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

[Lilura]

Also, like Roguey's post says, Chapter 2 was half the game. If part of the side quests were only available after you left the Underdark, nothing would be lost and the pacing would be much better.

I don't really mind because I was one of the players who didn't get too caught up in chapter 2, because I wanted Imoen back. And like I said the "chapter 2" quests can be done in chapter 3 or 6 also.

And the game would not feel like it is on rails from Spellhold and after.( and that IS a common criticism)

I much prefer less narrative drive, but again, you could go through a portal to skip Sahuagin City and once you hit the Underdark you didn't even have to enter Ust Natha, or the Beholder lair or Illithid collective.

 

[felipepepe]

I agree that one would spend days on chapter 2, then the others would look short on comparisson... but so what? And what's the alternative to that? Lock half of the quests to only appear after returning from Underdark? Players had already entered every goddamn house and alley in the game, making the go through everything again because MAYBE now there's a NPC with a new quest would feel very tiring and a pointless gating.

Where are you getting this from Sawyer's post? He said he wants to spread out content, probably so that all areas are reasonably filled with content.

I was talking about BioWare's quote that Roguey posted...

Most noteworthy was Chapter 2 of the game - it included a story segment that was similar to those in other chapters, but in Chapter 2 the player could also access all of the class-specific subquests. This led to Chapter 2 potentially dwarfing all other chapters in length because the players could spend 60 hours doing subquests.

 

[Roguey]

Its worth noting that many players would want to track down Irenicus and/or rescue Imoen ASAP, and so they can simply raise the money (20,000gp, reduced to 15,000, very easy to do), advance to chapter 3 and take out the rival thieves guild (not hard), then go straight to Spellhold.

They could, but they likely won't. There's the fear that they'll be underleveled or underequipped if they continue past the point of no return, and doing just a few quests shows that you gets tons of rewards for doing all these sidequests.

Also "I entered the main city and was overwhelmed by quests and just stopped playing" is something I've seen a few times on the SA forums where Josh likes to post.

 

[Roguey]

Reminder that the vast majority of quests/content in New Vegas were found in or near the city itself so as usual this is a bunch of flailing over nothing.

 

[Lancehead]

One final note, just in case: My arguments are in regards to quest content.

So your argument is not that there is too much content, but that it is concentrated?

Not in BG II, the game was a rare case, but P:E might be better off with lesser concentration.

In that case I want to remind you that it fits a story better to have more quests in more densely populated areas. For simply "sensible" reasons. Artificially distributing them would make the game lifeless and without any merit of design by intent, beyond the intent of "balance" which is a fucked up reason to do anything anyway.

I don't think the two big cities of P:E will have sparse content, just less than Athkatla.

 

[Jashiin]

Its worth noting that many players would want to track down Irenicus and/or rescue Imoen ASAP, and so they can simply raise the money (20,000gp, reduced to 15,000, very easy to do), advance to chapter 3 and take out the rival thieves guild (not hard), then go straight to Spellhold.

They could, but they likely won't. There's the fear that they'll be underleveled or underequipped if they continue past the point of no return, and doing just a few quests shows that you gets tons of rewards for doing all these sidequests.

Also "I entered the main city and was overwhelmed by quests and just stopped playing" is something I've seen a few times on the SA forums where Josh likes to post.

They brought us the menu and I was overwhelmed by the choices so I just stopped dining.
I entered the shoe shop and was overwhelmed by the amount of shoes so I stayed barefoot.
I walked unto the festival terrain and was overwhelmed by the amount of podia so I went home.
I entered the zoo and was overwhelmed by the animal diversity so I left.

 

[Jasede]

To be fair - and I am not siding with these people, mind you, I like complex games - most of them aren't actually stupid or simple or anything like that. It's just that when they want to relax from their job or from whatever they do - complex or simple - they don't really want to think or waste any time in a game, and just have it get to the point. As video gamers get older, linear, simple games become more popular as they have less time to invest in their hobby.

Or maybe that's the impression I've gotten from the people I know.

 

[felipepepe]

Yeah, the other day I tried to play Call of Duty, but after the awesome cutscenes the game was in first-person mode, and I hate first person mode, so I stopped playing. I hope the next developer fixes this.

Seriously, there are many different genres and levels of games, you don't have to make every game for everyone...

 

[Arkeus]

Sawyer's points are valid. He didn't say that P:E will have less content than BG2, he just said that it will be more spread out among 2 big cities and the wilderness.
Also don't forget thet P:E will only give XP for quest completion and not for kills. That alone should ensure that the game will have the same if not more quests than BG2.

We won't have alignments in PE, but we will have almost everything else you've suggested. We will probably not have 290 quests and we're not going to have 20 companions, but we do want to have many quests you can complete in many ways and at least 8 companions. We would rather do a smaller number of well-developed companions than have several dozen with less individual attention given to them.

Well, sadly he apparently has been saying there might be a bit less quests than BG2. Or not, depending on what he actually meant.

 

[Jashiin]

To be fair - and I am not siding with these people, mind you, I like complex games - most of them aren't actually stupid or simple or anything like that. It's just that when they want to relax from their job or from whatever they do - complex or simple - they don't really want to think or waste any time in a game, and just have it get to the point. As video gamers get older, linear, simple games become more popular as they have less time to invest in their hobby.

Or maybe that's the impression I've gotten from the people I know.

Well then 99% of the current AAA shit will suit them nicely. OR they can simply skip all sidequests and stay on the main path. Also most people have no problem waisting hours upon hours watching tv or browsing the things like the codex but suddenly in a game 20 hours of campainging is a chore? Childhood is over, they need new a new hobby if this is happening. They don't like gaming like they used to but can't admit it yet.

 

[Lancehead]

Sawyer's points are valid. He didn't say that P:E will have less content than BG2, he just said that it will be more spread out among 2 big cities and the wilderness.
Also don't forget thet P:E will only give XP for quest completion and not for kills. That alone should ensure that the game will have the same if not more quests than BG2.

We won't have alignments in PE, but we will have almost everything else you've suggested. We will probably not have 290 quests and we're not going to have 20 companions, but we do want to have many quests you can complete in many ways and at least 8 companions. We would rather do a smaller number of well-developed companions than have several dozen with less individual attention given to them.

Well, sadly he apparently has been saying there might be a bit less quests than BG2. Or not, depending on what he actually meant.

I'm expecting around 60-80 hours play time. Maybe 100 hours, if we're lucky.

 

[felipepepe]

I'm expecting around 10-20 hours play time. Maybe 25 hours, if we're lucky.

Fix'ed. Kickstarter game and all that.

 

[Jasede]

To be fair - and I am not siding with these people, mind you, I like complex games - most of them aren't actually stupid or simple or anything like that. It's just that when they want to relax from their job or from whatever they do - complex or simple - they don't really want to think or waste any time in a game, and just have it get to the point. As video gamers get older, linear, simple games become more popular as they have less time to invest in their hobby.

Or maybe that's the impression I've gotten from the people I know.

Well then 99% of the current AAA shit will suit them nicely. OR they can simply skip all sidequests and stay on the main path. Also most people have no problem waisting hours upon hours watching tv or browsing the things like the codex but suddenly in a game 20 hours of campainging is a chore? Childhood is over, they need new a new hobby if this is happening. They don't like gaming like they used to but can't admit it yet.

I don't see any of the people I know waste time watching hours of TV- they're too busy working or working and getting a Master's or working and trying to find time for the family or hiking or gender transition (lol!). Others spend their time dining out and going to the theatre or cinema or reading or, well, working overtime to save up for boats and houses and stuff. They do all that and don't feel like spending a lot of time on getting into a so-called "complex" game - or they don't play video games at all, because they're still for children and nerds in some minds.

I do feel like you confirmed what I said nicely: if 99% of AAA shit suits them nicely- then that means I must have a good point. Clearly most games are made for these people with little time.

Yeah, the other day I tried to play Call of Duty, but after the awesome cutscenes the game was in first-person mode, and I hate first person mode, so I stopped playing. I hope the next developer fixes this.

Seriously, there are many different genres and levels of games, you don't have to make every game for everyone...

I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not. Of course not every game is for everyone. I like complex, lengthy games. Not everyone does. I my experience people like simple to get into games that are accessible. So the games I like are a niche market. But we know all that. What are you saying?

I don't understand the first half of your post either.

 

[Jashiin]

To be fair - and I am not siding with these people, mind you, I like complex games - most of them aren't actually stupid or simple or anything like that. It's just that when they want to relax from their job or from whatever they do - complex or simple - they don't really want to think or waste any time in a game, and just have it get to the point. As video gamers get older, linear, simple games become more popular as they have less time to invest in their hobby.

Or maybe that's the impression I've gotten from the people I know.

Well then 99% of the current AAA shit will suit them nicely. OR they can simply skip all sidequests and stay on the main path. Also most people have no problem waisting hours upon hours watching tv or browsing the things like the codex but suddenly in a game 20 hours of campainging is a chore? Childhood is over, they need new a new hobby if this is happening. They don't like gaming like they used to but can't admit it yet.

I don't see any of the people I know waste time watching hours of TV- they're too busy working or working and getting a Master's or working and trying to find time for the family or hiking or gender transition (lol!).

I do feel like you confirmed what I said nicely: if 99% of AAA shit suits them nicely- then that means I must have a good point. Clearly most games are made for these people with little time.

Well yes, but they are already served. Their demands are not needed to be met in rpg's. Also these games aren't made FOR them. They are made as short as possible to save cost.

 

[Jasede]

Nobody gives a damn about our needs. The market goes where the money is. When you have 99% people with little time that like brief AAA games and 1% of people that like complex RPGs a developer will decided to make a popamole 99% RPG 100% of the time, unless he's paid in advance (Kickstarter). It's just good business sense.

 

[Infinitron]

The problem with BG2 isn't that it's too big.

The problem with BG2 isn't even that Chapter 2 is too big. The chapters don't really matter, it's a kind of open world game in practice.

The problem is that it starts you off by dumping you in Waukeen's Promenade instead of gradually building up the game's pace the same way BG1 did (from Friendly Arm Inn to Beregost to Nashkel and finally to Baldur's Gate). It kind of works if you see the game as a direct continuation of BG1, but for a standalone product that's just not good storytelling.

 

[Sensuki]

Mind you, Call of Duty 1 and 2 were great competitive FPS games that took a lot of skill. The newer ones have severely tarnished the series, and suffered from the same dumbing down that we see in RPGs today.

 

[Rake]

To be fair - and I am not siding with these people, mind you, I like complex games - most of them aren't actually stupid or simple or anything like that. It's just that when they want to relax from their job or from whatever they do - complex or simple - they don't really want to think or waste any time in a game, and just have it get to the point. As video gamers get older, linear, simple games become more popular as they have less time to invest in their hobby.

Or maybe that's the impression I've gotten from the people I know.

Well then 99% of the current AAA shit will suit them nicely. OR they can simply skip all sidequests and stay on the main path. Also most people have no problem waisting hours upon hours watching tv or browsing the things like the codex but suddenly in a game 20 hours of campainging is a chore? Childhood is over, they need new a new hobby if this is happening. They don't like gaming like they used to but can't admit it yet.

I don't see any of the people I know waste time watching hours of TV- they're too busy working or working and getting a Master's or working and trying to find time for the family or hiking or gender transition (lol!).

I do feel like you confirmed what I said nicely: if 99% of AAA shit suits them nicely- then that means I must have a good point. Clearly most games are made for these people with little time.

Yeah, the other day I tried to play Call of Duty, but after the awesome cutscenes the game was in first-person mode, and I hate first person mode, so I stopped playing. I hope the next developer fixes this.

Seriously, there are many different genres and levels of games, you don't have to make every game for everyone...

I can't tell if you're agreeing with me or not. Of course not every game is for everyone. I like complex, lengthy games. Not everyone does. I my experience people like simple to get into games that are accessible. So the games I like are a niche market. But we know all that. What are you saying?

I don't understand the first half of your post either.

I think he meant that P:E is supposed to be a niche game. These people in SA who haven't played BG2 because "too complex, i just want to relax" don't count. Their opinions don't count. This is a game for IE fans. Not the broad audience. Yes, in general people prefer simple games. I don't think that's relevent in this case.

 

[Jashiin]

Nobody gives a damn about our needs. The market goes where the money is. When you have 99% people with little time that like brief AAA games and 1% of people that like complex RPGs a developer will decided to make a popamole 99% RPG 100% of the time, unless he's paid in advance (Kickstarter). It's just good business sense.

Well yes. And good business sense is always pro money and detrimental to the product. What I'm disputing is that people do not want to think/waste time playing a game to relax. It's simply there is no alternative given to the short and linear pulp.

 

[Lancehead]

I'm expecting around 10-20 hours play time. Maybe 25 hours, if we're lucky.

Fix'ed. Kickstarter game and all that.

Okay, likely I'm too optimistic in my expectations, but I'll be very disappointed if the game didn't have around 40 hours content.

 

[Lilura]

Baldur's Gate gave us twenty-five companions, of which none were well-developed (Tiax and Xzar, ftw).
BG2 gave us seventeen companions, of which some were well-developed (Jaheira, Viconia, Keldorn and Edwin especially).
Planescape: Torment gave us seven companions, of which four were very well-developed (Morte, Dak'kon, Annah, FFG).

PE offering eight companions seems not enough (class-based system, but can they be multi-classed?), hopefully this won't mean "deep" Planescapey dialogue, pages and pages of text, kinda over that.

I prefer the middle-ground of BG2, where you have enough for diversity of role but still fleshed out reasonably well.

 

[Rake]

The problem with BG2 isn't that it's too big.

The problem with BG2 isn't even that Chapter 2 is too big. The chapters don't really matter, it's a kind of open world game in practice.

The problem is that it starts you off by dumping you in Waukeen's Promenade instead of gradually building up the game's pace the same way BG1 did (from Friendly Arm Inn to Beregost to Nashkel and finally to Baldur's Gate). It kind of works if you see the game a direct continuation of BG1, but as a standalone product that's just not good storytelling.

Why? There is no need to gradually build the game's pace. And BG was good only after you got into the city.(and that is way more common criticism than Athkatla's content by the way)
I don't have a problem with P:E having more spread content than BG2, but as a narrative devise dumping you in the middle of things is more interesting than a slow start gradually building up the game's pace.
And BG1 pace was worse than 2

 

[Lord Andre]

Chill everybody ! I got this.

The people that think BG2 city had too much quests and it was confusing are the same retards who think turn-based is too slow and boring.

Go to gamebanshee, then turn to bg2 walkthrough and browse every district. Count the quests. No single district has more than 4 quests. Waukeen's Promenade has only one, Graveyard only has the buried man and the paladin with a dead child and so on. Besides that you have some companions like Korgan or Jaheira with 1 quest each in the city. And on top of that add 1 quest for the main plot.

Where is this density ? An average of 3-4 quests per district ? Get the fuck outta' here !

Retards are confused because most of those quests are not standard <get quest from A, go to B, then back to A, done>

Instead, BG2 city quests imply A,B,C,D,E zig-zagging across the city with plot twists and shit. e.g. COMPLEX, e.g. Are you retards actually arguing that quests should be simple
A to B, B to A affairs ? Have you lost what little mind you had ? Fags.

 

[Infinitron]

PE offering eight companions seems not enough (class-based system, but can they be multi-classed?),

PE's system doesn't need multiclassing because the core classes are flexible enough in and of themselves.

hopefully this won't mean "deep" Planescapey dialogue, pages and pages of text, kinda over that.

The problem with BG2 isn't that it's too big.

The problem with BG2 isn't even that Chapter 2 is too big. The chapters don't really matter, it's a kind of open world game in practice.

The problem is that it starts you off by dumping you in Waukeen's Promenade instead of gradually building up the game's pace the same way BG1 did (from Friendly Arm Inn to Beregost to Nashkel and finally to Baldur's Gate). It kind of works if you see the game a direct continuation of BG1, but as a standalone product that's just not good storytelling.

Why? There is no need to gradually build the game's pace. And BG was good only after you got into the city.(and that is way more common criticism than Athkatla's content by the way)
I don't have a problem with P:E having more spread content than BG2, but as a narrative devise dumping you in the middle of things is more interesting than a slow start gradually building up the game's pace.
And BG1 pace was worse than 2

I disagree. There's always a need for pacing. By the way, I think you'll find not everybody agrees with you that BG was good only after you got to the city. I've seen people, even here on the Codex, that ragequit the game at that point.

 

[felipepepe]

I don't understand the first half of your post either.

Oh, it was't aimed at you, but at this:

I entered the main city and was overwhelmed by quests and just stopped playing

"This RPG has too many quests!" is the equivalent of "this linear corridor shooter has too many enemies to shoot!"