Backer beta: Developer Impressions

[Anaeme]

I thought the following feedback on the Backer Beta was very insightful, particularly from someone who has seen both the developer and fanbase sides of the game. 

 

http://new.spring.me/#!/user/GZiets/timeline/responses

 

 

Question:

 

George what do you think of the POE backer Beta? In particular the combat? Have you completely lost touch with the game?

 

 

 

GZiets

 

I played for a few hours this weekend - got through all the town content, as well as a wilderness map and a dungeon, before finally being defeated by a variety of bugs. Here are my thoughts so far:

 

In my opinion, combat is still too buggy to give it a fair assessment. There’s a sophisticated combat system lurking under the surface of this game, and some of it is pretty cool, but right now it’s not getting a chance to shine. In its current buggy state, fine control over my party seemed virtually impossible, and I resorted to directing them more like an RTS, paying little attention to the details. As I played, I couldn’t shake the feeling that the mechanics would be better served by turn-based (or at least slower-paced) gameplay. However, that might be my own prejudices showing through.

 

Some other reactions: 

Loved the richness of the world and the hints I got about the story. 

 

Liked the per encounter abilities. These encouraged me to spend them in combat, rather than hoarding them for the most desperate situations.

 

Liked the autopause options, though these still didn’t pause the action as much as I would have preferred. (Wish I had the equivalent of a per-round pause. Maybe that could be approximated by playing around with the Combat Time setting.)

 

Liked that I could mouse over lines in the combat logs to get details about how I had rolled, how the enemy’s defense stat had affected my roll, etc. This turned out to be a very effective way to quickly learn the basics of the combat system.

 

Liked the size and layout of the town. Felt like there was a nice balance of things to do and people to meet, and almost every building or POI had a purpose.

 

Liked the fact that dialogue showed me other options that would be visible if I had the appropriate skill (though when I raised my skills to the appropriate levels, those options seemed to be largely cosmetic, which was a little disappointing – hopefully there will be cases where they lead to alternate quest resolutions).

 

Didn’t like the very limited inventory space for my characters. 

 

Didn’t like the fact that I don’t get XP for combat. While this does put more emphasis on solving quests, the lack of rewards for killing creatures makes me want to avoid combat (the core activity of the game) as much as I can.

 

Minor point, but I was disappointed that I couldn’t become a cleric of Galawain, the beast god. (I played a nature godlike, so it seemed like a natural fit.)

 

A number of offensive spells seemed to be AOEs, which were virtually never useful since combat almost always devolved into a random melee within seconds.

 

(I haven’t completely lost touch with PoE, but I the last time I actively worked on it was during preproduction.)

Edited August 25, 2014 by Anaeme

[Bryy]

I agree with all of this. Spot on. Echoes my sentiments exactly. Well, except for combat XP. Bugs need to be ironed out before I can make a decision on that one.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Bryy

[Ink Blot]

I agree with all of this. Spot on. Echoes my sentiments exactly. Well, except for combat XP. Bugs need to be ironed out before I can make a decision on that one.

Agreed, although I also agree with the comment about combat XP as well. Don't get me wrong, I'm fine with only getting XP for quests, and I don't think lack of combat XP is going to bring about the fall of civilization, but in a game that's heavily focused on combat and where the bulk of the abilities/talents/spells are oriented toward combat effectiveness, it makes little sense to me that combat yields no XP at all. I just can't grasp the thinking there. Bah, I'm getting on my soapbox again. Let me just wrap up with this:

 

 

"I am Groot!"

[Tartantyco]

but in a game that's heavily focused on combat and where the bulk of the abilities/talents/spells are oriented toward combat effectiveness, it makes little sense to me that combat yields no XP at all.

 

 

Why? Nobody has yet explained why a reward is necessary.

[Qiushui]

Agree on all of his points, except combat xp.

 

Now, I will remove myself from this thread while it devolves into another xp debate. 

[Marceror]

Finding myself agreeing with virtually everything said.

[makryu]

Was he ever involved with PoE? I remember him being a stretch goal. What happened?

[Leferd]

He helped flesh out some of the world lore and pantheon of gods during preproduction.

[Seari]

Agree with everything he said.

[Azrael Ultima]

 

but in a game that's heavily focused on combat and where the bulk of the abilities/talents/spells are oriented toward combat effectiveness, it makes little sense to me that combat yields no XP at all.

 

Why? Nobody has yet explained why a reward is necessary.

Well, then how about you attempt to explain why it should be avoided at all cost? You will find yourself equally incapable of doing so.

 

Both ways are valid and have (dis)advantages of their own. It's mostly a matter of opinion and preference.

 

I do agree that it feels somewhat odd to not reward combat in a combat focused game. This solution seems a better fit for Torment(both old and new).

[Marceror]

I find it odd that no one is railing him for his comments about turn based combat. When I've made effectively the exact same observation I tend to get flamed for it. I guess it must be his holy aura protecting him!

[Tartantyco]

Well, then how about you attempt to explain why it should be avoided at all cost? You will find yourself equally incapable of doing so.

 

Both ways are valid and have (dis)advantages of their own. It's mostly a matter of opinion and preference.

 

I do agree that it feels somewhat odd to not reward combat in a combat focused game. This solution seems a better fit for Torment(both old and new).

 

 

I don't have to explain that. I haven't said anything of the kind. Putting someone else's words into my mouth is hardly a convincing argument.

 

I believe that you should fight because it makes sense in the game world. If you're going down to the SW corner of Dyrford Crossing and killing the wolves because you want the XP that's not a game world reason. If you go down and kill them because you'd rather take that route instead of fighting with the beetles to get to the ogre cave, that's a game world reason. If you see a huge dragon and think to yourself "Dragons are known to have vast treasure", that's a game world reason. If you see a huge dragon and think I'll get tons of XP for that, that's not a game world reason.

 

 

I find it odd that no one is railing him for his comments about turn based combat. When I've made effectively the exact same observation I tend to get flamed for it. I guess it must be his holy aura protecting him!

 

 

Probably because the discussion has already been had, he's not exactly here to defend himself, and I don't care because RTwP is going to be in the game regardless.

Edited August 25, 2014 by Tartantyco

[Azrael Ultima]

I don't have to explain that. I haven't said anything of the kind. Putting someone else's words into my mouth is hardly a convincing argument.

Yes. So stop doing it.

 

I never claimed that you have to explain it. I said that you (or anybody else) can't, because it is a logical impossibility. You made a demand that cannot be fulfilled.

 

It's nice that you would like to fight for in-world reasons. Other people don't. Neither of you is right or wrong.

[Tartantyco]

 

I don't have to explain that. I haven't said anything of the kind. Putting someone else's words into my mouth is hardly a convincing argument.

Yes. So stop doing it.

 

I never claimed that you have to explain it. I said that you (or anybody else) can't, because it is a logical impossibility. You made a demand that cannot be fulfilled.

 

It's nice that you would like to fight for in-world reasons. Other people don't. Neither of you is right or wrong.

 

Troll detected.

[talharbash]

George is at least being forth coming and honest.

 

That's a good thing.

[Shevek]

I agree with him on combat xp (this is a dungeon crawler; we need murder xp) but I disagree with his criticism on inventory size (opinions..opinions...). I think he was too quick to judge combat speed considering, as he mentioned, that the state of combat is a bit buggy (moreover, I believe the issue is not speed but feedback).

Edited August 26, 2014 by Shevek

[Tartantyco]

I agree with him on combat xp (this is a dungeon crawler; we need murder xp) but I disagree with his criticism on inventory size (opinions..opinions...). I think he was too quick to judge combat speed considering, as he mentioned, that the state of combat is a bit buggy (moreover, I believe the issue is not speed but feedback).

 

It is not a dungeon crawler.

[CatatonicMan]

Well, then how about you attempt to explain why it should be avoided at all cost? You will find yourself equally incapable of doing so.

 

If combat provided absolutely nothing and only wasted time and resources, then it would be easy to argue that combat should be avoided if possible (unless you just wanted to fight because you find fighting fun).

 

That said, PoE combat provides items and crafting ingredients. There is clearly some incentive to fight, even if that incentive is not XP. From this perspective, combat should be avoided unless it provides a net increase in player resources (or is unavoidable).

Edited August 26, 2014 by CatatonicMan

[Shevek]

 

I agree with him on combat xp (this is a dungeon crawler; we need murder xp) but I disagree with his criticism on inventory size (opinions..opinions...). I think he was too quick to judge combat speed considering, as he mentioned, that the state of combat is a bit buggy (moreover, I believe the issue is not speed but feedback).

 

It is not a dungeon crawler.

 

 

Sure it is.

[talharbash]

It's only a dungeon crawler if you roll generic characters instead of getting companions and just do the quests involving dungeons... I guess.

[Tartantyco]

 

 

I agree with him on combat xp (this is a dungeon crawler; we need murder xp) but I disagree with his criticism on inventory size (opinions..opinions...). I think he was too quick to judge combat speed considering, as he mentioned, that the state of combat is a bit buggy (moreover, I believe the issue is not speed but feedback).

 

It is not a dungeon crawler.

 

 

Sure it is.

 

 

No. Legend of Grimrock, for instance, is a dungeon crawler. Diablo is a dungeon crawler. Dark Souls is a dungeon crawler.

 

A dungeon crawler requires a linear, or near-linear game progression, through a restricted game space(Often the eponymous dungeon), with a focus on fighting monsters and collecting treasure. In Pillars of Eternity, as in Baldur's Gate, you are free to deviate from the main story and explore areas disconnected from the story line, and can also follow multiple paths towards your objective. You explore a large and open world, and are free to engage in or ignore peripheral content such as optional quests.

 

That is not a dungeon crawler.

[EdgarAllanBroe]

 

 

 

 

I agree with him on combat xp (this is a dungeon crawler; we need murder xp) but I disagree with his criticism on inventory size (opinions..opinions...). I think he was too quick to judge combat speed considering, as he mentioned, that the state of combat is a bit buggy (moreover, I believe the issue is not speed but feedback).

 

It is not a dungeon crawler.

 

 

Sure it is.

 

 

No. Legend of Grimrock, for instance, is a dungeon crawler. Diablo is a dungeon crawler. Dark Souls is a dungeon crawler.

 

A dungeon crawler requires a linear, or near-linear game progression, through a restricted game space(Often the eponymous dungeon), with a focus on fighting monsters and collecting treasure. In Pillars of Eternity, as in Baldur's Gate, you are free to deviate from the main story and explore areas disconnected from the story line, and can also follow multiple paths towards your objective. You explore a large and open world, and are free to engage in or ignore peripheral content such as optional quests.

 

That is not a dungeon crawler.

 

 

Based on your description, Dark Souls is absolutely not a dungeon crawler.

[leninghola]

With regards to combat xp... add in very rare "oddities" like in Underrail* that can drop from combat encounters. Otherwise, I see no real need for getting xp from every combat encounter. You aren't going to learn something every time you fight, nor is every fight going to challenge your physical and mental boundaries.

 

 

*A great example of a well thought out attribute, leveling and xp system.

[Shevek]

Naw, in BG2 you stumbled from dungeon to dungeon killing dragons (red ones, black ones, white ones...) and making jackets out of their skin. It was a dungeon crawler. Sure, you could meander away from the main story... to go to some other dungeon. You could do a dungeon filled with large floating eyes or a dungeon filled with dark skinned elves or a dungeon filled with dead things or a dungeon filled with vampires or a dungeon filled with trolls or a dungeon filled with puzzles, dungeons with illusions, or a dungeon filled with brain eaters, etc etc etc. As for IWD, that was DEFINATELY a straight up dungeon crawler. BG1 tried to mix it up with overland crap but even those basically devolved into dungeons (like that wooded area with the wyverns and crap.. dungeon with trees more or less ). Hell, most players bitched after BG1 and demanded more dungeons which is why they did Durlag's for TotSC and why BG2 is a dungeon-palooza.

 

Those games had little to no choice or consequence. The character development was all made at level 1 (unless you Dual Classed, but that was crap) and the development was entirely related to combat.

 

Look, they had a nice narrative. I am sure it was like playing a table top game with Gary Gygax himself. But, they were dungeon crawlers and dungeon crawlers should have combat xp. Look at what Zeits wrote, he himself said combat was the damn focus.

 

Btw, I do not dislike this. I love dungeon crawling. I just recognize it for what it is.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Shevek

[leninghola]

Naw, in BG2 you stumbled from dungeon to dungeon killing dragons (red ones, black ones, white ones...) and making jackets out of their skin. It was a dungeon crawler. Sure, you could meander away from the main story... to go to some other dungeon. You could do a dungeon filled with large floating eyes or a dungeon filled with dark skinned elves or a dungeon filled with dead things or a dungeon filled with vampires or a dungeon filled with trolls or a dungeon filled with puzzles,  etc etc etc. As for IWD, that was DEFINATELY a straight up dungeon crawler. BG1 tried to mix it up with overland crap but even those basically devolved into dungeons (like that wooded area with the wyverns and crap.. dungeon with trees more or less ). Hell, most players bitched after BG1 and demanded more dungeons which is why they did Durlag's for TotSC and why BG2 is a dungeon-palooza.

 

Those games had little to no choice or consequence. The character development was all made at level 1 (unless you Dual Classed, but that was crap) and the development was entirely related to combat.

 

Look, they had a nice narrative. I am sure it was like playing a table top game with Gary Gygax himself. But, they were dungeon crawlers and dungeon crawlers should have combat xp. Look at what Zeits wrote, he himself said combat was the damn focus.

 

Btw, I do not dislike this. I love dungeon crawling. I just recognize it for what it is.

 

 

BG games don't make it on any comprehensive lists of dungeon crawlers. The city of Baldur's gate itself was far larger than any single dungeon in the game. Too much story and dialogue to be a dungeon crawl.