AdaMusic

Yay! Let us casualize cRPGs to aRPGs a lá Diablo 3 where everything needs to happen quick and instant.

Even better idea.

You are contradicting yourself. We are the beta testers and we are verifying problems by debating stuff in this forum. I think "no bad builds" will always be a failure. Just makes the whole choice of stats totally uninteresting and unimportant. If I can just pick random stats and still have a good character in all situations then you have totally failed with game design.

Would be better than the current system.

Reading this thread and following critique even more makes me feel like the encumbrance system and stash system are both two bad systems. Personally I like the encumbrance system better since it is more close to how I picture reality in a fantasy world.

You do realise that Sawyer is not a fan of Baldur's Gate 2. Right? Huh? Where? How? When?

Well by looking at this thread I don't seem to be in a minority. On your points: 1. Why is it less strategic to be able to prepare for many situations? It is more complex than the RPS situation given by the stash inventory. To me it is like you're saying chess is less strategic than rock paper scissors because chess is more complex. 2. I feel like the current stash system has more annoying micro-managing. Instead of having 1 inventory per character we now have 1 inventory per character + a stash "bag". The stash bag in itself is unintiutive making the micro-management make less sense to the player. It's not a point for one or the other system. If it is, then the IE encumbrance system has less micro-management because of less amount of bags/chests/stashes/inventories. 3. I feel like you only express how you or a very small minority does this. I don't think the majority walks back and forth to a dungeon just so that he or she can grab exactly every possible trash loot and optimize how much money they get from a RPG run. 4. Nostalgia, yes, but more important convention. There is a reason why games, movies, etc, etc ... uses conventions to simplify things without losing complexity. The encumbrance inventory system is a brilliant example of a convention that has been used in multiple games with success. The biggest pro is that even if you're new to the game you'll probably understand the concept.

You basically ignore the arguments for the encumbrance based inventory system given in this thread. I'd love to see you actually meet the arguments and in that way convince us/yourself/the developers/someone why the stash system is in fact better.

The number of people who we know have access to the backer beta (from the Kickstarter numbers) is 7615. The 109 people who've voted only represent 1.4% of the backers. Ignoring the self-selction angle, my memory of statistics is that to draw conclusions to the greater population you'd want about 10% of the population voting (762 or so) at the bare minimum. You'd also want those 762 randomly sampled (ie not self selecting) to hope for any kind of validity to the results. My hope with quest/Objective XP was that it would give value to differing play styles (diplomatic, stealth) without devaluing killing things. That would be an improvement (IMO- I know many differ on this) to how the IE games did it. But I also acknowledge that if we're talking about spiritual successors to the IE games, combat in those games is required and is rewarded and (in the end) kill XP isn't inherently "bad" in and of itself. Player level almost only affects combat. Why would dialogue give XP that rewards the player by making him or her stronger in battle? Doesn't make sense. It would make sense if the player level didn't just indicate how strong a character is combat wise. And how does combat make someone better at stealthing? Or lockpicking? Or identifying rare items and stuff? XP is generalized and abstracted, don't try to apply some 1:1 logic to it. What you are saying is exactly the point that I am trying to make.

The number of people who we know have access to the backer beta (from the Kickstarter numbers) is 7615. The 109 people who've voted only represent 1.4% of the backers. Ignoring the self-selction angle, my memory of statistics is that to draw conclusions to the greater population you'd want about 10% of the population voting (762 or so) at the bare minimum. You'd also want those 762 randomly sampled (ie not self selecting) to hope for any kind of validity to the results. My hope with quest/Objective XP was that it would give value to differing play styles (diplomatic, stealth) without devaluing killing things. That would be an improvement (IMO- I know many differ on this) to how the IE games did it. But I also acknowledge that if we're talking about spiritual successors to the IE games, combat in those games is required and is rewarded and (in the end) kill XP isn't inherently "bad" in and of itself. Player level almost only affects combat. Why would dialogue give XP that rewards the player by making him or her stronger in battle? Doesn't make sense. It would make sense if the player level didn't just indicate how strong a character is combat wise.

In the backer beta forum there has been discussion on the subject of inventory systems. Most people in the backer beta forum seem to agree that the "PoE stash" system is inferior to the "IE encumbrance" system in terms of strategy, immersion, convention and simplicity (i.e. the "PoE stash" system is more complicated without adding any complexity). While watching Twitch the new inventory systems seems unintuitive because nearly ever player I've seen has misunderstood the concept. Even when they understand the concept the stash is not even used in the intended way (described in PoE updates). See this thread for the ongoing backer beta discussion (and motivation/arguments for why the "PoE stash" system is inferior): http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67254-feedback-about-the-new-inventory-the-stash-system/ My suggestion is to change the "PoE" stash system to the "IE encumbrance" system seen in games like BG, BG2, IWD, NWN and Elder Scrolls. Thoughts?

Not to be "that" guy, but a poll with around 100 votes dosnt really mean anything.... I'll be that guy, anonymous self-selecting internet polls are worthless. Your population is so limited (and again, self-selecting) that any attempt to draw the conclusion of such a poll to the larger society would carry a huge margin of error rendering it meaningless. They can be fun, but certainly not definitive. Can someone give a link to this poll?

Yea that map looks like a map from a classic dungeon crawler to me #sarcasm. "There are multiple dungeons in BG2 therefor it must be a dungeon crawler"... ... "There are multiple sex scenes in Mass Effect therefor it must be a sex simulator" ... ... "Oh did I forget to mention that the creator of Mass Effect likes sex?"

I guess I was not clear on how the stash works. I had assumed it was just for your stronghold, not a magical bottomless chest you take everywhere. That does seem like a bad idea. What I do like is the group inventory screen. That's a major improvement over constantly having so swap loot between characters. I think you should have a very large bag space with a weight limit. Agreed. That seems to be what mostly people want. And also search and sorting by weight, value or other tags.

Really? Not one thing. I think you are overreacting. Well.. there are lots of improvements engine wise (dynamic lightning, "2.5D", etc) and graphically (backgrounds, props, etc) but the game design changes are mostly for worse. The only good one I can come up with is the new dialogue system which has some kind of AI that "remembers" what kind of character you are playing. And about the bad game design choices: 1. I don't like the new inventory system; it is more casual (less immersion and takes less strategical thought than the IE inventory system) while being more complicated (for argumentation see the thread about the stack inventory system). 2. I also think that the new stats are less immersive because they do not describe a character as good as "classical" stats, such as charisma, strength and dexterity (what does "Might" really mean? Feels much more vague). 3. I dislike the new approach to making "all classes interesting"; because it makes magic less interesting and special; compare D&D (IE) to WoW (PoE). It also makes combat slower without adding strategy, fun or immersion. I feel like this is also a way to casualize. 1. I like the streamlined inventory system but have not read the thread you refer to, can you link it? 2. Here I agree with you. 3. All classes should be interesting. I'm not sure how it makes a game casual to give non-magical characters skills and abilities. It sure feels fun to me. Other game design improvements: the engagement system, Ranger animal companions, and the scouting system are three that come to mind right off the top of my head. 1. Here is the thread about the new inventory system: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67254-feedback-about-the-new-inventory-the-stash-system/ 2. - 3. I agree that all classes should be interesting. In my opinion, they already were in the old IE games. While fighters were gear based the mages were ability based. It made sense. I don't think this game design change is a "failure" because it can work if you want a more "high fantasy" touch where magic is not as "special" as in the IE games. I just think it is a bad decision because: I. It cost more time and cash to develop. II. It doesn't really make fighters more interesting. III. It makes magic less "special". Other game design improvements: Yea you are right. These are improvements. I was too harsh.

Haha. XD Yea.. the stash inventory system seems to be a failure.

Agree 100%. These small but relevant changes could be the difference of PoE being "a cRPG" or "a masterpiece".

I was hoping for something inbetween PST and BG2. In my opinion BG2 had better game design and GUI while PST was far more hm.. philosophically interesting and I also liked the even "harder" focus on dialogue. That is not something in between, that is PST in BG2 UI and using BG2 game mechanics. They never promised that, they just said story and conversations will be more in line with PST quality than BG2. I have never said they promised something else than they are giving us. I am just here to give feedback hoping the devs will make the game closer to my vision of the perfect cRPG (BG2 game design/graphics with PST story/conversations). Dialogue wise and graphically the beta is very promising. I think the game only need to work on a few tweaks on models and some bigger tweaks on game design.

Really? Not one thing. I think you are overreacting. Well.. there are lots of improvements engine wise (dynamic lightning, "2.5D", etc) and graphically (backgrounds, props, etc) but the game design changes are mostly for worse. The only good one I can come up with is the new dialogue system which has some kind of AI that "remembers" what kind of character you are playing. And about the bad game design choices: 1. I don't like the new inventory system; it is more casual (less immersion and takes less strategical thought than the IE inventory system) while being more complicated (for argumentation see the thread about the stack inventory system). 2. I also think that the new stats are less immersive because they do not describe a character as good as "classical" stats, such as charisma, strength and dexterity (what does "Might" really mean? Feels much more vague). 3. I dislike the new approach to making "all classes interesting"; because it makes magic less interesting and special; compare D&D (IE) to WoW (PoE). It also makes combat slower without adding strategy, fun or immersion. I feel like this is also a way to casualize.

Hello "Mr. Elitist". Everyone are entitled to their opinion. And of course an opinion is subjective... duh. If the developers think that the feedback is crap then they can say so. You are not in any position to judge if his/hers opinions are too narrow to be of any use. I don't understand why you are trying to bash on other people? Tons of subjective opinions just will be of little worth. Everyone has their own opinion what the perfect isometric game was. Unless you can argument in which way the game would benefit from becoming more like *insert game*, then it's useless for the devs. Don't you see how ironical your own post is? Without argumentation you say that the developers don't find subjective opinions to be of worth. And the subjective opinions without argumentation you are talking about... what opinion are you specifically talking about? And if you are talking generally, why reply to my post?

Hello "Mr. Elitist". Everyone are entitled to their opinion. And of course an opinion is subjective... duh. If the developers think that the feedback is crap then they can say so. You are not in any position to judge if his/hers opinions are too narrow to be of any use. I don't understand why you are trying to bash on other people? An opinion can also be informed and take account of objective circumstances, lest you make a fool of yourself. To each his own, I guess. If you think you can say whatever passes through your brain and then call it opinion, you're obviously free to do so, and I'm free to consider your point of view less useful than others. An opinion that is informed and take account of objective circumstances is still subjective. If you think that your opinion is less subjective and more valuable than other peoples opinion then I'm free to entitle you elitist and also consider your point of view less useful than others. I feel like you need to look yourself in the mirror before bashing on others. Now: let us go back to topic instead of discussing if people who like Baldur's Gate are entitled to opinions or not.

Good point. I certainly agree. For me this would not only make the gameplay make more sense, but also increase immersion and make magic feel more special. I think this would be a good game design decision.

Again, just reading this thread is showing how confusing the new system is. Why "casualize" something when it just makes things more complicated? I agree. The old IE inventory with search and sort functions would've been brilliant.

I was hoping for something inbetween PST and BG2. In my opinion BG2 had better game design and GUI while PST was far more hm.. philosophically interesting and I also liked the even "harder" focus on dialogue.

Hello "Mr. Elitist". Everyone are entitled to their opinion. And of course an opinion is subjective... duh. If the developers think that the feedback is crap then they can say so. You are not in any position to judge if his/hers opinions are too narrow to be of any use. I don't understand why you are trying to bash on other people?