ogrezilla

Why not just keep going and deal with having a shortage of arrows? because there is no reason not to go get more arrows. If I'm fighting trash monsters I might clear out the level with a sword or dagger or whatever the archer is trained in, but there's no reason to get into any significant fight without arrows. I'd obviously have arrows. And probably food and water. Most likely no elves or dwarf friends with me. And I wouldn't be lugging around 6 suits of armor and 8 battle axes. If I went into a tomb to find a skeleton lord, kill everyone on the first floor and simply left, do you think the skeleton lord would just wait for me to come back without trying to refortify the first floor? Its easier to pretend I have arrows in the same way I pretend my characters eat and go to the bathroom than it is to pretend that I'm not living in a world that only exists for my own amusement. I am specialized in another weapon. It doesn't matter though, because I have no reason not to go buy more arrows. There is no consequence for my poor preparation. I can simply stop what I'm doing and walk back to town. And since I'm going back, I'll take back everything I can carry. I will actually gain money when I run out of arrows because otherwise I would probably leave a lot of the junk items on the ground.

I honestly think running out of arrows in a dungeon, stopping what I'm doing and knowing that the enemies in the dungeon will wait for me to leave and come back is worse for the atmosphere of the game than just having unlimited ammo.

arrow management literally never once required you think think in an old IE game. Not once. It just didn't happen. Even if the number you can hold is limited, as long as they are practically free and unlimited from shops and you can freely return to town whenever you want, then you will never be forced to think about inventory management with standard arrows. The worst that will ever happen is you will walk back to town to get more. Again, I don't really mind it but the people making it sound like managing arrows is anything more than busywork have to be joking. It adds no challenge to the game. There is absolutely no strategy or intelligence required.

With the caveat that I don't know how archery is going to be in PE... I'd argue that the value in archery characters is whether you want them to be less useful or more useful in a combat situation. There are scenarios in the IE games where the best strategy is to have all the characters attacking from a distance. To me the question with an archer was never "Awesome" with a bow & "Useless" with a short sword (or whatever) because the archer characters could still add value to a fight (unlike say a mage with a sling who tended to add very little to a fight). So the management aspect of limited arrows - to my mind - is about where / when you want that character to be at their most useful - which isn't that dissimilar to when / where does your mage unleash the high level spells. And even with limited ammo in the IE games I never felt the need to hoard ammo (unlike spells). yes the walk back to might be tedious but it was generally not something that was needed; I usually had more than enough ammo for the situations or had utility by switching weapons. ya, I don't disagree. It really was rare to run out of arrows at all. Then again, I tend to have a dedicated archer and I pretty never had my non-archers switch to bows, so they were all holding arrows in their ammo slots just for the archer. Its really such a minor issue that I'm not too worried about it either way. My point though, is that I don't remember ever having to make that decision about where or when I wanted the archer to be most useful because I was never in danger of running out of arrows. I just chose to always be most useful and got more arrows when I needed them.

final fantasy tactics did that between each chapter. Really? That's very interesting. The only recent game that had this concept involved a certain Hawke in DA2. Bitter experience, to say the least... from chapter 1 to 2, but its a 2 year jump. You are a cadet in ch 1 and start ch 2 as a part of a group of mercenaries that you've been a part of for an unknown amount of time. Then every time you go from one place to another a day passes on the game calendar. I really don't remember the specific jumps between the other chapters but they were less significant I'm pretty sure. Still, the game probably takes place over a few years instead of a few weeks. Makes me want to try the game out Usually, games gloss over the time aspect. I think having a semi-time system with some measure of aging would really add a lot to a cRPG and immersion. However, it's quite difficult to implement. Having a time system will really make a big dent in immersion when you realize the village you visited 2 years ago looks exactly the same as it does currently. Hey, it even has the same beggar sitting in the exact same place and saying the exact same things.... talk about deja vu don't play FFT if you are looking for a cRPG. It's a great turn based tactical combat game with a completely linear story and good party creation, but there's no real role playing. There are I think two points in the game where you get to choose between two dialogue options. The gameplay consists entirely of party management and combat though. There is a lot of story, but you simply watch it happen like a normal final fantasy game. Though I would argue its a better story than typical final fantasy. And despite being present, the game doesn't really make much use of the time aspect after the jump from chapter one to chapter two. Its there, but it doesn't mean much. It actually has more combat implications than anything else, but they are minor enough (characters have zodiac signs) that I have never cared enough to pay attention to them. So it is a great game, but I don't know if its what you are looking for. Take that village for example. You never actually go into towns except for battles. Everything but combat is handled on a world map including shopping and talking in bars so you don't actually see the towns.

Interesting. The mystery remains, however. What do the guys at Obsidian want with 2D artists? If Project X is not an IE game, could it be a sequel to one of the IE games running on the Onyx Engine and so, therefore, more 2D artists will be needed? Also, the words on the main page lead me to believe that this is going to be a fantasy title rather than Fallout or Alpha Protocol. It's not a mystery. They've already stated they will be using 2D images, presumably mapped onto the 3D representation in the isometric perspective. to be fair, I don't think that was the case on september 12th when this thread was made

I get why people would want it in games where you essentially only control one character like Kotor and dragon age. Even though you can switch between them, its really clunky and you are always only controlling one of them. But in an isometric game, I don't get it either. We are controlling the whole party. It's not like its 6 players each controlling one character and the poor mage player has to sit in the corner. Even in party-based games many folks identify with their PC in a way that they don't identify with companions and like that character to contribute. That said, my concern is less how powerful mages are than class balance, which can be achieved in a variety of ways. fair enough. I wouldn't be against the ability to specialize a mage so that they are more consistently casting low to mid level spells as long as the option to have the classic mage is still available too.

I'm sorry but in light of our arrow discussions, that quote makes me laugh

final fantasy tactics did that between each chapter. Really? That's very interesting. The only recent game that had this concept involved a certain Hawke in DA2. Bitter experience, to say the least... from chapter 1 to 2, but its a 2 year jump. You are a cadet in ch 1 and start ch 2 as a part of a group of mercenaries that you've been a part of for an unknown amount of time. Then every time you go from one place to another a day passes on the game calendar. I really don't remember the specific jumps between the other chapters but they were less significant I'm pretty sure. Still, the game probably takes place over a few years instead of a few weeks.

I get why people would want it in games where you essentially only control one character like Kotor and dragon age. Even though you can switch between them, its really clunky and you are always only controlling one of them. But in an isometric game, I don't get it either. We are controlling the whole party. It's not like its 6 players each controlling one character and the poor mage player has to sit in the corner.

Just like high-level D&D mages.... * ZING * except gandalf was way more badass duel wielding a sword and a staff I am hoping the game allows for a wide variety of mages. Old school mages that don't cast often, but when they cast you damn sure notice. Mages that are able to actually hold their own with a weapon. Even mages that are more of a steady stream of mediocre spells if that's anybody's cup of tea.

Whether ammo items have weight or not is a separate matter from whether the player should have infinity arrows. Why stop with arrows, why not provide unlimited crossbow quarrels, arquebus rounds, throwing knives, spears, etc.? How about unlimited traps? I'd be interested to know where the heck the PC is getting all this magical infinite stuff. Does he have some sort of magic bag of holding? Is it really any different from providing the player with unlimited crafting supplies, or unlimited healing/mana potions, for example? First, this is very unrealistic and breaks immersion for some of us. It makes archery feel a bit more like shooting a magic laser gun. It can also lead to balance issues, resulting in very weak arrows or cooldowns for archery abilities. And it's also a problem for those of us who enjoy role playing our characters, making choices based on what we think they would want to do. If I'm playing an archer, his bow and arrows are his most important items. He's going to want to learn how to craft them, perhaps improve their quality, explore the word and find crafting recipes or learn them from NPCs. He's going to want to find, steal, or save up and buy the best damn arrows he can get his hands on. And he won't waste them, he's going to make each shot count. It's hard to do this if he gets a magic dimensional portal in his arrow quiver with infinite arrows. Things like throwing knives and axes at least cost a few more gold and took up a lot more inventory space. The arrows, bolts and bullets were all effectively unlimited; we just had the shopkeeper store them for us in HIS bag of unlimited holding. I don't understand, so you are saying the problem is that you think arrows are too cheap and they don't weigh enough? I think they are at a meaningless middle ground where they are neither limited nor convenient. They add nothing to the game other than tedium. So yes, I would rather they actually make managing my ammunition meaningful. If they aren't going to do that, I'd rather they just make them unlimited because as is they are already essentially unlimited, I just have to waste a few minutes going back to my source of unlimited arrows every once in a while. The managing of ammunition in its current form adds no real value to the game. No extra challenge or strategy. Just tedium.

Whether ammo items have weight or not is a separate matter from whether the player should have infinity arrows. Why stop with arrows, why not provide unlimited crossbow quarrels, arquebus rounds, throwing knives, spears, etc.? How about unlimited traps? I'd be interested to know where the heck the PC is getting all this magical infinite stuff. Does he have some sort of magic bag of holding? Is it really any different from providing the player with unlimited crafting supplies, or unlimited healing/mana potions, for example? First, this is very unrealistic and breaks immersion for some of us. It makes archery feel a bit more like shooting a magic laser gun. It can also lead to balance issues, resulting in very weak arrows or cooldowns for archery abilities. And it's also a problem for those of us who enjoy role playing our characters, making choices based on what we think they would want to do. If I'm playing an archer, his bow and arrows are his most important items. He's going to want to learn how to craft them, perhaps improve their quality, explore the word and find crafting recipes or learn them from NPCs. He's going to want to find, steal, or save up and buy the best damn arrows he can get his hands on. And he won't waste them, he's going to make each shot count. It's hard to do this if he gets a magic dimensional portal in his arrow quiver with infinite arrows. Things like throwing knives and axes at least cost a few more gold and took up a lot more inventory space. The arrows, bolts and bullets were all effectively unlimited; we just had the shopkeeper store them for us in HIS bag of unlimited holding. It had no influence on balance because there was never ever a reason to get into a fight without arrows. If you ran out it was because you simply forgot to check how many you had left. Had you noticed, there wouldn't have been some tough decision to make. There would have been a casual stroll back to town. The dungeon would wait exactly as it was. Every time. If anything, giving me that reason to go back to town an extra time probably made me money since I got to empty my bags. Otherwise I would have just left a bunch of junk on the floor of the dungeon. The breaking of immersion is really the only decent argument I have heard.

Joker_and_here_we_go.gif I have reasons to believe, this guy lives in his own world and shouldn't be treated seriously. Check his intelectual gems from Food thread. I omit his mutually exclusive statements, where he has nothing against limited things (just walking out from partially exterminated location ruines his immershun) I'm basically talking about the same situation proposed by Swayer in the cooldown thread yesterday. When your best course of action is to backtrack through completely safe areas back to camp, what is the actual value of that walk? In my opinion, there is none. I am not alone in that thought. Again, my point is this. Tedium for the sake of tedium is boring and adds nothing to the game. Tedium itself is not a good enough deterrent to enforce smart play. It adds no difficulty or challenge to the game. Yet it is the only punishment for poor resource management in pretty much every IE game. Every resource is either readily available or easily replenished. You never need to make difficult choices. You never need to strategically use your resources. Because you can always just go get more. There's nothing inherently wrong with it, its just boring. And I'm of the opinion that they should either improve it by going one way or the other. Either make resource management more important, or make it less tedious. If they don't, whatever. Not a big deal. Just a little bit of tedium in the game. PS: I stand by all of the statements you quoted. They aren't that hard to understand. They are just examples of what I said in the above paragraph. The last one being my poor attempt at bringing humor to the situation.

this game is not using D&D rules, is it? It might take some ideas, but there's no reason to expect this game to limit itself with rules designed for a completely different type of game. The devs will balance things on their own because it makes sense for this game, not because some dungeons and dragons manual told them to.

But that never happens. The character never stops being usable even if all they can use is a bow. You just walk back to town and grab more arrows from the unlimited supply. It never once had an impact on the game aside from adding a few minutes to your completion time. It's not a question of fun so much as the challenge the game presents. If you have unlimited ammo, you lose some of the challenge since you can just always have everyone fire arrows at the enemy before they get in melee range. Having limited arrows makes you manage how often you can do that, and for how long. what challenge did it add? You chose not to keep your characters stocked, but that was your own self imposed rule. Every one of your characters had access to unlimited arrows; you just chose not to use them. Its not a big enough deal that I really would be upset or anything if they are "limited" like they were in the old games. It was easy enough to go get more. It just felt like tedium for the sake of "realism" even though I was carrying an unrealistic amount of arrows on my party full of dwarfs and elves and magic users. I still say either actually make them limited or make them unlimited; the middle ground where they are unlimited except I have to waste a few minutes occasionally just isn't good design. People who want smart resource management don't get it and people who don't want tedium do get it. Nobody wins. It's just barely enough to justify it with immersion.

There was a long discussion with one of the devs - characters will run out of spells during fights if the idea doesn't radically change before they start programming it. So basically, mages are going to be nerfed like usual, sucks for us who play mage characters...like usual. Also, they said we can play solo, so I would like them to explain how a mage could go through a game solo without being forced to learn something unmagey things. Someone explained mages as glass cannons, they are super powerful, but they are weak physically, that was the trade off. I do agree to a point, but they dont need to be so weak that one hit kills mages (I have had that happen in a few games...I was like, what the hell just happened?!?!?!). They did say mages would wear armour, which I suppose is good, but I an not a fan of them being forced to use swords or other wepons, that is another class all together. simply put, nobody has said that.

I'm assuming not for characters who were regularly equipped with ranged weapons? Or did you just not use full time ranged characters?

considering how easy and insignificant it was to get more arrows, I really don't see how limiting them had any effect on the balance of the game. It seriously never ever had any influence on a fight. You could go get more at any moment with no disadvantage; just a few wasted minutes. There was never a reason to ever use basic arrows any more sparingly than you would have if they were unlimited. upgraded arrows are a different story and I am glad they were limited.

so when you run out of arrows in a game like icewind dale, do you really enjoy walking back to town to buy more? Does it actually add any value to the game? I mean, its a minor enough hassle that I really don't mind keeping up with arrows. I just don't get what is enjoyable about it. Seems like realism for the sake of realism to buy arrows for your elf. Never played icewind dale, but if ammo is scarce in a game it makes it so much more enjoyable to find some arrows after killing some enemy archer, for example. If I'm playing a character who specializes in archery and I run out of arrows, perhaps I'll pick up some other weapon to use in the meantime, or try to sneak and avoid enemies. If you were an archer in a dangerous place, how would you handle the situation? It becomes important to plan your shots carefully and take caution not to waste any. I would actually really enjoy a setup like you are describing. I guess the problem is that arrows were never scarce in any of the games I've played including the IE games. And if you did happen to run out you could easily go get more. So none of that other stuff ever mattered. Simply taking a few minutes to get more arrows was a very unsatisfying way to handle the situation. If I was actually forced to be smart with the arrows it would be a good setup.

so when you run out of arrows in a game like icewind dale, do you really enjoy walking back to town to buy more? Does it actually add any value to the game? I mean, its a minor enough hassle that I really don't mind keeping up with arrows. I just don't get what is enjoyable about it. Seems like realism for the sake of realism to buy arrows for your elf.

final fantasy tactics did that between each chapter.

"i ran out of arrows. Bad guys please wait here while I go get more back in town" grueling realism there. Really kept me immersed in the game. If anything it made things easier because it was an excuse to go rest up and sell whatever stuff I had to make more inventory space.

ya, it was nothing but busy work in IWD at least. It never once led to a situation where I had to strategically conserve arrows or figure out what to do when I ran out. You simply use arrows until you run out. Then you walked to town and got more. Which was rare since everyone in my party who didn't use a ranged weapon carried extra arrows anyways.

that was me and you still don't get my point at all. I actually said my preferred solution would be to punish bad resource management more severely by somehow forcing you to continue on without being able to buy more arrows. And they should actually be somewhat expensive. But the old games never once punished you for running out of arrows. Walking back to town isn't a punishment, its simply a minor waste of time. If the consequence for running out of arrows is completely insignificant like walking back to town, then I would absolutely just rather have unlimited arrows. Limited basic arrows that cost 1 gold per stack and require nothing but a walk back to town adds absolutely no value to the game. They are effectively unlimited anyway, they just require a minor inconvenience occasionally. And I definitely think any upgraded ammunition should be limited.