Immortalis

Okay, I don't like the idea of that. I don't mind having an inventory stash at your camp, or one that you can access while adventuring, but I don't like the idea of being able to magically teleport stuff back to your camp. If you don't want to spend the time hauling 100 two-handers back to your camp, then you shouldn't be able to sell 100 two-handers. If they're going to do that, they might as well have a "Loot Dungeon" button which instantly opens up a screen, from which you can choose what, in the entire dungeon that you've cleared so far, to sell, and instantly get the cash for it there and then. At least let us disable this feature for the Hardcore mode, if nothing else. Oh yea maybe I misunderstood.. I don't want the magical stash of teleportation either.. I was just agreeing that inventory slots shouldn't matter it should be based on strength.

I pretty much agree with this.. but my beef isn't the new UI.. It's about the unlimited stash back at base that you can teleport items to. Yeah, if they wanted to pacify "realists", they could certainly make up a magic genie box or whatnot. Doesn't matter to me either way. Can't really trump a human GM. Haha, yeah. I remember discovering encumbrance rules after YEARS of playing AD&D 1st Edition. Hey guys, there are rules for this, I guess we should start keeping track. There was so much stupid BS in that DM's Guide that never saw the light of day in any of my campaigns. I think we tried using it for a few sessions and then just forgot about it. Not really fun. On the other hand, just reducing the value of most items (except for a few precious pieces of treasure) to 0 would greatly reduce the incentive to hoard them, without necessarily sacrificing details/items that add to the setting/resource gameplay. I don't recall inventories full of Quarterstaffs, for instance. Honestly, I'm not a fan of "color" loot. Why the hell can I pick up a fork in Skyrim. To me it is all just clutter confusing the issue in an already bloated and horrible inventory system. If you want there to be a fork on the table, that's the art department's job. Draw a fork on the table. I can see it, I know it's there, it has nothing to do with the game, I don't need to be able to put it in my pocket. I don't know. I guess I'm as guilty as anyone of rearranging my home decor in Fallout 3. In an IE type game though, less is more where inventory is concerned. My 2gp. It's not fun because it's extra bull**** you gotta do that takes away from the fun of playing PnP with friends. Some groups will love the hardcore feeling of DnD but most people who do PnP are looking for easy rolls and a fun time with friends. In a game where all this maintenance is done for you.. it's much less about extra overhead to keep track on and more about resource and space management.. at least for me.. Again I don't travel through 3 forest areas over and over so I can sell every ****ing dagger and long sword.. Before I am about to go do a big quest I always have to ask myself like what am I bringing consumable wise.. do I have space for any potential items I will find.. Like I care about alot of that stuff.. at least I did when I first started playing.

The only thing I thought for sure you would agree with was the logical contradiction of those features.. I admit the second half is mostly my opinion and you may disagree, slightly agree or agree fully no clue.. We don't usually see eye to eye.. but there you go. Again.. we obviously disagree on inventory sizes and item collection paradigms.. but that was just one example.. That wasn't the focus of what I was talking about.

Basing your opinion on the amount of forum threads on the forum is probably the dumbest thing I have ever head. Let's make the games core mechanics around whatever idea someone had that I don't dislike on a gaming forum. As if we "the Combat XP Hivemind" can control what everyone does and says.. we are all one big hive mind of people who orchestrated thread pollution. Like is that how you see it? WE are all one guy at a computer that you want to channel your hate into? Not only have you shown how childish you are.. you have been anything BUT neutral. For the record.. I am glad Tale locked like 3 of these threads. Spamming the forum with combat xp threads isn't gonna make the developers change their mind or look at it a new way. The devs are gonna see combat xp as something one 15 year old kid wants. It actually hurts our discussion more then help it. But I can't do anything about it.

emphasis mine - you don't have to - I believe the point of it is to make you choose between what to carry and what to leave behind, never to be seen again. Josh seemed to think that a lot of people were making trips back into dungeons to collect every last 1gp dagger. Personally, I'd decide between that dagger and the stack of arrows / gem / whatever and then play on. More role-play-ey, less pack-ratty. It adds to meaningful gameplay by making you choose. If you choose to make trips to that remote stash of yours ... well, that's your choice for your game. This this this... And introducing the new rest mechanic.. (which I am in favor of btw) reintroduces that degenerative gameplay anyways. Now instead of supposedly running back and forth between a forest and a village to sell daggers.. we will do it for camp supplies. The degenerative gameplay still exists.. it was all a waste of time making the stash essentially pointless if that was his goal. In my opinion: Stash = Bad - I prefer the player leaving items left behind Camp Sleeping = Good - You should need to choose when you want to rest after combat.. not just jam the button and quickload if an encounter happened. One is removing choice from the game and one is enforcing tactical decisions.. If your really bad at this game or have nothing better to do.. sure you will cheese those mechanics.. but so what? that doesn't effect my play through in any way.

I'm not saying that though.. I wish you would of read it more closely.. that wasn't my point at all.

Actually This isn't even an argument against Kill XP. This is another dodge. Placing XP value on monsters does not cause XP exploits, provided those critters DIE when you kill them, or go away after you spare them. Yes? You ruin Gromnir's arguments! HEY.. Not So Good Fun!

sorry mc, but it kinda is binary. a primary value o' quest/task is that it avoids balancing. if you create categories that include kill/combat and quest and whatever, you has invalidated the point o' quest/task. you has necessarily reintroduced balancing. What a load of baloney. There's nothing stopping the devs from utterly separating combat from quests. Take the Ogre quest in the beta. That one is worth 2000xp regardless of how you complete it. Therefore, the Gromnirs are the world are happy. Now, what about the totally-unrelated-Lions on the other map? Hmm? Oh, I know! we can make them worth XP if they stomp on the party while they're exploring. Problem friggin solved. getting 2000 xp for the ogre quest is admitted not the problem. getting 2000 xp for the ogre resolution and then trying to add in and balance awards for combats against the bugs and spiders you need to fight or avoid to get to the ogre, or perhaps awards for some other unexpected route to confronting the ogre the developers did not plan for, is what creates a Balancing problem. is this genuine confusing? how? the lions example is pointless with quest xp. HA! Good Fun! Actually the opposite.. I think you hide behind this persona so you can always play off bad arguments as "I was trolling and didn't care". I wouldn't bring it up if I could honestly understand everything you said perfectly. Whenever you enter the argument people start interpreting what your saying in different ways and it adds unnecessary confusion. I admit you've tighten it up a bit.. you have switched to typing normally minus typos and referring to yourself in third person which is manageable for now. It's when you try to do ye olde English when your background is not even modern English that things go to the gutter. I believe your background is Brazil or Portugal ? I could be wrong..

Again I feel the sting of irony that you are critiquing me on lack of understanding leading to an ineffective debate. I mean seriously dude.. I barely can piece together what your even talking about.. I read every third word and hope I caught the gist of what you meant.. Which clearly I didn't. HA! Good Fun! finally, something we can agree to: you have a fundamental "lack of understanding." HA! Good Fun! I don't think my lack of understanding is fundamental unless everyone in the world starts talking like a retarded orc. I need a Gromnir translator.

My point was more about the potential for degenerative gameplay and the big irony of Josh trying to make a perfect system.. His reasons for implementing one feature run contradictory to another feature.. Having unlimited inventory would have the same contradiction but thats not the point im trying to make.. I don't wanna debate the features themselves just the fact that it's harder then it looks to just implement a "perfect system" and he should have used more discreation before axing features or adding new ones. Does that make sense? The degenerative gameplay hasn't gone away.. it just has a new shade of lipstick.

Again I feel the sting of irony that you are critiquing me on lack of understanding leading to an ineffective debate. I mean seriously dude.. I barely can piece together what your even talking about.. I read every third word and hope I caught the gist of what you meant.. Which clearly I didn't. HA! Good Fun! sorry mc, but it kinda is binary. a primary value o' quest/task is that it avoids balancing. if you create categories that include kill/combat and quest and whatever, you has invalidated the point o' quest/task. you has necessarily reintroduced balancing. so, get with the program private joker. you may not like quest xp, but don't pretend that the debate is as difficult to grasp or mutable as you pretend. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68043-do-you-want-experience-from-combat/?p=1496598 HA! Good Fun! See? There is no such thing as compromise in their side of the argument. You do understand that beliefs or systems can be diametrically opposed, right? That compromise between the two can be either impossible or simply victory in disguise for one at the expense of the other? That a call for compromise doesn't automatically give one side the moral high-ground vs. the other? Leave the 'kumbaya diplomacy' at the door. Please explain how any of this applies.. Like use the real example of the debate between kill and non-kill xp. Don't speak in generalities. I will expect you to have read the last 3 locked threads of about 1500 posts before you answer otherwise your talking out your ass and don't know what both sides actually want. If your going to claim to be an expert on what has been debated so far, then you should be able to do this no problem.

To be honest just reading this I see so many new conflicts in Josh Sawyers logic. Like for every degenerative thing he removed from IE he added another one in. For example. Josh states that a patient player can collect every item that drops which is degenerative gameplay so he implemented an unlimited stash. Then he turns around and creates limited resting mechanic to prevent constant resting after each encounter.. However.. a patient player can just run back to the inn and restock up and the whole point of that mechanic was worked around using the same tactic that his limitless stash was supposed to prevent. PrimeJunta.. Please read the above with an open mind before bashing it down.. I think you will agree with me on this one point. The rest is my opinion.. Does Josh have his heart in the right place? YES of course he wants to make a great game.. Did he have a bit of hubris when tackling this game? I have to say yes.. You didn't need to reinvent the wheel.. there were obvious issues with IE but you clearly thought you could do the best game ever on a small budget and even smaller timeline.. This wasn't the kickstarter to try new untested ideas.. it was the kickstarter to get people hooked back into IE style games.

sorry mc, but it kinda is binary. a primary value o' quest/task is that it avoids balancing. if you create categories that include kill/combat and quest and whatever, you has invalidated the point o' quest/task. you has necessarily reintroduced balancing. so, get with the program private joker. you may not like quest xp, but don't pretend that the debate is as difficult to grasp or mutable as you pretend. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68043-do-you-want-experience-from-combat/?p=1496598 HA! Good Fun! See? There is no such thing as compromise in their side of the argument. The minute kill -xp enters the stage no matter how much care or balance it is given to not invalidate or over shadow quests.. It ruins "my single player experience". Can't argue that further down because now it exists in their heads. Logic and mechanics have been put aside.

Oh my god that Carsomyr is so sexy.. I love how you used Boo to tug our nostalgia strings

That's a bit of a double edged sword to me. No, I don't think ~200 poll results should represent the majority. On the other hand, I feel that people that take the time to register an account and take place in the discussions clearly have a more passionate relationship to the product and perhaps their thoughts would carry a little extra weight. Not necessarily that Obs would rework major systems, but not complete derision to the concerns either. Agreed and additionally.. You have to be pretty conceited to think your forum poll should direct how Josh Sawyer does his job.. But a poll at least shows the mood on your own game's forum. We are one of the only feedback loops Obsidian has until the game actually releases..

One problem with arrows.. namely magical arrows are they always overshadow the bow itself as far as damage value and damage type (as did bullets and bolts). Also they are always the highest gold value.. which always seemed weird. I do think arrows should exist and bullets too.. but maybe a little more refactoring could be done on how they work..

By checking how many people downloaded it off Steam? Good point, you glorious wretch! Okay, so assuming you can see exactly how many people downloaded the demo, see how many people played for a substantial amount of time, see how many people post on the topic here in this forum, and then comparing it to the number of people who even generated the key, do you really believe that the number of people represented here should carry the day? Dude, how many people have even voted in this poll, let alone posted in this topic? This could found out with the generated keys linked to each account. Since this is not public however we will never know.

I made a valid argument and you cheapened it by changing what I said. I'm not mad just clarifying that you're trying to make a valid argument seem crazy and irrational.

Putting PST near DA2. Please. Oh... Please. Go take a break or something. Don't try to be sensationalist by removing context or misquoting. It betrays your age.

Look I really dont get why you all say amount of selled copies equals quality in those xp threads. On the one hand, people here express their hate against those "soulless" trible A games and on the other hand you say that sold copies is a indicator for quality. You basicaly say that assassins creed and cod are the best games ever made, also they should make PoE closer to diablo, guild wars 2 or the witcher because those games sold more copies than baldurs gate2. Following your argument thats exactly what you want. When planescape released.. it was considered "Triple A".. as was all the IE games.. (well maybe not IWD2.. I mean NWN was on the shelf next to it ) What is your point exactly? First you say community polls and "Best of" Lists are an indicator of a games quality (by popular vote on that community I assume) but then say that sales (people actually voting with their wallet instead of crapping out a review of top 10 games) is not an indicator of how good a game is. Like why does Skyrim sell as many copies as it does whereas Dragon Age 2 doesn't. Is it all the hype machine? I thought Dragon Age 2 had plenty of hype. Quality leads to sales. I am curious what your trying to prove.. I was just pointing out that the reputable sources you listed were shills at best.. IGN seriously? and that Sarex was correct in stating planescape had crappy sales. I personally enjoy planescape but its' not even close to my favorite IE game. EDIT I also want to point out the reviews you posted were basically shilling by one author anyways.. except the CODEX reivew in which planescape won over Fallout by how many votes? and how many votes over BG 2? Exactly. The votes of a handful of people just decided on behalf of the entire world that planescape is universally the best IE game ever... seriously? Then you complain about my poll.

Can we get rid of you too? I would sacrifice DnaCowboy to the god of IP blacklisting if it meant less **** posting troll comments from you.

Divinity: Original Sin was worse.. but I not only expect that.. but demand that from a Larian studios game..

I only posted 3 which are from different angles, use google and you will find out its basicaly at the top of every list, lots of them made by communites. It's the hipster thing to do.. I honestly believe most people who love Planescape never even finished the game. However: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0187405/trivia

Well when the game doesn't make enough money to cover it's budget in the first year, then yeah it's definitely a flop by anyone's standard. As for the kickstarter, well it just rode the hype train that Wastelands and PoE created. If Torment was the first KS out of the gate I very much doubt it would have made even a quarter of that money. RPG Codes: Best RPG of all time IGN: Place 13 on the best rpg list Gamespot: "one of the greatest rpg's ever made" why do I even list those go to the wiki article and read the reception/awards section IGN Gamespot RPG CODEX? :lol: Planes was good for what it was.. People definately remember that game more fondly then it probably deserves. It's not my favorite game by a long shot.. It would have been better without combat XP.. It's the Yang to Baldurs gate. Planescape should have been on a tight narrative path with branches out and made combat almost non-essential at all.. seeing as you can die unlimited times and basically gimp raise your companions.. combat was just a tool for story telling.. you had no way to lose the game from combat honestly. There was no challenge to over come and XP was useless in that game except for non-combat stats. Infact I think the IE engine was one of the worst engines you could use for planescape from a systems and balance perspective.. the graphics still look cool though.

I realize it I absolutely realize it. For me though there is a difference between a fun challenge and a drag. Inventory management is wonderful sometimes, but a drag in many games, including the IE games, and would be in this game. My 2 gp. Why? What about "inventory management" do you find a drag? That you can't pick up every item whenever you want? That's not realizing anything.. That's what you THINK you want.. If your talking about ****ty user interfaces or having to scroll through bags of holding to find that one thing you need.. then yes I agree. If you have no consequences for just running around picking everything up.. your basically working with an entitled mechanic.. your gonna love the idea of it now.. then hate it in 4 months and not know why.. but if they take it away then.. people will cry out that they are losing a feature they expect now.. ....In my opinion