Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Dunamisdeos]

I think the problem with X-COM is most fights end up boiling down to "You missed a single shot, so your soldier is dead now".

RPG's like Baldur's Gate it's just part of the flow.

[itisnotlogical]

You could deal with misses by having block and dodge animations.

I think Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic did that. A miss would do an animation of dodging or some fencing and maneuvering.

I found KOTOR a bit obnoxious in melee combat, because all the animations mean each round takes ten seconds when you just want to know if you hit or not.

[scriver]

Six seconds, unless Star Wars d20 changed the turn time.

And yeah, it's kind of the idea behind the RTwP idea. The turns, which in PnP are abstracted six seconds of time, all play out during six seconds, in real time, instead of one player at a time.

You could deal with misses by having block and dodge animations.

I think Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic did that. A miss would do an animation of dodging or some fencing and maneuvering.

In my opinion the first Neverwinter Nights game did it very well with the combat animations. Looks very much like the characters are "dancing", so to speak. I think the KotOR was made in an updated version of the same engine, weren't they?

Unfortunately the NwN1 dancing thing falls apart on higher levels when there's just too many actions during a turn to fit them all in six seconds, iirc.

[Retropunch]

I don't really understand the bit about accuracy/misses.  Other than the occasional person that doesn't get how RNG works I don't remember seeing much discontent about accuracy and misses for either D&D or the D:OS games.  It certainly doesn't seem to have hurt either's popularity, so I'm not sure why it should be such a concern that it needs removed/changed.

I think it's just part of opening it up to a wider audience - I can see why some people who aren't familiar with the system might find it confusing or frustrating because 'they should be close enough hit'. However,  whilst I can understand it, it does feel as though it's so integral to combat that it's not really the same system - it's such a big departure and it sounds as though they're changing other bits too.

All in all though, I'm fine with them getting rid of it as long as they still keep the complexity of combat there - it just feels as though they might be losing a lot of the nuance and will move it to the D:OS2 system where every skill/spell is really straight forward and simple and it turns into more puzzle than RPG.

[thegoatgod_pan]

I am confused how it would expand it to a broader audience given that every single person who plays a table top D&D or has any experience with crpgs is comfortable with systems where you don’t automatically hit.

Eg all the 5th ed players they hope to draw are going to be surprised as hell the game is nothing like 5th. Ditto for all pathfinder:kingmaker and pillars of eternity players.

[Retropunch]

I am confused how it would expand it to a broader audience given that every single person who plays a table top D&D or has any experience with crpgs is comfortable with systems where you don’t automatically hit.

Eg all the 5th ed players they hope to draw are going to be surprised as hell the game is nothing like 5th. Ditto for all pathfinder:kingmaker and pillars of eternity players.

I think it's because in BG1/2 you didn't hit a lot in some cases - in other CRPGs you don't get automatic hits but in the case of PoE you get grazes and the like, and for many other CRPGs the misses are quite infrequent or don't feel to count. I'm imagining they tested a very strict interpretation of the rules and it didn't play well with the 'completely new to this sort of game' focus group.

It's a big franchise in a way, and I'm imagining they're wanting to open it up as wide as possible so probably are getting rid of a lot of the stuff that might put off casual players. It's something I'm worried about, and can only hope they can make it up with enough interesting systems for each one they take out.

[thegoatgod_pan]

I am confused how it would expand it to a broader audience given that every single person who plays a table top D&D or has any experience with crpgs is comfortable with systems where you don’t automatically hit.

Eg all the 5th ed players they hope to draw are going to be surprised as hell the game is nothing like 5th. Ditto for all pathfinder:kingmaker and pillars of eternity players.

I think it's because in BG1/2 you didn't hit a lot in some cases - in other CRPGs you don't get automatic hits but in the case of PoE you get grazes and the like, and for many other CRPGs the misses are quite infrequent or don't feel to count. I'm imagining they tested a very strict interpretation of the rules and it didn't play well with the 'completely new to this sort of game' focus group.

It's a big franchise in a way, and I'm imagining they're wanting to open it up as wide as possible so probably are getting rid of a lot of the stuff that might put off casual players. It's something I'm worried about, and can only hope they can make it up with enough interesting systems for each one they take out.

cRPGs are not really for mass audiences--even gamer friends of mine are reluctant about diving into one because it is 100+ hour investment. Mass audiences, even gamer audiences like games you can play for a few hours and then a few hours a while later, without needing to remember, say, who Imoen is. Giving BG3 mass appeal via simplicity is weird, given that the target audience is people who like complexity and 100+ hour long games.

[Iduno]

cRPGs are not really for mass audiences--even gamer friends of mine are reluctant about diving into one because it is 100+ hour investment. Mass audiences, even gamer audiences like games you can play for a few hours and then a few hours a while later, without needing to remember, say, who Imoen is. Giving BG3 mass appeal via simplicity is weird, given that the target audience is people who like complexity and 100+ hour long games.

Imoen is the 1 Thief/X Mage, who you keep around because she's not dead weight or tied to a character who is (in the first game). Hope this helped.

Edit: Yes, Sciver. Thank you for asking.

[scriver]

...He wasn't really asking, you know.

[Retropunch]

cRPGs are not really for mass audiences--even gamer friends of mine are reluctant about diving into one because it is 100+ hour investment. Mass audiences, even gamer audiences like games you can play for a few hours and then a few hours a while later, without needing to remember, say, who Imoen is. Giving BG3 mass appeal via simplicity is weird, given that the target audience is people who like complexity and 100+ hour long games.

I'd usually agree, but D:OS2 got a much wider audience than anything before it - it was consistently on the top of the steam top sellers and it was a lot more accessible than anything before it. I'd say it's the closest that type of game has had to mass appeal, and I think they're hoping that BG3 will build on that more.

We're probably reading too much into the dodge mechanic - it's just my take on why they're cutting stuff out which is pretty core to the mechanics but might be perceived to confuse/annoy new gamers.

[Rince Wind]

Did they actually say that they eliminate misses alltogether? Maybe they just tone it down.

Judging by the damage dealt by our great weapon master fighter last time, that might be a good idea, actually.
I dealt out a lot more with my barbarian. GWM+reckless is pretty great.

[Retropunch]

Did they actually say that they eliminate misses alltogether? Maybe they just tone it down.

Judging by the damage dealt by our great weapon master fighter last time, that might be a good idea, actually.
I dealt out a lot more with my barbarian. GWM+reckless is pretty great.

https://www.pcgamer.com/baldurs-gate-3-will-combine-the-best-of-divinity-and-dandd-5th-edition/

There are some things on the chopping block, however. It's an interpretation of D&D, specifically 5th Edition, because porting the core rules, which Larian tried to do, doesn't work. Or it works, Vincke clarifies, but it's no fun at all. One of the culprits is missing when you're trying to hit an enemy, and while the combat system has yet to be revealed, you can at least look forward to being able to smack people more consistently.

"You miss a lot in D&D—if the dice are bad, you miss," he says. "That doesn't work well in a videogame. If I do that, you're going to review it and say it's♥♥♥♥♥♥ Our approach has been implementing it as pure as we can, and then just seeing what works and what doesn't. Stuff that doesn't work, we start adapting until it does."

Optimistically, it's possible they might go for a 'graze/hit/critical' system, where you basically hit all the time but sometimes do very little damage. However, I feel it's more likely they'll go for a more simplified combat system which is a bit more rock/paper/scissors like D:OS2. Not quite clear, but that's what I imagine.

As an aside, if anyone has been putting off playing Pathfinder because of it's very unfinished/buggy launch, it's now in a very playable state and is really, really good.

[Rince Wind]

Thanks.

That could also be interpreted as:  you'll miss less often.

[thegoatgod_pan]

As an aside, if anyone has been putting off playing Pathfinder because of it's very unfinished/buggy launch, it's now in a very playable state and is really, really good.

+1 to that--it was an excellent game a month or two after a launch, and is only getting better as the mod scene improves.

Similarly, while Pillars of Eternity 2 was OK, Pillars of Eternity 2 with the new turn-based mode is just plain great--the combat was way too confusing before, even with slow-mode, but turn-based makes every action significant and clear, and made me really make use of characters that required way too much micro before.

[Inarius]

PTW. I agree with what has been said above mostly. I just hope they won't fuck up everything like a lot of studios. And...well. Let's see. Let's say I'm moderately enthousiastic.