Jump to content

Game_Exile

Members
  • Content Count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

12 Good

About Game_Exile

  • Rank
    (2) Evoker
  1. Good point. There is an issue with the UI here, and whether or how the game should pause when accessing "lists" of class abilities, spells, etc. Obviously there are many ways everything (the UI, the choice of spells, active/passive abilities, limits/costs on pausing, etc.) can look, which could be more appropriate or less approprate for a real time combat system with limits on pausing. I am pretty sure there are MANY ways to make a good squad based tactical combat system with limited command pauses. "Truly tactical"? Yeah, I remember BG2. The vanilla game was piss easy with free sav
  2. It is a bad idea to design a strategic choice where the risk connected to it (journeying with poor health in this case) is eliminated by leaving the computer and going to get a sandwich. If P:E had a mechanic closer to Fallout, where you could choose the amount of time you want to "rest", then waiting around for health to regenerate on your pit fighter wouldn't be as much of an issue. My point with resting, anyway, was that there should be some significant resource risk (time, money, or whatever) in resting, where resting gives you a significant advantage (which will probably work out to
  3. It has everything to do with the game's design, lol. This is a good idea, and Crowseye pretty much says why: The decisions to rest can be a lot more interesting than it was in say, Baldur's Gate, where you just hit the rest button when you needed to recover spells and relieve exhaustion. Having advantages and disadvantages to where and how you rest, as mentioned above, can make money more interesting, for example, provided that money is scarce. Resting at an inn costs money, obviously, and "pitching camp" could cost supplies. The issue here is that there should be some more sign
  4. I don't understand why people wouldn't want combat to be "actiony", when combat is pretty much the highest representation of "action". It is, by definition, where the most action happens. And it's not like I'm demanding a game where people have to be mouse and keyboard ninjas to win combat encounters. I'd just like to see a system where there is more tangible benefit for making the right decisions at the right time. What does it matter if some people wanted turn-based? Combat in P:E is going to be in real time. And the big issue with turn based combat isn't necessarily if it is more
  5. "Seriously" and "truly", liar? There is no space in between "obvious" and "foundationary", with general comments, amirite? This is what I posted, in case you forgot: I am making a simple recommendation about balance based on what I am guessing the game's content will look like. If some skills will not be that interesting to use on their own, they should at least be linked to combat. "Ludicrously inefficient", my ass. An excellent example of the fact that combat is capable of being screwed up in game design. However, I was actually asking for an example of the balancing relationshi
  6. Turn-based combat has clear limits on actions that can be taken in each time interval. And you don't emulate turn-based combat by pausing whenever you want, because there is no pausing and reissuing commands between intervals in turn based combat. First you call this "the most logical compromise", then you talk about "cheater illogic" not mattering because Obsidian promised to make the compromise that is supposed to be the "most logical", lol. Having any command pause at all is a compromise from a real time system. The reasons for having limits on command pausing aren't based on some co
  7. And once they've carried out the orders, you'll need to give them new orders. Not to mention pausing allows you to change those orders right away if you screw up or need to make adjustments, assuming that the combat system isn't one that simulates "rounds" or "turns". It all depends on what combat looks like, of course. And there is always an advantage in pause, at the very least, in being able to stop and think about what's going on, without having to deal with more developments as they happen. You mean like in the IE games, where rounds and turns are simulated? If individual party
  8. Of course I think it would be ridiculous to limit mouse clicks and reading item and ability descriptions in this game (while limiting combat commands, on the other hand, is only sensible, and was already being done in the IE games outside of movement and cancelling). Come on, you are just trying to obfuscate what is and is not a resource mechanic in order to deny my point. Yes, and there have always been boundaries set on resources in those games. RtwP was introduced as a sort of compromise between a consistent "physical reality" in the game world vs Pen and Paper rules which have no s
  9. This is the only thing left I don't quite see as very accurate. There is nothing accurate or inaccurate about it. It's an observation about how things work psychologically, and it's practically in the definition of the words "whole" and "significant". When you are gathering resources and strength in a game, what are you gathering them for? Like I said, it depends on how the player needs to reach his goals. It was obviously a general balance issue that I had. My post would actually be very easy to understand if you weren't just trying to claw for the possibility of an error I migh
  10. It's because the game should dictate the challenge. If there is going to be really great and challenging combat, then there need to be boundaries on resources of all kinds. Challenge is all about what the player needs to do, and they should be learning to make the correct decisions the entire way, not hitting the pause button in reaction to obvious signals like a Pavlovian dog. All of these things would support tactical combat with limits on pausing by eliminating the need for constant micromanagement of characters. In fact, as these things get better and better, it will become more a
  11. Excuse me bro, what are you mad about? I wasn't saying anything about anyone else's point of view, and I never said anything would "ruin" anyone's game experience. Exaggerate much? There clearly is a balance argument for both limiting pauses and especially for limiting reloads to checkpoints or nil. Doing either thing sets boundaries which shape the challenge in the game (this is obvious, to be frank, at least with saves and reloads). And you don't know what "illogical" means. I've been plenty logical about the pause issue. It's fine with me if someone wants to do this. I still
  12. How would putting some cost or limit on pausing ruin anything? There should be some mechanic in place that would encourage players to think about things and commit to certain tactics, and some penalty for overreacting to every wrinkle that appears. If the cost isn't competence or effort from the player then it should be hard resources, like an extra stamina cost for pausing the game and issuing commands during pause. I frankly don't understand what this ruins, other than the prospect of having really easygoing combat or needing to make really elaborate and precise calculations during combat
  13. The biggest problem I have with the way combat looks right now is the unlimited pausing. Pausing should be limited by cost, possible frequency, or a combination of both, along with limited duration. At least there should be a reasonably balanced difficulty mode that includes this. With unlimited pausing, players who are always looking for the best possible outcome in combat are going to wind up with "pacing problems" any way you cut it. And maybe commands issued during pause should cost a little bit extra? There could be story affects connected to pause, like going into 'ultra synergy mod
  14. The game needs sexier visuals! Objects, architecture, females, all need to be decorated properly... and maybe with a bit more flair than some of the gothic type stuff I'm seeing from googling Luis Royo. This [external link] is really nice. I do like some middle eastern/japanese style in clothing and ornaments, though in that picture it's not the clothing that is interesting. Nor is it in this one [external link].
  15. Every less significant part in a whole leads to what is most significant. I expect combat to be central in P:E (why else would you have an XP system and all those stats for it?), but I could be wrong. It depends on how the player needs to reach the game winning goals. Like I mentioned before, there are always additional resource mechanics like timers and food, that would affect the dynamic. But that is all moot, anyway, if the devs don't seriously try to balance for a proper checkpoint system or an "ironman" mode. I'm not saying anything contrary to this. I am suggesting that combat
×
×
  • Create New...