Gromnir

unfortunate observation: if obsidian were getting primed to do a deadlands or deadlands-like kickstarter, am doubting he woulda' needed to google it. HA! Good Fun!

I quoted that as something I said/referenced not you...in regard to selling units....more of a thing we say in sports. we played d-1 football. always hated when somebody "quoted" us with what they thought we meant. that kinda thing would get any journalist seriously skewered. though, admittedly, by the time we got to University, we were no longer quotable as an athlete seeing as how we only ever got one start and that were due to injuries. as an aside, we saw "oh noes" nonsense in a post by helm, which kinda figures. HA! Good Fun! ps is a complete aside, but our one start were the kinda thing that were so complete epic fail that nobody would believe how bad we performed if we didn't still have video o' it. "nobody could be that bad," is actual responses we heard from friends who called us up after the game.

as soon as we can get our quest log to not evaporate, we will give it another try. this bug happens regardless of which load screen we use, so... well, we decided that the game were unplayable for now. not your fault o'course and we look forward to experimenting just as soon as obsidian ________ or gets off the pot. HA! Good Fun!

"Oh noes, I can powergame in Fallout by metagaming because of the wonders of the Internet. Game sux." is never good to put into quotes something somebody didn't say nor has ever claimed. makes you look like a schnook. that being said, we did observe that Developers has observed that fallout functional encouraged folks to metagame and they (sawyer and cain) seems to think that is a bad thing. personal, we don't mind occasionally playing a gimped character... particular after we has played the game a few times, but developers seem discouraged that a game they built with limitless seeming build potentials resulted in a very small number o' actual character builds getting played. HA! Good Fun!

**** man if they consider past xp mechanics to be failures this game is worse off than I imagined. Thank god they have a partnership with Paizo as a Pathfinder cRPG will no doubt have combat as well as other XP...not to mention popular/established mechanics already in place. This is especially true considering the IE games didn't try to have what you consider equal rewards for different resolution of quests so it's rather silly to judge it as if it did. Besides not everyone thinks there was an issue nor do they think of this as an improvement. Sure two of the head guys on PE think there was an issue but we've established that one didn't do too well when left to his own ideas....so yea cause for pause is very much warranted. *chuckle* it would be hard for stun's example to be any worse as an example o' past failures. ps:t? A Wisdom of 12 and lower, no bonus 13 gives you about a 2% bonus to experience earned. 14 5% 15 8% 16 10% 17 13% 18 15% 19 18% 20 20% 21 23% 22 25% 23 27% 24 30% 25 35% the game was so skewed in favor of wisdom it were ridiculous. intelligence and charisma also were receiving superior xp rewards, but as we noted in another thread, ps:t were the prime example o' th schadenfreude josh were talking about in his recent balance article. you could not active play as a cleric in ps:t, so no class had wisdom as a prime attribute, but wisdom not only got you the best xp awards, it gave you a freaking BONUS beyond the awards. and unlike other ie games, you could level as a thief, mage and fighter, so you were smartest to do all three if you wanted as much xp to get as much wisdom a possible. stun example o' the best is perhaps the worst freaking example we can recall, and clearly the most arse-backwards ie game as far as experience were concerned. is ironic that stun edited from bg2 to ps:t, 'cause he backpedaled his way into a complete ridiculous xp mechanic that made so that anybody who played through ps:t as a high wisdom mage character knew very well that playing as a low int/wis/charisma fighter as were oh-so-common, in other ie games were a functional punishment, particularly as combat... sucked. schadenfreude, and stun actual edited his way into it. tickles our sense o' whimsy. we loved ps:t, but stun points to it most farked mechanic as the guide for PoE? we couldn't have scripted this to make stun look more foolish. honest. HA! Good Fun! edited out oh-co-common... as if the c is all that close to the s on keyboard. sheesh

is so difficult to tell if you is being intentional obtuse for effect, or not. perplexing. *sigh* is not a "nuh-uh" argument. is axiomatic that NOT making any attempt to balance is easier than attempting to balance a myriad different xp award types. quest xp does not make any attempt to balance. it is therefore less resource intensive than ANY xp mechanic that attempts to do so. this should be so obvious that it is beyond question, but somehow it ain't. Explain how Kill XP imbalances PS:T. that has been done literal hundreds o' times in multiple threads, and Gromnir is simply repeating. folks who don't kill get less xp than those who do.... but you is the guy who couldn't understand why the absence o' stealth xp were a problem for those playing stealth characters. your inability to see the obvious is literal astounding, and keep in mind Gromnir has witnessed these boards since the late 90s. to be genuine surprised by a poster's inability to grasp simple concepts is noteworthy in and of itself. "Several problems with that." well, you got us-- this time we will say "nuh-uh." you just ain't worth the effort. if we can't explain that no work is requiring less effort than any amount o' genuine work, particularly when a developer describes the task in question thus: "Not only is it extraordinarily hard to balance for designers and QA staff, but it inevitably leads to nasty metagaming that, in my opinion, runs counter to some of the guiding principles of many RPGs." 1) no work v. 2) hard to balance for designers and qa staff yet you can't grasp that 1 is easier than 2? HA! Good Fun!

is so difficult to tell if you is being intentional obtuse for effect, or not. perplexing. *sigh* is not a "nuh-uh" argument. is axiomatic that NOT making any attempt to balance is easier than attempting to balance a myriad different xp award types. quest xp does not make any attempt to balance. it is therefore less resource intensive than ANY xp mechanic that attempts to do so. this should be so obvious that it is beyond question, but somehow it ain't. and as for immortalis perception o' a change in our posting, that is your imagination. perhaps you has read more posts and become familiarized, or more likely, you don't wanna simple admit that you were caught by ye olde schmuck detector 2000. am not sure if that is a sign o' growth or regression on your part. curious. HA! Good Fun!

didn't avoid the question of why should we care, we have answered many times, you just don't wanna hear. is a problem you exhibit frequent. might wanna have that checked out btw. "PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest." fallout is an example. is not a handful o' folks exploiting. is the fallout community as a whole quickly realizing that there were clear best builds. all those customization choices were largely pointless, 'cause only a handful o' actual builds were typical played. take out a major motivation for finding a best build, and you increase likelihood o' diversity. as for talking out our arse about issue being moot or what developers has learned from QA. HA! perhaps you should ask the questions o' the folks with the answers before making such claims. you is the one talking out his arse. HA! Good Fun!

I'm not sure what you're talking about. Definitely not my post though. LOL You're dodging. *sigh* before the edit, you used bg2 as the model, but it don't matter Quote "provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player." Planescape Torment's system, minus the meta-gaming exploits. I would suggest NPCs/monsters who are dealt with non-violently during the course of a quest/task/objective be worth zero XP for anyone who attempts to double-dip the rewards after initially completing the quest. Edited by Stun, Today, 02:28 PM. ps:t is no better. is no way possible you can be honest and believe that ps:t approach were more simple and straightforward. you is showing you ain't even trying for reason. and as for suggesting stealth deserves no xp, that further removes you from the realm o' rationale discourse, seeing as how an espoused goal o' PoE is to make all builds equal viable and rewarding. sarex comments is simple silly. will respond quick 'cause is funny rather than contributing anything. quest xp precludes the possibility o' the most obvious exploits as no XP advantage for any particular build is possible. the developers wanna encourage folks to try different approaches, so making no particular build or set o' builds has a numeric xp advantage makes diversity o' playable builds more likely. you don't wanna take just enough perception/intellect/lore to get the good diplomacy xp rewards? guess what, there is no such perfect amount o' perception for xp maximization. is no XP advantage for killing everything on the map. is no xp advantage for having X levels in mechanics. sure, there will be practical advantages to having various skills, but obsidianis avoiding the obvious xp imbalances, 'cause they ain't balancing. after we diplomacy the ogre, does we go back and see if kill gives more xp in PoE? no. gosh. "PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest." repeating self is so tedious. oh, and again, ‘cause some folks has very short attention spans, this entire debate is moot. There don’t exist the resources to change the mxp mechanic at this point, not that the developers believe it is warranted based on their firsthand observation o’ QA actual playing the game. Your Best Case Scenario is coming up with a new contribution to this debate and convincing obsidian to change future games. stun ridiculous notions o’ repeating what obsidian developers such as sawyer and cain consider past xp mechanics failures is not the least bit helpful to your possible ‘cause o’ bringing about future change and improvements. you is gonna need come up with something new, ‘cause old is what is considered the fail, and is too late to change for this game anyway. HA! Good Fun!

the fact that you could possibly believe the bg2 xp system would be more simple and as straight forward to implement shows you ain't even trying to be reasonable... and fact you don't believe stealth should get as much xp as kills is fundamental opposed to goals o' a system wherein the developers specific said they were trying to make all builds equal rewarding and that body count weren't gonna be rewarded. you ain't serious, or you simple ain't capable o' understanding obvious goals o' the developers. which is it? HA! Good Fun!

Ah the infamous double dip. When was that a big problem in the BG series? How much more xp could you even get for it anyways? Maybe a few people did it and you are saying that because of them we should now waste time on a new xp system? http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67963-backer-beta-developer-impressions/?p=1495117 people game the system. hell, we has mentioned numerous bg exploits. dual-class and then immediately add max spells to bg2 spellbook to gain multiple mage levels in less than a minute. do the basilisk map in bg with a solo dual-class player to get them level'd quick. simplest "exploit" were the worst: encouraging folks to play combat focused to maximize xp, regardless o' what they might otherwise think were fun. is a pleasant fantasy to believe folks don't game the xp system... just as folks gamed fallout special system. there were literal innumerable possible fallout builds, but only a handful o' builds actual got played. that were in part to maximize xp. any game that has a balancing act for xp may be exploited... so obsidian removes the opportunity to eploit. if there is no advantage to play combat-focused, people will be more likely to try other builds. should be obvious. HA! Good Fun! (edit: changed olay to play... weird)

You lie, you care enough to post that you don't care. Is it care, or narcissism that lead to my post? You decide! but do you care about usc cheerleaders? honestly, the last few years has seemed like a bit o' a drop off... the ucla squad mighta' been superior. sadly for Gromnir, Cal cheerleaders is rare amongst the nation's best, and the UCI/UCSB (our other alma maters) might not even current have cheerleaders. sad. HA! Good Fun! Can't say that - in the scheme of Cheerleaders - that USC has really left much of an impression on me. we played for Cal, so we did notice usc cheerleaders... am embarrassed to admit we typical found the cheerleaders as compelling as the games. we had zero pro potential and practices were cutting into our study time-- we were not an exemplary player from coaches perspective. aside: at the time, asu and arizona had best cheerleaders in the pac 10... not that we were ogling or anything like that. HA! Good Fun!

I can't wait when the game comes out and in the second week guides start coming out with how to exploit the system for max xp. I can't wait to see what you will say then. You are holding up the quest xp system as a beacon of unexploitability, when in fact such a system doesn't exit. The better question is, why should time be wasted on creating such a system in a singleplayer game? not in the sense you seems to believe. for instance, ps:t were rife with unlimited xp exploits from quests. we expect more than a few o' those. what you will never see from PoE is a way to choose best build or best method for garnering xp. no kill 90% underlings, unlock secret door, backtrack and then use diplomacy on final boss nonsense. regardless o' build, you will get same xp. everybody wins. no exploit. HA! Good Fun!

so what? if there ain't currently a quest for that map, there undoubtedly will be in final build, and even if there ain't, so what? stealth past lions would get 0 points. kill would get xp. how is this difficult to grasp? and you can use stealth to get past combat... which would give only the kill-lovers xp. why is kill more xp worthy than stealth? even if you believe kill is more worthy, the developers disagree. for the rest, you reply/quote yourself into meaninglessness. answer the challenge: "provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player." HA! Good Fun!

but do you care about usc cheerleaders? honestly, the last few years has seemed like a bit o' a drop off... the ucla squad mighta' been superior. sadly for Gromnir, Cal cheerleaders is rare amongst the nation's best, and the UCI/UCSB (our other alma maters) might not even current have cheerleaders. sad. sarex is all over the place http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66146-update-77-art-in-alpha/?p=1445520 can see our seriousness. oh, wait, you is necro-posting over some imagined grudge from a few months ago? how cute. HA! Good Fun!

Np dude glad to be of help, I remember our times fondly in the boobplate discussion we had. My imagination must have went wild there. if you ever thought we were serious 'bout b00b plate enough to make us drop character, you is indeed remembering with personal, if unrealistic fondness... am believing we posted pictures o' the usc cheerleaders in their sweaters in that thread... shows how "serious" we were with our back to ropes in that discussion. *chuckle* in point o' fact, this thread could use some usc cheerleaders. would be just as relevant. HA! Good Fun!

Why? Do they not exist? are they not hostile? Do they not attack the party? Did the devs not specifically place them in the party's way? They're not part of any quest, and therefore cannot be Double-dipped, exploited, or talked down. Nor does attaching an XP value to them break balance, since they will always be available to everyone who chooses to explore that optional map in between questing. *groan* and thus we see the complete lack o' comprehension regarding the possible balance issues. some folks will skip the bugs and spiders by stealthily getting past. others may find some more clever route. what if developers added a secret door? so why does the fighty character get more xp? and if you do give awards for stealthy, how to you balance properly... and how do you prevent folks from doing stealth and kill? quest xp avoids all such balancing issues completely. developers don't care how you solve tasks or quests, so they need not create a perfect calculus to balance. but this has all been said before, and developers is keenly aware that some group o' sincere but misguided folks believe as stun... but stun belief doesn't impact the way QA folks has played game. "PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest." so, ignoring for a moment that this entire debate is complete moot given the time left for development and the fact that sawyer and cain bot favor quest xp, "provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player." HA! Good Fun!

actually, the only time we do so is on the rare occasions when we is serious... typical drop the "HA! Good Fun" too, just so as to be clear. most recent example were some clown making light about his ancestors raping ours. some folks has commented on the fact that they recall us posting normal, but cannot recal more than a handful o' times in more than a decade. you is free to imagine different causes if you wish. it amuses us that you put such thought into the matter. nevertheless, thanks again for proving our point 'bout efficacy o' schmuck detector function. illustrations is always useful. HA! Good Fun! HA! Good Fun!

sorry mc, but it kinda is binary. a primary value o' quest/task is that it avoids balancing. if you create categories that include kill/combat and quest and whatever, you has invalidated the point o' quest/task. you has necessarily reintroduced balancing. What a load of baloney. There's nothing stopping the devs from utterly separating combat from quests. Take the Ogre quest in the beta. That one is worth 2000xp regardless of how you complete it. Therefore, the Gromnirs are the world are happy. Now, what about the totally-unrelated-Lions on the other map? Hmm? Oh, I know! we can make them worth XP if they stomp on the party while they're exploring. Problem friggin solved. getting 2000 xp for the ogre quest is admitted not the problem. getting 2000 xp for the ogre resolution and then trying to add in and balance awards for combats against the bugs and spiders you need to fight or avoid to get to the ogre, or perhaps awards for some other unexpected route to confronting the ogre the developers did not plan for, is what creates a Balancing problem. is this genuine confusing? how? the lions example is pointless with quest xp. HA! Good Fun!

It's just a forum personality...you guys gotta bring more to the table than that in your quest to kill quest only xp (and then get xp from that kill) we noted elsewhere that the Gromnir personality is a near infallible schmuck detector. when folks abandon rational argument and instead focus on our board persona, it is functional an admission o' defeat... or simple schmuckness. on boards such as these, schmuck and intellectual limited go hand-in-hand, so it is admitted tough to distinguish at times. HA! Good Fun!

in the interview, doesn't feargus say that the game (south park) were released "few" months previous? we would need to rewatch, but that would make the interview probable june-july, yes? HA! Good Fun!

Again I feel the sting of irony that you are critiquing me on lack of understanding leading to an ineffective debate. I mean seriously dude.. I barely can piece together what your even talking about.. I read every third word and hope I caught the gist of what you meant.. Which clearly I didn't. HA! Good Fun! finally, something we can agree to: you have a fundamental "lack of understanding." HA! Good Fun!

there is no vote. we has made that observation elsewhere. the developers decided on a best course o' action. they then watched to see how their plan worked in reality via considerable QA, and based on their considerable experience with QA o' past games. this game is now in late beta and sawyer and cain, after having reviewed how game were actually played and responded to via QA, feels that their original choice were correct. the notion that this is a voting issue is a fantasy. is unlikely obsidian would have time or resources to change at this point regardless, but they don't believe a change is justified based on the hypothetical musings o' a relative small number o' boardies when they has actual QA data that backs up their perspective. is no vote. there never were a community vote on this issue. perhaps if somebody, somewhere, in one o' these interminable and repetitive xp mechanic threads came up with a New perspective that had not been argued and dismissed a hundred times before, the obsidians might consider changes for the Next game, but not only has we seen no such new info, but it still wouldn't be a matter o' votes. HA! Good Fun!

is not a matter o' compromise regarding argument, but a recognition o' definitions. can't have a meaningful debate unless one can agree on basic definitions. duh. HA! Good Fun!

He'd just had his wizard cast "Grease" you see, and... it is possible that the build iteration feargus and their QA is using is a bit more refined than what we are getting with backer beta. one almost needs to assume that the beta in the hands o' QA is more refined or else we is very much dismayed by the certitude o' a december (or pre-december) release. that is unless the already-in-development expansion is being viewed by obsidian as a kinda super-patch for PoE. 'course, such a perspective would require substantial cynicism on our part, and our reputation is for assuming sunshine and rainbows, yes? HA! Good Fun!