Adhin
-
Posts
459 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Adhin
-
-
I like the concept art and considering they said large humans for there description that lived on and near the coast.. I.. excepted large humans. Not sure why everyone was expecting giant fish-lizard men to be honest. Either way I've liked the concept art quite a lot. Also I didn't get 'bad LARP' vibe from any of it soo... im sorry yall got that I guess? Opinions and all that.
-
I don't want horror like atmosphere because its scary, I haven't found a game or movie that's really scared me since before I was 8. I like it when its done well due to the added atmosphere it provides. Which, scary or not, is generally more enjoyable and immersive (scary or not) then if its all bright and shiny and all that non-sense. So, again, it's not about it 'being' scary, its about that style adding to the atmosphere of a good dungeon crawl or quest. Otherwise you end up with consistent gag-joke every area like in BG.
I love that game, I really do, it really changed everything (for the better) back in the day. But playing it again today.... eeesh. I mean I've played D1 again multiple times over to get 'inspired' for atmosphere stuff with some mod work I do but BG just lacks a lot of that. Unless i plan to make a poor SNL isometric skit game. Granted all that referential non-sense aside, main story of that games awesome, if I ignore the lack of RP choices in dialog... old games and all that heh. PST/BG2 hadn't happened... BG just had to come first.
Anyway, Atmosphere = super important. Horror? Good way to do that in relation to horror themed stuff (dungeon crawls, some monster types, specifically undead related).
-edit-
Oohh I completely forgot to mention, bad controls doesn't make a game scary it just makes it a bad controlling game. I cannot fathom why anyone, ANYONE, thinks its scary to have ****ty controls. Let alone enjoys playing a game with bad controls. Now I can understand a slow, more normal paced movement speed in a full on horror game but intentionally doing awful tank controls cause its scary is... bad design. No RE game was scary due to controls, except the part where you maybe scared to physically deal with those controls in which case yes, that I understand,
No one should have to deal with that janky BS. But you could just be navigating around a box room with no real textures and no enemies and I'd have the same repulsed reaction to said controls. Damned awful game design right there if I've ever seen it.
-re-edit-
Dead Space is a great example, good controls, plotting movement, great atmosphere. Scary? Depends on the person, I found more of it to be a little funny but damn the atmosphere was great and the controls didn't take anything away from that. I was never wrestling with my controller which, ultimately, takes me out of games that do that.
-
I was always pretty happy with the 3.5 changes in relation to a lot of the 'buffs'. That being a lot more stuff didn't stack. Ultimately what that meant, in computer playing terms, the better your equipment.. the less time you spent buffing. And the more combat or utility spells your 'buffers' could then memorize which made them more useful. Ultimately I don't mind some buffing but NWN which broke some stacking rules (then forced a hard +12 cap)... well it took 'forever' to buff. And im talking in a PW where you got 2-3 people doing the work for a group heh.
Most of the infinity engine games I didn't feel it was an issue since most where short term 'in the fight' moments. Either way I hope they have some stack-canceling rules in place so it's not just about applying every buff available. If they got a ton of buffs, and each one has full effect always, then they have to balance around that time sync and it just becomes a little silly. Also never been a fan of the kind of gameplay that breads. Run into monsters, get killed, reload, buff to tackle encounter you shouldn't have any business knowing about.
...it's a bad loop of degenerative gameplay they've already stated they don't want to promote. It's, in part, one of the reasons they're doing a dual bar system for 'health'.
-edit-
Oh forgot, DA:O, yeah I liked there mana/resource max being cut off to sustain buff/auras. Though as per why you would turn it off (besides the glow) was they just removed the max, they didn't 'cost' anything so going into a fight with full stamina or mana, then using some abilities 'then' activating your buff meant you, ultimately, got some free buff as you used the 'cost' on abilities prior. DA2 and every game to use that system since makes it also cost so there literally is 0 reason to ever turn buffs off (which I think is bad).
Also don't think it'll apply to PE, as they're using a 'number of abilities' in a circle/tier/whatever that, the whole level of stuff has its own seperate cooldown. For instance say you can cast 3 fireballs and 5 magic missiles. 3 fireballs and your Tier 3 line gets put on cooldown for 30 seconds or whatever, but you could still cast MM or anything from a higher or lower teir of spells. Kinda like that, wont need to rest to refresh spells that way.
I also believe they'll be doing a buncha low level stuff for mages with out any cooldowns (like magic missile may never have a cooldown as its part of the lower tier things). Something about spells your mage 'knows' (lower lvl stuff) vs powerful spells in his spell book (book having CD's per tier, personal lower lvl spells not).
Anyway, faster buffs, yay, slow buffs boo.
-
Personally I like my dungeon's dark, isometric or otherwise and I like requiring some kind of light source. I would prefer options beyond torches, of course, but I'd also like it if torches where handled better then just 'takes up a weapon slot'. Always felt that was bad management. Yeah in skyrim you can use a torch to block if you really wanted and attack and all that but... well this also comes down to I think most RPG's have poor inventory management as far as equipment slots for weapons are concerned.
All the infinity engine games had 2-3 'weapon' slots and an off hand slot. If you wanted to dual wield that kind of screwed up your ability to have a bow pre-equipped. Meant a lot of inventory management fiddling to deal with. Thrown weapons took up a weapon slot, couldn't be done with an off hand weapon either for that matter. I think a mildly more advanced system from Dragon's Dogma would actually work great, especially if all equipped items are shown on the characters.
Which is actually getting me a bit off course so I'll just end with this. I would love to see a basic 2 weapon swap like thing and torches not really be placed into either. Having torches be a side thing, like a belt slot like item that you hold in your hands while weapons are sheathed. Could make your mages do it, or whatever, but ultimately to do much outside of swinging it at enemies you'd have to drop it. Could prove an interesting tactical choice, who's using the torch, then who drops it where to keep the area lit while they fight.
Issue of course is making it not to irritating of a thing to deal with but that's how I'd prefer it in the end, and not taking up a weapon slot. That's always extremely clumsily handled in every game I've ever seen played since I can remember.
-
Yeah I'm all for heavy atmosphere drenched dungeons and whatnot for good effect and some messed up monsters. Hell even just a mini-zombie apocalypses as a quest somewhere can be fun but it's still an adventure RPG. Your gonna be in a city, hitting up taverns, chatting with tons of people... can't be horror all the time. But when its called for, freakin' drench me in that ****.
Side note, Dragon's Dogma had some nice horrory elements here and there (at night, in tombs) which where welcome touchs. To many older RPG's never quite got there with how they handled things. D1 had a great feel to its dungeon exploration for what it is.
Anyway yes but not all of it.. also didn't vote for 'hard mystery required to progress story' since that usually means awkward 'whys this here' puzzles. I love puzzles, and I love all that problem solving stuff but unless your making a puzzle game like portal it makes for a bad forced path. Awesome for side stuff though, things 'not' required.. and if you meant more like detective like quest stuff, all for that too. Hopefully avoiding RE-style 'puzzles' though, bleh.
-
1
-
-
They where generalized examples of RPG's. Not specifics, there are background feats in DnD, Fallout called there stuff perks or for the starting stuff traits. It's just names any given game applies to there different skill-like-systems. I'm also not talking about an alignment system or Fallouts Karma system. Never mentioned any of that.
I don't like the ink blot stuff, the your mothers falling, what do you do?! non-sense questions like that. Ultimately I just ignore them and pick what I want since the answers available either don't fit or carry a different meaning then I would apply to them. I just feel they're a poor way to come up with a 'class recommendation' or starting perks and traits (in fallouts case). Oblivion and Morrowind only really used that stuff to recommend a pre-set class from there list of pre-set class stuff. Most folks just made there own class up in those games though. No DnD cRPG im aware of has used that kind of scripted attempt at suggesting a class for a player.
Still parts I do like about it are the 'SPECIAL' machine prior to the questions (in FNV), an NPC asking your name, that kinda basic stuff. I think that's all a very interesting way to run through the process of setting attributes, name, looks all while keeping it in game. But hey that's just me, I like part of it, think the other parts stupid and a waste of time.
-
Scaling group size 'and' damage with difficulty is bad. I think group size only makes the most sense as it ultimately provides a greater tactical challenge then just '**** im taking twice the damage'. That said the lone enemies im getting because I prefer core rules and not taking twice the damage can be a tad boring.
@claus: Yeah I actually like a good bit of the jokes and definitely liked it back when I originally played it, hell of a lot younger then though heh. But yeah just playing it now reminds me how dense the jokyness feels. I think I've ran into 1 in every outdoors area so far. And often multiple ones in any given town. It reminds me of people constantly saying poor jokes in an attempt to 'get one to stick' instead of having good comedic timing with there quips.
BioWare got real good with that real quick over the years that's for sure. Same with Obsidian (or well Black Isle back then). One of the many reasons I've been such a big fan of there games, I mean besides the main story stuff and gameplay.
-
@AGX-17: That's not the kind of 'questionnaire' stuff I was talking about. PIcking when you where born, or what sign or whatever is basic character creation stuff like your stats, background feats/skills/talents/whatever. Morrowind/Oblivion and the past few Fallout games are prime examples of why I don't like them but was always happy they didn't actually 'do' anything. In Morrowind and Oblivion you got asked a bunch of questions (not talking basic form stuff like sign you where born under), im talking about the moral non-sense questions. In Morrowind/Oblivion they just picked from the base starting classes they had pre-made, or you could make your own class. In FO3/NV they picked background stuff and starting feats.
I wanna be clear its specifically the moral questions or ink bloch stuff with canned responses where the developer has a specific moral or reason behind the responses which are never the reason 'I' picked the response... it just bugs me. That said I've always enjoyed the basic in-game process of character creation you had with those games. For instance it always starting out with someone asking your name, you type it in, that's your name... someone asking where your from, what sign you where born under... all that in-game character creation stuff can be fun. Moral questions suck balls IMO though, they just fall flat.
-
I like multiple endings as long as it's not a 'pick your ending' at the very end. Only game I can think of that came close to a truly horrid 'pick your ending' was PST and that had some last minute choices that where governed by the kind of person your character was by the end really. I mean you really had to strive in one direction to get the proper good ending or whatever version (they had a good number of em). So i guess a multi-choice like ending isn't bad as long as 'whats' available (that is hopefully as well disguises as it was in PST) is based off what you did in the hours prior to all that.
Far as im concerned once you go the Dues Ex / Mass Effect 3 route of 'pick your ending' where nothing you've ever done has any bearings on the last hour of the game and its just 'take your pick'? Complete bullcrap... just utter bullcrap. Just go with 1 ending at that point and throw in 'alternate endings' in some unlock credits like they do with some movies on disc.. same damn thing.
-
I like the general idea of people having more complex reactions based off how your character looks and other general things but I think taking 4 general sides (some of which should be on an individual basis such as your 'alignment' part) and making a score that just universally works for everyone is... Well I don't like that part of it. It is instantly to gamy, even if you can't see the numbers in game we'll know about the numbers with in a week (at most) and have guides up how to game it and its just far, far to general.
I really, really dislike bringing this game up as an example but Fable 2-3 actually had NPC like and dislikes on a broader scale in relation to what you where waring and the kind of crap you did in the world (your overall reputation). And, in the end I feel a system closer to that is a better representation of the kind of thing your going for. Also I hate questionnaire style character creation systems. The second the game starts posing crappy what-if questions then makes its own moral judgements about my reasons behind my choices that never quite match up I want to hit a skip button and set things manually since, frankly, games are goddamn stupid at making those choices.
So yeah I like the general idea of what your getting at but I disagree with everything you said in how to accomplish it, and hope they get something interesting in like this.
-
1
-
-
Biggest thing I've run into with BG that I had forgotten was just how messy quests are, and finding quests. Some of them just don't go anywhere, some you literally have to break and enter a dudes house to get the quest. Some can't be completed if you talk to a person whos ON THE WAY to the place you pick up the quest... BG2, by and large, was a vast improvement to just how questing was handled (also NPC interaction in general). But it definitely moved a tad to far away from the open exploration you had with BG... I think BG 'lacked' a lot of just detailed content outside of the main quest, but that's not a 'either or' thing... games since then have managed both.
Think with BG2 they focused on the city its self being the big exploration and, as far as a city adventure went it was damn good at that. From what dev's have said I like the idea of having BG2 style city, some more wilderness like exploration outside it (instead of just travel destinations) and... I guess a second big explorable city from funding. I don't think you need full on large scale quests, or small quests even, in each outside area but there has to be 'something'. Even if its a small dungeon or few crypts to explore. If BG had more of that with areas looking more like PE... I'd be a hell of a lot happier (and still enjoying my BGEE time, mind you... love the widescreen upscaled stuff).
-edit-
Oh, and like 90% of the side content in BG are jokes.... it's all jokes. It's like reading a bad joke book, a really old joke book... but your experiencing it as seemingly (not at all) random encountery stuff out in the wilderness zones. BG2 also toned down on that and had better timed joke stuff by comparison. As did all of BioWare's work past that point... but damn BG crammed with that stuff.
-
I like it, just not a fan of the paladin title used for wildly generalized stuff but I guess it still fits. Kind of depends what options they have available with in that in the end. I also don't really think of paladins are 'religious' though it often fits heavily. That being, not tied to a god. I like the whole tied to a group and heavy morals and all that non-sense... I can't stand 'playing' them but I like that it exists and, ultimately, that's kinda what they got in PE.
Like I said though depends what options they have available to you as a 'Paladin' when you make one. That's one thing that always bugged me when they have classes heavily associated with an order or something then such an option never really exists.. always just kinda feel like a pretender running around saying your something you don't actually get to be. Could be one reason I generally never play Paladins.
Was a NWN module someone made along time ago though, back in 03 I think... had a lot of fun as a paladin in that but the whole game revolved 'around' you playing a paladin.
Anyway, options, need more info, blah blah blah, but probably yes?
-
I'm hoping for some out of combat sheathing or 'relaxed' (like larger 2H stuff carried on a shoulder). PST had it, and its a bit easier to handle with 3D as it doesn't require the absurd amount of sprites to accompany that many more animations. Which is ultimately why BG/IWD didn't have them. D1 did but they had a far less complex animation setup, D2 did which technically had a far 'more' complex setup with the crazy amount of layers and anytime your in town you had a separate neutral stance for standing and walking, but not running, and awkward none of that involved sheathed, just a more relaxed stance.
Aaanyway I pray they get sheathing in, and hopefully actual sheaths. Or at least a weapon belt loop..guess I don't care which. But something would be very welcome, definitely adds more to it. Absolutely love that aspect of Torment, the 'getting ready'... thugs pull out there weapons as you walk by, your whole party readies up and its fightin' time!
-
I basically just had it set to auto pause on finding traps to avoid setting them off. Often times you'd find them, mid move, a foot in front of a character which would, more often then not, result in a trigger if the game didn't force pause it for you so... I always kept that on. I know I had 1-2 other boxes checked but I can't remember which ones but it mostly involved non-combat related pauses.
Other then that I'd pause in combat if I needed to use a mage or there was just a lot of enemies and I needed to take it all in but my basic first-go would always just be my main fighters set to auto-attack stuff once I had them going and I'd let them mop up most stuff on there own like it was an RTS. More complex encounters had the pausing and micromanaging for better effective spell use... archers where never set to auto-attack, mages neither, just fightery melee types. Clerics I had setup for melee where just respond fighters in case something got to them.
...if there was an option to pause below 50% hp or on low hp I think I may of had that on... enemy sighted I think I tried a few times but it just bugged me to much. Anyway that's the jist of it, I picked 'mixed'.
-
Not to mention they're not 'just' rendering out. They use a mix of pre-render and hand painted details. They showed a making of example of that screen shot, 3D untextured, textured and rendered out, then how it looks after they did some 2D painting passes to liven it up a bit more. All that moss and some other details just didn't exist in the 3D rendering... they'd have to render is ultra-HD to do that then shrink down for majority of people out there, and that can lose some of what they would be going for if they where working off the higher end stuff.
Either way its not as simple as just rendering out a larger image and keeping 2 versions around.
-
Well I went ahead and actually made a bmp the same size as some... guy here mentioned, 10860x8140. BMP, no special compression, 24bit, 252 megs. I can see 32 bit being his actual projected 350-ish. Either way that's pretty high up there with out any major compression going on and with todays compression you can get BG2 or BG1 onto a 1-2 CD's, instead of the 4-5 they had to use back then. And that was a good 5 or so years ago, its gotten excessively better since then.
As for effects like shadows, special lighting outside of the pre-rendered stuff to the image its self... none of that's texture of major print on the games size, its all overlay renders... pixel shader stuff, it happens on render. Same with water in games, and I doubt they'll do a high frame count repeat water texture for there water. It'll probably end up being a 2nd layer, painted on (like drawing line around the 'water' areas) that do the pixel shader driven water stuff like... every games done since Morrowind and a few before.
What im getting down to is I'd imagine the download print would end up being around 15gigs unless they go well beyond a 50 map mark. To give you an idea, going off uncompressed images of 250 per, 50 would be 12.2 gigs. Any real compression would drag that waaaay down to ehh, well a JPG of the same (they wont use that but its an example) is about... 84MB per map instead of 250 aand presto, 4.1 gigs. If this games 15+ gigs after compression its going to be deliciously giant, seriously 'giant'.
-
They've said they plan to handle the picture size based off a 1080, 18:9, going off a ratio close to IWD2 and BG2. That being the image they released, is just that section of that map which is probably a good 3 times the width and height, or roughly around that. It should be good plus compression of massive images scales extremely well for installation stuff.
Either way think of that image as a screen shot (because it is) not a full map image.
-
was kind of boring in NWN1 too. NWN1 ultimately had better controles for the individual then NWN2 but the only thing that kept NWN going was the community and the ease(ish) they had for setting up servers which NWN2 ultimately didn't handle as well. In the end its the only thing that kept me playing NWN for 10 years, persistent world servers and that comes down to a... MMO like thing. The only reason I've ever played an MMO for any amount of time (which, at base, are all pretty crappy games) are the people you get to interact with on a constant basis... same with NWN1 with online.
Anyway, already said my actual feelings on it and I ended up voting for yay since I would still support and enjoy it if turn based. I'm just happier with there current real time approach, bioware snowflake or not.
-
I prefer real time but I like turn based 'sometimes'... usually depends how complex it is. ToEE for instance I loved but it was a great adaption of most of PnP rules. I believe however you can do most of that in real time as well with a pause same as IE. I think most turn based games are boring due to the lack of interesting stuff to do in general... XCOM doesn't give you a lot to do but i still enjoy the hell outa that though. But that has a lot more... I dunno, at stake I guess and alot more around it then just the combat its self so it works out well.
In the end real time can keep things moving quicker when they don't have as much interesting tactical options like ToEE had but you could easily do bullrush, grapples and anything, really, in real time as well.... no real limiting factor just cause its real time. Also you don't manage 'everyone at the same time' in turn based, its still one at a time where as in IE, when you puase, you literally manage as many of them as you want right there and then let it play out. I ultimately, find that more interesting regardless of the level of complexity in there systems or rules.
So i'm not sure what to vote as, I prefer real time, but would still support and enjoy turn based? So I guess yay but also I don't care to much but ultimately prefer real time...Wheres my 'Adhin, if its you, pick this option'?
-
Yeah, not inflation adjusted or time adjusted for the change in tech allowing stuff to not only look better but get rendered out at an extremely faster rate for quicker touch up and implementation. Every IE game took about 2 years and that was back when rendering out an environment could take them half a day or more. They'll be able to render one out, much larger, much more detailed, in less of the time. Granted that means more work on the environment part its self, but that's a huge chunk of time no longer being wasted. It's a lunch break at most.
So a lot of other stuff is faster and more efficient now then it was back then, things cost a bit more then they did back then... it kinda evens out. Either way I still think 4M is enough. Also keep in mind area doesn't = content. Someone said 'more content then BG2' and... that game was 200-ish hours of pure content first shot through, damn big ass game but its not the map 'size' that makes it big. Good thing to keep in mind, I'm sure they'll have a ton of content and it may very well be up and above BG2's overall content... but just cause there's 2 cities doesn't instantly make it more.
...but damn im looking forward to 2 large cities, loved that about PST and BG2. And the idea of some middle ground exploring outside instead of just 'here a quest area' sounds pretty awesome.
-
1
-
-
I'm sorry but if you think passing out in combat is stupid you've apparently never watched any fighting, been in a fight, or never watched any number of sports or.. I mean what the ****? People pass out from getting hit to much, people pass out from RUNNING to much. Sometimes that kills them, sometimes it doesn't. You can be cut, and stabbed a bunch of times and still not die... it depends 'where' you get stabbed, what gets severed, how bad the wound is. Most games aren't realistic and the auto-death from 'perfectly A-OK' is just as absurd and makes little sense... and hey PnP didn't really use it! The only one that did was 2nd edition and in that they had written out alternate rules in a 'or use this' which most did. Only reason games used to use a straight auto-death was because it was easier for them to implement, period.
-
5
-
-
Ahh im way to lazy atm to actually read the replies so sorry if this has all been said before in here but DnD makes the distinction in longsword (or broadsword) and bastard swords (hand and a half) which are what a lot of folks, currently or back then, refer to as longswords. To me this is just the whole katana thing, people seemed to suck balls at classifying stuff by names like we do now and days. Everything that gets made gets a specific name or code attached to it so its never confused with another similar thing. Back then, for the most part, anything that was over 2 feet was a 'longsword'... didn't matter what handle it had.
In DnD, because we love calssifying stuff so much and games need a more defined setting, Longsword (or broadsword) was a Viking Broadsword in general use. Always 1H only, though you could always of gotten a custom made one in PnP with a longer handle if you wanted to use it like a bastard sword. Which brings me to a bastard sword in DnD which is what a lot of folks call Longswords now and back then. But really that was the only distinction back then, how long was the blade. Short, or Long, throw sword on the end. Had little to do with the handle. You had more specialized stuff, bastard swords where often longer then your average longsword and always had a hand-and a half grip + full pummel.
My point is, getting hitched up about 'classifying weapons' about a period that failed wildly at actually classifying there OWN weapons is nitpicking a non-existent nit. Whatever that is. In DnD's worlds they classify stuff, in cRPG's we classify stuff with IN that world in away that we actually would right now because its what makes sense to us and, well game rules and all that... easier to balance. Oh and as for Blunt weapons in DnD they all had a x2 modifier on crit (less crit potential then the rest) except in a few rarer cases but where the least 'resisted' dmg type. Slash, and pierce in comparison where resisted heavily by a lot of different enemy types (and could be applied to armor). That's where the big difference came from in that at least. A Mace did same basic dmg, usedyour STR the same way, and ultimately had ****tier crit potential... but unlike a sword you where, 9 times outa 10, going to always get your damage. Which, in the end, is pretty close to the real lifes and its close enough for a game.
-edit-
Oh and the video, that's DnD bastard sword classification. Every class that started with martial could only use bastard swords as 2H (in PnP) except fighters came pre-equipped with using a bastard in 1H as part of there martial training. Other classes (like a barb or paladin) had to buy Exotic: Bastard to use a bastard in 1 hand. Anything bigger was a 'greatsword' or claymore. Which where used on infantry, the claymore that is. Though a lot of greatswords go into the crazy fantasy world of 2h swords for sure which is silly but they're always magic so... magic!
-Double-edit-
Oh and cRPG are notorious at failing to give those PnP options so I agree more options is good! ToEE did a good job at allowing that. They even allowed you to tie a buckler to your arm at a -1 AB while using a 2-handed weapon which I liked. I got faith they'll allow approachs like that, and if not, yo Obsidian... totally allow those kind of options!
-
1
-
-
XCOM is a damn cake walk on easy if you know the systems. The only real complaints I have about the game is the %chances seem wildly skewed. That and a lot of 'angles' make little sense. For instance, Alien is on the corner of a building, full cover... great. My shotgun guy runs up to the other part of that corners cover to get a point blank shot but, for some silly reason, only has a 40% chance to hit. Entirely because its not considered flanking even though he steps out to shoot, the barrels literally in the aliens face. A lot of the 'angles' and such cause some bizar percent chances, overwatch shots being taken THROUGH entire buildings because 1 character can see the alien and its technically with in there normal shoot radius but its all misses cause... theres a ****ing building between them.
XCOM has a lot of quirky issues I hope get fixed but the saving issue isn't one of them. If your not playing on ironman you can just save whenever you damn-well please. The Auto save feature outside of iron man does a relatively good job but if a lot of chars die in a round will override all of em so.. manually save if your not on ironman? Seriously though easy mode is the same as 'normal' in relation to funding and how much stuff costs (think you may start with a little more off the bat) but enemies all have a little less HP. Classic starts you off with less funding, satellites and troops (amongst other things) cost more, some buildings cost more and more to have subsequent ones built but all the enemies are the same (but you get more of them). Impossible... now that's ****ed up. All the same funding and cost issues of classic but 'all' enemies have more health and there's even more still. Literally first mission your going up against 8-9 brain dudes and they each got 4hp. The sheer amount of absurd luck requires to not have your whole squad wiped on that's silly.
Anyway XCOM is fun, though I can't see impossible being fun due to the general shift in math, no amount of tactics changes that. As for PE, I love the idea of the HP and Stamina, but then Health is just a general representation of how much abuse your character is taking over the long term. I was toying with the idea of a system like that but my 'stamina' bar was gonna also fuel all spells and skills and there would be a winded... bar it was all silly and convoluted but its what I have to work with in the mod im doing. Either way I like it, and should prove rather interesting as long as we don't lose health points to extremely fast. Hopefully if they don't do any real 'instant death' spells and if they do they mostly just knock you out and take away a % of your current HP.
-edit-
Oh and the save after death happens outside of Ironman incase folks failed to mention that. Makes sense in ironman, can cause some irritating domino effect with the 3-4 autosaves it keeps (periodically, not each turn) outside of ironman if you have the autosave feature enabled. Only way around that is manual saving and I forget to do that sooo often its not even funny. Though by halfway point game got real easy on normal diff I just kinda blew through the rest of it. Battleship wasn't even that big of an issue by the end, and the actual end battle is weeeaak compared to a battleship.
-
Said it countless times (including in this thread) the stuff they where talking about is about evening out XP distributions to broaden play styles. So all the figuring out the best, semi-cheese ways to deal with any given encounter? Absolutely 'nothing' to do with that, at all, and will ultimately probably always be there.
Josh Sawyer: Balance and Utility
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
As far as im concerned, most of the stuff he said is basically what 3E was trying to do and a LOT of that comes down to less about the classes but about what the classes physically go up against. You can make a 3.5 party with nooo priests and still manage just fine. Probably use more potions but you don't really need a healer. That and healers in DnD have, more often then not, been about 'after the fight' then the MMO style of 'during the fight' where that's all the priest does.
Also a group of all clerics is freakishly dominating in 3E heh. Full Plate, good with a morning star, tower shield, summons, dmg spells, powerful buffs. Not really the point though, or maybe it is to some extent.
Anyway I agree with what hes said, its been done before, it's not a new idea, and it usually works out pretty well but requires the encounters (both combat and otherwise) take into account all the available options. His ranger example was good, why would you ever take Halfling as a favored enemy in NWN? You don't ever 'fight' them but its an option? The hell? Granted they had all the options in NWN due to the custom modules and whatnot but with in their own campain, never used in any real capacity. Should of had the ability to turn certain things on and off on a per module basis to avoid that kind of stuff but doesn't matter to much... and wont apply like that to PE, but simply not having the option in PE will fix it.