I learned that fights don't give you experience

[Wicelo]

This is not a choice you want to make, it's supposed to be the spiritual successor to Baldur's gate.

 

Also I dislike the fact that you can kick caracters from your group and make a group by your own it kills all the atmosphere present in baldur's gate, you are not supposed to chose the people you meet in an rpg. You should be able to make only the main caracter.

 

I really hope you change those 2 things or the game won't be very good...

[Lord Wafflebum]

1) The no combat experience has been covered ad nauseum in the beta forums. If you haven't already, I recommend checking out some of those threads. You do get pseudo-combat experience from bestiary entries after killing enemies. Not the same, I know, but the removal of combat xp is in an attempt to keep folks from having to grind xp from killing things. Instead xp distribution is done mostly by quest completion. The merits of both have been thoroughly debated, but personally I think the way the have it set up will be just fine.

 

2) You could create custom parties in BG. I did it constantly. Regardless, there's nothing forcing you to make more than the one character. There are several companions you can pick up through the game that have their own personalities and such just like in BG. It's all a matter of personal preference on how you want to play.

 

3) Really? Those two things will be the deciding factors on whether or not the game is good? On what basis will those two things utterly ruin the game?

[anameforobsidian]

I think the quality of the game depends on a lot of things.  Lots of people are unhappy about the lack of combat xp, its been talked over and over and over.  Obsidian settled on a bestiary system, where you learn about beasts as you fight them and get experience from that.

 

The mercenaries are one of the relatively few changes that have been almost universally approved of.  Sure you couldn't do it in Baldur's Gate, but you could do it in Icewind Dale.  Many people even played BGII as a singleplayer in multiplayer mode so they could load their own characters for the party.  Finally, if you don't like it, this is one of the relatively few changes that is easy to ignore. 

 

While you're having unpleasant revelations, you probably won't be happy to find out:

mages can't do everything in PE,

there's incredibly little buffing before fights,

there's an engagement system (which means the enemy gets a free hit if you run away),

there are grazes instead of misses,

and more depending on your preferences.

Edited January 4, 2015 by anameforobsidian

[Lord Wafflebum]

Ohh, that's right, I forgot when I made custom parties in BG it was through "multiplayer." I never used multiplayer for anything other than creating a custom party

[LadyCrimson]

Being a spiritual successor doesn't mean exactly the same. They're keeping the atmosphere and general gameplay/workings/looks of the BG-type games while also taking the opportunity to try to improve or advance some stuff. As great as those past games were, they weren't without faults and maybe with hindsight some things can be improved/better. I can understand why some folks have reservations about some of the changes, but maybe an open mind isn't a bad idea.

 

eg, let's try it before jumping to conclusions that it'll ruin the game, simply because it's not what you're used to seeing in the older games.

 

...personally, I don't really need the xp-grind. I'm used to that, sure, but I don't need it, if what takes its place works just as well. We shall see.

[Nakia]

This is not a choice you want to make, it's supposed to be the spiritual successor to Baldur's gate.

 

Also I dislike the fact that you can kick caracters from your group and make a group by your own it kills all the atmosphere present in baldur's gate, you are not supposed to chose the people you meet in an rpg. You should be able to make only the main caracter.

 

I really hope you change those 2 things or the game won't be very good...

Looks as if this may not be the game for you.

1) Since the game has a combat and non-combat path giving XP for killing things would unbalance the game so the devs have come up with other ways to get XP.

2) Making your own party is the players choice.  You can ignore it if you wish.

[Katarack21]

I strongly dislike the non-combat XP. Then again, I'm not a huge fan of the endurance/health separation or of a few other things. The game still looks quite fun and very playable; the combat looks interesting and I can't wait to play it. There is no game out there where I love literally every single decision the developers made, so...I guess I just don't understand the complaining.

I haven't seen anything actually game-breaking bad at all.

[Nakia]

Unless a game is specifically written for an individual I think it impossible for a game to be perfect.  I think for me Planescape/Torment and Morrowind came the closest but each had a few bugs  and Morrowind a few details I would have liked changed or expanded.

 

Developers cannot please everyone all the time and so have to make choices.  They also have time and budget constraints to deal with.

[Yellow Rabbit]

Ouch. Wicelo, hello and welcome in "I know better" club! It's good to see our numbers growing. Although you may want to learn the main rule of this club: all members are going to be completely ignored by whoever is busy with crafting that PoE thing. And rightfully so.

 

About your OP:

1) Combat XP just not going to be there. Whether it for better, for worse or doesn't matter isn't clear yet. Being debated.

2) Don't worry, you'll have both options - make just main character and look for companions around or make full party from scratch. That is, when PoE will come out of the beta. It's still for testing, not playing, you know.

[PrimeJunta]

Oh goody. Another let's qq about combat XP thread.

[Nakia]

Oh goody. Another let's qq about combat XP thread.

I think we can expect this a lot in the future.  People are accustom to getting XP for fighting.  Seems to be pretty traditional in games.   Players will have a hard timne understanding that there is at theoretically a non-combat path and the devs have tried to balance this. 

[Hassat Hunter]

Even though pretty much every RPG which has used Objective XP rather than per-kill-XP has turned out to be so good they pretty much make every list of "Best RPG ever", or even "Best game ever"... :/

 

Who here wouldn't want a *real* Deus Ex sequel or Vampire: Bloodlines II?

[rjshae]

 

Oh goody. Another let's qq about combat XP thread.

I think we can expect this a lot in the future.  People are accustom to getting XP for fighting.  Seems to be pretty traditional in games.   Players will have a hard timne understanding that there is at theoretically a non-combat path and the devs have tried to balance this. 

 

It's classic Pavlovian conditioning: kill the monster; the bell rings and you get a treat. Some experienced players may have a hard time getting past that. In addition to replacing this with the monster lore XP, the game could reward the player with random comments from NPCs. "Ooh, I just love a skilled bandersnatch slayer!"

[Valsuelm]

Unless a game is specifically written for an individual I think it impossible for a game to be perfect.

 

Eh... I disagree.

 

Chrono Trigger

A Link to the Past

Nethack

Diablo

Warcraft 3

Baldur's Gate

Baldur's Gate 2

Planescape Torment

World of Warcraft in late Vanilla and early BC

Civilization 4: BTS

 

I could name more.

 

All of the above were amazing games, and widely acclaimed. Not for everyone of course, but nothing is, and out of the people who loved those games you won't find many stating that they'd want much changed in them. ie: I doubt too many who backed PoE who did so because the spirit of Baldur's Gate was primarily channeled would want to change much about that game.

 

Yes, there are a couple minor things I'd change with all but the first three (those really are perfect), but they are mostly UI changes. ie: The one thing I'd change in the original BG is the tedium of the inventory system, or remove the XP cap (but a mod can do that), and that's really about it. BG2 I'd remove the 'romances' and revert to the more open world of BG1. Anon.

 

We're talking about a major design decision that is not ignorable, not a minor UI issue or things that are ignorable.

 

Obviously, I'm still going to play the game, and hope it's good. But the decision in regards to Combat XP and a few other biggies give me reservations in regards to the direction the game design was taken in.

 

'If it's not broken don't fix it' comes to mind. I just hope all the fixing of things that weren't broken doesn't diminish the quality of the game experience. Unfortunately I don't know of a single game out there that had a lot of things fixed that weren't broken come out for the better. I most certainly am hoping that PoE is the exception.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Valsuelm

[Luckmann]

Even though pretty much every RPG which has used Objective XP rather than per-kill-XP has turned out to be so good they pretty much make every list of "Best RPG ever", or even "Best game ever"... :/

 

Who here wouldn't want a *real* Deus Ex sequel or Vampire: Bloodlines II?

Goal-oriented experience is always superior to Murderhobo-oriented experience simply because it allows you to design a game with roleplaying in mind, rather than the experience doleout and discrepancies that arises from presenting a player with wildly disproportionate rewards.

 

Let us all take a moment to remember Deus Ex: Human Revolution and how it changed Deus Ex from Objective-based Experience to Murderhobo-based Experience, and how you ended up killing absolutely everyone simply because it gave you experience, whether your character was built for it or not.

[Nakia]

In the above list I will give Planescape/Torment a 97 +, that one was almost perfect there were some bugs though but no game breakers.  The rest{ maybe perfect for you.  Which is why I say a game can not be perfect because even if some find it perfect others won't.

 

Added:  I would give a close to perfect for a TES expansion to Oblivion, Shivering Isles.     But it isn't a stand alone game.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Nakia

[Hassat Hunter]

@ Luckmann; Funny... I also regularly pointed out how DX -> DX:HRs difference in dishing out skillpoints totally changed the gameplay and didn't actually allow different playstyles anymore. You can probably find it in several of the XP-discussion threads around here.

 

Also a fun anacdote to add here (that isn't in those threads), the creators of the awesome "The Nameless Mod" also thought about adding 'ghost bonus' to their mod. But in the end they got cut since it wasn't in line with the DX-philosophy. HR guys should have picked something up from them, that mod is better than a full multi-million game like Human Revolution... :/

[Bryy]

No game is ever going to be 1:1 of another game.

[HoonDing]

Action games like Metal Gear Revengeance, Ninja Gaiden and God Hand have combat xp which varies on whether you killed enemies quickly and stylishly.  It makes sense in these games for skill to be rewarded.

Not so much in arrpeegee, where all you do is click on enemies and watch them die. Zero skill involved.

[Wazgrel]

Wow no exp for monsters? 

 

If anything, it's going to be a great experiment. I'm interested in trying such system out and seeing how it affects the gameplay. 

 

On one hand you have a game where you don't have to clear out the enitre lairs, commiting a species genocides, in order to gain levels and be competent later in the game. Also it provides a more thought for exploration, like having to decide - is it really worth it checking out that dead end and seeing if there's anything worthy there, risking party memebers and wasting potions. 

 

On the other hand removing exp for combat is like taking away one of the main aspects of the RPG. Which is pretty scary. Because if the whole thing doesn't really work or feels funky it might ruin the experience for people.

 

In both cases Obsidian has balls for doing something like it. Super excited for the game. I wish we had a release date though.

Edited January 8, 2015 by Wazgrel

[PrimeJunta]

Kill XP is not a "main aspect of an RPG." There are lots of RPG's without kill XP, both pen-and-paper and computer. Off the top of my head, Vampire: Bloodlines, Shadowrun Returns, and Numenera, to name three.

[Leferd]

Mass Effect 2 and Alpha Protocol also don't use Kill XP.

 

Neither did the Witch's Wake module for NWN.

[Gfted1]

Technically, you do get kill xp, its just been renamed Beastiary xp. And I think it has diminishing returns but Im not 100% on that. Basically it functions as a poor mans ECL.

[rjshae]

Does anybody know if there is going to be Training XP? I.e. use the loot to buy training from a master.

[Failion]

I like what underail a indie rpg has going for its experience system. You get to choices oddity or classic. Classic you gain xp like baldurs gate and those other old school games by killing stuff and completing quests. In oddity mode you get xp not by killing things but by collecting items in game world your guy studies and gains xp from. Gives more flexibility on character builds. Enemies still do though drop items your guys can study and get xp from and crafting materials. You  can still reach level cap going stealthy and not being very combat focused which is great thing about oddity experience system.

 

It seems what Obsidian done is having something similar to oddity to please people that like to kill things. but instead of studying body parts from dead monsters the more u kill them more bestiary you unlocked.

 

http://www.underrail.com/wiki/index.php?title=Oddity_XP_System