No respeccing, pls.
Don't advocate for poor mechanics!
Respeccing is cheap and cheating.
It takes a lot of the tension and excitement out for me when your choice doesn't really matter.
Respeccing is cheap and cheating.
It takes a lot of the tension and excitement out for me when your choice doesn't really matter.
Not allowing for respecs is poor mechanically. If you want tension and excitement in your specs then make it a hard decision on which ability to choose, don't handicap me into a poor build because I made a bad choice 30 hours ago.
Bad choices are a part of life and should be a part of RPGs.
I like the fact that you are stuck with the choice you made.
If there's no consequence, then there was never really choice.
Not allowing for respecs is poor mechanically. If you want tension and excitement in your specs then make it a hard decision on which ability to choose, don't handicap me into a poor build because I made a bad choice 30 hours ago.
Man, I'm really torn. I don't really care THAT much about DRM-free stuff, as I find steam's DRM to be so minimally invasive as to be nonexistant, but I'm more torn between Steamworks features, cheevos, cloud saves, and community features (ESPECIALLY with potential matchmaking if this thing goes coop), and the AWESOME goodies that come with GOG releases like dev interviews, wallpapers, digital manuals, soundtrack, etc.
Decisions, grrrrrr....
They said the middleware costs are too high.Why don't use Dungeon Siege 3 engine? so beautiful... all 3D... and cheaper to develop...
If there's no consequence, then there was never really choice.
It's the consequence of the immediate choice. Work to make the abilities have interesting interactions with each other and give us the chance to try out different builds without having to plow through 30 hours again.
After reading about how their GoG collaboration started, I had this crazy idea.
They should totally try to reach an agreement with CD Projekt RED and hire The Witcher 2's armor designer as an extended goal.
People would go nut over it.
Well, not exactly. You were able to "rotate" between three different classes, but that's pretty much it.I could be remembering wrong, but I thought respeccing was integrated into PS:T to some extent. With the class choice at least.
Yes, so much yes.After reading about how their GoG collaboration started, I had this crazy idea.
They should totally try to reach an agreement with CD Projekt RED and hire The Witcher 2's armor designer as an extended goal.
People would go nut over it.
I agree.What they should ideally do is make it possible for a variety of builds to progress through the game, with less of a chance of someone screwing up a build so badly that they end up stuck.
Offering a respec option is a bandaid fix and ends up just creating the illusion of choice. Permanence in RPGs tends to always be a good thing.
What they should ideally do is make it possible for a variety of builds to progress through the game, with less of a chance of someone screwing up a build so badly that they end up stuck.
Offering a respec option is a bandaid fix and ends up just creating the illusion of choice. Permanence in RPGs tends to always be a good thing.
What they should ideally do is make it possible for a variety of builds to progress through the game, with less of a chance of someone screwing up a build so badly that they end up stuck.
Offering a respec option is a bandaid fix and ends up just creating the illusion of choice. Permanence in RPGs tends to always be a good thing.
I don't think "someone will make a mod for it" is really a great reason to include a feature in a game. At most, it's a reason to put in a console command to save the modders time (like a god mode or infinite money), but that certainly doesn't mean it needs to be part of the core game. Anyway, if it is included, it should make sense from a roleplaying perspective--otherwise, just letting people decide halfway through that they've actually been playing a different character totally invalidates all the time they spent playing previously.I think the desire to respec goes beyond "i screwed up my build".
Sometimes you are simply sick of your fighter and you want to try to play as a mage without having to start over from scratch.
Personally i like consequence to my choices however i have yet to see an RPG without a respec mod. Why not simply make a decent integration into the game? Nobody has to use it.
I think the desire to respec goes beyond "i screwed up my build".
Sometimes you are simply sick of your fighter and you want to try to play as a mage without having to start over from scratch.
Personally i like consequence to my choices, however i have yet to see an RPG without a respec mod. Why not simply make a decent integration into the game? Nobody has to use it.
Didn't they hinted somewhere that they are going for 2D scenery and 3D characters, like in ToEE?I may be in the minority, but I hope it is 3D.
Respeccing is cheap and cheating.
It takes a lot of the tension and excitement out for me when your choice doesn't really matter.
Not allowing for respecs is poor mechanically. If you want tension and excitement in your specs then make it a hard decision on which ability to choose, don't handicap me into a poor build because I made a bad choice 30 hours ago.
Yeah, it may fit an hack'n slash or a MMO, but for a proper RPG, where NPCs are supposed to react to your choices, it's more harmful than good.Sorry but you are minority, no one want that from RPG game.
I don't think "someone will make a mod for it" is really a great reason to include a feature in a game. At most, it's a reason to put in a console command to save the modders time (like a god mode or infinite money), but that certainly doesn't mean it needs to be part of the core game. Anyway, if it is included, it should make sense from a roleplaying perspective--otherwise, just letting people decide halfway through that they've actually been playing a different character totally invalidates all the time they spent playing previously.
I'm OK with it in games where it's clear by the skill/talent/spell/whatever design what you're doing and how to build your character. Old fashioned, deep cRPGs have a tendency to let you build yourself into a corner because mechanics are not easy to understand and use.
People are born with weaknesses and strong sides due to their genetics. And they have to deal with life by utilizing their strong sides and knowing their weaknesses. If you built yourself into a corner, accept the failure because you can start it again. Or deal with it.
STR=25People are born with weaknesses and strong sides due to their genetics.
STR=4
DEX=8
CON=4
INT=18
WIS=25
CHA=18
Do you mean something like Age of Decadence? Where pretty much every single skill (even "physical" ones) can also be used in a dialogue check eventually?Fixed for Obsidian Game!
Speaking of which, I do hope there's more non-combat stuff for people who invested in physical stats- MOTB had the lodge, and a few flashbacks you could only see with high CON, but the game still heavily rewarded high CHA and WIS.
Wait, what? There's a substantial difference between imposing a morality system on a player and not letting a player screw up. You should definitely be able to make decisions that impact your ability to achieve your goal, whatever that might be.I'd say that a good RPG shouldn't have any bad decisions that a player may make.
Fixed for Obsidian Game!
Speaking of which, I do hope there's more non-combat stuff for people who invested in physical stats- MOTB had the lodge, and a few flashbacks you could only see with high CON, but the game still heavily rewarded high CHA and WIS.
Yeah, me too. I can understand the game not being 3D, but I love being able to zoom in and rotate the camera at will.I may be in the minority, but I hope it is 3D.
Yeah, me too. I can understand the game not being 3D, but I love being able to zoom in and rotate the camera at will.
Sawyer's tweet:in tomorrow's #projecteternity update, i'll talk about SOULS, mechanics, and a new pledge tier aimed at forum communities #assembleyourcrew
Wait, what? There's a substantial difference between imposing a morality system on a player and not letting a player screw up. You should definitely be able to make decisions that impact your ability to achieve your goal, whatever that might be.
Do you mean something like Age of Decadence? Where pretty much every single skill (even "physical" ones) can also be used in a dialogue check eventually?
Shagg! GAF Inn!
You misunderstand me; I'm talking about the player, not the player-character. A good RPG should allow a player to pick build and roleplay it satisfactorily. In Arcanum, for example, if you rolled a guns-build, you're screwed. It ends up being a "bad decision" on the player part. So if the game presents so many number of skills, all of those skills should be useful from start to finish of the game and those skills should represent viable builds. There shouldn't be "bad" builds.
For the player-character, yes, there should be c&c. Those consequences should affect the PC, not the player.
My comment was in reaction to the "respec if I made a bad decision".
I'm not even sure I agree with that, to be honest... mostly because I think there is value in playing through a game as a limited character. Not every ability is equally useful in the real world and it can make for a very different (and probably lengthier) path to accomplish the same goals. To my mind, it's a much less artificial, more interesting way to allow people to increase difficulty than just adding a hard mode. As long as it's clearly indicated that certain options may result in a more difficult game, I think unbalanced skills are totally fine. I would say what should be really balanced is not the usefulness of abilities, but how much interesting content investing in those abilities provides. At least when I'm playing an RPG, while my PC's goal may be to get to the end as fast as possible, my goal is to actually experience the world in which that character lives--a skill that just makes it easier to do the same thing doesn't add very much for me as a player, while a comparatively "useless" ability that adds to the content I can experience is great. Maybe it should even be a combination of both--the less "useful" skills from a gameplay standpoint offer more unique content, incentivizing them even for people who aren't just looking for a challenge. I might be totally alone in that thinking, though.You misunderstand me; I'm talking about the player, not the player-character. A good RPG should allow a player to pick build and roleplay it satisfactorily. In Arcanum, for example, if you rolled a guns-build, you're screwed. It ends up being a "bad decision" on the player part. So if the game presents so many number of skills, all of those skills should be useful from start to finish of the game and those skills should represent viable builds. There shouldn't be "bad" builds.
For the player-character, yes, there should be c&c. Those consequences should affect the PC, not the player.
My comment was in reaction to the "respec if I made a bad decision".
That's exactly like Age of Decadence then.I haven't been following it much, but that sounds about right. It doesn't necessarily have to just be dialogue checks- there's obviously more use for WIS, CHA and INT in speech(or their equivalents) than the physical stats, but checks for pushing boulders out of the way, DEX nimbly grabbing things, whatever. Again, PST and NWN2 had a few, but not very many- I want to feel like I could play a physical character and see things a more cerebral characters would never see.
And preferably without the ability to cheat the system too much. Bloody druids.
I don't think it's good comparition because i remember elephant gun being OP or is it just my memory ?
But yeah no mather where you go which skill you choose it should be usefull.
That's exactly like Age of Decadence then.
A game where even your "kill count" can help you in a dialogue check as an intimidating tool, for instance.