A different view on the whole XP controversy

[DigitalCrack]

Drastic solution: Remove all quest xp. Furnish all the areas with an invisible mesh of triggers. Whenever you pass into a new one, you get a bit of xp. This would be the end, once for all, for rewarding accomplishments and performed tasks. Instead we get a system that rewards capping the individual pieces of the game mosaic. The transition to theme park ride would be complete.

Well that is what xp is essentially in any game whether quest or kill. Especially when you think of kill xp, random xp triggers waiting for you to come trigger them. That is what we all want really ;-) we just don't know we want it.

[Zansatsu]

To Stay on Topic for the OP here are my thoughts ways to Improve the system.

 

1. The Cyclopidia/Beast Journal: As you discover new monsters, you as the adventure put it upon yourself if you choice, to learn all you can about this new creature. Once you have completely filled your journal with that creatures information you could be rewarded with A: a bonus to attack on such a creature B: a bonus to attributes or some new spell or ability C: Flat xp reward.

 

2.  Rare Spawns/Moving rare drops:  I realize this is not IE gamish but hey this is just a spiritual Successor so it doesn't have to be exactly the same right?  Putting Rare strong and Challenging creatures out into the wilderness randomly and having them move every time you start a new character would do a lot for exploration IMO. If you don't want to give XP since half the crowd is fine with simple loot rewards then have these monsters or people/bandits drop rare and powerful items.

 

3.  Implement a system similar to ESO/skyshards or Swtor/datacrons: Lets call them Soul gems. These gems contain something that strengthens your souls connection to this worlds mythology.  These Soul gems could provide minor stat upgrades to all variety of combat/non-combat attributes and be completely non mandatory.  You could receive bonuses to conversations, attributes, spell power, accuracy, lockpicking, so on and so on. Things that would be beneficial to every character no matter what type of person you built. Am i a scholar, well earning a bonus to lock picking is still a plus!

 

Note my suggestions could give or not give out xp for completing them. Plus they are only suggestions

Edited September 2, 2014 by Zansatsu

[Cantousent]

I'm definitely not part of the kill XP crowd.  I want the devs to decide the exact manner in which XP is awarded, but that doesn't mean it has to come from quests only.  I was actually thinking of starting a separate thread myself because of a discussion I was having with oak (I can't remember his full screenname).  He and I were having a friendly argument about quest v results XP.  ...But even quest XP is prejudicial.  Who decides what should be a quest?  Who decides what is an 'evil' quest as opposed to a 'good' quest.  ...And there *will* be some moral distinctions (or something amounting to moral no matter what folks call it) in the design, and why would we want something so sterile and removed from humanity that it doesn't reflect at least some of the character of the design team?

 

Now, to the point about others types of XP.  I don't want completely random kill XP, but I do think that significant encounters should get XP.  Not all encounters should require killing to overcome them and perhaps some should not even have killing as an option to overcome them.  That's a design thing, but encounters with set creatures who always inhabit the same area are not 'random' in the sense that most people mean.  The player may not know the lions are there, but he will still encounter the lions if he visits the area in which they reside.  Why would it be bad or reward 'subversive' gameplay to give XP for overcoming the encounter, especially if the party isn't forced to kill the lions in order to get a favorable outcome?  ...And tying XP to various methods for overcoming the encounter without giving a quest to do so beforehand does not seem difficult on its face.  It is essentially quest only XP that just doesn't have a lot of dialogue and a previous entry in the quest log.

 

Likewise, I don't think folks should get XP for simply walking to places on the gameworld map, but I do think folks should get an XP reward for truly remarkable discoveries, especially if it entails some difficulty and persistence on the part of the gamer.  How is that different than rewarding completenik questaholics who complete every obscure quest they can find?

 

So, while I'm not pro kill XP crowd, I am nevertheless a proponent of broadening out the XP system beyond where it currently is.  Especially if it preserves the whole idea behind quest only XP in the first place, namely:  no reward for extreme metagaming and increased balance.

[remiel005]

Is there enough of a conflict that they can just create an option when creating a new game where you get kill xp and maybe 10% of the normal quest xp?  I'm highly neutral on the topic - no combat xp feeling unrewarding based on the current display of creature drops in beta being my biggest argument for.  Ultimately when everyone is sitting a the final quest within a few levels of each other(if not capped) and very similar items it really doesn't matter to me how I got there.  Not sure how practical a combat xp option would be sitting next to the trial by iron, but I'm looking forward to this debate being put to rest with the least amount of unhappy people around when it comes time to back a second game. 

[Grand_Commander13]

I've suggested it before. It sounds like a joke, but I mean it: give decent kill XP for enemies, but take it out of future quest XP rewards. It's just so much easier to do that than go back and calculate how much XP each area is worth in each difficulty level, and necessarily dropping XP awards in higher difficulties so the player doesn't reach a higher level due to all of the extra enemies.

 

Really though, I don't understand why the kill XP crowd feels the game needs kill XP. I'll admit that it makes the game more compelling, but it doesn't make it more fun. It's like the difference between Saints Row 3 and Bully: Saints Row 3 has this constant tick of money every fifteen minutes and the territorial control aspect egging you on to complete it to see that glorious 100%. I'm playing more of it per day than I did of Bully, where I only did missions because they were fun and not because I needed the money, but once I finish it I won't be replaying it again in a hurry: I am compelled, but not entertained. It's the same principle you see in an MMORPG. Saints Row 3 is, to its credit, at least short enough that I'll finish it before the boredom sets in, unlike the indefinite-length MMO.

 

Sure, kill XP might encourage you to play more hours of Pillars of Eternity per day, but unless you're in the target audience for MMORPGs (and I'm going to assume that most here are not) it's not going to have any impact on how much you enjoy the game. You'll replay the game the same amount of times you otherwise would, because the mechanics and the story are what cause you to replay a game.

 

Unless you're assuming that Pillars of Eternity is going to be a mediocre offering that needs to use psychological techniques to make finishing it even once bearable. If that's the case, I'm going to be super-disappointed no matter what, so let's all hope that the kill XP debate is moot.

Edited September 2, 2014 by Grand_Commander13

[Panteleimon]

 

You really think that the majority of "pro-kill-xp" players is interested in something like that? Just read through those threads. You quickly find out that its not a discussion about logic and game mechanics its about personal preference, or with other words they just want it. Theirs no logical argument for it, just go on and read through it. All their so called negative side effects that will accour when you remove kill-xp cant be proven because their is zero way to prove it. Its a very "religious" debate.

 

 

That is exactly what combat xp proponents want, we even proposed a compromise numerous amount of times as a solution. But yeah it's hard to find those posts when they are drowning in the sh1t that are your posts. It's only the quest xp guys that are all or nothing on this issue.

 

 

There can't be compromise when that compromise is diametrically opposed to one or both sides. In this case, "compromise" is victory in disguise for the combat XP crowd, and pretending otherwise is incredibly disingenuous. There would be no real concession from the combat XP group, other than, what, having weakling enemy groups not give XP? Man oh man! How generous!

 

Calling for "compromise" doesn't automatically give you the moral high ground in a debate, and the artificiality of that claim in this case is plain. Pulling the dictionary out is the poor man's last resort, but I think a lot of people are forgetting that 'compromise' doesn't have just the one definition:

 

"To reduce the quality, value, or degree of something, such as one's ideals."

 

So far it doesn't look like this view of the XP debate is any different, but given it has nowhere to go that's no surprise.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Panteleimon

[Zansatsu]

 

 

You really think that the majority of "pro-kill-xp" players is interested in something like that? Just read through those threads. You quickly find out that its not a discussion about logic and game mechanics its about personal preference, or with other words they just want it. Theirs no logical argument for it, just go on and read through it. All their so called negative side effects that will accour when you remove kill-xp cant be proven because their is zero way to prove it. Its a very "religious" debate.

 

 

That is exactly what combat xp proponents want, we even proposed a compromise numerous amount of times as a solution. But yeah it's hard to find those posts when they are drowning in the sh1t that are your posts. It's only the quest xp guys that are all or nothing on this issue.

 

 

There can't be compromise when that compromise is diametrically opposed to one or both sides. In this case, "compromise" is victory in disguise for the combat XP crowd, and pretending otherwise is incredibly disingenuous. There would be no real concession from the combat XP group, other than, what, having weakling enemy groups not give XP? Man oh man! How generous!

 

Calling for "compromise" doesn't automatically give you the moral high ground in a debate, and the artificiality of that claim in this case is plain. Pulling the dictionary out is the poor man's last resort, but I think a lot of people are forgetting that 'compromise' doesn't have just the one definition:

 

"To reduce the quality, value, or degree of something, such as one's ideals."

 

So far it doesn't look like this view of the XP debate is any different, but given it has nowhere to go that's no surprise.

 

I would like to direct you to my post a few places up. I'm a Pro Combat XP player who suggested 3 approaches none of which are combat XP required. So why don't you take your garbage somewhere else.

[Seari]

3.  Implement a system similar to ESO/skyshards or Swtor/datacrons: Lets call them Soul gems. These gems contain something that strengthens your souls connection to this worlds mythology.  These Soul gems could provide minor stat upgrades to all variety of combat/non-combat attributes and be completely non mandatory.  You could receive bonuses to conversations, attributes, spell power, accuracy, lockpicking, so on and so on. Things that would be beneficial to every character no matter what type of person you built. Am i a scholar, well earning a bonus to lock picking is still a plus!

You should've just said like the attribute tomes from BG, instead of listing filthy MMOs

 

I support this idea, finding tomes was a lot of fun.

[Zansatsu]

 

3.  Implement a system similar to ESO/skyshards or Swtor/datacrons: Lets call them Soul gems. These gems contain something that strengthens your souls connection to this worlds mythology.  These Soul gems could provide minor stat upgrades to all variety of combat/non-combat attributes and be completely non mandatory.  You could receive bonuses to conversations, attributes, spell power, accuracy, lockpicking, so on and so on. Things that would be beneficial to every character no matter what type of person you built. Am i a scholar, well earning a bonus to lock picking is still a plus!

You should've just said like the attribute tomes from BG, instead of listing filthy MMOs

 

I support this idea, finding tomes was a lot of fun.

 

Thanks! If you have any Ideas please add them to the discussion.

[Panteleimon]

 

I would like to direct you to my post a few places up. I'm a Pro Combat XP player who suggested 3 approaches none of which are combat XP required. So why don't you take your garbage somewhere else.

 

 

 

 

None of your suggestions have ANYTHING to do with combat XP.  They're modifications you think people who are looking for combat XP would be interested in. That's super, but has nothing to do with my post, unless my specifically mentioning COMBAT XP threw you off. As far as I'm concerned, your first two suggestions are fine(I think the only reward for filling out a bestiary entry should either be an advantage against those monsters or XP, though) and the third has no place in the game. But that's just my opinion. They're thoughtful suggestions, which is always good.

 

So why don't you give your parents a call and ask them to teach you some manners?

Edited September 3, 2014 by Panteleimon

[Zansatsu]

I understood your post perfectly, you didn't understand the OP. And perhaps you can't read your own posts but that was one Patronizing piece of ...

[Cantousent]

Yeah, Zan, I think you're one of the people who tries to break out of these confining roles which folks want to assign to us.  The fact is, the person who flames you regarding combat XP today might be the person backing you up on romances (one way or the other) tomorrow.  I do think sometimes sides can be diametrically opposed, but I also firmly believe that sometimes people trying to think outside of the entrenched positions can help break through from time to time.

[Zansatsu]

Yeah, Zan, I think you're one of the people who tries to break out of these confining roles which folks want to assign to us.  The fact is, the person who flames you regarding combat XP today might be the person backing you up on romances (one way or the other) tomorrow.  I do think sometimes sides can be diametrically opposed, but I also firmly believe that sometimes people trying to think outside of the entrenched positions can help break through from time to time.

 

 

You're absolutely right, I will work on my patience.  We may agree on many other things.

Edited September 3, 2014 by Zansatsu

[Immortalis]

Yeah, Zan, I think you're one of the people who tries to break out of these confining roles which folks want to assign to us.  The fact is, the person who flames you regarding combat XP today might be the person backing you up on romances (one way or the other) tomorrow.  I do think sometimes sides can be diametrically opposed, but I also firmly believe that sometimes people trying to think outside of the entrenched positions can help break through from time to time.

 

I would agree with that.. although I do agree with some of the nay sayers of combat xp on other topics.. When I see how disrespectful and rude they get I almost feel dirty agreeing with them on anything..

[Helm]

 

Yeah, Zan, I think you're one of the people who tries to break out of these confining roles which folks want to assign to us.  The fact is, the person who flames you regarding combat XP today might be the person backing you up on romances (one way or the other) tomorrow.  I do think sometimes sides can be diametrically opposed, but I also firmly believe that sometimes people trying to think outside of the entrenched positions can help break through from time to time.

 

I would agree with that.. although I do agree with some of the nay sayers of combat xp on other topics.. When I see how disrespectful and rude they get I almost feel dirty agreeing with them on anything..

It also doesn't help that Obsidian doesn't make any statements about this controversy. They have chosen to simply ignore us, which adds additonal heat to these discussions.

[illathid]

I would agree with that.. although I do agree with some of the nay sayers of combat xp on other topics.. When I see how disrespectful and rude they get I almost feel dirty agreeing with them on anything..

 

 

 

As a neutral on the whole XP issue, I don't think either side can claim to have the moral high ground.

[Volourn]

"It also doesn't help that Obsidian doesn't make any statements about this controversy. They have chosen to simply ignore us, which adds additonal heat to these discussions."

 

But, they have spoken. Those whoa re pro combat xp are stupid. they got your money and so now they don't care what you think. The decision has been made.

[Seari]

HAhaha, Volourn telling it like it is.

[Gromnir]

"It also doesn't help that Obsidian doesn't make any statements about this controversy. They have chosen to simply ignore us, which adds additonal heat to these discussions."

 

But, they have spoken. Those whoa re pro combat xp are stupid. they got your money and so now they don't care what you think. The decision has been made.

 

the obsidian pov on quest xp is not unclear or hidden. we got numerous links to obsidian clarifications on the matter. what would another such posting serve? is a handful o' folks, without any QA or testing feedback, predicting doomsday scenarios for PoE combat... there is folks who is arguing for kill xp 'cause that were how all the ie games did it, gosh darn it. short of giving kill xp folks a complete new xp mechanic, what could the obsidians say that would satisfy the kill xp proponents? 

 

let the kill xp proponents stew. is ultimately a very minor issue. assuming it ain't affecting actual gameplay o' QA folks, what motivation does the obsidians have to change from a mechanic which they believe promotes essential goals o' balance, diversity o' gameplay style and simplicity? 'cause a small number o' contrarians believe that quest xp would discourage combat gameplay? is quieting the codexians and other p00p hurling monkeys in these threads enough reason to dismantle a mechanic they believe is working in favor o' one they rejected? 

 

...

 

again, the obsidian pov on this matter is Not a secret. if we could craft a hypothetical response that would not only satisfy the kill proponents but were also compatible with previous offered obsidian promises and opinions regarding xp mechanics, we would gladly offer such a solution. does anybody have an example o' such a response that would actual appease those furious with (un)righteous indignation? we ain't seen one? 

 

as tough as it is to believe, this issue will burn itself out in time. is so many more significant and serious concerns. there will be bigger obsidian mistakes and gaffs for the rage monkeys to seize 'pon. will be bugs and wacky design choices and  seeming unfulfilled promises that will result in dozens o' little threads such as these. 

 

this thread should actual be looked at positive by the obsidians. if this nonsense is the genuine biggest and most populous issue folks have with PoE, the obsidians should be overwhelmed with relief.

 

our advice: let it burn. 

 

HA! Good Fun! 

 

edit: font size issues... again

Edited September 5, 2014 by Gromnir

[Volourn]

"the obsidian pov on quest xp is not unclear or hidden. we got numerous links to obsidian clarifications on the matter."
 

And, they told the 'complainers' not to judge things until they tried the game out either. Well, we tried the game (beta) and now they are getting comments aka feedback.

 

 

"this thread should actual be looked at positive by the obsidians. if this nonsense is the genuine biggest and most populous issue folks have with PoE, the obsidians should be overwhelmed with relief. "

 

Kiddin' right? There's plenty of other issues. Wayyyyyy bigger issues than xp. The only reasons why xp threads get so alrge is that BOTH side spam each other.

 

Of course, you still haven't explained in your Obsidian apologist way why PE's xp system is garbage but SRR's xp system is pretty darn good. Weird that.

[Seari]

@Gromnir I get brain hemorrhage from reading your posts.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

It also doesn't help that Obsidian doesn't make any statements about this controversy. They have chosen to simply ignore us, which adds additonal heat to these discussions.

 

Obsidian did listen and the majority of backers as per the polls wanted Quest Based xp only. Polls at the time confirmed this. There were of course others who proposed other systems. While I was one in the minority that wanted an IE experience with combat xp, the majority had agreed with Obsidian's decision. And Obsidian was happy.

 

My play style has always been if combat is tedious, largely unrewarding and avoidable, I'll avoid it. Just like being waylaid by Kobolds in BG1. I always ran to the side of the screen and got out of there because I found the combat tedious, largely unrewarding and avoidable. You could get xp rewards and loot, but I never bothered. And I saw this with PoE. If combat is tedious, largely unrewarding and avoidable, then I'll avoid it. Others might not see it my way and enjoy the combat that's all ready there with enemies like some of the avoidable trash mobs. We're all different. But this is how I see it for me.

 

Now we have some of those pro-quest xp people switching camps or coming up with different designs like objective based xp as well as quest based xp. Well, I note that the current system in the Beta isn't just quest based xp. There is some objective based xp in it as well. Like the objective to find the Ogre cave and entering that cave rewards you with xp. Just the mere action of entering a cave is an xp reward. And you can simply leave the cave and do something else. You're actually rewarded xp along your quest in small parts and not at the end of the quest. The same with the Cat and Mouse quest with the Orlan in the inn and Medreth's gang. You are rewarded with xp with letting the Orlan go and you don't have to go back to Medreth for the additional xp. Going halfway through completing objectives in a quest and not completing the entire quest does reward you with xp in this game which is the total opposite of what Obsidian promised with its Quest based xp system with rewarding at the end of the quest.

 

And this is how I'll play PoE. I'll be avoiding trash mobs, taking the most optimal and easy routes for similar loot rewards and exactly the same xp reward, weighing up which is better with the pacifist or combat route, risks vs rewards, and largely abusing the xp system. Because I won't want to spend time going the tedious route when there's an easier alternative and the rewards are similar or the same. The only exception to the rule is if the reward (such as an uber item) is more than the easier route without that item and I really want that item. Again, risk vs reward. This IS roleplaying because my characters will be weighing up all these options.

 

The system is what it is in PoE. Objective and Quest based xp. We'll just have to see how much of a success the game is with this system. For me, it's not the system I like, but then I'm in the minority with liking how the IE games handled it.

Edited September 5, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Gromnir]

@Gromnir I get brain hemorrhage from reading your posts.

if that were true, we would be startled, but not apologetic.  am understanding that menopause is actual a common cause of cerebral hemorrhaging. perhaps you is simple confusing cause and effect.

 

do you really wanna make this a Gromnir thread?

 

on topic: we don't envision a developer response that would appease kill proponents and allow obsidian to maintain other promises.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Seari]

our advice: let it burn.

 

How many Gromnir personalities live in your head anyways?

[Fiebras]

You guys are worse than cats and dogs. And thats putting it mildly.