Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

KickStarter Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pre-Release Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,228
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Both of these things can be true:

1) If you think that the team capable of making THE ULTIMATE RTWP FANTASY RPG THAT WILL FINALLY BRING BACK MY CHILDHOOD AND SHOW THAT SAWYER WHO'S BOSS has been hiding in Russia all along, I have a bridge to sell you. It's not that it couldn't be true, but I sure wouldn't bet on it.

2) The prototype that we've seen conclusively proves that these guys have done their homework, know what it takes to produce a decent IE-style game, and aren't going to release a shovelware scam.
 

ga♥

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
7,587
1) If you think that the team capable of making THE ULTIMATE RTWP FANTASY RPG THAT WILL FINALLY BRING BACK MY CHILDHOOD AND SHOW THAT SAWYER WHO'S BOSS has been hiding in Russia all along, I have a bridge to sell you. It's not that it couldn't be true, but I sure wouldn't bet on it.

rating_agenda.png
 

prodigydancer

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,399
shovelware ... shovelware ... shovelware ... shovelware.
rating_agenda.png


Simple equation: A + B once equaled C, therefore it must ALWAYS equal C.
Two plus two equaled four on my calculator yesterday. So I've just re-checked and - fascinating stuff! - it's still four. Can you believe that?!

In other words, forgive us for not losing all hope just yet, omniscient one.

*plays game* "It's shit! I knew it all along!"
Psst! Don't tell anyone but I enjoy playing PoE almost as much as BG. It's a terrible transgression, I know, but I just can't help it.

---

This shit's really getting old. But I suppose it's the fundamental nature of the modern nerd that he cannot get over the fact that PoE was actually a very good game whether he personally liked it or not. I don't mean just Telengard, of course. I mean the whole every-thread-is-PoE-thread thing. The agenda behind it is well-known: "RTwP games cannot be good. Somehow the IE games were good but that was an exception and it'll never happen again." And when somebody calls it bullshit you guys start crying "OMG! DECLINE OF THE CODEX!!!11" Maybe it's time to give it a rest and move on to something more productive? There will never be a game that everybody likes (or hates for that matter).
 
Last edited:

Telengard

Arcane
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
1,621
Location
The end of every place
Simple equation: A + B once equaled C, therefore it must ALWAYS equal C.
Two plus two equaled four on my calculator yestarday. So I've just re-checked and - fascinating stuff! - it's still four. Can you believe that?!

In other words, forgive us for not losing all hope just yet, omniscient one.
I like how you made a reduction of algebra to elementary school math and then declared victory. It is an absolutely wonderful illustration of my point. I kick myself for not thinking of it myself.
 

Telengard

Arcane
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
1,621
Location
The end of every place
Shovelware isn't a scam in the sense people are talking about; rather, it serves a specific niche. For people who, say, absolutely positively can't get enough Call of Duty and Battlefield, there are the Snowblinds. And for those to whom even the Snowblinds aren't enough of the thing, there's the Tunnel Rats. The Tunnel Rats are what they are: small team, low pay, lack of resources. And that inevitably leads to a team with a limited amount of expertise in all of the many facets that go into the making of a complex game (such as Baldur's Gate). Or in other words: C team, skeleton crew. A team who will inevitably produce a game with one or two good ideas surrounded by a plethora of mediocrity and a certain amount of mess (bugs). All due to lack of money, and the loss of man hours that represents.

Which is all perfectly fine for the people in the market for a Tunnel Rats. For those who expect a Tunnel Rats budget and crew to produce a Call of Duty, though...

And there are already people in this thread saying the same old things about the second coming of old school Baldurs Gate Call of Duty, who will as time goes by hype each other up into a frenzy. Like they do every time. It's as regular as the tide here/

Now, then, as to the main reason why Baldur's Gate RtwP is hard to reproduce:
  1. D&D is hard to reproduce as a computer game as it is. There's a lot of moving parts. For instance, the non-D&D rpgs of old used to boast about having 50 spells total, and that's a drop in the bucket compared to what is available in 2e D&D. And 3e is even worse in that respect. Add in building encounters around a game where a player can devote a character purely to the trip action, and trying to make a computer game fun for those who have done so, as well as for normal people who don't do that (not to mention a game where the enemies could technically stand at 200 yards and just shoot arrows wrecking that build), and you're already having a hell of a juggling act trying to make the game function as modern D&D players have come to expect D&D to play.
  2. RtwP then strips out the core element that all of those many rules are centered upon - the turn. Once you do that, all of the many rules that were bound to the turn immediately become orphaned. And all those orphaned rules now have to be patched back into the replacement core element that is RtwP. It will always be a rough patchwork, since these rules weren't designed for constant action, so the rough patches will never actually function as they should. And thus the designers have to implement all of these patches in a way that doesn't actually work, but still "feels" right to the player.
  3. There's a lot of options in turn-based D&D. Options built around the idea of each individual deciding from moment to moment what they are going to do. In contrast, the fundamental idea of RtwP is to not have the player making those decisions. So, the need for those moment to moment decisions has to be stripped from the game, but yet the game still has to "feel" like you're playing D&D and making those decisions. That is a major challenge not at all answered by the Pause button. The only thing that can fill that emptiness is specific encounter design that gives the players the right feels at the right times.
  4. The removal of medium, long and extreme long range alters the nature of the battlefield, resulting in the nerfing of a number of old monsters and abilities, while also giving a huge advantage to those more melee-oriented. Over the years, this has altered the way even p&p games are played, and all computer games, to the point where even the idea of range barely exists anymore, and "ranged" character are just characters engaged in melee who are using ranged weapons and enemy debuffs so they don't get AoO'd to death. And this design is now considered normal. In fact, people get mad if you build encounters that assault their weakness to ranged attacks.
  5. Encounters thus have to be designed in such a way that makes the player "feel" like they're playing D&D, even as the computer makes most of the decision for them (or simply strips the decisions out), while making the monsters of those encounters interact with the player in such a way that the player feels like the monsters are using their abilities to their finest, even as they most emphatically don't. The monsters now fundamentally don't use even the most basic tactics of their abilities because that would end in TPK so fast it would make your head spin, and that would be "no fun".
In order to make all that work, Bioware playtested the encounters of Baldur's Gate to death, until they had honed them down into the equivalent of a Disneyland thrill ride. A ride with up and downs, thrills and chills, and a feeling of death at your doorstep - death which you are completely protected from as long as you stay in your seat and obey the basic rules of the thrill ride. Unfortunately, it take a lot of time and effort to do that much playtesting. And that cost lots of money. Volunteer beta testers can replace some of that (not all of it, though, since volunteers will only put up with so much), but since volunteer beta testers are also your customers, it is at the same time bad public relations to use them in that way. And thus, the resulting imitator game's thrill ride will never elicit quite the same thrills.

On the other hand, if what you are actually in the market for is a Tunnel Rats version of Baldur's Gate, then here lies what you are looking for. And have at it. I purchased Inquisitor for this exact reason, back when.
 

prodigydancer

Arcane
In My Safe Space
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,399
Telengard Much of what you say is true by definition (e.g. that RTwP removes the turn) but is only of importance if you want exact 1:1 adaptation of the PnP rules. Not everybody cares about such things. When I want PnP by the book, I play PnP.

Your "rough patchwork" remark is just a meaningless label as you don't elaborate. To me there was nothing especially rough about say the implementation of 3.5E in NWN2. I couldn't stand NWN2 because of how ming-numbingly boring the story and most characters were but mechanically the game was fine to me.

In contrast, the fundamental idea of RtwP is to not have the player making those decisions.
Yeah, the pause is there just so that you could go and make a cup of tea.

Over the years, this has altered the way even p&p games are played, and all computer games, to the point where even the idea of range barely exists anymore, and "ranged" character are just characters engaged in melee who are using ranged weapons and enemy debuffs so they don't get AoO'd to death.
You're blaming RTwP for something it's not in any way responsible for. I haven't noticed isometric TB games in practice utilizing much longer ranges . The screen is only so large and having to scroll during combat is very annoying so limited range is a natural thing. But saying that ranged characters engage in melee is pure nonsense. In PoE, a cloth-wearing ranger won't last 5 seconds in melee at high levels.

The monsters now fundamentally don't use even the most basic tactics of their abilities because that would end in TPK so fast it would make your head spin, and that would be "no fun".
And again there's no huge difference between TB and RT in this regard. In about 99% of all games the AI is dumb as a rock, and nothing can be done about this problem unless you write your own AI scripts.

A ride with up and downs, thrills and chills, and a feeling of death at your doorstep - death which you are completely protected from as long as you stay in your seat and obey the basic rules of the thrill ride.
Uh. So now you blame BG for not being a roguelike where death is part of the deal? Otherwise, yet again, how is this even different from any TB game? You hit a mathematically unwinnable fight, you circumvent it, exploit the AI weakness (via kiting or hit-and-run) or complain about being stuck.
 

Telengard

Arcane
Joined
Nov 27, 2011
Messages
1,621
Location
The end of every place
Telengard Much of what you say is true by definition (e.g. that RTwP removes the turn) but is only of importance if you want exact 1:1 adaptation of the PnP rules. Not everybody cares about such things. When I want PnP by the book, I play PnP.

Your "rough patchwork" remark is just a meaningless label as you don't elaborate. To me there was nothing especially rough about say the implementation of 3.5E in NWN2. I couldn't stand NWN2 because of how ming-numbingly boring the story and most characters were but mechanically the game was fine to me.

In contrast, the fundamental idea of RtwP is to not have the player making those decisions.
Yeah, the pause is there just so that you could go and make a cup of tea.

Over the years, this has altered the way even p&p games are played, and all computer games, to the point where even the idea of range barely exists anymore, and "ranged" character are just characters engaged in melee who are using ranged weapons and enemy debuffs so they don't get AoO'd to death.
You're blaming RTwP for something it's not in any way responsible for. I haven't noticed isometric TB games in practice utilizing much longer ranges . The screen is only so large and having to scroll during combat is very annoying so limited range is a natural thing. But saying that ranged characters engage in melee is pure nonsense. In PoE, a cloth-wearing ranger won't last 5 seconds in melee at high levels.

The monsters now fundamentally don't use even the most basic tactics of their abilities because that would end in TPK so fast it would make your head spin, and that would be "no fun".
And again there's no huge difference between TB and RT in this regard. In about 99% of all games the AI is dumb as a rock, and nothing can be done about this problem unless you write your own AI scripts.

A ride with up and downs, thrills and chills, and a feeling of death at your doorstep - death which you are completely protected from as long as you stay in your seat and obey the basic rules of the thrill ride.
Uh. So now you blame BG for not being a roguelike where death is part of the deal? Otherwise, yet again, how is this even different from any TB game? You hit a mathematically unwinnable fight, you circumvent it, exploit the AI weakness (via kiting or hit-and-run) or complain about being stuck.
Fine, let's talk down for the idiots.

I am neither praising no pillorying RtwP, I am describing the amount of work involved in converting D&D to RtwP. Work because of the amount of change that is required. Change equals work. Work equals time. Time equals money. Money equals "a very difficult thing to pay a lot of if you're on an indie budget". Everything else you said is just self-justification for a strawman. And to that, I clap very slowly.

But I will add for your delectation that when converting D&D specifically to RtwP, you have to specifically, purposefully, intentionally remove the ability for monsters to operate as they would in a p&p session or a turn-based computer game, even a blobber. You have to because of the rate to which certain monsters can kill a party. While those abilities can be dealt with as they come in a turn-based game, under RtwP the computer has to have the PCs respond to those abilities on auto-respond (the Dragon Age solution) or the monster has to have a limitation on ability use programmed in (what most everyone did before Dragon Age). This is an issue not of RtwP, but of mixing D&D as is with RtwP, of mixing two things that do not go well together. D&D is written to do a specific thing. RtwP is made to do a very different thing. That is why adapting D&D to RtwP is in effect hammering a square peg into a round hole. It's a lot of work to hammer that square peg home, and that is why so many fail. We have watched dozens fall by the wayside, and yet here we are again, with so many believing try #33 is a charm, and this time they'll succeed at making Baldur's Gate 3, instead of discount Baldur's Gate. Despite all of the evidence to the contrary.

Or if you want more fun, next time I have nothing to do at work, I'll pour through old threads and mix and match quotes from other games and this one, and thus illustrate the same rise and fall of stupid and unwarranted hype frenzy on every game that even looks remotely like Baldur's Gate. Not to mention, illustrate the fact that when someone asks why all this frenzy, the answer is always much the same as yours.
prodigydancer said:
Because because because
 

ThoseDeafMutes

Learned
Joined
Jul 11, 2016
Messages
239
I ignored this during the KS phase but actually looking at the video walk-through of the vertical slice it looks pretty respectable. If they can deliver an equivalent or greater level of quality across the game as a whole, it would be worth a purchase. Compared to Pillars, it seems to be easier to "read" a battle visually, and hits landing on enemies looks, sounds and feels better / more consistent. Those definitely aren't the most important things in an RPG, but they're nice to have, and it at least appears from what they've shown that they have the basics down too. I'll be keeping an eye on its progress for sure.
 
Last edited:

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,228
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
Looks like my fundraising campaign post may have been an inspiration. :cool:

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/owlcatgames/pathfinder-kingmaker/posts/1942381

The Art of the Deal - Our Vendor UI
Posted by Berserkerkitten


Hi Pathfinders,

Ahh yes, to be an adventurer! Exploring the Stolen Lands, battling hordes of of bandits, trolls and other baddies, fighting for the cause and never forgetting what's most important in life: fat loot! But since you have a finite amount of sword-swinging arms and you can only wear so much armor - what are you going to do with the tons upon tons of extra gear you collect on your travels? The hint is in the title of this update!

Today we're telling you all about how we're designing the interface you'll be using to interact with the merchants of Pathfinder: Kingmaker.

No cRPG is complete without a merchant. Whether you need to replenish your rations, stack up on potions or purchase a rare magical blade, this classic character is always there for you. Of course, the merchant is also more than willing to help you unburden your bags of all the unwanted loot, and will reward you handsomely for your trouble.

It should be noted that when we speak of “merchants”, what we mean is not a special kind of NPC, not an honorary title and not even a separate occupation – many characters can be considered merchants simply by virtue of having goods to sell. Thus, when we talk about merchants we mean exactly them, the characters of our game, and they are much more than just a list of items to buy and sell. Whether it’s a hermit mage trying to fund his arcane research by selling scrolls and wands or an actual professional merchant from the capital, you will interact with both of them through the vendor interface.

Many ways to implement a trade interface have been developed to this day, and we are no innovators in this area. Drawing on the principles of convenience and immersion, we have decided not to go down the path of invention and to steer clear of exotic solutions. We wanted to make sure that once you saw the vendor interface, you would quickly understand how it works based on your experience with other games. Apart from that we tried to preserve the immersiveness of the Pathfinder universe, which meant we had to stick to certain technical frameworks and develop a vision of the future artistic layout.

081bb2fe6d04417ddbb551ca84d22831_original.png

First sketch of the interface

However, this doesn't mean that creating a trade window is a simple task. As with all of our interfaces, we are doing a lot of analytical work here. In order to better understand how the interface should look and work, we looked at all the possible use cases and carefully examined the existing solutions. This approach has enabled us to pick out the most convenient features, as well as to determine the ones that cause grief and find a way to fix them. Building off the hallmarks of the Pathfinder system and the players' needs, we have gone through multiple phases of information design, identified necessary features and defined functional interface groups. As a result, we've decided that a barter trading system was the way to go.

While barter may be a bit more complicated than other, more streamlined trade systems, we believe that swapping the loot you’ve found in the wilderness for a masterwork weapon newly delivered from the civilized world will fit better with the atmosphere of the Stolen Lands. And just as you bring them new items from your travels, merchants will also sometimes surprise you with new wares. Their list of available items grows throughout the game, often because of you selling them these items, at times because of regular shipments, and other times based on your decisions and actions, including the recent developments in your kingdom. Most of their stocks might be pretty mundane – rations, standard scrolls and potions, and maybe a +1 Longsword or a Ring of Protection here and there. However, a merchant may sometimes get their hands on a rare or unique magical item that is bound to catch the eye of even the most seasoned adventurer.

6d2e49f086d250ac5ccb37f5eceb93c1_original.png

Common motifs of interface interaction


25d0b9207a43cf70c139329b0fbc5adb_original.png

The functional structure

As we approached the static wireframe phase, we already knew what sort of functionality we wanted to implement in the game. We have decided to split the interface into three equal, logically and visually distinct areas: the vendor area, the exchange area, and the player area. Note that all the text in the following layouts is provided as a visual aid and is not representative of the actual textual contents of the game.

6d6eeb621612292120c6887d173a460e_original.png

Static wireframes with shared stash


065b29ae7a4dda7bd205d2501cfdf8a1_original.png

Static wireframes with companion's equipment

We have decided to keep the player inventory positioned on the right so that the player could draw on their experience of interacting with the character window. This is also where we've put the characters' personal slots and where we are planning to give the player an option to don the purchased items without leaving the interface.

Since the game will feature significant amounts of loot, special attention is devoted to developing a system for filtering and sorting items. Sorting mechanisms are meant to help the player with trade operations, for all merchants have an assortment of goods they can sell as well as certain limitations on what they are willing to buy. A mage is highly unlikely to buy 24 sets of bandit leather armor off your hands, and a merchant from Brevoy is just as unlikely to sell you a Wand of Animate Dead. While most merchants are selective of the goods they trade in, some are willing to sell or buy just about anything. After all, if a Baron wishes to sell his Wand of Animate Dead to a store in the capital, who is the shopkeeper to argue with him? The afore-mentioned wizard will still be selling scrolls, wands and wondrous items later on in the game - if he survives the dangers of hermit life, that is. The barkeep at the local tavern will mostly trade in rations, perhaps selling potions and other bits of adventuring kit from time to time. However, the merchant in your capital city will display both the best wares the artisans of your realm can offer and the rare specialties of your international trading partners.

ab74c771d0d463378ee1071ccd4c27d1_original.png

Item grouping

As the diagram shows, we've combined some types of objects into groups. This is done to reduce the number of interface elements and to ensure ease of access.

The previous interface iteration has already been through user experience (or UX) testing. Thanks to our colleagues at the UX lab, we got the results that helped us reach a few important conclusions and solve a few issues.

For example, in the vendor area we had to choose between a shelving and a tiled item layout.

1462bcda563e3244e111879466c74ba6_original.png

Vendor area layout

Both options had their advantages and disadvantages. A shelving layout allows to display more detailed information, but if the vendor has a lot of items to sell, this might end up in a long scroll. A tiled layout fixes this problem, however, it makes it impossible to quickly read the name of the item. To solve this issue, we held a poll and decided to go with the shelving layout: most respondents indicated that the item's name is more convenient than the icon and is better at communicating the item's properties. And, after all, real merchants store their goods on shelves and in display cases, not in slots =) It should be noted that this decision also prompted us to add a filter that separates items on the basis of whether they were sold by the player.

The above example is not the only case where UX testing has helped us to significantly improve the interface. In its first implementation, the interface would move an item into the exchange zone on a double click. We thought the player would find this intuitive, because that is exactly how donning items in the character window works. However, what we realized is that if a player decided to sell 100 items, it would take them 200 clicks to do so. And that would be terribly tiresome! Therefore, moving the items now only takes one click. By the way, right now we're working on a feature that would allow selling a large amount of items at once, or bulk selling. The main difficulty here is to determine which items are to be considered as viable objects for the bulk sale, because this can be very situational.

At the time of writing, the artists haven't had a chance to get their hands on the trade interface yet, and only 80% of its intended functionality has been implemented, but we still decided to show you what it looks like in the game at the moment.

3fd46206d024d908cdfb212054770c50_original.png



5ea16b5f03a9e70fc05dea7323c53ea4_original.png

Interface Screenshots

To conclude, we'd like to tell you about an idea that we are still working on. Perhaps, many of you have noticed that a completely empty table is taking up a lot of useful space in these screenshots. While working on the interface, we came up with an idea: make it so that transferring items into the exchange slots would cause the player character and the vendor to put the models of these items on the trading table. And, depending on who has to pay extra to uphold their end of the deal, a handful of golden coins should appear on the left or on the right side of the table. We expect this solution to make the trade a more embodied experience and to help preserve gameflow even when opening the full-screen interface. The afore-mentioned principle of immersion is more than mere words to us. Of course, in its current state this is just an idea, and whether it's getting into the game depends on our ability to solve such underlying issues as, for example, the high number of assets that will have to be drawn to implement this feature. Nevertheless, we'll keep looking for ways to overcome these obstacles.

e54ae076d82e7a96221f608bf4f9ce98_original.png


We never settle and we always strive to create an interface that is a pleasure to interact with. The trade interface is no exception and there is still a lot of work, research and debate ahead of us. Make sure to leave a comment and suggest your ideas, we are happy to receive any and all feedback and we will definitely take heed of your advice as we work on the game.



One more thing


As many of you may have already noticed, the forum on the studio website is finally up. All pathfinders are welcome to join! For us, the forum is an opportunity to talk to you directly and to find out what you're thinking about the development issues... as well as about all other issues, really :) It is on this forum that we are planning to collect your ideas and hold polls on various game aspects.

So be sure to come and pay us a visit!



Hail to the Kings,


Owlcats.

b4bc9f676cdf60ef1ab0238e4caaf649_original.png
 

Quantomas

Savant
Joined
Jun 9, 2017
Messages
260
Baldur's Gate still lives in the minds of people, not only because of the game (you could actually have a negative opinion of it like Vault Dweller) but mostly because all the aspects of production aligned in a way to create a game that is significantly greater than the sum of its parts, which is a rarity in a publisher driven industry defined by roadmaps and budgets.

Chances are that people associate this aspect of BG with their hope for a potential worthy BG successor. The argument that this happened many times and that any hyped game before turned out mediocre or merely good doesn't stand against it, does it?

The hope this time is that Owlcat might succeed where others have not, and it is backed up by the fact that they are at least substantially different from your average US studio. But as with so many other things, we will only know whether they succeeded once we have the final game running on our desktop. But from what I have seen, I gladly pitch in my 25 bucks to give them a chance.

The one thing on which I am undecided is whether it's a good thing that they raised only 900K with their Kickstarter. If they wanted more funds, they could easily have it if they created a playable demo right next and go the Unknown Realm: The Siege Perilous route for an extended fundraiser. Edit: Though it is possibly a good thing that the game wasn't diluted by uncanny stretch goals and that it kept clear of promises of additional translations. These can be added later. Just as important though, they have their incentive to prove themselves left undiminished. Maybe this helps for the base game to turn out stronger.

  • Artifacts
  • Wondrous Items
  • Intelligent Items :obviously:
 
Last edited:

veevoir

Klytus, I'm bored
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
1,797
Location
Riding the train, high on cocaine
Shadorwun: Hong Kong BattleTech
That's a bad move - there should never be items smarter than average player. So there should be no intelligent items. Have none of you see Knight Rider, where the dude gets owned by his own car constantly?
 

Serious_Business

Best Poster on the Codex
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
3,909
Location
Frown Town
Baldur's Gate still lives in the minds of people, not only because of the game (you could actually have a negative opinion of it like Vault Dweller)

Holy shit, this actually needs to stop right now. Baldur's Gate is not a good game and RTwP is bad by definition. It was bad in Darklands, in U7, it's bad in BG, and in Pillars. It's shit and adds nothing to anything. It's just tactically inferior. This used to be common Codex knowledge. The new guys need to be drilled into the proper idea. Codex going to shit, etc. But really, if we keep spreading around the idea that this system is acceptable, we'll get more of it. More of the "glory days of Baldur's Gate" ; holy fuck please no. Can you imagine Baldur's Gate turned-based? BG2 turned-based? With the ToEE engine? That would have been cool as fuck, right? So this is the ideal. Without it, the Baldur's Gate series is just inferior. Yeah BG2 was alright and it's still playable I suppose, but no, just drop this nonsense, please
 

Durian Eater

Learned
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
75
Funny thing is that, when the BG games were released, the wonkiness of RTwP combat was one of the few things that otherwise positive reviews typically criticized. But since they're now "classics," everything about them must apparently be unimpeachable, including an approach to combat that was included solely because turn-based RPGs were out of fashion in the post-Gold Box era. And now a marketing decision from the 90s is still shitting up (slavishly derivative) games designed 20 years later.
 

santino27

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2008
Messages
2,678
My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit.
I like the TB vs RT debate as much as the next guy, but BG2 with turn based battles would have basically taken like 400 hours.
 

Doktor Best

Arcane
Joined
Feb 2, 2015
Messages
2,849
I like the TB vs RT debate as much as the next guy, but BG2 with turn based battles would have basically taken like 400 hours.
Which would have led Bioware to rethink encounter frequency and they would have distillated encounter quality even more by cutting down filler combat.
 

Iznaliu

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
3,686
For the last time; combat system matters a lot less than implementation of that system.
 

Drowed

Arcane
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
1,676
Location
Core City
Baldur's Gate was kinda mediocre, so, I don't see how it's surprising that even a "Russian shovelware" (TM) can be way more fun. The art was amazing, I'll give you that, but I'll never understand why some people here have such a massive boner for it.

Pathfinder will actually be quite different from BG in various things, and honestly, I can only interpret this as a good thing. It will not be a "successor" to BG, and this doesn't sound like a bad thing at all.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom