The supplies mechanic is bad

DKDArtagnan · February 23, 2016

Options is good.

Lack of options is bad.

Nr of supplies should have been an option.

From none to maybe 10

That's a weak solution, but certainly better than not having the option.

Personally, I love challenging combat - but I dislike having to micromanage everything in every single trash encounter, because I don't want to have to run back and restock.

The ideal solution would be functional combat AI, decent pathfinding and stronger custom scripts.

People who're not looking for a decent challenge can just pick a lower difficulty level.

But people who, like myself, DO want a decent challenge don't really have a choice except to suck it up and drown in tedium.

Edited February 23, 2016 by DKDArtagnan

gkathellar · February 23, 2016

No, it doesn't. You can't conserve your health resource.

I suggest taking less damage. CC is still king here, although less so than it used to be due to immunity rules that make sense in 1/4 cases.

It's kind of silly and ridiculous that everyone's just assuming that I'm some newbie who needs to get good.

Clearly you are and you do, though, since there are plenty of people telling you that health loss is manageable on PotD without tons of backtracking. That's a consensus I agree with - I don't remember ever needing more supplies than the game gave me on a PotD playthrough.

For the record, I'm not a fan of the supplies mechanic. It could be better, and it could be worse, but I think it lends itself to an overall problem Pillars has with encounter balance vs. adventure/strategic balance. That's not an easy problem to solve in any game that tries to use both at once, but it is what it is.

I play on PotD. I beat the game just fine. I'm not struggling with the game's difficulty. The supply mechanic has nothing to do with difficulty whatsoever. Unless you're trying to tell methat you don't take damage when you play, and that everyone should be held to that standard, then you have no point.

The problem here is that you're only seeing tactical difficulty as legitimate, and disregarding the fact that strategic difficulty is intended as a fundamental part of the game. You are backtracking a lot because you are not very good at managing the game's strategic element, which its design places a lot of emphasis on. There are problems with the way Pillars does this - namely, the fact that players can hugely increase their per-encounter power by "going nova" and disregarding the strategic, to which one's main disincentive to doing this is the inconvenience you're complaining about - but the strategic element is there and that's ultimately what you're bumping up against.

You, and all but one other poster, seem to have intentionally misinterpreted my point in order to essentially tell me I'm bad.

Woe is you, yo.

The supply mechanic means every bit of the content has to be designed in accordance with it. You can't have a dungeon that traps you, because then your game is over the moment you run out of health and supplies -- which, with a mere two rests (you have to go all the way down to 'normal' to get more than two, so please don't tell me that's the solution), would be inevitable in content of any real length.

On the contrary, it'd make such a dungeon necessarily challenging, and require careful, meticulous play. Actually, a situation you can absolutely get yourself into if you climb down the sacrificial pit in the Endless Paths. This is how difficulty works - it forces you to circumvent challenges that you didn't necessarily believe could be circumvented.

There's no element of difficulty in this mechanic. You lose health from combat, by design -- in fact, this game is rather brutal in this regard, with a lot of enemies and abilities that will deal so much damage that rest is an absolute necessity after a certain amount of time. Nobody overcomes this "challenge" to such a degree that they no longer need to rest. You just don't seem to mind that you have to periodically go and buy supplies.

The main thing is that you can rest far less often by playing well, and that you seem convinced that this isn't the case. Try to understand: "capable of beating PotD with lots of rest-spamming" is not equivalent to "really good at Pillars."

What's actually gained by this? The game is entirely beatable, so it's not some kind of difficulty check. If and when you run out of supplies, you have to simply backtrack and get more. Enemies don't respawn, dungeons don't trap you, you're never actually prevented from doing it. The challenge is expressly absent because this mechanic necessitates that you must always be able to do that. If anything, this mechanic removes difficulty and challenge by merit of its very existence.

I ... what? Break that down for me.

It's pointless tedium. It's a meaningless thing to keep track of, a nuisance that serves no purpose and isn't even realistic.

Running out of camping supplies isn't realistic?

Not that realism would be a justification, mind. But the mechanic's dressing fits what it accomplishes just fine, I think.

I wish the limit went away just becuase I keep finding the camping supplies while already having two and not needing the rest, just creates busywork where I have to remember where they were then return for them later.

inorite

Options is good.

Lack of options is bad.

Nr of supplies should have been an option.

From none to maybe 10

There's a point at which presenting options negates the entire concept that games are designed with rules, and that players proceed to work within those rules.

rheingold · February 23, 2016

"There's a point at which presenting options negates the entire concept that games are designed with rules, and that players proceed to work within those rules. "

^^^ this

Options are good but too many options are as bad as none. Trying to cater for everyone has gotta dilute the devs vision at some point.

Gfted1 · February 23, 2016

^Because people cant ignore an option? Is this the "I cant help myself" defence? That's one of my favorites. :lol:

rheingold · February 23, 2016

Nope, just that it leads to compromises, and before you know it you have dragon age inquisition:)

Seriously the devs have a vision of where the game is going, having them create an option for every damn thing is beyond silly. If for no other reason than it takes up resources to do. I realize that the first thing you going to say is "how much resources would it take" Well the answer is actually a huge amount because by the time they have finished options for the sky color, an option for the interface..... Basically you run the risk of never stopping. You can never please everyone and frankly you shouldn't try.

Edited February 23, 2016 by rheingold

falchen · February 23, 2016

That wouldn't be so bad, dragon age inquisition is awesome too. :D

More on topic though, we already have options for things like the stash access or knockout injuries, seems like this would be amongs the same line. Pillars is great anyway so it's not something I expec them to change now, a different system might be something to consider for the sequel/s though.

gkathellar · February 23, 2016

^Because people cant ignore an option? Is this the "I cant help myself" defence? That's one of my favorites.

For the same reason you don't allow players a set of dials for every other mechanic - the game was intended to be played in one of several ways, and putting every aspect of gameplay on individual player preference does nothing for that intent. Obsidian has no vested interest in working on something like this. To some degree, it also undermines Obsidian's ability to predict and control the end-user experience to ensure a degree of quality, and introduces more room for people to have a stupid (not easy or hard, just stupid) play experience.

I'm not passing categorical judgment on the notion, mind - I play BG2 with the tweakpack installed, and I make choices about my play experience in so doing. Nor am I hugely impressed with Obsidian's design sensibilities regarding PoE. Even so, there's something to be said for trusting the developers to know what they're doing, and playing the game as it's given to you, working within mechanical limitations that force you to approach things in a particular way.

I can see the argument either way, so it's not something I'm deeply invested in being right about, but that's my point.

Gfted1 · February 23, 2016

But wait, the "resources" and "investment" have already been made, as evidenced by the infinite camping supplies in story mode.

So were back to the mere existence of a button somehow ruining other peoples gaming experience.

wanderon · February 23, 2016

Nope, just that it leads to compromises, and before you know it you have dragon age inquisition:)

Seriously the devs have a vision of where the game is going, having them create an option for every damn thing is beyond silly. If for no other reason than it takes up resources to do. I realize that the first thing you going to say is "how much resources would it take" Well the answer is actually a huge amount because by the time they have finished options for the sky color, an option for the interface..... Basically you run the risk of never stopping. You can never please everyone and frankly you shouldn't try.

I agree - adding option after option ad naseum - changes the game from a vision of the developers into Monty Halls dial your own game any way you wish - no rules that can't be broken no wish that can't be met - no point in even attempting no theme to be found -_-

gkathellar · February 23, 2016

Nope, just that it leads to compromises, and before you know it you have dragon age inquisition:)

Seriously the devs have a vision of where the game is going, having them create an option for every damn thing is beyond silly. If for no other reason than it takes up resources to do. I realize that the first thing you going to say is "how much resources would it take" Well the answer is actually a huge amount because by the time they have finished options for the sky color, an option for the interface..... Basically you run the risk of never stopping. You can never please everyone and frankly you shouldn't try.

I agree - adding option after option ad naseum - changes the game from a vision of the developers into Monty Halls dial your own game any way you wish - no rules that can't be broken no wish that can't be met - no point in even attempting no theme to be found

Anyway, it's what the console/modding is for - and what the console/modding already accomplishes.

Killyox · February 23, 2016

Personally I go for as long as I can manage without resting/supplies. Result is that I can clear an entire map and not use supplies. Often I was on a map I cleared with 2 supplies left and there were still 2x 2 supplies in containers and such (POTD + Scale up + knockout injuries).

Rosveen · February 23, 2016

^Because people cant ignore an option? Is this the "I cant help myself" defence? That's one of my favorites.

Sometimes options violate core game principles. For example: removing ammo restrictions in a survival game, disabling permadeath in a roguelike. Doing so might make the game more enjoyable for you, so you're free to mod it however you wish (or find another game that fits your playstyle better), but it drastically changes the experience the developers inteded for you to have, the emotions you were meant to feel.

Restrictions give us form and direction. We always work within the confines of some system; classes are restrictions, locks and traps are restrictions, damage type immunities are restrictions... They all create problems to analyze and solve - the game's more fun this way. Making every challenge optional would leave us with a very bland RPG.

I don't think removing camp supply restrictions would break PoE or anything, but generally speaking, yes, more options aren't always good.

Edited February 23, 2016 by Rosveen

why · February 23, 2016

I've gotten to the point where I see criticism of the game and look to see if the poster cites IE, BG, or BG2 as a basis for the complaint and roll my eyes. It's almost disqualifies the argument. Not because there aren't valid complaints or comparisons on such a basis, but because it's become a sort of religious mantra.

archangel979 · February 23, 2016

But wait, the "resources" and "investment" have already been made, as evidenced by the infinite camping supplies in story mode.

So were back to the mere existence of a button somehow ruining other peoples gaming experience.

Yes. Difficulty modes have their achievements. Limited supply is part of difficulty.

Gfted1 · February 23, 2016

Sometimes options violate core game principles. For example: removing ammo restrictions in a survival game, disabling permadeath in a roguelike. Doing so might make the game more enjoyable for you, so you're free to mod it however you wish (or find another game that fits your playstyle better), but it drastically changes the experience the developers inteded for you to have, the emotions you were meant to feel.

Restrictions give us form and direction. We always work within the confines of some system; classes are restrictions, locks and traps are restrictions, damage type immunities are restrictions... They all create problems to analyze and solve - the game's more fun this way. Making every challenge optional would leave us with a very bland RPG.

I don't think removing camp supply restrictions would break PoE or anything, but generally speaking, yes, more options aren't always good.

Interesting edit.

So does the existence of "story mode" harsh the developers vision, for you?

Gfted1 · February 23, 2016

Yes. Difficulty modes have their achievements. Limited supply is part of difficulty.

So don't push that button? In someone elses game. :lol:

archangel979 · February 23, 2016

Yes. Difficulty modes have their achievements. Limited supply is part of difficulty.

So don't push the button?

Only if pushing the button turns off any achievements for you.

Gfted1 · February 23, 2016

Only if pushing the button turns off any achievements for you.

You lose that achievement after 10 rests, iirc.

Killyox · February 23, 2016

That wouldn't be so bad, dragon age inquisition is awesome too. :D

Which part of it? I got rid of it after playing it for 26h and being bored for 25h.Dilluted-wannabe-mmo rpg.

falchen · February 23, 2016

That wouldn't be so bad, dragon age inquisition is awesome too. :D

Which part of it? I got rid of it after playing it for 26h and being bored for 25h.Dilluted-wannabe-mmo rpg.

Everything, liked it start to finish. Surprised you'd play a game you didn't like for 25 hours, but whatever, tastes differ. :yes:

Tigranes · February 23, 2016

^Because people cant ignore an option? Is this the "I cant help myself" defence? That's one of my favorites.
Sometimes options violate core game principles. For example: removing ammo restrictions in a survival game, disabling permadeath in a roguelike. Doing so might make the game more enjoyable for you, so you're free to mod it however you wish (or find another game that fits your playstyle better), but it drastically changes the experience the developers inteded for you to have, the emotions you were meant to feel.

Restrictions give us form and direction. We always work within the confines of some system; classes are restrictions, locks and traps are restrictions, damage type immunities are restrictions... They all create problems to analyze and solve - the game's more fun this way. Making every challenge optional would leave us with a very bland RPG.

I don't think removing camp supply restrictions would break PoE or anything, but generally speaking, yes, more options aren't always good.

This. People have somehow begun shouting "more options are always better" as if this was Braveheart, but hey, the game with the most options is a padded room where you imagine everything yourself.

Games, throughout their entire history in human civilisation, have been about designing a set of restrictions. Without restrictions there are no meaningful choices, no challenge, no point. Of course, games have also had house rules and modifications throughout history. So should a game allow you to change everything about itself? But that's not practically possible, and more than that, there's a slope here where you end up destroying the various interlocking parts of the game by making too many core variables available to change. You turn the film's protagonist into Johnny Depp, you push a button to delete all swearing from a book, you use a frequency filter to blot out all the bass and drums from a song - OK, if someone hacks it that way, cool, but why should that be demanded of the original creators?

As Rosveen says it's not like killing camp supplies suddenly destroys everything about POE, but it does destroy the pacing, strategic considerations, the meaning of the level design, the effects of the encounter design, the balance of the character abilities, etc. You get a very different experience. Do you really want to play a game that is quite complexly different from the game that is sold? OK, fine. That's why we have mods, and that's why we have console commands, and cheat engine programs. The devs have already given you the tools - just spend 1 second opening the console and typing 'rest'. But to argue that any and all choices make all games better and that the designers are obliged to provide every option toggle is baseless.

Gfted to be blunt, I think it's understandable why you find the counterarguments to 'more options' puzzling, but that's because you're imagining a really crap counterargument. Nobody cares if you want to play that way. But by the same token it's not like the devs should provide enough buttons for every player's idiosyncratic desires. And in the case of camping supplies, you already have a button, use it. If some people just want to use noclip in, say, Jedi Knight II, and zoom around like a ghost through the walls, they can - but there would be no cause to argue it should be installed as an official toggle.

aartz · February 23, 2016

Story Time - ∞

Easy - 6

Normal - 4

Hard - 2

Path of the Damned - 2

And I thought that the limit in Story Time is 99. Which brings me to this question: what will happen if I have the max quantity of camping supplies and then change my difficulty level to higher? Surplus simply vanishes?

Heya Messier-31,

If you have too many camping supplies before switching difficulties it will discard all of your extras until you're at the cap.

So if you are playing on storytime and have 90 camping supplies but decide to switch to hard, the game will immediately cut you down to 2 after saving the difficulty. Switching back to story time at this point will not restore your camping supplies, so be careful!

Hope that answers your question =)

Gfted1 · February 23, 2016

Gfted to be blunt, I think it's understandable why you find the counterarguments to 'more options' puzzling, but that's because you're imagining a really crap counterargument. Nobody cares if you want to play that way. But by the same token it's not like the devs should provide enough buttons for every player's idiosyncratic desires. And in the case of camping supplies, you already have a button, use it. If some people just want to use noclip in, say, Jedi Knight II, and zoom around like a ghost through the walls, they can - but there would be no cause to argue it should be installed as an official toggle.

I don't follow but perhaps I am unclear. Its already official. So far what we know about V3.0:

1) Story mode exists.

2) Story mode allows unlimited supplies.

3) The "resources" herp derp is obviously not an issue.

4) See above for "the devs vision".

So trying to suggest that the existence of this option ruins the game is just hot air. Some players don't like the option, so therefore it must not be included in any form, else the source code for PoE will self delete, or something? C'mon. Don't push the button if you don't like what the button does.

Tennisgolfboll · February 23, 2016

Options is good.

Lack of options is bad.

Nr of supplies should have been an option.

From none to maybe 10

That's a weak solution, but certainly better than not having the option.

Personally, I love challenging combat - but I dislike having to micromanage everything in every single trash encounter, because I don't want to have to run back and restock.

The ideal solution would be functional combat AI, decent pathfinding and stronger custom scripts.

People who're not looking for a decent challenge can just pick a lower difficulty level.

But people who, like myself, DO want a decent challenge don't really have a choice except to suck it up and drown in tedium.

I dont get what you mean at all.

DKDArtagnan · February 24, 2016

Options is good.

Lack of options is bad.

Nr of supplies should have been an option.

From none to maybe 10

That's a weak solution, but certainly better than not having the option.

Personally, I love challenging combat - but I dislike having to micromanage everything in every single trash encounter, because I don't want to have to run back and restock.

The ideal solution would be functional combat AI, decent pathfinding and stronger custom scripts.

People who're not looking for a decent challenge can just pick a lower difficulty level.

But people who, like myself, DO want a decent challenge don't really have a choice except to suck it up and drown in tedium.

I dont get what you mean at all.

I'm saying that having an option in place to lessen the impact of a poorly thought out feature - is not the ideal solution. But also that it's better than nothing.

Personally, I'm a big fan of letting developers go with their vision.

That doesn't mean I have to agree with everything they do and that I should stay silent about it.

I'm just trying to explain why I think camping supplies don't quite support an entertaining experience, from my point of view. In fact I don't think they really do what the designers intended for them to do, but I could be wrong.

I think they intended for camping supplies to give the game a sense of realism and enforce caution - both to make the game more fun. I don't think it worked, because the end result is that if you run out of supplies - you simply quick travel to someplace that sells more. In "reality" - you would never - EVER - bring supplies for only 2 days on a journey like this. Beyond that, you would NEVER stay hurt because you didn't have wood for a fire. It makes no sense at all.

It's a design crutch that's poorly thought out as a response to rest spamming.

In my own personal opinion, a much better solution would be to implement what certain campaigns did in NWN - to restrict resting to "peaceful" areas. That's really all that's needed to make the game feel more realistic.

This solution is just another of many examples in PoE of over-design and feature-bloat. I'm sorry, but that's how I feel about it and many other features in other Obsidian games.

These guys are great at certain things - and their heart is in the right place. But they don't seem to have self-discipline when it comes to omitting features they've grown attached to for one reason or another.

As a result, the game is full of great ideas - but unfortunately many of them should have been changed and some dropped altogether.

Don't get me started on polish and refinement

Edited February 24, 2016 by DKDArtagnan

The supplies mechanic is bad

Recommended Posts

DKDArtagnan

gkathellar

rheingold

Gfted1

rheingold

falchen

gkathellar

Gfted1

wanderon

gkathellar

Killyox

Rosveen

why

archangel979

Gfted1

Gfted1

archangel979

Gfted1

Killyox

falchen

Tigranes

aartz

Gfted1

Tennisgolfboll

DKDArtagnan

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Forums

Activity