Just how Easy will Easy be?

[GammaHamster]

The fall of Bioware happened between NWN and DA1 or possibly even between BG2 and NWN.

 

 

The decline is a continuous process, not a single point in time. I once though it cannot get worse than NWN. I was wrong.

 

If you like and play DA1 then I have no idea why you would want to back this project.

 

You got me wrong there, the reason i use DA2 as an example is not me liking DA1, i am just picking the absolute worst one to better illustrate my point.

 

I would certainly not contribute one penny to a crowdfunded Dragon Age 1 sequel-in-spirit

 

I fully support you here.

Edited September 28, 2012 by GammaHamster

[ogrezilla]

Jeez. What happened to this thread? Just a minor quibble. The fall of Bioware happened between NWN and DA1 or possibly even between BG2 and NWN. Not DA2. That is a proven fact. If you like and play DA1 then I have no idea why you would want to back this project. I think you will hate it utterly, but it's your money. Do what you want with it. And I certainly appreciate your help in funding a game for 'old school' gamers when you are clearly not one yourself. I always admire generosity. I would certainly not contribute one penny to a crowdfunded Dragon Age 1 sequel-in-spirit.

I enjoy the old IE games and thought DA1 was a decent game. Not as good as the games this is being modeled after, but enjoyable enough to play through. I have never played DA2. That said, I wouldn't contribute to a game like DA either.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Director]

Also, enough with the Jennifer Hepler BS.

I can honestly say I've never felt more embarassed about being an RPG fan than when people reacted the way they did to Hepler's statements, which frankly, weren't all that inflamatory. People like different things in their games, imagine that.

 

 

What is the "Jennifer Hepler BS" ? Is this people ragging on about the Bioware writer that the said Shock / Horror "Not everyone cares about combat in video games" ?

 

I still can't believe that people go ape**** over such blindly obvious statements.

 

I've played Fallout 1+2, Baldur's Gate 1+2, PS:T and million other RPGs - do I remember the "combat" from any of them? Nope. I remember the stories and the characters.

If I want Tactical Combat - I can just play XCom, (and I have - for hundreds of hours).

 

But my girlfriend hates XCom, and when she plays PS:T, or Mass Effect 1,2,3 - the combat is just a barrier between her and the next character interaction. If the combat gets to frustrating, she goes and plays The Sims. (This happened on Dragon Age:Origins because she picked a fighter).

Edited September 28, 2012 by Director

[Malcador]

I still find it depressing people are worrying about the game being too hard for them at this stage of the project - hopefully there are difficulty sliders so that people can adjust the challenge to what they're comfortable with. Now if you want some story mode where you can faceroll through content...well..maybe a LP video of just cutscenes might be your thing, I dunno.

[GammaHamster]

 

 

But my girlfriend hates XCom, and when she plays PS:T, or Mass Effect 1,2,3 - the combat is just a barrier between her and the next character interaction. If the combat gets to frustrating, she goes and plays The Sims.

 

You see, your girlfriend found a solution that satisfies everybody.

[TwinkieGorilla]

You see, your girlfriend found a solution that satisfies everybody.

 

Hehe. Walked right into that one he did.

[Data4]

but they aren't doing anything different with difficulty than the old games. The old IE games had difficulty adjustment that allowed for an easier experience too. Just like this will do. No change for the game you or I will play at all.

 

Except that the resources spent on making optional easy modes are resources that could be better spent on more overall content. I don't get how people can't seem to grasp that this game is going to be made with a limited budget versus a AAA, publisher-backed title. It's quite literally a zero-sum game. Money spent on X will be money taken away from Y.

 

And yet much harder modes are part of the 2.3 stretch goal--this can mean one of two things:

 

(1) Obsidian only cares about catering to the hardcore gamers and carebears be damned.

(2) Easy and normal modes (and probably a "regular harder mode," just not "hardcore") are already guaranteed.

 

 

(1) makes no sense because Obsidian wants actual sales of the game post-production, and the only way to do that is to allow more casual play, however subjective that is.

 

(2) makes far more sense because the I.E. games always had different options including easy. Probably all of Obsidian's other games too.

 

The problem with your viewpoint is that you're stating it as an absolute binary when market forces dictate otherwise; in other words, this isn't like romances where you're going to get stuck in the game somewhere by a companion conversation. Combat mechanics are so pervasive and fundamental to the CRPG that allowing player adjustment is a very basic and absolutely necessary form of accessibility. Locking out a goodly number of potential players for a game that Obsidian wants to franchise on post-production sales is very dangerous--this sort of thing won't happen with/without stuff like romances or cosmetics or lack/presence of a given race.

 

There must be, at minimum, easy/normal/hard modes. In terms of finer distinctions, this should be very easy for Obsidian to compartmentalize by discrete combat mechanics, as they explain the piecemeal nature of the 2.3 stretch modes.

 

Aaannd, I totally missed Bobby Null's post earlier, so that's that.

 

If it's a design goal from the outset, I can't really complain. I guess my argument is against anything bolted on to cater to a niche crowd. I'm like Jasede as per his post a page or two back. RPGs are based on characters with statted skills used to achieve an objective. Maybe it's balls-out combat. Maybe it's theivery. Maybe, still, it's diplomacy based on relevant stats. What I find mindboggling are those who want a "tra-la-la let me skip through the lands of PE, making friends with NPCs, larping toilet use, and decorate my house for when I marry my companions" sort of thing in a game that's presumed to hearken back to the late 90's era of CRPGs. A huge reason why that era is worth hearkening back to, I think, was that it was BEFORE all that stupid let's play pretend stuff came about.

[Silver6986]

Oh my god, this thread is ending up just like Borett's about kill animations. What ogrezilla said, there will be the option for different Difficulty settings just like with the Infinity Engine games, it's even mentioned in the stretch goals that we could potentially (pending the final pledge figure) get an Ironman and Heart of Fury (a la Icewind Dale) difficulty mode, I played BG1 when I was 13 and on Normal diff (D&D rules) and found that the game was completely accessable. I now find I have to play with the Sword Coast Strategems Mod in order to get something out of the difficulty now.

 

The game will be fine for the noobs who just wanna play for the story, and hopefully I get my Heart of Fury mode!

 

It would be interesting to understand just exactly what OP meant by Easy? As in Fallout 3 Easy? (laughable), or something else?

[Director]

Jeez. What happened to this thread? Just a minor quibble. The fall of Bioware happened between NWN and DA1 or possibly even between BG2 and NWN. Not DA2. That is a proven fact. If you like and play DA1 then I have no idea why you would want to back this project.

Wha? I played all the "old school" games and really enjoyed DA1 as well. I even enjoyed DA2 a bit, but I'm not gonna say DA2 was a great game.

I would certainly not contribute one penny to a crowdfunded Dragon Age 1 sequel-in-spirit.

[/Quote]

Yeah - that's never gonna happen, the budget for a DA style game would be in the 10s of Millions.

[ogrezilla]

but they aren't doing anything different with difficulty than the old games. The old IE games had difficulty adjustment that allowed for an easier experience too. Just like this will do. No change for the game you or I will play at all.

 

Except that the resources spent on making optional easy modes are resources that could be better spent on more overall content. I don't get how people can't seem to grasp that this game is going to be made with a limited budget versus a AAA, publisher-backed title. It's quite literally a zero-sum game. Money spent on X will be money taken away from Y.

 

And yet much harder modes are part of the 2.3 stretch goal--this can mean one of two things:

 

(1) Obsidian only cares about catering to the hardcore gamers and carebears be damned.

(2) Easy and normal modes (and probably a "regular harder mode," just not "hardcore") are already guaranteed.

 

 

(1) makes no sense because Obsidian wants actual sales of the game post-production, and the only way to do that is to allow more casual play, however subjective that is.

 

(2) makes far more sense because the I.E. games always had different options including easy. Probably all of Obsidian's other games too.

 

The problem with your viewpoint is that you're stating it as an absolute binary when market forces dictate otherwise; in other words, this isn't like romances where you're going to get stuck in the game somewhere by a companion conversation. Combat mechanics are so pervasive and fundamental to the CRPG that allowing player adjustment is a very basic and absolutely necessary form of accessibility. Locking out a goodly number of potential players for a game that Obsidian wants to franchise on post-production sales is very dangerous--this sort of thing won't happen with/without stuff like romances or cosmetics or lack/presence of a given race.

 

There must be, at minimum, easy/normal/hard modes. In terms of finer distinctions, this should be very easy for Obsidian to compartmentalize by discrete combat mechanics, as they explain the piecemeal nature of the 2.3 stretch modes.

 

Aaannd, I totally missed Bobby Null's post earlier, so that's that.

 

If it's a design goal from the outset, I can't really complain. I guess my argument is against anything bolted on to cater to a niche crowd. I'm like Jasede as per his post a page or two back. RPGs are based on characters with statted skills used to achieve an objective. Maybe it's balls-out combat. Maybe it's theivery. Maybe, still, it's diplomacy based on relevant stats. What I find mindboggling are those who want a "tra-la-la let me skip through the lands of PE, making friends with NPCs, larping toilet use, and decorate my house for when I marry my companions" sort of thing in a game that's presumed to hearken back to the late 90's era of CRPGs. A huge reason why that era is worth hearkening back to, I think, was that it was BEFORE all that stupid let's play pretend stuff came about.

didn't this game just hit a big stretch goal to unlock the player house? Inspired by BG2? I honestly have no interest in it aside from having more quests, but others seem pretty happy to see it back.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Director]

But my girlfriend hates XCom, and when she plays PS:T, or Mass Effect 1,2,3 - the combat is just a barrier between her and the next character interaction. If the combat gets to frustrating, she goes and plays The Sims.

You see, your girlfriend found a solution that satisfies everybody.

 

Everyone except the company that wants to sell the game to my GF, or a sequel to that game. If putting in a "easy" mode is all it takes to make those extra sales - who cares.

 

I could care less for all these Iron Man / Hardcore modes, it's a complete waste of a stretch goal as far as I'm concerned. I'm not gonna scream about it - because it's not going to affect the way I play the game, and other people want it.

 

I have zero idea why adding an "easy" mode on the other end of the spectrum would upset you - if it's not going to affect you, and other people want it.

[GammaHamster]

 

 

Everyone except the company that wants to sell the game to my GF, or a sequel to that game.

 

Thats exactly why we are pledging money for this Kickstarter, so that the company will have no need to sell the game to your GF.

[ogrezilla]

Everyone except the company that wants to sell the game to my GF, or a sequel to that game.

 

Thats exactly why we are pledging money for this Kickstarter, so that the company will have no need to sell the game to your GF.

but it is in your best interest if they do, so long as there is a mode you each like. That way games like this don't need kickstarter to get made in the future. The key is to get a base game we enjoy with an easy mode that they like. The problem is that too many modern games have been defaulted to easy mode.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla

[Director]

didn't this game just hit a big stretch goal to unlock the player house? Inspired by BG2? I honestly have no interest in it aside from having more quests, but others seem pretty happy to see it back.

 

Yeah - I was pretty keen to see that happen, and could care less about the Iron Man / Hardcore Modes stretch goal - but not everything has to go my way.

 

People have to realise that the game isn't being made specifically for them.

[GammaHamster]

Wha? I played all the "old school" games and really enjoyed DA1 as well. I even enjoyed DA2 a bit, but I'm not gonna say DA2 was a great game.

 

 

Why not continue enjoying Bioware games and leave this game to people who actually need an old-school game?

Edited September 28, 2012 by GammaHamster

[metiman]

I see this thread has gone off the rails, but I do support easy levels of difficulty as long as it's easy to implement. Having a wide range of difficulty is a very important game mechanic. I'd rather they erred on the side of too difficult for balancing purposes, but having more difficulty options is always a good thing. So long as it doesn't require a whole new difficulty system to implement. Personally I'd prefer a default difficulty level similar to BG2 with SCSII and sane options (i.e. no teleporting demons or enemies that can disappear every round just before you can hit them or thieves with an infinite number of invisibility potions) or ToEE, which had a great default difficulty level IIRC. Challenging but not impossible. I'm very glad indeed that we have Tim Cain on this project. I hope he can insert a bit of ToEE into Project Eternity's combat mechanics.

[Grimlorn]

But my girlfriend hates XCom, and when she plays PS:T, or Mass Effect 1,2,3 - the combat is just a barrier between her and the next character interaction. If the combat gets to frustrating, she goes and plays The Sims.

You see, your girlfriend found a solution that satisfies everybody.

 

Everyone except the company that wants to sell the game to my GF, or a sequel to that game. If putting in a "easy" mode is all it takes to make those extra sales - who cares.

 

I could care less for all these Iron Man / Hardcore modes, it's a complete waste of a stretch goal as far as I'm concerned. I'm not gonna scream about it - because it's not going to affect the way I play the game, and other people want it.

 

I have zero idea why adding an "easy" mode on the other end of the spectrum would upset you - if it's not going to affect you, and other people want it.

Iron man/Hardcore waste of money? You take that back. Easy mode wastes resources too. Who cares what your GF and others like her want? She doesn't sound that smart anyways.

 

The game is being funded by players who want to see an old school RPG. They don't need to sell it to a mainstream audience. But I think it will still sell well because all people can talk about when it comes to RPGs is the older RPGs. You're not going to ever hear people talk about DA2 like that. Bioware and Bethesda will never create a truly good or classic RPG ever again. They're too focused on corporate profits and appealing to everyone. That's why their RPGs tend to be pretty bad these days. I don't care if Skyrim did 10 million copies. It was mainstream crap.

Edited September 28, 2012 by Grimlorn

[Director]

Thats exactly why we are pledging money for this Kickstarter, so that the company will have no need to sell the game to your GF.

 

You do realise that Obsidian intend to actually sell this game - correct?

And make a sequel, (hopefully)?

 

They are hoping to reach an audience much larger than just the people who kickstart it.

[Jasede]

Then what did we even pledge for? If they want to reach that "big large audience" they could just have gone for Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening.

 

We pledged because we thought they are reaching out to us- the oldschool RPG fans. The more concessions are made to this "new generation" of gamers the worse the game will be. Period.

[Director]

Why not continue enjoying Bioware games and leave this game to people who actually need an old-school game?

 

It's impossible for me to like both? Your mistaken.

[ogrezilla]

Then what did we even pledge for? If they want to reach that "big large audience" they could just have gone for Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening.

 

We pledged because we thought they are reaching out to us- the oldschool RPG fans. The more concessions are made to this "new generation" of gamers the worse the game will be. Period.

what concessions are being made? Easy mode was in the oldschool RPGs this is a tribute to.

[Director]

Iron man/Hardcore waste of money? You take that back. Easy mode wastes resources too. Who cares what your GF and others like her want? She doesn't sound that smart anyways.

 

The game is being funded by players who want to see an old school RPG. They don't need to sell it to a mainstream audience. But I think it will still sell well because all people can talk about when it comes to RPGs is the older RPGs. You're not going to ever hear people talk about DA2 like that. Bioware and Bethesda will never create a truly good or classic RPG ever again. They're too focused on corporate profits and appealing to everyone. That's why their RPGs tend to be pretty bad these days. I don't care if Skyrim did 10 million copies. It was mainstream crap.

 

Yeah - the game is being Kickstarted, because it's never gonna get backed by a publisher - that doesn't mean that Obsidian don't hope to sell 500K copies of it.

It's totally a niche title, but in NO WAY are they gonna limit themselves to the 50K Kickstarter backers.

 

Now as for "Easy Mode" - there is NO WAY that the game won't have an Easy setting. You know it - I know it. The only thing that weird is that you have some kind of issue with it being there.

 

There's a reason there is no stretch goal for "Easy" or "Normal" difficulties - because every game has them.

[Jasede]

Then what did we even pledge for? If they want to reach that "big large audience" they could just have gone for Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening.

 

We pledged because we thought they are reaching out to us- the oldschool RPG fans. The more concessions are made to this "new generation" of gamers the worse the game will be. Period.

what concessions are being made? Easy mode was in the oldschool RPGs this is a tribute to.

In general; we already know there'll be an easy mode. Whatever. I don't have to like it.

[Badmojo]

They said there was different levels of settings. The only thing is that each setting seem to allow you to have access to some features and not others if I understand correctly, what about a 'custom' setting to go through and turn on or off everything at the beginning of the game instead of pigeonholing us into a specific style of play?

[ogrezilla]

Iron man/Hardcore waste of money? You take that back. Easy mode wastes resources too. Who cares what your GF and others like her want? She doesn't sound that smart anyways.

 

The game is being funded by players who want to see an old school RPG. They don't need to sell it to a mainstream audience. But I think it will still sell well because all people can talk about when it comes to RPGs is the older RPGs. You're not going to ever hear people talk about DA2 like that. Bioware and Bethesda will never create a truly good or classic RPG ever again. They're too focused on corporate profits and appealing to everyone. That's why their RPGs tend to be pretty bad these days. I don't care if Skyrim did 10 million copies. It was mainstream crap.

 

Yeah - the game is being Kickstarted, because it's never gonna get backed by a publisher - that doesn't mean that Obsidian don't hope to sell 500K copies of it.

It's totally a niche title, but in NO WAY are they gonna limit themselves to the 50K Kickstarter backers.

 

Now as for "Easy Mode" - there is NO WAY that the game won't have an Easy setting. You know it - I know it. The only thing that weird is that you have some kind of issue with it being there.

 

There's a reason there is no stretch goal for "Easy" or "Normal" difficulties - because every game has them.

I actually disagree with that last bit. Too many games these days are designed with what used to be easy mode as the normal mode. Not only that, the general mechanics are largely dumbed down or streamlined to make them less complicated which typically means shallower. Then if there is a hard mode, they usually just bump up enemy hp or damage and call it a day. That is the problem I have with a lot of modern games.

 

I would love nothing more than to see this game be difficult and complex as the default settings and actually be a success commercially. That way more publishers might be willing to follow suit.

Edited September 28, 2012 by ogrezilla