Project Eternity Breaks $3 million
- Thread starter BrotherRool
- Start date
Yes, I don't like random number, it turns playing a game into playing a slot machine, a game of luck.The Crotch said:
I know I cant change anyone mind, and no one can change mine, and I don't want another pointless argument.
So lets just agree to disagree about the quality of the game.
I really want to invest in more kickstarters but until I see a return on some of the games I've invested in, I think I am going to be a little fickle. I'll prolly buy this and have been watching it but I am holding off on kickstarter until I start to see a few products.
Couldn't even chip in $25 for essentially a pre-order which will be cheaper than when it comes out for real? With a company like Obsidian I feel pretty confident in getting a return. I dont think they're trying to scam usmiso2002 said:
Also some of the kickstarter games are starting to come out for real now, like the aforementioned Faster Than Light and Zombies,Run!
I see your point. If you haven't played baldrs gate 1 or 2 or you don't mind replaying the game again than it may not provide enough difference for you. I've played baldrs gate and don't have an urge to play it again but would totally put out money for more of the same.SajuukKhar said:
But... that's... every RPG. Skyrim uses an RNG for its critical hits. So does The Witcher 2. Every JRPG and SRPG ever. Civilization. Xcom. Any game that has a chance-to-hit mechanic and/or variable damage and/or random loot tables.
I'm really not trying to change your mind. I'm just wondering why you'd come into a thread about an RPG and say, "I don't like RPGs".
I'm really not trying to change your mind. I'm just wondering why you'd come into a thread about an RPG and say, "I don't like RPGs".
I don't like how Skyrim uses RNGs for its critical hits, I would prefer it had something like Borderlands 2 were enemies have critical hit zones, and I do wish Skyrim used hand placed loot instead of randomly generated loot.The Crotch said:
I do like RPGs, but games like Skyrim have shown that you don't need RNGs to control your every attacks, and you dont need an attribute system.
In fact, the removal of the attribute system gave Skyrim larger character diversity.
SajuukKhar said:
I can tolerant RNGs for something like loot tables, only because its nearly impossible for devs to hand place loot in a game that large.
But RNGs take skill out of games and just turn the entire game into a giant slot machine, I don't find missing an attack for no other reason the computer said so to be fun, and I don't understand how other people find that fun.
Games are something you are supposed to play, and your ability to win or fail at a game should be based on your ability to play them, not a RNG.
If you can make something controlled by the player, you should, IMO.
Elder Scrolls has always promoted character homogenization. Skyrim is no exception.
Physically aimed attacks flat-out don't work in some genres. And again, it's totally cool that you aren't in to that. I just don't understand why you'd walk up and say, "I totally wouldn't spend money on this thing that by definition I do not like."
Physically aimed attacks flat-out don't work in some genres. And again, it's totally cool that you aren't in to that. I just don't understand why you'd walk up and say, "I totally wouldn't spend money on this thing that by definition I do not like."
That is provably wrong, and if you want I could send you a PM detailing why.The Crotch said:
But they only don't work because the game is designed to make it not work.The Crotch said:
Its a limitation that is literally 100% artificial, it is entirely possible to make the same game, with the same characters, with the same story, and the same themes, in a game that works without RNGs, or anywher near as many RNGs.
I wanted to like this game, I wanted to Obsidian move beyond what they were, out of their comfort zone, and make something truly new, but instead they fell back on old, tried and true methods, and aren't taking any real big risks.
The Elder Scrolls is far from a well working RPG that removes RNGs from most things, but I like that it at least tries.
It seems like a giant waste of both money and opportunity, to just make what is essential every other 90's RPGs with a graphics upgrade when they could have done something unique.
Fire it up.
And if you can tell me how to make a better Civilization or Xcom without involving RNGs, I'd like to know that secret, too.
And if you can tell me how to make a better Civilization or Xcom without involving RNGs, I'd like to know that secret, too.
Civilization is a 4X game, not an RPG.The Crotch said:
RTS/4X games are one of the very few instances were RNGs are acceptable because no human alive could directly control all of their hundreds of units.
Also they are remaking Xcom without RNGs, or at least as many, we will see then how well it fares, I doubt it will be good, but there needs to be shit to mold the standing stones of progress.
Mass Effect, while simple in its use, has shown that having a RPG where you can order you AI controlled team members around and give them orders/make them use skills in a more real time fashion is possible.
It isn't exactly great, but it is a step in the right direction, it needs work, needs to have its features deepened, but I respect it for trying.
And I wish Obsidian would TRY themselves, if they did, I know they could make something great.
I am aware of the genre. It is one of the genres that functions best by incorporating RNGs. Like party-based RPGs.
A lot of RTS' don't use any randomness. Off the top of my head, the big two examples I can think of are projectile drift in a few games - AoE 2, Total War - and the inaccuracy from high ground/hiding behind trees in the original Starcraft.
The Xcom remake is already out. It uses an RNG.
Mass Effect gives you extraordinarily little control over your squad compared to Baldur's Gate and its cousins.
Fire up the PM so we can stop shitting up the thread, aye? Genuinely curious.
Ya four million dollars.
A lot of RTS' don't use any randomness. Off the top of my head, the big two examples I can think of are projectile drift in a few games - AoE 2, Total War - and the inaccuracy from high ground/hiding behind trees in the original Starcraft.
The Xcom remake is already out. It uses an RNG.
Mass Effect gives you extraordinarily little control over your squad compared to Baldur's Gate and its cousins.
Fire up the PM so we can stop shitting up the thread, aye? Genuinely curious.
Ya four million dollars.
There is more then one Xcom being made, just as a finisher for here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XCOM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XCOM
Um, since when is the company and the people behind it not "past history"? I am well aware of their pedigree, and that we might see something more from them is more than enough for me to invest. I make enough money that it doesn't bother me to invest, I get the game and extra goodies to make it worth it for me. So I fail to see the issue.SajuukKhar said:
Because if there's one thing that Chris Avellone, Tim Cain and the rest of Obsidian staff lack in general, it's past history. Oh wait, that's stupid.SajuukKhar said:
Seriously, past history is the biggest thing they've got going for them.
I lost my internet for the last 2 days and this was a pretty darn happy surprise to come back too. $4 million? And at points I never even had faith that they'd hit $3 million, I'm ridiculously happy now. And if this game is good and sells well, hopefully they'll make enough money that they can go straight into making another game of their choosing. We might just have started Obsidian on the path that will allow them to eventually become publisher free =D