Jump to content

Barleypaper

Members
  • Content Count

    42
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

45 Excellent

About Barleypaper

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator

Badges

  • Pillars of Eternity Backer Badge
  • Pillars of Eternity Kickstarter Badge
  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  1. Tsh, "good". I eat "good" games for breakfast. I want a game that, well, > BG2. Spoilers, it's Planescape: Torment I refuse to let Deadfire go off and be its own game, with its own fans. It had the gall to call itself a spiritual successor to BG and it needs to answer for every single last one of its heinous deviations from the sacred IE formula! Or perhaps I just enjoy belittling the hard work of Obsidian Entertainment. Probably that.
  2. That's a terrible point; When one choice leads to success and the other one dooms you to fail, then there's no point in giving you a choice at all. When all available long-term choices are more or less equally valid then you get a system in which the game won't punish you for playing the way you want to - and isn't that the whole point of offering any sort of character customization in the first place? It's also a system that wont punish you, full stop. That's the problem. I'd rather be constrained by a system that punishes thoughtless action than let loose in a bubble-wrapped sandbox.
  3. There's nothing for them to figure out if they don't agree it smells bad in the first place, though. So you'd have to be rather more explicit on why balance-oriented design is a bad thing to convince them. Although I must say I don't see it as anything other than positive, good balance is of rather fundamental importance to the quality of (almost) any game as far as I'm concerned. I think it's less the application of balance where it's needed (if such need can be identified), something I'd agree is a positive thing, and more the abstract "balance-above-all" paradigm. The most obvious
  4. I'm rather tired of people saying "BG2 isn't perfect", as though there exist some legion of impenetrably dim grognards who believe otherwise. Of course BG2 isn't perfect. But it was, and still is, loved by many people for many good reasons (yes, even after removing all nostalgia-enhancing headgear; not everyone played BG for the first time 20 years ago, nor is everyone in this thread incapable of exercising objectivity). Anyway... I actually agree with both of your strange thoughts completely. A perfectly balanced single player game (especially one where you build your own character)
  5. I think you can build interesting settings where magic is ubiquitous, but I think PoE has fallen a little bit short, for me. The problem I have with Eora is that it's powered by 1-size-fits-all phlebotinum batteries, "souls". It's, in my opinion, boring. gkathellar mentioned the "bizarro-universe charm" that D&D had as a contrast to this. D&D had almost as many supernaturally-enabled classes as PoE, but they each drew their power from some different, eldritch, esoteric source; mages/sorcerers from the weave and the like (similar to soul power), clerics/paladins from the gods (a fic
  6. Have to chime in here on one point (because I feel it's quite significant): Perhaps, then, the mechanics of the game should be taken at face value. Whether this is a good or a bad thing, I haven't decided.
  7. We still talking about writing AI which analysis situation and reacts accordingly. AI can’t think for itself, and will follow scripted reactions. Strangely enough, the more “intelligent” AI is, the more stupid it becomes ones you understand how it works. I played original XCOM for many, many years and never got bored with encountered, because AI is basic to the point it will often do illogical things and surprise you. New XCOMs have much more robust AI with enemies reacting to your move, focusing vonourable enemies, refusing to run throug overwatch, if it’s probably going to kill you. That
  8. But what is this supposed shift in design philosophy? You keep talking as if BG was the big, open, interactive game while it was a complete opposite compared to RPGs that came before. KOTOR didn’t change design philosophy, Mass Effect didn’t change design philosophy. They all strived to do the same thing - somewhat interactive tight, well paced stories, with better and better visual presentation and mechanics to boost said story. Did I like BG more than those titles? Yes, but not because Bioware’s ideology has changed, but because BG was this odd child of niche RPGs trying to reach out to mass
  9. This argument is so, so overused. Great fact. How does that help us? Fun is subjective, so everything is correct? So game designers should just do ALL things? Nothing is wrong, because nothing is not fun to someone. News flash... getting stabbed in the leg is subjectively fun to some people. Objectively, we know it to be fun for very few people. There's probably a reason for that. There are very few things that we form opinions about that aren't based on some kind of objective reasoning to arrive at that opinion. What's your favorite color? That's probably purely subjective, as it's basica
  10. Does it get a pass? Never used food pre-buff unless I felt I had to. It was a boring, fiddly process which didn’t bring any depth nor interesting choices to the game. And that’s why I am happy to see in repurposed for an anti-too-much-resting-system for Deadfire. Honestly, if I was designing this game, I would remove all bland stat bumps. Food, potions, in-combat buffs, the lot. I don't buy the argument that "opportunity cost" makes such bonuses interesting in combat, either. +2 strength is never interesting me, except maybe as a permanent weapon effect. Even then, I'd prefer something mo
  11. I don't disagree, in essence. The point I'm trying to make is that what you see as bad design, I see as simply different design. To give an example: I enjoy playing the "weaker" classes in IE games precisely because they are weaker; it poses a unique challenge. Yes, I suppose I agree. BG was not a sandbox and combat was a big focus. For the most part, I wouldn't argue that PoE fails at being a spiritual successor. I'll also repeat that I don't actualy want pre-buffing, I'd just like people to stop ragging on it so hard. This topic isn't even about pre-buffing. I'll also state this: I
  12. Absolutely. The point I was trying to make is that games are not simulations of reality. Yes, there a simulators, but even those aren’t simulations. I like flight sims, car sims, I enjoy sims like Kerbal Space Program or Oxygen not Included but they are all games not simulators. Statement that making fantasy game combat “realistic” is objectively better is ignoring what games are. Games don’t work because they are realistic. They work because of mechanics, which create interesting problems to interact with/solve. And, again, Baldur’s Gate was never a simulator. Why are spells limited per rest?
  13. And if simulation is fun? What then? Designers strive to make the games they want to make, nothing more. We can keep saying BG2 sucked until Baator freezes over but the fact remains that I enjoyed it a good deal more than PoE. And that goes for the rest of the IE games, as well. Different people have different, equally valid, views on what is and is not fun. Because fun is subjective. This should go without saying.
  14. I can understand the mentality; other people have opinions about the game that seem to conflict with the things you like about it. Therefore, to protect your own enjoyment of the game you must shut down and/or counter these arguments. Everyone does this to an extend, myself included. It's not illogical, just unproductive. The only way to improve a system is to challenge it. Whether that be by discussing the merits of different mechanics on a forum or testing them out in-game. We can only do the former. When I started reading this thread I thought adding pre-buffing would make PoE2 more fun
  15. What you're saying is not wrong but there is a middle-ground between a full simulacrum of a fantasy world and an arcade hack'n'slash where you get power-ups from gobbling up cherries. Josh makes a lot of good points about game design but I believe there's more to designing a good CRPG than just "getting the numbers right". Case in point: Baldur's Gate 2 (archaic attribute system, hideous class inbalance, etc)
×
×
  • Create New...