Zenbane
-
Posts
431 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Zenbane
-
-
Political speak isn't something I enjoy. I just quoted exactly what the guy said and stated I was curious about stuff. There are other people in here putting words into the mouth of the original interview stating it means something it didn't actually come right out and say.
No one is putting words in the interviewees mouth, you just seem to think that "all but confirms a sequel" is the same thing as "he just confirmed a sequel." It's not political speak, it's a common figure of speech that you are interpreting wrong. Josh has eluded to a sequel on more than one occasion.
-
But it is a zero sum situation, whether you want to believe it or not. There are only finite resources and only a finite amount of time in which to utilize those resources. Dedicating time/resources to one area necessarily means you can't dedicate them to another. What it seems you're overlooking (forgive me if I'm wrong; this is just what your posts seem to convey) in the Stick of Truth example is that the cut content meant that time and resources that would have been spent to make it better (note: not great, but likely only mediocre, is the feeling I get from Fenstermaker's comments on it) would mean this time and those resources could not be spent improving the quality of what was kept to make it the best they could.
And I doubt it's as easy as it seems to know what will and will not work when the project is in the conception stage.
Well I am not denying that it is a zero sum situation. What I'm stating is that just about all technology falls in to that situation; especially software development. Therefore, using it as a scapegoat to excuse a product that provides less than 20 hours of quality in a genre that has a baseline of 30-40 hours is very much a lazy excuse. It was a zero sum situation after the first hour.
You are applying principles that I can agree with to a metric that I do not: 12-20 hours of gameplay as a final product. I've played RPG demo's that lasted that long. As for the thing you seem to think I'm overlooking in the Stick of Truth example, I'm fairly certain that it is just another assumption you are making in order to defend the ideal. All you did was describe one of many iterations that could have resulted in a final product with a minimum of 30 hours of quality. The fact that it didn't isn't justified by the zero sum theory, because it was a zero sum situation after the first hour.
Just look at how much time OBS has spent with each patch and expansion in PoE 2. Then look at the number of sales, they have hardly doubled. Clearly, if a developer/designer takes pride in their work then they are able to push beyond whatever scapegoat theories we can come up with. PoE can easily take over 30-40 hours of time investment (some people have boasted of 100's or even 1,000's lol), so I'm starting to think that we're just splitting hairs here.
In that interview, one of the things Eric says in response to name dropping the zero-sum tradeoff is, and I quote, "As a gamer, I'm getting old. I'm short on time." That's the real culprit. He then tries to distract the reader by making a generalized argument of, "I'd rather spend $60 on a 12-hour experience that makes me laugh my ass off than on a 100-hour experience that routinely wastes my time." But that is a red herring. As I said before, it is a false assumption that anything providing over 60 hours of gameplay is automatically a waste of time; which is what his argument suggests.
Some people are old, and so they wanna play as many different games as possible. Good for them. The gaming market shouldn't have to change entirely just because someone got old.
-
There are lots of things about the gaming industry that are exhaustively documented, and usually when people make generalized comments like "as if time was free" they are ignoring the entire economic expectations of anyone entering the gaming market. If someone is making a game purely for the $$$, then that's probably a game I would never want to play. The "zero sum game" theory is just an excuse, in my opinion, since even in a 12-20 hour game it can easily apply, and a loss is still suffered; yet the game was made anyway. Minimizing loss is good, but loss is almost always guaranteed in gaming unless there is a monetary offset via pay-to-play scenario's, like Subscription services or in-App purchases.
Some of the best gaming experiences come from Mod's, which historically have entailed amazing work from people that received 0 dollars. Like the top Mod for Skyrim which lead to a job at Bungie for the creator; or the Mod(s) that saved NWN 2 from being a total flop.
I prefer quality over quantity as well, but that doesn't mean that quality can only be achieved in small quantities. Again referring to the Stick of Truth example, the developers had already invested time in the 'bad' areas that ended up being cut out. The work was put in to making the bad parts, then work was put in to analyzing and cutting them out. Adding more work to refactor them for a few more hours of quality is completely feasible; and using the "zero sum" theory is really just an excuse in these situations. If someone is really building a business and design strategy around the zero sum game theory, then the design architecture during the projects conception should have excluded time investment in to what was eventually labeled "bad" to begin with. Thus reducing how much needs to be "cut out" in the end.
-
Sorry, I don't agree at all. In fact, one of the first things I look at when deciding to purchase a game is how long it is. Since I only play RPGs, really anything less than 30 hours kills my excitement, and less than 20 hours is almost a guaranteed no buy. The reason is simple: to me the purpose of an RPG is to build and roleplay a character, and to interact and investigate the lore of the world - something that is difficult to do in a short period of time. I'm looking for something similar to a novel, but with gameplay. It's the same reason I don't read short stories - not enough meat on the bones. That said, I don't like 150 hour + adventures since it's guaranteed you'll burn out, but I want an epic adventure that feels like the characters have been though a lot.I completely agree with Fentermaker on this. Here's the full paragraph, btw:
Personally, I would like to see us make shorter games (e.g. 30-40 hours instead of 60-80) where we cut the worst of our content and spend time iterating on the best. But there is pressure from the market itself (or at least perceived pressure) to make longer games so as to justify the game's sticker price with its "value" as measured in dollars spent per hour of gameplay. And I'm not sure if people understand that when you're on a budget, there's a zero-sum tradeoff between gameplay length and gameplay polish. There was some backlash for Stick of Truth, for example, for being "too short" at 12-20 hours. But that was a game where we cut the bad stuff and spent extra time on the good stuff, and I prefer that model. As a gamer, I'm getting old. I'm short on time. I'd rather spend $60 on a 12-hour experience that makes me laugh my ass off than on a 100-hour experience that routinely wastes my time. If any of you are in agreement, be vocal about it, because I think the dollars/hour guys are usually louder. Come to our forums and ask for a shorter, more polished game. If you don't feel that way, shhh, you, shhh.
Shorter games where the crap and filler (my words) is cut out, but the quality of the remainder is much improved? Yes, please. Shorter doesn't mean you can't build and roleplay your character effectively. I completely disagree with you on that. A well crafted and edited short story can have just as much meat as an average and relatively poorly edited novel.
The only problem I see is that there is an assumption that 30+ hours automatically equates to garbage. I don't agree with that at all. That's great the designers can cut out the bad stuff, but if you cut out the bad stuff and realize you have 50% of the total product left, then that's a problem with the product, not the philosophy. In the Stick of Truth example, after trimming the gameplay down to 20 hours, they should have analyzed the difference in the "bad" vs "good" and then focused on another 10 hours of more good. Is it impossible to take 20 hours of bad and refactor the content in to 10 hours of good? Stopping after trimming the fat defeats the purpose of iterative development, and is kinda lazy.
It's entirely possible to have a 30, 40, or 60+ hour gameplay experience that is mostly good. It just take a ton of time, and following quality assurance processes like the CMM or IDEAL (SEI).
-
3
-
-
Actually no. He said "we'd love to do a sequel." not 'yes there will be a sequel.' But that's not what I found the most interesting. It is the "...but we'd like to move on to a new project" part that I'm curious about. I wonder what it is?
No one claimed that he said, "yes there will be a sequel." The comment was, "he all but said it," which is exactly the case. There have been other statements made by Sawyer that "hints" at a sequel in the future. But they are exactly that, hints; which is what "all but saying it" means.
Regardless, Sawyer's other projects have been openly discussed, like the Tank Wars MMORPG.
-
1
-
-
Here's my beef, and I think Ob's name mentioned something akin to this earlier, sometimes a wolf is just a wolf. If I bypass a few creatures early on, I should expect those creatures to be more or less area difficulty appropriate. The pack of wolves menacing the small outpost that I never visited shouldn't suddenly be battle wolves with a contingent of dire wolves and a big daddy wolf with a shiny collar sporting the name 'Satan' etched into it. If the wolves scale like that, did the outpost people scale also?
lol... All hail, Satan Wolf!
I see that you were trying to illustrate the concept of pointless scaling, but you painted a picture so entertaining that the prospect of Satanic Wolves alone makes scaling seem glorious
-
2
-
-
If enemies just linearly scale with you all the way, for example, then what's the point of becoming more powerful?
Leveling up usually involves more than just increasing base attributes. So like... at level one you are forced to just beat a monster to death with a stick; but then at level 30 you can instead... stun, debuff, backstab, fireball, then chain lightning his buddies. Without monster scaling, combo's and strategies are void, and instead player evolution ranges from spamming stick swings to spamming fireballs.
Monster scaling is done so that stronger tactics are required to defeat an enemy. This has been observably true in RPG games for some 15+ year at least? Sure, some games have abused this and implement monster scaling as the sole form of combat difficulty, but that is the fault of the developer. If done correctly, monster scaling helps grant a sense of achievement to players who hone their combat tactic skills and abilities.
-
1
-
-
I mentioned "Wall-of-Text" 2 times. I didn't see the second one... Hardly a cause for derailing my point, but its what the internet does, ain't it? Focus on further derailment, to lose overall focus of my original points.
Except that you're the one who derailed it by typing a wall of text that includes phrases like: "wtf"; "ignorance"; "you did"; "are you reading"; "quote right" ... to name a few. You dropped a wall of text simply because you couldn't bother to read how you misspelled "wall of test" - which I only pointed out in a half-hearted statement that was a direct response to you demanding that I quote you. Whew!
The forums exist for gamers to voice their opinions in a constructive manner; I'm doing what I'm supposed to do - Not sure why *you* can't grasp this.
You claiming that backer NPC's and Tombstones are displayed in an "annoying wall of text" without actually providing evidence (i.e., a screenshot) is not constructive at all; something you can't seem to grasp. I am simply responding accordingly.
I have every damn right to voice my criticism; get used to seeing people voice their opinions on features that won't be popular to everyone.
I've played this game as well, and have as much "right" to voice my criticism of your criticism. Get used to people voicing their opinions of your opinions.
I really want to talk about my specific points, not this nit-picking interpersonal BS.
If providing evidence to back up your specific points is "nit-picking BS' in your mind, then that just further confirms that the implementation of Backer's via NPC's and Tombstone text is not a real game problem, simply your own personal issue.
What I find most interesting about your attempt to lecture on the importance of "the right to express opinions" is the fact that you are expressing a blatant disregard for other peoples opinions:
1) You criticize the opinion of PoE developers to include Backers as NPC's
2) You criticize the opinion of PoE developers to include Backers as Tombstone text
3) You criticize the opinion of Backer's when they chose their in-game text
As for the few points you made, I already supplied specific counters: immersion is not broken with Backer text since it comes across more as a game Easter Egg; I provided multiple screenshots of large areas of Text found in the normal game as a direct response to the imaginary wall-of-text you claim is an annoyance with Backer NPC's and Tombstones.
If you're done derailing the topic with lectures about internet opinions and who really misspelled a word that was purposely typed in ALL CAPS, then maybe you can finally provide a screenshot or two. I'm doubtful tho.
-
"WALL-OF-TEXT", is bad spelling? I didn't spell anything wrong, you did... Wtf are you talking about?
Go re-read your own post: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/83996-please-tell-me-i-heard-incorrectly/?p=1773660
I didn't spell it wrong, I quoted your bad spelling. Here, I will quote it again to help you:
and ALL TOMBSTONES everywhere I go because I personally find WALLS-OF-TEST annoying, although I love this game to death.
I didn't pay a single dime to back this game. Nothing to be jaded or jealous about,
Well unless you pirated the game, then you paid more than a dime for a legal copy. And like most jealous/jaded people, you are using an online forum to express an overly emotional reaction to other gamers who received special treatment.
Again, my points are missed on your ignorance.
So far you can't even acknowledge your own bad spelling, and instead put the accusation back on me simply because I accurately quoted your bad spelling. I guess we can add the definition of "ignorance" to the list of concepts you are not good at grasping.
Lastly, if you're gonna quote someone, do it-right, or don't do it at all.
I quoted your perfectly, you're the one that can't actually look at your own post to see what you did spell it as "TEST." If you're gonna engage in a forum conversation, learn to read better, or don't do it at all.
Lastly, I posted screenshots of various "wall of text" qualifiers found in PoE. I challenge you to do the same to back up your weak arguments. Prove it with in-game content. Otherwise you're just proving that this is more about an emotional response and less about a realistic problem with the game.
-
Where?
There are long-ish conversations on the critical path, but they are broken up into small dialog snippets, and - the important ones at least - even voiced.
That's not what people mean when they say "wall of text".
For starters, I was not talking about "what people mean" in a general sense. If you read the conversation, I was talking to a specific person about what that person is specifically stating in regards to Walls of Text.
As for your question, there are plenty of walls of text:
1) Beastiary entries
2) Weapon info
http://www.gamebanshee.com/baldursgateii/equipment/images/shortswordofmaskplus5.jpg
3) Character sheets
http://o.aolcdn.com/hss/storage/adam/123e2b16128934e9aec5e3f297c83a4/pe-ui-character-sheet.jpg
There's even walls of text describing walls in text:
http://fox.mmgn.com/Lib/Images/Reviews/normal/pillars-of-eternity-review-1116151.jpg
Now, provide a screenshot of any NPC in PoE who presents a wall of text that exceeds those standards - since that is what this portion of the conversation is actually about.
-
Here's my thing... Cause you know, you could respond directly and quote-me rather than being passive-aggressive.
Well I could quote where you said, "I personally find WALLS-OF-TEST annoying," but then I might be compelled to point out the bad spelling. I would just rather make a general reference to what you were trying to say, "you personally find a wall of text annoying," and give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you can either remember what you said, or scroll up to reference it. I guess I was too generous though.
Nothing you said just now counters the fact that someone who finds a wall of text annoying would have a hard time in any of the main elements of PoE, since it is full of walls of text.
I find your long-winded explanations to be lengthy attempts to hide the fact that you (appear) jaded by the fact that people who paid larger sums of money to support this game ended up with an icon and text. Your argument of "breaking immersion" seems like a default sound bite. In this case, the backer NPC's and Tombstones serve as little more than easy-to-find Easter Eggs. The gaming industry is full of Easter Eggs, and gamers have historically enjoyed trying to find them. One could argue that Easter Eggs break immersion, but if that's a real problem you're experience while playing the game, then the issue is more player related as opposed to game related.
One of my favorite Easter Eggs is from the NES Game, "The Immortal." If you complete a certain level a certain way, you can meet the game developers and bring them Coffee. I find things like this to be quite enjoyable, whereas you are trying to focus on the lack of immersion; which I find silly.
At best, PoE is guilty of too many openly found Easter Eggs. However, I find them to be a pleasant edition to the ever evolving gaming industry.
-
1
-
-
Hahah
. People are mostly bothered because they stick out like a sore thumb, with the garishly colored nameplates and names most likely written by monkeys on keyboards where the only consonants were X,Y,Z,J.lol, indeed. Although, couldn't we also say that the people complaining are similar monkeys behind similar keyboards?
-
I enjoy the Tombstone and Gold NPC's. I'm not an official backer, but I can't imagine why others would have such animosity towards backer text appearing in a text-based RPG. If you hate "wall of text" then I have no idea how you managed to get beyond the introduction. I can't help but think that people who complain about backer backgrounds in the game via NPC's and Tombstones are simply jealous. That's how it comes across, at least.
-
pfft, ya you also have to update IE mod every time they patch the game.. Almost more baffling how badly they broke experience and refuse to fix it.
Even more baffling is that you sympathize with Mod developers who only have to update their limited work, but show the opposite sentiment for the actual game developers who literally have thousands more tasks to address. I don't pity Mod developers who have to keep their Mod's up to date. If anyone builds a Mod without realizing that the game you're Mod'ing will have updates, then they should find a different hobby. As for the imaginary "broken experience" in Pillars, not only is it far from broken, but PoE as a whole is a game that involves much more than exp grinding. If someone calls the exp gains broken it is only because that player is trying to force PoE to be a game that it isn't meant to be. The fact that the exp gains aren't ideal for you personally doesn't mean that the game is broken overall.
Ya things so desperately needed like story time. give me a break.
Story Time is more important than the "broken exp" you keep complaining about. Story Time will attract a larger target audience to the game, whereas making a few exp tweaks that already exist in a Mod will only serve to squelch a few forum complaints.
Story Time makes business sense, implementing a feature that already exists in a publicly available Mod makes much less sense.
-
2
-
-
Im baffled that the developers refuse to just put that option into the base game.
It's baffling that the developers dont spend time on something that has already been built and widely available, and instead work on things that are needed and unavailable? Yeah, that's crazy
-
2
-
-
I imagine that with Story Mode enabled, the Console version becomes very viable. Not that I would ever suggest playing either in Story Mode nor on a Console, but I can see it happening. I really can't imagine the harm in it, since the end result would be more revenue for OBS, thus more funding to give PoE expansions, updates, and sequels more visibility and impact.
-
What i would love to see in 3.00 is the ability to more easily use abilities.For example when I want a fighter to attempt a knockdown I have to click on the character,then on the knockdown icon and finally click on the actual enemy avatar I want to attempt to knockdown.Is it possible to make it so that whoever the character is attacking is the recipient of the knockdown so that I could just choose my fighter and then click knockdown and they execute another knockdown? This can work well with the other abilities also.
One other thing that I feel would make for a more enjoyable experience in PoE is to have the selection circle of the character you select to become white instead of just a brightness change which is hard to see at times.
Well you can always do number macro's where you attach your knockdown to say a number 3 then click your fighter, press 3, then just already be in position to click the enemy in question.
Dude, that is sooooo.... 1990's gaming
-
The godlike race is pretty over powered as-is when compared to the other races, so I wouldnt mind it if they left Avian or any other variation out of futute updates.
-
Truth is relative and reality is a matter of perception, so there is rarely a situation where reality "says" anything absolute. This particular topic is no exception.
One thing I noticed is this observation, "he couldn't do what he wanted to do at Obsidian because of money." A lack of money is no excuse to fail to dedicate ones talents and skills to a project or task. Yes time is money but if your passion must be bought minute by minute then good riddance, I say.
-
1
-
-
In its current state, Paladins can tank better than Fighters, and have much more utility. I think that an increase in offense would create an obvious imbalance.
and lol @ the Barbarian raging with a high Int. I have to agree, as a high INT implies a strong tendency towards rational thought as opposed to blind rage.
-
Same to you buddy! I love them mule's and have deviated slightly for a Dark n Stormy (same concept, only use a Dark Spiced Rum).
Remember to use your "real time with pause" ability should you have trouble walking or driving later
-
3
-
-
Yeah but Paladins can stand in the middle of Hell itself and tank everyone lol. Any tweaks to offense may upset the balance of the RPG universe
-
1
-
-
My favorite part about the OP's ideas is that he fully covers hatchets and deflection... without questioning the greatness of a Hatchet's Deflection. Hooray for Hatchet Harmony!
Regarding the Barbarian suggestion though:
Barbarian
- Some cool frenzy upgrades are missing. How about one that increases carnage AoE(30%) or one that increases DR(4).The only problem I see with that is that there are currently effective means to largely bolster the AoE radius of a Barbarian (see: maxing Int + Firebrand). Granted, with the current state of Immunities, the Firebrand build is a bit nerf'd; however, we may need to wait 'n see the overall impact of the next big update in January before attempting to analyze significant changes to any class.
-
1
-
-
Great choice on the rogue axe build. I plan to use it after the next update.
. People are mostly bothered because they stick out like a sore thumb, with the garishly colored nameplates and names most likely written by monkeys on keyboards where the only consonants were X,Y,Z,J.
Eric Fenstermaker Narrative Interview at RPG Codex
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted · Edited by Zenbane
"to me he's not saying a 60+ hour game automatically means a lot of time wasting content"
"he's observing that many games with a lot of 'content' are actually just mediocre time wasters"
Those 2 statements seem in direct contradiction. All you did was replaced "60+ hour game" with "a lot of content"
We could easily flip those to read:
"to me he's not saying a lot of content means a lot of time wasting content"
"he's observing that many 60+ hour games are actually just mediocre time wasters"
Oh and you also switch out "saying" with "observing" - which I find interesting since everything is coming from a single article.
The most common way to achieve longer gameplay hours is to... add a lot of content