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

[Infinitron]

A few respawning groups of monsters does not equal doing the entire dungeon all over again. You seem to have an exaggerated mental image of what I'm suggesting.

Also, Irenicus' Dungeon isn't a good example. I'm expecting larger, more non-linear, Icewind Dale-style dungeons.

 

[Grunker]

A few respawning groups of monsters does not equal doing the entire dungeon all over again. You seem to have an exaggerated mental image of what I'm suggesting.

Could you answer my question about food?

 

[Rake]

require more micromanagement than the IE games

Yes, but pausing three times just to move from one position to another is more of a chore than interesting gameplay.
The thing that gives me hope is Sawyer's insistence that if it won't work in playtesting, he will not hesitate to scrap it

 

[Infinitron]

A few respawning groups of monsters does not equal doing the entire dungeon all over again. You seem to have an exaggerated mental image of what I'm suggesting.

Could you answer my question about food?

I don't know what to say. I asked Sawyer about this (I called it "Tents" instead of "Food") and he replied about "limited use rest spots" instead, which isn't quite the same thing. He said other people on the PE team thought they were too punitive.

Want me to ask him again?

 

[Grunker]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

A few respawning groups of monsters does not equal doing the entire dungeon all over again. You seem to have an exaggerated mental image of what I'm suggesting.

Could you answer my question about food?

I don't know what to say. I asked Sawyer about this (I called it "Tents" instead of "Food") and he replied about "limited use rest spots" instead, which isn't quite the same thing. He said other people on the PE team thought they were too punitive.

Want me to ask him again?

Yeah, if you feel like it. Maybe just straight up "what are your sentiments on Might & Magic's apples, i.e. food or another resource limiting the amount of resting possible?"

 

[Mangoose]

RTwP should be focused on macro-level combat decisions like "which abilities do I use?" if you ask me.

Yup. I agree with you that this is the biggest (potential) mistake for P:E.

 

[Mangoose]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

Do you think we could collaborate on an eloquent short essay to show Sawyer how horrible RTWP micromanagement is?

 

[Infinitron]

Yeah, if you feel like it. Maybe just straight up "what are your sentiments on Might & Magic's apples, i.e. food or another resource limiting the amount of resting possible?"

I'm pretty sure he won't answer, or will just say the same thing again. I've also tried to ask him about respawning - he didn't reply. That's usually a sign that "we haven't decided yet, no comment".

 

[Grunker]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

Do you think we could collaborate on an eloquent short essay to show Sawyer how horrible RTWP micromanagement is?

I'm going away on holiday tomorrow, and then I'm writing a review with VD. After that, I think that sounds like a pretty fun idea. Maybe the Tron would like to contribute. We'll call it "A Fair Warning", lol.

 

[Jestai]

Did you ever read anything written by Sawyer? He obviously wants to make everyone happy.

What in the fuck?

Sawyer is perhaps the most outspoken developer I've ever seen. I've never witnessed anyone else willing to piss on his audience to that degree if he disagrees with him. Just look at the butthurt displayed by me and others on some of his opinions that we find retarded and you'll know the truth of this

Sawyer as populist? Now I've heard it all.

Infinitron: M&M had food ages ago, as well as other games. Has Sawyer said why he doesn't like that system for rest? Because you can run out having to restart? Fuck the casuals, bro!

Maybe a bad phrasing on my part. He wants to make a system that makes everyone happy. "Following my rules, it will not be possible not to have fun", in a way. Removing tedious shit, balancing everything, making the game interesting for everyone and every playstyle, etc. Detractors on a theoretical level aren't always detractors of the final product. He will obviously fail but i'm pretty sure he has the aspie dream of making the perfect RPG.

 

[Infinitron]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

Do you think we could collaborate on an eloquent short essay to show Sawyer how horrible RTWP micromanagement is?

I'm going away on holiday tomorrow, and then I'm writing a review with VD. After that, I think that sounds like a pretty fun idea. Maybe the Tron would like to contribute. We'll call it "A Fair Warning", lol.

Heh, thing is I don't really agree that RTwP micromanagement is categorically bad. It depends on how dynamic the battlefield situation is.

Lots of randomness, lots of critical situations you need to run around responding to == clusterfuck. Relatively static, slow-paced combat, with few but meaningful positioning decisions == okay.

I guess it depends on how you define "micromanagement".

 

[Rake]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

Do you think we could collaborate on an eloquent short essay to show Sawyer how horrible RTWP micromanagement is?

You guys could always PM it to him in Obsidian forums. If you had valid points he would answer.

 

[Delterius]

A challenge is something to overcome. Once you've solved the riddle, you don't really want to do it again (at least not right after)

Who said the 'challenge' in question is comprised of single encounters?

And why does a game set up in such a way necessarily lead to consistent reiteration of past encounters, once a player gets the gist of it?

 

[tuluse]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

Do you think we could collaborate on an eloquent short essay to show Sawyer how horrible RTWP micromanagement is?

I'm going away on holiday tomorrow, and then I'm writing a review with VD. After that, I think that sounds like a pretty fun idea. Maybe the Tron would like to contribute. We'll call it "A Fair Warning", lol.

Heh, thing is I don't really agree that RTwP micromanagement is categorically bad. It depends on how dynamic the battlefield situation is.

Lots of randomness, lots of critical situations you need to run around responding to == clusterfuck. Relatively static, slow-paced combat, with few but meaningful positioning decisions == okay.

I guess it depends on how you define "micromanagement".

Starcraft fans seems to get off on micromanaging position in a real time game, with 10-50 units instead of 6, and without pause.

 

[Infinitron]

Not PE-related: George Ziets and Josh Sawyer talk about horror settings:

 

[hiver]

Jestai


first thing you need to learn here newfag, is that when you start throwing insults around at senior members of this site in order to appear edgy and score some quick easy ego points, you will get your little squishy ass pulled over your head.

Nothing you said there makes you any less of a dumbfucking moron and despicable shitstain that you are.
There is no more diverse content for the hardcore experience in your idiotic ideas. Just "give me more - make it even easier - reward me more!" crap.

You want to enjoy streamlined bullshit because youre a stremlined turd.

People should not enjoy the game i enjoy it - they should fuck off and play bioware crap that conforms to their moronic emotional engagement desires - or watch movies.
Instead of insisting that all the decline gets accepted as a norm and every fucking RPG should be made so it conforms to their own superficial idiotic brain deficiencies.
You do not speak "based on information we already have", you cheap shit, you speak from ridiculous ignorant asshole in your head.

Couldn't give less of a fuck if Torment had an easy mode with 90% less text as long as the real game is complex enough for me.

thats because you are a funny little moron.

Did you ever read anything written by Sawyer? He obviously wants to make everyone happy. That's a given.

its not a given and thats not what he means at all. idiot.

not a lot of time.

oh its that time again eh?
lets satisfy casual playas eh?

Why do you care if hardcore is the base of the game and normal is like its retarded console port?

Thats idiotic design only a stupid shit like you could subscribe to - because youre stupid and an actual simpleton.

A game should be designed without thinking about difficulty modes and then those should be added latter. Not in reverse.
And thats what Sawyer thinks and will do - or is doing already.
Meaning - The content of the game should not be removed in order to have an easy difficulty you stupid shit.

Which you would know if you were able to actually understand words.

What level of difficulty are you designing the game for as a reference ? I assume that for convenience the production level of difficulty will be blocked in fairly easy and then designed up / down for others during post-production ?

We're using Icewind Dale 2 and Baldur's Gate 2 for reference. The game is being designed for relatively high difficulty at first and later tuned down for lower levels of difficulty. It's easier to lower difficulty from a high bar than to raise it from a shallow baseline.

Which means they are designing a game with some sort of decent difficulty - not some sort of hardcore, as a base - and that content of the game doesnt come into that picture at all.
Unless you think IWD and BG are hardcore...? (dont answer imbecile this is a rhetorical question... ffs...)

The rest of your post is just a big strawman made up by your diseased mind.

thats just wishful thinking and a pathetic projection of a turd.

"He talked about casual morons enjoying the game => lol he's obviously one of them"

You are. And a cheap degenerate imbecile.

Maybe people should cut the knot, but it's not gonna happen with PE. WAKE UP CALL HIVER.

Thats a fantasy world spinning in that overflowing asshole in your head. I wasnt talking specifically about PE, you dumb hilarious shit.
It is a discussion about the issue in general.

Also, hiver, nobody on the Codex said the PE setting didn't have medicine. You didn't have to go bugging Josh about it.

Yes somebodies said there is no medicine and i even posted an excerpt from the kickstarter stating the same thing and yes... i did had to go ask Josh about it.
Its not bugging and i would thank you not to try and paint my question as bugging while yours are what... ? delicious poems?

Want to keep me off your Sawyer or something?

Heh, thing is I don't really agree that RTwP micromanagement is categorically bad. It depends on how dynamic the battlefield situation is.

Lots of randomness, lots of critical situations you need to run around responding to == clusterfuck. Relatively static, slow-paced combat, with few but meaningful positioning decisions == okay.

I guess it depends on how you define "micromanagement".

I dont mind micromanagement at all. Its just a part of that system.
Thats like saying you hate turns in TB.

 

[Jestai]

???

Giggled when you were about to me about "my fantasy world".

 

[Delterius]

???

Giggled when you were about to me about "my fantasy world".

Face it, you derailed a thread about the Codex' new favorite couple. You'll be hated forever.

 

[Jestai]

???

Giggled when you were about to me about "my fantasy world".

English pls biodrone

 

[Horus]

Holy Macoroni! We have reached 723 pages already and game isn't even out yet.

 

[Arkadin]

Rake: That's also Sawyer's biggest white whale though. Obsidian aren't exactly known for their great Q&A, and they don't have an endless amount of money. He can't just keep scrapping things that don't work. It's part of why I think parts of his approach to game design is contained within a pipedream.

Do you think we could collaborate on an eloquent short essay to show Sawyer how horrible RTWP micromanagement is?

I'm going away on holiday tomorrow, and then I'm writing a review with VD. After that, I think that sounds like a pretty fun idea. Maybe the Tron would like to contribute. We'll call it "A Fair Warning", lol.

Heh, thing is I don't really agree that RTwP micromanagement is categorically bad. It depends on how dynamic the battlefield situation is.

Lots of randomness, lots of critical situations you need to run around responding to == clusterfuck. Relatively static, slow-paced combat, with few but meaningful positioning decisions == okay.

I guess it depends on how you define "micromanagement".

I can't recall or find--is the combat still going to be based in rounds as in IE games, with initiation determining the order of actions (other than movement) taken within the round, quasi phased-based? I thought I remembered Sawyer suggesting that it would not longer be round-based, but I'm probably wrong. I'm only asking because I think this possibly could affect the ideal level of macro/micromanagment balance for the game.

 

[Infinitron]

I can't recall or find--is the combat still going to be based in rounds as in IE games, with initiation determining the order of actions (other than movement) taken within the round, quasi phased-based? I thought I remembered Sawyer suggesting that it would not longer be round-based, but I'm probably wrong. I'm only asking because I think this possibly could affect the ideal level of macro/micromanagment balance for the game.

You're not wrong.

 

[Arkadin]

I can't recall or find--is the combat still going to be based in rounds as in IE games, with initiation determining the order of actions (other than movement) taken within the round, quasi phased-based? I thought I remembered Sawyer suggesting that it would not longer be round-based, but I'm probably wrong. I'm only asking because I think this possibly could affect the ideal level of macro/micromanagment balance for the game.

You're not wrong.

Thanks. I'm not sure what the end result of this will be, I haven't played many real-time CRPGs that aren't in the IE style. Maybe it will feel a little more responsive? I could see that both engendering and preventing some levels of micromanagement...

Personally, I think if the AoOs work properly (and perhaps this will also have something to do with how the AI is scripted), it should lessen some amount of micromanagement by allowing you to actually control areas with defensive specialists like spearmen and effectively guard casters and such. I know I'm bad at the games, but I can't stand making my casters in IE games run around in circles because a bunch of goblins or orcs just walk right around my fighters. That ends up being the majority of the micromanagement pain for me.

 

[Roguey]

I was mistaken if I ever said I thought the IE games could get too micro-heavy. It's just the chaos of large-scale battles with multiple casters I'm not too fond of even though those fights are fun. In a turn-based system the enemy turns would drag on so there's no win-win scenario here.

They said from Day 1 they wanted to make positioning important and have AoOs and shit like that.

So far, it's this decision above all others that I oppose in P:E. Micromanaging your team's position sounds incredibly boring. The IE-games worked well because beyond a few macro-decisions (keep vulnerable people in backlane) you were worrying about tactical combat decisions and not the micromanagement of party position when you played, for the most part.

Hah, remember that interview I linked to yesterday.

The most obvious things about 3E that don't fit are attacks of opportunity and readied actions. We are not implementing these aspects of the system because they rely too heavily upon the sequential turn-based nature of pen and paper gaming.
...
To be honest, I think the primary thing that makes 3E combat seem more "sophisticated" is the use of attacks of opportunity. Those rules are easily the most confusing and among the most often criticized elements of the system.

Additionally
http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/49192-iwd2s-use-of-3e-was-a-mistake/

AoOs are an integral, and contested, part of 3E combat. Not necessarily "great". They work reasonably well in a tabletop turn-based environment. They work less well (and make a lot less sense) in a real-time CRPG environment. For an example that supports this, NWN's handling of AoOs felt very haphazard due to when they went off and how they were executed. They were great in ToEE because they were modeling the tabletop environment very closely.
...
I did (and do) think that 3E and 3.5 are better games than 2nd Ed., but I did (and do) criticize the choices WotC made when they built and revised the system. I think AoOs are pretty cumbersome,
...
AoOs create a new tactical aspect to movement. However, in practice, most of that goes out the window with 5' steps. In 4th Edition, "shifting" (taking a 5'/1 square step to avoid OAs provoked by movement) is your entire move action, which seems like a "no duh" change to me. In the D&D Experience module, the kobolds we fought were "Shifty", which meant that they could shift for free. It made them very difficult to deal with.

He's aware of the issues and will no doubt ultimately go with whatever produces the most fun. As I keep saying.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Like killing rats in Fallout right ? oh wait

Wait, wait, wait, wait... How did you go from "Hand-placed encounters are awesome" to "Thrashmobs are a consequence of RTwP"? Last time I checked there was nothing precluding RTwP from having great, hand-placed combat encounters. In fact BG2 and ID games sport quite a lot of those. Conversely, TB didn't prevent rest-spam nor facilitate good encounters in, say, ToEE (especially towards the end of the game). In fact encounter design is my main concern with D:OS, because the combat situations showcased thus far were pretty lackluster. What gives?

Ok ill admit, TB doesn't necessitate superior encounter design. The temple part in start with the spear in Fallout 2 was horrible. And yep BG2 was good. Never got into the IWD series for some reason, so can't comment on that. What i meant to say was, since TB encounters take a lot of time, putting a bazillion trash mobs to pop becomes very tedious . TB allows less leeway in terms of no of trashmobs, since encounters tend to take a long time thus forcing the hand of the designer. And my real gripe with RTwP is that I can't play with a party of more than 3 without using pause. Yeah not using pause in RTwP might be LARPing, but i prefer to play with minimum pause. This is not absolute, still paused /save scummed a lot in the spell duels, but the pause i RTwP feels like a cheap compromise for TB.