Degenerate Gameplay

[Sacred_Path]

Wow, I can hardly wait for the "WTF is this?" reviews. lol

Because people will be totally stumped at "wow I just sneaked around enemies and got XP for that! Dafuq?". They'll probably think it's a bug, m i rite?

Good shtuff. And I really like good shtuff.

 

Shtuff like this has a positive effect on my Josh-brolove-meter too.

At least Shadowrun and Wasteland 2 are looking real good, that is probably because the lead designers are not ****ing retarded morons like Josh Sawyer, who only wants the game to cater to retarded morons like himself.

 

Later @mates of the pro combat xp faction. It was fun. And cross your fingers, maybe Feargus or Avellone will finally realise that Sawyer is an idiot and fire his sorry wannabe designer ass... or maybe the game will just fail miserably (which is more likely) buh bye.

Schizophrenia or just plain retardation? You decide.

Edited January 19, 2013 by Sacred_Path

[Helm]

 

Because people will be totally stumped at "wow I just sneaked around enemies and got XP for that! Dafuq?". They'll probably think it's a bug, m i rite?

Thats not how it's gonna work you moron.

Schizophrenia or just plain retardation? You decide.

Retardation on your part.

And it was wrong to try and suck up to a retarded moron. I should have kept on criticizing him instead.

[Sacred_Path]

 

 

 

Because people will be totally stumped at "wow I just sneaked around enemies and got XP for that! Dafuq?". They'll probably think it's a bug, m i rite?

Thats not how it's gonna work you Mormon.

 

 

 

If the objective is defined as getting past those enemies, then that's exactly how it's gonna work.

 

Also I reject being affiliated with any organized religion, TYVM.

[TRX850]

I just realised the irony of this thread and others like it.

 

We've re-enacted a modern day version of Baldur's Gate NPCs, all taunting and jibing and strutting about, and to my delight, some friendly banter also.

 

History repeating?

 

Well, I thought it was ironic.

[Razsius]

@Sacred Path

 

 

It was unclear from PrimeJunta's post if he wanted to say/ include actual XP, but let's say it's about gold.
How many additional ressources do you think it would take, assuming those monsters are already properly implemented into the game, to put in 1 NPC who rewards you with X gold per head?
Where those quest givers are? In the vicinity of the monsters they want you to exterminate, perchance? Or would that be too obvious for your taste?
Trying to establish the nature of relationships between monsters and civilization is hardly "going MMO". It's something that games surprisingly often lack, and omission isn't inherently better in this case than trying.

brb no patience

 

 

If you have to make an npc per monster type?  A hell of a lot no?  What happens when you're exploring the middle of a volcano?  Is there going to be a hermit living in the middle of it who just so happens to have a bounty out for Lava Worms and requires Lava Worm tails?  That's like textbook mmo.  There's always an npc around right where you need them... ALWAYS.  The *great* thing about Baldur's Gate 1 was that you *could* find the middle of nowhere and be in it.  Ah hell.. what does it matter... why am I even arguing this?

 

@Hassat

 

 

Deus Ex was released before WoW if you must know... and it's pretty much from there.

 

Also, I seriously doubt ANYONE would want mmo quest systems in PE. So not sure what that's about...

 

 

And Baldur's Gate had a bounty quest before WoW did however there was only one.  Bounty quests, exploration xp, fetch quests and other equally mundane easy and most importantly grindy ways to gain xp are the staples of mmos.  If you have a ton of bounty quests and their givers in the game it becomes a staple of the game.  Please try to understand the association of the two as I won't be posting on the matter again (though only because I won't have the will to).

 

 

Question: What about the doomsayers that predict there'll always be ways to sneak around foes?

Josh Sawyer: oh no the players did what they wanted to do

Source

 

That really is a soul crushing statement both being called a doomsayer and the fact that Josh doesn't seem to care all that much about the issue.  That really... really.... hurts....

 

 

At least Shadowrun and Wasteland 2 are looking real good, that is probably because the lead designers are not ****ing retarded morons like Josh Sawyer, who only wants the game to cater to retarded morons like himself.

 

Later @mates of the pro combat xp faction. It was fun. And cross your fingers, maybe Feargus or Avellone will finally realise that Sawyer is an idiot and fire his sorry wannabe designer ass... or maybe the game will just fail miserably (which is more likely) buh bye.

 

 

That's a little much Helm.  I thought at the very least you were a little more mature and it's not like I don't realize how impactful that statement is but you're going way overboard my friend.  I don't want anyone to lose their job and I sure as hell don't want the game to fail miserably.  I want it to destroy my love of the Baldur's Gate series and that's a damn high bar to be sure.

 

 

I just realised the irony of this thread and others like it.

 

We've re-enacted a modern day version of Baldur's Gate NPCs, all taunting and jibing and strutting about, and to my delight, some friendly banter also.

 

History repeating?

 

Well, I thought it was ironic.

 

You're something else TRX850 i'm barely sane at the moment to be honest.  I'm glad you can always keep things on the upside.  See you around.

 

@Prime

 

I told you you guys would win.  I don't think this thread even registers on Josh's radar.  I'd really like some of your optimism right about now.  Ah hell who am I kidding i'll just live with my nightmares.  I so want this game to bury the crappy rpgs of today and to trump even the greats.  There's no way I would've pitched in as much as I did if I did not believe that.

 

I want to believe....

 

I so, so, so, so want to believe....

Edited January 20, 2013 by Razsius

[TRX850]

You're something else TRX850 i'm barely sane at the moment to be honest.  I'm glad you can always keep things on the upside.  See you around.

 

Honestly, compared to some of the game forums I've been on (like DayZ for example -- *that's* a tough crowd) this is the most knowledgeable, entertaining, witty, sarcastic-in-a-good-way, and downright chummy group of people I've had the pleasure of acquainting myself with in a long,  l - o - n - g  time.  There's the odd tantrum here and there, but like most families who have disagreements, they put it behind them and move on.

 

Now....back to work! All of you!

[PrimeJunta]

Guys, I promised I wouldn't wade into this topic again, but I guess I changed my mind. This time I'm not wading into the argument though. I just thought of something which I think is the reason for all this acrimony and thought I wanted to point it out. 

 

1. You can't determine if X is a degenerate strategy if you don't know or can't infer what the game developer intended. If the developer intended to send you exploring every corner of the map or killing every monster, then that is not degenerate behavior. But if the developer did not intend for you to do that, yet the game rewards you for it, then it is a degenerate strategy.

 

2. A good game rewards "fun" and does not reward "un-fun" strategies. Obvious, huh? However...

 

3. There are legitimate differences of opinion about what is and is not "fun." It might so happen that you'll find that playing a game with a degenerate strategy is fun. You and the developer disagree about what makes the game fun. So if the dev announces he's going to remove the incentive for the degenerate strategy that you were enjoying, you are not going to be happy.

 

Basically, I think this argument is fundamentally one about what makes a game "fun." It has gone far enough that we've hit the layer of deeply held personal preferences. As such, I think it's pret-ty unlikely that any of us will ever convince each other.

 

I think there's a better discussion to be had about what made the IE games -- or cRPG's in general -- fun (and what parts of them are not so much fun). There were a couple laundry lists in this thread and elsewhere, but that's somewhat thin gruel methinks. If we can have that without attempting to poke out each other's eyes, so much the better. And then maybe we can think about what kind of game system could support the fun bits and smooth out the not-so-fun bits. There certainly won't be a consensus because people have different preferences, but there might be more clarity.

 

That is all.

[Hassat Hunter]

If you have to make an npc per monster type?  A hell of a lot no?  What happens when you're exploring the middle of a volcano?  Is there going to be a hermit living in the middle of it who just so happens to have a bounty out for Lava Worms and requires Lava Worm tails?  That's like textbook mmo.  There's always an npc around right where you need them... ALWAYS.  The *great* thing about Baldur's Gate 1 was that you *could* find the middle of nowhere and be in it.  Ah hell.. what does it matter... why am I even arguing this?

Because you took one NPC giving money as bounty as example to mean every monster got their own bounty NPC? Which wasn't even the intention of said poster.

 

Also, Baldur's Gate had 2 bounties, not 1. The Winter Wolves. And the scalps of the bandits.

Bounty quests, exploration xp, fetch quests and other equally mundane easy and most importantly grindy ways to gain xp are the staples of mmos.

You forgot one of the most important one, namely combat-XP.

Although I assume you left it out on purpose, no?

 

And people here want to adjace it with lockpick-XP, mine-XP etc., even though BG2 and KOTOR2 already showed us that's... really bad.

 

I fail to see what's degenerate or even bad about having people explore the entire gameworld. I've seen several times in this thread "JE Sawyer made exploring pointless due to no-combat XP"... well, exploring gives XP after all.

 

RAGE!

 

I honestly... do not understand.

[Sacred_Path]

If you have to make an npc per monster type?  A hell of a lot no?  What happens when you're exploring the middle of a volcano?  Is there going to be a hermit living in the middle of it who just so happens to have a bounty out for Lava Worms and requires Lava Worm tails?  That's like textbook mmo.  There's always an npc around right where you need them... ALWAYS.  The *great* thing about Baldur's Gate 1 was that you *could* find the middle of nowhere and be in it.  Ah hell.. what does it matter... why am I even arguing this?

"If you put in one bounty hunt, you have to put one in for every monster race". Seems like a false dichotomy, good sir.

[Razsius]

I really didn't want to have to respond to this thread at like 4 in the morning but I will.

 

@Hassat

 

So you seem to want to know how I really feel Hassat.  You're a jerk.  I'm sitting at the starting line and you're already at the finish yet you come back to mock me.  Why exactly?

 

Also, Baldur's Gate had 2 bounties, not 1. The Winter Wolves. And the scalps of the bandits.

 

I've put 1000+ hours into the BG series and I let this one slip.  Should tell you how very little control I have over my emotions right now.

 

You forgot one of the most important one, namely combat-XP.
Although I assume you left it out on purpose, no?

 

When combat xp becomes grindy then yes it becomes an mmo staple.  Thankfully as the years have gone on it seems it started to shift to quests more then grinding.  Though there are, of course, still some hold outs.

 

And people here want to adjace it with lockpick-XP, mine-XP etc., even though BG2 and KOTOR2 already showed us that's... really bad.

 

Oh? I had no clue that people here had that stance and that BG 2s xp system was "really bad."

 

I fail to see what's degenerate or even bad about having people explore the entire gameworld. I've seen several times in this thread "JE Sawyer made exploring pointless due to no-combat XP"... well, exploring gives XP after all.

RAGE!

 

Funny, I never had the trouble of not wanting to explore but it's okay Hassat they'll give you xp for that so you win anyways.  You'll have your very own "carrot" whereas my "degenerate carrot" will be handily discarded.  Congratulations.

 

@Sacred_Path

 

"If you put in one bounty hunt, you have to put one in for every monster race". Seems like a false dichotomy, good sir.

 

I see you have conveniently forgotten the part where we were trying to give meaning to killing stuff in the non-linear areas of Project Eternity but then again maybe i'm completely wrong about this game being non-linear in the first place.  It really doesn't matter however, there will be one bounty hunt or two or whatever number Josh decides but one thing's for sure... there's no point addressing an issue that isn't there.

 

It's okay Sacred_Path you'll get your wish as well there's no reason to try to goad me into anything.

 

@Helm

 

If the Fans didn't give Obsidian any cash, then Sawyer's sorry ass would have already been out on the street and without a job, because Obsidian was not doing good at all, they didn't have any new projects to work on and would have had to close down if Project Eternity did not work out.

In the last few years 3 projects (!) that Saywer was lead designer on were cancelled. I have to say, I am not surprised. If I was a publisher I would shut down Project Eternity too, because Sawyer is an absolute retarded moron, and Obsidian doesn't even realise it.
Obsidian almost got the job to make Baldur's Gate 3, yes, that's right. Guess who was lead designer? Josh Sawyer. They put quite a bit of pre-production work into it too, and after Atari saw Sawyers crap design they just pulled the plug. I don't blame them.

Well, as a "thank you" he indirectly calls the fans who saved Obsidian and his job morons. Not to mention that Sawyer/Obsidian completely ignore us and just insult us. In other words: "we have your cash, so **** you". Now I ask you, who is the immature one? All I did was stoop down to Sawyer's level, nothing else. Fight "fire with fire", I say.

 

I know you're angry Helm, I know.  It's been 22 pages of this and you've been there since the beginning yet the thread itself might as well be meaningless.  If you feel even half "pain" I do then completely understand.  It's been around something like a decade and a half since we've seen an IE based game.  The word "hope" is the anchor we tie ourselves to as we abandon the Titanic... it's incredibly easy to drown.  But regardless of what we feel or how angry we become it's not a good argument nor is it good character to drag someone's name through the mud.  Lead Designer is not a position they hand to just everyone and although I don't know much of Sawyer's history i'm sure he's earned it and deserves it.

 

We all want to be heard... all of us.  Outright dismissing concerns of players I don't agree with does not sit well with me at all but taking the high road should be the only option.  The low road gets nothing no respect, no allies, no trust... nothing.

 

Get some rest man.. start fresh tomorrow.

 

@PrimeJunta

 

Regardless of why you did it... thanks.   I'll break out my nostalgia bank sometime tomorrow.

[TMZuk]

I'm going through this thread with something like disbelief.

 

Does anyone think that posting toxic hatred will change one damn thing in the game?

 

I seriously dislike combat-xp, feeling that they cause grinding and give life to the tired old trope that Roleplay = Killing Stuff. On the other hand, I ~also~, as I have voiced more than once, seriously dislike crafting. Now, crafting will be there. It was, if I remember correctly, a stretch-goal even. Does that mean I should start spewing vile remarks and drag peoples name through the mud? I think not!

 

I have voiced my dislike, and presented my arguments. If enough people agrees it might cause a change. Otherwise, I'll live with it! So I suggest mature behaviour when posting, or the forums will end up as infested as Bioware's.

[JFSOCC]

This is why I stopped reading this thread, mostly. I'm fierce in defending the good nature of this forum, but when those you're asking to be nicer block you, there's nothing much more you can do.

Does anyone think that posting toxic hatred will change one damn thing in the game?

[Sacred_Path]

I have voiced my dislike, and presented my arguments. If enough people agrees it might cause a change. Otherwise, I'll live with it! So I suggest mature behaviour when posting, or the forums will end up as infested as Bioware's.

are you a w...

[IM GOD]

 

 

Because people will be totally stumped at "wow I just sneaked around enemies and got XP for that! Dafuq?". They'll probably think it's a bug, m i rite?

Thats not how it's gonna work you moron.

>>>Schizophrenia or just plain retardation? You decide.

Retardation on your part.

And it was wrong to try and suck up to a retarded moron. I should have kept on criticizing him instead.

 

 

Since my last post didn't seem to go through, I will comment on this again:

 

Aside from your insistence that JE Sawyer hails from Redundancyville, what do you think calling him "moronic" "stupid" or "retarded" is solving? Do you think Josh is reading your posts and falling to his knees, weeping at his own incompetence? The fact that you feel it is appropriate to personally attack him (esp. with "retarded") over subjective, theoretical features of a video game says more about you than it does him. 

Edited January 20, 2013 by IM GOD

[rjshae]

How does degenerate gameplay devolve into degenerate discussion? Now we know.

[Hormalakh]

*pops head in*

 

We are advocating for a quest/objective + combat xp based system, just like in the IE games, the spiritual predecessors of Project Eternity.

 

These are my favorite pro quest/objective + combat xp quotes of the day, part 2. Part 1 can be found here.

 

 

My only hangup with the objective based system is that i don't necessarily want to see every playstyle get rewarded identically everytime, I'd like to see more challenging playstyes for certain quests reap the greatest rewards.

In other words, "I don't want to let other players ROLE-PLAY their characters the way they want to - it's my way or the highway. I find combat challenging and want a cookie everytime I fight someone. Those wimps using strategy shouldn't get the same cookie as me."

Most players, whether they realize it or not, think only of their characters' development, and don't particularly have any loyalty to quest-givers beyond the fact they provide opportunities to gain more XP and build their characters up even further. It may not be the popular view, but I think character development tends to trump story development.

"Combat-lovers are in. Story-lovers are out. I don't care that Obsidian said that Planescape:Torment was also an inspiration for this game."

[About having bounty xp replace quest xp] For one that awards no actual xp and essentially moves our xp "carrot" into a loot or gold "carrot". Second, if the Baron of Derpwood only awards you for killing orcs then you have no quest giver for killing hobgoblins. Assuming this is "corrected," then do you spend a ton of developer resources creating various quest givers to give incentives for killing x race for some doohickey they drop to get gold? Third, where are the quest givers? Are they scattered about across all the towns forcing you the player to visit various places for your goblin scalp turn ins and what have you? Maybe all the kill x guys are in a single place so that you only have to make a trip to a single town/city that's halfway across the world every single time you want to be rewarded for your effort. I'm not being fair again let's assume instead they code in a "monster bounty hunter" of sorts that accepts the noses of any monsters you kill. We're going to forgo realism and assume every monster actually has a nose. Also, there will be a "bounty hunter" in every town. Funny this is starting to look like an mmo...

"I can't be bothered to come up with actually interesting quests and will attack the developers' choice by coming up with some really uninspired quests and attack those quests. I mean how else am I going to be rewarded for my genocidial/speciecial tendencies in this game?"

This was not the only area it happened in VtM: B either. Remember those vampire hunters hunting LaCroix and the rest of your race? Yea there's no reason to kill all of *them* either. Objective xp giving more "choices" is an absolute joke. It just shifted combat being the most efficient method to stealth approaches being infinitely better.

P:E should be like Pokemon! Gotta kill em all! Otherwise it's a "joke."

[on removing XP gains to fix xp loopholes] And thus we would fix the fun right out of the game. Maybe enemies shouldn't drop loot at all! Instead we should have all loot be at the end of the dungeon in a big chest or awarded to you by the npc quest giver. We need some more equality of choice after all.

Loot plays two roles. It enriches those who engage in combat. It also pays for the cost of combat. By removing loot, you are effectively advocating for what you are railing against - discouraging combat altogether.

Yes, it would be "cleaner" if you just stuck to your quests like a good little adventurer, but for many many legitimate reasons (you're playing evil, or have a God complex, or some other roleplaying theme) any quest can be broken at any time. You can of course go back to a quest later, but if your reputation has altered things, or you've managed to unknowingly complete parts of other quests, but not in a way the quest-giver wanted, then there are just too many ways to break Quest-XP as the core reward system. [...] If they do sway from the quests, but are still adventuring and discovering things and defeating "enemies", then that's not a good reason to remove their XP rewards. It's simply not the same as PnP. Which is a damn shame.

"I can't think of how a developer can make a non-broken quest, ergo I want combat XP." O.K. Because you said so.

I agree there needs to be some clamping down on giving away "unearned" rewards. That's what we're really talking about here. And I'm pretty sure we all want the same thing in the end, and feel the joy at having earned that magic weapon, or those boots of speed, or that awesome new combat maneuver, or a new spell level. Progression is what keeps us interested.

 

I just don't want to lose that old school IE sense of progression to a new system that deals out XP in wider intervals that coerces me to play a certain way. If anything, it seems to have the opposite effect of allowing choice.

 

If there were exploration XP rewards dotted about all over the place, you'd be encouraging players to trigger them all without engaging in the related quest. So it still seems like this method is open to degenerate behaviour.

"Only combat should be rewarded because I find it "tough." Only the tough and strong should be rewarded. There is no such thing as a "role" that your character should play. I also need to see my character getting his regular fix of XP or he'll go into XP withdrawal." Oh noes! Adventurers exploring the world?! That's degenerate! Also you cannot into good quest creation. Please stop using this terrible strawman.

Bluffing your way past everything should have negative consequences just like killing everything and the kitchen sink should. Instead, I'd say greatly reward players for brokering alliances that would greatly help you in the future (as in MORE xp then a combat based option) or by not alerting or killing innocent guards on the way to steal a McGuffin. Players should *not* be rewarded for sneaking past everything or by roleplaying a coward. [...] Objective based xp system (to me) feels more forceful then a combat xp based one. As for exploration xp... why do we keep stealing lame mmo xp and quest systems to "add to" the spiritual successor of perhaps some of the best rpgs of all time?

So you're saying that since combat now has a decision behind it, since XP is taken out, that all other strategies should also have a decision behind them? I agree. That's why some non-trivial loot will be placed on enemies. As for "lame MMO XP", please see http://appealtoemotion.com/ Sawyer has never stated MMOs to be an inspiration for this game. One mechanic does not make an MMO: by that argument, then all fantasy-games are MMOs because all MMOs are fantasy games. Or some silly argument like that.

 

I think I'm done here.

[Hormalakh]

Oh jeez, this wasn't a poor attempt at a troll? I thought we were all just being obnoxious because that was the joke. Otherwise I wouldn't have been so obnoxious either...apologies.

[Gfted1]

Sad.

[Hormalakh]

- n/t apologies.

Edited January 21, 2013 by Hormalakh

[TRX850]

This whole argument is wrong on so many levels. Terms used are frequently misunderstood or misrepresented. And I am disappointed with the way it has been handled.

 

No one is arguing that black = white.

 

We are all RPG fans with a common love. Some of us prefer the old way. Some want a change. But no one is cutting anyone's throat here.

 

Please, let's show other game forums that we are better than them, and rise above this....in-fighting.  Please. It's not how we want to be remembered, is it?

 

Ok, I've dismounted from my high horse now. Who wants a cup of tea?

[Gfted1]

We dont close threads when someone get tired of them. Others may still like to read and comment. Lets all try to focus on the posts, not the poster, please.

 

Ill pass on the tea but can I have a coffee with lots of cream and sugar?

[TRX850]

Coffee....coming right up. I don't know what just happened, but I suspect I'll feel conflicted for at least 8 hours.

Edited January 21, 2013 by TRX850

[Sacred_Path]

Please, let's show other game forums that we are better than them, and rise above this....in-fighting.  Please. It's not how we want to be remembered, is it?

But this infighting is productive at times. If you're introducing new concepts in a game declared as old-school, resistance is to be expected.

 

Ok, I've dismounted from my high horse now. Who wants a cup of tea?

no cake?

[TRX850]

I saved a piece just for you, Sacred_Path.

[TRX850]

Oh jeez, this wasn't a poor attempt at a troll? I thought we were all just being obnoxious because that was the joke. Otherwise I wouldn't have been so obnoxious either...apologies.

 

I think I just punk'd myself.