forgottenlor

In a way it is more like the old I.E. system. You needed a rogue or thief and he sacrificed combat effectiveness for more skill points or lock picking/ trap finding ability). Now, though you get to choose who is your skill guy (its not linked to a particular class) and that is cool. What do you have against having a more skilled character and not maxing out every character with combat skills? I think its a good idea (though I haven't played the beta either).

I certainly wasn't referring to you, Sensuki. I think your Beta testing has been important constructive criticism.

That's pretty presumptive. Certainly some people are being overly negative, but most criticisms I've read regarding the beta have been fairly measured, insightful and given in the spirit of wanting to help the game get better through a combination of iteration and feedback. Personally, I like Obsidian (otherwise I never would have given them so much of my money over the years and for this project) but there are considerable issues that have yet to be fixed before PoE will be good or fun; I fully expect the story, plus choices and consequences to be excellent, but the combat is a hot mess. Pointing that out in a constructive way doesn't make anybody a hater. That is only one side of the negativity, and I'll agree that criticism aimed at improving the beta version can be very helpful to the developers. However, there are other sorts of negativity, and those are usually tied to an agenda that doesn't necessarily have anything to do with the Beta. This agenda is usually an intensive dislike for part or all of the developer's vision, most usually because the developers departed from some elements of the IE games, though rarely because the developers haven't departed from them enough. These people try to push their agendas through a variety of threads, and are usually very combatitive and loud.

Is anyone else noticing by the weird graphics? I am aware it is a screenshot, but the character models are not precisely defined. For instance it's hard to tell apart the two models on the left. Where does the blue character end and where does the enemy behind him start? Everything looks very 'fuzzy'/blurry. Also the left character looks like he has a transparent left leg. Quantics: This has been a common complaint since the beta began. Actually, it looks much better now. At the start, some models looked like faint ghosts. However, this needs to be fixed once and for all. Wasteland 2 has no problem in this regard, and nor has T:ToN, judging by vids that have been shown. Obsids, pick up the phone, and place a call to InXile. They can help you with this issue, surely. Some games give their figures dark or light outlines. While this may stunt realism a bit it does prevent models with similar colours from blending into each other.

Very good news. It's hard to imagine that I'd even be happier if I were Italian.

I thought that's what rjshae meant, too. It wasn't strictly specified, so I was simply commenting on the fact that the designer has to make sure, if you go down that road, that you make them actual trade-offs. I didn't think rjshae was asking specifically for things that didn't come with significant disadvantages. I agree, and that's why I thought those from Arcanum were good. The first time I played I chose no background because I couldn't find one that was really mechanically advantageous.

As long as the disadvantage is a definite disadvantage, and not "+ a bunch to something you're going to use on this character, but - 50 to Lockpickery." Then, you just go "LOLZ! That character wasn't ever going to pick locks, anyway. I JUST GOT A FREE BONUS!" I think that kind of goes along with their goal for stats. That way, you could actually have things like that. If your eyesight legitimately affected a definite frequently-checked factor, then bad eyesight would be a great balance to some chosen bonus. Another example would be "You do less damage, in general, but you inherently ignore 5DT worth of armor." Now, you can build that character to be a better armor-piercing character. BUT, you have to have a large enough portion of enemies in the game actually have 5 DT or more, and you can't have that character do so little damage that they can't hurt anything and are ONLY viable if all they ever fight are armored foes, etc. It's kinda hard to pick those tradeoffs, but a lot of that just relies on general game balance. Which is why it's best to kind of balance your core factors, if you can (enemies with high HP, damage values, typical armor values, bonus values, etc. -- get 'em all centered around some kind of nucleus), instead of just trying to balance this one thing against that other thing, succeeding, then trying to balance THOSE things against some other thing... Still, it's a bit of a puzzle. I think Rjshae means disadvantages that tend to hamper characters. The ones in Arcanum come to find. Normally you got a bonus in one substantial area, but a penalty in two substantial areas.

Rjshae, it seems like your talking about unbalanced characters and not unbalanced parties. For me a party of 2 Barbarians, 2 Fighters, and 2 Monks is an unbalanced party, since their are no healers, buffers, and very little in the way of crowd control. This is something you should be able to do in POE. I think unbalanced characters would be a cool optional feature (especially at higher difficulty), but its the sort of thing that for me (personally) that is a very low priority. If they manage to get everything working well, and add lots of cool talents so that I can customize characters and build them in lots of different ways, then I'd be happy with such additions. I do think if they make a ton of talents, you will be able to make inefficient characters, and that would be preferable to me than having a trait like "one eye," "limps," or "sociopath."

Why should classes branch? Why shouldn't there simply be more talents which allow development along a certain line? For example a marksmen branch of say 4-5 talents that build up ranged weapons that any class can take. Why can't I build a marksman chanter, for example, if I really want, if I dish out all my talents for ranged combat? Or for that matter a skill monkey branch. Why can't I get bonuses to all skills, or an extra skill for my fighter, if I really want them to be a jack of all trades?, or why couldn't a group of talents that strengthen summons for any class (that has access to summons)? That would be preferable in my eyes than branching each class into two paths.

I just want to say, I hope you keep going through the classes, Mutonizer. Your reviews are well thought out and a pleasure to read.

If they treat it as a real project and start to completely ignore the nostalgia fetish people, they could make at least 5 times as much as they got from the kickstarter. But I don't know how long would it take to create all the animations and effects from scratch so it can approach a level of quality most people expect now. The nostalgia fetish people are the ones who gave them the money to make this game. If they hadn't, Obsidian was in the position where they would have had to lay off a number of their staff. This game was made on a 4 million dollar budget (circa). Games like Skyrim are made with 25X that budget. Who is going to finance all the fancy animations and effects? That having been said they'd want to make at least 2 million dollars for a sequel (I'm assuming with the assets for this game already made, creating a sequel wouldn't cost as much as the base game.)

Well, in D&D computer games, Charisma is often underpowered. Personally, if I were Obsidian, I'd have replaced charisma with resolve, wisdom with speed (or agility, but speed was used in Wizardry 1-8, and Morrowind/Oblivion, so I think its more familiar), and have kept the other D&D attributes. I'd have split spell damage and physical damage, which would have left one dump stat depending on class. I don't know if it would have made as mechanically an interesting of a system, but it would be more familiar. You could also tie all the wierd bonuses (like range and duration) to resolve, since it's a new attribute. edit: I can understand not liking stamina and cooldowns. I'm used to cooldowns now, they're in so many games. As for the current health/stamina system, I'm not sure if its not overly complicated. Neither of these necessarily has to be tied to their six attributes, though.

While the attribute system is mechanically interesting, I'll be first to agree that it is non intuitive. That is because most RPG games work with a series of attributes which do certain things in those games. Another is that Obsidian is trying to keep some D&D names, which don't necessarily describe their attributes well, and lastly their attributes mix certain bonuses which are very unusual. Constitution is pretty much the only traditional attribute in their system. Perception in most games judges hit chances with ranged weapons, so I find it a decent name for what it does in POE. Attack speed is usually associated with a speed attribute. Deflection usually tied to a dexterity or agility attribute. Physical damage and magical damage are usually tied to two seperate attributes, and other factors such as range, duration, and area of effect are usually independent of attributes all together. For this reason might, dexterity, and intellect do things (at least partially) one wouldn't expect. And resolve is a completely new name. Because of these factors, the unique attribute system is unlike that of any CRPG that I can remember playing. I think that makes it non intuitive. I personally have always found game mechanics interesting, so it doesn't bother me, but I can completely understand people's confusion.

There's been conflicting interview content on this topic. Both Avellone and Sawyer have said something like "Obsidian has a reputation for releasing buggy games and we want to work against that." Fergus did say in the Matt Chat interview that he thought Dragon Age 3 was coming out around Christmas and he wanted to release before that. I have seen other Beta tests and where POE is now doesn't seem too worrisome to me, but it would be foolish to release it too early. Release a good game, and even if the sales are only decent you can start a new kickstarter, don't and you've shut that avenue off.

You've missed my point. I of course would try to make a good builds, and agree that is half the fun of building characters. I'm just saying if you can't build build say a decent high intelligence, high constitution, high resolve fighter, I could see those attributes being tweeked. I don't think it's important for all characters to profit equally from all attributes, but I can see if say, raising constitution is an utterly crappy choice for all characters, that it will be improved so that you get more hit points/endurance from each point.

Welcome to the darkside Indira. Looks like D3 had a great effect on you. They have to lock the attributes in once the game is released. No more changing attributes. If they did, that would mean changing things like game manuals having to be constantly updated. Characters that you're currently playing 6 months after release now play differently because all the attributes changed? Your tank fighter is no longer a tank because you just got a Steam update. No thanks. And it'd be better for Obsidian to squash more important bugs than changing the whole system because Josh saw a Youtuber making an OP build and killing something in 5 seconds. But there will always be OP builds no matter how much is changed. You can even create OP builds with S&M's system. Whatever system is implemented, it won't stop the powergamers finding ways to min-max and make OP builds. I don't think Josh cares so much about OP builds, he cares if builds suck. The question is then how characters with balanced stats play out or how high constitution/intellect/resolve characters play out. If they utterly suck, I bet the attributes will be further tweeked.

Sorry if you feel stalked. I hope you are aware that anyone can click on any user and see their past posts and backer status. The site makes such "stalking" a matter of two or three clicks. I am guilty of stalking Josh Sawyer as well. If I see he has posted recently, I just click on his profile to see what he has written in different threads, rather than trying to read my way through all the threads, which I must admit would be too much for me. But just so you are comfortable, I promise not to post anymore in your thread. Farewell.

Ah, I thought the rag doll physics complaint seemed familiar. The first time he complained, I looked at his other posts, and I saw he was in the Dungeon Siege 3 forums begging for a sequel, so you can see where his interests lie. I have no problem with someone liking Dungeon Siege 3, but he seems like he wants this to be Dungeon Siege 4, or hopes the game tanks and the result will be that Obsidian makes Dungeon Siege 4 (or a game like it). Edit:I'd be also curious how he played the beta. (Maybe he has a friend who is a high level backer?)

I just wanted to give my support for the bestiary idea and I hope you give it a try in next patch. It is a new system, and it needs to be tested. There is going to be opposition on the grounds that its not the tried and true combat xp, which people are used to. Some players don't want new systems, or are at least going to be opposed to a new system until they have to try it out and get used to it. I have high hopes though that this new system makes combat more rewarding under normal circumstances and that I think is what the goal should be. I also think its an interesting new mechanic, and would like to see how it works in practice. I also support mechanics xp, and here is my thinking. If lore is useful at filling out the bestiary, if mechanics is useful at gaining traps and locks xp, and if stealth is useful to avoid less rewarding combats, it makes the use of a lot of skills seem important and enjoyable. The other skills need to be balanced with this in mind, and that makes the whole non combat aspect of the game for enjoyable.

I am not sure anything is per say "wrong" with the old XP system. Let's say though you want to sneak around some opponents or get around them through dialogue. Will the game later on become more difficult, because you didn't enter combat with them? That might encourage you to fight some battles which you wouldn't have to or want to. I think a good system enables players to play how they want to. If you want to fight alot, talk alot or sneak alot, the game should allow that without making one of these the better choice. It should make each path rewarding. How you achieve that, though, is as we are now seeing, not so easy.

Couldn't you only create them in the beginning of the game? Whereas here you pick them up part way though? I think it's kind of cool that you can pick them up within the context of the story and personally have no problem shelling out money for them, though I also would have no problem with the player having a leadership value which would determine the number of people who could accompany them.

I'm not sure I'd call combat xp a feature. Just like I 'm not sure I'd call lockpicking xp a feature. I didn't have a problem with them though. It seems to me the design goals were to make it possible to avoid some combat without the feeling that you're worse off for it. You can solve a problem without fighting and not be penalized by the game for it. I think that's a laudable goal. I also think, though, that many players are saying they feel penalized for entering combat, and that's obviously not good either. And the stealth system isn't working great either, so that needs to be fixed. There are lot's of ways to make the XP system more engaging and combat more rewarding. Awarding minimal combat xp is one solution, improving loot is another. Yet another is making non combat xp for reaching certain areas or goals. I don't think most people are for combat xp, but I do think recent polls suggest that a lot of people don't find the xp system as implemented in the Beta good enough.

I'm all for shaping AOE size, but I don't think tying it to duration is good.

It makes me grateful for backer generated content.

Sounds good. I'm looking forward to reading it!