Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity [BETA RELEASED, GO TO THE NEW THREAD]

[Infinitron]

I'm saying checks in a broad sense, not just talking. Won't the game have dialog screen options to use your abilities?

Obviously environmental stuff like picking locks or whatever is a different story. Outside of dialogue - puppet mode, complete control.

 

[Excidium]

Yes bro like I said 3 posts above. I'm asking about things that pop in the middle of a conversation (or scripted events that might be handled through the same interface).

 

[Roguey]

I honestly find that hard to believe, I need to see Sawyer quotes.

Why, because "it doesn't make sense"?

On the contrary, he might feel that many of the checks might be trivialized if you could always select the companion with the highest stat to do your convincing/bluffing/intimidating for you.

But let's see what Roguey says.

I think I remember him saying more about it but all I found was

Those checks are only made on the PC. Individual companions are specifically scripted to butt in when it makes sense for their character.

You're role playing a single character, not your character and companions and/or hired adventurers.

 

[Excidium]

But Edér can disarm traps and make potions for me so how about that?

 

[Excidium]

Crafted items should be soulbound for the sake of consistency

 

[Roguey]

That's not the act of playing a role.

 

[Excidium]

I'm playing the role of the lazy designer.

 

[Wizfall]

It is way better that only your MC can talk/pass check.
Otherwise too easy to pass every checks (or you need to implement plenty of different useful skills), not even talking about stats check.
That the way Fallout 1/2 did it (some NPC had also a skill as a plus like science for Myron or repair for Vic) and it is very fine.

 

[Roguey]

It's fine if you're role playing as a group of blank slates like in SoZ and Wasteland 2. Not here or ToN.

 

[hiver]

I honestly find that hard to believe, I need to see Sawyer quotes.

Why, because "it doesn't make sense"?

On the contrary, he might feel that many of the checks might be trivialized if you could always select the companion with the highest stat to do your convincing/bluffing/intimidating for you.

But let's see what Roguey says.

It's some seriously backwards game design. I think the most sawyerian thing would be to not have checks in the first place, or maybe only for party-wide things like reputations (active skills like lockpicking being a different kind of thing).

Wasnt this supposed to be like in SoZ where you could switch companions to talk, even during conversation?

 

[Excidium]

It's fine if you're role playing as a group of blank slates like in SoZ and Wasteland 2. Not here or ToN.

What a load of crock. Sounds more like they are putting all the effort into combat.

 

[Arkeus]

What a load of crock. Sounds more like they are putting all the effort into combat.

Are you joking? It takes more effort to write specific triggers for specific companions to help you in than just leaving "stats of active characters are used".

 

[Roguey]

It's fine if you're role playing as a group of blank slates like in SoZ and Wasteland 2. Not here or ToN.

What a load of crock. Sounds more like they are putting all the effort into combat.

Eric Fenstermaker is our narrative lead and he's written some of the most reactive quests and characters in our games (e.g. Beyond the Beef, Veronica, and Boone in F:NV). I don't know where you would have gotten the idea that we weren't going to have highly-reactive dialogue.

 

[Excidium]

What a load of crock. Sounds more like they are putting all the effort into combat.

Are you joking? It takes more effort to write specific triggers for specific companions to help you in than just leaving "stats of active characters are used".

No because those are probably just here and there.

Having access to all characters abilities all the time on the other hand would require a new type of stat checks because thresholds + binary outcomes would be even more retarded of a system with that. So they opt to restricting checks to the MC so they don't have to come up with a new system, genius.

It's fine if you're role playing as a group of blank slates like in SoZ and Wasteland 2. Not here or ToN.

What a load of crock. Sounds more like they are putting all the effort into combat.

Eric Fenstermaker is our narrative lead and he's written some of the most reactive quests and characters in our games (e.g. Beyond the Beef, Veronica, and Boone in F:NV). I don't know where you would have gotten the idea that we weren't going to have highly-reactive dialogue.

None of that was really good in terms of reactivity in my experience.

 

[Roguey]

Having access to all characters abilities on the other hand would require a new type of stat checks because thresholds + binary outcomes would be even more retarded of a system with that. So they opt to restricting checks to the PC, genius.

That's not a factor in this decision. SoZ had a large number of thresholds with binary outcomes.

None of that was really good.

 

[Excidium]

None of that was really good.

I'm sorry but when there is an easy perfect way to solve a problem all the other options are just pointless.

 

[Lhynn]

Beyond the beef was p. good. for a console rpg quest.

fixed

 

[Excidium]

It could have been good if choices weren't served on a plate, no pun intended

I'm sure some xbox players felt really clever.

 

[Koschey]

"Excuse me, dear companion with notably higher might than me, could you perhaps try to intimidate those guards in my scrawny self's stead?"
"I’m sorry, my companion, but no. We all have our own destinies, and yours culminates here. I would not rob you of that."

 

[Cyberarmy]

"Excuse me, dear companion with notably higher might than me, could you perhaps try to intimidate those guards in my scrawny self's stead?"
"I’m sorry, my companion, but no. We all have our own destinies, and yours culminates here. I would not rob you of that."

Blackguards did this good enough, if your companions have high enough charisma they intimidate, charm, bribe for you.

 

[Ninjerk]

"Excuse me, dear companion with notably higher might than me, could you perhaps try to intimidate those guards in my scrawny self's stead?"
"I’m sorry, my companion, but no. We all have our own destinies, and yours culminates here. I would not rob you of that."

Fucking worst thing in a game ever.

 

[Duraframe300]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-02-10-pillars-of-eternity-interview-off-cuts

 

[Roguey]

None of that was really good.

I'm sorry but when there is an easy perfect way to solve a problem all the other options are just pointless.

There was no optimal solution to any of those things. There were multiple choices for the kinds of characters one would wish to play.

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-02-10-pillars-of-eternity-interview-off-cuts

Romances between you and fellow adventurers seem to be a de facto feature of role-playing games today. But Obsidian isn't doing them in Pillars of Eternity.

"We're not doing romances," said Sawyer, "but [the other characters] do have pretty detailed stories, they do have their own personal motivations and goals that sometimes align with yours and sometimes they don't. They interject into your conversations, they argue with you, they argue with each other."

OH GOD YES

The butthurt will be sweet

 

[Space Satan]

YUSSSSSSS!