Game News Project Eternity Kickstarter Update #44: On Melee Engagement

[Zeriel]

The combat/game systems were what I was intensely worried about with Project Eternity (i.e they've never done good combat, either in Infinity Engine or since), and it seems like my worries were perfectly justified.

 

[MicoSelva]

They never said they were taking out pause

I know, I referenced the conversation in the posts above mine.

 

[hiver]

Hey... this is great. Upgrading the Real Time with some cool Turn Based mechanics.
About time.

By the description it looks like it will play very, very nicely indeed and upgrade that whole section of combat tactics requirements.





Everything except that grimoire bash thing, of course... but then again, as soon as there are any sort of magic "books" in the process, magic system cant be that good anyway.

 

[Tytus]

When it comes to books, maybe they will have a Vogon-poetry-read-attack too. It would clear the entire screen after a couple of verses.

 

[Zeriel]

A great rebuttal to that whole update about melee engagement would be, "Hey, you know what would completely fix this problem and all the kludgy game balance pretzels you twist into to try to solve it? TURN BASED COMBAT." It really is sad that we're going to be saddled with all these dilemmas that wouldn't exist at all if they just, you know, took the D&D they're copying whole-sale anyway and ported it over as exactly what it is, turn-based combat.

 

[Excidium]

But having the escape ability be limited use sounds pretty silly.

Welcome to Sawyer's design school.

 

[Gozma]

A great rebuttal to that whole update about melee engagement would be, "Hey, you know what would completely fix this problem and all the kludgy game balance pretzels you twist into to try to solve it? TURN BASED COMBAT." It really is sad that we're going to be saddled with all these dilemmas that wouldn't exist at all if they just, you know, took the D&D they're copying whole-sale anyway and ported it over as exactly what it is, turn-based combat.

Respect for worthless late '90s compromise designs intended wholly to draw in Diabloheads must be maintained for nostalgia purposes

 

[Infinitron]

Respect for worthless late '90s compromise designs intended wholly to draw in Diabloheads must be maintained for nostalgia purposes

Darklands

 

[DwarvenFood]

Cool to see that the Grimoire demo has made an impression big enough for them to already incluede a reference.

 

[Excidium]

Respect for worthless late '90s compromise designs intended wholly to draw in Diabloheads must be maintained for nostalgia purposes

Darklands

wut

 

[tuluse]

I like the term diablohead.

 

[tindrli]

i wonder what The Brazilian Slaughter thinks about this MAJESTIC new melee engagment

 

[Lancehead]

A great rebuttal to that whole update about melee engagement would be, "Hey, you know what would completely fix this problem and all the kludgy game balance pretzels you twist into to try to solve it? TURN BASED COMBAT." It really is sad that we're going to be saddled with all these dilemmas that wouldn't exist at all if they just, you know, took the D&D they're copying whole-sale anyway and ported it over as exactly what it is, turn-based combat.

Does turn based combat give me simultaneous movement/combat? Because that's the whole point of RTwP.

 

[Lancehead]

That's exactly what Sawyer's doing. Don't you keep go on about how P:E is MMO/DOTA/Diablo combat?

Engagement mechanics are really the first details that had problems in historically (read: NWN2) in RTwP. But that doesn't say it can only in work TB. Much will depend on feedback.

 

[Zeriel]

A great rebuttal to that whole update about melee engagement would be, "Hey, you know what would completely fix this problem and all the kludgy game balance pretzels you twist into to try to solve it? TURN BASED COMBAT." It really is sad that we're going to be saddled with all these dilemmas that wouldn't exist at all if they just, you know, took the D&D they're copying whole-sale anyway and ported it over as exactly what it is, turn-based combat.

Does turn based combat give me simultaneous movement/combat? Because that's the whole point of RTwP.

Not really grasping what you're saying, here. Could you explain? Typically the way it works is you move around in real time until you get into combat. I'm completely fine with a setup like XCOM where combat maps are distinct from other types of gameplay, though I can't say I ever expect to see that in a full-fledged PC RPG.

 

[Zeriel]

Respect for worthless late '90s compromise designs intended wholly to draw in Diabloheads must be maintained for nostalgia purposes

Darklands

Trying to be as awesome as Darklands is way beyond Obsidian or any modern developer, though. Come to think of it, Darklands is the only game I've _ever_ played where shit combat doesn't bother me in the slightest because the rest of the game is just that much better. Torment comes to the closest, but lacks Darklands autistic rich attention to detail.

 

[Infinitron]

Respect for worthless late '90s compromise designs intended wholly to draw in Diabloheads must be maintained for nostalgia purposes

Darklands

Trying to be as awesome as Darklands is way beyond Obsidian or any modern developer, though. Come to think of it, Darklands is the only game I've _ever_ played where shit combat doesn't bother me in the slightest because the rest of the game is just that much better. Torment comes to the closest, but lacks Darklands autistic rich attention to detail.

I was just trolling really, but hey, let's say RTwP did originate as a compromise. So what? From compromises and limitations new disciplines are born.

Wolfenstein 3D was John Carmack's compromise, trying to create a first person game that was faster and cheaper than Ultima Underworld. He ended up creating an entire genre.

RTwP games have their place, if you approach them as "squad-level RTSes" rather than as nerfed turn-based games.

 

[Captain Shrek]

RTwP games have their place, if you approach them as "squad-level RTSes" rather than as nerfed turn-based games.

This is really not entirely true. Squad based RTS would not really work unless it works like in Drakensang games, where the combat pace is slowed down quite a bit. Even DA:O did that to make the problem manageable. If P:E does that it might actually save the combat.

 

[tuluse]

Not really grasping what you're saying, here. Could you explain? Typically the way it works is you move around in real time until you get into combat. I'm completely fine with a setup like XCOM where combat maps are distinct from other types of gameplay, though I can't say I ever expect to see that in a full-fledged PC RPG.

JRPGs

 

[Lancehead]

A great rebuttal to that whole update about melee engagement would be, "Hey, you know what would completely fix this problem and all the kludgy game balance pretzels you twist into to try to solve it? TURN BASED COMBAT." It really is sad that we're going to be saddled with all these dilemmas that wouldn't exist at all if they just, you know, took the D&D they're copying whole-sale anyway and ported it over as exactly what it is, turn-based combat.

Does turn based combat give me simultaneous movement/combat? Because that's the whole point of RTwP.

Not really grasping what you're saying, here. Could you explain? Typically the way it works is you move around in real time until you get into combat. I'm completely fine with a setup like XCOM where combat maps are distinct from other types of gameplay, though I can't say I ever expect to see that in a full-fledged PC RPG.

I mean in-combat. Turn based is sequential actions, RT is simultaneous (or asynchronous, whichever is more accurate) actions. You don't fix problems of RTwP by going TB, you fundamentally alter the combat and encounters.

 

[Cynic]

So, AoOs in RTwP.

Combat confirmed as clusterfuck.

 

[Zeriel]

A great rebuttal to that whole update about melee engagement would be, "Hey, you know what would completely fix this problem and all the kludgy game balance pretzels you twist into to try to solve it? TURN BASED COMBAT." It really is sad that we're going to be saddled with all these dilemmas that wouldn't exist at all if they just, you know, took the D&D they're copying whole-sale anyway and ported it over as exactly what it is, turn-based combat.

Does turn based combat give me simultaneous movement/combat? Because that's the whole point of RTwP.

Not really grasping what you're saying, here. Could you explain? Typically the way it works is you move around in real time until you get into combat. I'm completely fine with a setup like XCOM where combat maps are distinct from other types of gameplay, though I can't say I ever expect to see that in a full-fledged PC RPG.

I mean in-combat. Turn based is sequential actions, RT is simultaneous (or asynchronous, whichever is more accurate) actions. You don't fix problems of RTwP by going TB, you fundamentally alter the combat and encounters.

Fair enough, I guess what I was trying to say is that in the real world, you either go real time (which is not strategic, it's either shooters or trolly-as-fuck ARPGs) or turn-based if you expect to have combat that isn't garbage. You can theorycraft whatever you want, but seeing as no one has ever made RTwP combat that isn't ass, I'm not expecting Obsidian of all people to manage it.

 

[Lancehead]

RTwP didn't stop BG games from having great combat, and TB didn't make ToEE combat whole lot of fun. If you talk purely about the mechanics in how they control, I'd agree RTwP can be (and mostly is) more frustrating than TB, but for the combat itself, TB doesn't have any intrinsic advantage over RTwP.

 

[Zeriel]

BG games

great combat​

​

Unless you're referring specifically to mage battles in BG2, I think I'm going to just take this opportunity to duck out of this thread before my head explodes from the psychic mindfucking I'm receiving.​

​

 

[Lancehead]

With Strategems mod, BG combat is pretty fun and challenging.