Sacred_Path
-
Posts
1328 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Sacred_Path
-
-
I think I'm with Mr Sawyer when I say good game mechanisms first, realism second. But that actually means that realism does matter, as long as it doesn't take out the fun (and isn't that so subjective). My personal taste is, whenever I see chain mail bikinis or swords that are positively too large to fight with them IRL, it takes away some of the fun for me. OTOH, when I see that someone tried to be realistic or inherently logical about armor, weapons, and even magic, I always find it commendable.
-
2
-
-
Sure, but what about the fact that some plate armour was easier to wear and move in than a mail hauberk?
That's one case where I'd put ease of use above realism.
What about magically light armours? Can we not imagine 'mage-plate' whereby military sorcerers would invest heavily in designing optimal armours for their profession? Obviously an element of balancing is required, as opposed to punishment.It always makes me cringe when a game features magic heavy armor that is magically 'light' as that ridicules the entire point of making armor class/ attribute specific. Still I could live with it if it's balanced in such a way that normal magic plate has other, more powerful enchantments than the light variety.
-
Here you are talking about how your experience would differ if you did or did not take on these self-made guys. that is not how it change or mix up the game. that is a choice by you on what you want in your game. Please note that even player created characters could have dialogue and special event if it is designed that way.
Yes, that's something to hope for. As long as they have any reactivity at all it should make them feel on par with companions.
-
I have a simple wish: make armor the better the heavier it gets (not all kinds should be equal) and then put a minimum strength requirement on those armors. Wizards in plate should only be feasible if they have the required strength and maybe stamina.
-
Respeccing as an option is fine as long as it doesn't allow you to deliberately pump certain skills/ traits in the beginning, then changing to a different build later on as those old skills get less useful/ obsolete, because it would no longer be optional but required of a skilful player. Anything that influences the balance of a game is NOT optional.
-
Point buy, increases via perks (or not). Point buy is the choice for anyone looking to objectively test his characters.
-
I guess you must be at my end of the spectrum then (= immensly enjoy character building) to just start over with a new character if you realize you've screwed up your skill selection.
-
1
-
-
Lack of immersion is not a valid argument against the game, just because you realize that you are in fact person in front of the computer and not elven bard doesn't make the game bad.
That's like saying a movie script that builds on unrealistic assumptions and defies believing isn't bad because it's a work of fiction anyways. Not a valid argument in itself.
Except you cannot enjoy the movie without suspension of disbelief while many people enjoy games like Mario that make it obvious that it's a game and never even try to pretend to be reality.
And that's why the Mario games never had developers filming segments where they talk about the world's lore ;-) (and no by lore I don't mean backstory)
-
Contrary to claims above, people do respec iRL. If you stop using your skills they get rusty. If you focus on new skills you can learn. Real people are forced to retrain for new careers all the time when they're laid off or their industry goes away. If you are a physically powerful fighter, but you stop working out, your muscles will weaken. A person really could respec their physical skills (hitting with a greatsword) into mental skills (book learning) by sitting around a university getting a PHD.
If respec doesn't feel righ to you, then don't use it.
IRL, such a change can only occur slowly, not in seconds. And that's just as possible w/o respecs. Simply pick other skills to pump and talents/ perks to raise. It will take time and might be ineffective, ultimately - just like IRL ;-)
-
But you said that both approaches don't mix well. what you say here is not a argument of why they don't mix well.
Saying that they don't mix well should mean that the game in some way will be made worse because of it.
I'd say that's very well what I did. While companions may have assumptions and may be outspoken about the game world, created characters presumably will have none, and no life in the world to speak of. Would it irritate me to have a mix of both in the party? Slightly I guess.
That a game only gets worse if you miss out on content seems a pretty arbitrary opinion of yours. But going with it, one thing that could make the game worse is if the inclusion of the Adventurers' Hall makes the devs slim down the number of "full" companions - say, 5 companions, and if you want more you can use the AH.
-
Lack of immersion is not a valid argument against the game, just because you realize that you are in fact person in front of the computer and not elven bard doesn't make the game bad.
That's like saying a movie script that builds on unrealistic assumptions and defies believing isn't bad because it's a work of fiction anyways. Not a valid argument in itself.
But just for the record I don't in the slightest expect this game to fail. I wouldn't have pledged for the collector's edition if I did. Just having some doubts about one or two things isn't saying it's a bad game.
-
I think you need to expand on that. What in the game is affected by this? Remember that player created characters don't impact on the world apart from combat (or possibly some skill use), which makes their exclusion or inclusion a non-factor as for what is in the game compared to if it was with only pre-written companions. They just have less dialogue
Apart from dialogue, companions could have personal quests, leanings towards certain factions etc. All that is speculation right now. I'd just find it somewhat... strange to have mute puppets and fully scripted companions in one party. I'm not saying it's a design flaw, nor that they should remove one of these options. If anything, I'm hoping that they make characters from the AH a bit more seemingly possessed of their own will than they were i.e. in BG so the contrast isn't so stark.
-
But that doesn't matter because it clearly wasn't made for people like you. It's simply there for the Wizardry, IWD and Might & Magic crowd- a crowd, might I add, that no big developer caters to anymore. It's completely irrelevant what you prefer in this regard because it has no bearing on this. It's exactly like saying "I don't like rollercoasters" while going to an amusement park. So what? There's haunted houses and balloon popping or whatever it is you desire; you don't have to like the rollercoaster.
Where did you get the idea that I don't like party creation? I have played and liked both types of games; the point is I'm not sure that both approaches mix well.
-
I second that respeccing is unrealistic and doesn't necessarily add much fun. Especially in the case of perks and traits, your collection of both almost tells a story about your character and his journey.
-
Immersion? if you create all characters you can imagine them any way you want. As for Bg there hardly were much of "interactive characters", sure you could talk a big with them with a very few choices, but that was it. I came from games were you made your own party and I sure did that in BG too. Half the IE games there was no companions to talk about at all.
It seems as if they're trying to satisfy two groups of players, and while I commend them for it I still find it a bit cringe-inducing. Granted, we don't know yet exactly how interactive companions and goons will be. Since one of the influences cited for PE is TOEE, I could imagine that even player-created chars have some opinions one way or another (like the loot grabbing in TOEE).
Oh, and I fully acknowledge that what breaks immersion is completely subjective. Don't wet yourself over it.
-
Did you ever play Baldur's Gate 1 or 2 using the Multiplayer protocol instead of single player?
No, for exactly this reason. IMO it takes all the point out of having interactive characters if half of your party consists of puppets. It totally breaks the immersion.
Granted it's an IE feature, and hey maybe there will be so many scripted companions that you just don't need the goons. But I doubt that, like in BG2 if you wanted a certain party makeup or make use of many kits you HAD to start an MP game.
-
Trees are far too restricting; if they are class specific, they limit character building. If they're not class specific, they tend to offer a much smaller 'pool' of choices than traits/ perks. I really badly want to like Lionheart because I enjoy fiddling with that system so much.
Classes are also pretty restrictive =)
Yes, but they unequivocally are in the game already XD
Besides, a good offering of traits, perks and skills softens up the limitations of the class system
-
So from what I gathered there will be fully fleshed-out companions, and chars from the Adventurers' Guild that will basically just be hired goons. How are these supposed to blend together? Personally, i don't think they will mesh very well.
-
Trees are far too restricting; if they are class specific, they limit character building. If they're not class specific, they tend to offer a much smaller 'pool' of choices than traits/ perks. I really badly want to like Lionheart because I enjoy fiddling with that system so much.
-
I find the idea that healing magic is rare appealing, however you're right, if that results in resting every five steps it would be bad.
-
1
-
-
Care to explain? I've never played any of the Wizardry games.
The default walking speed in Wiz 8 is just about right for exploration, be it in a town or a hostile outdoor area. Running drains stamina rather quickly (unless you have stamina regenerating abilities or items). This is important as you don't want to get caught when your stamina is down, as that impairs your ability to fight and cast spells. Swinging heavier weapons drains stamina more quickly, and IIRC heavy armor exhausts you more quickly too. Running and walking are both possible in combat.
The only fault I can find with the system is that, when running, you are faster than almost anything else in the game world.
-
Wizardry 8 is a good example of run/walk toggle and stamina mechanics done right.
-
One cliché I'd like to see mocked is that, in a low technology environment, physically weak characters always have a way to be just as powerful as stronger characters - magic. Of course this is also done for balancing reasons, but it would be interesting if high INT characters lead by skills instead of magic, like in Fallout. Also casting off a physical attribute like in Arcanum is a good idea.
-
Hunting/ foraging skills, and crafting skills; i.e. skills that let you provide for your party, having something to do with ressource management. I'd like to see crafting at a very basic level like in NWN2, just that this time, it should be actually worthwhile to craft (repair?) mundane weapons and armor.
Apart from that, language/ diplomacy skills are always very nice for character diversity.
Update #29: Fulfillment and the Pros and Cons of Nostalgia and Realism
in Pillars of Eternity: Announcements & News
Posted · Edited by Sacred_Path
As much as I like variety in character building, I do hope they stick with the simple concept that the heavier the armor, the (objectively) better it is. Fighters in CRPGs traditionally don't have much to offer except using heavy armor and heavy weapons. With the Ranger, Barbarian and Paladin in the game, it's easy for the Fighter to end up getting shafted.
Moreover, I'd like to see heavy armor be as expensive, comparatively, as it really was - a lot more than it is say in DnD.