Osvir
-
Posts
3793 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Osvir
-
-
Could tiles and models deploy some sort of "iceberg technology"?
Y = Model/Tile
W = Image
Z = Player perspective
-
Some thoughts~brainstorm.
Random generated levels? As in, Level 1, then Level 5, level 3, Level 8 etc. etc. on one playthrough but on another it's mix-matched again. Or it could be a part of a puzzle, a sort of "3 Levels Loop" into infinity and you have to solve the trap that you are in, and when you figure out that you are by use of [Trigger] you set off the next set of the trap, which could be causing the floors being sucked into a black hole or something. A sense of urgency.
Likewise, encounters could be treated like this as well to spice it up even further. On one playthrough you are facing another set of monsters on the floor than in another playthrough etc. etc. I think that's the most simplified way to give Od Nua a "random" feature.
The more complicated and mathematical way to do it is "Tiles".
Tiles are really good and cool but how do you make a tile set out of a picture game like the IE games?
This is one way, picture is not meant to be pretty, just simplified:
It would require lots of different parts of buildings, roads, trees, doors etc. etc. to be cut apart and how do you random generate that together with something else?
The Sewers in Baldur's Gate could possible be random generated if you could cut it up into pieces and be some sort of mathematical architecture of programming. This is all related to development fluff, depends on how they do it.
Is Hector going to draw everything first and then cut it all to pieces? Putting it that way kind of makes it sound cruel, but I think it could be beneficial to have some sort of tile system in-design, being able to click and draw different textures to create a "map".
This is nothing but a texture, technically. A very pretty texture and a piece of art too
A tile could possibly be that bridge, and the roadier dirt could also be one. Shore edges, trees. Statues, waterfall etc. etc. maybe be able to draw out the bridge easily, edit in photoshop or other similar program, throw it back in and voila. Perhaps remove the bridge and add more of the dirty road to the front? Perhaps that small hedge covering the water up to the edge of the cliff. Drag the shore up to edge and you get this concept below.
I admit, I did polish a little bit, so it wasn't "flawless" entirely. That's why it should be easy to extract textures, modify quickly in photoshop, then throw it back in again.
I'm in favor of the randomness of level generation that Diablo has, but to some extent maybe a whole world is created rather than everything changing every time I "log on"/boot up.
I wonder if Obsidian could randomly generate tons of maps by code that they could base the art on as well, the mathematical aspect, tying piece B to piece G that is a completely different look etc. etc. what is compatible with what? How much polish? Etc. etc. A "Polish" function in some sort of Toolkit?
-
@Sacred_Path: It allows you to be able to play 1 character (which generates much more experience by itself) or a party of character who gain the same amount of experience but it is spread around 6-ways. The same mechanic in earlier Final Fantasy games (1-9), having lesser party members yields more experience for everyone in the party (this can be achieved by either choosing few party members or killing some of them in battles).
This isn't a bad thing. You control how many companions you want and you can finish the game in whatever way you choose. You could also play a game and Aloth dies one game (with perma-death rules), and another game you manage to keep him alive all way through.
@All: What I am advocating for isn't relevant to what Malekith said. Playing as 1 character and you die, you got wiped out. No more characters. The End. If you have 3 characters it is another question, 1 character dies but I can continue but another character dies I can't.
Who is the main character?
-
^So basically you both agree that Hardcore should be Hardcore and Easy should be Easy?
-
1
-
-
I recall statements "Cultural Background" stuff for the character in P:E at character creation, as for how does backgrounds affects the main story? I don't know. Sounds like a lot of work though.
By the way, the "Main Character Dies=Continue" is purely mechanical in design/development whilst "Main Character Dies=Game Over" is narrative "The End". The story (which was bigger than my character) abruptly came to an end.
Parallel example, it is like you are reading Star Wars and suddenly Luke Skywalker slips on an insignificant "banana" and its "The End" in the middle of the book. If the story is progressive without the main character, then a good story following that example should be able to continue.
The Main Character could also be like "StarCraft 2", an overlord type.
I think Jaheira really strikes gold and enough said.
"Yes, oh omnipresent authority figure?"
-
That pretty much sums up where I stand too. Great post .Leif.
-
Something I did real quick.
Red is "Picked Level" and Grey is "Locked out".
Could you choose "Class" level up every level? This would allow for the oddball, but it would also allow for a purely focused "Class" direction as well. Basically, the Character levels up (as a character) and gets to choose 1 Class at Level Up to get better in. So the Character would be some like this:
Character Level
Level 1: Fighter
Level 2: Wizard
Level 3: Fighter
Level 4: Barbarian
Level 5: Ranger
So basically a Level 2 Fighter+ Lvl1 Barb/Wiz/Rang. It wouldn't mean that the Ranger gets level 5.
Likewise, instead of choosing Upgrades when you level up, is there a way to choose Upgrades before you level up? This might go better in the 'resting' mechanics thread but w/e... could you pre-decide the Class direction/experience before gaining the experience? (Kind of like "Research").
Example:
Telling my Rogue at Camp "I want you to gain Offensive Experience" which makes the Rogue get Offensive Abilities, or I can tell the Rogue "I want you to gain Utility Experience" and he instead gains experience and abilities correspondingly.
-
Here is some Zombie history from Haiti on Wikipedia
-
There are some alternate endings in PS:T? I know you can become the Skeleton King (or w/e it was) and get an early ending (bad) ending.
This thread pretty much goes into that bin I guess. "Early Endings" and "Alternate Endings" I guess.
-
Disclaimer: Tired thoughtful brainstormed rambling.
@Dream: Pretty much all M&M games, Lands of Lore, Realms of Arcania... uuhm... Wizardry.. most of these requires the entire party to be wiped out. They are also FPS RPG's, can't think of a Party Isometric RPG that does this. How does Pool of Radiance work? (the later one, not the original old old school ones)... how does ToEE work?
All of the FF games pretty much (that are Party based story more so than "Main Character" Story). Disgaea (likewise other Turn-Based RPG's, though those are some mechanics that doesn't work for an IE game). Likewise, none of these old classic gems really doesn't have a definite main character though. Lands of Lore does, I have only played with one character (of the 4 you can choose, I guess you could call those "Cultural Backgrounds").
All of the above are irrelevant though. Relevant to your challenge Dream, but not relevant to P:E.
@Scenario (includes the party mechanic, stated in this thread that it is going to be in P:E, that you only lose when your Party dies): I go out into the P:E world, got Mortality mode on. My character lost all health but doesn't get perma-death because... the rest of the party needs to die first? So this would mean I could resurrect the main guy on Mortality mode over and over again because the rest of the party survived? So basically there's 2 outcomes that could be played with...
Reflecting on paragraph^: for some reason I think that there is a misconception of how "Mortality" works, I suspect it should be something like "Outcome A" if anything, and not like "Outcome B". I can understand with "Mortality" Off or on easier difficulty that your entire party needs to be wiped out, but with it "On"? Doesn't sound quite right.
Outcome A, The main character dies when he dies, you lose the game so you'd have to keep your main character alive (BG style). No ill intended but this was dumb, even if the Bhaalspawn lore made it reasonable, it was pretty dumb. I think Baldur's Gate generally follows a story where the main character doesn't need to be the main character, and hardly is needed to progress the story (there are other actors that fills that role very well). If you could spawn at the Temple (as a Priest, w/o Gorion) and walk from there to the Friendly Arms Inn (or directly to Nashkel) or start in Gullykin as a Gnome.. it wouldn't have mattered if your character was the Bhaalspawn or not really. In Baldur's Gate 2 the Bhaalspawn is way more important (granted) but in the first game... I don't know, I never liked the main character too much in Baldur's Gate. The companions made the game interesting in my opinion, not the main character. Heck, Sarevok felt more interesting than the main character in Baldur's Gate. Jaheira or Minsc could progress the story in BG2 now that I think about it, both of them has an agenda and motivation versus Irenicus to continue.
Outcome B, The main character dies when the party dies, you lose the game only when the entire party has been wiped out. So basically a standard Party game mechanic. You die when you've been completely wiped out, makes sense. What doesn't make sense is that the party members around you could die like flies (Perma-death) but not the Main Character. So if all 5 of your companions die they die, even if you keep your main character alive through it, but if the main character dies and the 5 other guys are still alive the Main Character manages to somehow survive?
All I am suggesting is,
Outcome C, The main character dies when he dies, you get to continue, or you can reload. You only lose when the entire party is wiped out. So this is a hybrid-thing with B. It would give most material for a roleplaying experience on a 3rd playthrough, 4th playthrough etc. etc. this "Outcome" could be tied to the final dungeon, but it would really shine the most if "Global" possibility, why?
Playthrough 1: Main charcater survives all game.
Playthrough 2: Main character dies in Chapter 1, I get to continue. The story I experience and create/narrate for my character/story from this point on becomes different because I don't have the main character, instead I follow the experience as an observer rather than the main actor (StarCraft story and character control. The player is in this case an, example, "Commander". Not some player generated character).
Playthrough 3: Main character dies in Chapter 2, I get to continue. The story I experience and create/narrate for my character/story from this point on becomes different than Playthrough 2.
You get more material to play with your character in "Outcome C" on different playthroughs. You could also play the game more similarly to a Final Fantasy game, where you use the in-game designed characters (companions) instead of your psuedo-important character.
I am deliberately excluding "Companion" playthroughs, which would be a novel by itself (Playthrough 1: Forton, Playthrough 2: Edair etc. etc. with main character death possible you'd spice up those combinations as well).
What I am implying is not that there should be written content for each of these playthroughs but merely allowing for it to happen opens up so many door (and that, my friends, is the point). Many people thought Imoen was bad, I thought she was way more interesting than the player character story in BG1.
I'd rather my protagonist be an integral part of the games narrative structure (though not a pawn of prophecy or chosen one) through whatever means, be that a silver shard embedded in his heart or what have you, and also that my companions all be disposable at almost any time. So personally i'd have to vote in the negative to this idea.
I respect your opinion Nonek
(btw, the silver shard in his heart being some sort of reason for him to be alive = "chosen one"). Can't I just rip the silver shard out of his heart and insert it into someone else? What is the main "character"? A soul? An item? An artifact? Are you, the Player, the Soul of the "Character"?If the main character is some sort of "Soul", that could explain why the entire party has to die, as either the main "character" could simply jump between bodies as a "Soul". Which would be an odd way to solve this, but it is a solution nonetheless (E.g., if the main first guy you created dies~permadeath, you could perhaps simply just inhabit Forton and take over him and interract with the world still as the main "Character" but you simply just have Forton's appearance).
I am simply trying to push for an idea which allows you to do just that, but where the main character is disposable as well, for even further variety. As a possibility and not something that gets forced down your throat, something that allows you to move on and continue without the main character (without messing it up for those who wish to play with the main character).
In a way, more options for what to do with the Main Character (up to the player and not up to the game~). Like I've said before, if it is already pre-designed in the game that Companions can act as front-figures, then it should be possible to play without the Main Character naturally. It wouldn't be "Everyone has to do this!" but more of a choice a la "Do you want to do this?".
Some players could simply reload (as some already have stated), other players could say "Darn it!" and continue. I'd prefer both of these options, as it would give more options to more players different styles and provide more material for replayability. Diversity and variety.
And hey, if the main character could die you could have some "Suicide" Ability that you could use to make it even more epic as you take out the final boss by exploding or something
you could go out with a "Bang", and still continue the game. Kind of a "Companion Revenge!" type of thing.Finally, and following the direction of the thread (About the main characters role in the story) I'd not want my character to be the plot, but more or less be a part of it. Most preferably a character that gets "hit-by-lightning" (the "Event", figure of speech) and then move on and experience the world in different directions.
Summary of post:
* The point: Opening doors, possibilities, variety, more options. Replayability.
* What is the main character?
* Baldur's Gate main character was pretty pointless. In BG2 the main character feels important for the plot and progression.
* Starcraft & Warcraft 2, the player is a "Commander"/"Overlord". The player character is you pretty much and not some avatar figure.
-
Could the Player take the "Quest" in a completely new direction by the actions he/she is taking?
Say, there is a Side-Quest to banish a Demon, but instead you release him and becomes his master. Now this wasn't just some "Hey Demon become my summon!" but an actual "Doomsday Demon" making it even more threatening than the task previous task at hand, and he's on your leash
Could the player produce some "doom events" themselves? Basically, instead of facing Sarevok, the Bhaalspawn goes off elsewhere on a "X" choice. Choosing to face other player triggered events that is way more a problem than Sarevok. Or stumbling into some dark deep place and accidentally summon Cthulhu (in a side-quest).
Sarevok is just an ant in a much larger scheme after all... no?
Basically, can the Player kind of become the "threat" narratively?
-
3
-
-
Conceptual, not a suggestion, just improvisation.
Chapter Based Scaling:
* Chapter 1
You are thrown into the world, it is at a current state somehow. The world might be a little bit docile, and little to find or fight. Some bands of bandits lurking about etc. etc. of what you can explore during chapter 1. Maybe you can travel to a Xvarts Village and thwart them somehow.
* Chapter 2
Unlocking more areas possible to explore, monsters from both Chapter 1 and newly introduced monsters reacting to how you played in Chapter 1 (non-lethal or lethal) and providing some sort of "counter-evolution" to that ("How many X did you slay in Chapter 1?").
* Chapter 3
Further unlocking more areas to explore, perhaps you choose Faction A above Faction B in Chapter 2 and that effects what kinds of soldiers run around guarding cities and towns around the world or whatnot (random towns?). Character/Party gets introduced to the world, starts to gain in reputation. Though, one could possibly take the route to not gain a reputation and choose to stay more suburb?
* Chapter 4
Etc. etc. plot related~demon summoned from outer realms~character could be the "Catalyst"? (Knowing the True Name of a Demon side-quest that transforms into Player triggered main quest? :D)
On Level Scaling I think you need to bring it into 4 brackets:
How does Level Scaling work on Easy?
How does Level Scaling work on Normal?
How does Level Scaling work on Hard?
How does Level Scaling work on Hardcore Ironman?
Additionally important, where do you feel you belong?
-
^Great post!
I also got an idea from it.
Could leveling up be pre-decision? "I want my character to gain experience in this" and whenever you gain experience the character gains experience for specifically what you have chosen before-hand. So you could tell the Rogue "I want you to gain more Scout experience" or "more Offensive experience" and they'll level in whatever you choose and thus you'll get a class style. You'd be able to choose the "Direction" you want to take the class/leveling up at camp.
-
^I think that sounds like a misconception.
The idea lies in the character struggling at the very end of his life. You've been stabbed in your chest and if you are given immediate treatment you'll survive otherwise you'll draw closer to death. It doesn't have to be "-10" either, simplify it to 3:
1: "All health gone, starting to loose life" * Maimed
2: "Time is running out, you need immediate assistamce"
3: "Final breaths"
During this time you get a chance to "resurrect" (i.e. stabilize) the character in a maimed state at 0 Stamina and low health. Failing to stabilize kills the character, a.k.a permadeath (if you play with "Mortality" On). What this means that in a tough fight one of your companions lose all health, so you are 1 guy short in the battle. You could probably take out the monster, but not before the companion dies, so you might need to grab one of your guys from the group to "stabilize" the dying guy, now 2 guys short in the rough fight. Basically that it could cause tactical situations where you get to decide. Is the companion fodder? Some random guy from the AH or some more important companion you've grown attached to? Etc. etc.
Lots of FPS games use this mechanic where you can resurrect your companions, so not so much ToEE only. Not really a D&D mechanic but it seems that the FPS genre adopted it more than modern RPG's do.
-
"Force" people. You are forcing yourself to go make a sandwich because you think you're getting some extra benefits by leaving the game? That's your choice completely and has nothing to do with the design. I can stop playing League of Legends in the middle of a match to go make some coffee or something, it'll ruin everyone's experience because I go "afk" but I really needed that cup of coffee.
In essence: Not playing as designed. You make the design flawed, because you want to "break" it.
You could always try using that in a review "I had to go make a sandwich to be able to rest".
good design would not give a benefit to someone who walks away from the game like that. I understand its the player's choice, but predictible player choices should be considered when designing mechanics. LoL clearly discourages you from walking away. A mechanic that limits resting to every 16 game hours does nothing to discourage walking away. In fact, it would seem to encourage it by allowing you to be rested for more of your actual time playing the game.
Obviously some of the blame is on the player. But ideally the game design would encourage the game to be played. A single player game doesn't need to discourage someone from walking away. Please include a pause button. But I don't want to come across a point in the game where the optimal solution is to stop playing the game while I wait for some artificial timer to finish. The 16 hour rest limit would do exactly that. If there is a difficult encounter coming up and I'm injured, the optimal strategy would be to wait until I can rest before I attempt the fight.
The optimal strategy, so far as I understand it, is to fight one battle then walk towards the next one because my stamina will have regenerated almost 100%. Whilst you are making sandwich I am well under way to finish the game. To be honest... why do you need "Resting" in P:E? There is no spells to memorize, no health to heal and stamina will heal by itself.
What is the function of the resting? What can you do there? Is it a special place where you can access crafting? Some preparation inventory management?
"What is Resting?" in P:E
-
Heh, I've seen a couple of episodes from some Let's Plays playing Lands of Lore & another one on Legend of Grimrock, different players but both picked up the rock to do some "throw rock" damage in both games. In the LoG one the guy spoke about "Arr me trusty rock!". Some Let's Plays has the Chair as the most trusty companion pet to have (Amnesia).
I vote for Pet Rock too by the way, as in an actual rock and not Shale.
-
1
-
-
@GrinningReaper659: Likewise, on the other side of Yin (where you stand), there's us who prefer Yang which is Ego stroking too. Endless debate and I will not try to sway your Ego above my own so... *bows*
Pretty much this:
I always found games that emphasize more on a party of companions overcoming a ordeal far more appealing then games with one main character when it comes to ego stroking. Everyone has their preferences. I believe team oriented stuff is more epic and grand. Even in real life playing basketball with your friends and you knowing their strengths and weaknesses against enemy team. From watching hollywood action flicks,war movies, I find it more appealing in these games where a party of heroes is getting slaughtered 1 by 1 and its really glorious when they finally prevail or even go all down.
-
1
-
-
@whining: *shrug*
@company:
What I said before the other thread died. "Creative QA". Some free employees. I can't say I think what they are doing is bad, they are introducing new people into development for a price. They also mention that you'd be able to use it in a resume. Seeing how P:E and Wasteland 2 right now stands, Black Isle is inspired by something. It is like they are adding one step before being able to work in "Technical QA".
In my opinion, Black Isle Studios does it wittingly but that doesn't mean that it is any lesser of a serious matter. The Developers (Black Isle Studios) can directly communicate with the Forums as if they were employers and the Forums could be used more of a "Meeting" I guess. If you are a Developer you might understand, heck if you know any work. I used to work in stocktaking, to make it better I had to discuss with my colleges at the job, for the job and be able to demonstrate work for the job "Pointing at things" etc. etc. it is another mentality than what we are doing on these forums. There is no guidance here (because the higher tier backers got that privilege).
So what Black Isle Studios is doing might actually be great for the game. A whole new way of developing products and ideas, no? As a customer you know what you want, and discussing with the costumers so they get that is probably good. That doesn't mean the game gets tailored for a specific group, it just means that the game gets more polished. Regardless, if Black Isle Studios makes the game by themselves the game gets tailored around them, so it is also about "expanding the circle" for how "big" or "good" game it should be.
5 people makes a game, they really like it and think its great, problem is no one else does.
30 people makes a game, they really like it and think its great, chances are that more people are going to like it is substantially bigger.
-
- Update #2 -- Why you shouldn’t donate.
Something you should think about before donating or telling your friends to donate. You might be the cause of a small number of people sitting in their cramped, dark f****** shelter depressed because they’re not sitting in their cramped, dark f****** for real because the world didn’t really end.
Got that? Some people won’t be happy you’re helping.
So, if you have no compassion for those apocaleptics who want it all to come down around our ears (but not theirs), then you probably shouldn’t put in a contribution. But if those people, sitting in their ivory dungeons, annoy the hell out of you with their barrels of water, stacks of freeze dried, and smug attitudes, then maybe you should just empty the bank account on this project. Just to spite them.
Create some apoplectic apocaleptics. (Yeah, try saying it out loud.)
This is the update from interplay that has caused the ****storm, just in case anybody hasn't seen it.
Then you need to read their Update 1.
Here is their Facebook page by the way.
And a Gamasutra article I haven't read.
That Update (#2) also sounds like a trick to gather more seriously devoted backers (who actually wants to help out with the project). The game seems to already be in production, they are just trying to grab some free employees.
Ask Obsidian, how much does it help to have a forum which discusses ideas and finds problems that you haven't seen or thought about? Sounds like a "Creative QA" to be honest. Black Isle seems to be going for a more specific targeted group. Like I said in another post, a closed forum "with purpose"-discussion.
-
Because it is Ego stroking the player, obviously *skims thread*
-
^Oh, on this:
It still adds more physical tangible difficulty if you are locked out from the AH. Like I said in another post, I could just not use the AH and when someone dies they perma-die (with no replacements) but that is more abstract vague lock-out.As a choice of course. Either you press the "X" button making the AH "Off" or you don't and keep it "On".
"X" can be a Mod or in-designed. Likewise, Economic Difficulty could also be possibly modded in.
-
Is the Bhaalspawn really a player character though? In most ways I would like to say "No" (you only give the character a "Face" basically), because it is Bioware's character and we are just following their red thread that they've created. That's why I thought it more fun to create the PC in a multiplayer game (someone following the Bhaalspawn) and those characters that I made would continue the story without the Bhaalspawn, they would try to figure out the conspiracy and try to figure out everything that's happening without the Bhaalspawn.
It is also way more easier to roleplay a character that you've created rather than something the developer has created.
It's a player character with a heritage. It's the same thing as being born black/white/asian/gay/straight/whatever. There are things about you that you can't change but that doesn't mean you're not you.
You can change It has been implied that the cultural background in P:E is going to be definable at character creation, which implies that your character can have a different heritage. Already differing from BG and getting closer to DA:O and Arcanum, so depending on the cultural background my character could possibly be a "Nobody". The "Chosen One" for the Event, but not for the unfolding.
Is the main character really the only one who can defeat the Darkspawn? Ferelden would probably have been lost to the Darkspawn, but other nations would repress it I believe. Grey Wardens stationed elsewhere etc. etc. same thing in Baldur's Gate 1 specifically, your character holds no real importance to finishing the Quest and other characters could have gone on without the character.
-
Almost done with Divine Divinity, resting really works well in Divine Divinity, all I am missing in that game is a bedroll that I can carry with me and use wherever I'm at (does it exist?).
If the "Bedroll" doesn't exist in P:E then I've got nothing against specific places where you can rest and not everywhere (unless you've got a "Camp"/"Bedroll" that is placeable).
-
Is the Bhaalspawn really a player character though? In most ways I would like to say "No" (you only give the character a "Face" basically), because it is Bioware's character and we are just following their red thread that they've created. That's why I thought it more fun to create the PC in a multiplayer game (someone following the Bhaalspawn) and those characters that I made would continue the story without the Bhaalspawn, they would try to figure out the conspiracy and try to figure out everything that's happening without the Bhaalspawn.
It is also way more easier to roleplay a character that you've created rather than something the developer has created.
you could go out with a "Bang", and still continue the game. Kind of a "Companion Revenge!" type of thing.
Level scaling and its misuse
in Pillars of Eternity: Stories (Spoiler Warning!)
Posted
^So basically PrimeJunta would like a game that accommodates to as many different players as possible, and Valorian would like a game that accommodates only to him?
*popcorn*