I think it's particularly telling that lock/trap XP is dead last in this poll.  It falls significantly behind kill XP (by about 10 as I reckon it at this time) and doesn't even reach 40%.  I don't think you can take any one poll from these forums and extrapolate too terribly much out of them, although I did think this poll was fun.  However, where was the howl?  I know that kill XP folks were more numerous and more vocal.  Even though I fell on the other side of that issue, I respect that it's been a mainstay for a long time and people are going to be pissed off (can I say that on live TV?).  Where was the huge movement for trap XP.

Better late than never. Thank you for lighting a fire under me arse.

Locks & Traps may be the least voted on but 81 out of 212 is not exactly an insignificant percentage of people in favor of it.

 

 

Matt is too busy doing math to stoop to our lowly pleb level..

That was a bit uncalled for.. . I never implied anything of the sort. He asked why the poll said a thing. I answered his question by saying it said a thing because that's what people think. Then he responded to arguments and statements I never made and I responded by voicing my confusion about that. And now I'm voicing my confusion about your post. Math hasn't even been mentioned so I don't know where that's coming from. Have I said something else that offended you?

 

For what it's worth, I believed him to be joking/being silly. But maybe he wasn't. *shrug*

 

 

 

It totally was.. I think Matt is a little sensitive.. I won't poke him anymore.

 

 

 

Locks & Traps may be the least voted on but 81 out of 212 is not exactly an insignificant percentage of people in favor of it.

 

I have to agree.. I can't think of a more Degenerative Game mechanic then Lock / Trap Xp.. but somehow people want it? To iterate my original question.. What the **** happened..

Edited October 16, 201411 yr by Immortalis

I don't want combat XP or Bestiary XP, but trap/lock XP is just dumb. Hell, it's arguably more degenerate gameplay than combat XP because you're almost requiring a player to have a slot occupied by a character that can deal with that ****. Just let players deal with locks or traps how ever they want and let the reward be lootz or not getting hurt by traps.

LoL, you guys are so funny. Lock and trap xp was so minor and insignificant in all of the IE games that it isn't even worth mentioning. Like do you guys even remember how little xp was gained from it...

Well... I guess you do have me on that one, Archimedes.  It's pretty minor.  I still think it's bad design, especially since they've remained solid on no kill XP.  But what the hell?  It's not like I'm going to refuse the play the game over the issue.

LoL, you guys are so funny. Lock and trap xp was so minor and insignificant in all of the IE games that it isn't even worth mentioning. Like do you guys even remember how little xp was gained from it...

Lol! It grants you a completely insignificant amount of XP, which is such a good reason to put it in the game. It couldn't possibly ever affect your game in any meaningful way, whatsoever, *pompous laughter... monocle adjust*

 

All the more reason to allow every footstep to grant us .00001XP. If it doesn't, I'm going to be mad. But... it's not like I actually want to be able to feasibly gain any XP via footsteps. I just don't want every footstep to feel like an unrewarded chore.

Edited October 16, 201411 yr by Lephys

That's so funny. I've almost brought out 'each footstep' argument, but I just couldn't arse myaelf. We don't really know exactly what they intend to do at this point. We may not know for a while.

That's so funny. I've almost brought out 'each footstep' argument, but I just couldn't arse myaelf. We don't really know exactly what they intend to do at this point. We may not know for a while.

What's hilarious is that it never clicks with anyone. Someone will inevitably come back with "I'm not even going to respond to that. Footsteps granting XP is preposterous. Locks and traps can threaten you," etc.

 

But, what they don't realize is, there's nothing different about awarding the XP specifically for picking a lock that's just lying on the ground, or disarming a trap you can already get around, only makes sense if you're simulating the actual method of people's brains gaining experience, directly through performing actions. In which case, footsteps would actually be pretty feasible. You could gain experience walking on rocky/uneven ground, or through marshes, etc. Conditioning, if you will. The action improves your character, just like the others do, in a simulation. That's the only value they have, at that point. Disarming a trap that you don't even need to disarm to get past is basically just studying the trap.

 

And, as I've said 80 times before, if that's what your XP system does, then awesome. But if the XP you gain from disarming a trap allows you to boost your Athletics, then you might as well throw the act of running, itself, into the pool, and let that, in turn, allow you to level-up and improve your Mechanics.

 

It's all about the core of the XP system. WHY is it giving you XP? Because you performed an action and it wants to simulate the improvement to your character as a result? Or because you accomplished something as dictated by the story/situation/characters/game world?

LoL, you guys are so funny. Lock and trap xp was so minor and insignificant in all of the IE games that it isn't even worth mentioning. Like do you guys even remember how little xp was gained from it...

 

It's not so much that lock and trap xp is in the game.. The reason I am so dumb founded is that it's in the game and Combat XP isn't.

 

Trap / Lock xp is way more degenerative and abusable then combat xp.. at least with combat xp you are challenged in some way..

To start I voted;

 

Quests

Objectives

Exploration

Specific Combat Scenarios (which I would clump in objectives personally)

Bestiary unlock bonus (prefferably if more options than just combat are there to unlock it, like reading books about them.

 

Or really the proper answer;

Look at Vampire: Bloodlines and Deus Ex (the original)... they were really good in giving proper objective XP rewards.

V:B didn't have trash fights. It also didn't have levels but you leveled directly with xp. It is much harder to balance such a game if you don't limit xp gain a lot.

Edited October 17, 201411 yr by archangel979

Level scaling of encounters can be a good thing if it is applied in moderation and done right (by adding more enemies), but horrible if done wrong (like invisibly scaling the HP's or other stats of enemies, as that pretty much negates the hole concept of character progression and gaining power).

 

Agreed. It can also be made by putting different kind of enemies (more or less powerful depending on the power of your party). And all can also be balanced by having an ECL system. 

Edited October 17, 201411 yr by No idea

To start I voted;

 

Quests

Objectives

Exploration

Specific Combat Scenarios (which I would clump in objectives personally)

Bestiary unlock bonus (prefferably if more options than just combat are there to unlock it, like reading books about them.

 

Or really the proper answer;

Look at Vampire: Bloodlines and Deus Ex (the original)... they were really good in giving proper objective XP rewards.

 

Yawnnn.. Oh were you bringing up this old strawman again?

Feel free to be the first to disprove it then... you know; instead of going "wall-mode" as usual and spewing the same ad homen over and over. Go ahead, make my day.

 

 

 

V:B didn't have trash fights. It also didn't have levels but you leveled directly with xp. It is much harder to balance such a game if you don't limit xp gain a lot.

Replace "1 point to buy, 2 point for lvl 2 skill" with 1000 and 2000 and you got the DX system. Replace this with allowing picking with levels, you got PoE. It doesn't matter *how* the system allows you to spend your XP, it's all about how you GAIN XP. There are plenty of good ways to spend XP systems. Gaining XP systems however, there are a fairly limited amount of ways to do so.

So in the end "it allows you to spend XP directly" isn't actually relevant since it's not about spendature, but gaining. And in that Vampire and Deus Ex are equal, even if they have a different spendature method. A gaining system that PoE could use (and benefit from) and what "Objective XP" would really be about (instead of "quest XP" or "level as you progress XP as in Elder Scrolls")

 

Also;

* Condemned Building

* Snuff studio's/house

* Sewers

* Mansion

* Both endgame levels (and depending on your path you may need to do both)

 

And I probably forgot some sequence with a whole bunch of thrash fights. Although the interesting thing about the comdemned or some boss fight (snuff) are that "Objective XP" easily allows developers to get the person a kick under the butt by infinite spawns. Something that can be challenging for combat-XP systems to do right. There have been many instances where that could lead to exploits (inf. XP), totally no reason why this character gives XP while all other do (the "just set their XP to 0 once you got other reward" for example is often mentioned as combatting combat XP flaws, but is totally prone to error, costs developers time to implement, and when you think about it makes no logical sense), or that infinite means 'till a certain point' to prevent people from gaining too much XP from it.

There have been plenty of games where the deterent to solving something is combat... and the result is people fail on purpose for the XP, and to stop that developers allow only x fails to spawn consequences. Do you think intentionally failing 5 times to get all spawns, then get it right is a preferable situation to answering right is the best, and if you get it wrong, you always need to fight for no XP would be a proper punishment, rather than reward for failing?

 

And that's just one of the many MANY instances game-designers can profit from having many more options open with less of "but then I need to code in countermeasures for XP-stuff" (and thus lot's of potential additional buginess) to just create cool stuff. I personally don't see cons to giving developers a large range of possible encounter, opponent or even gameworld options without having to worry about what needs to be added to counter XP-exploits.

 

But I'm sure this, again, will fall on deaf ears for the Combat-XP fan who thinks one can actually add a proper "sneak past bonus" (no, you can't) and developers magically can adjust XP-values on the fly without effort or time...

Deus Ex and VmTB are NOTHING like POE. The comparison is misleading.

 

Both of these games emphasized non-violent gameplay. In fact, they are more rewarding if you play that way. The only regions of VMTB which forced combat actually felt annoying as they DID not reward you in any way. Both of the games only had boss battles that were really either necessary or eventful. 

 

V:B didn't have trash fights. It also didn't have levels but you leveled directly with xp. It is much harder to balance such a game if you don't limit xp gain a lot.

Replace "1 point to buy, 2 point for lvl 2 skill" with 1000 and 2000 and you got the DX system. Replace this with allowing picking with levels, you got PoE. It doesn't matter *how* the system allows you to spend your XP, it's all about how you GAIN XP. There are plenty of good ways to spend XP systems. Gaining XP systems however, there are a fairly limited amount of ways to do so.

So in the end "it allows you to spend XP directly" isn't actually relevant since it's not about spendature, but gaining. And in that Vampire and Deus Ex are equal, even if they have a different spendature method. A gaining system that PoE could use (and benefit from) and what "Objective XP" would really be about (instead of "quest XP" or "level as you progress XP as in Elder Scrolls")

 

No, it is not all about how you gain XP. With freedom players have in V:B one could use all xp to level non-combat skills or all combat skills. Devs don't know. They give you just bit of XP and increase challenge slightly.

In PoE (and IE games) each level up gives some non-combat and some combat increases and it is known how much. Players can also survive much tougher challenges then those of similar level. Xp disbalance can be easily had and it will not break anything.

 

Not to mention V:B was not a combat game. Combat was in most missions something to avoid as it was way more deadly then in IE games (also no raise dead).  No reason to give kill xp for actions that are not recommended in that game. Also PnP Vampire games also don't give XP for separate actions but for goals accomplished.

Also;

* Condemned Building

* Snuff studio's/house

* Sewers

* Mansion

* Both endgame levels (and depending on your path you may need to do both)

Those didn't have trash fights, but all fights were part of quests. V:B does not have random roaming through open maps and fighting lions/beetles/whatever . Closest was police that could intervene if you broke the masquerade by feeding on humans with witnesses around.

Edited October 17, 201411 yr by archangel979

My b, Immortalis. I can take a joke, just didn't realize that's how it was meant. I've been spending a bit less time on these forums the past few weeks, so that combined with the fact that there legitimately are some people on the forums who would get that mad about something that silly caused me to misinterpret your post. I apologize.

I'm telling you people, this forum would work so much better with beer on draught.  We could have our own little beer summit.  I mean, no one will get everything he wants, but we'll still all be happy anyway.

 

Like combat XP, I don't have the stamina to fight over lock and trap XP anymore.  It's not like I don't play games with them and still enjoy them.  I will continue to think that it's bad design, but once you start reiterating the same arguments two or three times, it's gotten to the point where you should stand down and let someone else take up the cause for a while.  I do wish Grom would participate again, but that's mostly because I get a kick out of his posts.

I'm telling you people, this forum would work so much better with beer on draught.  We could have our own little beer summit.  I mean, no one will get everything he wants, but we'll still all be happy anyway.

 

Like combat XP, I don't have the stamina to fight over lock and trap XP anymore.  It's not like I don't play games with them and still enjoy them.  I will continue to think that it's bad design, but once you start reiterating the same arguments two or three times, it's gotten to the point where you should stand down and let someone else take up the cause for a while.  I do wish Grom would participate again, but that's mostly because I get a kick out of his posts.

 

I wouldn't get anything done.. So many fanboys that need a good ol verbal spanking and if you gave me a bunch of beer I would actually become their friends.. Eww gross.

 

 

First, could it just be that the people who didn't vote for it is tired of mindless grinding?

Again.. A Gross over exaggeration of those games.. "Grind XP" never entered peoples vocabulary until MMO's became popular. You never had to grind anything in any IE game unless you wanted to.. which IMO was stupid/pointless.

Mmmm i remember in secret of mana grinding away to level up my fire spells and levels before the first main boss and basically every new area whenever i gain new caps on my abilities. Ff3 i remember grinding up my characters to learn new magic and become higher levels. Same with FF7. I remember grinding alot in dragon warrior games, basically spending a whole afternoon grinding slimes to get enough cash for all the gear the first town had and to be able to successfully survive wandering trying to find next town. I remember grinding in legends of lagoon because of just simply following the quest line strictly meant that u were under level and undergeared for the boss fights. I remember grinding in earthbound for new weapons and being able to survive because i felt i needed higher level spells and abilities to survive. In dragon age and mass effect, I remember going and finding every enemy so i could be at the topest level as i was doing the main quests. Ahhh i could go on and on about the many games ive played thru the years and will say ive known about grinding wayyyyy before wow even came out lmao. And i havent even touched isometric games yet until the past few years.

Edited October 19, 201411 yr by redneckdevil

....Ahhh i could go on and on about the many games ive played thru the years and will say ive known about grinding wayyyyy before wow even came out lmao. And i havent even touched isometric games yet until the past few years.

 

It's largely irrelevant, since of all the games you mention, exactly zero of them are IE games or even play like IE games. In addition, he never claimed grinding didn't exist prior to MMO's, he said it didn't enter people's vocabulary, so people like yourself may have been doing it, but it might not have had a name. For all intent and purposes, the term "grinding" didn't really become prevalent until the explosion of MMO's, which is what his point was.

I don't understand the 'grinding' argument.  I don't think the problem is that slaughter is necessary, only that it is incentivized.  I'm not arguing in favor of kill XP, but I don't think it's 'grinding' per se, but the reward creates a huge incentive, even if the actual amount of XP for most folks won't necessarily be game breaking.

 

I think we should look at rewards holistically.  XP is the single biggest jackpot.  It is not first among equals in the arena of rewards.  It is the king of the reward court.  However, there are many other rewards in the game, from loot, reputation, STEAM achievements, bragging rights, and story based rewards.  I think it would be cool to discuss the reward system in the big picture, which is why ol' boney's poll could be cool if it didn't always boil down to XP.  <.<  Not his fault, just the way it is.

 

 

First, could it just be that the people who didn't vote for it is tired of mindless grinding?

Again.. A Gross over exaggeration of those games.. "Grind XP" never entered peoples vocabulary until MMO's became popular. You never had to grind anything in any IE game unless you wanted to.. which IMO was stupid/pointless.

Mmmm i remember in secret of mana grinding away to level up my fire spells and levels before the first main boss and basically every new area whenever i gain new caps on my abilities. Ff3 i remember grinding up my characters to learn new magic and become higher levels. Same with FF7. I remember grinding alot in dragon warrior games, basically spending a whole afternoon grinding slimes to get enough cash for all the gear the first town had and to be able to successfully survive wandering trying to find next town. I remember grinding in legends of lagoon because of just simply following the quest line strictly meant that u were under level and undergeared for the boss fights. I remember grinding in earthbound for new weapons and being able to survive because i felt i needed higher level spells and abilities to survive. In dragon age and mass effect, I remember going and finding every enemy so i could be at the topest level as i was doing the main quests. Ahhh i could go on and on about the many games ive played thru the years and will say ive known about grinding wayyyyy before wow even came out lmao. And i havent even touched isometric games yet until the past few years.

 

 

Yeah and a lot of us have played games in the past as well. And I've never heard of the term 'grinding' before MMOs. However, I have heard other terms like farming. You know like farming resources in rts games to make your side more powerful. Exploring other parts of the map to farm resources before the enemy does. Depends on how you view it. I don't ever recall 'grinding' and it never felt like a grind in those early games. However, in MMO's which I don't play anymore, it did feel like a grind.

I don't understand the 'grinding' argument.  I don't think the problem is that slaughter is necessary, only that it is incentivized.  I'm not arguing in favor of kill XP, but I don't think it's 'grinding' per se, but the reward creates a huge incentive, even if the actual amount of XP for most folks won't necessarily be game breaking.

 

I think we should look at rewards holistically.  XP is the single biggest jackpot.  It is not first among equals in the arena of rewards.  It is the king of the reward court.  However, there are many other rewards in the game, from loot, reputation, STEAM achievements, bragging rights, and story based rewards.  I think it would be cool to discuss the reward system in the big picture, which is why ol' boney's poll could be cool if it didn't always boil down to XP.  <.<  Not his fault, just the way it is.

 

I disagree.

 

XP is hardly the single biggest incentive. Take for example Deus Ex. Let's say that getting Paul killed has a higher XP reward. Do you still feel that this option would be the most favored one?

Edited October 19, 201411 yr by Captain Shrek