Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'm starting to get upset. I haven't pledged 500 bucks so Obsidian would listen to every bitching and whining from a vocal minority. I pledged becausce I trust Cain and Sawyer to create a fun, challenging and complex RPG system. So instead of improving the durability system and crafting skill they are streamlining it by removing both.

Edited by Bendu
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So there's nothing to worry about, right? They'll listen to the whining and bitching from a vocal minority about the removal of these features and put them back in!

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, for one, am glad that durability has been removed. I have never felt that it really adds much more to an RPG than boring mundane maintenance. It serves no purpose other than to irritate in my opinion. Glad it’s not in PE. Some might argue that durability is more "realistic"; to that I have two responses: firstly: I just don't care about "uber realism" (this is a fantasy RPG after all, I don't actually want it to be super realistic because...well reality is mostly mundane and boring crap); secondly: I don't think that in a world where magic exists and especially with the situation of magical equipment that durability would even exist on said equipment; i.e. magic equipment would not degrade in durability, but normal non-magical equipment could degrade; so you can justify the absence of durability in the game (i.e. make it more "realistic") by simply stating that magic prevents magical equipment from degrading in durability. Though of course this does not justify normal equipment not having durability, so for this there are two solutions: 1: the game designers implement a durability degradation for all normal non-magical equipment (you don't even need to make any repair/crafting skills for it, just make items degrade slowly over time to satisfy those that crave "moar realism") and 2: just ignore the stupid irritating mechanic and use your damn imagination. I prefer option 2, so I am glad that Mr. Sawyer and crew made this decision. Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ Bendu

 

Crafting hasn't been removed.  If I understand the quote correctly, generic crafting as a skill is being removed, but the subset skills; herbalism, alchemy, etc. are still in the game.  That means that they will likely come up with more specific crafting for weapons & armor (smithing?) to fit into this system.

 

You're other point is well made...I'm a bit leery of decisions made in this manner.  With so little information about the whole skill system by which we can gauge such mechanisms as durability; it requires both proponents and detractors to make massive assumptions, which is never god policy in design.  

 

That stated, durability might have been a tenuous fit in P:E by the developers' perspective to begin with, so this feedback helped push them, "off the fence."  

 

I've been thinking about this, and the real measure as to whether durability will be a valuable mechanic lies mostly in how often we might be upgrading/ exchanging weapons and armor.  If we are starting the game at level 1 and going to level 10-12, I think it is likely that we may be upgrading with enough frequency that durability becomes essentially moot.  P:E isn't a low magic or low-enchantment / resource environment, nor is it looking to have the generic D&D type "Longword +3" so we might expect to find a wide variety of weapons and armor to play around with in game.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my, I wont have to visit a vendor every 10 minute and click the "repair all" button like I do in The Old Republic. I miss it already, it's so much fun having to click that button. Click, click, click.

OH, THE COMPLEXITY.

 

Yeah, good freakin' riddance.

Besides, who says there needs to be progression? BG2 crafting wasn't fun?

I loved BG2's "crafting"... it so much better than modern day crafting where I have to carry around 1000 wood, 10 rolls of duct tape and 12 cats through the entire game to make the 'wooden shiv of cat destruction' endgame item. Because, hey, it's so much more fun to have you search 1000000 lootpiles for wood than get the item whole in the end. Let's add weight too to make the system even more annoying (The Witcher II, Drakensang).

 

Can't say I found a game where crafting was actually any fun, and not something I completely ignored.

  • Like 4

^

 

 

I agree that that is such a stupid idiotic pathetic garbage hateful retarded scumbag evil satanic nazi like term ever created. At least top 5.

 

TSLRCM Official Forum || TSLRCM Moddb || My other KOTOR2 mods || TSLRCM (English version) on Steam || [M4-78EP on Steam

Formerly known as BattleWookiee/BattleCookiee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love the sentiments throughout this thread.

 

"Until I see a game that successfully implements System X in an enjoyable manner, NO game shall attempt to implement System X in an enjoyable manner! u_u"

 

:)

 

Good times.

  • Like 5

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, it works fine in System Shock II, so I know it can be done.

But I can't see it work at all in an IE-type game. Different game, different rules, different definitions of whats good and bad for the game.

 

They might think adding aliens in. Would work in a LOT of games. But in a fantasy game like PE it would just be out of place. Should they add them now just so they can? Or maybe think hard what it would add, and if nothing, just not do that?

  • Like 1

^

 

 

I agree that that is such a stupid idiotic pathetic garbage hateful retarded scumbag evil satanic nazi like term ever created. At least top 5.

 

TSLRCM Official Forum || TSLRCM Moddb || My other KOTOR2 mods || TSLRCM (English version) on Steam || [M4-78EP on Steam

Formerly known as BattleWookiee/BattleCookiee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't say I found a game where crafting was actually any fun, and not something I completely ignored.

It's very rare. If there was ever an RPG mechanic that could be universally defined as "a mixed bag", it would be crafting. And there's *always* an ugly flaw.

 

1) In some games, you got a great, fully detailed, multi-processed system, but it ends up being quite burdensome in the way of component gathering, recipe collecting and inventory management (NWN2). Result: Feels like crafting! But at the cost of weighing down the game experience. Too intrusive to game flow.

 

2) In other games, the crafting system feels solid and natural, and fun, but could end up breaking the game completely due to the sheer overpowered nature of the stuff you could craft (Skyrim). Result: There's your devil's deal. Mechanics-wise it's a true, realistic crafting system without undue burden. Allows the player to live completely off the stuff he crafts if he wishes to - and BREAK THE WHOLE REST OF THE GAME if he goes too far.

 

3)Then you've got a simple, effective, one-step process system that doesn't require a lot of thought, and even less component gathering, but is attached to immense cost to the player (both in levels, and money), to the point where crafting is little more than a curse, specifically designed to to insure that if you're gonna craft, your character will pay for it with EXP and Money loss. ie. power loss. (TOEE).

 

4) Lastly, "crafting". (BG2, DA2). Technically not a crafting system, since the player doesn't craft anything, he merely hunts down the components and then someone else does the rest. This shouldn't even be part of the discussion. It's not crafting any more than ordering an entree at a restaurant = "cooking".

 

 

If I were to design the perfect crafting system I'd... well, I don't know what I'd do. I guess I'd take a combination of #2 and #3, and find a way to eliminate the extremes. But that's easier said than done, even in Theory. Because a good crafting system should not have arbitrary limitations on what can be crafted, but at the same time, without limitations the system can overpower everything else. It can make treasure hunting and loot drops pointless, combat difficulty non-existant, and pretty much make the entire rest of the game feel mundane.

Edited by Stun
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3)Then you've got a simple, effective, one-step process system that doesn't require a lot of thought, and even less component gathering, but is attached to immense cost to the player (both in levels, and money), to the point where crafting is little more than a curse, specifically designed to to insure that if you're gonna craft, your character will pay for it with EXP and Money loss. ie. power loss. (TOEE).

 

 

 

 

I forgot about TOEE, but I actually crafted alot in that game. Instead of say speciallizing in Halberds and having to hope that you would find a decent one at some point in the game, you could make one, albeit at a high cost. It allowed for effective tactics like using a wall of polearms. Also crafting a wand of magic missles or fireballs gave a mage a ton of extra staying power in a battle. So I actually used the system. In general, though, I agree with your argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh my, I wont have to visit a vendor every 10 minute and click the "repair all" button like I do in The Old Republic. I miss it already, it's so much fun having to click that button. Click, click, click.

OH, THE COMPLEXITY.

 

This is like saying "Oh my, I won't have to visit a rest spot every 10 minutes and click the "rest" button. I miss it already, it's so much fun having to click that button. Click, click, click. OH, THE COMPLEXITY."

 

You're making an unwarranted assumption here that the game would have allowed and encouraged that kind of gameplay.

Edited by Infinitron
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

* shrugs *

 

Sawyer can't win. If he doesn't change stuff he's arrogant and if he does he's pandering.

 

I read what he said and it sounds reasonable to me. He's stuck to his guns on a load of other controversial stuff (and we have to trust his judgement) and listened to us on some others (the hyperbole in this thread is awesome... suggesting design-by-committee for removing something as small yet potentially annoying as item durability? LOLOLOLOLOL)

 

So kudos to Sawyer as far as I'm concerned.

  • Like 13

sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For me its a case of either go with a good durability system that adds something to the game or dont bother. having only armor and weapon / shields take damage and then its just a case of "oh but its not so bad when it do take damage" feels like something that was just thrown in (in my opinion).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

**** Yeah! :banana:  :banana:  :banana:

 

Thank you a lot Josh Sawyer! This was a necessary update in my- not so humble- opinion. :bow:

Edited by kenup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sample size? More than half of those who voted in Sensuki's poll said durability belonged in PE. The load minority got it removed.

I guess that's because the decision was based on arguments, not popularity.

 

Edit: oh, and I believe that if you don't speak up, you don't get listened to. If you were passionate enough to care, argue your position and post it.

Edited by JFSOCC

Remember: Argue the point, not the person. Remain polite and constructive. Friendly forums have friendly debate. There's no shame in being wrong. If you don't have something to add, don't post for the sake of it. And don't be afraid to post thoughts you are uncertain about, that's what discussion is for.
---
Pet threads, everyone has them. I love imagining Gods, Monsters, Factions and Weapons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not about numbers, people. Josh was unsure about this system. A significant minority would have been enough to get him off of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Count me among those who are wary of this new change.

Durability was announced mere days ago, in the official update that probably thousands read and now such a short time later it is rather quietly being removed again.

Either the devs made a misstep and announced a mechanic they themselves were not convinced of and now sought approval from their fans or they overreacted because of some bellyaching from the community.

 

I'm not saying durability was necessarily great, but the reaction seems hasty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Sample size? More than half of those who voted in Sensuki's poll said durability belonged in PE. The load minority got it removed.

I guess that's because the decision was based on arguments, not popularity.

 

Edit: oh, and I believe that if you don't speak up, you don't get listened to. If you were passionate enough to care, argue your position and post it.

 

I do not agree that the most 'passionate' voices should be given the most consideration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Sample size? More than half of those who voted in Sensuki's poll said durability belonged in PE. The load minority got it removed.

I guess that's because the decision was based on arguments, not popularity.

 

Edit: oh, and I believe that if you don't speak up, you don't get listened to. If you were passionate enough to care, argue your position and post it.

 

I do not agree that the most 'passionate' voices should be given the most consideration.

 

Ignoring the fact that the most "passionate" people tend to drown out reason and suppress opposing views by screaming their opinion as loudly as possible (metaphorically in this case,) backers of P:E were doing so having been informed that Obsidian would be making their own game, while taking into consideration classic experiences and the opinions of fans. They didn't say they were going to make it a mass design-by-committee democratic vote on every game mechanic and design decision. Professional game designers at a privately-held developer are under no obligation to kowtow to the wills of either the masses or the loudest opinions. The Kickstarter wasn't "pay us money and we'll let you design the game!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as infinitron said, the most probable reason was an internal disagreement about using this mechanic, so they turned to us to see which way the wind blows. and, as most may have noticed, those who are for durability, have no problem playing the game even if it's not in, while those who are against, will just call the game crap if it's in. so that minority, as some called it, was actualy an indication of the percentage of players who may have ditched the game just for that.

so it's not about who made the most passionate argument, or about a democratic vote to decide how it should be made... it's a cold-calculated assesment of how much the sales may be hurt by the implementation of this mechanic


The words freedom and liberty, are diminishing the true meaning of the abstract concept they try to explain. The true nature of freedom is such, that the human mind is unable to comprehend it, so we make a cage and name it freedom in order to give a tangible meaning to what we dont understand, just as our ancestors made gods like Thor or Zeus to explain thunder.

 

-Teknoman2-

What? You thought it was a quote from some well known wise guy from the past?

 

Stupidity leads to willful ignorance - willful ignorance leads to hope - hope leads to sex - and that is how a new generation of fools is born!


We are hardcore role players... When we go to bed with a girl, we roll a D20 to see if we hit the target and a D6 to see how much penetration damage we did.

 

Modern democracy is: the sheep voting for which dog will be the shepherd's right hand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so that minority, as some called it, was actualy an indication of the percentage of players who may have ditched the game just for that.

In all probability, it is a minority. I am completely confident that the vast majority of backers an potential buyers simply wouldn't have cared either way. I'm sure most backers receive emails about updates, but very few chose to voice an opinion on the matter. Realistically speaking, those most likely to say something on this topic are hardcore RPG fans with articulated opinions on RPG design, and I doubt that these are in the majority anywhere in any group.

 

So yes, while the decision to take out durability and crafting skill may have saved P:E some customers at the cost of causing minor butthurt to others (me), I highly doubt it would have made a noticeable difference, economically speaking, to keep durability and crafting as is.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Sample size? More than half of those who voted in Sensuki's poll said durability belonged in PE. The load minority got it removed.

I guess that's because the decision was based on arguments, not popularity.

 

Edit: oh, and I believe that if you don't speak up, you don't get listened to. If you were passionate enough to care, argue your position and post it.

 

I do not agree that the most 'passionate' voices should be given the most consideration.

 

Ignoring the fact that the most "passionate" people tend to drown out reason and suppress opposing views by screaming their opinion as loudly as possible (metaphorically in this case,) backers of P:E were doing so having been informed that Obsidian would be making their own game, while taking into consideration classic experiences and the opinions of fans. They didn't say they were going to make it a mass design-by-committee democratic vote on every game mechanic and design decision. Professional game designers at a privately-held developer are under no obligation to kowtow to the wills of either the masses or the loudest opinions. The Kickstarter wasn't "pay us money and we'll let you design the game!"

 

I don't want them to change the game to pander to the majority. I don't want them to change the game to pander to anybody. I think all this community interaction is at best a lesser evil compared to Publishers, and I really wish they would just take our money and make exactly the game they want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow this is kinda stupid.  Baldur's gate had durability, it was just cheap as hell.  Or did me having to replace my longsword 5 times until I found "Varscona" just happen in my mind?  There are some things to get upset over... this was not one of them.  The skill choices will be less interesting as a result of this and one more element that when done right can offer a level of tension to the game is taken out... well... 

 

I don't mind modern game conventions.  I do mind seeing the game dumbed down just because people either don't like crafting or are too lazy to repair gear every once in awhile.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

- a relatively small number of people (relatively small compared to number of backers, forum members and active posters) start to whine and bitch

 

- Josh says "I thought you would like this feature/ what would you like instead (to spend your money on)?"

 

 

Two remarks on this:

 

1) The number is even smaller compared to all who will ever play this game, but Obsidian can only ask and see how many answer. And if a third or half of all answers have a problem with it it is at least worth taking a day to think about it.

 

2) In my recollection Josh said "We put this feature in because of reasons A and B. Do you see better ways to do A ?" (with A being money sink, B being skill usefull for all). I don't know if any of the solutions we came up with were news to them or helped at all, but they found another and probably better solution, because otherwise they would have kept the old solution.

 

Having trust in the developers doesn't mean to think them infallible. It doesn't mean that solutions they come up with are perfect at the first, second or even third iteration.

 

Some  game developer told the story of how he had finished developing a game, but it just wasn't fun. He tuned the parameters again and again, overextending funds, getting really frustrated. Before giving up and just shipping the game he made another seemingly inconsequential change and bang, somehow it worked. He didn't really know why exactly, but he found the sweet spot and the game became a huge success.

 

I even heard of aircraft designers having asked pilots about their opinions.

Edited by jethro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want them to change the game to pander to the majority. I don't want them to change the game to pander to anybody. I think all this community interaction is at best a lesser evil compared to Publishers, and I really wish they would just take our money and make exactly the game they want.

Uhh, they *are* making exactly the game they want. There's nobody with a metaphorical gun to their head saying "The game has to not have a durability system or there will be no game at all" like you'd see with a publisher. The team heard the opinions and decided to change the design. This is a perfectly valid artistic decision to make, and I honestly don't understand why you would think that listening to outside opinions means Obsidian loses agency in the design of their game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...