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

[BruceVC]

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.

 

Hi Indira

You've been a little quiet lately? Where have you been

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I have a feeling Messier-31 is Hitler's alt.

[cleric Nemir]

 

"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.

 

 

 

NO! You can have a maimed character that will EVENTUALLY end up dead if you do not ACT. You can have him slowly dying, in a sort of "bleeding to death" way we mentioned. But that turned into a "you could've had", because they decided to rip you off of means to stabilize that character's "bleeding to death" state and regenerate him enough hp that he can remain safe. This can be done different yet equally good in many,many ways, with your actions as a player and AI actions properly balanced, AND turn out tactically appealing. Plus,no - I am not against the penalties that would be applied to that character as teknoman2 believes, I consider that idea fukin briliant.

 

I also only once specifically said that, in so far seen cRPGs, the death of a PC isn't necessarily a game-over situation, and that is bloody true - because you had means of raising that dead fuker back to life. Be it item, spell or a trip to the God's Pocket Monastery. Jesus. 

 

For all that is good and just, why is the main argument you two have a NO RELOAD paradise of a game ?? You cannot possibly mean to say that you expect a save/load system game, ANY game out of an sea of them you ever saw in your life, to be so friendly to you it challenges you in no way to reload a fukin save ? Really, guys ?? Dafuq??? 

 

Let me tell you how I as a long-term gamer react to such a game that makes me die on occasions.

I say that sorta game is fricking awesome. And we all here died our share from BG's over IWD's,Fallouts and whatnot.

 

Now, when I would sit to a game where I enter combat, get maimed and then watch as my character is invulnerable in that maimed state, I'd go fukin bananas. Because I am not playin an undying superhero that can go around and BANG/POW/KHA-SPLAT everything else to death like a Marvel character, I do not just keep calm and say "Yep, should'd hard-mode dis" ,carry on; I take that CD out and hurl it like a motherfukin diskos.

Why? Because I am expecting a good and persuasive continuation to our beloved genre of games. Familiar one, at least. 

 

I am literally AMAZED that this forum isn't in a civil war-state over this. I truly and full-heartedly am  a m a z e d.

 

Also teknoman:  I haven't even began to touch the subject of my OWN worries, worries over how the fist-fukin father of fuker am I to play my favorite class roll inthere and what will it look like. You wanna know how I feel when thinking about playing a priest inthere? I feel like there's a huge Obsidian foot up my ass. And you can feel free to guess why.

 

I have managed my best to swallow these new concepts so far because I still (barely) manage have hope within me, but this is simply absurd. 

 

I can pull out one last straw here and say that I am prepared to wait and see some videos on this until "all my hope dies", because current state of their design will not make me feel bad or wrong about my opinion.

Edited November 12, 2013 by cleric Nemir

[teknoman2]

i do not see why having an option to let someone play it with maim and an option that lets you play it with death is a bad thing. if they include options that let you play it like DAO and options that let you play it like dark souls, i think it should satisfy everyone, unless you are the type of person who thinks that if YOU play on hard with expert and trial of iron ON, everyone should play it that way

 

on maimed characters:

i can't find the update with the info on it but from what i remember

they CANNOT fight anymore even after the battle. they do not die, they get back up with 1 hp, but they count as a dead party member, until you get them to a doctor, healer or whatever to fix them and then they can regain their hp and get back in the fight

Edited November 12, 2013 by teknoman2

[Commitment Tissues]

   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 dont understand the logic behind this decision to take such a large step back in game design(cost i guess is the only reason i can think of).

 

   i think gaming is so far past this kind of game,that many players wont give it a second look.  im a long time obsidian fan and iv played many of their games and i would hate to see this project fail because of the antiquity of the design.  i dont think that there are many players in todays gaming landscape that will tolerate this outdated design,no matter how good the story/characters/world are.

 

  i just dont think the isometric view was one of the reasons people loved the baulders gate/planescape/nevewinter nights games,it was an aspect that was simply tolerated due to the technological limitations of the time,and now that we are so well advanced in that aspect,i think very few will want to go back.

 

  heres hoping this project has enough success to open the door for obsidian to create a more modern game,with this new world and lore as a base. i dont see this ever standing up to the mass effects and KOTOR's of the world. but i wish them the best of luck and hope for better in the future .

 

I hope horrible horrible things happen to you.

 

Look, child, this game isn't for you. If you just want camp badly written elves performing sexual favours for one another within some trite fantasy universe with sh*te consolised game mechanics then go and play some bioware games. There have been an enormous number of bad 3D rpgs released in recent years, why are you complaining about the ONLY mainstream one which isn't? So much crap has been released in accord with your awful tastes and yet you still seek to rob the rest of us of a good pc rpg.

 

Why am I even bothering to argue with some twelve year old? look at what the internet has reduced me to...

Edited November 12, 2013 by Commitment Tissues

[rjshae]

strange i always imagined that the isomatrix engine was 3d seen from atop cam i liked arcanum course what you could do in that game seemed a lot i remember how i fund this portal that keep spawning monsters so i keep t killing them monster got to lvl 26 by it before i had to kill a lot to lvl up well suddenly the game go slower and slower and lag lag lag

 

but to put it simpel a isomatrix vs 3d like bg2 vs nwn 2 well the detail of paper-doll was the only real difference els bg 2 did pretty good cheat my brain to think it was 3d

 

Bhwa?

Edited November 12, 2013 by rjshae

[Lephys]

Nemir... with all due respect to your argument, they haven't removed permadeath. They've given the option to deal with it in two different ways. It's hardly any different from offering various difficulty levels. You're playing on hard, and someone else gets to set the game to easy? They've REMOVED CHALLENGE?! No. They've simply offered people the chance to play against a less ruthless amount of difficulty.

 

What are you going to do if you play with permadeath on and 50% of your companions die? Is it okay for someone to ever replay that game in such a manner that those companions DON'T die? Whether it's reloading, or replaying the entire game? If so, then why not let people take the option of not having to replay the entire game just to make up for a tiny mistake? And the people who want to roll with companions being fully dead because of a combat mistake can do so.

 

I also agree with Tamerlane that, ideally, their deaths would impact the story more, instead of JUST impacting the player's toolset. But, that is an awful lot of content to make just for an un-ideal scenario (even with their deaths affecting the story in a unique way, the game already dictates that, ideally, the goal is to prevent them from dying.) So, *shrug*.

[Walsingham]

 

   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 dont understand the logic behind this decision to take such a large step back in game design(cost i guess is the only reason i can think of).

 

   i think gaming is so far past this kind of game,that many players wont give it a second look.  im a long time obsidian fan and iv played many of their games and i would hate to see this project fail because of the antiquity of the design.  i dont think that there are many players in todays gaming landscape that will tolerate this outdated design,no matter how good the story/characters/world are.

 

  i just dont think the isometric view was one of the reasons people loved the baulders gate/planescape/nevewinter nights games,it was an aspect that was simply tolerated due to the technological limitations of the time,and now that we are so well advanced in that aspect,i think very few will want to go back.

 

  heres hoping this project has enough success to open the door for obsidian to create a more modern game,with this new world and lore as a base. i dont see this ever standing up to the mass effects and KOTOR's of the world. but i wish them the best of luck and hope for better in the future .

 

I hope horrible horrible things happen to you.

 

Look, child, this game isn't for you. If you just want camp badly written elves performing sexual favours for one another within some trite fantasy universe with sh*te consolised game mechanics then go and play some bioware games. There have been an enormous number of bad 3D rpgs released in recent years, why are you complaining about the ONLY mainstream one which isn't? So much crap has been released in accord with your awful tastes and yet you still seek to rob the rest of us of a good pc rpg.

 

Why am I even bothering to argue with some twelve year old? look at what the internet has reduced me to...

 

 

In turn I am mocking you for not being older.

[cleric Nemir]

Nemir... with all due respect to your argument, they haven't removed permadeath. They've given the option to deal with it in two different ways. It's hardly any different from offering various difficulty levels. You're playing on hard, and someone else gets to set the game to easy? They've REMOVED CHALLENGE?! No. They've simply offered people the chance to play against a less ruthless amount of difficulty.

 

What are you going to do if you play with permadeath on and 50% of your companions die? Is it okay for someone to ever replay that game in such a manner that those companions DON'T die? Whether it's reloading, or replaying the entire game? If so, then why not let people take the option of not having to replay the entire game just to make up for a tiny mistake? And the people who want to roll with companions being fully dead because of a combat mistake can do so.

 

I also agree with Tamerlane that, ideally, their deaths would impact the story more, instead of JUST impacting the player's toolset. But, that is an awful lot of content to make just for an un-ideal scenario (even with their deaths affecting the story in a unique way, the game already dictates that, ideally, the goal is to prevent them from dying.) So, *shrug*.

 

 

It's a game with a save/load system.  And if I am reloading whole day like an idiot on vanilla, then the reasons it is so are pretty much clear. It is either the fact that I suck very much, or the fact that game is so "good" that it isn't my fault at all.

 

Now,in all my plays and replays of the oldies, and I am not counting the noob period here, I have moderately-to-almost-none reloaded my saves in them on vanilla, but more important to me seems the fact that almost every time I needed to reload I found it reasonable. My spellsets were inappropriate, my positioning flawed, weapons and gear ineffective, my opponents - which I always welcome in a game - have been VERY strong, and I needed to think of what to do, how to approach the fight,etc. In my particular case, it rarely pissed me off that I had to reload a save in a game I consider good, but yes - there were plenty situations that I found to be a game's problem, or I can imagine them as a problem to some type of players. That sounds like it needs balance, not a "begin from scrap" design.

Truth is,when the topic concerns those good old games ( trademark abuse?  ), they are generally all viewed as good and are very popular up to this day, in and beyond this forum.

 

Point of my posts,Lephys,is why is now a PE's vanilla being redesigned in such a strange way?

I find the concept of toggleable death, death as an "ingame character death that we all were perfectly normal with in vanilla numerous times in oldies" death to be very, very - strange.

I so far used expressions like absurd, immersion-breaking, nonsense, mayhap even thrown a curse or two, because I cannot comprehend their decision to change the game's design into one that is having unkillable player characters per se - 'cause it's a load of crap. Why is change going in that direction at all?

 

I guess I never mentioned that I consider Dragon Age a load of crap also, have I? Nothing can ever persuade me that this direction is a good thing,Lephys. Because it's crap,sounds crap, and it will most certainly look craplike.

 

"They made our PCs unkillable in order to balance the game, but if you're feeling mighty you can set so they can actually be killed".

 

Does that sound crap or is it just me, Lephys? Try to say it to someone unfamiliar with the game development, but familiar with the oldies. Please. Do just that. Don't forget to show that person the announcements of PE before you do it, so he can hope some.

 

One more thing - I am still not sure why do you people always take an example of "one/more PC died, continue the game and suffer". I never suggested such thing, because when I pick my party members I usually like them, making sure they won't die, and if they do - I reload. And try my best to make it not happen again, thus learning and getting better in the game. It's something quite normal for a game with save/load to have as a point of it. Are you people trying to count in the imaginary 1% "hardcore" players that would resist the urge to load a save, and are actually worrying they suffer for it? Which exactly of the old games had this in mind, ever? Why would any previous game address such "grand" percentage players at all? Who even mentioned such need here?

 

Until there comes a gameplay video that can show me it isn't looking and feeling as stupid as it sounds, I will not be persuaded that things are fine.

Because PE is currently developing around the stupidest thing I have ever heard - a disposal of the very idea of player character death in combat. Death's on Expert mode. If you do set it on, you are punishing yourself. In a fantasy cRPG that is to be a successor of old ones. I'm loosing link between PE and the oldies just by saying those sentences outloud.

Edited November 13, 2013 by cleric Nemir

[Tamerlane]

It's just you. It is entirely just you. You have wandered into a field, abducted a calf, painted it gold, and now you're wondering why nobody is coming to worship it.

 

Most people don't give a **** about how other people play videogames.

[cleric Nemir]

I am not trying to get worshipers of "how grand and awesome me and my thinking and gaming is", I am trying to explain how and why am I shocked,

 

I'm always open for discussion of my view, but I will defend it, not brick-wall in front of it. I will always defend a view of mine, and if someone doesn't want to debate because they don't give a fuk what I think, then I can be at peace knowing that. So, are you interested in a debate on my views or not?

 

If not,then why are we typing this to each other, you and me?

[Tauron]

I thought all that has been said relative to OP was said on first few pages.

[Lephys]

Nemir... if you're going to reload because a companion died, then how is allowing them to simply be "maimed" instead of "gone forever" any different from a reload, skipping the reload?

 

You wanna talk about the oldies? Baldur's Gate. Someone dies, they're dead. People stop attacking them in combat, why? Because they're dead. Then, you make your way to a temple, and pay the priest like 500 gold... BOOM, resurrection. They weren't dead and gone forever. So, with maiming (which is an option), instead of having to go pay money somewhere to get someone to come back to life, your price is that you pay their capability until you get them healed up again. Same thing, really, just mildly different logistics.

 

Again, if you want perma-death without any kind of resurrection, ever, then that A) wasn't in most of the "oldies" like this, and B) is actually apparently an option in P:E. And if you don't want that, then you pick maiming. Or you pick perma-death, then re-load every time someone dies. *Shrug*. Either way, you circumvent the actual consequences of playing through the rest of the game without that person, or you don't. I'm not sure why it matters why accomplishing this should be trickier rather than easier.

[Karkarov]

Nemir... if you're going to reload because a companion died, then how is allowing them to simply be "maimed" instead of "gone forever" any different from a reload, skipping the reload?

 

You wanna talk about the oldies? Baldur's Gate. Someone dies, they're dead. People stop attacking them in combat, why? Because they're dead. Then, you make your way to a temple, and pay the priest like 500 gold... BOOM, resurrection. They weren't dead and gone forever. So, with maiming (which is an option), instead of having to go pay money somewhere to get someone to come back to life, your price is that you pay their capability until you get them healed up again. Same thing, really, just mildly different logistics.

Wait a minute....

 

My understanding was that the main character couldn't "die" or it was really really hard to kill them, but your companions pretty much could die to any old normal stuff.  What you guys are calling "maiming" would be what happens when a character got knocked out.  They would take a temp penalty due to the KO and when you got a "real rest" in the penalty would go away.  That said if you took down a dude+did enough real wounds to them to take their wounds counter to 0 they weren't maimed they were dead.

 

At least that is what I am pretty sure I remember someone like sawyer saying somewhere.  The challenge setting of the game was only supposed to effect the power of the enemies and maybe their ai to a lesser extent.  It wasn't supposed to effect death rules.  Meanwhile yeah, you could always save scum either way.

[cleric Nemir]

 

Nemir... if you're going to reload because a companion died, then how is allowing them to simply be "maimed" instead of "gone forever" any different from a reload, skipping the reload?

 

You wanna talk about the oldies? Baldur's Gate. Someone dies, they're dead. People stop attacking them in combat, why? Because they're dead. Then, you make your way to a temple, and pay the priest like 500 gold... BOOM, resurrection. They weren't dead and gone forever. So, with maiming (which is an option), instead of having to go pay money somewhere to get someone to come back to life, your price is that you pay their capability until you get them healed up again. Same thing, really, just mildly different logistics.

 

Again, if you want perma-death without any kind of resurrection, ever, then that A) wasn't in most of the "oldies" like this, and B) is actually apparently an option in P:E. And if you don't want that, then you pick maiming. Or you pick perma-death, then re-load every time someone dies. *Shrug*. Either way, you circumvent the actual consequences of playing through the rest of the game without that person, or you don't. I'm not sure why it matters why accomplishing this should be trickier rather than easier.

 

 

I'm really more displeased here that "maimed being presented as an untouchable state" is not done as something similar to "maimed and slowly dying - needs to be stabilized". Look at Temple of Elemental evil and the combat in there. Elements of that game's combat system can be used as working examples, even if it's turn-based, there's existing ideas that are good, and can surely be implemented in some form to a RTwP game. There 's other ways to do this, I strongly think that there could be other solutions instead of those now planned.

I would be perfectly fine with "revive his stamina" that is acyually "you stabilized his condition" for example, provided that the maimed is still vulnerable to AoE and can be coup-de-grace'd if rest of the party doesn't make sure he is out of danger. Fighter positioning near to distract, spells like Sanctuary and Resilient sphere,etc.

I'm not saying that enemies should be scripted to continue attacking him while maimed; "KO all - then kill'em" would be fine model of AI behavior imo, but the feeling of real threat is lacking if the enemy cannot do diddly-squat to the PE's maimed one that is unkillable, in my perception of rpg combat. Bottom point is I cannot enjoy such a game, it's not a simple thing of toggling death "on" for me. 

 

Yes, you are trying your best to present me their design as a valid one and not all that different, but I cannot view it as such, because I immersion-wise feel better with the IE one's. I can only thank you for trying, and sticking with the debate, you and all others that did.

 

Do you agree that we end this? I will be left to my worries until I see some videos on combat and then reconsider those worries under a video example, and we can go back to other topics.

 

("I thought you'd never ask" and lets wrap it?).

Edited November 13, 2013 by cleric Nemir

[cleric Nemir]

 

Wait a minute....

 

My understanding was that the main character couldn't "die" or it was really really hard to kill them, but your companions pretty much could die to any old normal stuff.  What you guys are calling "maiming" would be what happens when a character got knocked out.  They would take a temp penalty due to the KO and when you got a "real rest" in the penalty would go away.  That said if you took down a dude+did enough real wounds to them to take their wounds counter to 0 they weren't maimed they were dead.

 

At least that is what I am pretty sure I remember someone like sawyer saying somewhere.  The challenge setting of the game was only supposed to effect the power of the enemies and maybe their ai to a lesser extent.  It wasn't supposed to effect death rules.  Meanwhile yeah, you could always save scum either way.

 

 

I would like more than anything for this to be the potential truth, but all so far indicates they don't die, just maimed and left at fixed value of 0HP until combat is over. Difficulty setting/toggle, or both, for the actual death option.

Edited November 13, 2013 by cleric Nemir

[curryinahurry]

@ Karkarov:

 

http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Vitality

 

and check out update 24.

 

Knocked out is 0 stamina; maimed / dead is 0 health.  

 

@ Cleric Nemir

 

The concept for this system was likely influenced Darklands; a game older and tougher than the "oldies" you are referring to in your post.  No resurrection in the PE world, so dead is dead.  That is how some of us want to play the game, with death actually having some consequence as managing characters becomes more strategic over the course of a dungeon than tactical in that of an encounter.  As Lephys pointed out, death in the IE games was little more than a time out for any character not the PC.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

In all fairness, in Hardcore D&D rules resurrection does cause a point of Constitution loss, which can be a HUGE deal. Still, the point does stand, permadeath is much more serious when it is truly permanent and not "dead until someone casts a spell".

[Bli1942]

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

 

Thread was already a troll thread so doesn't really matter that it got derailed

[Karkarov]

@ Karkarov:

 

http://eternity.gamepedia.com/Vitality

 

and check out update 24.

 

Knocked out is 0 stamina; maimed / dead is 0 health. 

Well there should only be "dead" at 0 wounds.  Maiming should be something that you have a statistical chance of on KO due to 0 stamina.  Also don't link wiki's, too much of what I have seen on them has been based on hearsay, someone making a theorycraft post, or a broad interpretation based on like half a sentence Sawyer said 6 months ago.  If you want to say "this is how it is in game" you need to link a dev post or an update.  Either way it is still all subject to change regardless.

[curryinahurry]

Here is the reference from Update 24:

 

Stamina and Health
In Project Eternity's combat, players need to be concerned with two elements of a character's vitality: Stamina and Health. The majority of damage a character takes is subtracted from his or her Stamina. Stamina represents how much general abuse a character can take before falling unconscious. Characters lose it quickly and regain it relatively rapidly, even without assistance. Soul-based abilities are able to help replenish or regenerate Stamina and are often used on the battlefield to turn the tide of combat. If a character hits 0 Stamina, he or she is knocked out. Intervention from another character can bring an unconscious character back into a fight.

For players, the Health of their party members is a tether that makes them consider how far they are willing to venture from a safe resting spot. Though Health is typically lost at a lower rate, when the PC or a companion hits 0 Health, he or she is maimed (in standard play) or killed (in Expert mode or as an option in standard play). Magic may help mitigate damage to Health and slow the tide, but once characters have died (in Expert mode), there is no known magic that can bring them back.

 

 

So death or maimed depending on difficulty level.  0 stamina is knocked out.

[teknoman2]

so i remembered wrong about maimed characters. still it is like having a character die in BG, except that you dont have to drag his items around until you can raise him, he keeps them on and walks around, but is pretty much useless for any other work except a pack mule

also, from what i understand, cleric nemir wants a system like the one in temple of elemental evil, where characters did not die at once, but they got unconscious and would die if not treated. also i detect a slight complaining for not using the DnD system but are making one of their own

[IndiraLightfoot]

BruceVC: Bogged down with work and other RL stuff, I'm afraid, nothing exciting.

[curryinahurry]

@ Teknoman2

 

Well, we don't know just how punitive "maimed" status will be in game.  We also don't know if it will be a toggle setting that is set as default: on in expert and off in standard modes, and could possibly be adjusted to player preference.  

 

And yes, I think that is a fair assessment re: Cleric Nemir, particularly the D&D legacy issue.  Personally, I think this type of system provides for much deeper gameplay, but I can understand the frustration of people who want this game to be as close as possible to the IE / D&D games.  I personally have some concerns about how the classes are being designed, but I think overall gameplay will be quite fun. 

Edited November 13, 2013 by curryinahurry

[Fearabbit]

Cleric Nemir:

I don't get your problem... maybe I agree! But here's what it looks like to me right now: there's one option in the game that's exactly how you want it (dead is dead), and there's another option where PCs are only badly injured.

 

Why is this a design flaw? It seems to me like they covered all their bases.

 

Also I think that you'll still have to reload if your whole party is "maimed", so isn't it a bit extreme to say the PCs are unkillable?