Experience point system in the beta and onwards

[PrimeJunta]

I have to say that games are generally held up to a much higher standard for what is considered "art" then movies are. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie I would consider art.. maybe Shawshenk Redemption? I dunno.. probably there were some I missed or forgot but most of the stuff out of hollywood these days is what we in the game industry call shovelware and they totally get away with it too.

Hollywood hasn't made movies that would qualify as art in thirty years or so, allowing for the very odd exception. They used to but it somehow faded away by the early 1980's at the latest.

 

The latest movies that touched me at more than a European level weren't European or American at all. This one, for example.

[BrokenMask]

The bugs, UI issues and unfinished combat system aren't bugging me. That can all be fixed/improved.

 

I simply don't think that the design (mechanics and systems) of the game is very good.

Yeah, I understood that <_< I said that I don't mind you not liking them even though I like them.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

In a reply to my wondering whether we'll get to have a more old-school, combat xp, in the game too (or even if modders like me can help them add one before it ships, Sking says:

"Once the game releases any mod you feel is necessary to heighten your experience, you should definitely do."

What this means, folks, is that OE isn't budging. We will have quest-xp only (their version of "objective xp"), so there's nothing to see here. Scram! Go home!

 

Thats not what that means.. it means he doesn't want to give a direct answer because it's probably not his call and you could use the quote against him if it was later changed. All he said was what has already been said. When the game comes out you are free to mod it as you wish.

 

He is basically saying, no you can't mod the game before it is released.. and I am ignoring the other part of your question about xp.

 

That doesn't mean they are debating or even thinking of changing anything.. but your interpreting beyond what was said in that message.

 

That sounds a bit more hopeful. I would be hard-pressed to interpret it as there's still hope for combat xp, lock xp, trap xp, and that kind of fine-grained xp system, but you could be right that they are certainly discussing ways to do objectives in much finer increments, for instance!

[PrimeJunta]

For the sake of your soul, Indira, give up all hope on this.

 

The worst that could happen is that you get a really nice surprise.

[Sarex]

For the sake of your soul, Indira, give up all hope on this.

 

The worst that could happen is that you get a really nice surprise.

 

Learned that lesson long ago.

[Immortalis]

 

 

In a reply to my wondering whether we'll get to have a more old-school, combat xp, in the game too (or even if modders like me can help them add one before it ships, Sking says:

"Once the game releases any mod you feel is necessary to heighten your experience, you should definitely do."

What this means, folks, is that OE isn't budging. We will have quest-xp only (their version of "objective xp"), so there's nothing to see here. Scram! Go home!

 

Thats not what that means.. it means he doesn't want to give a direct answer because it's probably not his call and you could use the quote against him if it was later changed. All he said was what has already been said. When the game comes out you are free to mod it as you wish.

 

He is basically saying, no you can't mod the game before it is released.. and I am ignoring the other part of your question about xp.

 

That doesn't mean they are debating or even thinking of changing anything.. but your interpreting beyond what was said in that message.

 

That sounds a bit more hopeful. I would be hard-pressed to interpret it as there's still hope for combat xp, lock xp, trap xp, and that kind of fine-grained xp system, but you could be right that they are certainly discussing ways to do objectives in much finer increments, for instance!

 

Yea I didn't mean to give you hope that it's gonna change.. I just think it's dangerous to assume things or add meaning to things where there isn't any.

Until Josh or Fergus comes into this thread and says "We Hear you and will be examining other options for our XP System" I wouldn't get too excited..

[PrimeJunta]

Not Feargus. Josh. Feargus gonna fearg. Josh generally means what he says and says what he means.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Feargusaurus can stampede, though, and shake up things quite a bit.   

[Zombra]

Hilarious (and alarmingly naïve) to think that Obsidian's decision to scrap kill XP had anything to do with trying to enrich the roleplaying experience. It did NOT.

Ah yes!  Josh's nefarious plan to screw over backers!  Muhahahahahahahaha!

 

Oh wait, it's not malice, it's laziness, right?  Because they can't be bothered to figure out how to do incremental XP ... not like incremental XP has been in every single game they've ever made or anything.

 

Anyway, there's no good reason for them to do this!  They're just lazy and/or evil!  Good job, internet detective!  You cracked the case!

Thank goodness!

Edited August 24, 2014 by Zombra

[Nomadmerc]

Curious if we can pool the available modders together before the games release so there will be a team to get a better xp system in place quickly.

[Fluffle]

^well that's... a pretty darn well-written argument, Junta. You have earned another 'Like" from me.

 

Also, I'm suddenly conflicted on whether I should start a new PS:T playthough or throw the CDs in the trash. Of course, PS:T, whether it's a good example of anything or not, is almost always the bizzaro exception to every rule. On paper, it's the worst RPG ever made.

 

1) No Gender or race choices. A fixed protagonist, with only 3 class options (like Dragon age! But worse)

2) you can't wear armor

3) you can't use missile weapons of any type (in fact, no one can, save for 2 NPCs)

4) the weapons and spell choices you do have are ridiculously limited

5) Combat is horrendously, hideously, unthinkably, terrible

6) It's an exceedingly ugly game

7) It's filled to capacity with fetch quests

8.) the Modron cube <ugh>

9) The goal is to die.

10) The loot is silly

11) It's party based, yet aside from a couple of exceptions, you cannot equip your companions with anything, or choose their weapons, or customize them in any way

12) Nothing is tactical, nothing is strategic,

13) you can't die, and you can resurrect your party members 3 times a day if they die, but they never will because:

14) Healing charms are stackable to 99, and you can pause the game and consume as many as you wish. The effects are instant. Thus insuring immortality of your party members.

15) The Pacing is the worst of any game I've ever played.

16) It rewards unpredictablilty, as you just mentioned + the grinding (although that's purely optional, since even leveling is not of significant importance in the game)

 

 

Yet, somehow, PS:T manages to be the greatest RPG ever made. Art is intangible, I suppose.

 

Why don't you make such a list of all the things you dislike in the beta of PoE so far (bugs aside)

and admit that somehow it still may be able to manage to be one of the greatest RPG ever made too?

Edited August 24, 2014 by Fluffle

[IndiraLightfoot]

Fluffle: You sweet marshmallow, such a bringer of hope and comfort! *Hug*

[Stun]

Why don't you make such a list of all the things you dislike in the beta of PoE so far (bugs aside)

and admit that somehow it still may be able to manage to be one of the greatest RPG ever made too?

You mean speculate?

 

 

Oh wait, it's not malice, it's laziness, right? Because they can't be bothered to figure out how to do incremental XP ... not like incremental XP has been in every single game they've ever made or anything.

It's neither. It's resources. They had more than $4M to work with for their other games. Edited August 24, 2014 by Stun

[Zombra]

It's neither. It's resources. They had more than $4M to work with for their other games.

So 2 years ago, they decided to half-ass the central reward system for the game for the sole reason that they didn't want to spend money or time on it.  In the meantime, new systems have been added and others cut, but all the while they've stood firm that the XP system must remain fundamentally and objectively bad.  No one on the development team actually believes that there are advantages to this system, despite the many arguments in place showing that many of the players do.  Got it.  

[Stun]

So 2 years ago, they decided to half-ass the central reward system for the game for the sole reason that they didn't want to spend money or time on it. In the meantime, new systems have been added and others cut, but all the while they've stood firm that the XP system must remain fundamentally and objectively bad.

Bad? It's only bad if you're one of the rejecters of the system. Do YOU see it as bad?

 

 

No one on the development team actually believes that there are advantages to this system, despite the many arguments in place showing that many of the players do.  Got it.  

Straw man. I just listed one of the advantages to the system, and like any drama queen, you saw it and went into a hissy fit. Edited August 24, 2014 by Stun

[Zombra]

Bad? It's only bad if you're one of the rejecters of the system. Do YOU see it as bad? 

No one on the development team actually believes that there are advantages to this system, despite the many arguments in place showing that many of the players do.  Got it.  

Straw man. I just listed one of the advantages to the system, and like any drama queen, you saw it and went into a hissy fit.

No, I think it's a fantastic system and a great idea.  I must have misunderstood.  I thought you were saying that they used this system solely to save dev resources, not because it actually has merit.

 

EDIT: Wait, this is what you said:

Hilarious (and alarmingly naïve) to think that Obsidian's decision to scrap kill XP had anything to do with trying to enrich the roleplaying experience. It did NOT.

Soooooo ... let's start over.  Why did they go with this system?  Please list all the reasons, since you're the expert.

Edited August 24, 2014 by Zombra

[RedSocialKnight]

I like the quest-only XP system. If I want to pursue a no-kill solution to a quest -- sneaking in to release the captives instead of killing all the guards for example -- I don't want to be penalized for it.

 

And I don't want to have to meta-game for points, for example by learning lockpick just so I can level up faster by picking every lock I see.

 

However, optional encounters should be implemented as minor quests. You shouldn't end up with no XP after a full-scale combat.

[Valeris]

Following this poll, the system as it is currently implemented has been rejected by the player base.

[Immortalis]

I like the quest-only XP system. If I want to pursue a no-kill solution to a quest -- sneaking in to release the captives instead of killing all the guards for example -- I don't want to be penalized for it.

 

And I don't want to have to meta-game for points, for example by learning lockpick just so I can level up faster by picking every lock I see.

 

However, optional encounters should be implemented as minor quests. You shouldn't end up with no XP after a full-scale combat.

 

I can get behind this.. I don't actually care if we get kill -xp in quests or not.. as long as there is the payoff after an encounter or milestone.

 

My issue with lack of kill -xp is for when your not on a quest.. or your getting to a quest and now suddenly your achievements don't mean ****.

[Stun]

Soooooo ... let's start over.  Why did they go with this system?  Please list all the reasons, since you're the expert.

Saving dev resources is a multi-faceted merit. Aside from simply saving money and time and facilitating balance (they only have 4 million to work with) it also means they can spend those saved resources on enriching the game's other features.

 

As for other merits, I don't recall claiming there were several reasons why they scrapped kill XP. That's your drama-queen mind's conclusion jumping.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Stun

[Zombra]

Saving dev resources is a multi-faceted merit. Aside from simply saving money and time and facilitating balance (they only have 4 million to work with) it also means they can spend those saved resources on enriching the game's other features.

I understand what resource management means, thanks.  (I'm an RPG player for chrissake.)

 

As for other merits, I don't recall claiming there were several reasons why they scrapped kill XP. That's your drama-queen mind's conclusion jumping.

Make up your mind.  Did they deliberately make a subpar system just to save resources or not?  Do they truly see no merit in the system for gameplay and RP?

Edited August 25, 2014 by Zombra

[Immortalis]

 

Saving dev resources is a multi-faceted merit. Aside from simply saving money and time and facilitating balance (they only have 4 million to work with) it also means they can spend those saved resources on enriching the game's other features.

I understand what resource management means, thanks.  (I'm an RPG player for chrissake.)

 

As for other merits, I don't recall claiming there were several reasons why they scrapped kill XP. That's your drama-queen mind's conclusion jumping.

Make up your mind.  Did they deliberately make a subpar system just to save resources or not?  Do they truly see no merit in the system for gameplay and RP?

 

 

Why are we both liking the same post by RedSocialKnight? that would leave me to believe we agree on a common system? What are you against exactly from my previous post?

[Fluffle]

@Immortalis

 

Why are you liking that post indeed, where RedSocialKnight says he likes the quest-only XP System and then you

like the post after that where Valeris claims that based on the poll this very system has been rejected by the fanbase?

 

So do you like the quest-only XP System or do you not like it?

[Immortalis]

@Immortalis

 

Why are you liking that post indeed, where RedSocialKnight says he likes the quest-only XP System and then you

like the post after that where Valeris claims that based on the poll this very system has been rejected by the fanbase?

 

So do you like the quest-only XP System or do you not like it?

 

I guess I was misunderstanding his point..? I really zoned in on this quote

 

"However, optional encounters should be implemented as minor quests. You shouldn't end up with no XP after a full-scale combat."

 

Now that I am reading his post more closely I guess I misunderstood what he was saying..

 

EDIT:

I ultimately don't want to be completely nonnegotiable.. I am hoping for a middle ground that makes most people happy.. although I would prefer the IE systems be implemented almost exact.. I understand this game isn't about just what I want

Edited August 25, 2014 by Immortalis

[Stun]

Make up your mind.  Did they deliberately make a subpar system just to save resources or not?  Do they truly see no merit in the system for gameplay and RP?

Obsidian has decided to scrap kill XP because It's far easier for them to control and balance the pace of level advancement in an open world when they don't have to account for the XP of every enemy kill in every crevice of every room in every map...for every difficulty setting. Instead, they can simply hand place specifically calculated XP rewards where they wish and then add it all up and make sure the XP cap isn't reached by anyone when they still have 50% of the game left to play. (Example: what kill xp did to BG1)

Find the contradiction. I. explained. the. benefit. And this explanation did not deviate one iota even 5 posts later.

 

In my opinion, taking the easier route here DID sub-par the system, since I want XP for killing things. But for someone like you who sees kill XP as a roadblock to role playing, removing it does not sub-par the system at all. It apparently does the opposite: makes it better.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Stun