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

[LannTheStupid]

Kitsune monks, though...

 

[Pink Eye]

Kitsune monks, though...

Yes. But imagine, rat monks.

 

[getter77]

I wonder if the Mythic paths will have any applicable advantages for folks trying out solo runs so as to encourage the endeavor---something along the lines of the Swarm allowing you to gain raw stats, or better yet natural feats outright, from any major figures/creatures you devour. Or the Lich being able to wrest bonus spells and/or arcane feats from the desiccated minds of comparable thralls.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

And you missed my point entirely. I'm not talking about timers specifically. You said "I think you're getting a lot of your fun from making other people have less fun." A lot of people like Dark Souls. Many others cannot get into it, and have been asking for an easy mode for years. The very reasons that make the first group like the games are the same ones that keep the second group out.

Now, I'm sure you're gonna try and answer that it's not the same, and that Dark Souls' difficulty is more integral to the games than Kingmaker's timers were. And you might be right in that, but you'd be missing the point again. It's not specifically about timers, or difficulty or any one feature. It's about general design philosophy. The question that must be answered when cutting or including features in a game is "Does this make the game better or worse?", not "Does this make the game more or less fun for the normies?"

Timers and RPGs don't mix, hence why very few RPGs have them. If they were an enjoyable feature that improves the genre, they would be more common. But they are not. They are exceedingly uncommon in RPGs. One thing virtually every RPG has in common is the lack of an unwinnable state. No matter how deep a hole you dig yourself into, you can always work your way out of it. That's one of the defining aspects of RPGs, and developers mess with that convention at their own peril.

My argument is evidentiary. It's not about what I want, it's about what is.

If timers are a necessary and good feature for RPGs you have to explain why almost no RPGs include them, ever. Eitherevery RPG in the last 20+ years has been made wrong, or RPGs and timers don't mix. Genres are what they are, not what you or I want them to be, or what the Codex thinks they should be.

For all the difficulty of Dark Souls, it still allows the player to experiment and play at their own pace. There is no unwinnable state. Meanwhile there are a lot of easy ways to land Kingmaker in an unwinnable state, often with little to no feedback. Even that would not be the end of the world if you could just reload or the game was short. However you can be playing a doomed game for dozens of hours and not realize it, forcing you to redo most or all of the game from a few simple wrong decisions.

You really think that's good game design that improves the quality of your entertainment? I mean, there's no accounting for taste, but come on.

Clearly Owlcat agrees with me now, so the matter is moot.

 

[InD_ImaginE]

Honestly timer was its own nice thing but it really affects the design philosophy of PfK.

Every single optional area only served for one off encounter, most exploration are meaningless are in part due to time limit. Big exception is that ine puzzle chain of the evil queen. And then there is the Kingdom Management timeskips which are tied to geeting the unique items.

While PfK was nice in the urgency department I honestly hope that removing time limits wil allow Owlcats to flesh out optional zones and exploration more.

 

[Drowed]

[GOOD WRITTING] and RPGs don't mix, hence why very few RPGs have them. If they were an enjoyable feature that improves the genre, they would be more common. But they are not. They are exceedingly uncommon in RPGs.

If [GOOD WRITTING] are a necessary and good feature for RPGs you have to explain why almost no RPGs include them, ever. Eitherevery RPG in the last 20+ years has been made wrong, or RPGs and [GOOD WRITTING] don't mix. Genres are what they are, not what you or I want them to be, or what the Codex thinks they should be.

If you are going to use as an argument the fact that a certain feature is not present in most of the games produced, you create a rather silly argument for its alternative uses.

The question of the unwinnable state is another completely different point worth exploring, but the initial argument is, at best, naive.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

If you are going to use as an argument the fact that a certain feature is not present in most of the games produced, you create a rather silly argument for its alternative uses.

The question of the unwinnable state is another completely different point worth exploring, but the initial argument is, at best, naive.

Nonsense. Good writing is subjective, timers are not. Besides, good writing is not a core part of RPGs, while finishing them is. Fans don't really complain when the writing is poor, but almost everyone complains about time limits.

 

[Pink Eye]

>good writing is not a core part of RPGs,
>while finishing them is
Can you expound upon this? I would like you to give an explanation as to what you mean here. Otherwise I am completely dismayed by this statement.

 

[Drowed]

Good writing is subjective, timers are not. Besides, good writing is not a core part of RPGs, while finishing them is.

So your're saying that the definition of RPG isn't subjective and you are able to tell what its "core" is. Good luck with that.

And not to mention that I can use 10 or 20 more examples instead of the idea of "good writing" if you want me to, that was just one example. Your argument makes no logical sense, it's literally an ad populum / appeal to tradition. I'm surprised you're not able to see that.

Edit: 'Bad Spelling' fo sure, after all I learned English playing CRPGs, what did you expect?

 

[Xamenos]

If you are going to use as an argument the fact that a certain feature is not present in most of the games produced, you create a rather silly argument for its alternative uses.

The question of the unwinnable state is another completely different point worth exploring, but the initial argument is, at best, naive.

Nonsense. Good writing is subjective, timers are not. Besides, good writing is not a core part of RPGs, while finishing them is. Fans don't really complain when the writing is poor, but almost everyone complains about time limits.

Whether any given writing is good or not is just as subjective as whether the use of timers is good or not. And you keep harping that people being unable to finish Kingmaker due to the timers, but would you say the same about any other thing? People where also unable to finish it because they were incapable of understanding core mechanics like attribute-dependent classes, preparing spells, or fighting swarms. Not to mention how many were unable to finish other games (Dark Souls, Cuphead to name a couple) because these games were simply beyond their skills. Would you argue that these games should be made easier so that everyone will be able to finish them?

 

[Lawntoilet]

Good writing is subjective,

No it fucking isn't. I bet you liked The Last Jedi with that attitude. But guess what, it is a big pile of shit because it has objectively bad writing, whereas other movies are not because they don't. Like for example Chinatown is not a big pile of shit because it has objectively good writing.

 

[Ontopoly]

Would you say the same to someone who likes Dark Souls as it is?

Dark Souls has no timers and can be won through (excessive) grinding. In fact it's impossible to "lose" Dark Souls because re spawning is a game mechanic.

Why would being able to lose be a bad thing? People like you just want everything to be handed to them and when the game is designed like this it ruins it for everyone because nothing is actually earned or worked for. Adversity is the spice of life. If you want to eat dry unseasoned chicken wings than stay away from me and everything I associate with.

 

[Ontopoly]

Talked!

You frequent this site. Let's be real, you probably did some fucked up shit.

For all the difficulty of Dark Souls, it still allows the player to experiment and play at their own pace. There is no unwinnable state.

Dark souls isn't even an rpg so I'm not sure why you're using it as an example of what RPGs should be like. It has bare minimum rpg mechanics but it's an action game. I wouldn't call Skyrim a puzzle game because every once in a while I rotate some blocks. The rpg mechanics aren't relevant enough to the game to be it's defining genre. If you're going to be an rpg purist at least be a good purist and not part of the decline

 

[frajaq]

I do wonder how they're gonna restrict resting/resource replenishment if timers for quests are gone

there are some ways to do it, like only allowing in specific places (a one-time "bonfire" since we are talking about dark souls) or "locking" the party in a certain mission ("you can't rest until you defeat all the demons in these castle ruins" or whatever)

 

[Grampy_Bone]

So your're saying

I said what I said.

I can use 10 or 20 more examples instead of the idea of "good writing" if you want me to

This is the weakest non-argument I have ever seen. I'm surprised you're not able to see that.

We can separate RPG features between must-haves (levels, experience points, combat) which are objective and quantifiable, and nice-to-haves (good writing, choice and consequences) which are subjective and harder to quantify. My argument is that hard features like levels and combat are pretty consistent across the genre, and time limits are not. This is pretty undeniable, so the only argument is to try to invalidate my opinion by claiming no one can define what an RPG is. That's the classic dead end so let's not go down that road.

A better argument would be to say I'm standing against innovation, which in a way I am. There are some things I don't think developers should mess with. Owlcat found this out when they made a game to their tastes and found much of the market did not like it. People just don't expect hard time limits in RPGs. Owlcat is free to make the game they want, and people are free to criticize it.

There are some tropes in books and stories that just have to be there. Like how almost every Hollywood blockbuster has a scene in act 2 where the heroes are at some terrible low point with no hope, or a scene where they are powerless and get lectured by the big bad. Are those scenes necessary? Do you need them? Can you toss them out? If so, why are they there? Some creators try to mess with the formula, and when their project fails, they blame the audience. Frankly, that's loser talk. The audience can't be wrong, and there's no accounting for taste.

Owlcat messed with the formula and got burned. The Codex argument is, "Fuck all those paying customers, they are just bad at the game." Okay.

I guess it depends on what your goals are. There are niches for everything. I think it's naive for a developer to think they will be the one to turn the whole genre in a new direction. Consider Daniel Varva and his lifetime war against quicksaves. He can fight it all he wants, people are going to get them.

>good writing is not a core part of RPGs,
>while finishing them is
Can you expound upon this? I would like you to give an explanation as to what you mean here. Otherwise I am completely dismayed by this statement.

Unlike pretty much every other genre, RPGs get easier over time. Time spent will eventually equate to a win, regardless of player skill or input. RPGs give you the ability to fix mistakes, rarely costing you more progress than a single battle or dungeon. Roguelikes reveal this, as the only RPGs with forced permadeath are relegated to a small subniche so unpopular most of the games lack any production value and are given away for free.

You can't grind your way through Super Mario. But with RPGs, the more you play, the easier they get.

Meanwhile, stories in RPGs aren't the main focus. The genre didn't begin with stories, it began with combat, dungeons, and level ups. Stories came later, and were a nice addition (when done well) but not what makes an RPG what it is. Most games have stories, only RPGs have this style of gameplay.

 

[Efe]

yet it is a statistical fact that players dont finish games while still praising the said game..
thus, finishing a game is not necessary or objective.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Owlcat didn't "mess with the formula and get burned," the game was very successful and obviously people are excited for the sequel.
That's despite all the retards complaining about swarms, time limits, lack of respec option, and other criticisms.

 

[NJClaw]

For all the difficulty of Dark Souls, it still allows the player to experiment and play at their own pace. There is no unwinnable state.

Dark souls isn't even an rpg [...]

Oh no, oh god, oh fuck, please no. No.

I do wonder how they're gonna restrict resting/resource replenishment if timers for quests are gone

there are some ways to do it, like only allowing in specific places (a one-time "bonfire" since we are talking about dark souls) or "locking" the party in a certain mission ("you can't rest until you defeat all the demons in these castle ruins" or whatever)

I think that locking the party in a mission (if not clearly stated before the beginning of said mission) would cause more or less the same uproar as the hard time limit in Kingmaker.

"I no longer have spell slots and I overwrote all my saves during this mission, now I can't beat the boss and I need to restart the game".

I really don't understand how you can be bothered by the timer in Kingmaker. I am the most anxious person in the world: almost every morning, while I walk to work, I need to go back home to be sure that I properly locked the door. Yet, that timer was always so lenient that it never represented a real thret. They always give you something like 5x (or more) the time that you need to fully explore everything in that chapter.

 

[Ontopoly]

Owlcat messed with the formula and got burned. The Codex argument is, "Fuck all those paying customers, they are just bad at the game." Okay.

They got burned? They out performed PoE2 and their Kickstarter is doing great. Just because you see people complaining on Steam forum doesn't mean anything. There is always a few people that scream loudly. Also thanks njclaw for those great sources so people can see what I mean.

 

[Roguey]

So, what stops the player now to rest before every fucking combat?

I imagine they'll still keep the heavy camping supplies, only now nothing but your own impatience will stop one from backtracking to buy more or rest safely. The degenerates will be pleased.

 

[Lawntoilet]

So, what stops the player now to rest before every fucking combat?

I imagine they'll still keep the heavy camping supplies, only now nothing but your own impatience will stop one from backtracking to buy more or rest safely. The degenerates will be pleased.

Kingmaker had a good resting system so that's better than nothing, but if you're leading a crusade it makes sense to me that there would be consequences to you spending all your time dicking around collecting rare shinies for your Artisans instead of helping to curb the demonic horde ravaging the land. But hey that's just me

 

[LannTheStupid]

No it fucking isn't. I bet you liked The Last Jedi with that attitude. But guess what, it is a big pile of shit because it has objectively bad writing, whereas other movies are not because they don't. Like for example Chinatown is not a big pile of shit because it has objectively good writing.

I have never understood and will never understand this argument. I like what I like; there are some circles of some people that judge each other's work and grant each other some awards. How does it affect my joy or boredom over a specific piece of writing? I like lots of things that other consider bad writing; mostly in Russian, though. So for me it is not bad writing.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Owlcat messed with the formula and got burned. The Codex argument is, "Fuck all those paying customers, they are just bad at the game." Okay.

They got burned? They out performed PoE2 and their Kickstarter is doing great. Just because you see people complaining on Steam forum doesn't mean anything. There is always a few people that scream loudly. Also thanks njclaw for those great sources so people can see what I mean.

They had 50% bad reviews until they re-released the game as "enhanced" edition, and still hover close to 30%. Numerous fixes and changes were introduced to alleviate this concern. Now they've admitted they're not going in the same direction with the sequel. I call that getting burned, otherwise why would they change it? You are free to see things differently.

 

[Lawntoilet]

No it fucking isn't. I bet you liked The Last Jedi with that attitude. But guess what, it is a big pile of shit because it has objectively bad writing, whereas other movies are not because they don't. Like for example Chinatown is not a big pile of shit because it has objectively good writing.

I have never understood and will never understand this argument. I like what I like; there are some circles of some people that judge each other's work and grant each other some awards. How does it affect my joy or boredom over a specific piece of writing? I like lots of things that other consider bad writing; mostly in Russian, though. So for me it is not bad writing.

I can enjoy stuff that has objectively bad writing, that doesn't make it good. I also don't like things that have objective merit sometimes. Doesn't make it bad. They're different metrics.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Owlcat messed with the formula and got burned. The Codex argument is, "Fuck all those paying customers, they are just bad at the game." Okay.

They got burned? They out performed PoE2 and their Kickstarter is doing great. Just because you see people complaining on Steam forum doesn't mean anything. There is always a few people that scream loudly. Also thanks njclaw for those great sources so people can see what I mean.

They had 50% bad reviews until they re-released the game as "enhanced" edition, and still hover close to 30%. Numerous fixes and changes were introduced to alleviate this concern. Now they've admitted they're not going in the same direction with the sequel. I call that getting burned, otherwise why would they change it? You are free to see things differently.

They never had 50% bad reviews and the game sold very well.
But the bugginess is a totally separate issue from your assertion that they "messed with the formula and got burned."