Unnecessary features

[Hiro Protagonist II]

It sounded like Obsidian was designing the game by stretch goal without a clear vision.

[player1]

My take on this is that all half-backed features should be either removed or improved to not be half-backed.

 

IMHO these include:

 

1) Stronghold

Current implementation is not well integrated with the game. Like if it is mini-game on its own. It is also big money sink just for the sake of being money sink. I'm ok with something just sinking money, but then give something back too. Also tieing half of the economy to turns and other hand (hireling pay) to days is really bad implementation.

 

2) "Sponsored adds" by Kickstarter backers

I completely understand why this was done. Obisidian needed money to make game, and needed to add strong backer rewards for people that donated a lot of money to the game.

 

But due to this, game suffered and is weaker then it should be. Soul watching of backer NPCs is big fluff that gets boring really quickly, and NPCs themselves detract from game experience due to being "too shiny", yet totally irrelevant for the game. Especially considering that whole godlike population of Drywood consists of backers.

 

On the other hand, kickstartered tomstones were done pretty well, without detracting from the game.

[player1]

As separate post, here are comments on other suggestions.

 

1) Supply mechanic.

Love it. It is just right mechanic to manage classes with per rest abilities.

 

But I would like adding some level of urgency to campaign, to reward more players that spent less time in resting then others.

 

If there is some conflict in campaign, have it gradually escalate over time. Have it controlled through difficulty or some other slider (off, low, medium, high).

 

2) Custom companions.

I do not have problem with them as such. But I would really like if story companions are not tied to the same 15 point attribute rules. They are, after all, story companions, not player created characters. They should have their attributes allocated based on their personality and should use over 15 points if needed. After all, they are special story companions.

 

Even in old BG games, their companions had unusual high attribute total. But since they were predefined and not optimized, it was OK.

 

As for custom companions, I would like if their mercenaries role is better reflected. Let them have upkeep, instead of one-time pay. Maybe even have it negotiable. Up front sum for some time, or right on share of loot during adventuring or something...

Edited April 28, 2015 by player1

[Nakia]

Althernai's reply is excellent just what I wanted to say but think how to say it.  :D   Obsidian's Kickstarter was a ground breaker.   The fact that they reached their starting goal in around 31 hours was headline game news.  Also as a backer I really think Obsidian does appreciate what we did and our support.  

 

Thank you, Althernai. for your post.

[Sedrefilos]

What would you like to see removed in future PoE games?

 

For me it's:

 

- Limited camping supplies. Stupid beyond comprehension. Especially when you can carry like 80 suits of armor. Oh, another thing that needs to be removed. "Take everything" is just dumbing down to please modern gamers. 

 

- Custom made companions. Devalues real companions and makes them detached from the story. 

 

- Stronghold. Just forget about it. It belongs in different kind of games. Give us a room in the inn, a house in the city or something like that. Why does every game has to have a stronghold?

 

- Enchanting/crafting. Again, why does this has to be in every f...ing game? Stop being lazy devs and make interesting items. Creating high level merchant or smith who will do this kind of work if he is provided with unique material and lots of gold would make sooo much more sense. 

 

Instead of all this superficial stuff I would like to see more attention given to combat, items, dungeon design, encounter design, lore, story, npc depth, dialogue etc.

Limited supplies is a good mechanic and makes resting more meaningful, immersive and strategic. Has nothing to do with how many items you can carry.

 

The rest of the points are optional. Don't want them? Don't do them.

[Captain Shrek]

I like limited camping supplies as a way to produce strategically interesting challenges (as opposed to resting whenever I want), and I like custom made companions, which only 'devalue' NPC companions if you somehow believe you don't have a choice, and contribute greatly to longevity of the game, just like they did in IE games. 

 

Strongholds are cool but POE's is crap and you can tell it's a consequence of ambitious KS stretch goals making them unable to scrap it. It should either be expanded / improved greatly, or removed.

 

Limited camping and healing implementations are horrible. The idea itself is good though. Half-a**ed things like no healing but yeah inns cure everything make the game a chore. A better solution would have been limiting total capacity, restricted resting or at least danger-prone resting in certain areas. 

 

Still haven't understood why the HP/Stamina thing or no healing exists though. They contribute to bloating the game with unnecessary mechanics. removing the HP bar changes absolutely nothing. 

[Aotrs Commander]

Limited camping and healing implementations are horrible. The idea itself is good though. Half-a**ed things like no healing but yeah inns cure everything make the game a chore. A better solution would have been limiting total capacity, restricted resting or at least danger-prone resting in certain areas. 

 

Still haven't understood why the HP/Stamina thing or no healing exists though. They contribute to bloating the game with unnecessary mechanics. removing the HP bar changes absolutely nothing. 

 

 

Again, what would restricted resting have achieved but people complaining they had to tediously walk out of the dungeon to camp (like they do if they want to go to an inn now anyway)?

 

Resting in dangerous areas - just like saying "well, if the PCs are resting too much, ambush them in their sleep" is actually not a very good solution, since rather than discouraging people from resting for spell-spam, it punishes you for trying to rest when you really DO need to. Meaning you - ocne again - have to leave the dungeon to go and rest somewhere safe and still adding the same amount of busy work.

 

The alternative is to allow people to rest anywhere as often as they like, which then encourages rest-spam.

 

 

The HP/stamina thing is actually a good idea. Healing after combat is always a bit of tedious chore (and requires the cleric to use all the spell slots). This way, you basically remove that bit of book-keeping, but you achieve the same sort of effect of degrading the party's hit point reserves over time (making hit points a limited resource that you need to rest to regain IN EFFECT giving you the same results as hit points+spell healing, where you need to rest once you run out of the latter). Essentially, one can look at it as if the endurance regeneration after combat is the party's cleric casting his healing spells (or radiance) several times out of combat, but without you having to micromanage it.

 

Again the alternative is either to do it IE style (and thus you once again REQUIRE a cleric/druid and then they will have to spend all their spells healing OR again, back to rest spam) or you give a party unlimited hit points (and/or spells) and removing resting as mechanic altogther.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Aotrs Commander

[Eos]

I really don't understand how are you guys OK with all that? We should be striving for a game that is excellent and different from other mainstream games today. Not the game that is mediocre and same like mentioned games (minus fancy graphics, cinematics and VO).

 

Call it cynicism, call it realism, call it the death of idealism, but to me it's like this: I can focus on the flaws of the game (and bitch and moan about them on the forums) and consequently lessen my enjoyment of it or I like it for everything it has done right and have 100+ hours of great entertainment. Now I can't tell you that one thing is strictly better than the other, but I know which one I enjoy more :D

[Captain Shrek]

Why play the game. Set it on autoresolve. Problem solved.   

[Ink Blot]

2) Custom companions.

I do not have problem with them as such. But I would really like if story companions are not tied to the same 15 point attribute rules. They are, after all, story companions, not player created characters. They should have their attributes allocated based on their personality and should use over 15 points if needed. After all, they are special story companions.

 

Even in old BG games, their companions had unusual high attribute total. But since they were predefined and not optimized, it was OK.

 

 

As a counterpoint, I very much dislike this idea. For one thing, I find it cheesy that NPCs have access to abilities or higher ability scores than possible for the player. The companions are following you. Why would they bother if they're obviously more of a hero than you are? This kind of thing just doesn't sit right with me.

[player1]

They are npcs in living world. They certanly should not be tied to some arbitary character ability points.

 

And if their build has more ability points it does not mean that they will be better then player.

 

After all idea is that companion ability points are NOT optimized for their role, but given based on personality. Customized player character will always beat that.

Edited April 28, 2015 by player1

[Ink Blot]

They are npcs in living world. They certanly should not be tied to some arbitary character ability points.

 

And if their build has more ability points it does not mean that they will be better then player.

 

After all idea is that companion ability points are NOT optimized for their role, but given based on personality. Customized player character will always beat that.

Still doesn't sit right with me. My view is more old-school in that the player character(s) are viewed as exceptional and far above the norm. Even though the NPCs may also be viewed as exceptional, they still should be created under the same rules as the player is constrained to. As I noted, I find it cheesy and contrived when they can have abilities the player's class is restricted from picking, scores the player's race is restricted from attaining, or any combination of that.

[player1]

You mean like watcher abilities and cleric/paladin bonuses that are exclusive to player character only. :D

 

Note that I do understand your point.

I just do not agree that PC is any weaker if NPC have stats with higher ability total, as long as those characters are made role-play wise, instead min-maxed.

Edited April 28, 2015 by player1

[Ink Blot]

You mean like watcher abilities and cleric/paladin bonuses that are exclusive to player character only. :D

It's the Watcher/PC's story. When everyone's a special snowflake, no one's a special snowflake.

 

Anyway, we've made our points, I guess. Probably not going to find the middle ground on this one.

[Crucis]

My take on this is that all half-backed features should be either removed or improved to not be half-backed.

 

IMHO these include:

 

1) Stronghold

Current implementation is not well integrated with the game. Like if it is mini-game on its own. It is also big money sink just for the sake of being money sink. I'm ok with something just sinking money, but then give something back too. Also tieing half of the economy to turns and other hand (hireling pay) to days is really bad implementation.

 

2) "Sponsored adds" by Kickstarter backers

I completely understand why this was done. Obisidian needed money to make game, and needed to add strong backer rewards for people that donated a lot of money to the game.

 

But due to this, game suffered and is weaker then it should be. Soul watching of backer NPCs is big fluff that gets boring really quickly, and NPCs themselves detract from game experience due to being "too shiny", yet totally irrelevant for the game. Especially considering that whole godlike population of Drywood consists of backers.

 

On the other hand, kickstartered tomstones were done pretty well, without detracting from the game.

 

Oh puh-leeeeze.  If you're annoyed by backer NPCs, you've got bigger problems than them.  Just friggin' ignore them.  Simple as that.  There are zillions of commoners and nobles walking around the city as well.  Some might find it annoying that they have nothing more to say than a single line or so.  Would you want to dump them too?

 

Seriously, you and the other whiners on this need to get over it.  I don't mind them being there because they populate any of the cities and towns and make them look less empty.

[tinysalamander]

Its also ridiculous that I can enchant my weapon/armour in the midst of a dungeon without access to a smithy. I would also like a smith merchant to do any crafting (I'm an adventurer not a blacksmith).

 

My character is a priest. If I say this weapon is blessed by the flames Muspelheim it is.

[jackjack]

Either fix or obliterate the stronghold. It's an exercise in frustration at best, a bit of a tacked-on slap in the face at worst.

[bleakcabaler]

Enchanting is the worst. I'm halfway through the game and already have such amazing items (uniques enchanted by me) that I wonder why do I even bother checking the loot, I already know I have the best items available. It should be completely removed and uniques should be reworked. BG2 had a good itemization or did Sawyer hate it too?

 

Also some crafting recipies (Scroll of Paralysis) are trivializing the encounters. Arcanum and New Vegas were the only RPGs with good crafting, just dont do it at all if you cant make it right. 

[player1]

 

My take on this is that all half-backed features should be either removed or improved to not be half-backed.

 

IMHO these include:

 

1) Stronghold

Current implementation is not well integrated with the game. Like if it is mini-game on its own. It is also big money sink just for the sake of being money sink. I'm ok with something just sinking money, but then give something back too. Also tieing half of the economy to turns and other hand (hireling pay) to days is really bad implementation.

 

2) "Sponsored adds" by Kickstarter backers

I completely understand why this was done. Obisidian needed money to make game, and needed to add strong backer rewards for people that donated a lot of money to the game.

 

But due to this, game suffered and is weaker then it should be. Soul watching of backer NPCs is big fluff that gets boring really quickly, and NPCs themselves detract from game experience due to being "too shiny", yet totally irrelevant for the game. Especially considering that whole godlike population of Drywood consists of backers.

 

On the other hand, kickstartered tomstones were done pretty well, without detracting from the game.

 

Oh puh-leeeeze.  If you're annoyed by backer NPCs, you've got bigger problems than them.  Just friggin' ignore them.  Simple as that.  There are zillions of commoners and nobles walking around the city as well.  Some might find it annoying that they have nothing more to say than a single line or so.  Would you want to dump them too?

 

Seriously, you and the other whiners on this need to get over it.  I don't mind them being there because they populate any of the cities and towns and make them look less empty.

 

 

Well sure, I do ignore them. Just like commercials on TV.

Actually nope, it's more like credits going in the middle of the movie.

 

Anyway, the point stays, they are out of place with names and looks (at least godlikes) and do not improve the game in any way. They are compromise done in order to get game funded.

 

Same for not so stellar implementation of stronghold. It needed to be there, due to kickstarter goal, but was never implemented decently.

Edited April 28, 2015 by player1

[kaiki]

I like the backer NPCs. They make the world seem alive. It wasn't until I got to Defiance Bay on my first play through that I even found out they were backer NPCs, they blended in with the setting that well for me.

[player1]

Hmm... I think I finally found first non-backer godlike in the game. Some death godlike drunkard in Salty Mast.

 

Almost god worried that Obsidian pulled "only backers are godlikes".

Edited April 28, 2015 by player1

[scrotiemcb]

How enchanting should have been:

- "Slaying" should be enchant-only, but only effect Accuracy. This allows you to customize a weapon against specific encounters.

- "Lash" should be enchant-only, but instead of adding damage allow a possible alternative (ex: sword goes from Piercing/Slashing to Piercing/Slashing/Burn, whichever does most). This should allow you to customize a weapon against specific damage reductions.

- "Proofed" should be enchant-only, allowing customization against specfic incoming damage.

 

Everything else - everything - should be find-only.

[Sanctuary]

What would you like to see removed in future PoE games?

 

For me it's:

 

- Limited camping supplies. Stupid beyond comprehension. Especially when you can carry like 80 suits of armor. Oh, another thing that needs to be removed. "Take everything" is just dumbing down to please modern gamers. 

 

- Custom made companions. Devalues real companions and makes them detached from the story. 

 

- Stronghold. Just forget about it. It belongs in different kind of games. Give us a room in the inn, a house in the city or something like that. Why does every game has to have a stronghold?

 

- Enchanting/crafting. Again, why does this has to be in every f...ing game? Stop being lazy devs and make interesting items. Creating high level merchant or smith who will do this kind of work if he is provided with unique material and lots of gold would make sooo much more sense. 

 

Instead of all this superficial stuff I would like to see more attention given to combat, items, dungeon design, encounter design, lore, story, npc depth, dialogue etc.

 

Camping supplies is one of the most annoying "features" with the game for me, and it has absolutely nothing at all to do with difficulty and everything to do with actually being able to have fun with specific classes prior to level 9/11.

 

The custom made companions are pretty boring compared to the story companions, but it's just too bad that the story companions have completely ass stats for their classes and aren't worth taking after your initial playthrough with them, especially if you decide to play on Hard or PotD.  There's just no reason to take Durance ever, over a custom Priest with 16 Might, 16 Dex, 16 Int.

 

It's like the developers intentionally made their stats bad so that you had to pick between immersion and actual gameplay.

 

And yeah, the "unique" weapons are super boring.  Almost all of them just have a unique name, but copy/pasted abilities with almost none of them having anything truly unique about them.  Zzzzz.

 

 

I like limited camping supplies as a way to produce strategically interesting challenges (as opposed to resting whenever I want), and I like custom made companions, which only 'devalue' NPC companions if you somehow believe you don't have a choice, and contribute greatly to longevity of the game, just like they did in IE games. 

 

You would think that some people are simply playing another game entirely.  There's very few "strategies" in this game.  The same tactic works for 95% of the fights, so the only thing camping supplies does is limits how much you can actually try something new for a change.

 

 

 

 

- Limited camping supplies - disagree. You need *some* kind of limiter, else you end up doing the old BG "sleep after every fight".  Suddenly, every single fight, you have a whole days worth of spells, feats, etc. I found the Hard limit of 2 a bit annoying at first, changed my playstyle, and now I am fine with it.

As opposed to: tank runs in, group focus fires down/paralyzes biggest threat while a Wizard or two uses Chill Fog or Slicken every single fight; or a Druid does something similar?  Because that's what's been working from Normal through PotD.  Want to actually do something else?  Too bad, because camping supplies supresses experimentation and the same strat you can do from level one and three respectively works for the entire game on almost everything.

Edited April 28, 2015 by Sanctuary

[Naurgalen]

I too don't like the limited supplies: for me resting should be limited in a more rational and old school way: if you rest in the open / a dungeon you can -and probably will- be attacked. The chances would be adjusted by the amount of enemy's in the map and how near you are to them, but the risk should be permanent. Then map designers could have "protected places" (a hidden room, a sanctuary, a cave or whatever) where you could sleep with no problems like an Inn.

 

Stronghold and enchantments may be underdeveloped, but they have potential to be fun systems. Customizing is rarely a bad thing.

[Sannom]

For example, on completing quests (and depending on how the quest was completed) the player and/or companions could sometimes gain memories reflecting what they each took away spiritually/socially/personally/philosophically, while quest XP would reflect mundane skill training. You could then imbue items with those memories, which would provide thematically appropriate bonuses (say, a quest where you arrived too late to help someone may confer a movement speed bonus), and the bonuses you add would be used to generate a more... poetic, Avellonian sort of item description of how it feels to you as a Watcher, sort of like the personal biography section.

That's pretty much MotB's enchanting system, right? Then again, NWN2 and its add-ons could never quite choose one crafting system and stick with it.

 

The rest of the points are optional. Don't want them? Don't do them.

I would agree with you as far as crafting and custom companions are concerned, but not the Stronghold. That thing asks for too much investment to be so segregated from the rest of the game. At least crafting and custom companions are meant to help you in your adventures!

 

 

Still doesn't sit right with me. My view is more old-school in that the player character(s) are viewed as exceptional and far above the norm. Even though the NPCs may also be viewed as exceptional, they still should be created under the same rules as the player is constrained to. As I noted, I find it cheesy and contrived when they can have abilities the player's class is restricted from picking, scores the player's race is restricted from attaining, or any combination of that.

NWN2 didn't have a problem with setting up some of the character with over-the-top attribute points though. Looking at you, Bishop!