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

[Sensuki]

I can't help but think that some of the design there was deliberate Bethesda fan trope mockery, but I may be wrong because usually Josh likes to be as accommodating as possible.

Bethesda fans certainly deserve it though.

Back on topic:

A couple of things I've been thinking about recently

War Hammers and Morningstars are going to be very useful weapons in that they will allow a melee character to cover all three damage types if they use one of these weapons in their weapon slots. War Hammers and Morningstars will use the most efficient damage type vs the DT of an opponent out of Pierce and Crush. A character could use a War Hammer and a Long Sword or a Morningstar and a Greatsword and cover all 3 damage types.

According to a recent Josh post, the DPS value across weapon speeds has been calibrated to pretty much not matter (this is a re-post of a quote)

BTW, the fast/standard/two-handed differences are much less pronounced than they originally were. Fast weapons do have an efficiency advantage when DT values are comparably lower and two-handed weapons have an efficiency advantage when DT values are higher, but the margins are not large. Because of other considerations that I think are more interesting/important for players, I focused instead on making the weapons have roughly equal viability on the basis of raw damage alone. I.e., it's rarer that players will find themselves questioning whether or not they should be using a fast weapon vs. a two-handed weapon, but they will probably question whether they should attack a target with a stiletto or a club (both fast, one Pierce, one Crush, the former negates DT, the latter has increased Accuracy) or a pike instead of a pollaxe (Pierce vs. Slash/Crush, the former has reach, the latter uses the more advantageous of two damage types

Is this a good thing codex?

 

[Infinitron]

Is this a good thing codex?

*shrug* It's value neutral, as long as there's still enough weapon-switching within each type. I guess he wants to be a bit more encouraging of character archetypes - ie, a fast weapons build, a standard weapons build and a two-handed weapons build.

 

[Lancehead]

If the content is going to be anywhere near open-ended in PE, then "difficulty curve" starts to become a meaningless term. It's only meaningful in linear games. In that sense, Sawyer is best off not paying any attention to what Vogel has to say in that quoted material. (Edit: Well, except perhaps for the main-questline which I fully expect to be quite rigid.)

I'm against "having to remember to go back and kill a thing you tried to kill hours ago."

So I take it that you are for level-scaled Bethesda worlds.

 

[Infinitron]

So I take it that you are for level-scaled Bethesda worlds.

Well, it's not that simple. A difficulty spike encounter at the bottom of a dungeon means you need to walk all the way through the dungeon again later on when you're ready to defeat it.

A difficulty spike encounter in an open world game with fast travel, on the other hand, is easily returned to. So that's less tedious.

In general, difficulty spike AREAS provide a more cohesive experience than difficulty spike encounters within otherwise easy areas.

 

[Sensuki]

Was bored so I was going over some of Sawyer's Eternity forum posts. I found these ones on mouse movement which I think are complete and utter bullshit, I wonder what he is basing this information from.

The right hand generally has a greater and more comfortable range of motion to the left than to the right.

As an FPS gamer, everyone I know usually favors right movement turns (especially low sens players because it's easier to flick left to right and re-position the mouse).

This is in response to a forum poster saying they have a high mouse sensitivity ("My mouse can move from the top to the bottom of my 1920x1200 screen with less than 1/2" of motion not even on highest sensitivity.")

I don't think your mouse sensitivity is typical. Mouse travel is important not because of the distance it covers once, but because the distance it covers literally thousands of times over the course of the game. UIs intended for long-term use should have ergonomic considerations.

Left-side L is also creates the most uncomfortable direction to move the mouse in (assuming you're right-handed): upper left to lower right. Given the choice between a left- or right-side L, I'd prefer a right-side L. But I'd rather not have an L for portraits/action icons at all. The combat log is one of the most domineering elements of the UI but it's also one that could easily be separated from the rest. If we were to have some sort of an L layout, I think a right-side pane containing portraits and action icons with an adjustable combat log on the bottom could work well.

Josh Sawyer uses a Microsoft IntelliMouse Explorer v1.1a which has a DPI of ~440. The average PC user today uses a high DPI mouse (800-5600 DPI) because most gaming mice these days use market gimmicks of ridiculously high DPI, so it would not be uncommon at all for the fair majority of people to be able to traverse their desktop in a short movement (excluding laptop users). Outside of FPS gamers I don't know too many people that use a low DPI or sensitivity.

Mouse Acceleration is also turned on by default on both Windows and Mac. The average PC user would not disable it and thus a fast movement on the desktop combined with even a low-medium sensitivity would hit the edge of the screen.

That said, mouse accel sucks, 800 dpi is generally enough for large screens and I personally think that 400 dpi feels the best (the lowest setting) but I am definitely in the 0.1% of people that think that, as is Sawyer.

If I draw a left side L it feels way more comfortable than drawing a right side _| (I am right handed).

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Sensuki
You are turning more diligent than Roguey regarding PE data, without his Josh fellation.

I plan to roll a Cypher PC, now it has attacks targeting psyche and reflex...but to build that up it needs to overcome initial deflection. there is a weapon which negates (part of) shield deflection (flail iirc)

Also, the druid has firebrand skill, which makes regular melee attacks target reflex, instead of deflection.

Now my question is, can the cypher purple fire psyche leach mode, work simultaneously with druid firebrand reflex target?

 

[Lancehead]

So I take it that you are for level-scaled Bethesda worlds.

Well, it's not that simple. A difficulty spike encounter at the bottom of a dungeon means you need to walk all the way through the dungeon again later on when you're ready to defeat it.

A difficulty spike encounter in an open world game with fast travel, on the other hand, is easily returned to. So that's less tedious.

In general, difficulty spike AREAS provide a more cohesive experience than difficulty spike encounters within otherwise easy areas.

I don't see the difference; you'd have to walk back to the difficult area from the nearest settlement much the same way you have to walk back to the end of the dungeon (I'm against fast travel).

But to Roguey, it's a nuisance just to remember to come back to and finish an area. In which case it's safe to assume (of course, Roguey can refute here) that it's also a nuisance to remember to come back to an area you couldn't even start previously, because there's no difference between the two scenarios that would make one more bearable than the other given the act that causes the nuisance. Clearly, then, open-world games with static area/creature levels aren't Roguey's cup of tea.

Going back to Vogel's argument, by making areas--dungeon or otherwise--flat in terms of difficulty, you may compromise area and level design by avoiding any nasty surprises for the unwary adventurer. It's somewhat baffling that he considers not doing so as "wasting [player's] goodwill". What exactly is the goodwill being built upon here? That once you clear first chamber of the dungeon, you should know what to expect for the rest of it? But if he only means to avoid nonsensical design whereby an illogical combination of creatures are living under one roof just to provide changes in difficulty, then I can agree with him, though I don't believe that's his point.

 

[SophosTheWise]

Seeking help of russian codex

http://www.3dnews.ru/769913

Is that a new interview?

Nothing of much value. Maybe just this part:

"As for technological progress, our world is close to XVI century Europe. Guns and ocean going ships are common. The only exception is printing press, so books in P:E are all hand written.

I know this bit of lore has been established a long time ago, but now it does strike me as kind of odd. How is it possible that guns are common but the printing press hasn't been invented yet? I'm no expert on weapon history, but in a world where guns are probably "mass" produced, how can the printing press not exist? It's not that technologically complicated, if I'm not mistaken. Flintlock pistols are really intricate, wheellock even more so (I've got a wheellock hunting rifle from around 1850 at home :D ). I mean come on, PE is set in a world where they build massive ships, have guns and magic. How can the printing press not exist? Any history expert here?

 

[Infinitron]

because there's no difference between the two scenarios that would make one more bearable than the other given the act that causes the nuisance.

I don't agree with this. Areas are large and typically straightforward to reach - in an Infinity Engine-style game, it's just clicking a place on your world map. In contrast, walking through dungeon corridors to find that unique ultra-tough optional boss again can be annoying.

Additionally, with areas you typically never even began to explore it in the first place - you immediately realized it was too tough for you - so there's no element of repetition.

(I'm against fast travel)

Well, tough cookies. Most RPGs have it. Some of them don't even have any other way of travelling (the world isn't seamless).

 

[SophosTheWise]

because there's no difference between the two scenarios that would make one more bearable than the other given the act that causes the nuisance.

I don't agree with this. Areas are large and typically straightforward to reach - in an Infinity Engine-style game, it's just clicking a place on your world map. In contrast, walking through dungeon corridors to find that unique ultra-tough optional boss again can be annoying.

Additionally, with areas you typically never even began to explore it in the first place - you immediately realized it was too tough for you - so there's no element of repetition.

(I'm against fast travel)

Well, tough cookies. Most RPGs have it. Some of them don't even have any other way of travelling (the world isn't seamless).

Still, in all IE games you can't just beam to another map just by looking at your map and selecting a region. I think that's the point here. You have to travel through the map to a border to be able to fast-travel. Even though it seemed a bit nonsensical sometimes. But recently, we had Dragon's Dogma which didn't have "real" fast travel and that generated a lot of "adventure feeling" for me.

 

[Duraframe300]

Seeking help of russian codex

http://www.3dnews.ru/769913

Is that a new interview?

Nothing of much value. Maybe just this part:

"As for technological progress, our world is close to XVI century Europe. Guns and ocean going ships are common. The only exception is printing press, so books in P:E are all hand written.

I know this bit of lore has been established a long time ago, but now it does strike me as kind of odd. How is it possible that guns are common but the printing press hasn't been invented yet? I'm no expert on weapon history, but in a world where guns are probably "mass" produced, how can the printing press not exist? It's not that technologically complicated, if I'm not mistaken. Flintlock pistols are really intricate, wheellock even more so (I've got a wheellock hunting rifle from around 1850 at home :D ). I mean come on, PE is set in a world where they build massive ships, have guns and magic. How can the printing press not exist? Any history expert here?

Well you are assuming here its mass produced. Common doesn't have to mean everyone has a gun.

And simple possible lore reasons

1. There's no real need for it for one reason or the other.

2. It's held back with purpose by someone. (obvious reason)

It's a theme that is going to be explored in the game, but its not that hard to come up with lore reasons for it, imo.

 

[Lancehead]

because there's no difference between the two scenarios that would make one more bearable than the other given the act that causes the nuisance.

I don't agree with this. Areas are large and typically straightforward to reach - in an Infinity Engine-style game, it's just clicking a place on your world map. In contrast, walking through dungeon corridors to find that unique ultra-tough optional boss again can be annoying.

Additionally, with areas you typically never even began to explore it in the first place - you immediately realized it was too tough for you - so there's no element of repetition.

Yes, that's true, but the issue has more to do with players not liking "pending" areas ("having to remember [...] a thing [from] hours ago."), which is what I meant by "the act that causes the nuisance"; longer distance to get to the dungeon end only exacerbates that. The distance itself is a secondary issue according to what Vogel wrote.

(I'm against fast travel)

Well, tough cookies. Most RPGs have it. Some of them don't even have any other way of travelling (the world isn't seamless).

I was referring to Bethesdian fast travel without which RPGs can do just fine whether they have seamless worlds or not.

 

[Roguey]

Did you die Roguey?

I'm not fooled for a second that you care about players other than yourself dying to shit. I know I don't.

No, I always follow the intended path first time through.

Josh cares a lot about how people play his games.

So I take it that you are for level-scaled Bethesda worlds.

I don't care about level scaling, but Oblivion-style scaling, where everything scales to your level, sounds pretty dumb and obnoxious. Bethesda clearly thought so too, considering they changed it for Skyrim.

 

[Sensuki]

Yes, that's true, but the issue has more to do with players not liking "pending" areas ("having to remember [...] a thing [from] hours ago."), which is what I meant by "the act that causes the nuisance"; longer distance to get to the dungeon end only exacerbates that. The distance itself is a secondary issue according to what Vogel wrote.

Those people must hate BG2 then, you get like 5-10 quests just by wandering around early Athkatla and you have to remember what they are or check your journal. Actually I've heard Roguey talk a lot about Icewind Dale and NWN2 and stuff, but not much about the Baldur's Gates. Did you find that with BG2 chapter 2 ?

 

[Sensuki]

I found something on the lack of George Ziets continued work on Project Eternity on his formspring from March 19th.

You've mentioned that your "longer-term plans are dependent upon whether I return to Obsidian full-time". What is that dependent on, if you don't mind me asking?

I didn't have anything specific in mind. My current contract runs for another couple months - we'll see how things stand then. Of course, it's partly up to them too.

The contract must have been for 6 months.

October 16 to May 16 (or thereabouts).

So it looks like the lack of contribution was more budgetary than anything else.

I think it's fair that he doesn't take the Contract Writer position that they have, because it's not his favourite thing to do, not a full time position and he's already been laid off twice from the company. He's probably better off sticking with his at-home work which he has plenty of atm and waiting for something better.

He has said that he may work on Eternity in the future, so that probably means the Expansion or if they've set aside some rainy day money to have him back for a month or two later in Production to do some dialogue, editing, etc etc

 

[Zed]

Or maybe bring him on board for the duration of leading an entire expansion project.

 

[Sensuki]

I'd like that as well.

Sensuki

I plan to roll a Cypher PC, now it has attacks targeting psyche and reflex...but to build that up it needs to overcome initial deflection. there is a weapon which negates (part of) shield deflection (flail iirc)

Also, the druid has firebrand skill, which makes regular melee attacks target reflex, instead of deflection.

Now my question is, can the cypher purple fire psyche leach mode, work simultaneously with druid firebrand reflex target?

What are you asking? If a Druid can attack an enemy with the Firebrand while the Cipher is draining reflex from the target? I don't see why not .... that sounds like the whole point of the Cipher ability.

I am not sure what I am going to roll class-wise although I have a feeling my first PC will be a Black Vailian chick, struggling to find a fitting name that is French/Occitan/Catalan sounding but I've got like 10-11 months to think of one I guess.

I hope they have some black girl come in and do Vailian female voice sets as well, that would be sick.

 

[Zed]

But there are probably too many in-house candidates for that already.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

I prefer George Ziets style over MCA's (MCA more into subversion).

Figures, obsidian can't spare jew gold to bring him back

 

[tuluse]

Maybe InXile will bring him on as a lead for a future project.

 

[Shadenuat]

I know this bit of lore has been established a long time ago, but now it does strike me as kind of odd. How is it possible that guns are common but the printing press hasn't been invented yet? I'm no expert on weapon history, but in a world where guns are probably "mass" produced, how can the printing press not exist? It's not that technologically complicated, if I'm not mistaken. Flintlock pistols are really intricate, wheellock even more so (I've got a wheellock hunting rifle from around 1850 at home :D ). I mean come on, PE is set in a world where they build massive ships, have guns and magic. How can the printing press not exist? Any history expert here?

Well gunpowder for sure existed before printing press, chinese used matchlocks since ~1300 (or maybe before, I don't know much about china), turks deployed first cannon hundred years ago maybe. And wiki says mass production of books by press began in ~1500.
So yeah, before printing press people written recipes for gunpowder by hand, such badass warmongers ancient people were.

As for P:E, I have a simple idea - once people learned for the first time that a bullet penetrates Arcane Veil, everyone went apeshit because now they could throw down first class magic casters and finally one shot those bastards. So commonfolk started to produce GUNZ and shoot wizards after decades of fireballs torching their asses.

 

[Sensuki]

Firearms are not common items IIRC.

 

[Shadenuat]

They're common enough players would deploy them, probably every big city has at least some, at least cities which belong to progressive cultures. Books though, players would probably find only books written by hand. Whatever that would mean.

 

[Sensuki]

Yeah books are apparently very expensive and luxury items.

 

[tuluse]

I know this bit of lore has been established a long time ago, but now it does strike me as kind of odd. How is it possible that guns are common but the printing press hasn't been invented yet? I'm no expert on weapon history, but in a world where guns are probably "mass" produced, how can the printing press not exist? It's not that technologically complicated, if I'm not mistaken. Flintlock pistols are really intricate, wheellock even more so (I've got a wheellock hunting rifle from around 1850 at home :D ). I mean come on, PE is set in a world where they build massive ships, have guns and magic. How can the printing press not exist? Any history expert here?

As Sawyer has written, the technology for a printing press was around long before people actually made one. Someone has to have the idea, and there needs to be a demand for mass produced books for a printing press to be made.