Will PoE be shit?

[Johannes]

This was shit from the start. IE games and RTwP need to die in a fire.

Closest to my opinion, though I liked IE. But I liked them despite fact that they were RTwP, not because of it. There is no sensible reason in 2014 to design a RTwP RPG, at least not a combat focused one. With Kickstarter, Obsidian had the independence to make their own game without some clown in charge forcing bad systems to be implemented because of a misguided idea of "what the market wants", but they chose to pander to IE fans instead, and in the worst way possible (copying even the bad elements). Even though I have a feeling most of those fans are like me and liked IE despite RTwP, though I could be wrong.

I don't see what's there to like in IE games if you take the combat system away.

 

[Gentle Player]

This was shit from the start. IE games and RTwP need to die in a fire.

Closest to my opinion, though I liked IE. But I liked them despite fact that they were RTwP, not because of it. There is no sensible reason in 2014 to design a RTwP RPG, at least not a combat focused one. With Kickstarter, Obsidian had the independence to make their own game without some clown in charge forcing bad systems to be implemented because of a misguided idea of "what the market wants", but they chose to pander to IE fans instead, and in the worst way possible (copying even the bad elements). Even though I have a feeling most of those fans are like me and liked IE despite RTwP, though I could be wrong.

I don't see what's there to like in IE games if you take the combat system away.

I liked the encounter design, great variety of foes, mage duels, enemy adventuring parties, the variety of spells, buffing and debuffing, character building, and the graphics.

 

[Athelas]

So in other words: you do like the combat.

 

[eremita]

Pillars of Eternity is basically the equivalent of the Codex's first truly big penis.

At first, our tranginas were tingling at the prospect of delving into true tactical complexity within RTWP mechanics. We were naturally lubricated and ready for a good ol' dicking. But then the first penetration happened and it hurt, it hurt bad. It turns out Giant JE Sawyer Penis is not good the first run through. Some of us have gotten scared at the prospect of more. Some of us keep soldiering through by lubing to ease the penetration of this massive, tactical cock inside our tiny trangina insides. Then something magical happens: we begin to adapt. Our codex trangina opens up revealing unknown spots of pleasure that only a JE sawyer Tacti-Penis can reach. And reach it does. And then we no longer need lube because our excitement at the prospect of having our codex trangina insides hit produces its own codexian lube-soup of pleasure. Then we start to cum, but we don't just cum, we CUM. JE Sawyer tacti-penis makes us cum again and again and again. We cum in brand new ways splurging codexian gravy all over JE Sawyer Tacti-Penis as he laughs in our faces. Fuck this asshole! But he makes me cum in spectacular, innovative ways! As JE Sawyer walks away from our stinky, trangina taint he'll look back and send us the most douchebaggey smirk we've ever seen. And then it hits us, nobody can ever fuck our codex tranginas like he can, his PILLAR HAS RUINED US FOR ETERNITY.

Well, that was disturbing.

 

[Commissar Draco]

What I don't understand is that if RTWP is a deal breaker for so many people why are they following news and participating in discussions/threads about PoE at all? Why give a shit?

Because hate is good for the soul.

Hate is the greatest gift Emperor gave to Humanity; picked:

It could have been good, but J.E. Sawyer happened.

not that Commissar had much hope after they picked RTwP over TBs but without Rougism-Sawyerism applied to core design it could be yet another broken Gem from Obsidian.

 

[Gentle Player]

So in other words: you do like the combat.

I don't like the system used for the combat. But I liked how the encounters were designed.

 

[Athelas]

So in other words: you do like the combat.

I don't like the system used for the combat. But I liked how the encounters were designed.

I don't think you can separate the system from its implementation.

 

[Black_Willow]

It could've been a great RTwP game like BG2, but Sawyer came so we'll get shit instead.

 

[Gentle Player]

So in other words: you do like the combat.

I don't like the system used for the combat. But I liked how the encounters were designed.

I don't think you can separate the system from its implementation.

One can look at how the encounters are designed - composition of enemy parties and the abilities they use, and how they can be countered - as well as variety of these parties in separate encounters, and appreciate that without necessarily liking the RTwP system. That's how I felt when playing IE games (mainly BG2, though BG1 and IWD2 had their moments), and I thought to myself that the well designed encounters would really shine in a good turn-based system.

Conversely, there could be a game with a slick TB system (ToEE comes to mind) that one can really enjoy mechanically - in terms of options available, control, accessibility of interface and general ease of use - but which is full of mostly dull encounters with the same mundane melee enemies.

 

[Athelas]

So in other words: you do like the combat.

I don't like the system used for the combat. But I liked how the encounters were designed.

I don't think you can separate the system from its implementation.

One can look at how the encounters are designed - composition of enemy parties and the abilities they use, and how they can be countered - as well as variety of these parties in separate encounters, and appreciate that without necessarily liking the RTwP system. That's how I felt when playing IE games (mainly BG2, though BG1 and IWD2 had their moments), and I thought to myself that the well designed encounters would really shine in a good turn-based system.

That's not really a given because like I said before, you can't view the implementation of combat in isolation from its underlying mechanics. A good example would be the Haste spell - by necessity, it has to work different in a real-time environment than it does in turn-based.

Conversely, there could be a game with a slick TB system (ToEE comes to mind) that one can really enjoy mechanically - in terms of options available, control, accessibility of interface and general ease of use - but which is full of mostly dull encounters with the same mundane melee enemies.

I don't see how that supports your argument. Games with battle systems of all kinds can have bad combat. This goes without saying.

 

[Surf Solar]

If they polish up the combat and balance out the attributes better, it will be a good game.
I dont mind it being RTwP when there are so many other turnbased games getting released these times.

 

[Spaceman]

I foresee a great rift in the Codex in the coming months: turn-based versus real-time-with-pause.

People were at it for years.

RTwP is essentially turn-based but the purpose of it is to have some fluidity. It usually ends up in pause-fest though so it's more like Combat Mission series turn-based combat but with turns being 2-6 seconds long(in CM they've lasted for minute and new orders arrived after 15 seconds as far as I remember). So in theory it should be okay for people who like turns. However the execution ends up being extremely tiring for the player.

At the same time the system achieves only one, secondary goal. It allows for cheesing through some shitty encounters with 2 goblins by letting your warriors/rangers kill them automatically without pausing. It doesn't achieve fluidity, it's tiring and tedious.

The only flaw turn-based systems have is their level of abstraction. Which can make it much worse than RTwP for some people.

It goes up to taste but imo. RTwP was flawed from the start and will be always flawed so why bother with it?

I would have to concur and say that both Turn-based and RTwP actually have the same amount of potential. Turn-based systems have the problem that all turn-based games have - their flow is fairly unrealistic. In real life (and thus real-time systems) everything happens simultaneously. You have organic, fluid combat. In a turn based system, a character with the highest initiative can use a potion of speed, run to your mage and hit him in the face. This unrealistic amount of action could be stopped in the real time system by ordering your archer guy to turn the enemy into a walking needle pillow before he opens his mouth.

Basically what I'm trying to illustrate here are that real-time systems are more realistic. And in fact, if done well they allow almost as much tactical gameplay as turn-based ones. I'd even have to add, that non-tiled turn-based systems (e.g. D:OS) are the worst, because a lot of tactical elements can only be implemented in a grid (then again, this is one of the flaws of RTwP systems... hence my argument that they are both equally good.)

(It is really weird to be contrarian while taking the middle ground...)

And here is my say about PoE: I never really got into the 'deep' discussion you guys are having over here and am looking at the game from probably the most arbitary viewpoint possible... and so far I think it's going to be above average. I might be missing something though, because of my aforementioned distancing from the discussion (doesn't mean I didn't read it, I just don't like taking sides for now)

 

[roshan]

So far there are 46 positive votes, 37 ambivalent ones, and 74 negative ones. Looks like the general opinion is that the game is turning out to be a turd.

 

[Volrath]

"It could have been good, but J.E. Sawyer happened."

The fact that this option is winning is all thanks to Roguey

I wonder if the kickstarter would have been as popular on the Codex had we known from the beginning that Sawyer was going to be the project leader?

 

[Duraframe300]

"It could have been good, but J.E. Sawyer happened."

The fact that this option is winning is all thanks to Roguey

I wonder if the kickstarter would have been as popular on the Codex had we known from the beginning that Sawyer was going to be the project leader?

We more or less did.

 

[Roguey]

I wonder if the kickstarter would have been as popular on the Codex had we known from the beginning that Sawyer was going to be the project leader?

But you did know. It's right there in the text of the pitch.

Hell, remember the controversy over cooldowns?

 

[Volrath]

"It could have been good, but J.E. Sawyer happened."

The fact that this option is winning is all thanks to Roguey

I wonder if the kickstarter would have been as popular on the Codex had we known from the beginning that Sawyer was going to be the project leader?

We more or less did.

Hmm, I checked, it does say Project Director. Guess you were right. Funny how this turned out then.

 

[Roguey]

Haha yeah.

All those bad things JES said about third edition and BG were years in the past too. I enjoyed trolling the PoE megathread by digging those quotes up.

 

[Gentle Player]

That's not really a given because like I said before, you can't view the implementation of combat in isolation from its underlying mechanics. A good example would be the Haste spell - by necessity, it has to work different in a real-time environment than it does in turn-based.

Well, I'm not a game designer so unfortunately I don't have the intelligence or the clout to have a proper debate about the intricacies of systems implementation, as interesting as that would be. I'll just say that I myself do view encounter design - as in the makeup of the enemies you fight; their affinities; their spells and abilities etc. - and general variety of spells in the game (the main things I liked about IE) as being somewhat separate qualities from the nature of the combat system, be it RTwP or TB.

Of course, in the game proper there will be mechanical adjustments to spells, abilities etc. in order to fit either combat system, as you said; but the essence, I think, is still there. By that I mean a fight against a party consisting of a lich, a beholder, vampire, cleric and mage - with all the variety of spells one has to watch out for, defenses one has to breach, and everything else that fighting a party of that makeup entails - is still (or at least has the potential to be) an interesting and varied fight with many nuances whether it's in a clunky RTwP game or a slick TB game.

Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology, or I'm just an idiot and nobody else views it that way. But the point remains that, for me personally, I can play BG2, appreciate the variety of foes I fight and the abilities they use, as well as the abilities at my own disposal, enjoy playing, but still not like the RTwP system and wish it was turn based. I don't know how I can explain it any further, it's just my opinion!

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Enemies move around and can move into your stealth radius: if you can move back fast enough you can avoid detection, if you fail, you'll trigger a fight. Seems pretty suspenseful to me. It's way more engaging than stealth was in the IE games.

Yeah, but it's always clear cut when you'll be detected (once two circles collide), you're ready for it, you can't be surprised. There are no those "Oh shit, my thief failed his check in the middle of the enemy group, they're gonna gang up on him now" moments.

It's kinda like 3d person vs 1st person stealth games in a way.

On the other hand, the idea that you would routinely want to avoid enemies in a combat-focused RPG might be a problem worth examining.

Well, IIRC IWD2 already had some stealth solutions to quests (sneak out the captives from the orc camp or something like that) and enemies stopped giving XP for kills depending on how high your level was (unless you level-squatted) so this isn't the first time Sawyer tried to implement stealth as an alternative to killing shit.

 

[Roguey]

Chaotic stealth is very much ftl.

 

[Athelas]

Yeah, but it's always clear cut when you'll be detected (once two circles collide), you're ready for it, you can't be surprised. There are no those "Oh shit, my thief failed his check in the middle of the enemy group, they're gonna gang up on him now" moments.

Not quite that clear cut. There are outer and inner circles, corresponding with 'investigating' and 'alerted' states. You can still get away from an enemy that touched your outer circle and who starts moving towards you to investigate. I found even the very basic implementation in the first beta build enjoyable to play around with.

It's kinda like 3d person vs 1st person stealth games in a way.

I don't see how. The difference between those two is the 'unfairness' of 3rd person stealth camera, not anything to do with detection stats as is the case with PoE vs IE stealth.

 

[Nikaido]

Basically what I'm trying to illustrate here are that real-time systems are more realistic.

And no one gave a shit. Do chess players worry that their "knight" and "rooks" pieces aren't doing realistic things? turn based games tend to allow for more interesting gameplay than your classic button masher or pause spamming system. And that is all that matters, because these are games, not interactive movies. If realism is what makes you argue in favor of a system, go play Go Home and choke on lesbian strap-ons.

 

[Gondolin]

Poll needs obvious "We could've turned this around, but Roguey happened" option.

 

[Shannow]

This was shit from the start. IE games and RTwP need to die in a fire.

Closest to my opinion, though I liked IE. But I liked them despite fact that they were RTwP, not because of it. There is no sensible reason in 2014 to design a RTwP RPG, at least not a combat focused one. With Kickstarter, Obsidian had the independence to make their own game without some clown in charge forcing bad systems to be implemented because of a misguided idea of "what the market wants", but they chose to pander to IE fans instead, and in the worst way possible (copying even the bad elements). Even though I have a feeling most of those fans are like me and liked IE despite RTwP, though I could be wrong.

Spoiler

Will probably still pick it up at some point because I'm a graphics whore. Didn't back it though.

Dunno. I'm firmly in the TB camp and I think that many of Sawyer's design decisions are not just bad in general but specifically for RTwP games. Namely giving all classes several active abilities that should be used per encounter - and from the sound of it significantly increase the micromanagement. Thus leading to constant pausing. It may lead to more involved combat but it also completely cancels out whatever perceived advantages RTwP may have over TB.
That said, I'm not opposed to RTwP-fags getting games too. As a TB-fag I was shafted for a decade. I wouldn't wish that on anybody.
No reason that different styles of gameplay can't happily co-exist, as long as all groups are catered to.

And Obsidian don't intend to ever produce a TB game.

Spoiler

I dare their Pathfinder cRPG project to prove that statement false. But I'm not holding my breath.

One of the reasons I never understood the infatuation with OE that so many on the codex exhibit.