Backer beta: Developer Impressions

[Azrael Ultima]

No, partial task completion was not my proposal. I even repeated it for you in your quote. The only possible system which does not disadvantage any possible playstyle.

 

But thank you for confirming that you willfully ignore what doesn't fit your worldview, and therefore that any attempt of discussion is pointless.

Wait, what? So I can leave my game running when I sleep or go to work and I can get XP? You can't actually be suggesting that as a viable system for granting XP. This game isn't turn-based, and even if it was there's no guarantee that time is being spent in any meaningful way(i.e. not picking your nose)

No, of course not. It just shows the ridiculousness of requesting a system that is independent of playstyle.

 

As, technically, leaving the game running while you sleep actually constitutes a playstyle as well, which, by gromnirs demand, may not be disadvantaged.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Azrael Ultima

[Panteleimon]

 

As for the ego stroking, well isn't that the point of games?

 

 

 

No, it isn't. At least not all games, or this game.

 

 

 

Wait, what? So I can leave my game running when I sleep or go to work and I can get XP? You can't actually be suggesting that as a viable system for granting XP. This game isn't turn-based, and even if it was there's no guarantee that time is being spent in any meaningful way(i.e. not picking your nose)

No, of course not. It just shows the ridiculousness of requesting a system that is independent of playstyle.

 

As, technically, leaving the game running while you sleep actually constitutes a playstyle as well, which, by gromnirs demand, may not be disadvantaged.

 

 

 

That's a pretty disingenuous argument. A "playstyle"  has to involve actively playing the game. You're trying to make a point, but that isn't the way to do it.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Panteleimon

[Silverbarr]

 

 

seriously folks. quest task is simple/straightforward and infallible. everybody gets same xp for completion.  given that obsidian believes alternative play styles should be rewarded equal and should be encouraged, come up with a better solution.

 

*shakes head sadly*

 

this is not complex, or confusing. not even a little.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Sadly, it isn't as much fun. I don't understand what was so incorrect with the IE games? They worked perfectly in my opinion, and I played every possible way through the series multiple times - and to be fair, I don't chase the tail when it comes to someone else getting something I don't get. Hell, the world would suck if everything would have to be completely equal. By your logic there should be no way to fail a quest, or choose different options as it may lead to differences down the line.

 

 

It's not my job to come up with a solution, but seeing as previous RPG systems which continually thrive due to offering what most people here seem to want, seems common sense to use a known and revered system.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Silverbarr

[Sarex]

No, it isn't.

 

Fascinating, you have won me over with your argument, how could I have been so ignorant all this time. I have seen the light thanks to you and you great post.

[Gromnir]

"You can be free to choose however you want to play the game in an enjoyable way as long as each particular way of playing it is rewarded enough to make the playstyle fun. The playstyles don't need to be equal at all. As long as skills checks are rewarded and good xp is given both for the murder solution and the sneaky/diplomatic solution the everything is fine."

 

and how do you measure or decide what is enough for sneaky or diplomatic to be fun?  quest/task avoids such balancing.

 

 

and around we go. serious. is 2002 all over again and nothing new is spontaneously appearing.

 

*shrug*

 

doesn't matter though regardless o' what you think o' Gromnir pov, obsidian/bis has disagreed with you for a decade or more, and they disagreed all during development o' PoE. is yet another corpse on the pile o' would-be ad hoc xp proponents. is getting a bit fetid, but we expect the corpse pile will continue to grow.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

No, partial task completion was not my proposal. I even repeated it for you in your quote. The only possible system which does not disadvantage any possible playstyle.

 

But thank you for confirming that you willfully ignore what doesn't fit your worldview, and therefore that any attempt of discussion is pointless.

you is going to need point out you solution, 'cause we saw partial, which made no sense, so please illuminate.

 

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/67963-backer-beta-developer-impressions/?p=1494553

 

we did see some nonsense whereby you wanted to give xp based on passage o' game time?  were that genuine serious? surely you can see problems, yes?

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 26, 2014 by Gromnir

[Shevek]

"You can be free to choose however you want to play the game in an enjoyable way as long as each particular way of playing it is rewarded enough to make the playstyle fun. The playstyles don't need to be equal at all. As long as skills checks are rewarded and good xp is given both for the murder solution and the sneaky/diplomatic solution the everything is fine."

 

and how do you measure or decide what is enough for sneaky or diplomatic to be fun?  quest/task avoids such balancing.

 

 

and around we go. serious. is 2002 all over again and nothing new is spontaneously appearing.

 

*shrug*

 

doesn't matter though regardless o' what you think o' Gromnir pov, obsidian/bis has disagreed with you for a decade or more, and they disagreed all during development o' PoE. is yet another corpse on the pile o' would-be ad hoc xp proponents. is getting a bit fetid, but we expect the corpse pile will continue to grow.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

So many fetid corpses... its a real shame no one is getting xp for them.

[Sarex]

doesn't matter though regardless o' what you think o' Gromnir pov, obsidian/bis has disagreed with you for a decade or more, and they disagreed all during development o' PoE. is yet another corpse on the pile o' would-be ad hoc xp proponents. is getting a bit fetid, but we expect the corpse pile will continue to grow.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I'm saving this quote and will call you on it.

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

seriously folks. quest task is simple/straightforward and infallible. everybody gets same xp for completion.  given that obsidian believes alternative play styles should be rewarded equal and should be encouraged, come up with a better solution.

 

*shakes head sadly*

 

this is not complex, or confusing. not even a little.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

 

 

It's not my job to come up with a solution, but seeing as previous RPG systems which continually thrive due to offering what most people here seem to want, seems common sense to use a known and revered system.

 

if you can't come up with a better solution, that what on earth would motivate obsidian to change?

 

...

 

this can't be mystifying to so many, can it?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Azrael Ultima]

 

That's a pretty disingenuous argument. A "playstyle"  has to involve actively playing the game. You're trying to make a point, but that isn't the way to do it.

 

Nah, that's just the most ridiculous edge case. It's still pretty much the only option even if you exclude anything nobody in their right mind would do.

[Panteleimon]

 

No, it isn't.

 

Fascinating, you have won me over with your argument, how could I have been so ignorant all this time. I have seen the light thanks to you and you great post.

 

 

If you view the entire medium of video games solely as a vehicle for ego-stroking, then your standard of thoughtful, intelligent content must be very low(because the best stories emulate life in some fashion, and life does not seek to constantly congratulate you) . Thankfully for you, the lion's share of game studios(and film studios) are creating products with your ego in mind.

[Yonjuro]

 

As, technically, leaving the game running while you sleep actually constitutes a playstyle as well, which, by gromnirs demand, may not be disadvantaged.

 

 Yes, very clever (for sufficiently small values of clever), but, since we're in pedantic mode, leaving the game running as a play style is a huge advantage and a speed run would put a player at a huge disadvantage in your XP system. I know you weren't proposing this as a serious solution to Gromnir's challenge, but these examples only show the ridiculousness of your proposed solution, not to the challenge (which does have a solution, but it is at least as asinine as the time based XP idea).

[captainjandor]

For the record, I don't feel the need to get XP for combat, and haven't for years, in CRPGs and P&P. Mass Effect 2 didn't give XP for kills; you got it for completing quests and assignments/missions. Worked out great (for me anyway).  I bring up Mass Effect 2 (and the whole series really) because they were ALL about the combats. And it didn't matter that you didn't get 36 xp for this mook you shot in the face, because who gives a ****? It was fun to shoot mooks in the face! And they were between you and your objective, so ya know.

 

Contrast that to something like Arcanum (one of my favorite games ever), where you not only got XP for kills but for damage dealt, and it really squashed playing characters that weren't focused on dishing out the hurt. Which is a shame because the game had MANY tools for getting along without combat; you just never leveled up fast enough to acquire them.

 

As long as the advancement is coming at a reasonable pace I don't see the problem. If combat is fun, you'll do it when you want to. if it's not, well, would it matter if you got XP for kills if the combat wasn't FUN? And if all XP coming from quests encourages people to use alternate means to solve problems, all the better! Heck, it might even work out great for replay because you could theoretically skip lots of fights with beetles to get to the plot points faster and NOT suffer for it (by being under-leveled for the fights you care about)!

 

Anyway, to the OP, I think the man made some good points. And I myself REALLY hope they update the BB soon to get rid of these bugs so I can properly evaluate the games systems.

[Sarex]

If you view the entire medium of video games solely as a vehicle for ego-stroking, then your standard of thoughtful, intelligent content must be very low(because the best stories emulate life in some fashion, and life does not seek to constantly congratulate you) . Thankfully for you, the lion's share of game studios(and film studios) are creating products with your ego in mind.

 

When I want a good story I read a book, not play a game. There is simply no comparing the two.

[Tartantyco]

I wonder if anyone on the pro-kill-XP side actually think they're making any persuasive arguments.

[Yonjuro]

 

 

...

 

If case you should say that it is impossible to satisfy all these playstyles without being game breaking, I will simply point you in the direction of BG/BG2. In that game some amount of combat was necessary, but if you chose to solve a quest in a diplomatic or sneaky way nothing required you to go back and kill everything just to have enough xp to move forward. You could choose to if you wanted to.

 

I want to play a game with choice. That to me is much more important than balance. That was how the IE games worked and what initally intrigued me so much about Pillars of Eternity. Unfortunatly, many of the systems, if not significantly altered, simply do not support that principal. This is unfortunate as it was stated the game was to be a spiritual successor to the IE games.

 

 

This post sums up how I feel, seems like a major amount of people also.

 

 

 Uh, really? Because you still have the choice to kill whatever you want in PoE. You even get loot for it - the extra loot probably pays for whatever extra resources you need to do the extra combat (plus a little extra on top of that).

 

 I don't think choice means what you think it means. I think it means, you know, actual choice (as opposed to killing more stuff = more XP).

 

 I get the argument that people really have: IE games were fun so let's keep the same formula - it's not even a bad argument necessarily - BG1 and 2 are my two favorite games.

 

 It has nothing to do with choices being limited though. They aren't limited. Play the beta. Kill the ogre. You even get a valuable item for doing so. 

[Osvir]

@Pro Kill-XP: As far as I recall, Experience will function in such a way that you get experience just for opening the block down to the Dyrford Ruins. You'll get "chips" of experience as you get further, and then a chunkier reward at the end. I recall someone saying that if you check your Character Sheet in your inventory whilst exploring, you should see it go up in Experience at some few points at this time (Note, just hearsay until proven otherwise).

So to get to the experience, sometimes you will have to defeat Beetles along the way, which won't give you experience.

In essence, you want the XP right away as a quick "fix", when it is just 3-4 seconds away from where you killed the Beetles and you get a "chip" of experience.

Kill XP isn't necessary.

EDIT: But I can't deny that 2 different level systems for 1 pool is alluring me. Character/Class Levels and Skill Levels that gain Skill Experience and Weapon Levels that gain Weapon Experience. Killed some 3 guys worth 100 xp each? 300 XP to your Weapon, and to your Character/Class. Snuck by them? Gain 300 XP to your Skills & Character/Class.

That's 3 Level Systems:
- Character/Class Levels 1-12
- When you get Experience to Skills, you get Experience to Class, when you get Experience to Weapons, you get Experience to Class, etc

- Skill Levels
Gained by using different methods of getting by enemies or hostiles, and by completing objectives with more guile and perhaps even intellect where least men or women take physical harm. A dialogue rich character.

- Weapon Levels
By slaughtering and destroying everything around you, you become a fierce warrior.

As you travel the road, sometimes it might be good to choose the more physical path even when you are a stealthy or diplomatic character (just to prepare you for harder fights later). And sometimes take the safe road where no one comes to harm, even though you destroyed everything along the way, and you gain experience in both ways, the experience will benefit the Skill- or Weapon Level and always benefit the Character Level.

 

/End Idea.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Osvir

[Azrael Ultima]

 

As, technically, leaving the game running while you sleep actually constitutes a playstyle as well, which, by gromnirs demand, may not be disadvantaged.

 

 Yes, very clever (for sufficiently small values of clever), but, since we're in pedantic mode, leaving the game running as a play style is a huge advantage and a speed run would put a player at a huge disadvantage in your XP system. I know you weren't proposing this as a serious solution to Gromnir's challenge, but these examples only show the ridiculousness of your proposed solution, not to the challenge (which does have a solution, but it is at least as asinine as the time based XP idea).

 

They aren't at a (dis)advantage in regards to XP gain per timeframe, which by definition is the same for everybody. That the game is harder/easier with certain playstyles is hard to avoid and hard to define as advantage or disadvantage, as some players might intentionally choose a style that is different from baseline difficulty.

 

Anyway, the point was that any solution fulfilling his requirements must be one that is utterly retarded as a gameplay element.

 

I wonder if anyone on the pro-kill-XP side actually think they're making any persuasive arguments.

I'd say they are about as persuasive as the arguments of the anti-kill-XP side.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Azrael Ultima

[Zansatsu]

Is anybody anywhere advocating for a kill XP only system?

No

[Gromnir]

is some more funny ad&d quirks btw... and all ie games were ad&d

 

"Experience is the measure of a character’s ability in his or her chosen profession, the character’s class. Each player character begins the campaign at 1st level with no experience points accumulated. Thereafter, as he or she completes adventures and returns to an established base of operations, the Dungeon Master will award experience points to the character for treasure gained and opponents captured or slain and for solving or overcoming problems through professional means."

 

so exp comes from loot, kills and professional skill use, and as we saw above, were awarded after adventures.

 

furthermore, ad&d added the dreaded training requirement to actual level. regardless o' how much xp gained during an adventure, you never actual could level-up during an adventure as training were essential to transform experience into skill/levels. according to ad&d, characters were required to spend 1-4 weeks in training to translate adventure experience into leveling experience... and depending on how well the player performed in the adventure, training time might be extended or diminished. training were also very expensive. 

 

2nd edition modified leveling rules a bit, but am admitting we largely ignored 2nd edition changes. that being said, 2nd edition did stress that xp were awarded “for victory over their foes, which is not necessarily synonymous with killing."

 

anywho... none o' this makes much difference even if it does kill notion that murdering critters is necessarily the basis o' d&d xp awards at the times the ie games were made. is also further clarifying that xp were given at conclusion o' adventures.

 

regardless, none has chosen to take up the challenge: "provide an alternative system that is as simple and straightforward to implement as task/quest only xp that will will guarantee that regardless of an individual purchaser's style o' gameplay, they will get as much xp as a fighty, diplomatic, sneaky or whatever else kinda player."

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps correction: iwd2 were 3e, not ad&d. our bad

Edited August 26, 2014 by Gromnir

[Marceror]

I wonder if anyone on the pro-kill-XP side actually think they're making any persuasive arguments.

I wonder if you think you're being persuasive.

[Monte Carlo]

 

I wonder if anyone on the pro-kill-XP side actually think they're making any persuasive arguments.

I wonder if you think you're being persuasive

 

He's certainly not helping bring any light to the debate.

[Tartantyco]

The debate was over long before this thread even started.

[Uomoz]

I don't really understand the arguments of the pro exp-for-kill party. I'm not particularly against it, but I find the obsidian solution ok for the scope of the game. The experience for kills is still there, its considered when attributing the experience "pack" at the end of a quest or at certain checkpoints. The system is made in a way that the experience for kills is granted even to those who resolve the quest in a peaceful way. It's made in a way that consider every encounter you have to go through to reach the end of the quest, even if you need to go to a place more than one time (so it considers the killing of a group of enemies multiple times).

 

I like it.

[Marceror]

The debate was over long before this thread even started.

So basically this is the ole "I win, you lose" argument that I used to use on my sister when I was 7. Whatever gets you through the day, pal.