.jpg.ce846aae50e732dc4985eb712252381f.jpg)
PrimeJunta
-
Posts
4873 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
56
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by PrimeJunta
-
-
Just sayin...nothing? Ill just quote myself from earlier and leave you guys to your woeful rationalizations:
Gfted1, you've been derailing this thread.
A DEVELOPER explicitly asked us for feedback. We started to give it, and then you started gratuitously sniping at us. That is in my opinion entirely unbecoming of a moderator.
I have reported your posts in this thread, and hope the other mods slap you down.
-
1
-
-
I see, you're worried about the "finished product suffering" even though you don't know the end result yet. K.
Um... isn't that why we're discussing the topic? And why @LLaney asked us for feedback?
Speaking of, Mr. Mod, you're doing a stellar job keeping this thread on-topic. Just saying...
-
To help get this thread back on track a bit, how about describing how your personal idea of how a good video game romance subplot would go? With any of the companions or a hypothetical character. (And please lets resist the temptation to roll our eyes at each other, at least in the thread)
It wouldn't.
Keyword: subplot.
Vidya game romance can only work if it's central to the story. Planescape: Torment did it with Deionarra and to a lesser extent, both Annah and Fall-from-Grace. These weren't subplots, they were crucial strands of the Nameless One's story.
Another good example: Prince of Persia -- Shadows of Time. That did it well too, and it also made it intimate and central to the story.
Any attempt to make romance a side dish is bound to turn into harem anime or push-this-button-to-win-teh-secz. Either make romance central to the whole thing, something the player has to deal with whether s/he wants to or not -- where "dealing with" may involve any of a number of different ways things can go -- or don't do it at all.
(Okay, there is one way it could work as a subplot: between NPCs, PC not involved. That could work the same way romance plots can work in films.)
-
6
-
-
:shrug:
You can keep speculating 'til the cows come home, or you can look at the data and draw your own conclusions. Again, there's lots on Google. I'm sure if you slice and dice it enough you'll find a niche that fits your preconceptions, whatever they are.
Here's a good starting point:
http://essentialfacts.theesa.com/Essential-Facts-2016.pdf
Wikipedia has some demographics broken down by genre:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_and_video_games
According to the Wikipedia article, with cRPG's it's between 24 and 33% women. Still a minority, but a big enough minority that it's clearly no longer a NO GURLS ALLOWD treehouse. (If you want those, go with tactical shooters or sports).
-
Josh translated Principi sen patrena somewhere. IIRC it was something like "Princes without a ruler." Free princes. Would fit a gang of noble-born pirates well.
If not that, it might mean something like "princes without an inheritance" -- landless princes. Would also fit.
Reasoning: Patrena clearly comes from the Latin root pater (father) -> gives us "patron" or -> "patrimony" ~ inheritance. My Vailian isn't good enough to guess which, but I am leaning towards the former. Latin for "princes without a patron" is "principes sine patrono" which is pret-t-t-ty close...
-
3
-
-
Lot of market research has been done into gaming demographics. The gender split is roughly 50/50 by now overall. Google it.
-
2
-
-
Only ones I'm genuinely intrigued by are Xoti and Maia, and Maia only because she's Kana's sister.
Xoti on the other hand – a follower of Gaun, a Readceran, and what seems like a complex and interesting character right out of the gate, and I'm very curious on how she'll get along with Edér. Oh, and the lantern seems cool too, gonna want her in the party in the darker places.
-
2
-
-
Hoo boy, there is a lot to like here for sure.
Open world map.
Open exploration.
Maritime theme.
Oceanian cultural influences. That's fresh. And cool.
Just about everything about Neketaka.
Improvements to visuals.
Improvements to performance -- that one clip where they had sixteen dozen spell effects on-screen at once which didn't slow it down f.ex.
Improvements to loading times.
Return of Edér, Aloth, and Pallegina -- good choices there.
Multiclassing, in particular the way it gives more party-building options while sticking with companion characters.
Keeping the scope and size roughly the same as in P1 but putting in more time and resources to do it, instead of just making a game twice as big.
Deeper companion interactions.
Mid-game based on New Vegas style faction mechanics instead of a scripted story, Obsidian knows how to do this really well.
-
6
-
-
In your opinion. I think the boat looks fine and they shouldn't bother trying to adjust things for a few whiners.
They are actively soliciting feedback. Even said so right in this thread. You're just as welcome to give yours as I am to give mine, and naturally it's up to them to decide what they want to do with it.
(The boat's a minor thing FWIW, I'm much more upset at the decision to remove health/endurance and per-rest spells.)
-
^
What he said.
The boat is ugly. Says so right in the thread title. The rest of it is explanation of why I find it ugly, and what I think could/should be done to make it less ugly. I suggest looking at real ships because I believe that modelling a cool-looking sailing ship from scratch without doing so is unlikely to succeed.
That's really all there is to it. This geeking out about specific ship types is fun but doesn't really have anything to do with the argument I'm making. It is an argument from aesthetics, and I continue to believe that it would be possible to have a cool-looking ship and cool shipboard gameplay.
-
4
-
-
Wow, so many ship nerds here
But that's a good thing, since different ships stretch goal was achieved someone needs to verify whether concepts drawn by devs are seaworthy, so to speak.They shouldn't need consultants for that. All they need is to look at some actual ships and base the designs on those, like how they do for weapons, armour, and architecture. They don't need to be historically accurate or detail-perfect or anything like that, they just need to look like viable, seaworthy vessels suited for their intended purpose, whatever that is. A half-hour on Google would already help. If they want to do it right, I'd suggest buying a plastic model kit of the kind of boat they want to have and building that, it'll give you a very good idea of what goes into them. Won't even take that long if you're doing it for research and not painting it, that's the time-consuming part.
This could be a good start... https://www.hobbylinc.com/heller-corsair-single-masted-sailing-ship-plastic-model-sailing-ship-kit-1:150-scale-80616
-
1
-
-
A bit wrong? More like very wrong.
I'm nice person and i give Obsidian some credit. They got a lot of equipment in POE1 right so i expect them to keep up the good work.
It's a whole new game we're talking about here, not some expansion/DLC, so new weapon types are a real possibility.
But no they didn't confirm this in words AFAIK.
They're fairly relaxed about naming; it's not all that technically accurate. Arming swords are called longswords, and their rapiers are pretty short-bladed for actual Renaissance rapiers and do look more like smallswords or foils. I'm pretty sure Ydwin's weapon falls under the rapier category; I can't see how it would help to introduce another one so close to it.
-
really hoping, in general, we see at least a couple new melee weapons introduced. Deadfire being far more exotic than the dyrwood, it should have a few exotic weapons to introduce.
Well, they are adding smallswords so it is totally possible they'll add more weapon types, some of which may be exotic.
Did they actually say that, or are you extrapolating based on the concept art for Ydwin? 'Cuz that would be a bit of a stretch. It's more likely it's just a rapier drawn a bit wrong.
-
Level-scaled loot is of the devil.
-
7
-
-
Ambivalent.
The P1 system does let you support wacky item-based builds from start to finish, or at least from the point you get the item to finish. That's good.
On the other hand, I disliked the way it diluted the character of individual items. Even in the best case, it usually boiled down to a single property you were interested in -- Marking, or an on-crit debuff, or whatever.
I found it particularly displeasing aesthetically that you could upgrade the quality of an item: in my view, properties like "Fine" or "Exceptional" ought to be intrinsic to the item. You shouldn't be able to take a rusty butter knife and make it a "superb" dagger. That's largely a naming thing; if these qualities had been clearly flagged as enchantments then sure, whatever, why not.
So a more restrictive enchantment system does address these gripes of mine. The immovable enchantment ceiling provides the character that I thought was missing due to the possibility of upgrading item quality. So in principle I'm in favour.
However, this does significantly dilute the ability to base builds around items, like many of your wackiest ones @Boeroer. The only way around that that I can see is to make this a bit of a Monty Haul – if there are enough items around with the particular enchantment you're looking for in each of the tiers, then that becomes possible again.
tl;dr I don't have a strongly-held opinion on this one (unlike per-rest spells and endurance/health, BRING THEM BACK)
-
3
-
-
So far there hasn't been any suggestion of cultures inspired by South-East or South Asia. They could of course have kept that a secret, but if so, I can't think why.
-
Gromnir, why do you want a reckangular ship?
In that case everybody has to use junks.
The ships shown by PJ are defenitely good enough for combat at sea, mostly because they have actually been used for exactly that purpose.
Junks aren't brick-shaped either. They have the same basic teardrop shape, except truncated at the bow and stern a bit more sharply. The sides bend out just like on European ships. Hydrodynamics and wood are the same everywhere.
-
3
-
-
A (possibly*) fairly simple solution to sails: have the sails rigged correctly, but when you zoom in they disappear, leaving just the base of each mast visible.
*Possibly because I don't know the limitations of Deadfire's engine.
That'd be quite easy I'm sure. Lots of other little tricks you could pull.
As far as boarding actions, I'm hoping they'll either do it properly, complete with ships grappling and crashing into each other, decks at different elevations involving climbing and jumping (with the appropriate animations), or bypass it through a scripted interaction, after which the ships are connected with a bridge or bridges (some planks laid down) at their point of contact, with a few predetermined configurations in which they can be. The boarding party would have to get over the bridge, the defending party would have to keep them out, and could turn the tables on them.
A halfway solution where the ships always line up neatly to form one big open battlefield would be boring.
-
based on past experience, am not thinking you is actual planning on resting either. just a guess.
Naw, I'm good. I never expected you to concede, I was mostly playing to the gallery there for a while now. :smug:
-
yesyes or no, would having rectangular and uniform be easier and allow more congruent combat space during boarding party combats?
see?
HA! Good Fun!
Yes.
Would that make for better -- more varied, more interesting ship to ship combat?
(Also, you still haven't answered mine.)
just did answer a yes/no. you're welcome.
HA! Good Fun!
Fair enough. So you feel that it's more interesting to have a big congruent open space for combat, than one where the boarding party has to climb over at a narrower point of contact, the positioning of which may vary from battle to battle depending on how the vessels make contact.
Personally, I feel the second case would be more varied and more interesting.
Your Honor, the prosecution rests.
-
yes or no, would having rectangular and uniform be easier and allow more congruent combat space during boarding party combats?
see?
HA! Good Fun!
Yes.
Would that make for better -- more varied, more interesting ship to ship combat?
(Also, you still haven't answered mine.)
-
and you drew it wrong. serious. sails is all wrong. honest. would need wind coming from two separate directions at once.
I know. See, sometimes you need to make concessions for gameplay reasons.
as for deck, you are ignoring actual smaller size and less practicality in boarding party combats. make the beam largely uniform as widest point amidships and you get more space. am not seeing how it can't be more clear or obvious. two largely rectangular ships is also gonna make for far easier boarding party combat, yes? that should be obvious.
(A simple yes or no is still impossible for you, I see. Don't ever change...)
I would expect the ships to grapple, be drawn together, and then the boarding crew climb over at the point where the ships touch. It would be narrower, for sure, but then it's a choke point. Having them exactly alongside and the crews just be able to walk over the whole length of the ship would be boring.
-
*brain freeze*
as we said, unless you wanna make boat significantly bigger, she is gonna look tubby. so, you wanna make "significantly wider at the beam." a largely rectangular deck with same beam 'tween perpendiculars is gonna be maximizing space.
and yeah, put the boat on a windward port tack and you can let out the boom. which also means you take in your jib and use the mainsail, obscuring pretty much everything in front o' the mast.
*shrug*
am thinking pj needs actual see the 3d models o' alternatives to get a better notion o' what is going on with obsidian's awkward, but gameplay efficient, boat.
HA! Good Fun!
Here, I drew it out for you. Proportions translated exactly from that model of the brigantine -- I measured --, other stuff adjusted to match what's on Obsid'z boat.
Now: does it have more, less, or roughly equal deck space? Yes or no please, if that's not too difficult for you.
(The sails aren't exactly like they would be IRL under that kind of wind, but hey, you gotta make some concessions for gameplay reasons, no? Also, the gun deck is too low, but that's another concession I'm willing to make for the same reason.)
-
6
-
-
you aren't looking in 3d, are you? and yeah, if is exact same length, and same beam amidships, even without worrying o'er the second mast, and your brushed-off superstructure issues, you got much less functional deck space. what are you seeing?
I'm seeing a ship that's significantly wider at the beam, with more deck space, even without the suggested mild exaggeration I mentioned.
Would you like me to draw that in the same projection as Obsidian's model? I can probably find the time later today.
-
1
-
But that's a good thing, since different ships stretch goal was achieved someone needs to verify whether concepts drawn by devs are seaworthy, so to speak.
Player sexual companion
in Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
They should write in lots of torrid romance and steamy hot sex... but only between NPCs. PC would be all by his little self in the big captain's cabin on the Defiant, while the rest of the gang gets it on belowdecks.
The reaction would be epic.