Discussion: the PoE beta xp system

[Hellraiser789]

Personally, I think TRUE Objective XP trumps Combat XP by a million miles. But thats not what PoEt has. It has QUEST XP, which is great, but doesnt seem to be quite enough IMO. Also, I tend to agree, opening a door with a key should grant the same XP (if any) as lockpicking it (personally I dont think it should get ANY XP). Traps, same thing. The point of lockpicking is to be a BONUS, not an XP generator. I mean in Dragon Age, I went with the Rogue a lot because I hate the idea of not being able to unlock a chest or hit a trap (plus the XP bonus was nice, even if it wasnt much)

 

 

But this is also an example of OBJECTIVE XP (If i understand it correctly, someone correct me if I am wrong). Objective XP grants equal xp for different options so you dont feel like you have to fight your way through a level over stealthing through it. Objective XP would give you XP for opening the lock with the key, unlocking it with your rogue, bashing it with your fighter, melting it with your mage, or grabbing the nearest goblin and using him as a battering ram just because you can.

 

More options are always better. Thing is, how things are currently being implemented may not solve some of those key problems people have. Right now, people who (usually) prefer combat are essentially being penalized for fighting unavoidable trash mobs simply because they dont have a stealth heavy character with them, and getting little reward for it. Does that mean fighting should always be the best and only solution? No, but essentially stealthing seems to be the best choice now as combat currently seems to sucks. To be fair, it is a beta and stuff, but thats all they have to go on, so its reasonable to be apprehensive.

 

Equality between options is best. Stealthing through enemies SHOULD be a viable option. But it shouldnt be the only one that makes sense. Although, heres the funny thing - its all about how people perceive things (at least IMO).

 

Situation A: I stealth through the enemies to get to Area A and receive 1000 xp for getting there

Situation B: I fight my way through 3 fights, each fight granting me 300 xp and then get 100 xp for getting to Area A.

Both situations grant 1000xp, making each feel viable, but if I dont FEEL like Im getting anything out of combat, then whats the point? Thats kill/encounter/whatever xp though, which is inherently evil, so what do I know? Also, Random loot would help too. If I know Im getting a beetle shell (worthless junk?) everytime I fight a bunch trash mob beetles, it feels like a chore. If I have the CHANCE to get find an awesome amulet that happened to be swallowed by the beetle when he hate that merchant fellow over there, then that gives me a reason to kill stuff. And why do I need a reason? Cuz combat sucks right now.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Now that's something I agree with. Quality, not quantity, Obsidian. I'll rather have a couple of complex and tactically advanced fights per map than a dozen of easy and forgettable ones.

 

So you want maps like BG1 where there's one or two encounters on a map? No trash mobs. And the rest of the map is void of anything. But it's pretty walking around just the same.

[Gfted1]

Yeah, those of us who wanted objective only XP are 'whining' because that's what the game already has.  We see tons of threads started by people 'whining' for Objective XP.  There has been a lot of whining, but I doubt that it's from the folks who are already getting what they want.  ...But at least some folks are manning up and making a direct argument for what they desire instead of making backdoor arguments that, in a comical twist, sometimes put them at odds with people who want the same thing.  The argument against the bestiary is that it's the equivalent of combat XP and so just give us combat XP?  lol  Oh, I like this one: we should get lockpicking XP because it's intuitive and natural and the only True Way™.  OH, and if they give lockpicking XP for the relatively small number of opportunities to use it, I can argue for kill XP that will dwarf lockpicking XP in the aggregate.

 

The fact is, in the beta itself, lockpicking XP sets up situations where one person will get XP entirely randomly not because of a good decision or because of forward thinking, but because I turned to the right first and found the key whereas you turned left and picked a lock.  I had the key and didn't even get the chance to pick a lock, and so it's only natural that one gets more XP for achieving the exact same result.  One didn't do more.  One didn't find more places.  One didn't come up with a clever solution.  One went right and one went left.

 

Not to mention, why should I get less XP for finding the key on someone's body? picking his pocket?  Convincing him to open the door?  Or simply putting my boot through it?

 

Well yes, that's the breaks. Every single situation in the game cant be balanced so every conceivable player action rewards the exact same thing. If my Rogue picks a lock/disarms a trap/opens a door I would agree that they naturally earn xp. I think they should go all the way with it and reward xp to whoever grappling hooks across the gorge, or whoever retrieves the dragon egg, or whatever similar circumstances in the game. But that's a lot of work and I wouldn't expect that. I think Obs is offering an olive branch with the beasitary xp and it seems like a reasonable solution, imo. It has diminishing returns so you cant farm it but it still provides the granular rewards many people like (me included).

[Gromnir]

 

 

Yes. And then, any quest you have to solve by killing, or any quest you can solve by killing AND you decide to solve by killing is kill XP under a different name. I fail to see the problem. Should we eliminate any killing from quests? And why?

Every crap trash mob cant be a quest because then you have created the situation that the non-kill XP crowd are whining about. Its degenerative gameplay, now Ill be FORCED to kill everything, me OCD!, immurshun, people will stealth past then go back and kill, etc...

 

 

 

I don't see what was fixed by doing this.. Just add Combat XP then adjust quests to counter weight things out so that passive quest rewards give higher bonuses to offset the killing of NPC's, then make the NPC's disappear or worth nothing..

 

or, you could simply leave things the way they is and you don't need have go through what even indira were admitting is a taxing process o' balancing. have people complete larger objectives or quests or tasks or whatever the hell you want to call it so it don't result in childish bawling, and then give out nice and balanced xp awards that do not discriminate for or against combat... or against any other method o' completion.

 

current method is elegant, balanced and extreme simple. add unnecessary complexity 'cause a handful o' kids need instant gratification from every bug killed or every lock opened is a silly-arsed approach.

 

nevertheless, we see that obsidian is trying to throw folks a bone. give folks something illusory and maybe they will be satisfied. we will observe that such a approach has worked in the past. am guessing it were worth a shot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Immortalis]

 

 

 

Yes. And then, any quest you have to solve by killing, or any quest you can solve by killing AND you decide to solve by killing is kill XP under a different name. I fail to see the problem. Should we eliminate any killing from quests? And why?

Every crap trash mob cant be a quest because then you have created the situation that the non-kill XP crowd are whining about. Its degenerative gameplay, now Ill be FORCED to kill everything, me OCD!, immurshun, people will stealth past then go back and kill, etc...

 

 

 

I don't see what was fixed by doing this.. Just add Combat XP then adjust quests to counter weight things out so that passive quest rewards give higher bonuses to offset the killing of NPC's, then make the NPC's disappear or worth nothing..

 

or, you could simply leave things the way they is and you don't need have go through what even indira were admitting is a taxing process o' balancing. h

 

 

Oh well if Indira admitted it then I guess it's all over.. Fact of the matter is.. I don't care how taxing it is. It would be much less taxing if they did this **** a year ago. Making good games is taxing regardless.. if making good games was easy, everyone would do it.

 

I'm a player and I don't care how hard or long it is for them to balance a game at the end of the day. I understand it will take time, that it's hard and that it might mean delays and future patches and a longer beta.. but at the end of the day, it's their job to do it.. and it's been done before.

 

This argument doesn't hold water for me grommy.

[Yonjuro]

... So you are saying you wont earn XP for things you don't do and places you don't go?

 

 No, I was giving an example of locks and traps that weren't necessary to complete a quest in the backer beta.

 

 I was responding to a post which was a response to an earlier post that lock opening XP provides an incentive to backtrack and open doors that you don't need to open (and to find/disarm all of the traps, even those that aren't in your way). The post in question indicated that the poster may have misunderstood what was being argued.

[Hellraiser789]

 

 

 

Yes. And then, any quest you have to solve by killing, or any quest you can solve by killing AND you decide to solve by killing is kill XP under a different name. I fail to see the problem. Should we eliminate any killing from quests? And why?

Every crap trash mob cant be a quest because then you have created the situation that the non-kill XP crowd are whining about. Its degenerative gameplay, now Ill be FORCED to kill everything, me OCD!, immurshun, people will stealth past then go back and kill, etc...

 

 

 

I don't see what was fixed by doing this.. Just add Combat XP then adjust quests to counter weight things out so that passive quest rewards give higher bonuses to offset the killing of NPC's, then make the NPC's disappear or worth nothing..

 

or, you could simply leave things the way they is and you don't need have go through what even indira were admitting is a taxing process o' balancing. have people complete larger objectives or quests or tasks or whatever the hell you want to call it so it don't result in childish bawling, and then give out nice and balanced xp awards that do not discriminate for or against combat... or against any other method o' completion.

 

current method is elegant, balanced and extreme simple. add unnecessary complexity 'cause a handful o' kids need instant gratification from every bug killed or every lock opened is a silly-arsed approach.

 

nevertheless, we see that obsidian is trying to throw folks a bone. give folks something illusory and maybe they will be satisfied. we will observe that such a approach has worked in the past. am guessing it were worth a shot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

Why dont we just cut out combat then? cause it interrupts from the constant need to play fetch and complete those quests. Quests are cool, I like them a lot. RPGs are my favorite genre, usually because of the depth of quests and the story. But that doesnt mean combat shouldnt be fun or rewarding (Not to say that XP = Fun, but I think most people agree that the current combat system needs work or else we wouldnt be here)

 

And I think its hardly elegant to say "Heres 1000xp for getting my doll back, but you get nothing for slaying that dragon, cuz I didnt ask you to." Or something like PC kills Ogre, gets no xp, HAPPENS to find an NPC that says "Hey can you kill and Ogre for me, its been eating my sheep?" "Already killed it..." "O thanks, heres 1000xp!" Why wouldnt I just get the xp from killing the Ogre? cuz at the end of the day, I still had to kill it...

 

Personally I think it would be more elegant to tailor each encounter to be well balanced and an awesome experience, giving everything in the game a reason for being there and providing a richer and more interactively intensive game. I understand time restraints and get that it would take a TON of work and stuff, but that hardly makes Quest-Only XP the best possible solution. I guess we will see how it works. 

 

PS: dont mean to come off aggressive or anything, Im just voicing my opinion and kinda end up ranting a lot in case none of you have noticed haha. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I dont mean to trample on that, so I apologize if I come off that way.

Edited September 23, 2014 by Hellraiser789

[frapillo80]

 

 

 

 

 

Yes. And then, any quest you have to solve by killing, or any quest you can solve by killing AND you decide to solve by killing is kill XP under a different name. I fail to see the problem. Should we eliminate any killing from quests? And why?

Every crap trash mob cant be a quest because then you have created the situation that the non-kill XP crowd are whining about. Its degenerative gameplay, now Ill be FORCED to kill everything, me OCD!, immurshun, people will stealth past then go back and kill, etc...

I don't see what was fixed by doing this.. Just add Combat XP then adjust quests to counter weight things out so that passive quest rewards give higher bonuses to offset the killing of NPC's, then make the NPC's disappear or worth nothing..

or, you could simply leave things the way they is and you don't need have go through what even indira were admitting is a taxing process o' balancing. have people complete larger objectives or quests or tasks or whatever the hell you want to call it so it don't result in childish bawling, and then give out nice and balanced xp awards that do not discriminate for or against combat... or against any other method o' completion.

 

current method is elegant, balanced and extreme simple. add unnecessary complexity 'cause a handful o' kids need instant gratification from every bug killed or every lock opened is a silly-arsed approach.

 

nevertheless, we see that obsidian is trying to throw folks a bone. give folks something illusory and maybe they will be satisfied. we will observe that such a approach has worked in the past. am guessing it were worth a shot.

 

HA! Good Fun!

As I already said, I'm fine with quest xp, but not with the current trash mobs. They are the equivalent of pools of lava you can walk across: yes, you actually do have the option of walking across them, and all you'll get is to get your feet burnt. I'd just get rid of them entirely, but then just imagine the protests about the promised wilderness area being emptier than BG1. No time for integrating them in some more interesting system either. So that's why I grudgingly go for some kind of combat xp or equivalent. But very grudgingly, and yes, it is but a bone.

 

As for the current method being balanced, yes; simple, even too much; elegant, not really. But if my suspension of disbelief can work for adventures improving their combat skills thanks to xp gained through opening locks and viceversa,I guess I could force it to work also for xp being granted only by the pig farmer and not by the killed ogre. Still, harump!

Edited September 23, 2014 by frapillo80

[Gromnir]

 

 

 

 

Yes. And then, any quest you have to solve by killing, or any quest you can solve by killing AND you decide to solve by killing is kill XP under a different name. I fail to see the problem. Should we eliminate any killing from quests? And why?

Every crap trash mob cant be a quest because then you have created the situation that the non-kill XP crowd are whining about. Its degenerative gameplay, now Ill be FORCED to kill everything, me OCD!, immurshun, people will stealth past then go back and kill, etc...

 

 

 

I don't see what was fixed by doing this.. Just add Combat XP then adjust quests to counter weight things out so that passive quest rewards give higher bonuses to offset the killing of NPC's, then make the NPC's disappear or worth nothing..

 

or, you could simply leave things the way they is and you don't need have go through what even indira were admitting is a taxing process o' balancing. h

 

 

Oh well if Indira admitted it then I guess it's all over.. Fact of the matter is.. I don't care how taxing it is. It would be much less taxing if they did this **** a year ago. Making good games is taxing regardless.. if making good games was easy, everyone would do it.

 

I'm a player and I don't care how hard or long it is for them to balance a game at the end of the day. I understand it will take time, that it's hard and that it might mean delays and future patches and a longer beta.. but at the end of the day, it's their job to do it.. and it's been done before.

 

This argument doesn't hold water for me grommy.

 

sure it holds water. game is being released this year. *shrug* what you want is a kinda childish bit o' ego stroking, but from a practical perspective, what you want is difficult to add to a game that is already on a rather aggressive, and seemingly fixed, release schedule.

 

eventually, you become just another karzak demanding dw for bg2 thieves, or a kid cursing out his mom demanding pie.

 

http://consumerist.com/2014/08/06/jerk-or-genius-burger-king-customers-buys-23-apple-pies-just-so-loudmouthed-kid-cant-get-one/

 

*shrug*

 

but go for it. is your time and and dignity  you is spending.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps is people still trying to sell the notion that lack of kill xp makes combat pointless? 

 

*insert patronizing eye-roll here*

Edited September 23, 2014 by Gromnir

[Captain Shrek]

Reminder to Gromnir: Playing RPGs to cast spells and kill trolls is ego-stroking. Doesn't get more stoked-ego'd than being a universe saving super hero with sol power. Yeah, gaming is all about feeling big and tall. It is about rewards. 

[frapillo80]

Reminder to Gromnir: Playing RPGs to cast spells and kill trolls is ego-stroking. Doesn't get more stoked-ego'd than being a universe saving super hero with sol power. Yeah, gaming is all about feeling big and tall. It is about rewards.

RPG are indeed (almost) all about rewards, and especially about the balance between risk and reward. Otherwise, we would be playing a graphic adventure with combat interludes, with no need for xp, level progression or loot, since story and quests would be enough of a reward. Currently, trash mobs are only risk and no reward, therefore, from an RPG perspective, they are a paragon-level fail. More importantly, combat against them is as dull as Anomen's wit.

[Gromnir]

Reminder to Gromnir: Playing RPGs to cast spells and kill trolls is ego-stroking. Doesn't get more stoked-ego'd than being a universe saving super hero with sol power. Yeah, gaming is all about feeling big and tall. It is about rewards. 

and you is getting rewarded in the current system, but some kids is demanding their pie now! they don't wanna wait. they want it NOW. they need to see that xp counter tick up at this very moment, or it don't count... or somesuch.

 

*chuckle*

 

and if you honestly get ego-stroked from beating a game that is meant to be beatable by any kid aged 13 or older (am being a bit conservative on the age thing), then perhaps you look at games different from us... which is fine.  we like obsidian story telling, and we looks at the combat as moderate fun puzzles, but we never genuine bought into the ego stroking aspect... though we know it is a selling point, particularly for bioware games. one reason folks had a problem with ps:t and iwd is that some folks couldn't identify with tno or their iwd party. that has never been an issue for Gromnir, so perhaps we is simple wired different. that being said, while we recognize that crpg developers is frequently selling the ego-stroke, the notion that some kids can't wait a few minutes to get their pie strikes us as bordering on the insane. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Captain Shrek]

 

Reminder to Gromnir: Playing RPGs to cast spells and kill trolls is ego-stroking. Doesn't get more stoked-ego'd than being a universe saving super hero with sol power. Yeah, gaming is all about feeling big and tall. It is about rewards.

RPG are indeed (almost) all about rewards, and especially about the balance between risk and reward. Otherwise, we would be playing a graphic adventure with combat interludes, with no need for xp, level progression or loot, since story and quests would be enough of a reward. Currently, trash mobs are only risk and no reward, therefore, from an RPG perspective, they are a paragon-level fail. More importantly, combat against them is as dull as Anomen's wit.

 

Being saying this since ages. 

[frapillo80]

Well, I wouldn't know about RPG's ego-stroking, but for sure those wilderness lions are the reversal of some ego-stroking. I mean, are they there just to make me feel like an idiot if I go and fight them, since I have everything to lose and nothing to gain from doing that?

Edited September 23, 2014 by frapillo80

[Cantousent]

As an aside, how about a class that directly benefits from the sole act of killing?  lol  The Serial Killer class.  Among other features, he gets a tiny amount of XP for every kill.  I kid I kid!  ...But, actually, even a tiny amount of XP per kill would be a real benefit to a character, especially at low levels.  Kill opportunity in even a more traditional (as opposed to action) RPG will be ubiquitous.  Far more than locks and traps and whatnot.

 

On a more serious note, someone up above mentioned making quest givers unkillable.  Think about that.  I thought one of the biggest arguments for kill XP is Freedom™ to do whatever you want.  The solution that gives players back kill XP is to take away that freedom?  I think there was also a comment about the incentive to kill being extra gear.  I personally think it's perfectly reasonable for folks to get extra gear from kills.  If the quest givers have extra gear, go for it.  If you want to do the quest and then kill the quest giver, fine.  I don't think you should finish the quest and then get extra XP for killing the quest giver.

 

As for lockpicking XP:  I don't mind folks getting extra XP as a result of lockpicking.  I don't want it to be incidental.  I want the design team to fashion the XP rewards in the way that serves their creative vision best.  Maybe there is a minor objective that can only be completed by lockpicking.  Fair enough.  Just no XP for randomly going out of your way to pick locks.  Truth to tell, most folks will do whatever they can to pick locks on prominent doors and chests anyway, and there's practical value in disarming and setting traps that far transcends incidental XP anyway.

 

As for the beastiary, I think it's a great accommodation.  Not my cuppa, but good for the folks who enjoy it.  I would simply suggest, as someone mentioned up above, and forgive me for not remembering the name.  I think it was Hydra.  Anyhow, tie it to Lore and maybe even Int and Per.  Don't have a quest giver per se, but *do* have journal entries and track it like a quest.  That way, it's not simply combat anyhow.  It's the ability to engage with creatures (often in combat) and learn useful things, sometimes even non combat related things, from encounters.

[frapillo80]

Bestiary could turn out real nice, but I am afraid it would need a significant amount of work in order to be implemented in a way sophisticated enough not to smack of a shameless surrogate of the "get 10 beetle shells to the notice board, receive experience" quests that plagued Dragon Age *shudder*. It would be probably also be exploit-prone, and ironing out all the possible exploits needs time too. I keep getting the impression that the devs are in a rush even for rushing standards..

[Hiro Protagonist II]

This comes across as throwing the combat xp people a bone. I don't want a bone, I want some meat. Even the recent Eurogamer review of the beta has problems with no combat xp.

 

17.40 onwards. They question the decision about no combat xp.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ0YB45qy-U&feature=player_embedded

[frapillo80]

That's exactly what I feared: taking decisions like "only quest xp plus 0 xp trash mobs" to save time balancing, so that the game does not get penalized by reviewers for lack of balance, and then reviewers are even less responsive because "only quest xp plus 0 xp trash mobs" obviously baffles them...

[Cantousent]

So, the people at Eurogamer don't mind laborious combat... as long as they get XP goodies?  If the problem is combat, it's combat.  From a design standpoint, giving XP won't make people happy with the combat.  I sure as hell hope that Obsidz sticks to their guns on this.

[Immortalis]

As it stands now.. I will always take the non-combat route.. Like as if killing beetles for 20 minutes is gonna be fun compared to being engaged by the amazing plot that ziets and avellone wrote.. Take progression and incentive out of taking the harder more challenging routes through the game.. and this game is gonna be a one time play to enjoy the story and then promptly shoved on the shelf next to Dragon Age 2..

 

So sad.. I was so excited for this game.

 

 

So, the people at Eurogamer don't mind laborious combat... as long as they get XP goodies?  If the problem is combat, it's combat.  From a design standpoint, giving XP won't make people happy with the combat.  I sure as hell hope that Obsidz sticks to their guns on this.

 

Wrong again.. It's been stated about 1000 times why this argument is crap

Edited September 24, 2014 by Immortalis

[Matt516]

 

 

So, the people at Eurogamer don't mind laborious combat... as long as they get XP goodies? If the problem is combat, it's combat. From a design standpoint, giving XP won't make people happy with the combat. I sure as hell hope that Obsidz sticks to their guns on this.

Wrong again.. It's been stated about 1000 times why this argument is crap

That's not a rebuttal. I could just as easily say that it's been stated about 2000 times why this argument is good.

 

And neither of us would be correct, because the necessity of combat XP for game (and combat) enjoyment is a matter of PERSONAL PREFERENCE. Stop acting like your position is the only reasonable one. Combat XP is a good reward system for RPG gameplay. That doesn't mean it's the only good reward system. OE is doing something different - good for them! Let's help them succeed instead of bitching endlessly about one single feature as if the game will live or die based on its inclusion.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Matt516

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Combat XP is a good reward system for RPG gameplay.

 

I'm glad we agree.

[Hellraiser789]

I think its great they want to try something different. Objective XP would have been awesome IMO. But Quest-Only XP... I don't know. We will see how it goes. The bestiary and other features give me hope, but I trust the devs will be able to make it work. I just want a good game. The XP system doesnt matter so much as the gameplay. I think a lot of people currently have a problem with combat itself, rather than the xp system. the xp system using combat xp is kinda meant to be a reward for dealing with the time- and resource-demanding nature of current combat - which would hardly be considered rewarding. (Sure you can argue that I need a reward for combat - but enjoyment is also a form of reward, and if most people cant even get THAT out of combat...then there needs to be something else)

[Matt516]

 

Combat XP is a good reward system for RPG gameplay.

I'm glad we agree.

We disagree on its status as an indispensable reward system though - which seems to be the matter at hand.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

We disagree on its status as an indispensable reward system though - which seems to be the matter at hand.

 

 

And yet Josh is thinking of putting it back in, in the form of bestiary pages which you agree with. So it doesn't seem that indispensable for a lot of people who are against combat xp if they then agree with bestiary combat xp.

Edited September 24, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II