The bad things about Project Eternity...

[SophosTheWise]

So, we know quite a lot of stuff about Project Eternity so far and I guess most of us are equally psyched to delve into Dyrwood.

 

What I'm interested though is: what are the things you've learned about PE up until now that didn't please you or that you did not like at all? Is there anything you wish to be different?

 

I think it'd be interesting to see some critical thinking and maybe we can give the devs a bit of constructive input.

[Doppelschwert]

I don't like that I can't play it right now.

[Sacred_Path]

I'll go with the obvious ones

 

 

The attribute system, probably. + standard abilities instead of more player chosen talents, if I got the terminology right. I started out thinking that character building would make this my favorite game OF ALL TIME, but probably not.

[SophosTheWise]

I'll go with the obvious ones

 

 

The attribute system, probably. + standard abilities instead of more player chosen talents, if I got the terminology right. I started out thinking that character building would make this my favorite game OF ALL TIME, but probably not.

 

Care to elaborate?

[Sacred_Path]

 

I'll go with the obvious ones

 

 

The attribute system, probably. + standard abilities instead of more player chosen talents, if I got the terminology right. I started out thinking that character building would make this my favorite game OF ALL TIME, but probably not.

 

Care to elaborate?

 

Not really. An attribute system that's failproof just isn't my cup of tea. As for player customization vs. abilities that are picked for you - shouldn't be hard to relate to why I prefer the first.

[lolaldanee]

only shoulder and up portraits instead of full body are my biggest disappointment so far

and lack of extensive voice acting, but thats something i knew from the start, so it doesn't really count

[mcmanusaur]

This reminds me of that thread that got locked...

[Lephys]

I'm summoning all my willpower (see what I did there? We're talking about attributes, *snicker snicker*) for this to be all I say on the matter, but... why do people STILL not comprehend that there's a difference between your stat allocation not mattering at all and no stat ever failing to POTENTIALLY support A good build for a given character?

 

Also, I'll throw in the obvious "We don't actually know much at all about the system... just enough to make wild, wild speculations."

 

(Hey... concision points for that, though, yah? )

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

No naked Cadegund.

Elves.

Classes besides Mage are useful.

XP isn't awarded everytime I slice up a mook.

Not turn-based.

[Greensleeve]

No naked in intimate detail interactive and animated sex with Cadegund.

Elves.

Classes besides Mage are useful.

XP isn't awarded everytime I slice up a mook.

Not turn-based.

 

Fixed that for you. 

 

Edit: Oh, and I forgot: It's not literally BG2. 

Edited October 21, 2013 by Greensleeve

[Stun]

Note: like others have pointed out, we're kinda at a disadvantage here on this thread because we really don't know that much yet about anything, so this will be a tiny list of stuff I'm concerned about - stuff that sounds like it's going in an un-cool direction.

 

1) The inventory system

2) The resting mechanic

 

#1 should never be. By the end days of the IE game era, Black Isle and Bioware had finally gotten the inventory system problems licked. IWD2 had the best working, neatest, perfectly designed inventory system. It was... well... perfect. Yet here we are today, watching Obsidian as they overhaul perfect, and slap on layers and layers of convolution and unnecessary nonsense to something that shouldn't be complex.

 

#2 The resting mechanic for PE, as Josh is describing it, reeks of Obsidian's tiresome crusade to stamp out "degenerate gameplay" at any cost, including fun. But even that's not a huge deal. Game developers tend to forget that Gamers are supremely intelligent. If PE ends up being mod friendy, look for a "rest anywhere" mod within 1 week of the game's official release.

Edited October 21, 2013 by Stun

[rjshae]

I was disappointed that the designers caved on the equipment maintenance feature instead of simply making it an option for the expert mode. Otherwise I've been reasonably pleased by the various concepts presented.

[Karkarov]

The only contribution on what I know about PE that I don't like for this thread is this...  The fact that I don't know enough about the actual mechanics of PE.  We know tons of concepts, ideas, and things that will be included.... but we don't know enough about stats.  We don't know exactly what happens when we level up or how much freedom we have to make our own leveling choices.  We don't know the bare bones mechanics of "I swung a sword at goblin X" how do we determine if I hit, how do we determine the damage? How much real damage does it do or is it all stamina?  We just don't know anywhere near enough about the actual game parts of the game.

[Sacred_Path]

I'm summoning all my willpower (see what I did there? We're talking about attributes, *snicker snicker*) for this to be all I say on the matter, but... why do people STILL not comprehend that there's a difference between your stat allocation not mattering at all and no stat ever failing to POTENTIALLY support A good build for a given character?

did you even read what I said?

[Lephys]

 

I'm summoning all my willpower (see what I did there? We're talking about attributes, *snicker snicker*) for this to be all I say on the matter, but... why do people STILL not comprehend that there's a difference between your stat allocation not mattering at all and no stat ever failing to POTENTIALLY support A good build for a given character?

did you even read what I said?

 

Did you? "An attribute system that's failproof just isn't my cup of tea."

 

Failproof means failing is not allowed. Meaning if you want to be the most accurate mofo in the land, you can just close your eyes, and allocate all your points into random attributes (because you can't fail!), and you'll STILL accomplish what you wanted! Either that, or the point allocation is just for show, and you're always the best at everything.

 

Since neither of those are true, we must not have a failproof attribute system. Which is what many have called it ever since Josh talked about it, suggesting that your point allocation no longer matters. Hence the words to which you just responded, that emerged from my fingertips.

 

It's not a failproof system. It's a revamped system. Could it still be terrible? Yes. But, disliking it because it's going to be failproof is just as folly as disliking P:E because it's not going to have an attribute system at all; neither is accurate in the least.

 

I'm not demanding that everyone be excited and optimistic about the system like I am. I'm simply pointing out the complete lack of necessity in jumping to baseless conclusions and deciding to dislike things because of them.

 

Basically, if you're going to dislike something, actually dislike IT and not some false concept of it.

[Sacred_Path]

Did you? "An attribute system that's failproof just isn't my cup of tea."

 

Failproof means failing is not allowed. Meaning if you want to be the most accurate mofo in the land, you can just close your eyes, and allocate all your points into random attributes (because you can't fail!)

"This game doesn't have easy combat! If I close my eyes it's actually getting challenging!"

 

Character creation will be failproof insofar as you can't create a gimped character. To me, that's a downside. Another effect and another downside of this is that a complete noob can probably build a tank that's as effective as that built by a 100+ hours veteran. We have heard enough about the design philosophy here that we can even assume that, if Dex and Con are completely defensive attributes, a character specializing in Dex will be just as survivable as one specializing in Con. That seems to be what they're going for.

 

This is assuming that even that noob does RTFM and possesses basic reading comprehension.

[nikolokolus]

I sort get what you are saying Sacred_Path.  Personally I'm going to wait until I can actually sit down with the game and see how the systems "feel" in practice before passing any judgement, but I do have some reservations about the idea that "no bad builds" will sort of reduce every character into a sort of indistinguishable "mush" from every other build.  For instance, this is the biggest gripe I have with a game system like 4th edition D&D - every class "feels" just about exactly the same no matter how you build a character. 

[Sensuki]

Not many of the design decisions have been what I would call my first preference, but not necessarily bad. I only have minor gripes.

 

This is a bit of speculation but I fear that the devs have gone 'full retard' if you will regarding design of feminine proportions because of their frustration in having to over-sexualize their characters in previous titles. I just hope that the female models are not all like Asha Greyjoy or Brienne of Tarth.

 

I like that they've gone naturalistic in armor design and whatnot, but I hope the definition (hips and dugs etc) are still there on the base models. The Dungeon screenshot didn't look too promising there.

 

----

 

I would have prefered a |_| shaped UI to the bottom bar only, and I do not agree with the reasons given for it.

 

I think the portrait size in the UI is too small, which is a shame.

 

----

 

I don't like the fact that attack animations will not have early cancels as I believe that will end up making the game feel a bit clunky and the responsiveness will end up not being as crisp as the IE games, we'll have to wait and see there.

 

----

 

I don't like the fact that the legacy selection circle colors have been changed - I understand why, but I have a feeling that people who preferred green & red will have to put up with blue for PC controlled and not have the option to change it. That is immersion breaking for me.

 

----

 

I fear that the combat log will be more revealing of information than I think it should be, even on Expert mode. Recent examples lead me to believe that when I make a roll to hit or a skill check, the game will give me the target DC. I do not want to know the target DC I think that is stupid. I prefer the legacy Infinity Engine style of 18 + 4 = 22: Hit (or Miss) without giving away the target DC.

 

----

 

I would also be annoyed if the default IE mouse controls were changed. I want left click and hold to be marquee select and right click and hold to be re-position party formation. This is pure speculation but I have a feeling they may have taken away the IE style right click functionality in favor of something else.

 

----

 

That's all I can think of that I would find really annoying at this stage and most of them are speculative.

[nikolokolus]

I'm red-green color blind so making the selection circles something else is just fine by me ... and I honestly have no idea how blue is immershun breaking whilst green or red somehow enhance "immershun"

[Sensuki]

I'm red-green color blind so making the selection circles something else is just fine by me ... and I honestly have no idea how blue is immershun breaking whilst green or red somehow enhance "immershun"

It's pretty simple. I want them to be the same as the IE games, simple as that. I would like to be able to change them back to legacy colors. I understand the reason for the default being blue, but I will be disappointed if I cannot change them back.

 

Call me strange, but I think it's really off putting, especially the unselected royal blue color they're using - that looks ****ed. The multi-colored selection circles in BG:EE are absolutely retarded as well.

Edited October 22, 2013 by Sensuki

[Sarex]

@Sensuki I agree about everything except the armor, I really fell that they should have a fantasy flavor like in the previous IE games and if that is too hard to animate or won't look as good because it is too small, then I would like them to have a drawing of the item in the inventory like in BG2.

Edited October 22, 2013 by Sarex

[Messier-31]

only shoulder and up portraits instead of full body are my biggest disappointment so far

and lack of extensive voice acting, but thats something i knew from the start, so it doesn't really count

 

You will probably be able to change that with custom portraits. I like where this is going.

 

 

No naked Cadegund.

Elves.

Classes besides Mage are useful.

XP isn't awarded everytime I slice up a mook.

Not turn-based.

 

ad.1 - Giggity!

 

ad. 2 - Monks. But seriously, would you rather have a new made-up race? There already are the godlike, orlan and... amaunabananarama. What about orcs and goblins, are these fantasy cliche monster races confirmed or not? Could use some greenskin slayin'.

 

ad. 3 - Won't believe it untill I see it. Gonna wait for the game and check it out.

 

ad. 4 - Slice up a monk, instead of a mook. You won't regret it. My quote from this other topic: "I kinda like the idea of not gaining XP from defeating foes. Makes you wanna avoid some combat situations and consider a different approach. I used to play Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and we would be awarded with experience points just after some major events would be brought to an end. Not for every kill we would get, maybe just for some very important and story related boss's's's'sss... What I mean is that you play your role as in a theater, not simply hack n' slash everybody; there you put politicians."

 

ad. 5 - As in all IE games, so as in PE. Besides, this isn't Fallout in (Some Other) Forgotten Realms. Even though Fallout was kewl.

 

 

So, long story short:

You are all wrong, and monks are to be shot at sight    tee hee

:bow: :bow: :bow: :bow: 

 

j/k

Edited October 22, 2013 by Messier-31

[SophosTheWise]

I sort get what you are saying Sacred_Path.  Personally I'm going to wait until I can actually sit down with the game and see how the systems "feel" in practice before passing any judgement, but I do have some reservations about the idea that "no bad builds" will sort of reduce every character into a sort of indistinguishable "mush" from every other build.  For instance, this is the biggest gripe I have with a game system like 4th edition D&D - every class "feels" just about exactly the same no matter how you build a character. 

 

I don't really care about that 100+ hours veteran vs. noob thing. After all it's a singleplayer game and I don't draw my ego out of my awesome character builds. Also I don't really care if I can't make a bad build, because... Who in their right mind would ever want to make a bad build? It's something that only happens by accident and causes frustration and a new character after two hours of playing.

 

What I get though is the skepticism towards the possibility of having "indistinguishable mush". I felt this was already happening in 4E (I may be wrong, I'm no expert), but I only played a  few shorter games of 4E, so I don't know. If Josh can really pull it off and make awesomely customizable characters with no bad builds possible, I will salute him.

[Sacred_Path]

I don't really care about that 100+ hours veteran vs. noob thing. After all it's a singleplayer game and I don't draw my ego out of my awesome character builds.

Do you not care about building good characters or do you only care if others judge them? Mebbe make up your mind.

 

Personally, I care about the time I've invested in a game. There's also something very satisfying when you see that digging into the game has made you become better at the game, rather than systems that accomodate everyone equally from the get go.

 

 

Also I don't really care if I can't make a bad build, because... Who in their right mind would ever want to make a bad build?

 

It's the possibility that matters. See... it ties in with what I said about pre-assigned abilities vs. freely chosen talents. If the game decides to take you by the hand and slap certain abilities onto you and you just can't help it, with the sole intention of being noob friendly, that rubs me the wrong way.

 

I came into P:E with certain expectations, which were based on Sawyer's promise that this game won't require you to have one of each class in your party, as it usually is in D&D. What I took away from this was, hey, if I want to roll with a 6 ranger party I can do that. That may have been a little too enthusiastic on my part, but still. I figured that this approach would require some metagame knowledge about enemies, talents etc., but could be pulled off by an experienced player via the right selection of 'feats' and attributes for each character according to their role. Now it seems that for the sake of class distinction, a party with 6 of the same type may not work well, with characters largely defined by their abilities. The fact that no experience with the game's attributes would make me better at building i.e. tanking rangers and scouting rangers is just salt to the wound.

Edited October 22, 2013 by Sacred_Path

[sarkthas]

Class specific Monk. 

 

I was hoping the class would be closer to how it was in BG2. Weak at lower levels, but with very good magic resistance at higher levels...=)

Edited October 22, 2013 by sarkthas