Do you want experience from combat?

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

I never grinded in any IE game ever, its not necessary.

Nor did I, despite my many playthroughs. Glad this issue is out of the way, then. Killing non-respawning baddies in CRPGs gets an "approved". Stun is right, though, the word "grinding" is needlessly used extensively by quest-xp-only proponents. IIRC, Josh himself used it in one of the backer updates during the KS. Weird thing is:

I.t...w.a.s...n.e.v.e.r...a.n....i.s.s.u.e.

[Mayama]

 

 

I never grinded in any IE game ever, its not necessary.

Nor did I, despite my many playthroughs. Glad this issue is out of the way, then. Killing non-respawning baddies in CRPGs gets an "approved". Stun is right, though, the word "grinding" is needlessly used extensively by quest-xp-only proponents. IIRC, Josh himself used it in one of the backer updates during the KS. Weird thing is:

I.t...w.a.s...n.e.v.e.r...a.n....i.s.s.u.e.

 

As stated a million times bevor the reason why their is no kill-xp is because it makes it possible to give out the same amount of xp for every approach to solve a problem without exploiting the system. If you would give XP for every single step people could farm those and get two or three times the xp that was intended for it. Its a common problem with rpg's that have multible approaches to a problem and give xp for every step. I can understand why the dev's decided to do it this way and some month after release we will find out what people in general think about it. 

[IndiraLightfoot]

"Exploiting the system", "intended for"... *Shiver*

How about just making your CRPG reward all accomplishments, but with tiny xp amounts, and be done with it? Why this fostering attitude?

[Stun]

If you would give XP for every single step people could farm those and get two or three times the xp that was intended for it.

Wait... didn't we just cover this, like, 5 minutes ago? As long as farming isn't required, what does it matter what an exploiter does?

 

Oh that's right. This is the Policing you claim isn't occurring. It matters because the devs demand that we play their way.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Stun

[Mayama]

"Exploiting the system", "intended for"... *Shiver*

How about just making your CRPG reward all accomplishments, but with tiny xp amounts, and be done with it? Why this fostering attitude?

So you think its fine if people do stuff like, sneaking through the vent tunnel getting sneak xp, running back to the start killing anyone at the normal route getting kill-xp, talking the boss out of the situation getting talk-xp and then kill him to get kill-xp again? That is what people usually do in games that give xp for every small step.

 

PoE is not a open ended sand box game which does not care about balance. If you want to ensure that the game is always challanging on the road to victory you need to controle the ammount of xp.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Mayama

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

"Exploiting the system", "intended for"... *Shiver*

How about just making your CRPG reward all accomplishments, but with tiny xp amounts, and be done with it? Why this fostering attitude?

Because. The. Devs. Want. To. Award. Accomplishments. Not. Body. Count.

[Stun]

 

"Exploiting the system", "intended for"... *Shiver*

How about just making your CRPG reward all accomplishments, but with tiny xp amounts, and be done with it? Why this fostering attitude?

So you think its fine if people do stuff like, sneaking through the vent tunnel getting sneak xp, running back to the start killing anyone at the normal route getting kill-xp, talking the boss out of the situation getting talk-xp and then kill him to get kill-xp again? That is what people usually do in games that give xp for every small step.

 

Ooh! I can answer this hyperbole-ridden straw man!

 

Answer: since this is a single player game and Gamer-Joe's exploiting doesn't effect my game experience in any way, yes. I don't mind at all. Stop trying to police the gamer.

[Msxyz]

 Its a common problem with rpg's that have multible approaches to a problem and give xp for every step. I can understand why the dev's decided to do it this way and some month after release we will find out what people in general think about it. 

 

 

Many people (including me) backed this game on the perceived premise that Obsidian would have used a tried and true formula which was equally beloved by many. Instead, after the beta, I feel like I've backed an experiment (mechanics, UI, gameplay) I may like or not but; certainly, not the kind of game I hoped.

 

Maybe I will end up enjoying this but, so far, PoE seems the kind of game I would normally wait purchasing until I can read reviews and impressions.

 

Whom is to blame for the different expectations? Part me, I've no problem admitting this, but I'm not alone thinking the lack of XP and many other things don't make PoE really a spiritual successor of anything but a new game of its own.

 

I don't feel easy just to "wait some months after release to see how it pans out" since I already paid in full and even something more...

Edited September 2, 2014 by Msxyz

[Mayama]

Answer: since this is a single player game and Gamer-Joe's exploiting doesn't effect my game experience in any way, yes. I don't mind at all. Stop trying to police the gamer.

 

You make the mistake of assuming that the majority thinks about exploiting in single player games the same way as you do. Their are as many oppinions on it as their are people out their and because their is no way to satisfy everyone they can only aim at making the game as fair and challanging as they want. Its up to the dev's how to handle that, if you want a game where nobody "polices" you than make your own game.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Mayama

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

"Exploiting the system", "intended for"... *Shiver*

How about just making your CRPG reward all accomplishments, but with tiny xp amounts, and be done with it? Why this fostering attitude?

Because. The. Devs. Want. To. Award. Accomplishments. Not. Body. Count.

 

Rhetorical question ensues, not to you specifically KP, but to Josh & Co, and others in favour of no-kill-xp:

But that's bizarre. We have a combat-heavy CRPG. So, let's say that the party encounters a gigantic beetle nest in a forest, and these beetles are new to them (it gets updated in that PoE bestiary). After much ado, they manage to vanquish the beasts (which charged them, not the other way round), and the biggest beetle even gets listed as most powerful enemy defeated, but your party ain't getting any xp for it!

 

Hey! Wait a minute! That was an accomplishment right there! Why on earth disqualify one kind of accomplishment and have the rest of them in (because they are not living beings (some are even undead) that die at the player's hand)? It doesn't compute, nor is it good design. It leaves me flabbergasted.

Edited September 2, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Mayama]

 

 Its a common problem with rpg's that have multible approaches to a problem and give xp for every step. I can understand why the dev's decided to do it this way and some month after release we will find out what people in general think about it. 

 

 

Many people (including me) backed this game on the perceived premise that Obsidian would have used a tried and true formula which was equally beloved by many. Instead, after the beta, I feel like I've backed an experiment (mechanics, UI, gameplay) I may like or not but; certainly, not the kind of game I hoped.

 

Maybe I will end up enjoying this but, so far, PoE seems the kind of game I would normally wait purchasing until I can read reviews and impressions.

 

Whom is to blame for the different expectations? Part me, I've no problem admitting this, but I'm not alone thinking the lack of XP and many other things don't make PoE really a spiritual successor of anything but a new game of its own.

 

I don't feel easy just to "wait some months after release to see how it pans out" since I already paid in full and even something more...

 

 

Their are thousands of opinions on what needs to be included in a spiritual successor. Assuming that it matches your own opinion 100% is pretty naive.  Actually you can only "wait til it is released" because thats how kickstarter works, you invest money in something and hope for the best.

[Stun]

 

Answer: since this is a single player game and Gamer-Joe's exploiting doesn't effect my game experience in any way, yes. I don't mind at all. Stop trying to police the gamer.

 

You make the mistake of assuming that the majority thinks about exploiting in single player games the same way as you do.

 

I did no such thing. I wrote my entire post in 1st person singular. Because that's all I care about in a single player game: ME.

[Mayama]

 

 

"Exploiting the system", "intended for"... *Shiver*

How about just making your CRPG reward all accomplishments, but with tiny xp amounts, and be done with it? Why this fostering attitude?

Because. The. Devs. Want. To. Award. Accomplishments. Not. Body. Count.

 

Rhetorical question ensues, not to you specifically KP, but to Josh & Co, and others in favour of no-kill-xp:

But that's bizarre. So the party encounters a gigantic beetle nest in a forest, and these beetles are new to them (it gets updated in that PoE bestiary). After much ado, they manage to vanquish the beasts (which charged them, not the other way round), and the biggest beetle even gets listed (most powerful enemy defeated), but your party ain't getting any xp for it!

 

Hey! Wait a minute! That was an accomplishment right there! Why on earth disqualify one kind of accomplishment and have the rest of them in (because they are not living things that dies at the player's hand)? It doesn't compute, nor is it good design. It leaves me flabbergasted.

 

Herp derp answer: Thats actually exactly how most PnP rpg's suggest on how to give XP out. Give it out when the day is over or the quest is solved.

Not herp derp answer: XP as a artificial reward in rpg's and how it contradicts reality is a rabid hole that is way to deep and scary to enter it.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Mayama

[Mayama]

 

 

Answer: since this is a single player game and Gamer-Joe's exploiting doesn't effect my game experience in any way, yes. I don't mind at all. Stop trying to police the gamer.

 

You make the mistake of assuming that the majority thinks about exploiting in single player games the same way as you do.

 

I did no such thing. I wrote my entire post in 1st person singular. Because that's all I care about in a single player game: ME.

 

You care only about yourself but the dev's have to care about EVERYONE playing their game and need to find a way to please the majority.

[Stun]

You care only about yourself but the dev's have to care about EVERYONE playing their game and need to find a way to please the majority.

Thus we have the Policing you falsely claimed doesn't exist. Edited September 2, 2014 by Stun

[Mayama]

 

 

 

 

Answer: since this is a single player game and Gamer-Joe's exploiting doesn't effect my game experience in any way, yes. I don't mind at all. Stop trying to police the gamer.

 

You make the mistake of assuming that the majority thinks about exploiting in single player games the same way as you do.

 

I did no such thing. I wrote my entire post in 1st person singular. Because that's all I care about in a single player game: ME.

 

You care only about yourself but the dev's have to care about EVERYONE playing their game and need to find a way to please the majority.

 

Thus the Policing you claim doesn't exist.

 

You claim their is policing that whole discussion started with you claiming that fixing exploits equals policing, seriously. In general dev's try to fix exploits in games because it A) makes them not look good and B) a lot people dont like exploits in their games.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Mayama

[Stun]

You claim their is policing that whole discussion started with you claiming that fixing exploits equals policing, seriously. In general dev's try to fix exploits in games because it A) makes them not look good and B) a lot people dont like exploits in their games.

Offering XP for kills is not an exploit. And it won't ever become exploitable unless we're dealing with idiot developers who don't have the sense to eliminate respawns and make NPCs walk away/go away/disappear/be worth nothing when a quest is completed.

 

Give your ridiculous hyperbole a rest already.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Stun

[Tartantyco]

Offering XP for kills is not an exploit. And it won't ever become exploitable unless we're dealing with idiot developers who don't have the sense to eliminate respawns and make NPCs walk away/go away/disappear/be worth nothing when a quest is completed.

Give your ridiculous hyperbole a rest already.

 

[Zansatsu]

 

 

Like I said I played through it two times and didnt have any problem finishing it without grinding once. You dont need max stats to finish the game, theirs no reason to grind exept making the game even easier than it is.

That's nice.

 

But that has nothing to do with your claim or what we were discussing. You don't have to grind in any of the IE games, yet that hasn't stopped your side from citing IE-game-grinding at every turn on this thread.

 

It shows that grinding is optional, not a essential part of the game. I never grinded in any IE game ever, its not necessary.

 

My mouth is agape!! A large portion of all the complaining has been about GRINDING and how you had to do it to beat the game! Now we learn it was never an issue just something people did because they feel like it?!!!! Isn't that what I and others have been saying all along and yet we were told we were crazy people?!

[Elerond]

Question is more should game reward player for grinding not is it necessary to grind to win the game. 

[IndiraLightfoot]

Question is more should game reward player for grinding not is it necessary to grind to win the game. 

Nope. Grinding has become a moot issue after those interesting posts above. The remaining one is this: Should the game reward the player for combat?

Edited September 2, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[Amentep]

 

Question is more should game reward player for grinding not is it necessary to grind to win the game.

Nope. Grinding has become a moot issue after those interesting posts above. The remaining one is this: Should the game reward the player for combat?

 

Wouldn't it be important to define what would be a valid "reward" for combat here as well?

 

Because a reward could be in form of loot, it could be in the form of XP, it could be in the form of satisfaction over you're prowess with the combat system, but not all of those will be seen as rewarding by every group.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Amentep: Indeed, and that's why archangel979 started this thread recently:

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/68164-a-different-view-on-the-whole-xp-controversy/

A few suggestions have already come up. Obviously, there are plenty more, but buried in among the agitated debates in numerous xp threads.

Edited September 2, 2014 by IndiraLightfoot

[redneckdevil]

i wanna qoute soemthing i found on the steam message boards about kill xp and dnd

 

 

While it may have changed since I used to play D&D, "kills" did not give XP.

What you had was an encounter rating, which was made up of a modified combination of the challenge rating of the critters, and traps (mundane and magical) in said encounter. The XP payout for a given campaign is based upon the encounter ratings the group came into contact with and overcame.

Now, what this actually means if you had a competent GM was that you got your XP for overcoming the challenges placed before you, not slaughtering everything. Sneak through the encounter with the kobold's without killing a single one on your way to accomplishing your goal? Your insanely charismatic party leader talked his way past them? Your warrior charged in screaming like a madman and hacked them all to bits? All of the above is a succesful navigation of the encounter.

TL;DR You were never supposed to be paid XP for killing something, you were supposed to be paid XP for completing the campaign, the XP value of which was determined by the encounter ratings of the encounters inside the campaign.

Paying out XP for quests and not kills is actually the more faithful representation of "D&D Board Game".

 

i for the life of me cant figure out how to link it from my steam without opening it again but its "no killing for xp" 

[Monte Carlo]

Yep, Sawyer could easily have initiated an encounter-level system where you got no XP for killing low-level trash mobs, encouraging you not to waste your time on them via sneaking or dialogue (etc).

 

But he didn't.