Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Difficulty after 1.1 - Game is still too easy

Balance PoTD

  • Please log in to reply
263 replies to this topic

#161
Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell

Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 146 posts
  • Deadfire Backer

hmmm didnt read all the topic , so the following is only my personnal feeling

 

i Like to play with fun builds ( i mean i do more Rp build  ( one of my char is an inquisitor called Casandra Rivan darcozzi paladini who had a a far far familiy link with a certain lucia  rivan ^^ anyway thats my fun ) . I love the combat part but not solo i like to play with companion

 

before the patch i ran really too easily in normal and veteran and i enjoyed the potd but now with my way to play i m stucked with veteran level ..... i need to really micro manage everything during fight and IF one thing is goind wrong it s the end. so Normal is too easy and boring  veteran for me is Boring cuz too much micro management and theory crafiting  and most of it the addition to the encounters are ...... hmm odd

 

drake everywhere ? ? ?  army of critters ?? not really lore friendly

 

So maybe adding a level of difficulty bringing back the old potd will be a nice way to satisfy everyone

 

Cuz i perfectly understand some people play the game only for the challenge of the combat engine some only for the story ^^ but i guess many people are somewhere between the two extrem

 

my two cents

 

I do understand your point and agree there does seem to be big difference between normal and veteran difficulty other difficulties not such gulf between. Does make it very challenging when first move up from normal to veteran.

 

Other part doesn't help with it is fact that higher difficulties made harder after release which they often end up making start out very micromanagement and frustrating, sometimes having cheese it bit till get enough spells, health etc that you can really start hold your own. Difficulty you choose after reaching point doesn't really matter as becomes cake walk when got high enough level.


Edited by Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell, 14 June 2018 - 04:52 AM.


#162
Shadenuat

Shadenuat

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 900 posts
  • Location:Russia
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

I doubt they'll ever do Dark Souls/Knights of the Chalice respawns/locking player out of rest. They'll say something like "it's too stressful to lock players out of their rests". It would turn encounters into a gauntlet. Which would be awesome, but only for aforementioned 1%. Although maybe single optional dungeon could make use of that.

 

My guess for PoE3 is just a more streamlined version of what we have now. Maybe work on encounters and make them a lot better&unique so every one makes you think which ability is best to use. Add some automatic light pre-buff system for you and enemy that would allow to put some spells like summoned weapons into there, but for player it takes money/resources/food/ingredients. Remove rest & per rest alltogether.

 

But it's all just guessing. There might not be PoE3, and for me personally a lot of things Josh does are still very hard to understand (recently tried to explain to a friend why priest's ability did 25.9 damage to undead while having 12 base damage +20%+24%, was hilarious).


Edited by Shadenuat, 14 June 2018 - 07:37 AM.


#163
Loren Tyr

Loren Tyr

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 858 posts

 

Per rest does work but issue is that needs to punish as without punishment it gives chance for someone to cheese game with it. Per encounter works if company truly put effort into each fight make it interesting and challenge in different way each fight. If not per encounter becomes set path do x,y and z each fight and win.

 

Per rest don't need know what's coming as you working tactically every fight only using what you feel needs to be used for each fight and therefore saving stuff for next possible encounter. Truth is makes you feel good if can complete whole dungeon without having go back to town replenish and makes you feel good when you meet boss and get use those powerful spells you been saving as not able use them every fight which made them rather fun (using most powerful spells should be limited and feel good when get use not boring cause this 100th time you used it and it means nothing to you any more.)

 

If you remove per rest and per encounter what system are you going use?

 

As for ambushing and the other things yeah we should have things like that and not just our party but the bad guys to. Fights need have lots things make it different and interesting.

 

 

Making resting and time progression an actual cost does certainly help (though that rarely happens, artificial restrictions like the camping supplies thing are just a cheap hack; the main cost there is that it's annoying to have to get more), but without actually adding tactical elements over a larger time span it's still not particularly compelling. It also only works in certain areas. Wandering around a city area for example there'd be no natural disincentive not to just unload your big guns on whatever, because there's probably an inn or camping supply store around the corner. Something similar applies out in the open, since probably you're not that far from resting options (often just one loading screen away) and travel time has no cost either. Conversely in dungeons and such you get the original problem of still lacking any predictive information, not knowing how deep that dungeon goes or what's in it. So how frequently you can rest without running out of resting supplies too soon is just a blind guess.

 

And sure, some people may feel satisfaction about using minimal resources, but if that's all there is to it you're essentially just forcing the player to make his own difficulty level. That's not good game design. I imagine I'm not the only one who on the one hand would want to actually make use all their cool goodies and spells and whatnot, cause they're cool and fun to use; but at the same time, doesn't want to accidentally overuse them and make the game too easy, because as it turns out the power level of those things was balanced against a less frequent use. This is a fundamental problem: if the cost of resting / time is at best vaguely defined, balancing anything that relies on that cost to keep it in check is essentially impossible to do properly. Which is why such per rest systems simply cannot be made to work (absent something like a DM). I don't want to have to save my resources on some vague promise that I might get to use them later on a big boss fight at the end (itself a fairly tired trope btw), I want to enjoy using all the various aspects of my character and party and items in the understanding that the game is balanced and designed around me doing just that; that the game organically rewards me for thinking ahead, for making clever use of what's available, for not being wasteful. And I'm not saying that is by any means an easy thing to do, but simple per rest systems certainly don't deliver on this. 

 

Ultimately what I would want is to move away from artificial structures like per encounter and per rest, to a much more organic system. Where at least in some basic sense you can apply the same considerations as you would in reality, or some hypothetical version of reality. Wizards can only cast a fixed number of high level spells, why? We can imagine that it takes mental and physical effort to channel the energy needed to do so (and maybe it uses up specific (and scarce) additional resources as well). So instead of artificially restricting it two castings of a particular "spell level" (whatever that's supposed to represent), why not give them the ability to cast however much they want. Make them able to cast a spell with a little energy, with a lot of energy (or whatever); cast it quickly but maybe mangle it or miss, cast it carefully instead. And get exhausted as they do, which can affect them in all sorts of ways. As in reality, doing straining things repeatedly will wear you out; you lose strength, you lose accuracy, you lose focus, you make more mistakes; you might just drop unconscious from strain. And if you're backed into a corner, by all means try a last-ditch fireball at the limits of what you can do; maybe you'll just manage to save yourself, if the thing doesn't misfire and incinerate your arms. 

 

Anyway, it's just an example. There's all sorts of ways in which games can be improved, that they give you much more of an impetus to be varied in your strategies, to change and adapt and force you to come up with new solutions on the fly. That at least is my ideal (and yes, not one easily accomplished). And I think an important part is moving away as much as possible from artificial structures like 'per encounter' and 'per rest' (but also 'spell level'); and also, to give game elements just more varied qualities (from the basics up, eg. weapons, shields, armour; now they at heart only have a small number of qualities (AR and action speed penalty, say), given them more and having everything have more strengths and weaknesses provides a far greater incentive to vary things, change gear and strategy). 



#164
AeonsLegend

AeonsLegend

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 537 posts

 

I was never making a comparison in the first place. Torment is an RPG, one that has found a very devout niche audience, and yet not a very hard one at that. In that sense, it proves that not all people who "actually like RPGs" are people who are actively looking to beat a game at its hardest difficulty or who even care about whether a game is hard or not at all. Whether it is an "open world game" or not, or whether difficulty goes up or down or sideways or whatever, is moot (and arguable too, considering how grinding is an option in that game that is largely non-existent in Deadfire, but again, it's all moot). The point is merely that saying "the hardest" means "for people who actually like RPGs" is a rather bull**** remark when it is utterly demonstrable that plenty of players who "actually like RPGs" don't necessarily play them in their hardest difficulty or look for a challenge when playing these games at all. It's just an asinine "no true Scotsman" remark that does absolutely nothing to answer the question it is allegedly responding.

 

Oh but you were making a comparison and you are doing it again in your reply just now. You are saying that people generally don't care about difficulty because <your Torment example>. To which I replied that Torment didn't have a difficulty issue because it was evenly difficult all the way. It doesn't matter that Torment wasn't difficult to begin with. It's about consistency. If Torment became easier as the game progressed then people would have complained about that.

 

Not many people complained about the difficulty at the start of PoE II. People have generally complained about the difficulty further into the game and this is due to the points I explained earlier. Open world and levelling system. Things that are completely different from how Torment was set up.



#165
cokane

cokane

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 180 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

...

 

Making resting and time progression an actual cost does certainly help (though that rarely happens, artificial restrictions like the camping supplies thing are just a cheap hack; the main cost there is that it's annoying to have to get more), but without actually adding tactical elements over a larger time span it's still not particularly compelling. It also only works in certain areas. Wandering around a city area for example there'd be no natural disincentive not to just unload your big guns on whatever, because there's probably an inn or camping supply store around the corner. Something similar applies out in the open, since probably you're not that far from resting options (often just one loading screen away) and travel time has no cost either. Conversely in dungeons and such you get the original problem of still lacking any predictive information, not knowing how deep that dungeon goes or what's in it. So how frequently you can rest without running out of resting supplies too soon is just a blind guess.

 

And sure, some people may feel satisfaction about using minimal resources, but if that's all there is to it you're essentially just forcing the player to make his own difficulty level. That's not good game design. I imagine I'm not the only one who on the one hand would want to actually make use all their cool goodies and spells and whatnot, cause they're cool and fun to use; but at the same time, doesn't want to accidentally overuse them and make the game too easy, because as it turns out the power level of those things was balanced against a less frequent use. This is a fundamental problem: if the cost of resting / time is at best vaguely defined, balancing anything that relies on that cost to keep it in check is essentially impossible to do properly. Which is why such per rest systems simply cannot be made to work (absent something like a DM). I don't want to have to save my resources on some vague promise that I might get to use them later on a big boss fight at the end (itself a fairly tired trope btw), I want to enjoy using all the various aspects of my character and party and items in the understanding that the game is balanced and designed around me doing just that; that the game organically rewards me for thinking ahead, for making clever use of what's available, for not being wasteful. And I'm not saying that is by any means an easy thing to do, but simple per rest systems certainly don't deliver on this. 

 

Ultimately what I would want is to move away from artificial structures like per encounter and per rest, to a much more organic system. Where at least in some basic sense you can apply the same considerations as you would in reality, or some hypothetical version of reality. Wizards can only cast a fixed number of high level spells, why? We can imagine that it takes mental and physical effort to channel the energy needed to do so (and maybe it uses up specific (and scarce) additional resources as well). So instead of artificially restricting it two castings of a particular "spell level" (whatever that's supposed to represent), why not give them the ability to cast however much they want. Make them able to cast a spell with a little energy, with a lot of energy (or whatever); cast it quickly but maybe mangle it or miss, cast it carefully instead. And get exhausted as they do, which can affect them in all sorts of ways. As in reality, doing straining things repeatedly will wear you out; you lose strength, you lose accuracy, you lose focus, you make more mistakes; you might just drop unconscious from strain. And if you're backed into a corner, by all means try a last-ditch fireball at the limits of what you can do; maybe you'll just manage to save yourself, if the thing doesn't misfire and incinerate your arms. 

 

Anyway, it's just an example. There's all sorts of ways in which games can be improved, that they give you much more of an impetus to be varied in your strategies, to change and adapt and force you to come up with new solutions on the fly. That at least is my ideal (and yes, not one easily accomplished). And I think an important part is moving away as much as possible from artificial structures like 'per encounter' and 'per rest' (but also 'spell level'); and also, to give game elements just more varied qualities (from the basics up, eg. weapons, shields, armour; now they at heart only have a small number of qualities (AR and action speed penalty, say), given them more and having everything have more strengths and weaknesses provides a far greater incentive to vary things, change gear and strategy). 

 

 

There's so much wrong in this post, I don't know where to begin. For one: "but if that's all there is to it you're essentially just forcing the player to make his own difficulty level. That's not good game design." Switch the word "forcing" to "allowing" and I actually think it's *good* game design. The player controls HOW RISKILY they want to play. Whereas in Deadfire, you are actually *forced* to one play style.

 

The idea that "per rest systems simply cannot be made to work"? CRPG's have had per rest systems from at least Pool of Radiance to Pillars of Eternity, dude. That's about 30 years of consistent design, with several award-winning, greatest of all time titles in there. How can anyone say this system "cannot be made to work" is to simply ignore facts.

 

Yes, the camping supply thing wasn't ideal in PoE, but it was a good iteration on the previous resting=random encounter chance system. And for all its flaws, it DID work. The game got great reviews and sales on launch and enough of a following for expansions and a sequel. And it's basically the flagship title for Obsidian right now. I'll never understand people complaining about the tedium of having to go back for camping supplies on here. That's the whole point! The system doesn't work, i.e. rest-spamming would be easy, if you didn't have some punishment for over-using camping.



#166
Loren Tyr

Loren Tyr

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 858 posts

There's so much wrong in this post, I don't know where to begin. For one: "but if that's all there is to it you're essentially just forcing the player to make his own difficulty level. That's not good game design." Switch the word "forcing" to "allowing" and I actually think it's *good* game design. The player controls HOW RISKILY they want to play. Whereas in Deadfire, you are actually *forced* to one play style.

 

The idea that "per rest systems simply cannot be made to work"? CRPG's have had per rest systems from at least Pool of Radiance to Pillars of Eternity, dude. That's about 30 years of consistent design, with several award-winning, greatest of all time titles in there. How can anyone say this system "cannot be made to work" is to simply ignore facts.

 

Yes, the camping supply thing wasn't ideal in PoE, but it was a good iteration on the previous resting=random encounter chance system. And for all its flaws, it DID work. The game got great reviews and sales on launch and enough of a following for expansions and a sequel. And it's basically the flagship title for Obsidian right now. I'll never understand people complaining about the tedium of having to go back for camping supplies on here. That's the whole point! The system doesn't work, i.e. rest-spamming would be easy, if you didn't have some punishment for over-using camping.

 

 

No, I just have a different view of what works well in a game, 'dude'. 



#167
cokane

cokane

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 180 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

There's so much wrong in this post, I don't know where to begin. For one: "but if that's all there is to it you're essentially just forcing the player to make his own difficulty level. That's not good game design." Switch the word "forcing" to "allowing" and I actually think it's *good* game design. The player controls HOW RISKILY they want to play. Whereas in Deadfire, you are actually *forced* to one play style.

 

The idea that "per rest systems simply cannot be made to work"? CRPG's have had per rest systems from at least Pool of Radiance to Pillars of Eternity, dude. That's about 30 years of consistent design, with several award-winning, greatest of all time titles in there. How can anyone say this system "cannot be made to work" is to simply ignore facts.

 

Yes, the camping supply thing wasn't ideal in PoE, but it was a good iteration on the previous resting=random encounter chance system. And for all its flaws, it DID work. The game got great reviews and sales on launch and enough of a following for expansions and a sequel. And it's basically the flagship title for Obsidian right now. I'll never understand people complaining about the tedium of having to go back for camping supplies on here. That's the whole point! The system doesn't work, i.e. rest-spamming would be easy, if you didn't have some punishment for over-using camping.

 

 

No, I just have a different view of what works well in a game, 'dude'. 

 

 

Saying "I just have a different view" and "this system cannot work" are mutually exclusive arguments.



#168
Loren Tyr

Loren Tyr

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 858 posts

Saying "I just have a different view" and "this system cannot work" are mutually exclusive arguments.

 

No, they're not. I have a certain view of what makes a good game (as I have elaborated on in some detail), and this is ultimately not compatible with for example these per rest style systems. You can disagree with my view on things, but that doesn't make my line of reasoning inconsistent. 



#169
algroth

algroth

    (9) Sorcerer

  • Members
  • 1312 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer
  • Black Isle Bastard!

I was never making a comparison in the first place. Torment is an RPG, one that has found a very devout niche audience, and yet not a very hard one at that. In that sense, it proves that not all people who "actually like RPGs" are people who are actively looking to beat a game at its hardest difficulty or who even care about whether a game is hard or not at all. Whether it is an "open world game" or not, or whether difficulty goes up or down or sideways or whatever, is moot (and arguable too, considering how grinding is an option in that game that is largely non-existent in Deadfire, but again, it's all moot). The point is merely that saying "the hardest" means "for people who actually like RPGs" is a rather bull**** remark when it is utterly demonstrable that plenty of players who "actually like RPGs" don't necessarily play them in their hardest difficulty or look for a challenge when playing these games at all. It's just an asinine "no true Scotsman" remark that does absolutely nothing to answer the question it is allegedly responding.

Oh but you were making a comparison and you are doing it again in your reply just now. You are saying that people generally don't care about difficulty because <your Torment example>. To which I replied that Torment didn't have a difficulty issue because it was evenly difficult all the way. It doesn't matter that Torment wasn't difficult to begin with. It's about consistency. If Torment became easier as the game progressed then people would have complained about that.

Not many people complained about the difficulty at the start of PoE II. People have generally complained about the difficulty further into the game and this is due to the points I explained earlier. Open world and levelling system. Things that are completely different from how Torment was set up.
Uh, no. I was replying specifically to the assertion that "the hardest" meant "for people who actually like RPGs". I was providing an example of a very easy game that is widely considered as one of the best RPGs of all time by people who "actually like RPGs" to show that it is incorrect to assume that people who like RPGs necessarily care about difficulty or do so because the games are diffuxult in the first place. Your comparisons regarding Deadfire and Torment are your own, and they are moot to the point I was making.

Edited by algroth, 14 June 2018 - 07:08 PM.


#170
Shadenuat

Shadenuat

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 900 posts
  • Location:Russia
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Playing with Deadly Deadfire which cuts xp by almost 30% (28% to be exact) made me realise just how ridiculous the XP gains in this game are. Even with this cut, after finishing most basic business in Neketaka and doing a quest or two outside, I am level 10 anyway and most things become very, very manageable. I am not even sure that 30% cut is enough, since I don't do stupid stuff like rushing to give out all my bounties and roll around with cargo hold full of bloody heads.

 

Still with that 30% cut it feels a lot more like BG series, where every level after 8th or so felt earned, not just for free.

 

The XP gains seem to be balanced for player to go around Neketaka and some main plot, gaining 5-7k xp for things like walking 10 meters from one NPC to another (like that quest with island deed near Vailian embassy), hitting level 15. Somehow I doubt even the most story loving people would like not having ANY more party growth after ~20 hours or so, in a game that takes some ~70 hours to complete.

 

Then there's slight increase in HP, about 20%, which makes enemies not die to single fireball from Evoker or a 1-2 combo from a monk. Enemies still die quick though, and Empower is still broken and can simply 1-shot many enemies. But with PoTD armor scaling and that extra HP from mod now it takes not just spell and awesome button, but maybe a buff/debuff or two. And that's on levels ~10-12.

 

Although it does say things about your RPG system when 300-700 hp enemies "are not strong enough".

 

Obsidian should stop derping around with nerfing hatchets against plant enemies and fix this for their next difficulty reiteration.


Edited by Shadenuat, 16 June 2018 - 07:38 AM.

  • dunehunter likes this

#171
Zares

Zares

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 6 posts
  • Location:Katowice, Poland
  • Steam:STEAM_0:1:31676885
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

@Shadenuat, you are right. Too high XP gain is a real problem. And it'll be probably even worse after a big DLC, because there will be more quests and more XP for completing them. Next thing that makes the game too easy is too high accuracy gain per lvl (+3/lvl). Baldur The Difficulty-Fixin' Pig-Buddy mod fixes it, by adding a flat +10 accuracy bonus (so early game is playable without maxing Perception) and applying -2 accuracy per lvl (so we gain +1 accuracy per lvl instead of +3/lvl) - this fixes 90%+ accuracy at 20 lvl.

 

But like I said before - mods shouldn't be a solution, vanilla game should be challenging enough on the hardest difficulty.



#172
1TTFFSSE

1TTFFSSE

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 527 posts

On PotD upscaled + deadly deadfire hc mod the only fight so far where I felt like I needed to bring out my really big guns and "broken strats" - specifically scroll of meteors/+ power potion/incredible food was surprisingly the Lucia Rivan fight because my full lvl 16 party could not brute force it. like the other fights. Have not done Nemnok though yet.

 

 

new stats upscaled with mod: 

114 deflection, 162 for, 120 reflex, 144 will , AR: 16 / 19pierce

 

old stats:

90 deflection, 138 for, 96 ref, 120 will, AR: 12 / 15 pierce

 

 

Attached Files


Edited by 1TTFFSSE, 16 June 2018 - 05:22 AM.


#173
Shadenuat

Shadenuat

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 900 posts
  • Location:Russia
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

Yeah 1.1, with mod, has more enemies with 100-120+ in defences. Although sometimes design is kinda poor when enemies have 100 natural defences in everything, making pretty much any attack, including debuffs, fail most of the time.

 

Often I don't understand logic at all, like ogres having high will and undead having low will. Sometimes enemy design just feels random, as one enemy of same type would just have different set of defences or armor, even if armor looks similar to me.

 

And there are still some fire nagas in the game with 3 fire armor. Cause they're fire nagas. So you use fire to kill them. Getit.


Edited by Shadenuat, 16 June 2018 - 06:33 AM.


#174
Tigranes

Tigranes

    Obsidian VIP

  • Members
  • 10487 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

It makes sense that if you have 8 eotens they will have some variations in defences, instead of being identical. I'd actually like a little more fluctuation.

 

But yeah, stuff like fire nagas weak to fire is just silly.


  • InsaneCommander likes this

#175
1TTFFSSE

1TTFFSSE

    (5) Thaumaturgist

  • Members
  • 527 posts

Yeah 1.1, with mod, has more enemies with 100-120+ in defences. Although sometimes design is kinda poor when enemies have 100 natural defences in everything, making pretty much any attack, including debuffs, fail most of the time.

 

Often I don't understand logic at all, like ogres having high will and undead having low will. Sometimes enemy design just feels random, as one enemy of same type would just have different set of defences or armor, even if armor looks similar to me.

 

And there are still some fire nagas in the game with 3 fire armor. Cause they're fire nagas. So you use fire to kill them. Getit.

basically, it makes it that you have to use consumables...stuff like deadeye for accuracy, that one potion that ups weapon penetration



#176
Shadenuat

Shadenuat

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 900 posts
  • Location:Russia
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer

It makes sense that if you have 8 eotens they will have some variations in defences, instead of being identical. I'd actually like a little more fluctuation.

Well I think white tigers are probably similar. They should be tigers. But some tigers are not like others sometimes even in same location. Sometimes same with undead. Maybe it's about their class, but I think we expect some sort of consistency and unique features in monsters. Otherwise, there is little difference between undead rogue, xaurip rogue & human rogue. They both shoot bows with hobble shot and it hurts. Eotens, I mean, make some Eoten shamans, and Eoten fighters then. It would make more sense. It's just sometimes (but not always) it's all same eoten, figuratively speaking. Even if stats oddly fluctuate from poor reflex to will to fortitude and same with armor.


Edited by Shadenuat, 16 June 2018 - 08:42 AM.


#177
dunehunter

dunehunter

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 2482 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Gold Backer
  • Fig Backer
Yeah most RPGs I have played cannot handle level scale well. The enemy’s power always scales slower than player party, which result in the game is very hard at beginning, but becomes easier and easier as u lvl up.

But I think it is intended because most players are not hardcorer, they wanna feel powerful when lvl up or get new gears. So the designer gives them such satisfaction. A real difficulty will only exist in fans made mod I guess.

Edited by dunehunter, 16 June 2018 - 09:16 AM.


#178
hilfazer

hilfazer

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 645 posts

 

And there are still some fire nagas in the game with 3 fire armor. Cause they're fire nagas. So you use fire to kill them. Getit.

 

Fight fire with fire :)



#179
Gregorovitch

Gregorovitch

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 71 posts
  • Steam:Gregorovitch
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 


The idea that "per rest systems simply cannot be made to work"? CRPG's have had per rest systems from at least Pool of Radiance to Pillars of Eternity, dude. That's about 30 years of consistent design, with several award-winning, greatest of all time titles in there. How can anyone say this system "cannot be made to work" is to simply ignore facts.

 

Yes, the camping supply thing wasn't ideal in PoE, but it was a good iteration on the previous resting=random encounter chance system. And for all its flaws, it DID work. The game got great reviews and sales on launch and enough of a following for expansions and a sequel. And it's basically the flagship title for Obsidian right now. I'll never understand people complaining about the tedium of having to go back for camping supplies on here. That's the whole point! The system doesn't work, i.e. rest-spamming would be easy, if you didn't have some punishment for over-using camping.

 

IMO the rest system in PoE was without doubt the best ever implemented. Far better than the IE games for example becasue:

 

a) it killed rest spamming to farm XP

b) it removed radom arbitrary rest restrictions based on random interruptions

c) it succeded in limiting rests on pain of whimping off the dungeon to get supplies

d) it provided an additional fail condition, i.e. whimping off the dungeon, to enhance gameplay and add depth, difficulty and exitement

e) it enables genuine full on fail conditions by allowing player to get trapped with insufficient resources to escape for even more depth, difficulty and exitement

 

The Deafire system does not even come close to it. Having finished Deadfire now I find it impossible to understand why it replaced PoE's state of the art system. It was a collossal mistake responsible for maybe 50% of what's wrong with Deafire, the difficulty problem especially.


Edited by Gregorovitch, 16 June 2018 - 10:05 AM.

  • cokane likes this

#180
ThacoBell

ThacoBell

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 165 posts
  • Deadfire Backer

 

 


The idea that "per rest systems simply cannot be made to work"? CRPG's have had per rest systems from at least Pool of Radiance to Pillars of Eternity, dude. That's about 30 years of consistent design, with several award-winning, greatest of all time titles in there. How can anyone say this system "cannot be made to work" is to simply ignore facts.

 

Yes, the camping supply thing wasn't ideal in PoE, but it was a good iteration on the previous resting=random encounter chance system. And for all its flaws, it DID work. The game got great reviews and sales on launch and enough of a following for expansions and a sequel. And it's basically the flagship title for Obsidian right now. I'll never understand people complaining about the tedium of having to go back for camping supplies on here. That's the whole point! The system doesn't work, i.e. rest-spamming would be easy, if you didn't have some punishment for over-using camping.

 

IMO the rest system in PoE was without doubt the best ever implemented. Far better than the IE games for example becasue:

 

a) it killed rest spamming to farm XP

b) it removed radom arbitrary rest restrictions based on random interruptions

c) it succeded in limiting rests on pain of whimping off the dungeon to get supplies

d) it provided an additional fail condition, i.e. whimping off the dungeon, to enhance gameplay and add depth, difficulty and exitement

e) it enables genuine full on fail conditions by allowing player to get trapped with insufficient resources to escape for even more depth, difficulty and exitement

 

The Deafire system does not even come close to it. Having finished Deadfire now I find it impossible to understand why it replaced PoE's state of the art system. It was a collossal mistake responsible for maybe 50% of what's wrong with Deafire, the difficulty problem especially.

 

I'm sorry, what? If I'm interpreting your point "e" correctly, are you actually stating that softlocking your game and making it completely unwinnable is a good thing? On a game that can conceivably take over 100 hours to beat at that.


  • KentDA likes this





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Balance, PoTD

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users