Eternity Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire Pre-Release Thread [BETA RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[AwesomeButton]

You mean it says what stat's important for which class. That's written out. But no one gives you instructions to minmax stats, and for some number of players anything but a minaxed build is difficult.

 

[The Bishop]

...

Honestly, I think in a video game the simplest way of encouraging players to care about any particular mechanic is to just make it real part of the game, and not easily avoidable imitation. It's pretty easy to make players care about conserving supplies in PoE - just make it that they can't backtrack and will die if supplies run out. The current system with limited supplies would work just fine for that. Obsidian will never do this though for reasons I mentioned above, not in this style of game. So to me the two obvious solutions would be to either change the style of game, make it that losing and restarting are integral parts of the experience, or just do away with the whole resource thingie if you can't make it work.

Sure you can't lose in Pillars (or the IE games, or any game like it) because of resource attrition; you can always trek back for more camping supplies.

However, husbanding your resources so you don't have to is a big part of the experience. Deciding which per-rest abilities to use and when, adjusting tactics so the party loses health at a roughly even pace, sometimes even having a badly wounded character hang back and sit out fights in order to push a bit further... I enjoy it, and for me it's an integral part of the experience in this kind of thing. All the D&D based games had it. Dragon Age: Origins didn't -- all it had was injuries, healable with injury kits -- and it was a poorer experience for it. Pillars 1 had it. By the sound of it, Pillars 2 won't, or at the very least it'll be a much diluted experience. That's a loss.

Sure, just like you adjust tactics in Skyrim when it rains, because you don't want your bowstring to get wet, so you wait it out by standing under trees when it pours. Roleplaying at its finest.

 

[Parabalus]

Just how many beta testers do we need to convince Josh to bring back endurance/health?

Did you feel like that feature chamged anything? I did not.

It means I don't have to waste time casting Cure Light Wounds x10 after combat or installing an OoC casting script - pure genius.

IMO, losing still works as a temporary dead end in IE games, but it has to take a long time, and presupposes that the player is not using metaknowledge from past playthroughs. In a 4X game where everything is much more random, it's more difficult for a player to benefit from metaknowledge from a past playthrough, but he can still abuse the strategic AI's limitations.

Losing in the IE games though, to feel "fair", has to be a slow process. Not talking about a simple "party wipe - game over screen with skulls", no. I'm talking about the process where little by little, after a big number of encounters which seem overwhelmingly difficult, the player realizes that his party is built inefficiently, and he has spread his attribute points wrong - both those things are haram for Josh btw. This is when the player gives up. One more proof that Josh is wrong with the no bad builds rule. This rule takes more away than adding regenerating health takes away from gameplay.

IE games can be soloed (or 5-manned) by recruitable NPCs, what you're saying doesn't really exist. There is also no such thing as "build" in the IE games.

Sure you can't lose in Pillars (or the IE games, or any game like it) because of resource attrition; you can always trek back for more camping supplies. However, husbanding your resources so you don't have to is a big part of the experience. Deciding which per-rest abilities to use and when, adjusting tactics so the party loses health at a roughly even pace, sometimes even having a badly wounded character hang back and sit out fights in order to push a bit further... I enjoy it, and for me it's an integral part of the experience in this kind of thing. All the D&D based games had it. Dragon Age: Origins didn't -- all it had was injuries, healable with injury kits -- and it was a poorer experience for it. Pillars 1 had it. By the sound of it, Pillars 2 won't, or at the very least it'll be a much diluted experience. That's a loss.

I dislike going back for supplies, but the alternative of a "Game Over" screen doesn't sit well with me. It amounts to reloading several hours backwards and replaying with more meta knowledge.

Pillars 1 rest system is one of the best in CPRGs, I'm sceptical of Deadfire's change in this regard.

 

[Prime Junta]

Sure, just like you adjust tactics in Skyrim when it rains, because you don't want your bowstring to get wet, so you wait it out by standing under trees when it pours. Roleplaying at its finest.

You feel that, say, deciding which spells to use now and which to save for later, or whether to rest now or move a wounded character to the second line with some extra armour, are similar to waiting out a bout of rain? Interesting.

 

[The Bishop]

You feel that, say, deciding which spells to use now and which to save for later, or whether to rest now or move a wounded character to the second line with some extra armour, are similar to waiting out a bout of rain?

They are though? Of course inherent system of Skyrim are much, much simpler than those in PoE, but you can still hide behind your henchman imagining that you're hurt, or refuse to drink healing potions to roleplay limited supply, or gastritis, or allergy. Count how many times you used spells so you can simulate that you're running out. There's really no limit to how varied, deep, or complicated a game can be for as long as you play it in your own head.

 

[AwesomeButton]

What I said is that stuff like having to cast 10 times Cure Light Wounds, and your aversion to having to do that is affecting your choices during combat.

In PoE you just drop down and get revived afterwards. The best system would be the system where you are careful, because there is a minor penalty to losing much health.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Sure you can't lose in Pillars (or the IE games, or any game like it) because of resource attrition; you can always trek back for more camping supplies.

However, husbanding your resources so you don't have to is a big part of the experience. Deciding which per-rest abilities to use and when, adjusting tactics so the party loses health at a roughly even pace, sometimes even having a badly wounded character hang back and sit out fights in order to push a bit further... I enjoy it, and for me it's an integral part of the experience in this kind of thing. All the D&D based games had it. Dragon Age: Origins didn't -- all it had was injuries, healable with injury kits -- and it was a poorer experience for it. Pillars 1 had it. By the sound of it, Pillars 2 won't, or at the very least it'll be a much diluted experience. That's a loss.

It's not about being able to lose because of resource attrition, it's about resting having some kind of cost other than time wasted as you trek back to an inn. Of course, there are systems in PoE that encourage you to conserve resources, but ultimately the only benefit of doing so is having to go back less often. It's a very half-assed solution, and it's not at all difficult to improve. Supplies could cost significant amounts of money; some enemies could respawn; god forbid, you could have a global per-playthrough limit on resting.

Of course, Obsidian don't want to do any of these, as they would make their carebear audience howl in agony, so they went the other direction. Hopefully, this means less filler combat and more meaningful fights balanced around the party having their full arsenal available at all times - much like D:OS, for example. This would be a significant departure from the IE model though, so I wouldn't get my hopes up.

 

[Grunker]

Resting is the new "what is an RPG"

 

[Prime Junta]

Supplies could cost significant amounts of money; some enemies could respawn; god forbid, you could have a global per-playthrough limit on resting.

(1) Would require a revamp of the entire economy. In the early game, 1000 copper is a lot of money. In late game, 10,000 is pocket change.
(2) Would only be a mild additional inconvenience (or a way to grind copper, if they dropped loot when they died). I.e., would not qualitatively change anything -- cost of too much resting is still inconvenience.
(3) lol

I'm sure it could be improved, but it would need better ideas than that. In fact I rather like the way P2 revamped resting.

Main point is, I never once trekked back to an inn for supplies, but having limited resting and per-rest resources/per-rest health nudged me to pay attention to resources. I know I'm in the minority, and modern goons can't into that, instead simply resting after every fight and trekking back for supplies.

So the irony is that P2 does improve resting -- but it removes the very things that make resting a worthwhile game element.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

(1) Would require a revamp of the entire economy. In the early game, 1000 copper is a lot of money. In late game, 10,000 is pocket change.

Well, yeah, making things cost money is only meaningful in a somewhat balanced economy. It's not really a huge problem if supply costs become less meaningful in the lategame, but you do indeed need to put some effort into this solution.

(2) Would only be a mild additional inconvenience (or a way to grind copper, if they dropped loot when they died). I.e., would not qualitatively change anything -- cost of too much resting is still inconvenience.

Not really. Respawns are an inconvenience, true, but they're also a resource sink. If you exit a dungeon to resupply, and then re-enter it, you'd lose some of said supplies in the process of getting back to where you were. This in and out of itself encourages better play, and then you can also introduce shortcuts into the level designs as progression milestones. Not really something IE-likes have tried in the past, but it is an option.

(3) lol

You laugh, but this year saw the release of Persona 5, a very successful (both critically and commercially) JRPG featuring TB dungeon crawling, which does this exact thing. The game takes place over 9 months, with each day acting as a basic time unit that lets you do things. Leaving a dungeon in P5 restores all mana, but entering it again costs a full day; and even with this, all enemies respawn so you can only really leave after finding a safe room if you want to preserve your progress.

So what you're really saying is that IE fans can't handle the hardcore mechanics of a mainstream weeb waifu simulator.

Main point is, I never once trekked back to an inn for supplies, but having limited resting and per-rest resources/per-rest health nudged me to pay attention to resources. I know I'm in the minority, and modern goons can't into that, instead simply resting after every fight and trekking back for supplies.

You crawled through the entirety of Od Nua without ever leaving?

So the irony is that P2 does improve resting -- but it removes the very things that make resting a worthwhile game element.

Well, if they're unwilling to make it meaningful, then might as well remove it and hope it helps elsewhere.

Personally, I just really like the idea that entering a dungeon in a dungeon-heavy game should feel like a commitment, a long journey you need to prepare for. IE games have never been very good at this unfortunately, and if Sawyer is afraid to innovate too much, then there's no point in half-measures imo.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Supplies could cost significant amounts of money; some enemies could respawn; god forbid, you could have a global per-playthrough limit on resting.

(1) Would require a revamp of the entire economy. In the early game, 1000 copper is a lot of money. In late game, 10,000 is pocket change.

Do you collect every xaurip spear since the tutorial dungeon? Not saying it's a bad thing, but if the game economy is not expecting you to do it, doesn't it count as breaking the game on purpose?

Talking about this, here is an example in inconsistency and in "I don't know what I want". The following statements are coming from the same source:

1. It's "degenerate gameplay" to have mobs surprise you if you sleep, because players will savescum to avoid the mobs.
2. It's "degenerate gameplay" to have to manage an inventory. It adds nothing to the gameplay. Let's let players have an unlimited inventory.
3. Players end up with a lot of cash towards the endgame because they can collect every piece of trash and sell it for one coin. We'll use the Stronghold as a money sink.
4. Although the inventory is limitless, we are limiting the amount of camping supplies players can carry so we can limit how many times they can rest before backtracking.
5. Backtracking and sleeping at an inn after every combat is also "degenerate gameplay". Yes, I know, we just incited players to play this way. But it's a bad way to play, believe me.
6. Players like to face every encounter 100% prepared and rested. Whoop-de-doo - it's how people play, we can't change that.

These have all been defended by Josh at one time or another.

(2) Would only be a mild additional inconvenience (or a way to grind copper, if they dropped loot when they died). I.e., would not qualitatively change anything -- cost of too much resting is still inconvenience.

In my experience, sometimes it takes a mild additional inconvenience to change your mind and make you stay in the dungeon for one more encounter before going back.

Main point is, I never once trekked back to an inn for supplies, but having limited resting and per-rest resources/per-rest health nudged me to pay attention to resources. I know I'm in the minority, and modern goons can't into that, instead simply resting after every fight and trekking back for supplies.

I like IE's resting system. You rest where you are not supposed to - you are interrupted by a trash mob. You backtrack - you have to fight your way through respawning trash mobs. Forces you to conserve your healing abilities much better than health/endurance in PoE forces you to conserve your resting supplies. No doubt about it.

Also, I hate having to rest in the BG/IWD, because this adds to my total ingame time played counter when I save my game. I like to spend as little ingame time as possible to finish the game, it's a sort of a self-imposed challenge. I know I'm in the minority, and modern goons can't into that, instead simply resting after every fight and trekking back for supplies.

 

[Background Character]

Do you collect every xaurip spear since the tutorial dungeon? Not saying it's a bad thing, but if the game economy is not expecting you to do it, doesn't it count as breaking the game on purpose?

You don't?

 

[AwesomeButton]

Do you collect every xaurip spear since the tutorial dungeon? Not saying it's a bad thing, but if the game economy is not expecting you to do it, doesn't it count as breaking the game on purpose?

You don't?

Read on.

 

[Prime Junta]

You crawled through the entirety of Od Nua without ever leaving?

No. When I hit content that was above my pay grade, I left to do something else and return a couple of levels later. I didn't just pop back for a rest and camping supplies.

Do you collect every xaurip spear since the tutorial dungeon? Not saying it's a bad thing, but if the game economy is not expecting you to do it, doesn't it count as breaking the game on purpose?

As a matter of fact I do because of that "loot all" button, but it wouldn't make much difference even if I didn't. The Fine/Exceptional etc. items are where the money's at, and I would expect only very few players would leave any of those lying around. Josh certainly assumes most players will do just that, it's the reason the inventory works like it does.

In my experience, sometimes it takes a mild additional inconvenience to change your mind and make you stay in the dungeon for one more encounter before going back.

Maybe. For me, the inconvenience of trekking back for more camping supplies is sufficient. Respawning monsters wouldn't change my behaviour in any way, I'd still try to push forward as far as I can.

The IE system fails though, because rather than rewarding you for pushing yourself to the limit, it punishes you for it.

How? If you do so, and have to rest mid-dungeon, that random mob will clobber your barely-surviving party hard. I play both games more or less the same way -- I try to rest as little as feasible -- but in the IE games I save before every rest and reload if attacked simply because dealing with the trash mob when out of healing, spells, and low on HP is not my idea of fun.

(BTW, you clearly have no idea what "degenerate strategy" even means. Look it up and rephrase your list and I might address it. As it is there's no point.)

 

[AwesomeButton]

BGII and IWD overdo the respawning at times, but it's still the better approach for me.

BTW, I don't use the loot all button. I just don't. I always set the loot radius to the minimum so I have to click every loot container separately, and I pick things up one by one. I'm just used to doing it this way. Besides, the loot all button sends everything to the stash, which I try to use as little as possible. If there is degenerate gameplay, then it is having an unlimited inventory.

 

[Prime Junta]

BTW, I don't use the loot all button. I just don't. I always set the loot radius to the minimum so I have to click every loot container separately, and I pick things up one by one. I'm just used to doing it this way. Besides, the loot all button sends everything to the stash, which I try to use as little as possible.

Thanks for sharing. So what?

If there is degenerate gameplay, then it is having an unlimited inventory.

Degenerate strategy means something, and you clearly have no idea what. Again, look it up. Using the phrase like you do just makes you look

 

[AwesomeButton]

BTW, I don't use the loot all button. I just don't. I always set the loot radius to the minimum so I have to click every loot container separately, and I pick things up one by one. I'm just used to doing it this way. Besides, the loot all button sends everything to the stash, which I try to use as little as possible.

Thanks for sharing. So what?

You are welcome. So, nothing. The paragraph begins with "BTW", doesn't it?

If there is degenerate gameplay, then it is having an unlimited inventory.

Degenerate strategy means something, and you clearly have no idea what. Again, look it up. Using the phrase like you do just makes you look

I don't give a shit what it means. The paragraph you skipped commenting on demonstrates clearly enough the inconsistencies, and how "degenerate gameplay" is an excuse for Josh doing whatever he feels is better. It is apparent that no one cares what "degenerate strategy" means.

 

[santino27]

/reads another 3 pages of posts.

Beta really can't come soon enough.

 

[Iznaliu]

Beta really can't come soon enough.

I would rather they wait to produce something good rather than release something mediocre now.

 

[santino27]

Beta really can't come soon enough.

I would rather they wait to produce something good rather than release something mediocre now.

I would rather they release something to beta now so we can discuss the actual implementation instead of what we think the implementation will be and all of the many reasons it will or won't work out.

 

[Lacrymas]

They probably already have a playable P1-beta-like slice of the game they can throw on the trough for us to gobble up, someone already finished the entire game after all, so something else is delaying it.

 

[Prime Junta]

I don't give a shit what it means.

And this is why the world is going to hell in a handbasket. Nobody gives a shit about how things actually are, it's only their precious feelings and opinions that matter, and every one is as good as any other.

The paragraph you skipped commenting on demonstrates clearly enough the inconsistencies, and how "degenerate gameplay" is an excuse for Josh doing whatever he feels is better. It is apparent that no one cares what "degenerate strategy" means.

Josh uses the term "degenerate strategy" in a very particular, specific way. You're just using it as a vague synonym for which means you're not making a point or an argument or saying anything meaningful about why P1 is the way it is, you're just expressing your contempt for something. Which is all well and good, but why would I care?

 

[AwesomeButton]

Nothing of the sort. Degenerate gameplay is alive and well in PoE.

Please don't tell me what I mean with the words I use. If you don't know what I mean, you can ask. Making up a convenient argument that the other side supposedly makes and then disproving it is a pretty cheap tactic, known as "strawman".

 

[Prime Junta]

Please don't tell me what I mean with the words I use. If you don't know what I mean, you can ask. Making up a convenient argument that the other side supposedly makes and then disproving it is a pretty cheap tactic, known as "strawman".

You were commenting on Josh's thinking, using a term he's known for using, using it wrong, consequently claiming that he was stating something he wasn't stating, and then attacking that instead of the thing he's actually claiming. That's the strawman right there, dude.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Ok, instead of discussing the accuracy of your interpretation of my interpretation of what someone else said, let's keep it simple.

A question to everybody:
Does backtracking after every other encounter in order to be fully rested qualify as exploiting game mechanics, or does it not qualify as exploiting game mechanics?