Combat Rtwp.

[Waterd]

 i'm starting to think his problem is that he treats this as a problem to be solved rather than a game to be played.

 

To me a game to be played is a problem to be solved. That is what is fun about games, having said that i like theme and story in my games, despite i can enjoy poker or chess just fine.

[Azrael Ultima]

There's a fairly big difference between solving the problems a game presents you with, and trying to solve the game itself.

That would be true if pausing would be a limited resource, since it´s not, you can pause every one tenth of a second (or whatever is physically possible to do) and would not change anything.

That would be true... if you're immortal and have nothing to do but play PoE. Time is a limited resource for everybody else, and pausing costs time. That the game does not impose any additional restrictions on it doesn't mean that there are none. Edited September 14, 2014 by Azrael Ultima

[Waterd]

To be more clear, RtwP is probably still a game, my comment is that it would be unfun. 

I said it becomes a toy the moment you use the mentality described by matt ¨just don´t do unfun things¨ Then it becomes a toy, IF the designer , designs the system with that mentality THEN it becomes just the designing of a toy. 

RTwP isn´t , by default a toy, it can, as I say well be a game. Just as currently designed, a terrible unfun game, since I think it´s annoying to pause 2 to 3 times per second.

[Waterd]

Using real life free time as a ingame resource is an idea that if proposed in game design would be laughable. 

Imagine that when you sit playing starcraft you start with a number of minerals equal to the total amount of your real life wealth, or when you play Counterstrike your total health is equal to your fitness determined by how tired you are in real life. Or in the game the number of times you can rest is equal to the number of candy you have in a jar, and you have to eat a candy every time you rest.

 

Not only those numbers are ridiculously high and will probably make the game broken in many senses, the idea of using a subjective real life resources as a ingame resource to determine the resources available to solve the problem is just a terrible design idea. In great part because now the designer is unaware about the resources available for the problem and thus his ability to design the problem get nullified.

 

Are you really proposing add a real life resource to be used as one of the resources available to solve the problem?

Edited September 14, 2014 by Waterd

[Azrael Ultima]

That's not clear at all. RTwP isn't a game, it's a game mechanic.

I'm not sure what you're even trying to get at with your "toy" comment, since the purpose of a video game is generally the same as that of a toy anyway, so a video game being a toy is a non-issue.

As for the unfun part... that's your perception. The game is unfun to you, fine. That just means it's not the right game for you, though, not that the game itself is flawed.

 

 

Using real life free time as a ingame resource is an idea that if proposed in game design would be laughable.

Seriously?

 

I'm not going to bother explaining why time being limited out-of-game is still a restriction on how much you can pause. Either you can't understand, or you don't want to.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Azrael Ultima

[Waterd]

A game is a system of rules with a goal, which have challenges, where a toy is an object we can play and experiment, have no inherent goals, or challenges, despite the player can make their won

there is nothing wrong with either designing a game or toy.

I just want to be clear what is the design goal of PoE.

If it´s a game, then RTwP as implemented now , i think it´s bad design because most people will find it unfun.

if its a toy, RTwP is ok.

 

Sawyer design comments make me think he want to design a game. If he wants to design a toy, that is all fine ,and my mistake, it would be good to know so i can move on. I´m not interested in a Toy, im not saying there is anything inherently wrong with it.

 

I'm not going to bother explaining why time being limited out-of-game is still a restriction on how much you can pause.

 

Yeah, do not bother, because it´s irrelevant.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Waterd

[Yonjuro]

You correctly post what i said

RTwP requires a pause every half second to play optimally. Therefore optimal play is not fun. Therefore, since nobody will play optimally, the designer of the game is really designing a toy where players are making up their own rules.

 

How from that you conclude that im stating the difference between RTwP and TB is from a toy to a game, i have no idea.

 

 Hmmm. Well, it follows logically from those statements if you mean them literally, but I'm not going to be pedantic about it. I will assume that you are using words figuratively. 

 

 

Part of solving the problem is to develop the ability to recognize when you need to pause based on all of the events on screen;

 

That would be true if pausing would be a limited resource, since it´s not, you can pause every one tenth of a second (or whatever is physically possible to do) and would not change anything. 

 

 Fine, pausing is not a limited resource, but pausing more than you need to doesn't lead to a better solution - that's the point.  Let's take it to the absolute extreme. Suppose the game runs at 30 frames per second and you had a control to auto-pause every frame - will you come up with a better solution? Clearly not - you won't even be able to piece together what is happening and, even if you could, most actions take several seconds to complete (and the shorter actions, like melee attacks, are predictable) so you aren't getting new information every frame. 

 

 

However, your stated problem is not a problem for the subset of people who like that style of play.

 

Well I want to know people that find fun pausing 3 times per second, but ok.

 

   It isn't necessary (or useful from a problem solving standpoint) to pause anywhere near that often. If you're good at these games, you react in real time and pause when you need to do more than one thing at a time. 

[Waterd]

 Fine, pausing is not a limited resource, but pausing more than you need to doesn't lead to a better solution - that's the point.

 

I agree, there is a cap on how often pausing improves performance. The point i make is that in these systems in general (And for what i saw of beta videos of combat), that point is at around 0.3/0.5 seconds of action per pause.

 

It isn't necessary (or useful from a problem solving standpoint) to pause anywhere near that often.

 

Well if we base that in Icewind dale 2 for example, I would say that Yes, pausing that often is useful.

[Yonjuro]

 

 Fine, pausing is not a limited resource, but pausing more than you need to doesn't lead to a better solution - that's the point.

 

I agree, there is a cap on how often pausing improves performance. The point i make is that in these systems in general (And for what i saw of beta videos of combat), that point is at around 0.3/0.5 seconds of action per pause.

 

 I've played the beta - it's a new system that nobody has experience with and it still needs some work, but I'm not pausing anywhere close to that and I don't think the people in the videos you've watched will pause that often once they get used to the new game.

 

 

It isn't necessary (or useful from a problem solving standpoint) to pause anywhere near that often.

 

Well if we base that in Icewind dale 2 for example, I would say that Yes, pausing that often is useful.

 

 

 IWD2 is a challenging game but it has discrete 6 second rounds and it typically takes more than one round to dispatch an enemy. I promise you that you can play optimally without pausing every half or one third of a second.

[PrimeJunta]

Didn't like the combat. Both sides just meet up in a big group for a huge cluster****.

If only you had seen it in the first build. This one is crystal-clear by comparison. It's being heavily worked on, and I'm quite sure it'll be a lot better when the beta finishes.

 

Non human races look ridiculous, especially the godlings. Just human bodies with goofy heads stuck on them. dwarf is a human squished up a bit. several fights could be solved with just two characters while the other 4 just watched. I really hope the game can be played with just 3 guys, because managing six characters is terrible.

It can. I don't find six characters particularly hard to manage though.

 

Hopefully there will be cash dropping like crazy because with only a few inventory slots for each character, picking up and selling loot is not much of an option.

There's an unlimited stash in which you can throw vendor trash. The inventory does kind of suck though, but not so badly it'll ruin the whole game IMO.

 

The beta wasn't fun in the slightest.

I would slightly qualify that. I have had some fun in the beta, but only after fairly extensive fighting with the combat, due to the general lack of transparency, pacing problems, and balancing problems. It is progressing fast though; the difference between the first and second builds was already enormous.

 

I had high hopes for this game, but they were all dashed to hell after a few minutes in the beta.

A few minutes? Awww.

 

Beta isn't even the right term for it, tech demo is more accurate. It just kind of shows off a few features of the game.  I started in some random town with random ass characters. It did not make me care at all. It was just a chore to play through. I know the actual game won't feel this way, but the beta fails miserably to get me more excited about the game.

That's not the purpose of the beta. The purpose of the beta is to let you play for a few hours with a broad selection of systems in the game, and then give feedback to the developers on what should be changed, and secondarily to report bugs.

 

What the hell are these guys doing? I see too many updates about stupid crap like art assets. Nobody cares how good you are at drawing derpy little gnome guys! I am not going to buy this game. I'll get a pirated version on release. It if really wows me, really blows me away, I will buy it. I have been sold too many crappy games to take a chance on projects like this anymore. I would encourage you guys to be more careful with your money.  All kickstarter games I have bought turned out to be about 10% of what was promised. All mediocre games at best. Don't be fooled by this one, too. I really hope it turns out good, but I'm not betting with my wallet on this one.

Considering that you appear to also have pirated the beta, I've no doubt you'll pirate the real thing too. 'Cuz you're a real class act, son.

[Waterd]

It doesn´t mattter how often people pause, what matters is much is optimal for people to pause.

 

IWD2 is not a challenging game but for different reasons Kiting almost op all melee opponents are almost a joke, because of it. , and even there you have infinite rests, which makes casters op since you can prebuff /presummon with half your spells for it and the other half to blast everything with the highest level spells, making 95% trivial. Summons are so OP that basically have an inbuilt taunt and don´t bring HOF because HOF only makes the game take longer to do things, but you must essentially use the EXACT same tactics than without hof.

 

Sorry if i dont believe your promise, I played IWD2 enough to know and watched enough videos of people playing and talked with enough people to know. If you are denying this i don´t have much to talk, despite the 6 second per round. Once you have 6 characters and several summons, what´s relevant its by how many seconds the state of the game change.

Since every change of state of the game may mean that you should change your characters actions, the action of any character allied or enemy means that is optimal to reanalyze the situation, since that is so, the best way to do it is to pause. 

That leads to an optimal pause of everytime somebody acts, since there is going to be at least 2 or 3 characters that act in that second, is optimal to pause every 0.3/0.5 second.

[PrimeJunta]

To me a game to be played is a problem to be solved. That is what is fun about games, having said that i like theme and story in my games, despite i can enjoy poker or chess just fine.

Interestingly, many if not most cRPG's never even do that. There's not necessarily any victory condition, beyond "don't die until the main quest finishes." There's a main storyline you can follow and sometimes affect, some obstacles in your way that you may solve in one or several ways, and various characters in the game tell you what they want. Beyond that, you set your own objectives.

 

What's the victory condition of Fallout 2? There isn't one: there's just a big ol' set of consequences to your actions. It's up to you to decide which constitute victories and which constitute defeats.

 

I.e., again: wrong genre son. No games here, just toys.

[Yonjuro]

 

Sorry if i dont believe your promise, I played IWD2 enough to know and watched enough videos of people playing and talked with enough people to know. If you are denying this i don´t have much to talk, despite the 6 second per round. Once you have 6 characters and several summons, what´s relevant its by how many seconds the state of the game change.

 

 If you interrupt your characters mid-action (especially spell casters who will lose the spell) and change what they're doing, you are not playing optimally (or even sensibly). Many of your characters will be doing the right thing at the end of six seconds (continuing to attack the same enemy is often the optimal choice; when it isn't you made a suboptimal choice the last time). You're just not playing well if you think you need to pause and issue orders every half second. This much shouldn't even be controversial.

 

 If you're pausing to take stock, that's different. But if you pause to check the game state and restart without issuing orders, then you could still play optimally (or, at least, as optimally as you were already playing) without that pause - doing so requires getting good at multitasking.

[Waterd]

Why get good at multitasking when i can just pause several times per second? the moment you claim that you can replace pauses with skill is the moment you accept pausing every fraction of a second is useful.

 

Wether I made a suboptimal choice the last time or was an optimal choice the moment i issued the order, but not 3 seconds later (but didn´t realize of that until 0.5 seconds ago), doesn´t change the fact that pausing the game didn´t give me an advantage.

 

Interestingly, many if not most cRPG's never even do that. 

 

I agree with you there!. I would claim some ¨questionable¨ rpgs do it though, Battle for wesnoth and Fire emblem, I would say. In the world of tabletop RPG many do, Mansion of madness, mice and mystics and Descent, to name a few.

 

Again, I thought Pillars of eternity would be like another CRPG, but again, if you see the first post, several comments of sawyer make me thinks his intention is different. Again I may be wrong, and then my point is moot. But if i´m wrong why he cares about balancing options so much? why restrict rest to difficulty? the only answer I can think off is that he wants to make such a game. 

Edited September 14, 2014 by Waterd

[PrimeJunta]

It's not a binary choice, Waterd. You can make a toy with more robust systems, and the more robust systems may make it a better toy.

 

But toy-ness is a crucial defining feature of a cRPG. They're different in this sense from RTS's let alone multiplayer PvP games.

 

I don't know if Josh wants to make an RTS or multiplayer PvP game, but I'm pretty sure he doesn't want to turn P:E into one, despite the accusations often leveled at him.

[Yonjuro]

Why get good at multitasking when i can just pause several times per second? 

 

 Well, because of this:

 

 

 

...

Well I want to know people that find fun pausing 3 times per second, but ok.

 

 You're not having fun that way, remember? My point is that most people who enjoy RTwP games are playing differently than you are  and potentially playing very well in terms of optimal problem solving. Obviously feel free to play the game however you want (or find a turn based game you will like better).

 

 the moment you claim that you can replace pauses with skill is the moment you accept pausing every fraction of a second is useful.

 

 Certainly some of the pauses will be useful and just as certainly, not all of them will be. You're right in that it is two ways to get the same information; what is the game state? One of the two ways seems to be less enjoyable than the other and we seem to at least agree that pausing every 0.3 seconds is not enjoyable. 

 

 

Wether I made a suboptimal choice the last time or was an optimal choice the moment i issued the order, but not 3 seconds later (but didn´t realize of that until 0.5 seconds ago), doesn´t change the fact that pausing the game didn´t give me an advantage.

 

 

 I think you have a typo in that sentence; you probably meant to say "did give me an advantage"?

 

 In any case, I agree there will be times when what looks like an optimal decision will later turn out not to be one and it can make sense to do something new when the circumstances change. (Also, noticing that in real time can be a fun challenge.) 

[Waterd]

My goal as a player is not to have fun, my goal is to optimize my decisions, fun should be a subproduct of that. That is what optimal play is. When people analyze optimal play fun is not on the ecuation.

A good game design, makes it that the search for optimal play, produces fun for the one involved as a subproduct.

 

 potentially playing very well in terms of optimal problem solving

 

Is hard to believe that if they willingly not maximize the use of a resource they have, specially one that is infinite.

 

All pauses will be usefull, regardless of if i change inputs or not. Every pause will allow me to reanalyze the game state to verify if there is anything i can do to improve the course of action. You can´t talk about fun and enjoyable when talking about trying to find optimal play. 

 

Also, noticing that in real time can be a fun challenge.

 

Sure, again i can create my own challenges, but then the software becomes not a game but a toy in which i create my own rules. Ive been doing that in many CRPG.

The point is what is the game, the game is defined by a set of rules and optimal play is my best course action using those rules to get to that goal. If in doing that I don´t need to notice things in real time because i can pause, then i won´t or else im not longer playing the game and start playing a selfmade game where i create my own rules.

[Waterd]

Again  Primejunta seems to imply im wrong and sawyer does not intend to Design a game where players are expected to look for optimal play and have fun in the process. If that is so if i have a way to confirm that, then yes, I have no other action than just walk away.

 

Again, is true that most CRPG aren´t like that. however I gave examples of ¨arguably RGPS¨ in Fire emblem and battle for wesnoth and tabletop rpg in descent , mice and mystics and Mansion of madness where that does hold true.

 

So it´s not crazy the idea that some PoE is intended to be like that. It´s just a matter of if Sawyer wants to create that. Evidence suggests he wants(for reasons i already stated). If im wrong though i would like to see evidence to confirm it.

 

I will say though that people like me exist and true generally stay away from CRPG for that reason. But It´s not that hard to create certain OPTIONAL hardcored rules for this kind of players. I would be willing even to help design them if it´s a desired feature.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Waterd

[PrimeJunta]

The thing you're missing here is context. I'm sure Josh wants to design a game "where players are expected to look for optimal play and have fun in the process," but what you're missing is that in the context of a cRPG, these are always local optima. I.e., they're about looking for optimal choices within constraints players have, to an extent, set for themselves.

 

"I want to find the best way to play with an all-wizard party." "I want to find the best way to play while role-playing a strict but honorable character." "I want to find the best way to play without pausing."

 

Want evidence? Here's some. You're right -- the most efficient way* to play a RTwP game is to pause way more than would be fun. Since this is a fundamental feature of P:E, wouldn't you say that it's pretty strong evidence that Josh does not want to make the kind of game you think he wants to make, at least when it comes to P:E?

 

I.e., I would, again, strongly recommend you stay away from P:E and cRPG's in general. That's not what it's about, and it would ruin the game for a lot of us if it were.

 

(Also, you're using "hardcore" in a very different sense than it's used in the cRPG community. "Hardcore" cRPG gamers tend to play these games in intentionally inefficent ways -- by playing with smaller parties, intentionally handicapped builds, and so on. It's considered part of the challenge. There's a guy here called Stun who's about as hardcore as it gets. Ask him, he'll talk your ear off.)

 

*if you assign zero resource cost to your time, as the player.

[constantine]

What the hell are these guys doing? I see too many updates about stupid crap like art assets. Nobody cares how good you are at drawing derpy little gnome guys! I am not going to buy this game. I'll get a pirated version on release. It if really wows me, really blows me away, I will buy it. I have been sold too many crappy games to take a chance on projects like this anymore. I would encourage you guys to be more careful with your money. All kickstarter games I have bought turned out to be about 10% of what was promised. All mediocre games at best. Don't be fooled by this one, too. I really hope it turns out good, but I'm not betting with my wallet on this one.

 

This is Obsidian for Christ's sake. They are rpg masterminds and PoE will reflect that level of designer quality, a fact that is already apparent in the beta release.

[Azrael Ultima]

A game is a system of rules with a goal, which have challenges, where a toy is an object we can play and experiment, have no inherent goals, or challenges, despite the player can make their won

there is nothing wrong with either designing a game or toy.

I just want to be clear what is the design goal of PoE.

If it´s a game, then RTwP as implemented now , i think it´s bad design because most people will find it unfun.

if its a toy, RTwP is ok.

So what is Minecraft then?

 

A game is a system of rules which may or may not have an ultimate goal. Not all games have goals to reach, or even any way of actually ending them.

Half the fun for many people is trying out various ways of using these rules in unexpected ways or adding their own to make play more interesting.

 

Toys are simply tools to facilitate games. A video game is normally both.

Edited September 14, 2014 by Azrael Ultima

[PrimeJunta]

"Toys are tools to facilitate games."

 

That, sir, is a damn good definition. I will keep that in mind.

[Arcane Paladin]

The best way I can think of to defend RtWP is to equate it to sports

RT: Soccer or Hockey

Turn based: Baseball

RtWP: Football

As far your optimizing issue, in my opinion, it ruins the game. I happen to think that min-maxing has no place in RPGs. It takes the roleplay out of it. Part of the excitement, for me, is to take a least optimal race/class combo and try my damnest to succeed if not thrive.

Now, to each their own. If you try and optimize everything, go for broke but I think you implied that large numbers of gamers embrace this approach. That maybe true, but not in this genre from what I've seen(ex: hardcore one life(self imposed) no reloads) as many IE game players purposefully do things that aren't optimal.

[Waterd]

Minecraft is totally a toy, 100%. I agree toys are tools to facilitate games A game is the system of rules with a goal.

Yes all games have goals to reach that is a inherent property of games.

From wikipedia on games:

 

Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction

 

I also like this gamastura article

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/167418/what_makes_a_game.php

"a system of rules in which agents compete by making ambiguousdecisions.

 

 I simply mean that your decisions have meaning and repercussions inside the game system; they cause new challenges to emerge, and most importantly of all, they have meaning with regards to the final outcome of the game.

 

However I do not intend to discuss semantics.

What i talk game here i refer to a system of rules for players to interact with and do goal-oriented actions.

 

That´s why i clarified it in a post above I was referring to that to game.

 

 

 

wouldn't you say that it's pretty strong evidence that Josh does not want to make the kind of game you think he wants to make, at least when it comes to P:E?

 

Yes, but then again, if so why limit resting?

I think maybe he doesn´t realize how unfun it is for some people to pause every half second? OR maybe he has a plan for this, then i ask, what it is?

Edited September 14, 2014 by Waterd

[Ginsu23]

RTWP is like 1/2 turn-based, and 1/2 real time. It gives you the option to be careful and strategic in difficult battles by pausing a lot. It also gives you the option to blow through easy fights quickly by not pausing at all. It's the best of both worlds. I don't see what the problem is, Waterd.