Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Helm

  1. Oh woops, like I said your posts are hard to read (you win the rage troll prize for the most undescernable postings) and I was out of context (for some reason). Not to mention that your posts are always full of garbage and troll rage. Sorry that I didn't take more time to read your crap whining again. BTW, Having a bad day? You seem to be very agressive today. Or are you still mad because you lost our last discussion that started here? You know, where you were expecting me to sort through your 3500 posts to find some info and some other bull****.
  2. I edited my post (before you posted). I misread some of what Indira wrote. But true, running like a coward should because you messed up sneaking should not be possible. There should have to be some kind of tradeoff.
  3. 1) Not in open areas. I don't think that Obsidian wants to constantly send the player through extremely crowded or narrow areas. 2) If it is very cluttered, then yes, of course. 3) We agree. 4) Same here, pretty much. 5) If they make sure that sneaking requires a great amount of skill, and is not a no-brainer easy thing to do, then this would be ok. EDIT: God, I messed up reading that. I have to correct 2 points. 3) I still don't think sneaking should give you extra xp. It should be an alternative activity that should be rewarded in a different way, i.e. by substantially improving the outcome of the quest. i.e. you snuck past the guards so that they did not kill the hostages. 4) see number 3
  4. V. good. So we can agree that while in a shooter like CoD combat should be the dominant way of conflict resolution, a game with the premise "3 approaches are viable" should indeed offer all 3 approaches. Wut? Why did you like my post? And about the Call of Duty thing, that was sarcasm dude. Not to mention that I don't have a problem with stealth. I just don't like it's implementation. Read this.
  5. So you didn't know you're supposed to write the things you mean, and mean the things you write. That's one of the more inventive reasons for backpedaling I've seen! I will always write that Project Eternity and the Infinity Engine games are cRPGs when responding to you and will never assume that you know that anymore. I am deeply and truly sorry that I have insulted you by not respecting you or your encumbrance. Yes. And then I will visit the Call of Duty forums afterwards and post "COMBET IZ TOO EAZY AND ALWAYS WINS" because I always get killed while trying to avoid combat.
  6. Do you realize your rhetoric becomes more and more muddled? All of a sudden IE games are "tactical combat games", RPG doesn't even figure in there anymore. Of course, if you're under the impression that these games are isometric shooters with a level progression mechanic, it's becoming more obvious what your problem is. See, people who function normally mentally can enjoy one thing (like kill XP) but also enjoy another, especially if it's an obvious improvement (as in this case). Also, normal people feel bad when they spam up a perfectly productive thread like this with random snubs. I know I do now Oh, I'm sorry that I did not write "role playing party based tactical combat game". I thought it was obvious that this is a cRPG. Because that is what is says on the front page. I just forgot about your little problem with comprehension and logical deduction. Sorry about that. Not to mention that I have never said anything about "party based isometric shooters with a level progression mechanic" in any relation whatsoever. You must be suffering from a delirium. You poor thing. Like I said, keep your head away from monitors. Your next disupute with one could prove fatal after all of the damage that has already been done.
  7. I reiterate, you assume that kill XP is so fundamental for a CRPG that you cannot for the life of you imagine any other approach. Since you're not a full retard, I think it's a form of pouting. But there's no need to pout Little Helm, I'm sure you'll find another (probably flawed) mechanic in P:E that you'll come to love and defend just like that anachronism (kill XP). It is fundamental for a party based tactical combat game. But apparently you have lost the ability to comprehend written and spoken text from the slamming of your head into the monitor all those countless times. All that just because of the "annoying combat" in the IE games, you could have just simply turned down the difficulty to easy you know.
  8. There is a crucial difference between systemic rewards and contingent (explicitly placed) rewards. Please explain, in your own words, what the difference is, and get back to me. it's amusing to watch you try and worm your way out of your contradictory statement. But I'll leave it at that. It is just another amusing post from PJ (that I will quote if needed).
  9. The problem is that it makes combat in a tactical combat based pointless, because avoiding combat will yield the best results. Take the time and skim through the thread, there has been quite a bit of argumentation on this matter. You can than decide what sounds better to you.
  10. Oh really? And what does that have to do with combat xp then? Why is objective xp not degenerate and combat xp is degenerate if a game designer implements it? That is what you just wrote. Illogical and contradictory bullcrap, because you apparently have no idea what you are saying.
  11. These are very valid concepts. My thoughts: 1) To avoid combat you do not need to use a stealth ability, so it will not fix the fact that you might want to avoid combat as much as possible where stealth is not required. 2) In spots where the game is very narrow and linear (like in a dungeon), it might work. I would expect something like you mentioned for the stealth ability 3) Sneaking itself should not reward you with xp at all, because it is the easy way out imo. (read number 4 please) 4) You should only get an xp reward for sneaking if it substanitally improves the outcome of the quest/objective i.e. you snuck past the guards so that they did not kill the hostages. 5) Screw pure pacifist runs @ combat haters. Go and play the Sims if you hate combat.
  12. PJ does not want combat xp at all. No refining, no adapting, nothing. He just wants it gone and is really stubborn about it. Read the little "conversation" I had with him on the first page and check the "degenerate gaming" thread.
  13. Yes, dear. That's because if the Baron of Derpwood offers the bounty, it becomes an in-game objective. Therefore, because whacking them aligns with designer intent, by definition, it is not degenerate behavior.Are you some kind of clown that is trying to be funny or do you just have no idea what you are writing? Because that makes absolutely no sense at all. What you just wrote is the most contradictory and ridiculous post in this whole thread. This is what you wrote: "If a designer implements objective xp, then it aligns with designer intent, by definition, it is not perverse degenerate behavior." on the other hand: "If a designer implements combat xp, then it does not align with designer intent, by definition, it is perverse degenerate behavior." Are you high or what the heck is wrong with you? BTW, you also really have to stop calling the system used in Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape degenerate. They are great games. Jeez.
  14. You apparently can't tell the difference between fundamental cRPG mechanics (for IE style tactical combat based games) and D&D rules. I wouldn't be surprised if really thought that combat xp was only used in D&D games. Both of you must have also been ramming your head into the monitor because of the "annoying" combat in the IE games. Real hard too.
  15. What's wrong with having the Baron of Derpwood offer a bounty of 10 zorkmids per dead orc, payable upon presentation of an orc snout? What's wrong with killing 10 orcs for 1 zorkmid and 10xp each? I'm kinda interested to see how the P:E team does decide to handle it, since on the face of it The Endless Paths sounds very Diablo-esque (except not randomly generated) and as such a good candidate for an area where kill XP would work without creating perverse incentives. So combat xp + combat loot is a perverse incentive, but if the Baron of Derpwood offers a bounty of 10 zorkmids + xp per dead orc/kobold/whatever, then it isn't a perverse incentive? Yeah, that really makes sense (not). Yes, true. Because we are all retards that can't quell compulsive killing for xp (but refuse to kill for loot or any other reason). Anyway, his proposal to add a simple mechanic to prevent "xp double dipping" and "xp loopholes" is legit. scripting would also work.
  16. Some of these are design-driven answers, so I'll answer a few. We're starting out with one basic attack for each weapon type with variants as a lower priority. Making all of the weapon attacks unique/good is more important (IMO) than having variants. Also, a lot of our animation time is traditionally spent on creatures, and I think having a large bestiary is important. On Black Hound, we put a lot of effort into standard melee variations and I don't think it would have had as large of an impact as additional creatures/creature animations. I'd like to have special death animations and that's something Dimitri, Mark, and I have discussed, but not in detail. Good shtuff. And I really like good shtuff. Shtuff like this has a positive effect on my Josh-brolove-meter too.
  17. Well, he should learn from you. After bashing your head so many times, you learned the value of a HELM. No, I wasn't bashing my head into the monitor while I was playing Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale and Planescape, just because they all used combat xp. But as I can see from your response, you must have done this quite often, which is probably why you have failed to read the front page: Miss classic cRPGs [with combat, quest and diplomacy xp] like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment? So do we! Introducing Obsidian's PROJECT ETERNITY.
  18. Removing combat xp (from tactical combat based game!) is very problematic. Removing quest xp is very problematic. Removing diplomacy xp is very problematic.
  19. It shouldn't take much longer until PJ realises that quest/objective only xp is fundamentally flawed (for PE). It's amusing to see him constantly run his head into a brick wall. That brick wall really is a nasty one.
  20. I feel (felt) the same way. But the more I think about it the more I don't like it. I really didn't give it much thought at the beginning, but that has changed as you can see. I think the game can have both (stealth and combat), but "quest xp only" is not the solution. The system would have to be much more complicated in order to 1) cater to the fans of the IE games so that they don't feel estranged and 2) to cater to those who like stealth/pacifist gaming. Anything can be fixed and Josh has enough time to do it. We'll see what happens.
  21. Look, Greenballz is also disappointed. That it isn't a solution. That is just normal quest and objective xp. I am so disappointed. Poor Greenballz...
  22. I personally wouldn't consider that a resource though, seeing that it regenerates. But yes, it could be used for a stealth mechanic. I suppose stealth will be like in commandos (but much simpler of course) as Josh says here. Stealth is a good idea, for some quests it would be an interesting an excellent alternative to a diplomatic resolution (Maybe @Valorian can post his examples here, they were excellent), but that still doesn't fix the problem that you will avoid every combat situation like the pest if you can. Woops. Typo.
  23. You're still assuming that player skill doesn't play any part in the outcome, which, I'm convinced, is likely not true. Well, if I play the game on easy as a skilled player, then I will have more loot from fighting, sure. Maybe I will kill everything in the whole game (on easy) for loot that I don't need. But seriously, in the end that will not really make a difference. Every player will receive enough loot for his play style as Josh has said. The only benefit is from questing, nothing else.
  24. If you can read: I did not say that the loot will be exactly the same. The outcome will be the same (for practically every encounter). And you of course won't avoid the rare elites with good loot (if you want to at least). It will only even be worth fighting the elites, because they (might) have good loot. And thats it. But not like it makes a difference. Sneaking and avoiding combat is the acitivity of choice because it won't be punished with less loot as Josh has already said. It does not mean you will ignore every single combat situation as I have just said. But you will avoid most of them.
  • Create New...