Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity [BETA RELEASED, GO TO THE NEW THREAD]

[Executer]

Suejak, the LARPing thing is complicated. I'm not going into the whole what is an RPG thing, but I will go into one issue.

That issue is gameplay vs realism in CRPGs, particularly in relation to 'immersion'. I don't mean the sort of immersion that comes from a narrative, setting or reactive world, key components in a good storyfag (or any) CRPG.

I'm referring to the sort of immersion that comes from continually enhancing graphics and coupling that with more and more physics based gameplay elements, basically pushing the gameplay towards a simulation. This type of immersion I believe encourages gameplay elements relating to simulation, the dress up, the romance and sex mods, etc.

Remembering the roots of many CRPGs in P&P, we have an alternate style of gameplay. Less simulation and more 'game', gameplay elements from table top games, etc. Because in this model turn based combat, can be argued to be immersive in the sense it is entertaining, realism/simulation does not factor in. I think this allows a more tactical approach, and reduces the amount of reactive gameplay found in games closer to simulation (aka modern immersive elements).

There is a definite grey area here but the anti-LARPing stance is about getting more 'game' in my games, and cutting back on reflex/simulation based elements.

I don't know; this guy got heavy support in the other thread:

LARPing is simply pretending, where as most of us play RPGs because they are simulations, that is, the very opposite of pretending. This isn't exactly rocket science here.

So it seems cool new-age Codexers define an ACCEPTABLE roleplaying experience as a "simulation". LARPing, instead, is simply "pretending". I'll admit that it's not a terribly well-thought-out or well-made point, but basically the idea seems to be that unless "roleplaying" directly earns you experience points or loot, then it's LARPing and stupid.

Basically, I think the difference between modern Codexians and classic Codexians is that the latter were okay with imposing their own rules on a game for the sake of the added challenge and flavour. You'd play through Diablo 2 as a fire mage. You'd play through Fallout without using drugs. You'd play through Arcanum with an idiot character. These things "don't directly affect gameplay" in the sense that they are artificial disadvantages for their own sake, but they're fun. Freedom was a big thing. Now freedom seems secondary to a PUNISHING designer dungeon of doom, a la Dark Souls or some other console ARPG claptrap. I had to explain the concept of emergent gameplay in another thread, ffs.

So yeah, these days everybody talks like we need the game DESIGNERS to keep us from saving during dungeons and shit like that, so our magic system will be balanced and we'll have a thrilling action-packed experience. Fuck that. Just don't rest so fucking much and Vancian is a fun system, you goddamn monkeys.

Anyway, you and I seem to see people defining LARP differently. Not a huge surprise. I don't think it means anything in particular anymore.

I actually think you and Lyric Suite agree, the examples you gave actually affect the gameplay, and in a reactive world like Arcanum the narrative is affected by your low intelligence character. If Arcanum didn't react to your dumb character, but you were just running around doing things you considered dumb because you were a dumb character (i.e. go to a store with no gold and sell something worth 1000 gold for next to nothing 'because your dumb'), we begin to see the distinction.

Edit; Also my post was more of a tangent on the sort of gameplay i think encourages/is conducive to LARPing, not really a definition.

 

[suejak]

I actually think you and Lyric Suite agree, the examples you gave actually affect the gameplay, and in a reactive world like Arcanum the narrative is affected by your low intelligence character. If Arcanum didn't react to your dumb character, but you were just running around doing things you considered dumb because you were a dumb character (i.e. go to a store with no gold and sell something worth 1000 gold for next to nothing 'because your dumb'), we begin to see the distinction.

Maybe so. I was called a LARPer earlier for not wanting to be locked into every dungeon until I beat it and limiting myself to 3 rerolls for stats, and Vault Dweller has said that BG is an easy game "unless you LARP," so I dunno.

Hope you're right

 

[RK47]

What pisses me off is people saying "Sawyer knows best". No he fucking doesn't. I can read just as fine as everyone else. He wants to dumb it down to retard levels because aparently walking back to camp is the end of the world.

You're being trolled bro.
It's alright to be angry. But you don't need to express it.
Just pull your pledge and watch the trainwreck.
Don't be so emotionally invested that you start to express butthurt whenever you post about it.
A silent dismissal is more effective than a demand for change since they already hit their target and all your recommendations mean fuck-all. It's all their money now. Stretch goals is hype for more money.
Don't let it consume you.

 

[J_C]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but can we go back arguing about cooldowns? I mean, that is a dead horse, but it is much more interesting than arguing about LARPing.

 

[General Maxson]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but can we go back arguing about cooldowns? I mean, that is a dead horse, but it is much more interesting than arguing about LARPing.

How about Codex does something constructive for a change and likes Obsidian on fagbook. Or makes fake accounts and votes. Or persuade random people to like it. Whatever gets it over 20 000 likes, so we get an additional dungeon level. It costs nothing and it brings definite . :D

 

[SwiftCrack]

I can't believe I'm saying this, but can we go back arguing about cooldowns? I mean, that is a dead horse, but it is much more interesting than arguing about LARPing.

How about Codex does something constructive for a change and likes Obsidian on fagbook. Or makes fake accounts and votes. Or persuade random people to like it. Whatever gets it over 20 000 likes, so we get an additional dungeon level. It costs nothing and it brings definite . :D

what this guy said

 

[Spectacle]

Can you stupid fuckers stop demanding TB combat in every fucking RPG?

Where are you getting this from?

Read the thread, there are plenty of people wanting TB combat as a stretch goal or arguing that Project Eternity will inevitably be shit because it's not turn based.

 

[groke]

Can you stupid fuckers stop demanding TB combat in every fucking RPG?

Where are you getting this from?

Read the thread, there are plenty of people wanting TB combat as a stretch goal or arguing that Project Eternity will inevitably be shit because it's not turn based.

I strongly doubt that any of the people arguing for turnbased are interested in PE in the first place.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

First of: I'm a storyfaq

Secondly, fuck that guy. Fuck him so hard

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61206-i-actually-dont-want-to-see-the-26m-goals-content/

I'm sure some of you are die hard fans of the full party creation stuff but I simply don't want to see it make it to the game.

Why?
*First off I was hoping we will see as strange companions as PS:T but now the party is modifiable so we probably won't see something like Morte, since if he can be left out, there's no point adding items as Teeth to loot tables.
*I'm more into the story rather than the hack'n slash factor of cRPGs so I'd like to get my companions as involved as I can.
*Leaving out companions has no meaning for me but thinking of the fact that the possibility of creating a stronger party always stands there, disturbs me.
*Player housing where my companions rest will lose it's meaning if there will also be some randomized characters there.
*My PC will lose its uniqueness if I can have 6 PCs. E.g. which of my PCs will have romantic relationships with NPCs?


I don't know but maybe altering companion classes without changing their looks/characters would be possible?

 

[DwarvenFood]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60038-george-ziets-as-a-possible-stretch-goal/page__st__120

Hmmm...just checked the Kickstarter page. Looks like Feargus et al have discussed bringing back Ziets.

It has been discussed. Is it going to happen? Keep checking the updates to find out.

George is not only a talented writer, but he is one of the nicest guys I've ever worked with. Would be awesome to team up again on PE.

Wow, okay, I'm predicting an update today at 18:00 CEST (as usual) to celebrate reaching the 2.4m$ goal, can only hope they will already be able to mention Ziets !

 

[J_C]

First of: I'm a storyfaq

Secondly, fuck that guy. Fuck him so hard

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61206-i-actually-dont-want-to-see-the-26m-goals-content/

I'm sure some of you are die hard fans of the full party creation stuff but I simply don't want to see it make it to the game.

Why?
*First off I was hoping we will see as strange companions as PS:T but now the party is modifiable so we probably won't see something like Morte, since if he can be left out, there's no point adding items as Teeth to loot tables.
*I'm more into the story rather than the hack'n slash factor of cRPGs so I'd like to get my companions as involved as I can.
*Leaving out companions has no meaning for me but thinking of the fact that the possibility of creating a stronger party always stands there, disturbs me.
*Player housing where my companions rest will lose it's meaning if there will also be some randomized characters there.
*My PC will lose its uniqueness if I can have 6 PCs. E.g. which of my PCs will have romantic relationships with NPCs?


I don't know but maybe altering companion classes without changing their looks/characters would be possible?

Let me repeat: Fuck that guy!

 

[Spectacle]

Can you stupid fuckers stop demanding TB combat in every fucking RPG?

Where are you getting this from?

Read the thread, there are plenty of people wanting TB combat as a stretch goal or arguing that Project Eternity will inevitably be shit because it's not turn based.

I strongly doubt that any of the people arguing for turnbased are interested in PE in the first place.

If so, fuck them up the ass with a rusty steel pipe for polluting this thread with their whiny shitposting.
Edit: Afterwards, we'll use the now bloody and shit-covered steel pipe to fuck the guy in IronicNeurotic 's quote.

 

[wormix]

*My PC will lose its uniqueness if I can have 6 PCs. E.g. which of my PCs will have romantic relationships with NPCs?

He's retarded.

He's also complaining that people who don't pledge $50 will "miss out" on the (useless) pet, but then goes on to say that he'd "prefer a low damage but combatant pet".

 

[Jarpie]

Didn't someone say something eerily very similar in Wasteland 2 forums in the spring that since game has four characters you make, he/she can't get immersed playing it?

 

[Roguey]

I suspect Obsidians main target demographic is Bioware refugees, the game will likely emulate BG2 (so romances and all that), but with a non D & D combat system, that will be of Obsidians usual standards.

I disagree regarding "usual standards" because a) they don't have to work with inherited systems b) they're trying to appeal to a different demographic (fans of BG and IWD) and c) aside from New Vegas, which used inherited systems and was intended for fans of Fallout 3, we've never seen Sawyer unbound.

Also it's a shame they didn't go turn based, because Mr Cain can actually design good turn based combat. Obsidian on the other hand can't knock out good RTWP combat. We'll see if Tim can help with the problem, but I'm pessimistic in this case.

When did he do that? Fallout..? Arcanum...? Nope. ToEE? That game with shit encounters? And when the Codex interview asked him about it he claimed that ToEE's biggest problem was actually the story and dialogue? Don't look to Cain when it comes to good systems or combat.

 

[Lyric Suite]

So it seems cool new-age Codexers define an ACCEPTABLE roleplaying experience as a "simulation". LARPing, instead, is simply "pretending". I'll admit that it's not a terribly well-thought-out or well-made point, but basically the idea seems to be that unless "roleplaying" directly earns you experience points or loot, then it's LARPing and stupid.

A simulation involves gameplay, you fuck wit. That was the point i was trying to make.

The Codex is truly getting dumber as time goes along.

 

[Spectacle]

Didn't someone say something eerily very similar in Wasteland 2 forums in the spring that since game has four characters you make, he/she can't get immersed playing it?

Yes, and that's retarded. But saying that your PC, the center of the plot in the case of PE, doesn't feel unique because the game also lets you generate customized mercenaries is yet another level of retardedness entirely.

 

[Hobz]

*My PC will lose its uniqueness if I can have 6 PCs. E.g. which of my PCs will have romantic relationships with NPCs?

He's retarded.

He's also complaining that people who don't pledge $50 will "miss out" on the (useless) pet, but then goes on to say that he'd "prefer a low damage but combatant pet".

Wow that guy is a genius. Who doesn't love babysitting useless characters in combat ? Maybe the pet should be a romance option too. It would make it really unique !

 

[IronicNeurotic]

There's even more retardation

I don't see a problem with the player's hall, however.... having this as a 2.6 million stretch goal, something that is this 'high' on the amount of cash flow coming into this game, is a bit ridiculous. I would have expected something far more grander than a player's hall for a 2.6 million stretch goal, which is more than double the original goal. It's almost like they're asking people to not give them money after the 2.5 million goal. If they want to keep the cash flowing in a good way they should have added something that applied to a higher majority of their player base, instead of something that only makes a small fraction of people go 'yay'. I think they really hurt themselves with this goal, and would have preferred to see something that would add more to the game itself.

I hope they decide to add something more to that 2.6 million goal, or at least make the 2.7 million goal killer, because I'd really love to see this game get as much stuff as possible added to it. And having a stretch goal that doesn't cause enough people to go 'yay', is really going to hurt the amount that they get over all. Which means less content for the finished project due to a lousy stretch goal. Now I know not everyone agrees, but just ask yourself this. Were you more excited about the two stretch goals before it; crafting and enchanting, two new character classes. Cause if you were than that should defiantly tell you that the 2.6 million stretch goal was poorly thought out.

I'm much more excited about the player hall than crafting and enchanting.

I expect several people will be, but I honestly believe that the old school rpg lovers like myself look at something like this and shrug our shoulders, it doesn't bother us that it's being added but we could care less.

Yo, party creation is THE NEW SHIT

Thankfully he gets called out on it.

 

[Jaesun]

Retards on the Obsidian forum? *monocle pop*

 

[Lord Andre]

I played Alpha Protocol a week ago (for the first time) because of Obsidian writing nostalgia. I liked the G21 guys, so in missions where they were enemies I used tranquilizers. I call that roleplaying. Having an in-game house that I can decorate and keep orphans in, I call that larping fagottry. That would be my line in the sand.

TB combat is superior to RTwP when it comes to making a "chess like" battle system. There are however certain tactics that one may think of, that are impossible to pull in TB. Tactics that require 3-4 squad members starting and acting at the same time, in different ways, to pull off one particular result. These tactics can be pulled off in RTwP. Vice-versa you lose the "chess like" complexity from TB. So, I would say both systems have advantages and disadvantages as long as the implementation is good.

TB can give you "chess like" tactics. RTwP can give you tactics based on synchronized actions.

 

[DalekFlay]

TB is a lost cause by now. It's a strange stance to take, but it seems Obsidian still wants to draw in next-gen crowd by compromising on some 'old-school' traditions. Let's see if they add 'romance' into the game first... I'm not entirely sold on this game just yet. But the low pre-order price (2 years pre-order) enticed me.

Maybe they're doing RtWP because the point of the whole fucking deal is to emulate the RtWP classics from the IE engine.

 

[Jaesun]

TB is a lost cause by now. It's a strange stance to take, but it seems Obsidian still wants to draw in next-gen crowd by compromising on some 'old-school' traditions. Let's see if they add 'romance' into the game first... I'm not entirely sold on this game just yet. But the low pre-order price (2 years pre-order) enticed me.

Maybe they're doing RtWP because the point of the whole fucking deal is to emulate the RtWP classics from the IE engine.

Indeed. What an incredibly complex idea to understand.

 

[Jarpie]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61...e-26m-goals-content/page__st__20#entry1229689

I tried my best to fight the urge to reply but I failed, just had to reply to that idiot.

 

[IronicNeurotic]

Hillarious that your lack of ability to think on a statement makes me stupid.

We are talking about a game that's not yet made. I'm telling you that whatever (in this case the party) is fully customizable it will suffer from uniqueness in the end.
Check out IWD series. Your party is fully player made and no PC or event adresses you directly. In simple terms, the story isn't about you.

* Yes you can dismiss Morte in PS:T even as a part of the story. But almost noone plays that way because people love Morte, his quotes and the side quests that evolve around him. Yet even with just nameless one, the story is 80% about the PC and 20% about the rest of the world, and I personally like that kind of cRPGs. You don't have to agree and don't be afraid this stretch goal wont be removed just because I said so. It's just that I'm hoping that any possible future stretch goals aren't in the same direction.

* I couldn't care less about even older games such as EotB series and what not, and that's certainly what I didn't pay for ($2.5M for new EotB? lol.). Another example is Wasteland where the game doesn't involve NPC companions. Yes it's older than FO series but honestly it isn't 10% the game FO 1, 2 and NV each are.

Could I make myself clear?