Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by GrinningReaper659

  1. @Varana Fixed It's true that there are some cool unique equipment abilities that can't be enchanted onto equipment by the player. In most cases, though, my best gear ended up being stuff I enchanted myself because the universally allowed enchantments are very good and fill up the maximum allowed enchantments neatly, while sometime the unique abilities keep the item from ever being fully enchanted (12/12) and it ends up being less powerful because of that or simply because the un-enchantable ability isn't as good as one of the abilities you can enchant. I did exaggerate though, there are certainly some things that can't be enchanted by the player.
  2. Just quoting myself to repeat my thoughts, they have not changed. EDIT: Crafting and enchanting (both of which will be from this point forward collectively referred to as variations of 'craft' - craft, crafting, crafted, craftable, craftastic, etc.) will be discussed in this post. Seems like the slippery slope of accessibility and modernization to me: In BG2, you have only unique items craftable by actual blacksmiths after collecting the pieces. From there it seems to go something like this: Let's make a bunch of awesome items craftable. Let's just make pretty much all items craftable. Let's just let all players craft basically anything, even items that challenge or surpass the best epic equipment you can find in the game. Okay, but the player still needs to find recipes throughout the world, improve their crafting skill, and can only craft at a forge, so it won't be universally achievable without any effort or anything. You know what, let's just let any player craft anywhere, forget forges, hearths, and labs. Yeah, let's forget about the crafting skill too. Why not drop recipes as well, now every player can craft anything anytime! Great, now we have a crafting system which doesn't make much sense, is boring because all associated challenge has been removed, and that also serves to undermine equipment progression and unique magic equipment. If you can't tell, I don't like the crafting system much. The worst part is that these seemingly forced stretch goals that resulted in bland and/or shallow systems are now going to affect the whole franchise, because Obsidian likely believes that rolling back or removing a system such as the stronghold, crafting, etc. would look like admitting failure. I would absolutely love it if, instead of the stronghold we have now, they made PoE2 with the simple class strongholds that were in BG2. They weren't overly complicated and sometimes only had a couple of quests, but they were somewhat reactive in that they were (sort of) unique to your class, and they didn't seem like weird mini-games. I think the crafting system of PoE2 would be better off if it took some notes from BG2 as well, maybe using a BG2-like system, but with more plentiful, actual recipes that you find throughout the world for most stuff and then collecting pieces for the epic loot like in BG2. But I seriously doubt those things will happen.
  3. I didn't. That place was difficult for my PC to make a decision about. He was clearly nuts and doing serious harm, but his priest made some good points about how he at least wanted the best and how the other guy would likely end up being a lot worse. I killed the undead in the basement, but I ended up leaving Raedric and his peeps alone and killing the other dude. Probably should have just killed them both.
  4. I don't see what's so exciting about wasting points in dump stats once and then never doing so again once you realize they're dump stats. Dump stats are simply bad design. Certain character have dump stats. Its normal. Its impossible to have every stat matter for everybody. PoE is a good example why this cant work So you actually prefer to have a system like in the IE games where half of the stats essentially don't matter at all? Okay, that's fine (doesn't make any sense to me), but please drop the line about the possibility of making mistakes being exciting because of dump stats hmmm, should I dump WIS, INT, and CHA on my fighter and max the rest or not? Tough choice, really exciting. And frankly, it's not any different here. It's just a different set of stats being dumped. And a sillier looking set of stats being dumped. At least with the maxed STR, CON, DEX characters, the maxed and dumped stats made some rational sense. But there are builds in PoE that make no rational sense are are only meta-gaming builds that I find extremely annoying, the prime example being the min STR, max DEFL fighter builds that are designed to completely abuse the game's AI by creating characters who are too weak to even carry the armor they're wearing, let alone the weight of their own bodies. Honestly, I like how the old DnD stats were used better than the way the PoE stats are used. That said, I think that the PoE stats might have more potential, if they were used in a more rational manner (as least IMO). No, not even close. The only arguably meaningless stat in PoE is CON, and it is hugely more meaningful than the worthless dump stats in the IE games. You can't get over your intuitive understanding of might and the fact that you think it should be the same as strength. Whatever, I really don't care that you wish that PoE might was the same as IE Strength, but there is no way the IE games had a better stat system than PoE. Also, does it make sense to you that someone with the charisma, intelligence, and wisdom of a squirrel seems to get by just fine in the world of Baldur's Gate and has no issue being likeable or communicating effectively? The ridiculous dump stats in the IE game made the system make no sense at all, regardless of how attached you are to separating weapon damage from spell damage.
  5. I don't see what's so exciting about wasting points in dump stats once and then never doing so again once you realize they're dump stats. Dump stats are simply bad design. Certain character have dump stats. Its normal. Its impossible to have every stat matter for everybody. PoE is a good example why this cant work So you actually prefer to have a system like in the IE games where half of the stats essentially don't matter at all? Okay, that's fine (doesn't make any sense to me), but please drop the line about the possibility of making mistakes being exciting because of dump stats hmmm, should I dump WIS, INT, and CHA on my fighter and max the rest or not? Tough choice, really exciting.
  6. I don't see what's so exciting about wasting points in dump stats once and then never doing so again once you realize they're dump stats. Dump stats are simply bad design.
  7. OP, I personally didn't lose any motivation after reaching the level cap, and it didn't cause me to skip any content. My main problem was how trivially easy combat was starting in Act 3 because of it (and in the game in general), but I guess if I had simply done things in a different order that wouldn't have been the case, but then the fun pre - Act 3 challenge wouldn't have been there. I'll definitely be knocking the difficulty up to PoTD for my next playthrough, which will hopefully help out with the challenge aspect.
  8. Maybe you're just fundamentally misunderstanding the reasons for removing combat XP? I don't know why you think the goal was to meticulously control the level progression, which was always going to be impossible in a somewhat open game with lots of side areas. The primary reason for removing combat XP was to keep the "slaughter everything" approach from being the optimal approach, allowing for more roleplaying freedom. Removing combat XP is not equal to "controlling XP gain." You can control XP gain with or without combat XP and with or without quest XP. it should probably also be noted that there is combat XP in the form of the bestiary, which was the concession they made to people who were upset about combat XP removal. My guess would be that what happened is that their QA people completed considerably less content per playthrough than their actual players ended up completing. Also, it couldn't possibly be as simple as bringing the player to max level upon completing some specific percent of the quests in the game, because different quests reward different amounts of XP. That's like saying that the cap will be reached after you kill 80% of the monsters/creatures in the game, which would also be impossible because different creatures tend to give different XP amounts. I don't think that a good system is overly difficult, but it's not quite as simple as your idea there.
  9. Good documentary, definitely worth the wait. I'm glad I was able to be a (very small) part of the process and more just generally glad that this game was made. It can be sort of disheartening spending too much time reading peoples' complaints about the game here, at the Codex, etc., but it's nice to realize how well this game has done. So, congratulations, you guys made a great game that lived up to the promises you made in your pitch. Also, the broader implications of a 2D, party-based, isometric RPG with a focus on story getting such a high level of critical acclaim are exciting as it further validates the importance of the subgenre, and will hopefully inspire other such titles. Looking forward to the expansions and PoE2
  10. If you haven't checked it out again, the patch is up on GOG now. @ Jojobob, yes I get this feeling with many games. I hate learning the mechanics and creating builds and characters with a certain goal in mind only to have that completely borked due to rebalancing patches. I wish games were released with much more attention to 'balance' in the first place, and patching involved minor tweaks and bug fixes instead. Of course, if wishes were horses... Sheesh, must've been minutes ago. I've been watching it like a hawk. You probably shouldn't install the patch, Luckmann. They've balanced XP rewards by lowering the ridiculously high bounty rewards, and I know how much you detest balance.
  11. People use profanity in the real world regularly. They have done so throughout human history. If the way that people talk is going to be rooted in reality (as it is), then your misguided belief that profanity only occurs in "the boys locker room" shouldn't deter them from including profanity in the game. If you really don't realize that most people use profanity regularly, then you are living a very sheltered life. Adventurers typically aren't posh nobles who don't want to get their hands - or mouths - dirty, so profanity makes a lot of sense. If the nobles in Brackenbury refrain from using profanity in public, that would make sense. Sailors, adventurers, and prostitutes forcefully restricted from using the sorts of words they are sure to use all the time? That just makes no sense.
  12. As far as I'm concerned the only line that shouldn't be crossed is exclusive anything which provides an in-game advantage of any sort. They crossed this line with Gaun's Pledge as far as I can tell, which does piss me off. Achievements, though? They don't provide an in-game advantage of any sort, they're not even technically in-game at all, so the only justification for not making an achievement exclusive is, again, a clear message to a company (from a loyal customer in this case) to the effect of it's wrong to appreciate loyal customers! I really do not get this. A Steam achievement that I'll never see (I use GOG) obviously doesn't matter much to me and since it's irrelevant I guess you could say that it's not much good for appreciation either. It's still recognition of loyal customers at least, and as long as it doesn't change anything in-game, then it has nothing to do with gaming and everything to do with good business practices.
  13. If you're killing people in the game, then it's still a killing sim, even if the killing is more rare and realistic. If you were actually joking and you don't feel that way at all, and you weren't just saying how you felt in the form of a joke, then my response simply doesn't apply. Feel free to ignore it.
  14. Dating sims are for lonely, insane people? and... Murder sims are for romantically fulfilled, sane people like yourself? Okay then. How's that superiority complex working out? I really dislike romance in games btw, but the short-sightedness it takes to accuse others of loneliness and insanity for liking it while patting myself on the back as I kill people in a computer game is beyond me.
  15. This is odd, as I was pointing out why I didn't understand someone else's criticism, not issuing any of my own. I understand your points, and I certainly wouldn't question the need for fine-tuning game design, I guess I wouldn't call many of those things by the word "balance" (although I know that is how many of these design tweaks are defined in patches). Decided, as always, to turn to google. I think I get now what this word means in a single player context. https://gamedesignconcepts.wordpress.com/2009/08/20/level-16-game-balance/ In single-player games, we use “balance” to describe whether the challenge level is appropriate to the audience; In multi-player games where there is asymmetry (that is, where players do not start with exactly equal positions and resources), we use “balance” to describe whether one starting position is easier to win with than another. Within a game, if there are multiple strategies or paths to victory that can be followed within the game, we use “balance” to describe whether following one strategy is better or worse than following another. Within a system that has several similar game objects (such as cards in a trading-card game, weapons in a role-playing game, and so on), we use “balance” to describe the objects themselves, specifically whether different objects have the same cost/benefit ratio. I can see how 1, 3, and 4 apply to PoE ... so now I concede my position. Honestly, not being a game designer, I really only thought it applied to 2. Sorry if I came off a bit hostile, it's just that I've seen this argument that "balance doesn't belong in a single player game" declared so many times now. It was beginning to annoy me, because balance is used to design every single player game ever, and it has nothing to do with MMOs when talking about single player games. Thank you for looking up the definition, which made my point better than I did.
  16. I must confess that I tire of seeing this proposition that "balance doesn't belong in a single player game." You might as well say that game design doesn't belong in a single player game. Post-release balance patches are just continued design as they see whether things are working as intended or not once the game has been released. Why you have some sudden need to tell them that that their design decisions are incorrect is beyond me. Balance isn't a bad word. Do you think they just rolled some dice to determine racial bonuses, experience progression, or damage dealt by weapons? No, they designed these things, planned them out, and :gasp: balanced classes, items, and everything else against one another to make sure that the game would be fun and consistent. This is true of every single player game, it's not some oddity of PoE and I really am lost as to how people don't understand this.
  17. Your main problem is that you keep implying that isometric or top-down RPGs are inherently worse than first person or third person over-the shoulder stuff. That's like, your opinion, man. And it's not shared by many people that backed this game. Isometric isn't a technology limitation and it has nothing to do with nostalgia, it's just a preference. There were plenty of RPGs and tons of first-person RPGs in the days of BG. Anyway, I can't stand first person or even third person over the shoulder RPGs. It's got nothing to do with nostalgia and it certainly isn't outdated technology. It's okay that you don't like these sorts of games, but implying that isometric perspective is 1) outdated, 2) inherently worse than first person perspective, or 3) only preferred because of nostalgia is simply incorrect. One of the main reasons that people backed this game is because they haven't found a lot of games to enjoy since the IE games. I don't like TES games or DA games or Witcher games (since the Witcher 2 disallowed isometric perspective). I'm really enjoying these Kickstarted isometric RPGs. For those of you who love AAA mainstream games, great, what exactly is the problem? Those games exist and are made all the time. Why are you here trying to convince some devs catering to different preferences than yours that they should change their game to suit the countless 1st person RPGs out there or trying to convince fans of isometric games that their preferences are based on nostalgia or something?
  18. "Oh I'm definitely a "completionist," whether there's loot or XP to be had or not. I didn't leave a single stone unturned after reaching the cap in PoE, and the lack of additional XP didn't make it more boring for me at all." Sorry, you're a bit above just being a completionist. Oh, okay. But, I think power gamer is someone who squeezes every possible advantage out of the game such as optimized min-maxing, etc. I don't really explore everything so that I can get more powerful (if I did that, then I would have just stopped exploring after hitting the level cap). I know that not only completionists will do side quests. I was talking specifically about people that didn't do them, not saying that nobody did them except for completionists. I don't really try to rake the game for XP, but rather content. I definitely don't feel the game is pointless after you hit the cap... I just thought I saw a problem with the rate of progression and I wanted to propose a potential solution. Okay, I guess the side quests would be more difficult for people who find the game more challenging, especially if they started rewarding less XP. That's a valid criticism. I don't get this at all. Are you saying that you paid the bill for the game and I did not? Are you saying that I'm screaming my head off about entitlement? Not really sure where you're getting that from. I don't see what would be so difficult about slowing down XP progression after a certain level or simply toning down the XP rewards in side quests (it seems the former would be less offensive to you). I certainly never wanted to suggest that Obsidian should tailor the game or XP progression to people who do all the content like me. I took the fact that I do more than most into consideration in everything I said. I never said anything about disregarding other peoples' playstyles, and I never suggested that my idea was perfect or that Obsidian would be foolish not to listen to me. I was just trying to suggest a potential solution to a potential problem.
  19. Okay, that makes sense. Maybe a compromise is in order then? Maybe doing 3/4 of all optional content will allow you to reach the max level? That's not really relevant as I'm speaking in broad strokes. If I had to do everything to hit the cap before Act III, then complaining about hitting the cap before Act III would have been pointless. Like I said, though, I still had over half of the endless paths to do, had at least four bounties left, and had all of Act III ahead when my full party hit the cap. Does this not seem like a bit of an imbalance to you?
  20. How would that affect a non-completionist, then? Would they pick and choose a side-quest that might come along, that seems connected to the story. And then find that they need to advance the story a bit more to be able to clear the next sidequest? Do you think that's a remote possibility? See, here's the thing in a nutshell: you're suggesting tweaks exclusively from a power-gamer perspective. And whoever keeps implementing these things is making the game unplayable for everyone else. Huh? I'm not sure that you understood what I was getting at. I'm not a power gamer. My whole goal was to keep people who do most of the content from hitting the level cap before Act III without affecting the progression for those that don't do side content. There's a clear problem with progression, and not just for completionists, when I hit the level cap with a full party before Act III and before being halfway done with the endless paths... So my suggestions are to fix the overly rapid XP progression gained through side content without impacting those who don't do much side content. If the main path XP rewards remain the same, then for example Prime-Mover wouldn't be any more under-leveled because he's just doing the main quest stuff mostly, while the people who do most of the side stuff won't get shoved up to the level cap so soon.
  21. @whoever authored that Steam discussion: 1. You have got to be joking. I really can't believe you could be upset about not getting one achievement. 2. Entitlement. This whiny, bitchy attitude is what punishes companies for having customer loyalty programs and allows and even encourages them to treat their customers with as little appreciation as possible. Why do the backers get a special achievement? Why do the five-year customers get a discount that I don't get? I'm not supporting your company if you don't take away the things that they have that I don't have!! And there are always more potential customers than current customers, so companies gladly discontinue any such appreciation programs and feel vindicated in doing so because of you ridiculous whiners. Guess what, supporting a company or their project before they've fully proven themselves or continuing to support them throughout the years is deserving of special appreciation. Your whining doesn't entitle you to jack ****.
  22. Oh I'm definitely a "completionist," whether there's loot or XP to be had or not. I didn't leave a single stone unturned after reaching the cap in PoE, and the lack of additional XP didn't make it more boring for me at all. I tend to agree with Luckmann in part that content is meant to be played, so hitting the level cap with so much undone is a but odd and it further trivializes encounter difficulty for the remainder of the game. That being said, I get that some will skip a lot of content. My first reaction is "then they'll be underleveled," but that isn't really helpful. I still think that the best way to solve the XP issue for everyone is to drastically reduce the XP rewards of optional content only to the point that hitting the level cap requires doing most of the content in the game. This doesn't affect people like you at all, because the XP gains from main story content remains the same. That, or to drastically slow down level progression starting at the level one can reach after completing all main story content only. This would have essentially the same result and still wouldn't affect those who don't do everything, the only real difference being that people could reach whatever level that is (8-9) more quickly than in the former idea. Aren't some XP changes coming in 1.05 to address the issue? Or are they only lowering bounty XP rewards?
  23. You know, there are only a few things that most of us could agree on as being clear contributors to the regression of the quality of CRPGs, at least for those of us who still do love the IE games and haven't found many games that we love since. One of those things is expanding VA. We know for a fact that doing this is expensive and consistently leads to limiting the written words in the games. To say that I would be disappointed to see Obsidian take this franchise down that road would be a pretty big understatement. Make the world bigger, make the story better, add more and better content and please don't tell me that you're going to actually limit content because you want to add more VA for unknown reasons. Seeing BAdler mention that they hope and plan to expand the VA for the sequel is pretty disheartening. There's no question on this: expanding the VA budget reduces the amount of written words - that's quests, character interactions, etc. You can't add VA money without 1) taking that money from being used somewhere else in the budget, and 2) encouraging an attitude of limiting the amount of writing to accommodate a more fully voiced experience.
  24. Yeah, but it sounds stupid, or more modestly: I can't make sense of it. And even if we accepted that notion, who's to say that you're not the exception here? Who knows whether the average player reaches lvl 12? Clearly I'm proof of concept here, but two people's experiences is hardly enough to establish a pattern. So you now need to actually produce an argument or evidence to support your claim. For what it's worth, my whole party hit level 12 before doing any Act III quests (but Act III had started, I loaded the Twin Elms map and then left immediately), before doing level 8 of the endless paths, and with ~4 bounties left to do.
  25. ARRRR you suggesting that you think you might be playing a version for backers? There is no different version for backers, but those gold-labeled NPCs all have stories written by Obsidian based on ideas submitted by backers. You don't need to talk to any of them if you don't want to, none of them have quests or anything. You can't add money to the treasury, it's only a place from which you can get items that you earned through stronghold quests. There's no point in storing items there, your stash can hold infinite items.
  • Create New...