Warnings or not, you're pretty much asking for an effectively untested mode
On the contrary my friend. One of main purposes of Early Acess is to test things after all.
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
you're willing to potentially trade your campaign's/game's stability (and others in fact', if somebody decides to play MP with 6ppl enabled) for 6ppl party?
Well ... I would say that everyone is potentialy trading game stability for themselves, since nobody is forcing you to flip that switch ... so ... no, i dont trade others stability at all.
And i dont think i trade even my own ... You know, when you look at that single problem we find out right now, when we use 6member party mod ... i would dare to say that problem that is there is that game have only 4 spawning points on the boat ... therefore (logicaly) once you have more than 4 party members, game dont know what to do with them, you dont "walk" on the boat ... you spawn there. So thanks to existence of this mod, Larian claimed to count with, we find out the problem ... it would be resolved by simply adding two more spawning points, or adding message that would inform player to keep two persons behind. And IF we would get this feature, that would help us revealing another problems that will be there after ... i mean, sure Larian totally can just say "you used mod, you broke your game, not our problem" and it would be perfectly fine ... or ... and there should be no surprise when i say this, they could potentialy take under concideration how easily they could fulfill one of th greatest wish of their comunity ... i mean come on, this topic have almost 100 pages, that alone should speak for itself.
You are talking about "some imaginary problem that may (or may not) occur" ... well, that is hard to argue against, quite honestly. Its as if someone as you "what would you do if something goes wrong" ... good question, its important to ask it in any case, sure ... but how can you answer it if you dont know what would go wrong, or in what situation?
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
All this doesn't sound like a fair trade to me.
I cant honestly imagine how would you like to make it fairer(?).
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
Sticking warnings in obvious or semi-obvious problematic points like boat sounds like bandaiding and just screams "unfinished content"
I presume this is matter of attitude ...
To me it screams: "Do you remember how we warned you that turning this option *ON* will cause problems, bcs (as we told you back then) the game is NOT created for this? And you decided to turn it *ON* anyway, while you agreed that you will be restricted? ... Well, this is it."
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
I can understand wanting more than 4 people in party but I cannot understand your willingness to sacrifice for its sake. If I would want this mode I would at least want it fully functional (if imbalanced), playtested and as clear of bugs as possible.
Well, it would certainly be preffered, yes ... That is one of reasons we keep asking for it, the sooner we get it (if we get it) the more we will be able to test it and report bugs.
But if we dont get it, we will use the mod anyway ... and mods cause problems, bcs people who made them usualy dont know whole coding and may cause some colisions ... many of those would be prevented if the mod would create someone who knows whole coding ... aka Larian.
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
I wouldn't say that everything went fine and dandy for these games though.
I didnt mean it did ... There was some problems, but through them ... those games become sucesfull.
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
VtMB didn't make as much money as it was expected on release and picked up popularity much time after the release and, as I understand, was one of the contributing factors for Troika Games disbanding. It's the community support of the game that ended up keeping it afloat to my understanding.
Basicaly yes ... ActiVision forced Troika to release before the game was ready, there was massive cuts of content and not enough bug catching, you were not even able to finish the game in released state, since it crashed every single time in certain quest. Also, Half Life were released in same week and that alone casted LOOOOONG shadow to basicaly everything else ... coincidence? I think not. And you just cant left out that in those times game releases certainly didnt have as much attention as they have now ...
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
Yes, assigning clear roles will be easier with party of 6... but I think that as far as BG3 goes 4 still works fine.
Exactly my point ... You dont *need to* but it would certainly provide some benefits ... among many others, people who are perfectly fine with 4, would simply keep the switch turned off ... and they would be perfectly fine.
Originally Posted by Ruswarr
The thing is... I don't see *only* two "factions". It's more like a lot of sub-factions that can barely agree on some things, and every single one thinks they are in the right. Hence I would rather trust Larian based on what I see in EA (but not everything is perfect ofc) because at least they have more or less clear vision on what to do with, well, their game. And that's coming from someone who has quite a lot of grievances with DOS2.
Well, yeah ... they are more like the two major factions ... Then there are DnD tabetop hardcore fans, DnD tabetop casuals, people who just likes RPG and didnt know BG, nor DoS before this (that would be me) ... and the best part is that those factions are not exclusive to each other.
---
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Not sure why you're getting so upset.
Sometimes i wonder why you keep presuming everyone around you is angry ... force of habbit?
Originally Posted by GM4Him
Ragnarok's been one of the people out here who has argued both sides of the issue at various points.
Wrong ... as usualy.
I still dont understand why cant we change Race for our hirelings. Lets us play Githyanki as racist as they trully are!
