|
Yo, that trailer has me pumped. One thing: Please double the gibs and make some additional gibs require more inertia to overcome, so they travel less distance. They should also trail particles like blood along their path. Think the kind of brutal "deconstruction" units from Myth suffer when dieing from a dwarven molotov. More blood, more! 
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2013 01:07
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
FRINGE posted:The Black Company would be as good (or better). Definitely agree to this. Black Company is amazing. Malazan is an interesting series, but it's so incredibly dense, you have no chance of understanding what's happening without consulting a wiki or reference guide. Something like the Black Company is easy to translate into a game, too. Myth has a lot of similarities to it, for example, and it remains one of the best strategy games made.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 12, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:...blood fountains are optional How wrong can one person be? The first thing I want from killing that giant dragon is an explosion of gold and magical items loosed from his body with enough force to slide for a few meters. The second thing I want is a fountain of blood and dragon parts smacking my adventurers in the face with a wet, meaty thud. Let it rain.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
In regards to carrying capacity, I think a lot of players main gripe is that carrying capacity limits out in the field cause a lot of aggravation, when they need to shuffle inventory around. If I have the dubious wish to pack 16 suits of chainmail+1 back to camp for selling, I have to hand that all off to Gorktar, my dumbass half-orc berserker who can't identify any of the magical poo poo he's carrying. Then I end up having to play shuffle inspect at base camp just to off-load all that crap at a reasonable price. I know it's not an issue now, but that honestly depends on how much loot there is on a given outing, and just how much the player feels like channeling their inner klepto. As an aside, the first thing I do when playing Skyrim/F:NV is to download an infinite inventory mod. I don't remember what Abraxo cleaner is good for, but I know it makes something, somewhere, eventually, so might as well carry 20 of the drat things.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
Prokhor Zakharov posted:RPG Item Hoarding is a disease, please seek help Survival trait, sir. My favorite thing was doing the missions for the Boomers in F:NV and failing pretty much every check they had, but still completing their collection tasks instantly thanks to my kleptomaniac tendencies. Wizardry 8 (and previous ones?) had an excellent mesh of inventory management. Everyone was slot dependent in combat, holding 6 or 8 slots total without weight restrictions, and a party inventory accessible outside of combat that could hold an amount based on the combined parties strength (read: infinite). It essentially abstracted the concept by saying every party member was holding an equivalent portion of gear, but these 6 items are accessible in combat. They also had the option of looting things directly into the party inventory instead, or letting you drag and drop an item onto a specific character. Best inventory system.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2013 18:14
|
|
|
Drifter posted:That sounds like this one, unless I misremember. Wiz 8 was such a fun game back in the day. I thought they were going for a style of belt/pocket items are accessible in combat, regular inventory is literally like the infinity engine games where you have rows of slots you drop items into and your carry weight goes up. I thought the only difference was that everyone's inventory opens at once and everything else is straight from the infinity engine.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2013 18:26
|
|
|
Megazver posted:Unfortunately, this is a game specifically designed to make AD&D neckbeards feel young and in love again. Everyone deserves to be in love, Megazver. Even fat, autist, neckbeards who love stats like me. Your wizard might not value strength, but it might be worth it if it helps Tome Slams and Jams, so maybe Intelligence on a fighter doesn't let them do more damage because they're stronger, but because they know what to aim for (anatomy), or it lets them bypass defenses (pointy end goes here under the armpit). Maybe they have a mechanic where magical weapons require a willpower stat to wield and a fighter with high will or determination or whatever can use it, getting the benefit of an armor bypassing mechanic or just setting some dude on fire. The real goal is just to have a combat system that uses all 6 stats, then tweak who wants what later on.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2013 15:05
|
|
|
I would immediately assume the following: Melee characters derive their damage from Might/Power, Accuracy and Defense from Dex, Health and Stamina from Con, I have no loving idea about perception because Dexterity exists, Intellect is a caster stat: dump it. Resolve is a hybrid stat, maybe I need it????? Caster characters: Might/Power dump it, Con at default level, Dump dexterity, I have no loving idea still about perception, Max intellect like the min/maxing chode I am, max resolve if it's a healer, balance them/go by whatever hints I can find if it's a hybrid class I guess???? If I finished making my character and it turns out my fighter is poo poo at doing damage because I dumped Int, I would be exceptionally confused. Ditto if my wizards fireball sucked with Might/Power being low. I honestly think what you should do with this whole stats issue is completely remove class discussion for now, and focus on how stats affect the combat itself. "Strength makes things deal more damage, Dexterity increases hit chance". Then figure out that everyone wants both, so to help casters grasp that concept, rename it to Power and explain that it ups damage on EVERYTHING. Then figure out what the gently caress perception does, "Perception allows a character to bypass physical defense, dispel illusionary spells and craft superior quality items" and now I know if my barbarian is gonna craft a giant gently caress-off axe (or I make a crafting mule), I should probably up perception so he can both make that axe AND hit his enemies easier with it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2013 19:44
|
|
|
Captain Oblivious posted:I take some comfort in that the thread has reached rock bottom and can never possibly be this lovely again. Your optimism is admirable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2013 21:56
|
|
|
Intelligence is now renamed to Cunning. Good job everyone.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
Chairchucker posted:Honestly I'm hoping there are no characters like Minsc. He was fine in BG1 where the 'personality' of NPCs was limited to brief sound bytes. In BG2 where they gave NPCs slightly larger speaking roles, in my mind it became apparent that a comedy character with only one joke was better suited to the shallower NPC system of the first game. I'm hoping for the exact opposite. Everyone likes different kinds of characters, and there's a lot of people who want a comedic companion just as much as you want a somber one. Fan favorites like Minsc, HK-47 or even Morte are favorites for a reason. Players like companions that are ridiculous in the case of Minsc, patronizing to the player (HK-47 paired with a Light sided player is amazing.), or just witty and charming. Mordaedil posted:A character like Minsc & Boo is also sort of poisonous to such a theme, because suddenly they take the center stage and then suddenly, who gives a gently caress about Skie, Yeslick, Quayle or Eldoth? I've played through BGI/II and I don't remember any of these characters outside of Minsc. As much as you think his character is poisonous, he's infinitely more memorable than those four put together. If Minsc, a completely tongue-in-cheek character, can take center stage, then how interesting are those characters to begin with? Don't conflate 'serious' with 'interesting'. A character with a serious problem doesn't automatically make me more interested in their plight, if they lack any memorable personality or if they have no interaction with the players story. Teaching Morte dirty comebacks by pissing off prostitutes was more interesting to me then anything Vhailor had to say, ever.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
Pimpmust posted:More importantly, is chunky explosions with screen-shaking on critical hit in? Seconding this.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 8, 2014 19:47
|
|
|
Scorchy posted:This already happens in the trailer The gibs all travel in a straight line and there's no blood anywhere. Like this but in High Definition 2014 Graphics Quality w/ Screen Shake: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0t3paCm21E&t=20s
|
|
#
¿
Jan 9, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
GreatGreen posted:I quit WoW years ago, but I've thought for years and still maintain that a single player version of WoW (excellent drop rates and exponentially increased leveling speed, plus competent AI bots for both factions you could party with and fight against that do everything normal players would do) would basically be my dream RPG. I had the same idea. Take the combat mechanics, but treat it as a single player RPG in the same realm as Fable. You start off a lowly adventurer much like in your WoW career, but you don't have that burden of keeping things balanced like an MMO designer does. That means the player can go from being a cog in the wheel, to someone in a party or raid, to progressively being strong enough to take down raid difficult things by themselves, to finally being a terrifying force that other people have to band together to stop. You become the legendary hero, in essence. Chop it up into 3 acts or so, that see the players power increasing from nobody into as powerful as a large group of seasoned veterans into a legend. Then you throw in a dash of politics to raise the stakes. The player is no longer on a stage with a single monster or raid boss, but is sat on the world stage, trying to control the fate of the city/kingdom/continent/world from some threat, so thematically your rise to physical power equals your rise to political power, with the consequences it brings.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Give me this game already please, tia~~ Looking at the stats page rope kid, how are you going to explain to idiot players like me what the benefits are for having a high accuracy compared to penetration? In the same vein, do I need dex to hit on spells? Do spells gain bonuses from penetration? Also, her stats say her Might is 13, but it appears her might is actually 12, but boosted by equipment. Might want to note that her stats are being artificially modified (for good or ill) with maybe a (+/-) on the stats page. Especially important if the equivalent of feats have a stat requirement (or dialogue has a req or etc...) and I mistakenly think I have the minimum but don't.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 04:01
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Accuracy is your chance to hit with any attack -- weapon, spell, gun, etc. doing damage, causing status effects, etc. -- it doesn't matter. All other things being equal, 1 point of Accuracy is 1% greater chance to hit (shifting crit, graze, and miss accordingly). When you do something offensively, you are always trying to hit and that always depends on your Accuracy vs. the target's defense(s). Part of the reason I ask is how the game will provide feedback to this kind of thing. For example, I noticed it's 'Might' instead of 'Strength' because Might implies general power, which is applicable to spells. But in what ways would the game tell me, "Hey, that fireball missed because your wizard is a clumsy ogre." When I played Wizardry for the first time, I had a huge issue with my characters constantly missing. I understand what miss means, but I had no way to discover what matters when trying to hit. If you think, "well dex, dummy!", that's not always obvious. Other things like distance of the attacker, spell or weapon type vs enemy type, class and skill set, level, etc... all might determine my chance to hit. Even knowing that I have, say, a 70% to hit something with my attack, if I can't figure out where that number comes from, the knowledge itself is useless. There isn't even feedback in the form of a visible dice roll, so I don't even know if it's incredibly bad luck, or all my characters are poo poo. And if they're poo poo, why. I had to restart an entire 6 person party the first time I played the game, because I didn't pick the right skills and stats, after scrounging on the internet for builds. I don't want to discover a similar issue when my rogue is poo poo because he can't hurt heavily wounded targets (say: the whole reason I might want that class in my party), because I hosed up and dumped Perception. Alternatively, imagine I max Perception in the belief I need it high to hurt heavily armor Dragons and Black Knight Jerks, when it turns out daggers totally ignore armor (the perk for being a rogue), and now my rogue's stat allocation is awful and I need to reroll him because my cleric outputs more damage. I'm not asking how you plan to idiot proof the game, mind you. Just how you intend to give information to the player that they can act on. That's interesting about no prereqs for Talents/Feats btw. Part of the pain in NWN games and D&D-likes is knowing that if I want to pick up say, the feat Whirlwind, I need to pick up Cleave first (and have 13 min Dex or whatever. Note: I am pulling these examples out of my rear end. I have no idea what actual prereqs are for talents, except that they exist). How does that play into doing things like cross class feats, or designing hybrids that want to have both spell casting and defensive feats?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 04:57
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:The newer Fallout hacking games were great and actually felt like "hacking" without being annoying as poo poo. There's actually a hacking FAQ that's easy to google on breaking into real OpenVMS systems, and the main trick to it is guessing the hardware password if it exists. If the minigame was you figuring that out, they could have made the minigame actually replicate hacking a VMS system.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
Octo1 posted:Wait... if magic implements can be used pretty much like weapons, and anyone can use them, does that mean I can sneak attack with a wand? Quaff fire resist potion from stealth. Backstab with a Wand. ***Your Wand of Fireballs Shatters*** 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2014 22:52
|
|
|
The MSJ posted:I want a high-level spell that detonates any protective magic an enemy has. Do this and put it on a class that is melee focused.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2014 00:57
|
|
|
Drifter posted:Will there be animations to skritch my pet's ears if I play as a ranger? What will my companion's romance options look like? Will they be written by Chris Avellone?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
I don't get the aggressive posting about bathroom sounds complaint. To me, it just sounds like he wants an Archer/Scout class, based around ranged attacks, suppressive attacks maybe, or maybe even a utility type character (Shooty man with arrows/bolts that do all sorts of crazy things like having magic spells on the end or something). And not, well, a WoW Hunter.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 00:08
|
|
|
Now that I think about it, Hunters kind of worry me about their design. So lets just talk about Hunters in PoE. I'm fine with Hunters as a pet using class, but pet reliant is a different story. Given the bond that will exist in PoE, I can tell you I'll never run a Ranger in my group. Ever. The combination of pet AI in video games often being borderline retarded so I've experienced events like: vanish on cutscene load, can't pathfind around danger areas/traps, fall behind a moving party (especially with buffs), get stuck behind objects or doors, are susceptible to AoE by definition because there's two targets to hit, can't use equipment which leads to scaling issues, balancing a ranged class that is also in melee without making either half weak and easy to crush, and that their health pool is shared combined with all these possible pet issues, no thanks. That sounds like 100% hassle. I don't see one single upside to that class as it's written on paper. If you sat me down in character creation and said, "Given what you know about the hunter, you can also have a Cipher or Bard or" I'd take or. If you take health sharing out, you might end up with a class that has a throwaway animal companion that you sacrifice to off-tank a boss or something. Great lore for, say, a dabbler of undead and demons. Not so great for caring for nature and little woodland creatures. It seems the health sharing mechanic is a way to tie the pet to the character so that the pet is always a concern and is integral to the class. That might be to heavy handed though in implementation, because it definitely turns me away from the class immediately. I'd be far more interested in a ranged death dealer over dealing with some dude and his pet who can't keep up and gets stuck on doors. Wizardry ranged classes are a good example of ranged death dealers by the way. They didn't need pets. Just double crossbows.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 00:48
|
|
|
Jackard posted:What. I don't remember any of the old games PoE is based off of failing give you direct control over companions. Are you seriously going to say that you've never seen an IE game or recent RPG like NWN2/MoTB, DA:O, etc... where a companion has gotten trapped on level geometry, hung up on a monster or game object, fell behind the party, got lost or pathed inappropriately (through a trap, through spell effects, through the enemy defensive line)? That's ignoring all the other complaints that accompany pets, minions and guardians that I mentioned.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
rope kid posted:We rolled for the 3.5 game we're playing at work because our DM loves rolling, but we did it all as a group. That experience, rolling as a group, is definitely more exciting than everyone sitting around and allocating points. He also does random rolls at the table for treasure that we find, which is also a lot of fun. Our characters are all over the place, balance-wise, but the ability scores are only a small element of that in the campaign. Do they have loot chests for 3.5? One of the coolest accessories I saw was a loot chest with loot cards. Reach in and literally take your piece of loot from the chest, based on the pack the DM puts in.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Drifter posted:I personally miss the budding romance subtext between that Hacker and SHODAN. That is a romance I could get behind, honestly. Something twisted and black, devoid of any real love, and instead full of jealousy and control. A Requiem for a Dream style of romance, where the romance obliterates both partners lives and livelihood, their relationship eventually disintegrating as they both hit rock bottom.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 00:30
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:Darth Sion? I think so? More monstrous for both parties, in any case. I don't remember Darth Sion to well, so I can't say for certain how accurate that would be. I wouldn't put Kreia in the same regard, as her relationship to the player was more mentor and friend, even if her intentions were sinister.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 12, 2014 01:14
|
|
|
rope kid posted:I was running a combat playthrough today and was going around getting feedback from people. Sorry I couldn't make it. How'd it go?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 26, 2014 04:10
|
|
|
What's so special about wereboars?  I mean, were-whatever is kind of cool, sure. So why boars? What about werepeccaries?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
Drifter posted:
Boss fights are what happen when you fail the dialogue check 
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2014 00:36
|
|
Boss fights
|
Clever Spambot posted:A million times this. This is true, but the problem is the 'set up and forget about it' class is always the front line tank. How about my wizard does his thing automatically (Sleep a crowd, channel a spell for a few turns, power up a spell, etc..) while my fighter wrecks the frontline and punishes idiots trying to sneak past to interrupt my wizard or try to outmaneuver my rogue? Why does the front line fighter always have to be the boring one? The real goal is every class should need some micro, and every class should do its job automatically. Some of the time. It's ok if my cleric throws on a melee buff that heals when they hit a mob and let him autoattack for a while. It's ok to spend a turn or two positioning, flanking, sneaking and tricking enemies so he can wail on something for a few turns without my input. It's ok if some of the time, I have to manually control my fighter as he charges through a line of bad guys, hammers the mage to the floor, and punches his lights out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 17, 2014 23:10
|
|
|
Brainamp posted:Probably not what you are thinking of, but KOTOR2 had the Exile who basically made almost everyone s/he met into a loyal follower because of force bonds, or Alpha Protocol's Mike Thorton who was recruited because he was just really drat good at manipulating people. What they should do is, instead of letting the player manipulate people by changing personality, let a companion manipulate the player. What a wonderfully evil companion to have, who tells you exactly what you want to hear, when you want to hear it, and it turns out they're a psychopath.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
hemale in pain posted:Maybe I should read some Shakespeare MadJackMcJack posted:The films are better. There's actually a very good movie, 'Titus' that closely follows Titus Andronicus. Everyone should watch it, because it exemplifies his writing so well. I kind of wish RPG's had more dialogue written along these lines, where characters are not above dick jokes, but there's a level of sophistication about it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 24, 2014 03:44
|
|
|
On a d8, you rolled a Cartman? Also, I would unironically love having an ARM. Hell yeah. Do it ropekid.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2014 23:13
|
|
|
Drifter posted:^^^ - please don't talk about her here. You're going to have people disagree with you and they're going to respond, and others or you will respond to them and it will continue to be an echo chamber going back and forth. Please edit out whether you like her or not, her usefulness et cetera from your post. You're absolutely right. I was going to comment on it, but there's zero chance it wouldn't be misconstrued. Heed the above advice.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
Mr.Pibbleton posted:Hey an Aleut here chiming in on racial representation in video games. This is clearly insulting, racist, and furthermore ........ prometheus12345 posted:I think it's the same dragon gamecrate described in the article from a few weeks ago. I better be able to take its hide and craft armor from it. Is that going to be a thing?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
rope kid posted:Animancers Sagani Eastern Reach godlike characters Eothas Dyrwood Saint's War Magran Ondra  It's been discussed before that players would like to see a 'low intelligence' run that contains unique dialogue and situations. I say forget that. Add a 'low lore awareness' run where the player is both, in and out of character, entirely ignorant of what is going on in the game world. A spin on the classic, where the player constantly makes mistakes and references to characters, places and events that do not match with the game, that NPC's will call you out on. Player's can even have a long diatribe exclaiming their hatred of some given culture/race/magic/etc.. at some point, only to be pointedly reminded they made several mistakes because they lack any and all sense, context or rationale. A path through the game where it assumes the player is utterly oblivious, at all times.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
I pulled down Unity to try it out, but haven't had the time so far. I'm wondering how easy it is to use now. Interesting stuff about Catastrophic Events every couple hundred years. So given the time and place in the game, how long has it been since the last one?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2014 23:12
|
|
|
Sleep of Bronze posted:Assuming I have the rough timelines in my head at least somewhat correct, the next Lover's Tide shouldn't be anywhere near Pillars. The 'present' of the setting isn't very far off the revolution when the event described happened. I figured given the fact they exist and are acknowledged, they would play into the game in some aspect. Either impacting people from the last one, or possibly a 'looming threat' deal. Why think up something so cool and not use it, after all.
|
|
#
¿
May 1, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
Utgardaloki posted:Make sure to look through his entire video history. He's brilliant. Yeah, they are really good.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 11:17 |
|
|
Sweetgrass posted:Those chanter spell names own bones, god drat. I want to second this. Rope kid, whoever made those spell/song names, please give them a pat on the back and tell them a
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2014 23:34
|
|