Things that need to be good enough in PE

[IndiraLightfoot]

I just know Obsidian will have a wonderful and enjoyable story to tell, or rather a whole web of them, long and short.

And the game will most likely be smashing!

 

But here I'm still gonna voice concerns and list three things that I think just need to be good enough in PE for it to be a great success:

1) The choices when levelling a character of a certain class and race need to be abundant, if not outright overly generous, and this all through progression [This would make for really fun replayablity in its own right.]

2) The number of monsters/villains need to be as large as they can possibly make it, and this can also be done by varying single classes of baddies in clever ways [This avoids Darkspawn/Draugr sickness.]

3) Combat and skills need be something more than clickfest and chores. Strategy and some cunning on the player's behalf should be needed for these things to play out favourably.

 

 

Which are your things of must-bes, peeps?

Edited October 11, 2012 by IndiraLightfoot

[bronzepoem]

Don't you worry about the graphic and bug? I do.

[Ignatius]

Definitely agree on point 2. DA hammered home how important this is. "LOOK, DARKSPAWN!!!!" SNORE.

 

Um... You kind of touched on the important elements that make a game like this tick, more or less. Essentially, it would be prudent of them to make this game NOT SUCK.

 

I can't quite come up with three, but for myself, the game world needs to offer a lot of exploration and a lot of good quests. They can't skimp on this stuff, because developers have been skimping on that stuff for the last 10 years or so. The entire KS is wasted if the world isn't overflowing with hidden goodies and fascinating characters/monsters keeping you from them. Things like the Cult of the Sightless Eye in BG2 are the entire reason that game is so re-playable for me. I just really look forward to taking on that quest. Not to mention the dozen other similar, involved quests.

 

Well, another point would be that a dragon is required, and the dragon needs to be guarding a fat hoard of loot, and he needs to be brutally hard. But that's more a personal thing.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Ignatius

[IndiraLightfoot]

Ignatius, you bring up points that should have been on my list!! I agree on all accounts, and I think this thread could be about us reiterating what we think is absolutely essential. ind you, this is not in any way my way of saying: "Obsidian will miss these things." I just want to underline some things that I think really, really matter.

[Lysen]

Why not four or two?

 

I don't really care about combat, and I want more gameplay options besides killing hordes of mindless enemies like it was in Dragon Age for example. Let me steal things and persuade NPCs instead of fighting them, craft equipment and explore a big, believable world, and I will be happy.

[agewisdom]

For me, there's ONE thing I absolutely demand from Obsidian Entertainment:

 

A gripping, intense personal story where the character grows in maturity and power and is forever marked and defined by the hard choices he/she has had to make.

 

I can only think of a few games like these, namely Planescape Torment & MOTB. The battle system may not be gripping, the graphics may not be enthralling, it may not be fully voiced, but who cares? It's the STORY, that I'm interested in, especially if I had a hand in making it through the choices that I make.

[rjshae]

I agree with 2 & 3. But what I really want to see is an immersive, plausible setting with plenty of depth that breathes of things happening and people living their own lives. Some games come closer than others to this than others. I can live with some of the unrealistic shortcuts implemented in the name of gaming enjoyment, but I really dislike it when I go to an in-game city and it just feels like an empty shell.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Perhaps I should edit the topic title to "Things...". How do I do that? I can't seem to find a button for that.

Edited October 11, 2012 by IndiraLightfoot

[Amentep]

Essentially, it would be prudent of them to make this game NOT SUCK.

 

This is what I'm rooting for. Think I've got a good chance.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Now's the topic title changed.

 

Thanks, Tale!

[Ieo]

Companion depth and opportunties to influence them (without breaking the sense of individuality unless we're talking about a major identity crisis anyway).

 

At least some quests/chains that have multiple endings, not just 'good/bad'.

 

Please no dragons... unless they're subverted or more original or something.

 

 

...It's too early for me to think of anything more, but the Darkspawn problem......... I became so frustrated with them and offended by their design that I dialed the game difficulty all the way down just to splat large herds of them with single fireballs because I GOT SO SICK OF IT AAAAAUUUUGH.

[IndiraLightfoot]

There seems to exist a mass of people suffering from the Darkspawn Fatigue syndrome. We need to found and fund a global organisation: DFS, sorta like AAA.

[nikolokolus]

Three "little" things:

 

1. Gameplay -- meaningful and varied choices, multiple paths to problem solving, deep/difficult combat that rewards thoughtful and clever tactics.

2. Compelling story -- It doesn't need to be some vast, epic world changing story arc, but It will hopefully draw me in (Torment, Arcanum, and Mask of the Betrayer are great examples)

3. Mutually exclusive pathways -- I know some people favor completionist style playthroughs, but I want to make decisions that will lock off certain factions, quests, story lines, etc. This enhances not only immersion, but makes replay all the more compelling.

 

But honestly, it still comes back to gameplay; that's what will keep me coming back for more. Story is important too, but the story will only be fresh one time, if the gameplay is compelling, you can find new ways to entertain yourself in a game on every new playthrough.

Edited October 11, 2012 by nikolokolus

[IndiraLightfoot]

Yet another great post.... coz I agree with it with all my heart!

[RiceMunk]

One thing that I've been vaguely annoyed with in modern RPGs is how the main story ends up being structured.

 

Usually you end up with one main quest. This is all well and good but in order to continue with this quest, you usually end up having to (because you need to fetch the four macguffins or whatever) perform three or four or so "big sidequests" which have little to no link to the main questline itself. Mass Effects 1 and 2 (dunno about 3; didn't play) and especially Dragon Age:Origins were offenders in this. Hell, even both of the KotORs did this.

 

I'm starting to get a bit bored with this formula. I mean, I understand that it makes the game a bit more replayable by allowing you to mix up the order you do the sidequests in but it also has a bad habit of impacting the cohesion of the main plot.

I find myself pining for a finely polished railroad (with plenty of interesting sidetracks) over all this plot coupon- collecting that seems to be so popular with newer RPGs.

 

Am I just being a curmudgeon who can't remember the horrible things about railroaded main quests or do I actually have a point here? Halp.

[Ignatius]

I think most of the PE team would agree whole-heartedly with everything being said here. This is the reason they're making this game after all -- games like this don't really get made anymore. All of the great stuff we're talking about here used to be essentials as far as great cRPG design went. We didn't have to ask for it. Then... I don't know what happened. EA, I guess? :-/ I mean, FO:NV wasn't bad though (it was great actually). I guess a lot of RPGs have been absorbed into the MMO genre, and outside of the big three -- Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, and Dragon Age -- where are we going to find a rich and massive RPG experience?

 

I find myself pining for a finely polished railroad (with plenty of interesting sidetracks) over all this plot coupon- collecting that seems to be so popular with newer RPGs.

 

Am I just being a curmudgeon who can't remember the horrible things about railroaded main quests or do I actually have a point here? Halp.

 

No, I feel the same way. This is sort of the intangible that makes an RPG great. It's about melding pacing, design, a believable world, and a great story, and that's kind of hard to I guess. I feel that BG2 nailed it as far as that issue is concerned. The flow was organic and open, and you didn't feel like you were methodically doing chores. I honestly can't think of many of the older cRPGs that followed the ME/DA formula, so maybe it's just a symptom of those newer games. A misguided attempt at making the game feel like a sand-box. It doesn't matter how open-ended your questing is when there's only a small handful of them and the order you do them in is inconsequential.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Ignatius

[nikolokolus]

Railroading sucks too ... maybe that's why I favor mutually exclusive paths and decisions?

[Ieo]

I'm starting to get a bit bored with this formula. I mean, I understand that it makes the game a bit more replayable by allowing you to mix up the order you do the sidequests in but it also has a bad habit of impacting the cohesion of the main plot.

I find myself pining for a finely polished railroad (with plenty of interesting sidetracks) over all this plot coupon- collecting that seems to be so popular with newer RPGs.

 

Am I just being a curmudgeon who can't remember the horrible things about railroaded main quests or do I actually have a point here? Halp.

 

Well, how did you feel about the Baldur's Gate implementation? Main storyline, looooots of side quests. BG1 and BG2 implementations were a bit different in that BG1 was more "open" and thus you had a better chance to lose track of the main story. BG2 was a better balance in that you could definitely do major side quests (chaining) but you could ignore them and just head down the main storyline. DA:O felt like a horrible railroad comparatively, to me. I suspect PE is going to be big on the multi-faction world exploration and cultural bit, so there's going to be quite a bit of breadth and definitely not a railroad. The trick is to allow players to skip all side quests and go straight through a main storyline, if they want--this was possible in BG.

 

 

Railroading sucks too ... maybe that's why I favor mutually exclusive paths and decisions?

 

Yeah, and with cultural vectors and reputation factions, I fully expect mutually exclusive paths. Even PS:T had that up to a point.

Edited October 11, 2012 by Ieo

[IndiraLightfoot]

BG1:s "open" approach was a bit better I think, but storywise I liked BG2 more. I think I'd prefer "open" and also something where you get lost quite a bit in sidequests, and ideally, this losing yourself, as it were, would have an impact on the main quest(s). In DA O those three big subquests were obvious, horrible and forced - they made my RPG-tummy churn! If such paths are to be included they should be cleverly interwoven and acknowleding the order of things.

Edited October 11, 2012 by IndiraLightfoot

[RiceMunk]

Railroading sucks too ... maybe that's why I favor mutually exclusive paths and decisions?

I guess railroad is a bit of a bad word I used there. What I mean is that I prefer to be doing only one clear thing over being told "Okay, in order to advance with the main quest you need to go do these four things in whatever order. Have fun!". I have nothing against having to choose between two different tracks to take on that railroad but I don't want to have to do both tracks in order to get forward. It introduces a kind of false openness into the story imo. I don't know, I'm not sure what word to use of it.

 

Well, how did you feel about the Baldur's Gate implementation? Main storyline, looooots of side quests. BG1 and BG2 implementations were a bit different in that BG1 was more "open" and thus you had a better chance to lose track of the main story. BG2 was a better balance in that you could definitely do major side quests (chaining) but you could ignore them and just head down the main storyline. DA:O felt like a horrible railroad comparatively, to me. I suspect PE is going to be big on the multi-faction world exploration and cultural bit, so there's going to be quite a bit of breadth and definitely not a railroad. The trick is to allow players to skip all side quests and go straight through a main storyline, if they want--this was possible in BG.

I prefer the way both Baldur's Gates did it. Note, however, that Throne of Bhaal did the whole "do these things in whatever order"-thing. It kind of weakened the plot of that one, too, maybe.

I'd say BG2 struck the best balance between complete openness and having a well-defined questline to follow. You could stop messing around with all those sidequests in Amn at whatever point and get on with the main plot, if you wanted to. At any point you knew that doing one specific thing would let you get on with your Irenicus-hunting and forget all about that nonsense in Trademeet.

DA:O was particularly annoying in that it kind of crammed all the locations down my throat and had more or less no "optional" big places for me to explore. It ended up feeling very contrived.

Edited October 11, 2012 by RiceMunk

[nikolokolus]

As long as what needs to done is reasonbly clear to advance the story that's fine, but I don't want a lot of handholding. You should have to dig a little to suss things out.

[agewisdom]

One thing that I've been vaguely annoyed with in modern RPGs is how the main story ends up being structured.

 

Usually you end up with one main quest. This is all well and good but in order to continue with this quest, you usually end up having to (because you need to fetch the four macguffins or whatever) perform three or four or so "big sidequests" which have little to no link to the main questline itself. Mass Effects 1 and 2 (dunno about 3; didn't play) and especially Dragon Age:Origins were offenders in this. Hell, even both of the KotORs did this.

 

I'm starting to get a bit bored with this formula. I mean, I understand that it makes the game a bit more replayable by allowing you to mix up the order you do the sidequests in but it also has a bad habit of impacting the cohesion of the main plot.

I find myself pining for a finely polished railroad (with plenty of interesting sidetracks) over all this plot coupon- collecting that seems to be so popular with newer RPGs.

 

Am I just being a curmudgeon who can't remember the horrible things about railroaded main quests or do I actually have a point here? Halp.

 

Whilst I understand the PAIN of being given a quest, then forced to do 101 side quests to progress further, and then find I need to do 202 side quests to progress further... ad infinitum, I don't see there being much alternatives.

 

All RPGs must have a main quest to drive the narrative forward. The main quest cannot be too short nor too easy, otherwise, the game would just end quickly. For instance, if the main quest is to stop an Archvillain, who happens to be just 2 blocks down the road - it would be all to easy to just waltz in there and off him... Granted, maybe there would be a need to level up a bit, but is it really what we want? To have an interesting gameplay narrative, some of the side quest needs to be intertwined with the main quest. Unfortunately, this leads to... being required to do 101 side quests...

 

If we want to avoid this main quest syndrome to drive the narrative, then what you will have is a PC that doesn't really have anything to do. So, what does a player do? Is his quest to make as much money as possible? Is it to level up? What is the PC to do? This is very likely to turn the RPG into a hiking simulator or sight seeing tour in the PE universe...

 

I just don't see a good way around this. Baldur's Gate 1 seems to be a good compromise. A slow emerging main quest which still allows you some flexibility in approaching side-quests and doing some exploration.

[ImRhoven]

 

Which are your things of must-bes, peeps?

 

Personally, I'm pretty confident that OE can pull of the awesome story, dialogue and an original and varied setting. Those are their strong points, after all.

 

My "must-be" would be this:

 

It must be a whole lot less buggy than some other Obsidian titles.

 

And I don't mean the minor things, but CTD's every 15-30 minutes, enormously annoying looping sound files, slow-your-top-of-the-line-gaming-pc-to-a-crawl graphic glitches, crucial quest items not spawning (and reloads not helping), critical NPC's getting stuck in an AI loop or just disappearing, save game corruption (over and over again) and other such niceties. Yes, I've had all of those, and I've only played 2 of Obsidian's games (KotoR2&NWN2)*, never felt to urge to try another for some reason ... Untill now. (I did try out F: NV at a friends', but it crashed at the first loading screen, so I was all "hell no, I'm not doing this again.") Worst part is that I loved those games and they could've been among my favorites if not for their half finished states.

 

So please, please, please Obsidian, don't release PE before it's finished!

 

*Yes, I'm aware that those games' horrible state at release is commonly blamed on their publishers pushing for a premature release, and the fact they're going without a publisher for PE is what brought me over the line to pledge a non-trivial amount of money on this project, but it's still Obsidian's name on those boxes. And my last attempt at NWN2 was over 4 years after release (so with a bunch of patches), and it STILL corrupted all my save games.

[Hassat Hunter]

PS:T did well in this regard. You always knew exactly what to do, and there were a bunch of sidequests to do along.

 

It, like BG2, was much more fun when you were stil in the city, and became progressively less so the more after the plot really got rolling on...

[IndiraLightfoot]

ImRhoven: I was a modder in NWN2 all through its expansions and I knew those patches by heart. I had the game installed on two computers, one laptop and one desktop, and I hade like two crashes in dozens of months. Those computers weren't even very good, so I honestly don't know what you are talking about. I supect your pc was clogged with malware and other stuff that drained its performance.