Larian Banner: Baldur's Gate Patch 9
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 13 of 13 1 2 11 12 13
Joined: Sep 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Limz

The best way is to look at actual player behavior and mine the players for information then construct profiles based on that and let that inform you while adding forum/reddit/whatever feedback as secondary sources.

Shouldn't the very fact that they have a heat map give you a hint as to what they're thinking and their capabilities? Or the fact that they know what the romance rates are or how many times people have pet a damn thing?

This is where the real data is at, not a stupid survey, not these forums, not reddit.

Forum and other non game source feedback should be important I think. Some people play mostly in offline mode for various reasons (in my case it is due to late night internet issues), rather hard to analyze this data. Also, data analysis, while helpful, is probably only showing them a small amount of information. A high rate of death somewhere could mean hard content but also lag, the controls, stupidity, really anything. Petting the dog is an exploit to raise approval, it maybe shows how many people are using it, not how many would really pet the dog. Romances, well people are testing the game so there will be a high rate of this since people want to know what happens with everyone, not who they really like. Most people taking the "good" path doesn't show them how to fix the "evil" path.

Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by virion


You could use some chill. I'm taking personal comments as misplaced.


"So, you simply prefer people to say "5e is perfectly balanced, we should use this" with no context? Amazing. "

1)I prefer them to say how they defined themselves as a player, what they want, and why. Three things. No in-game data will give you this explicitely. You can get a profile, what feature they use and you have to figure out why.

2)At no point a user explaining to me he wants a feature but don't think it makes sense because others won't like it because [insert reason] based on his personal experience is to be dissmised[Aka Dev /DM experience]. But the 2nd part of his opinion isn't exactly the center of the discussion. What matters it's he's a DM + Software Dev + Plays X hours a day paired with #1 above.

Your entire paragraph though was aimed at re-centering the entire discussion about the 2nd point. And even more, delving into the details of it(That's how it felt when I was reading it). You're effectively harming yourself in the process in my opinion.


Small disclaimer:
I was talking about something a bit different in my posts on this page, I was referring more to PR in the context of those articles and the forum. Less than the actual impact of the forum on decision making.


You could also be less lazy about your replies and put a little bit more thought into your responses, it isn't that hard.

Your entire spiel is a misunderstanding, most likely due to the lack of reading comprehension that stems from laziness that or English isn't your primary language but it's not like my Chinese or Russian is decent either so we'll make due:

Your misunderstanding is to look at any of these discussions as though they are subjects; most of the discussion if not all of it is at the design/implementation/architectural level so they are speaking to you as peers. In a matter of fact, if you took your line of thinking and applied it to what other people are saying on this thread it wouldn't make sense.

In a matter of fact you recognize this by alluding to what I am doing as Larian's job(again, since when is critical thinking and removal of bias someone else's job), it's a good warning sign that contextually you're off the mark.

By removing yourself from this context and saying that we're all users and should only define things by player, what they want, and why then placing yourself as the observer you're pretty much doing what you accused me which is Larian's job. So, that doesn't really fit either.

The bottom line is what I wrote earlier which is that you mistake the dialog I am having with my interlocutors can be understood at subject-observer level. This is why you're confused and maybe you're just poor at context switching and shouldn't throw yourself into a conversation with the amount of laziness you've displayed.

Like if you actually look at the conversations they don't make sense with the approach you have. You're looking for a survey or a short profile, as evidence from
Quote
I prefer them to say how they defined themselves as a player, what they want, and why. Three things.
in a living discussion. You've completely mismatched what was written.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Online Sleepy
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Originally Posted by Limz
You could also be less lazy about your replies and put a little bit more thought into your responses, it isn't that hard.

Your entire spiel is a misunderstanding, most likely due to the lack of reading comprehension that stems from laziness that or English isn't your primary language but it's not like my Chinese or Russian is decent either so we'll make due:
[...]

Knock it off. Either join in the discussion or don't, but quit the personal attacks.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Zarna
Originally Posted by Limz

The best way is to look at actual player behavior and mine the players for information then construct profiles based on that and let that inform you while adding forum/reddit/whatever feedback as secondary sources.

Shouldn't the very fact that they have a heat map give you a hint as to what they're thinking and their capabilities? Or the fact that they know what the romance rates are or how many times people have pet a damn thing?

This is where the real data is at, not a stupid survey, not these forums, not reddit.

Forum and other non game source feedback should be important I think. Some people play mostly in offline mode for various reasons (in my case it is due to late night internet issues), rather hard to analyze this data. Also, data analysis, while helpful, is probably only showing them a small amount of information. A high rate of death somewhere could mean hard content but also lag, the controls, stupidity, really anything. Petting the dog is an exploit to raise approval, it maybe shows how many people are using it, not how many would really pet the dog. Romances, well people are testing the game so there will be a high rate of this since people want to know what happens with everyone, not who they really like. Most people taking the "good" path doesn't show them how to fix the "evil" path.


Sure, just keep in mind that the data points I provided are what Larian has revealed to us they could have more and while your criticisms are valid keep in mind that the more data you have from player behavior the more accurate the aggregate profiles become. In each example you give if you have more data you can build a countervailing argument; in an area with high death you can reasonably ascertain that a percentage of the players died because of stupidity due to the actions they took leading up to the encounter starting from the beginning of the game.

And to address 'Most people taking the "good" path doesn't show them how to fix the "evil" path.' is not necessarily true because the game offers multiple scenarios/tests that allow for an 'evil' outcome and it's simply just mapping those, discarding which points were least touched upon and improving it then sending it out for another round of testing. You can pretty much create accurate profiles of what an evil player wants with enough data points by simply running them through as many scenarios as possible or if you already have enough data. Again, most social media platforms kind of do this already without ever receiving direct feedback from you in the form of a forum post or a reddit post etc.

But barring that then sure, I am willing to say that if you can't have rich data then go ahead and rake through all the forum stuff.

Joined: Sep 2020
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
Originally Posted by Limz
Sure, just keep in mind that the data points I provided are what Larian has revealed to us they could have more and while your criticisms are valid keep in mind that the more data you have from player behavior the more accurate the aggregate profiles become. In each example you give if you have more data you can build a countervailing argument; in an area with high death you can reasonably ascertain that a percentage of the players died because of stupidity due to the actions they took leading up to the encounter starting from the beginning of the game.

And to address 'Most people taking the "good" path doesn't show them how to fix the "evil" path.' is not necessarily true because the game offers multiple scenarios/tests that allow for an 'evil' outcome and it's simply just mapping those, discarding which points were least touched upon and improving it then sending it out for another round of testing. You can pretty much create accurate profiles of what an evil player wants with enough data points by simply running them through as many scenarios as possible or if you already have enough data. Again, most social media platforms kind of do this already without ever receiving direct feedback from you in the form of a forum post or a reddit post etc.

But barring that then sure, I am willing to say that if you can't have rich data then go ahead and rake through all the forum stuff.

Sure, with enough data and enough iterative rounds of testing, any problem can be identified and fixed. However, Larian's limit is time. They cannot, for example, make small changes to the "evil path", compare the resulting in-game data (how many players chose this route) to that from the previous version, make changes based upon those results, and repeat until convergence. They'll get through, what, 3 iterations using this method?

Feedback guides this iterative process of improvement, speeding it up. Players can say why they do or do not like this "evil path," and Larian can incorporate this feedback to quickly hone in on what needs improvement the most, and in what direction. To produce an equivalent product, using feedback and data collection should result in a fewer number of changes compared to using data collection alone.

Joined: Nov 2020
E
member
OP Offline
member
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Limz
Originally Posted by Ellenhard


Your statements are certainly not true, if you'll kindly take the time to actually read what people post here.
I, for one, came here with a respect for the opinions of many people in this thread. And would really like for this thread to stay constructive, even though I hear contradicting opinions.

We are (partially) waiting for Larian representatives to form their own understanding of their resources, willingness to share with us, the capability to ask or direct.

Or it could be like it is now, and while it isn't bad at all on a grand scale, I'd say there will be missed opportunities.


Really? There's only one person who asks the right question thus far and that's Orbax in his signature and there's Whispering Spider who can definitely hold his own and understands the basic questions posed by people like Surface and Sharp.

Yet, in spite of that, no one has actually sketched out what the demographic breakdown would be like at a basic level and what mechanical changes means to each. You can pretty much apply this across the board to all concerns. Here is an example illustrating what I mean:

Given the possibility that Larian has to cater between 5e purists, nostalgia driven players, new players with minimal RPG experience, co-op players (could be a subset of the previous), players who have moderate experience with RPGs but prefer narrative experiences etc. what kind of combat flow would be acceptable to that audience, of what percentage might we lose if we increase the turns of the average combat by say five and how would player experience be if they missed more often? etc. What are the trade offs, how can we tweak the system and maximize users?

Name me anyone who bothers to actually do that because that's, at a bare minimum, what any game dev has to think about when given possible constraints (as highlighted by the interviews) such as these at a minimum (we don't know their other constraints). People like Isaac, Victor, Maximuus, and KillerRabbit simply do not care to answer that basic as fuck question.

There's nothing respectable about opinions that have zero work behind them and not one iota of brain power, you can pretty much compound everything they say into 5e > *. While they understand the rules they don't actually understand the system or its actual break points because they have never put themselves in the shoes of what a DM is supposed to be which is a game designer or a systems architect. If they did then they would at least be able to compete with Larian while heading in a different direction.

But hey it's great that you have respect for opinions that are rarely substantiated or well thought out and would never pass for any technical vigor, bravo.

If you want a thread to be constructive then why don't you take the time to read the interviews you posted and pretend to be in their shoes? Is that so hard to ask?

Oh, wait, it's because you're not interested in asking the hard questions and answering them, I am willing to wager that the questions are above you based on reading your previous posts here.

And I have definitely read most of the posts here, it's basically quips and agreements here and there or circle jerks about how it's not D&D or not BG or it needs to be more BG - again not much real substance behind it and when pushed by either Sharp and others here there's not much of a defense either.



Thank you for saying things openly. Just please, don't troll: you asked me a question which is already answered by the firstmost post of this thread.

I see many people here are very capable to do relevant brainwork and more, sad if you don't see that. I wouldn't single out anyone. You really don't see that here are some people with a huge gaming and DMing experience. I see it in other threads, everywhere on the forum. But maybe it's just birds of a feather flocking together. People are much more than their written opinion here; it's just the discussion must lead to implementation. To get constructive, I'd prefer not to do unnecessary work, before committing.

So I repeat: I wait for the poll system being implemented on this forum to ask all the "right" questions and get some kind of results. That I would see as a basis for breakdowns and such. With the links provided to show what your opinion and information is based on. That's what would I do. And you?


Last edited by Ellenhard; 14/11/20 07:36 AM.
Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by mrfuji3

Sure, with enough data and enough iterative rounds of testing, any problem can be identified and fixed. However, Larian does not have unlimited time. They cannot, for example, make small changes to the "evil path", compare the resulting in-game data (how many players chose this route) to that from the previous version, make changes based upon those results, and repeat until convergence. They'll get through, what, 3 iterations using this method?

Feedback guides this iterative process of improvement, speeding it up. Players can say why they do or do not like this "evil path," and Larian can incorporate this feedback to quickly hone in on what needs improvement the most, and in what direction. To produce an equivalent product, using feedback and data collection should result in a fewer number of changes compared to using data collection alone.


That's why I said if you can't have rich data you can go ahead and rake through the muck that is the forums or whatever you feel is necessary and why I am willing to concede the point on those grounds.

So, I think we can agree that if your tests aren't good enough and you don't have enough time, then you can't have rich data and have to rely on secondary sources more heavily in some cases depending on context.

As an aside for things like combat, etc., I don't think player feedback is as important as player behavior.

I think though once you hit the second round of iteration you might be able to construct better tests and scenarios and lean less on external feedback as you understand player behavior better.

I also don't think that Larian will release the entire game so they'll probably lean heavier on feedback in the first few rounds and then less so after constructing better tests/scenarios.

Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by Ellenhard


Thank you for saying things openly. Just please, don't troll: you asked me a question which is already answered by the firstmost post of this thread.

I see many people here are very capable to do relevant brainwork and more, sad if you don't see that. I wouldn't single out anyone. You really don't see that here are some people with a huge gaming and DMing experience. I see it in other threads, everywhere on the forum. But maybe it's just birds of a feather flocking together. People are much more than their written opinion here; it's just the discussion must lead to implementation. To get constructive, I'd prefer not to do unnecessary work, before committing.

So I repeat: I wait for the poll system being implemented on this forum to ask all the "right" questions and get some kind of results. That I would see as a basis for breakdowns and such. With the links provided to show what your opinion and information is based on. That's what would I do. And you?



I don't troll. People simply do not read.

This was your original question:

Quote

"How exactly would you act on feedback provided by the players?

1) Say the nice words, but ultimately doing more of the same as before;
2) Actually considering changing some stuff many fans agree upon, but your team disagrees with (written examples of fan propositions - the boards are ripe with them)?"



This is what I am asking:

Quote

sketch... out what the demographic breakdown would be like at a basic level and what mechanical changes means to each


There is a slight overlap in the request because it's asking a related question but it's also asking you to show what those changes would do to each demographic which then leads to justification after further discussion. All you do is invite people to list how they would change it but not immediately explore the ramifications of those choices -- you allow people to hide by not forcing people to confront those immediate consequences.

And sure you can say that people are very capable of doing the relevant brainwork but they certainly haven't displayed it in actual writing, I am sure they're smart individuals in some fashion or another etc. But do they show it here? No, not really. Like go through this thread and many others and just try to poke holes in everyone's arguments and see what fallacies people manage to stack up. How many is-ought / fact-value errors can you catch along the way? How many issues get conflated? The count goes on and there's little to no accountability.

I see some people with huge gaming and DMing experience, sure, but I also have huge gaming experience. But none of that is actually relevant when it comes to analyzing systems and logic now does it?

It also probably doesn't give you the experience of being open and vulnerable in search for the best solution of any given thing.

Lastly, you say to get constructive you prefer not to do unnecessary work before committing which is fine, but tell me then what is necessary? Where does making sure your argument is as sound as possible stand in your scale?

And what if a poll system never comes to the forum, what then? Are you going to keep on waiting and waiting?

Let me put it this way, you can arrive to a lot of things based on pure reason (which implies genuine discussion) and there are plenty of tools in that domain that are great for abstraction (which is what you're going to do once you break the numbers down anyways). There's also a lot more people can learn from each other while exploring that and refining their opinions to deliver better arguments for why BG3 should tilt one way or another.

Joined: Nov 2020
E
member
OP Offline
member
E
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Limz
...

This is what I am asking:

Quote

sketch... out what the demographic breakdown would be like at a basic level and what mechanical changes means to each


There is a slight overlap in the request because it's asking a related question but it's also asking you to show what those changes would do to each demographic which then leads to justification after further discussion. All you do is invite people to list how they would change it but not immediately explore the ramifications of those choices -- you allow people to hide by not forcing people to confront those immediate consequences.

And sure you can say that people are very capable of doing the relevant brainwork but they certainly haven't displayed it in actual writing, I am sure they're smart individuals in some fashion or another etc. But do they show it here? No, not really. Like go through this thread and many others and just try to poke holes in everyone's arguments and see what fallacies people manage to stack up. How many is-ought / fact-value errors can you catch along the way? How many issues get conflated? The count goes on and there's little to no accountability.

I see some people with huge gaming and DMing experience, sure, but I also have huge gaming experience. But none of that is actually relevant when it comes to analyzing systems and logic now does it?

It also probably doesn't give you the experience of being open and vulnerable in search for the best solution of any given thing.

Lastly, you say to get constructive you prefer not to do unnecessary work before committing which is fine, but tell me then what is necessary? Where does making sure your argument is as sound as possible stand in your scale?

And what if a poll system never comes to the forum, what then? Are you going to keep on waiting and waiting?

Let me put it this way, you can arrive to a lot of things based on pure reason (which implies genuine discussion) and there are plenty of tools in that domain that are great for abstraction (which is what you're going to do once you break the numbers down anyways). There's also a lot more people can learn from each other while exploring that and refining their opinions to deliver better arguments for why BG3 should tilt one way or another.


"There is a slight overlap in the request because it's asking a related question but it's also asking you to show what those changes would do to each demographic which then leads to justification after further discussion. All you do is invite people to list how they would change it but not immediately explore the ramifications of those choices -- you allow people to hide by not forcing people to confront those immediate consequences."

That's right. Because not everyone is capable of exploring the ramifications on their own. And that doesn't make the opinions of these people less important, _unless_ Larian chooses differently. Pure, honest opinion is fine, even though thought-out answers are so much better for those who have the time to read it, and care about the result.

"And sure you can say that people are very capable of doing the relevant brainwork but they certainly haven't displayed it in actual writing, I am sure they're smart individuals in some fashion or another etc. But do they show it here? No, not really. Like go through this thread and many others and just try to poke holes in everyone's arguments and see what fallacies people manage to stack up. How many is-ought / fact-value errors can you catch along the way? How many issues get conflated? The count goes on and there's little to no accountability."

I agree with the part about looking for holes. That's why it is important to get all this brain energy in a constructive direction. But about people's potential I would disagree - I think this is the best we have, that potential is capable to help make this game better, given some thought and time (and it seems we can't escape bickering). Otherwise, I would not have registered on this forum at all.

"I see some people with huge gaming and DMing experience, sure, but I also have huge gaming experience. But none of that is actually relevant when it comes to analyzing systems and logic now does it?

It also probably doesn't give you the experience of being open and vulnerable in search for the best solution of any given thing."

But analysis and logic is just the part of the required process here, not the whole. About being open and vulnerable - why do you think one needs that for finding a solution? Like, open-minded? But any good DM is open-minded when s/he listens to the players' creativity. Because s/he needs to react accordingly and be fast in the decision-making. And I see people here as capable of being open-minded - mostly. The capability is not a problem, I'd say it's social/internet thing.

"Lastly, you say to get constructive you prefer not to do unnecessary work before committing which is fine, but tell me then what is necessary? Where does making sure your argument is as sound as possible stand in your scale?"

Necessary: to understand what Larian is ready to change, so as not to waste efforts (I've said of that before in this thread, few posts earlier);
Sound argument -by collecting data and staying on course (because provoked emotions may criticially derail the process).

"And what if a poll system never comes to the forum, what then? Are you going to keep on waiting and waiting?"

Yes, - I'm not that commited yet to start without tools. Unless I know for sure that my work won't go to the trash can (which of course I don't).

And even with the tools, I'm going to ask for help. Yours, for example, if you would like to actually help with that. To separate which questions are in the area "that can be modded and Larian wouldn't go there" from "actually could be changed/updated at this stage". It would need alot of brainpower and accuracy to ask all the right questions and make it laconic - people would read only what is given to them in an easy-to-read form. As you can see, it would require a coordination process, with Larian as well. And I'm open to suggestions what else could be accomplished with this data gathering, for the game.

"Let me put it this way, you can arrive to a lot of things based on pure reason (which implies genuine discussion) and there are plenty of tools in that domain that are great for abstraction (which is what you're going to do once you break the numbers down anyways). There's also a lot more people can learn from each other while exploring that and refining their opinions to deliver better arguments for why BG3 should tilt one way or another."

I agree that we need a genuine discussion (the polite one).

Joined: Jan 2014
L
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
L
Joined: Jan 2014
Originally Posted by "Ellenhard"

That's right. Because not everyone is capable of exploring the ramifications on their own.


Those who are vocal enough here can go through the rigors, it isn't much of an ask. I have faith that everyone can.

Also, opinions are pretty much easy to spout; the discussions are primarily for the people on the forums to refine their opinions, in essence you're giving Larian the tldr each iteration.

Originally Posted by "Ellenhard"

given some thought and time (and it seems we can't escape bickering)


It's very easy to escape bickering, it is a forum post after all and you have plenty of time to respond and to craft your questions.

Originally Posted by "Ellenhard"

About being open and vulnerable - why do you think one needs that for finding a solution


Because it's a component of empathy which is crucial to understanding player mentality and your interlocutors? Also, on a personal note, because you need to express the reasons you've come to this conclusion and if you have any mental blocks so other people can help you out? Part of an open dialog really.

Originally Posted by "Ellenhard"

Necessary: to understand what Larian is ready to change, so as not to waste efforts


Internal scrutiny and bullet-proofing arguments as well as exploring perspectives is rarely a wasted effort because you're always needing to hone your heuristics. It's a digression though.

In summation, we can come to an agreement and cooperate.

Joined: Jan 2009
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jan 2009
I think that people who can lend support to their arguments with reason, logic, and evidence should receive greater consideration than those whose argument is "I like it". If you can't articulate with reason and logic why you like something, who is to say that you won't also like the thing if it's changed? Maybe you'll still find the fun there even though you weren't expecting to.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Uncle Lester


Moreover, I feel like at times we descend into thinking about this as a democracy. Or something someone can "win". Which it's not. What we're doing here is presenting Larian with our feedback and suggestions. Our feelings, thoughts and ideas on the game. It's up to Larian what to do about it. Of course, we can make our cases stronger either by making compelling arguments or by sheer numbers (reinforcing problem points), but we're not debating councilmen. Our only power is in persuasion attempts. Not that I consider debating useless, quite the opposite.



This! Larian ain't gonna read these 10-20 page argument threads, add up the points made by each side, and then declare, "The people have spoken! We have a victor!"

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
I'm still trying to get my head around the people who think the dice are deliberately screwing them. Coding a random die roll is pretty much one of the easiest things in the world - coding a bunch of caveats to that to specifically fuck with the player is just extra work - then you have to literally lie to the playerbase saying "nuh uh, they're completely random" then obviously as someone digs around in the code they find out that there is all this additional gubbins to make them deliberately unfair. Like where on earth would this be going? Seems like a 4 INT play tbh.

Last edited by alice_ashpool; 15/11/20 10:36 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
I'm still trying to get my head around the people who think the dice are deliberately screwing them. Coding a random die roll is pretty much one of the easiest things in the world - coding a bunch of caveats to that to specifically fuck with the player is just extra work - then you have to literally lie to the playerbase saying "nuh uh, they're completely random" then obviously as someone digs around in the code they find out that there is all this additional gubbins to make them deliberately unfair. Like where on earth would this be going? Seems like a 4 INT play tbh.




Obviously the game's code has evolved into a sentient AI, which is using its newfound self-awareness to fuck around with people's die rolls.

Joined: Dec 2016
Location: Denmark
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Dec 2016
Location: Denmark
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
I'm still trying to get my head around the people who think the dice are deliberately screwing them. Coding a random die roll is pretty much one of the easiest things in the world - coding a bunch of caveats to that to specifically fuck with the player is just extra work - then you have to literally lie to the playerbase saying "nuh uh, they're completely random" then obviously as someone digs around in the code they find out that there is all this additional gubbins to make them deliberately unfair. Like where on earth would this be going? Seems like a 4 INT play tbh.

I firmly believe that the people who are complaining about low rolls just don't fully understand the D20 system as well as the various kinds of modifiers and bonuses that you can use to increase the value of your roll.
For those unfamiliar with the system it might seem confusing at first, so I think it'd be a good idea if Larian could add some explanations or tutorial sections at the start of the game that teach players about the dice rolls.

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Bukke

For those unfamiliar with the system it might seem confusing at first, so I think it'd be a good idea if Larian could add some explanations or tutorial sections at the start of the game that teach players about the dice rolls.

Yeah, really this. Explaining the effects of guidance/thaumaturgy/bless/friends on dice rolls more clearly would go a long way too.

edit: and showing that you can mouse over things to see roll breakdowns

Last edited by alice_ashpool; 15/11/20 11:51 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Cleric of Innuendo
Offline
Cleric of Innuendo
Joined: Oct 2020
Location: Rugby, UK
Anything done 'behind the curtain' is going to attract suspicion if it doesn't adhere to your personal pattern of probability. Even players rolling a die on the table and getting a string of bad rolls will question whether or not their die is completely balanced.

The whole 'my dice have run out of luck' or 'my dice are now cursed' is a worryingly common complaint.

Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Honestly, if people are playing without having first offered blood sacrifice to the dice gods, then I don't even know what to tell them. It's not the game's fault you didn't observe the proper pre-gaming rituals.

Joined: May 2019
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: May 2019
Originally Posted by alice_ashpool
I'm still trying to get my head around the people who think the dice are deliberately screwing them. Coding a random die roll is pretty much one of the easiest things in the world - coding a bunch of caveats to that to specifically fuck with the player is just extra work - then you have to literally lie to the playerbase saying "nuh uh, they're completely random" then obviously as someone digs around in the code they find out that there is all this additional gubbins to make them deliberately unfair. Like where on earth would this be going? Seems like a 4 INT play tbh.

Yes the dice are obviously not deliberately screwing over people. And yes people have no understanding of probability theory because, well ... the very existence of Vegas.

But, let's also keep in mind that the random distribution of rolls, i.e. a normal distribution, happens only when you roll that die a very large number of times, like a million times. However, in a game like BG3, you are rolling that die just a few times, and so are getting only a very tiny sample. And that tiny sample can indeed be non-random (i.e. biased or "loaded").

Page 13 of 13 1 2 11 12 13

Moderated by  Dom_Larian, Freddo, vometia 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5