More like BG2 please

[Namutree]

 

You claiming that OE is tricking IE fans is ludicrous. Absolutely, ludicrous. They said up front that they were making changes to the system and they OUTLINED MOST OF THEM DURING THE MONTH LONG KICKSTARTER AND IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARD. Why did you not cry foul then?

 

They promised an isometric, rtwp, crpg in the same STYLE as the IE games. They clearly stated that it would be THIER OWN IP, THEIR OWN RPG SYSTEM and it would have significant gameplay changes. All they promised is the feel of late 90s crpg gaming. THEY DELIVERED.

 

Obsidian also promised the exploration of BG, the combat of Icewind dale, and the narrative of torment. They specifically invoked the IE game's features. Then DIDN'T deliver. Also, poe's combat is unlike any crpg from the 90's.

 

 

 

I REALLY hate people putting words into my mouth.

You called the combat of the IE games a boring snooze fest. Was I to assume that was a compliment, or a harsh repudiation. I assume the latter; if I was mistaken, and "boring snooze fest" was actually a compliment I apologize.

 

 

 

 Its just that I dont have to wait till ToB to have my melee characters have active skills and I am not just micro managing my arcane characters. In other words its SIMILAR but not the SAME. 

 

Having to micromanage fighters at mid-level is not similar to the IE games. It is a complete shift in how the fighter works and plays. Not to mention in Throne of Bhaal fighters are still sufficient without micromanagement against trash mobs. Not the case in poe. So no, they aren't SIMILAR; they are TOTALLY DIFFERENT!

[Tartantyco]

 

 

It's not that this game feels like an IE game; because it doesn't.

 

 

It's a good thing that we have you here to dictate what does and does not feel like an IE game.

 

Happy to help. As I have pointed out; the game mechanics are objectively different in virtually every regard. Unless people think that mechanics (Which are the majority of the game) are not a part of the IE feel; than I am simply right. If mechanics aren't important than I could say that HALO "feels" like an IE game.

 

 

It's still mechanically the same as IE games. It doesn't share the same systems, but the game is aesthetically and mechanically the same as IE games.

[OnAPaleHorse]

It would have to be intangible, because Arcanum was almost nothing like either.

 

Whoa whoa, wait....wait....how was Arcanum COMPLETELY dissimilar to BG2? I see many similarities, which has nothing to do with the AD&D license. Just one example: experience from combat, though conscious of the fact that I don't want this to degenerate into a discussion about experience gained from combat.

[Stun]

It's still mechanically the same as IE games. It doesn't share the same systems, but the game is aesthetically and mechanically the same as IE games.

Define mechanically.

[Namutree]

 

Happy to help. As I have pointed out; the game mechanics are objectively different in virtually every regard. Unless people think that mechanics (Which are the majority of the game) are not a part of the IE feel; than I am simply right. If mechanics aren't important than I could say that HALO "feels" like an IE game.

 

 

It's still mechanically the same as IE games. It doesn't share the same systems, but the game is aesthetically and mechanically the same as IE games.

 

Aesthetically; kind of. Mechanically; not at all. Unless you are just talking about the game interface. I don't want this to be a debate about the semantics of the word "mechanically".

 

When I reference the mechanics; I am referring to how the game functions. For example; the inventory system in poe is very different than in the IE games. As is how the classes function. Perhaps the word mechanically could have been wrong word for the concepts I was referring to, but the proper context is understandable either way.

[Tartantyco]

 

It's still mechanically the same as IE games. It doesn't share the same systems, but the game is aesthetically and mechanically the same as IE games.

Define mechanically.

 

Real-time with pause

 

Combat operates the same, just a different ruleset

 

Character creation is the same, just different stats

 

Spellcasting is practically similar(More like a sorcerer)

 

Environment interaction is the same

 

Open world exploration

 

Encounters and quests

 

Etc.

[Tartantyco]

-herp-

Edited August 21, 2014 by Tartantyco

[OnAPaleHorse]

 

It's still mechanically the same as IE games. It doesn't share the same systems, but the game is aesthetically and mechanically the same as IE games.

 

 

Also define aesthetically, since PoE so far looks and feels fundamentally different than IE games, to me. To give an example, BG2's backgrounds were mostly static. However they felt very much lived-in and dynamic, although technically false. The beta of PoE displays very sterile surroundings, like when Bronson Pinchot steps off the plane in The Langoliers. I don't feel like anyone has been in or around the town for quite some time. It's just a series of minimal interactions. Perhaps Faerun is the intangible, the glut of lore associated with the place.

[Namutree]

 

 

 

Real-time with pause

 

Combat operates the same, just a different ruleset

 

Character creation is the same, just different stats

 

Spellcasting is practically similar(More like a sorcerer)

 

Environment interaction is the same

 

Open world exploration

 

Encounters and quests

 

Etc.

 

Not everything listed here is true, but I get what you are saying. Yes, while the interface is kind of like the IE games; these are features not unique to them. 

[Tartantyco]

What the hell does that reply even mean, Namutree? It's not about whether the features are unique(As if the IE games were composed of unique features?), it's whether they function in the same way as in the IE games. Which they do.

[Stun]

Real-time with pause

Yes.

 

Combat operates the same, just a different ruleset

No it doesn't. The IE games didn't have a stamina system. Or engagement/disengagent mechanics. The IE games didn't have per-encounter abilities. The IE games didn't measure actions by seconds, nor did they measure damage with decimal points. The IE games did not do grazes. The IE games made great use of the element of chance while PoE is designed from the ground up to bury chance in an unmarked grave, to be forgetten forever. You could pre-buff in the IE games. Your inventory wasn't unlimited in the IE games. You didn't get all your health back when you rested for 8 hours in the IE games.

 

Character creation is the same, just different stats

Yes.

 

Spellcasting is practically similar(More like a sorcerer)

We don't know enough to accurately conclude that. Especially with wizards. The demo didn't allow us to play around with the grimoire management mechanics.

 

Environment interaction is the same

It's different and better, actually. Don't sell PoE short.

 

Open world exploration

I suppose.

 

Encounters and quests

No, and no? Except for Planescape torment, Encounters in the IE games featured more enemies, and difficulty varied wildly from one encounter to the next. In PoE that refreshing variety is simply not there. in this demo at least, there seemed to be no difference, difficulty wise between a pack of lions, and a pack of Skein cultists.

 

Quests? Don't know enough to say. The quests in this demo were far more dramatic and complex than the typical wilderness area quests we got in Bg1. But far less content filled than the sidequests in BG2.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[Panteleimon]

 

 

 

Why is it so hard for you to understand that not everyone wants to play a Wizard? Why should Wizards be the only fun characters (sorry, I don't consider a character who spends his whole time auto-attacking to be fun)?

 

You get to create a main PC in these games, they are the only character you get to directly create at the start of the game and they will be with you for the entire play through. They will be the ones you control in dialogue. I would like my main character to be interesting and fun to play in combat, regardless of if he's a fighter, a rogue, a wizard, or a anything else. I also find trash fights that are trivial a waste of time, this game has a strategy game combat system, it should require at least a modicum of strategy to win any fight.

 

Because your idea of fun is for the classes to have the same play style. Sure the wizard and fighter have different tactics, but they now both focus on tactics in battle; while in the IE games fighters were more about strategy in setting up their gear. Not to mention the fact that the old fighters made exploration simple by allowing you to dispatch trash mobs without much effort or mental energy.

 

This is just another major departure from the IE games. One that some may consider better, and others consider worse. Whether or not it's better isn't important; it isn't something that can be co-exist with the feel of an IE game.

It's not fun to throw some magic tin suit and a magic pig sticker +3 on my PC Paladin and cut him loose auto-attacking linebacker style while the wizards go to work with all their spells. Here's a shocking concept: they could make front liners' true lethality derive from their own skills and abilities, not the breastplate they're wearing. They aren't mannequins for their trinkets, they're deadly dang people with a deeper skillset than whacking(at level 4 they get whacking repeatedly though Panteleimon!).

 

Playing BG2 with a non-caster was like being a backup dancer for Brittany Spears. You think giving them casomyr made it all better, and you're wrong. It was lipstick on a pig.

 

If movement away from "Mages of Amn" bothers you THAT much, then Karkarov is right and you want Harry Potter with dice.

[Tartantyco]

No it doesn't. The IE games didn't have...

 

 

That doesn't mean the combat doesn't feel the same. And sure as hell the IE games counted actions by seconds. A round was 6 seconds, and 10 rounds was a turn. Casting and attack time was based on increments of those turns. Just because some stuff is added doesn't mean combat becomes radically different. It is practically the same in almost every respect.

 

What relevance does this have to combat?

Lets stick to combat.

 

 

How about no? The IE games are more than combat. You're just showing how little of the IE legacy you care about.

[Stun]

 

No it doesn't. The IE games didn't have...

 

That doesn't mean the combat doesn't feel the same.

 

The combat doesn't feel the same anyway. Period. Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[Koth]

 

No it doesn't. The IE games didn't have a stamina system. Or engagement/disengagent mechanics. The IE games didn't have per-encounter abilities. The IE games didn't measure actions by seconds.

 

 

At the risk of getting involved in what is shaping up to be some kind of flame war, I did want to chime in on the last point. I think a lot of peoples gripes can come back to the Stamina system. Whilst I do find it jarring in its current state, the more I play, the more I can see the merrits involved with such a system. To respond to the above quote:

 

I do feel that they are in essense the same thing. The stamina system was put in place to help mitigate the issue of the rest-scumming people used to employ by resting after every encounter. All the stamina system does is create an encounter based health mechanic. This way you're good to go after each fight, but will need to rest after multiple encounters. Is that really so very different from hp? I almost feel like its a terminology issue.

 

As for per-encounter abilities, these are simply tied in with the stamina system so that you won't have to rest after every fight to get back encounter based skills. I think in the beta we are more subject to the negative side effects of this as a lot of the skills still need tweaking. But once they are, I'm confident it will become a robust system.

 

Finally with regards to "IE games didn't measure actions by seconds.". Technically they did. They just called them rounds and turns. A "round" was 6 seconds game time and a "turn" was 10 round i.e. 60 seconds. PoE has just gotten rid of that and is calling a spade a spade here.

 

The above post should be all qualified with an "in my humble opinion". I can understand that we're all passionate here and want a fantastic product! Personally I'm going to remain optimistic and have faith in the team. I think in a few more patches, as abilities get tweaked and better combat pacing, targeting, feedback ui improvements are implemented, it will feel a lot more like the IE games. 

 

Cheers!

 

Koth.

[Stun]

 

No it doesn't. The IE games didn't have a stamina system. Or engagement/disengagent mechanics. The IE games didn't have per-encounter abilities. The IE games didn't measure actions by seconds.

 

 

At the risk of getting involved in what is shaping up to be some kind of flame war, I did want to chime in on the last point. I think a lot of peoples gripes can come back to the Stamina system. Whilst I do find it jarring in its current state, the more I play, the more I can see the merrits involved with such a system. To respond to the above quote:

 

I do feel that they are in essense the same thing. The stamina system was put in place to help mitigate the issue of the rest-scumming people used to employ by resting after every encounter. All the stamina system does is create an encounter based health mechanic. This way you're good to go after each fight, but will need to rest after multiple encounters. Is that really so very different from hp? I almost feel like its a terminology issue.

 

As for per-encounter abilities, these are simply tied in with the stamina system so that you won't have to rest after every fight to get back encounter based skills. I think in the beta we are more subject to the negative side effects of this as a lot of the skills still need tweaking. But once they are, I'm confident it will become a robust system.

 

Finally with regards to "IE games didn't measure actions by seconds.". Technically they did. They just called them rounds and turns. A "round" was 6 seconds game time and a "turn" was 10 round i.e. 60 seconds. PoE has just gotten rid of that and is calling a spade a spade here.

 

The above post should be all qualified with an "in my humble opinion". I can understand that we're all passionate here and want a fantastic product! Personally I'm going to remain optimistic and have faith in the team. I think in a few more patches, as abilities get tweaked and better combat pacing, targeting, feedback ui improvements are implemented, it will feel a lot more like the IE games. 

 

Cheers!

 

Koth.

 

^the end result of all of this is that the system is designed to keep the action going. And that makes combat feel more MMO'ish than IEish.

 

Combat simply doesn't feel the same. Note: This is not a commentary on which one is better. it's just an observation of the huge differences.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[InsaneCommander]

The feeling of an IE game depends on each player's opinion. That can change with other buids, but maybe we could have a poll?

[Shevek]

Nice casual insult... "mmo-ish." I'm done with this whiney flame thread. Go download enhanced edition and leave this board then.

[Tartantyco]

The combat doesn't feel the same anyway. Period. 

 

 

Overruled!

[Namutree]

 

It's not fun to throw some magic tin suit and a magic pig sticker +3 on my PC Paladin and cut him loose auto-attacking linebacker style while the wizards go to work with all their spells.

That's your opinion, and if that's what you think I suggest you play with a different class that better suits your preferred play-style. That's a part of why the IE games were so great; they allowed a variety of different play styles.

 

 

Here's a shocking concept: they could make front liners' true lethality derive from their own skills and abilities, not the breastplate they're wearing. 

 

They're deadly killing ability didn't come from their breastplate; it came from their weapon proficiency and their weapon. Both of which are strategic decisions. I get that you seem to want the fighters to be more tactical, but the fact that they weren't very tactical was a defining class trait. Changing that is a radical shift of play style.

 

 

 

Playing BG2 with a non-caster was like being a backup dancer for Brittany Spears. You think giving them casomyr made it all better, and you're wrong. It was lipstick on a pig.

 

This merely reinforces my notion that the supporters of the major changes poe has made simply didn't like the IE system.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Namutree

[Stun]

Nice casual insult... "mmo-ish." I'm done with this whiney flame thread. Go download enhanced edition and leave this board then.

I didn't mean it as an insult.

 

There are combat mechanics in games. Some are designed with an emphasis on perpetual split-second action, some aren't. PoE's is an example of the former. the IE games are an example of the latter.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[OnAPaleHorse]

Aesthetics: hold down tab, receive magnifying glass icon signifying pertinent interaction. Then interact. It's like the narrative sickness inherent to bumbling around Chicago in Shadowrun Returns. My GOD don't minimize exploration to that. It feels like the designer saying: ignore most of what is going on in this scene, just this one barrel of juniper berries merits attention.

 

I would contrast that to the grave site of Jerrod within the burial isle in Heart of Winter. Lots of writing, lots of character, lots of work. The raw nuances, the build up. And I should add that's not nostalgia glasses talking, since I played through most of IWD and IWD2 and BG2 in Dec-February 2013-2014. Still masterpieces. Apparently still untouchable.

[Namutree]

Nice casual insult... "mmo-ish."

To say it is mmo-ish is not an insult as much as an observation, and an accurate one. I played a bit of runescape 3 a year ago and it wouldn't be a stretch to say poe's combat is some where between the IE games and that. If I had to guess; I'd say it's closer to runescape 3 than the IE games, but not by a whole lot. 

[Shevek]

They have repeatedly stated that you could make "passive" melee characters if you so choose. This is not possible yet (probably) because the talent tree is incomplete. Do not worry, you guys will be able to select your melee characters, click on an enemy to attack and go grab a soda when all is said and done. This great and noble IE gameplay, will, I am sure, be once again possible.

[Namutree]

They have repeatedly stated that you could make "passive" melee characters if you so choose. This is not possible yet (probably) because the talent tree is incomplete. Do not worry, you guys will be able to select your melee characters, click on an enemy to attack and go grab a soda when all is said and done. This great and noble IE gameplay, will, I am sure, be once again possible.

I hope so. So far I have been discussing my impression, and if such a fighter is possible to make I will be one of the first in line to thank Obsidian for giving us the IE experience.