Backer beta: Developer Impressions

[Helm]

and the reasons why xp for kills and individual activities PLUS quest awards has been beaten to death... beaten beyond death, is that if the fighty character gets more xp 'cause xp from fights ends up yielding more xp, then you is functional encouraging fighty even if you do make diplomatic and sneaky options viable. quest and task xp awards avoids any sorta attempts to balance awards for differing play styles... yadda-yadda, etc. ad nauseum.

Well, what were you expecting from a game where the core activity is combat? Not to mention that Baldur's Gate had diplomatic/peaceful solutions to quests, and you don't have to kill everything just because you get XP for doing so, so that isn't a problem anyway. Do you play flight simulators and whine that you have to fly a plane too or what?

 

Go play a stealth game or pacifist: the pacification if it bothers you.

[Gromnir]

we pose this challenge every time this Stoopid debate reappears and we never get an answer:

 

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.

 

go ahead. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

edited a double "that"

Edited August 26, 2014 by Gromnir

[Gromnir]

 

don't be obtuse. if you want xp for individual kills or individual lockpicks you is not actual advocating the quest/task xp reward approach.

 

*sigh*

 

and the reasons why xp for kills and individual activities PLUS quest awards has been beaten to death... beaten beyond death, is that if the fighty character gets more xp 'cause xp from fights ends up yielding more xp, then you is functional encouraging fighty even if you do make diplomatic and sneaky options viable. quest and task xp awards avoids any sorta attempts to balance awards for differing play styles... yadda-yadda, etc. ad nauseum.

 

*groan*'

 

you don't have any idea just how obtuse this all is and how repetitive.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Bullsh*t, You're stating an opinion as fact. I want XP for completing quests equally as much as I want XP for killing things. Take either of them away from me, And I will respond to the omission the SAME. Incidently, there would be nothing stopping the devs from increasing quest completion rewards for those who completed those quests non-violently, thus equaling out the discrepancy you claim will occur for the violent route.

 

And it's not up Gromnir to decide whether or not a thread discussion is "too old" to be discussed. I don't see a moderator tag next to your name, so stop pretending you're one.

 

asking for both kill and quest xp utterly defeats the Point o' quest only. 

 

duh.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Helm]

 

 

Don't be disingenuous, Helm. You don't want this to be Diablo.

You're right, I don't want to kill everything. But I don't want combat to be a pointless chore either.

 

And happily it won't.

 

Yes it will be. Combat in this game is a pointless high-risk chore that you are better off skipping.

[Helm]

 

 

don't be obtuse. if you want xp for individual kills or individual lockpicks you is not actual advocating the quest/task xp reward approach.

 

*sigh*

 

and the reasons why xp for kills and individual activities PLUS quest awards has been beaten to death... beaten beyond death, is that if the fighty character gets more xp 'cause xp from fights ends up yielding more xp, then you is functional encouraging fighty even if you do make diplomatic and sneaky options viable. quest and task xp awards avoids any sorta attempts to balance awards for differing play styles... yadda-yadda, etc. ad nauseum.

 

*groan*'

 

you don't have any idea just how obtuse this all is and how repetitive.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Bullsh*t, You're stating an opinion as fact. I want XP for completing quests equally as much as I want XP for killing things. Take either of them away from me, And I will respond to the omission the SAME. Incidently, there would be nothing stopping the devs from increasing quest completion rewards for those who completed those quests non-violently, thus equaling out the discrepancy you claim will occur for the violent route.

 

And it's not up Gromnir to decide whether or not a thread discussion is "too old" to be discussed. I don't see a moderator tag next to your name, so stop pretending you're one.

 

asking for both kill and quest xp utterly defeats the Point o' quest only. 

 

duh.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Yeah, and quest only xp utterly defeats the point o' combat.

 

duh.

 

HA! No Fun!

[Stun]

asking for both kill and quest xp utterly defeats the Point o' quest only. 

 

duh.

 

HA! Good Fun!

No sh*t, Sherlock.

 

This is probably why I would never advocate quest only xp -OR- combat only xp. Instead, I'd advocate both quest and combat xp.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Stun

[Gromnir]

 

and the reasons why xp for kills and individual activities PLUS quest awards has been beaten to death... beaten beyond death, is that if the fighty character gets more xp 'cause xp from fights ends up yielding more xp, then you is functional encouraging fighty even if you do make diplomatic and sneaky options viable. quest and task xp awards avoids any sorta attempts to balance awards for differing play styles... yadda-yadda, etc. ad nauseum.

Well, what were you expecting from a game where the core activity is combat? Not to mention that Baldur's Gate had diplomatic/peaceful solutions to quests, and you don't have to kill everything just because you get XP for doing so, so that isn't a problem anyway. Do you play flight simulators and whine that you have to fly a plane too or what?

 

Go play a stealth game or pacifist: the pacification if it bothers you.

 

 

PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest.

 

you don't wanna play a role-play game that offers choices? then go play an rts game.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Marceror]

Passing thought here, but perhaps Stun, Helm and Tartantyco should be given their own subforum where they can argue about anything and everything related to the game!

[Gromnir]

 

No sh*t, Sherlock.

 

This is probably why I would never advocate quest only xp -OR- combat only xp. Instead, I'd advocate both quest and combat xp.

 

such posts reveal just how utterly and intractably obtuse you is being. nevertheless, instead o' getting stoopid and repetitive and sweary, answer our challenge as posed above.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Passing thought here, but perhaps Stun, Helm and Tartantyco should be given their own subforum where they can argue about anything and everything related to the game!

"Get into slap fights over BG2's mechanics" Subforum?

 

Would probably cut down on posts in this forum by at least half.

Edited August 26, 2014 by KaineParker

[CatatonicMan]

You lose any arguement by quoting Wikipedia. I teach this to my students. People who rely on Wikipedia lack any real research skills and proper critical thinking skills. We call that a psuedo intellectual. Instead of having someone read something from wikipedia try framing it in your own words. You get much more credibility that way.

 

You lose any argument by quoting Wikipedia? Yeah, that's not actually true. Some arguments, maybe, if it happened that Wikipedia was wrong about the thing you quoted. 

 

Regardless, I don't have the time or the patience to type out every definition, term, concept, or fact that I use. It's a waste of time when an explanation that's just as good - or likely better - is a simple link away.

[RedSocialKnight]

I don't agree that true turn-based combat would make the game better, but I understand why he wants it -- it's very hard to tell what's happening when the whole party and the mobs all clump together in a big scrum with the placement circles overlapping and everyone just swinging away.

 

A slightly more abstract set up for the battle field where the character and mob circles had hard limits (each representing a "hex") would help a lot with making the view of the battlefield less jumbled.

[Stun]

 

No sh*t, Sherlock.

 

This is probably why I would never advocate quest only xp -OR- combat only xp. Instead, I'd advocate both quest and combat xp.

such posts reveal just how utterly and intractably obtuse you is being. nevertheless, instead o' getting stoopid and repetitive and sweary, answer our challenge as posed above.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I see no challenge from you posed above

[Ink Blot]

PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest.

 

Which would be great if almost every talent/ability/spell wasn't geared towards combat effectiveness. I made a 'pacifist' Rogue earlier this morning to see if you could complete the quests in the beta without combat. Kitted an Orlan Rogue out with Stealth and Mechanics for skills, and pumped Intellect, Resolve, and Perception all to 15. However, every single one of the class abilities I was able to choose from when leveling were combat-oriented. Even the bloody class and race extras at character creation were geared toward combat.

 

Honestly, I don't mind the idea of quest XP only, but for the love of the deities why is every single ability/perk/talent/class special ability/spell all geared toward combat effectiveness?

[Leferd]

 

 

 

PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest.

 

 

Which would be great if almost every talent/ability/spell wasn't geared towards combat effectiveness. I made a 'pacifist' Rogue earlier this morning to see if you could complete the quests in the beta without combat. Kitted an Orlan Rogue out with Stealth and Mechanics for skills, and pumped Intellect, Resolve, and Perception all to 15. However, every single one of the class abilities I was able to choose from when leveling were combat-oriented. Even the bloody class and race extras at character creation were geared toward combat.

 

Honestly, I don't mind the idea of quest XP only, but for the love of the deities why is every single ability/perk/talent/class special ability/spell all geared toward combat effectiveness?

They separated combat abilities and non combat skills into non mutually exclusive trees.

 

You'll notice you have athletics, sneak, lore, and mechanics on separate tracks from your combat abilities on level up.

[Gromnir]

 

PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest.

 

Which would be great if almost every talent/ability/spell wasn't geared towards combat effectiveness. I made a 'pacifist' Rogue earlier this morning to see if you could complete the quests in the beta without combat. Kitted an Orlan Rogue out with Stealth and Mechanics for skills, and pumped Intellect, Resolve, and Perception all to 15. However, every single one of the class abilities I was able to choose from when leveling were combat-oriented. Even the bloody class and race extras at character creation were geared toward combat.

 

Honestly, I don't mind the idea of quest XP only, but for the love of the deities why is every single ability/perk/talent/class special ability/spell all geared toward combat effectiveness?

 

this is a complete different argument from the quest based xp question. perhaps you feel diplomatic and sneaky options is underrepresented. Gromnir hasn't gotten very far, but we has been able to talk way past most major encounters. nevertheless, if xp were awarded for sneaky and diplomatic and lockpicks and kills, there would almost certainly  needs be a resulting best build for maximizing xp rewards. quest/task awards as only xp outlet removes the need to find a correct or meaningful balance such that no one style o' gameplay results in greater xp awards.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Tartantyco]

 

PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest.

 

Which would be great if almost every talent/ability/spell wasn't geared towards combat effectiveness. I made a 'pacifist' Rogue earlier this morning to see if you could complete the quests in the beta without combat. Kitted an Orlan Rogue out with Stealth and Mechanics for skills, and pumped Intellect, Resolve, and Perception all to 15. However, every single one of the class abilities I was able to choose from when leveling were combat-oriented. Even the bloody class and race extras at character creation were geared toward combat.

 

Honestly, I don't mind the idea of quest XP only, but for the love of the deities why is every single ability/perk/talent/class special ability/spell all geared toward combat effectiveness?

 

It isn't.

 

You have yet to answer why combat must be rewarded with XP simply because it is a substantial part of the game.

[Stun]

don't let your ADD stop you from scrolling up a couple posts. hint: post starts with, "we pose this challenge..." Gromnir is extreme subtle.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Oh, you mean this one from a page an a half ago?

we pose this challenge every time this Stoopid debate reappears and we never get an answer:

 

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.

Insufficient information given. The parameters are not even remotely comprehensive enough to promote an honest discussion.

 

We'd need to know how much easier/harder the diplomatic route will be vis-a-vis combat route. We'd need to know precisely how viable stealthing will be. We'd need to know exactly how many instances of required combat there is (Josh told us to expect many). We'd need to be assured that every single option will be viable in every single quest. We'd need to know how much content is not quest tied. And lastly, we'd need to know how significant the enemy loot drops will be.

 

Otherwise your proposal is neither better design, nor simpler design. It's just Lazier design. And BG2's system was better.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Stun

[Gromnir]

to ink blot as clarification

 

please keep in mind that we is much in favor o' providing additional opportunities for sneaky and diplomatic or unforeseen and creative resolutions. we like combat, but more choices in a crpg makes Gromnir more happy. that being said, encouraging obsidian to offer more such options is a separate issue from how xp is awarded.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

Oh, you mean this one from a page an a half ago?

we pose this challenge every time this Stoopid debate reappears and we never get an answer:

 

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.

Insufficient information given.

 

We'd need to know how much easier/harder the diplomatic route will be vis-a-vis combat route. We'd need to know precisely how viable stealthing will be. We'd need to know exactly how many instances of required combat there is, and we'd need to be assured that every single option will be viable in every single quest.

 

Otherwise your proposal is neither better design, nor simpler design. It's just Lazier design.

 

you don't need more information. the fact that you believe you need more info is proof itself that alternative options is necessarily more complex. obsidian need not ask any o' your queries 'cause regardless o' the answers, everybody gets same awards with quest xp.

 

duh.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 26, 2014 by TrueNeutral
removed personal attack

[Blarghagh]

Guys, one last time, cool it with the personal attacks. Also, if you want to discuss this specific issue in more depth I'd suggest you make a seperate thread - this has gone long past going off-topic from discussing developer impressions.

[Helm]

 

 

and the reasons why xp for kills and individual activities PLUS quest awards has been beaten to death... beaten beyond death, is that if the fighty character gets more xp 'cause xp from fights ends up yielding more xp, then you is functional encouraging fighty even if you do make diplomatic and sneaky options viable. quest and task xp awards avoids any sorta attempts to balance awards for differing play styles... yadda-yadda, etc. ad nauseum.

Well, what were you expecting from a game where the core activity is combat? Not to mention that Baldur's Gate had diplomatic/peaceful solutions to quests, and you don't have to kill everything just because you get XP for doing so, so that isn't a problem anyway. Do you play flight simulators and whine that you have to fly a plane too or what?

 

Go play a stealth game or pacifist: the pacification if it bothers you.

 

 

PoE is a role-play game that allows sneaky and diplomatic. give xp awards for individual kills, and individual lockpicks and individual whatever inevitably leads to an ideal approach for maximizing xp by making the right gameplay and character development choices. quest only xp avoids the need to devise a fair an balanced calculus. quest is simple and guaranteed to result in every player getting exact same XP rewards for completing quests regardless o' how they chose to complete the quest.

 

you don't wanna play a role-play game that offers choices? then go play an rts game.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

We used to have the choice to either engage in combat or not. We used to have the choice to be diplomatic or not. PoE is a stealth simulator that doesn't resemble the IE games at all, it is just a boring stealth simulator where the core activity is avoiding combat while doing the bidding of villagers for XP.

 

You don't want a roleplaying game that offers choices and hate combat? Then go play Pacifist: The Pacification or a stealth simulator.

 

HA! Good Fun! (<- god, that is so retarded)

[Gromnir]

Guys, one last time, cool it with the personal attacks. Also, if you want to discuss this specific issue in more depth I'd suggest you make a seperate thread - this has gone long past going off-topic from discussing developer impressions.

being kinda selective, eh? well, we kinda predicted that months ago. nevertheless, this entire discussion 'bout xp awards is spam as is having been repeated ad nauseum in multiple threads and is not particular relevant to zeits. that being said, we do likes that we get to say, "we told you so," and be correct.

 

"We used to have the choice to either engage in combat or not. We used to have the choice to be diplomatic or not. PoE is a stealth simulator that doesn't resemble the IE games at all, it is just a boring stealth simulator where the core activity is avoiding combat while doing the bidding of villagers for XP.

 

"You don't want a roleplaying game that offers choices and hate combat? Then go play Pacifist: The Pacification or a stealth simulator.

 

"HA! Good Fun! (<- god, that is so retarded)"

 

all of which, even if true, would not be a valid argument for separating xp awards into individual constituent parts such as lockpick success, sneak, diplomacy and fighty as it would lead to a need to balance such awards. seriously, how is this not getting through?

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 26, 2014 by Gromnir

[Stun]

you don't need more information.

Fine. Lets see. Your proposal stinks for 5 fundamental reasons.

 

1)If there is content in this game that is not tied to a quest, your system doesn't address it.

2)If there are times when combat is forced/required, your system doesn't address it.

3)If the diplomatic route in a quest simply requires a single skill/stat check, while the combat route requires use of more than one player skill, your system does not take that into account.

4)If sneaking past an encounter doesn't grant loot rewards but intimidation and/or combat does, your system does not address it.

5)If solving a dungeon puzzle requires no character skill and rewards XP, but killing the dungeon level's inhabitants requires the use of several of your character's skills but Doesn't reward XP, your system is a joke.

 

In light of the above, I'd have to conclude that BG2's system, while still flawed, is certainly a better system than the one you are proposing.

 

Hey Gromnir, that was SIMPLE.

Edited August 26, 2014 by Stun

[Ineth]

Combat in this game is a pointless high-risk chore that you are better off skipping.

 

I won't be skipping it