The supplies mechanic is bad

[archangel979]

I think the only way to truly limit rest-spamming would be to have consequences for resting too much. Like once you have a quest and you enter the area dedicated to it, you can only rest so many times before the quest automatically fails.

That would be a wrong approach and would only annoy people that don't want such challenge. Best way would be to let everyone finish the quest but with different results based on how long it took. For example if your quest was to save someone, and you do it with no resting you also fight a higher ranking guy that has a cool weapon you can loot of his body. If rest even once he left the area by that time. Then preserving resources and risking going further without resting let you get something for it. And if you rest 1-2 times you can save the girl and get a full reward (that includes a magic item from a quest giver). And if you rest 3+ times the girl dies, you get a lesser reward (same XP but only some gold or a lesser magic item) for returning the body and a guilty party to face punishment.

yeah.... ahh sounds like you're describing a game that'll sell 100 copies if u buy 3 of em. maybe I read it wrong.

Probably not the game he was talking about but for a example of super successful game that challenges players... Dark Souls series. Edited March 3, 2016 by archangel979

[Ymarsakar]

 

Two things they can design in. Rests that aren't 8 hours long, shorter or mechanically different, as in in combat rather than out of combat. That way, you may be resting, but half your party is also not doing anything. Sort of like in XCOM 2. Having 1 hour rests plus 8 hour rests, might make it easier to balance. Since you can incrementalize it better. Instead of fully restoring the player's spells each 8 hours. You can give the player smaller rest periods, which restore smaller powers, and thus can more greatly limit the full rest periods and modify game difficulty to suit.

 

The other one would be tying the number of rests to the game plot, Watcher abilities, making a central mechanic as in NWN Mask of the Betrayer. Instead of limiting the player to a timed main quest, you limit the player on the micro/tactical level, rather than the strategic/logistical level.

 

Reviewers and many player hated the soul sucking mechanic in NWN2.  

 

 

I hated the engine and 3d camera instead, as well as the power creep later on.

[MonkeyLungs]

 

I think the only way to truly limit rest-spamming would be to have consequences for resting too much. Like once you have a quest and you enter the area dedicated to it, you can only rest so many times before the quest automatically fails.

That would be a wrong approach and would only annoy people that don't want such challenge. Best way would be to let everyone finish the quest but with different results based on how long it took. For example if your quest was to save someone, and you do it with no resting you also fight a higher ranking guy that has a cool weapon you can loot of his body. If rest even once he left the area by that time. Then preserving resources and risking going further without resting let you get something for it. And if you rest 1-2 times you can save the girl and get a full reward (that includes a magic item from a quest giver). And if you rest 3+ times the girl dies, you get a lesser reward (same XP but only some gold or a lesser magic item) for returning the body and a guilty party to face punishment.

yeah.... ahh sounds like you're describing a game that'll sell 100 copies if u buy 3 of em. maybe I read it wrong.

Probably not the game he was talking about but for a example of super successful game that challenges players... Dark Souls series.

 

 

I have played a good amount of Dark Souls 1 and 2 (have all the stupid achievements on Xbox 360) and have all the stupid trophies for Bloodborne. Even played a dex character with no shield in dark souls. Pillars of Eternity is LIGHTYEARS more difficult to me than those games. I just wanted to point out that opinions and experiences vary quite a bit.

 

Like Pillars ... I actually think it is quite hard on Normal. My first playthrough was a mix of Normal and Easy and I actually used Story Time to kill 2 notable enemies. I don't think I woudl ever have the patience to solo this game on anything above Story Time and even on Story Time solo'ing Caed Nua was almost 'put head through wall' frustrating. For the players that actually find PoTD easy ... well I salute you champions and your skill but I don't think your experience with the game is representative of most players.

[CaptainMace]

See, the problem with being snarky is you have to pay attention and be accurate. Ive never said I suck at the IE games, I suck at PoE, genius.

 

And the beautiful thing about Story Mode is that CaptainMace never ever has to activate it, thus avoiding the hurt in the butt.

 

Didn't know you answered that.

Glad you acknowledge the fact that you indeed suck, which is the reason you're among the people who think a "story mode" doesn't affect the game design.

 

I don't see how being forced to play story mode would be a butthurt for me though. I'd probably just quit out of boredom, since, you know, it wouldn't be an actual game anymore, which is heavily implied by the name of the difficulty setting : story mode.

[Gfted1]

 

 

Story mode is an "optional" game setting that you will be in no way "forced" to play. Your pain for the developers pain never has to be realized. HUZZAH!

[CaptainMace]

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

To be honest ? Yes.

And there's a reason it's called "story mode" genius.

 

But frankly, Gfted1, you already admitted several times that you sucked ass at IE games to begin with, so nobody's surprised you're glad to see a "story mode" coming, or bitching about ressource limits.

 

 

You seem to be avoiding the fact that this was the quote I reacted to.

Never said I would be forced to play this mode but you somehow focused on the fact it's an option.

 

Dude, wake the **** up. This optional game mode completely removes the supplies (which, btw, is the subject of the topic). The whole gameplay revolves around supplies/rests being limited. So obviously, YES, the story mode harshes the developer's design, it even ****ing shreds it in pieces.

 

Not surprised it totally flies over your head though.

 

Love 30 Rock btw.

[Gfted1]

Imo, the creators of a product get to decide what "harshes" their vision, not some random internet angyperson. They have implemented this mode themselves so they must be okay with it. This point seems to keep flying over your head.

[CaptainMace]

You're the kind of dude that denies the fact any piece of art, in the wide sense of the term, belongs as much to its creator as it belongs to people who experience it. (otherwise, pro tip for any artist/creator/whatever out there, keep your product in the closet and don't share it with anybody, it's yours you know).
The kind of dude that doesn't find anything wrong to Ridley Scott claiming, in an interview, years after Blade Runner got released, that "Deckard is a replicant" when one of the most important aspect of the movie was speculation over this specific point. And the dude claims it with a smile. T'is ok, you know, since he's the creator.

No it is not. Pillars has its ass on the fence on many aspects of its gameplay since the release. But at least, the rest system, and the gameplay designed around it, going to the point of allowing different rests depending on the difficulty selected (which emphasizes the importance of this feature) was one of the few consistent things of the game, and now even that is out the window 

 

But yeah, we could consider it's nothing since it's optional. Although Highlander 2 didn't alter Highlander in any way so where's the problem with how terrible a sequel it is, right ? Same logic for Fallout 3 and Fallout and so forth and so on.
Whatever, we'll never agree on something if we go from opposed principles anyway.

Edited March 21, 2016 by CaptainMace

[Gfted1]

You are correct, I do not carry imaginary self created burdens that other entities have not even commented on.

[Tigranes]

I should really just create a sticky.

 

Tilde, enter, 'rest', enter. You now have your infinite rests. If you want it, use it. No video game will ever feature all the options you want and nor should it. 

[Gfted1]

You should see if you could make a macro and tie it to the "R" button so people wouldnt have to do all that typing. That would be awesome.

[Marceror]

I'm a fan of the supplies mechanic. For me, it adds a layer of immersion.

[Valsuelm]

I'm a fan of the supplies mechanic. For me, it adds a layer of immersion.

 

Funny, I find it the exact opposite. I'm constantly reminded of an artificial handicap that makes no sense, especially in light of 'the stash'. There is absolutely no difficulty factor in having to go back to pick up camping supplies, there is however an annoyance factor and a break the 4th wall factor.

[Teioh_White]

How are people playing this game that they need to go back to town ever? I always have to rest when I don't need too just because I've found supplies out in the field, and well, might as well at that point.

 

It's really just there for the Devs to give a very rough estimate for how often you 'should' be resting, but it's not great at its job. Better would be unlimted rest on easier difficulties, and strict limitations on the hardest if the game still wants to try and be a 'resource' based system. Though not enough people care enough to make that worth the Devs time in a medium always strapped for time.

[kmbogd]

I don't find the mechanics of the supplies system necessarily illogical but I'm not a fan of it. I would have preferred a system in which most of the encounters are not trash mobs and are balanced so that they really push survival to the max; health might or might not be restored at the end of the fight. Therefore I'd prefer classic health based system to this implementation of endurance+health+supplies.

Edited March 21, 2016 by kmbogd

[Teioh_White]

A 'classic' rest system like the rest of the IE games is basically the same issue. Just now it's killing/reloading for 'interruptions' rather than going back to town. No IE game that I'm aware of has really tried to be a 'resource' game, despite basing the entire combat system off a resource system. It's just up to the player to self police themselves on that front, which is mildly annoying, but far easier on the Devs limited time.

[Marceror]

 

I'm a fan of the supplies mechanic. For me, it adds a layer of immersion.

 

Funny, I find it the exact opposite. I'm constantly reminded of an artificial handicap that makes no sense, especially in light of 'the stash'. There is absolutely no difficulty factor in having to go back to pick up camping supplies, there is however an annoyance factor and a break the 4th wall factor.

 

I also play with the restricted stash, since unlimited storage with absolutely no limitations or drawbacks is just wrong to me. So for my stash it's better that I can only pull things out of it when I am in a safe place, and can take the time to unload the large sacks from my horses (or whatever is carting all of this loot for me) and sort through what is what.

[mc_kracken]

A playable (in it's current state it's useless for regular people..) Ironman would save the camping issue AND the fact that the game is too easy on HARD.

 

see my suggestions for Ironman 2.0

[Jasta11]

I disagree. Sure, you can cheese th mechanic by backtracking a lot... but I don't want to do that. I want to press forward and see how far I can get before I am forced to use supplies. Several maps also have supplies liberally distributed about. The only area that is designed not to be completed in one go are the Endless Paths, and that's kinda the point of said Paths.

 

It sure as hell beats the Baldur's Gate system where you have no reason not to rest between every fight regardless of how little sense it made to spend 3 days escaping Chateau Irenicus.