Experience point system in the beta and onwards

[Stun]

These are extremely petty people we're dealing with.

Overruled! Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[CatatonicMan]

Don't worry, they won't.

 

 

 

Sawyer would rather let the whole game end up as train wreck than change his "vision".

 

The game is going to be a train wreck merely because the XP system isn't to your taste? Are you really going there?

Edited August 21, 2014 by CatatonicMan

[Helm]

 

 

 

 

If they DO end up bringing back kill exp

Don't worry, they won't.

 

Sawyer would rather let the whole game end up as train wreck than change his "vision".

 

Umm, why are you being condescending regarding to Sawyer? <_<

 

Do you have some type of reason to be snide about him, like evidence that he doesn't listen feedback despite his job being listening feedback?

 

Because he is the reason that we have this system.

 

He also mildy insulted us.

 

So waaaaait, you don't actually have any evidence that he doesn't listen feedback, yet you keep insulting the guy? ._.;

 

What?

 

If he would have listened to feedback, then this would have been changed 2 years ago. Do you have any idea how many threads like this we have had in the past 2 years?

[Helm]

 

Don't worry, they won't.

 

 

 

Sawyer would rather let the whole game end up as train wreck than change his "vision".

 

The game is going to be a train wreck merely because the XP system isn't to your taste? Are you really going there?

 

Check your comprehension skills.

 

He has a vision, he won't change any of it. That includes the quest only xp part.

[Zansatsu]

"Everyone in QA and among the OEI devs fights most of the time in PoE. They love blasting critters in red circles with spells and bashing them with morning stars. They also use stealth quite a bit, but often to scout, less often to avoid fights (some more than others). So while the concern is a rational one, people are not entirely rational."

 

That's the quote from Sawyer, it's tongue and cheek, and he is calling the people irrational all be it very politely.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Zansatsu

[BrokenMask]

Edit: Frick, accidentally posted before post was full  and I didn't notice it before I finished my post <_< And no delete post button

Edited August 21, 2014 by BrokenMask

[BrokenMask]

What?

 

 

If he would have listened to feedback, then this would have been changed 2 years ago. Do you have any idea how many threads like this we have had in the past 2 years?

 

Two years ago when public hasn't yet played the beta? <_< Dude, apparently QA haven't complained about it, so you can't expect him to change it unless QA is loud about that.

 

"Everyone in QA and among the OEI devs fights most of the time in PoE. They love blasting critters in red circles with spells and bashing them with morning stars. They also use stealth quite a bit, but often to scout, less often to avoid fights (some more than others). So while the concern is a rational one, people are not entirely rational."

 

That's the quote from Sawyer, it's tongue and cheek, and he is calling the people irrational all be it very politely.

Thats factual information, people are irrational. Thats just how the world works.

Edited August 21, 2014 by BrokenMask

[600lbpanther]

Regardless if I get XP for every kill or not...is the leveling consistent and timely based?

That is essentially what we are talking about...or no? 

 

Or are we talking about "having to do quests" because quests kind of suck (to me at least since it is always a "gopher" quest i.e. - go for this generic shxtty thing. go for that shxtty generic item.) and thus if I avoid quests then I do not level up?  Which means:  I have to do fetch quests to level up to move through the game.  To me...that is always the draw of the Elder Scrolls series...I rarely do quests...I Just love to adventure and fight and level up.

 

If the quests are fun, or at the very least "loose" and not cumbersome, and can be incorporated into the "adventuring" aspect that I like then I can get over the NO-XP per kill.  (Which is definitely not the norm and yes...you can argue logic all day..."If I kill something I learn from it" which is how I view it too). 

[Volourn]

"Umm, why are you being condescending regarding to Sawyer? <_<

 

Do you have some type of reason to be snide about him, like evidence that he doesn't listen feedback despite his job being listening feedback?"

 

He has called people names when they disagree with him. He also LOATHES the IE games espciially the BG series and has always hated BIO the creators of the BG games, and hates people who like the BG/IE games. He's made this very clear.

 

It's not about being condescending. It's about knowing that he loathes us.

 

That said, I don't hate ALL his ideas. Some of the changes have been good.

 

However, as far as xp goes, that's not being changed. Ever.

 

 

That said, let's stay on topic and not worry about personal stuff. 

 

 I believe in rewarding the player for accomplishing stuff, for overcoming challenges, for role-playing, and everything else. PE does not seem to do this in a meaningful way like SRR which does it awesomely.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Volourn

[Helm]

"Umm, why are you being condescending regarding to Sawyer? <_<

 

Do you have some type of reason to be snide about him, like evidence that he doesn't listen feedback despite his job being listening feedback?"

 

He has called people names when they disagree with him. He also LOATHES the IE games espciially the BG series and has always hated BIO the creators of the BG games, and hates people who like the BG/IE games. He's made this very clear.

 

It's not about being condescending. It's about knowing that he loathes us.

 

That said, I don't hate ALL his ideas. Some of the changes have been good.

 

However, as far as xp goes, that's not being changed. Ever.

 

 

That said, let's stay on topic and not worry about personal stuff. 

 

 I believe in rewarding the player for accomplishing stuff, for overcoming challenges, for role-playing, and everything else. PE does not seem to do this in a meaningful way like SRR which does it awesomely.

Really? Sawyer hates the BG/BG2 Bioware and generally dislikes all of the IE games?

 

Do you have any quotes about this or remember what he said exactly?

[Volourn]

I'd rather not get too far into anti Sawyer because I don't hate him but I know he hates me since he's banned me before and has basically told me to shut up. L0L read the Codex PE threads for an exact quote.

 

I'm just going to stick on the topic of xp in this thread so I don't get banned.

 

 

 

I still have yet to get an answer why people think it's okay to get experience for helping a little girl find her dolly but not for defeating the dragon who ambushes you on the road? <> It's a simple question. Please answer.

[BrokenMask]

Ummm, Volourn, you don't make sense. Why would Sawyer be involved in project that is about IE nostalgia if he hates IE games?

[Volourn]

Man. I do not want to down this road. I don't want to be banned. This is my final post  about mr. Sawyer.

 

He's an Obsidian employee. He works on games they ask him to. Simple as that. I do stuff at work too that I'd rather not be doing but ti's my job so I do it. As I'm sure plenty of people do.

 

That's it. Back on xp topic: I still have yet to get an answer why people think it's okay to get experience for helping a little girl find her dolly but not for defeating the dragon who ambushes you on the road? <> It's a simple question. Please answer.

[BrokenMask]

Riiiight, I'm bit skeptical about this forum lacking freedom of speech and you getting banned for that, but okai

 

And to answer to your question, depends on whether all enemies in games are dragons or whether dragon is unique or rare enemy. If its latter, yeah, exp would be nice. Like that giant spider in that cave, its in dead end, but it doesn't even have special loot.

 

So enemies like unique dragons or unique giant spiders should either give you strong loot or exp since otherwise killing something unique/impressive doesn't have that special "Hurrah!" thing going on

Edited August 21, 2014 by BrokenMask

[Helm]

I'd rather not get too far into anti Sawyer because I don't hate him but I know he hates me since he's banned me before and has basically told me to shut up. L0L read the Codex PE threads for an exact quote.

 

I'm just going to stick on the topic of xp in this thread so I don't get banned.

 

 

 

I still have yet to get an answer why people think it's okay to get experience for helping a little girl find her dolly but not for defeating the dragon who ambushes you on the road? <> It's a simple question. Please answer.

No problem, bro. I understand. 

[600lbpanther]

Volourn first you spill your little heart on how Sawyer hates you, banned you, told you to shutup, and then you even post a website to obtain Sawyer's exact quote and woefully exclaim afterwards about how you did not want this topic to go down this path.

 

To your question about the girl and her dolly and why you get XP points for completing that quest but not for the dragon ambushing you:  I believe it's been answered before and the answer is:  It really does not make any sense except from a game XP balancing aspect. 

 

The main questions I have with this XP-from-quest-only system are:

1. Does it affect the leveling experience?  To me this is what we are really talking about:  Having to do quests to obtain levels rather than choosing to do quests at one's leisure and filling the rest of the xp with random encounters at the player's discretion.
2. Are the quests fun, interesting, and take me on adventures where the ultimate prize yields enough experience to make it worthwhile? In essence, it would be like a "shell game".  Rather than get XP per kill...you get one big "pot" of XP.  The problem lies in "gopher" quests that have arisen in the past gaming years (i.e. - Kill 10 rats and get their whiskers, or run to X and get Y and bring it back to me).  These are predictable and boring and would make "leveling" a chore rather than a natural progression.

[Nomadmerc]

I still have yet to get an answer why people think it's okay to get experience for helping a little girl find her dolly but not for defeating the dragon who ambushes you on the road? <> It's a simple question. Please answer. 

 

 

I'd like to have this answered as well.

[Volourn]

"To your question about the girl and her dolly and why you get XP points for completing that quest but not for the dragon ambushing you:  I believe it's been answered before and the answer is:  It really does not make any sense except from a game XP balancing aspect. 

 

The main questions I have with this XP-from-quest-only system are:

1. Does it affect the leveling experience?  To me this is what we are really talking about:  Having to do quests to obtain levels rather than choosing to do quests at one's leisure and filling the rest of the xp with random encounters at the player's discretion.
2. Are the quests fun, interesting, and take me on adventures where the ultimate prize yields enough experience to make it worthwhile? In essence, it would be like a "shell game".  Rather than get XP per kill...you get one big "pot" of XP.  The problem lies in "gopher" quests that have arisen in the past gaming years (i.e. - Kill 10 rats and get their whiskers, or run to X and get Y and bring it back to me).  These are predictable and boring and would make "leveling" a chore rather than a natural progression."

\This doesn't answer the question at all. So, finding the girl's dolly is worth xp but the dragon is not... just because?   I think the player being ambushed and trying to find a way to survive a 'random' dragon attack is much more worthy than finding a little girls' dolly (no offense to little girls who love their dolly notwithstanding) and therefore is more suitable fo xp rewards even if not tied to an actual quest.

[CatatonicMan]

That's the quote from Sawyer, it's tongue and cheek, and he is calling the people irrational all be it very politely.

 

Ow, that hurt my English. I think the word you're looking for is "albeit", not "all be it"

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

Are you saying solving the kill xp problem by giving out xp for individual kills, but subtracting it from the quest xp total is bad, because then the player will know the outcome of engaging the trash mobs? As in, he'll know that in the end it's more convenient to avoid opponents, therefore noncombat resolution becomes the optimal solution, because it's faster/easier and yields the same reward?

 

 

Yes.

 

You would receive 2000XP no matter if you chose to avoid or engage in combat with the trash mobs.

 

 

OK, but why exactly is this a problem? Because it creates duller gameplay? (As in, the existence of an optimal path discourages experimentation, once said optimal path has been discovered.) Or because it punishes risk-taking behavior? Both? Neither?

Edited August 21, 2014 by aluminiumtrioxid

[GrinningReaper659]

 

I still have yet to get an answer why people think it's okay to get experience for helping a little girl find her dolly but not for defeating the dragon who ambushes you on the road? <> It's a simple question. Please answer. 

 

 

I'd like to have this answered as well.

 

 

Nice strawman you've constructed there, this is not what your opponents are arguing... everyone on here that opposes your view has already told you it's absurd.

 

I certainly don't think that finding a little girl's dolly needs to be rewarded with XP, and I think that defeating a dragon often should be rewarded with XP, but what does it matter if my XP for killing that dragon comes in the form of having completed a quest or an objective that involved its demise; what is this obsession that the death of every monster needs to be directly and immediately rewarded with some instant gratification XP? Further, it doesn't matter to me if my XP for killing that dragon stems simply from the fact that I'm gaining XP throughout the game and that that dragon obstructed my progression. The necessity of being constantly rewarded with XP for each time your character decides to kill some creature just seems foolish to me. It's a desire to have your particular style of play favored above other styles of play, even though the game designers have decided that they'd like players who roleplaying stealthy or diplomatic characters to be rewarded similarly to those who play characters that slaughter their way through every challenge. Quest XP accomplishes this desire of the designers by rewarding players for finishing the quest, as opposed to rewarding them for individual acts of slaughter or stealth along the way. Either way, the character is progressing and it seems that you're essentially upset that the way some people want to play the game (kill everything) isn't going to be the favored and encouraged path to complete every quest or objective.

 

I think that there is a strong case to be made for more objective-based XP (such as XP for clearing a wilderness area of dangerous beasts, XP for the handling of the scripted events, XP for exploring a ruin, etc.), but I don't see any merit in the arguments put forth here for per-kill XP.

[Shdy314]

 

 

No.

 

L0L

Ah Volourn. Still the master of speaking nonsense and patting yourself on the back. I hope saying that isn't seen as a personal attack. I would like to respond to your post with more substance but you are not giving me much to work with.

 

Maybe you will make a more cogent post to someone else I can respond to.

"a vocal minority complaining about it then they can do the following:"

 

L0LZ

Well I knew it was a long shot.

 

 

Did you seriously type this out and say.. "yea I made a good argument"

 

 

What are you Volourn now? This is the best response you could come up with?

Did you seriously type this out and say.. "yea I made a good point"

 

I mean I know you are arguing from an emotional rather than intellectual standpoint but you have to try and produce something of substance.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Shdy314

[Zansatsu]

 

That's the quote from Sawyer, it's tongue and cheek, and he is calling the people irrational all be it very politely.

 

 

Ow, that hurt my English. I think the word you're looking for is "albeit", not "all be it"

Posting from my phone so thanks for being the grammer Nazi. People asked for the quote, so I found it.

[Shdy314]

 

 

That's the quote from Sawyer, it's tongue and cheek, and he is calling the people irrational all be it very politely.

 

Ow, that hurt my English. I think the word you're looking for is "albeit", not "all be it"

Posting from my phone so thanks for being the grammer Nazi. People asked for the quote, so I found it.

 

No no you are supposed to respond by making fun of him for being a grammar nazi but failing to point out it is "tongue-in-cheek" not tongue and cheek.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Shdy314

[Zansatsu]

 

 

 

That's the quote from Sawyer, it's tongue and cheek, and he is calling the people irrational all be it very politely.

 

 

Ow, that hurt my English. I think the word you're looking for is "albeit", not "all be it"

Posting from my phone so thanks for being the grammer Nazi. People asked for the quote, so I found it.

No no you are supposed to respond by making fun of him for being a grammar nazi but failing to point out it is "tongue-in-cheek" not tongue and cheek.

Are the pot shots at me necessary? I've been even handed and civil. Also haven't made any direct attacks at anybody from out of the blue.