Sensuki Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 LOL didn't even know that, gonna try that for my next video. The NWN2 spell icons are confusing.
Ink Blot Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 LOL didn't even know that, gonna try that for my next video. The NWN2 spell icons are confusing. Yeah, I find a lot of my pause time is taken up reading the spell and talent descriptions so I can figure out what I can use in a given situation. The use of the old icons is very confusing at times. 1
Fiebras Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 I always leave the modals on at all times as soon as I start a new game, theres no reason not to. I think combat would be less of a "cluster****" if we could clearly understand what each unit was doing. Just this patch we got permanent visual effects for modals that are on at the time which look cool. Though I suspect a small UI change and tickable combat log notifications may help with it. I want to make a thread about it later.
Sensuki Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 You can't activate a Chanter Chant until combat though, and it doesn't auto activate, which is annoying.
Fiebras Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) I think thats because you have several chants to choose from. Granted just selecting which chant to start combat with might be enough but I dont know how balanced it would be to switch chants on the fly since that would make it really easy to stack multiple chant effects by chant-canceling. Sort of like animation canceling in action games. I think having to choose your chant as your opening move in combat is fine to be honest . Its kinda like the Priest's Indiction or the Rogue's Crippling Strike in that you always initiate combat with them. Edited September 5, 2014 by Fiebras
GreyFox Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Are the maps really that cramped? I keep reading that different people are getting clustered up into a corner and such. Is the map space too small on some of the maps or does the character models(size) have more to do with it?
Sensuki Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Yeah characters and creatures are larger than the Infinity Engine games, and the maps are smaller (in total scale, not actual resolution) than the Infinity Engine games. They're all in 16:9 too so they're not very tall maps.
IndiraLightfoot Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 All that I can say for certain is that BG1 gave us maps from the very beginning that are almost larger than the entire beta maps taken together, scale-wise. And the encounter density was like three NPCs, one cutscene, five animals, in the big foresty map east of Candlekeep. I know, some people don't like that "emptiness" and scarcity, but I really do, still. 6 *** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***
Sensuki Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Same. I think I'm going to request they do 1920x1280 per screen in PE:2, which would make the maps 4:3 again. 2
IndiraLightfoot Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Those rather "empty" expanses - they are still full of brilliant atmosphere and ambience - regulated the pacing, like in good music, varied the tempo, so when you got to a place like Durlag's Tower or Bodhi's abode, you would really feel the difference, and then the intensity got "fuller" somehow. 1 *** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***
GreyFox Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) All that I can say for certain is that BG1 gave us maps from the very beginning that are almost larger than the entire beta maps taken together, scale-wise. And the encounter density was like three NPCs, one cutscene, five animals, in the big foresty map east of Candlekeep. I know, some people don't like that "emptiness" and scarcity, but I really do, still. I agree with you on this and it looks like it is going to feel very cramped and rushy when exploring in PE. I don't mind having some empty space and you could argue that in some cases that extra space helps with combat/tactical positioning. Seems to me that their idea that this game would be *howeverbig* compared to BG1/2 is going to be smaller than they said since they were going from the map count. In reality it seems this game will be much shorter since the maps are actually smaller(I understand not smaller in resolution). Edited September 5, 2014 by GreyFox 2
Shadenuat Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) Maps could be a little bigger but I like the density. I'd like to see maps that you have to travel through to get from one hub to another, like roads between cities in BG1. And some random encounters. That would be a nice change of pace from here-be-wolves-and-here-be-beetles encounter-sliced maps. Edited September 5, 2014 by Shadenuat 2
IndiraLightfoot Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Seems to me that their idea that this game would be *howeverbig* compared to BG1/2 is going to be smaller than they said since they were going from the map count. In reality it seems this game will be much shorter since the maps are actually smaller(I understand not smaller in resolution). This is a huge fear of mine as well. In reality, we're getting this "Sorry, honey, I shrunk the CRPG"-universe, where areas are like dioramas in some museum, or perhaps like a doll house museum. 5 *** "The words of someone who feels ever more the ent among saplings when playing CRPGs" ***
Fiebras Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 I rather like the smaller and denser maps personally. I think it allows for more detail and focus. And rven in these "smsll" maps there are times of pause like when crossing the river. Btw it would be nice if harvestable plants were highlighted like inventory containers. I didnt realize the sheer amount of ingredients that were right there until i decided to pixel hunt through every mess of plants. Granted Its nice that its kinda realistic that once you know how certain ingredient looks like you are gonna pick up on it when looking but many are hidden within the un-interactable plants. Which is also rather realistic too but.....yeah. 1
Cantousent Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 I've had similar thoughts about the plants as you, Fiebras, but I don't think they need to be highlighted so much as the player should know right off the bat to keep an eye out for prominent looking bushes and other things that are harvestable. That way the player is rewarded for keeping an eye on the scenery, which really encourages folks to enjoy the beautiful artwork also. :Cant's sight seeing icon: Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends!
Sensuki Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 It's probably just not implemented yet. Everything lootable should highlight like containers. Including loot on the ground.
Fiebras Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) Agree with you Cantousent though some kinda blend into other plants and such as it is now or arent prominent enough. The River Reed and (something)'s Bell comes to mind. The Cave Coral, the ones on the trees in Stormall, and the golden ones around town are well made though, even if that last one looks a bit dull in color as oposed to golden. Edited September 5, 2014 by Fiebras
Ink Blot Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) LOL - Midget pr0n! Nice one, Sensuki. *edit* Re the Might score: Dwarf get +2 Might, which means you can set it to 20. If you choose the Living Lands culture background, that gives you a further +1 for the 21 total. Edited September 5, 2014 by Ink Blot
sb5 Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Your videos show that most of the time you will have to rest after one or two battles... I think the health damage should be a lot lower for normal hits but be either increased or at the current rate for crits. 1
Sensuki Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 That's one of the aims of the videos, to demonstrate that the adventuring day is too short. 2
morhilane Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 Your videos show that most of the time you will have to rest after one or two battles... I think the health damage should be a lot lower for normal hits but be either increased or at the current rate for crits. For me, this really depends on the class I'm using (playing on normal, which I considered the median of game balance). Druid, Chanter, Barbarian and Cipher have no problem bringing the party through 4-5 encounters at which point all my per rest abilities are exhausted (health is usually not that bad). I consider 4-5 encounters to be a nice "adventuring day". Paladin, Monk and Ranger usually "fall" at Medreth and wake up with half their health missing (that's always my first encounter). Either, I can't play them or they need a "boost". I play the Barbarian, Chanter and Druid in melee might I add, so it doesn't seem to really be a "melee" problem. Maybe I'm more cautious when I'm playing those... Azarhal, Chanter and Keeper of Truth of the Obsidian Order of Eternity.
Cantousent Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 I decided that, since this isn't really *playing* the game so much as testing it, I would simply kill both sides. Medreth is a far tougher fight and I don't even think he and his mooks have better stuff. I don't know, the battles seem too long and the aoe thing kind of gets a little on my nerves, but I think I'm getting more used to the system and the battles are becoming more entertaining. At least I'm using up my spell reserves. The one thing I will say about Medreth is that I didn't start out the battle tactically positioned this time, whereas Nyfre and her band are in an enclosed space with a doorway to block egress. So it's a little easier tactically to spam aoe spells without having overlap either on beneficial or harmful effects. I'm going to rest up and head out to administer beetle beat down. Fionavar's Holliday Wishes to all members of our online community: Happy Holidays Join the revelry at the Obsidian Plays channel:Obsidian Plays Remembering tarna, Phosphor, Metadigital, and Visceris. Drink mead heartily in the halls of Valhalla, my friends!
Ink Blot Posted September 5, 2014 Posted September 5, 2014 I decided that, since this isn't really *playing* the game so much as testing it, I would simply kill both sides. Medreth is a far tougher fight and I don't even think he and his mooks have better stuff. I don't know, the battles seem too long and the aoe thing kind of gets a little on my nerves, but I think I'm getting more used to the system and the battles are becoming more entertaining. At least I'm using up my spell reserves. The one thing I will say about Medreth is that I didn't start out the battle tactically positioned this time, whereas Nyfre and her band are in an enclosed space with a doorway to block egress. So it's a little easier tactically to spam aoe spells without having overlap either on beneficial or harmful effects. I'm going to rest up and head out to administer beetle beat down. On the surface, that's a good thing though. You shouldn't be able to have your party tactically arrayed before every battle. But, IMO, the issue arises that there just aren't enough offensive AoE spells (at least not in the Beta) that don't also include friendly fire. You'll find it a lot different (better?) when you hit the beetles and spiders, I think.
Recommended Posts