Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Features concerns so far

update concern criticism

  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
170 replies to this topic

#41
Valorian

Valorian

    (7) Enchanter

  • Members
  • 971 posts

 

Why it's almost like... the real world. Imagine that. ;)

 

 

 

 

Yes, almost..

 

Apart from the little difference that in the real world holding the "objective" trophy in your hands on the podium doesn't improve your hunting skills at all. The act of hunting itself is what does the job.



#42
forgottenlor

forgottenlor

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 292 posts
  • Location:Vienna, Austria
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 I fear time constraints end up downscoping the game

 

 

My number one fear as well.


  • rjshae and Malekith like this

#43
Fearabbit

Fearabbit

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 343 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

 

Yes, almost..

 

Apart from the little difference that in the real world holding the "objective" trophy in your hands on the podium doesn't improve your hunting skills at all. The act of hunting itself is what does the job.

 

 

Yeah but if you go down that road, then you wind up at the learning-by-doing system of The Elder Scrolls, not at combat XP that can also be used to advance your diplomacy or crafting skills.

I think the XP system in RPGs is too abstract for these kind of arguments. All it's saying is "during your adventure, you've grown as a person", and the actual transformation into a tangible "character growth currency" in the game can be linked to anything you want. The difference here is that one system allows several non-combat paths to victory, whereas the other system only allows combat paths.

 

But I think this discussion has been had before. If that's the concern of some people, it's certainly allowed to voice that opinion.



#44
UpgrayeDD

UpgrayeDD

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

 

why it's almost like... the real world. Imagine that. ;)

 

 

 

yeah because in the real world you get better at things by avoiding them right?  I also like how every time this comes up it's always used as the example of slaughtering hapless villagers.  when I see you guys do this it cheapens your arguements so much it's not even funny.  I can't think of a single game where I was able to kill npc villagers and did so for XP or gold.

 

 

 

How so? It simply makes combat not necessarily the best way when it otherwise would have been, no?

  Well I guess it all depends on how the combat turns out in the end.  But if it turns into a game when resource management (health/spell limits/item consumption) actually matters it becomes the ONLY smart choice(doing the exact opposite of sawyers intended goal) to avoid all combat.  If you'd like I'll do a play through of Baldurs Gate II and list all the enemies that become something that I would be able to avoid swiftly and and without penalty if they did not offer XP.  

 


I dunno, you could actually enjoy combat. 

 

I do enjoy combat in video games, but I also have a need to play smart.  To me if these two things are conflicted than I find that to be a poor design decision.  I guess it all depends on how they do things but in other games where they award set ammounts of exp at the end of a mission I have found it to be an unenjoyable aspect in them. 



#45
KaineParker

KaineParker

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3021 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer

Why it's almost like... the real world. Imagine that. ;)

 
Yes, almost..
 
Apart from the little difference that in the real world holding the "objective" trophy in your hands on the podium doesn't improve your hunting skills at all. The act of hunting itself is what does the job.


How does stabbing a goblin improve a bard's performance abilities then? Isn't that just as unrealistic as a Ranger getting better at tracking because he completed a quest?

#46
UpgrayeDD

UpgrayeDD

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

 

 

 

Yeah but if you go down that road, then you wind up at the learning-by-doing system of The Elder Scrolls, not at combat XP that can also be used to advance your diplomacy or crafting skills.

I think the XP system in RPGs is too abstract for these kind of arguments. All it's saying is "during your adventure, you've grown as a person", and the actual transformation into a tangible "character growth currency" in the game can be linked to anything you want. The difference here is that one system allows several non-combat paths to victory, whereas the other system only allows combat paths.

 

But I think this discussion has been had before. If that's the concern of some people, it's certainly allowed to voice that opinion.

 

I personally liked the way New vegas handled EXP more than any other game.  You could approach things in multiple ways and EXP never seemed to be any kind of issue in any of my playthroughs and I never focused on combat at the begining.



#47
okkoko

okkoko

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 140 posts

2 of my top 3 concerns have been mentioned above, in no particular order:

 

1) Exceptionally odd attributes

 

2) No kill xp

 

3) ... [mystery]

 

o/ ---> . 

 

. ^ \o  

 

o/  v  \o

 

***

 

o/ ---> \O

 

\O ˇ \o

 

o/  v  \o

yes i get the picture i think but hmm eater it is brilliant or o/ v \o look closely at this picture the /\ being for number 1, an o being Zero so in truth there is written 01 v 10 INFACT the link google show up with containing there INN! 01 ---> moves to be like 10*10*10*10=10000 bits of information may i say ding ding!


Edited by okkoko, 14 September 2013 - 10:25 AM.


#48
UpgrayeDD

UpgrayeDD

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

 

How does stabbing a goblin improve a bard's performance abilities then? Isn't that just as unrealistic as a Ranger getting better at tracking because he completed a quest?

 

bards can and should utalize their bardic music abilities in combat :p


Edited by UpgrayeDD, 14 September 2013 - 10:27 AM.


#49
okkoko

okkoko

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 140 posts

 


 

How does stabbing a goblin improve a bard's performance abilities then? Isn't that just as unrealistic as a Ranger getting better at tracking because he completed a quest?

 

bards can and should utalize their bardic music abilities in combat

like i can just see how i hammer at my foes with my magic electric guitar comon give me the fire and a fire ball or a ball of a magic blaster skills and all while your bard is playing his guitar



#50
UpgrayeDD

UpgrayeDD

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

Bard CC for the win.  Played right a bard can be the MVP.



#51
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
Holy carp... the "no kill XP" displeasure again?

Look, what's the point of combat in a game WITHOUT a leveling system? There, that's the purpose of combat without XP-just-because-you-battled-a-thing.

We've played lots of games in which fighting things was the main way you got XP (whether there was any other reason to fight them or not), and we've grown used to that, and it's pleasant, in a way, to just know how you can get some more XP, and combat is pretty fun, so it's nice to know you can gain XP by doing something fun.

This means neither:

A) That XP was the only reason, ever, for combatting anything ever in any game in existence. Nor...

B) That no combatting of things in P:E will ever net you XP. The emptying of health bars simply won't guarantee you XP every time it occurs. Doesn't mean it won't give you XP any time ever.

It's not like if you love combat, and you just fight through the whole game, you're going to be level 1 at the end, with 0 XP, and everyone else who fights as little as possible is going to be level 1,000. They didn't swap out the repetitive task that always earns you XP; killing for, say, gardening. "Every time you grow a tree, you get 1,000 XP 8D!"

No, now, there's just a more specific set of criteria for getting XP. It COULD involve talking, or killing, or dancing, or climbing, or sneaking, or subduing-but-not-killing, or concocting, or whittling, or phase transducing...

Yes, in real life, "combat" gets you XP. But why does tossing a molotov-like grenade that burns-to-death 53 enemies net you MORE experience than throwing one accurately that burns-to-death 1 enemy? Did you really gain 53-times more molotov-tossing experience because of how many enemies were congregated together in one spot? Does the death of something really earn you XP, or do your actions and decisions earn you XP? Hell, really, the longer you go WITHOUT something dying, the more XP you'd get. If I let a goblin attack me 100 times before I kill it, instead of 5, don't you think I'd get a lot more swordsmanship practice in?

Ohhhhh, okay. So, if you want to vote for a "we gain XP by doing, regardless of whether or not anything dies" system, them go for it. But don't tell me that not gaining XP for something's life depleting is somehow heresy, and that combat serves no purpose if the passing of a soul doesn't somehow transfer vast amounts of life experience into your character.

"Dude... I just poisoned the main city well... I'M GONNA BE LIKE LEVEL A MILLION by the end of the day! 8D!"

Edited by Lephys, 14 September 2013 - 12:10 PM.

  • Azrayel, tox1c5lug, JFSOCC and 2 others like this

#52
Sezneg

Sezneg

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 22 posts

 

 

Why it's almost like... the real world. Imagine that. ;)

 

 

 

 

Yes, almost..

 

Apart from the little difference that in the real world holding the "objective" trophy in your hands on the podium doesn't improve your hunting skills at all. The act of hunting itself is what does the job.

 

... and this totally explains why you can use exp from hunting to raise your diplomacy skill.



#53
Tamerlane

Tamerlane

    (8) Warlock

  • Members
  • 1125 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

As much as D&D ever explained why you can use EXP from fighting to become a better talker, yes.



#54
Lephys

Lephys

    Punsmith of the Obsidian Order

  • Members
  • 7245 posts
  • Location:The Punforge
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
The abstract application of XP to the improvement of both fighting AND talking, simultaneously, isn't being called into question. Yet, that this XP that improves all things is wrong to not fountain up out of entities that have just been killed IS.

I think that's the point of the "... and THIS does make sense?" posts in response to the "this doesn't make sense!"

If the system made perfect sense as-was, then the only thing that would improve from enemy deaths would be your character's ability to mentally process death and the taking of lives. That, and maybe your Knowledge: Anatomy skill. :)

Edited by Lephys, 14 September 2013 - 02:54 PM.


#55
bonarbill

bonarbill

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 326 posts

I agree that they should not used the IWD/BG2 map system.  The map travel system in games like Fallout or Arcanum is much more enjoyable because of the exploration aspects.  I enjoy getting lost in the world map finding interesting random encounters and hidden areas.



#56
rjshae

rjshae

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 5075 posts
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

 

why it's almost like... the real world. Imagine that. ;)

 

yeah because in the real world you get better at things by avoiding them right?  I also like how every time this comes up it's always used as the example of slaughtering hapless villagers.  when I see you guys do this it cheapens your arguements so much it's not even funny.  I can't think of a single game where I was able to kill npc villagers and did so for XP or gold.

 

Mmm, no, but thanks for the reductio ad absurdum argument. In the civilized world you learn to solve most problems without violence, and in so doing you learn how to be more diplomatic. I take it you've never had that learning experience? :p


Edited by rjshae, 14 September 2013 - 06:56 PM.


#57
UpgrayeDD

UpgrayeDD

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

Holy carp... the "no kill XP" displeasure again?

Look, what's the point of combat in a game WITHOUT a leveling system? There, that's the purpose of combat without XP-just-because-you-battled-a-thing.

We've played lots of games in which fighting things was the main way you got XP (whether there was any other reason to fight them or not), and we've grown used to that, and it's pleasant, in a way, to just know how you can get some more XP, and combat is pretty fun, so it's nice to know you can gain XP by doing something fun.

This means neither:

A) That XP was the only reason, ever, for combatting anything ever in any game in existence. Nor...

B) That no combatting of things in P:E will ever net you XP. The emptying of health bars simply won't guarantee you XP every time it occurs. Doesn't mean it won't give you XP any time ever.

It's not like if you love combat, and you just fight through the whole game, you're going to be level 1 at the end, with 0 XP, and everyone else who fights as little as possible is going to be level 1,000. They didn't swap out the repetitive task that always earns you XP; killing for, say, gardening. "Every time you grow a tree, you get 1,000 XP 8D!"

No, now, there's just a more specific set of criteria for getting XP. It COULD involve talking, or killing, or dancing, or climbing, or sneaking, or subduing-but-not-killing, or concocting, or whittling, or phase transducing...

Yes, in real life, "combat" gets you XP. But why does tossing a molotov-like grenade that burns-to-death 53 enemies net you MORE experience than throwing one accurately that burns-to-death 1 enemy? Did you really gain 53-times more molotov-tossing experience because of how many enemies were congregated together in one spot? Does the death of something really earn you XP, or do your actions and decisions earn you XP? Hell, really, the longer you go WITHOUT something dying, the more XP you'd get. If I let a goblin attack me 100 times before I kill it, instead of 5, don't you think I'd get a lot more swordsmanship practice in?

Ohhhhh, okay. So, if you want to vote for a "we gain XP by doing, regardless of whether or not anything dies" system, them go for it. But don't tell me that not gaining XP for something's life depleting is somehow heresy, and that combat serves no purpose if the passing of a soul doesn't somehow transfer vast amounts of life experience into your character.

"Dude... I just poisoned the main city well... I'M GONNA BE LIKE LEVEL A MILLION by the end of the day! 8D!"

     I never called it herasy to get XP for not killing things.  I love how the only way you can try to come up with an arguement is to try to push that idea.  I don't love kill exp I dislike Objective exp.   So please please please anyone of of you who bothers reading this it's not about Wanting kill Xp it's about not wanting objective XP.  when you can wrap your head around that maybe you can begin to understand why I don't want it.  It turns the game into a "walk from point A to point B as quickly as possible".  It turns activity that is not on that direct path into a waste of time and resources. 

     Sawyer talked about kill XP being a way to promote degenerative play but he should look at games that do it and see degeneracy that can go with it.  I used to play DDO for a while.  You'd be able to get little chunks of XP here and there for things like optional objectives and completionism(breaking items/sneaking past most enemies or killing most enemies) but the vast majority of the XP came from quest completion.  As a result about half the population of the servers would litterally just run past most all the enemies to get to the end goal turning trivializing most of the quest.

   Even though it's not a playstyle I enjoyed I didn't blame those people as it was the most efficient way of completing the quest.  But turbine didn't like it and probably saw it as a degenerative way to play the game.  So they came up with dungeon alert which buffs enemies AC/damamge and at red alert gives every mob on the map the ability to slow your movement by about 80% if you get hit.  However because they never did proper testing there would be maps where through no fault of the player doing a normal paced walkthrough of a dungeon would trigger the dungeon alert to yellow and in some cases red alert.  Not only that but multiple players all share the dungeon alert meter so spliting up a party to do multiple tasks becomes something very annoying as it will easily trigger the ridiculus bonuses the monsters get.  So basically normal players get to deal with a stupid and annoying mechanic so that turbine could feel better at slowing down(and failing at it) degenerative play.

    Mass Effect II was another game that had objective Only XP and with it(not because of) came levels with infinite respawn cheese, uninspired linear levels, almost 0 exploration, a rather dull leveling system, not being able to reach the max level without buying DLC, one of the worst final encounters of any game I've ever played to completion, Horrible itemization schemes, etc...  The combat had it's moments and could be fun but that didn't change the fact that I found those other aspects of the game lacking and/or not fun.  Needless to say I didn't find it a game worth replaying since I bought near it's release.



#58
UpgrayeDD

UpgrayeDD

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

 

 

 

Mmm, no, but thanks for the reductio ad absurdum argument. In the civilized world you learn to solve most problems without violence, and in so doing you learn how to be more diplomatic. I take it you've never had that learning experience? :p

 

Or maybe I see it as a world that hasn't led the same kind of sheltered and easy going life that most Americans and europeans now enjoy?   Becuase even in our modern world that aren't political and criminal organizations that would kill people by the hundreds, thousands, or even millions?   I take it you've never had that learning experience?



#59
Fearabbit

Fearabbit

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 343 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer

Great, nobody listened to me when I said "let's not start that again".

 

 It turns the game into a "walk from point A to point B as quickly as possible".  It turns activity that is not on that direct path into a waste of time and resources. 

 

I take it that this is your main problem with objective XP. How I see it: If there's stuff to do when you stray from the direct path in any RPG, you do it because it's interesting in and of itself, or because you get rewarded for it. In the best case, it's both.

 

If Project Eternity didn't reward you for doing things off the direct path and they were not interesting at all, then I'd agree with your concern. But if they're interesting and I get rewarded in some way, then I don't see why I wouldn't do them. And they will reward me in some way - with a pile of gold, or with a legendary item, or with XP. There's no reason that there can't be small objectives that award you XP if you complete them.

 

In your story about DDO, you said there were small objectives and stuff, but people rushed past that. To which I reply... well first of all, it's an MMO, where I think the mentality is a bit different. Second, apparently the small XP and item rewards were too meaningless, which can be changed by making them better.

 

So I don't really see this as an argument against objective XP, just as an argument for having a good balance between challenge and reward. (And by the way, yes I enjoyed the New Vegas XP system as well. Wouldn't say it's perfect but it's definitely one of the best systems featuring combat XP.)


Edited by Fearabbit, 15 September 2013 - 04:27 AM.

  • forgottenlor likes this

#60
KaineParker

KaineParker

    Arch-Mage

  • Members
  • 3021 posts
  • Location:Houston, Texas
  • Pillars of Eternity Silver Backer
  • Deadfire Silver Backer
  • Fig Backer
Perhaps they should rename "Objective XP" as "Challenge XP" and describe it as "you will get XP for dealing with random groups of enemies, overcoming obstacles, and completing quests but how you choose to do so is up to you".
  • Azrayel and JFSOCC like this





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: update, concern, criticism

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users