Development Info Josh Sawyer on Utility and Balance in Game Design

[Excidium]

AoD or Grimoire, because they exist.

 

[Alex]

Yes, Alex, but you have to ask yourself, does really it make sense to:

1) Whine about the skill system in the spiritual successor to a series of games which featured little to no skill usage?

Well, I don't really care if they are skills or not. I mean, the core of my arguments aren't about whether the you have persuasion as a skill where you put points in to be more useful or if bards have the special ability to persuade others, or whether the effect is achieved through charisma or what not. There are ways to make any of these approaches work. My point has always been about how different characters should have different options separated from combat.

The reason I argued against combat skills separated from non combat ones is because, as I see it, the only games where this is really warranted are full on railroady combat games where the rest is just window dressing. I would much rather give the player more options so he can decide for himself how he will approach the game.

2) Whine about cooldowns between battles in the spiritual successor to a series of games notorious for encouraging rest spamming?

Well, sure! I mean, wouldn't you rather have resting implemented correctly rather than having systems introduced that remove the impact of past mistakes?

3) Whine about "blurred" class roles in the spiritual successor to a series of games which featured multiple wacky multi-classing options?

I don't really care much for that argument either. With all the kits, sub-classes and what not, AD&D 2e had a lot of different configurations to draw from, many of which mixed the abilities of two or more classes. But personally, I don't much care for games where a class is defined by what it can do, abstractly (heal, take a lot of damage, hit an area). I care about what it can do concretely (draw miracles from the gods, be though and very good with a weapon, wield eldritch forces to reshape the world).

My point is that I think it is important how classes are characterized differently, not what they do differently. That said, what they can do that others can't is very important to make the right characterization sometimes. Like how only clerics can heal in D&D, or how fighters can take a lot more punishment. I admit I am a bit afraid Mr. Sawyer will miss this and end up making classes a lot less distinct, a bit like they are in 4e or 3e with a bunch of splatbooks.

 

[tuluse]

Sawyer and Cain have both said there is unavoidable combat in this game, and it is going to be combat focused.

 

[Infinitron]

Alex
We all have preferences. My point is, the "OMG THIS SUCKS RUINED FOREVER" attitude is out of place, because none of Sawyer's ideas are really significantly divergent from the IE experience. It's the same stuff packaged in a different way.

 

[Harg Harfardarssen]

However, arguing against these general design principles is countered with the misguided rebuttal that "P:E is this and that, which makes the principles 'o.k' in this one specific context."

Thus, measuring a game-designers ideas against your own standards, deluded "Ultimate Codexian Game" though they may be, is a no-go because P:E just isn't an "Ultimate Codexian Game" and is exempt from criticism on the popamole front. At the same time, these ideas in no way reflect on P:E, because they're just general design principles and won't necessarily find their way to P:E. Must be nice having both bases covered.

I don't think P:E is excused from criticism, but I do think its way too early to draw any conclusions about how good an IE style game it will be.

General principles are only relevant to the degree they are made specific mechanics in actual games. So when we are discussing problems with the general principles, we are necessarily going to have to imagine ways in which they will lead to specific bad mechanics, like undifferentiated classes.

In this case, since Sawyer is currently working on P:E and the formspring question to which he was responding was about P:E, P:E is probably the best frame of reference for figuring out how he would implement these principles specifically. But he hasn't gone into much detail at all about this, so there are very few conclusions we can draw about P:E. If we can't draw conclusions about how he will make P:E, then we certainly can't draw any conclusions about how they will be implemented in other, as yet unconceived, games.

 

[St. Toxic]

It's the same stuff packaged in a different way.

But is it an improvement? Are we talking about maintaining (low) standards as an ideal or what?

 

[Infinitron]

It's the same stuff packaged in a different way.

But is it an improvement? Are we talking about maintaining (low) standards as an ideal or what?

Well, I would say that ultimately Project Eternity's quality will be measured by its encounter design and its C&C - ie, the actual content. Not by the intricacy of its systems. These games were never about that.

So those are what I would focus on maintaining and improving.

 

[Nebuchadnezzar]

I think I remember that Sawyer said he wouldn't implement multi-classing because you could tailor your class to your particular liking.

 

[St. Toxic]

Well, I would say that ultimately Project Eternity's quality will be measured in its encounter design and its C&C - ie, the actual content. Not in the intricacy of its systems.

So, at the very least, you admit that it's not an improvement on the system. I agree with you in that, with the right quality content, design flaws are a lot easier to overlook.

 

[Moribund]

Well, I would say that ultimately Project Eternity's quality will be measured by its encounter design and its C&C - ie, the actual content. Not by the intricacy of its systems. These games were never about that.

Measured by who? And who says they aren't? They were decent in those areas it's DnD after all.

encounter design and its C&C - ie, the actual content.

BG was never about c & c even to a tiny degree. I don't think the most wildly optimistic fanboy would expect good encounter design.

BG series was hardly paradise, it's sad people can't even fix their standards that high without being seen as unreasonable. Pathetic.

 

[Mrowak]

Yes. And most of those raging people are comparing Sawyer's high-level principles to their own vision of the "Ultimate Codexian Game", instead of viewing those principles in the proper context of an Infinity Engine-like, D&D-ish game.

Well, for what is worth, I am comparing them to my own vision of the "Ultimate, Codexian, Infinity Engine-like, Old School D&D-ish Game".

Yes, Alex, but you have to ask yourself, does really it make sense to:

1) Whine about the skill system in the spiritual successor to a series of games which featured little to no skill usage?

2) Whine about cooldowns between battles in the spiritual successor to a series of games notorious for encouraging rest spamming?

3) Whine about "blurred" class roles in the spiritual successor to a series of games which featured multiple wacky multi-classing options?

Yes yes and yes.

And its not whining. It's analysis. This sawyer cocksucking is going too far.

It is whining. You are taking his words out of proportions ascribing to them what Sawyer did not say, or in fact argued against. Half of this thread is about "Sawyer wants every class/build to succeed!!! Heretic!", but you forget that he specifically states that he doesn't want the chars to succeed at the same thing.

He did not say that a party of rogues should singlehandedly defeat a dragon as a D&D template party would. He only stated that each setup should have some uses, and perhaps succeed at different facets of gameplay.

Fuck, I love this place, but it has some bipolar problems. Either it's rabbid HATE or unquestioned LOVE, without even bothering to check the fucking facts, and instead making up stories in your head to fit own visions of doom/eternal paradise. Stop living with that the dream of the ultimate RPG in your brain and get back to reality. The game is not going to be Fallout++ or Arcanum - it was obvious from the start. Acting all butthurt now, will get us nowhere.

 

[Moribund]

Yes. And most of those raging people are comparing Sawyer's high-level principles to their own vision of the "Ultimate Codexian Game", instead of viewing those principles in the proper context of an Infinity Engine-like, D&D-ish game.

Well, for what is worth, I am comparing them to my own vision of the "Ultimate, Codexian, Infinity Engine-like, Old School D&D-ish Game".

Yes, Alex, but you have to ask yourself, does really it make sense to:

1) Whine about the skill system in the spiritual successor to a series of games which featured little to no skill usage?

2) Whine about cooldowns between battles in the spiritual successor to a series of games notorious for encouraging rest spamming?

3) Whine about "blurred" class roles in the spiritual successor to a series of games which featured multiple wacky multi-classing options?

Yes yes and yes.

And its not whining. It's analysis. This sawyer cocksucking is going too far.

It is whining. You are taking his words out of proportions ascribing to them what Sawyer did not say, or in fact argued against. Half of this thread is about "Sawyer wants every class/build to succeed!!! Heretic!", but you forget that he specifically states that he doesn't want the chars to succeed at the same thing.

He did not say that a party of rogues should singlehandedly defeat a dragon as a D&D template party would. He only styated that each setup should have some uses, and perhaps succeed at different facets of gameplay.

Fuck, I love this place, but it has some bipolar problems. Either it's rabbid HATE or unquestioned LOVE, without even bothering to check the fucking facts, and instead making up stories in your head to fit own visions of doom/eternal paradise.

You didn't listen to the video or just didn't pay attention.

 

[Mrowak]

It is whining. You are taking his words out of proportions ascribing to them what Sawyer did not say, or in fact argued against. Half of this thread is about "Sawyer wants every class/build to succeed!!! Heretic!", but you forget that he specifically states that he doesn't want the chars to succeed at the same thing.

He did not say that a party of rogues should singlehandedly defeat a dragon as a D&D template party would. He only styated that each setup should have some uses, and perhaps succeed at different facets of gameplay.

Fuck, I love this place, but it has some bipolar problems. Either it's rabbid HATE or unquestioned LOVE, without even bothering to check the fucking facts, and instead making up stories in your head to fit own visions of doom/eternal paradise.

You didn't listen to the video or just didn't pay attention.

Trolling plant

Game devs talk a lot about difficulty but no one wants more raw difficulty they want similarly interesting combat where one party might win in a totally different manner than another and have great difficulty with some encounters other parties would breeze through but have some other things to make up for it and that's where it seems like the baby is going to be thrown out with the bath water.

8:15 - "And again you can have different party compositions that work better with each other or worse with each other in different situations and that's cool."

Watch the fucking video and don't be a moron.

 

[Mangoose]

I'm honestly neither optimistic nor pessimistic about P:E at this point. Because there are barely any fucking details.

But keep masturbating and thinking that making predictions based on ABSOLUTELY JACK SHIT makes you seem smart.

And no, jumping to conclusions before other people can make predictions doesn't make you smart. In fact, it makes you a dumbass. Because an educated person waits for as much data as possible before making a conclusion.

 

[Moribund]

It is whining. You are taking his words out of proportions ascribing to them what Sawyer did not say, or in fact argued against. Half of this thread is about "Sawyer wants every class/build to succeed!!! Heretic!", but you forget that he specifically states that he doesn't want the chars to succeed at the same thing.

He did not say that a party of rogues should singlehandedly defeat a dragon as a D&D template party would. He only styated that each setup should have some uses, and perhaps succeed at different facets of gameplay.

Fuck, I love this place, but it has some bipolar problems. Either it's rabbid HATE or unquestioned LOVE, without even bothering to check the fucking facts, and instead making up stories in your head to fit own visions of doom/eternal paradise.

You didn't listen to the video or just didn't pay attention.

Trolling plant

Game devs talk a lot about difficulty but no one wants more raw difficulty they want similarly interesting combat where one party might win in a totally different manner than another and have great difficulty with some encounters other parties would breeze through but have some other things to make up for it and that's where it seems like the baby is going to be thrown out with the bath water.

8:15 - "And again you can have different party compositions that work better with each other or worse with each other in different situations and that's cool."

Watch the fucking video and don't be a moron.

I did watch the video, how you can think that's his message is beyond me. He then goes on to speak about needing to constraing things to balance them, that rogues are merely a utility class in DnD and lots of other stupid stuff.

He says "that's cool" then talks about how to eliminated that and make sure it's easy for everyone for the whole video. How can you possibly think that he's working hard to make that happen when all the steps he's actually talking about are the opposite.

I'm not a racist, but, well, you know.

 

[Mangoose]

[He says "that's cool" then talks about how to eliminated that and make sure it's easy for everyone for the whole video.

No he doesn't. That is in a separate part of the video (BEFORE the part I cited).

That was a direct quote.

Do you want me to transcribe the fucking video?

He then goes on to speak about needing to constraing things to balance them, that rogues are merely a utility class in DnD and lots of other stupid stuff.

Why are you a moron? He doesn't "GOES ON" to speak about that stuff, he already spoke about that before the quote I cited.

 

[Moribund]

I'm honestly neither optimistic nor pessimistic about P:E at this point. Because there are barely any fucking details.

But keep masturbating and thinking that making predictions based on ABSOLUTELY JACK SHIT makes you seem smart.

And no, jumping to conclusions before other people can make predictions doesn't make you smart. In fact, it makes you a dumbass. Because an educated person waits for as much data as possible before making a conclusion.

Well I hear there's an XCom remake, that's gonna be awesome. Oh.

I guess in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

 

[Moribund]

[He says "that's cool" then talks about how to eliminated that and make sure it's easy for everyone for the whole video.

No he doesn't. That is in a separate part of the video (BEFORE the part I cited).

That was a direct quote.

Do you want me to transcribe the fucking video?

He then goes on to speak about needing to constraing things to balance them, that rogues are merely a utility class in DnD and lots of other stupid stuff.

Why are you a moron? He doesn't "GOES ON" to speak about that stuff, he already spoke about that before the quote I cited.

Before, after, whatever. If you disagree then fine. I don't give a shit, though you'd have to be a crackhead at this point to doubt things will be dumbed down. But if you want to be pedantic then just go fuck yourself, seriously.

 

[Mrowak]

I'm honestly neither optimistic nor pessimistic about P:E at this point. Because there are barely any fucking details.

But keep masturbating and thinking that making predictions based on ABSOLUTELY JACK SHIT makes you seem smart.

And no, jumping to conclusions before other people can make predictions doesn't make you smart. In fact, it makes you a dumbass. Because an educated person waits for as much data as possible before making a conclusion.

Well I hear there's an XCom remake, that's gonna be awesome. Oh.

I guess in the land of the blind the one eyed man is king.

You are trying too hard to fit in newfag.

 

[Mangoose]

@9:25

"It's not that they have to be perfectly - objectively - that every player is going to look at these things and go, Oh I don't know what to pick, they're all perfectly balanced.

"That's not really my goal. My goal is that you just don't dismiss options.

"I think that's really it. Balance to me doesn't mean that you view them all as equal but that you at least consider them all.""

 

[Mangoose]

Well I hear there's an XCom remake, that's gonna be awesome. Oh.

You still judge the game before you buy it, you fucking moron. You simply wait til it's fucking FINISHED.

Even skyway at least bases his opinions on gameplay videos.

Also:

I'm honestly neither optimistic nor pessimistic about P:E at this point.

Well I hear there's an XCom remake, that's gonna be awesome.

 

[Mangoose]

Before, after, whatever.

Yup, before. Which means he did not eliminate the stuff he was talking about after.

I don't give a shit, though you'd have to be a crackhead at this point to doubt things will be dumbed down.

I don't predict anything. Why do you have to self-fellatiate and make predictions? Why are you getting all emotional during the first few months of development of a game? Does it save you money to make a judgment now rather than closer to the release of a game? Does it give you a better quality of life to make a judgment now rather than later?

But if you want to be pedantic then just go fuck yourself, seriously.

I gladly am pedantic and poke holes in your logic, because if you don't want to post logically, go fuck yourself, seriously, and slowly.

Actually, I most enjoy on this forum being pedantic and tearing into retards that toss around arguments with logical holes and a fear of citing direct details. So please continue giving me my fun.

 

[Mrowak]

Fuck, I love this place, but it has some bipolar problems. Either it's rabbid HATE or unquestioned LOVE, without even bothering to check the fucking facts, and instead making up stories in your head to fit own visions of doom/eternal paradise. Stop living with that the dream of the ultimate RPG in your brain and get back to reality. The game is not going to be Fallout++ or Arcanum - it was obvious from the start. Acting all butthurt now, will get us nowhere.

Before calling people Bipolar you know, you should probably watch the video or stuffies? I guess, you still need to debate witches. Go! shoo!

God fucking dammit!! I did not mean that personally! And then again you pull a strawman here, that has nothing to do with anything (which only means that you cannot into argumentation)!

Sometimes you are a bro Captain Shrek, but at times you get overcome by... hell if I know. That's uncool bro. That's very uncool.

 

[Captain Shrek]

but at times you get overcome by... hell if I know.

Probably that I am not trying to be liked or disliked and have very clear opinions on what I like or dislike?

 

[Mangoose]

but at times you get overcome by... hell if I know.

Probably that I am not trying to be liked or disliked and have very clear opinions on what I like or dislike?

That's what someone who wants to be liked on the Codex would say.