Update #9: The power of MODES and Godlike Races: Our $2.3M Stretch Goal

[Cantousent]

Yeah, but Sawyer wasn't disdainful in his response. He merely made a point that combat would be one of the three legs of the stool. It is clear, from previous updates, that some combat is avoidable and that there will be a variety of methods to get past some things, but combat is going to be a major part of the game. I don't mean to be dismissive, but I can tell you what worries me about making a non-combat mode. For it to work properly, it has to be implemented extremely well and then tested thoroughly. If they just throw in the mode pell mell, they will get hammered by any professional journalist, and they should be hammered in such a case. This is a kickstarter, but it's not an amateur development project. Obsidian is a professional studio and they really have to be careful that this project is polished every bit as much as if it were underwritten by a publisher. Probably more. Since I don't want what I can only believe are substantial resources spent *taking out* a feature that I firmly believe the vast majority of player (including me) want included. While I can't prove that assumption off-hand, does anyone really dispute that the majority of players will buy this title expecting combat at some point or another? The *vast* majority? So, I don't want you to be forced to do stuff you don't like, but I don't want to see the team bend over backwards in order to allow you to avoid a feature I want instead of taking the time to include some feature or another I would also like.

[Stun]

If you are turning on Expert Mode at the beginning of the game, you're permanently (for that game) setting all dials to 11. You don't need to do that, though. If you start a normal game, you can manually turn on/off the options of Expert Mode that you enjoy at any point in the game. If you want combat to be standard but you prefer having companion influence messages turned off, you can just select that feature (and/or other story/dialogue-based elements).

And with this, we inch our way closer to the the "too good to be true", jinx zone, where all games die.

 

Quick, release update #10 and make it something horrible, to bring my anticipation/expectations back down.

 

But seriously, this is the best update yet. Got me to double my donation.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Stun

[horocaust]

New game modes? Meh. I'm unlikely to try them.

A godlike race? If that's going to be the sixth one, which seems to be the case, then that's good.

[Monte Carlo]

Can we get the opposite?

 

For example, Mass Effect 3 had "Story Mode," which allowed players to skip through the monotony of random fighting and "strategic play," in order to appreciate the story, world, and characters without having to tredge through the parts they wouldn't enjoy.

 

I don't particularly like some of the responses I've seen to this, and similar sentiments. There hasn't been any abuse or vitriol, which is great, but there is definitely a certain amount of disdain.

 

I'm a story-driven gamer. In my particular case, I also really enjoy the gameplay elements of RPGs, and I foresee myself trying out some of these increased difficulty modes (although I'll be doing that after I've done a complete playthrough). For me, unlocking the story as a reward for completing gameplay challenges really works.

 

However, I don't see a reason why someone shouldn't be allowed to play a game purely to experience the story, or why they should be disparaged for it. Saying something like "go read a book or watch a movie" isn't helpful - or even cogent. Experiencing a story interactively - even stripped of its combat elements - is another experience entirely. That's something I think a majority of RPG fans can agree on. It might also be that the story told by a particular game is not one you can experience anywhere else.

 

So I think asking for a mode that removes combat, or (more likely to be implementable) one that makes combat vanishingly easy is a perfectly valid request. Real time with no pause necessary. Real time with no action on the player's part necessary. It's not the option I would choose, but I'm certainly not going to belittle someone who does want to play the game that way, or fault the developers for including that option, as well as their more difficult modes, in the game.

 

Let me put that right for you then.

 

Go and read a book.

[generic.hybridity]

Great update guys.I loved Iron man Mode in TOEE and really enjoyed the Hardcore Difficulty of New Vegas. Can't say I'll be playing and Iron Man Heart of Fury combo though. I enjoy my sanity too much for that.

 

Just a request. If we have an Iron Man mode can we have a way to flee from Combat? In TOEE I remember being unable to flee from a situation which was going badly. I think it would be better to be able to live to fight another day.

[Darth Trethon]

Hmm....and speaking of godlike races I wonder just how close these races actually resemble gods...if the name is even remotely accurate they should be completely invulnerable, unkillable and invincible no matter what insane ultra-hard game modes are turned on.

[slopesandsam]

Yeah, but Sawyer wasn't disdainful in his response. He merely made a point that combat would be one of the three legs of the stool. It is clear, from previous updates, that some combat is avoidable and that there will be a variety of methods to get past some things, but combat is going to be a major part of the game. I don't mean to be dismissive, but I can tell you what worries me about making a non-combat mode. For it to work properly, it has to be implemented extremely well and then tested thoroughly. If they just throw in the mode pell mell, they will get hammered by any professional journalist, and they should be hammered in such a case. This is a kickstarter, but it's not an amateur development project. Obsidian is a professional studio and they really have to be careful that this project is polished every bit as much as if it were underwritten by a publisher. Probably more. Since I don't want what I can only believe are substantial resources spent *taking out* a feature that I firmly believe the vast majority of player (including me) want included. While I can't prove that assumption off-hand, does anyone really dispute that the majority of players will buy this title expecting combat at some point or another? The *vast* majority? So, I don't want you to be forced to do stuff you don't like, but I don't want to see the team bend over backwards in order to allow you to avoid a feature I want instead of taking the time to include some feature or another I would also like.

 

1. My comment about disdainful comments wasn't directed at Sawyer, but at some of the other forum members. I feel I should also re-iterate that I don't mean this as a harsh rebuke. Obviously there haven't been any responses like the firestorm of awful that occurred when that female Bioware employee expressed a similar stance. I just don't like people dismissing such ideas out of hand.

 

2. Ease of implementation is an entirely different subject, I think. If scaling the difficulty of the game to where some players can (if they choose) breeze right through combat is difficult/impossible to do without it impacting on the integrity of the game, that is a reasonable excuse. But it's also a reasonable excuse for not implementing any feature.

 

3. That a vast majority of players will want to experience the combat element (an unproven statement, but I would also guess that this is the case) isn't an argument for excluding the minority who don't. You could just as easily say that a vast majority of gamers don't want to play an old-school isometric RPG, so Obsidian shouldn't bend over backwards to make one. And obviously I don't know the numbers, but I would bet that the number of players who will play PE on the more extreme difficulty settings are also not a majority.

[Cantousent]

But it's also a reasonable excuse for not implementing any feature.

I agree with this statement. In fact, I think folks should argue for things they want and against things they don't. However, I will point out that I normally don't argue against stuff very strenuously.

 

Keep in mind, my reading of the original idea is that he wanted a non-combat story mode. He didn't want an easy combat mode. Inasmuchas he's happy with modes that make combat extremely easy, I'm all for that. I honestly believe that implementing a non-combat mode will be hard on development. Once again, we're forced to conjecture, but it's an educated guess. I would be happy to have a dev weigh in on this particular issue and I would try to accept his answer graciously. Since the question was asked and answered, I doubt that will happen, but you never know.

 

No matter what else, I'm not trying to poke fun at either you or machineiv personally. I think it's perfectly legit to ask for what you want which is still pretty much all I'm doing also. Tell you what, though, if they come out and say they're going to include a non-combat mode, I slap you on the back and offer you a glass of the house red. Virtual, of course. :Cant's wry grin icon:

[Darth Trethon]

Hmm....and speaking of godlike races I wonder just how close these races actually resemble gods...if the name is even remotely accurate they should be completely invulnerable, unkillable and invincible no matter what insane ultra-hard game modes are turned on.

Isn't it more 'God-touched' than God-like? -__- Like being cursed with certain physical features which mark that person as being touched by that god - for good or ill. Maybe godlike races will be viewed as higher or lower class races by the non-godlike races?

 

Sounds about right....still I think the name ought to be changed since "godlike" sounds a bit off imo. Still I do not mean this to sound serious or anything, just a tiny insignificant remark, whether this actually ends up renamed or not will have no effect on how highly I think of the game.

 

And me being a huge fan of magic powers and things I very much look forward to playing with the godlike race regardless.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darth Trethon

[Darkpriest]

Hardcore mode in New Vegas was absolutely fantastic and I'd love to see something similar in a fantasy RPG.

 

I don't see why an Ironman mode needs to be coded though, players can easily self enforce a single savegame. And as was mentioned before, savegame corruption is common in RPG's and alot of us are trained to cycle multiple save slots to avoid this unholy terror. Having only a single save seems dangerous and potentially super disappointing to me. Not to mention most players can tell when they are fighting a a losing battle and will just re-load their single savegame as soon as the party cleric dies. Or at the very least when they are down to a single survivor and know the fight is hopeless. If a player is disciplined enough to avoid cheesing the reload they are disciplined enough to only make 1 savegame if they want to play Ironman, without an extra game mode to make them.

 

I like the idea of a plane-touched or aasimar type race, but I think Godlike is a bad name for it, heh Hopefully that can be a placeholder and possibly changed in the final game?

 

if you have it under steam or with any other cloud service that's a backup, that should safeguard you against crashes or corruption. Test of Iron is different than forcing oneself to one save only:

 

1) because even though you try to keep yourself to one save, there are always temptation to reload if something goes wrong.

 

2) If you get wiped, that's it, game over, bye bye, auf wiedersehen, au revoir, addio, etc... No starting from a pre wipe situation. Go back to the beginning... Some people like the challenge and do not fear of being punished by the game.. That's why people like "Ironman" modes in games. Overcoming challenges is one of many "fun" factors.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darkpriest

[cyberarmy]

This is good news! But sadly i really cannot update my pledge anymore.

 

Unless i sell my kidney or start Grand Theft quests. Hımmmm.....

[Spell]

I really love the idea of making your own difficulty lvl! I'm really looking toward the one-save game, because when you make an important to the story decision with "there is no going back with a quick load" in mind, all those decisions are even harder to make. But deleting you game save after death is way to hardcore to me. Hope you could play with the "single save" on and "one life" off.

[JeremyR]

Like I said on the KS page, if you really want to give us options, why not give us a turn based option for combat? You constantly mention Temple of Elemental Evil, why not add a combat mode like that had?

 

To me, real time combat games are inherently face punching, at least with more than 2-3 characters. Basically they are die, reload try again, die, reload, die reload, because I can't control all the characters at once. Just not fun.

[Olauron Mor-Galad]

I like this update. Trial of Iron and Path of the Damned are not for me (at least in the first game) but Expert mode sounds very promising.

 

To me, real time combat games are inherently face punching, at least with more than 2-3 characters. Basically they are die, reload try again, die, reload, die reload, because I can't control all the characters at once. Just not fun.

You can pause a game any time you want and control all the characters at once.

[PsychoYoshi]

Looks like Sawyer still has a good old WRT54G hanging on for life on top of his computer.

 

Sounds like all of the modes will add a lot of depth; my only concern is that if too many are implemented, it'll spread the gameplay all around too thin.

Edited September 27, 2012 by PsychoYoshi

[Darkpriest]

Mr. Sawyer just scared a hell out of me.

 

 

It would also be nice to have some sort of reward for playing in one of these modes. It need not be extreme but something other than bragging rights might be nice. Greater likelihood of special equipment, or a unique ending come to mind.

 

The difficulty should be its own reward.

 

I would not mind increased xp multiplier. Since you will face more and more powerful monsters, the more frequent appearance of some magic item is inherently given.

 

I would not mind an achievement as well.

 

What I would dislike is that some items that can affect gameplay and world lore/story are available only when you've toggled that mode... (like some legendary artifacts, etc.). Same goes for endings and any other elements of the story. (well unless different ending would just give you a line of text at the end.. "Man you ARE a god" )

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darkpriest

[mercy]

Give us more content, damnit, not a bunch of add-on party favors like companions and difficulty settings. Give me a lineup of abilities and spells to rival D&D's. Give me dungeons galore. Give me a richer backstory to the world, and ways to explore this lore.

Drithius

 

I totally 100% agree with above! Also I would like to see more features, like bashing doors, exploding doors with Fireball spell, massacre-able NPC-s, ability to make firebombs, ability to make Golems and destroyable walls, picpocket NPC-s and ways to steal large amounts of treasure - gold, mithril, valuable items from Noble's houses.

 

Ability to create deadly poisons and Smear the stuff onto blades, darts, bolts, arrows, allowing assassination from a distance or Backstab with daggers that have deadly poison applied.

Edited September 27, 2012 by mercy

[GarfunkeL]

Expert mode and Path of the Damned, here I come. Saving Ironman for the second play through.

 

 

Can we get the opposite?

 

For example, Mass Effect 3 had "Story Mode," which allowed players to skip through the monotony of random fighting and "strategic play," in order to appreciate the story, world, and characters without having to tredge through the parts they wouldn't enjoy.

 

I see a lot of ideas for making the game harder, and more omghardcore, but is this a tactical combat simulator, or is this a game with a story? It seems like the emphasis is on the wrong part of the game.

Bioware has pandered gameplay-hating "players" long enough. If you want to enjoy a story, read a book. How is that so difficult to understand? As for this game, select EASY, don't select any of these three options and enjoy.

[Reddie]

If you want to enjoy a story, read a book. How is that so difficult to understand?

 

I like both gameplay and story, but the POV of people who don't like the former is pretty obvious to me. Books are linear storylines, while cRPG games offer branching storylines, thus being completely different in terms of "enjoying a story". How is that so difficult to understand?

[Pidesco]

If you want to enjoy a story, read a book. How is that so difficult to understand?

 

I like both gameplay and story, but the POV of people who don't like the former is pretty obvious to me. Books are linear storylines, while cRPG games offer branching storylines, thus being completely different in terms of "enjoying a story". How is that so difficult to understand?

 

[Dermi]

If you want to enjoy a story, read a book. How is that so difficult to understand?

 

I like both gameplay and story, but the POV of people who don't like the former is pretty obvious to me. Books are linear storylines, while cRPG games offer branching storylines, thus being completely different in terms of "enjoying a story". How is that so difficult to understand?

There is something for them as well: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamebook All branching story, no tedious gameplay.

 

EDIT: Shoot, Pidesco beat me to it.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Dermi

[Reddie]

Yeah, as if everyone telling "if you want a story go get a book" was refering to this very specific subset/genre.

[Darth Trethon]

@Pidesco and @Dermi

 

I am sorry but no, not really. Those are just not going to cut it. For one they are a grand rarity, secondly the stories are just not as good and having visual representation whether in still screens of nicely drawn art or cutscenes makes everything that much better.

 

The more important question at hand here is: why are people who don't care about story and plot driven by player choices here? Obsidian has a long track record for being ALL ABOUT story, player driven plot and multiple endings.....sorry but if you don't care about story why even look at Obsidian in the first place? It makes no sense to me. Not to mention that the Project Eternity description clearly states that Obsidian is dedicated to continuing their tradition of creating good stories and player driven plot and then Chris Avellone has committed to writing a novel so I can't even imagine how someone would think of seriously proposing that the story be shortchanged, diminished or ignored.

 

I am all about story and player driven plot....it's the single, most important reason why I care about the RPG genre in the first place as I have been for many years.....and no company is a better representative of these characteristics in their games than Obsidian.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darth Trethon

[Pidesco]

The real problem with the position of "I want to play the game, but with story only, no combat," is that it's the same as a guy buying a comic book and complaining that the comic book doesn't allow him to enjoy the story without the drawings.

[Nakia]

Well, I want story, action, excitement, immersion, choices, Puzzles, mysteries, replayability, laughter, tears, conflict, friends, enemies, a warm spot by the fire.

In other words I want the game Obsidian is going to give.