What are you playing right now?

[ShadySands]

Technomancer. I can't beat the first boss on easy

 

Woe is me

[Gromnir]

 

I'll take both your words for it, I didn't look at any guides and just build the characters the way it made sense to me. And I didn't notice any game changing abilities/items. May be it's my fault, may be the game is too abstruse, I'll let others judge.

While I did enjoy PoE, I must agree that it is not that fun without grasping the mechanics, which are all too obscure and arcane for most players (including me, who had to resort to the forums to understand things) to learn on their own without boring trial and error.

 

Truth to be told, it kinda stabbed itself in the back when it came to character building, as it offered an ocean of flexibility... and dropped you on a lonely island with all the materials to build a whole fleet of boats but an incomplete manual.

 

as we noted earlier, we believe that the great poe flaw, if it is a flaw, is the fundamental design philosophy to try and be hardcore, but not too hardcoe.  doomed.  poe is too dense for many casual players.  the mechanics is indeed lacking transparency, but more problematic is simple the complexity.  four or five different abilities, spells, conditions and lord only knows what else might affect any given accuracy v. defense resolution.  'course spell accuracy is generated different than weapon accuracy.  trap accuracy uses different math and the math has changed multiple times since release.  hazards?  many players don't even know what is hazards or how to calculate hazard accuracy.  priest seals were original traps for purposes o' math, but now they is hazards, and even Gromnir is baffled by actual in-game priest seal spell accuracy when all buffs, debuffs and other conditions is to be considered. can be more than a bit overwhelming.

 

poe is dense.  is too dense for casual.  is too hardcore for casual.  what makes worse is that hardcore crpg fans is tending towards limited notions o' proper crpg development.  is no way to please even most hardcore crpg fans if hardcore is your goal.  poe is too dense and hardcore for casual and is wrong hardcore or not enough hardcore for many/most o' the crpg snobs.

 

doomed.

 

Gromnir weren't discouraged by poe density and we did not find obsidian mechanic choices to be too casual or heretical.  is too bad more folks ain't more like us.

 

...

 

that were a joke.  nobody wants more Gromnir.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 28, 2016 by Gromnir

[Keyrock]

 

Then just boot up morrowind again with the overhaul mod, it's so nice. Riding and watching ur boat or strider travel and the landscape. Welp time to play some morrowind now dammit lol

I probably will. I want try openMW. If you aren't aware, it is a new engine for morrowind that pulls certain files from the core game (which you have to own a copy of), but upgrades graphics section of the engine. This means it could allow modders to make new models for the game that reach modern standards. Just imagine Morrowind that looks as good or better than Skyrim.

 

It supports higher resolutions, they are trying to iron out engine bugs still remaining in the vanilla game, and they are supporting mac/linux/windows. Probably the single most interesting mod I've seen for Morrowind (save arguably tamriel rebuilt).

 

Morrowind, even after 14 years, still has one of the most impressive and dedicated modding scenes. It's awe inspiring. Too bad Bethesda can't see it.

 

I am also waiting on OpenMW to fully mature to play Morrowind again.  It's getting close.

[Guard Dog]

I bought the pre-release version of the new Master of Orion game. It's always been pretty to look at but it was a buggy mess at first. Of course I knew that is what I was signing up for so I'm not complaining. After the last update I made it 200 turns into a game without a glitch. It's come a long way. 

[Tale]

Tried out XCOM Long War to see if I could do a series of posts about it. I'm still working out the kinks. Lots of stuff happens suddenly and quickly and becomes hard to capture unless I screenshot every single action, so I'll have to do more experimenting to find a format I like.

 

Tried out Steve Jackson's Sorcery, part 1. Decent enough game, no real hook though.

 

And Sunless Sea. Hooked me real quick, but I'm not sure how long that appeal can last. Not really sure about how to progress.

[Fenixp]

And Sunless Sea. Hooked me real quick, but I'm not sure how long that appeal can last. Not really sure about how to progress.

Try not to do pure trading runs for the purpose of trading runs, it's not a trading game, it's an exploration game. Gather and re-gather port reports. Greatest riches are buried in things you've not seen before.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

I'll take both your words for it, I didn't look at any guides and just build the characters the way it made sense to me. And I didn't notice any game changing abilities/items. May be it's my fault, may be the game is too abstruse, I'll let others judge.

game-changing abilities is stoopid.  developers should be lauded for not having individual abilities that is game-changers. sadly there were a couple poe class abilities that were altering the gameplay dynamic once your character acquired.  such developer miscalculations is a flaw to be avoided.  just saying.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Why do you say that? Don't those kind of abilities give you a real sense of progression?

 

Technomancer. I can't beat the first boss on easy

 

Woe is me

How did you do in Bound by Flame?

[ShadySands]

I was pretty good in Bound by Flame but I'm trying to play this game with a controller and I'm not used to it

 

I finally beat it on like the 7th try and pretty handily too

[Gromnir]

 

 

I'll take both your words for it, I didn't look at any guides and just build the characters the way it made sense to me. And I didn't notice any game changing abilities/items. May be it's my fault, may be the game is too abstruse, I'll let others judge.

game-changing abilities is stoopid.  developers should be lauded for not having individual abilities that is game-changers. sadly there were a couple poe class abilities that were altering the gameplay dynamic once your character acquired.  such developer miscalculations is a flaw to be avoided.  just saying.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

Why do you say that? Don't those kind of abilities give you a real sense of progression?

 

ridiculous.  is one o' the common mistakes in bad crpgs that you don't get meaningful abilities 'til some point deep into the game.  you don't feel powerful until level X?  wth?  why even have all those hours grinding to levels previous to X?  this problem is exacerbated with game-changers. *chuckle* d&d 3.5 were a fantastic example o' this problem.  classes would have game-changing sooper abilities at level 2, 5, 8 or whatever.  so sure enough we would get ridiculous multi-class combos where players never takes more than 2, 5, or 8 levels o' a class, 'cause is not the class that is compelling to play but rather is the game-changer that folks is pursuing.  terrible. awful. antiquated. what an utter waste o' class progression.

 

make class progression meaningful.  give players useful choices at level-up (as 'posed to nothing save a % skill increase that becomes pointless past X% anyways.) make challenges match player power so that there is no freaking game-changers.  level X should never result in a fundamental change in the class gameplay dynamic.  

 

is one reason why so many star wars games fail.  become jedi = win.  well screw that.  got a bunch o' unique and intriguing classes that is largely made pointless when Jedi becomes available?  why?  yeah, if becoming a jedi is part o' the story and all playable characters necessarily becomes jedi, then we get why a developer would go such a route, but is still a waste o' resources.   instead o' attempting to makes, for example, three base classes and three jedi prestige classes, it makes far more sense, and is offering the player far more choice, if you instead have six equal viable and fun classes that is equal fun all the way through a game.

 

game-changers is dumb... is causing many balance issues (duh) and is largely antithetical to the presumed goal o' maximizing choice in a crpg. of course you choose the game-changer.  is no actual choice if choice is a forgone conclusion.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps sooper-dooper weapons available at some point deep in game is likewise terrible.  poe did a good job with customization options and upgrades so that weapons found early in the game would be equal (and often superior) to weapons found late in the game. durance's staff were, for Gromnir, an endgame weapon.  crushing/burn quality made one o' the earliest available magic weapons in the game useful from start to finish.  find out 2/3 into the game that as a priest we were stoopid not to focus on weapon class X or Y?  bad design.  just as bad to have game-changing weapons.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Gromnir

[Bartimaeus]

I would say that this sounds like two (or three) separate issues, really. When I'm playing a sorcerer in Baldur's Gate, every level-up is a game-changer to some degree, every level up makes at least a moderate impact on how I play the class (not every level-up will be perfectly equal, of course, for complex reasons, but...). I would say that that feels like good game design - as Wrath of Dagon said, it gives a very solid and satisfying sense of progression, it makes me feel like every level-up is valuable. Again, some level-ups will be better than others - depending on spell choice (and what's available for choosing) and what new amounts of memorizations I will get for each spell level and the such - but yeah.

 

I agree with most of the rest of what you said, though...I would just hesitate to call "game-changers [...] dumb" in a blanket statement. It depends.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[Fenixp]

I would say that this sounds like two (or three) separate issues, really. When I'm playing a sorcerer in Baldur's Gate, every level-up is a game-changer to some degree, every level up makes at least a moderate impact on how I play the class (not every level-up will be perfectly equal, of course, for complex reasons, but...). I would say that that feels like good game design - as Wrath of Dagon said, it gives a very solid and satisfying sense of progression, it makes me feel like every level-up is valuable. Again, some level-ups will be better than others - depending on spell choice (and what's available for choosing) and what new amounts of memorizations I will get for each spell level and the such - but yeah.

 

I agree with most of the rest of what you said, though...I would just hesitate to call "game-changers [...] dumb" in a blanket statement. It depends.

 

Isn't it more like every other level-up for Baldur's Gate, in other words, whenever a new tier of spells unlocks?

 

At any rate, I'd say too large jumps in power between levels pose a bit of a different problem, and that is the fact that the player's skill becomes a lot less relevant that way - when you can't beat an encounter, overcoming it is no longer a question of changing tactics, it's a question of gaining more levels. Sure, you should get a feeling of progression, but not to a point where you routinely start giving up encounters thinking "Meh, can't win it anyway". In my experience, Pillars hits about the right balance between player skill and character skill progression - of course, this is an extremely subjective view on the subject.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Fenixp

[Gromnir]

am thinking that bg spell caster progression problems is something poe were trying to avoid.  bg leveling is not a great example o' what is right, but rather o' what is wrong.  with a couple notable exceptions, low level spells (and abilities) too often become useless in old d&d.  magic missile is a nice spell, and is one o' the noteworthy level one spells that gets use as an arcane spell caster levels, but even magic missile requires sequencers to generate genuine impact late in the game. there is a reason why so many veteran bg sorcerers, in spite o' the enormous spell catalog available, has largely identical spell choices. most low level spells in d&d (especial the earlier editions o' d&d) become progressive less useful.  bad.  is the kinda badness poe attempted to avoid with some success.  

 

abilities available at low levels should not see efficacy diminish precipitous as levels increase. would be terrible as a poe monk or fighter if low level abilities became useless by mid levels.  shouldn't be any different for spell casters.  those low level abilities were paid for via considerable gaming hours.  is dumb to make 'em diminish and dwindle... which is necessarily what happens when later-level game-changers become available.  is no way to talk around this one.  game-changer is an inherent relative measure.  relative to what?  is game changing compared to your current abilities.  is game-changing compared to foe abilities.  new abilities should never overwhelm past abilities and new abilities should never change the challenge o' the game. 

 

should never be a game-changer.  such stuff is dumb.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 29, 2016 by Gromnir

[Wrath of Dagon]

Yes, but new abilities can complement your existing abilities and make them a lot more powerful, like Cryostasis in Underrail. In fact most of the feats you get there allow you to improve your existing abilities.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gromnir]

so?

 

*shrug*

 

if an ability would otherwise become useless due to leveling, then one would expect that a non lazy developer would make such necessary improvement to be an integral quality o' the original ability.  create a feat or ability just to keep a previous acquired ability from becoming useless is lazy design.  bloats feats and ability lists unnecessarily.

 

also, if such stuff is mere allowing an ability to keep pace with leveling challenges, then it hardly qualifies as a game changer, yes?  is a return to previous status quo.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Wrath of Dagon]

No, there's a cool down for the more powerful feats, so you still use your regular skills/abilities (which you upgrade at level up through spending SP). But such feats are a game changer in the sense that they might make an unwinnable fight into a manageable one, and cause you to refine your approach and strategy. Of course enemies get those too, so you have to adjust the strategy to counteract them.

[Gromnir]

No, there's a cool down for the more powerful feats, so you still use your regular skills/abilities (which you upgrade at level up through spending SP). But such feats are a game changer in the sense that they might make an unwinnable fight into a manageable one, and cause you to refine your approach and strategy. Of course enemies get those too, so you have to adjust the strategy to counteract them.

you seem to be trying to talk 'bout a specific game rather than a general principle. but if you wanna backtrack a bit regarding game-changers, who is Gromnir to argue with you.

 

*shrug*

 

keep in mind that we recognize that any rpg with mathematics based combat will have game-changers.  particularly when developers is producing large numbers o' customization options or has many levels, there is gonna be unforeseen player behaviors.  an otherwise innocuous seeming level 9 ability, when coupled with a couple feats, a specific equipment load-out, and careful timed support spell casting and or consumable usage, will sudden become a game-changer.  nevertheless, such is never a goal in good design.  game-changers is inherently bad for reasons we already discussed, and they most often show in good games 'cause o' developer mistake.  

 

am also realizing just how difficult is the developer job regarding level progression.  the player should feel as if he is becoming more powerful.  simultaneous, the developer is attempting to prevent earlier acquired powhaz and abilities from being marginalized while also keeping challenges faced by the player from becoming too easy or too hard. is a near impossible balance to be striking, particularly as player skill is gonna vary. 

 

regardless, game-changers is a mistake. they happen, but is not a goal, save for stoopid developers.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps you has identified a different but equal noteworthy developer mistake: if a battle is unwinnable w/o a specific ability/spell/feat, then developers is doing a poor job.

Edited June 29, 2016 by Gromnir

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

No, there's a cool down for the more powerful feats, so you still use your regular skills/abilities (which you upgrade at level up through spending SP). But such feats are a game changer in the sense that they might make an unwinnable fight into a manageable one, and cause you to refine your approach and strategy. Of course enemies get those too, so you have to adjust the strategy to counteract them.

you seem to be trying to talk 'bout a specific game rather than a general principle. but if you wanna backtrack a bit regarding game-changers, who is Gromnir to argue with you.

 

I'm using a specific game as an example, I haven't thought about it enough to be able to talk about general principles without specific examples. I'm not backtracking, but perhaps we're not both talking about exactly the same thing here.

 

ps you has identified a different but equal noteworthy developer mistake: if a battle is unwinnable w/o a specific ability/spell/feat, then developers is doing a poor job.

No, because there are alternate abilities and alternate approaches. Although in some situations that might be the case, don't know.

[the_dog_days]

I was pretty good in Bound by Flame but I'm trying to play this game with a controller and I'm not used to it

 

I finally beat it on like the 7th try and pretty handily too

I beat him on my first try but it was a close thing. I used rogue stance and my back stabs kept clipping through the guy and hitting his weak spot in the front. The bugs he kept summoning gave me more trouble than the boss did.

[majestic]

Has anyone tried Stellaris' Asimov update yet? I just looked at the patch notes and while I liked the new war objectives the shuffling around of happiness and ethnic divergency struck me as rather unnecessary.

 

Plus all that shuffling and rebalancing and making a lot of government type modifiers disappear means I can pretty much restart my long running empires. Good going on the Federation changes as well. Voting on wars, yeah... after waiting years to actually dictate foreign policy again. Fie. Unless maybe you can start a war vote while not being president now. No idea yet. Doubt it though. *sigh*

[Gromnir]

 

No, because there are alternate abilities and alternate approaches. Although in some situations that might be the case, don't know.

 

 

...

 

you realize that what you said makes zero sense.

 

*shrug*

 

as for not having thought enough to discuss general principles without using an indie fallout clone with a handful o' sales as your only example,  you were making general statements on the subject in any number o' earlier posts. is a smidgen amusing, no?  is particular guffaw inducing as this all started 'cause you were utilizing wasteland 2 as your example o' level progression done right... a game which at release only had  % skill increases at level-up, and as such no possibility o' such game-changers anyways.

 

am suspecting if we respond further, PETA is gonna be giving us a call for our savage inhumanity directed at equine dead. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[teknoman2]

i decided to start a "no humanity" run of dark souls. meaning i will get through all the game without ever reversing the hollowing which means without kindling any bonfire, without fighting against any invading spirit (npc or player) and without ever invoking any assistant for boss battles

[Fenixp]

Monsters in Doom 2016 sometimes fight each other, in the hell levels anyway. I now feel kinda sad that I'm happy about all of these things which were present in the original game and got dropped in the name of games getting less gamey and more authentic.

[Tale]

Zero Time Dilemma is, so far, better than expected. It's actually more puzzle dense than I remember the previous ones being and they're pretty fair.

 

The plot is also the most confusing to start with. But with knowledge of previous games, it kind of makes sense.

[Wrath of Dagon]

 

No, because there are alternate abilities and alternate approaches. Although in some situations that might be the case, don't know.

 

...

 

you realize that what you said makes zero sense.

 

*shrug*

 

as for not having thought enough to discuss general principles without using an indie fallout clone with a handful o' sales as your only example,  you were making general statements on the subject in any number o' earlier posts. is a smidgen amusing, no?  is particular guffaw inducing as this all started 'cause you were utilizing wasteland 2 as your example o' level progression done right... a game which at release only had  % skill increases at level-up, and as such no possibility o' such game-changers anyways.

 

am suspecting if we respond further, PETA is gonna be giving us a call for our savage inhumanity directed at equine dead. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

I only mentioned "game changing" in passing. I was arguing that a level up system should have noticeable effect at every new level, which W2 does. I brought up Underrail as an example because I'm playing it now and it's brilliant, and because those are the two most addictive games I played in a long time. So I was analyzing what makes them so addictive, not trying to argue with you about nitty-gritty of RPG mechanics, which in truth somewhat bore me. I evaluate a game as a single whole, not system by system. Edited June 30, 2016 by Wrath of Dagon

[Gromnir]

then it makes your response and critique o' individual game mechanics a rather dubious proposition as you immediate retreat to a touchy-feely gestalt approach when questioned. am not sure how to progress.

 

HA! Good Fun!