Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
prince87x

No experience from combat

Recommended Posts

 

There is a poll, in the Gameplay & mechanics forum, that clearly shows only a small minority of the people (9%) is satisfied by how XP is now rewarded.

 

One of the reasons to hold a more or less open beta is to receive feedback about mechanics. I would be surprised -and disappointed- if Obsidian doesn't reconsider the way XP is handled. 

 

Not to be "that" guy, but a poll with around 100 votes dosnt really mean anything....

 

Not to shoot myself in the foot here, but I suspect those who would be most motivated go and vote would be people hoping to change the xp system.

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I'm hearing in this thread:

 

"This bugged experience system isn't fit for final release! Giving XP for kills will fix the bugs."

 

"This combat, which is artificially more difficult because of bugs, is too hard for me. The solution is obviously isn't to fix the bugs and make combat easier, but to give XP for kills."

 

"I don't know what a dungeon crawler is. Obviously, the solution is to give XP for kills."

 

3WHJDwN.gif

 

Yea that map looks like a map from a classic dungeon crawler to me #sarcasm.

"There are multiple dungeons in BG2 therefor it must be a dungeon crawler"...

... "There are multiple sex scenes in Mass Effect therefor it must be a sex simulator" ...

... "Oh did I forget to mention that the creator of Mass Effect likes sex?"

Edited by AdaMusic
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I'm hearing in this thread:

 

"This bugged experience system isn't fit for final release! Giving XP for kills will fix the bugs."

 

"This combat, which is artificially more difficult because of bugs, is too hard for me. The solution is obviously isn't to fix the bugs and make combat easier, but to give XP for kills."

 

"I don't know what a dungeon crawler is. Obviously, the solution is to give XP for kills."

 

3WHJDwN.gif

 

Wilderness in BG1 = Overland Dungeons

 

Your point?

 

You wander around killing monsters and instead of being surrounded by stalactites you are surrounded by trees. YOU BASICALLY WANDER AROUND AND KILL THINGS IN THE IE GAMES. Stop trying to make those games something they were not.

 

Also, stop trying to insult posters you disagree with by trying to place words in their mouths. Deal with the ideas by using actual quotes not fake quotes you use to try to prove a point.

 

The IE games were fun but they were, at their core, games centered around dungeon crawling. The dungeons drove the story forward. They are how you gained companions, met story objectives, found loot and gained xp. Trying to deny this is ludicrous.

Edited by Shevek
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

People act like this is self-evidently a bad thing, but I'm actually not sure why. Why is gaining 0 XP a bad thing? What exactly are you being deprived of here?

 

Personally, I think it's cool when you can't count on the inevitable level-up to rescue you from a tough encounter. You have to make due with what you have. No level-up for you until the quest is over.

 

You are being deprived of any character progression for a days worth of playing a game, as to why that is bad, well it railroads you in to doing quest to have character progression at all, ie. it removes choice from you.

 

Everything is pretty much explained and discussed in this thread already:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67140-experience-point-system-in-the-beta-and-onwards/

 

 

How on earth is kill-XP any different from your complain.

You have to slaughter anything that moves, otherwise you are denied character progression.

It forces you to be murderhobo, instead of playing quests and adventures.

 

All XP is an abstraction of some kind. You don't have to kill even if kill XP is granted; but if the game railroads you into combat then your characters have to be able to kill. This is a fine distinction but an important one, since the IE games did railroad you into combat, so combat ended up being their primary focus.

 

There are a few different arguments going around but what I get from them is that Kill XP can encourage combat as the primary solution to problems. Objective XP does not, but it does inherit a couple of new problems: potentially giving a dis-incentive to killing (as the risk is greatest in combat but the reward is theoretically equivalent to other solutions) and in having a player play the game for a significant amount of time with potentially no reward.

 

The ultimate factor really is implementation (IMO) since as I started, all XP is an abstraction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's what I'm hearing in this thread:

 

"This bugged experience system isn't fit for final release! Giving XP for kills will fix the bugs."

 

Whether or not the bugs connected to the quest system are fixed; it won't change the fact that making xp quest exclusive railroads us into doing quests. Quests shouldn't have a monopoly on xp.

 

 

"I don't know what a dungeon crawler is. Obviously, the solution is to give XP for kills."

 

The issue as to whether BG1/BG2 & IWD/IWD2 are dungeon crawlers is merely semantics. The real point is that the IE didn't railroad you into doing quest exclusively, and if poe does; it will not capture the feeling of playing an IE game.

Edited by Namutree
  • Like 2

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea it is weird, but the Beta is short. And at the moment im more worried at the fact that some of the classes are so over powered that level 5 is all you would need to beta the whole game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shevek proudly proclaims that all games ever made are now dungeon crawls. Yes, even Tamagotchi.

 

You are only deserving of ridicule at this point, Shevek.


"You're a fool if you believe I would trust your benevolence. Step aside and you and your lackeys will be unhurt."


 


 


Baldur's Gate portraits for Pillars of Eternity   IXI   Icewind Dale portraits for Pillars of Eternity   IXI   Icewind Dale 2 portraits for Pillars of Eternity


 


[slap Aloth]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There is a poll, in the Gameplay & mechanics forum, that clearly shows only a small minority of the people (9%) is satisfied by how XP is now rewarded.

 

One of the reasons to hold a more or less open beta is to receive feedback about mechanics. I would be surprised -and disappointed- if Obsidian doesn't reconsider the way XP is handled.

 

Not to be "that" guy, but a poll with around 100 votes dosnt really mean anything....

 

I'll be that guy, anonymous self-selecting internet polls are worthless. Your population is so limited (and again, self-selecting) that any attempt to draw the conclusion of such a poll to the larger society would carry a huge margin of error rendering it meaningless.

 

They can be fun, but certainly not definitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There is a poll, in the Gameplay & mechanics forum, that clearly shows only a small minority of the people (9%) is satisfied by how XP is now rewarded.

 

One of the reasons to hold a more or less open beta is to receive feedback about mechanics. I would be surprised -and disappointed- if Obsidian doesn't reconsider the way XP is handled.

 

Not to be "that" guy, but a poll with around 100 votes dosnt really mean anything....

 

I'll be that guy, anonymous self-selecting internet polls are worthless. Your population is so limited (and again, self-selecting) that any attempt to draw the conclusion of such a poll to the larger society would carry a huge margin of error rendering it meaningless.

 

They can be fun, but certainly not definitive.

 

 

Can someone give a link to this poll?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shevek proudly proclaims that all games ever made are now dungeon crawls. Yes, even Tamagotchi.

 

You are only deserving of ridicule at this point, Shevek.

Shevek rightly asked that you didn't put words in people's mouth. Now you are doing it again.

 

The only one here deserving of ridicule is you.


"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

There is a poll, in the Gameplay & mechanics forum, that clearly shows only a small minority of the people (9%) is satisfied by how XP is now rewarded.

 

One of the reasons to hold a more or less open beta is to receive feedback about mechanics. I would be surprised -and disappointed- if Obsidian doesn't reconsider the way XP is handled.

 

Not to be "that" guy, but a poll with around 100 votes dosnt really mean anything....

 

I'll be that guy, anonymous self-selecting internet polls are worthless. Your population is so limited (and again, self-selecting) that any attempt to draw the conclusion of such a poll to the larger society would carry a huge margin of error rendering it meaningless.

 

They can be fun, but certainly not definitive.

 

Tbf, in this case we're only interested in the views of a pretty limited population (backers who have played the beta).  My issue is more with the point Namutree raised regarding how the self-selection would tend to skew; a poll on the topic put out by Obsidian where they asked all backers with beta access to give their opinion on the matter would be reasonable enough to work from, I believe.

 

 

Back to the issue at hand, I have less of a problem being railroaded into doing quests in a game where I am required to complete quests to progress and unlock further areas because of the basic structure of the thing.  You could level up to some degree by ignoring quests and simply killing things in the IE games, yes, but there was absolutely no way they were not required to reach new areas with more things to kill.  I have more of a problem with being essentially forced to jettison any hope of roleplaying someone who's not a mass-murderer if I want a strong character by the end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Shevek rightly asked that you didn't put words in people's mouth. Now you are doing it again.

 

The only one here deserving of ridicule is you.

 

The best thing to do with people like him is to ignore them. Notice how almost everyone is doing it.

 

 

I have more of a problem with being essentially forced to jettison any hope of roleplaying someone who's not a mass-murderer if I want a strong character by the end.

 

How are you forced? You keep saying that, but that was simply never the case in IE games.

Edited by Sarex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm happy with no kill XP, but it is exaggerating a bit to say kill XP forces you to play a mass murderer. You killed plenty of hostile stuff in the IE games and could hit the level caps, more so with mods.

  • Like 1

"Take your child murderin' god and shove his him up his own ass."-Volorun

 

"...the vote of a black redhead disabled homosexual transsexual Jew should probably be worth the same as at least a hundred white heterosexual Christians."-Rostere

 

"i can think of many women i would gladly sleep with, but not a single one that i would want as a girlfriend/wife... neither real nor fictional."-teknoman2

 

"I'm all for killing dogs in film." - algroth

 

"Iselmyr is the one who did GOMAD... Aloth is lactose intolerant" -ShadySands

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  I have more of a problem with being essentially forced to jettison any hope of roleplaying someone who's not a mass-murderer if I want a strong character by the end.

Then you're going to be disappointed as reaching the end requires a lot of combat. Even if you talk/stealth your way out of as many possible combat situations as you can; you will still be a mass murderer at the end. Not that kill xp being added would have made that any more/less likely.

 

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't really thought about CRPGs and even PnP D&D in that way before. So I've basically been a digital mass murderer for the last three decades and more? I have actually reaped countless of lives.

 

*Dramatic pause, staring in amazement*

 

Who am I? Death himself? Oh, no, wait, that's the next D3 expansion, after Reaper of Souls, mark my words! ;)

Edited by IndiraLightfoot
  • Like 3

*** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tbf, in this case we're only interested in the views of a pretty limited population (backers who have played the beta).  My issue is more with the point Namutree raised regarding how the self-selection would tend to skew; a poll on the topic put out by Obsidian where they asked all backers with beta access to give their opinion on the matter would be reasonable enough to work from, I believe.

The number of people who we know have access to the backer beta (from the Kickstarter numbers) is 7615. The 109 people who've voted only represent 1.4% of the backers. Ignoring the self-selction angle, my memory of statistics is that to draw conclusions to the greater population you'd want about 10% of the population voting (762 or so) at the bare minimum. You'd also want those 762 randomly sampled (ie not self selecting) to hope for any kind of validity to the results.

 

My hope with quest/Objective XP was that it would give value to differing play styles (diplomatic, stealth) without devaluing killing things. That would be an improvement (IMO- I know many differ on this) to how the IE games did it. But I also acknowledge that if we're talking about spiritual successors to the IE games, combat in those games is required and is rewarded and (in the end) kill XP isn't inherently "bad" in and of itself.

Edited by Amentep
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tbf, in this case we're only interested in the views of a pretty limited population (backers who have played the beta).  My issue is more with the point Namutree raised regarding how the self-selection would tend to skew; a poll on the topic put out by Obsidian where they asked all backers with beta access to give their opinion on the matter would be reasonable enough to work from, I believe.

The number of people who we know have access to the backer beta (from the Kickstarter numbers) is 7615. The 109 people who've voted only represent 1.4% of the backers. Ignoring the self-selction angle, my memory of statistics is that to draw conclusions to the greater population you'd want about 10% of the population voting (762 or so) at the bare minimum. You'd also want those 762 randomly sampled (ie not self selecting) to hope for any kind of validity to the results.

 

My hope with quest/Objective XP was that it would give value to differing play styles (diplomatic, stealth) without devaluing killing things. That would be an improvement (IMO- I know many differ on this) to how the IE games did it. But I also acknowledge that if we're talking about spiritual successors to the IE games, combat in those games is required and is rewarded and (in the end) kill XP isn't inherently "bad" in and of itself.

 

 

Player level almost only affects combat. Why would dialogue give XP that rewards the player by making him or her stronger in battle? Doesn't make sense. It would make sense if the player level didn't just indicate how strong a character is combat wise. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Tbf, in this case we're only interested in the views of a pretty limited population (backers who have played the beta).  My issue is more with the point Namutree raised regarding how the self-selection would tend to skew; a poll on the topic put out by Obsidian where they asked all backers with beta access to give their opinion on the matter would be reasonable enough to work from, I believe.

The number of people who we know have access to the backer beta (from the Kickstarter numbers) is 7615. The 109 people who've voted only represent 1.4% of the backers. Ignoring the self-selction angle, my memory of statistics is that to draw conclusions to the greater population you'd want about 10% of the population voting (762 or so) at the bare minimum. You'd also want those 762 randomly sampled (ie not self selecting) to hope for any kind of validity to the results.

 

My hope with quest/Objective XP was that it would give value to differing play styles (diplomatic, stealth) without devaluing killing things. That would be an improvement (IMO- I know many differ on this) to how the IE games did it. But I also acknowledge that if we're talking about spiritual successors to the IE games, combat in those games is required and is rewarded and (in the end) kill XP isn't inherently "bad" in and of itself.

 

 

Player level almost only affects combat. Why would dialogue give XP that rewards the player by making him or her stronger in battle? Doesn't make sense. It would make sense if the player level didn't just indicate how strong a character is combat wise. 

 

 

And how does combat make someone better at stealthing? Or lockpicking? Or identifying rare items and stuff? XP is generalized and abstracted, don't try to apply some 1:1 logic to it.


"You're a fool if you believe I would trust your benevolence. Step aside and you and your lackeys will be unhurt."


 


 


Baldur's Gate portraits for Pillars of Eternity   IXI   Icewind Dale portraits for Pillars of Eternity   IXI   Icewind Dale 2 portraits for Pillars of Eternity


 


[slap Aloth]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Shevek rightly asked that you didn't put words in people's mouth. Now you are doing it again.

 

The only one here deserving of ridicule is you.

 

The best thing to do with people like him is to ignore them. Notice how almost everyone is doing it.

 

 

I have more of a problem with being essentially forced to jettison any hope of roleplaying someone who's not a mass-murderer if I want a strong character by the end.

 

How are you forced? You keep saying that, but that was simply never the case in IE games.

 

By the need to keep up level-wise to progress.  Take BGII, for example, and the Underdark: if you're doing the drow city quests there, one route if you're not looking to kill everyone is simply to clear the Kuo-Toa camp (or just to do that from the start and get out of the place as soon as possible), ignoring the Illithid and the Beholders, right?  But that is a ton of XP you are missing out on, in a game where your ability to keep on with it requires you to have plenty of said XP if you want to survive.  The less killing you want and do, the worse you are at it and the harder and more frustrating combat becomes.  That's forcing a very specific playstyle on you, in a way that giving XP only for something you will need to be doing anyway (quests) does not. 

 

I agree that the limitations on resting does make it a bit more of a problem, but to some degree it simply affects what you're weighing - is using up more of my resting supplies by getting in a fight with that group of whatevers worth it to me?  Overall, not being rewarded by the game, XP-wise, for doing something (killing nonessential enemies) and being penalised by the game for not doing something (killing enemies) are very different things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo. There absolutely must be some kind of reward for killing creeps, but it dos not need to be exclusively experience points, (although thats what I want) 

It could be other things.. or based on or in a different system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't really thought about CRPGs and even PnP D&D in that way before. So I've basically been a digital mass murderer for the last three decades and more? I have actually reaped countless of lives. Who am I? Death himself? Oh, no, wait, that the next expansion of D3, after Reaper of Souls, makr my words! ;)

I'm really enjoying a PnP game I'm in at present where my character basically leaps at every opportunity to avoid a fight.  We're getting a lot of "roleplaying XP" because she'll usually try to negotiate instead if it's feasible.  It's nice for that to be a realistic option in any rpg, IMO.  Less metagaming helps with immersion for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

By the need to keep up level-wise to progress.  Take BGII, for example, and the Underdark: if you're doing the drow city quests there, one route if you're not looking to kill everyone is simply to clear the Kuo-Toa camp (or just to do that from the start and get out of the place as soon as possible),

 

I did the drow city without killing everyone.

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Namutree: Same here.


*** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Tbf, in this case we're only interested in the views of a pretty limited population (backers who have played the beta).  My issue is more with the point Namutree raised regarding how the self-selection would tend to skew; a poll on the topic put out by Obsidian where they asked all backers with beta access to give their opinion on the matter would be reasonable enough to work from, I believe.

The number of people who we know have access to the backer beta (from the Kickstarter numbers) is 7615. The 109 people who've voted only represent 1.4% of the backers. Ignoring the self-selction angle, my memory of statistics is that to draw conclusions to the greater population you'd want about 10% of the population voting (762 or so) at the bare minimum. You'd also want those 762 randomly sampled (ie not self selecting) to hope for any kind of validity to the results.

 

My hope with quest/Objective XP was that it would give value to differing play styles (diplomatic, stealth) without devaluing killing things. That would be an improvement (IMO- I know many differ on this) to how the IE games did it. But I also acknowledge that if we're talking about spiritual successors to the IE games, combat in those games is required and is rewarded and (in the end) kill XP isn't inherently "bad" in and of itself.

 

 

Player level almost only affects combat. Why would dialogue give XP that rewards the player by making him or her stronger in battle? Doesn't make sense. It would make sense if the player level didn't just indicate how strong a character is combat wise. 

 

 

And how does combat make someone better at stealthing? Or lockpicking? Or identifying rare items and stuff? XP is generalized and abstracted, don't try to apply some 1:1 logic to it.

 

 

What you are saying is exactly the point that I am trying to make. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...