Poll on preferred party size

[Archaven]

So i was right after all.. based on the Twitch Q&A video session, he revealed that we are not allowed to mod 5-6 characters simply because the "UI" doesn't allow for that. So all these path-finding issues and game-design is now debunked. And i was right.. it was done in "favor" of the UI.. basically plays better on big monitors... like big TVs and possibly plays well too on controllers (more or less you get what that means). This is the worst things to happen to this franchise, TBH. And i've said it again, the best party size for big TVs would be 4. They knew that the backlash would even be worst if they were to reduced it to 4, so they go with 5. Will the gameplay suxs? No. Certainly not at all. It's just no longer the old school cRPG that i love to play. If i wanted 4, i've already completed one which is Dragon Age Inquisition. One truly disappointed fan here.

Edited February 2, 2017 by Archaven

[JerekKruger]

So all these path-finding issues and game-design is now debunked. 

 

Erm... no. It's quite possible that the reasons for reducing the party size were one thing (path finding, tweaking encounters, whatever) but that once this change was made, and the UI was adjusted to accommodate it, the UI becomes the main obstacle to modding the game to allow larger parties.

[Archaven]

 

So all these path-finding issues and game-design is now debunked. 

 

Erm... no. It's quite possible that the reasons for reducing the party size were one thing (path finding, tweaking encounters, whatever) but that once this change was made, and the UI was adjusted to accommodate it, the UI becomes the main obstacle to modding the game to allow larger parties.

 

 

I've already explained couple of times. Path-finding is contradictory. You can find answers in earlier posts and even think for yourself. And about tweaking encounters, this is subjective. You can easily argue that encounters were tweaked for 4 party or even 3 party characters too. To even prove that encounters are scalable, they even mentioned something about dynamic AI with with backend data they've coded to adapt to certain combat situations. This whole reduction is simply an UI issue. To look good on big TVs, you can't have too many characters or even big encounters TBH. And the worst part of all, they've said it modding is quite difficult even with PoE1. With this UI restrictions, for modding 6 characters, it's even out of the questions.

Edited February 2, 2017 by Archaven

[Lanyon]

So i was right after all.. based on the Twitch Q&A video session, he revealed that we are not allowed to mod 5-6 characters simply because the "UI" doesn't allow for that.

Goddamnit. I didn't see the Twitch stream, but if this is the case I'm canceling my pledge. PoE was supposed to be about reviving the IE style of game for hardcore cRPG fans, a NICHE MARKET. This news sounds like they're trying to eventually go down the old dumb down/simplify road in order to pander to the masses and *shudder* attempt to release to consoles.

 

Do I go too far in saying that I'm starting to have doubts, to thinking that maybe Obsidian has capitalized on their fanbase and is gearing towards abandoning them for the sake of the almighty dollar?

 

I'm beyond disappointed. Looks like Beamdog (the creators of the Enhanced Editions) are my only hope now.

[JerekKruger]

This whole reduction is simply an UI issue. To look good on big TVs, you can't have too many characters or even big encounters TBH.

 

I just find this conclusion bizarre. Who plays PC games on a TV? Every PC gamer I know plays sat at a desk using a monitor. Using TVs is very much a console thing and, as far as I am aware, Obsidian haven't got plans to release Deadfire on consoles. Yet you state, with absolute certainty, that this is the reason that Obsidian have made their 5 party limit. It's just bizarre.

[Archaven]

 

So i was right after all.. based on the Twitch Q&A video session, he revealed that we are not allowed to mod 5-6 characters simply because the "UI" doesn't allow for that.

Goddamnit. I didn't see the Twitch stream, but if this is the case I'm canceling my pledge. PoE was supposed to be about reviving the IE style of game for hardcore cRPG fans, a NICHE MARKET. This news sounds like they're trying to eventually go down the old dumb down/simplify road in order to pander to the masses and *shudder* attempt to release to consoles.

 

Do I go too far in saying that I'm starting to have doubts, to thinking that maybe Obsidian has capitalized on their fanbase and is gearing towards abandoning them for the sake of the almighty dollar?

 

I'm beyond disappointed. Looks like Beamdog (the creators of the Enhanced Editions) are my only hope now.

 

 

I really have no issue if they were to release on consoles. More money to them, it's great. But i really hate it things has to be simplify, if that's really the case :/

[Micamo]

You guys are gonna hate me for saying this, but my reason for preferring large parties has nothing to do with game mechanics.

 

When I leave a character out of my party that I like, and I'm not getting any of their banter conversations or barks in conversations, I feel like I'm missing content and it drives me right up the wall.

 

So, what I'd actually like is a system like Final Fantasy X where you decide who is in combat with you as a mechanical choice, but your whole party is considered to be "with" you at all times for the sake of participating in the story. (With some allowances for say, two party members who hate each other and refuse to be in your group at the same time.)

[Lanyon]

I really have no issue if they were to release on consoles. More money to them, it's great. But i really hate it things has to be simplify, if that's really the case :/

 

Neither would I, if a game could be released on consoles without changing a single thing about what makes it great on PC.

 

Unfortunately, past precedent has ALWAYS shown that as soon as a title is going to be released on consoles as well as PC, something has to be sacrificed that wouldn't have had to be if the title was PC only.

[Sedrefilos]

PoE did revived the IE feel. This is PoE 2 though. Time to move a bit forward

[Lanyon]

PoE did revived the IE feel. This is PoE 2 though. Time to move a bit forward

I despise this mentality. Whatever happened to the old mantra "If it isn't broken, don't fix it" ?

 

Speaking in general terms (not just the games industry) I can't begin to count the number of things that have been essentially ruined over the years in the name of 'progress'. If something is working, stop trying to reiterate it.

 

PoE was decent, don't get me wrong, and it did somewhat revive the IE feel. I say somewhat, though, because I can unequivocally declare without hesitation, and I'm sure many would agree with me, that PoE was no BG2. IMHO it wasn't even BG1... given the choice to start up yet another playthrough of either game, I'd still pick BG1 over PoE even though I've done MULTIPLE playthroughs of BG1 and only 2 of PoE.

 

BG2 is considered by many to be the pinnacle of cRPG experiences (I for one am in the camp that BG2 was the better experience between it and PS:T, although the story in PS:T is what makes it considered 'the best cRPG of all time' according to many). Here we are nearing 2 decades since the release of BG2, and nothing has come close to how awesome it is.... this is REGRESS, not progress.

[Amentep]

People were upset that PoE wasn't a D&D clone given that PoE's kickstarter was predicated on the nostalgia for the IE games.  I can understand when people who like PoE hear that PoE 2 is changing things and feeling a bit put out that the kickstarter for the sequel is suddenly tossing out the systems of that game while at the same time stressing its continuation nature - they don't even have the 12 years of time and distance from the last game like IE fans did...

[JerekKruger]

I despise this mentality. Whatever happened to the old mantra "If it isn't broken, don't fix it" ?

 

It died along with our ancestors who refused to cook their food? It's a terrible mantra.

 

PoE was decent, don't get me wrong, and it did somewhat revive the IE feel. I say somewhat, though, because I can unequivocally declare without hesitation, and I'm sure many would agree with me, that PoE was no BG2. IMHO it wasn't even BG1... given the choice to start up yet another playthrough of either game, I'd still pick BG1 over PoE even though I've done MULTIPLE playthroughs of BG1 and only 2 of PoE.

 

 

I've now done more playthroughs of PoE than I have BG2. I still tend to think that BG2 has a better story (PoE's beats BG1's hands down), but mechanically PoE is far superior (in my humble opinion).

[LordCrash]

PoE did revived the IE feel. This is PoE 2 though. Time to move a bit forward

 

Ironically, that's exact the same thing Bioware said when people criticized the combat and other elements in Dragon Age: Inquisition... 

 

I've now done more playthroughs of PoE than I have BG2. I still tend to think that BG2 has a better story (PoE's beats BG1's hands down), but mechanically PoE is far superior (in my humble opinion).

In my humble opinion PoE's combat mechanics were worse compared to those in BG2. PoE only felt needlessly obtuse and complex for the sake of complexity, while being constantly impeded by a clunky GUI. Edited February 2, 2017 by LordCrash

[Sedrefilos]

My post was half-joking. I am not pro everything PoE 2 proposes per se. I just don't believe the "IE feel" is the same for everyone. I just find myself agreeing with Sawyer on what is a spiritual successor to IE games as he points out those 3 pillars in the campaign video. Mostly. Party size is not a big concern for me. As a matter of fact, I see Dragon Age Origins as a successful successor to BGs even if it had party size of 4; which I don't like generally, but I did liked it in D:OS. So party size not a big deal. Other than that I am a bit concerned about removing the dual health/stamina system and its concequences (making all abilities per encouter and having them powered-up by per-rest class resources).

Edited February 2, 2017 by Sedrefilos

[rheingold]

Pillars was great, fantastic and I want more of the same. I'm not opposed to change mind, just that it needs to be justified and move relatively slowly otherwise you tend to loose all the good points for the bad.

Unfortunately I am getting a bad vibe about 2, it is starting to look a bit like the dragon age franchise which started off promising enough but got progressively worse.

I have a major problem dropping down to 5 characters for the wrong reasons.

Wrong reason would be for dumbing down purposes, making gameplay easier, less complicated.

Good reason would be less but deeper companions.

So yeah, overall I'm worried about a number of issues regarding Deadfire.

[LordCrash]

Wait, really? Imo Dragon Age: Origins (while being enjoyable, don't get me wrong) was worse than BG2 in almost any possible way. Calling it a successor to BG2(/ToB) is really a bit much...

Edited February 2, 2017 by LordCrash

[kirottu]

 

So i was right after all.. based on the Twitch Q&A video session, he revealed that we are not allowed to mod 5-6 characters simply because the "UI" doesn't allow for that.

Goddamnit. I didn't see the Twitch stream, but if this is the case I'm canceling my pledge. PoE was supposed to be about reviving the IE style of game for hardcore cRPG fans, a NICHE MARKET. This news sounds like they're trying to eventually go down the old dumb down/simplify road in order to pander to the masses and *shudder* attempt to release to consoles.

 

Do I go too far in saying that I'm starting to have doubts, to thinking that maybe Obsidian has capitalized on their fanbase and is gearing towards abandoning them for the sake of the almighty dollar?

 

I'm beyond disappointed. Looks like Beamdog (the creators of the Enhanced Editions) are my only hope now.

 

He didn't say it like that. What he essentially said was if you mod in sixth party member you also need to mod the UI. That's it.

 

Edit: Sawyer quote.

JS: Modding a lot of stuff will be easier in Pillars 2. Modding the party size from 5 to 6...certainly possible, if you want to do that that's cool. I don't know how the UI is going to react to that and everything because things are spaced out for increased legibility for 5 characters, but there you go.

Edited February 2, 2017 by kirottu

[Archaven]

Pillars was great, fantastic and I want more of the same. I'm not opposed to change mind, just that it needs to be justified and move relatively slowly otherwise you tend to loose all the good points for the bad.

Unfortunately I am getting a bad vibe about 2, it is starting to look a bit like the dragon age franchise which started off promising enough but got progressively worse.

I have a major problem dropping down to 5 characters for the wrong reasons.

Wrong reason would be for dumbing down purposes, making gameplay easier, less complicated.

Good reason would be less but deeper companions.

So yeah, overall I'm worried about a number of issues regarding Deadfire.

 

I'm not sure if anyone plays Dungeon Siege 3 before. It was made by Obsidian. Go look at the game if folks thing they don't make bad decisions. Go look at Sacred 3. Although they are different genre, the direction and goal was same. For greener pastures.

[LordCrash]

I liked Dungeon Siege 3, to be honest.

[Lanyon]

Wait, really? Imo Dragon Age: Origins (while being enjoyable, don't get me wrong) was worse than BG2 in almost any possible way. Calling it a successor to BG2(/ToB) is really a bit much...

 

I'm of the same mindset LordCrash, I remember being SO stoked about DA:O because it was touted as the spiritual successor to BG while being marketed.

 

I've never been so disappointed by a game. I don't find it even enjoyable, let alone anything compared to BG2. I still have DA:O installed, and I've never finished it.

[Ganrich]

Yeah, DAO is more a NWN spiritual successor if we have very limited enemy types, limited number of classes, and boring aggro mechanics. A 4 man party is boring, 3 classes is boring, 8 enemy types is boring, etc.

 

I can deal with a 5 man party because I still think interesting class comps can be obtained, but any lower and I wouldn't back it without a whole lot of coercion. Even then it would be a minimum backing amount, and the game better have a NWN-esque mod tools/editor. Or be turn based, but being turn based would be very coercive.

[Sad Panda]

PoE is completeable solo, on PotD, with a Monk using no gear whatsoever. It's not easy of course, but the idea that at higher levels you'll be forced to bring along the most combat effective characters and hence forced to bench less combat effective ones* is ridiculous. Even if that were the case, one could make an argument that PotD was included in the game specifically for power gamers, and if your desire is for role-playing then there are four other difficulties to choose from, all of which are very doable with suboptimal setups.

 

Also PoE doesn't have characters who are more skill orientated vs more combat orientated: all characters get exactly the same number of skill points on each level up. So that's a false trade off.

 

Finally, both Kana and Hiravias can be built to be top tier characters. Chanters in general are usually rated amongst the best characters in the game, and Kana has a pretty damn good stat spread for a Chanter, and Druids can be built to do the higher single target damage in the game, and tank, and also be a spellcaster, all in one package.

 

*I don't know when you last played PoE, but in the current patch every companion is perfectly capable of holding their own in combat. Sure, if you bring along Aloth, Hiravias, Durance, Kana and Grieving Mother the game will be easier, but in no way is the game even close to impossible with other party setups.

 

I've already played through the game on PotD several times using strictly RP builds, e.g. dropping all of Kana's points in Lore. My point rather was, because the party size is six characters, this is well possible just by the virtue of tactics alone, without resorting to out-of-character power builds. However, with every decrease of the party size this becomes exponentially harder, which is exactly my worry here: Having to choose between lore-friendly character builds -- and lore-friendly campaign difficulty.

 

The reason I wish to play RPGs at the highest possible difficulty ultimately also comes down to roleplaying: The more the protagonist has to struggle, the more meaningful their eventual victory is. If the task before them could be completed by just any ol' band of clowns, why would it remain unattended to by the other forces at play, and why should the protagonist receive any praise for completing it? To me, the PotD is the appropriate difficulty for roleplaying, and it's the claim that it'd been included for the benefit of power-gamers that I find to be of suspect. If your desire is simply for challenging hack-n-slash, there are significantly better games for that.

[JerekKruger]

... it's the claim that it'd been included for the benefit of power-gamers that I find to be of suspect. If your desire is simply for challenging hack-n-slash, there are significantly better games for that.

 

Find it as suspect all you want, PotD was inspired by IWD2's Heart of Fury mode: a mode that was specifically included to provide a challenge to those players who enjoy punishing tactical real time with pause combat. That was the whole point, and it's the reason why PotD is the only difficulty that actually buffs enemy stats.

 

But that's beside the point. You say that you don't find role-playing rewarding without a challenge, and are worried that with a 5 character party it won't be possible to play on PotD with a non-power gaming style. My response is that if it does turn out to be the case that 5 character parties make PotD only accessible to super optimised play (which, given the difficulty of PoE, I find extremely unlikely), then you'll still have your role-playing challenge when playing on Hard. From what you've said, it doesn't matter what difficulty you play on so long as it provides a challenge for the specific style of play you enjoy.

[Sad Panda]

But that's beside the point. You say that you don't find role-playing rewarding without a challenge, and are worried that with a 5 character party it won't be possible to play on PotD with a non-power gaming style. My response is that if it does turn out to be the case that 5 character parties make PotD only accessible to super optimised play (which, given the difficulty of PoE, I find extremely unlikely), then you'll still have your role-playing challenge when playing on Hard. From what you've said, it doesn't matter what difficulty you play on so long as it provides a challenge for the specific style of play you enjoy.

 

While that's a fair point, there is quite a great jump in difficulty going from Hard to PotD. I did a Neutral Evil playthrough where I purposely got most of my companions killed, blew off all quests which required even an inkling of benevolence, and still had quite little difficulty finishing the game. As tends to be the case, especially nowadays, the "regular" difficulties rarely actually present a challenge for other than casual gamers, even if you're handicapping yourself heavily with roleplay decisions. Usually there either needs to be especially challenging gamemode, such as PotD in PoE or the Dark Mode in Witcher 2, or mods need to be employed to increase the difficulty.

 

Now, it may be the decrease in party size will indeed up the challenge across the board, but I'm expecting this will not be the case, and instead combat scenarios will be toned down to account for the fact. My point remains that smaller party size means greater pressure toward power builds in the highest difficulties, since having one or two character who can't pull their weight in combat imposes a relatively higher penalty. I can appreciate that the people who do want to have to use every tool at their disposal to beat the challenge may feel that the larger party size makes the game too easy, but I'd rather see that accommodated by a special mode -- the same way in PoE we had settings for enabling or disabling maiming, AoE highlighting and so on -- rather than limiting the party size for everyone.

[Ninjamestari]

PoE is the real spiritual successor for the Infinity games. 6 party members is an honored tradition and should definitely be kept. There are so many problems that arise today from people wanting to change stuff just for the sake of change; reducing party size from 6 to 5 doesn't accomplish anything, dropping it to 4 would make the game completely different. If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

 

Seriously, change for the sake of change is just chaos. It never leads to anything good. Only make changes that are backed by strong reasoning and not just "We thought we'd do things a little bit differently for no reason".