Pathfinder Pathfinder: Wrath of the Righteous Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[ChildInTime]

Wow, would you look at that - the legs on the armor are no longer the size of a mountain compared to the rest of the body - progress!

Spoiler

 

[The Wall]

Improvement for sure but I liked horse sized thighs on my waifus. Gave them certain. . . brazilian charm

 

[Lawntoilet]

So is there "a right way and a wrong way to write a movie" or is "good writing subjective," because that was your original statement, which had nothing to do with story structure, dialogue, or characters (and I wasn't separating them when I talked about "good writing," you just assumed for no reason that I did so).

Your argument about time limits is still a bad analogy. Many RPGs try to evoke a sense of urgency in their story but very few (Fallout, MotB, and Kingmaker among them) actually provide any narrative reinforcement for that urgency.
"Mechanics reinforce the writing" is a good thing in games.

I think it's possible to separate elements of writing into mechanics and style.

Yes but they are not separable from "good writing" as I said. You can have a story with interesting characters but with shitty dialogue and flaccid prose and while it may be worthwhile to read because you like those characters it is not "good writing."

A story needs to follow certain formats and those formats are not so arbitrary--as these 'beat sheets' show. When you watch a film that's missing a final confrontation with the villain, or the 'dark night of the soul,' or the act 2 downturn, you may not realize it, but your brain does.

Not necessarily. You can have a good story that doesn't follow your checklist, or (more commonly) one that ticks the boxes in different ways. On the Road doesn't follow your checklist for example (although I am not a huge fan of it personally). Or something like The Act of Killing, which I thought was an incredible story, I don't think ticks the boxes either.

However, two movies can both follow the 'beat sheet' while one can be well written while the other is poorly written. Compare Christopher Nolan's batman movies to any other Batman movie. Similar beats, much different quality of writing.

This is what I meant by "ticks the boxes in different ways" so I agree here. Titanic, Toy Story, Die Hard, Dumb and Dumber, Alien - all these movies tick the boxes in different ways.
Now, to me this says that the boxes actually are so generalized as to be basically meaningless as to the quality of the end product, because all those movies are completely different, and all have different strengths in their writing.

I think there is a similar 'beat sheet' for successful video games and again, it's not so arbitrary. Pointing to the history of the RPG genre is not a metaphor, it's just reality. Time limits are rare. They are not part of the RPG 'beat sheet,' and the fact that RPG players howl in protest about them again and again shows us why.

You're now jumping from writing to mechanics but whatever, either way "A sense of urgency" is something I'd put on the RPG "beat sheet." It is just rarely enforced mechanically.

I don't think Kingmaker's narrative reinforces its mechanics as well as you think it does,

I said the mechanics reinforce the narrative, not the other way around. And in the context of narrative urgency backed up by a time limit I stand by that statement completely.

and often creates unintuitive and contrived scenarios (such as winning all the troll invasion events and still losing because you "didn't fight the trolls"). I do like the idea of mechanics being driven by story. However, I also think RPGs are games about giving players options, and always allowing for player input to resolve a situation, and that means no completely unwinnable state.

If you die you reload, that's not any more "unwinnable" than if you somehow ignore the warnings about time limits for dozens of hours and run out of time then have to reload.

Games are full of unrealistic mechanics purely to make things easier for the player. Do you save and reload? ... When I play D&D games I try to stretch my resources as far as possible, because that's how I like to play. But there might be some people who like to rest spam, who am I to tell them to play any different?

Mechanics don't exist to make the game easier. They exist to make the game, the game. The easiest game ever is to play pretend and say "I win cause I said so" but it's not very satisfying to anyone except maybe a baby.

"who am I to tell them to play any different?" Well in the case of a person implementing a time limit, you are the dev, and you are free to tell people exactly how they can play the game, because that's what mechanics are for.

I know it's tempting to simply declare everyone else is playing games wrong and should get behind your personal, preferred play style, but developers do not have that luxury.

If you prefer to play a game without a time limit I am not going to tell you you're "playing games wrong." I also would not say that having a time limit is my "preferred play style," I would rather say that in the specific instance of Kingmaker, I enjoyed it because it reinforced what I was told by the narrative. It was not necessary to my enjoyment but added to it.
But if you are playing a game that tells you, explicitly and repeatedly, that there is a time limit involved, and you ignore that time limit then you are actually playing the game wrong in this instance because you're ignoring a key mechanic. Like if you never level your character up then you're playing the game wrong in the same way by ignoring mechanics.

They are making products for a market, and that means giving the market what it wants. A hard time limit reduces market appeal, for what? So you can impress the Codex? Do you think developers would rather have Codex brofists, or Steam dollars? Come on.

Pathfinder is a pretty hardcore game in many respects, and made a lot of fans happy. The lack of a time limit is a very small course correction to keep the series in line with genre conventions, not a deep, 'Spoony betrayal' of everything the genre stands for.

Yes they are making products for a market, and have been very successful in the CRPG niche. I bet the time limit mechanic lost them approximately zero sales.

When did I say it was a betrayal? Don't mischaracterize me you shithead. It's not a "course correction" either because it wasn't a mistake. It was a thing that nicely suited Kingmaker because it reinforced the narrative, and might be nice to have for WotR because maybe it would reinforce that narrative, but ultimately the point is that anyone who couldn't deal with it is a fucking retard who can't read or a whiny piss baby.

 

[Pink Eye]

By the way, here is what Owlcat had to say about the whole reactivity thing:

Spoiler

 

[LannTheStupid]

Gave them certain. . . brazilian charm

It's a brazillion dollars stretch goal together with Portuguese localization.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

You had to fisk an entire post and write a whole lot of blather to say "herp derp you are bad at teh games durr durr durr"? Re: my post about deriving status from a videogame.

Yes they are making products for a market, and have been very successful in the CRPG niche. I bet the time limit mechanic lost them approximately zero sales.

This statement alone is incorrect, as Gregz's posted reviews show many people complaining over the time limits, and every one of them has comments replying 'time limit? pass.' Again, developers wouldn't be getting rid of things if they thought it improved sales and the quality of the game. Why are you arguing with me and not Owlcat?

Proof by assertion in the face of facts is a lazy argument. Why are you getting so emotional over this? It's just a videogame man.

 

[Ontopoly]

On the contrary, I think that Dragon Age: Origins and Mass Effect 2 were the last great Bioware RPG's. When Bioware went down (which they first thought as success) the decline of the genre was preserved only by CD Projekt Red, and then the Kickstarter / nostalgia renaissance happened.

You are entitled to your vision of history for sure.

I didn't include witcher or mass effect because they aren't RPGs. And origin encouraged cooldowns so it's part of the decline.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Gave them certain. . . brazilian charm

It's a brazillion dollars stretch goal together with Portuguese localization.

Hey you stole my joke from several pages back bro
Is OK though I liked that joke

 

[user]

One thing that worries me about this game is that the early game progression will be too abrupt and that mythic path shenagigans will start at low levels. Hope that is not the case.

 

[Lawntoilet]

You had to fisk an entire post and write a whole lot of blather to say "herp derp you are bad at teh games durr durr durr"? Re: my post about deriving status from a videogame.

Yes they are making products for a market, and have been very successful in the CRPG niche. I bet the time limit mechanic lost them approximately zero sales.

This statement alone is incorrect, as Gregz's posted reviews alone show many people complaining over the time limits, and every one of them has comments replying 'time limit? pass.' Again, developers wouldn't be getting rid of things if they thought it improved sales and the quality of the game. Why are you arguing with me and not Owlcat?

Proof by assertion in the face of facts is a lazy argument. Why are you getting so emotional over this? It's just a videogame man.

No man what I said was everyone who liked the time limit thought they added to the game, not that they were necessary. Getting rid of them would be decline but wouldn't make it a bad game. Also yes ignoring mechanics does mean you're playing the game wrong cause the mechanics ARE the game. It's got nothing to do with status, like if you think Pathfinder is too hard or not your kind of game then I don't think you're a bad person or anything, but if (like you) you come in saying "Pathfinder is too hard SO MAKE IT EASIER FOR ME" or "It's not my kind of game SO GET RID OF THE MECHANIC FOR ME" then yeah I think you're a pretty big fag. These are the people who are actually concerned with the "status" of being able to beat the game because they feel inadequate and little-dicked because they can't click to win, like game journos.

Owlcat also just posted that they're not getting rid of time limits so whatever. Like I said they were nice to have but not a dealbreaker, that would be a stupid position to take.

Also quit projecting that people who enjoyed the time limit are "emotional" about it, like I laid out a structured and logical argument that you ignored just cause I called you a retard once or twice, give your fucking balls a tug.

 

[LannTheStupid]

Grampy_Bone
1. People started wars over football matches. I hope someone nukes South Korea for always winning in Starcraft or Tekken.
2. Time limits are not essential for Owlcat games. However, I would argue that time limits are essential for playing as the ruler of a kingdom under barrage of attacks. How time limits specifically affected the sales comparing to initial bugs, to kingdom management, to swarms, to RTwP I do not know. And neither do you.

 

[Reinhardt]

I usually hate time limits in games, but i really liked Breath of Fire 5...

 

[Pink Eye]

One thing that worries me about this game is that the early game progression will be too abrupt and that mythic path shenagigans will start at low levels. Hope that is not the case.

Yeah. I don't think they will be able to avoid it though. At least in Kingmaker the power shenanigans don't start till around mid game.

 

[Ontopoly]

Again, developers wouldn't be getting rid of things if they thought it improved sales and the quality of the game. Why are you arguing with me and not Owlcat?

You keep posting this exact same thing but ignore everyone who debates it. Kingmaker had time limits because the ap had it. It was also there to balance the kingdom part of the game. Wrath is a much different ap. If there's no time limits and there's no time limits why not take advantage of the casuals that don't want time limits by assuring them they'll get what they want? They'll probably even keep time limits with stuff like companion quests anyways.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Kingmaker had time limits because the ap had it.

It didn't though. No tabletop game has time limits like that. Who's ignoring what? I've been told over and over by PF fanboys referencing the PnP game is off limits. I guess that's only true when it supports my point.

 

[LannTheStupid]

I didn't include witcher or mass effect because they aren't RPGs.

Ah, OK. Your point of view is moot, then. Thanks.

 

[Lawntoilet]

It's just a videogame man.

Haha holy shit you really are a Last Jedi fan, "it's a movie for kids about space Wizards "

This is a discussion YOU started about a video game, on a forum to discuss video games, in a thread to discuss a video game, like how fucking dumb do you have to be to try and criticize someone for discussing the game

 

[Ontopoly]

Kingmaker had time limits because the ap had it.

It didn't though. No tabletop game has time limits like that. Who's ignoring what? I've been told over and over by PF fanboys referencing the PnP game is off limits. I guess that's only true when it supports my point.

So you also ignored the point I made about how it balanced the kingdom part and instead cried about how no one is treating you fairly. I never said the PNP is off limits, I don't care what someone else told you. And the AP did have time limits but with a DM they can always hand wave them away if they want. Still had a time limit though.

 

[Nortar]

No tabletop game has time limits like that. Who's ignoring what? I've been told over and over by PF fanboys referencing the PnP game is off limits.

Say what?
Have you ever played a real pnp rpg with a decent DM/GM, not some board-game shit?

 

[Ontopoly]

I didn't include witcher or mass effect because they aren't RPGs.

Ah, OK. Your point of view is moot, then. Thanks.

This guy thinks witcher series is an rpg. "But I'm playing the role of Geralt"

 

[Pink Eye]

Kingmaker had time limits because the ap had it.

It didn't though. No tabletop game has time limits like that. Who's ignoring what? I've been told over and over by PF fanboys referencing the PnP game is off limits. I guess that's only true when it supports my point.

My friend who plays table top, told me that the Kingmaker AP does have time limits. The DM was responsible for setting them up. Also, events would get worse and worse the longer players ignored them. For example, DMs will be told to,"let players develop their kingdom for a year or two in-game then introduce the next chapter stuff".

 

[LannTheStupid]

Hey you stole my joke from several pages back bro

I am using torrents, too. :blush:

 

[Grampy_Bone]

No man what I said was everyone who liked the time limit thought they added to the game, not that they were necessary. Getting rid of them would be decline but wouldn't make it a bad game. Also yes ignoring mechanics does mean you're playing the game wrong cause the mechanics ARE the game. It's got nothing to do with status, like if you think Pathfinder is too hard or not your kind of game then I don't think you're a bad person or anything, but if (like you) you come in saying "Pathfinder is too hard SO MAKE IT EASIER FOR ME" or "It's not my kind of game SO GET RID OF THE MECHANIC FOR ME" then yeah I think you're a pretty big fag. These are the people who are actually concerned with the "status" of being able to beat the game because they feel inadequate and little-dicked because they can't click to win, like game journos.

Owlcat also just posted that they're not getting rid of time limits so whatever. Like I said they were nice to have but not a dealbreaker, that would be a stupid position to take.

Also quit projecting that people who enjoyed the time limit are "emotional" about it, like I laid out a structured and logical argument that you ignored just cause I called you a retard once or twice, give your fucking balls a tug.

Dude, your nose is so far up my ass you can tell what I had for breakfast.

All I did was point out few RPGs have time limits and out come the arm-flapping autists screeching about decline. Which is odd because it's hardly a feature anyone seemed to care about before.

My one and only complaint about Kingmaker was that it's too far off from the PnP game it's based on, a topic I was shouted at for even bringing up. Now your side is justifying your arguments by pointing to tabletop. Hypocrisy much?

Well Owlcat is or isn't getting rid of it, I guess we don't know anymore. Fair enough, sorry, I'll stop making that point.

 

[Pink Eye]

No man what I said was everyone who liked the time limit thought they added to the game, not that they were necessary. Getting rid of them would be decline but wouldn't make it a bad game. Also yes ignoring mechanics does mean you're playing the game wrong cause the mechanics ARE the game. It's got nothing to do with status, like if you think Pathfinder is too hard or not your kind of game then I don't think you're a bad person or anything, but if (like you) you come in saying "Pathfinder is too hard SO MAKE IT EASIER FOR ME" or "It's not my kind of game SO GET RID OF THE MECHANIC FOR ME" then yeah I think you're a pretty big fag. These are the people who are actually concerned with the "status" of being able to beat the game because they feel inadequate and little-dicked because they can't click to win, like game journos.

Owlcat also just posted that they're not getting rid of time limits so whatever. Like I said they were nice to have but not a dealbreaker, that would be a stupid position to take.

Also quit projecting that people who enjoyed the time limit are "emotional" about it, like I laid out a structured and logical argument that you ignored just cause I called you a retard once or twice, give your fucking balls a tug.

Dude, your nose is so far up my ass you can tell what I had for breakfast.

All I did was point out few RPGs have time limits and out come the arm-flapping autists screeching about decline. Which is odd because it's hardly a feature anyone seemed to care about before.

My one and only complaint about Kingmaker was that it's too far off from the PnP game it's based on, a topic I was shouted at for even bringing up. Now your side is justifying your arguments by pointing to tabletop. Hypocrisy much?

Well Owlcat is or isn't getting rid of it, I guess we don't know anymore. Fair enough, sorry, I'll stop making that point.

We don't have to argue about time limits. We can always talk about builds, or flurry of blows, or how awesome monks are. Or we can talk about Kingmaker.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

My friend who plays table top, told me that the Kingmaker AP does have time limits. The DM was responsible for setting them up. Also, events would get worse and worse the longer players ignored them. For example, DMs will be told to,"let players develop their kingdom for a year or two in-game then introduce the next chapter stuff".

Sure, the DM is supposed to nudge the players along the story. But no DM* would stop the party in the middle of a side dungeon and say, "you didn't address the problem, game over, start from scratch." That's just not a thing. They would roll with the scenario, maybe have the kingdom get taken over, but the PCs would always have some way to turn things around. That level of finality is rare in a PnP game outside of combat or direct hazards.

*(no DM who wanted to keep his players anyway)