A different view on the whole XP controversy

[kinexsci]

Hi there,

 

I find myself reading blogs more than actually responding, but I couldn't help but think about this. I would say that I'm a proponent for kill xp eith respect to the challenge of the combat, but I also believe pacifists should get equal xp if they choose to finish quests in an alternative manner.

 

I believe a simple solution to help both parties is to tag combat encounters to quest lines. By doing this, combat-oriented players can receive xp following each successful combat encounter. Experience earned from each combat encounter would then be subtracted from the total xp granted from the completion of the quest. This way, anyone that completes the quest without performing combat would gain an equal amount of xp. As well, once the quest line is complete, the mobs connected to the quests would no longer provide xp for going back and killing them, so there's no bonus incentive for completing quests one way or another. 

 

My two cents.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

am admitting that awarding xp for clearing the fog of war appeals to us personally 'bout as much as does a nice heaping tablespoon of vegemite.

 

*shudder*

 

option 1) mechanically, we can see adding this idea as a quest... a cartographer's quest. am not certain what the reward would be. perhaps the lone achievement in the game could be Cartographer Completionist (aka slow death.) clear each map would result in some objective xp, and final reveal of all fog of war would result in a final quest reward. get you a golden compass and some 1007? player could use dialogue options to hire sub-contractors to do some exploring... or even possibly to lie to the quest giver 'bout areas not actual explored.  "yes, that is genuine walrus tusk scrimshaw i traded for when i was in the arctic mapping the coast of ____________." could use stealth or combat to clear maps. could find ways to get all sorta abilities to be relevant and make the quest more interesting.

I personally love this idea.  Just a minor tweak to an excellent idea is that I don't think explorer xp need be doled out for each map.  Folks whose only desire is kill XP want immediate gratification of XP reward desires.  I know I'll get some guff from some kill XP proponents on that, but I believe it's the driving force.  I've even said it's a good argument of sorts because it makes combat more visceral for folks if they're getting immediate rewards, it's just not a good enough argument to win the day.

 

However, folks who explore would, in my opinion, be more amenable to story and loot rewards.  Not even big loot rewards.  Explorer people are like goody two shoes types who go way out of their way to be the good guy in the game.  Yeah, they like to see some gameplay reward lovin' thrown their way from time to time, but story rewards and a pat on the back (or a condescending pat on the head) will have more impact.  I speak as one of these pathetic goody two shoes player types.

 

Also, I think explorer rewards for side quests make a lot of sense for these groups.  Some quests might not be readily apparent, but finding out that the super tough battle you just fought wasn't some random monster you found running around but you chanced upon the super Lionspider of dooooom and overcame it without foreknowledge!  That needs a log entry because, where I agree with Gromnir is that just getting XP in your log doesn't make any sense at all.  Even if you didn't know it was a 'quest' before-hand (which it clearly was) anything significant enough to yield XP should be significant enough to yield questesque lovin' in your journal.

 

I don't want to mislead folks.  I hate kill XP.  I don't mind XP awarded for killing, but I am completely against the mechanic that yields XP for wandering around killing things.  I think XP rewards should be significant and noteworthy events in the characters' lives.  I think Seari has a point about the balance issue, especially since it's one of the big reasons the designers cite for quest XP.  ...But they also care about the story and their artistic vision and anything *anything* that rewards some act will encourage the mass of players to engage in it.  From my perspective, they want you to be able to kill your way through the game as a choice, and it's less of a choice if it's one of your primary rewards.  That is to say, if you can sneak, talk, or fight your way past encounters, and you get a better reward for fighting past it, whatever your inclination, the reward will always be poking around somewhere in your considerations.  If you get the exact same reward for any of the three (or four or five or however many ways of getting past the encounter) then you chose fighting because, damn it, that's. how. you. roll!  External rewards for one thing or another cheapen player choice.

 

M&M X had stuff like this in it, and it's pretty fun for us pixelhunters. Keep the good ideas flowing, folks!

[Zansatsu]

 

 

actually, the portion o' the beta we have were specifically used because it is insular and limited. the beta were chosen so it would not have far-reaching or extensive impact on the rest o' the game as a whole.  therefore, it should come as no surprise that the beta quests necessarily must be o' a similar insular and discrete nature if they is to be successfully offering rewards. the level o' complexity and depth for the beta were specifically chosen to be shallow. we thought that point were made clear. guess not.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

No argument there. I'm sure the main quest line will be very interesting. But they don't have any non spoiler side quests they could have showcased that actually had an interesting quest mechanic or story line? This was the most basic of basics.  This demo I'm assuming was meant to wet our appetite for what was to come. Maybe not.  All it showed me was same old same old. 

 

odd. we never looked at the beta as a appetite wetting demo. 

 

 am thinking we were mislead a bit on that point as game is functional at feature lock and developers is gonna need work very hard simply to make 2014 release. nevertheless, the beta were never advertised as a appetite wetting demo-- quite the contrary. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Yeah beta's are to test the system and ask for feedback. Well this is my feedback, the side quests are boring hope that isn't all you got. And if they aren't "showing it off" then why are they traveling the world going to Game Shows and demoing it to people? Seems like a wasted opportunity in a long line of things they might have done better. I'm here posting my ideas to better the game with quest Ideas since all my other ideas are off limits.

[Captain Shrek]

I personally feel this issue is mostly overrated. But that could be just me. I prefer a good story as a reward for doing quests. For combat, I do not need rewards if it is interesting in and itself. Obviously very subjective opinion.

 

As I see it, RTwP combat with parties in most games tends to be tiresome for single player games. The two exceptions being the Drakensang River of Time game and Trash-eliminated gameplay from Dragon Age Origin. NWN and NWN2 modules where you control only one character also work for me. So I do not see how giving XP would really help me here as the combat itself seems quite very flawed what with bad AI and terrible cooldown like mechanics combined with RtwP cluster**** that it is. 

[Ondb]

I personally feel this issue is mostly overrated. But that could be just me. I prefer a good story as a reward for doing quests. For combat, I do not need rewards if it is interesting in and itself. Obviously very subjective opinion.

 

As I see it, RTwP combat with parties in most games tends to be tiresome for single player games. The two exceptions being the Drakensang River of Time game and Trash-eliminated gameplay from Dragon Age Origin. NWN and NWN2 modules where you control only one character also work for me. So I do not see how giving XP would really help me here as the combat itself seems quite very flawed what with bad AI and terrible cooldown like mechanics combined with RtwP cluster**** that it is. 

 

Its not logical thing.

Humans prefer small rewards happening frequently over large rewards happening later. This is the reason why Diablo3 team implemented paragon system. Its not logical, but after they implemented it people start playing game again.

 

When combat is not trivial, humans need rewards. We have 2 kind of rewards traditionally (XP and items). Giving items after every combat is obviously problematic.

Removing combat XP is dangerous thing to do. If the quest XP will happen after long time, people could stop playing the game.

[illathid]

...people could stop playing the game.

 

 

The obvious response to this "Ok." Obsidian isn't getting more money from people logging more hours in a game, why does it matter if people stop playing the game? This  is assuming the narrative content is strong enough for people to enjoy finishing the game?

[Razsius]

 

...people could stop playing the game.

 

 

The obvious response to this "Ok." Obsidian isn't getting more money from people logging more hours in a game, why does it matter if people stop playing the game? This  is assuming the narrative content is strong enough for people to enjoy finishing the game?

 

 

Because that's exactly what the Baldur's Gate series didn't do?  I, for one, have replayed the series many a time.  Did it really help Bioware's pocketbook at all?  No it did not, but I do remember them as the great company that delivered that experience to me and it makes me more inclined to buy their games.

[Grand_Commander13]

Its not logical thing.

Humans prefer small rewards happening frequently over large rewards happening later. This is the reason why Diablo3 team implemented paragon system. Its not logical, but after they implemented it people start playing game again.

 

When combat is not trivial, humans need rewards. We have 2 kind of rewards traditionally (XP and items). Giving items after every combat is obviously problematic.

 

Removing combat XP is dangerous thing to do. If the quest XP will happen after long time, people could stop playing the game.

 

But that's Diablo 3. It's kind of like an MMO, in that you're expected to enjoy grinding through battle after battle so your character will get stronger and get better gear to fight stronger enemies. This is Pillars of Eternity, where the story and companions are the big draw. Just because it retains the concepts of loot and level doesn't mean they're anywhere near as central to the player's enjoyment of the game.

[Volourn]

"where the story and companions are the big draw"

 

Are they? And, to who? Who are you speaking on behalf of?

 

\Seriously, it's best to post what you want and what you think not some mythical blob.

 

 People look for different things from RPGs.

\

Me? I'm greedy. I want the best of EVERYTHING.