:( Sad that obsidian is making this game isometric...

[cleric Nemir]

 

"maiming is like a less permanent death for the non hardcore gamers" . Oh,wow.

So the Day has finally come..  Look on their work ye mighty, and despair; the legendary Obsidian made player character death a hardcore thing.

 

I just know I'm going to have nightmares about this one. Death of the PC is hardcore now.

Death of the PC is.. hardcore..

Death.. of the PC.. is hardcore..

Death.. PC.. hardcore..

 

Edited November 12, 2013 by cleric Nemir

[Malekith]

Welcome to 2013

[Lephys]

*shrug*. Some people don't want their characters to die-die. Forever-sies. So, instead of reloading the game every time someone dies, to achieve their "no one's wiped from the face of the earth just because I'm not skilled enough at this game" playthrough, they can simply go on with their virtual lives and simply deal with a "death" penalty, so that combat still encourages them to make sure no one dies. Just not "OR ELSE!"

 

If you're actually going to continue playing after someone has died, never to use them ever again (because you screwed up 30 minutes into the game), foregoing an entire playthrough's worth of companion reactivity and content... I'd call that relatively hardcore, if I were going to assess death options and rate them as hard-or-soft-core.

[Tamerlane]

 

"maiming is like a less permanent death for the non hardcore gamers" . Oh,wow.

So the Day has finally come..  Look on their work ye mighty, and despair; the legendary Obsidian made player character death a hardcore thing.

 

I just know I'm going to have nightmares about this one. Death of the PC is hardcore now.

Death of the PC is.. hardcore..

Death.. of the PC.. is hardcore..

Death.. PC.. hardcore..

 

Hey guys, stop playing games wrooooooooong!

[cleric Nemir]

Well, ladi-fukin-da. I ain't even mad anymore.

[Bli1942]

   Heard about this game recently and decided to make a forum account to get other peoples opinions about it.  im very dissapointed in the fact that they are making an "infinity engine style" game.

 

i hurd resently dat dey r making it fps instead n 5 hrs long

[cleric Nemir]

 

 

"maiming is like a less permanent death for the non hardcore gamers" . Oh,wow.

So the Day has finally come..  Look on their work ye mighty, and despair; the legendary Obsidian made player character death a hardcore thing.

 

I just know I'm going to have nightmares about this one. Death of the PC is hardcore now.

Death of the PC is.. hardcore..

Death.. of the PC.. is hardcore..

Death.. PC.. hardcore..

 

Hey guys, stop playing games wrooooooooong!

 

 

I've grown to like Lephys's "slap both b*tches" style more than anyone else's, sorreh.

[Walsingham]

I'm just a tiny bit late to this party. I'd echo other posters:

 

- Isometric delivers vastly superior tactical control in groups, compared with FPS

- I don't see how being able to walk around someone in FPS increases my social engagement with them, when facial expressions are as ropey as they are using current technology

 

I'd go further and and _suggest_ that generating a fully 3D world imposes a heavy burden on designers (artistic and tactical), and draws resources away from story and dialogue. I am absolutely unequivocal on where I want the main effort: story and dialogue.

 

Hope that helps the OP understand.

[jethro]

 

"maiming is like a less permanent death for the non hardcore gamers" . Oh,wow.

So the Day has finally come..  Look on their work ye mighty, and despair; the legendary Obsidian made player character death a hardcore thing.

 

--------------------------------------------

A: "Well we had it tough. We used to have to get up out of the shoebox at twelve o'clock at night, and LICK the road clean with our tongues. We had half a handful of freezing cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at the mill for fourpence every six years, and when we got home, our Dad would slice us in two with a bread knife."

 

B: "Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, (pause for laughter), eat a lump of cold poison, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing "Hallelujah.""

 

C: But you try and tell the young people today that... and they won't believe ya'.

--------------------------------------------

 

(If you don't recognize it, that's the end of the Monty Python "Four Yorkshire Men" sketch)

 

In ye good olde days of BG I played with Minsc and whoever else I chose as companions from beginning to end. And if one of them died I reloaded (at least as long as "raise dead" as in-game reload-equivalent wasn't available). Because for me story was more important than playing a combat simulator. And I can't prove it, but I would bet a substantial sum that a majority of BG players at that time did exactly the same. So where do you see your very subjective "hardcore" in this mass of reloaders and raise-deaders?

Edited November 12, 2013 by jethro

[Sensuki]

I do not mind reloading if a character dies, that has been the acceptable norm for me in games since I started playing RPGs. If a character of yours gets killed, it simply means that you made a mistake and need to play better.

 

One could argue that a lot of the stuff in the BG & IWDs revolved around a bit of a dice roll (such as saves) but most of the time you had to interrupt casters casting save or die spells or prepare the correct protective spells in advance. Some people find this tedious but I just accepted it as the standard, I do not have a problem with it as such.

 

In Eternity these things have been removed. There's still some randomness but it's more controlled than in previous IE titles. One could argue these are better circumstances for Permanent Death (and there is also no Raise Dead).

 

Eternity also has the Health and Stamina mechanic to further reduce the chances of permanent death of a character. Player controlled characters are given the equivalent of three lives before they start running low on Health resources.

 

The difference between the people that intend to play with permanent death and maiming is that the Permanent Death crowd is either like me in the fact that they do not mind reloading if they made a mistake, and enjoy the more strict circumstances upon what is considered a failure OR they are part of the crowd that accepts companion death as a part of role-playing, and play on regardless. Whereas the maiming crowd does not enjoy the strict circumstances and are in favor of reducing the amount of reloading they have to do to get through the game while keeping their companions intact.

 

It's good that we have options.

[BruceVC]

I do not mind reloading if a character dies, that has been the acceptable norm for me in games since I started playing RPGs. If a character of yours gets killed, it simply means that you made a mistake and need to play better.

 

One could argue that a lot of the stuff in the BG & IWDs revolved around a bit of a dice roll (such as saves) but most of the time you had to interrupt casters casting save or die spells or prepare the correct protective spells in advance. Some people find this tedious but I just accepted it as the standard, I do not have a problem with it as such.

 

In Eternity these things have been removed. There's still some randomness but it's more controlled than in previous IE titles. One could argue these are better circumstances for Permanent Death (and there is also no Raise Dead).

 

Eternity also has the Health and Stamina mechanic to further reduce the chances of permanent death of a character. Player controlled characters are given the equivalent of three lives before they start running low on Health resources.

 

The difference between the people that intend to play with permanent death and maiming is that the Permanent Death crowd is either like me in the fact that they do not mind reloading if they made a mistake, and enjoy the more strict circumstances upon what is considered a failure OR they are part of the crowd that accepts companion death as a part of role-playing, and play on regardless. Whereas the maiming crowd does not enjoy the strict circumstances and are in favor of reducing the amount of reloading they have to do to get through the game while keeping their companions intact.

 

It's good that we have options.

 

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

[Messier-31]

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

 

For 99% it's the latter.

[BruceVC]

 

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

 

For 99% it's the latter.

 

 

Exactly my point, I question if people REALLY restart an game after spending 50 hours + playing just because they got killed. This would be the ultimate exercise in futility for me

[Bli1942]

 

 

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

 

For 99% it's the latter.

 

 

Exactly my point, I question if people REALLY restart an game after spending 50 hours + playing just because they got killed. This would be the ultimate exercise in futility for me

 

 

It would be pretty fun to do that but only once...and I feel like it'd work better in something like MOrrowind, I always die so easily in infinity engine games

[Tamerlane]

I think "play it through, even if things go badly" would be a lot more popular if the loss of companions affected the narrative in any significant manner. But... well, it doesn't. Lose Boone to a bunch of nightstalkers? Boone is never mentioned again until the epilogue. Grace gets smashed by a construct in the Modron Cube and you don't have Raise Dead? At best you'll get a line from Annah mocking her and that's it. "I've spent twenty hours with this character and they just died and they ain't coming back" should be a pretty ****ing big thing to accept, but it's not really reflected in most games that allow companion permadeath. Not the Infinity Engine games, not the Fallouts, not Fire Emblem, not Valkyria Chronicles...

 

... and I can't blame developers for that one bit. "Doing it properly" would be a large amount of effort for minimal gain.

Edited November 12, 2013 by Tamerlane

[cleric Nemir]

 

 

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

 

For 99% it's the latter.

 

 

Exactly my point, I question if people REALLY restart an game after spending 50 hours + playing just because they got killed. This would be the ultimate exercise in futility for me

 

 

Of course that noone was doing that but a sadistic few, and I sure wasn't one of them.

 

Is it late to mention again that we had various other ways to prevent permadeath in the games before this one, so you already had a set of chances in which you could prolong such a "nuisance" that dying surely is? There already was the "equivalent of three lives" all along,cmon. Cause there was healing & resurrection trough spells or items, and unique heavy buffing.

 

So if it wasn't broken,why are they fixing it? (SIGH. No, I mean "broken" as in "non functional" - NOT "flawed,but operational"", and "fixing" as in "repairing" - NOT "starting from scratch") Why did the need to improve turned into a rework that looks like this: We added a new element, Stamina, and we thrown healing and resurrection out. Instakills? Vorpal swords? We consider them a nuisance, screw those. Wait.. with no healing and resurrection, how do we make actual dying situation less of a problem inthere? We'll remove it.

 

And those "punks" that wanna get sadistic, NOT the imaginary 1% that continues the game when one of the companions is dead - but those punks  that were perfectly normal with: (Sensuki again - he's better with words than me, ergo the quotes) "I do not mind reloading if a character dies, that has been the acceptable norm for me in games since I started playing RPGs. If a character of yours gets killed, it simply means that you made a mistake and need to play better. One could argue that a lot of the stuff in the BG & IWDs revolved around a bit of a dice roll (such as saves) but most of the time you had to interrupt casters casting save or die spells or prepare the correct protective spells in advance. Some people find this tedious but I just accepted it as the standard, I do not have a problem with it as such.",for those gamers we have a toggle of PC death/game mode that gives 'em their coveted reloads and immersion-friendly deaths, lulz, have fun healing that if you fail at the first go.

 

"It's good that we have options.", Sensuki concludes.

Though I generally support his post's view, I must add that we need to ask ourselves how far must it go? My previous, most recent post was a lame joke, but now I am serious. I do not think that developers are doing it right and that they can surely do better. Let me answer the jethro's question:  So where do you see your very subjective "hardcore" in this mass of reloaders and raise-deaders? I DO NOT SEE IT. THAT WAS MY JOKE'S POINT. WHAT WAS ONCE NORMAL IS BEING MADE INTO A HARDCORE OVER THE YEARS. I even hate the whole - hard/soft core separations to begin with.

 

But I didn't invented the damn separation, and the "evolution" of cRPGs is adjusting the slider on it not towards hard or soft in particular, but moving it altogether towards BAD. In My H fukin O.

Edited November 12, 2013 by cleric Nemir

[Karkarov]

What happened to talking about why the game being isometric is bad?  Doesn't the perma death debate already have it's own thread?

[teknoman2]

What happened to talking about why the game being isometric is bad?  Doesn't the perma death debate already have it's own thread?

it's called evolution of discussion. after a few pages we will move to something else

[Tamerlane]

I dunno, Kark. I'm kinda enjoying the... whatever the hell this is.

[teknoman2]

 

 

 

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

 

For 99% it's the latter.

 

 

Exactly my point, I question if people REALLY restart an game after spending 50 hours + playing just because they got killed. This would be the ultimate exercise in futility for me

 

 

Of course that noone was doing that but a sadistic few, and I sure wasn't one of them.

 

Is it late to mention again that we had various other ways to prevent permadeath in the games before this one, so you already had a set of chances in which you could prolong such a "nuisance" that dying surely is? There already was the "equivalent of three lives" all along,cmon. Cause there was healing & resurrection trough spells or items, and unique heavy buffing.

 

So if it wasn't broken,why are they fixing it? (SIGH. No, I mean "broken" as in "non functional" - NOT "flawed,but operational"", and "fixing" as in "repairing" - NOT "starting from scratch") Why did the need to improve turned into a rework that looks like this: We added a new element, Stamina, and we thrown healing and resurrection out. Instakills? Vorpal swords? We consider them a nuisance, screw those. Wait.. with no healing and resurrection, how do we make actual dying situation less of a problem inthere? We'll remove it.

 

And those "punks" that wanna get sadistic, NOT the imaginary 1% that continues the game when one of the companions is dead - but those punks  that were perfectly normal with: (Sensuki again - he's better with words than me, ergo the quotes) "I do not mind reloading if a character dies, that has been the acceptable norm for me in games since I started playing RPGs. If a character of yours gets killed, it simply means that you made a mistake and need to play better. One could argue that a lot of the stuff in the BG & IWDs revolved around a bit of a dice roll (such as saves) but most of the time you had to interrupt casters casting save or die spells or prepare the correct protective spells in advance. Some people find this tedious but I just accepted it as the standard, I do not have a problem with it as such.",for those gamers we have a toggle of PC death/game mode that gives 'em their coveted reloads and immersion-friendly deaths, lulz, have fun healing that if you fail at the first go.

 

"It's good that we have options.", Sensuki concludes.

Though I generally support his post's view, I must add that we need to ask ourselves how far must it go? My previous, most recent post was a lame joke, but now I am serious. I do not think that developers are doing it right and that they can surely do better. Let me answer the jethro's question:  So where do you see your very subjective "hardcore" in this mass of reloaders and raise-deaders? I DO NOT SEE IT. THAT WAS MY JOKE'S POINT. WHAT WAS ONCE NORMAL IS BEING MADE INTO A HARDCORE OVER THE YEARS. I even hate the whole - hard/soft core separations to begin with.

 

But I didn't invented the damn separation, and the "evolution" of cRPGs is adjusting the slider on it not towards hard or soft in particular, but moving it altogether towards BAD. In My H fukin O.

 

this all is nice and good but what do you propose they do? what solution to the death mechanic would seem right to you? finding something flawed is as easy as breathing, considering that there is nothing flawless, finding a solution that will make everyone happy is not, hence the options to adjust "death" to how you want to play

i find the fact that characters do not die in the latest games unless the whole party is down a good thing. i can finish the fight and get on with the game, without having to drag the party all the way to the other side of the world to find a priest that can resurect my dead or loading and replaying the entire battle. what i do not like is the complete regeneration of the characters at the end of a fight.

the "if he dies he dies and you have to move on" style is something i do not enjoy, but i know that some people do. so it should be an optional feature, but forcing all players to play like that is wrong, unless you make a sadistically hard game like dark souls

Edited November 12, 2013 by teknoman2

[Tamerlane]

No, tekno, you don't get it. You are playing videogames wrong!

[BruceVC]

 

What happened to talking about why the game being isometric is bad?  Doesn't the perma death debate already have it's own thread?

it's called evolution of discussion. after a few pages we will move to something else

 

 

Correct we evolve and refine our discussions on this forum, besides since when do we ever adhere 100% to any original topic

[IndiraLightfoot]

I'd love to see this fun discussion having its own thread, but I'm not anal about topics and indexation, and the spirit of these forums is indeed lax in this matter.

[Messier-31]

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure I understand what you saying, are you saying if you have been playing a particular RPG for say 60 hours and your main character gets killed you are fine starting the whole game again? Or when you say reloading you just mean restoring a previous saved game?

 

For 99% it's the latter.

 

 

Exactly my point, I question if people REALLY restart an game after spending 50 hours + playing just because they got killed. This would be the ultimate exercise in futility for me

 

 

Of course that noone was doing that but a sadistic few, and I sure wasn't one of them.

(...)

 

But I didn't invented the damn separation, and the "evolution" of cRPGs is adjusting the slider on it not towards hard or soft in particular, but moving it altogether towards BAD. In My H fukin O.

 

 

this all is nice and good but what do you propose they do? what solution to the death mechanic would seem right to you? finding something flawed is as easy as breathing, considering that there is nothing flawless, finding a solution that will make everyone happy is not, hence the options to adjust "death" to how you want to play

i find the fact that characters do not die in the latest games unless the whole party is down a good thing. i can finish the fight and get on with the game, without having to drag the party all the way to the other side of the world to find a priest that can resurect my dead or loading and replaying the entire battle. what i do not like is the complete regeneration of the characters at the end of a fight.

the "if he dies he dies and you have to move on" style is something i do not enjoy, but i know that some people do. so it should be an optional feature, but forcing all players to play like that is wrong, unless you make a sadistically hard game like dark souls

 

QUOTATION PYRAMID! Weeeeeeee!

 

 

 

What happened to talking about why the game being isometric is bad?  Doesn't the perma death debate already have it's own thread?

 

it's called evolution of discussion. after a few pages we will move to something else

 

Yeah, you know what they say about Godwin's law:

 

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches 1. In other words, Godwin said that, given enough time, in any online discussion — regardless of topic or scope — someone inevitably makes a comparison to Hitler or the Nazis.

 

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

Edited November 12, 2013 by Messier-31

[jethro]

"It's good that we have options.", Sensuki concludes.

Though I generally support his post's view, I must add that we need to ask ourselves how far must it go? My previous, most recent post was a lame joke, but now I am serious. I do not think that developers are doing it right and that they can surely do better. Let me answer the jethro's question:  So where do you see your very subjective "hardcore" in this mass of reloaders and raise-deaders? I DO NOT SEE IT. THAT WAS MY JOKE'S POINT. WHAT WAS ONCE NORMAL IS BEING MADE INTO A HARDCORE OVER THE YEARS. I even hate the whole - hard/soft core separations to begin with.

Well, lets think again, if you just reload after a death, you have an easier game play than someone who plays on with a maimed character. You agree? So something isn't right if the first play style is called the hardcore one.

 

So either the developers didn't think at all when they made that comment or they were assuming that when you play with death enabled you really want death and don't want to reload. I.e. someone who reloads should play with maimed instead so that he doesn't need the whimpy reload anymore and really hardcore players turn death on.

 

In other words, when the developers talked of hardcore they probably meant real hardcore, not the mass of players that were as whimpy in BGs times as they are now, including you and me.

Edited November 12, 2013 by jethro