Search the Community

My ongoing peeve with Reputation gain (i.e. the pre-defined meaning and intention of conversation options) vs what I actually intended the option to mean. Currently, in PoE(2), the reputation system is, as in most (all?) other games, static. You choose Conversation Option A, and it has already been given a meaning by the writers/devs, no matter what meaning you and your PC may put in it. Example: In BoW, I convinced Neriscyrlas to find respite and release herself to the Void. My PC (paladin, dimplomatic, good) took this direction with the best intentions, since there's no option to release Neris to the Wheel (that I could find). But after playing the same dialogue sequence with Reptutations in conversations turned on, I found that this was in fact the "Cruel" option! Why? Why would this me more cruel than killing her? Well, sure, you're telling her that she's already dead and have been living an utter pointless existence for centuries, but is that really cruel? It wasn't for me, until I played it with the pre-set meaning of conversation options releaved. What I think would solve this problem, is a way to change the Reputation, i.e. the intention of conversation opotions. The example I just gave could just as well have been Honest, or even Benevolent (a peaceful solution), which was the way "I" meant it. These static "choices" breaks the immersion, restricts your ability to RP the character the way you envisioned it. You want to RP? Well, I as my character would have said this, but according to the rep-gain my character must say that in order to be aligned with the reputation-mechanic-RP aspect, if you catch my drift. You'll end up with having to pick choices just to align with the "correct" rep gains, or choose the "wrong" convo/rep options to align with what you would say, thus ending up with an ingame-personality that does not reflect your RP. Am I making sense? So, please, in PoE3, look into the possibility of being able to change the Reputation, i.e. intention/meaning of certain conversation options. E.g. dropdown for [chose your intention], where it makes sense, where you can select between a few options. I think that this would make the RP aspects of the game a whole lot more rewarding, since you can be much more dynamic in the way you approach conversations. Again, this is not something particular to PoE2, but PoE 1 and 2 are the RPGs I've spent the most time playing and enjoyed. Also, I do think that the PoE devs are more receptible to suggestions than, say, Dragon Age devs would be (simply due to the more corporate, top-down nature of how Bioware/DA is managed).

This one might be a little goofy, but here goes: I love the nonlethal approach. I explicitly try to kill as few things as I possibly can whenever I have a realistic nonlethal option for dispatching enemies in games, and I feel the highest vindication whenever the game, world or characters reacts to those actions. These options are common across many shooter/FPS hybrids--Deus Ex, Dishonored, Alpha Protocol, etc. But after recently finishing Dishonored it occurred to me that I'd never seen this option in any Infinity Engine RPGs or really any pure Western RPGs that I could think of at the time, and I began to wonder why not? Most tabletop RPGs, D&D included, have at least a short barely-referenced sidebar on how to deal nonlethal damage and knock somebody out in a fight, why has this never been an option in the classic or modern pure western RPG? Sure it's a bit silly, since most of what you're cutting down are nameless orcs, thugs, kobolds, and other miscreant cannon fodder, but I've always believed the mark of a true hero is restraint: Just look at Batman. It would be nice to have a game where my diplomat knows some martial arts focused strictly on rendering opponents unconscious when things get hairy, I would prefer to walk away like a smug badass saying "I warned them" when negotiations fail. Usually, instead I just shake my head and sigh mournfully at the lives wasted this day, because the option to do anything but set them on fire isn't ever present. Granted, I eventually become desensitized and then when negotiations fail I just cackle like a maniac as I introduce them to a colleague of mine: Doctor Force Lightning, Ph.D. in Murder From a development standpoint, adding in options like these seem pretty trivial, depending on how deep you wanted the system to be. A good 90% of it would be minor subsystems in the game logic--a bool or two here, a different value there--I'm not asking for much, just a little confirmation that I left those dumb thugs on the street battered, bloody, but still breathing. It's not like anyone's going to carefully examine the character model and check to make sure they're using the flat-edge of the blade, so unique animations aren't really necessary I'd say. Don't suppose there's anyone out there who shares my sentiment?