RPGCodex's first review discussion (part 2)

[LadyCrimson]

Original thread/part 1

Link to actual review: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=9867

Discuss/continue.

[Valsuelm]

If you guys abandoned the retarded policy of locking threads when they reach an arbitrary 'post limit', which unduly interrupts whatever conversation is being had, this thread wouldn't be necessary.

[GrinningReaper659]

If you guys abandoned the retarded policy of locking threads when they reach an arbitrary 'post limit', which unduly interrupts whatever conversation is being had, this thread wouldn't be necessary.

 

According to Tigranes, there is a technical issue which compels them to do so, on RPGCodex he said:

 

"The forum has a weird (read: stupid) quirk where after, say, 25 pages, we start to get some random errors, sometimes involving disappearing posts. Thus it is customary to close after that, and invite users to start new ones."

[Amentep]

IIRC the thread limits were instituted after a board upgrade on the old BIS boards.¹  The rationale was that threads of very long length became issues within the database.  In BIS's case, it created the "Black Hole" thread, where you could post and the reply wouldn't show up.  Or it would, randomly inserted somewhere in the thread making replies come pages before the message they're replying to. Eventually it caused a destabilization of the entire forum, screwed up indexing and ultimately ended up with the nuking of that board and moving to another. 

 

I'm assuming that the issue wasn't specific to any BBS or server and so has continued on so that a new "Black Hole" isn't ever created.

 

¹It's been awhile, so I could be wrong.

Edited April 27, 2015 by Amentep

[RedSocialKnight]

Aw dang it, I just came in to post this dumb graphic, and the other two thread got locked right then. Anyway:

 

[Anaeme]

I hope they all remain asleep and weary of the angst and bloodletting that has flowed freely for the past few days.

 

I am sure they have had enough right??

[Guest 4ward]

hey Sensuki i couldn't reply in the other thread since it's now locked, but if you're reading this, you might want to check out the game 'The last of us', i think it's for PS3 / PS4 only, my brother who's a BG2 and Homeworld fan is hooked. He plays it for the second time now on hard difficulty and says that it's a great game with good tactical combat. Perhaps that would be something worth checking out (if you haven't already)...

[dlux]

Logging back in after about 2 1/2 years just to say that I mostly agree with the RPG Codex review. 

 

Although I was a huge advocate of the project at first during the Kickstarter, I didn't like the direction that the game was going which is why I removed my pledge and left the project. Sad to see that most of my fears have been confirmed, I wish I could say that I really like the game and I was wrong for leaving the project, but I can't. I wanted for PoE to be on par with the IE games, but after playing it for a while I have determined that each and every IE game is clearly and vastly superior to PoE from a gameplay perspective (in my opinion). I would like to finish PoE, but I don't think that I will be able to. :/

 

I hope that you take the the criticism to heart when making PoE 2, although I doubt that this would be the case if PoE is a financial success.

 

Kudos to the art team, you guys did an absolutely amazing job.

 

Gruß

[Exoduss]

 

If you guys abandoned the retarded policy of locking threads when they reach an arbitrary 'post limit', which unduly interrupts whatever conversation is being had, this thread wouldn't be necessary.

 

According to Tigranes, there is a technical issue which compels them to do so, on RPGCodex he said:

 

"The forum has a weird (read: stupid) quirk where after, say, 25 pages, we start to get some random errors, sometimes involving disappearing posts. Thus it is customary to close after that, and invite users to start new ones."

 

Dissapearing Posts you mean LadyKitchen deleting them ? 

[aluminiumtrioxid]

hey Sensuki i couldn't reply in the other thread since it's now locked, but if you're reading this, you might want to check out the game 'The last of us', i think it's for PS3 / PS4 only, my brother who's a BG2 and Homeworld fan is hooked. He plays it for the second time now on hard difficulty and says that it's a great game with good tactical combat.

 

10/10, would get trolled again.

[constantine]

I hope they all remain asleep and weary of the angst and bloodletting that has flowed freely for the past few days.

 

I am sure they have had enough right??

Sure of that.

 

 

So, PoE's combat/overall experience can be made better. Let's start posting suggestions, however those will most likely be thought about for PoE2. But with some luck, the expansion will modify some rules ? Dark Souls 2 redesigned encounters with their latest patch.

 

Here I go:

-engagement: remove bonuses of disengagement attacks. Add talent to move for x seconds wihout provoking such attacks, albeit with less speed, like hobbled.

 

-status effects: grazes should prevent afflictions for some (if not all) of the effects. Crits shouldn't have x1.5 duration. Give immunities to some enemies (spirit immune to knockdown for instance) and modify spells that boost against certain afflictions to grant immunity instead. With some work, you can find balance by give-and-take.

 

-work on challenging enemy AI and add companion AI

 

 

-stretch out XP rewards for bestiary XP to killing +50% of given creature. Less quest XP, like -30% to individual XP reward

 

 

-collect copy-pasted encounters in some places and do some of the following:

Re-design enemy placement/type of them.

Make ambushes/enemies calling reinforcements.

Remove some.

 

 

-add more, if only for flavor, dialogue choices that acknowledge PC's class, background, race.

Have Disposition cancel one another: 1Cruel gets canceled by 1 Benevolent resulting to neutral (non-existant) Disposition.

 

 

-Attribute-related:

Make interrupts last longer but have them occur less likely (change concentration-interrupt formula). That way you give more merit to (Perception) interrupt builds.

Give more love to DEX- either have it give +4% action speed per point or have it also give 1 Deflection per point, or 1 Accuracy per 2 DEX points above 10 (with same penalties for below 10).

 

 

-Skills:

Have group Stealth work with an average of party members skill value.

Add Survival bonus alert the player that danger lurks ahead or patroling enemy is approaching (creature type/numbers). This way we will not have to stealth everywhere if there is a high survival guy in the party.

Have mechanics work without needing to go into inspect mode but at a closer range to the trap/hidden object and after a time delay (dependant on skill value)

 

-Finally, some core combat mechanic:

Allow player to escape combat through some 'escape button' that increases speed, but lowers defenses and leaves PCs open to disengagement attacks.

Then some enemies may pursue, others may not care, others may alert allies, depending on enemy AI and/or specific combat/quest scenario.

 

-Another core combat mechanic:

Have combat initiate inside a specific radius. That way companions out of the action cannot use combat-only abilities and others may approach the encounter from stealth.

 

 

That's the most of it, some issues having more importance than others, and issues that escaped my attention in the first place-

 

thoughts ?

 

*edit: typos

Edited April 27, 2015 by constantine

[kaiki]

"Have Disposition cancel one another: 1Cruel gets canceled by 1 Benevolent resulting to neutral (non-existant) Disposition."

 

I disagree with this suggestion. As there doesn't seem to be an issue with the system as is. People can have reputations (which is what disposition really is) as both benevolent and cruel at the same time, just usually not toward the same people. What would be interesting would be special dispositions that are gained from different combinations. Say Cruel 1 and Benevolent 1 would get you, just to come up with a name, Two-Faced 1. Instead of simplifying the disposition system I'd say go the other way and make it a more nuanced system.

[constantine]

"Have Disposition cancel one another: 1Cruel gets canceled by 1 Benevolent resulting to neutral (non-existant) Disposition."

 

I disagree with this suggestion. As there doesn't seem to be an issue with the system as is. People can have reputations (which is what disposition really is) as both benevolent and cruel at the same time, just usually not toward the same people. What would be interesting would be special dispositions that are gained from different combinations. Say Cruel 1 and Benevolent 1 would get you, just to come up with a name, Two-Faced 1. Instead of simplifying the disposition system I'd say go the other way and make it a more nuanced system.

Brilliant idea :D

[Cronstintein]

I think it's a pity Obsidian didn't steal the perk system from their own game, Alpha Protocol.  It's been too many years to recall specific examples but the gist of it:  You could say something bloodthirsty in a conversation and get a perk "Bloodthirsty" which would give some small buff like +2% damage.  In and of themselves the buffs were too small to matter really but at the end of the game you'd have a list of perks that were direct results from the RP decisions you made.  Was pretty rad.  (The whole game is great except for the part where you actually play it, sad really)

[kaiki]

I think it's a pity Obsidian didn't steal the perk system from their own game, Alpha Protocol.  It's been too many years to recall specific examples but the gist of it:  You could say something bloodthirsty in a conversation and get a perk "Bloodthirsty" which would give some small buff like +2% damage.  In and of themselves the buffs were too small to matter really but at the end of the game you'd have a list of perks that were direct results from the RP decisions you made.  Was pretty rad.  (The whole game is great except for the part where you actually play it, sad really)

 

I like that idea. I would hazard a guess that they didn't use a system like that as it would have seemed too "outside" what the IE games did. I hope for PoE 2 they push those boundaries and implement a really robust system for dialog choices outside of "You deserve this gold more then me, keep it starving peasant." "Oh thank you! Take my grandmother's magic ring! It may be worth 10x more then my reward but you deserve something for being benevolent."

[Ink Blot]

"Have Disposition cancel one another: 1Cruel gets canceled by 1 Benevolent resulting to neutral (non-existant) Disposition."

 

I disagree with this suggestion. As there doesn't seem to be an issue with the system as is. People can have reputations (which is what disposition really is) as both benevolent and cruel at the same time, just usually not toward the same people. What would be interesting would be special dispositions that are gained from different combinations. Say Cruel 1 and Benevolent 1 would get you, just to come up with a name, Two-Faced 1. Instead of simplifying the disposition system I'd say go the other way and make it a more nuanced system.

I like this idea as well. Something further or alternatively: everyone has different and sometimes conflicting traits, depending on who they're dealing with. Perhaps if you use the cruel response to someone, that's your reputation with anyone affiliated with them. Or, that's your reputation in that town. So you could end up cruel in Dyrford but benevolent in Defiance Bay. Or honest to the Dozen but deceptive to the Justiciars. Something like that. After all, I felt the traits were not really about how your character actually is inherently, but more about how others perceived him/her.

[Anaeme]

I really wonder if Obsidian is aware of what has been going on?

 

None of the developers have uttered a peep since all this began

[scrotiemcb]

I think it's a pity Obsidian didn't steal the perk system from their own game, Alpha Protocol... (The whole game is great except for the part where you actually play it, sad really)

I think you just wrote my one-sentence review of PoE.

[Karkarov]

If you guys abandoned the retarded policy of locking threads when they reach an arbitrary 'post limit', which unduly interrupts whatever conversation is being had, this thread wouldn't be necessary.

You say that like the other thread was necessary in the first place?  If it wasn't a RPG codex review it wouldn't have gotten it's own thread and that is sort of dumb on many levels.

[Stun]

I think it's a pity Obsidian didn't steal the perk system from their own game, Alpha Protocol.  It's been too many years to recall specific examples but the gist of it:  You could say something bloodthirsty in a conversation and get a perk "Bloodthirsty" which would give some small buff like +2% damage.  In and of themselves the buffs were too small to matter really but at the end of the game you'd have a list of perks that were direct results from the RP decisions you made.  Was pretty rad.  (The whole game is great except for the part where you actually play it, sad really)

Yep. That's what I would have liked to see. And I can think of a few games that did that, not just Alpha Protocol. Divinity Original Sin did it, and sometimes the perks were significant. Like if you continued to be "bold" or whatever in conversations you eventually got a perk that made you immune to Fear.... stuff like that. Stuff that made your Role play style become *tangible*, and relevant to gameplay beyond just getting a few extra lines of NPC dialogue during quests like: "Hey, I heard you were Diplomatic. I need your diplomatic help!".

 

I'm not going to overly criticize PoE's reputation system, because its existence is at least net positive. But I will say that they'd do well to....turbo charge it. Make it matter in the game more than it currently does.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Stun

[Cronstintein]

Yeah, Divinity's was also interesting!  I liked it, but it did tend to make me want to 'game' it so that I could manage the perks intentionally. 

 

While the fluffy way it's handled in PoE is okay, I would like a mechanical/consequencial style difference even better. 

Even something simple like:

[dishonest > 2] Ack, I'm not going to ask this guy for help, he'll probably just take my gold and leave! 

[constantine]

Yeah, Divinity's was also interesting! I liked it, but it did tend to make me want to 'game' it so that I could manage the perks intentionally.

 

While the fluffy way it's handled in PoE is okay, I would like a mechanical/consequencial style difference even better.

Even something simple like:

[dishonest > 2] Ack, I'm not going to ask this guy for help, he'll probably just take my gold and leave!

Great example of how to do it.

[kaiki]

Yeah, Divinity's was also interesting!  I liked it, but it did tend to make me want to 'game' it so that I could manage the perks intentionally. 

 

While the fluffy way it's handled in PoE is okay, I would like a mechanical/consequencial style difference even better. 

Even something simple like:

[dishonest > 2] Ack, I'm not going to ask this guy for help, he'll probably just take my gold and leave! 

 

I'm playing through D:OS right now. The problem I have with the system is the feeling that every reputation type is good. Because you get the perks while PoE seems less "gamey". I do like your example of "dishonest > 2", exactly what I hope will be in PoE 2. The only issue I could see with that type of system is when I did my run through with reputation tags off in the dialog window I ended up with 1 of every type, even though I thought I was playing a simple compassionate & passionate guy. I think they'd need to telegraph the actions that would create negative consequences beyond what PoE does, otherwise I want it.

[Sabin Stargem]

Disposition ought to represent the player's personality, not their reputation.   A deceitful person might not be known to others as deceitful, since that is the point:  To fool other people about who you truly are.  A deceiver won't advertise this, unless they are very stupid.

 

However, having perks arise from taking various actions would make sense.  For example:

 

"Generous":  You are a magnanimous sort, having often freely given to others.  Unfortunately, many unscrupulous types have taken to trying to play upon your charitable nature, overcharging for their services.

 

+20% costs when buying items, -20% profit from selling, easier to persuade Honest and Benevolent characters.   Some quest givers will attempt to fleece the generous.   Earned by giving to others without verifying their need.

[talharbash]

I really wonder if Obsidian is aware of what has been going on?

 

None of the developers have uttered a peep since all this began

 

They can't really post here and agree with people who don't like the game. Also they can't really post here and argue with their customer.

 

I mean they can but it wouldn't be wise. Best for them to take notes and improve the next title or deliver a better experience with the DLC.