Decline Sword Coast Legends Pre-Release Thread

[Roguey]

You'd think people who paid $239.99/$349.99 for a video game would be good at playing them, but no.

Granted the $350 version comes down to $70 each if you're splitting it five ways but in that case, you'd think five friends would be good at playing together and yet-

 

[tuluse]

You'd think people who paid $239.99/$349.99 for a video game would be good at playing them, but no.

Granted the $350 version comes down to $70 each if you're splitting it five ways but in that case, you'd think five friends would be good at playing together and yet-

I think the prevalence of freemium/free2play games designed to suck money out of people who can't play well enough to win on their own merits shows that no, the more you pay the less likely you are to be good.

 

[pippin]

The game's not in Steam Early Access. This is a short beta test for high tier pre-orderers. Game's coming out at the end of the month.

Yeah, but I do think EA is creating some sort of mindset when it comes to development in certain companies... It might be my own paranoia, but I expect to see more and more unfinished and broken games in the future. Then, when you release patches and stuff like that, you'll be seen as a dev who is "in touch" with the audience and etc.

 

[Excidium II]

:tinfoilhat:

 

[Telengard]

What you are witnessing is not Early Access, but the thing which Early Access foretold - larger companies adopting the Early Access idea and "allowing" people to pay to be a beta tester. For now it is called: Head Start Access.

You too can pay money to fall through floors, be unable to save your Options selections, and get stuck in Menu Cursor Spinning - from actual forum bug reports.

 

[pippin]

Funny that this came to be in the age of Privilege Shaming (tm).

 

[Bubbles]

Anybody else see this and feel a stab of black, bitter rage in their gut? The infamous Eye Tyrant, scourge of AD&D and bane of heroes level scaled for accessibility.

You should keep this thread well away from your gut then. People there are finding all sorts of arguments in favour of letting dragons and beholders scale down to newbie levels:

no, because the entire point os the DM mode is for any character to be able to do the missions

The whole point is to be INCLUSIVE not exclusive to certain level ranges

in this case, this option WOULD hurt everyone actually. Because people would make their missions for certain levels, which means if you wanted to play them, you either grind a character up to that level, or hope you have a character that fits, otherwise you are screwed, it would also mean many would use that option over the any level option because they like being exclusive to certain levels.

What happens if you get a team of level 2's and 3's and they are fighting against a dragon, according to everyone here, they should be dieing no matter what, because that dragon should not be killable by such low levels......that helps no one and will just make people hate you as a DM or the dungeons you create. Okay, put a level recommendation there........and the first problem i mention come up and DOES limit it to certain people.

Why is saying "I want to limit the people who play my games" more inclusive then saying otherwise?

Also, yeah, pokemon has level scaling in multiplayer, everything scales to level 50, so it does not matter what level your Pokemon are, everyone can participate. You can have level 50's and your friends has level 100's, you can still fight against each other and alongside each other without issue, so thanks for bringing up proof of my point of not excluding people simply for not having the right character level.

 

[twincast]

That is a "problem" which could easily be fixed by allowing the generation of characters on levels higher than 1...

 

[Neanderthal]

You should keep this thread well away from your gut then. People there are finding all sorts of arguments in favour of letting dragons and beholders scale down to newbie levels:

Fuckin hell that's utterly retarded, so every creature however fearsome should be level scaled so baby never has to know failure, and is told his arse is special and magic and shits only rainbows and sparkles. Accessibility really is the bane of almost everything, internal consistency, challenge, verisimilitude and now progression.

Now it's a grind to adventure up to a certain level, I mean god forbid that you have an enjoyable game that is fun to play and levelling up is satsifying and rewarding, no it's all a grind for this prick.

I mean you don't even have to fight high level monsters: What's wrong with avoiding it, running away, sneaking past, bargaining with it, leading it into your enemies or any of a dozen other strategies. No everything must fall before this special snowflakes power fantasy.

I need a drink, don't know how you deal wi that shit Bubbles.

 

[StrongBelwas]

...If you really need a dragon in a low-level adventure for some reason, couldn't you just use a Wyrmling, instead of neutering an adult dragon?

 

[stray]

Fuckin hell that's utterly retarded, so every creature however fearsome should be level scaled so baby never has to know failure, and is told his arse is special and magic and shits only rainbows and sparkles. Accessibility really is the bane of almost everything, internal consistency, challenge, verisimilitude and now progression.

Now it's a grind to adventure up to a certain level, I mean god forbid that you have an enjoyable game that is fun to play and levelling up is satsifying and rewarding, no it's all a grind for this prick.

I mean you don't even have to fight high level monsters: What's wrong with avoiding it, running away, sneaking past, bargaining with it, leading it into your enemies or any of a dozen other strategies. No everything must fall before this special snowflakes power fantasy.

I need a drink, don't know how you deal wi that shit Bubbles.

Man, not even Bioware was that bad.

But at the same time, that's still their mentality.. This company might still be the same thing if they listen to that. The part about "baby.. is told his arse is special", I mean.

 

[Alchemist]

I didn't realize this would have level scaling. This is an even worse travesty of the D&D name than I thought.

 

[Ziem]

this might actually be worse than pillars of mediocrity

 

[m_s0]

That video looks like prototype footage of a game that is still years from release.

So a 2015 game at launch day, then.

...If you really need a dragon in a low-level adventure for some reason, couldn't you just use a Wyrmling, instead of neutering an adult dragon?

No, because baby wants to kill a dragon and feel badass. At 1st level.

 

[Lhynn]

this might actually be worse than pillars of mediocrity

If it wasnt for the gauntlet like multiplayer, yeah, it would be.

 

[Brancaleone]

You should keep this thread well away from your gut then. People there are finding all sorts of arguments in favour of letting dragons and beholders scale down to newbie levels:

That is something I was missing in my life.

They talk about static enemy levels with the kind of 'equal opportunities' rhetoric as if it was some kind of racism. Levelism, maybe.

 

[AwesomeButton]

This is turning out to be even worse shit than I was expecting at the time it was revealed. Scalable Eye Tyrants. A game for retards if there ever was one.

 

[pippin]

Yes, let's make creatures with static levels. All creatures will be Lvl. 1 forever. This is the new shit!

 

[Desur]

Dat extended tank and spank at 21:21

'That was intense.'

Seriously though it's a shame, I thought there was at least some potential in there (alright, I was just hyped up by the live DM thing, hopefully Larian hit the $2 mil threshold and make it actually work).
They still got almost 3 weeks time, can they make this game any good?

Spoiler

 

[DavidBVal]

You should keep this thread well away from your gut then.

Why did I have to click that link?

I feel like if I lost permanent INT points by reading some posts.

People there are finding all sorts of arguments in favour of letting dragons and beholders scale down to newbie levels:

Wrong. That thread says that, currently everything scales, like it or not, and some players are asking to be able to, optionally, put fixed level stuff in their content, which is being heavily contested by others, calling it "non-inclusive"

So now saying that a Dragon is level 16 is a form of discrimination to poor level 1 players... priceless.

Definitely what is scaling to player level is the quality of games.

 

[prodigydancer]

I thought I would reserve judgment but if they really have forced level scaling for everything this game is doomed.

 

[DavidBVal]

'That was intense.'

Definitely I never thought I'd see a lich spamming Ray of Frost. I won't touch this game with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Bubbles]

I thought I would reserve judgment but if they really have forced level scaling for everything this game is doomed.

Everything made by players is level scaled; monsters don't change their name or model when they scale, they just increase or decrease in power. However, you can give any monster an offset of up to +/- 5 levels (compared to the average level of the party), so a conscientious DM could make sure that all dragons and beholders will be at least level 6, and all rats will be at most level 15.

The official campaign has both fixed levels and level scaling.

 

[Turjan]

'That was intense.'

This was the highlight of the video for me, given this was uttered when I was just saying to myself "this is incredibly boring".

 

[prodigydancer]

Everything made by players is level scaled ... However, you can give any monster an offset of up to +/- 5 levels

Yeah. No sane DM will even try to work on any serious content facing such restrictions. Technically speaking +5 may be enough at low levels especially if n-Space uses MMO-style balancing where you can't hit +5 monsters for shit (and I wouldn't put such cheap and dirty tricks past them). But from creativity perspective it's stifling, annoying and disruptive. Disruptive, because it limits the DM's power which should never be the case (I believe it's already been discussed earlier in the thread).