Centralised agreed discussion conclusions for PE

[Radwulf]

As we've been getting a fair number of threads now I thought it might be a good idea to have a centralised location for all points that have a firm majority or plurality backing as a point of easy reference. This list I've added only includes polls but doesn't need to be limited to them. As there are so many threads if you feel something should be added (and that this is a good idea) please include it yourself. Each point should have strong and uncontested backing, be described in a short and succinct sentence and be backed up by a dedicated discussion thread. If there's disagreement over any point that is included please discuss it in another thread and leave this on topic and easily navigable.

 

- lockpicking should be skill based with no minigames

- no planescape style spell animations (no time pause)

- want non lethal damage

- party members should be levelled when they join the party

- want multiclassing

- classes should be balanced in combat and non combat skills, not necessarily just for combat

- BG style resting in safe locations for as long as desired

- want experience points only for completed objectives

- independent companions that can leave if sufficiently angered

- prefer PST style dialogue presentation over BG style (novel-esque)

- text should be both dialogue and descriptive

- deep relationship and influence system with reactions to your party makeup

- making a system that works takes priority over easy comprehensibility, although both desirable

- offer stat/skill dialogue options that are obviously a reward

- party members should contribute to conversations when appropriate

- no timed dialogue choices or only in a few appropriate situations

- BG style spells (unique quirks and low level still useful later) over NWN or Arcanum

- forced party members shouldn't need to replace existing ones

- if you can get quests you should be able to finish them or at least remove from journal

- pack animals desirable but not a make or break issue

- game should respond to your actions dynamically and you should see the result

- most people play with manual pausing

- there should be a goodly number of weapons divided into subsets (that behave identically)

- little interest in a merchant class

- no quest variance with difficulty settings (presumably stick to ai, no. of enemies)

- want extra characters walking around cities as long as it isn't too resource heavy

- want to loot everything (skyrim, BG)

- humans should get bonuses too, not just be generic

- you should start alone and put some effort into building your party

- no repeatable quests

- want BG style artist portraits

- want BG sized parties (6)

- characters should sheathe weapons when not using them

- health and stamina should be handled by at least two stats

- critical hits should have status effects (like stun), so should critical misses

- NPC's should be fully equipable

- all stats should be useful so there are no easy dump stats

- ammo should be limited

- don't want aggro mechanics

- scrolls and potions should be quite rare if included

- want fog of war

- want long term wounding and sickness effects, perhaps optional

- companions follow same rules as you but could have some unique feats

- gods and religion should play a prominent role

- want crafting

[anubite]

I think this is a bad topic. You won't find consensus. You're also not showing how you've reached these conclusions (the threads you're taking these intepretations from).

 

If you want to simplify work for the developers, just make a thread which links to all the popular threads and summarize their talking points or highlight well-thought-out posts about design.

 

A few more numerical people agreeing to a certain idea or not does not make it something "wanted". I could just as easily make 10 fake accounts and bump some thread with massive praise if I wished to. This is the internet and a forum only a specific population post on. You can't make such conclusive statements as "we want something" because 4 or 5 people agreed with somebody about a particular turn of phrase.

 

Finally, this is not a popularity contest. The developers may wish to implement something which may not be popular, but could be more fun ot worthwhile than these armchair developers request.

 

In short, a post like yours only creates misconceptions and isn't useful to anybody. Developers benefit from raw discussion and points, not blanket statements about what people want - there are ten different ways to implement what people want and details are so much more necessary as a developer looking for ideas.

Edited November 25, 2012 by anubite

[Radwulf]

The point of the thread is to provide a central point of reference for things that have been discussed. I stated explicitly that the points I've added have been from polls and that they each have their dedicated threads, which tells readers that these things first have been discussed and second that there is a thread directly related to that subject which they can reference for more information rather than just trawling through 21 pages of threads. If you think I should provide a direct link to the threads I could do that but I think it would get too messy.

 

Yes I have created this thread to help developers but also to help the community to keep track of what has been said. This would help keep duplicate threads down whilst also garnering increased debate in those threads should the conclusions here be strongly disputed and could later be changed. The only results I've included are pretty clear cut results from polls and I've tried to keep the points of comparison clear where it isn't obvious. I don't think it's likely that people will try to cheat the polls (perhaps I'm naive) but I am aware of the risks of the small sample size which is why the ones I've included are clear cut.

 

Finally I don't know why you seem to think that by doing this I'm trying to stick a demagogic shotgun to Obsidian's head and say 'this is the will of the people, do it or else'. I'm well aware that Obsidian is a talented developer that has created great games without reference to 'armchair developers'. I have complete confidence that if they use this, they will use it as intended, that is for strictly reference only.

 

I think that a centralised point of reference for ideas that have been discussed would be useful. Perhaps I've framed and presented it wrong in which case I'm open to suggestions. If this doesn't point developers and forum readers to raw discussion and points that are useful and interesting whilst cutting out duplication then it simply won't be supported or referred to and therefore not create misconceptions and problems.

[JFSOCC]

I have serious problems about who decides what the consensus is, as many of the threads you listed don't actually have a consensus.

[MReed]

If this thread is going to have any value at all, it should:

 

1) Be reworded to "These are items that have had polls with a large (> 100) number of votes cast, and the results were..."

2) Include a link to the poll threads so that users can read / learn about what has already been discussed (to avoid reiterating the same points again).

 

Stating that the result of a poll show a consensus on an issue is... Misleading at best. "Consensus" implies that those opposed to the opinion of the majority have conceded the point (or, perhaps, a compromise was negotiated) and I can't think of any thread where that has happened.

[FlintlockJazz]

I have serious problems about who decides what the consensus is, as many of the threads you listed don't actually have a consensus.

 

Second this. 90% of the OP's topics do NOT have a consenus of any form and are being hotly debated, I cannot see how anyone could seriously think otherwise...

[general_azure]

Gotta agree with the other guys in here, this post needs links to the actual polls as well as the results. There's stuff on that list I can't remember ever voting on and some where I'm rather suprised how the consensus supposedly turned out.

[BasaltineBadger]

Most of the things on the list are pretty meaningless and some makes me wonder if people know anything about PE. People seriously thought that here is a possibility that there will be lockpicking minigame in a IE inspired top-down RPG? Or that gods and religion won't play prominent role in a game about souls and stuff? What the hell.

[Lephys]

Also, since the game is still in early development and we don't know what all the over-arching game mechanics will be, there are certain things in the list that we can't really decide. Kind of like deciding "There should be a breath meter" as opposed to "You should be able to hold your breath indefinitely" when it turns out that the game won't even allow any characters to travel beneath the surface of water. It's for that reason I believe several of the threads could use more discussion and less decision-making. You know... start with a sketch and work towards the details.

 

We're supposed to be collaborating on figuring out what possibilities there are for Project Eternity, not simply deciding what exactly should be copied and pasted from previous games to make up this game. Not that previous games' systems are NOT possibilities, but the list goes so far beyond that.

Edited November 27, 2012 by Lephys

[DCParry]

Apparently, the easiest way to get consensus is to say there is consensus, whether that has any basis in reality or not.

 

This seems like a thinly veiled attempt to "strong arm" devs into following a particular design philosophy, which of course is just silly and based on a misunderstanding of a supporter's role in the Kickstarter environment.

[Tigranes]

Apparently, the easiest way to get consensus is to say there is consensus, whether that has any basis in reality or not.

 

That's how it's always worked in the history of Western civilisation, so...

[Lephys]

That's how it's always worked in the history of Western civilisation, so...

 

Hahaha. Touche, salesman... touche.

[Hormalakh]

The only thing agreed is that nothing is agreed. We're talking about RPG gamers here.

[Osvir]

Threads, categorized by "Kickstarter", "Classes", "Alignment", "Player" etc. etc. it is more of a collection from A-X what has been discussed. Fairly up to date.

ObsidianForumsAL.pdf

ObsidianForumsMX.pdf

Edited November 27, 2012 by Osvir

[BasaltineBadger]

The only thing agreed is that nothing is agreed. We're talking about RPG gamers here.

 

Is there even a consensus regarding what exactly is an RPG?

[Hormalakh]

The only thing agreed is that nothing is agreed. We're talking about RPG gamers here.

 

Is there even a consensus regarding what exactly is an RPG?

 

HAH! No, there isn't. Read RPG codex's taxonomy project for that bit. Like 47624323 subgenres in RPGs.

[Hassat Hunter]

Bad, bad thread... sorry :/

I rather have the devs read the individual topics and hear the cons and pros than have a meaningless list like this...

[MReed]

Bad, bad thread... sorry :/

I rather have the devs read the individual topics and hear the cons and pros than have a meaningless list like this...

 

Not the OP, but I'm fairly certain that the purpose of this thread was not for the developers (who, hopefully, are reading the threads as they occur) but for users that may be new to the forum and / or haven't been following the forum to closely, to ensure that they are actually contributing something new to the conversation if they bring up something that has already been discussed.

 

That being said, though, the presentation should be very different than the way it was in the OP -- the PDFs that were posted are much better for this purpose.

[Hormalakh]

Threads, categorized by "Kickstarter", "Classes", "Alignment", "Player" etc. etc. it is more of a collection from A-X what has been discussed. Fairly up to date.

Wow man good job. This is so much easier to read.

[JFSOCC]

Threads, categorized by "Kickstarter", "Classes", "Alignment", "Player" etc. etc. it is more of a collection from A-X what has been discussed. Fairly up to date.

seriously impressive.

[Somna]

Threads, categorized by "Kickstarter", "Classes", "Alignment", "Player" etc. etc. it is more of a collection from A-X what has been discussed. Fairly up to date.

 

LOL. Troll category?

[FlintlockJazz]

Threads, categorized by "Kickstarter", "Classes", "Alignment", "Player" etc. etc. it is more of a collection from A-X what has been discussed. Fairly up to date.

 

Good work sir!

[AGX-17]

I think the first post should have direct links to the appropriate threads. Info that there "is" a thread about a subject doesn't make looking through 21 pages any easier.

 

Problem is, people who haven't seen the initial 12 page discussion of [subject] make new threads and new polls on the same subject upon registering for the forums. So someone is going to have to go searching either way to find the original/most responded to thread to use as a baseline anyway.

Edited November 28, 2012 by AGX-17