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

[Darth Trethon]

I don't see why I shouldn't be bothered by these demands - these ideas have been occupying my favourite genre for years and when there is finally a chance to have an old school game here they come again demanding the same stupid bloody useless dumbing down of features that can be had in any main stream production.

I haven't been asking for any dumbing down as far as I recall.....besides what's there for you to be worried about now? You ARE going to get your hardcore options(2.3 mil is literally around the corner and the funds are going up quite well so it's a near guarantee) no problem. Hell I haven't even asked for an easy mode though it seems like there'll be one....if the game can please both sides of this argument through checking/unchecking a few boxes in the menu I don't see an issue.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darth Trethon

[Monte Carlo]

If there is such a great market for combat free crpgs why has nobody made one?

[C2B]

I have nothing against content-tourists. Choose EASY and make a diplomat, like someone else said. What I *do* have a beef with is people asking for features that are utterly at variance with what the precursor titles were about. Why? Because (a) they eat development resources (b) they are extraneous (see initial point) and C experience teaches us that the more you pander to gamers who have sucked at the teat of Bioware, the more they will bug you and lobby for yet more dripping wet auto-gaming.

 

I must have missed it....what such feature was requested that offended you so?

 

Actual removal of combat. Which in turn would remove a lot of narrative as well, and imo hurt both sides.

 

It's a question of balancing the combat. Removing major gameplay elements is something entirly different and shouldn't be done. In any case.

Edited September 27, 2012 by C2B

[Darth Trethon]

If there is such a great market for combat free crpgs why has nobody made one?

 

Well CRPGs are something of a rare breed these days really....there isn't a great market for crpgs period. Ultimately I just want this game to meet the success it deserves....I want to see this game sell unexpectedly well and bring in enough money for Obsidian to make sequels or other games independent of publishers and I don't see that happening if the game is inaccessible to those who like the game for its non-crpg features. If an easy mode can can please those who aren't into the hardcore stat micromanagement then what's the issue? The less prohibitive the game is and the more it can please all the different kinds of players out there then the better its chances of success are.

 

Ultimately you have to recognize that a lot of the backers that are making this possible are fans of Obsidian's storytelling and choice system as seen in their more recent rpg days and aren't familiar with all the crpg hardcore bits. I don't think it's entirely reasonable that you expect this to be a pure hard to the bone crpg without options to please the non-crpg players.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darth Trethon

[Darth Trethon]

I have nothing against content-tourists. Choose EASY and make a diplomat, like someone else said. What I *do* have a beef with is people asking for features that are utterly at variance with what the precursor titles were about. Why? Because (a) they eat development resources (b) they are extraneous (see initial point) and C experience teaches us that the more you pander to gamers who have sucked at the teat of Bioware, the more they will bug you and lobby for yet more dripping wet auto-gaming.

 

I must have missed it....what such feature was requested that offended you so?

 

Actual removal of combat. Which in turn would remove a lot of narrative as well, and imo hurt both sides.

 

It's a question of balancing the combat. Removing major gameplay elements is something entirly different and shouldn't be done. In any case.

 

lol no that wouldn't work....I wouldn't want combat removed....it's still plenty of fun beating on enemies.

[Dorateen]

 

Path of the Damned is a spiritual successor to Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury mode. In our encounters, we like to turn individual combatants on and off based on the level of difficulty. If you come into an area on Easy, maybe casters are replaced with weak melee enemies. If you come in on Hard, maybe the casters are augmented by a tough melee enemy or two. With Path of the Damned, that goes out the window. All enemies from all levels of difficulty are enabled and the combat mechanics are amplified to make battles much more brutal for everyone involved.

 

 

I wish to raise a substantive point. If the developers do include a difficulty mode that is indeed derived in spirit from Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury, then the player ought to be allowed to assemble a squad of crack commando teammates who would be up to the challenge.

 

I don't want to be saddled with "Optional Male Romance Guy" or "Comic Relief Witty Bard" as companions for such encounters.

 

Harumph!

 

[Monte Carlo]

Path of the Damned is a spiritual successor to Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury mode. In our encounters, we like to turn individual combatants on and off based on the level of difficulty. If you come into an area on Easy, maybe casters are replaced with weak melee enemies. If you come in on Hard, maybe the casters are augmented by a tough melee enemy or two. With Path of the Damned, that goes out the window. All enemies from all levels of difficulty are enabled and the combat mechanics are amplified to make battles much more brutal for everyone involved.

 

 

I wish to raise a substantive point. If the developers do include a difficulty mode that is indeed derived in spirit from Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury, then the player ought to be allowed to assemble a squad of crack commando teammates who would be up to the challenge.

 

I don't want to be saddled with "Optional Male Romance Guy" or "Comic Relief Witty Bard" as companions for such encounters.

 

Harumph!

 

Your post is imbued with the rich ichor of wisdom and I salute you.

[evdk]

If there is such a great market for combat free crpgs why has nobody made one?

 

Well CRPGs are something of a rare breed these days really....there isn't a great market for crpgs period. Ultimately I just want this game to meet the success it deserves....I want to see this game sell unexpectedly well and bring in enough money for Obsidian to make sequels or other games independent of publishers and I don't see that happening if the game is inaccessible to those who like the game for its non-crpg features. If an easy mode can can please those who aren't into the hardcore stat micromanagement then what's the issue? The less prohibitive the game is and the more it can please all the different kinds of players out there then the better its chances of success are.

 

Ultimately you have to recognize that a lot of the backers that are making this possible are fans of Obsidian's storytelling and choice system as seen in their more recent rpg days and aren't familiar with all the crpg hardcore bits. I don't think it's entirely reasonable that you expect this to be a pure hard to the bone crpg without options to please the non-crpg players.

If they like the game just for the non-rpg features they'd better learn to like the rest. Sorry if I am sounding like and abrasive ****, but if I had a beer bottle for every time I have heard this sort of argument in the past, I would be swimming in bottle caps like some kind of hobo Uncle Scrooge - and the games suffered for this each and every time. Accessibility is poison.

[Monte Carlo]

^ More wisdom.

[Darth Trethon]

If there is such a great market for combat free crpgs why has nobody made one?

 

Well CRPGs are something of a rare breed these days really....there isn't a great market for crpgs period. Ultimately I just want this game to meet the success it deserves....I want to see this game sell unexpectedly well and bring in enough money for Obsidian to make sequels or other games independent of publishers and I don't see that happening if the game is inaccessible to those who like the game for its non-crpg features. If an easy mode can can please those who aren't into the hardcore stat micromanagement then what's the issue? The less prohibitive the game is and the more it can please all the different kinds of players out there then the better its chances of success are.

 

Ultimately you have to recognize that a lot of the backers that are making this possible are fans of Obsidian's storytelling and choice system as seen in their more recent rpg days and aren't familiar with all the crpg hardcore bits. I don't think it's entirely reasonable that you expect this to be a pure hard to the bone crpg without options to please the non-crpg players.

If they like the game just for the non-rpg features they'd better learn to like the rest or GTFO. Sorry if I am sounding like and abrasive ****, but if I had a beer bottle for every time I have heard this sort of argument in the past, I would be swimming in bottle caps like some kind of hobo Uncle Scrooge - and the games suffered for this each and every time. Accessibility is poison.

 

I think there's a big difference between the rpg features side of the game and crpg features(stat management and so on.....I was talking about the crpg features. Ultimately whether you like it or not the harsh truth is that there's more to this project than crpg hardcore players and the "gtfo" approach can only ensure there is no more to it after this.....no sequel, no nothing. I do not think that is what Obsidian or anyone here wants. Accessibility is the future and only way forward but I think there is a chance here for it to be done drastically different than it's ever been done before, a way to please both sides without damaging the experience of either.

[evdk]

Personally I would them rather make a wonderful game and then go down in a blaze of glory than compromise and make plenty of sequels of declining quality. Remember Ultima!

[Darth Trethon]

^ More wisdom.

 

Not really no, you're both afraid of what it might mean to your precious game if Obsidian start catering to anyone other than the hardcore crpg players when in fact you fail to realize that in some way they will have to do just that....it's been a very long time since Obsidian last did a crpg so do you really want to start taking guesses at how many of its backers are familiar only with the rpg storytelling of their more recent works? Probably more than you're comfortable with....and you're asking that Obsidian completely ignore this and cater only to you....essentially ignoring a large portion of their backers.

 

That will NOT generate enough sales to create anything going forward and will ensure plenty won't return for any future kickstarters essentially leaving Obsidian at the mercy of publishers.

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darth Trethon

[Nakia]

Maybe it is my age but I simply fail to understand what the argument is about. No one is forcing anyone to place on hardcore or ironman or Insanity mode. OE has clearly tated that you will have choices. They have made that very clear. Maybe I am missing something but this is a role playing game, it is a computer game therefore the player's character will interact with elemnts of the game, other NPCs, animals and monsters in the wilderness and so forth. In order for the STORY to evolve the player must interact and do things. OE has stated that it will be possible to avoid combat.

 

No one is forcing anything on anyone.

[Gfted1]

So in your opinion, the game that explicitly states to be the spiritual successor to BG, IWD and PS:T is backed by people that have no idea what that means?

[C2B]

^ More wisdom.

 

Not really no, you're both afraid of what it might mean to your precious game if Obsidian start catering to anyone other than the hardcore crpg players when in fact you fail to realize that in some way they will have to do just that....it's been a very long time since Obsidian last did a crpg so do you really want to start taking guesses at how many of its backers are familiar only with the rpg storytelling of their more recent works? Probably more than you're comfortable with....and you're asking that Obsidian completely ignore this and cater only to you....essentially ignoring a large portion of their backers.

 

That will NOT generate enough sales to create anything going forward and will ensure plenty won't return for any future kickstarters essentially leaving Obsidian at the mercy of publishers.

 

What is exactly your point and where is he saying this?

 

What are you even arguing about?

 

What?

 

 

Coming back with Sawyer's post from earlier in this thread:

 

To be clear: we're making a game in which story, setting (i.e. exploration of the setting), and tactical combat are emphasized in more-or-less equal measure. The options we're talking about are present so you can tune your particular flavor of gameplay elements, but we're not making a game for people who inherently dislike these

gameplay elements.

 

Discussion done.

 

(Sawyer's been a man of the middle since ever. He doesn't overly cater to either side)

Edited September 27, 2012 by C2B

[Pidesco]

So in your opinion, the game that explicitly states to be the spiritual successor to BG, IWD and PS:T is backed by people that have no idea what that means?

 

laff.

 

I like this post

[evdk]

Hello, I have backed this game expecting it to be a great RPG like Mass Effect and now I find that there is no cover shooting? I demand that it is implemented post haste!

[Darth Trethon]

So in your opinion, the game that explicitly states to be the spiritual successor to BG, IWD and PS:T is backed by people that have no idea what that means?

 

Oh I fully believe it is and can fully deliver on that promise without completely alienating everybody else. I think their 2.3 mil stretch goal proves their commitment to having the game be sufficiently flexible to please the old without alienating the new.

[Darkpriest]

Path of the Damned is a spiritual successor to Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury mode. In our encounters, we like to turn individual combatants on and off based on the level of difficulty. If you come into an area on Easy, maybe casters are replaced with weak melee enemies. If you come in on Hard, maybe the casters are augmented by a tough melee enemy or two. With Path of the Damned, that goes out the window. All enemies from all levels of difficulty are enabled and the combat mechanics are amplified to make battles much more brutal for everyone involved.

 

 

I wish to raise a substantive point. If the developers do include a difficulty mode that is indeed derived in spirit from Icewind Dale's Heart of Fury, then the player ought to be allowed to assemble a squad of crack commando teammates who would be up to the challenge.

 

I don't want to be saddled with "Optional Male Romance Guy" or "Comic Relief Witty Bard" as companions for such encounters.

 

Harumph!

 

That would take away story elements but in all seriousness... you wold have to get the best out of the companions (and your tactics) in order to get through the challenges...

 

What I would want to see is that your formation matters, not that it breaks after the first round of gameplay, because melees beeline to your casters with you having no way to intercept them and stop with your own melee/tanks, etc.

 

(that's why I'd prefer to see a turn based combat, but RTWP is ok too)

Edited September 27, 2012 by Darkpriest

[Darth Trethon]

Hello, I have backed this game expecting it to be a great RPG like Mass Effect and now I find that there is no cover shooting? I demand that it is implemented post haste!

 

No, not like Mass Effect. Hell I'd hate if it was like mass effect....only pretends to give the player choices and branching ans so on. Expecting it to deliver complex story choice and consequence system like Fallout New Vegas and Alpha Protocol while the gameplay is flexible enough to allow different play styles.....

[Pidesco]

Oh I fully believe it is and can fully deliver on that promise without completely alienating everybody else. I think their 2.3 mil stretch goal proves their commitment to having the game be sufficiently flexible to please the old without alienating the new.

 

In all CRPGs of the last 10 years flexible has meant watered down in some way.

[evdk]

Oh I fully believe it is and can fully deliver on that promise without completely alienating everybody else. I think their 2.3 mil stretch goal proves their commitment to having the game be sufficiently flexible to please the old without alienating the new.

 

In all CRPGs of the last 10 years flexible has meant watered down in some way.

In ALL the ways, really.

[Monte Carlo]

So in your opinion, the game that explicitly states to be the spiritual successor to BG, IWD and PS:T is backed by people that have no idea what that means?

 

Oh I fully believe it is and can fully deliver on that promise without completely alienating everybody else. I think their 2.3 mil stretch goal proves their commitment to having the game be sufficiently flexible to please the old without alienating the new.

 

No. The new need to be gently, tenderly but firmly unengaged from the gaming teat of dumbed-down dross and reintroduced to the purity of the Old Skool.

[sesobebo]

No. The new need to be gently, tenderly but firmly unengaged from the gaming teat of dumbed-down dross and reintroduced to the purity of the Old Skool.

 

what? You mean like games, that actually have to be played?

[Darth Trethon]

I am only being realistic here and I do not believe I am being unreasonable. Ultimately this will not have a great impact on me either way....so long as the story and player choice system are decent I can deal with any kind of gameplay and difficulty.