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

[Jarpie]

Get the GD shit fuck out of this topic.

 

[Mrowak]

Not only for that but also to provoke serious questions and make player look at certain values from a different perspective - there doesn't have to gameplay mechanic around it if they are subtle enough.

THere is where I differ as I pointed out in the article. No doubt there is audience for game mechanics unrelated stuff; especially the social part. But then I point to 50 shades of gray.

I just think that something should be going on in the background - the world should be giving impression that it lives its own life beside PC and that certain things do happen in it without your input. It's not an appeal for realism but an appeal for context.

 

[Jaesun]

http://www.overclockers.com/kicksta...ent-highlighting-games-coming-to-linux-part-1

New article here:

Steve: Can you talk a little about the reputation system which you are developing? How will you handle cause and effect in the wider world of Project Eternity?​

​

Feargus: Our reputation system will be similar to what players may have seen in Fallout: New Vegas. As you interact with people in the world, you start to generate a variety of reputations, positive and negative, with the world’s factions and communities. The system tracks both good and bad impressions, so if you save a basket of kittens from a burning house and later punch an old lady in the face, your reputation in that community is not “neutral”, it’s “mixed”.​

​

People from those communities will react to you based on your reputation, but it isn’t always a case of “positive rep” = “good times”. Sometimes being disliked by one group may actually cause another group to approach you favourably. And being liked by a group may result in their enemies coming after you — even if you’ve never done anything to harm them directly.​

​

Steve: How will non-combat skills be earned? Will skill progress be similar to Skyrim, or closer to Icewind Dale II where you get so many points based on intelligence or other various attributes?

Feargus: Skill progress will be closer to Icewind Dale II where you get a number of points per level to spend on skills. We don’t have “skill” and “non-skill” classes, so with each character it’s more about deciding where to spend points rather than having one super-skilled character and five drooling buffoons dragging their swords behind them.

​

Steve: Can you describe the crafting system? Is it going to be similar in terms of mechanics, to other games we may be familiar with?​

​

Feargus: It may be loosely similar to crafting in Fallout: New Vegas. You will find ingredients in the world (environment, containers, combat loot) and can then use recipes to craft items at certain locations. The main differences will likely be that our recipes will have slightly fewer ingredients (excepting extremely rare items) and the ingredients will be segregated from other items in your inventory.​

 

[Mrowak]

I am all for appeal for context as long as in it is not pressed on as a message like Bioware does. TW2 as I said did this all right. I am okay with that.

So just to be clear:

Bioware level of Homosexuality = Bad

TW2 : Great enough and done well.

See? So as long as they remain thematically consistent "ghay is ok".

 

[Infinitron]

This person doesn't want there to be unlockable conversation options in nested dialogues: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61355-companion-dialogue-one-thing-that-needs-to-be-sorted/

I played a little NWN2 the other day again and I was suddenly reminded of something that was prevalent in quite a few of Obsidian's RPGs with regards to companion dialogue, most notably NWN2, KotoR2 and Fallout: New Vegas. Something I feel that needs to go and I don't want to see in Project Eternity: Dialogue options that stay with you almost forever!

To be clear on what I'm talking about, I'm meaning dialogue options that crop up every time you talk to a companion/party member that stay there even when you've already asked them that question before, usually because it can lead to several additional dialogue options later that need you to build up a certain relationship level with them to answer more and/or you need to have a high enough Charisma/Persuasion/Speech etc. skill to unlock this.

Personally, this is damn frustrating, and as much as I've largely enjoyed Obsidian's RPGs for the most part, this is all too common a factor I feel just needs to go. There's no need for it. There are exceptions, such as asking party character for their opinions on other party characters and other factors that can lead to a list of responses, but having a list of dialogue options get clogged up because questions and topics I've already discussed with them just stay there is counter-productive. In NWN2 and KotOR2 is was particularly bad, because after I'd gained some approval with the character in question, I had to suddenly remember where in the dialogue trees those once locked-off responses were, asking them the same things again in the right order to finally unlock that stranded dialogue choice, and even then discovering that my approval still wasn't high enough more often than not.

Seriously... either let the companions raise the point themselves when your approval is high enough, or if you must keep the original unanswered questions around, keep them isolated and on their own in the first, initial list rather than burying them in the same initial conversation trees that force me to repeatedly repeat the same damn questions over and over simply because the previously locked-off response is five or six tiers of conversation in. It's frustrating in NWN2 and KotOR2 to chat with companions because of this, and shouldn't be. In other similar games companions chatting is usually one of my favourite parts, but doing it in that manner pretty much ruins it for me.

What do you think, Codex? Decline?

 

[fizzelopeguss]

Their artists have redeemed themselves for now, go back to the drawing board with the character concepts though.

 

[Infinitron]

Infinitron
Decline of course. He is trying to kill the replyability in the story/character interaction.

The idea is to have the new dialogue options appear on the "root" of the directory tree, rather than having to dig for them. Not to eliminate them entirely.

 

[Wise Emperor]

Hey, Morte read again what I have tattooed on my back.
(...)
Read everything.

 

[Captain Shrek]

Infinitron
Decline of course. He is trying to kill the replyability in the story/character interaction.

The idea is to have the new dialogue options appear on the "root" of the directory tree, rather than having to dig for them. Not to eliminate them entirely.

But the entire idea of replayability in this scenario (beyond having actual trees of story options) is that you should NOT know what options are available apriori or at least NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE ALL VISIBLE with the same build. Differing builds should get a chance to create their own story by having access to different dialogue options only their CHOSEN (since everyone can choose all the skill apparently) skills.

 

[Infinitron]

But the entire idea of replayability in this scenario (beyond having actual trees of story options) is that you should NOT know what options are available apriori or at least NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE ALL VISIBLE with the same build. Differing builds should get a chance to create their own story by having access to different dialogue options only their CHOSEN (since everyone can choose all the skill apparently) skills.

Hmm...sure, but what if you tried and failed your skill check once already, but have since upgraded your skill? The game could give you a shortcut on the root of the dialogue tree to try again.

I guess it depends on the nature of the skill check. I agree that it might not make sense for some things to have a shortcut like that.

 

[Captain Shrek]

But the entire idea of replayability in this scenario (beyond having actual trees of story options) is that you should NOT know what options are available apriori or at least NOT BE ABLE TO HAVE ALL VISIBLE with the same build. Differing builds should get a chance to create their own story by having access to different dialogue options only their CHOSEN (since everyone can choose all the skill apparently) skills.

Hmm...sure, but what if you tried and failed your skill check once already, but have since upgraded your skill? The game could give you a shortcut on the root of the dialogue tree to try again.

And that is the same thing? How?

 

[asper]

I am all for appeal for context as long as in it is not pressed on as a message like Bioware does. TW2 as I said did this all right. I am okay with that.

So just to be clear:

Bioware level of Homosexuality = Bad

TW2 : Great enough and done well.

See? So as long as they remain thematically consistent "ghay is ok".

No need to start another argument. The earlier was about putting them in as a social gesture.

No it wasn't. That's what we were trying to make clear.

 

[Infinitron]

And that is the same thing? How?

You've already explored the dialogue tree once. You know the skill check is in there. There's no challenge in finding it again.

But again I agree this would be appropriate only for the most explicit skill/approval checks.

 

[aVENGER]

I'd rather not have the side bars. Too cluttered.

For what it's worth, they could be toggled on/off in BG2.

BTW, looks like ImageShack doesn't like my work. Another try with a different host, in case someone hasn't seen it yet:

 

[Infinitron]

aVENGER

1) Install a Referer Control plugin for your browser
2) Block *.imageshack.us from knowing what site you originate from
3) Say goodbye to frogs in ice cubes

 

[piydek]

Almost 19000 "likes" on Facebook. By the rate they're growing in the last couple of days, I'd expect Obsidian to hit 20k rather soon. One more level to the mega-dungeon seems pretty certain now.

 

[evdk]

Including something in a game does not immediately mean giving it "legitimacy", for fuck's sake.

That's not what i said.

Why not include a companion that likes to eat feces and get pissed on? Hey, it happens in real life, so why not put it in the game?

Statistics.

REMOVE GD SHIT FROM THE PREMISES

I'm still floored by the fact that Lyric Suite honestly thinks The Witcher series is politically correct.

That's because your definition of political incorrectess is based on a librul strawman.

Complains about strawmen, uses the word "librul". Jesus Fucking Christ.

 

[Captain Shrek]

BTW why is there a head lodged in that underground part of the dungeon, considering it is going deeper? Whose stupidity is that?

 

[piydek]

Including something in a game does not immediately mean giving it "legitimacy", for fuck's sake.

That's not what i said.

Why not include a companion that likes to eat feces and get pissed on? Hey, it happens in real life, so why not put it in the game?

Statistics.

Why would it be a question of statistics? Should majority of proper RPG players need to want to see their own characteristics thrown into a game? That's a completely bullshit "I want to role-play myself" approach. Anything that writer wants to do and is consistent within the gameworld is OK. It shouldn't be a reflection of its player demographic. It's a fucking role-playing game, detachment from one's self is absolutely required. Questions of whether it's "odd" or "mainstream" or existent or non-existent in "real-world" are completely irrelevant.

BTW why is there a head lodged in that underground part of the dungeon, considering it is going deeper? Whose stupidity is that?

And this is stupidity how exactly? Doesn't it only suggest that the structure was built upon some ancient site-of-whatever? Further levels would probably reveal further (lower) parts of the statue.

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.1up.com/features/interview-chris-avellone-project-eternity

According to this interview, this is "Project Eternity concept art":

and this is a screenshot from "Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition":

:facepalm:

 

[Captain Shrek]

And this is stupidity how exactly? Doesn't it only suggest that the structure was built upon some ancient site-of-whatever?

....

You mean the 3 levels were built ON it instead away from it?

 

[Lyric Suite]

Statistics.

I.E., moral relativism.

 

[Semper]

perhaps the dungeon is built around an ancient statue? there's also something around the head's neck which looks like slave collar.

 

[Captain Shrek]

perhaps the dungeon is built around an ancient statue? there's also something around the head's neck which looks like slave collar.

It does not looked built around. THAT would be okay. It is built ON. o_O

 

[evdk]

Statistics.

I.E., moral relativism.

Sorry, I forgot to put myself into a transcended mode.

 

[piydek]

And this is stupidity how exactly? Doesn't it only suggest that the structure was built upon some ancient site-of-whatever?

....

You mean the 3 levels were built ON it instead away from it?

perhaps the dungeon is built around an ancient statue? there's also something around the head's neck which looks like slave collar.

What i think as well. The only thing that's weird is that there's not much room around the statue and the proportions of statue seem to be too big for the structure to have real functional use of it, for whatever reason it was built around it.