Josh Sawyer on dealing with grognards

[Stun]

I don't understand why, if I point out some folly in some people and don't actually make any connection to you, whatsoever, you automatically affiliate yourself with that group. Why is that?

I think it may have something to do with the specific examples that Josh gives in articles like the one in the Op. He cites these examples, attributes them to "what grognards want", then dismisses them. Many of those examples though, happen to be features I loved, that were in games that I loved. So naturally, I concluded that I must be a grognard. And then here you come, taking Sawyer's ball and running with it....

 

If you're not just averse to change for no other reason than that it's change, then you're obviously not in the group I'm talking bout.

I'm pretty sure NO ONE is in this mythical group you're talking about Lephys. The IE games themselves were an ongoing experiment in change. There were 5 of them. Each one was different from the other.

 

 

 

Also, funding someone's game automatically justifies excessively scrutinizing everything that person says or does.

There's no such thing as excessively scrutinizing proposed game features. Edited April 14, 2014 by Stun

[Ffordesoon]

Hoo-boy, here we go...

[Lephys]

I think it may have something to do with the specific examples that Josh gives in articles like the one in the Op. He cites these examples, attributes them to "what grognards want", then dismisses them.

How do you know he's never personally experienced someone telling him that these "suckerpunches" he's describing are good and should be in the game? You've never heard anyone tell you that, so clearly no one exists who thinks that way? That's along the lines of the thinking he's describing, in general. You did the same thing to him that you did to me.

 

Just because he describes certain people, who happen to be of the old-school persuasion, who sort of buck against changes out of nostalgia or inertia, you automatically assume he's said "anyone who could even remotely be considered 'old school' is obviously one of these people, u_u"? Then you tell him he's wrong, because the specific example he gave that didn't apply to you, somehow applies to you, but is totally wrong by not being accurate regarding you.

 

Excellent.

 

Many of those examples though, happen to be features I loved, that were in games that I loved. So naturally, I concluded that I must be a grognard.

This was your first response in this thread:

 

But back on topic:

Sawyer warned however that other elements, what he described as “GM-sucker-punch kind of stuff”, were being carefully filtered by the team because “the vast majority” of Pillars of Eternity’s backers simply won’t enjoy them.

 

“Combat encounters that can only be completed a certain way or (situations where) you have to have one of these characters, or you have to have these two characters,” said Sawyer, “those ‘gotcha!’ moments that some gamers love, well… God bless you I guess, but we’re not gonna do that.”

K, is this supposed to be representative of what "grognards" want? Aside from the fact that I can only think of 1 (one) such encounter in ALL of IE games (Kangaxxx), I have yet to meet a grognard who's ever said: "hey I want more encounters that force me to use at least 1 rogue and 2 clerics." or "I hate modern games because they don't require you to have a Fighter!" lol

 

You might want to figure out which it is:

 

Is he describing your feelings on the matter? Or is he describing someone else's thoughts on the matter? It's one or the other.

 

I'm pretty sure NO ONE is in this mythical group you're talking about Lephys.

Really? You seemed pretty sure you were part of it when you responded with that assumption. And if no one exists whose part of that group, then, *GASP*, I might be... MISTAKEN! I know, I'm apparently supposed to think I'm incapable of such a thing. Regardless, it's kind of moot unless you can somehow present evidence that no one just kind of hates the fact that some old school elements will be different, just 'cause they liked how they were.

 

So, I observe a group. You observe that the group doesn't exist. Awesome. I'm not really going to fight you on that, since you can believe quite literally whatever your brain is capable of choosing to believe.

 

 

There's no such thing as excessively scrutinizing proposed game features.

The fact that there actually is, aside, "everything he says" isn't proposed game features. You personally over-scrutinized his example of people liking a very specific list of viable party builds/strategies to complete fights, merely because you don't know of anyone who's complained about that. Like it's invalid if you don't get to confirm it, personally.

 

That's not even a game feature. It's just something you can't even prove isn't true. At the point at which there's not even any productive goal to the scrutiny, it's excessive.

 

 

Hehe, don't worry, Ffordesoon. I don't know about Stun, but I'm stopping here. I don't really have anything else to say on the matter that's going to produce any different results than what I've already said. I'm trying to work my way down to a "three strikes" policy,

Edited April 14, 2014 by Lephys

[Stun]

 

I think it may have something to do with the specific examples that Josh gives in articles like the one in the Op. He cites these examples, attributes them to "what grognards want", then dismisses them.

How do you know he's never personally experienced someone telling him that these "suckerpunches" he's describing are good and should be in the game?

 

I'm pretty sure he has.

 

Just because he describes certain people, who happen to be of the old-school persuasion, who sort of buck against changes out of nostalgia or inertia, you automatically assume he's said "anyone who could even remotely be considered 'old school' is obviously one of these people, u_u"? Then you tell him he's wrong, because the specific example he gave that didn't apply to you, somehow applies to you, but is totally wrong by not being accurate regarding you.

No sale. He made no such distinctions when he broad-brush stroked us, therefore, I'm exercising my right to pick apart his generalizations, piece by piece. And he is a game developer, Lephys, Remember? He should know, better than everyone else, that no two gamers are exactly alike.

 

 

 

Many of those examples though, happen to be features I loved, that were in games that I loved. So naturally, I concluded that I must be a grognard.

You might want to figure out which it is:

 

Is he describing your feelings on the matter? Or is he describing someone else's thoughts on the matter? It's one or the other.

 

I said *Many* of the examples. ^it's right there, in the passage you quoted. "Many". I even spelled it correctly. If I wanted to use the word "ALL", I would have. But I didn't. I used "Many", which means that he's describing my thoughts on many matters, and someone else's thoughts on other matters.

 

 

 

 

And if no one exists whose part of that group, then, *GASP*, I might be... MISTAKEN!

Or... you might be attempting to burn down a straw man, categorizing the people you disagree with as one big singular group, so that you can dismiss us all with one simplistic rebuttal. You do that All. The. Time. Edited April 14, 2014 by Stun

[Fatback]

 

 

The PC is more popular than ever?

Very much so.

 

A lot of the credit can of course go to things like Steam.

But also the simple fact that certain genres just can't work on anything other than a PC.

 

A calculator can handle a platformer, but cRPGs are a good example.. I wouldn't envy console users at all if they got ports of them. Have fun playing something that complex with a controller.

I would like to see that graph since the next gen consoles are out the last "season" of consoles also lasted a long time. Out of curiosity only it's not an attack. Edited April 14, 2014 by Fatback

[nipsen]

 

I disagree.

 

It successfully does what it claims to do: Rank games based on popularity -and- To be an outlet where gamers and the media can come together and pool game critiques into one giant website for a consumer to read and draw conclusions for himself/herself.

 

That's.. not what metacritic is supposed to do. What you get is a slice of selected reviews from selected sites, that then is amplified by similar user-reviews. Which again gives the site credit as a stable predictor for people who are interested in things like that.

 

Just imagine what would happen to Metacritic's credibility if they suddenly started challenging every review score in every magazine, and kept having user scores that were completely different from the reviews. Actually, we've seen that a few times with "site abuse". :D .. I suppose reviews cannot be wrong when they're all wrong together.

[Karkarov]

What I find odd is how anyone expected Baldur's Gate 3, which is clearly what many people seemed to think was happening with the Kickstarter. 

1: The D&D license was never on the table... so they were never going to make a Baldur's Gate, or have use of the rule set the Infinity Engine games used.

2: The IE games are all based on what is ancient tech by today's standards, clearly you have new options today for making your game that god forbid might be better.

3: The IE games also had plenty of fairly obvious problems, common sense would tell you that when making a game in their "spirit" it is only rational to try to fix those problems.  I cant even imagine what it is like to be a game dev looking back at a game you made a decade + ago, there must be a million things where you think "If only I had done this a little different..."
4: Obsidian was always clear and upfront from day one this would be a new IP with their own hand made rule system.

 

So considering those pretty basic things... it is sort of obvious we were never going to get a brand new IE game just with a new name on it.  They need this to be a new IP, they need it to succeed, and they need it to grow under it's own inertia.  That was never going to happen if they simply made a IE clone with a new name that was cashing in on nostalgia alone with outdated mechanics.  Hence the use of the word "Spirit" of the IE games in the Kickstarter campaign not "We are making a new Infinity Engine Game".

 

Also Hassat.... I would love to know how your graph knows how many pc and console games sold in 2014 since we are only 4 months in and how it knows the sales of 2015 a year that hasn't even started yet.  That chart is simply based on "trends" and the trend doesn't factor in things like a new console generation getting released.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Karkarov

[Hassat Hunter]

It's not my chart...

 

Feel free to point out some of the 'fairly obvious problems' of IE?

[Messier-31]

Due to the consideration that absolutely can not be taken into account, if somebody has something for someone, or no-one has anything to anyone, the matter is simple and requires no additional explanation.

[MReed]

What I find odd is how anyone expected Baldur's Gate 3, which is clearly what many people seemed to think was happening with the Kickstarter. 

 

1: The D&D license was never on the table... so they were never going to make a Baldur's Gate, or have use of the rule set the Infinity Engine games used.

2: The IE games are all based on what is ancient tech by today's standards, clearly you have new options today for making your game that god forbid might be better.

3: The IE games also had plenty of fairly obvious problems, common sense would tell you that when making a game in their "spirit" it is only rational to try to fix those problems.  I cant even imagine what it is like to be a game dev looking back at a game you made a decade + ago, there must be a million things where you think "If only I had done this a little different..."

4: Obsidian was always clear and upfront from day one this would be a new IP with their own hand made rule system.

 

1) 100% agreed.

2) Technological improvements (e.g. Unity, general changes to the UI, and so forth) are definitely part of my expectations.  Mechanically (how combat works, how skill works, how spells work, how inventory works, how dialog works and the like), however, I expected this game to strongly resemble the old Infinity Engine games.  I don't think this is (or was) an unreasonable expectation, given how the Kickstarter was marketed.

3) I reiterate Hassat Hunter's call for a list of the "obvious (non-technical) flaws" of the old Infinity Engine games.  More to the point, I sure wish that Obsidian had posted this list (because they obviously agree with you, and have a pretty extensive list) during the Kickstarter, as it would have helped me when deciding how much (or if) I should donate to this title.

4) Yes, it is possible to have a game that is mechanically very similar to the Infinity Engine games and have a new rule system and background.

 

 

They need this to be a new IP, they need it to succeed, and they need it to grow under it's own inertia.  That was never going to happen if they simply made a IE clone with a new name that was cashing in on nostalgia alone with outdated mechanics.

 

If this is the way that Obisidan was thinking when they created the Kickstarter, they (in my opinion, of course) were deliberately misleading their backers.  My hope was that this game would prove to the publishers that yes, there does exist a small, niche market of gamers that are willing to support games with old-school mechanics -- and, if it turned out that this market didn't exist, then I'd get at least one last game of this type.  Instead, it looks like I'm going to get "DA:O-lite", which isn't necessarily a bad thing (I liked DA:O), but it isn't what I funded.

 

One of the purposes of Kickstarter is to allow products to be created that probably won't be a commercial success, by largely eliminating the risk from the product producers (they don't have to repay their contributors, after all).  That's what I thought the purpose of this Kickstarter was -- but it looks like I was mistaken, and the goal was simply create another mass market game (just one that the publishers wouldn't fund).

 

<shrug> -- that's the risk that you take with a Kickstarter, lesson learned.

[Sarex]

Spot on MReed.

 

At this point it would be beneficial for Josh to come out and say what he disliked about the IE games, or if that list is too long (as seems to be the case), what he liked about them. While it won't change anything, it will serve to inform the public and lessen any shock that would/will happen at release. I really think that what we were told in the KS was not the whole picture.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Oh, this discussion again. Here are the quotes (also, again) from Obsidian's KS for PE:

"Project Eternity (working title) pays homage to the great Infinity Engine games of years past: Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment.

Project Eternity aims to recapture the magic, imagination, depth, and nostalgia of classic RPG's that we enjoyed making - and playing. At Obsidian, we have the people responsible for many of those classic games and we want to bring those games back… and that’s why we’re here - we need your help to make it a reality!

 

We are excited at this chance to create something new, yet reminiscent of those great games and we want you to be a part of it as well."

 

This is what it says on the label, on the very front page, from more or less day one IIRC.

It pays homage to, it's reminiscent of, and it recaptures the atmosphere of, the great IE games, but they say they will create something new.

However, unfortunately, they also say: "We want to bring those games back"!! That I think is something of a misnomer, and one reason why so many expect it to be more or less the same as the IE-games. And just to be clear: I would jump at the chance to buy BG 3 with AD&D rules if it ever got made, since I love those golden oldies to bits. However, I also appreciate Obsidian's ambitious attempt to renew the genre, based on their vast experience in making these games, coz there is certainly room for improvement here and there.

[Stun]

Spot on MReed.

 

At this point it would be beneficial for Josh to come out and say what he disliked about the IE games,

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/39401-armor-abstractions-in-fallouts-special-game-system/?do=findComment&comment=526647

 

^we can start right there and work our way to the present. He dislikes almost everything about BG2, from its NPCs to its plot structure to its ruleset to its quest volume(!).

 

Which would be fine, except that he didn't seem to have any qualms shamelessly name dropping BG2 (and all the other IE games) when he needed money from us for his next big project.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oh, this discussion again. Here are the quotes (also, again) from Obsidian's KS for PE:

"Project Eternity (working title) pays homage to the great Infinity Engine games of years past: Baldur’s Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment.

Project Eternity aims to recapture the magic, imagination, depth, and nostalgia of classic RPG's that we enjoyed making - and playing. At Obsidian, we have the people responsible for many of those classic games and we want to bring those games back… and that’s why we’re here - we need your help to make it a reality!

 

We are excited at this chance to create something new, yet reminiscent of those great games and we want you to be a part of it as well."

 

This is what it says on the label, on the very front page, from more or less day one IIRC.

It pays homage to, it's reminiscent of, and it recaptures the atmosphere of, the great IE games, but they say they will create something new.

However, unfortunately, they also say: "We want to bring those games back"!! That I think is something of a misnomer, and one reason why so many expect it to be more or less the same as the IE-games. And just to be clear: I would jump at the chance to buy BG 3 with AD&D rules if it ever got made, since I love those golden oldies to bits. However, I also appreciate Obsidian's ambitious attempt to renew the genre, based on their vast experience in making these games, coz there is certainly room for improvement here and there.

That's only half of the truth and you know it, Indira. Even aside from the totally UN-vague promouncements of "we want to bring those games back" and "we loved making those games", there's also the video, which did not shy away from dramatically plastering those titles in giant graphics and invoking them as the premise of the entire kickstarter campaign. Edited April 14, 2014 by Stun

[Hassat Hunter]

Since most of Karkarov's is his own opinion and not OE's it's to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

But still, I would indeed be very interested in what OE (or specifically Sawyer) indeed finds pain-points of OE that aren't technical (like pathfinding). We've already got quite a few, and not all of them fill me with confidence :/

 

EDIT:

Okay, the link Stun pointed to is... troubling.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

That's only half of the truth and you know it, Indira. Even aside from the totally UN-vague promouncements of "we want to bring those games back" and "we loved making those games", there's also the VIDEO, which did not shy away from plastering those titles in giant graphics and invoke them as the premise of the entire kickstarter campaign.

 

You are right about that. It's no use denying it, but I wonder if it was more like "Look at our glorious past and our credentials! Expect something equally good and deep etc..."? Nonetheless, it certainly got a lot of people backing their KS.

[Sarex]

@IndiraLightfoot

 

The problem is not what was said in the KS, the problem is what wasn't said. As more time passes we learn how much Josh dislikes the BG series. Now everyone is entitled to his opinion and taste, but it doesn't inspire confidence that the person in charge of the "spiritual successor" of the IE games, thinks so little of it's best one. If he was upfront in the KS about his views on BG I doubt that the support would have been as overwhelming.

 

All that being said I still chose to be optimistic that the game will be good.

[IndiraLightfoot]

@IndiraLightfoot

 

 

All that being said I still chose to be optimistic that the game will be good.

Me too, Sarex!

 

And BG2 was no 3 on my all-time top-10 CRPG list recently, so I'd say it's a fantastic game overall!

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65082-your-favourite-game-list-after-rpgcodex-revealed-theirs/

My list, however, also shows that employees at Obsidian are responsible for 6 out of 10 games on my list, so I really do trust that they will make something that's at least good. And Josh is right about one thing, that darn Imoen hunt at the start of BG2 was the worst part, especially for us that almost loathe Imoen to begin with. :/

[Sarex]

Heck, IWD2 is number one on my list, but I'll still express my concerns.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Sarex

[Volourn]

Obsidian employees didn't do anything with BG series. That was BIO. BIS was the publisher. That's it. And, very few if any Obsidian employees had any significant  effect on the game. Only Obsidian's boss had an important role since he was the boss at BIS.

 

 

"love the MIght & Magic series, and Ultima Underworld, and Dungeon Master, ToEE and even the IWDs, but are they true CRPGs?:\

 

Those are all 'true' CRPGs whatever that is supposed to mean. L0L

[Karkarov]

Since most of Karkarov's is his own opinion and not OE's it's to be taken with a grain of salt.

 

But still, I would indeed be very interested in what OE (or specifically Sawyer) indeed finds pain-points of OE that aren't technical (like pathfinding). We've already got quite a few, and not all of them fill me with confidence :/

 

EDIT:

Okay, the link Stun pointed to is... troubling.

Do you what the problem with the people on this forum is Hassat?

 

You are all too arrogant, you are all too insular, and none of you play any games that are well.... not ancient and or made by someone other than CD Projekt RED.  Stop being childish.  I pointed out a blatant flaw with the chart you linked, which is what I meant by "your chart" as in "the chart that you linked", and you replied with the usual petty insults and of course completely ignored my point about the chart.

 

What's wrong with BG2?

 

Let's start.

 

1: Counter the Mage.  I am pretty sure I have covered this elsewhere but Tic Tac Toe isn't a great combat system, and it is exactly what 50% percent of all encounters in Baldur's Gate 2 boiled down to thanks to the constant non stop wave of mage after mage after mage after mage....  There is nothing fun about casting the same half dozen counter spells, sending my melee in, watching mage guy die in one round (cause I countered everything) 500+ times.  It isn't fun, it isn't exciting.

 

2: D&D 2nd Edition rule system.  Why is this a problem?  Because it means there is absolutely no character ability development.  The only difference between this fighter and that fighter is one decided to go dual wield and the other went two hander.  That's it.  What is different between this level 15 rogue and that level 15 rogue?  One is better at picking pockets and the other is better at moving silently.  Massive differences, so unique.  Lot's of games have done it better at this point, even the hated Dragon Age 2.  Character development that isn't about their backstory would be nice.  The fact that this rule system never translated well to PC in the first place could be brought up too. 

 

3: Save Scumming due to sucker punches and insane bouts with RNG.  I know you think that is good but most people will just say it is frustrating and just wastes time.  It isn't like there is any skill involved, you just reload and try again either bringing your hard counter or hoping to get lucky on the roll.

 

4: Bad storyline flow "Rescue Imoen NOAH!!!!!!  But it is okay if you take 6 months, it's all cool.  Save the Elves NOAH!!!!!  .... Actually if you need a in game year to get ready feel free, they can hold out.  Irenicus is busy getting a pedicure."

 

5: Inability to create the exact party you want, apparently some people cared enough about this Obsidian addressed it in the kickstarter itself.

 

To be honest these things are also just off the top of my head.  I am sure if I wanted to think about it for a few hours I could come up with more.  Make no mistake I am not saying BG2 is a crap game, but I am saying it definitely can be done better.

[Hassat Hunter]

Ehm, yeah, I *still* didn't link it. As I stated before.

I ignored the chart because it's not my task to defend other peoples post...

 

I've played plenty of RPG's. Plenty. A quick look in several threads will learn you many other forumgoers have the same. Who's arrogant now with 'you never played modern RPG's bar The Witcher'?

 

Seems to me it's more about fixing the players than the game. I know I've gone through BG2 without sleepscumming, savescumming, without doing the same several counters against mages, BG1 without HP-on-level-up savescumming. Heck, I never even used the 'obvious counters' people say here (like anti-magic for Kangaxx or petrification immunity for Basilisks). Yet I made it through. Odd, isn't it? Of course the game did get a lot less fun after Atkhatla. But the same is true for PS:T and Sigil. After so much freedom and places to go through, railroading a combat-heavy path will seem sucky.

That's really my only problem with BG2, more so than what you say is wrong with it.

 

I'm like... the worst AD&D/Infinity Games RPG gamer ever. Yet I completed pretty much all of them (bar IceWind Dale II, where I have a save from before the final battle I never returned to). And enjoyed the heck out of them despite sucking, or being often completely mutilated repeatingly.

And it's not like modern games do better on the tension part... "The galaxy is dying... go ahead, scan planets!", "our sovereign is dying. But she probably will survive till you finish the entire Mage Tower plotline!", "Khoonda can be attacked any moment now, and moment, any moment *3 planets later* any moment!"

But hey, that's actually a good thing... otherwise you get Human Revolution type of situations... 'want to take your time getting to know the game... THE HOSTAGES DIE!' serves you right for trying to get acquited to the game, controls, HUD and all... sucker.

Edited April 15, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[Volourn]

"You are all too arrogant, you are all too insular, and none of you play any games that are well.... not ancient and or made by someone other than CD Projekt RED.  Stop being childish.  I pointed out a blatant flaw with the chart you linked, which is what I meant by "your chart" as in "the chart that you linked", and you replied with the usual petty insults and of course completely ignored my point about the chart."

 

Why are you lying? I like and play all sorts of games. I don't even like CDP. Their games are overrated and their mommy smells like poo. Why should we take you seriously when you lie and besmirch us(me)? That's rude and disgusting. And, your 5 points ar enothing more than nitpicking, personal perference, and silly.

 

 

 

P.S. Anyone who thinks there won't be 'save scumming' in PE are fooling themselves.

[Mr. Magniloquent]

P.S. Anyone who thinks there won't be 'save scumming' in PE are fooling themselves.

 

Who cares. It's single player only. Nothing is compromised by save-scumming but threads within this forum and the scummer's dignity. Iron-man will also exist for those without self-control, or like the gamble.

[Volourn]

"Who cares. It's single player only. Nothing is compromised by save-scumming but threads within this forum and the scummer's dignity."
 

I don't but many do including Mr. Sawyer and his opinion actually matters more than our opinions since he is making the game.

[constantine]

I believe there is no need for argument and distress.

 

 

PoE will not not be an Infinity Engine game but IE-ish. It will be fresh not only in its looks but also in gameplay & mechanics. And that is good.

 

I am a grognard and I absolutely love the old classics but I cannot wait to welcome this new production that years of experience and mature outlook in the genre allowed the developers to come up to.

 

Put your trust in those guys that think very much like you and welcome the honest effort that is being made here. That is what I did.