Overflowing with money.

[Karranthain]

We all know this particular problem - we start the game penny-pinching, carefuly selecting purchases and then, at a certain point (usually towards the end), the money ceases to be an issue whatsoever. Our adventurers' pockets are so laden with gold it's a wonder they still actually bother with quest rewards.

 

I think we can assume that the problem will be somewhat (or perhaps even completely?) solved by the player stronghold, which will probably be a huge money sink. It certainly helped in NWN2.

 

Will there be other money sinks in the game?

 

Will the game be playtested in that regard? That's obviously a huge amount of work, but it could pay off nicely (terrible pun intended).

 

Having to make difficult choices when purchasing equipment certainly opens up interesting questions: "Do I buy this magical claymore or perhaps the boots of speed?".

 

 

[gamerdude130]

That's a good question. My hopes is that equipment will cost quite alot of gold and so gold will be valuable. I also hope that the money earned from selling equipment won't be as ridiculous as in Fallout New Vegas. In which i literally made over 150k caps just selling guns i looted from the Fiends  .

Edited July 27, 2014 by gamerdude130

[Karranthain]

Yeah, the issue's particularly aggravating in a post-apocalyptic games (in which everything, save for radiation and violence, is supposed to be scarce).

[Sensuki]

There's been topics on this before, and this is the main reason they wanted a durability mechanic.

 

If you don't invest in the Player Stronghold, you'll have absolutely truck loads of extra money.

 

I personally don't have a problem with having a ridiculous amount of money in the game, and now that the content for the game is no longer being created, any suggestions about money sinks other than alterations to the formula are not very useful.

 

You could make hiring adventurers costly, but I think it's better to make it so that the prices make sense in the setting/world, rather than complete gamism.

 

Crafting also consumes money.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Sensuki

[Karranthain]

Yeah, perhaps this topic is rather untimely. That said, as you've mentioned, there's still time to tweak the crafting/stronghold/equipment costs a bit etc. In fact I'm guessing that this hasn't been done yet.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Karranthain

[Sensuki]

Beta

[Karranthain]

Yeah. Though the scope of the beta won't allow us (the players) to gauge this particular aspect.

 

But here's hoping that Obsidian will take a long, hard look at this particular issue.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Karranthain

[Nonek]

It's a thorny subject indeed, personally i'd like to see at least one game with a realistic carrying limit, somewhat like the first Witcher but maybe even more draconian. And the loot left behind is simply gone, so one has to choose very carefully what one takes and leaves behind. Equipping oneself would also be a strategic choice with the limited inventory, and if a backpack is not purchased then even less can be carried. However even here I can see the problem of over affluence arising, and somewhat breaking the economy.

 

I would certainly make gold far more valuable, so that a gold piece is a tremendously valuable coin, used in financial transactions and such. And a purse of such is a tremendous reward for a quest.

 

I would have a durability system, and make the better armours and masterwork weapons tremendously expensive to buy, alter or repair as befitting masterworks. Indeed I would make finding a worthy smith a task in itself.

 

I would implement a very detailed and largely unavoidable taxation system, with upkeep needed for the roads and taken from travellers, taxes to enter cities, a levy on houses and property, a levy on an excessive amount of goods carried into cities etcetera. With the only method of avoiding taxation either being an outlaw, or being raised to the nobility where taxes are waived for military service and feudal service to ones lord.

 

Bribes would be a constant drain to lubricate almost any transaction, and theft would be a constant risk, as well as a spur to adventure. The lure of gold should corrupt almost anyone, and sticky fingers should be a given, a guardsman or a peasant will not be so stupid as to not steal when his family need that coin and you have an obscene amount.

 

Pay the npc's, fine they can scrounge up armour and weapons beside you and you might consider that enough payment, but they have presumably fought and risked their lives to secure that just as you have, that is as much theirs as yours. If you want to be their leader, then you have to pay for the privilege or manipulate successfully enough, and a character should be intelligent enough to value their own services and life.

 

Finally barter and services in place of coin should be a viable method of payment, indeed with skilled craftsman, apprentice trained and of a skill level one cannot imitate without abandoning their adventuring career, coin should be only one part of what is needed to attract them. Food, lodgings, materials and perhaps other favours befitting their skill and value.

 

Edit: Oh and in just one game i'd like to see my character carrying a backpack, and if not then they'll have to carry all that loot in their arms with appropriate penalties.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Nonek

[Nonek]

I do apologise for double posting:

 

I'd also like to see a detailed system of crime and punishment, with consequences varying from paying substantial weregild, seizure of property and titles, to maybe even indentured servitude somewhat like young Cuchulain.

[Falkon Swiftblade]

I think the reason this kind of thing happens is because during the process of making the game, often times there's a ton of content being tested, but then there are a lot of loose ends being created for content sake which doesn't end up into the game until the last minute. So the first 3rd of the game might be tested thoroughly and they get that balanced well. Then, the final weeks of the project all the content is entered into the database that 30 people had been working on. However, now there's like 20X the amount of quests implemented in that hadn't been scrubbed against an internal list so items or rewards are put in the world to fill space. This is tough to do though, because unless you create a linear game you can't control which quests are done, nor do you know if the player will do X quest and not Y quest. I've done beta testing for a few games in the past, and often times you only test certain parts over and over. Or sometimes an item that wasn't meant to be sellable is somehow exploited and slipped through the cracks.

 

A game I was very impressed with that handled this issue almost perfectly throughout the game was Blackguards. Finding money was a challenge, and you often did have to pick and choose what you were going to spend money on. Also, there wasn't a way to grind until near the end of the game. Even then there was a finite amount of equipment you could have and you never got enough xp to level everything to max. Also having a finite amount of enemy's helped limit the ability to earn $ too fast.

[Ineth]

Having to make difficult choices when purchasing equipment certainly opens up interesting questions: "Do I buy this magical claymore or perhaps the boots of speed?".

 

The Baldur's Gate games didn't force you to make such decisions (except in the early parts of each game), but Icewind Dale 1 did.

 

When you come to Kuldahar near the beginning, you'll see lots of powerful enchanted items in the blacksmith's shop but you can't afford a single one of them. So you leave and follow the main story line, and by the time you come back to Kuldahar later you can maybe afford one of those items. And so on. By the end of the game (not counting expansion), you can own maybe 3 or 4 of them, but you have to choose which.

[Gromnir]

am not thinking there is a problem. as a developer, if you wanna control money, and you believe that such control is important, you may place the player on rails and offer negligible side-questing.  players will necessarily have enough money to enjoy the game if the play nothing but the critical path. taking the aforementioned as a given, the more side-quests is available, the more money players will potentially be able to acquire money beyond what is necessary. 

 

if you is concerned 'bout balance rather than money, then as a developer you do not make purchasable items unbalancing. problem solved. developers can create innumerable ways for players to use money that don't impact relative power, but if balance is a concern, you simply don't makes unbalancing items purchasable. 

 

from our pov, this is another one o' those "nothing to see here" issues. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[rjshae]

Any extra money will be rapidly consumed by the spouse mini-game, in combination with the bar tab, exotic dancer mini-game, and brothel taxes.

[Silent Winter]

 

Having to make difficult choices when purchasing equipment certainly opens up interesting questions: "Do I buy this magical claymore or perhaps the boots of speed?".

 

The Baldur's Gate games didn't force you to make such decisions (except in the early parts of each game), but Icewind Dale 1 did.

 

When you come to Kuldahar near the beginning, you'll see lots of powerful enchanted items in the blacksmith's shop but you can't afford a single one of them. So you leave and follow the main story line, and by the time you come back to Kuldahar later you can maybe afford one of those items. And so on. By the end of the game (not counting expansion), you can own maybe 3 or 4 of them, but you have to choose which.

 

yeah, but by the time I could afford them ... I didn't need them anymore.

This is another  balancing issue - awesome looking gear that you can't afford, so you adventure until you can, only to return and find out they're not so awesome anymore.  It feels like a let-down.  Either have less awesome gear at the shops or balance it so that you can afford it before late-game.

 

I like most of Nonek's ideas (naturally people would try to steal from you if you're loaded - a perception check perhaps?) - Also, why not have people rip you off if your pockets are over-flowing with gold:

Innkeeper [appraise skill on you]: Bad time to be coming through here, what with the ...er ...festival and wotnot.  Prices are triple what they usually are.

 

(Disagree about paying the NPCs - unless it's a mercenary type which would make sense in-game - otherwise I consider it to be ;party money' so they get their share of the food, equipment, etc and the loot when all's done.  I think they did it in TOEE, where the joinable NPCs got some of the spoils / bought their own equipment or something.  But that was one or 2, not the whole team.

[kangaxxter]

I think a large problem in IWD/BG was that a plurality, if not majority depending on the game, of your gold came from selling items. Significantly reducing the amount of gold from selling items means that you'd value the actual quest rewards over quest loot. It'd encourage holding on to unique or powerful items as opposed to vendor trashing most of what you find to afford more specialized gear. The only items that should sell for large sums are "treasure items" like gems and jewelry. A second-hand sword, even if it's magical, shouldn't be in that much of a demand for the trading post of a small mining village, unless there are lots of adventurers coming through looking to equip themselves, and that should reflect in what the merchant would offer you for it.

[Pray]

Just off hand a few money sink ideas that involve side quests:

 

1) A political line that involves having a high intellect, a high stealth, or loads of money to bribe officials and individuals, in order to finish a quest line with the optimal reputation.

 

2) A small house is found somewhere along a non-critical path and the player finds a troubled family in need. Player can decide to ignore their need or help provide for them. This is both costly and time consuming - in return, when the. say, father recovers from his illness/injury, they provide some sort of persistent benefit to the party (regular buff foods, or the offer to work as a guard/manager of your stronghold). The benefit does not necessarily have to be a net gain to the player, but is simply a question of what the player values emotionally. 

 

3) Obviously expensive items can be a significant money sink. I feel like this is an obvious one.

 

4) Becoming a backer of a rebel cause (or it's rival), while staying in the shadows. This means providing both financial as well as perhaps more shady assistance. Winning the cause means a town (after the rebels win or lose) becomes hostile or friendly to the party, and becomes a hub for trading/rest near a perhaps farther from friendlies location, giving it strategic meaning but not forcing the player into the option.

 

Just a few ideas.

[Urthor]

Just create dialogue options then.  Treasure seeking archeologist won't halt his exploitation of culturally sensitive ruins: Here's 100k in coppers, that's more money than you'll ever get from this place, go home.  Trying to convince reluctant mercenaries to decamp from their cause. 

 

Solves multiple issues with one stone.  

 

1) Easy to implement at a very late stage of development.  Far easier and cheaper in costly man hours to write dialogue and program another outcome for a quest than it is to have an artist construct a new map/models for a new endgame area devoted to ripping players' excess cash out of them.

 

2) Fits seamlessly with the role playing element.  Not all the world's problems can be solved by money, but it'd be downright illogical for the annoying disgruntled mercenaries to require you to perform a fetch quest when you've got a 7 figure cash supply.

 

The major issue would be making sure that this only works in the end-game, and doesn't just allow the vast majority of quests to be bypassed for small sums of money.  Too many "500 gold to skip quest" options would hurt progression in the game early on, if these dialogues available they should only really deal with massive sums.  

 

You could also limit these dialogue options to having a fully completed player stronghold perhaps.  

Edited July 28, 2014 by Urthor

[Pray]

Just create dialogue options then.  Treasure seeking archeologist won't halt his exploitation of culturally sensitive ruins: Here's 100k in coppers, that's more money than you'll ever get from this place, go home.  Trying to convince reluctant mercenaries to decamp from their cause. 

 

Solves multiple issues with one stone.  

 

1) Easy to implement at a very late stage of development.  Far easier and cheaper in costly man hours to write dialogue and program another outcome for a quest than it is to have an artist construct a new map/models for a new endgame area devoted to ripping players' excess cash out of them.

 

2) Fits seamlessly with the role playing element.  Not all the world's problems can be solved by money, but it'd be downright illogical for the annoying disgruntled mercenaries to require you to perform a fetch quest when you've got a 7 figure cash supply.

 

The major issue would be making sure that this only works in the end-game, and doesn't just allow the vast majority of quests to be bypassed for small sums of money.  Too many "500 gold to skip quest" options would hurt progression in the game early on, if these dialogues available they should only really deal with massive sums.  

 

You could also limit these dialogue options to having a fully completed player stronghold perhaps.  

 

Would this really be such a bad thing in the early game? I think having the option alone might incentivise players to save more money (either having money to skip these quests. or saving the money by doing the quests) which causes the player to feel the risk vs reward mechanic of having more or less money.

 

Players frugal enough might be able to never feel the pinch of "wasting" money on the sink, but then it simply serves the purpose of a money sink.

[philby]

I like how in The Witcher 2 for each chapter there seemed to be plans for a couple of sets of armour that were stand outs and something to aim for, but you can't afford them yet. So you play a bit and build up some resources and then get the armour. I found however that by the time I got the armour it was pretty late in the chapter but at least it gave you something to set you up for the next bit.

 

So if something like that was implemented, where there is some kind of item in a particular area/chapter that is clearly fantastic but expensive, it gives you something to work toward and spend a big pile of money on.

 

I don't really like durability style systems, I just find them really annoying. I'm also a bit of a hoarder, so things like camp storage chests and the Ebon Hawk cargo hold made games more fun for me to play

[Zwiebelchen]

I think the problem with Baldurs Gate series was the sheer amount of trash loot you gathered on your travels and the absurd amount of money you got from selling magic items.

 

That's why I hate games where enemies drop exactly the gear they are using. It creates an absolutely ridicolous item overflow.

I know it goes against realism, but it would be much better to hand-select the loot in the game and not make creatures drop their armors and weapons all the time. You could argue that armors would be broken anyway, after a battle.

 

So less realism for the sake of balancing income. That is imho the way to go.

Edited July 30, 2014 by Zwiebelchen

[Gfted1]

I don't think PoE will have the condition described by the OP, in fact I think it could be opposite. Since we can literally carry every single piece of loot in the game they will either have to greatly devalue the loot or greatly increase the costs for all purchasable items. Otherwise the economy will be utterly broken and you will be swimming in cash very quickly.

 

Imo, the inventory system will require players to loot everything just to keep up with the devaluation and be able to buy things.

[rjshae]

Perhaps a higher mark-down on expensive items.

 

"Sorry yer ladyship, but our noble Duke demands a... 'luxury' tax on all major transactions." Mutters... "greedy git..." He continues, "After all, 'is nibs needs 'is 'normous belly fillin' with more sweet cakes and the finest soddin' swill. But ye looks as if ye can afford it, if yer catchin' me meanin'."

 

Gaining the Stronghold gets you out of paying most of the tax because you're now a member of the landed estate.

[SqueakyCat]

Imo, the inventory system will require players to loot everything just to keep up with the devaluation and be able to buy things.

 

I thought you were going to name your character Kirby or Hoover (iirc)?  Personally, I'm going to name mine Dyson, and I'm going to roll through the game suctioning up everything that's not nailed down and tossing it into my infinite stash. 

[Gfted1]

 

Imo, the inventory system will require players to loot everything just to keep up with the devaluation and be able to buy things.

 

I thought you were going to name your character Kirby or Hoover (iirc)?  Personally, I'm going to name mine Dyson, and I'm going to roll through the game suctioning up everything that's not nailed down and tossing it into my infinite stash. 

 

 

Hehe, Hoover has a nice ring to it but I may have to jack your Dyson idea. They suck better!

 

I usually find it irritating to have to pick up every soda can and ashtray ala FO:NV & D:OS (seriously, go to hell with those seashells ) so maybe someone can mod in some kind of "loot all" option that allows the user to pick up everything in a certain radius or something similar?

[Amentep]

I only find it irritating to pick up every item when I'm picking them up and not trying to pick them up like in an Elder Scroll game where you would have an item like roast beef that you could eat and get some ridiculously beefy bonus and it was sitting on a plate which sat on a piece of paper which further sat on a table, and then you went to get the item but got the plate and the paper but the item didn't move on the table like you were doing one of those magic tricks where you pull the table cloth out from under all the place settings and everyone goes "oooo" and "ahhh" when not even a fork shifts from your masterful table cloth pulling and so then you just get mad and started double clicking on everything and picked up every item in sight, including candlesticks and the centerpiece and then you walked out of the room satisfied you'd won over the man who made it hard to pick up a roast beef and then some monster attacked and you whacked it and once it was dead you'd forgotten you'd picked up an entire seven course meal and while selling items you're thinking "where the hell did the potato salad bowl come from and more importantly why the hell is the weapon shop owner buying the potato salad bowl - is he some sort of potato salad bowl fetishist or is there a secondary market in this game for selling bowls that I need to break into and make some cash?"