Is there a reason Boots of Evasion exist?

[Cottonmouth]

 

That's a case against having such a high powered trap placed there, not that the gloves shouldn't be random.

 

 

That said, I thought BG2's non random items were just fine, even if subsequent playthroughs were always going to be about quickly getting all the best gear.

Well here's my case:

- Barring the gloves the only way you can get to that skill level (rk.13 + resting bonus) is to have a rogue dedicated to nothing else but mechanic, and level the rogue to lv.11.

- The rk. 15 traps are placed in WM. Meaning you do them at lv. 7-10.

- To even get the rogue companion you need to first get through that dungeon riddled with rk.13+ traps. Or you'll have to possibly game the RP system by making a skill slave rogue you otherwise won't use.

- If you go to the dungeon without a skill slave rogue that are no less than 2 instances where you may walk into an otherwise undetectable instant-death trap. On POTD difficulty that means your playthrough is DONE.

 

So yes the gloves are pretty essential. It is doable (I did it) without gaming the system. But the whole experience felt unfair to me, because the game deliberately didn't give me all the necessary tools to get through it.

 

Looks like the traps are too high powered. They should be weakened a little bit so the gloves aren't an essential item.

[Rathlord]

 

 

 

 

Guess again, entitlement generation.

 

You don't "deserve" to have the game modeled around you. This is an ignorant, arrogant fallacy that gamers have dreamed up for themselves and now consider fact. Everyone doesn't "deserve" to be able to play the game how they want to.

 

The game is modeled after the developers goals and vision. Do they take feedback? Sure they do, and that's awesome. But no one deserves to have the game forced to match their expectations. They were quite honest about what this game would be when it was being made.

 

So no, he doesn't need to "demand" satisfaction from a game he's metagaming and playing in a way not in the vision of the developers. The game isn't built around min/maxing and if that steps on your toes- too effing bad. I don't go on Call of Duty forums and whine about how it's not a realistic shooter. He wants something from this game that it isn't designed for.

 

Have fun with the game the devs (and majority of the fans wanted) or don't. It's not sweat off my brow. But don't act like anyone is entitled to anything other than the game they paid for- which is exactly what they got. No one anywhere was led to believe this game would have any specific loot system without RNG.

 

If you wanna argue it's not fun for you- fine, argue that to your heart's content. But don't bring up how it's fine to demand whatever you want out of a game. That's not appropriate or accurate.

 

Guess what, entitlement generation are the ones buying games now. Times have changed. Taking consumer feedback isn't just a cool thing to do. It's an absolute necessity. Why do you think PoE was on Kickstarter? Do you seriously think you can develop a $60 game without giving people like OP what they want?

 

AAA gaming isn't high art. If you are that specific about your vision and goal of antagonizing players. Make a $20 indie game. Plenty of people love that (myself included). You make a $60 game. You make mass market adjustments and try to satisfy everyone. And you start acting like you care.

 

As a consumer of course I'm going to be stand on the side of another consumer. Even if I don't want what the OP wants, his demands as a fellow consumer empowers me. And so should you. Because you are as much as a consumer as we are.

 

And you don't know more about "visions and goals" more than any of us. You don't work for OBS. Or you would've been fired for belittle the OP, aka people who put food on your table.

 

 

Thinks that gamers are good at designing games. Sorry to break it to you, but they aren't, and 99% of the time gamers don't even know what's fun or makes a good experience. I work in the industry, I've seen the oodles and oodles of bad ideas vomited repeatedly by people. You can take consumer feedback into consideration without caving to every person who whines about how they demand something be changed.

 

It's not belittling people to call bad ideas bad. But the only thing that approaches the entitlement we see here is the fits that are thrown when people don't get what they want. Consumers have always funded video games. Always. Maybe not as directly, but that still doesn't mean one individual or even a small group gets to determine how a game should be made. You aren't standing on the side of the consumer. You're standing on the side of garbage game development. I've seen time and again games fall apart because they try to pander to too many bad ideas. It's a crucial, critical flaw in many game developers and you can find the evidence of it plastered all over the internet if you have the will to look.

 

I get it. You feel like you're important when you make a stand. You feel even better when your ideas get incorporated into a game. But that doesn't mean all ideas are good ideas, and the only thing you get for blindly supporting everyone who makes a game suggestion is a reputation for not having any common sense. Chose your battles and make stands for ideas that have merit, not because theoretically you feel empowered and tingly for supporting a consumer.

 

Now, if you'd rather discuss the relative merits of the ideas posted here rather than how ridiculously entitled and demanding you are, I'd be happy to have that discussion without the need to be so blunt.

Edited September 24, 2015 by Rathlord

[Oralaina]

Guys, if you want to do "dueling tongues" how about you take it to private blogs somewhere?  Nothing either of you are posting is really germane to any of the issues being discussed here.

[Rathlord]

Hmm, can't say I can recall a game where RNG loot has given me any worthwhile replay value, let alone huge. I've found deep gameplay systems that allow for multiple ways of accomplishing the same goal, that are satisfying to execute, give replay value. The chance to get different gear than I got last time? I can't see that making me want to play through something again.

 

Maybe it could be nice -in addition- to the above, depending on game design in certain genres. But by itself, no chance of saving a game from an uninstall after completion. On the other hand, it's easy to see how RNG in a game based on class/party builds, significant RNG in loot just spoils the whole thing. (Like really, not getting your Holy Avenger in BG2 when you wanted to be a pally? That'd be terribe).

 

RNG in fights would help a ton in a game like this, where most fights aren't really 'designed' encounters, more just some random mobs standing around. Would spice if up to have some different mobs standing around, though not a great deal. (Idealy solution is less trash fights and more designed encounters, but that starts pushing towards a different genre).

 

I prefer limitations and choices on what one can do in a single playthrough myself, to encourage replay value. It's not terribly hard to do, but most RPG's tend to go the way of letting you get almost everything in a single run. Constraints breed creativity and all that.

 

 

I can definitely empathize with how you feel. I do agree that in some ways it almost feels a bit half-arsed, how it's currently implemented, with psuedo-random loot. It encourages bad, unfun gameplay (resting over and over to get items; why not truly make it random so it can't be gamed?). It should have been an all or nothing system.

 

But I still don't agree with this:

 

 

 

On the other hand, it's easy to see how RNG in a game based on class/party builds, significant RNG in loot just spoils the whole thing. (Like really, not getting your Holy Avenger in BG2 when you wanted to be a pally? That'd be terribe).

 

I could only get behind this idea if having good loot were required to progress through the game. But it's really not. In BG2 you could go through the whole game without the Holy Avenger. In PoE you can make it through the whole game without any specific items. So I don't feel the criticism is terribly valid. If you get an awesome item- awesome! If not, there's always next time. If you envision a world without wikis (which is where this genre thrives anyways), if you didn't set your expectations around getting certain items, you'd never know you were missing them. And that would free you to play the game any way you wanted, without disappointments.

 

Now, I'm certainly not one to disparage how anyone plays. If your fun revolves around getting specific items, while I kind of feel you're missing the point- that's fine. And if the majority or even a large portion of the playerbase feels that way, and I'm in the minority- they definitely need to look into this. But if it's just a small minority, I don't feel they have an obligation to change it up just for the minority playing the game in a way it's not particularly designed to be played. You seem to have been very rational about the discussion so far, and I appreciate that. I'd love to see what a larger sample size of the players think about current loot distribution.

 

 

As a rambl-y sidenote, I think a lot of people's obsession with gear actually has its ontogenesis with MMO's. I've found myself more and more drawn to trying to gear my characters perfectly in genres outside MMO's the more experience I get with them. I don't play them much anymore, but I see a definite impact on gamers in general. MMO's condition you to always want the best in a very psychological way. I wonder if we'd even be having this conversation if it weren't for them- it's an ideology that's only seeped into people's minds in the last decade or so, and it seems a very direct link to me.

 

[Rathlord]

Guys, if you want to do "dueling tongues" how about you take it to private blogs somewhere?  Nothing either of you are posting is really germane to any of the issues being discussed here.

 

See my post above

 

Edit: There's a joke in there... something about being unarmed for the duel. Too lazy to type it out, just laugh, please.

Edited September 24, 2015 by Rathlord

[Rathlord]

Hmm, can't say I can recall a game where RNG loot has given me any worthwhile replay value, let alone huge. I've found deep gameplay systems that allow for multiple ways of accomplishing the same goal, that are satisfying to execute, give replay value. The chance to get different gear than I got last time? I can't see that making me want to play through something again.

 

Counterpoint: Risk of Rain. While certainly not entirely motivated by random loot, it is without a doubt an RNG driven game whose replay value is largely influence by the loot system. It's really a paragon of RNG-done-right, all things considered. For a very short game (I can complete it in just 15 minutes probably, if I was in a hurry) it gains amazing replayability and fun from its RNG systems.

 

One thing I don't disagree with is that RNG, in unexperienced or unintelligent hands is a dangerous tool and has been the bane of many otherwise-good games, not to mention a contributing factor in many bad ones. And, whilst I feel the execution could have been better in PoE, my final conclusion is that (personally) it's very far from souring the experience for me.

[sapientNode]

RNG sucks I agree.  As far as loot goes that is.

IN my opinion everything should be hand placed based on the overall design of the world and campaign.

 

However I think we would be hard pressed to find developers that can think in that scale or have the producers go ahead to limit items based a certain design.

 

RNG has become the go to in order to please the people who just want stuff and will lose attention if stuff is not dropping.

 

Some of us remember quite well finding a single +2 blade and it being like the most amazingly powerful item you find for 3/4 of the game.

 

I think evolving weapons is a cool idea and I think a very robust crafting system could allow for non linear games and a feeling of finding or creating something very powerful.

[iLurk]

I don't mind RNG in a game like King's Bounty or rogue like, but in PoE I really would have liked hand placed items like in BG1+2. IWD had randomized items but that game itself was story lite and combat heavy so didn't mind random items all that much.

[Caerdon]

RNG sucks I agree.  As far as loot goes that is.

IN my opinion everything should be hand placed based on the overall design of the world and campaign.

 

However I think we would be hard pressed to find developers that can think in that scale or have the producers go ahead to limit items based a certain design.

 

RNG has become the go to in order to please the people who just want stuff and will lose attention if stuff is not dropping.

 

Some of us remember quite well finding a single +2 blade and it being like the most amazingly powerful item you find for 3/4 of the game.

 

I think evolving weapons is a cool idea and I think a very robust crafting system could allow for non linear games and a feeling of finding or creating something very powerful.

 

Could someone please tell me why everyone always assumes that a procedural loot system inevitably results in massive amounts of more and more powerful items like in Diablo or Borderlands? Is it because they can't differentiate between how things usually are from how things can be?

 

I loved how magic items were much more rare in BG1 than in BG2. Varscona, that +2 longsword (with additional +1 cold damage) was, by far, my most used weapon in that game, but you know what? There was absolutely zero reason why that sword had to in possession of Greywolf instead of any number of characters a well-designed loot system could've randomly picked, such as Meilum the Masterful, Raemon, Drasus, Desreta or any of the groups hired to kill you or that you could otherwise pick a fight with.

 

I think people grossly overestimate both the quality of hand-placed loot and the amount of thought the devs actually put into placing it. While the loot in BG series was more or less appropriately placed, it really was nothing more than that. That's nothing that a well-implemented procedural loot system can't handle, but it can also handle arbitrarily large amounts of loot drops while ensuring that all weapon and item categories are well-represented and distributed evenly in a progressive manner. The hand-placed loot in both BG1 and BG2 failed in that regard.

[KDubya]

I'd even be happy with randomizing the stores. Instead of knowing that Tall Grass will be waiting for you at Dryford finding it in Gilded Vale or Hearthsong would be fine and add a little excitement or frustration.

 

Maybe have it as a toggle-able setting. People wanting full on random could have their game, people wanting to be able to plan out each move and purchase before the game starts would have theirs.