Instalar o Steam
Iniciar sessão
|
Idioma
简体中文 (Chinês Simplificado)
繁體中文 (Chinês Tradicional)
日本語 (Japonês)
한국어 (Coreano)
ไทย (Tailandês)
Български (Búlgaro)
Čeština (Checo)
Dansk (Dinamarquês)
Deutsch (Alemão)
English (Inglês)
Español-España (Espanhol de Espanha)
Español-Latinoamérica (Espanhol da América Latina)
Ελληνικά (Grego)
Français (Francês)
Italiano (Italiano)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonésio)
Magyar (Húngaro)
Nederlands (Holandês)
Norsk (Norueguês)
Polski (Polaco)
Português (Brasil)
Română (Romeno)
Русский (Russo)
Suomi (Finlandês)
Svenska (Sueco)
Türkçe (Turco)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamita)
Українська (Ucraniano)
Relatar problema de tradução
I'm not saying pathfinder rules use strong maths. I'm saying you need strong maths skills to implement them in a video game engine. Maths isn't just about numbers, it's about patterns, especially in set theory, which is pretty much what you're going to use when implementing those rules.
You need to design objects and interfaces following specific patterns so that they can be flexible enough to bend to whatever crazy rule the writer put in the book.
Making the computer understand rule context is very hard.
its because of distance.... if your too close to the enemies when you charge... they'll aggro and start combat before you can finish "casting the charge" so to speak....
so I just make sure my tank is far enough back to do the full charge animation and take more than just one or two steps and charge...
Remember Baldur's gate 3 "we're not going to go past level 12 because spells and abilities are too hard to code past that level", and we're talking about D&D 5E, which is a very simple system compared to pathfinder... if even larian doesn't do it, let's be real, only owlcat is left with that ambition.
On the bright side though, pathfinder 2E is built with VTT in mind (especially foundry), and the system is way more friendly toward implementation. Anyone playing P2E on foundryVTT can see how powerful the core module is, it's very close to a full fledged cRPG.
That means owlcat would have a better shot with the second edition as it has a cleaner writing.
It's both a blessing and a curse for sure. If a well established, big name studio has the humility/sense/whatever you want to call it to say "this is too hard/timely/complex of a task, then one should take note. If it were easy, everyone would be doing it.
Of course, ambition can appear as incompetence/hubris when a much smaller group tries to take on such a task and consistently delivers a flawed product. In the big picture, it shows why these systems are so hard to translate into a game.
Like I said above: when a company like Bethesda releases a game, they have a solid (and large fanbase) that will buy no matter what. Even though the stuff they release is also problematic, they have plenty of dedicated gamers that fix their errors. Owlcat is far smaller, and it has had to depend on fans to donate to them in the hopes of getting a project. Given the launch quality of all three of their products, they have produced a group of us that will buy the product later and when it is on sale.
If their goal is to have multiple projects/IPs running, then they need to have solid products that ensure player loyalty. Sans that, they are going to inevitably spread themselves thin financially (unless their diehard fans are going to keep pumping money into them).
I truly want Owlcat to be just under the big triple A companies (large enough to make huge games but not so large they lose their vision like so many have). I simply worry that their revenue is going to dry up if they don't reconsider some of their methods.
I say these things not to dump on Owlcat but as someone who wants them to keep producing games. It's something they need to hear.
There wouldn't be as many players sinking 1000's of hours in the games if there wasn't that much possibility within the game.
I have 1500+ hours on WOTR and I have never encountered a major bug forcing me to abandon a quest or restart the game (and I've finished the game several times with different mythic paths), and I've never had minor mechanic bugs hinder me so much in fights that I had to change my build. And I'm playing on core with no respec and no mods (no even toybox).
Considering the amount of content the game as, I think it's pushing it a little far to say that the game is filled with bugs... I've seen games with far less content have more and bigger bugs than that.
Yes, I like the time, the customization, and the variety you can pull from the game (pre mods). I am finally trying topybox for my 6th run. I unfortunately have had some crashes, problems with some DLC, and a few QoL issues (pre any mods). While they were not enough to stop me from playing the game, it did bother me a few times.
I will be honest: after the problems I had with Kingmaker (beating it twice and doing multiple Stolen Lands roguelikes until the glaring bug made me stop playing it), I almost swore off Owlcat. This was back when they hid their non "Enhanced Edition" of the game (because there were a LOT of negative reviews). It took me some convincing to try Wrath, and I am glad I did. I fully understand how easy it would be for the technical aspects of the game to be offputting. These games are flawed gems to begin with, so adding technical issues on top of it will turn away people.
I say these things because Owlcat is a smaller company, and they have "something to prove." They have a fanbase that likes them for sure. Given it's size, I don't think it's self sustaining. Newer gamers that don't know the series are going to make of break Owlcat's success. I also have read multiple RT reviews where almost every reviewer mentions bugs (whether they liked it or not). If they are fine with the reputation of "get it a year later and when it's on sale" reputation, then I truly worry for what is in store for their future.
How long ago was this? The OG Final Fantasy was shipped back in 1987 on the NES with one stat literally doing nothing. (Intelligence specifically, if one is curious.)
Bottomline, they certainly have the needed manpower to do more internal testing and ironing out bugs in patches -before- they get rolled out into the wilds. The likely issue is that the team that still works on supporting WotR is dwarved in comparison by those who work on other, newer stuff. Suffice to say there is room for improvement here.
They also cut any content that had issues, resulting in entire quests, towns, mechanics, skills, characters being scrapped.
They the games had close to zero bug, but they also had very simple mechanics and no complex effects.
Basically if a bug was on display, they would cut the entire code related to it so that it didn't show on screen.
Also a very important thing to keep in mind, japanese devs are console devs for the majority. Developping on console is far easier than on PC, because the hardware doesn't change, so any bug that could be related to CPU, memory access, drivers etc. are easily caught early. Because yes, somes bugs are caused by hardware interactions, when you get a crash on PC most of the time it's an issue related to RAM or CPU, this is why some people never get certain bugs while some get it all the time.
Since updates didn't really exist back then, more western devs started doing it this way too. Bioware did it a lot in baldur's gate.
But with Pathfinder, when a lot of players are also TTRPG players that know the rules, if you want to do something close to the source material, you're going to have to get your hands dirty and actually impletement some problematic features, because you can't just throw major rules out of the window.
Okay, it isn't fair to call them small. Still, I have mixed feelings. All three of their games have had reviewers call out bugs (whether they liked the game or not). If they are working on newer IPs, I fear we are going to see history repeat. While their fanbase isn't small, I don't think it's large enough to sustain them yet. They cannot do like a triple A and release a game that is going to sell millions regardless of the effort put into it.
When these games are working, they are solid, enjoyable, and worth the time one will sink into them. That said, their new releases consistently fix something while breaking something else. And to be fair, I give credit given the complexity of the system. Then again, Dwarf Fortress was made by two people and does a very impressive job with bugs considering how much more complex their system is.
I agree with you that hiring a few more people to keep all their games running smoothly as it will mean better reviews which in turn means better sales. I get QA/coding is going to be the biggest part of a game like this, so I really hope their upcoming IPs take this more seriously (or that they start with a smaller, less complex system and build off of that).
WOTR is their least buggiest release, even at launch it was pretty good although that is a low bar given kingmaker and RT were absolute messes