Underrail Forum
Underrail => General => Topic started by: Sanger on February 15, 2016, 04:32:16 am
-
Screw you too, Styg. :P
-
Al Fabet pls just leave stuff behind
-
Al Fabet and pile of old money are my favorite jokes in the game
-
The sad part about Al Fabet is that rather than listening to valid feedback from players the developers instead chose to make a mockery of siad players. Goes to show how much they respect people who actively try to help the development of their game.
-
The sad part about Al Fabet is that rather than listening to valid feedback from players the developers instead chose to make a mockery of siad players. Goes to show how much they respect people who actively try to help the development of their game.
don't know if there's some kind of a backstory to this, but it seems to me that you're just a bit too oversensitive. :)
-
Out of everyone who has ever complained on the forum about the problems with carry weights and limits of merchants buying things I was by far the most active and constantly going over this every time (well, up to a point anyway) a new patch came out or someone made a new complaint about this.
It isn't also coincidence that the name is somewhat close to mine.
I don't feel offended on a personal level by this. What bothers me is that rather than taking a valid complaint about the system seriously, Styg chose to instead make a mockery of a customer.
To contextualise this more. Before the patch which introduced the changes to carry weight and merchants I really loved the game, gave pelnty of feedback which was generally well received by otehr people and Styg.
After that patch I stop giving any feedback except about this and this happened for a very simple reason. The game is unplayble to me as a result of these changes. I cannot play the game if I'm not looting everything and selling everything. In my opinion this system creates 2 problems.
First, it removes the pleasant part of getting loot, you just cannot carry it all and heck, even what you can carry you can't sell everything anyway. Yay another gun dropped... If only they'd buy it anyway...
Second, it removes the whole point of exploring. Going of the beaten track to get more loot is the major point of doing it. Sure you can do it once just to see everything, but after that exploration is useless. Similarly, it is unnecessary to even do side quests because again, what you can carry is extremely limited even on 10 str and then again, you cannot sell everything that you can carry.
Styg chose to ignore this problem. Despite the fact that no one complained with the previous system, only the new system had complaints even if some people lked it. He also said he'd think about adding an option to remove these limits, something he chose not to do but he never promissed anything anyway.
But the real point is. Rather than taking feedback to heart and at least add an option like he did with the oddity or classic system. He not only decided not to listen to the feedback, but he also decided to make a mockery out of that feedback.
Again I don't feel personally insulted, but it's a very bad attitude from the Dev.
-
If I was Styg I would add more game options like:
- Ironman - more XP and unique powerful items elsewhere. If the character dies it dies once and forever.
- Rathound - carry any amount of items with no penalty.
Mods might help here as well.
-
The sad part about Al Fabet is that rather than listening to valid feedback from players the developers instead chose to make a mockery of siad players. Goes to show how much they respect people who actively try to help the development of their game.
Now I'm sure that I understood joke right! :D
Also this game is creation of certain mind, certain personality.
If he see game like this - he see it like this for a reason.
Game isn't a set of machanics (it's not a cybersport moba-crap), it's a living world with its own history and atmosphere, colour and smell, taste in general.
What you want is to add something that don't belong to this world - diablo-like mechanic, which was roguelike game at the start.
It doesn't fit this game, that's all.
And I don't know what's all fuzz about, since we have cheatengine to run game faster, and I think there is somewhere cheats on amount of carry weight.
-
No enough capacity？too bad ,and welcome to the first world problems of RPGs!
And I don't think this is a "bad attitude from the Dev" , why would that be ?
Because they didn't take your advice? No, i bet it is not. unplayable? maybe you should start a crowdfunding to cure OCD.
Because they didn't take your advice seriously? how do you know? what if they never take your advice and say nothing but "no thanks" ? would that be “polite” enough for you?
it is a joke,for you and every player who thought the sameway ,I will be laughing and forget -- if not honored.
only thing make you feel sad,or ill treated is that you taking it too seriously and never appreciate the joke. that's kind of sad IMO.
For the idea itself. I don't think some easy going trading machine will make this hardcore RPG better. you want your stuff stack to 255 ? just go anywhere else ,you will get it.
I personally like an OP charactor who can dominanting the game world , rob every coins, kill every one i don't like, and have a happy ending with my 8 beautiful wives ... but ,that will only happens when I am the head dev-- even i know that would be a bad news for the game itself, and no, I like that doesn't mean I play softcore stuffs for some easy satisfaction, I like it the hardcore way, even that made me paiful.
so I have to get through tough decisions, arrenge my back pack every 10 mins, fearing all the consequences for killing merely a chicken. yeah I'm talking about Elder scroll and screw that game, they can not make out a good game machine since Battle Spire.
Some can made a game that satisfy most people and recieving few complains, and the games they made look all the same ,fallout elder scroll whatever-- people like it the same, and tolerance the same flaws , we can sell that shit forever -- the end of story.
we had enough of that wimps,fear of changing would cause negtive feedbacks, remove founder's ‘so called‘ offensive jokes or so. fear of lose business is killing ideas, somethimes good ones. we need devs who know what they are doing ,even that may not exactly what players wanted.
players sometimes can be a bunch of ungrateful bastards hard to be contented, i would say, and take orders from players your games will end up mediocrity. don't mind them ,just keep your ideas ,and this one is brilliant, even I am paifull right now,but it is ok, now I can look down upon all those infinite capacity mod users of Elder scrolls.
--BTW dying is so annoyed lets make the charactor immortal.
-
I don't mind the joke. This was a joke topic. I do wish the economy made more sense though, don't see any reason why food vendors purchase so little food. What, is there an overabundance of food in Underrail? Everyone living there too fat with mushrooms and hopper steaks? Afraid players might get too rich selling 100 kg of eels for the cost of riding the metro twice? Oh well.
-
This situation makes the Pack rathound feat almost mandatory, specially if you are going to do some serious crafting. I am level 12 and I am having big trouble selling almost everything. The reason is most vendors don't have enough money. Yes, I could trade any stuff for a different one but that doesn't alleviate my encumbrance.
-
My own guide to combat encumbrance:
1) Stashes. Have at least one near every location that has merchants.
2) Recycle. There are many low cost items that are worth more if recycled and turned into repair kits. And even some merchants buy those.
3) Crafting and recycle. Sometimes it is more profitable to create leather armor from skins and then recycle those armors
4) Wiki documentation. I have documented what each merchant is buying (that I have encountered) and how much cash they have in official wiki, to make it easier to plan "trade routes".
5) Save scumming. If you haven't recently visited the merchant, the act of initiating bartering will generate what they want to buy. This can be abused with save/load, but personally, I used it mostly to complete wiki documentation on merchants to gather what they may want to buy.
6) Pack Rathound. Nuff said...
7) When going to combat area or wildness exploring, equip just needed combat gear. Do not carry crafting equipment, ammo for weapons you do not use, or extra suits of armor that do not give protection needed for the area. Players that played game at least once have advantage here, since they may know what to expect. Also you never need to carry more then couple of grenades of each type. Keep extras in stashes. Same for mines.
8 ) When traveling to different town for the first time, carry also your "traveling pack". This includes most important crating gear you may use in new area, any excess ammo and specialized armors with different resistances and such.
Also, this is great opportunity to carry the "loot bag" to pawn to new merchants. Here focus on medium value gear that is light. Stuff that costs 10,000 is just too difficult to sell, while low value or heavy stuff is not worth carrying around. Use wiki to get info on merchants and what they want to buy. For example, never carry boots to Camp Hathor or Railroad crossing, since there is no merchant there that would buy those.
9) It is OK to go to new town with light encumbrance, if there is train or boat route to the place. You will create stash there anyway.
-
I find it very strange that you miss the point so completely. This isn't like new games that hold your hand. This is supposed to represent a realistic version of this world. It is insane to assume that all vendors want all items at all times when trade is so scarce. It is not difficult to take your time and realize that you can either just leave things and come back or make trips back to your apartment/room.
I have an apartment FULL of items.
If this makes it unplayable, that's fine. You must, however, realize your attitude is pedantic and bothersome and is entirely too dramatic about a minor inconvenience which is a part of an overall theme of the game not holding your hand.
I'm glad the carry limits are what they are and that the trade system functions as it does. It's very much like the original Fallouts, where in order to trade you had to travel and plan.
If you need your hand held, there are plenty of games out there for you. I'd say that you're missing the point of a harsh world where trading is minimal and where the shop owners you trade with have budget concerns and a limited ability to move merchandise, which makes sense given the brutality of the ingame world and how hard it is to travel to sell items. This all means the trading system makes sense.
It's pretty gross to read your complains, honestly. Where I styg, I'd likely be far less amicable to someone who so clearly missed the point entirely You being a customer doesn't make you above being totally dramatic, misinformed, and so connected to such a silly concept.
-
I'm glad the carry limits are what they are and that the trade system functions as it does. It's very much like the original Fallouts, where in order to trade you had to travel and plan.
Ha, that is a bold lie. In Fallout anyone would buy anything as long as they had something to trade for it.
The trading system in Underrail is understandable from a game balance point of view but it makes little sense a lot of the time. Traders will buy any amount of ammunition but not any amount of food (guess which one of these things is likely to be in higher demand? hint, it's the one that everybody needs constantly regardless of circumstances), they'll buy any amount of plain crossbow bolts but only a couple of special bolts at a time for some inexplicable reason (one would think the deadlier bolts would be in higher demand!), etc.
-
It isn't also coincidence that the name is somewhat close to mine.
I think you're thinking into this way way way too much
-
what Sanger mentioned about the food and special bolts makes sense. it would be expected that they buy food and any kind of ammo in virtually unlimited quantities. but considering other loot i really don't see the problem. i'm melting crap into components all the time and literally swim in repair kits.
besides, in my experience, merchants usually spend all the money they have on the stuff i bring back so if i could sell them everything it really wouldn't make much of a difference. :D
-
As far as I'm aware, I was not the only one complaining. There were several people who did complain about this system. So it was far from being a "lonely crusade". Also I never derailed topics into that. I've specificly posted on topics about this situation and if I was constantly going on about it it was simply because I wished for Styg to implement the option as soon as possible and not save it as a lat minute thing because I wanted to keep being involved into the early access and that system completly ruined the game into unplayability for me. I cannot enjoy the game one bit because of it.
If Styg decided against it because of my insistence then there isn't much I can say about that other than he deliberatly chose to make the worse than he could have especially when it would take no development time at all to keep the old system, it was already designed and working, it only needed the option to switch in between. It's not even a case of additional development time needed.
I've always said that it's ok to experiement with a system which might be deliberatly bad. Much like the oddity which I dislike. it's ok to have the option there, so long as it's an option. Not that I think the oddity system is bad but the merchant system certainly is as it removes all incentive of exploration since you don't care about extra loot that you cannot carry nor sell. It also pretty much does the same for the side quests though I guess you might take some just to level up quicker.
Right now people play their first time, explore everything, do the side quests. On other playthroughs, how much exploration do you think they will do? How many side quests do you think they will take? I imagine most will ignore exploration except go this specif place or that specific place for a specific item that is there or take a specific side quest for a very specific reward or just wanting to be X level before tackling the next main storyline quest.
The game teaches you to ignore what you don't need by leaving it behind, it's extra weight, it might not be worth that much. The side effect is that it teaches you to simply ignore a large part of the game because what you will get you won't need. This is a very real problem whether or not some harcore fans of the new merchant system want to recognise it and more importantly, whether or not Styg wants to recognise it.
As it is, Styg pretty much didn't cared for it. It's his game, it's his right to say how his game is made. But at the same time as total biscuit once said. A game is not the developer's but it's the player's game. They play the game the way they want it or they won't play it at all and this is very true for me and many others. Right now I'm waiting someone can make a mod that will make the game good and once someone does that I will not atribute the game being good to Styg but to the mod autor.
Similarly, because of this issue, myself and people who feel similar to me to this horrible system will not have any good will towards Styg in the future so whenever he makes a new game, we are the people who won't consider buying into early access.
-
Interesting...
In my second play-through I explore the more then in my first.
In the first one, I did not try to explore much due to same reasons. I would just get a lot of loot that I would need to carry back to the towns, which I did not need, since there is more then enough loot if I follow the quests. Plus monsters respawn so anything I do I would feel it would get reset at some point later.
But, now in second playthrough I explore more because I did not do it in the 1st one, so game is more fresh, and second due to oddity system, so I can get every bit of extra experience possible quicker, plus it is nice to find sometimes some unique weapon.
Also, not all enemies respawn, so killing human bandits has some finality on its own. Just because they do not give XP and I do not need their loot does not mean I'm not progressing in the game.
-
Elhazzared, dude, it seems you've been into this game for a time now. surely you understand there's more to it than collecting loot and selling it to merchants for shiny coins.
-
I'm glad the carry limits are what they are and that the trade system functions as it does. It's very much like the original Fallouts, where in order to trade you had to travel and plan.
Ha, that is a bold lie. In Fallout anyone would buy anything as long as they had something to trade for it.
The trading system in Underrail is understandable from a game balance point of view but it makes little sense a lot of the time. Traders will buy any amount of ammunition but not any amount of food (guess which one of these things is likely to be in higher demand? hint, it's the one that everybody needs constantly regardless of circumstances), they'll buy any amount of plain crossbow bolts but only a couple of special bolts at a time for some inexplicable reason (one would think the deadlier bolts would be in higher demand!), etc.
A bold lie? Did I say it was exactly the same? no, I said it is very much like it. It has the same interface at it's core and the only difference is that traders are only after certain things.
That leaves them very much alike.
I'm going to be brutally honest: You seem to have some issues, man. This seems to be an unreasonable focus you have that does not fall on the side of "reasonable things to be very concerned with."
Ammo would be a form of currency in and of itself. Buying infinite food, when in reality it won't last forever does not make sense. Ammo is always needed. Countless real life studies have concluded that in such a situation, ammo would be a very likely form of currency.
-
Further, it is NOT hard to just take things back to your apartment or make trips back. It just isn't. If you view moving around in a video game as a level of effort that kills an entire, amazing game for you, I'd implore you to consider changing your standards for what is actually taxing and what isn't.
Money is not hard to get, it simply requires a little effort and putting together a trade route. You also have the option of going for a high strength build and there is a feat to help you out (although I would never use it, personally. I can just store things, come back for them, or take them back to my place. If the difference between getting what I want and not getting what I want is a minor amount of nonphysically strenuous effort, I'm going to make the effort, personally.)
-
Elhazzared, dude, it seems you've been into this game for a time now. surely you understand there's more to it than collecting loot and selling it to merchants for shiny coins.
Perhaps to you this isn't an important part of the game and as I said rpeviously, this will just make players not want to go explore and do side quests. Basicly, they will ignore a large part of the game because what is the point? You can't sell it anyway!
As for me, there is more to the game than looting, but if the looting aspect of an RPG isn't good then the RPG is dead to me. I tried to play several times during early access after this horrible system was implemented. Almost all times I wouldn't go past taking the outposts because I couldn't even sell that tiny amount of loot. The one time I went further than that and I wasn't enjoying it very much I went as far as the SGS at which point I rage wuited over not even being able to carry the loot that is on SGS. Not to mention I knew even what I had I couldn't sell probably sell half of it.
The game just loses all the fun once you turn loot into trash. It's kinda the same thing neverwinter did. You spend the whole game, beggining to end in shitty green gear and that poor progression killed the game for me.
Now let's compare when I started playing the game before this system was implemented? Aside from providing good feedback, I classified this game as being the best RPG I had played since fallout 2 and fallout 2 is the RPG of RPGs. Nothing even comes close to it. I made a vid that I put on my Youtube channel showing off the game and giving a few tips as to how to deal with the dificult enemies early on (something probably not needed now as the dificulty was lowered early on). I even started a let's play series which I had to stop doing mostly because I stoped having the proper envoirement (read, too much noise around) to do it, however the patch came relatively shortly after I started doing it anyway so I'd have canceled it anyways. I also advised everyone I knew hat if they wanted a good RPG the likes they haven't seen since fallout 2 to give this a try.
So this is how the game changed for me. From best RPG made in the last decade to the most horrible RPG I've ever played, all thanks to a couple changes. Carry weights which are ridiculously low even on 10 str, mostly because things like metal armor and sledge hammers weight a ton which realisticly make sense, but the truth is that from a gamming perspective they should be lowered for a better playabillity. And the merchant changes which was by far the most weighty thing and made the game completly unplayable for me.
In a game like this, looking for that better piece of gear, killing more enemies for XP and you know, if the next awesome piece of gear doesn't drops, what the enemy drops is what you use to buy it. This does not exists anymore. The world isn't fun to interact with because the most important thing in an RPG was made into trash. Loot! Go play any RPG and loot is the major aspect of the game.
-
A bold lie? Did I say it was exactly the same? no, I said it is very much like it. It has the same interface at it's core and the only difference is that traders are only after certain things.
The trading systems in Fallout and Underrail are nothing alike. To suggest that planning trips in order to offload all of your junk is necessary in Fallout is simply wrong, because NPCs don't have limits on what items they'll buy or how many of each item they'll purchase.
I'm going to be brutally honest: You seem to have some issues, man.
I'm also going to be brutally honest: your saying this as a total stranger on the Internet means absolutely nothing to me. ;)
Countless real life studies have concluded that in such a situation, ammo would be a very likely form of currency.
Haha, "countless real life studies", wow. So why do Underrail merchants buy all your plain bolts but not your specialty bolts then?
I know you love the game, but there's nothing wrong with being able to see flaws in something you enjoy rather than just defending it to the death out of blind loyalty.
-
Not that I think the oddity system is bad but the merchant system certainly is as it removes all incentive of exploration since you don't care about extra loot that you cannot carry nor sell.
Wrong for me. Incentive of exploration still exist because there are intelligent stories to hear, and interesting people to kill (or vice versa).
On other playthroughs, how much exploration do you think they will do? How many side quests do you think they will take? I imagine most will ignore exploration
And this has nothing to do with merchants and trading system. I see no difference here from Fallout, where merchants will buy almost everything (except Geiger counter).
On 10 playthrough people won't do all quests too, and if they do, they will do it in Underrail.
A game is not the developer's but it's the player's game. They play the game the way they want it or they won't play it at all and this is very true for me and many others.
When we talk about pure author's work, like in case of Underrail, it's the same as if we dictate a writer how character should look and act.
No, it is a auhor work and world, it is he who dictates to us how to read his book so that we can know exactly what the author wanted to say to us.
After we did it, we can paint the cover and draw a mustache to main character.
Even if we don't want to know the author's intent, we cannot deny the author's right that we learn the author's message exactly as the author wants.
-
A game is not the developer's but it's the player's game. They play the game the way they want it or they won't play it at all and this is very true for me and many others.
When we talk about pure author's work, like in case of Underrail, it's the same as if we dictate a writer how character should look and act.
No, it is a auhor work and world, it is he who dictates to us how to read his book so that we can know exactly what the author wanted to say to us.
After we did it, we can paint the cover and draw a mustache to main character.
Even if we don't want to know the author's intent, we cannot deny the author's right that we learn the author's message exactly as the author wants.
You are each adopting an extreme point of view and you are both wrong. First, games aren't books, their user interface is much more complex and subject to scrutiny. Second, the developer has full right to do as he pleases with his game and to choose what does and doesn't match his vision for it, but those playing it have the right also to offer feedback and suggestions, and good developers will listen, as the perspective of a player often includes things the developer did not account for. The Suggestions subforum is not purely decorative.
-
Basicly, they will ignore a large part of the game because what is the point? You can't sell it anyway!
You can't be more wrong then with sentnse like this.
Don't you understand that the reward is quest itself?
New places, new characters, new puzzles?
Looks like we did a full circle. ???
First, games aren't books
I never said that the games are books.
I'll give you two words - metaphor and analogy, and on that level of discussion I'm done with it.
-
First, games aren't books
I never said that the games are books.
I'll give you two words - metaphor and analogy, and on that level of discussion I'm done with it.
You said: "When we talk about pure author's work, like in case of Underrail, it's the same as if we dictate a writer how character should look and act. No, it is a auhor work and world, it is he who dictates to us how to read his book so that we can know exactly what the author wanted to say to us." Direct comparison between games and books. Bad analogy. Books are always read in the same way, only the content changes. Games all play differently. If they don't play well in some way the developer must know.
-
Fenix, the quest itself is a reward the first time you do it. After doing it one time, no one will care and it is possible some people will not even care to do it even once cause there is no incentive to do it. What you are going to gain as an advantage for your character is completly lost because you cannot do anything with the loot you get not to mention you can't even haul possibly a huge part of it.
I understand that you like the system as it is. but the system is bad and encourages you to just ignore a big part of the content that was created since there is no reward fr doing it. You say just doing it is plenty reward. Sorry, that's just a waste of time from most peoples perpective. People don't tend to do something unless they have something to gain from it.
-
Elhazzared, dude, it seems you've been into this game for a time now. surely you understand there's more to it than collecting loot and selling it to merchants for shiny coins.
Perhaps to you this isn't an important part of the game and as I said rpeviously, this will just make players not want to go explore and do side quests. Basicly, they will ignore a large part of the game because what is the point? You can't sell it anyway!
As for me, there is more to the game than looting, but if the looting aspect of an RPG isn't good then the RPG is dead to me. I tried to play several times during early access after this horrible system was implemented. Almost all times I wouldn't go past taking the outposts because I couldn't even sell that tiny amount of loot. The one time I went further than that and I wasn't enjoying it very much I went as far as the SGS at which point I rage wuited over not even being able to carry the loot that is on SGS. Not to mention I knew even what I had I couldn't sell probably sell half of it.
The game just loses all the fun once you turn loot into trash. It's kinda the same thing neverwinter did. You spend the whole game, beggining to end in shitty green gear and that poor progression killed the game for me.
Now let's compare when I started playing the game before this system was implemented? Aside from providing good feedback, I classified this game as being the best RPG I had played since fallout 2 and fallout 2 is the RPG of RPGs. Nothing even comes close to it. I made a vid that I put on my Youtube channel showing off the game and giving a few tips as to how to deal with the dificult enemies early on (something probably not needed now as the dificulty was lowered early on). I even started a let's play series which I had to stop doing mostly because I stoped having the proper envoirement (read, too much noise around) to do it, however the patch came relatively shortly after I started doing it anyway so I'd have canceled it anyways. I also advised everyone I knew hat if they wanted a good RPG the likes they haven't seen since fallout 2 to give this a try.
So this is how the game changed for me. From best RPG made in the last decade to the most horrible RPG I've ever played, all thanks to a couple changes. Carry weights which are ridiculously low even on 10 str, mostly because things like metal armor and sledge hammers weight a ton which realisticly make sense, but the truth is that from a gamming perspective they should be lowered for a better playabillity. And the merchant changes which was by far the most weighty thing and made the game completly unplayable for me.
In a game like this, looking for that better piece of gear, killing more enemies for XP and you know, if the next awesome piece of gear doesn't drops, what the enemy drops is what you use to buy it. This does not exists anymore. The world isn't fun to interact with because the most important thing in an RPG was made into trash. Loot! Go play any RPG and loot is the major aspect of the game.
It's not too hard to either edit the game to effectively remove the loot weight, or to edit the running game's memory to set every item to have 0 weight. To get around the merchant sell limits, you could again either edit the game or hack yourself some more money and throw the unsellable loot in a dedicated garbage bin. I myself ran through the game with 3 strength and the Pack Rat feat without doing either, but I know someone who used the Cheat Engine[1] tool to override the carry limit.
I feel like it may be more pragmatic to change the one thing that's bothering you, finish the game, and then move onto something else once you've gotten everything you want out of it.
[1] http://forum.cheatengine.org/viewtopic.php?t=586479
-
As for me, there is more to the game than looting, but if the looting aspect of an RPG isn't good then the RPG is dead to me. I tried to play several times during early access after this horrible system was implemented. Almost all times I wouldn't go past taking the outposts because I couldn't even sell that tiny amount of loot. The one time I went further than that and I wasn't enjoying it very much I went as far as the SGS at which point I rage wuited over not even being able to carry the loot that is on SGS. Not to mention I knew even what I had I couldn't sell probably sell half of it.
I must ask, how long have you *not* played the game and still hang in the forums?!?
You talk about not even passing very early game with the loot system. I was assuming you at least know what you talk about and have played at least whole game once with the current system, instead of just b******* about new system. Heck, when we are at this, have you even played oddity XP?
Yes, the system can be a chore from time to time, but just because you can not *easily* sell all loot, does not mean all loot is bad. You can find decent crating components and good armor weapons. And whatever you can not sell right away, you can easily *stash* it.
Also, by being "systematic" (documenting what every merchant may want to buy) I was able to sell ALL loot I wanted to sell before getting into Deep Cavens, in my first playthrough. And no metal armor was ever left in the wildness. Maybe some hammers, those hammers have very bad weight/cost ratio to be worth it, most of the time.
The sheer amount of merchant shops and boat/train system were enough to sell all I wanted, after I got access to all the traders. There is whole game of "Elite" inside world of Underrrail. Although piloting starship is cooler then walking around. :P
Truth to be told, the biggest issue for most of the time was selling crossbows and boots. Especially boots. Not many traders buy boots, and everybody drops boots. 8)
Interesting enough, due to me being this systematic, the Deep Cavern section totally tuned around everything for me. Almost no merchants and an insane amount of loot. But I was able to adapt my making my base in the warehouse where I stashed everything I found elsewhere in the region. There is a reason why you can stash stuff in containers.
-
Now, with all said, I do think that some streamlining could help the game.
For example, it is not fun to spend 15min just walking around between merchants in the city and your stash, since you can not carry everything you want to sell in the same town at once. That is just wasted time.
Why not have "abstract" stash, that you can access from UI, when in towns/controlled areas, to store excess equipment?
Think of it as your belongings that you do not carry on yourself, but can easy get to without effort. Stuff you keep in your room when in the town, instead carrying around in backpack.
.
Heck, if you want to expand this, it would be cool if such stashes are unlocked by some actions. For example in SGS, that is automatic. You have your room, thus access to the stash. Then in the Junkyard, you could pay some fee to the barkeep to keep your stuff, thus unlocking your stash, etc...
When system like this is in place, then you can introduce Fallout1/2 style unsafe stashes, where some things are just not save to keep, and will eventually get looted.
-
You said: "When we talk about pure author's work, like in case of Underrail, it's the same as if we dictate a writer how character should look and act. No, it is a auhor work and world, it is he who dictates to us how to read his book so that we can know exactly what the author wanted to say to us." Direct comparison between games and books. Bad analogy. Books are always read in the same way, only the content changes. Games all play differently. If they don't play well in some way the developer must know.
All you said is a bullshit - look, I'm on your level of discussion.
-
Pretty hostile, aren't you?
-
Not at all.
-
Just incredibly rude and defensive, then.
-
Elhazzared, dude, it seems you've been into this game for a time now. surely you understand there's more to it than collecting loot and selling it to merchants for shiny coins.
Perhaps to you this isn't an important part of the game and as I said rpeviously, this will just make players not want to go explore and do side quests. Basicly, they will ignore a large part of the game because what is the point? You can't sell it anyway!
I have no doubts some player are that obsessed with looting, but they aren't in the majority. But "the most important thing in an RPG"? Really? What about such things as lore, quest lines, character development, NPC interactions, puzzles, enemy encounters?
If I wanted to play a game with a heavy focus on buying & selling, I'd rather play Monopoly with friends.
-
Player1 - I've hang around for a while, I guess for years because this game is potentialy the best RPG since fallout 2. If only the merchant system wasn't so incredibly bad! I've been here in the hopes that Styg would give us what he said he might do at some point which is, add the option between both merchant systems and carry weight limits.
Of course I haven't played the whole game with the current system! The current system is so bad that I can't even play it, I hate every second of playing it with this system so do you expect me to grit my teeth and play it to the end? What is the point? Games are for people to have fun, not for them to endure a bad time. That said, when the old system was in place where there was neither carry weight limits and merchants bought everything you sold them so long as they had money I finished the content the game had to offer twice with 2 different builds and then even tried to start a let's play series but alas it was never to be finished. As for oddity, I've never played on oddity by choice. My way of looking at it is, Oddity is a system that was made specificly for the players who wanted pacifist playthroughs. Who didn't just want to go everywhere killing everything just to gain the XP. I however like aggressive playthroughs, go everywhere, kill everything so I prefer classic where my XP comes from completing quests and killing things.
Yes you can find good loot and crafting components, if you're a crafter anyway. However there is no point to spend hours looking for a better piece of gear if all the bad ones can't be carried and sold because just a you can find better gear you can also BUY better gear... I know that closer to the end you will only want to craft cause anything you craft is better, not the issue here. The early game must be satisfying to play as well.
Being systematic is nice to say, but when you start the game you have nearly no sellers to sell loot to and you have to consider the pain that it is until you unlock all sellers as well. Also as you said, it is a chore to walk around to every merchant throughout the whole underrail just to be able to sell the majority of your stuff. And this beneficts the game in which way? Realism? Is a little bit of realism worth making the player waste that much time? Or perhaps should the game include such things known as quallity of life improvements as they so well named it on the current patch?
MichelBurge - That is good for carry weight, to actually make merchants work as they used it's not possible to do. Maybe you can hack money and throw stuff away but we ae entering the too much trouble to constantly do it not to mention it doesn't feels satisfying. The merchants aren't really buying, you are just pretending the game is doing what it's supposed to do. which as far as the carry weight works, not so much with merchants.
Chimera - Looting is the main mechanic of games like fallout and underrail and such RPGs. Loot = money and money = a stronger character. This creates the sense of improvement throughout the game alongside the leveling. Many players will still play this game with this system, but the truth is, given a choice between this system and the old I have no doubts the majority would prefer the old.
In any game the most important thing are it's mechanics. You can have a beautiful lore, interesting NPCs and so on. If the game mechanics are not good, the game isn't good. A game is an interactive experience and thus each player will create his own story based in his own interactions. However if the interactions are bad because the mechanics don't support it well enough, it just won't work.
-
Trurth to be told, I do not think you have good idea how this system works, or how to optimally play with it to enjoy the game, due to stubborn rejecting of playing with it for any decent amount of time to give valid critique of it.
Same for the oditty system.
Thus, your critizism of it feels outdated, since it is not criticism of current game but of first game impressions from the alpha that introduced the changes.
-
The last time I tried to play the game it was 2 patches before release and I couldn't play with that system. How is it not valid critique if I can't play with it. If it makes my gameplay experience so bad that I can't even play for more than a few minutes ad quit in disgust? Bear in mind that before said system was put in place I would play the whole content available of the game and sing nothing but praises to the game!
As for the oddity system. I personally do not like it because it does not fits my playstyle. I don't really want to have to go around finding the scatered oddities to level up. I prefer the classic system. Do quests, kill things especially since the way I like to play the game is kill everything... I did not say it was a bad system, I just don't like it, it doesn't suits my playstyle but as long as it's an option over the normal XP system then I won't complain about it, but I certainly will not use it.
My problem is that first and foremost. Merchants have a limit of how many items they will buy and that they only buy specific types of items. There is nothing outdated about this because it is exactly how it it works. Merchants should buy everything so long as they have cash. I'd even go as far as saying they should have unlimited cash just so that players aren't forced to visit several just to sell everything, but hey, I'll be glad just for them buying everything, no limits! Second, carry weights. Realistic or not, all that it acomplishes is force the players to stop doign whatever they are doing to go sell stuff and thus break immersion (this assuming the merchants would actually buy everything). the carry eight would bother me less if some items were not as heavy as they are, again good examples are sledge hammers and metal armor, but also there are other things that are also quite heavy.
So you are wrong, there is absolutly nothing outdated about my problems with the game. Unless you are to tell me that merchants now buy everything you sell them and there are no carry weights anymore.
-
The last time I tried to play the game it was 2 patches before release and I couldn't play with that system. How is it not valid critique if I can't play with it. If it makes my gameplay experience so bad that I can't even play for more than a few minutes ad quit in disgust? Bear in mind that before said system was put in place I would play the whole content available of the game and sing nothing but praises to the game!
Thing is, your critique is essentially bad first impressions.
It is very valid as first impressions, but only as such.
Since you did not experience decent amount of play time with it, you can not do proper deep critique of it. Only "theory crafting", and what you think game would feel when playing with such system when getting deeper into game, despite not playing nor experiencing it yourself.
Thus, your feedback is less valuable as such.
As for the oddity system. I personally do not like it because it does not fits my playstyle. I don't really want to have to go around finding the scatered oddities to level up. I prefer the classic system. Do quests, kill things especially since the way I like to play the game is kill everything... I did not say it was a bad system, I just don't like it, it doesn't suits my playstyle but as long as it's an option over the normal XP system then I won't complain about it, but I certainly will not use it.
Oddity system is great for exploring, essentially the thing you think is lacking due to the loot/trading system.
And just to know, you still do get XP for the quests.
Also, I do not really see the need for XP for killing enemies.
For human enemies, their loot as well as passage you clear out, is reward on its own. Yes, loot. Just because metal armors and hammers are difficult to pawn does not mean there is no more then enough other valuable loot that weights less, or useful items to keep. Firearms are easy to pawn (value of 1000 per kilo) or stash and pawn later.
For monster enemies, reward is crating components. Also, due to monster respawning, which is necessary for crafting system to work correctly, oddity system is better, since it does prevent grinding for XP which is ugly and outdated RPG mechanic.
Merchants should buy everything so long as they have cash.
Why should they? For player convenience? Merchants should follow their own interests. And that means the need to keep their buying power, instead getting everything from first adventurer that arrived that day, so that when there is something really interesting that they have cash to buy it.
Second, carry weights. Realistic or not, all that it acomplishes is force the players to stop doign whatever they are doing to go sell stuff and thus break immersion (this assuming the merchants would actually buy everything).
No. The stashes are there for the reason. If you can not carry something, stash it nearby, or just leave it if it is not worth carrying. Return for it later when you finish your adventure, if it is valuable enough to be bothered.
Also, selling immediately is not mandatory. Keep items and stash them near compatible merchants to sell later when they get buying power back.
Also, post Junkyard, players should be swimming in money, so there is not even requirement to sell most of the stuff you accumulate in stashes, in order to buy other stuff. The only exception being cosmetic house upgrades in Core City or Super Steel Bars from Foundry for advanced late game crating. But at that point, there should be more then enough merchants to pawn most of the valuable stuff.
^This still does not mean that exploring and gaining loot is not rewarding. It is, because for every several items that are only worth selling, there will be something else that will benefit you directly to keep. Either being crafting component, ammo, or weapon/armor that is better then you use, or an oddity item.
-
Since I feel inspired, let me talk a bit more about loot system.
My personal method of playing is "systematic master trader extraordinaire". No loot is left behind lying around, exempt in stashes (even if that means that stash is in the wildness and has only low value loot). Trade route planning where to sell stuff etc...
But there are other play styles too. For example, the style I like to call "realistic burglar".
Does burglar tries to loot everything?
No, only what they can carry and has high value per weight, or is something that is useful for them directly (heavy crating component or backup metal armor for energy resistance enemies). Even such style requires use of stashes, but mostly for backup items or crafting materials, and less for the things to sell, since with this kind of playstyle, only items with high value per weight are worth looting for the purpose of selling.
For this style, I think game would benefit if there is sorting by value per weigh unit.
For example, both animal organs and sledgehammers have awful value per weight unit, while electronics have awesome value per weight unit, and firearms are decent but not great.
This could even be color coded for convenience, to figure out at glance how value is item for looting.
-
Now, maybe some other improvements to trade system could be done.
For example, lets say that weapon merchant currently does not want to buy any new firearms (already bought the desired quota).
Why not have ability, that if you buy a gun from him, you gain ability to sell another gun in its place?
Hey, Mr. Merchant, can I barter this gun for that SMG?
How much to I need to pay extra for that?
That would be really cool.
Heck, I'll put this in suggestion forum...
-
How is it theory crafting? The 2 points I've essencially made will happen throughout the whole game. it's not theory, it's how it works. Merchants will never buy everything and carry weights will prevent you from carrying all the loot you find unless you stop to go sell it/stash it.
My feedback is very valid reguarding that issue. I never said no one will play this game like this. I said, because of this, I can't play the game and people like me won't.
As for whether the other system is better or no. For your theory crafting curiosity. The previous system had 0 complaints. Everyone liked it. The new system has people like me who can't even play the game, people who play it but would prefer the old system and people who like the new system better. So we went from a system everyone was happy with to a system that many people are unsatisfied with, a few to the point of not even playing the game because of how bad it is.
This is once again valid feedback.
If you mean about me saying that people will not explore and not do most sidequests. Well, you pretty much had epili saying that he didnt even bothered the first time, now he's doing more to see the areas. Odds are, once he's seen all there is to see, he's not going to bother doing it again... Again people don't like doing pointless things. It's natural human behavior. If it's pointless to go to an area where you know you won't be getting anything out of it, you won't go there, it's a waste of time.
The oddity system can make you explore a bit more. Sure, but that an horrible grindy way to get levels. You have to basicly waste time doing something for nothing more than gaining one more level. Note that I don't know whether this is necessary or not because I dunno how will the leveling process be in oddity... granted not so much on classic anymore too because there's been changes to XP since the time I practicly stopped playing (safe from the few atempts only qo quit quickly after).
Killing enemies as a way to grind XP is not an outdated system, it is still the system used by pretty much every RPG and do you know why? Because it works! We could debate about whether or not this is good however it is a subjective topic. What I can say is. I don't go out of my way to grind XP, I go out of my way to find loot and enemies I kill happen to award XP in the process. It's a win/win situation the way I see it.
You say enemies drop loot, in one way or another. My point remains the same, you can't carry all of it and from what you can carry, only a small part is able to be sold... Granted, further into the game there are more merchants available which means you can sell more but you already had to deal with the very bad early game and even then you still can't sell everything, not to mention that you have to waste a lot of time going between merchants just to sell.
Why should merchants buy everything? It's that quallity of life thingy. Yes, it's not very realistic but you know what? I makes the game that much more enjoyable for the majority of people. Sometimes realism has to take a step back towards build good game mechanics. I could argue from a realistic point of view that there is no such thing as certain things not being in demand because they always are, even if not in their original form, then at least in the components they have which can be used for a variety of things. However I don't like using realism as an escuse. this is a game and the simple matter of it is. Realism is not an escuse, a game needs good mechanics and if realism has to take a step back, then realism takes the step back.
Stashing to sell later in a town or just going and selling it immediatly is nearly the same thing. In fact it probably is better to sell immeditatly considering while you continue the quest the merchant might reset an be able to buy more.
Some items are worth keeping obviously but the majority of items you find are just vendor trash (do note that even a very good gun that is worse than the one you have is considered vendor trash). You can't sell everything and that is a cardinal sin because that was the whole reason you were exploring. Carry weight is merely a. Instead of stop doing what I'm doing to dump inventory, I just continue on and once I'm finished here I'll go sell. It's not realistic yes, but it's more immersive that you completly do what you are doing and then go sell rather than stoping several times to dump inventory.
You also make a good point that post junkyard players are swimming in money. This happened in the previous system too and was a complaint players had. However this new system makes it impossible to balance the issue. If you limit how much a player can sell then you must give it a good amount of cash for it while the previous system could simply adjust the value of items a little bit... Either way this should not be a reason to have bad game mechanics. Just because you still make more than enough you should highly limit a player in what he can take and what he can sell.
As a last point about money in RPGs, while it's always possible to balance it better, you always get a lot more than you need no matter the game. You're always straped for cash early on and midgame you have a lot. It this wrong? It's yet another subjective topic, my thoughts are that players should always be able to buy the next best thing when they move on to the next town with better items, however, some people will disagree.
-
How is it theory crafting? The 2 points I've essencially made will happen throughout the whole game. it's not theory, it's how it works. Merchants will never buy everything and carry weights will prevent you from carrying all the loot you find unless you stop to go sell it/stash it.
The point is that how you think it will affect later game, post SGS, is theory crafting, since you never experienced it yourself. You only base it on your early impressions and comments of other posters, which is 2nd hand experience.
-
As I said, later on the problem will be reduced because there are more merchants available. I did say that. While I'm not there, I don't think it is rocket science to say that more merchants = selling more things. Not being able to carry everything. This is again not theory crafting. The further ahead you get on the game the bigger the maps tend to be. For example, I may not have gone to the junkyard since since the new system was implemented, but I know for example that the SGS is not a big place to loot and you can't take everything in there in one go because of sledgehammers. Similarly, I remember just how big depot A is. The amount of loot there is enormous and I doubt that Styg decided to cut it to half size or half loot (even then it would still be more loot than the SGS).
Similarly, it doesn't takes rocket science to say that as more merchants become vailable, you'll lose more time moving from merchant to merchant to sell things. You might increase how much you can sell by a bit, but then again you also increase the busy work of doing so without a good reason for it too.
So I am not wrong in what I'm saying.
You may like this system. It has more flaws than merits, in fact the only merit is being more realistic (even that is debatable). The previous method only had beneficts for the players. So it was less realistic, who cares if literaly everyone was having fun?! Still, just because you like the new system, it doesn't means that everything I said was incorrect.
-
Personally, what I do not like with current loot system is a tedium of managing resources. The time it takes to move from place to place in order to do trading tasks.
What I do like is removal of instant gratification of get everything *now*, sell everything *now*, which is so simplistic and bland.
I like managing inventory optimally.
I also like that I need to keep stashes of stuff to pawn later (just like pirates). Feels more immersive.
But it would be nice if it could be automated to some level. After player gets rich, why not have helpers that would do the menial tasks for them?
-
It may be simplistic, but that's what's good about it. You do what you have to do and you are rewarded for it... Do you know why simple is often good? Because it works!
inventory management has a time and place. that is in rogue likes where you don't have the option to sell things. One exaple. Sword of the stars: the pit. There you have to manage your inventory because it is part of the difficulty.
In this game inventory management is not part of the dificulty, it's part of the tedium of having to sell stuff and waiting for merchants to reset. This is not immersive, this is just plain boring.
-
Inventory management is as old as RPG genre itself.
Heck, in PnP no way that Game Master would allow us to loot bunch of metal armors from dead guards in the middle of mission. Common sense logic...
Loot, loot, sell, sell has more in common with H&S dungeon crawling cRPGs then immersive roleplaying RPGs, since there whole game revolves around looting and killing.
-
Chimera - Looting is the main mechanic of games like fallout and underrail and such RPGs. Loot = money and money = a stronger character. This creates the sense of improvement throughout the game alongside the leveling. Many players will still play this game with this system, but the truth is, given a choice between this system and the old I have no doubts the majority would prefer the old.
In any game the most important thing are it's mechanics. You can have a beautiful lore, interesting NPCs and so on. If the game mechanics are not good, the game isn't good. A game is an interactive experience and thus each player will create his own story based in his own interactions. However if the interactions are bad because the mechanics don't support it well enough, it just won't work.
Whether talking Underrail, Fallout, or cRPGs with actually broken game mechanics (Arcanum, Morrowind), I doubt that the majority of players were as obsessed with money-making as you seem to be. Backstory, feats, perks, skills etc. and how those allow a character to interact with the game world, this is what I'd consider far more important in roleplaying games, and what makes them stand apart from action games with rp flavor like Diablo.
Also, even without paying much attention to loot, my character managed to get so much money in the first playthrough, that it sat in her inventory basically wasted. Underrail is not a game where money is a problem; choosing the wrong skills, feats and attributes is far more likely to screw up character progression.
-
Player1 - In PnP (and I am playing 2 games of D&D, one of savage worlds, going to join soon anotehr of savage worlds and one of warhammer fantasy roleplay 2ed) you have something called a party through which you distribute the weight of items and can carry everything. More to the point, you get to a town, go to the proper store (and there always is a proper store) and sell everything and they will buy everything.
Let's add to that the fact that walking to a shop in PnP games is as simple as saying. I'll go look for the store, it doesn't takes you minutes walking around in real time.
Yes usually there is inventory management, but the weights are never like it is in UR. You can always carry a ton of weapons and armor and other random stuff. More to the point you can always sell everything to the merchants. Now let's add that most RPGs allow you to have companions to carry even more stuff and what you end up with in reality is a carry weight that it's there just cause. They know that those things are boring and do not benefict the game in any way so they include them and make them not a problem just so that the small group that likes hardcore realism shuts up.
Chimaera - It's not about how much money you can even make. It's about not feeling rewarded to do things. I know that I could go through the game, take only half a douzen guns to sll per place I go to and I'll still earn more money than I need. It's the fact that looting isn't fun that ruins the game for me. Even if I'm getting more money than I can spend I don't care, I still count that money as power and I still want it. I still want the reward for the things I do otherwise the gameplay just isn't fun.
-
Elhazzared every game has a weight/slot cap on inventory, I really really don't see the issue with whats in the game currently. Styg has mentioned in interviews that the system is specifically designed so you can't just loot and sell everything, you need to choose what you want to take carefully and that adds to the feel of the world. What I would say back to you, reading over your posts in this thread, is that the inventory space and merchant system is fine. I'm currently playing an smg character with 3 strength and I can carry all my gear +~6 weapons +a few sets of armor +other loot like bullets, meds and craftables which is more than enough loot. The quests and rewards from quests should make you enough money to not worry about selling everything. If you really want to loot and sell everything then get the salesman and pack rathound perk (seems like a fun playthrough) or just edit the game to your liking.
-
it's not like I have the know how to edit this game otherwise I'd have done that a long time ago and made it playable.
You might not mind this but to me not being able to loot and sell everything makes this game completly unplayable to me. I tried doing it several times and I just can't, I just quit in disgust. it bother me beyond believe and sucks out all the fun.
-
And I can understand that, but that you consider looting to be the most important mechanics in a cRPGS, doesn't mean it is so for most players. When my character does quests, it is because I am interested in seeing the outcome, and how it can influence the NPCs, locations or even the storyline - this is what I meant by a character interacting with the game world. I don't consider gathering and selling loot important, because cRPGS (that I know of, including Underrail) don't have realistic economies; your money buys you very little influence over the gaming world.
-
But you will be interested in the outcome of a quest once. After you've done it then what will it do for other playthroughs? If you know there is no point in doing a quest because you are not getting anything you want and you already know what the quest is all about and the dialogues. There is no point.
How do most games avoid making it pointless? The loot is worth it!
-
You avoid making it pointless by having multiple quest outcomes or by having mutually exclusive quest lines, or, in case of "kill them" quests, by making battles interesting. I dont care about loot as quest rewards at all.
edit: A somewhat extreme example: my character has destroyed a certain location in Underrail, including all the merchants there, because it was the only way for her to free a certain NPC, which I really liked. A simple reason that has nothing to do with loot (in fact you lose all shopping opportunities and some quests that way).
-
After seeying the wust once there is no reason to do a quest. Maybe you want to do it cause you like to waste time. it is your perogative, the majority of people will not bother to do something if they don't stand to gain anything from it.
-
Funny, because I consider your approach to playing a cRPG a waste of time. Like I wrote before, if I want to play a buying & selling game, I'll play Monopoly.
-
Is it. Let's look at it this way. You do a quest to gain absolutly nothing. I look to do a quest to gain something. This counting that you had already done it in the past at least once to see the outcome so simply seeing the outcome of a quest is no longer the issue here.
In my case I am doing it to gain something thus I've not wasted my time.
In your case you are doing because you can do it but there is no reward (we'll assume you throw the reward away and that this is not underrail but a game with a proper economy system) for doing so thus you've wasted your time.
Now, you may be one rare case that considers that doing something for nothing in a game it's no waste of time and if that's what gets you going then more power to you, but doing quests for no reward is for the majority of people a waste of time. So is exploring and getting no rewards.
-
With that approach better play diabloids...
-
No, you do things in the game to get better. Be it more money to buy more stuff, be it XP or any other kind of reward, anything that advances your character in some way or another.
To put into another terms, even if this doesn't exactly compares to PnP. You are not going to save a town from a bunch of trolls just to get a smile and a thanks. You better be getting paid for putting your life on a line.
This goes for any RPG, you do something in order to gain something it doesn't means that you won't do something just cause you can and felt like it of course. For example I always liked to exterminate the slavers in the den after I joined those anti-slaver group in the new california republic. But that is just a one thing I'd do because I could. I general I don't do anything if I don't get a reward. Even then wiping them out would yield me money in the form of loot and of course XP so it wasn't a total waste of time though the money for it is bad.
A player has to be rewarded for what he does or punished for what he does (it goes both ways of course since for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction). However a player's time should never be wasted.
-
In do not see any instance in the game, when player is not rewarded for the quests, either with XP (quest completion or oddity) or money or loot (to sell or to keep). Same for exploration.
In fact, most important rewards are those that add to XP or give items or crafting materials you want to keep, and not those that give coins or sellable junk loot, since money is abundant.
-
Since you can't take and sell all of the loot, your reward is denied. Sure, you could go in and do that quest, only to return and the merchants still not buy absolutly anything. Same thing with exploration. Sure you get the drops. But you don't get to make anything out of it.
-
But who cares about sellable loot?
It's the loot that is worth keeping that is the real reward, as well as oddities to level up.
Due to abundance of money, sellable loot is not really worthy reward anyway, just something extra you can carry around, if you happen to have extra space in backpack, otherwise no big deal if left behind.
Really, you are way out of touch with this game. Too much theorycrafting and too little experience.
-
I know that you can still make more than enough the money, that is not the point. the point is that it is a big chunk if not the only thing that there is of a reward which is just going into the trash bin.
To you it makes no difference if you have 20K charons or 200K, to me it makes all the difference. It doesn't matters if I can spend it or not. I fought for that loot, therefore I have the right to take and sell it. It is my reward, if I don't get my reward then it is a waste of time.
-
Money is supposed to be the tool in the game, and not reward on its own.
If you can not spend it, is is useless, just a number in the inventory.
Item that you can use is worth zillion times more then inferior item whose only role is to give you money (if already full of money). Those are the rewards why exploring is done, not junk items.
-
Elhazzared, dude, it seems you've been into this game for a time now. surely you understand there's more to it than collecting loot and selling it to merchants for shiny coins.
Perhaps to you this isn't an important part of the game and as I said rpeviously, this will just make players not want to go explore and do side quests. Basicly, they will ignore a large part of the game because what is the point? You can't sell it anyway!
I have no doubts some player are that obsessed with looting, but they aren't in the majority. But "the most important thing in an RPG"? Really? What about such things as lore, quest lines, character development, NPC interactions, puzzles, enemy encounters?
If I wanted to play a game with a heavy focus on buying & selling, I'd rather play Monopoly with friends.
Personally, I can say I am a pack rat too. Yes, I took every single item I could in the office of Sellus Gravius in Seyda Neen, Morrowind (I actually made a point of collecting entire armor sets and displaying them in mod houses. Also, complete sets of weapons in specific materials, and crockery). Yes, I robbed the people of Neverwinter blind. Those golden pantaloons in Baldur's Gate 1? I held onto them until Throne of Bhaal (expansion to BG2), despite not knowing what use they were to me (and oh my god, was it worth it in the end!). I am currently busy finding every single rag in the Hive in Sigil (PS:T). No piece of cheese, no wooden fork is safe from me in Skyrim. Arcanum was fun too, though I don't exactly remember how I handled the inventory in there.
But at the end of the day, I can live with leaving stuff behind when I realise "Meh, it's not really that important" - the plot is important, and at the end I am swimming in gold anyway, even in the Underrail. I still take everything with me, even if I have to go multiple times, and contrary to what some here say, I still explore - a lot. I am a completionist, and a hurdle to packratting is not going to stop me from finding everything in here (after playing Morrowind for 1 week, I knew more about the game, setting and community than the friend who had recommended it to me. And he had been playing it for 2 years.) It is fun in a way, and I get to memorise the paths way better by going along them several times.
The only system that ever really annoyed me was the one in Neverwinter Nights, where you had a combination of weight (which was okay) and Tetris. You had different sized items, which had to fit into luggage tabs of a specific size. This could get annoying, as when you have lots of stuff, you might find a large sized item (3x2 squares), and while you have lots of space (20 squares), they could be scattered all across your inventory due to bad automatic Tetrissing (it filled the tabs from bottom left to top right, going horizontally) when picking up stuff. It was unnecessary, and weight alone would have been enough. Underrail is pretty chill compared to that. But I still continued and finished NWN, and am still a big fan of all those mods.
So, Ehazzared while I can understand you on one hand, I at the same time have to pity you a bit, as you seem too focussed on this mechanic and making money. But to each their own.
By the way, I think using stashes (something that was not always an option in those older games I mentioned) is a good way of making me reconsider what I really need - that way I also know what I can safely sell off, and specialise my character (something I am notoriously bad at, sometimes. I always play a rogue, for example, because I have to open those doooooors!) concerning their fighting style.
When I saw Al Fabet? I laughed, because I recognised my habits in him too. :)
-
Sadly there is no way around this. If I cannot loot everything and sell everything the game ceases to be fun for me and there is no point in playing a game that just isn't fun.
Out of those games you mentioned I played only arcanum, never got to finish it actually but I remember my favorite build was a 20 str, 20 dex fighter with full arcane stuff (just passing days and checking the witch XD) with a little bit of temporal magic for either doubling my movement or just stasis the strong enemies... As for my looting habits nothing was left behind, not even at the point that I had more money than I could count. That's what your party were good for, mules, I specificly told them not to fight.
I remember farming the portal near the starting area, my thrower builds actually managed to kill everything the portal spawned even early on when it was worth a load of XP. Other builds have to kill some and then close the gate before I died.
All in all it was a good game but if I had to put faults to it were the tecnology path was aweful cause it required more inventment than your level cap allowed and you hit level cap way too fast. I could get to max shortly after the isle of despair (or whatever that place where the dwarves were thrown it was was called).
But anyway, yes, it was fun and I could quite literally swipe everything... some of the bugs were extremely annoying though.
-
Is it. Let's look at it this way. You do a quest to gain absolutly nothing. I look to do a quest to gain something. This counting that you had already done it in the past at least once to see the outcome so simply seeing the outcome of a quest is no longer the issue here.
In my case I am doing it to gain something thus I've not wasted my time.
In your case you are doing because you can do it but there is no reward (we'll assume you throw the reward away and that this is not underrail but a game with a proper economy system) for doing so thus you've wasted your time.
Now, you may be one rare case that considers that doing something for nothing in a game it's no waste of time and if that's what gets you going then more power to you, but doing quests for no reward is for the majority of people a waste of time. So is exploring and getting no rewards.
The reason I consider obsessing about loot (like you are doing) a waste of time is very simple: I play games to be entertained. If I play Monopoly with friends, the reason I enjoy is not because I can win fake paper money. Similarly, if I enjoy a cRPG it is not because my character can accumulate virtual loot. It's the quality time spend I can spend with friends, or the fun things I can do with a character in a cRPG that matter to me. :)
Btw, I have played Arcanum too. You spent your time "farming" all that loot and XP in a game that doesn't even have challenging combat. At the same time if you never finished it, you missed out on some of the best features, like the conversation with K., or the various endings where you can see how your character influenced the world.
Playing Arcanum like Diablo, now that's what I'd call a waste of time.
-
...
iknowthatfeelbro.jpg :D only with years that have passed this urge has become weaker, and never was an actual problem that prevented me from gain pleasure from any rpg.
-
Well if you are entertained by doing something completly pointless then more power to you. To me the RPG part pretty much screams. If I'm not getting paid, I'm not risking my skin. If you even want to go there.
Exploring, yeah everyone will explore once, they'll see everything there is to see and after that expect them to not explore the whole map ever again. Same with quests. Maybe they'll do this or that one cause of one particularity or another, the majority of the side quests however will be ignored as there is no point in doing them... You talk about yourself but the truth of the matter is that the majority of gamers won't do something that won't benefict them. In fact the majority of gamers won't care about the RP that much, they will do good and bad things depending on what yields the highest reward. Taht's their concept of morality in a game.
As for the Arcanum example, what stopped me from finishing it was actually bugs, bugs that at a certain point wouldn't let me progress. As for the time I spent farming. Was it wasted? I kill things, loot the bodies and containers and move on. It was pretty simple and quick, I never even have to move between location cause between me and the party there is more than enough carry weight. As for the game not having any challenge, no game has challenge once you learn it's ins and outs. I've certainly died several times in it but once I've learned it I never died. Same thing with underrail when it was in a playable state to me. I died a lot the first fw times, once I lerned it's ins and outs I never died anymore.
-
But that's the thing: for me, spending time fighting re-spawning critters in a game that has easy (and to be honest, a bit boring) combat is the very definition of a pointless action.
Btw, Arcanum isn't Diablo, where indeed you get the "explore once, see everything" experience. My evil wizard took a different path from my goody two-shoes scientist, and as a result, the outcomes of their choices were very different.
edit: have you tried playing with the Unofficial Arcanum Patch? I used it in my games and had no problems finishing.
-
Since you can't take and sell all of the loot, your reward is denied. Sure, you could go in and do that quest, only to return and the merchants still not buy absolutely anything. Same thing with exploration. Sure you get the drops. But you don't get to make anything out of it.
leave some loot for others, surely there are lower level scavengers and adventurers in south underrail who would appreciate you killing enemies and leaving inferior stuff around. don't be so greedy. :D
But that's the thing: for me, spending time fighting re-spawning critters in a game that has easy (and to be honest, a bit boring) combat is the very definition of a pointless action.
Btw, Arcanum isn't Diablo, where indeed you get the "explore once, see everything" experience. My evil wizard took a different path from my goody two-shoes scientist, and as a result, the outcomes of their choices were very different.
don't even try, his approach to this is so different that he can't understand you any more than you can him. to each his own, he wants unlimited loot and unlimited respawns. there are games that have those.
-
And why are we talking about respawning enemies exactly? If you are merely refering to the portal in arcanum I merely did it at the time cause it was retardedly good XP and no, it wasn't easy, I had to very carefully pull one at a time, sometimes 2 came and they did loads of damage and damaged my armor with each attack. Normally I wouldn't kill all because it required a certain build to work and even then I had to be extremely careful. However it wasn't just respawning enemies, cause it threw harder and harder stuff at you, when I did it was to see how much XP I could get before closing it and to see if there was a limit on enemies and indeed there was... As far as underrail goes, I don't fight respawning enemies usually I used to do an area once and that's that.
Arcanum is indeed a case where there is more to see in some quests by playing differently. Also no I haven't tried the unofficial patch, didn't even knew there was one. I had first the original, then I bought later on a new copy of the CD very cheap that came already with the latest official patch but it was still broken in places. for example, the owner of the brothel started lowering her likeless of you each time you visited untill the point where she just attacked you or the dragon cave chest provoked an instant crash. just to qoute a couple I remember.
Dirtman - For others? Everyone else can go die in a fire. It's my loot, my money, if they everyone else wants to loot, they have to beat me to it. :P
Also I don't want unlimited loot and respawns. I only want to get what I earned in that fight. If you think I don't like challenge you are wrong. I'd gladly play underrail on the hardest dificulty, ironman mode if I had no weight limits and merchants buy it all. All I want is my due, that all.
-
Are we still bringing this up? I thought it was a lost cause?
I might be misinformed but are there trainers that allow you to remove the carry weight? I think I heard someone mentioning it, could be wrong. Trade limits might be more difficult to alter, not sure if there are mods for that yet.
It all comes down to intent and design, which is subject to the creator and not the ones that play it (most of the time). Styg decided that the game will work this way, there's really nothing to do about it (aside from modding). One can debate this forever, there's no right or wrong answer. What matters is why it was implemented the way it was, not why something else wasn't. I have already detailed my thoughts on the why's of the design of trading and encumbrance in Underrail so I won't repeat myself again. I just find it funny that this is still rolling knowing nothing will change. I think this discussion was heading the wrong direction from the start.
-
I think this discussion was heading the wrong direction from the start.
...which was a few years ago. :D :D :D
-
Are we still bringing this up? I thought it was a lost cause?
I might be misinformed but are there trainers that allow you to remove the carry weight? I think I heard someone mentioning it, could be wrong. Trade limits might be more difficult to alter, not sure if there are mods for that yet.
It all comes down to intent and design, which is subject to the creator and not the ones that play it (most of the time). Styg decided that the game will work this way, there's really nothing to do about it (aside from modding). One can debate this forever, there's no right or wrong answer. What matters is why it was implemented the way it was, not why something else wasn't. I have already detailed my thoughts on the why's of the design of trading and encumbrance in Underrail so I won't repeat myself again. I just find it funny that this is still rolling knowing nothing will change. I think this discussion was heading the wrong direction from the start.
One thing did lead to another but the start of the topic did boil down to. Pitty that Styg chose to make a mockery out of serious and good feedback rather than listening to it. Eventually it did lead to the explanation of why I said this and the discussion of this topic once again.
There is cheatengine that can disable carry weight yes! Nothing that fixes the broken traders. Fact of the matter is, the people who were interested in modding this game so far still don't know what they need to have in order to mod the game cause they don't recognise the game code language or something like that. Apparently Styg does not wants to disclosure this or release modding tools. At least not just yet.
It may be true that debating this might not help it, at least as far as Styg is concerned cause he wants to stick with a poor design decision just because he came up with something different. I guess it do is as pointless as exploring or doing sidequests in underrail.
I can only hope that some day some one will be able to make head and tails out of the language and mod the game into something playable at which point I will play and will give credit for a good game to that modder and that modder only.
-
The thing is, you are so single-minded on this issue, on subjective level, that it is no wonder why joke was created in the game.
I can already picture Al Fabet rationalizing that while he has 200,000 stygs, and nothing to buy with them, that he can still not leave those sledgehammers lying around to waste. He earned them, he must get them. Animal hearts too. :D
-
Because this issue is rather important. It's important to the point of a game going from, best game since fallout 2 to worst crpg I've ever played. That's the level of importance of this issue.
-
He didn't make a mockery out of serious and good feedback. It was (and still is to an extent) good feedback, the problem is that no matter how many times it was repeated that this is the way the design is heading and your feedback is good but not in line with their vision, you kept bringing it up and prodding this issue despite knowing it won't change. Sometimes even going to frustrating lengths like saying that their design is objectively bad and other such nonsense. That's the thing that is mocked, not the initial feedback. I think you need to look at this with some good ol' self-aware, self-deprecating humour.
-
I kept bringing up the issue in the past for a simple reason. Styg never said we are not going to do this. Styg said he might implement the option between the 2 systems and as I've said in the past, it wouldn't cost much development time because the system was already made and working, if anything just a slight adjustment needed for the new items introduced meanwhile. So I kept asking for this to be a priority, much like the XP had both oddity and classic from the moment Styg decided to implement the oddity, the same concept should have been applied to the merchants and carry weight system.
So I obviously kept asking since there was the chance that Styg would actually implement it as he put it on the table himself! At no point did he ever say. No we're never going to implement the old (and better) system as an option anymore.
Granted, right now there is no point in asking, Styg has made it clear that he wants this horrible system to be the way to play the game.
You say it's not a mockery of feedback but from my point of view, it is. I don't take it as a personal insult, but it do is a mockery of good feedback none the less.
-
It was kinda heavily implied after a while that it wouldn't happen though, I mean years ago. No one is denying that you feel as though your feedback is being mocked, for all intents and purposes the character perfectly illustrates the kind of gameplay Styg wants Underrail to have. What I'm trying to say is that it's not your suggestion in itself that is being made fun of, it's that your behaviour honestly kinda warranted this kind of response. Some of the stuff you've said about the design of Underrail implies that you think Styg is incompetent by saying that the design is horrible, non-ironically ranking the game as one of your worst and calling the design objectively flawed.
We can always discuss whether it would require lots of development time without getting to a conclusion because honestly we don't know. There might have been a significant amount of balancing in work to get this to work and there might have been very little. If they were to implement something like this it always comes down to whether its worth it and we don't know either way because we lack info. Therefore speculating on that is futile.
It sounds like you feel you've been betrayed or let down. It was a maybe after all. And they decided no, for whatever reason. Though I think Al Fabet hints quite strongly that it was simply a design decision and maybe a wee bit of spite like you suggest. *shrug*
-
That is what you feel from it. To me it feels like a mockery of the feedback that was given because if it was simply a case of agreeying the feedback was good but just not liking the insistence on something that is after all very important, then there would have been no need to make a mockery out it.
I don't think Styg is incompetent but I do think he is hard headed. The design decision was frankly horrible. I presented plenty of proof that it was flawed and that the system was objectively worse than the previous one. Styg chose to keep it because he wanted to make something different. Not because it was better but because he made something different and it is his game so he will have his way.
Looking at it objectively, having the option to at least use the original system would have not hurt the game in any way, in fact, it would only bring more people to buy and play because it would please a larger amount of people and in the great scheme of things, it wouldn't change what underrail is.
You say you don't know whether implementing the old system would take a long development time or not. I'm telling I know for sure it wouldn't because it was already in place. It was 100% made and working, it's just adding an option to the options menu to to flick between them (or maybe to the start new game menu). the only thing needed to do was add the new items to the old system which is little more than adding the command to fetch the item from the item list.
And yes I feel let down massively. I've been waiting for years and years for a game that would at least come close to fallout 2. Underrail appears only to be brought down by a bad design decision. One that was ultimatly unnecessary because it isn't a case where you can't even have a choice.
I could understand if it was a case where it was just impossible to have 2 concurrent systems because it would fundamentaly change the game. I could understand it if it was a case that no system was better, they just had good and bad points. But it was not the case. Both systems can be there without changing what the game is and more than that. The new system is downright bad. I presents no single positive point over the old system.
Let's look at both systems from an objective point.
Old system:
The good:
Gives you the choice to grab everything or only what's valuable.
Makes sure exploration is rewarded with loot and XP (loot is always worth something as it is worth money).
Makes sure that all side quests are worth it for the same reasons as exploring.
Allows you to go to a single settlement and sell everything to the merchants around.
Does not breaks game immersion by having you stop mid quest, possibly several times, to go and dump loot.
The bad:
Too much money floating in the economy.
Not very realistic.
The new system:
The good:
More realistic.
The bad:
Even more money floating in the economy.
Breaks game immersion by forcing the player to stop several times to dump loot.
Encourages the player not to explore because the loot is going to be left behind (at least a large part).
Encourages the player not to do side quests, same reason as exploration.
Forces the player to play in a single playstyle which is leave loot behind rather than actually letting the player decide his playstyle.
Forces the player to waste his time going to various settlements in order to sell his spoils making him waste a lot of time just running around.
This is what we see from both systems when we look at them objectively. It's isn't just a design decision, it is objectively a bad design decision.
What is truly sad is that Styg is a capable developer, apart from this system he's shown he can design a really good game. If only he was less stubborn and more accepting of the opinion of people trying to help him create a better game (that is what early access is for after all) he'd have a really great game that could possibly compete with fallout 2 for one of the best cRPG ever made.
-
I was under the impression that system came to be before Styg started hiring, but it was so long ago that I can be wrong. However, if it was from another Dev then it makes it even more incompreensible as to why it was chosen. Never the less, Styg do is the one who makes the final decision and his was to stick with it.
-
The forums is cutting posts with certain character, give me a minute to fix this. ^^
EDIT no 13: fixed it. Gee these forums man :P
I should mention that when I say Styg I mean the development team, not just Styg himself.
Removing features from a game can sometime require just as much resources as adding features. I work with games so I know this. We don't know how much work was required to rebalance the game after the update released and since.
It's ok that you feel let down but that's on you, it was never a promise it was a consideration. He didn't snag something from under your nose, he removed something you like, there's a difference. And it's a bummer for some but let's not pretend that this is on Styg because it isn't.
Your perspective is not objective, it's entirely subjective and that's ok. Evident by the fact that some of the points you bring up as bad/good are being perceived as the opposite by someone else. And don't retaliate with that one thing you said a while ago about liking/disliking an "objectively flawed" system because that's a logical fallacy. The simple fact that people have different opinions on a matter renders every opinion on it subjective. Including your own.
This is not a matter of making something right or wrong, better or worse. It's a matter of intent and design, Styg wants his players to play after a certain set of rules (like every other single game), you just happen to dislike some of those decisions and try to justify it by twisting it and convincing yourself that you're objectively right. There's such a thing as being overly confident in your ideas and I think you are irrationally married to what you think is good design and won't hear anything else. It's impossible to debate with you because you haven't reasoned yourself into thisso it's impossible to reason you out of it.
If I were looking at things objectively (or at least as objective as I can because objectivity in itself is kind of a flawed concept when applied to human rationale) I would conclude that: some people like this, some people don't. I happen to dislike it, well bummer but what can I do.
I mean you can dislike a system, you can air your opinion about but when you get to the point where you are unflinching in your devotion to convince others you're right you will find it even harder to convince others because you paradoxically seem talked into thinking what you think rather than rationalizing you way there, even if it comes from yourself. That's why preachers are such easy targets for ridicule.
-
That is where you are wrong. You can define things as being objectively right or wrong.
Saying that you prefer one or another system is subjective. Pointing out what different system do for a game is objective.
In any game you'll always play by a certain set of rules, that much is true, however the more choice you have the better, this is not subjective, this is objective.
For example. It's always better to be able to solve a quest in multiple ways, than only having a single way to solve a quest.
It's always better for an FPS to have lots of places to explore (not necessarely saying open world) than to be a rail shooter.
It's always better when a game encourages the players to try out different things and to go out of the beaten path.
Option are just good. This is not subjective at all.
The new system pretty much seems to encourage players to play in a single play style. Ignore loot, ignore exploration, ignore sidequest. Just go on a rail doing the main storyline and be done with it. All because the incentive to go out of your way is gone.
Now I will agree that removing a system to implement a new one takes times and time is money, especially in the development of a game. That said the old system still exists, implementing the option is as simple as putting it back. Everything is coded, it's just putting it back in place and then set the option to use one or the other. Assuming all you need to do is implement it and add the linking to the new items, it's something that can be done in one or two days easily.
Certainly, it will take a lot more time for a modder to grab the game and make the old system from scratch as they don't have the files and even then I'd bet you anything that a modder would be able to get rid of the buying limits and while he's at it, just remove carry weights directly in a couple days. It's actually when you have to make new pieces of art and dialogues and adding things, modifying the maps that it starts taking a long while to get anything done. Just diving into the code and making a few alterations is relatively quick.
-
I guess the only thing I can say to that is you should check out the stuff made by Team ICO, their games are univerally praised despite being incredibly minimalistic and restraining. Though it should be noted that their design philosophy actually improve their game, it's a philosophy called design by subtraction. That giving players options is always a good thing is not true, it's highly situational and it all comes down to what you want to say and how you want your players to react to the box you put them into, the more cleverly you design a game, the more the size of that box cease to be relevant, what matters is the posibility space given. So no, there's no objective truth to game design, at least not as long as we as human beings set the precedence for what should be considered objective, because all our impressions are subjective.
"...The new system pretty much seems to encourage..."
No, it encourage *you* to do all those things. This is what you need to understand El, this is the way *you* force yourself to play the game because it's not designed the way you want. Most players do explore the maps, do quests and pick up loot, the difference is that they do it in accordance to the rules. You want to sidestep the rules and thus you get punished and you feel unfairly treated. It's about your response to the rules, not the rules themselves. You don't want to take responsibility over your reactions and want to blame everything else for being unfair, badly designed or objectively flawed. You need to pull yourself up by the bootstraps and realize that you are having a problem with the system, the system is not the problem.
No, it's not just as easy as "just putting it back". Unless you want something untested, unbalanced and subpar. Remember that a lot of balancing has been made since the change, and without the previous model in mind. The game is not balanced for infinite inventory and unrestricted trading. How much that imbalance is we don't know and that's why I said previously that it's futile to speculate and saying that it's just a matter of a few lines is speaking from a place of ignorance, unless you know the framework, which we don't.
-
The new system pretty much seems to encourage players to play in a single play style. Ignore loot, ignore exploration, ignore sidequest. Just go on a rail doing the main storyline and be done with it. All because the incentive to go out of your way is gone.
Pure theorycrafting. Nothing objective about it. Just guesswork on your side.
In fact, it is blatantly false. But how can you know, since you never properly played the game with current rules for any decent length of time?
-
Player1 - Simple, because you can't carry the loot and you can't sell a lot of it. The incentive to explore and do sidequests is exactly to get said loot!
Elias - Apparently I need to explain myself better. Just giving more option for the sake of it is not going to improve the game, it has to be things that bring something new and positive to the game, that said, more option is always good. Limiting a player in what he can do is not always a good thing. Obviously there are always going to be limitations but even so you should always seek to give players as many options as possible.
You say it encourages me. This is wrong, the whole game and the way Al Fabet was made pretty much throws this at your face. Ignore loot! You don't need all that loot, you can do with just taking the most valuable items and be done with it. This is not theory, this is what the game encourages you to do and what the developer wants you to do. The moment you are throwing away the majority of loot you are losing the rewards of exploring and sidequests (to some the degree the ones from the main quest as well but the less you do the less you lose). Doing side quests and exploring is for the rewards. You may do it once for the fun but the majority of people are not going to do all the side quests and exploring the entirety of the map in every single playthrough. They've done it in the pastm, they know the outcome, they know there is no reward waiting for them, might as well just skip it! That is what the game encourages the player to do... Yes, I do have a problem with the system, but that is because the system is bad. I'm not saying the old system was perfect, but it was a lot better than the current system. Why do you think that there are no other games with systems so agressive towards player loot? Because they know it's a bad system, because they know most players will dislike it. In fact one of the most common cmplaints about RPGs is their limited invetory size being too small.
I'll tell you even more, if you create a pool and manage to get it spread to most gamers with the 2 following options. Do you prefer your RPG to have a system that has no limit of inventory space and merchants buy everything or a system that highly limits your inventory space and merchants only buy a small percentage of what you can carry. What do you think will have most votes?
Above all this question must be disassociated with a game. So there is no fanboys nor haters voting specificly in one or another. What matters is simply to evaluate what system is perceived as being better by gamers.
And lastly, yes it is as simple as putting it back. Unbalanced system? The only problem the old system had was one and just one. There was too much money floating around. Guess what, the current system does exactly the same, only worse and yes, it is worse because while not having much recent playing experience, I remember how much money I got after doing the first quest and right now, even selling less I still end up with more money than before. So what could the old system do to unbalance things? You'll have more money? It's not like it is a problem to beggin with! Other than that nothing changes. The loot you get is the same after all. You only leave the things that are not valuable and you'll never use behind after all. There would be no balance issues that don't currently exist and more to the point, were not as bad before!
-
"This is not theory, this is what the game encourages you to do and what the developer wants you to do."
Exactly. The problem is that you approach this from your point of view: that loot is the single, utmost important driving force of an RPG. Loot is not the life force of an RPG, it's not the Alpha and Omega of RPGs. It is to some, but not all. Underrail is one of those where the loot is not the focus. The stories and quests are, I'd argue that the combat is the focus but that's an entirely different discussion. That you say that the single thing that makes people do quests are the reward is not true, that's a guess. Because you don't know. What we do know however is that the loot system is not as big a problem as you make it out to be, the relative lack of complaints and the general positive reviews for the game supports that despite having restricted inventory, the game is regarded as very good. If the problem is as vast, as huge and global as you say it is then the statistics would be different but they are not. The reception even proves you wrong, you said previously that you predicted that the game would be received poorly by the buying public, it has now been proven that is untrue.
Your claim of objectivity rings false because it comes from a place of intellectual dishonesty, you're so devoted to your cause that you can't think objectively, you are strictly viewing all of this from your perspective and your perspective alone. You claim that you view things objectively but you don't. Man, take a deep breath, step back and look at the response. Surely you must have questioned your reasoning? Surely it must have crossed your mind that maybe, MAYBE you are putting way to much importance and faith into what you write and think? You act like a preacher with a bible. I mean, your unshakable devotion that you are right and everyone else is wrong is so surreal to me given the copious amounts of counterpoint after counterpoint from various places.
I think this is the last thing I write regarding this (I probably said that last time as well but hey, I'm just a dude). You're simply impossible to reach.
-
That is where you are wrong. You can define things as being objectively right or wrong.
Saying that you prefer one or another system is subjective. Pointing out what different system do for a game is objective.
Not if you post statements like "Breaks game immersion by forcing the player to stop several times to dump loot."
Immersion is by its definition subjective. What is immersion-breaking for one player is not so for another; some people consider lack of realism to be immersion breaking. Heck, I've met RPG players who imposed far stricter rules on themselves in games than in Underrail.
Having a preference for a game mechanic is one thing, but you are trying to pass your own preferences as objective truths. In the end you just manage to sound obsessed.
-
Elias - The game was well received by the public? And how many copies didthe game sell exactly? I mean, let's compare this to to say, pillars of eternity or divinity original sin.
Now yes, this is a niche title and perhaps this perceived well reception just means that only the people who like really bad systems like this bought the game... Well tis is exagerating but many people don't even complain whether they like the game or not. then there is also the unknown element of how many people tried, didn't liked it and just refunded the game. I don't imagine it was that many because again, very niche game with this current system anyway.
What you can say for sure is that amoung the people like a game which imposes realism at the expensive of the game suffering in the quallity of life department the game was a success.
You may want to call all the points that I've made subjective by saying they are viewed from my perspective only. Yet at the same time you already admited that I am right when I say the game encourages you to leave loot and by definition to ignore side quests and exploration and that it was what the developer wanted... How is this subjective?
More to the point. I've made a listing of what each system does for the game. I have yet to see anyone say that the current system has anything that is better other than realism (which I put down) and even then I find it highly unrealistic that there is such things as a lack of demand for anything in a post apocaliptic world. Quite literaly anything you can salavage is worth it's weight in gold and if a merchant can buy something for half it's value or less to sell later to someone at it's normal going price. It is always worth doing so. How many electrocincs parts do you think can be made now that the world has gone to hell and you can't even go to the surface? How much iron copper and on do you think you can get before it runs out? From a realism standpoint. What the current trade system does is making a realistic trade system should no appocalipse have ever happened and it does that well enough. however this is a debatable system and I merely wanted to present you something that even the people who like this so called realism possibly might have not stoped to think for a moment. However do present me with advantages of this system other than a hipotetical realism that I was willing to accept even if I don't fully agree with it.
Chimaera - Let's say you are fighting in depot A, the underground, clearing room by room working your way forward and sudenly. inventory is full, there is more good stuff you want... Depot A respawns enemies so storing stuff to pick up later is not an option. Option A, you nearly get nothing out of it and you do it all in one go. Yes you didn't broke immersion. Option B ad most often chosen by players who are by nature greedy cause human beings are by nature greedy. Stop doing the quest, go to the seller, sell quickly the loot that you can, stash what you can't sell nearby, continue the quest. Rinse and repeat as many times as necessary and for Depot A, I'm guessing a lot. Game immersion broken.
Now some players like to play with much worse rules than this. It is after all their choice, some people are masochists too and who are we to judge?
It isn't just a case of preference. For example. While I know that objectively a hex based movement system is better. I prefer a square based movement system even though it is objectively worse... I can diferentiate between what is subjective and what is ojective. Just because you happen not to agree with me, it doesn't means that I am not objective in what I'm saying.
-
Yet at the same time you already admited that I am right when I say the game encourages you to leave loot and by definition to ignore side quests and exploration and that it was what the developer wanted... How is this subjective?
That definition is something made up by you.
Chimaera - Let's say you are fighting in depot A, the underground, clearing room by room working your way forward and sudenly. inventory is full, there is more good stuff you want... Depot A respawns enemies so storing stuff to pick up later is not an option.
Wrong. Storing items is an option and respawn is very slow and not applied to all enemies ("muties" will not respawn, for example). You have more then enough time to stash items at couple locations in the Depot A, to not interrupt the the flow of the quest, finish the quest, move current inventory to the Junkyard stash, go back and pick up everything from the Depot A stashes and move to Junkyard, with no respawn happening in the meantime.
At the end, sell what you can and stash rest for the selling later, when merchant buying power is restored.
-
The thing is, you are so single-minded on this issue, on subjective level, that it is no wonder why joke was created in the game.
Second this. :)
this is the way the design is heading and your feedback is good but not in line with their vision
Tried to explain this for years, but always failed.
Elhazzared threads just keep on giving. :D
Definitely. )
-
Again, no point in doing something that has no reward so the by definition is not wrong. It's is not that you cannot do it despite not being rewarded, but it is not what the game encourages you to do.
Although admitedly a very long time ago (almost in a galaxy far far away...) Starting by the tunnels, going up into the mutant infested upper area and then working all the way back, you'd have enemies respawn. As far as I am aware, enemy respawn times hasn't changed, at least I don't remember that being in the patch notes. Also literaly all enemies in depot A would respawn however the game was reduced in difficulty or maybe at the time everything there respawned for testing purposes I am willing to grant that much as a possibillity, but at least the first time you'll do it, it's hardly not going to get a respawn in the earlier areas at least... Another possibillity is that the place was made easier cause depot A used to be quite the nightmare if you weren't prepared for it in which case maybe it is faster to run through now... I kinda liked the difficulty of the game though. I remember how many people would ask for help reguarding the bandits on the way to the SGS and while they were hard to deal with in a straight up fight, the way to do it was so simple, just toss a grenade and the fight becomes that much easier. However they were apparently nerfed.
-
Whenever I've done Depot A I've had plenty of time to stash all of the accrued junk close to an exit and proceed. Never even come close to reaching the respawned timer.
Can someone close this thread please? I didn't actually want to start a runaway thread about carry weight with neverending circular arguments, this was just supposed to be a light hearted thing.
-
Again, no point in doing something that has no reward so the by definition is not wrong. It's is not that you cannot do it despite not being rewarded, but it is not what the game encourages you to do.
Just because you ignore to see rewards does not mean there are no rewards for exploring.
1) Found oddities -> reward
2) Found items you want to keep (equipment, ammo, uniques, crafting stuff, etc...) -> reward
3) Found loot that is easy to carry -> reward
4) Heavy loot that can be stashed in wildness and carried out later -> reward
With points 1 and 2 being actually the best rewards, that drive exploring, not stuff to sell, due to diminishing returns of sellable loot after player gets rich.
Although admitedly a very long time ago (almost in a galaxy far far away...) Starting by the tunnels, going up into the mutant infested upper area and then working all the way back, you'd have enemies respawn. As far as I am aware, enemy respawn times hasn't changed, at least I don't remember that being in the patch notes. Also literaly all enemies in depot A would respawn however the game was reduced in difficulty or maybe at the time everything there respawned for testing purposes I am willing to grant that much as a possibillity, but at least the first time you'll do it, it's hardly not going to get a respawn in the earlier areas at least...
This just shows how much out of the touch are you with the game and that pretty much everything you say is based on theorycrafting on the game that does not exist anymore.
Human "muties" never respawn. Other critters respawn slowly and it never happens so quickly that you would get respawned opponents in already cleared parts of Depot A during single run. As I said there is more then enough time to clear out whole Depot A and go back and pick up everything you left behind in a couple of trips back.
-
Oddities = XP -> you get more than enough XP to level up, as far as you can see everyone asks for more levels because they reach level cap too soon. You don't need those oddities.
Items you want to keep -Z alright, you may find some good items, odds are when you go to the next settlement, items will be so much supeiror to what you found that it's not even a contest, at least up to a point where you can only get better by crafting.
Loot that is easy to carry -> yeah you'll find it, only that you can sell it because the merchant was already at it's limit and will probably be for a very long while.
Stashing the rest -> fact of the matter is, you'll keep stashing and stashing and stashing some more because you'll get so much more than you can ever sell.
You keep saying that exploring is reward of itself. Again, I never said it isn't, but past the first time what is the drive to explore? You already saw it, you already know what's there. That particular drive is fulfilled. How do developers balance this? Adding the reward for exploration which here is just inexistent since XP there will always be plenty and loot, well I've already expressed how it goes. If it was just carry all, sell all. Fine, there is a reward. Just isn't the case.
There is less respawns, but are still respawns. If you can run the whole area now under the merchant reset, the area was made much easier than before which is just sad. I remember both the psionic and guns+grenades took me more than an hour to run through easily. Even the gun+grenade which was by far the better build (since mk5 grenades were a lot easier to craft back then) still took quite a while to finish due to having to plan each encounter, being careful with the pulls and so on. Apparently you can just casually stroll in there if you can finish it under the reset timer. However I'm willing to admit I was wrong here. If you can do under the respawn rate then at least you can stash things inside the area and then do transfer runs.
-
Oddities = XP -> you get more than enough XP to level up, as far as you can see everyone asks for more levels because they reach level cap too soon. You don't need those oddities.
In fist playthrough, where I did not explore everywhere, I got to 25 level only after beating last boss.
So yes, to reach level cap early you do need to explore, since it is not enough just to collect what is in the main path. Also you are rewarded by easier encounters in the main path, by not rushing it.
Items you want to keep -Z alright, you may find some good items, odds are when you go to the next settlement, items will be so much supeiror to what you found that it's not even a contest, at least up to a point where you can only get better by crafting.
Depends. Sometimes found stuff is better then stuff in shops. Also, I pretty much never bough consumables, since I found all I need through looting.
Loot that is easy to carry -> yeah you'll find it, only that you can sell it because the merchant was already at it's limit and will probably be for a very long while.
Stashing the rest -> fact of the matter is, you'll keep stashing and stashing and stashing some more because you'll get so much more than you can ever sell.
Most valuable stuff will be sold eventually. Loot is not going away, just because it is in stashes and not sold immediately.
You keep saying that exploring is reward of itself. Again, I never said it isn't, but past the first time what is the drive to explore? You already saw it, you already know what's there.
I want more XP, I want more supplies, I like interesting encounters. Basic RPG stuff.
-
Chimaera - Let's say you are fighting in depot A, the underground, clearing room by room working your way forward and sudenly. inventory is full, there is more good stuff you want... Depot A respawns enemies so storing stuff to pick up later is not an option. Option A, you nearly get nothing out of it and you do it all in one go. Yes you didn't broke immersion. Option B ad most often chosen by players who are by nature greedy cause human beings are by nature greedy. Stop doing the quest, go to the seller, sell quickly the loot that you can, stash what you can't sell nearby, continue the quest. Rinse and repeat as many times as necessary and for Depot A, I'm guessing a lot. Game immersion broken.
Now some players like to play with much worse rules than this. It is after all their choice, some people are masochists too and who are we to judge?
What I consider immersion breaking is acting opposite to what a character would do; e.g., if I create a goody two-shoes paladin, then making him greedy makes no sense for me. My Underrail character got through Depot A with no problems: she was a mage, whose main motivation was making things go boom, and didn't care much about a career as a merchant. That' is why immersion is a subjective concept - it depends on what a player is looking for in games.
Btw, if you call other players masochists simply because you dislike their playing style, then you are being judgmental. At which point I have to concede that Eliasfrost was right.
-
Chimaera - I didn't called other player masochists, I simply said there are some, doesn't means the majority of people are like that. Similarly the majority of people don't like bad rulesets. That was the comparison. In other words, the people who like such settings are a minority. It's nt bad that theminority is included in a game, but not at the expense of ignoring the majority.
Actually, a goody two shoes paladin can be greedym it's natural for characters to have flaws. I've actually played a paladin just like that in D&D once... It's also the same concept that people have to say that characters have to always be in character. People forget that while people have their morality, sometimes they break it if what they get is too good or just because they feel that it is worth to do it in the moment. No one is that perfect.
While to a degree I will agree that game immersion may be subjective, there are things that people will always agree. To archieve game immersion you have to actually feel like you'r in the character's shoes. So you are exploring this area and looting it. You now there are enemies around. Would you clear out the place first or would you stop mid way to go back to a shop to sell loot cause you can't carry more? If you do the second it breaks game immersion because no one would realisticly do that. However in underrail that's what many will do due to the current system. Even if you can stash, it's less bothersome to go back and forth as your carry weight fills up than doing multiple runs at the end of it.
Player1 - I am not going to preten to say how long it takes to level up exactly. But there are always some side quests and a minimal exploration you do. For example, you will always explore that side passage you know to have some fixed loot that is great, like for example, those special weapons. You will always do quests that give such weapons, for example that knife that gives you criticals and so on. It is true you will level up faster if you jsut explore and do more sidequests, but it is not necessary to go out of yourway.
Find better stuff than in shops? I doubt you'll find anything in the junkyard that is better than whatever is for sale at the next settlement and by the time this rule no longer applies because yes, it will cease to apply at a certain point. You will be able to just craft better. Possible exeption for said extra special weapons which are located in specific locations anyway.
Loot in stashs is indeed not going away, it just acumulates higher and higher if you manage to systematicly swipe it all out. You'll always get more than you can sell. Unless you sit there doing nothing until the next reset comes and do so until you run out of loot to sell, you will keep getting more than you can sell. your stickpile just gets bigger, not the other way around.
More XP, again, you reach a point of saturation. More supplies? When you can't even get rid of the excess? Interesting encounters. Sure, but that's going to be a limited number amoung all there is.
-
Can someone close this thread please? I didn't actually want to start a runaway thread about carry weight with neverending circular arguments, this was just supposed to be a light hearted thing.
But it's rather appropriate considering the thread name, don't you think? ;) Anyway, as long as it remains contained in this thread, I have no problem with it.
-
I think this thread can be somehow useful for devs to see how different gamers see the same set of features, to adjust them in the future maybe.