Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9

Register Log In

Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Suggestions & Feedback Fast Travel Limitation Poll

Print Thread

Page 5 of 9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Maximuuus #814465 02/05/22 11:30 AM
Joined: Oct 2020 Icelyn veteran
Icelyn veteran Joined: Oct 2020	Originally Posted by Maximuuus If combats are not challenging + you can freely rest between them yes, it excise all challenge dungeons. Except maybe from bosses. To me the current difficulty level of the game overall is normal and similar to other games I play on normal (and even a bit harder than some). There will also be higher difficulties included on release to give more of a challenge. No need to remove QoL stuff for everyone. Last edited by Icelyn; 02/05/22 11:59 AM.

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814467 02/05/22 11:57 AM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	I thought they did. O_o I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll RagnarokCzD #814469 02/05/22 12:16 PM
Joined: Aug 2020 Gray Ghost veteran
Gray Ghost veteran Joined: Aug 2020	Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Originally Posted by Gray Ghost It feels like too much of a coppout on the part of the devs. It's putting the onus on the players and saying that if players don't enjoy the game, it's their fault for not playing the right way, absolving the creators of responsibility. I dont believe this ... especialy that part where player "is supposed to play the right way" ... That sounds like direct contradiction to what im trying to say ... When player try to "play the right way" he is "trying to play the way he presumes Devs wanted him to play" ... Question is if there even is any "expected way to play" in the first place. O_o What im trying to say is that player should not "play the right way" ... he should "play the way he is having fun and dont give and fuck about the right way" ... And in that case, yes ... its totally players fault he is not having fun ... i know people dislike to hear it ... but who else is there to blame, if you can do EXACTLY what you want to ... but you dont do it bcs you dont NEED TO? This kind of mindset fascinates me from psychological aspect more than game design ... We demand to swim with our hands tied to our waist, since we presume it would be better ... but we refuse to try swim, while not using our hands, to find out what would it be like. Do you know what will happen once our hands will be tied and we will be thrown in the water? (Yes it is absurdly extreme example ... but it should help you understand.) The thing about this argument that I don't get is that it assumes that games where those limitations aren't imposed don't exist. It assumes that the majority of games don't present an expected way to play, when they very clearly do. Good dames are designed around a core gameplay loop, a fundamental way to play that everything else is built off of. In a well-designed game, that gameplay loop is rewarding in and of itself, and other features are built to compliment that loop. For example, Mario. The core loop of every mainline mario game is moving across the screen and navigating platforms. Everything else added on is there to improve and compliment that loop, or to provide something to break up the loop so that the repetition doesn't make it boring. You can argue if that's the only way to make a good game, but that's the way most games are made, and it's a reliable one that produces countless great games. With most cprgs, the devs want you to play with the companions they provide. They might make it possible to play without those companions, but the overall experience is designed so that the maximum enjoyment will be found playing in the way they intend. Even with your extreme, swimming with hands tied example, if you take the wider context into account then it becomes "we want our hands tied when we swim here because we know that it's fun and we enjoy it." We know exactly what will happen, because it happens in most other games of this genre. And the people who've been playing BG3 and asking for changes are essentially people saying "we don't like swimming with our hands untied. We want you to tie our hands because we know that works." Does that take something away from the people who like having untied hands? Yes. But then it becomes a matter of Larian deciding who they want to cater to. But the request itself is entirely logical and reasonable and the people who want it are entirely reasonable. Arguing that it's a bad choice in and of itself is a poor argument because we have clear proof that it's perfectly good in and of itself. Is it prefect? No, nothing's perfect. Is it better than the approach you feel Larian is taking? I don't know, but one could argue that it is because it's had ages of refinement and polishing that Larian's theoretical approach hasn't had, but maybe once Larian's approach has had the time and care put in, it will be equal or even superior. As for the question of who is to blame. It comes down to this; if this is how Larian wants the game to work and this sort of "create your own limits" approach is their vision, then yes, it's the fault of the players for not meeting the game on its own terms. But in that case, setting your own limits IS the right way to play, and thus if you don't do so, you're playing it wrong. But if this isn't Larian's intention, then it's absolutely Larian's fault because then it just means they made a poorly designed game. Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Originally Posted by Gray Ghost And not only that, but I feel as though that isn't even what Larian is going for anyway. Its certainly possible that curent mechanics are (or not) there just to gather data. After all, they should have some measures about how often people rests, if they plan to include any limitations in the result. But even that would be argument for "play the way you want to" ... Since (quite logicaly i would dare to say) if nobody will clean whole surface of Act 1 with as little Long Rests as possible, how would Larian gather any data supporting that this is the way people wants to play it? Quite the contrary, if we all will rest after every single combat (just bcs we want to) all Larian will see in their data is that litteraly MILLIONS of peope do exactly that. My feeling there is, if that was their intent, they should have said that. They should have said "we're giving players a lot of space to explore and try things to see how they want to play and how to tune mechanics." Larian says they want to be our DM, well DMs TALK to their players, and when it comes to house rules, they need to be agreed on TOGETHER so that things work. Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Originally Posted by Gray Ghost But short of that, especially since this is a still developing game, why should we think that's what they're going for when it's not an approach that is at all typical of game design? Why should we assume Larian is trying for some unique, avant garde approach Bcs that is what we have, duh. What other reason would be there to give players "to test" any other mechanic, than the one you are planning to use? Because like you said above, they could just be there for data gathering purposes. They could also just be unfinished. Also, because it's a departure from the traditional approach of the genre, and because this game is being created within a genre, the reasonable action is to judge it based on the conventions of that genre. If they're trying to play with those conventions, then they should say so and allow us to properly adjust our expectations. I'm someone who firmly believes in openness and clarity in communication. Leaving stuff unsaid is a recipe for confusion. Even if it's supposedly obvious, it should be said. The level of dissatisfaction aparent in these forums makes it clear that it's actually NOT obvious.

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Icelyn #814470 02/05/22 12:26 PM
Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium Maximuuus veteran
Maximuuus veteran Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium	Originally Posted by Icelyn Originally Posted by Maximuuus If combats are not challenging + you can freely rest between them yes, it excise all challenge dungeons. Except maybe from bosses. To me the current difficulty level of the game overall is normal and similar to other games I play on normal (and even a bit harder than some). There will also be higher difficulties included on release to give more of a challenge. No need to remove QoL stuff for everyone. I guess no one is asking them to remove anything. I'm asking them to add coherent rules for everyone and eventually QoL options for you Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD I thought they did. O_o "You can fast travel from everywhere to everywhere whenever you want" is not a rule, Ragnarok. It's only a "QoL" feature that has a HUGE impact gameplay, story, immersion (and so on) -wise. Last edited by Maximuuus; 02/05/22 02:45 PM. French Speaking Youtube Channel with a lot of BG3 videos : https://www.youtube.com/c/maximuuus

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Maximuuus #814476 02/05/22 05:10 PM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	This will be a little longer, so lets split it into two sections: Originally Posted by Gray Ghost The thing about this argument that I don't get is that it assumes that games where those limitations aren't imposed don't exist. Im honestly not sure i understand you right now ... You get the feeling that i claim that there are no games with such limitations? If so, not at all ... all i claim is that those games could make some people happier, IF they would loose their rules a bit. Dont get me wrong, im not "against" limitations in general for both Fast Travel and Long Rests ... as long as they "make sense" (to me ofc). For example i rarely Fast Travel in BG-3 from the spot ... simply bcs i dislike it ... i allways (or more like often, i get lazy since 10th play) walk to nearest Teleportation rune ... it seems more natural to me. But since i do that im aware that all this adds to the game is walking ... sure, its immersive, it helps the atmosphere and i certainly like it ... but on the other hand im aware that many people would find it tedious, boring and anoying (and i dont blame them at all). And so concidering both, i claim that curent situation is best from wider perspective ... I get what i want, and im happy ... They get what they want and they are happy ... Sure, im aware that there are third group of people unhappy, bcs they demand system limitations for exactly the same outcome, but since making those people happy would mean making second group unhappy ... my opinion is quite clear: If someone demand that developers should ignore wishes of certain group of people, in order to please another group ... that demanding group should be that one that will be ignored. Simple as that. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost It assumes that the majority of games don't present an expected way to play, when they very clearly do. Again, not at all ... I never said this ... im very well aware that games presents expected way to play, i simply dont feel obligated to follow it, if that is not what i want to do. Do i want to use Witcher III. as Horse Riding Simulator, instead of killing mosnters? Then i do ... Do i want to use GTA as Need for Speed, instead of shooting and blowing things up? Then i do ... Do i want to sit in the Stormwind and talk with my friends about their last raid, instead of participating in it? Then i do ... And more sticking to the actual topic: Do i want to turn BG-3 into Bomberman 3D and spend hours, and hours, and hours by placing smokepowder barrels ... and then blow them? Then i do ... Do i want to turn my Wizard into Cloth wearing Cleric without a shield? Then i do ... Do i want to push any and every enemy around the map until we reach some edge where i can instant kill them? Then i do ... Do i want to travel the whole map on foot, and enjoy the scenery? Then i do ... Do i want to fast travel from the middle of anywhere no matter the situations for no matter the reaons? Then i do ... Do i want to Long Rest? No matter if i need to, or should to? Then i do ... And if i do not ... then i dont, again no matter the circumstances. I presume you get the idea. As i said, i dont really care what i "should" do, as long as im having fun doing what i want to do ... and i see no reason why anyone, especialy other players, should told me. What i honestly dont understand is why this even bother others ... its still single player game. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost In a well-designed game, that gameplay loop is rewarding in and of itself, and other features are built to compliment that loop. In my honest opinion ... BG-3 is a Good game allready, maybe even great one ... And the reason i give it such credit is bcs there is so many possible ways to play it, so everyone CAN find their own style, if they at least try. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost You can argue if that's the only way to make a good game, but that's the way most games are made, and it's a reliable one that produces countless great games. Indeed ... But you are right, i can ... and i do ... argue that is not the only way. Especialy now, when there "faithfull adaptation of 5e" allready exists (yup, talking about Solasta) ... I cant speak for Swen obviously, but imagining myself on his chair ... I would not want to release another game too simmilar to that either, especialy not so soon after ... If they would manage to release BG-3 before Solasta, that would be different song entirely, they would still be "the first one who prooved that tabletop rules can be translated faithfully and still make great game" ... wich would sound as great achievment. Right now, when the other one is allready out ... the best title they can hope for is "Solasta with better graphics" ... wich is obviously not as impressive, so their only option is to aim for different goal. Even more ... once uppon a time someone come with new idea, something "revolutionary" you could say. And those (if the idea was well executed and recedived, obviously) then can easily become "one of games that defined, or changed whole genre". I bet you know some. So i will not bother with examples. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost the maximum enjoyment will be found playing in the way they intend. Any enjoyment is matter of subjective taste. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost "we want our hands tied when we swim here because we know that it's fun and we enjoy it." I wish. Oh that would be great ... Sadly, you are wrong here since most people around here is more like: "We want everyone hands tied when we, or they, swim here because we know that it's fun and we enjoy it ... and therefore we demand so they enjoy it aswell." IF ... and that is not a typo, its a big IF ... people would demand OPTION to adjust the game the way they want, while maintaining curent system for others ... i would quite honestly dont give a shit ... As i said, its single player after all ... so do whatever the hells you want in your game, just dont mess with mine, and we will be cool. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost Does that take something away from the people who like having untied hands? Yes. But then it becomes a matter of Larian deciding who they want to cater to. Question is: Why pick between them in the first place, since curent system is allready implemented and all the other group demand is left it as it is. See i would totally understand that Larian would need to pick, if there would be two groups demanding some system changes that would require complete rework each ... But that is not the case. :-/ To stick with my own stupidly exaggerated example: You demand to tie everyone hands ... I demand so Larian starts to give out ropes, and help people to tie their hands ... as long as they want to ... and leave alone those, who dont. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost But the request itself is entirely logical and reasonable Everyone thinks this about their own ideas. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost No, nothing's perfect. Options are perfect ... as long as you can get exactly what you want, what is bad about that? Originally Posted by Gray Ghost As for the question of who is to blame. It comes down to this; if this is how Larian wants the game to work and this sort of "create your own limits" approach is their vision, then yes, it's the fault of the players for not meeting the game on its own terms. But in that case, setting your own limits IS the right way to play, and thus if you don't do so, you're playing it wrong. But if this isn't Larian's intention, then it's absolutely Larian's fault because then it just means they made a poorly designed game. I wonder why is that even important for you ... Lets say you are right for a second, okey? Lets say that Larian indeed (for reasons you listed) designed the game poorly ... so what? O_o As long as you have fun, the game still serves its purpose ... doesnt it? Originally Posted by Gray Ghost My feeling there is, if that was their intent, they should have said that. They did ... I remember Swen saying quite litteraly "you are helping us just by playing the game, since we gather it all". O_o Originally Posted by Gray Ghost Larian says they want to be our DM, well DMs TALK to their players, and when it comes to house rules, they need to be agreed on TOGETHER so that things work. Thats true ... By the way ... how many people DM usualy talks with? And even more by the way ... how usualy DM resolves problem, where half of his players wants A and half wants B where both options exclude each other? Just a hint: - This DM would need to talk with MILLIONS at once ... - Just on this forum, there is barely 100 people, more like 20 active members lately ... even less of them is active in discusions ... and still we are UNABLE to agree with each other. - Every DM i know (and i admit i dont know many, cca 5) sooner or later brings up rule zero, if there is an argument ... Originally Posted by Gray Ghost Because like you said above, they could just be there for data gathering purposes. Yes ... that is indeed possible. But still it would make more sense to me to gather data about system im going to use ... rather than system im going to discart completely and replace. o_O Originally Posted by Gray Ghost They could also just be unfinished. They can ... On the other hand, year and half in EA ... it would start to remind building a house from the roof. O_o Originally Posted by Gray Ghost Also, because it's a departure from the traditional approach of the genre, and because this game is being created within a genre, the reasonable action is to judge it based on the conventions of that genre. Every revolution starts with change. Chances are aproximately 50/50 ... not bcs they would be so equaly ballanced, but for the reason that we have no data to use. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost If they're trying to play with those conventions, then they should say so and allow us to properly adjust our expectations. There is many things people claim Larian "should have said" ... But they dont listen anyway, so what would be the point. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost I'm someone who firmly believes in openness and clarity in communication. Leaving stuff unsaid is a recipe for confusion. Even if it's supposedly obvious, it should be said. The level of dissatisfaction aparent in these forums makes it clear that it's actually NOT obvious. Yeah that would be fine ... As it seems Larian dont share this phylosophy ... well, what can we do. --- Originally Posted by Maximuuus is not a rule, Ragnarok. It's only a "QoL" feature ... Exactly: Originally Posted by Maximuuus add convenient options or QoL features As i said: They did. Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 02/05/22 05:11 PM. I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll RagnarokCzD #814479 02/05/22 06:10 PM
Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium Maximuuus veteran
Maximuuus veteran Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium	Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Originally Posted by Maximuuus is not a rule, Ragnarok. It's only a "QoL" feature ... Exactly: Originally Posted by Maximuuus add convenient options or QoL features As i said: They did. You were answering to "they created coherent rules and add convenient options or QoL features" about the weight system. Which would be understood by most people within the context as "they created coherent rules FIRST and THEN add convenient options or QoL features (encumbrance levels as a core rule then a convenient "send to camp" button). Where are the core rules about fast travelling and the related points of camping. Why bother with rules about the weight system and a QoL send to camp button rather than just remove the rules about encumbrance ? If you remove it, the system becomes beautifull because the system doesn't have rules so players can create rules in their head if they want to. Just like with the fast travel system ! That's what you're saying and that is stupid. The core difference related to this conversation between the "weight" system and the "(fast)travel" system is that one have rules and QoL improvement while the second is the QoL improvement of nothing. No one is asking Icelyn to walk for hours to travel. As the send camp button has proven, QoL improvement (which may also be found in options, like auto saves) allow the player to more or less completely negate existing rules about a secondary system like the encumbrance. Main systems (and the resting/fast travelling system ARE main systems) need rules because it is too important gameplay and roleplaywise. If Icelyn doesn't like them, they could easily add options to disable them. The same system as now for her. A consistant one for the others, whatever we like it or not. I'm sorry to talk about you Icelyn but you kind of represent the players that like games without too many "systems" here It's getting even longer Ragna. Not sure I'll answer more. 3 options : you're trolling, you want the last word whatever it cost, you just don't realize that games need good rules first to be fun. Travelling in the world is a main feature of good roleplaying video games (The R for Role, the P for (game)Play). You can't avoid making it a core system with a deeper design than "fast traveling and camping whenever you want wherever you want". POINT It may be an option but not the entire system. Last edited by Maximuuus; 02/05/22 06:49 PM. French Speaking Youtube Channel with a lot of BG3 videos : https://www.youtube.com/c/maximuuus

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll RagnarokCzD #814480 02/05/22 08:25 PM
Joined: Aug 2020 Gray Ghost veteran
Gray Ghost veteran Joined: Aug 2020	Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Originally Posted by Gray Ghost As for the question of who is to blame. It comes down to this; if this is how Larian wants the game to work and this sort of "create your own limits" approach is their vision, then yes, it's the fault of the players for not meeting the game on its own terms. But in that case, setting your own limits IS the right way to play, and thus if you don't do so, you're playing it wrong. But if this isn't Larian's intention, then it's absolutely Larian's fault because then it just means they made a poorly designed game. I wonder why is that even important for you ... Lets say you are right for a second, okey? Lets say that Larian indeed (for reasons you listed) designed the game poorly ... so what? O_o As long as you have fun, the game still serves its purpose ... doesnt it? I had a longer response to more points but the forum ate that, so I'm just going to focus on this, since it's the part I'm most concerned with. If the game is designed poorly then, fundamentally, that means Larian failed in makingit. I would argue that the closest thing to an objective measure of success and failure in creative endeavors is whether or not the creation ellicited the reaction that the creator wanted. If we assume that the game is poorly designed for the reasons I set out, then that means fewer people will enjoy it because a poorly designed game isn't as fun as a well-designed one. People who would have liked the game if it had been well-designed. Sure, some people might still like it, but that's in spite of the game, not because of it. Take a bad movie for example. If a horror movie makes you laugh from beginning to end, then it's still an entertaining movie, but it's a failure as a horror movie, and needs to be judged on those merits. The fact there's something to like in it doesn't redeem it. There's something to like in every movie, just like there's something to like in every game. To say that it doesn't matter if a game is well designed just because some people enjoy it is to disregard the effort and care people have put into good, polished, well-designed games. And when you talk about how, if a player doesn't have fun in the game then it's their fault, that's only true if the game is well-designed. Take FromSoft titles. I wouldn't enjoy those games, because the difficulty of them is too much for me and the idea of constantly dying and struggling doesn't appeal to me. But the games are still well made, and for the target audience of the games, they're brilliant. I can recognize that, regardless of my peronal tastes, those games set out to do somethign specific, to evoke a specific feeling and experience, and they succeed in doing that. It's just an experience I don't want. If I played those games and disliked them, it's because it's not meant to appeal to me and my tastes, that's not the fault of the game. It's my fault for trying a game that doesn't mesh with my tastes and abilities. Meanwhile with a bad game, those are also meant to appeal to a target audience, but if it's poorly designed, then that target audience is unlikely to enjoy it, because it fails to be appealing to them. So it's the game's fault they don't have fun. To summarize the "so what?", if the game is poorly designed, I'm probably not gonna have fun in the first place. It's less likely that I or anyone else will have fun with it. And that would be the fault of the game, not the people playing it.

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Maximuuus #814481 02/05/22 09:01 PM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	Originally Posted by Maximuuus If you remove it, the system becomes beautifull because the system doesn't have rules so players can create rules in their head if they want to. That's what you're saying Nah ... Thats at best what you read ... wich is kinda sad, by the way. You were the one who started with weight: Originally Posted by Maximuuus At this point they could also remove any consequences when you carry too many things in your inventory so players could eventually decide a weight not to exceed. All i did was to point out that there allready is QoL feature, that "can be used to remove any consequences of carrying too many things" ... Anything beyond that were your words, not mine. :-/ --- Originally Posted by Maximuuus "they created coherent rules FIRST and THEN add convenient options or QoL features" I dont see any reason why it should matter what was created first and what second ... Also as far as i know "send to camp" was present since day 1 of Early Acess ... so im not even sure if we can know what was "first". O_o ACTUALY!!! "Send to Camp" was in game even before Encumberance, (unless i remember that incorectly) ... since implementation of Encumberance come up in patch 2 or 3! Originally Posted by Maximuuus Where are the core rules about fast travelling and the related points of camping. Depends ... Core rule about fast travel is that we are travelling through nexus of waypoints (those runic portals on walls) ... that is reason we allways come out of one. QoL feature then is that you dont need to manualy walk to nearest, the game does it for you. I dont think we were told of any rule about camping so far ... Originally Posted by Maximuuus Why bother with rules about the weight system and a QoL send to camp button rather than just remove the rules about encumbrance? Not sure what are you asking here ... In my opinion (wich is basicaly the only answer i can give you really, so i dare to presume you were asking about that) ... I repeately expressed my dislike for often repeated suggestion that "Send to camp" should be recreated, so people can either send whole groups of items, all wares at once, or any item with single click with some keybinding ... Why? Exactly for this reason, weight and encumberance rules would imediately loose any meaning, since our characters would effectively gain infinite inventory with no weight limit. :-/ Yes, basicaly we have "something close" right now ... but not exactly this! Since i honestly do believe that our curent "send to camp" feature was never meaned to be used as infinite backpack ... just QoL feature allowing us to store items we forget to store, when we were in camp ... in other words: Using it as infinite backpack is clearly exploit. That is the difference between curent state and this hypotetical nonsence you come up with for some unknown reason. O_o (and if you cannot see it, im not sure how to explain it ... just try to send to camp 100 items ... and them imagine you would send them all at once, or not at all since there would be no weight limits, so you would not have any reason to send them anyway ... it should be clear after that) And that is also the reason to "why not remove the rules completely" ... As i said before: The rules are still right there for you, you simply have way around them, if you want to. :P Originally Posted by Maximuuus If you remove it, the system becomes beautifull because the system doesn't have rules so players can create rules in their head if they want to. As i stated abowe, difference is that in that weight example, dont need to remove rules in order to create your own way ... But no, system dont become beautifull ... system become mess. I repeat once again: The rules are still right there for you, you simply have way around them, if you want to. :P Or i can repeat once again something else: Its single player after all ... so do whatever the hells you want in your game, just dont mess with mine, and we will be cool. I believe you realize that same phylosophy i aply on myself: I dont want to remove any rules, since i dont want to mess with your game ... i just want mine to stay the way i like it. Originally Posted by Maximuuus and that is stupid. On that we can agree ... you managed to fabricate bullshit. Hope you are proud. Originally Posted by Maximuuus The core difference related to this conversation between the "weight" system and the "(fast)travel" system is that one have rules and QoL improvement while the second is the QoL improvement of nothing. Wich is suppose to be wich? Since i can see rules and QoL improvements on both. O_o Originally Posted by Maximuuus No one is asking Icelyn to walk for hours to travel. Amount of time is irellevant ... I often refuse to rest since it "bothers me" ... and it only takes barely one minute. Point is that it would not add anything worthy. Just walking ... have you even tryed it? Originally Posted by Maximuuus As the send camp button has proven, QoL improvement (which may also be found in options, like auto saves) allow the player to more or less completely negate existing rules about a secondary system like the encumbrance. Yeah, big shock ... exploits can break the game. surprised face Originally Posted by Maximuuus It's getting even longer Ragna. Not sure I'll answer more. 3 options : you're trolling, you want the last word whatever it cost, you just don't realize that games need good rules first to be fun. I have two more: 1) You dont actualy really even bother to read anything i tell you, since your explanations of my words are direct contradictions of those words you are reacting on. O_o 2) I actualy do believe that strict rules are not as fun as you .. and players who dont like them should be taken under concideration during development, and should have option to avoid figuratively every and any rule they dislike ... bcs its ffs their game, and its nobody business, except their own, how they will play it. Sure, there is also option that YOU are trolling ... just to have it covered aswell. Originally Posted by Maximuuus Travelling in the world is a main feature of good roleplaying video games (The R for Role, the P for (game)Play). You can't avoid making it a core system with a deeper design than "fast traveling and camping whenever you want wherever you want". I probably dont understand this sentence ... I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Gray Ghost #814482 02/05/22 09:32 PM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	Originally Posted by Gray Ghost I had a longer response to more points but the forum ate that, so I'm just going to focus on this, since it's the part I'm most concerned with. Happened to me aswell few times ... You just need to get to previous page, copy your whole coment, open the forum in next tab, and insert it as whole new coment ... worked every time for me, hope you use it some day in the future. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost If the game is designed poorly then, fundamentally, that means Larian failed in makingit. Yeah, thats basicaly the same sentence created with different words ... If A = B and B = C, it means C = A. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost because a poorly designed game isn't as fun as a well-designed one. People who would have liked the game if it had been well-designed. You either missunderstand me ... or i expressed myself poorly ... or, most likely, bit of both ... I simply believe that this is matter of taste, and expectations ... your own example with movies is quite good in that regards: Originally Posted by Gray Ghost Take a bad movie for example. If a horror movie makes you laugh from beginning to end, then it's still an entertaining movie, but it's a failure as a horror movie, and needs to be judged on those merits. The fact there's something to like in it doesn't redeem it. Indeed ... Horror fans would hate it. But Comedy fans would love it! And that is exactly what i mean ... sure, some people would be dissapointed ... but some other people will be exited. You are right, the move would not be redeemed as Horror ... Did you know that late 80' movies like Gremlins, Leprechaun, or Critters were originaly presented as pure Horrors? And theese days they are called "horror comedy" ... One could argue that there were something to like that redeemed them. Originally Posted by Gray Ghost if a player doesn't have fun in the game then it's their fault, that's only true if the game is well-designed. You seems to be still too focused on that wrong interpretation ... Its getting late, so i start to be lazy in searching for best words ... Lets just say if the game offers me option A ... and i want to play it with option A ... but the game also offers me option B ... and i deeply despise option B ... and i use option B, no matter the reason ... its not game fault that i feel discuised with it, its my fault, since i decided it. And i dont think any kind of desing could fix this ... maybe expect that one that dont offer any other options, than exactly those that they want. :-/ Wich would equally ruin it to anyone else. Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 03/05/22 05:44 AM. I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Maximuuus #814488 03/05/22 03:10 AM
Joined: Oct 2020 Icelyn veteran
Icelyn veteran Joined: Oct 2020	Originally Posted by Maximuuus I'm sorry to talk about you Icelyn but you kind of represent the players that like games without too many "systems" here I like modern systems.😊

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814497 03/05/22 09:43 AM
Joined: Oct 2020 mr_planescapist addict
mr_planescapist addict Joined: Oct 2020	I like tested true old systems with a touch of modern. Then again, I like records. I have an old amp with records player and original Pink floyd albums. But also listen on latest technology Astel&k modern DAC mp3 player with Grado headphones. I like BG2. Actual I love that game. I was 21 when I first played it. But I don't go "its old system, so bad...). I've got an OLED for my Switch, but also a CRT for retro games (Super famicom, PS1...) because it just plays faster, no lag, and still looks amazing for these old games. People who worship JUST modern stuff seem like that's ALL they consume. Fuck the rest. I feel they are so ignorant on the possibilities of what/was available. Give it a chance. Power to GEn X we accept EVERY tech./systems. New and old. Rag, the way you think about how games should play, you would NEVER EVER get a job at ANY game studios. Now or 30 years ago. So your opinion is NULL in my view. Last edited by mr_planescapist; 03/05/22 09:54 AM.

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll mr_planescapist #814499 03/05/22 11:38 AM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	Originally Posted by mr_planescapist you would NEVER EVER get a job at ANY game studios. Now or 30 years ago. So your opinion is NULL in my view. Feeling is mutual ... as i stated before. Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 03/05/22 11:38 AM. I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Icelyn #814500 03/05/22 12:11 PM
Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium Maximuuus veteran
Maximuuus veteran Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium	Originally Posted by Icelyn Originally Posted by Maximuuus I'm sorry to talk about you Icelyn but you kind of represent the players that like games without too many "systems" here I like modern systems.😊 I also like modern systems but about (fast)travelling in BG3 I'd call it "empty" rather than modern. Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Core rule about fast travel is that we are travelling through nexus of waypoints (those runic portals on walls) ... that is reason we allways come out of one. QoL feature then is that you dont need to manualy walk to nearest, the game does it for you. That's even not true : The camps doesn't have one. The system you describe to travel fast in the world is as empty as your analysis. Last edited by Maximuuus; 03/05/22 12:41 PM. French Speaking Youtube Channel with a lot of BG3 videos : https://www.youtube.com/c/maximuuus

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814502 03/05/22 12:50 PM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	Sure you can ignore it if you wish ... But that doesnt mean it dont exists. :-/ I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll RagnarokCzD #814503 03/05/22 12:58 PM
Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium Maximuuus veteran
Maximuuus veteran Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium	Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD Sure you can ignore it if you wish ... But that doesnt mean it dont exists. :-/ Camps doesn't have runic portals, it's a fact. On top of that : mechanical rules =/= visual or narrative packaging that explains them. The nexus portal is the visual and narrative layer that translate the mechanical rules and tries to make the whole system coherent. The only mechanical rules about fast traveling is that you have to find a waypoint first before being able to fast travel there (camps are exceptions for unkown reasons), then you can fast travel whenever you want wherever you want. The visual/narrative layer is debattable as previously explained by poeple that know the lore of these portals. The rules are not coherent because you can fast travel inside/outside locations without portals as proven by camps. Even simple suggestion would improve the system as a whole without changing its shallow mechanical rules. I even don't understand why you're arguing so much once again. Icelyn could still have the same experience with an option that turns a deeper system into something as empty as he like. Last edited by Maximuuus; 03/05/22 02:44 PM. French Speaking Youtube Channel with a lot of BG3 videos : https://www.youtube.com/c/maximuuus

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll Maximuuus #814505 03/05/22 04:28 PM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	Originally Posted by Maximuuus Camps doesn't have runic portals, it's a fact. Never said they do. O_o Originally Posted by Maximuuus The rules are not coherent because you can fast travel inside/outside locations without portals as proven by camps. You are messing two different things. :-/ Originally Posted by Maximuuus Even simple suggestion would improve the system as a whole without changing its shallow mechanical rules. I dont see any tho. O_o Originally Posted by Maximuuus Icelyn could still have the same experience with an option that turns a deeper system into something as empty as he like. I was quite sure Icelyn is a woman. O_o I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814507 03/05/22 05:50 PM
Joined: Apr 2022 A Alexlotr journeyman
Alexlotr journeyman A Joined: Apr 2022	It's unrealistic so I'd get rid of it. Maybe turn on fast travel for easier difficulty levels like story mode. They can also have a button "kill all enemies in a combat". And if they don't find it fun, they can choose not to press it.

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814511 03/05/22 07:16 PM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	Sure, why not. I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814512 03/05/22 07:21 PM
Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium Maximuuus veteran
Maximuuus veteran Joined: Feb 2020 Location: Belgium	I don't mess things, you just don't understand what we're talking about. Travelling to and from camp is also about travelling back in already explored area. It obviously has strong link with the resting system but whatever you click the map and the "(leave) camp" name or just the "long rest button", it's all about the system that allow us to reach specific points without walking. The system as is just don't make any sense and the only pro is the quality of life, or the convenience it has to offer. The core rules are absolutely cheap for such an important feature of cRPG and it is deep as a keyboard cheat command to teleport with a debattable narrative layer on top of it. As The Composer suggested in this thread an easy suggestion would be to remove the runes completely and to allow clicking icons on a map (i.e the worldmap) rather than on names of runes in a list. The same system than it was BG1/2 (because that's exactly what it is right now) but with another visual and narrative layer. Just for you : in BG1/2 when you were fast traveling back and forth between two locations a worldmap with icons and names opened. You clicked the icon of the next location and you were teleported in the location you had chosen. Without random encounters it would be exactly the same as now mechanicaly but with a visual and a narrative layer that's suggesting travel/walking rather than teleportation. It solve the narrative-wise debatable question and the mechanical incoherence arround the camp at the same time. Both the mechanical one and the narrative-wise question (again) about the camp. A camp in the middle of nowhere that is not spotted anywhere but on a list of names. Icons on a map to fast travel also solve this weakness of the system as a whole and it gives a very cRPG feeling to the game. It would be the bare minimum improvement. The next question is being able to teleport from everywhere or only from defined area (probably surface, underdark, grymforge). This is easier to implement as a customizable option than a toggle for reactions. Last edited by Maximuuus; 03/05/22 07:56 PM. French Speaking Youtube Channel with a lot of BG3 videos : https://www.youtube.com/c/maximuuus

Re: Fast Travel Limitation Poll GM4Him #814529 04/05/22 06:41 AM
Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec RagnarokCzD veteran
RagnarokCzD veteran Joined: Oct 2020 Location: Liberec	I still like much more the idea that Waypoint runes should be added to camps. At least from story perspective it would make much more sense than walking somewhere ... then being exhausted from that travel ... and therefore start walking back to rest. I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!

Page 5 of 9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Hop To

Link Copied to Clipboard

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5