The bad things about Project Eternity...

[Lephys]

EDIT: I've said my bit, and clarified things, and you either believe me or arbitrarily label me a liar. I'll not waste my time "discussing" with you if you're going to ignore my very words and meanings.

Edited November 9, 2013 by Lephys

[Hassat Hunter]

Oh, look, a thread I wisely ignored, till now.

 

I assume the above posters haven't actually read the objective XP vs. kill XP threads? Do so. I so tried my best in them to be reasonable... but to some, it seemed like talking to a brick wall.

Seriously, read the threads. But don't come complaining to me afterwards if you;

1) Lost hope in humanity

2) Are seriously mind****ed

3) Your PC catched fire from the flamewars bursting out

4) Somehow inherit the brick-wall thinking of some users, the one Lephys means with 'they'

5) Forever fear the word 'they'

[Sarex]

Again, it's a 2 way street.

[zimcub]

I can't read the threads, because i have serious lack of time, because of my job and i probably won't be able to for another month or two. And saying go read about "them" doesn't really tell me much.

 

Lephys first commented how things aren't the truth and that we don't know what the truth will be so it's better to imagine a "perfect world", where everything comes true, because a discussion based on speculation is a bad thing. We explain why we think the discussion is important about this, even if it's speculation. And now he's telling me, he said that because some guys in ANOTHER thread annoy hm and are ruining things by taking it too far?

 

I pushed Lephys because he talks like a politician, where every post ends with "maybe i think that way, maybe i don't", and when i push him on what on earth he's actually talking about, all i get is "they" and "them" are doing "that", which i still fail to see what it has to do with this thread.

If you have a bone to pick with some of the posts, then point it out specifically, but don't tell new posters on what they should be imagining instead. Especially if your only problem here is "other" people with brick-like minds in "other" threads.

 

There will be flame wars on every forum, where people actually care about the product and i think it's a necessary evil, if it means that developers can find gold nuggets among the discussion, because that is when posters actually give it their all to make a point. And for all we know, those brick-walled people, just might be right, since we know just as much as them.

 

 

And Lephys's expectation, that developers will actually mention things specifically, like "we plan to make Candlekeep-like quests", is unrealistic as they won't comment on every single thing they do. Things like this will be apparent only when the game is actually complete, which will be too late, so i see nothing wrong with him posting his fear about it either, and thus notifying the developers (if the read it) on what they should also be careful about.

Edited November 9, 2013 by zimcub

[Hassat Hunter]

Again, it's a 2 way street.

You haven't read them, have you?

In these there are pretty clear distinctions between users who actually give reasons, pro's and con's, discuss, try to give counters to your arguments... (the reasonable), some who simply are 'I prefer it this way', which is totally fine, and nothing bad can be said about that (again, reasonable), and... the brick wall who insults others, ignore their posts, ignore their points being repeatedly adressed in the 'see, no one has replied back yet how this is a bad example (yes, yes, we have)'... the people in question.

Not quite sure why you're on the defensive, since as far as I can tell, you're not seen as one of those. But they exist, and I gave you a pretty good thread to see that for yourself to read.

 

It's not about which side one is on, it's how the discussion goes. There's a difference between discussion and completely ignoring everything everyone else says and then insult them.

I think you know that too, right?

And saying go read about "them" doesn't really tell me much.

Sadly, it's one of those things were telling doesn't do much good, one has to experience the horrible thruth for him- or herself.

 

I personally wouldn't object to discussion about speculation. That's a good thing, a healthy thing for a forum for a game not yet published.

But of course a line can be reached if someone just goes all out hating on the developers, saying stuff like "J.E. Sawyer ruins all games. He's the destroyer of fun, I want him to die" cause of ONE thing in PE... you don't agree that's kinda overstepping the line?

I do... I really, really, do.

 

As for the gold nuggest section, I agree. But the nugget might be burried deep if a thread goes haywire and post and post of crap gets posted. No developer is going to waste their time reading all of that, and thus, the value gets dimished or lost.

I really don't know how (even if) OE scoures these boards, and if they actually take suggestions from it, or from posts go around asking themselves questions or change things. We all don't know. But I can bet we all know no dev will read every post in a 50-page thread. Especially if filled with hate and flame.

I sure hope too developers can distinguish good ideas from bad. Sometimes things sound good on paper, but can get bad in execution (or vice-versa) and gamers usually don't understand that and may get hateful. And of course the danger lurks too from misinterpretating data, the fun thing that got us Dragon Age 2. Cause a statistic saying X doesn't give a reason, and pasting one to it, especially a wrong one, can be very risky.

 

PE's development is actually opener than most. Boon of Kickstarter, with the journals and J.E. Sawyer and Adam Brennecke posting her often too. But yes, much will be hold back of course, since stuff always gets cut in game development, and how often have you not had that a preview of a game told stuff that never made the final version and was just 'damn, I was looking forward to that'. Better not give false promises, especially since it's made for a select niche market of hardcore fans, and you kinda want to keep them to you.

 

TL;DR variation; Discussion is fine. Brickwalling and doomsaying however, doesn't help anyone. Nor does blind faith that Obsidian will do perfect.

[zimcub]

"J.E. Sawyer ruins all games. He's the destroyer of fun, I want him to die"

Hahahahahahahahaha, if those are the people you're talking about, then yes i agree, you have a valid point (however that doesn't seem like what happened here). I've learned not to even bat an eyelash at those kind of comments, so i can't even take those people as a serious point of discussion. Probably also why i can't actually remember seeing them, because i probably erased them from my mind.

Edited November 9, 2013 by zimcub

[cleric Nemir]

So the Scarborough fair became a Vanity one. I'm learning more and more about that funny word,ambiguous. Never going to use it,though.

[Lephys]

I can't read the threads, because i have serious lack of time, because of my job and i probably won't be able to for another month or two. And saying go read about "them" doesn't really tell me much.

Then why don't you use your time efficiently (and save yourself the trouble of having to type out all this stuff in argument to what I'm not even saying) by actually reading my posts, then followup clarifications?

 

Lephys first commented how things aren't the truth and that we don't know what the truth will be so it's better to imagine a "perfect world", where everything comes true, because a discussion based on speculation is a bad thing. We explain why we think the discussion is important about this, even if it's speculation. And now he's telling me, he said that because some guys in ANOTHER thread annoy hm and are ruining things by taking it too far?

You are mistaken. All I said was that we only know what we actually know, and that, regarding unknown things, speculation is all fine and dandy and leads to productive discussion, while assumption is arbitrary and leads to a dead end. I didn't say anything about anyone in particular in this thread, because I didn't even bring it up. If I had been talking about a particular post, I would've cited it. It's the mindset I was getting at. Why is it important that some people in other threads have done it? Because this is a forum, and we're all humans, and we're all capable of taking things too far, even inadvertently, and I've seen a lot of people (yes, even in this thread) that start venturing dangerously close to that mindset, of focusing SO hard on the most negative sheer possibilities they can that they start disliking the game based on what it could possibly be, rather than on what it will actually be. And while that isn't quite a dead end, it's the path to it, and I encourage people to keep that in mind, and to focus on exploring the possibilities they would like to see rather than all-but-assuming the ones they wouldn't are going to ruin the game.

 

I don't see how encouragement to remain objective and unassumptive (I know, probably not an actual word) to maintain the quality of discussion is irrelevant to a discussion. Do you wait until someone burns himself on a stove that you knew was hot to warn him about it, or do you tell him beforehand, "Hey, just so you know, you're awfully close to that stove, and it's actually quite hot"? Maybe he knew. Maybe he didn't. Encouraging information doesn't label people as idiots. It's not a hostile gesture or accusation.

 

I pushed Lephys because he talks like a politician, where every post ends with "maybe i think that way, maybe i don't", and when i push him on what on earth he's actually talking about, all i get is "they" and "them" are doing "that", which i still fail to see what it has to do with this thread.

No, you pushed me because you misunderstood my words, and instead of saying "I don't know what you're trying to say here" or asking for clarification, you just decided "assume that whatever it seems to ME that he's saying -- even though I'm aware that I'm unclear as to the actual meaning of his argument -- is precisely what he's intending, because he's voluntarily being an ambiguous, misleading shady politician." If you misunderstand, so be it. But I don't appreciate being told that I'm intentionally misleading you for the sake of deception and trickery. That's not a very nice accusation.

 

And Lephys's expectation, that developers will actually mention things specifically, like "we plan to make Candlekeep-like quests", is unrealistic as they won't comment on every single thing they do.

Never, ever said I expected that. I only said that, since they haven't commented on the specifics, we don't know that quests will be like Candlekeep quests. So there's no need to point out a "flaw" in a quest system that is dependent upon the game being filled with Candlekeep-like quests. True story. And no, for the record, I'm not alleging that you said some specific thing. I'm merely clarifying what I've ACTUALLY stated as compared to what you're alleging I'm arguing, above.

 

If you require further clarification from me, please ask. I've never claimed that I'm the perfect communicator, and you're dumb if you don't get my exact meaning instantly. But, if you're not going to ask and help me be more clear about whatever it is that isn't clear (regarding my thoughts and posts), then I'll save us both the perpetuation of your misunderstandings. Your choice.

[YourVoiceisAmbrosia]

I like most of what I've seen from Project Eternity thus far. I can understand the controversy surrounding objective XP vs kill XP, but at the same time I can see how both have their advantages and disadvantages and can be implemented both well and poorly. 

 

I'm hoping that the world of Project Eternity will have some sort of alien or bizarre aspect to it (much akin to Torment) or that it would make an attempt to subvert typical conventions and expectations found in most role playing games. We have Elves and Dwarves, which are commonly seen and found in most fantasy games and have been the norm for quite some time, and much of what we have seen is very reminiscent of Baldur's Gate. That's certainly not a bad thing at all; in fact, that's what the Kickstarter advertised to begin with, but Baldur's Gate follows many fantasy tropes that have been done many times before and I wouldn't mind seeing something that most role playing games never try.

 

I guess the main concern I have is that Obsidian feels pressured to "play it safe" and avoid taking artistic risks. I can understand why they would feel this way; they've been given a once-in-a-lifetime chance to make a game without executive meddling and there appears to be a lot of pressure on them from their fanbase to make a "good" RPG with this one shot. However, part of what made games like Torment and KOTOR II memorable is that they deviated from the tried-and-true methods we see in most setting and games and took these risks to deliver a unique experience. 

 

Granted, I'm not trying to say that what we're seeing is completely generic; it seems like there has been a lot of attention to detail in making a consistent and believable world, which is another aspect I really like. Also, much of the writing has not been revealed (I'm assuming for good reason) so it's not fair to pass judgement yet. In fact, we really don't know much of anything about this game at all, aside from some of the basics, so this post may just come off as silly in the end. 

 

All I can really say is that I hope the people at Obsidian make the game that they want. The dream game that they always wanted to play, but never could because the state of the industry wouldn't let them. It may not seem like it from a lot of these forum posts, but I am led to believe the people who backed this project did so because they wanted to give you creative freedom that would not normally exist in most publisher models. If you just "played it by the book" because you're worried of displeasing your fanbase, then, ironically enough, it won't be much different from how publishers would want you to "play it by the book" to net more sales. Do whatever comes natural, because it appears, at least to me, that most of the people here like it when you do what you want.

[zimcub]

Then why don't you use your time efficiently (and save yourself the trouble of having to type out all this stuff in argument to what I'm not even saying) by actually reading my posts, then followup clarifications?

I am and i see is you trying to backtrack and worm yourself out of an argument you got in to because you "assumed" (quote the irony) that Cubiq is another doombringer.

 

I didn't say anything about anyone in particular in this thread, because I didn't even bring it up.

So, what are you doing here again? Telling others they aren't allowed to "assume" because of some other people in a different thread?

 

Why is it important that some people in other threads have done it? Because this is a forum, and we're all humans, and we're all capable of taking things too far, even inadvertently, and I've seen a lot of people (yes, even in this thread) that start venturing dangerously close to that mindset, of focusing SO hard on the most negative sheer possibilities they can that they start disliking the game based on what it could possibly be, rather than on what it will actually be. And while that isn't quite a dead end, it's the path to it, and I encourage people to keep that in mind, and to focus on exploring the possibilities they would like to see rather than all-but-assuming the ones they wouldn't are going to ruin the game.

Why don't you stop white knighting for the developers, and telling people what they should and shouldn't imagine on this forum (It's not "encouragement", if you're the only one who thinks it is), since the developers are perfectly capable of stopping any argument they want to, with actual information about the game, if it's wrong, or by moderation if they feel they go too far.

You're just telling people what to do based on the ASSUMPTION that it MIGHT not be what they think it is, so you got absolutely no ground here yourself. And what you think is too doom and gloom might not be for the rest of the people here, and you have no right to decide where the line is.  The developers/moderators do.

 

And i'm pretty sure that if you had actually been in an argument (i say argument, because you clearly have different views) with some of the people (like Cubiq) and instead of telling them they are just assuming things, you would immediately find out from them what they actually want from the game, since the topic goes hand in hand.

 

No, you pushed me because you misunderstood my words, and instead of saying

Oh no i didn't misunderstand, i pushed you because I've been reading your posts for a while (they are hard to miss on this forum) and in most posts you talk like a politician, where you try to shift the point away after you are confronted by it with some kind of philosophy. Even now, I asked you to specificlly point out the people you believe to be the cause of this discussion, and you still have not shown a single post on who "they" are, that you keep talking about, so that we may compare it to Cubiq's post and see what exactly gave you the right to tell Cubiq he should, instead of pointing out his fears and worries for the game, in the attempt to reach out to developers and see his point, be thinking about roses and daisies.

 

I am actually giving you a way out here, the benefit of the doubt, (and i can't believe i have to point it out for you), that maybe, just MAYBE the posts are such horrors and unspeakable monstrocities, that gives you the right to stop and repress "other" post in "other" threads from "other" people that might have something to do with "assumption" and game design in the same post, even though it might help development, in some cases.

 

 

But I don't appreciate being told that I'm intentionally misleading you for the sake of deception and trickery. That's not a very nice accusation.

You are and I'll prove it in the next 2 quotes

 

And Lephys's expectation, that developers will actually mention things specifically, like "we plan to make Candlekeep-like quests", is unrealistic as they won't comment on every single thing they do.

Never, ever said I expected that I only said that, since they haven't commented on the specifics, we don't know that quests will be like Candlekeep quests. So there's no need to point out a "flaw" in a quest system that is dependent upon the game being filled with Candlekeep-like quests.

You did.

I would just save all that concern until one of the updates is "We really liked the Candlekeep chore quests, and we hope to fill the game with quests just like those.

A direct quote from you, from your reply to Cubiq.

 

 

If we ignore the part where you just tried to worm yourself out of a point by twisting words and trying to deny what you clearly said.

 

Please explain to me exactly HOW do you expect them to point out with "specifics" that there won't be Candlekeep like quests other than them stating it directly?

Perhaps with a vague statement like: "There won't be short quests"? Really? and who defines what is short?

There won't be xp attached to trivial tasks? Really? who defines what is trivial?

Maybe the developers don't consider the Candlekeep quests to be short or trivial? If they consider the quests to be an "important part of getting to know the world". Then they might be an exception to any statement they use to define other quests.

It's absolutely unrealistic to expect them go in to such "specifics" unless you intentionally point it out to them. (to which you have already said is not allowed because we aren't allowed to "assume")

Edited November 13, 2013 by zimcub

[MattH]

I keep thinking that that big waterfall in the first background art would either need to have a larger pool or be very young,

[Diagoras]

Anyone else getting a kick out of people in the complaints/criticism thread complaining about people criticizing the complaints thread?

[Sarex]

Anyone else getting a kick out of people in the complaints/criticism thread complaining about people criticizing the complaints thread?

 

Another post that has added oh so much to the discussion at hand. Don't worry friend we notice you, no need to feel alone.

[Diagoras]

Another post that has added oh so much to the discussion at hand. Don't worry friend we notice you, no need to feel alone.

 

 

Now we're at people complaining about people criticizing people complaining about people criticizing the complaints thread.

Edited November 13, 2013 by Diagoras

[Karkarov]

I avoided this thread up until now mostly for one reason....  That there is only one real response to it and I will likely be trolled for saying it.  However since a couple other people have come out and said it I feel it is only appropriate to back them up.

 

We don't know enough about the real mechanics of the game to determine if it is going to be a good game or not.  We know some generalities and some very loose basics like the "no exp per kill" but we haven't played them in game so we don't know for sure how it all comes together and works.  What's worse is... those are generalities.  How can you be calling down a game for making mistakes or potentially being bad when you can even tell me how much stam and hp a level 1 fighter has.  That is some pretty bare bones basic info... but we don't know.  What level do you need to learn to use fireball?  I can't even decisively tell you the names of any important non player NPC's.  If I don't have even that basic a level of info how could I possibly be able to make any kind of determination of if the game is good or not?

 

That said you can hate me for saying this but the no kill exp thing sure didn't hurt Mass Effect 2/3's popularity at all and I think it played out just fine.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Another post that has added oh so much to the discussion at hand. Don't worry friend we notice you, no need to feel alone.

 

 

Now we're at people complaining about people criticizing people complaining about people criticizing the complaints thread.

 

 

[mcmanusaur]

I have likewise (wisely it seems) avoided this thread until now, because I am yet another who feels that these kinds of threads and the "discussion" they generate are not constructive. However, now that we have some borderline flaming directed at those who have expressed similar sentiments, I feel that I have to make my case.

 

There just aren't "bad things" about Project Eternity, especially at this point when we haven't yet experienced the game, because it's all subjective anyway; there are some aspects of game design that I might construe as objectively good or bad but none of the complaints in this thread fall under that (since having it one way just achieves a different goal than having it another way). A better title might be "What are your dislikes about PE so far?", but even that's still quite premature.

 

What this thread will likely achieve over anything else (since it is not a suggestions thread) is further cementing people's psychological biases regarding specific features (about which, like many have already said, we hardly have complete knowledge), so that they will approach the finished product from a more biased perspective and the whole thing just becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

That said, if this is what you guys want to do with your time, then you're free to do so- this is just my opinion about your "opinions"- and no, I'm not obliged to name specific posters for my points to be valid. I simply think there are much more constructive ways to approach discussing the game than "let's lump all the 'bad' things about the game into one thread!".

 

Bu please, proceed.

Edited November 13, 2013 by mcmanusaur

[obyknven]

Now we can compare strategic elements, faction menegment and outposts building from Dragon Age: Inquisition  with stronghold from Project Eternity.

Bioware perform great job and invent new gameplay strategic elements, modifable enviroment, cool design.  Meanwhile Obsidian just copypaste strongholds from Baldur's Gate 2 / NWN 2 and it's make PE pathetic if they really don't add nothing new (and cool) into gameplay.

 

I even don't talk about visual superriority of DA:I upon PE.

http://youtu.be/98Y1IAY-TYk

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Wow, oby that is obvious even for you.

[Messier-31]

Where is the "dislike" button?

[Karkarov]

Where is the "dislike" button?

I have asked myself this question when browsing this forum many many times.

[Sacred_Path]

oby: There's a stronghold update. It's about strongholds.

[jethro]

Bioware perform great job and invent new gameplay strategic elements, modifable enviroment, cool design.  Meanwhile Obsidian just copypaste strongholds from Baldur's Gate 2 / NWN 2 and it's make PE pathetic if they really don't add nothing new (and cool) into gameplay.

 

 

"Bioware perform great job and invent new gameplay strategic elements". strategic? STRATETIC???? BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAAA

 

oby, you are a very funny man.

 

But the best part of your satire was the bioware movie full of empty he-man action perfectly suited for twitchy 11 year old boys who dream to be heroes by hitting buttons on their controller at the right moment. 

[Lephys]

@Zimcub:

 

You are being outright irrational at this point, so further "discussion" is a bit moot. Believe it or don't, but your correctness is not the topic of this thread, so I'll not be continuing on the matter.

[teknoman2]

lol, of course the graphics look better, they use the same engine as battlefield 4, while PE uses an indie engine. however PE is 2D so they can add as much detail as they want in the final draft.

as for the strategic elements...