Preview Pillars of Eternity Presentation at PAX South 2015

[Ramireza]

Pretty shitty Gameplay presentation, a typcial "lets show the dumb audiance awesome combat shit!" presentation. But maybe they didnt want to spoil that much, who knows.

But the Q&A was great! (And i love Tim Cain)

 

[Arsene Lupin]

I think its easier to judge the quality of a game when the person playing is not very skilled. Things tend to be slower and you can usually get a better idea of how the AI works.

Anyway, is there an archive of the PoE stuff somewhere like YouTube yet? I'm having a hell of a time finding anything on the Android Twitch app. All I've been able to find is a general PAX feed... (Really wish I was at my PC right now....)

 

[t]

No way to watch vods on twitch android app anyway. All you can do is install flash with dolphin browser, but that's kind of a hassle.

 

[Mrowak]

I like what they are doing with their reputation tracking system. It would be cool to see the world respond to your actions, in terms of how aggressive / diplomatic / efficient you are reputed to be. It reminds me of AoD.

 

[naossano]

"- I want Turn-based"
You aren't the only one pal.
Hope you can get more lucky on the next TB licence you'll create Tim...

 

[Rahdulan]

No one asked if there's going to be a moron script for low intelligence characters? Step it up, audience.

 

[throwaway]

It's up on YouTube guise http://youtu.be/GayMOQI7QTQ

Edit: @ url

 

[Grunker]

GayMO

 

[throwaway]

Fittingly :incloosive:

 

[Infinitron]

It's up on YouTube guise http://youtu.be/GayMOQI7QTQ

Edit: @ url

That is not the full presentation.

 

[Makabb]

After the disappointment of Shadowrun and underwhelming Wasteland 2 a real incline is coming in the way of PoE. Well done Obsidian, this realy feels like the old IE games

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

That is not the full presentation.

Why does he keep saying that it's possible to make a muscle wizard (like here on the 21 min mark), when the entire attribute concept is based on that being a decision that isn't supported? A high might/power wizard deals more spell damage, he can't compete with a low might fighter in melee damage, or isn't this right?

edit: or is it that PoE will have a sort of schizophrenia between combat and dialogue/events, where a low-int high-might wizard is a powerful wizard throwing around high damage spells in combat, and he's the same muscular moron as a high-might fighter in dialogue?

 

[Infinitron]

Why does he keep saying that it's possible to make a muscle wizard (like here on the 21 min mark), when the entire attribute concept is based on that being a decision that isn't supported? A high might/power wizard deals more spell damage, he can't compete with a low might fighter in melee damage, or isn't this right?

He'll do as much melee damage when he hits, but lacks abilities that increase chance to hit, etc, that melee classes have

 

[Durante]

or is it that PoE will have a sort of schizophrenia between combat and dialogue/events, where a low-int high-might wizard is a powerful wizard throwing around high damage spells in combat, and he's the same muscular moron as a high-might fighter in dialogue?

That's exactly what will happen, and why I'm still sour on the whole attributes concept of PoE.

 

[hiver]

If you make a high Power-Might wizard... you are not going to use him as a fighter. You will use him as a wizard.

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

or is it that PoE will have a sort of schizophrenia between combat and dialogue/events, where a low-int high-might wizard is a powerful wizard throwing around high damage spells in combat, and he's the same muscular moron as a high-might fighter in dialogue?

That's exactly what will happen, and why I'm still sour on the whole attributes concept of PoE.

I think it's kind of inevitable with a gamist (yeah I'm going this route, people can stop reading) attribute system. The advantage of gamist systems over simulationist ones is that you can offer clear rules which players can base their strategy off of (I know exactly what a high intelligence character does in combat: he suffers less interruptions - or whatever it is in PoE); you set aside your common-sensical understanding of what intelligence means and replace it with what it entails according to the game's logic. This simple game logic falls apart when dealing with wildly varied dialogues/events (what does getting the fact that I get less interruptions tell me about how well I perform in a chess match, or in a political debate).

edit: not sure why he didn't just drop attribute checks, it's not like they even factored into the baldur's gates (other than charisma based storekeep ones). Just go all in on reputation/disposition.

 

[hiver]

PoE attributes work across the board.

Higher intelligence will get you less interruptions in combat (+whatever else it does in combat) and better performance in a chess match and political debate.

Whats really the problem there?

Except you assuming something nonsensical and complaining about your own wrong assumption?

or is it that PoE will have a sort of schizophrenia between combat and dialogue/events, where a low-int high-might wizard is a powerful wizard throwing around high damage spells in combat, and he's the same muscular moron as a high-might fighter in dialogue?

Who told you he will be completely the same? And why wouldnt he get the similar kind of reactions in dialogue? After all the game doesnt really look at your "muscles" but Might. And a wizard with great might will have his spells mighty, not his muscles - which would be similarly scary.

Right?

 

[Turok]

More i see, more i like.

 

[Athelas]

If you want to be pedantic, the problem isn't so much that the wizard can use his might to break open the bars of a sealed entrance in a scripted interaction, it's that he has to break open the bars when he has the power to summon thunderstorms and fiery explosions.

not sure why he didn't just drop attribute checks, it's not like they even factored into the baldur's gates (other than charisma based storekeep ones).

Planescape: Torment did it. Attribute checks are also a much better way of resolving dialogue that I'm baffled they've consistently been sidelined in favor of rote and boring dialogue skills.

Just go all in on reputation/disposition.

They have nothing to do with each other. Reputation/disposition is a consequence, it doesn't determine your options in dialogue.

 

[Arsene Lupin]

The problem is that people (Sawyer) aren't articulating the attribute systems well. Calling a high might wizard a "muscle wizard" is meaningless because might does not represent/simulate strength.

 

[Infinitron]

The problem is that people (Sawyer) aren't articulating the attribute systems well. Calling a high might wizard a "muscle wizard" is meaningless because might does not represent/simulate strength.

No, it also represents strength. They used the muscle wizard in the presentation gameplay demo to bash open a passageway. The weaker party members couldn't.

 

[hiver]

Might (MIG): A measure of how physically and magically strong a character is.

It would be much better if they made the high Might wizard use his mighty spells to open up passages, not physical strength...

Maybe it was me who is making wrong assumptions here but this just seemed logical to me, that Might in a fighter would present physical strength while applied to a wizard it would present how mighty his magic is...

 

[Jim the Dinosaur]

Just go all in on reputation/disposition.

They have nothing to do with each other. Reputation/disposition is a consequence, it doesn't determine your options in dialogue.

I wasn't saying they were closely related other than being checked in dialogue/events, just that besides the problem of making an interruption-proof berserker fighter a la minsc in chargen to suddenly discover that he's stephen fry in dialogue, there's also the issue a lot of party-based games have in attribute checks, namely that prison bars can only be bent by the protagonist, not the 7 foot half-orc party member standing idly next to him.

Reputation is far more elegant in such a system: it's based on your the actions of your party as a whole and has no part in combat mechanics that could conflict with it. It would be a better investment of developer time to focus on fleshing out that disposition thing than including attribute checks that add very little.

 

[sser]

Might (MIG): A measure of how physically and magically strong a character is.

It would be much better if they made the high Might wizard use his mighty spells to open up passages, not physical strength...

Maybe it was me who is making wrong assumptions here but this just seemed logical to me, that Might in a fighter would present physical strength while applied to a wizard it would present how mighty his magic is...

Wouldn't this create an issue where you have a big set of plate armor that requires 18-STR and, technically, both you and the wiry wizard can wear them without penalty? Or have they sought different methods of segregating equipment?

 

[Infinitron]

Might (MIG): A measure of how physically and magically strong a character is.

It would be much better if they made the high Might wizard use his mighty spells to open up passages, not physical strength...

Maybe it was me who is making wrong assumptions here but this just seemed logical to me, that Might in a fighter would present physical strength while applied to a wizard it would present how mighty his magic is...

Wouldn't this create an issue where you have a big set of plate armor that requires 18-STR and, technically, both you and the wiry wizard can wear them without penalty? Or have they sought different methods of segregating equipment?

There is no equipment segregation in PoE. But an armored wizard will cast spells slower, and spells already take much more time to cast than melee attacks so...