Suggestion: setting up camp as risky and more than a rest button

[Uomoz]

In Starfarer (another RP game in development), random encounters and similar are random but predetermined, so if you rest, get an encounter, reload and rest again you always get the same encounter. Maybe a system like this would prevent rest scumming.

[metiman]

Every time I hear the term "x scumming" I think, "console player".

[Uomoz]

I don't even have a console.

[TrashMan]

You can save in X-Com during the missions, I do it all the time.

 

Hm.. then it must have been UF:AI.

 

Either way, it's a good mechanic that may irritate some people, but I don't care.

 

 

People are too weak-willed to play properly.

 

Preference.

 

No.

Not really.

[TrashMan]

Well, that save/load issue is not just for resting but for just about every aspect of the game (from randomizing loot, to boss encounters, to character death, to traps, to being ambushed during travel, to everything else). I concur its an issue (I acknowledged it in my original post) but the issue is not with resting it is with saving (hence why there is an ironman mode).

I disagree.

 

I will generally save before a fight where I think I might die, I don't want to bother fighting through encounters I've already won, it would be boring. As such, I would save just before I rest because I have no idea what kind of fight I would get.

 

If you are already saving before hand, then actually fighting the ambush that you get is optional because you can just load and try again. The makes the ambushes nothing more then an inconvenience.

 

Inconvenient. That's all the rest-ambush mechanic becomes.

 

The risk of having to re-do the dungon level is exactly what is needed. Proper fear of faliure because you actually lose something.

That prompts the player to play with more caution - more scouting, more preparation.

Hence why a prepared player is less likely to loose a fight, or even a single companion - because he plays it safe and smart.

 

 

In Starfarer (another RP game in development), random encounters and similar are random but predetermined, so if you rest, get an encounter, reload and rest again you always get the same encounter. Maybe a system like this would prevent rest scumming.

 

Not a bad idea.

[moridin84]

The risk of having to re-do the dungon level is exactly what is needed. Proper fear of faliure because you actually lose something.

That prompts the player to play with more caution - more scouting, more preparation.

Hence why a prepared player is less likely to loose a fight, or even a single companion - because he plays it safe and smart.

Well I disagree. I want to save as much as I like.

 

On the other hand, there is going to be an ironman mode isn't there? Where you only get one save slot. I guess in that case the rest-ambush thing might make sense. The possibility of dying and having to restart the entire game is certainly going to make you think twice about resting in a dungeon.

 

Still against it though.

Edited October 7, 2012 by moridin84

[Shevek]

What specific things do you think the save/load mechanic 'undermines' beyond resting. Dialogue options and gambling I guess?

 

I do not believe you fully read my previous post. I listed many said instances. I will list them again for you, I guess.

 

Save/load trivializes: Getting ambushed during travel, traps, pc/npc death, randomized loot, pickpocketting, encounter dynamics, etc. Hell, one could argue save/load trivializes all risk associated with exploration and to a certain extent trivializes things which mitigate that risk such as stealth and spells like wizard eye.

 

Save/load trivializes most consequence based dynamics. All those things I listed become mere inconveniences by your definition, so should the devs eliminate them? I suppose you would say yes but I do not think it is good design to get rid of something because some gamers cannot control their own abuse of save/load. Should we then get rid of all consequences because one can simply reload a save? Designing around what weak willed gamers do or do not do is not the best design.

 

In any case, it does not seem you wish to engage in a dialogue. If you did, you would have read the posts you quoted. We can just agree to disagree, I think.

Edited October 7, 2012 by Shevek

[Shevek]

In Starfarer (another RP game in development), random encounters and similar are random but predetermined, so if you rest, get an encounter, reload and rest again you always get the same encounter. Maybe a system like this would prevent rest scumming.

 

Nice. That would be a great fix.

[Osvir]

People are too weak-willed to play properly.

 

Preference.

 

No.

Not really.

 

Look, I don't want to start anything brother so don't presume this is rude (and I'm sorry for assuming that you are assuming, which in itself might come off as rude which I do not mean too. See this as a bureaucratic literal self-observant post of no ill will hugs!) <3

 

The point and the response:

Playing a game "properly" is preference. You prefer to play in a way you deem it to be played. In your mind that's the proper way to play it.

 

I might have misunderstood your post, and I am again sorry for it, but playing a game properly is in my mind completely about preference.

 

But if I had to state "How do you play a game properly?" then my answer would always be "To have lots of FUN". Are you not having fun playing a game, then you do not have the proper mindset. But as I said, this is my preference.

 

I don't care if Project: Eternity becomes the best game or the worst game ever spawned in the history of mankind. I've already decided and set my mind on it. I will have fun, and I'm not even forcing that thought. I want to have fun so I will have fun, it's that simple it's kind of the same thing about "I want to spread love so I will spread love" <3

Edited October 7, 2012 by Osvir

[curryinahurry]

Josh Sawyer has already said that resting would be an important mechanic within the game. They just want to avoid the spamming of rest in IE games or the tedium of backtracking to rest if the PC felt unprepared vis a vis spells. I would be surprised if there wasn't a fairly robust rest/camping feature in this game. I would like it to be a bit more abstract than DA:O; with dedicated interfaces for crafting, potion brewing, conversations, etc. It would also be interesting to allow for resting in dungeons to have a strategic component, setting up watches, etc.

[Shevek]

Josh Sawyer has already said that resting would be an important mechanic within the game. They just want to avoid the spamming of rest in IE games or the tedium of backtracking to rest if the PC felt unprepared vis a vis spells. I would be surprised if there wasn't a fairly robust rest/camping feature in this game. I would like it to be a bit more abstract than DA:O; with dedicated interfaces for crafting, potion brewing, conversations, etc. It would also be interesting to allow for resting in dungeons to have a strategic component, setting up watches, etc.

 

I hope you are right.

[TrashMan]

1) Save only allowed at camp locations. Saving, resting and reloading if attack wouldn't work because even tough ambushes are random, once generated they become fixed.

 

Now some would complain "but waht about real life? I don't want to re-do the dungeon level if something comes up!"

Then plan your time better. His escape, the game can be paused and can stay paused while you take care of whatever needs to be taken care of.

And finally,Ssave&Exit should be a viable option anyway.

 

 

To me, a perfect CRPG should try to emulate the experience of PnP RPG. Saving anytime and anywhere ruins it, as well as the usabiltiy of some classes.

 

Scouting, setting traps and lockingpick - all become pointless as it is far faster to use save scumming

The aventuring atmosphere and feelign of danger are gone, because you are never risking anything.

[Valorian]

Resting definitely should be an important event for an adventuring party, and not being able to rest everywhere and anytime is a good thing.

Important in the sense that it replenishes all your resources: HP, all (but low level) spells, stamina.

 

I've always hated in games with auto-regeneration how, for instance, traps become trivial. You're in a dungeon (where you probably wouldn't be able to rest), you trigger a trap and suffer some serious damage... then you wait a few seconds and your HP bar is full again.

[Vargr]

This stuff is definitely things Obsidian should consider thoroughly, and if nothing else, implement in the Expert mode.

 

Like what some say about saving/loading anywhere. Yeah, I always thought that takes away from the tension and feeling of reward as well.

 

TrashMan suggested saving at camp locations etc only, and I could live with that.

The "Save & Quit" option could generate a savegame that is deleted when you load it again.

You know, if you need to run out all of a sudden, or get a sudden urge to do the dishes because you realize your wife/girlfriend will be in

shortly and asked you to do it this morning...

Edited October 8, 2012 by Vargr

[Lady Evenstar]

I want to be able to save wherever I need to and for camping not to be a hassle. An occasional ambush, sure, but I want to be able to focus on clearing the dungeon, not wasting lots of time trekking back to town or a designated rest area.

[Amentep]

1) Save only allowed at camp locations. Saving, resting and reloading if attack wouldn't work because even tough ambushes are random, once generated they become fixed.

 

To me, a perfect CRPG should try to emulate the experience of PnP RPG. Saving anytime and anywhere ruins it, as well as the usabiltiy of some classes.

 

I've never had a DM refuse to allow a session to break up anywhere in the campaign - including in the middle of combat. So I'm not sure where the "save" issue comes from. Mind you PnP games don't allow you to restart from a previous point (unless the DM is really generous)

 

That said, what might work is a mechanic I've seen in some games where you can do a "permanent save" at only specific points (home, hotel, camp) and then an "interim save" anywhere. Interim saves are deleted when they are loaded. Thus if you screw up after an interim save you have to go back to the last permanent save but you're not utterly screwed if you find life suddenly requires you to step away from your computer either because you can use an interim save to pick back up in the middle of the dungeon.

[Rabain]

To me, a perfect CRPG should try to emulate the experience of PnP RPG. Saving anytime and anywhere ruins it, as well as the usabiltiy of some classes.

 

Scouting, setting traps and lockingpick - all become pointless as it is far faster to use save scumming

The aventuring atmosphere and feelign of danger are gone, because you are never risking anything.

 

This is your opinion and not a fact, as mentioned above it is purely preference. You even say "to me" which implies it is your opinion. There are no hard facts about this, unless you can pull some out of some study that has been done.

 

I can as easily say that my sense of atmosphere and feeling of danger are in the moment, not because I am afraid of having to reload a save from 15 minutes ago but because the dungeon music, lighting, design and actually not knowing what is around the corner are all adding to it. That to me seems a better design goal than trying to force atmosphere by making me afraid to die because of reloading so far back along my path.

 

There may be players who have no lockpicking, trap setting or stealth abilities because they are playing one class solo. So they should just live with being surprised around a corner and dying and having to replay 15 minutes of dungeon to get back to the same spot? Doesn't sound like fun to me.

 

I think this is where your argument falls apart, everything you are asking for is denying something to other people. If we can save anywhere then we choose to save when we want, if you want to save every 15 minutes then you do that and live with the consequences, I can save every 30 seconds if I want to.

 

Forcing me to play your way would not improve my sense of danger or atmosphere, instead it is more likely to make me just play less because I am punished for actually being surprised by the game and dying or I play so slowly, looking around every corner and crawling along that the game is actually no fun.

 

For any atmosphere you think you have added you have equally removed something and made the game feel repetitive before I have even completed my first play through. What if a fight takes 6 times to beat it because you are it is just a challenging fight but the nearest save is 15 minutes before the fight, you should play for 1hr 30 minutes the exact same corridors and trash monsters to get to the problem fight? Rather than being atmospheric that would feel so frustrating I would just quit and go do something else. That sounds like bad design to me.

[Shevek]

Personally, I don't think that "save points" are the only solution to making rest a viable mechanic. I am not entirely against them but I can see how some would take issue with them. I like Uomoz's suggestion of having some random encounters be predetermined as opposed to when you hit the rest button. This would not deny anyone the ability to save/load, it would just reduce the effectiveness of that as a tactic. I am sure the devs are looking at similar solutions to issues with lockpicking and other systems that can be trivialized by abuse of save/load.

 

Ultmately, though, it boils down to the gamer stepping up and not abusing every single thing they can to get ahead.