When Can I Aply at Target Again

addict Joined: Oct 2020	If combats are not challenging + you can freely rest between them aye, 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 fifty-fifty a bit harder than some). There will also be college 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 xi:59 AM.

enthusiast
enthusiast Joined: Aug 2020	It feels like as well 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 savour the game, it'due south their fault for non playing the right manner, absolving the creators of responsibility. I dont believe this ... especialy that role where thespian "is supposed to play the correct mode" ... That sounds like straight contradiction to what im trying to say ... When thespian 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 correct way" ... he should "play the way he is having fun and dont give and fuck near the correct 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 arraign, if you can do EXACTLY what you want to ... simply y'all dont do it bcs you dont Demand TO? This kind of mindset fascinates me from psychological attribute more than game design ... We demand to swim with our hands tied to our waist, since we presume it would be better ... simply we refuse to try swim, while not using our easily, to find out what would it be similar. Do you know what volition happen once our hands will exist tied and nosotros volition be thrown in the water? (Yes it is absurdly extreme case ... but information technology should help you understand.) The thing nigh this statement that I don't get is that information technology assumes that games where those limitations aren't imposed don't exist. Information technology 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 at that place to amend and compliment that loop, or to provide something to interruption up the loop so that the repetition doesn't make it dull. You tin can argue if that's the merely fashion to make a good game, but that's the fashion most games are fabricated, and it's a reliable one that produces countless great games. With almost 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 exist constitute playing in the way they intend. Even with your extreme, swimming with easily tied example, if you take the wider context into account and then it becomes "we desire our easily tied when we swim here considering we know that it's fun and we enjoy it." We know exactly what will happen, considering it happens in almost other games of this genre. And the people who've been playing BG3 and request for changes are essentially people saying "we don't like swimming with our hands untied. We want you to tie our easily because we know that works." Does that take something away from the people who similar having untied hands? Yep. 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 information technology'south a bad choice in and of itself is a poor argument considering we have clear proof that it's perfectly good in and of itself. Is it prefect? No, zip's perfect. Is it better than the approach you feel Larian is taking? I don't know, simply one could argue that it is considering it'due south had ages of refinement and polishing that Larian's theoretical approach hasn't had, just perhaps once Larian's approach has had the time and care put in, it will be equal or fifty-fifty superior. Equally for the question of who is to blame. It comes down to this; if this is how Larian wants the game to piece of work and this sort of "create your own limits" approach is their vision, and so yep, it'south the fault of the players for not meeting the game on its ain terms. But in that case, setting your ain limits IS the right style to play, and thus if yous don't do so, you're playing it wrong. But if this isn't Larian's intention, then it's admittedly Larian'south fault because then information technology just ways they fabricated a poorly designed game. And non only that, but I feel equally though that isn't even what Larian is going for anyway. Its certainly possible that curent mechanics are (or not) there merely to assemble data. After all, they should have some measures about how oft people rests, if they plan to include any limitations in the upshot. Merely even that would be argument for "play the way you want to" ... Since (quite logicaly i would cartel to say) if nobody will clean whole surface of Act 1 with every bit little Long Rests every bit possible, how would Larian gather whatever data supporting that *this* is the way people wants to play it? Quite the contrary, if we all will rest later on every unmarried combat (just bcs we desire to) all Larian volition run into in their data is that litteraly MILLIONS of peope practice exactly that. My feeling in that location is, if that was their intent, they should have said that. They should accept said "nosotros're giving players a lot of space to explore and try things to meet 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. Just curt of that, especially since this is a still developing game, why should nosotros think that'due south what they're going for when it'south not an approach that is at all typical of game design? Why should nosotros presume Larian is trying for some unique, avant garde arroyo Bcs that is what we have, duh. What other reason would be in that location to give players "to exam" any other mechanic, than the one y'all are planning to utilize? Because like you lot said above, they could just be in that location for data gathering purposes. They could also just be unfinished. Also, considering it's a departure from the traditional arroyo of the genre, and because this game is being created within a genre, the reasonable action is to judge information technology based on the conventions of that genre. If they're trying to play with those conventions, so they should say so and let us to properly adjust our expectations. I'chiliad 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 exist said. The level of dissatisfaction aparent in these forums makes it clear that it's actually NOT obvious.

veteran
veteran Joined: February 2020	If combats are non challenging + you tin can freely residual between them yes, information technology excise all claiming dungeons. Except maybe from bosses. To me the electric current difficulty level of the game overall is normal and like to other games I play on normal (and even a bit harder than some). There will also exist higher difficulties included on release to give more of a challenge. No demand to remove QoL stuff for anybody. I guess no one is asking them to remove annihilation. I'm asking them to add coherent rules for anybody and eventually QoL options for you "You can fast travel from everywhere to everywhere whenever you lot desire" is not a rule, Ragnarok. It'due south just a "QoL" characteristic that has a HUGE impact gameplay, story, immersion (and and then on) -wise. Last edited by Maximuuus; 02/05/22 02:45 PM.

veteran
veteran Joined: Oct 2020	This will be a fiddling longer, so lets split information technology into two sections: The affair about this argument that I don't go is that information technology assumes that games where those limitations aren't imposed don't exist. Im honestly non sure i sympathise yous right now ... Yous become the feeling that i claim that there are no games with such limitations? If and then, not at all ... all i claim is that those games could brand *some* people happier, IF they would loose their rules a bit. Dont get me wrong, im not "confronting" limitations in full 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. Only since i do that im enlightened that all this adds to the game is walking ... sure, its immersive, it helps the atmosphere and *i* certainly like information technology ... but on the other hand im aware that many people would detect information technology tedious, boring and anoying (and i dont blame them at all). And and so concidering both, i claim that curent situation is all-time from wider perspective ... I go what i want, and im happy ... They get what they want and they are happy ... Sure, im aware that there are third grouping of people unhappy, bcs they demand system limitations for exactly the same effect, just since making those people happy would mean making second group unhappy ... my opinion is quite articulate: If someone demand that developers should ignore wishes of certain grouping of people, in order to please some other group ... that demanding group should be that ane that will be ignored. Unproblematic as that. Information technology assumes that the majority of games don't present an expected way to play, when they very clearly exercise. 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 information technology, if that is not what i desire to practise. Do i desire to use Witcher III. as Horse Riding Simulator, instead of killing mosnters? Then i practise ... Practice i want to use GTA equally Demand for Speed, instead of shooting and bravado things upwardly? And then i exercise ... Exercise i want to sit in the Stormwind and talk with my friends about their last raid, instead of participating in it? And then i do ... And more sticking to the bodily topic: Do i desire to turn BG-three into Bomberman 3D and spend hours, and hours, and hours by placing smokepowder barrels ... and so blow them? And then i practise ... Practise i want to turn my Wizard into Cloth wearing Cleric without a shield? Then i practice ... Do i desire to button any and every enemy around the map until we achieve some edge where i tin can instant impale them? Then i do ... Do i want to travel the whole map on human foot, and bask the scenery? Then i exercise ... Do i desire to fast travel from the middle of anywhere no matter the situations for no matter the reaons? So i exercise ... Do i want to Long Balance? No matter if i need to, or should to? Then i practice ... And if i do not ... so i dont, once again no matter the circumstances. I assume you get the idea. As i said, i dont really care what i "should" exercise, 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 empathise is why this even bother others ... its still single actor game. 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 Skillful game allready, possibly even slap-up 1 ... And the reason i give it such credit is bcs there is so many possible ways to play information technology, so everyone CAN find their own style, if they at least try. You tin argue if that's the only way to make a good game, but that's the way most games are made, and information technology's a reliable i that produces countless nifty games. Indeed ... Only yous are correct, i can ... and i exercise ... argue that is not the only fashion. Especialy now, when there "faithfull adaptation of 5e" allready exists (yup, talking about Solasta) ... I deceit speak for Swen manifestly, but imagining myself on his chair ... I would not want to release another game also simmilar to that either, especialy not so soon afterwards ... If they would manage to release BG-3 earlier Solasta, that would exist different song entirely, they would still be "the first one who prooved that tabletop rules can be translated faithfully and still brand nifty 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 non as impressive, and so their but selection is to aim for different goal. Even more ... in one case uppon a time someone come with new idea, something "revolutionary" yous could say. And those (if the idea was well executed and recedived, obviously) then can easily get "one of games that divers, or changed whole genre". I bet you lot know some. And so i will not bother with examples. the maximum enjoyment will be institute playing in the manner they intend. Any enjoyment is matter of subjective sense of taste. "nosotros want our hands tied when we swim here because we know that information technology's fun and nosotros savor it." I wish. Oh that would be nifty ... Sadly, y'all are wrong here since most people around hither is more than similar: "We want everyone hands tied when nosotros, or they, swim here considering we know that information technology'south fun and we enjoy information technology ... and therefore we demand so they relish information technology aswell." IF ... and that is not a typo, its a large IF ... people would need 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 unmarried actor afterwards all ... then do whatever the hells you desire in *your* game, simply dont mess with mine, and we will be cool. Does that take something abroad from the people who like having untied hands? Aye. But then it becomes a matter of Larian deciding who they desire to cater to. Question is: Why pick betwixt them in the first place, since curent system is allready implemented and all the other group need is left it as it is. See i would totally sympathize that Larian would need to option, if there would be ii groups enervating some system changes that would crave complete rework each ... But that is not the case. :-/ To stick with my own stupidly exaggerated example: You demand to necktie everyone hands ... I demand so Larian starts to give out ropes, and aid people to tie their easily ... every bit long as they desire to ... and exit alone those, who dont. But the request itself is entirely logical and reasonable Everyone thinks this well-nigh their own ideas. Options are perfect ... as long equally you can get exactly what yous want, what is bad about that? 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, so yes, information technology'due south the fault of the players for not meeting the game on its ain terms. But in that case, setting your own limits IS the right manner to play, and thus if you don't exercise so, you're playing it wrong. Simply if this isn't Larian's intention, so information technology's absolutely Larian's error considering then information technology just ways 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 y'all listed) designed the game poorly ... so what? O_o As long as you have fun, the game notwithstanding serves its purpose ... doesnt it? My feeling there is, if that was their intent, they should have said that. They did ... I remember Swen proverb quite litteraly "you are helping u.s.a. just past playing the game, since nosotros gather information technology all". O_o Larian says they want to be our DM, well DMs TALK to their players, and when information technology comes to firm 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 than 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? Only a hint: - This DM would need to talk with MILLIONS at in one case ... - Merely on this forum, there is barely 100 people, more like 20 active members lately ... even less of them is active in discusions ... and still nosotros are UNABLE to agree with each other. - Every DM i know (and i admit i dont know many, cca five) sooner or later brings upwardly rule zero, if there is an argument ... Because like you said above, they could just be there for data gathering purposes. Yes ... that is indeed possible. Merely all the same it would make more sense to me to gather information nearly system im going to utilise ... rather than organisation im going to discart completely and supplant. o_O They could too just be unfinished. They can ... On the other hand, year and half in EA ... it would starting time to remind building a house from the roof. O_o Also, because it'southward a departure from the traditional arroyo 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 alter. Chances are aproximately 50/50 ... not bcs they would be so equaly ballanced, but for the reason that we take no information to utilise. If they're trying to play with those conventions, and so they should say then and permit us to properly adjust our expectations. There is many things people claim Larian "should accept said" ... Simply they dont listen anyhow, then what would be the point. I'1000 someone who firmly believes in openness and clarity in communication. Leaving stuff implied is a recipe for defoliation. Even if it'southward supposedly obvious, it should exist said. The level of dissatisfaction aparent in these forums makes it clear that information technology's actually Non obvious. Yep that would be fine ... As it seems Larian dont share this phylosophy ... well, what tin nosotros do. --- is non a rule, Ragnarok. It's only a "QoL" feature ... Exactly: add together user-friendly options or QoL features As i said: They did. Last edited by RagnarokCzD; 02/05/22 05:eleven PM.

veteran
veteran Joined: Feb 2020	is not a dominion, Ragnarok. It's only a "QoL" feature ... Exactly: add convenient options or QoL features As i said: They did. You were answering to "they created coherent rules and add user-friendly options or QoL features" about the weight organization. Which would exist understood by about people within the context as "they created coherent rules Starting time and So add convenient options or QoL features (encumbrance levels equally a core rule then a convenient "send to camp" button). Where are the core rules about fast travelling and the related points of camping ground. Why bother with rules virtually the weight organization and a QoL ship to military camp push rather than only remove the rules about encumbrance ? If you lot remove it, the organisation becomes beautifull considering the system doesn't take rules and so players tin create rules in their caput if they want to. Only similar with the fast travel system ! That's what yous're saying and that is stupid. The cadre difference related to this conversation between the "weight" system and the "(fast)travel" system is that 1 take rules and QoL comeback while the second is the QoL improvement of nothing. No one is asking Icelyn to walk for hours to travel. Every bit the send camp push button has proven, QoL improvement (which may too be found in options, like motorcar saves) allow the player to more than or less completely negate existing rules nigh a secondary system like the encumbrance. Main systems (and the resting/fast travelling system ARE main systems) need rules considering it is too important gameplay and roleplaywise. If Icelyn doesn't similar them, they could easily add options to disable them. The same system equally now for her. A consistant 1 for the others, whatsoever nosotros like information technology or not. I'm deplorable to talk about yous Icelyn just 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. three options : y'all're trolling, you lot want the last give-and-take whatever it cost, you but don't realize that games need practiced rules start to be fun. Travelling in the earth is a main characteristic of expert roleplaying video games (The R for Role, the P for (game)Play). You can't avert making it a core arrangement with a deeper pattern than "fast traveling and camping whenever you want wherever you desire". Point It may be an option just not the unabridged organization. Last edited past Maximuuus; 02/05/22 06:49 PM.

enthusiast
enthusiast Joined: Aug 2020	Equally for the question of who is to blame. It comes down to this; if this is how Larian wants the game to piece of work and this sort of "create your ain limits" approach is their vision, then yep, 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 correct mode to play, and thus if you don't do so, you lot're playing it wrong. But if this isn't Larian's intention, then it's absolutely Larian's mistake because then it but means they fabricated a poorly designed game. I wonder why is that even of import 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 Equally long as y'all take fun, the game nonetheless serves its purpose ... doesnt information technology? I had a longer response to more points but the forum ate that, and then I'chiliad just going to focus on this, since it's the part I'thou 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 gear up out, so 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 information technology had been well-designed. Sure, some people might still like it, but that's in spite of the game, not considering of it. Have a bad movie for case. If a horror movie makes you laugh from beginning to terminate, then information technology'southward still an entertaining movie, only it'due south a failure every bit a horror moving-picture show, and needs to be judged on those merits. The fact there'southward something to like in it doesn't redeem information technology. At that place's something to similar in every moving picture, simply like there'southward something to similar 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 attempt and care people accept put into good, polished, well-designed games. And when you talk about how, if a histrion doesn't accept fun in the game then it's their error, that's just truthful if the game is well-designed. Accept FromSoft titles. I wouldn't bask those games, considering the difficulty of them is too much for me and the idea of constantly dying and struggling doesn't entreatment to me. But the games are nevertheless well made, and for the target audience of the games, they're brilliant. I tin recognize that, regardless of my peronal tastes, those games set out to do somethign specific, to evoke a specific feeling and feel, and they succeed in doing that. Information technology's simply an experience I don't want. If I played those games and disliked them, information technology's considering it's not meant to entreatment to me and my tastes, that's not the fault of the game. It'south my fault for trying a game that doesn't mesh with my tastes and abilities. Meanwhile with a bad game, those are as well meant to appeal to a target audience, but if it's poorly designed, then that target audience is unlikely to bask it, considering it fails to exist appealing to them. And so it'southward the game's fault they don't have fun. To summarize the "so what?", if the game is poorly designed, I'thousand probably not gonna have fun in the first place. Information technology's less likely that I or anyone else will accept fun with information technology. And that would be the fault of the game, non the people playing it.

veteran
veteran Joined: Oct 2020	If you remove it, the system becomes beautifull because the system doesn't take rules so players can create rules in their head if they desire to. That's what you lot're saying Nah ... Thats at all-time what yous read ... wich is kinda deplorable, by the way. Yous were the one who started with weight: At this point they could also remove any consequences when you lot bear likewise many things in your inventory so players could eventually make up one's mind a weight not to exceed. All i did was to betoken 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. :-/ --- "they created coherent rules FIRST and THEN add convenient options or QoL features" I dont encounter any reason why it should thing what was created first and what second ... Too equally far as i know "send to camp" was present since day 1 of Early Acess ... so im not fifty-fifty certain if nosotros can know what was "kickoff". O_o ACTUALY!!! "Send to Camp" was in game even before Encumberance, (unless i recall that incorectly) ... since implementation of Encumberance come up in patch 2 or three! Where are the core rules near fast travelling and the related points of camping ground. Depends ... Core rule about fast travel is that we are travelling through nexus of waypoints (those runic portals on walls) ... that is reason nosotros allways come up 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 whatsoever rule nigh camping ground and so far ... 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 y'all asking here ... In my opinion (wich is basicaly the but respond i can requite you lot actually, so i dare to assume you were request most that) ... I repeately expressed my dislike for often repeated proffer that "Send to camp" should be recreated, so people tin can either send whole groups of items, all wares at one time, 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. :-/ Aye, basicaly we have "something close" right now ... but not exactly this! Since i honestly do believe that our curent "send to camp" characteristic was never meaned to be used equally infinite haversack ... just QoL feature allowing us to store items nosotros forget to shop, when we were in camp ... in other words: Using it every bit space backpack is clearly exploit. That is the divergence betwixt curent state and this hypotetical nonsence you come up with for some unknown reason. O_o (and if y'all cannot see it, im not sure how to explain it ... just try to send to camp 100 items ... and them imagine you would ship them all at once, or not at all since at that place would exist no weight limits, then you would not have whatsoever 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 at that place for yous, you simply have way around them, if y'all want to. :P If you remove it, the system becomes beautifull because the system doesn't have rules so players can create rules in their caput 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 mode ... Merely no, system dont go beautifull ... system become mess. I repeat over again: The rules are still right at that place for you, you lot simply have style around them, if y'all want to. :P Or i can repeat once more something else: Its single player after all ... then practice 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. On that we can concord ... you managed to fabricate bullshit. Promise you are proud. The core difference related to this conversation betwixt the "weight" arrangement and the "(fast)travel" arrangement is that ane accept rules and QoL improvement while the second is the QoL improvement of nothing. Wich is suppose to exist wich? Since i can see rules and QoL improvements on both. O_o No one is asking Icelyn to walk for hours to travel. Amount of time is irellevant ... I ofttimes reject to remainder since information technology "bothers me" ... and information technology only takes barely ane minute. Indicate is that it would not add together anything worthy. But walking ... have you even tryed it? As the send camp push has proven, QoL improvement (which may also be found in options, like auto saves) allow the histrion to more or less completely negate existing rules nearly a secondary system like the encumbrance. Yeah, big shock ... exploits can pause the game. *surprised face* Information technology'southward getting even longer Ragna. Not sure I'll answer more. 3 options : you're trolling, you want the last word whatever information technology cost, you merely don't realize that games need good rules first to be fun. I have two more than: ane) Y'all dont actualy really even bother to read annihilation i tell you, since your explanations of my words are directly contradictions of those words you are reacting on. O_o two) I actualy do believe that strict rules are non 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 concern, except their own, how they will play information technology. Sure, there is likewise option that You are trolling ... just to have it covered aswell. Travelling in the globe is a main feature of good roleplaying video games (The R for Office, the P for (game)Play). You can't avoid making it a cadre system with a deeper design than "fast traveling and camping whenever you want wherever y'all desire". I probably dont understand this judgement ...

veteran
veteran Joined: Oct 2020	I had a longer response to more points but the forum ate that, and so I'1000 only going to focus on this, since it'due south the role I'k nearly concerned with. Happened to me aswell few times ... Yous just need to get to previous page, re-create your whole coment, open the forum in side by side tab, and insert it as whole new coment ... worked every time for me, hope y'all use it some day in the hereafter. If the game is designed poorly then, fundamentally, that ways Larian failed in makingit. Yes, thats basicaly the aforementioned sentence created with different words ... If A = B and B = C, it ways C = A. because a poorly designed game isn't as fun as a well-designed one. People who would take liked the game if it had been well-designed. You either missunderstand me ... or i expressed myself poorly ... or, most likely, chip of both ... I simply believe that this is matter of taste, and expectations ... your own example with movies is quite good in that regards: Take a bad movie for case. If a horror pic makes you express mirth from first to terminate, then information technology'south notwithstanding an entertaining movie, just it's a failure as a horror moving picture, 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 information technology. But One-act fans would honey it! And that is exactly what i mean ... certain, some people would be dissapointed ... simply some other people will exist exited. You are right, the motion would non be redeemed as Horror ... Did you lot know that late lxxx' movies like Gremlins, Leprechaun, or Critters were originaly presented as pure Horrors? And theese days they are chosen "horror one-act" ... One could argue that there were something to similar that redeemed them. if a actor doesn't have fun in the game then it'southward their fault, that's only truthful if the game is well-designed. You seems to be yet as well focused on that wrong estimation ... Its getting belatedly, and so i start to be lazy in searching for best words ... Lets just say if the game offers me choice A ... and i desire to play information technology with pick A ... but the game also offers me option B ... and i deeply despise pick B ... and i use selection B, no affair the reason ... its non game fault that i experience discuised with information technology, its my fault, since i decided information technology. And i dont think any kind of desing could ready this ... maybe expect that one that dont offer any other options, than exactly those that they want. :-/ Wich would as ruin information technology to anyone else. Concluding edited by RagnarokCzD; 03/05/22 05:44 AM.

addict
addict Joined: Oct 2020	I'm distressing to talk nearly you Icelyn but y'all kind of correspond the players that similar games without too many "systems" here I like mod systems.😊

aficionado
addict Joined: Oct 2020	I like tested true old systems with a affect of modern. And then again, I similar records. I have an old amp with records role player and original Pinkish floyd albums. But as well mind on latest technology Astel&k mod DAC mp3 actor with Grado headphones. I like BG2. Actual I dearest that game. I was 21 when I first played information technology. But I don't go "its quondam system, then bad...). I've got an OLED for my Switch, just also a CRT for retro games (Super famicom, PS1...) because information technology just plays faster, no lag, and notwithstanding looks amazing for these old games. People who worship JUST modern stuff seem like that's ALL they swallow. Fuck the remainder. I feel they are so ignorant on the possibilities of what/was available. Requite it a chance. Power to GEn 10 nosotros accept EVERY tech./systems. New and old. Rag, the way you think near how games should play, you would NEVER EVER become a chore at ANY game studios. At present or 30 years agone. And so your opinion is NULL in my view. Last edited by mr_planescapist; 03/05/22 09:54 AM.

veteran
veteran Joined: Feb 2020	I'm sorry to talk well-nigh yous Icelyn just you kind of represent the players that like games without also many "systems" here I like modern systems.😊 I also like mod systems but almost (fast)travelling in BG3 I'd phone call it "empty" rather than modern. Core dominion well-nigh fast travel is that nosotros are travelling through nexus of waypoints (those runic portals on walls) ... that is reason we allways come up out of one. QoL feature so is that you dont need to manualy walk to nearest, the game does information technology for you lot. That'southward even not true : The camps doesn't have one. The organization you describe to travel fast in the earth is as empty as your assay. Concluding edited by Maximuuus; 03/05/22 12:41 PM.

veteran
veteran Joined: Feb 2020	Sure you can ignore it if you lot wish ... But that doesnt mean it dont exists. :-/ Camps doesn't have runic portals, information technology'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 brand the whole system coherent. The only mechanical rules about fast traveling is that y'all have to detect a waypoint first before being able to fast travel in that location (camps are exceptions for unkown reasons), so you can fast travel whenever you lot want wherever you lot 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 equally proven by camps. Even unproblematic suggestion would ameliorate the system as a whole without changing its shallow mechanical rules. I even don't understand why you're arguing so much once over again. Icelyn could nonetheless have the aforementioned experience with an option that turns a deeper arrangement into something every bit empty as he similar. Terminal edited by Maximuuus; 03/05/22 02:44 PM.

veteran
veteran Joined: Oct 2020	Camps doesn't accept runic portals, information technology'southward a fact. Never said they practise. O_o The rules are not coherent considering yous can fast travel inside/outside locations without portals as proven by camps. Yous are messing 2 different things. :-/ Fifty-fifty simple suggestion would improve the arrangement as a whole without changing its shallow mechanical rules. I dont see whatsoever tho. O_o Icelyn could nevertheless accept the same experience with an option that turns a deeper organization into something every bit empty every bit he similar. I was quite certain Icelyn is a woman. O_o

stranger
stranger Joined: Apr 2022	It's unrealistic and so I'd get rid of it. Maybe turn on fast travel for easier difficulty levels like story manner. They tin can also have a push button "kill all enemies in a combat". And if they don't find it fun, they tin choose not to printing it.

veteran
veteran Joined: Feb 2020	I don't mess things, yous just don't empathise what we're talking about. Travelling to and from camp is also nearly travelling back in already explored expanse. It obviously has stiff link with the resting system just whatever you lot click the map and the "(leave) camp" proper name or just the "long rest button", information technology's all virtually the arrangement that allow us to attain specific points without walking. The system equally is just don't brand any sense and the only pro is the quality of life, or the convenience it has to offer. The core rules are admittedly cheap for such an of import 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 piece of cake suggestion would be to remove the runes completely and to allow clicking icons on a map (i.eastward the worldmap) rather than on names of runes in a list. The same arrangement than it was BG1/2 (because that's exactly what it is right now) but with another visual and narrative layer. Simply for you : in BG1/2 when you lot were fast traveling back and forth between ii locations a worldmap with icons and names opened. Yous clicked the icon of the adjacent location and you lot were teleported in the location you had chosen. Without random encounters it would be exactly the same every bit now mechanicaly but with a visual and a narrative layer that'south 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 military 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 too solve this weakness of the organisation as a whole and it gives a very cRPG feeling to the game. It would exist the bare minimum improvement. The side by side question is being able to teleport from everywhere or but from defined area (probably surface, underdark, grymforge). This is easier to implement every bit a customizable option than a toggle for reactions. Terminal edited by Maximuuus; 03/05/22 07:56 PM.

hodgesmrse1943.blogspot.com

Source: https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=814500