Game News Project Eternity Kickstarter Update #63: Stronghold Mechanics

[Lady_Error]

So it's having your own prison that gets the Codex excited?

 

[Excidium]

But can you have a harem?

 

[Arkadin]

So it's having your own prison that gets the Codex excited?

Being able to keep prisoners could make playing evil really fun, I think. Torture, please!

 

[slackerwizrd]

Isn't it more of a leap to assume there is something when there is no evidence? That is an argument from ignorance.

The argument from ignorance has less to do with "there is something when there is no evidence". I'm assuming you meant, "it hasn't been proven, so it's false", which adequately describes everyone's argument against your assertion that it's a waste of resources.

However, It's no more of a argument from ignorance to say, "Since we have no evidence that the stronghold is diverting resources, it's not a gimmicky waste" than to say, "Since we have no evidence saying it's not diverting resources, it's a gimmicky waste." It's the same type of argument. Both are arguments from ignorance because we don't know how the other aspects are impacted - if at all.

 

[slackerwizrd]

Isn't it more of a leap to assume there is something when there is no evidence? That is an argument from ignorance.

The argument from ignorance has less to do with "there is something when there is no evidence". I'm assuming you meant, "it hasn't been proven/disproven, so it's false/true", which also adequately describes everyone's argument against your assertion that it's a waste of resources.

However, It's no more of a argument from ignorance to say, "Since we have no evidence that the stronghold is diverting resources, it's not a gimmicky waste" than to say, "Since we have no evidence saying it's not diverting resources, it's a gimmicky waste." It's the same type of argument. Both are arguments from ignorance because we don't know how the other aspects are impacted - if at all.

After reading this, I noticed I should have added more context. Fixed prior statement inline of quote. The fact that there's some assumption that lore may/may not be pumped into the stronghold is no much more of a argument from ignorance than your assertion (or anyone's assertion) that the stronghold is a waste of resources because of the diverting cost to the stronghold rather than 'core' elements. Likewise, as I think of it, your assertion that there is no lore in the stronghold is also argument from ignorance.

Another words, "Pot meet Kettle."

 

[J_C]

Why do you assume there will be no lore associated with the stronghold? It might be an ancient castle full of mysteries just waiting for the player to discover.
How do you know there will be no story realted elements in the SH? Prisoners are an excellent mechanic to introduce story related gameplay to the stronghold.

Because no such info was given. Obviously, they wouldn't want to floud us in spoilers. But, isn't it more of a leap to assume there is something when there is no evidence? That is an argument from ignorance. I'll concede that the prisoners might be interesting, but it still shouldn't need the whole building and managing a SH thing.

Based on this logic, the whole world in PE, half of the classes, the skill system is just a tacked on gimmick, because we don't know enough about them. And if we have no info, it must be shallow. Now THIS is ignorant argument.

 

[Azael]

So it's having your own prison that gets the Codex excited erect?

 

[norolim]

Because no such info was given. Obviously, they wouldn't want to floud us in spoilers. But, isn't it more of a leap to assume there is something when there is no evidence? That is an argument from ignorance. I'll concede that the prisoners might be interesting, but it still shouldn't need the whole building and managing a SH thing.

I did not assume anything. I contested your assumptions. The goal was to suggest that we don't know and untill we do, there is no way to accurately assess the importance of the SH in the game world.

I don't mean side quest as in a single log entry. Rather the whole proccess used to calculate your SH's state, events, available quests etc. All the possible quests, that were hinted at, start from and surround one object of a class of objects, that of Managing The Stronghold.

Not true. Some activities that were mentioned and that originate in the SH are related to managing resources (you will use everywhere) and characters. Some events may start outside of the SH and finish in it, e.g. recruiting/hiring. Missions we will send unused companions on will take place outside the SH; we don't know whether they'll affect the world beyound the SH or not. There are also the prisoners that may or may not be usefull outside the SH.

Yes, there are games about managing a Stronghold. This still doesn't change this game to a SH manager.

I didn't say that.

But managing a SH in an RPG should be secondary to character progression( skills, spells etc), realizing the world, characters, C&C( and with Obsidian's history with bugs, on bug fixing).

Why do you assume it isn't? Do you know how much time and resources were spent on those systems and the SH? And btw, a SH is a great place to realise C&C (the scope of which doesn't necessarily have to be limited to the SH).

 

[Gicusan]

The potential to have our very own guantanamo bay is pretty sweet.

Yes. Tim should play some Inquisitor too. Some nice torture chamber would be sweet. And I am sure the guys can write a good executioner.

 

[you know what time it is]

I can feel already, how something rapey is moving around nexus' covers

dis gonna be glorious

 

[Delterius]

"Tell me how it is possible this place where there are multiple quests could be one of the biggest hubs. And please, no quests that are related to it at all."

So you don't have anything... Good to know.

No more than you do. Indeed, if you believe the devs are unable to reach thematic integration of their games' features, I don't know why you've singled out this one. The Stronghold is no different than any other piece of game content that Obsidian dangled out in front of the playerbase in order to attract backers, wether they can integrate this quest hub into the greater narrative is a matter no different than wether they can build a good game.

Which is why this discussion is silly.

Though I found it humorous when you wanted me to prove how something is a quest hub with quests that aren't directly related to it. It seems you just don't like this feature in particular.

 

[St. Toxic]

if you believe the devs are unable to reach thematic integration of their games' features, I don't know why you've singled out this one. The Stronghold is no different than any other piece of game content that Obsidian dangled out in front of the playerbase in order to attract backers, wether they can integrate this quest hub into the greater narrative is a matter no different than wether they can build a good game.

I don't know about that. In my mind it certainly makes sense to differentiate between a player-owned stronghold mechanic and the inclusion of additional writers/ systems designers, dungeons, playable races, difficulty settings, classes and regions. Meanwhile, multi-system release is an entirely different beast. Crafting and enchanting, however, is pretty much on par with the stronghold -- I mean, you could do without it and still have a great game on your hands. Maybe you could explain how all of these additions are on the same level?

There are bound to be plenty of features that feel tacked on or that outright clash with the rest of the game, and that's just going by experience; few games manage to present a whole where you won't see seems come apart or encounter superfluous content. Naturally, any in-depth description of a particular game mechanic inevitably gets analyzed, and the benchmark is always going to be a set of subjective expectations. In this case it's actually a fairly valid concern (unless the game somehow revolves around stronghold ownership) that the stronghold may detract from or clash with core features. By core features I mean features that, if badly implemented or outright left out of the game, render the game shallow, and the stronghold, unless I'm mistaken, can't really be considered a core feature to a party-based dungeon-hack/cRPG.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

the stronghold, unless I'm mistaken, can't really be considered a core feature to a party-based dungeon-hack/cRPG.

They could introduce a game mode called "Solipsism" where all the side- and main-quests conveniently come visit you in your stronghold instead of you having to go out and find them.

 

[Infinitron]

By core features I mean features that, if badly implemented or outright left out of the game, render the game shallow, and the stronghold, unless I'm mistaken, can't really be considered a core feature to a party-based dungeon-hack/cRPG.

The stronghold is an area with quests. Areas and quests aren't "features", they're game content.

You might think that players shouldn't be spending their time in strongholds in a "party-based dungeon hack/cRPG", but that's a question of narrative and theme, not of investment in "features".

 

[Delterius]

St. Toxic A game feature is as central as the developers make it. This goes for everything, from seemingly natural additions like combat to the most superfluous, like crafting and everything story specific. There's no natural position of priority for races, difficulty settings, classes, regions and etcetera or even the stronghold within a game's scope. For one, race was often a lesser decision in the IE games. Its mostly about the how of hybrid classing. Also how important is it to include a new class and or race when you already have a plethora of those? When adding or tweaking a game feature, you're dealing with the game as a whole and nothing is a natural choice. Its all up to the developers and how much the whole of the game interacts with its parts.

Wether or not the Stronghold is well implemented into the game's scope is a valid concern, however its very early to bring it up. There's precious little we know about the game's story for that. But here's what we know: a Stronghold is part of the adventure and there's game content associated with it. Furthermore acquiring one is a staple of not only D&D but BG2 in particular. As such it is a potential 'core experience' of 'Ye Party-based Story'. Finally, as you said, its a 'region' to explore. This data, by itself, should be a good advocate for the inclusion of the Stronghold and, moreover, show that its a great option for the devs to confer priority in development.

However, as aforementioned, there's very little Eternity specific we know about it. But there's one thing: you'll get it early. 'Late Act 1' was said. Assuming there's 3 Acts, this means that the Stronghold is there for 2 thirds of the game. That's a humongous amount of time to have it and do nothing with it. Thus I really doubt that it will be a gimmick.

 

[crawlkill]

Project Eternity's going to make Dragon Age Inquisition look like shit. Not that it needs any additional help.

I find this gloat weird because I bet 90% of the codex assumed this as soon as they started watching the pitch video.

we needed about twelve months and a rape fantasy fantasist to confirm that an Obsidian RPG would be smarter than a Bioware RPG

Nb4 you have some half hearted apartment in the cities that no one ever uses.

but but it has upgradable ventilation when things get hot stay cool deal your own custom weed from the window planters

 

[Dorateen]

The potential to have our very own guantanamo bay is pretty sweet.

Yes. Tim should play some Inquisitor too. Some nice torture chamber would be sweet. And I am sure the guys can write a good executioner.

They should include waterboarding as a developable skill.

But I wonder if players will be able to pump detained enemy combatants for information? That would be awesome.

 

[St. Toxic]

There's no natural position of priority for races, difficulty settings, classes, regions and etcetera or even the stronghold within a game's scope.

Are you sure? I mean, suppose the project gathered twice the amount of geld and kept pushing the line with even more stretch-goals of bloating the game with additional gimmicks -- eventually you'd have to start prioritizing cohesive content or end up with an overall weak game. It's one thing to add more content to systems which already constitute the entirety of the game, meaning non-intrusive content, and another to add features with the potential of changing the game's entire premise.

For one, race was often a lesser decision in the IE games.

Races usually play a key role in fantasy.

Wether or not the Stronghold is well implemented into the game's scope is a valid concern, however its very early to bring it up.

Didn't you just say pretty much the opposite thing in your last post? There isn't supposed to be anything special about the stronghold, and it's as likely to become an annoying nuisance in game as is the addition of more races, difficulty settings, classes, locations and key writers / devs etc. Where's the validity in expecting one type of additional content to make the game more enjoyable, and another type (which is really the same) to do the opposite? Focus.

There's precious little we know about the game's story for that. But here's my apologist take on why the stronghold will be soooooo guuuuud. Thus I really doubt that it will be a gimmick.

I really couldn't give less of a shit if it's good or bad. But as far as the stretch-goals go, this is one that definitely has a bigger fuck-up potential than, say, hiring additional staff.

The stronghold is an area with quests. Areas and quests aren't "features", they're game content.

Seems like it's more than that, if Tim Cain is to be trusted. At the very least it's a fucking mailbox and a tax harvesting minigame.