No experience from combat

[Amentep]

Also who says it's too late for the xp system, I think it would take less time to go back to a know xp system, then to figure out how to make this one work.

Sawyer implied early on in one of these debates it *was* something that could be changed late in development (how late is something I could only guess) -

 

I want to say something about my high-level approach to design, whether the systems being described are dialogue, rest mechanics, or how you gain experience: the bottom line for any mechanic is how it affects the ways in which players play the game. I.e., after all of the theorizing, all of the speculation, and all of the strong statements of feeling on a mechanic, what matters is how people play the game.

 

So when I write that what Tim and I want to do is use quest/objective/challenge XP as the primary (if not only) methods of achieving XP, that means "want" will give way to "reality" if they are in conflict -- conflict in practice, not conflict in a forum discussion. When changing the system requires relatively little effort, there's not a ton of benefit to being absolutist over a year in advance. Moving from a class-based to classless system -- that's a big deal. That's something you decide and pretty much stick with. Deciding whether to give XP for monsters or not give XP for monsters -- that's not a big deal. That's easy to address, even late in development. Deciding whether people can rest at certain locations or they can rest anywhere is also pretty easy to address.

 

These things exist on a sliding scale of difficulty, implementation/adjustment-wise. We plan things so we can make the simple changes easily later on. Generally that means creating simple base layers of mechanics and adding in "adjustment" or tuning mechanics when the metrics/gameplay we see demands it.

[Helm]

Let's just agree to have only potato farming XP instead. Problem solved.

But, but, how do you improve your Rogue's lockpicking skill by harvesting potatos for XP?

 

 

 

xD

[IndiraLightfoot]

Amentep: Wow! Nice digging. Now, I suddenly feel much more hopeful.

[PrimeJunta]

I agree that it is a shame that two or three controversial design decisions have split the community into feuding factions. Hopefully Obsidian listens to the fans like Larian and Inxile did during their betas. I don't think it will happen though, because Sawyer seems to be very bullheaded when it comes to changing core mechanics of his design.

 

I normally don't respond to this sort of thing, but... really, Helm. You're one of the most abrasive and divisive posters on these forums. Getting all pious about how bad it is that the community is split is a bit rich, frankly. If you want us all to be a big happy family, then :roots in cliché bag: be the change you want to see.

[Sarex]

Sawyer implied early on in one of these debates it *was* something that could be changed late in development (how late is something I could only guess) -

 

I remember that post, either way I think that the xp system is just a numbers game. The only difficult thing should be to figuring out how much xp each quest, creature, action gives in order for the game pace to be fluid.

[Helm]

 

I agree that it is a shame that two or three controversial design decisions have split the community into feuding factions. Hopefully Obsidian listens to the fans like Larian and Inxile did during their betas. I don't think it will happen though, because Sawyer seems to be very bullheaded when it comes to changing core mechanics of his design.

 

I normally don't respond to this sort of thing, but... really, Helm. You're one of the most abrasive and divisive posters on these forums. Getting all pious about how bad it is that the community is split is a bit rich, frankly. If you want us all to be a big happy family, then :roots in cliché bag: be the change you want to see.

 

Uh, oh, here come the personal insults again. I should have known that you would never change.

 

But yeah, just completely deny that there is a lot of controversy and feuding going on, if that makes you feel happy.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Helm

[Amentep]

 

Sawyer implied early on in one of these debates it *was* something that could be changed late in development (how late is something I could only guess) -

 

I remember that post, either way I think that the xp system is just a numbers game. The only difficult thing should be to figuring out how much xp each quest, creature, action gives in order for the game pace to be fluid.

 

Yeah I remembered it as well, which is why I've been interested in how the XP system works in practice in the beta. The theoretical discussion is fine, but I also remembered Sawyer saying a lot of his philosophy centers on how players play vs the systems themselves so that I figured the Beta would be important in terms of feedback regarding XP (much more so than the previous debates had been).

[Tartantyco]

Uh, oh, here come the personal insults again.

 

 

Maybe it's an honest observation of your character, Helm? But no, it couldn't be that! After all, you are perfect.

[Volourn]

You do realize that honest observations can still be personal insults right? It's not either/or. If I call you a douchebag for your post it's an insult but it's also true.

 

 

Back to xp... XP is about rewarding the player for overcoming challenges, using their character skills, discovering things, role-playing, and advancing the story. I don't feel rewarded in PE. I felt rewarded in SRR. *shrug*

[bonarbill]

 

 

I agree that it is a shame that two or three controversial design decisions have split the community into feuding factions. Hopefully Obsidian listens to the fans like Larian and Inxile did during their betas. I don't think it will happen though, because Sawyer seems to be very bullheaded when it comes to changing core mechanics of his design.

 

I normally don't respond to this sort of thing, but... really, Helm. You're one of the most abrasive and divisive posters on these forums. Getting all pious about how bad it is that the community is split is a bit rich, frankly. If you want us all to be a big happy family, then :roots in cliché bag: be the change you want to see.

 

Uh, oh, here come the personal insults again. I should have known that you would never change.

 

But yeah, just completely deny that there is a lot of controversy and feuding going on, if that makes you feel happy.

 

 

I'm not seeing any controversy on this forum.  All I'm seeing is three people (You, Mrakvampire, and Glubba) acting like bunch of butthurt crybabies.

[Amentep]

I'm not seeing any controversy on this forum.

Kill XP vs Quest/Objective XP vs hybrid XP systems has been a topic for theoretical debate for a year now (probably the second most popular debate after Romance threads).

 

Add in subjective qualities tied to how the IE games did it and how far the current systems have moved away from that, and that people pledged money for an IE successor game - yeah there's been a bit of controversy over the decision to go with Objective XP and a fair bit of passion (in both positive and negative senses).

[Helm]

 

Uh, oh, here come the personal insults again.

 

 

Maybe it's an honest observation of your character, Helm? But no, it couldn't be that! After all, you are perfect.

 

So, am I your new victim? Have you had enough of insulting and attacking Stun on a personal level?

 

Take a long walk if you need to vent your aggression, bro. 

[Tartantyco]

Do you need a hug, Helm? Sounds like you need a hug.

[Amentep]

Or we could talk about Beta experiences with the XP system in PoE - that's actually on-topic AND constructive.

[Helm]

 

Also who says it's too late for the xp system, I think it would take less time to go back to a know xp system, then to figure out how to make this one work.

Sawyer implied early on in one of these debates it *was* something that could be changed late in development (how late is something I could only guess) -

 

I want to say something about my high-level approach to design, whether the systems being described are dialogue, rest mechanics, or how you gain experience: the bottom line for any mechanic is how it affects the ways in which players play the game. I.e., after all of the theorizing, all of the speculation, and all of the strong statements of feeling on a mechanic, what matters is how people play the game.

 

So when I write that what Tim and I want to do is use quest/objective/challenge XP as the primary (if not only) methods of achieving XP, that means "want" will give way to "reality" if they are in conflict -- conflict in practice, not conflict in a forum discussion. When changing the system requires relatively little effort, there's not a ton of benefit to being absolutist over a year in advance. Moving from a class-based to classless system -- that's a big deal. That's something you decide and pretty much stick with. Deciding whether to give XP for monsters or not give XP for monsters -- that's not a big deal. That's easy to address, even late in development. Deciding whether people can rest at certain locations or they can rest anywhere is also pretty easy to address.

 

These things exist on a sliding scale of difficulty, implementation/adjustment-wise. We plan things so we can make the simple changes easily later on. Generally that means creating simple base layers of mechanics and adding in "adjustment" or tuning mechanics when the metrics/gameplay we see demands it.

 

Good find.

 

I would say there definitely is hope, but Sawyer considers combat XP to be "degenerate gameplay", not to mention that he has insulted us for wanting combat XP (or similar mechanic) a few times. What I am trying to say is that he is firmly convinced that the current system is perfect.

 

But I dunno, let's see what happens and not give up hope. Maybe Feargus will finally put his foot down or maybe Sawyer will finally realise that there actually is a problem.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Helm

[GreyFox]

As a neutral person to this topic I see some cherry picking in regards to D&D/PnP.

 

We'll we are doing thing A because ya know real life role playing and **** but not doing thing B because well this isn't ****ing real life role playing and ****....

 

Also not sure how wanting kill xp = wanting to play a CE murderer who runs around **** slapping everything in the game.

 

Having not actually played the game I can't say that objective based exp doesn't work but it sure sounds/looks lame to me.

 

I can certainly see would be new comers to the game/genre be like "**** this" when they see their efforts not intuitively rewarded....

Probably better to give exp for most things including quests/kills/skills but I've admitted to not knowing yet so...

 

I can say it works well in PnP but am often reminded that this isn't D&D sooooo....

[Amentep]

Good find.

Took me a bit to find it, but totally worth bringing to the discussion, I think!

 

I would say there definitely is hope, but Sawyer considers combat XP to be "degenerate gameplay", not to mention that he has insulted us for wanting combat XP (or similar mechanic) a few times. What I am trying to say is that he is firmly convinced that the current system is perfect.

 

But I dunno, let's see what happens and not give up hope. Maybe Feargus will finally put his foot down or maybe Sawyer will finally realise that there actually is a problem.

I think - if I understand Sawyer's position correctly - is that he doesn't consider combat xp to be "degenerate gameplay" but that combat xp as implemented in most games encourages (sometimes railroads) combat solutions - even when other solutions are available (or in addition to solving things in other ways - the "turn in quest, then kill quest giver" syndrome). It is when a game system has the unintended consequence of encouraging specific behaviors in players (rather than letting the player choose how they play within the framework that the game gives) that is the creation of degenerate gameplay.

 

So I could see (and I've probably been more hopeful about the XP systems than most) that if the feedback ends up being negative with regard to the player experience in Beta with the XP system that there could be major adjustments if it becomes clear that the system isn't fun and can't be tweaked to be fun.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Amentep

[Gfted1]

Discuss the posts and not the posters, please. If your entire contribution to the discussion is to snipe from the sidelines with personal insults then keep it to yourself.

[DigitalCrack]

I think its pretty crappy of people to assume an xp system, that's barely been tested by masses at this point, is garbage and obviously not as good.  We've had years of playing similar games where you get xp from kills so of course people will be inclined to favor what they are comfortable with.  How can something be deemed a bad idea until its been given a fair chance.  2 and 1/2 days is hardly enough time to pass judgement especially when the beta is almost unplayable right now.  Wait till there has been some patches and more time to get an accurate feel from it.

[IndiraLightfoot]

A dev has actually posted about the xp system!

 

Sking, on 21 Aug 2014 - 01:31 AM, said:

Experience is awarded only through quest progression. At certain points during quests a "Quest Update" scroll pops up in the top left and any experience gained is shown in the Combat Log. 

 

 

You may have just missed it 

http://forums.obsidi...tice/?p=1486643

 

IndiraLightfoot, on 21 Aug 2014 - 6:50 PM, said:

Aluminiumtrioxid: Yeah! I'm quite perplexed and taken aback by that. Like SilentWinter wrote earlier: I had expected at least the rudiments of an intricate and new and fresh objective xp system, where xp triggers went off here, there and everywhere! But as things are now, it's only quest xp as far as we know. It's almost bizarre.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if we*ll see a dev post or some lines in a patch update, reading something like this:

"Our fine-meshed objective xp system didn't make the cut, so we scrapped it for the beta build we brought to Cologne. In the next patch, we will have the xp system in place, and we really welcome your feedback on it."

 

If not, I have no clue what happened.

 

Alright folks, well, this certainly answers that: The quest-only xp system is intended this way (perhaps with some long quest being divided into one or two xp chunks before the final xp lump)! So, no mistake, this is what they meant by objective/challenge xp, it seems. I'll be darned.

 

It's a bit like the quest xp system of M&M X, but without the rest of its xp system: without the teachers, and without those progressing skills from rather fast levels, IIRC.

[PrimeJunta]

Hey, there is an XP system in place. I finally leveled up. Once. In the ogre cave. Before meeting the ogre. I think the secret sauce was that my starting quests didn't disappear before I managed to complete them.

 

After that some Bad Things happened again and I had to quit.

 

Again, I think it's too early to tell. For me I think the main appeal of an XP system is frequent small rewards punctuated by big juicy rewards (i.e. leveling up). Can't tell from the beta how that's gonna feel, because it's (a) broken and (b) inflated.

[Gfted1]

 

 

Experience is awarded only through quest progression.

 

*sadfaceemoji*

[Gromnir]

 

I'm not seeing any controversy on this forum.

Kill XP vs Quest/Objective XP vs hybrid XP systems has been a topic for theoretical debate for a year now (probably the second most popular debate after Romance threads).

 

has been a debate involving these developers for much longer than a year if one wishes to go back as far as the bg3 and fo3 development debates. same issues. same developers.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[yrm_dm]

From what I've read combat is pretty hard.   One way for gamers to make combat easier is to gain some xtra XP from combat to get ahead of the curve.

 

It was always fun in Baldur's Gate or whatnot to re-start the game with previously saved characters (or bring them in) and re-tackle the game for the second time with more powerful characters so you could reach the limits of power.

 

One easy way around this problem, but still using quest EXP, would be to have several quests become available like...   "bounty on X creatures" where simply killing that creature type and recovering it's ear, once you've read the wanted poster, would provide extra quest XP, in even a small amount in a way that doesn't tie you to an advancement speed limit heavily restricted by the game designer version of QUEST XP.

 

If you can never break out of QUEST XP advancement limits, any quest you find too hard can't be easily circumvented unless there are thousands and thousands of easy side quests (like the X creature bounty) where you can level up and come back.

 

I.e.   There should be a way for gamers to "get ahead" of where they're supposed to be.    This isn't a queue for an amusement park ride where everyone has to have the exact same experience waiting the exact same amount of time.

 

Some of you guys SHOULD be able to have stronger characters and a better run than me, if you put in the research and effort and time.    If someone else power-games better than I do, good for them.  I'll watch their video and learn from their success.

 

Quest XP - Restricts how fast you can power up PCs      Restricts the ability to find "just one more battle" to squeak a character over the limit to the next level.

 

There are potential easy solutions for this so I trust the game developers to find the right balance.

[Amentep]

 

 

I'm not seeing any controversy on this forum.

Kill XP vs Quest/Objective XP vs hybrid XP systems has been a topic for theoretical debate for a year now (probably the second most popular debate after Romance threads).

 

has been a debate involving these developers for much longer than a year if one wishes to go back as far as the bg3 and fo3 development debates. same issues. same developers.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Well...I was mostly referring to this incarnation of it, but yeah.