The 'Changes for Balance' Thread

[Abel]

Internet crashed, so i will admit i have not read the few last pages. But this post is probably my last one in this thread anyway, so forgive my laziness... >>> copy/paste.

 

   

 

POTD players are a minority. That's a fact. You'd have to know literally nothing about gaming if you assume that most players play on highest difficulty level. And the changes done by Obsidian are not POTD-only, they affect everyone, even if the degree is considerably smaller.



    Also would you mind not trying to read my mind? You're not very good at it. I never said anything bad about Josh Sawyer. If you read the whole thread, you'll see it was actually quite the opposite. I also don't blame the posters for anything. I mean, this is the internet. People will post tons of crap and there's nothing you can do about it. Just see how many people in this topic posted insluting one-liners and moved on.

First i fail to see how classes overhauls is exclusively done because of PotD difficulty. It would be assuming that no one should care about balancing unless they play in PotD (Btw, i never played PotD). I failed to see this obvious thing, and that's why i told what i told. I simply assumed, myself, that game balance and difficuty modes where 2 different things, that, even if they should be considered together won't mean that balance is relevant only on the highest difficulty mode. It should be important, even in Classic. For basically the same reasons.

Second. My point was not about how you think of Sawyer, obviously. It was about how the way you spoke of posters here seemed to imply some nonsensical things to me, which i tried to illustrate in my post with the Sawyer thing. The way you think of Sawyer is irrelevant to my argument. And i already knew that you probably had a better opinion of him than myself. Problem is, it looks like you are confused: things i say don't necesarily reflect my own opinions about matters, as i said before. I may defend something i dislike, only because some people who dislike it too throw unfair things based on rumor-type assumptions. And once more, i strongly dislike it. Because doing this kind of thing is the opposite of educating people. And it's a poison of society. I want to be educated myself, i value knowledge, sense of criticism, and open minded people who are able to think their own way, and help me consider worlds i could never even think of by myself, because of who i am, a human being, defined by its own limits. And i need people to bring fair points to do so. Though, it is my own way to think and live.

If you are to criticize something, go ahead. Criticism is progress. It helps people and things grow. But only if you do your best to be fair while doing it, whatever combative you may get. I don't see being combative or passionate as a bad thing, unless you use groundless affirmations in order to discard thoroughly part of the point that may prove to hinder your own argument. The very title of your topic, and your first sentence, made me feel immediately that OP would never educate me. Because these 2 things were groundless.

I am not sure whether the problem is my bad english (i'm french after all, and self taught. I try hard every day to improve it by myself since years, along with Japanese. Participating to these english forums is actually one of my means to do so) or if you just see one word in a whole sentence and use it to get back to others without even trying to consider what they wrote. In any case, it looks like it will not be possible to discuss together, altough i tried to adress things in hope it would end up being possible. Whether it's because of your limits or my own limits is not important anymore.

So, have a nice day.

Edited June 13, 2018 by Abel

[Gfted1]

Lets please keep the discussion focused on the topic and not each other.

[George_Truman]

There is absolutely nothing fun in having to restart the game because a dumb patch just nerfed your fun character to the point of being uplayable.

 

You can already re-spec and hopefully they will allow stat re-speccing eventually as well. I find it very hard to imagine that your character was irreparably made unplayable. 

[Zoso der Goldene]

 

There is absolutely nothing fun in having to restart the game because a dumb patch just nerfed your fun character to the point of being uplayable.

 

You can already re-spec and hopefully they will allow stat re-speccing eventually as well. I find it very hard to imagine that your character was irreparably made unplayable. 

 

Not sure where PoE nerfs were already mentioned (Perception not contributing to Deflection, but Accuracy (which was overdue), and Defender going from +15 Deflection to -5).

Even then, had you built an extremely tanky fighter, that would still have been playable afterwards, it would just have nothing to do with what you had in mind when you created the character in the first  place.

 

I don't see anything in 1.1 that's comparable or even close.

If I'm wrong, I'd like to see a concrete example of a character that is either unplayable or doesn't match the original concept anymore. Or am I missing the point, after 8 pages of discussion?

[Abel]

 

There is absolutely nothing fun in having to restart the game because a dumb patch just nerfed your fun character to the point of being uplayable.

 

You can already re-spec and hopefully they will allow stat re-speccing eventually as well. I find it very hard to imagine that your character was irreparably made unplayable. 

 

 

It is just a guess (correct me if i'm wrong), but i would suppose that he found some build that he found fun to play and very powerful, too. Once it got nerfed and became just average as a whole, it, naturally, induced frustration. Which i can understand. Still, i will admit that even so, i can't see the point of questioning the whole balancing process because of this. Especially when you can respec your character.

Edited June 13, 2018 by Abel

[Manveru123]

Lets please keep the discussion focused on the topic and not each other.

I'm fine with boring snide remarks, really. Please intervene if he starts roleplaying though

 

 

 

You can already re-spec and hopefully they will allow stat re-speccing eventually as well. I find it very hard to imagine that your character was irreparably made unplayable. 

 

This is a gameplay issue. I covered that a few pages ago. Basically you start the game with a particular character, and with a specific playstyle. Now that playstyle is no longer possible because suddenly damage and survivability is gone. You can try to salvage the run by respeccing, but you are eg. stuck with a subclass that is literally hindering you and the game is no longer fun.

[Manveru123]

 

 

I don't see anything in 1.1 that's comparable or even close.

If I'm wrong, I'd like to see a concrete example of a character that is either unplayable or doesn't match the original concept anymore. Or am I missing the point, after 8 pages of discussion?

 

The first thing that comes to mind is the fact that they completely removed a Chanter mechanic. Not nerfed, balanced or whatever, just straight out deleted it. I think that's a bit more important than Defender giving negative Deflection.

[Lord_Mord]

This is getting absurd, if it wasn't from the beginning. If you excuse me: I'll save my effort and just lie down and die. As you can't stop the inevitable, be it the necessary balancing of the system on one side or the unavoidable complaint of the complainers on the other, I suggest that you all do the same.

[Boeroer]

I also would like it if the game came out pretty balanced. Sadly, this wasn't the case at all. Now you could discuss the following: is it better to leave it in that very unbalanced state and disappoint people or is it better to balance it with patches and disappoint people?

 

I personally think that the later is preferable. That's because I play those games for a long time, multiple playtroughs.

 

 

People who only play it once will prefer the first approach I guess.

 

I don't think there's a way to make them all happy, but it seems that approach a) caters to more "casual" players and b) to enthusiasts/fans/hardcore fans. Without judgement that is.

 

I as a developer would try to please the later more because I feel more connected to them. Understandable. Also understandable that somebody who thinks balance is important (Josh) decides to balance the game further if he thinks it's not well balanced yet.

Edited June 13, 2018 by Boeroer

[Abel]

 

 

 

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit I see. I shall reiterate using small words and sentences for your benefit: I did read the thread. I grasp the points made in it. I see merit in your core point. I agree with it in part. Your skill at making this point is atrociously bad. 

 

You couldn't have given off a more neckbeardish vibe if you tried.

 

Such a great orator you are! To be fair to you though, your ability to so engagingly undermine your own position really impressed me. You're a hair's breadth away from a well-argued point on the one hand and demented ranting on the other, being able to maintain that fine balance is a rare feat indeed. I certainly wouldn't be able to match it. 

 

 

lool. Just because, honestly, i laughed, sorry. Both of you are pretty great in some ways. It's troll and good humour at the same time. Made my day, thanks

[Zoso der Goldene]

 

 

 

I don't see anything in 1.1 that's comparable or even close.

If I'm wrong, I'd like to see a concrete example of a character that is either unplayable or doesn't match the original concept anymore. Or am I missing the point, after 8 pages of discussion?

 

The first thing that comes to mind is the fact that they completely removed a Chanter mechanic. Not nerfed, balanced or whatever, just straight out deleted it. I think that's a bit more important than Defender giving negative Deflection.

 

Could you please be specific?

You can't be talking about Beckoner's Abjuration Immunity, it must have to do with refilling class resources, right?

 

Is it that? There's a less powerful verion on PL IX.

[Loren Tyr]

People who only play it once will prefer the first approach I guess.

 

On average they would to actually. Perhaps not the subset of those who started playing already, but presumably the majority of players who will end up playing only once will start their playthrough in version 1.1 or later. So they get a more balanced game without having potentially been disappointed by their character having changed on them. Obviously there will be a 1.2 with further changes later (and so on), but presumably the relative changes will tend to be smaller compared to earlier updates (and for single run players, it'd also only matter if it gets updated mid-game and it affects specific game elements they strongly rely on in some fashion). 

 

So definitely, I think developers continuing to maintain and improve (not that I necessarily see all changes as improvements, but it is clearly their intent to make the game better as they see it) their games after release is a very good thing. 

[Manveru123]

Could you please be specific?

 

You can't be talking about Beckoner's Abjuration Immunity, it must have to do with refilling class resources, right?

 

Is it that? There's a less powerful verion on PL IX.

 

Set to Their Purpose was changed from Brilliant to Smart. Basically Chanters had an Inspiration that was the only source of resource regeneration for multiclass characters. You could make some pretty damn cool Chanter/caster builds around that, for example. Yes, there is a PL 9 invocation with a similar effect.. which you can't get as a multiclass, so you have to restart.

[Abel]

 

Lets please keep the discussion focused on the topic and not each other.

I'm fine with boring snide remarks, really. Please intervene if he starts roleplaying though

 

 

 

You can already re-spec and hopefully they will allow stat re-speccing eventually as well. I find it very hard to imagine that your character was irreparably made unplayable. 

 

This is a gameplay issue. I covered that a few pages ago. Basically you start the game with a particular character, and with a specific playstyle. Now that playstyle is no longer possible because suddenly damage and survivability is gone. You can try to salvage the run by respeccing, but you are eg. stuck with a subclass that is literally hindering you and the game is no longer fun.

 

 

 

That is pretty much what i understood. Which would mean that the point of disagreement between you and others is simply in the way you consider things long term wise.

 

Maybe this is something you don't know, but Obsidian was in a big pinch before they started their kickstarter for the first game. Now, they finally have their own IP. It's unbelievably precious for them as a company. I strongly believe that they NEED people to look back at their work in a few years and think: ''yeah, it was great''. There is no publisher involved here. Obsidian, who was known for years as ''King of Bugs Company'' can't use any excuses as publishers tyranny anymore. They bet their very reputation on Pillars franchise. And thus, they need to make the game the best possible, even if they achieve this only in Pillars 3.5.

 

They can't allow this game to be just another AAA ''hastily done'', ''hastily realeased'', ''Barely post launch supported'', ''Immediately forgotten'' game.

 

When you look back at good old games, balance was definitely a huge problem. But Pillars can't rely on the forgiveness for nostalgia sake of their customers anymore.

 

At least, this is how i see the matter.

[Manveru123]

 

That is pretty much what i understood. Which would mean that the point of disagreement between you and others is simply in the way you consider things long term wise.

 

Maybe this is something you don't know, but Obsidian was in a big pinch before they started their kickstarter for the first game. Now, they finally have their own IP. It's unbelievably precious for them as a company. I strongly believe that they NEED people to look back at their work in a few years and think: ''yeah, it was great''. There is no publisher involved here. Obsidian, who was known for years as ''King of Bugs Company'' can't use any excuses as publishers tyranny anymore. They bet their very reputation on Pillars franchise. And thus, they need to make the game the best possible, even if they achieve this only in Pillars 3.5.

 

They can't allow this game to be just another AAA ''hastily done'', ''hastily realeased'', ''Barely post launch supported'', ''Immediately forgotten'' game.

 

When you look back at good old games, balance was definitely a huge problem. But Pillars can't rely on the forgiveness for nostalgia sake of their customers anymore.

 

At least, this is how i see the matter.

 

I think I see what you mean. If they create a game for specific audience, it is obvious that they will do what they can to cater to that audience so that they keep supporting them. Okay, that makes sense, I just feel like it might be a poor move from a marketing perspective. I'd be fine to be proved wrong on that, though. Time will tell.

 

Also, slightly off topic in case you aren't aware, neither POE1 nor POE2 was actually published by Obsidian. It was done by Paradox Interactive (Tyranny too) and Versus Evil respectively. This is, however, an extremely common practice and studios that actually develop and publish the games by themselves are very rare.

[tinysalamander]

I also would like it if the game came out pretty balanced. Sadly, this wasn't the case at all. Now you could discuss the following: is it better to leave it in that very unbalanced state and disappoint people or is it better to balance it with patches and disappoint people?

 

I personally think that the later is preferable. That's because I play those games for a long time, multiple playtroughs.

 

People who only play it once will prefer the first approach I guess.

 

I will only play it once and I would prefer second option if possible.

[Abel]

 

 

That is pretty much what i understood. Which would mean that the point of disagreement between you and others is simply in the way you consider things long term wise.

 

Maybe this is something you don't know, but Obsidian was in a big pinch before they started their kickstarter for the first game. Now, they finally have their own IP. It's unbelievably precious for them as a company. I strongly believe that they NEED people to look back at their work in a few years and think: ''yeah, it was great''. There is no publisher involved here. Obsidian, who was known for years as ''King of Bugs Company'' can't use any excuses as publishers tyranny anymore. They bet their very reputation on Pillars franchise. And thus, they need to make the game the best possible, even if they achieve this only in Pillars 3.5.

 

They can't allow this game to be just another AAA ''hastily done'', ''hastily realeased'', ''Barely post launch supported'', ''Immediately forgotten'' game.

 

When you look back at good old games, balance was definitely a huge problem. But Pillars can't rely on the forgiveness for nostalgia sake of their customers anymore.

 

At least, this is how i see the matter.

 

I think I see what you mean. If they create a game for specific audience, it is obvious that they will do what they can to cater to that audience so that they keep supporting them. Okay, that makes sense, I just feel like it might be a poor move from a marketing perspective. I'd be fine to be proved wrong on that, though. Time will tell.

 

Also, slightly off topic in case you aren't aware, neither POE1 nor POE2 was actually published by Obsidian. It was done by Paradox Interactive (Tyranny too) and Versus Evil respectively. This is, however, an extremely common practice and studios that actually develop and publish the games by themselves are very rare.

 

 

Not quite right. Paradox and Versus Evil only took care of distributing the game after release. The box copies. They had never anything to do with development of the game, nor they could influence it in any way. The publishers i talked about are the ones who pay for the game to be made and that have full power over everything during development, to the point that they can even change the whole genre of a game at their leisure, cancel it, or change a release date to be set 4 months earlier than previously planned (Zenimax did that to Obs with New Vegas, which is why the game was so buggy at release. Well considering that the bonus payment they promised to Obs for the game was dependent of the fact that New Vegas would reach a 90% ratings on metacritic or not at release, this release date change was pretty nasty lol. Though, this is something i read somewhere at the time on some online newspaper i guess, so, i still lack enough accurate and proved informations). But that is why many studios look for independence, i guess. After all, Obsidian was on the brink of being closed because of a major game cancellation by a publisher before their first kickstarter. Check this out for further details if interested (documentary: Road to Eternity). You may understand why they NEED their Pillars IP to last, and to be recognized even years from now, and thus, why they need to constantly improve it, even post release.

 

 

Pillars, Shadowrun, Wasteland, Divinity, and such games are under full control of their developers, not any publisher. That is what being independent developer means. This is a very important thing to grasp, because i you don't grasp this, you won't make any sense of what i said in my previous post.

Edited June 13, 2018 by Abel

[Manveru123]

I'm sorry mate but you are just wrong. Paradox Interactive took active part in development of the first Pillars. Their QA team was on it for most of the proccess. I don't know what happened after that (I quit), but it is safe to assume it was the same deal with Tyranny. I'm not saying that they were directly influencing OBS, because I can't know that, but saying that they had nothing to do with it is simply not true.

 

Obviously it's not the same as having publisher take total control (which I really hate in gaming), but if we're nitpicking, let's be precise

[rjshae]

A person who finds the whole patching/refinement cycle unbearable can always just wait. There's plenty of other fine games out there to enjoy.

[Abel]

A person who finds the whole patching/refinement cycle unbearable can always just wait. There's plenty of other fine games out there to enjoy.

 

Pretty much what i'm doing :D (still hoping for more significant mechanic changes, too)

[aktivb]

So for some reason people around here feel that a purely single player game with NO competitive part requires constant rebalancing. My question is: WHY?

I was playing an Arcane Knight (Bleak Walker/Evoker), who after the patch forgot how to tank and started shooting toothpicks instead of magic missiles. Buffing up, blowing my missile load, cleaning up with FoD. That was really fun. Now I'm not only squishy, my Evoker (and nerfs to items like the Evoker PL gloves) subclass makes no sense because my offensive spells are garbage and I can't just respec to a normal Wizard. All I could do now is either completely change my playstyle and play a gimped Paladin or restart after 30 hours. I don't think I can lower difficulty, too, because it's POTD.

 

Ok, I have no experience with that particular class, but lets say I take you on your word and your class was nerfed into oblivion. Lets also say it's considerably weaker than any other class in the game.

 

Suppose the game launched at 1.1, you got it immediately, and picked Arcane Knight. 30 hours in you realize that beyond being just initially weak, it is never going to get any stronger. You start a new game and pick a fighter, and he just pounds through everything your Arcane Knight struggled with, and you just sunk your first 30 hours into a dead end.

 

Would you then still be here proclaiming that games should not be overhauled post launch? That they should be left in an unbalanced state. That it is your responsibility to break out the modding tools to make Arcane Knight a powerful and enjoyable class? Suppose Obsidian then released 1.2 as first post launch patch, and now you can load your abandoned save and the Arcane Knight is a powerhouse. You'd still come storming in here to ask what the hell people are thinking, overhauling post launch?

 

Maybe Obsidian got overzealous and left Arcane Knight in the trenches, but since they a) have balance as a goal, and b) they are still balancing, that can still be redeemed.

 

POTD players are a minority. That's a fact. You'd have to know literally nothing about gaming if you assume that most players play on highest difficulty level. And the changes done by Obsidian are not POTD-only, they affect everyone, even if the degree is considerably smaller.

 

POTD players might be a minority of the playerbase, but that doesn't mean that only POTD players wants or expects the game to be balanced. It certainly doesn't mean that the majority of non-POTD players or non-forum members automatically rally under your banner, resulting in your position making up the majority.

 

EDIT: Post went up unfinished, haven't got time to finish it now

Edited June 13, 2018 by aktivb

[Zoso der Goldene]

 

Could you please be specific?

 

You can't be talking about Beckoner's Abjuration Immunity, it must have to do with refilling class resources, right?

 

Is it that? There's a less powerful verion on PL IX.

 

Set to Their Purpose was changed from Brilliant to Smart. Basically Chanters had an Inspiration that was the only source of resource regeneration for multiclass characters. You could make some pretty damn cool Chanter/caster builds around that, for example. Yes, there is a PL 9 invocation with a similar effect.. which you can't get as a multiclass, so you have to restart.

 

But to be honest, that should have never made it to the original game. +10 Class Resources for the entire Party. How did that slip QA?

It's so clearly game breaking (the fact that there is a much weaker PL IX version should be a pointer), and we're lucky that no content was created to match this level of overpoweredness, otherwise it would be unplayable for everyone else. And to be honest, they fixed their mistake as soon as possible.

 

My point was it doesn't change the support role of the Chanter in general, it makes a particular build most would consider cheesy - rightfully so, if you ask me - not work anymore.

While the PoE 1 Defender nerf, combined the Perception change, turned Fighter from probably the best tank there was into not-really-fit to tank (yes, it's viable, but that's about it), as compared to paladins, for example (IIRC Josh also claimed he wanted to have people tank less). So it hit the core character concept, in a sense, and that after the game had been out for a year.

Most of the characters I wanted to take into White March were not up for the task anymore.

Looking back, I think they still did the right thing for the entire game, even if that meant fighters fared far worse as tanks.

 

And obviously, I think they do the absolutely right thing now considering the long run, even if that hurts some players (and I can certainly understand how it can be upsetting, see above).

[gloomseeker]

The whole balancing act is the reason why it took me years to fully play PoE1.

 

Don't get me wrong, I have nothing against fine tuning a game but if my build gets turned on his head halfway through it tends to put me off from playing this particular game quite a bit. 

[Archaven]

the biggest issue i have with the patch is that it breaks total builds. i was playing a monk/ranger and making swift flurry out of a sudden melee is only is really a big failed design decision by obsidian.

[Katarack21]

 

 

"It failed to provide any challenge no matter whom you fight."

 

Firstly that was not my sentence. I just added my personal impression to the discussion. Now if you take that "any" very literary, it is indeed a hyperbolic statement. But this is a forum discussion, not a juristic text. People talk that way, you know. And dying three times on PotD is not really what I would call challenge. But as you insist, here is my non-hyperbolic attempt:

 

In my experience as a self defined average player the game clearly failed to provide an appropriate challenge on the difficulty settings normal and above, apart from very few fights, given the assumption, that players an all difficulty levels but story mode are expected to fail from time to time.

 

You can quote that, nitpicker.

 

Dude. *HE* admitted that it was in fact extreme hyperbole and then proceeded to rephrase with more realistic statements. So...**** you, basically? Like...you don't matter in that conversation. That was an example of hyperbolic statements, not something *being attributed to you*. And my point was, and remains, that hyperbole to an extreme degree creates lack of meaning because at a certain point it ceases to connect with the reality of the situation. Not, like.."nitpicking". Your half-assed attempt to be annoyingly specific as a joke at my expense to create the impression that I'm some kind of obsessively specific jackass just makes me concerned about your comprehension.

 

Are you okay? Like...I'm worried about you. Your executive function doesn't seem to be working well.

Edited June 13, 2018 by Katarack21