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

[Infinitron]

In terms of combat, I will consider this game a success if its battles are

1) tactically diverse - not just three mobs here, three mobs there
2) punishing, if you don't use your brain to assess the tactical situation, use the appropriate abilities and leverage your party's strengths and weaknesses

What you don't want is for combat to degenerate into slogs where one always uses the same tactics and abilities without much thought.

Beyond that, the exact details of the mechanics...just aren't really very important. Per-encounter or per-rest? Stamina or health? Meh. It's how it all comes together that matters.

 

[Brayko]

Shit. I've run out of random things to say! @$#@%&$@#!

 

[Infinitron]

Their purpose is to have a game where healing spells or potion do not exist as such,

No, instead there will be stamina spells (potions too?). The difference! It's mindblowing!

But there is a difference. You still lose health whenever you're hit. That health doesn't come back.

In fact, if a fight lasts very long because you kept on "healing" your stamina with abilities, then you will have lost a ton of health in that fight, and you're now fucked if you're not near a rest area.

Remember, stamina is not a shield for health like in Betrayal at Krondor. You lose both simultaneously.

 

[Lord Andre]

My take on the whole stamina-health issue. I have no problem with the system itself and I am aware that they are tied to diverging mechanics and not just damage soak. But, BUT I have a problem with regeneration. If none of them regenerated then I would list it as incline.

I am also aware that regeneration is meant to counterbalance the "no magic healing" aspect. IMO it balances it so well that it actually makes the game easier than before. At least in the past, healing spells competed for spell slots with buffs and summons and save-or-dies. Regeneration competes with nothing because it's free by default.

 

[LeStryfe79]

LeStryfe79

So you have a different opinion on a subject that can't be measured objectively. Good for you. And before you call me a troll perhaps you might try to understand what a forum is and is not. e.g. If there were no diverging opinions then there wouldn't actually be a discussion.

Oh yeah...before I forget Now where is Jaesun with that join date ?

Edit: Jaesun please retardo J_C's inflammatory one liner, as it's derailing this thread. This isn't GD, is it ?

That's cool man. I was just fuckin with ya.

 

[imweasel]

No, instead there will be stamina spells (potions too?). The difference! It's mindblowing!

Yes. And the fucking stamina heals rapidly outside of combat, just like in Dragon Age 2. Bullshit.

 

[Lord Andre]

In fact, if a fight lasts very long because you kept on "healing" your stamina with abilities, then you will have lost a ton of health in that fight, and you're now fucked if you're not near a rest area.

You have a point there, that's the only thing that makes it at least acceptable. But...

In before healing surges !!!

 

[Volrath]

So we're back to the stamina = health argument again? It only took 100 pages

 

[Infinitron]

At least in the past, healing spells competed for spell slots with buffs and summons and save-or-dies. Regeneration competes with nothing because it's free by default.

Very good. This is a valid criticism.

Personally I don't think it's a huge issue, though. You pretty much always stocked some healing spells with you in these games, and if you ran out, you just rested and rememorized them.

 

[CappenVarra]

The thing is, nobody actually cares that much about mechanics.

Speak for yourself, motherfucker.

The thing is, only RPG fans care about the mechanics. Which explains a lot about the people who don't, actually

I didn't say nobody cares about mechanics - I said nobody cares about them that much. That is, they're not what makes or breaks a game in these parts.

Man, I wish somebody told me that 2 years ago. Now I've spent all that time on the wrong forum

 

[Gozma]

I care about all that other stuff but we have no way to talk about it. If they put up a map and it's like a twisty corridor with a fight node every 20 yards a la NWN2 you can happily anticipate that I will shit on it without referencing mechanics.

 

[Lord Andre]

Current critique aside, at the end of the day I'm expecting Sawyer to pull some really good shit out of his ass but not before he's done trolling.

 

[Volrath]

Why wouldn't stamina regenerate outside of combat? What's the big fucking deal?

 

[Blaine]

Uh what? Learning from other peoples mistakes is a wrongheaded approach? Looking at similar games and learning from their design mistakes is wrong?

It's wrongheaded when "fixing mistakes" is the central theme of most of your design decisions, yes—especially when said mistakes are being nitpicked from incredibly successful games. "Fixing" an actual failure or a defective product is one thing, but even the best games ever made have had their weaknesses. P:E will also have its share of weaknesses.

In other words, ought to focus more on what he will be doing, not on what he won't be doing because it wasn't his favorite aspect of Game X. And some of those "mistakes" arguably aren't even mistakes, but rather design decisions that he doesn't agree with.

You're on a website that criticizes constantly. We used to ridicule the old "you need to have played the game seven times to criticize it"....

I don't believe that either, and am on record saying so.

You guyse are butthurt that he criticizes your favourite games. Just admit it and move on, don't start creating these wild rationalizations.

If that's what you need to believe to support your opinion, be my guest. You'll note that I personally have never "gone after" Sawyer for criticizing any game, only for his overall approach to making design decisions. I've seen games developed before with the "let's fix all those mistakes of our predecessors" approach, and every single one has been shit. I don't think P:E will be shit, but I don't like the "fix all the mistakes" approach to computer game development.

 

[tuluse]

So we're back to the stamina = health argument again? It only took 100 pages

I can't wait until we get back to inventory mechanics

 

[tuluse]

If that's what you need to believe to support your opinion, be my guest. You'll note that I personally have never "gone after" Sawyer for criticizing any game, only for his overall approach to making design decisions. I've seen games developed before with the "let's fix all those mistakes of our predecessors" approach, and every single one has been shit. I don't think P:E will be shit, but I don't like the "fix all the mistakes" approach to computer game development.

I don't know if you consider this the same thing, but I think the entire pitch for PE was "let's make an IE game, but better!"

It's just when talking about mechanics it's boring to say what they plan on doing the same, so they have to focus on the differences which leads to this "Josh thinks BG2 sucked" perspective.

 

[Arkeus]

I am also aware that regeneration is meant to counterbalance the "no magic healing" aspect. IMO it balances it so well that it actually makes the game easier than before. At least in the past, healing spells competed for spell slots with buffs and summons and save-or-dies. Regeneration competes with nothing because it's free by default.

Spells that regenerate Stamina still compete with buffs and summons. They are ressources you use during a fight and not after, and as such if you want to use buff/summons then you can't use them.

 

[Brayko]

How about RTwP? I haven't really heard much opinion on that other than "I fucking hate it".

 

[Blaine]

I don't know if you consider this the same thing, but I think the entire pitch for PE was "let's make an IE game, but better!"

If it was, I must have missed it. I'll frankly be blown away if this new crop of Black Isle-alikes are as good as, let alone better than, their predecessors.

Call it a deeply ingrained expectation that's been trained into me by the decline. For more than a decade, games got shittier with each passing year. If suddenly we receive 90s-style cRPGs that are even better than back in the day, well, I won't care that I was wrong for being skeptical, because I'll be too happy.

 

[uaciaut]

My problem with Sawyer is not that he criticizes things. Is that he criticizes things I like:

Do you want him to hold your hand while he tenderly looks into your eyes and says he likes everything you like? Seriously though, "he has different opinions than mine" is about as bad as you can get with an argument. Sure, you can be concerned that things you liked about old d&d game will not be implemented into a game that was promised to follow the legacy of said games but as long as the guy said that he won't be using any ad&d system the point is moot.

Basically i care what he thinks about ad&d 4 as much as i care what he thinks about unicorns or world peace; what i DOi care about is what system he can come up with for P:E. And so far from what he said that you actually touched upon:

1. Stamina system makes sense and can work if implemented correctly - see Wizardry 8 which (imho) did it right and made for a pretty interesting tactical decisions. And having non-mage classes actually have a resource of their own is actually i'm fully behind. And no, stamina is not health.
2. Cooldowns can or can't work depending on how the system is made up as a whole. The point is (again imo) resource management within a fight and outside of it, having to rest to get your cd's abilities back can be as trivial and unmeaningful if poorly implemented as having cd's in the first place. Again you have the freedom to hate/fear everything that seems to be outside the realm of your favourite game and seems to fall in line more with most mediocre/shitty games of today, at the end of the day mechanics are as good as they're implemented and i'd trust a good designer to look at the big picture more than have their vision clouded by preconceptions (thank god you're not a designer).
3. Having to actively play classes is bad how? I don't know if i don't understand this properly or what, but you saying that sawyer "hates" mage duels but at the same time wants people to actually manage their classes more instead of letting their fighters chase around like headless chickens while you focus 90% of your time on your mages makes no sense to me.
4. As far as i know he actually advocated a lot for small inventory of sorts, at least equiped inventory. Iirc he said that you're very limited BY INVENTORY in how many weapons you carry on you so you can't just have all weapon types on you and just switch to whatever counters your opponents' armor type.
5. He's never said anything about aggro mechanics in P:E at all, in fact most of what i've seen from him argued against those.

That's all i can see in your post that's P:E-related and not horribly taken out of context or just shit you're saying cause "he criticizes things I like"

 

[Brotherman Bill]

Uh what? Learning from other peoples mistakes is a wrongheaded approach? Looking at similar games and learning from their design mistakes is wrong?

It's wrongheaded when "fixing mistakes" is the central theme of most of your design decisions, yes—especially when said mistakes are being nitpicked from incredibly successful games. "Fixing" an actual failure or a defective product is one thing, but even the best games ever made have had their weaknesses. P:E will also have its share of weaknesses.

We don't even know one tenth of the total system and you already make statements on "most of the design decision"

 

[tuluse]

If it was, I must have missed it. I'll frankly be blown away if this new crop of Black Isle-alikes are as good as, let alone better than, their predecessors.

Call it a deeply ingrained expectation that's been trained into me by the decline. For more than a decade, games got shittier with each passing year. If suddenly we receive 90s-style cRPGs that are even better than back in the day, well, I won't care that I was wrong for being skeptical, because I'll be too happy.

They specifically said they wanted to take the best parts from each IE series and mash them together into, my own words now, a super IE game.

They've already done the graphical part of it, with high quality 2D + dynamism. Now they just need better mechanics and encounter design than BG2, and a better narrative than PST.

Good luck Saywer and MCA.

 

[Lancehead]

Arguing they're the same is like claiming blunt and slash weapons are the same.

That's a retarded analogy.

No, it's not, I was drawing comparisons on how they are functionally different.

Stamina and health both are required to keep fighting, but the functional differences make the player manage them differently (long term vs. short term).
Blunt and slash weapons both do damage, but the functional differences make the player use them differently (enemy and armour type).

 

[Volrath]

Doing better encounter design than BG2 is impossible. If he's able to pull that off then Sawyer's a genius and should get his cock sucked by all the doubters here on the Codex.

 

[Lord Andre]

stuff

First of all, "things I like" are the things that come together to form my opinion on a game. For example, I don't like DAO because I don't like: "list of stuff". Or I like Fallout because I like: "list of stuff".
So it's perfectly relevant for me to refer back to "things I like" when I am speculating about whether I will like an upcoming game or not.

Second, the old argument "Mechanic X is not evil in itself, it's how it is implemented that counts." True. But. If I have 5 games and all five are bad and all have a list of common elements, then statistics dictate that those elements are probably the cause. Think of smoking causes cancer. They can't prove a direct link between smoking and cancer but the statistical proximity between the two events makes it very likely that smoking indeed may cause cancer. Now replace smoking with cooldowns and you will see what I mean.

Third, there are some half-valid points in that wall of text. I can't say agree but I accept the possibility that you may be right.