What would PE look like if Obsidian catered to the worst of us?

[Lephys]

And the kitten would be a romance option.

... and the tree... ... and the fire...

 

Hey! One of my "qualities" made it into the "worst of us" list! 8D!

 

You know, Sacred_Path... you forgot to mention how... "pun"ishing those 500 words would be.

Edited October 15, 2013 by Lephys

[Messier-31]

Here we go... a poor translation of some article from long forgotten past, regarding the story:

 

The title in polish: "Name of your fantasy world"

 

1. Super old forest, that nobody knows s##t about. Eir Glanfath, maybe? For more drama effect it is wise to say that further you go the trees get bigger and older. Some should walk around and hurt people for fun. Unless PC's an elf, he or she obviously will be amazed to discover, that the forest is somehow crawling with elves prettier than him/her.
2. Super old mystic mountains. Should be old as the world, higher then the debt of our governments, also full of waterfalls, trees, castles smashed to bits, and other cool places that will look cool without the help of state-of-the-art graphic cards.
3. A mountain, biggest in the world. Mount Everest should look compared to it as a pickup-truck next to a monster-truck. Every NPC should admire it from the distance (from time to time), and unless the PC's a dwarf, he or she will be amazed to discover, that underneath it there are tons of dwarves stacked in a tunnel system.
4. Some big lake. It does not have to play a major role in the game, but it's important because it looks super awesome next to the biggest mountain in the world.
5. Huge and endless sea. Mandatory elves came from that direction long time ago on their white ships. Amount of mermaids, krakens and such should be 2-3 times more than usual fish.
6. Coast. The more twisted coastline the better. Somewhere here should be the Happy Idyllic Village at the End of the World (PC starts there).
7. Grim, dark and very very bad east from which swarms of orcs, trolls, goblins, communists and other creatures are sent by the Lord of Darkness to the realm of the PC. Lots of swamps and skeletons recommended.

There should be a lot of  fantasy creatures in the world. Even a pink dire beetle bug has its place! Also, developers could change some of that, like put the forest in the south, and mountains in the north. If they have the gut to do it, they could also try to put the sea on the east, but that would mean the elves had to travel from there - this would totally spoil the atmosphere of their mysterious nature.

 

Every story has to have epic background story of epic events from the epic past e.g. great epic war that swept half of the races or populace. The war lasted for hundreds or thousands of years and was started by the evil Lord of Darkness. Enter the PC:

• appearance irrelevant;
• has to be Chosen One;
• is an orphan raised by some uncle;
• wants to get out of the Happy Idyllic Village at the End of the World;
• has talent for putting himself into trouble;
• doesn't wash nor go to toilet;
• Lord of Darkness hates him/her;

Generally the story goes like this:

• the world is probably doomed;
• someone destroys the Happy Idyllic Village at the End of the World;
• PC is rescued by some Master of Everything (weapons, tactics, magic, you name it);
• Master of Everything is killed early, so the PC sworns a revenge;
• the world is still doomed, it doesn't stop even for a bit;
• PC meets some wacky people who follow him;
• dwarf has a beard, elf has a bow and unlimited supply of arrows;
• bad guy has always some flaw so is easily beaten;
• good guys win!
• also there could be a plot twist at the end - like the participation of pink dire beetle bugs in the evil scheme!

Eager to play?

[Death Machine Miyagi]

Any game of this sort requires a dialogue tree, with about three options. For example, if an NPC asks, 'Are you hungry?', you would be given a choice of how to respond, such as:

 

1. Yes, I'm hungry, thank you!

2. Yes, I'm hungry.

3. Yes, I'm hungry. Also, you're stupid and ugly. 

 

Each of those responses would result in the exact same outcome and likely even the exact same NPC response. But hey, your agreement that you are indeed hungry has been phrased in a way which is slightly different! Choices!

[Agremont]

 

 

 

Bikini plate mail...

 

'nuf said.

I don't see what is wrong in a high fantasy to have bikini plate mail wearers. You see everyone already is supernaturally strong. Why would a sexy strong free woman NOT wear one When she knows she can best orcs bands in combat and put anyone down that talks smack.

 

 

It's subjective I suppose but if you want my opinion on it, it's because it looks incredibly silly.

 

 

It isn't even really subjective. Plate mail exists to protect the body from incoming attacks. Leaving large open holes in plate mail so you can show off some skin is incredibly stupid, even in high fantasy. You might as well not even bother wearing armor at all. 

 

 

Well there's always the "magic" argument. Which has it's problems too.

[Lephys]

Well there's always the "magic" argument. Which has it's problems too.

Well, you see, it's the Inverse Property of Enchantment. The potency of the Enchantment is inversely proportionate to the amount of the body the enchanted item covers.

 

Why do you think rings and amulets are often so magical? They're really just enchanted pieces of armor that physically only cover about .8% of the body.

 

[Death Machine Miyagi]

 

 

 

 

Bikini plate mail...

 

'nuf said.

I don't see what is wrong in a high fantasy to have bikini plate mail wearers. You see everyone already is supernaturally strong. Why would a sexy strong free woman NOT wear one When she knows she can best orcs bands in combat and put anyone down that talks smack.

 

 

It's subjective I suppose but if you want my opinion on it, it's because it looks incredibly silly.

 

 

It isn't even really subjective. Plate mail exists to protect the body from incoming attacks. Leaving large open holes in plate mail so you can show off some skin is incredibly stupid, even in high fantasy. You might as well not even bother wearing armor at all. 

 

 

Well there's always the "magic" argument. Which has it's problems too.

 

 

This argument requires a couple things.

 

A) A creator who feels it vitally important that his suit of magic armor for women affords both complete protection for the wearer and the ability to show off her **** on the battlefield. Not saying the will isn't there, of course; just because a male wizard has a high intelligence score doesn't necessarily mean he's always thinking with his brain. But in practical terms, such an enchantment seems more like something out of a bad parody of high fantasy than anything else. 

 

And of course a female wizard might make such a thing, as well. But, setting aside the possibility she's a lesbian, that seems less likely.

 

B) A female wearer who does not object to marching onto a battlefield looking like a stripper. Not saying such wouldn't exist somewhere, but I would suspect your average female warrior in a quasi-medieval world would have a hard enough time being taken seriously without taking such an approach. No, I'm pretty sure bikini plate mail is a primarily male fantasy. 

 

Really, is there any such explanation that would not be a paper thin excuse to keep the female characters barely clothed? I can't think of one. Certainly 'A Wizard Did It' wouldn't help much.

[mcmanusaur]

The story arc with a clearly defined climax would have to take a backseat to the simulation of realistically fluctuating market prices of real estate and natural resources, and it would take players all the way to the endgame (which is actually where most of the content is) until they could afford to upgrade their longsword +0 to a longsword +1 (mcmanusaur).

 

Fixed that for you.

Edited October 16, 2013 by mcmanusaur

[PrimeJunta]

OTOH the ancient Greeks went into battle naked, as did Celtic woad warriors and a good many others. In a fantasy world where women can be warriors too, I can't see why there couldn't be naked amazons.

 

But yeah, platemail bikinis and boobplate are still dumb.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

OTOH the ancient Greeks went into battle naked, as did Celtic woad warriors and a good many others. In a fantasy world where women can be warriors too, I can't see why there couldn't be naked amazons.

 

But yeah, platemail bikinis and boobplate are still dumb.

I find the best way to rattle someone is to go around nude. You should see how JWs react when I answer the door!

[Ieo]

 

I was reminiscing on the last hours of the Kickstarter when Obsidian held a live party at their studio to celebrate its successful close, and remembered the live chat access with the video feed.  It was like reading the comments on youtube; while I had thought that the general maturity of those who would back a cRPG like this would be more in respect as what I find in these forums, it was a cesspit as any other on the internet.

 

And I remember thinking: Gods, I hope Obsidian doesn't cater to this crowd in any fashion.

no.jpg

 

Sometimes on these forums I see arguments between "thank you obsidian for hearing our voices" and "obsidian shouldn't listen to any of the crap we spout."

 

But I thought we could play a little game:  What would PE look like if Obsidian dropped developer integrity altogether and just went to target the biggest or loudest crowd? (you might call it "ultimate fanservice mode")

 

My greatest irrational fears:

• memes
• universal clothing-toggle option
• everyone's romancable; multiple partners!
• giant anime swords
• giant anime hair
• tiny anime apparal / langerie armor
• anime anything
• any use of teen-speak acronyms (OMG LOL)
• greenshirt girl
• ultrasimulation - my sword should take into account the factor of air resistance
• super ultra gritty violent underground mature 18++, I'm not old enough physically, but I swear I'm like 20-something in maturity years, game
• objective arrows, everywhere
• auction house (a la Diablo 3)
• memes

 

 

Yes, the live feed was an absolute pathetic cesspit...

 

Add to the stereotypical "adolescent male gamer wants only smut" things (or the stereotypical "female gamer wants only romanceable Twilight vampires"), I would add these to answer the OP title--

• 3D rotating camera with zoom-in on every full-animation kill effect, possibly slow motion
• Fully voiced NPCs with zoom-in animation
• Color-coded dialogue options denoting good/bad and with matching emoticon effects
• Console porting and multiplayer (meh, it's about the SP role-playing, man)

 

 

 

 

You have to understand, self control and allowing players to play their game the way they wish got thrown out with the baby and the bath water. Hence we wind up with gems like no healing or resurrection (unless you nap), cool downs, unlimited inventory, no kill xp, and having to trek to specific locations to rest (see napping). Most of the games mechanics were only created to prevent this or that action. 

 

 

Are you saying that these "features" have been added to Project Eternity? Ewww ...  I supported a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate. If Project Eternity lacks comparable latitude to play it in a way I find enjoyable it will be the last Obsidian game I buy/support.

 

 

You have to understand that Gfted1 is gifted in seeing and only talking about half the picture. Unless some things have changed drastically since I last saw, "cool downs" here isn't the instantaneous MMO-style type. No healing/rez is because there is no death, but there is permanent maiming, so you still have to play smart. The unlimited inventory is offset by having only part of your inventory available during combat (or something, I didn't read into that in great detail)--face it, everyone got the Bags of Holding in BG2 whenever they could. No kill xp is the "glass half empty" take on objective-based xp, which was added to make all play styles viable for roleplay purposes, like being able to talk your way out of a fight if you didn't want to fight, but you'd get rewarded somehow either way.

 

You'd better read all the original updates and discussion threads about those topics rather than take anything that poster says at face value.

[Gfted1]

Cry all you like but everything I said is true. Every single one of those mechanics were added with the sole intention of preventing some other action.

 

No healing / res: To prevent healing between battles.

Unlimited inventory: To prevent people walking back and forth to pick stuff up. What?

No kill xp: To prevent "grinding" in a game that doesn't have respawning mooks.

Rest spots: A disincentive to resting.

Cool downs: So you cant use your nukes and then rest.

[mcmanusaur]

Unlimited inventory: To prevent people walking back and forth to pick stuff up. What?

 

If only the solution was as simple as limiting inventory space but having a "salvage" mechanic so that players could decompose extra loot into near-weightless crafting components (but not the terribly generic MMO kind, mind you)... If only there existed such a way we could restrict players from carrying around tons of weapons and armor without incentivizing them to make multiple trips for all the loot.

 

No kill xp: Because it wouldn't serve any purpose.

 

Fixed!

Edited October 16, 2013 by mcmanusaur

[Sarex]

Cry all you like but everything I said is true. Every single one of those mechanics were added with the sole intention of preventing some other action.

 

No healing / res: To prevent healing between battles.

Unlimited inventory: To prevent people walking back and forth to pick stuff up. What?

No kill xp: To prevent "grinding" in a game that doesn't have respawning mooks.

Rest spots: A disincentive to resting.

Cool downs: So you cant use your nukes and then rest.

 

But what I can't wrap my head around is, why remove/disable those kind of things, it's just taking away some of the freedom from the player. I mean no one is forcing you to play the game that way, but whit those changes they are forcing us in to their mold. I guess it's their game to make, but my opinion is that they really didn't like the mechanics of the IE games.

 

 

 

No kill xp: Because it wouldn't serve any purpose.

 

Fixed!

 

I don't really get your point. It would serve the purpose of rewarding the player.

Edited October 16, 2013 by Sarex

[Gfted1]

If only the solution was as simple as limiting inventory space but having a "salvage" mechanic so that players could decompose extra loot into near-weightless crafting components (but not the terribly generic MMO kind, mind you)...

That's actually a good idea.

 

Or, you know, they could make a choice of whats important and whats not. Whats that word you guys like to throw around? Oh yeah, TACTICS. Now to counter the inevitable "hoover" effect of people picking up everything they had to devalue it to almost worthless. Tell me what was gained here. Sure you can pick up every object on the continent but it isn't worth anything so whats the point?

 

If only there existed such a way we could restrict players from carrying around tons of weapons and armor without incentivizing them to make multiple trips for all the loot.

And then you lost me. No doubt your scathing wit has flown over my head.

[Nonek]

Personally i'd have stopped people walking back and forth to pick stuff up by having it simply disappear, but that's only a personal preference.

 

I've been thinking about the issue of boobplate and chainmail bikini's etcetera (I bet you have,) and i'm not alltogether against having a character who flesh is protected by magic rather than steel, iron, linen and leather. However I do think that the obvious benefits in weight, agility and upkeep must come with some downsides, so what if the arcane process one uses is all too visible, squirming, twisting sigils and runes that cover the entire body. Imposing a comeliness penalty, a reaction penalty from anyone wary of magic, an upkeep cost to maintain the enchantments and perhaps other side effects over time.

 

There's also the issue of climate and temperature, perhaps further enchantments to protect against the enviroment as well?

 

Edit: Ones spelling continues to deteriorate.

Edited October 16, 2013 by Nonek

[Gfted1]

But what I can't wrap my head around is, why remove/disable those kind of things, it's just taking away some of the freedom from the player. I mean no one is forcing you to play the game that way, but whit those changes they are forcing us in to their mold. I guess it's their game to make, but my opinion is that they really didn't like the mechanics of the IE games.

I don't have a good answer for that. I just chalk it up to a very narrow focus of what they would like the game to play like. I sometimes wonder what crapstorm will erupt when the other 73,500 backers that never registered / post here first load up their games expecting an IE experience. Oh well, time will tell.

[mcmanusaur]

But what I can't wrap my head around is, why remove/disable those kind of things, it's just taking away some of the freedom from the player. I mean no one is forcing you to play the game that way, but whit those changes they are forcing us in to their mold. I guess it's their game to make, but my opinion is that they really didn't like the mechanics of the IE games.

I think that however you look at it, there were some features of IE games that incentivized "degenerate play" or whatever you want to call it, and- not to imply that what Gifted1 mentions is necessarily among those- it's good that Obsidian is acknowledging that.

 

I do think that many of the aforementioned design decisions are quite on the side of minutiae (something which old-school RPG players seem quite inclined to obsess over), however.

 

 

 

No kill xp: Because it wouldn't serve any purpose.

 

Fixed!

 

 

I don't really get your point. It would serve the purpose of rewarding the player.

 

 

Giving the player XP every time he opens a door would also serve the purpose of rewarding the player; that's obviously not sufficient justification in and of itself.

Edited October 16, 2013 by mcmanusaur

[mcmanusaur]

That's actually a good idea.

 

Or, you know, they could make a choice of whats important and whats not. Whats that word you guys like to throw around? Oh yeah, TACTICS. Now to counter the inevitable "hoover" effect of people picking up everything they had to devalue it to almost worthless. Tell me what was gained here. Sure you can pick up every object on the continent but it isn't worth anything so whats the point?

I agree, and there's always the possibility of simply having less loot (that doesn't equal less objects in-game, just less combat/magical equipment). I've personally never bothered making multiple loot-hauling trips, but I'm disadvantaging myself by not doing that (or so I hear).

 

And then you lost me. No doubt your scathing wit has flown over my head.

There wasn't anything witty to that part; I was just clarifying what I believe my suggestion would achieve while continuing with the tongue-in-cheek style.

Edited October 16, 2013 by mcmanusaur

[motorizer]

Well I for one am glad that obsidian are trying to address the problems in the games they are inspired by rather than just copying them (no one ever said it was going to be baldurs gate 3)

 

But you're never going to please everyone, I'm happy with everything so far, but there is stuff I would have done differently if I was the designer.

[motorizer]

 

That's actually a good idea.

 

Or, you know, they could make a choice of whats important and whats not. Whats that word you guys like to throw around? Oh yeah, TACTICS. Now to counter the inevitable "hoover" effect of people picking up everything they had to devalue it to almost worthless. Tell me what was gained here. Sure you can pick up every object on the continent but it isn't worth anything so whats the point?

I agree, and there's always the possibility of simply having less loot (that doesn't equal less objects in-game, just less combat/magical equipment). I've personally never bothered making multiple loot-hauling trips, but I'm disadvantaging myself by not doing that (or so I hear).

 

 

 

 Tolkein kind of skirted around the 12 trips back into Moria that the fellowship made to collect all the goblin's crap.

Or could it just be that stories and adventures aren't about collecting rubbish and selling it to incongruous shops that buy more than they sell.

[Sacred_Path]

But what I can't wrap my head around is, why remove/disable those kind of things, it's just taking away some of the freedom from the player. I mean no one is forcing you to play the game that way, but whit those changes they are forcing us in to their mold. I guess it's their game to make, but my opinion is that they really didn't like the mechanics of the IE games.

In the case of resting, you're wrong. The IE games were designed with resting in mind, and completing them without ever resting should be very hard/ impossible unless attempting a speed run. The game gives you no indication that there is any downside to resting, with the possible exception of monster spawning in unsafe locations, which can easily be circumvented by saving/ reloading or backtracking and resting in inns. There is no other intuitive way to play the game so that's what all kinds of players will do. Give me a true alternative to rest spamming and I'd use it.

[Malekith]

 

Cry all you like but everything I said is true. Every single one of those mechanics were added with the sole intention of preventing some other action.

 

No healing / res: To prevent healing between battles.

Unlimited inventory: To prevent people walking back and forth to pick stuff up. What?

No kill xp: To prevent "grinding" in a game that doesn't have respawning mooks.

Rest spots: A disincentive to resting.

Cool downs: So you cant use your nukes and then rest.

 

But what I can't wrap my head around is, why remove/disable those kind of things, it's just taking away some of the freedom from the player. I mean no one is forcing you to play the game that way, but whit those changes they are forcing us in to their mold. I guess it's their game to make, but my opinion is that they really didn't like the mechanics of the IE games.

 

The IE games were never meant to be played that way. That was no "freedom of the player", it was exploiting loopholes in the mechanics. Sawer designs a tighter system with no broken parts so the player cannot  excpoit it. (not that it is sure he will succeed mind you, propably players would find other ways he didn't predict to break the game).

But it is delusional to believe that the badly designed parts of the IE games were in fact consious desisions of the devs and were meant to be played that way.

FFS, they are mostly the same devs!!!! If the didn't like the way their old games were played it means they never intended to be possible to play that way, and it was in fact mistaken in the design.

[Malekith]

The game would look exactly the same. People they cater to are the worst of us. Depending on point of view.

This is what most of us payed for. If they had promised a AAA cinematic game i wouldn't have donated a  single $

[Giantevilhead]

 

 

 

 

 

Bikini plate mail...

 

'nuf said.

I don't see what is wrong in a high fantasy to have bikini plate mail wearers. You see everyone already is supernaturally strong. Why would a sexy strong free woman NOT wear one When she knows she can best orcs bands in combat and put anyone down that talks smack.

 

 

It's subjective I suppose but if you want my opinion on it, it's because it looks incredibly silly.

 

 

It isn't even really subjective. Plate mail exists to protect the body from incoming attacks. Leaving large open holes in plate mail so you can show off some skin is incredibly stupid, even in high fantasy. You might as well not even bother wearing armor at all. 

 

 

Well there's always the "magic" argument. Which has it's problems too.

 

 

This argument requires a couple things.

 

A) A creator who feels it vitally important that his suit of magic armor for women affords both complete protection for the wearer and the ability to show off her **** on the battlefield. Not saying the will isn't there, of course; just because a male wizard has a high intelligence score doesn't necessarily mean he's always thinking with his brain. But in practical terms, such an enchantment seems more like something out of a bad parody of high fantasy than anything else. 

 

And of course a female wizard might make such a thing, as well. But, setting aside the possibility she's a lesbian, that seems less likely.

 

B) A female wearer who does not object to marching onto a battlefield looking like a stripper. Not saying such wouldn't exist somewhere, but I would suspect your average female warrior in a quasi-medieval world would have a hard enough time being taken seriously without taking such an approach. No, I'm pretty sure bikini plate mail is a primarily male fantasy. 

 

Really, is there any such explanation that would not be a paper thin excuse to keep the female characters barely clothed? I can't think of one. Certainly 'A Wizard Did It' wouldn't help much.

 

 

The problem is that the logic is not universally applied.

 

For example, most male characters who have super strength still have huge muscles even though their strength comes from a supernatural source rather than their muscles. However, most female characters who have super strength are just kind of toned and almost never have big muscles. If you apply the same logic to both sides, either both supernaturally strong men and women should have big muscles or they should look like regular people.

 

Even without magic, male fighters who wear nothing but a loin clothe like Conan, look like they're really tough and strong. On the other hand, female fighters who wear chain bikinis rarely even look like athletes.

 

So chain bikinis wouldn't be nearly as big of a problem if you actually made the female characters who wear them have similar physiques to male characters who wear very little clothing. And heels never make sense, no one who needs to walk more than half a mile should wear them.

[Sarex]

The IE games were never meant to be played that way. That was no "freedom of the player", it was exploiting loopholes in the mechanics. Sawer designs a tighter system with no broken parts so the player cannot  excpoit it. (not that it is sure he will succeed mind you, propably players would find other ways he didn't predict to break the game).

But it is delusional to believe that the badly designed parts of the IE games were in fact consious desisions of the devs and were meant to be played that way.

FFS, they are mostly the same devs!!!! If the didn't like the way their old games were played it means they never intended to be possible to play that way, and it was in fact mistaken in the design.

 

I said that no one is forcing the player to exploit the system, you can play the game just how it was "designed" to be played. Why does it diminish the game for you that someone exploits it, play it how you want it, you have the freedom to do so. As for those badly designed parts of IE games, well I guess we will see if they where truly bad when P:E comes out.

Edited October 16, 2013 by Sarex