Deuce Traveler]

So it looks like Anthony Davis left this thread with his tail between his legs.

Or maybe he received as many nuggets of information as he was seeking and decided to spend his time actually programming instead of spending his time on the forums. Cleve could probably take a lesson or two there.

 

[Darth Roxor]

No, it's Anthony who could take a lesson from Cleve.

 

[Duraframe300]

No, it's Anthony who could take a lesson from Cleve.

Purchasing a bunker?

 

[Jaesun]

So it looks like Anthony Davis left this thread with his tail between his legs.

Or maybe he received as many nuggets of information as he was seeking and decided to spend his time actually programming instead of spending his time on the forums. Cleve could probably take a lesson or two there.

 

[Raghar]

So it looks like Anthony Davis left this thread with his tail between his legs.

Or maybe he received as many nuggets of information as he was seeking and decided to spend his time actually

being butthurt under a blanket in fetal position trying not bite his tongue

instead of spending his time on the forums.

I think that might be more correct version.

 

[Johannes]

edgy

 

[Raghar]

I think that's just an accurate description of this thread.

 

[Jaesun]

I think that's just an accurate description of this thread.

Not really, there are the people that are here to actually discuss this, and then there are the OMG EDGY/retards/shiposters. That is basically the codex in a nutshell.

 

[roshan]

It feels like IE to me, except better (not counting the DnD stuff). It doesn't have the fakey swings to fill the time and it doesn't have the lost attacks and other bugs because you ran out of time on your turn. It *fixes* a lot of systemic issues IMHO.


Also, history lesson, the IE engine was originally developed for an RTS game - like Starcraft. True story. DnD was put into the Infini Engine after.

I think there has been too much emphasis put on "feeling" like an IE game as opposed to PLAYING like an IE game. In Sawyer's posts, he keeps talking about imitating "encounter duration" and other such nonsense which was never the point. IE games never sought to keep a player occupied for 20 seconds. When the IE games were good they sought to give the players an interesting and unique challenge that they might or might not be able to overcome, not to purposely waste a specified amount of their time. There is a difference between superficial imitation and capturing the essence of the experience.

The real aspects of IE gameplay - hard counters (versus POE spells that do boring and pointless %), randomness (versus POE attempts at making fighters do a steady stream of DPS like an MMO game), death (versus health regeneration and autoresurrection meter in POE), distinct classes (as opposed to POE where everyone has spell like abilities, two skills and needs the same attributes), non combat spells (versus POE where all gameplay is about balanced combat), interesting itemization, slow paced combat (versus kewl running animeshuns) - have basically been put in the garbage bin because Josh Sawyer didn't like BG2, namecalls backers as "grognards" and claims they don't know what they find fun.

It's disingenuous of you (Obsidian) as developers to make promises, take in millions of dollars, and then make a game that is philosophically opposite to the experience your backers paid for just because egos in your team think they exclusively know what is or isn't fun. You can make whatever game you want so long as it's you yourself putting up the cash, I guarantee you if this was not funded via kickstarter you wouldn't be getting so much flak. It's natural that there be a lot of disgruntled people and really, you shouldn't be complaining but rather having a chat with your friends at Obsidian at how they could have fucked up so epically.

 

[roshan]

Well, I dunno about other people, but I dislike quest XP only for two reasons:

1- PoE is (as far as I can tell) a combat oriented game. Yet experience points aren't at all tied to combat, but to solving quests, which has a nebulous relationship with combat. In a combat-centric RPG, I believe the function of experience points should be rewarding the player for taking risks and mastering its aspects. In fact, I think I suggested once that you could have somehow measured how well the player did against a certain encounter (say, you could measure how much time he took, how much damage he dished, how many resources he spended, or something like that) and give a XP amount proportional to it. That way, you would put the combat system rightfully as the guiding principle behind XP. Combat difficult would be translated into appropriately more rewards, and the players would have more incentives to try new approaches to battling.

2- It also feels like you guys are trying to restrict how experience is given out. Experience in Baldur's Gate was an "open" system. That is, given the parameters, the player could earn as much or as little XP he wanted in an area. Now, it is very true this can create problems, especially to people who are a bit compulsive. But I don't feel the right way to solve these problems is simply to close the open systems. Now, I don't even care that much that XP was open. If it was based in combat but closed, I would be pretty happy. But closing off this system together with some of the other design decisions showed a clear trend toward a much more restricted game.

This.

Anthony Davis the issue with having no combat XP is that you as developers are artificially restricting what players do or do not benefit from. As a result players are now railroaded into doing what you intended for them to do as opposed to what they want to do. If XP is built into the various systems of the game then people have a choice of which system to interact with.

I could play BG1 and get XP by doing the various fedex quests. Or I can ignore them entirely and instead focus on clearing out areas. Or in the EE version by lockpicking, learning spells and disarming traps. Open systems, open gameplay.

I don't know what it is with you guys at Obsidian trying to obsessive compulsively dictate a player's experience of your game. From NWN2's railroaded, linear path areas, to POE having quest only XP, it seems that you guys are absolutely unwilling to let players have fun on their own terms.

 

[Shevek]

The real aspects of IE gameplay - hard counters (versus POE spells that do boring and pointless %), randomness (versus POE attempts at making fighters do a steady stream of DPS like an MMO game), death (versus health regeneration and autoresurrection meter in POE), distinct classes (as opposed to POE where everyone has spell like abilities, two skills and needs the same attributes), non combat spells (versus POE where all gameplay is about balanced combat), interesting itemization, slow paced combat (versus kewl running animeshuns) - have basically been put in the garbage bin because Josh Sawyer didn't like BG2, namecalls backers as "grognards" and claims they don't know what they find fun.

A few things:

1. The classes in PoE feel just as distinct or more so than in the IE games. What made a ranger different than a fighter in the IE games? A few spells & added twf proficiency points vs more max proficiency and slightly faster leveling? In PoE, you have classes with extremely distinct playing mechanics. The Cipher has the soul whip mechanic, Chanter has the song/evocation mechanic, Monks have wounds, all classes have a distinct and varied ability/spell list, etc etc. I mean, other than a few kits like the inquisitor, most IE melee classes were the same except for proficiencies or some limited spell casting. The IE monk was garbage until ToB. The paladin needed the holy avenger or to be an inquisitor or it was garbage. The ranger was shit unless it was an archer. The spell casting classes all got one of the same 2 pools of spells and casting was basically the same for all of them. I mean, seriously, this is not a weakness for PoE. Not to mention that most IE classes/kits were garbage except for a few. I mean, why play a Jester or a signle class Cleric or Druid? Why play an unkitted fighter?

2. Hard counters themselves were not a strength of the IE games. I hated the god damn endless magic protection stripping in IE.

3. I don't think its the lack of non-combat spells is what hurts PoE as far as spells. I don't give a crap about "Knock." The big thing that PoE does lacks are spell sequencers, contingencies, etc. That being said, this is a low level campaign. Other than maybe minor spell sequencer, the player wouldnt have those spells in IE at these levels. The other thing the spells lack are cheapness. I will admit, it was fun to be cheap with spells in IE games (stinking cloud/web/cloudkill or cloudkill/skeletons or lower resist + chromtic orbsX2).

4. The items in PoE can be pretty interesting. I have found stat boosting gear, cloaks that not only give bonuses to stealth but also give stealth auras, plenty of items that give clicky spell/ability uses, etc. The spear you get at the end of Rhemen is pretty sweet too (you get to pick enchantments based on dialogue choices made throughout the dungeon, thats pretty good). Ya, some of it is random. Hell, didn't IWD 1/2 have random loot? Those were IE games, right?

5. Death was not strength of the ie games. I dont see how getting instagibbed or imprisoned and mashing reload is good gameplay.

6. Everyone does not need the same attributes in PoE and the IE games certainly was not the pinnacle of stat implementation. I would argue that there are more stat permutations that are desriable in this game than in the IE games. In IE, you make a dude, if hes melee, mash reroll until you can max str/dex/con and dump all the rest. Even then, you had to be midful of a few things. Dex? More than 18 is a waste. Str? Anything between 8 and 15 is a waste and your investment here doesnt matter as soon as you get a str belt. If you are a caster, the only reason to go for caster stats is the Wish spell. Wisdom,Charisma? Useless. Int? You could cast level 9 spells with idiot level Int. Seriously, why you would bring this up is baffling.

7. Do running animations really matter that much to you?

 

[roshan]

1. The classes in PoE feel just as distinct or more so than in the IE games. What made a ranger different than a fighter in the IE games? A few spells & added twf proficiency points vs more max proficiency and slightly faster leveling? In PoE, you have classes with extremely distinct playing mechanics. The Cipher has the soul whip mechanic, Chanter has the song/evocation mechanic, Monks have wounds, all classes have a distinct and varied ability/spell list, etc etc. I mean, other than a few kits like the inquisitor, most IE melee classes were the same except for proficiencies or some limited spell casting. The IE monk was garbage until ToB. The paladin needed the holy avenger or to be an inquisitor or it was garbage. The ranger was shit unless it was an archer. The spell casting classes all got one of the same 2 pools of spells and casting was basically the same for all of them. I mean, seriously, this is not a weakness for PoE. Not to mention that most IE classes/kits were garbage except for a few. I mean, why play a Jester or a signle class Cleric or Druid? Why play an unkitted fighter?

I agree with you on this, I'm not at all fond of 2E classes and how they played. But I think that 3E did things quite well. Most classes were useful in combat in their own way without everyone becoming a pseudo-mage. What I mean is that when all classes are special and have equally special abilities then they all become the same because they all end up being interchangeable in terms of their roles in the party. Versus classic parties where you have distinct roles and distinct levels of management for fighters, clerics, rogues and mages.

2. Hard counters themselves were not a strength of the IE games. I hated the god damn endless magic protection stripping in IE.

I don't remember this being a major part of any IE game aside from BG2 with SCS. Can you explain what it is you have against hard counters?

3. I don't think its the lack of non-combat spells is what hurts PoE as far as spells. I don't give a crap about "Knock." The big thing that PoE does lacks are spell sequencers, contingencies, etc. That being said, this is a low level campaign. Other than maybe minor spell sequencer, the player wouldnt have those spells in IE at these levels. The other thing the spells lack are cheapness. I will admit, it was fun to be cheap with spells in IE games (stinking cloud/web/cloudkill or cloudkill/skeletons or lower resist + chromtic orbsX2).

Well that's the problem when your overriding philosophy is "banalce!!!". You end up with no non combat spells, no interesting or unique spell effects, no fun spell combinations, no spells that have discernible or tangible effects (such as hard counters) everything just ends up being boring.

4. The items in PoE can be pretty interesting. I have found stat boosting gear, cloaks that not only give bonuses to stealth but also give stealth auras, plenty of items that give clicky spell/ability uses, etc. The spear you get at the end of Rhemen is pretty sweet too (you get to pick enchantments based on dialogue choices made throughout the dungeon, thats pretty good). Ya, some of it is random. Hell, didn't IWD 1/2 have random loot? Those were IE games, right?

IWD didn't have randomly generated loot, it had a randomized loot table of pre-generated items.

5. Death was not strength of the ie games. I dont see how getting instagibbed or imprisoned and mashing reload is good gameplay.

Because reload = failure. A game in which you can't fail is also a game that you can't win because it ends up playing itself like NWN2. In the end it's simply about what kind of player you are. There are players that want to carve out victory. Then there are others that just don't want to lose. It's quite obvious which market POE is catering too.

6. Everyone does not need the same attributes in PoE and the IE games certainly was not the pinnacle of stat implementation. I would argue that there are more stat permutations that are desriable in this game than in the IE games. In IE, you make a dude, if hes melee, mash reroll until you can max str/dex/con and dump all the rest. Even then, you had to be midful of a few things. Dex? More than 18 is a waste. Str? Anything between 8 and 15 is a waste and your investment here doesnt matter as soon as you get a str belt. If you are a caster, the only reason to go for caster stats is the Wish spell. Wisdom,Charisma? Useless. Int? You could cast level 9 spells with idiot level Int. Seriously, why you would bring this up is baffling.

I agree, hence, please refer to 3rd edition rules. Not that it was perfect - 3E could certainly have been made better specially in a computer game by making the various stats have more profound effects on characters, but the solution was certainly not to make STR enhance gun and spell damage.

7. Do running animations really matter that much to you?

The question is do they matter to you? Does the excitement of seeing your characters run around compensate for the inevitable clusterfuck that results?

 

[Shevek]

But I think that 3E did things quite well.

3E... ugh... d20 has its share of issues. If it were something akin to Saga Edition rules, then, yes, that kind of system can be ok and lead to very distinct builds. Though, honestly, 2E did martial/magic multiclasses far better than 3E.

I don't remember this being a major part of any IE game aside from BG2 with SCS. Can you explain what it is you have against hard counters?

Liches, etc

Well that's the problem when your overriding philosophy is "banalce!!!".

Theres some truth there. That being said, we havent seen what a high level caster is like in PoE yet. Casters were crap in BG1 at these levels.

IWD didn't have randomly generated loot, it had a randomized loot table of pre-generated items.

I believe this game has loot tables as well. In the Dyrford Ruins a certain chest it seems to drop from a set of items. Also, most enemies drop the same thing over and over (I think they are even putting in "What You See Is What You Get" loot in the next patch).

A game in which you can't fail is also a game that you can't win because it ends up playing itself like NWN2.

I don't mind failing when I deserve it but failing solely because of the almighty RNG is dumb. Ya, they can tune the difficulty up a bit. I think they just have to smarten up the npcs and have them use more abilities. This has nothing to do with the dual health pool.

I agree, hence, please refer to 3rd edition rules.

There are better rules than 3E out there. In any case, if we are saying that we are comparing PoE to the IE games...

The question is do they matter to you?

Not really.

 

[Bester]

Liches ruled. Favorite enemy in BG2.

 

[Athelas]

This.I could play BG1 and get XP by doing the various fedex quests. Or I can ignore them entirely and instead focus on clearing out areas. Or in the EE version by lockpicking, learning spells and disarming traps. Open systems, open gameplay.

What? The side quest/trap/lockpicking/spell XP in BG 1 was miniscule compared to what you got from killing stuff. How much XP did you get from learning a spell? 20 or so?

And you didn't get XP from bashing locks or avoiding traps, so describing them as 'open systems' is absurd.

non combat spells (versus POE where all gameplay is about balanced combat)

The game has much more non-combat gameplay than the BG/IWD's.

 

[Johannes]

3. I don't think its the lack of non-combat spells is what hurts PoE as far as spells. I don't give a crap about "Knock." The big thing that PoE does lacks are spell sequencers, contingencies, etc. That being said, this is a low level campaign. Other than maybe minor spell sequencer, the player wouldnt have those spells in IE at these levels. The other thing the spells lack are cheapness. I will admit, it was fun to be cheap with spells in IE games (stinking cloud/web/cloudkill or cloudkill/skeletons or lower resist + chromtic orbsX2).

Cheapness? You mean coolness here I think.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

I mean, other than a few kits like the inquisitor, most IE melee classes were the same except for proficiencies or some limited spell casting.

Sure, the differences between classes like fighter/ranger/barbarian do seem to be more pronounced in PoE but keep in mind that even limited spellcasting (say Ranger's very useful at higher levels Armor of Faith) along with some other kit/class specific abilities do make them play differently enough and can be very useful depending on your party composition (not everyone goes through the game every time with a caster heavy party or rest spams, just like not everyone rolls a diplo-sniper everytime in Fallout).

The IE monk was garbage until ToB. The paladin needed the holy avenger or to be an inquisitor or it was garbage. The ranger was shit unless it was an archer. The spell casting classes all got one of the same 2 pools of spells and casting was basically the same for all of them. I mean, seriously, this is not a weakness for PoE. Not to mention that most IE classes/kits were garbage except for a few. I mean, why play a Jester or a signle class Cleric or Druid? Why play an unkitted fighter?

-IE monk sucked until level 14 (when it receives a major magic resistance boost and his fists become +2 weapon) and is a decent class from then on, way before TOB.

-Inquisitor is arguably the most powerful melee class in BG2 but Cavalier and Undead Hunter have pretty useful abilities of their own (and don't lose Turn Undead which is an underused ability that works even against liches at higher levels), they're certainly not garbage. Also, getting the Holy Avenger is and should feel like a defining moment for any paladin class/kit, it's intentional.

-The only Ranger kit that is shit is Beastmaster, Stalker can be pretty potent with their Backstab (can reach x4), Fighter HP and THAC0 progression, Haste spell (that doesn't fatigue you IIRC), low level Priest Buff spells etc. not to mention that they have no real drawback given the abundance of great leather armours in the game.

-Lastly, saying that the majority of IE classes/kits were garbage is just exaggerated nonsense. You're delusional if you don't think PoE will have optimum builds/classes/party compositions (even after 100 balance patches) etc. doesn't mean the rest of the options will be garbage as long as they result in a different gameplay experience and are good enough to tackle everything the game throws at you.

Hard counters themselves were not a strength of the IE games. I hated the god damn endless magic protection stripping in IE.

Hard counters/Magic protection minigame do present issues of their own no doubt but atleast they do a good job of making sure various encounters feel different as you can't just tank and spank/bruteforce every enemy you come across, you have to adjust.

 

[Seari]

Hard counters themselves were not a strength of the IE games. I hated the god damn endless magic protection stripping in IE.

Hard counters/Magic protection minigame do present issues of their own no doubt but atleast they do a good job of making sure various encounters feel different as you can't just tank and spank/bruteforce every enemy you come across, you have to adjust.

That's why Shevek doesn't like hard counters.

 

[roshan]

This.I could play BG1 and get XP by doing the various fedex quests. Or I can ignore them entirely and instead focus on clearing out areas. Or in the EE version by lockpicking, learning spells and disarming traps. Open systems, open gameplay.

What? The side quest/trap/lockpicking/spell XP in BG 1 was miniscule compared to what you got from killing stuff. How much XP did you get from learning a spell? 20 or so?

And you didn't get XP from bashing locks or avoiding traps, so describing them as 'open systems' is absurd.

non combat spells (versus POE where all gameplay is about balanced combat)

The game has much more non-combat gameplay than the BG/IWD's.

Look this is pretty much my point. In vanilla BG1, you could either get XP from doing quests or killing monsters. With two possible ways to get XP, you had some level of choice regarding what you wanted to do in the game. But in a game where quests are the only source of XP, you are effectively forced to play a "yes-man", some sort of bitch that has to do everything asked of him because you need to grind every last shitty quest to get XP whether it fits your character and play style or not. I hope you and other Obsidian fans understand that there are people out there who do NOT like to complete (grind) each and every quest and would like to play something other than a universal errand boy.

 

[Infinitron]

Oh yeah, sorry Anthony Davis, I forgot to tell you about roshan. But I don't think he posts on your forums.

 

[Johannes]

I mean, other than a few kits like the inquisitor, most IE melee classes were the same except for proficiencies or some limited spell casting.

Sure, the differences between classes like fighter/ranger/barbarian do seem to be more pronounced in PoE but keep in mind that even limited spellcasting (say Ranger's very useful at higher levels Armor of Faith) along with some other kit/class specific abilities do make them play differently enough and can be very useful depending on your party composition (not everyone goes through the game every time with a caster heavy party or rest spams, just like not everyone rolls a diplo-sniper everytime in Fallout).

The IE monk was garbage until ToB. The paladin needed the holy avenger or to be an inquisitor or it was garbage. The ranger was shit unless it was an archer. The spell casting classes all got one of the same 2 pools of spells and casting was basically the same for all of them. I mean, seriously, this is not a weakness for PoE. Not to mention that most IE classes/kits were garbage except for a few. I mean, why play a Jester or a signle class Cleric or Druid? Why play an unkitted fighter?

-IE monk sucked until level 14 (when it receives a major magic resistance boost and his fists become +2 weapon) and is a decent class from then on, way before TOB.

-Inquisitor is arguably the most powerful melee class in BG2 but Cavalier and Undead Hunter have pretty useful abilities of their own (and don't lose Turn Undead which is an underused ability that works even against liches at higher levels), they're certainly not garbage. Also, getting the Holy Avenger is and should feel like a defining moment for any paladin class/kit, it's intentional.

-The only Ranger kit that is shit is Beastmaster, Stalker can be pretty potent with their Backstab (can reach x4), Fighter HP and THAC0 progression, Haste spell (that doesn't fatigue you IIRC), low level Priest Buff spells etc. not to mention that they have no real drawback given the abundance of great leather armours in the game.

-Lastly, saying that the majority of IE classes/kits were garbage is just exaggerated nonsense. You're delusional if you don't think PoE will have optimum builds/classes/party compositions (even after 100 balance patches) etc. doesn't mean the rest of the options will be garbage as long as they result in a different gameplay experience and are good enough to tackle everything the game throws at you.

Also for class differentiation an important thing to not miss in IE is multi- and dualclassing. If Ranger and Fighter are too boring and similar to each other, how about rolling a fighter/thief, fighter/mage, or ranger/cleric of some sort? Just because some options are relatively similar to each other, isn't so bad when overall there's such a wide array of choice.

 

[Roguey]

Obsidian never said it was going to play like an IE game. Saying they were going to use their own rules from day one was proof of that. All those Josh-quotes I posted before the Kickstarter ended where he talked about D&D being garbage was also proof.