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

[Volourn]

It's not a matter of trust. It is just meaningless nonsense. I deal in absolutes. Those who don't are cowards. the game will either have 0 unkillable or it will have more than 1. Period. And, since the game is only months way, this kind of detail should have been finalized by now.

 

[Jezal_k23]

Fair enough. I see where you're coming from.

Personally, I won't mind if there are a few essential characters. I'd appreciate it if none are essential, but ultimately I don't really mind.

 

[Volourn]

Ultimately, it's not a big deal for me either.

 

[Mangoose]

Josh keeps doing it:

I wonder how flexible the game will be in terms of essential characters. In New Vegas you could everyone short of the children and two robots, while in BG and PST you would get a game over or Arkanis Gath'd if you killed the wrong man at the wrong time.

We strive to have few/zero essential characters.

Can't have zero essential characters. Your Player Character is essential

 

[Mangoose]

Ultimately, it's not a big deal for me either.

Man, since when have you been reasonable all of the sudden. I'm not sure if I like the new Volly or the old Volly more.

 

[t]

Ultimately, it's not a big deal for me either.

Man, since when have you been reasonable all of the sudden. I'm not sure if I like the new Volly or the old Volly more.

1 MILLION OR BUST RAFLES

 

[Maculo]

I am not sure whether this has been covered, but how will the reputation system react to middle path or inconsistent players? For instance, if I have taken an equal amount of diplomatic and forceful/violent dialogue options, will future NPCs react to select reputations levels, or will the game react to middle path reputations?

 

[Delterius]

Ultimately, it's not a big deal for me either.

Man, since when have you been reasonable all of the sudden. I'm not sure if I like the new Volly or the old Volly more.

His grammar, man.

 

[Copper]

I am not sure whether this has been covered, but how will the reputation system react to middle path or inconsistent players? For instance, if I have taken an equal amount of diplomatic and forceful/violent dialogue options, will future NPCs react to select reputations levels, or will the game react to middle path reputations?

It's an interesting question, but I don't think we know how that will work. My guess would be that NPCs have priorities - it doesn't matter what else you've done, kicking that puppy and getting a Cruel reputation means the goody-goody cleric won't like you, while the psycho assassin values that point of Cruel above everything else. Ultimately it depends on how much scripting they want to set up for each individual character.

 

[Maculo]

It's an interesting question, but I don't think we know how that will work. My guess would be that NPCs have priorities - it doesn't matter what else you've done, kicking that puppy and getting a Cruel reputation means the goody-goody cleric won't like you, while the psycho assassin values that point of Cruel above everything else. Ultimately it depends on how much scripting they want to set up for each individual character.

That was my first assumption. NPCs with priorities would solve the issue (assuming its an issue) quickly. That being said, I am wondering whether playing a pure diplomat or psycho is more beneficial than playing a moderate character. This is a minor roleplaying nitpick though.

 

[Copper]

Yeah, well everything we've seen indicates they're as far away from Bioware Purest Paragon/Roughest Renegade binary design as they can be without going for something more like a relationship simulator. I'd imagine the game will push you to pick a general approach though, with key characters distrusting someone who has no clear reputation as an opportunist with weak character. In the Arcanum playthrough, Avellone did say that Obsidian values the ability to have a neutral response to almost every situation, and Josh said that such responses are more or less only considered noteworthy when they take place in the context of shit hitting the fan, when the character's lack of extreme behaviour is more remarkable. (Not sure on this, they may track 'Stoic' choices more often.)

 

[Mastermind]

Man I wish there'd be a decent game where after stealing and selling everything you still can't get all the good and worthwhile stuff from vendors.

console commands would fix that

I should be able to just steal everything the vendors have with a good enough thief.

 

[Mastermind]

That's his own fault. Receiving feedback doesn't mean he has to agree with it.

How is this the feedback''s fault? What feedback? He alone made the stupid decision to make the spell's D&Dish. He already removed the game's rules far from AD&D, and the complains were minimal. If he had made the decision to follow their vision and have the power's follow his soul based approach, i bet the backers would be supportive in their absolute majority

Do you think developers should ignore the demands of some hardcore fans to keep obsolete or inferior features in the sequel just because it was in the original?

I think developers should try to make a good game. While this means they do have to understand the expectations established by previous titles, they have to be willing to re-evaluate mechanics if they've demonstrably failed or caused problems in the past. I think its most important that they keep the spirit of a franchise/series/world alive. If they can do that while improving a mechanic, they should go for it. If changing mechanics radically alters the feeling of the setting and series, the cost has to be weighed very carefully.

This was pitched as a successor to the IE games, which means it must feel like them. Giving non-spellcasters fantastic soul-based abilities goes against that feel (angry posts against this idea can be found in the earlier pages of this very thread).

How? Most non-spellcasters in BG2 had some supernatural abilities.

 

[Roguey]

How? Most non-spellcasters in BG2 had some supernatural abilities.

PoE has this as well, but they're more on the mundane side, i.e. nothing that would feel too out of place in 3.5 for the most part.

 

[Grunker]

I am not sure whether this has been covered, but how will the reputation system react to middle path or inconsistent players? For instance, if I have taken an equal amount of diplomatic and forceful/violent dialogue options, will future NPCs react to select reputations levels, or will the game react to middle path reputations?

Roguey can correct me, but i believe something along the lines of F:NV was discussed. Fine by me, F:NV had just about the best rep mechanics I can recall. The system recognized my inconsistent playstyles in a variety of ways that the NPCs reacted to in their own styles.

 

[Makagulfazel]

I liked how Obsidian covered the transaction with the Legion at New Vegas; if you killed Vulpes in Naples, another non-essential Legion NPC would appear. He would slap you on the wrist for killing Vulpes, offer immunity from the Legion and then you could just go ahead and murder him too. Obsidian shined when it came to handcrafting NPC reactions in F:NV. They didn't seem to care much for relying on a reputation value for generating actions, but rather concentrated on littering the game with triggers. Must be fun as a QA guy - they probably are given a bit more free reign than having to play the same sequences over and over again.

 

[Maculo]

Roguey can correct me, but i believe something along the lines of F:NV was discussed. Fine by me, F:NV had just about the best rep mechanics I can recall. The system recognized my inconsistent playstyles in a variety of ways that the NPCs reacted to in their own styles.

If that's the case, then I am not worried anymore (it was minor to begin with). I enjoyed the F:NV reputation system.

Honestly, I am not sure why I did not think of F:NV's system considering Josh Sawyer's involvement. Thanks for that reminder.

 

[Volourn]

"He would slap you on the wrist for killing Vulpes, offer immunity from the Legion and then you could just go ahead and murder him too."

That's some horrible deux e manchina shit C&C.

 

[Mastermind]

"He would slap you on the wrist for killing Vulpes, offer immunity from the Legion and then you could just go ahead and murder him too."

That's some horrible deux e manchina shit C&C.

It is but you have to cater to the retards to some extent if you want to keep making games.

 

[Makagulfazel]

.. Because if Caesar was going to absolve you of your crimes in the first place, it must be a grand example of deus ex machina if he sends another messenger? Do you guys even know what deus ex machina means, ya dumbfucks? You gain infamy with the Legion if you kill the alternate messenger, fa-why.
You get non-essential NPCs and you still whine. It's Volly, though, so... just wasted my time posting

 

[Volourn]

BUTTHURT FANBOY ALERT!

 

[Roguey]

It is but you have to cater to the retards to some extent if you want to keep making games.

Josh is very much against blind decisions. That you can lock yourself out of the option of joining the Legion later on because of a decision you made much earlier isn't something you can know without metaknowledge.

 

[Copper]

It all depends how it's done - I remember Freespace 2 having at least one mission where you are either told 'awesome hero, you are the one for elite spec-ops mission behind enemy lines' or, if you fuck up in your previous missions, 'maggot, fuck off and prepare to die on this suicide mission with 5% chance of success'. Nice to see in a linear game.

You can do a lot with a little if you choose the right words - here's hoping Eric's dialogue is a lot more refined than his prose.

 

[WhiteGuts]

Isn't MCA in charge of the writing ?

 

[Infinitron]

Isn't MCA in charge of the writing ?

No, Eric Fenstermaker is. But Josh is his boss.