Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Undecaf

Members
  • Content Count

    792
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Undecaf last won the day on March 12 2012

Undecaf had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

324 Excellent

About Undecaf

  • Rank
    (6) Magician

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Location
    Finland

Badges

  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer
  1. That Eora is located in the Serpens constellation.
  2. Indeed. Combat rolling is a cancer of the combat design these days.
  3. I'd hope they step away from the PoE system and instead, whilst going fo open classes still. Where you have an advantage if you build your character according to your class choice; where you can build a potent fighter even if you are druid, but put those limitations on how far skills (actual skills, none of that PoE "specialization" stuff) can advance. And move on from there.
  4. I'm not objecting to crafting and all that, but what I would want first an fromest, before even thinking of those, is rich character systems that create the feeling that that what ever you're doing, matters some how. One of the good things about TES games of yore, was precisely that. Even moving aroung affected character progression somehow, and the systems therein seeped into other systems, e.g. fatigue affecting chances of success in locpicking, spellcasting and hitting your targets, succesfully creating your potions, etc. That's the sort of feeling I miss in todays games. The feel of playing a PnP session where the GM means business when it comes to systems and character progression.
  5. It really has a bad rep for a reason. What I'm after is much more systemic, and less player driven even though player input is (obviously) required. The point would be to create a situation where the dialog feel like it is occupying the player more whilst retaining the stat driven nature. What that would be in practice in up for debate and requires more thought, but the core idea would be to (with help from other features) make non combat gameplay more interesting and involving so as to step away from the basic cycle in which these games normally operate... which is walk-talk-kill, rinse and repeat. E.g. what would it require to make the walking part interesting aside from combat encounters, what would elevate the talking sequences from simply picking lines, and, well, the killing part could use some systemic flavor too because we've already seen the basics of it in dozens upon dozens of games. Push the envelope on mechanical and systems design. People are not shy anymore of more systems driven gameplay. Creating a "superb" story whilst keeping all else simple and fluid doesn't do anything good anymore, only lukewarmth. But yeah, this is starting to veer off from "speech skills discussion" so that's where the point is.
  6. I would prefer if Obsidian used their current system for skillchecks (that all stats can produce them, and they only drive the discussion towards a certain direction and don't work as "win-buttons"), but I would also like if there were actual "speech" skills like persuasion, intimidation, deception, mercantile, seduction, etc, that were actually put in more "hands-on" use. So that for example, you would actually have to do something to haggle - even if it was something as simple as in Morrowind on choosing how much discount you wanted. Gamify those options that cater to the "opponents" senses and good will, so that the situations in dialog was more... interesting than simply picking tagged lines.
  7. Depends. They might (should?) give the characters looks a gameplay function. Size and ”beauty” and shape (athletic, chubby...) can be used to create large anounts of in-game reactivity and functionality. Synergize that with an actually broad and comprehensive skill system and you might have something that actually pushes the genre forward in some respects.
  8. If only... I'd love myself a good blobber here.
  9. I don't understand. Are playing games not because of the experience they offer, but because of their sequels? What if there are none to be had? Also, I do not think this game is a "sequel" to Deadfire.
  10. Only if they managed to pull off broader systems for characterprogression and interactivity. Better narrative design is almost a given.
  11. Same. Get creative with one thing and design around what that one thing offers.
  12. I don't really care about how they handle the animations. If there are robust systems underneath that gradually improve the gameplay through the progression elements (skills and attributes) so that the player actually feels the progression from **** to good, I'm more than fine.
  13. Ok, sure. Let's just hope the design here becomes a bit more than what is the standard simplicity for first person games in general.
  14. I wouldn't say so by default. It's the gameplay design that decides that.
  15. I don't know anything about that TT game of his other than it being in the works. There any merit in it, or is it all still shrouded?
×
×
  • Create New...