Do you want experience from combat?

[Stun]

On one hand, I think the 'you must do all quests' argument due to 'quest' only experience is ridiculous.  On the other hand, if I'm to be intellectually honest, that feeling could also be turned around on folks who don't like combat XP because it encourages folks to commit 'genocide.'

Indeed. So lets all stop pretending that "system abuse" is some sort of factor here. It isn't.

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

 

 

Well saying you come in oblique, which is like slanting, to me means your saying, yes you muddy your conversation with a shtick making it difficult at times to fully understand you. Enough is there so when you call somebody on there mistake of your goblin speak well there isn't much to say. Again I could be misinterpreting that so feel free to brow beat me some more.

again, if such a belief makes you feel better 'bout yourself, who is we to deny your little fantasy.  Gromnir is just a simple board poster and clear not as clever as you, but, "better a witty fool than a foolish wit."

 

so, which category do you thinks you belong to, the fool or wit?

 

now, on-topic... is still moot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

I don't think your stupid Gromnir (as I said it's diabolical). Quite the contrary. I do think you have a nasty streak which you are dumping all over this forum.

 

oh, more talk 'bout Gromnir instead o' topics? what did we note about that earlier?

 

*snort*

 

in spite o' your confusion you seem quite aware o' material for which you should take offense, no?

 

and please review. what we had no patience for is when posters purposeful misrepresent. claim to not understand Gromnir? fine, but you have no such excuse for josh comments, cain comments or indira comments. pretend as if what indira were suggesting were same as obsidian claims o' need/goals for an experience mechanic were conversely mendacious or cretinous (denotative, not connotative.)  so, much as with this topic itself, we have a functional choice o' two diametric opposed options. 

 

we seem harsh to you? gosh. am tending to agree that we is harsh, but only with the willful obtuse or mendacious. indira statements and josh position were not confusing, even if Gromnirs posts elude you. no excuses. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

    I've never misunderstood Josh or Cain, I misunderstand you. I don't agree with their stated goal or need for perfect balance. Indira stated a combat Xp system could be implemented in time. You said not a balanced one and he agreed but that wasn't an issue for him and it isn't one for me. I already admitted to that.

    I've never read you anywhere saying Combat Xp could be balanced until a page ago at least I don't think so because again you intentionally play the fool (which you clearly are not) and yes your post can be hard to read and understand perfectly. I thought balance was your whole problem with it. Maybe you said it can be balance before somewhere but I've only been on these forum for 2 weeks. I skim a lot of the post because some are very long or a chore to read. I don't think I'm alone in that, and this is just a forum, I'm not trying to master every topic, just enjoy a game. 

    You jump off topic, disguising your insults and condescension with a calculated court jester bit, then at the very end after you spent all that time patronizing someone tell them to stay on topic. Sheesh. I've never been warned by a moderator so I assume they don't take issue with me.

     I don't know that you really read what I say either. I've said multiple times I'm not married to Combat Xp and am only here to discuss why I prefer it over quest only. I've agreed that the problem I've noticed with the progression of the Quest only Xp at the moment is pacing and that the wilderness will, after I've completed this game once, serve little function for me, which is sad because it's a beautiful game. Really why trudge out everywhere again using up resources once I know where the important stuff is? One thing I enjoyed about the IE games was the fact that if I didn't stay on point all the time I still could progress if I decided to just do some Dungeon romping. To me having Quest only XP is actually going to shrink how much I do everytime I replay the game, if I do replay it. Doesn't mean I won't like the game.

 

am gonna ignore most o' this 'cause it is for the most part clear obfuscation or flat out mendacity. for instance, cain and sawyer has never asked for "perfect balance," but you keep repeating and knocking the stuffing outta that strawman. as we noted, even indira admitted that to do a balanced mechanic would be requiring considerable effort. you quoted indira responding to such a query. to therefore then act confused is fraudulent... or worse.

 

however, main point is this:   "You jump off topic, disguising your insults and condescension with a calculated court jester bit, then at the very end after you spent all that time patronizing someone tell them to stay on topic. Sheesh. I've never been warned by a moderator so I assume they don't take issue with me."

 

Gromnir is the one staying on-topic In Spite o' you and others trying to make the thread about Gromnir and his posting style. You is jester in question, though you, like stun, don't seem to get the obvious. if you weren't dragging off-topic and making the thread about Gromnir, we sure as hell wouldn't be making it an issue. duh.  clearly if our posting style were a problem from bis/obsdiain pov, we would not have been able to maintain the style for over ten years. 'course am doubting that sinks in either.

 

leave topic about exp and you won't hear Gromnir bring up Gromnir once.  if we get off-topic, is 'cause you can't accept that simple fact. 'course if you do insist on making us a star in this thread, we will indulge your peculiar needs and fixations. am flexible. oh, and fact that we can continue this ridiculous debate about Gromnir is clear proof that you is understanding us, or you simple would desist, left befuddled and confused but silent. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

complete aside: we is referring to indira as he/she 'cause zan keeps calling indira a he. indira strikes us as a female name. the fact that the name is feminine does not require that indira actually be be female, but we made the assumption that indira were belonging to the fairer sex. if our assumption is incorrect, we will accept correction and apologize for the continued he/she bit. whichever gender is appropriate is the one we will use forthwith, though truth-to-tell, indira's gender is not particular important to us, we simply wish to avoid being rude when using pronouns to disagree with her... or him.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Gromnir

[Zansatsu]

I don't know what you said but it comes off condescending, let's try to stay on topic please.   

[Marceror]

Originally I was in favor of combat xp. But after reading this thread I think I would just prefer to be consumed by the Great Glow!

[Gromnir]

I don't know what you said but it comes off condescending, let's try to stay on topic please.   

HA! am gonna take that as a joke... is only good one you has made thus far.  is ironic off-topic however. you need to be aware o' off-topic... and apparently hypocrisy.

 

given the impossibility o' replacing the existing xp mechanic with a different xp mechanic that achieves obsidian's espoused goals (i.e. encouraging diversity of play style, balance, simplicity) in the time remaining before the release of PoE, this topic is moot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

given the impossibility o' replacing the existing xp mechanic with a different xp mechanic that achieves obsidian's espoused goals (i.e. encouraging diversity of play style, balance, simplicity) in the time remaining before the release of PoE,

 

 

 

^This is the clearest you've been this topic, Gromnir, and I do read what you write.

 

You know that I don't agree with OE on this quest-xp-equals-diversity-of-playstyle, on contraire, but I respect them for believing in their design vision. And like Josh has said on numerous occasions: Faced with a game design he made that's not working as intended, he would change it. I hope that policy applies in this case too. There will be plenty of possible solutions available then.

 

P.S. As for addressing my gender on this forum, "he" would be more IRL-correct, but my avatar's named after my favourite and often recurring D&D character, and that's a she.

Edited August 31, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

given the impossibility o' replacing the existing xp mechanic with a different xp mechanic that achieves obsidian's espoused goals (i.e. encouraging diversity of play style, balance, simplicity) in the time remaining before the release of PoE,

 

 

 

^This is the clearest you've been this topic, Gromnir, and I do read what you write.

 

You know that I don't agree with OE on this quest-xp-equals-diversity-of-playstyle, on contraire, but I respect them for believing in their design vision. And like Josh has said on numerous occasions: Faced with a game design he made that's not working as intended, he would change it. I hope that policy applies in this case too. There will be plenty of possible solutions available then.

 

P.S. As for addressing my gender on this forum, "he" would be more IRL-correct, but my avatar's named after my favourite and often recurring D&D character, and that's a she.

 

"he" it is.

 

keep in mind that we have said, "given the impossibility o' replacing the existing xp mechanic with a different xp mechanic that achieves obsidian's espoused goals (i.e. encouraging diversity of play style, balance, simplicity) in the time remaining before the release of PoE," with only the most minute and insignificant variations many times. we can repost each iteration if you wish. am thinking that if you is being fair, you will agree that on this point we have not been unclear. at this point in development, producing an xp mechanic that achieves obsidians's espoused goals AND would also include kill xp is simply not possible.

 

 

we also recognized that you do not believe that obsidian's goals is  justified. we were not unclear on this point and we can also repost quotes on this point if you so desire.

 

 

*shrug*

 

 

is a fundamental difference o' opinion as to what goals should be pursued. nevertheless, as we has been explaining ad nauseum to zan, neither you, nor anybody else, has ever suggested that in the time remaining, obsidian could produce an alternative xp mechanic that included per kill xp, that achieved their espoused goals o' balance, diversity o' gameplay styles and simplicity.  there simple is no argument on this point.  zan chose obfuscation and denials rather than a simple admission that your proposed exp mechanic were, from obsidian’s pov AND their stated goals, not a viable replacement.

 

 

again,we think it is complete fair to argue whether obsidian goals is valid, but zan were holding you up as an example for something you never actual claimed could be achieved. bad on him.  hopefully you aren't actual defending him, 'cause if so, bad on you too.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited August 31, 2014 by Gromnir

[oaktownbrown]

I haven't played much of the beta. I've only done most of the Dyrwood Ruins because of bugs. My main concern with quest only XP is that there will inevitably be some quests that players, for whatever reason, don't wish to complete. E.g., in the current beta, I played as a Druid. I'd never remove a dragon egg from its nest. There may be other ways to complete the quest that don't involve disturbing the egg but I would have not wanted to follow up on the quest even if my game hadn't bugged out in the Dyrwood Ruins. This, in itself, is not a problem. But I wonder how many such quests there will be for people who want to roleplay a particular role or use a particular playstyle. How will Obsidian accommodate players who don't want to do certain quests (without becoming underleveled) and at the same time allow completionists to do every quest (without becoming overleveled)? 

Edited August 31, 2014 by oaktownbrown

[oaktownbrown]

As examples of what I mean, let's take a group of DnD goblins that the party randomly encounters.  The devs don't give XP for overcoming them because they are more or less trivial for a well prepared party and the monster type is ubiquitous.  No XP.  Now, let's take a pride of hungry assed man eating lions that the party randomly encounters.  The party sneaks by the lions and goes on their merry way, XP.  Party knocks off lions and makes the road safer, even more XP.  The party has a druid or some sort of lion taming dude who manages to tame the lions and donates them to the nearest zoo, a hefty infusion of XP.  The party doesn't get 'kill' XP, but they do get XP for killing the lions.  Better results yield better XP.

 

 

 

I would hate the option of putting lions in a zoo if I were playing most Druids. It's not neutral or balanced and it fails to protect nature IMO.  I think it would be possible to devise creative solutions that would work for most character types but it may take quite a bit of work.

 

It could also be a problem in that what a dev sees as a solution would not work at all for some (many?) players, as in the proposed solution above. (I'm not trying to knock your proposal specifically. I'd guess that anything I came up with would have similar problems. I'm trying to illustrate the difficulty of finding quest paths that work and that don't lead to many players, for whatever reason, not wanting to complete the quest.)

 

I like the idea of Druids being able to communicate with animals. Maybe it could be a talent, either class-specific or one available generally.

 

Sorry that I couldn't figure out how to add this to my comment above. 

Edited August 31, 2014 by oaktownbrown

[Stun]

"he" it is.

 

keep in mind that we have said, "given the impossibility o' replacing the existing xp mechanic with a different xp mechanic that achieves obsidian's espoused goals (i.e. encouraging diversity of play style, balance, simplicity) in the time remaining before the release of PoE," with only the most minute and insignificant variations many times. we can repost each iteration if you wish. am thinking that if you is being fair, you will agree that on this point we have not been unclear. at this point in development, producing an xp mechanic that achieves obsidians's espoused goals AND would also include kill xp is simply not possible.

 

we also recognized that you do not believe that obsidian's goals is  justified. we were not unclear on this point and we can also repost quotes on this point if you so desire.[/size][/font]

 

 

is a fundamental difference o' opinion as to what goals should be pursued. nevertheless, as we has been explaining ad nauseum to zan, neither you, nor anybody else, has ever suggested that in the time remaining, obsidian could produce an alternative xp mechanic that included per kill xp, that achieved their espoused goals o' balance, diversity o' gameplay styles and simplicity.  there simple is no argument on this point.  zan chose obfuscation and denials rather than a simple admission that your proposed exp mechanic were, from obsidian’s pov AND their stated goals, not a viable replacement.

 

again,we think it is complete fair to argue whether obsidian goals is valid, but zan were holding you up as an example for something you never actual claimed could be achieved. bad on him.  hopefully you aren't actual defending him, 'cause if so, bad on you too.[/size][/font]

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

I'm pretty sure the bulk of the gripes on this thread (and all the other XP threads) is about those developer goals themselves, and how presumptuous they are. More to the point: Josh believes that a quest-only XP system will satisfy all playstyles. But if the players themselves are in the middle of playing this 60 hour game and they feel that all the combat they're frequently forced to engage in feels pointless/unrewarding, then it won't matter whether or not Josh's stated goals have actually been met. His design has failed already.

 

Perception is reality in this case and this is something we're going to have to wait and see about, I suppose. But I was *there* when Bobby Null came to these forums during the kickstarter and took feedback from us on a possible Megadungeon to rival Durlag's tower and Watcher's keep - an idea he said the dev team was discussing. And now, a couple years later, we've got a 15 level megadungeon. There is NO WAY they're gonna succeed in recapturing the feel/pace/magic of those dungeon experiences by simply tying everything to Quest XP-only.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Stun

[Cantousent]

Originally I was in favor of combat xp. But after reading this thread I think I would just prefer to be consumed by the Great Glow!

laughed out loud.  :D  ...But, as someone mentioned earlier, this *is* one of the few ways for the devs to get community feedback.  I don't think they should bow to every major uprising, but I would hope they at least take into account the views they have explicitly solicited.

 

I would hate the option of putting lions in a zoo if I were playing most Druids. It's not neutral or balanced and it fails to protect nature IMO. I think it would be possible to devise creative solutions that would work for most character types but it may take quite a bit of work.

 

It could also be a problem in that what a dev sees as a solution would not work at all for some (many?) players, as in the proposed solution above. (I'm not trying to knock your proposal specifically. I'd guess that anything I came up with would have similar problems. I'm trying to illustrate the difficulty of finding quest paths that work and that don't lead to many players, for whatever reason, not wanting to complete the quest.)

I think this will always be an issue because folks don't want to think that the design team is making moral judgments about what decisions the players make.  However, I've never seen an RPG where the weren't judgments about outcomes.  I think they have to be careful, but I do think they should reward better results, which means that there will be some judgment about what constitutes a 'better result.'  For example, from the lions' perspective, having the townsfolk send out the most corpulent member every few days to provide a feast for the pride would be the best outcome, but that's probably not going to happen.

 

 

On one hand, I think the 'you must do all quests' argument due to 'quest' only experience is ridiculous. On the other hand, if I'm to be intellectually honest, that feeling could also be turned around on folks who don't like combat XP because it encourages folks to commit 'genocide.'

Indeed. So lets all stop pretending that "system abuse" is some sort of factor here. It isn't.

 

I get the point, but system abuse is a factor here. Strictly speaking, it's a factor if for no other reason than the devs themselves have cited it as a factor. I *do* think that kill xp is more prone to abuse, but I also concede that it's a matter of degree. All robust systems will have some potential for abuse.

Edited August 31, 2014 by Cantousent

[Marceror]

 

Originally I was in favor of combat xp. But after reading this thread I think I would just prefer to be consumed by the Great Glow!

laughed out loud.  :D  ...But, as someone mentioned earlier, this *is* one of the few ways for the devs to get community feedback.  I don't think they should bow to every major uprising, but I would hope they at least take into account the views they have explicitly solicited.

 

Nice to see another Wasteland fan (that is to say, I assume that only Wasteland fans get that reference).

 

On that topic, it's rather ironic that Wasteland 2 seems to be hitting a lot closer to the mark for me than Pillars of Eternity, in spite of the fact that the genre is totally wrong. I didn't expect that at all.

 

In WL2 there is inventory management. In WL2 ammunition for your ranged weapons is critically important (no magical shoot forever ranged weapons there). That ammo is precious, in fact. There is combat based experience, skill based experience and quest based experience. Sure, it's turned based rather than RTwP, which turns out to be a real strength. The story and characters aren't quite as deep, but it's appropriate for a whacky sci-fi setting.

 

It may differ drastically from the I.E. but it seems to be aligning with my "old school RPG" sensibilities" much more closely than what I'm seeing of PoE thus far.

 

I still expect to enjoy PoE, don't get me wrong. But am feeling that it's strayed a bit far afield from is supposed origins.

[Cantousent]

This is where an ol' skool Obsidz fanboy like me jumps up to defend PoE.  Okay, I'll oblige briefly on that count.  I think there's a difference.  PoE doesn't have the same history or grauitas that the Wasteland/Fallout universe has.  Wasteland has been in production for a lot longer.  The devs are going to handle things like ammo and other like items differently in a post apocalyptic setting than in a fantasy universe.  The PoE demo doesn't give the player a chance to immerse himself in the game world, whereas Wasteland 2 has a familiar game world in which many players will already feel some affinity.

 

There, fanboy credentials polished.  Now for a frank assessment:  Wasteland 2 is much better judging by the demos.  If I had to make a choice based on them, I unreservedly say that I would choose Wasteland 2 at this point, and I didn't even pledge for it.  I got my beta access to Wasteland 2 *because* of my pledge to Project Eternity.  In fact, what I've seen of Wasteland 2 so far makes me wish I'd pledged more for the Tides of Numenara.  I reserve judgment until I've played both finished products, but I can certainly understand why someone would come to your conclusions at this point, Merc.

[Marceror]

This is where an ol' skool Obsidz fanboy like me jumps up to defend PoE.  Okay, I'll oblige briefly on that count.  I think there's a difference.  PoE doesn't have the same history or grauitas that the Wasteland/Fallout universe has.  Wasteland has been in production for a lot longer.  The devs are going to handle things like ammo and other like items differently in a post apocalyptic setting than in a fantasy universe.  The PoE demo doesn't give the player a chance to immerse himself in the game world, whereas Wasteland 2 has a familiar game world in which many players will already feel some affinity.

 

There, fanboy credentials polished.  Now for a frank assessment:  Wasteland 2 is much better judging by the demos.  If I had to make a choice based on them, I unreservedly say that I would choose Wasteland 2 at this point, and I didn't even pledge for it.  I got my beta access to Wasteland 2 *because* of my pledge to Project Eternity.  In fact, what I've seen of Wasteland 2 so far makes me wish I'd pledged more for the Tides of Numenara.  I reserve judgment until I've played both finished products, but I can certainly understand why someone would come to your conclusions at this point, Merc.

The reality is, my feelings about about WL2 have nothing to do with the history of the WL world. I've only recently tried the original WL, and didn't bother to go very far with it. I've never played any of the Fallout games, as the post apocalyptic setting has never been a huge draw for me. I actually didn't back WL2 either, as I didn't learn about the KS until after it was over. I gained access to WL2 based on backing Torment and PoE.

 

On paper, PoE is by far the game that I would expect to enjoy more. The fantasy setting has always been a big deal to me, and the Infinity Engine games are my all time favs.

 

It's still way too early to judge PoE. I can only say that based on what I know of PoE and WL2 *at this moment*, it's looking like WL2 will be a game I'll enjoy more, which is a rather ironic twist.

 

OE has been very upfront about wanting to model 3 core pillars from the I.E. games: 1) A 2D game world 2) A deep, immersive story and characters and 3) Real time with pause. What I didn't realize is that they would be happy to throw so many of its other characteristics to the wayside. No ammunition? No combat or rogue-skill based xp? -- and potentially a game where combat is NOT at the core of the experience. Essentially no inventory management.... I'm not even saying that these decisions are necessarily horrible decisions. Just that a game without these things doesn't sound like it resembles the Infinity Engine very closely, which is what I thought I would be getting with PoE.

 

inXile promised an "old school RPG. Obsidian did not. It's the apparent lack of many of those old school sensibilities in PoE that are causing me to disconnect from it somewhat.

 

That all said, I will reserve my final judgment for the final game. Even if different, and not what I was expecting, it doesn't necessarily mean PoE won't end up being a game that I love on its own terms.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

 

This is where an ol' skool Obsidz fanboy like me jumps up to defend PoE.  Okay, I'll oblige briefly on that count.  I think there's a difference.  PoE doesn't have the same history or grauitas that the Wasteland/Fallout universe has.  Wasteland has been in production for a lot longer.  The devs are going to handle things like ammo and other like items differently in a post apocalyptic setting than in a fantasy universe.  The PoE demo doesn't give the player a chance to immerse himself in the game world, whereas Wasteland 2 has a familiar game world in which many players will already feel some affinity.

 

There, fanboy credentials polished.  Now for a frank assessment:  Wasteland 2 is much better judging by the demos.  If I had to make a choice based on them, I unreservedly say that I would choose Wasteland 2 at this point, and I didn't even pledge for it.  I got my beta access to Wasteland 2 *because* of my pledge to Project Eternity.  In fact, what I've seen of Wasteland 2 so far makes me wish I'd pledged more for the Tides of Numenara.  I reserve judgment until I've played both finished products, but I can certainly understand why someone would come to your conclusions at this point, Merc.

The reality is, my feelings about about WL2 have nothing to do with the history of the WL world. I've only recently tried the original WL, and didn't bother to go very far with it. I've never played any of the Fallout games, as the post apocalyptic setting has never been a huge draw for me. I actually didn't back WL2 either, as I didn't learn about the KS until after it was over. I gained access to WL2 based on backing Torment and PoE.

 

On paper, PoE is by far the game that I would expect to enjoy more. The fantasy setting has always been a big deal to me, and the Infinity Engine games are my all time favs.

 

It's still way too early to judge PoE. I can only say that based on what I know of PoE and WL2 *at this moment*, it's looking like WL2 will be a game I'll enjoy more, which is a rather ironic twist.

 

OE has been very upfront about wanting to model 3 core pillars from the I.E. games: 1) A 2D game world 2) A deep, immersive story and characters and 3) Real time with pause. What I didn't realize is that they would be happy to throw so many of its other characteristics to the wayside. No ammunition? No combat or rogue-skill based xp? -- and potentially a game where combat is NOT at the core of the experience. Essentially no inventory management.... I'm not even saying that these decisions are necessarily horrible decisions. Just that a game without these things doesn't sound like it resembles the Infinity Engine very closely, which is what I thought I would be getting with PoE.

 

inXile promised an "old school RPG. Obsidian did not. It's the apparent lack of many of those old school sensibilities in PoE that are causing me to disconnect from it somewhat.

 

That all said, I will reserve my final judgment for the final game. Even if different, and not what I was expecting, it doesn't necessarily mean PoE won't end up being a game that I love on its own terms.

 

I dunno man, I'm replaying BGTrilogy right now and the things that PoE heavily deviates from it on(XP system, ammunition, attributes, etc.) I couldn't care less about. I play these games because I like doing interesting quests and killing **** RTwP party combat, and PoE should deliver on those two fronts. I suppose we could get into a large argument about what the IE games are about, but they range from hack-n-slash to pretentious pseudo-intellectualism to dungeon delving interrupted by charname's girlfriend giving birth to an inventory baby so I don't think a consensus on what a successor to all IE games would be would ever be definitive.

[Marceror]

 

I dunno man, I'm replaying BGTrilogy right now and the things that PoE heavily deviates from it on(XP system, ammunition, attributes, etc.) I couldn't care less about. I play these games because I like doing interesting quests and killing **** RTwP party combat, and PoE should deliver on those two fronts. I suppose we could get into a large argument about what the IE games are about, but they range from hack-n-slash to pretentious pseudo-intellectualism to dungeon delving interrupted by charname's girlfriend giving birth to an inventory baby so I don't think a consensus on what a successor to all IE games would be would ever be definitive.

 

I think it's going to come down to for me, am I immersed by the game and does it feel like it was rushed out the door? Even if certain aspects are different, if the game is awesome I'm likely to be able to overlook things like streamlining ammunition out of the game. My other big concern though is that the game will be truly ready for its seemingly totally inflexible Winter 2014 release date. Based on what I'm seeing so far in the demo (err, backer beta) that's feeling like a stretch. Hoping the impending patch changes my mind on that.

[Cantousent]

...to dungeon delving interrupted by charname's girlfriend giving birth to an inventory baby[.]

So, what's wrong with pretenshus pseudo-intellectualism, ya bastard?  lol I have to admit, I laughed out loud when I read the part about the inventory baby.  I do contend that it's hard to get a feel for the whole of the PoE campaign from the demo.  Wasteland is set in a post apocalyptic Western United States.  The setting is more or less immediately accessible as an idea.  The whole PoE world might be great, we just can't tell whether or not it will be by a few conversations and some race and class descriptions.  I am quite glad that WL2 ships in September.  I stopped playing the demo quickly because I wanted to save the actual game for when it was finished, which is why I did hardly anything in the PoE demo.  I'm even afraid to visit the other forums because I don't want to be spoiled on anything.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I think it's going to come down to for me, am I immersed by the game and does it feel like it was rushed out the door? Even if certain aspects are different, if the game is awesome I'm likely to be able to overlook things like streamlining ammunition out of the game. My other big concern though is that the game will be truly ready for its seemingly totally inflexible Winter 2014 release date. Based on what I'm seeing so far in the demo (err, backer beta) that's feeling like a stretch. Hoping the impending patch changes my mind on that.

I think it depends on how fast they can squash bugs and adjust for balance. I'm fairly confident on their ability to get bugs sorted out, but balance may take a bit of fine tuning to get where they want. Guess we will have to wait until the next build before losing our ****.

 

So, what's wrong with pretenshus pseudo-intellectualism, ya bastard?  lol I have to admit, I laughed out loud when I read the part about the inventory baby.  I do contend that it's hard to get a feel for the whole of the PoE campaign from the demo.  Wasteland is set in a post apocalyptic Western United States.  The setting is more or less immediately accessible as an idea.  The whole PoE world might be great, we just can't tell whether or not it will be by a few conversations and some race and class descriptions.  I am quite glad that WL2 ships in September.  I stopped playing the demo quickly because I wanted to save the actual game for when it was finished, which is why I did hardly anything in the PoE demo.  I'm even afraid to visit the other forums because I don't want to be spoiled on anything.

I think WL2 has the benefit of taking place in a fairly familiar setting and the Beta gives a fairly good chunk of content integrated into the game. PoE's Beta throws you into an unfamiliar world at a fairly advanced level, so I have a much harder time getting a solid grasp on the "feels" of PoE than I did with WL2.

 

BTW, PoE's demo occurs ff the critpath. It is pretty spoilerfree, besides that charname is actually the son of MurderGod who s being stalked by his removed mortality because it believes nothing can change the nature of a man and that Bruce Willis was dead the entire time.

[Marceror]

BTW, PoE's demo occurs ff the critpath. It is pretty spoilerfree, besides that charname is actually the son of MurderGod who s being stalked by his removed mortality because it believes nothing can change the nature of a man and that Bruce Willis was dead the entire time.

 

This is solid gold! I guess Cantousent is up spoiler's creak now!

[Cantousent]

Wait... Bruce Willis was dead the entire time?  That must mean I see dead people!

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Wait... Bruce Willis was dead the entire time?  That must mean I see dead people!

Also, Rosebud is the sled.

[Caladian]

The problem is this, people are trying to apply their definition of what a cRPG is.  There are as many definitions of cRPGs as there are types of pizza.  If you google it, many include games like Zork as a cRPG.  It just isn't what you are used to.  BG isn't the beginning and the end of the definition of it.  I've been playing computer games since Zork was brand new.  Yes, I'm a geezer.  If you want a game where smashing rats is your objective?  Pretty sure there is a game about that.

 

It is already clear that whinning enough to fill Lake Superior isn't going to change the direction of the xp system.  Continuing to whine about it, just makes you a very horrible sore loser.  Get over it, and try to find some sort of incremental thing that can be done, and get over it. 

 

Despite all of the bugs, I've enjoyed the game immensely for the exact thing you don't like to do, not killing everything.  If boss mobs were made into mini-quests (get something that drops off them then turn them in to some collector), they might buy it.  Even in the beta several times I ended up killing things because I wanted their crafting materials, and wanted to see if there were hidden objects somewhere.

[Helm]

ITT: Pro-Kill-XPers Pro-Quest-Only-XPers make up insane scenarios in an attempt to make Quest-XP-only Quest-XP + Combat-XP + Exploration-XP + Skill-Usage-XP + Objective-XP look bad.

Fixed that for you buddy.

[Zansatsu]

 

Wait... Bruce Willis was dead the entire time?  That must mean I see dead people!

Also, Rosebud is the sled.

Soylent Green is people....

[DnaCowboy]

                          VICTORY

 

 

So the polls tell an interesting story, in that the majority of backers would like to see Combat XP included in the retail game. These same backers also voted on being prepared to wait while it is being implemented, what we need now is a response from the developers.

I took it upon myself to contact a developer asking for guidance; however, I have yet to receive a reply, that being said we need a way to politely request that the devs respond to our request, any constructive ideas?

Edited September 1, 2014 by DnaCowboy