Infinitron

Yes, of course my argument is an oversimplification but then again, so was yours. I agree that both mechanics can incentivize players, but which is more effective?

The following was not written by me. Aeschylus said:

This is a high fantasy role playing game. What could you possibly advertise in it?

http://www.kickstart...sidian/comments Feargus says:

Because this thread isn't about whether or not Project Eternity will be a hack and slash game or about health regen or anything else. It's a poll about the experience mechanic.

Don't expect too much. The Wasteland 2 forums have been in a semi-coma since that game's Kickstarter ended. Granted, Obsidian is a larger company and they might have more time to engage the community with new information, but there's only so much you can say about a game that's still so far away from release.

Indeed, and PE is no hack and slash. So how am I completely wrong?

You wouldn't need to get a quest to kill the dragon from somebody else. Presumably upon meeting the dragon you would get a bit of dialog with him, challenge him to a fight, and defeating the dragon would turn out to be an objective in and of itself.

I agree bro, there's no better incentive to explore areas full of monsters that want to kill you than awarding no xp for killing them. On the contrary, since monsters are monsters are monsters, what is your incentive to explore any particular area if you can get the same amount of XP from grinding monsters in an area you've already explored? Objective-based XP incentivizes you to go to new places and do new things.

Repeating myself:

You are assuming that's an invalid reason. But Josh is the game designer and he can indeed dictate to you how to play his game. Luckily, strict rules and limitations aren't necessarily unfun.

There's an unspoken assumption here that you really, urgently NEED that granular level of experience you'd get from only partially clearing the dungeon. But I don't think you do, not really. Not everything in a game needs to reward you. As long as the game is built around its experience mechanic effectively, it shouldn't really bother anyone.

It's called 'loot'.

Nah, that's not what the poll is about. I'm trying to measure support for Josh Sawyer's design philosophy specifically. I'm sure everybody here has his own set of compromises he's willing to make but that's not what I'm interested in.

Dude, it's fine to dislike this. It's not cool though to try to use your pledge as a threat. That wording is actually pretty horrible. I disagree. Let the man do what he wants with his money. Not all games are for everybody. None of would be here supporting this game if we didn't agree with that.

Like I said, this is really a larger question about the gameplay structure the game will provide. Paraphrasing some previous posts of mine:

That's not really true. Josh has actually gotten a lot hate on the Codex, for cooldowns and other things. It's just that objective-based systems have been proven to work great for games based more on choices and consequences and reactivity than on sandboxy romping, and that particular subgenre of RPG seems to be Obsidian's core competency.

Made a poll for this: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61543-are-you-for-or-against-gaining-experience-points-only-for-completing-objectives/

Josh Sawyer recently said: Which caused a bit of an uproar among certain folks on the forum. I'm not sure if there's been a poll about this already, but in any case, the issue has now become much more salient. What do you think? Let's find out what the majority wants.

The thing here is that this is so much more complex than simply saying "I want to get xp for killing monsters". That in itself is meaningless unless the game itself is structured in such a way that it really rewards the kind of exploration and grinding experience that Monte wants. The game that Obsidian want to make doesn't sound like it will provide that kind of structure, even if it DOES end up handing out experience rewards for monster-slaying. So what would be the point of it?

Ah, I see. So, Monte Carlo, what you want is an isometric sandbox, basically?

You basically described a typical sandbox RPG, then proceeded to claim that you "hate sandboxes". I...don't know what to say to that. I'd better get out of this thread before I get warned by one of the mods.