Living One

That's not the point*:the problem with DAO is that (as I wrote above) it took compromises to accomodate that playstyle.Of course PE might not take such compromises but in that case why waste resources to implement a system that's not a viable gameplay option? *and neither is the quality of the options DAO offered:it was the pretense to make that system a valid alternative.In this case offering just a handful of options(as mentioned by others) would be better because there would be no attempts to make such system so useful.

I'll repeat myself:NO.It was a dumb feature for those who couldn't be arsed to manage their party and it brought several problems I listed in the post above. End of rine.

So...there are not enough resources for additional combat animations but they can afford to make(and possibly animate!)some virtual pet.Nice prioritizing Obsidian. Also lol at inside-combat cooldowns.I don't know if I should hope for shorter battles(likely too simple but inside combat kool-downs should be out) or longer ones(more complex but with the annoying wait for kool-downs and possibly spammable magic). At this point I'm seriously hoping non-combat solutions will be a prevalent option even if I was hoping to get some nice dungeon crawling fix out of this game.

Nice update.

This.I honestly hope we won't get a 'walk-self contained fight-walk-self contained fight' game were the overall experience feels splittable in many pieces.It's basically the argument about a game being more or less than the sum of its parts(if fights are mostly self contained experiences it's likely going to be a case of 'less of its parts' since there's little to link these parts to one another.)

You're not,but when you read about LARPers getting all 'emushonal' about the back-story they made up themeselves about their characters and their mules while disregarding game mechanics(you know the medium's language...such petty details compared to teh emushonz of LARPing) as a mere annoiance between them and their 'emushonal engajment' losing some IQ points and getting depressed about humanity and not bothering is an obvious outcome.

Excellent ideas,expecially the Neal Hallford one since the BaK spiritual successor won't happen because binding its fate to some obscure,well hidden poll on the net isn't the best idea ever.

Cooldowns to replace resting sounds acceptable but there is still this potential problem.Then again I can live with it(sort of).

Great!Considering this and the fact that the cooldowns doesn't sound as annoying as I thought(though I still don't get how they'll deal with the 'stand around after battle and wait for cooldowns') there are some p.good news today.

I really don't know how people are reading these quotes and coming to the conclusion that we are getting the DA:O combat system. So,it's basically the same as Vancian with flawed resting,the difference being you don't have to press a rest button?Again,I would have prefered if they fixed the system instead of going this route.Plus,this way don't I just have to stand still after a battle to wait for the cooldown? In any case I'll still go for a wait and see approach. I wonder about the standing around myself. I hope they aren't just hoping the hassle of standing around will be enough to discourage it. One way to deal with that would be making time move with in game triggers instead of with real time. So when you travel to a new screen, some amount of game time passes. That way the developers know exactly how many spells you will recharge before entering each new area. It would need to work in a way that you can't just go back and forth obviously. Then each area can be designed knowing that you have a finite number of spells to get through it and the encounters can be balanced for that. Either have fights like random skeletons and whatnot to add attrition or more difficult encounters where you will need multiple spells for one fight. Keep in mind, I'm not a developer. I'm some guy who came up with that in about 2 minutes as I typed it out. I don't want to increase the number of potentially pointless speculations but: 1-I remember(I think) Sawyer,during some conference with devs or something,saying that his solution to prevent the players from save scumming in front of the slot machines(Fallout New Vegas) was to put a short time limit(aka cooldown or stand around) to the slot machines usage upon reloading. 2-Arcanum's fatigue system was open to the stand around problem.And this is made from PE's other designer. Granted,they may have different views now, or maybe they always thought there were better ways but that was the only viable solution due Arcanum's messy development or FO3 save system or something else,etc.

I really don't know how people are reading these quotes and coming to the conclusion that we are getting the DA:O combat system. So,it's basically the same as Vancian with flawed resting,the difference being you don't have to press a rest button?Again,I would have prefered if they fixed the system instead of going this route.Plus,this way don't I just have to stand still after a battle to wait for the cooldown? In any case I'll still go for a wait and see approach.

I really didn't get the impression that it would be the same system as DA or MMORPGs. They still talked about strategically choosing spells and specifically avoided the rest system in the old games. Most importantly, these game developers aren't stupid. They know what they are doing. Too bad there are no other current definition of cooldown system.And we are not sure they do.Keep in mind Obsidian survived Troika due to better business acumen.I honestly wouldn't be surprised if some of the most questionable decisions(generic fantasy,level scaling like DAO,cooldowns) were attempts to pander to disgruntled DAO fans. long cooldowns still fit that definition but have a completely different impact on game design and combat. Then why haven't they clarified anything?And will there still be meaningful resource-management if they really go with cooldowns?They frequent internet communities,they'd likely know about the rep of cooldowns,yet they don't clear things up.I guess I'll have to wait and see if I should re-pledge or not. I hate to speculate, but its 7 in the morning where they are, so its reasonable to assume its because they are sleeping. And was there meaningful resource management in any of the old IE games? Not really. And definitely not when it comes to spells. When I said about clarifyng was more about being clearer from the start(hence why I wondered if they knew about cooldowns and how they are viewed).But,then again Wirdjos is probably right and they don't know yet.As for management of spells I would have prefered if they tried to fix the problem instead of going with cooldowns. Anyway it doesn't matter.I'll just have to wait and see and decide to either pledge,buy it normally or not.

To clarify one thing:this shouldn't mean that said 'scaled encounters' should scale enough to make levelling up as pointless as it is in a level-scaling contest.Just some minor tweaks,not a major encounter overhaul.

I really didn't get the impression that it would be the same system as DA or MMORPGs. They still talked about strategically choosing spells and specifically avoided the rest system in the old games. Most importantly, these game developers aren't stupid. They know what they are doing. Too bad there are no other current definition of cooldown system.And we are not sure they do.Keep in mind Obsidian survived Troika due to better business acumen.I honestly wouldn't be surprised if some of the most questionable decisions(generic fantasy,level scaling like DAO,cooldowns) were attempts to pander to disgruntled DAO fans. long cooldowns still fit that definition but have a completely different impact on game design and combat. Then why haven't they clarified anything?And will there still be meaningful resource-management if they really go with cooldowns?They frequent internet communities,they'd likely know about the rep of cooldowns,yet they don't clear things up.I guess I'll have to wait and see if I should re-pledge or not.

I really didn't get the impression that it would be the same system as DA or MMORPGs. They still talked about strategically choosing spells and specifically avoided the rest system in the old games. Most importantly, these game developers aren't stupid. They know what they are doing. Too bad there are no other current definition of cooldown system.And we are not sure they do.Keep in mind Obsidian survived Troika due to better business acumen.I honestly wouldn't be surprised if some of the most questionable decisions(generic fantasy,level scaling like DAO,cooldowns) were attempts to pander to disgruntled DAO fans.

So much butthurt from the candylanders. By the way has Obsidian already confirmed linear dungeons to not get lost or are they saving it to attract the DA crowd even more later?And what about quest markers?

I don't know why I'm even bothering after the level-scaling/cooldowns combo and reading Sawyer's posts about accessibilty at SA but,yes level scaling is bad and lazy and it should be encounters the ones to get more attention. Then again,clowndowns are bad and lazy too and they are still in.

Some people really don't like to read it seems.That is a problem with RESTING and can accour in every other non-vancian system.

Vancian sucks. Remove evdk from premises. Good design advice. Funny that none of them work in the gaming industry then. Funny that rpgs turned **** by following crowds that disgree with them.

Oh,I'm sure they'll listen.To the romance creeps.Also,yes sure they really are showing their integrity.For realsies.

Couldn't be arsed to read the whole thread.Is this one of those "whining because everything isn't candyland" kind of things? Also,glad to see what really is Obsidian after all thes years of 'we would like to do more it's just the publishers!1!'. I bet even David Gaider and Todd Howard would kickstart a less popamole game if they had a chance.

Purpose for mana points and cooldowns are same Barely, and in very different ways, especially where mana regen is involved. Cooldowns aren't strictly about limiting resources, but limiting the overuse of power moves/abilities in a short spawn of time. Memorization is all about limiting your resources for a fairly large amount of time (i.e. "I'm entering this dungeon now and I know that if I don't want to make a boring travel back to town I'll need to use these resources carefully"). Mana is a limited resource in the sense that gives you a limit of spells you can use in a row, but doesn't prevent you to use, for instance, the same useful but inexpensive spell very often as far as mana is available. So, if what you are trying to say is that every mechanic can find its place in a game, then I agree with you; if you are saying that they are essentially the same thing, then you are wrong. (1)DA:O had mana points AND cooldowns in same system and that prevented quite effectively you from overusing most powerful spells. Friendly fire was another thing they used to stop spamming of area effect spells´and those worked great. It's not about actual system; it's about how they implement them. Same goals can be achieved with much smoother and rewarding systems than Vancian. That's just you playing poorly and/or exploiting the system. If anything the problem with IE games was that they didn't punished/discouraged that kind of behavior hardly enough. Resting in the middle of a dungeon should be far more dangerous and going back to town to rest should be far more problematic (i.e. you end wasting way too much time to end a timed quest or like in Dark Souls when you rest all minor enemies respawn with you). Of course, developers usually don't like these punishing mechanics, despise how they make things much more interesting, because there are many people, even on this forum, that don't like to play to master the mechanics but "just for the story", (2)I don't know about you, but I play games for fun; not to get punished. I mean difficulty is always welcome, but punishment for playing poorly? Wow, you must be one of those hardcore fans then? (1)Hint:there should be no such nonsense as overpowered spells.Cooldowns are a lazy way out for designers who cannot balance.Those who can don't use 'em.* (2)How does even make sense 'welcoming difficulty' and 'disliking punishment' at the same time? *edit:also,you say it's not about the system and then go on criticizing the actual Vancian system?The fact is that the system per se does matter just like the execution.And a cooldown system is inherently inferior in this type of game because it's an additional timing mechanic in a system where the pause function itself admits that focus on timing is getting limited in favour of different tactical considerations(pause is there so you can manage your party) and also because said timing mechanic is unrelated to the characteristics of the spells,being insead a tackled on counter(the time it takes for a fireball to cast and land instead is related).So,no cooldowns are not a smoother and rewarding system.

lol Don't let the door hit you on the way out, right? "My way or ignore list." The less of those responses on the forum, the better. fix'd

This.I seriously think magic system should be the subject of a next update. Expecially ruling OUT cooldowns would be nice.

They are free market research for the games developer, all of the information on what people do in the game is available to them. Dragon Age 2 was done like this,with data from the first game gathered as you describe. As far as I'm aware they only looked at the fact that barely anyone finished the game so they made it easier. The fact remains that achievements offer the developer some feedback. If they then go full retard with the results it's not exactly the fault of the information. It actually is more than that:while scouting the BSN for lulz I recall Gaiderp saying that data indicated romances were pretty popular and that's why they are buffing them up.It's likely they used said data for much more. Fake edit:now that I recall data gathering was also behind scrapping non-human origins. Anyway this would be going a bit OT now.