Can I even handle a game like PE any longer? Well, I sure hope so!

[Nonek]

Ha yes I remember falling for that in Dragon's Eye, the Eldath chaps if I remember correctly.

[Yonjuro]

Ha yes I remember falling for that in Dragon's Eye, the Eldath chaps if I remember correctly.

 

Yup, that's the one.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Yeah, that doesn't sound fun at all. Adding a hoard of sword spiders that you grind through while backtracking wouldn't make it fun - it would just make it take longer. Adding a hoard of mindflayers or beholders wouldn't make it more fun than adding sword spiders.

 It would compound the problem if you were backtracking in order to recover from injuries. To continue with this hypothetical, if you are limping away with an empty spellbook and having used most of your healing potions, that is a case where making the level more difficult would necessarily make it more tedious. One step forward seven steps back.

 

 There were some examples in IWD where, oddly enough, you find places to purchase healing/potions and safe places to rest in the dungeons. It's a bit strange, but it makes tactical retreating take less time.

 

 Hmm, maybe putting stores and youth hostels in a dungeon may be a sign that the dungeon is too big/linear? I'll have to think about that.

 

 

 

 

 they might as well add a Starbuck's coffee shop. Those hellspawn love a good mocha latte.

 

Indeed, they love the smell of newly ground coffee beans in the morning!

There have been a few legendary shops deep within dungeons in the CRPGs over the last 30 years that I've played, and often they are outright bizarre. However, for a few shop encounters, I think the game designers got away with it. Perhaps it was Dungeon Explorer II who topped them all with the Gream Reaper shop, where you also could gamble with your life/lives, by playing Black Jack with Death himself.

 

And, well, how to make backtracking right? As you mention, adding a few mindless random encounters along a lengthy backtrack very rarely adds to the fun (especially if you are out of spells and gimped in some way - I've had such moments early on in ToEE, where I must as well restart, but stubborn as I am, I try to fight till the bitter end.)

 

Perhaps PE will have mechanics related to health, stamina and spell recuperation that actually would make even a few random encounters fun, as long as the encounters make sense story-wise and as that combat is varied and challenging enough?

Another solution is to tell the players with a splash screen/illustration card "Suddenly, the cavern collapses behind you. At the same, a chasm opens up in front of you..." And then they have to take another way back home, which is a new - problem solved and more content for us!

[Wombat]

As for back-tracking, while I'm a kind of player who won't play New Vegas without Sawyer mod, thanks to the fast-travel option, I didn't need to backtrack long way to the presidential suite as long as The PC is not in dungeons dangerous areas except-unfortunately-some Vegas areas remained as routine paths.  Some people may find the compromise as blasphemy but, personally, I found resource management in relatively forgiving wilderness rather dull compared with that in dangerous areas.  A nice thing about the fast-travel is that I can always go back "on foot" or explore around if I decided to do so since it's just an option.  Even in the older format, I did't find back-tracking or nanning path-finding AI is an interesting gameplay.  If there is nothing interesting, I'd like to go back to cities/towns/my base or access to their functions, without wasting my time on dealing with path-finding AI.  

Related to this, how about letting city areas presented by dialogue options like in Darklands except the areas of interests/possible random encounters?   Some people seem to find the city population in old IE games is not convincing even compared with something like Assassin's Creed series but I don't think those people want to find an NPC among convincing number of people or even support such implementation which realizes city crowd and their AI even if such thing were possible within the current technology level.  Personally, I don't like to do nanning path-finding AI in relatively safe and known areas.  I imagine the actual presentation of the game would be like a mixture of old adventure book-like dialogues and IE games (guess something like Indira posted above...) and I think some people may be against such presentation, though.  Just a thought.

About resting places, I believe, thanks to the save-anywhere, at times, I'll be able to ignore some rest places in PoE as I did in old IE games, talking of player options.  Also, I think Expert mode will provide some interesting restrictions for resource management.  For Expert mode, maybe some places are very good for something like a full-fledged camp while some areas are just good enough for bivouac sheltering.  For bigger dungeons, how about allowing the players to build a base camp and C1, C2 to conquer the entire area but guess this would make things way too resource management-heavy and that the concept itself is provably rather too heavily affected by modern mountaineering...  In any case, I think I wrote about possible classifying rest places before (not the base camp thingy, though).

BTW, this is a question for the team.  Related to how you ended up with the current format of inventory management, didn't you consider an option to allow players who are not into resource management access the party inventory anytime rather than just resting places?  This may screw up the idea of Strength affecting the number of personal inventory slots but some people might have liked the old idea rather than the current one although, personally, I guess I belong to the group who like some restrictions in strategic choices around equipments-just for curiosity, reacted to the topic of offering the players options to filter the core gameplay.

PS  Yeah, I know writing down random ideas must be much easier than realizing them in the game... 

[Yonjuro]

 

And, well, how to make backtracking right? As you mention, adding a few mindless random encounters along a lengthy backtrack very rarely adds to the fun (especially if you are out of spells and gimped in some way - I've had such moments early on in ToEE, where I must as well restart, but stubborn as I am, I try to fight till the bitter end.)

 

 

 

 It's an interesting question. If you eliminated walking around and various other inconvenient things in a game, it would almost surely detract from the experience. E.g., in the BG series, there were choices to make about what items to leave on the ground. Those decisions can add to the game play experience unless there is too much of it and it becomes a chore. Likewise, walking around and exploring the world, even walking back to where you were before is an important part of the experience of the game.

 

 I'm sure that level designers think a lot about how much time (or maybe how many discrete events) are spent directly advancing a quest line/exploring a new area vs. doing 'other necessary stuff' like backtracking to the point where you need to take the next action.

 

 As Jarmo pointed out earlier in the thread, putting strange stores/rest areas in a dungeon indicates that the developers recognized a design problem late in the development process. Our good friend 'Swift Thomas' in IWD2 (who would essentially teleport you to a different map)  seems to be a clear sign that something went wrong with the area design and wasn't uncovered until play testing. 

 

 Now I'm curious about the best practices for level design that, say, count events (and path lengths of events) of different types that indicate issues like this before spending a lot of time and effort on the level and encounters. It seems like measuring the right things could save a lot of money during development and make a much better game.

 

 If any developers are reading this and can enlighten us, I bet a lot of people would be interested.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Damn, Wombat, that's a great post, and I largely agree with it, but for some reason I had alarm bells go off. Does this type of game (overall) fit into a niche, or is it a game for a [slightly/moderately/largely] broader market?

 

There are markets within markets.  We are making an RPG that has no claims to being "mainstream", but it's also not designed to be intentionally confusing or just plain obtuse.  I know Gfted1 has concerns that he's going to get annoyed with the mechanics after a few hours and quit the game, but I'm confident that this will not be the case.  We have taken (and continue to take) great pains to maintain a challenge for players without being oppressive or frustrating in the ways that the original IE games could often be.  And of course, we are also providing a lot of options for people who want to adjust their level of challenge, as this is a very personal thing.

 

If something does turn out, in practice, to be thoroughly unenjoyable for players, we'll change it.  But challenge isn't something you inch toward, IMO.  It's something you put out for people to deal with and pull back from based on feedback.  If you like the idea of exploration, a reactive story with cool characters, and party-based tactical combat, I want to find a way for you to enjoy this game, whatever your specific preferences (and personal time constraints) may be.  We won't be able to accommodate everyone, but we should be able to accommodate a lot.

[TRoar]

There are markets within markets.  We are making an RPG that has no claims to being "mainstream", but it's also not designed to be intentionally confusing or just plain obtuse.  I know Gfted1 has concerns that he's going to get annoyed with the mechanics after a few hours and quit the game, but I'm confident that this will not be the case.  We have taken (and continue to take) great pains to maintain a challenge for players without being oppressive or frustrating in the ways that the original IE games could often be.  And of course, we are also providing a lot of options for people who want to adjust their level of challenge, as this is a very personal thing.

 

If something does turn out, in practice, to be thoroughly unenjoyable for players, we'll change it.  But challenge isn't something you inch toward, IMO.  It's something you put out for people to deal with and pull back from based on feedback.  If you like the idea of exploration, a reactive story with cool characters, and party-based tactical combat, I want to find a way for you to enjoy this game, whatever your specific preferences (and personal time constraints) may be.  We won't be able to accommodate everyone, but we should be able to accommodate a lot.

 

 

That's a great approach. I have faith in you guys. I think you'll do a great job, and I understand that every creation has an experimental aspect, as evidenced by the differences in the IE games. What I've seen so far of PoE is balance through the major aspects of the game, which is what encourages my faith - seems to me like you're bringing together the best parts of the IE games.

 

Besides that, I'm sure this will just be the first installment, an important stepping stone, no doubt, but there will be time for evolution/refinement.

 

Keep up the great job, Josh.

[Robsidious]

 

-snip-

 

We have taken (and continue to take) great pains to maintain a challenge for players without being oppressive or frustrating in the ways that the original IE games could often be.

 

My concern is that some of the things deemed oppressive or frustrating may be features I liked, though I know the game isn't being designed for me specifically ;-) 

 

I would be very interested to hear about the process you guys use(d) to determine what the good and 'bad' things about the IE games are. It could make for an interesting topic in a future update as a way to address player expectations, if you feel so inclined.

[Metabot]

One thing that is pretty annoying in BG2 is level drain. Although, a better way to remedy that would've helped.

[Zed]

One thing that is pretty annoying in BG2 is level drain. Although, a better way to remedy that would've helped.

any permanent debuff makes me reload my game after the fight. that said I am usually pretty good at avoiding level drain.

[Lephys]

Please dont bash Gfted1, i like that guy's straightforwardness and honesty. I also believe he cares for this game so its natural for him to explain his thoughts so far.

FWIW, it is not my intention to bash Gfted1. His concerns are perfectly valid, but he seems to mentally investigate all his concerns with the Torch of Worst-Case Scenarios +1. He acts as though everyone (including the dev team)'s just pretending those aren't even concerns, as if getting hurt really badly and having to go rest isn't even a potential problem.

 

I'm just trying my best to assuage his worries. Why? Because, his concerns seem to all be pretty decently addressed, while he reacts as though we can't do anything but assume the worst. I'm with Josh in that I believe he'll be able to enjoy the game, even if it's not his favorite game in the universe, and I hate to see someone hold onto such powerful concerns for something (essentially, at this point, "I don't even think I'm going to enjoy this game, even though I paid money for it already") that he didn't actually have to (because it turns out, in the end, it wasn't nearly so bad as he thought.")

 

And it's not just him. There are other people with those same exact concerns. When I see people failing to consider things that might lessen their reason for concern, I just try to point those things out, is all. That's just how I am. Maybe it comes across wrong, and/or I fail at my task. But, it's not for lack of trying, and I'm confident it's a purposeful task to attempt.

 

 

As for the topic of "difficulty," to put it simply, it's as Josh said; there need to be factors that manifests in different groups, at different values, in different situations, so that the player has a reason to actually evaluate the effectiveness of what he's doing in any given situation. Now, the extent of that evaluation is where sheer difficulty settings come in, but making a game that doesn't engage the player's thought processes at all isn't really doing anyone any favors. The core of the idea of challenge (as opposed to none) is in the engagement of the player's mind, the support of the player's efforts and choices. It's not about setting some bar you have to hop over. That's where actually difficulty comes in.

 

Challenge, as an inherent part of the design, is like a multiplier for the player's interactive efforts. If it's 0, then the utmost exhaustion of the player's mental capabilities is no more useful than their complete neglect. If it's more than 0, then player efforts actually contribute to the gameplay experience. Difficulty sets the bar. For example, Iron Man Mode makes death-prevention efforts necessary, instead of merely beneficial. It is a level of challenge, rather than A challenge in lieu of none.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Lephys

[Infinitron]

I suspect there aren't many company forums where a moderator would be allowed to bellyache so loudly about one of their products and still keep his post.

 

Good on you, Obsidian, I guess.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Infinitron

[Metabot]

We have taken (and continue to take) great pains to maintain a challenge for players without being oppressive or frustrating in the ways that the original IE games could often be.  And of course, we are also providing a lot of options for people who want to adjust their level of challenge, as this is a very personal thing.

 

In what ways, specifically, were the IE games frustrating or oppressive? I know you might cause some controversy if you answer this question 

Edited January 14, 2014 by Metabot

[Robsidious]

 

...seems to mentally investigate all his concerns with the Torch of Worst-Case Scenarios +1. 

 

 

I just had to quote this. This is the funniest turn of phrase I have read in quite awhile, it really tickled my funny-bone for some reason. Lol.

 

Lephys makes a good point too about the tendency to make negative assumptions regarding Eternity. This applies to all video games really, especially kickstartered ones. I'm not commenting on Gifted1s views particularly, it's something I've just noticed as well, for all sorts of games. I fall prey to this myself sometimes, usually when there is a fear involved about some feature I really dislike, or think I will dislike. It could be that this behaviour is simply a way to protect ourselves from disappointment by pre-emptively lowering our expectations. However, does this actually increase our eventual enjoyment of the game, as opposed to going in optimistically assuming we will have a great time? I don't know. Human beings are pretty good at jumping to conclusions, yet I want to leap off the cliff into Eternity, I want to fly.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Robsidious

[Stun]

In what ways, specifically, were the IE games frustrating or oppressive? I know you might cause some controversy if you answer this question 

Well, aside from some of the things people have been discussing since page 1 or so, I'd say:

 

1) Enemy cheese: Stuff like getting finger-of-deathed by a mages when you're only 11th level, or getting imprisoned (looking at you, BG2)

2) Sitting around watching your 1st and 2nd level characters miss, and miss, and miss (hello BG1)

3) Getting your rest interrupted 5 times in a row (Icewind Dale 1 & 2)

4) Inventory management mini-game extraordinaire (BG1, especially with TotSC)

 

Personally, none of these things seem all that oppressive or frustrating for me, but then, I've played the IE games so many dozens of times each that I've instinctively learned to deal with all of the above and now I love them for the raw, old-school goodness they've come to represent. But for a new player, yes, I imagine these things would be seen as.... frustrating or whatever.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Stun

[TRoar]

 

One thing that is pretty annoying in BG2 is level drain. Although, a better way to remedy that would've helped.

 

any permanent debuff makes me reload my game after the fight. that said I am usually pretty good at avoiding level drain.

I had my cleric remember a few restoration spells, and led the attack against vampires with the amulet that protects against negative energy as well as the upgraded mace of disruption. Level drain wasn't too bad if I was prepared for it.

[Valorian]

One thing that is pretty annoying in BG2 is level drain. Although, a better way to remedy that would've helped.

 

I loved the level drain effect as an on-hit ability on some monsters. However, I preferred when saving throws were allowed against the effect.

[Metabot]

 

In what ways, specifically, were the IE games frustrating or oppressive? I know you might cause some controversy if you answer this question 

I'm not a mind reader, but If I had to guess at what J.E. Sawyer is referring to, I'd say:

 

1) Enemy cheese: Stuff like getting finger-of-deathed by a mages when you're only 11th level, or getting imprisoned (looking at you, BG2)

2) Sitting around watching your 1st and 2nd level characters miss, and miss, and miss (hello BG1)

3) Getting your rest interrupted 5 times in a row (Icewind Dale 1 & 2)

4) Inventory management mini-game extraordinaire (BG1, especially with TotSC)

 

Personally, none of these things seem all that oppressive or frustrating for me, but then, I've played the IE games so many dozens of times each that I've instinctively learned to deal with all of the above and now I love them for the raw, old-school goodness they've come to represent. But for a new player, yes, I imagine these things would be seen as.... frustrating or whatever.

 

Oh ok, that doesn't bother me that much I think. I don't mind having separate inventories for each character personally, but combining them on one screen isn't a bad idea.

[TRoar]

FWIW, it is not my intention to bash Gfted1. His concerns are perfectly valid, but he seems to mentally investigate all his concerns with the Torch of Worst-Case Scenarios +1. He acts as though everyone (including the dev team)'s just pretending those aren't even concerns, as if getting hurt really badly and having to go rest isn't even a potential problem.I'm just trying my best to assuage his worries. Why? Because, his concerns seem to all be pretty decently addressed...

Agreed. I also think the most valuable feedback will come once we've all played the game for a few months...

[SqueakyCat]

I know how popular this opinion will be, but it's just that, an opinion. 

 

I also have some of the same reservations as Gifted1.  For my part, I readily admit that, in part, it comes from a place of nostalgia, but I was hoping for a game more I.E.-like.  I knew that D&D licensing wasn't an option, but many of the design decisions feel like quite a departure from the games I loved playing so much back in the day.   Apparently, I'm in the minority as I thoroughly enjoyed the combat in BG 1 & 2 (and still do).

 

That said, I'm obviously not a game designer, so I won't really know until I actually play the game.    Since I don't work, I can spend endless hours in a game (or until my fingers go numb from carpal tunnel and my eyes get blurry), and  I really, really hope I'll be spending a lot of time in Eternity's world, but only time will tell.

 

Infinitron, are things really that slow on the Codex that you're making posts about another Moderator on this forum?  Gifted1 is a backer (same as you and I) and has the right to express his opinion like any other backer.  I didn't realize that expressing an opinion that differs from others constitutes "bellyaching".   Like Gifted1 said, he still wishes nothing but success for Obsidian (as I do),   Maybe Obsidian should employ Roguey-like Moderator's to quell any discontent with pages upon pages of quotes from her/his object of obsession, Josh Sawyer. 

[Stun]

no pixel-hunting-heavy gameplay like the notorious mask fragment in Mask of the Betrayer (Some people needed to go back to the map when they missed the special quest item to get a satisfactory narrative end.  A similar thing happened to Bronze Sphere in PST).

I totally get the gripe here, but the mask fragments and the Bronze Sphere are terrible examples of the phenomenon.

 

PS:T's Bronze Sphere is not "pixel-hunting". It's the first chapter's main quest, so it's not like you're ever going to miss it. Instead, it suffers from a different problem: The player isn't told of the true value of keeping it after chapter 1.

 

And the mask fragments... there's no hunting at all. no hitting "alt" (or Z in MoTB's case) to highlight and search the map. The fragments are given to you in dialogue. Now, one could complain that they're not handed to you during the main quest (although Bishop's fragment is) and therefore, you could miss them. But I think that's kinda the point. They're supposed to be a reward for someone who walked through all the dreams. and in MoTB, that means exploring everywhere.

 

And this brings us to the underlying question: In an RPG, Shouldn't the player be specially rewarded for all the exploration he/she took the time to engage in?

Edited January 14, 2014 by Stun

[Bryy]

 

Would you (everyone) say that the issues are a) overall game scope b) game difficulty or c) something else?

 

If I had to boil down all my frustrations with IE games and their relatives to two, I'd say "lack of transparency" and "lazy design masquerading as challenge."

 

By "lack of transparency" I mean things like the way Athkatla dumps all the mid-game quests on you at once, with no indication – direct or implicit – of how hard they are. My first-ever quest in my first-ever attempt at BG2 was the Firkraag one, and that did not go well. I just kept feeling I was doing it wrong, when actually I was doing the wrong quest.

 

By "lazy design masquerading as challenge" I mean things like hitpoint bloat, filler combat, and puzzles based on finding that one doodad/person/pixel by trial and error. One of my pet peeves is the hidden door – i.e., an area transition that your character would easily see but you can't because it's partly occluded by something, so you keep wandering around the map like an idiot not being able to progress. This was surprisingly common in isometric games with a fixed camera!

 

This is essentially what I was going to write.

 

 

 

Damn, Wombat, that's a great post, and I largely agree with it, but for some reason I had alarm bells go off. Does this type of game (overall) fit into a niche, or is it a game for a [slightly/moderately/largely] broader market?

 

There are markets within markets.  

Amazing answer, btw.

Edited January 14, 2014 by Bryy

[Metabot]

How should the difficulty of quests be indicated though? Borderlands style or what?

[PIP-Clownboy]

How should the difficulty of quests be indicated though? Borderlands style or what?

 

Dear god, I hope not. Leave the handholding to MMOs.

 

The quest is too difficult if your party can't handle encounters. 

 

Firkaag was pretty much optional with some of the best items in game - I don't see the issue Prime Junta. You could clear the surrounding area, deliver the acorns for easy xp and advance the initial quest. Then the difficulty ramps up when you enter the dungeon proper. 

 

Also, the actual quest giver's entire motive was to lure you there under false pretenses... Hence the ludicrous reward he was offering which sounded like easy money at time when you were most likely dirt poor. 

Edited January 14, 2014 by PIP-Clownboy

[Metabot]

Exactly, I'm not sure what other indication there could be other than MMO style color coding and then of course we'll exclamation points and question marks over npc's heads.