Risen 2 - Preview Roundup # 2

JDR13 said:

The way human enemies approach in combat is not high on that list though.
To be fair, I don't see how you would survive those encounters otherwise. Humanoids have always been pretty tough in PB's games, even when you're only facing a single opponent. To be able to survive four of them attacking you at once, PB would have to compensate by just making them weaker. I'm not sure if I would find that significantly preferable.

Click to expand...

Well personally I would welcome the NOTR levels of difficulty it would bring back to the game but that would probably clash with PB's attempt to make the game more accessible

I am sure that a middle way between the two extremes is possible but needs a lot of careful "encounter" design and balancing.

I would be more understanding in a completely open ended design as in G3 where balancing is more difficult but even there when the Alternative AI of the CP's allowed you to enable multiple enemies to attack you (Up to 3 but they create all the suspension of disbelief you need as you really feel that a group is attacking you) I never looked back…

DArtagnan said:

I'm hoping they're compensating the "actiony" combat with more variety in terms of how you build your char.

Click to expand...

Actually they seem to have simplified the system quite a bit and removed a lot of all those little skills(*) I loved and provided so much fun in the early game… You may look at the Gamebanshee preview if you don't mind being spoiled (I do not for game mechanics)…

(*edit: Well the functionality is still somewhat there in a reduced form but you do not need to invest LP's for them and thus it feels that they will have a severely reduced impact on overall gameplay)

DArtagnan said:

I think Gothic 3 has the best of the character development systems, actually - even if several skills were broken or buggy.

Click to expand...

Completely agree and after the CP fixes by a very large margin too comparing it with Risen 2 it seems Still maybe we still have not seen it all as the GameBanshee previewer also admits but that is how it looks…

DArtagnan said:

BTW, was the beta access available to everyone?

Click to expand...

People got in through an IGN Prime offer I believe…

JDR13 said:

I'm also not enthused about having a companion all the time. I've always liked the solo aspect of PB's games. I thought it was neat to have temporary companions for certain events, but I have the feeling we'll be traveling with one person or another for the majority of Risen 2.

Click to expand...

Well, you can always tell the companion to "wait here" and then kind of forget to pick them back up .
Seriously though I think that as soon as we get our ship in the game which serves as a home base we'll be able to "store" the companions there and just go alone if we wanted to.

I have to say that I really liked the interaction with Patty in the beta. The technical side could use a lot of improvement though (AI, pathfinding etc.). After playing SWTOR where you have a companion by your side all the time that follows you on the mark and pretty much never ever gets in the way of anything and then Risen 2, well, it is a bit like different leagues.

Moriendor said:

I have to say that I really liked the interaction with Patty in the beta.

Click to expand...

So did I. What bothers me however, is that you still received full XP for anything she killed.. even if you didn't lift a finger. She also seemed extremely overpowered for that area. I'm curious how this is going to work out in the full game.

I wonder if companions will level. Seeing as how there was no character screen for Patty in the Beta, it doesn't look like that's the case. That means companions will eventually become too weak for certain areas as the PC becomes stronger. So I assume we'll be provided with stronger companions as the game goes on.

I just hope they manage to do a good job with the balancing. In the Beta, I could just let Patty fight 90% of the enemies, and she would always win without so much as a scratch. It better not be like that in the final version.

I agree that Patty seemed a bit overpowered for most of the critters in the beta but as I mentioned earlier there are a couple of encounters in the beta, too, where even Patty gets killed quite quickly. It also seemed to me like enemies preferred to focus on the main character most of the time and that if you wanted Patty to do the fighting you had to run in circles and actively try to lose aggro, i.e. you need to kind of "exploit" the system to take full advantage of your companion.

I don't think that you should get less XP from companion kills. No one would be using a companion then if they'd "steal" XP and it would be unfair, too, if you did the majority of the damage, then at the last moment Patty charges in to deal the finishing blow and you'd get reduced XP. They could work around that by calculating who did the majority of the damage but then it starts getting to a level of complexity (also with regard to the balancing because it would get very hard for them to figure out which level a player will be at a certain point in the game) where I'm not sure if it'd be worth all the effort...

As far as the leveling is concerned, I hope that the game auto-levels the companions. That would really suck if you "lost" a companion just because they remained at a lowly level.
I don't think that will be the case. They'll probably make it so the companion always has x% of health and deals y% of damage of the main character or something like that.
At least I sincerely hope so. There is no way I'd swap Patty for that retarded Jaffar gnome .

I always felt that in games with companions / partys, combat XP should be split, e.g.: 50% dispensed based on damage inflicted, 50% shared among party. "Coup-de-grace wins all" is silly, "bystander gets the same" is also silly.

Ideally, it would be based on contribution in terms of input/output of damage and healing.

But for singleplayer games, I find it's not really too important. That said, companions in games like Risen never really work all that well - given the AI/pathing issues.

I largely prefer having the choice of going solo at all times.

GhanBuriGhan said:

I always felt that in games with companions / partys, combat XP should be split, e.g.: 50% dispensed based on damage inflicted, 50% shared among party. "Coup-de-grace wins all" is silly, "bystander gets the same" is also silly.

Click to expand...

I think that there should be a clear distinction between a game with a party and a game with companions. I agree that XP should always be split in a party RPG but in an RPG with optional companions I'm fine with getting 100% XP for every kill.

I think that if the player didn't get the full xp for companion kills, it would take out a lot of fun in the combat due to "rushing" to kill every enemy in time or have your kill "stolen." By getting the full xp, the combat can be played in an organic, "as intended" way without losing xp points. Any other way would be frustrating, I think - although it didn't necessarily feel that way when traveling with a companion in Skyrim and you "lost experience" from having the NPC with you, but then again, Risen 2 uses a different system than Skyrim's.

I like the idea of having a companion in an open-world RPG. In fact, one of my "dream games" is to one day play a party-based RPG in an open-world setting. I love the idea of having a well-rounded, specialized group of adventurers in a setting like Skyrim, with a good cast of characters with deep back-stories, unique quests, party-banter/interactions, etc. I call this a "dream game" because actually accomplishing this would be quite difficult (path-finding, game balance, etc.).

Nevertheless, I am excited about the prospects of having different companions to adventure with in Risen 2 (not that I have ever minded or complained about going solo previously in these games). Even though I become more concerned about the overall quality of Risen 2 with each preview, this is definitely something that leaves me with a positive impression.

Nerevarine said:

I think that if the player didn't get the full xp for companion kills, it would take out a lot of fun in the combat due to "rushing" to kill every enemy in time or have your kill "stolen." By getting the full xp, the combat can be played in an organic, "as intended" way without losing xp points.

Click to expand...

You always have the option to tell your companion to "wait", so I don't think those things would be an issue. As it stands now, I don't have a problem with it as long as they nerf the companions a bit in the final release.

Nerevarine said:

I like the idea of having a companion in an open-world RPG. In fact, one of my "dream games" is to one day play a party-based RPG in an open-world setting. I love the idea of having a well-rounded, specialized group of adventurers in a setting like Skyrim, with a good cast of characters with deep back-stories, unique quests, party-banter/interactions, etc..

Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but I hope Piranha Bytes doesn't attempt it. I like their games because of the unique atmosphere they've always provided, and going party-based would undoubtedly change too many things for my liking. They need to stick with what they're good at doing.

Dragon Age: Origins was close to that kind of experience, but was held back by the linear level design. Ironically, Baldur's Gate is probably the closest thing to what you describe.

JDR13 said:

You always have the option to tell your companion to "wait", so I don't think those things would be an issue. As it stands now, I don't have a problem with it as long as they nerf the companions a bit in the final release.

Click to expand...

A fair point - but would it "punish" players who do travel with companions or discourage people from traveling with one if a "killer takes all, but you don't have to bring a companion" system was implemented, thus wasting the effort to put them in the game in the first place? As for nerfing companions, I fully agree that it needs to be done if they are capable of wiping out mobs all by themselves, but it's a difficult line to balance - if they are too powerful, it ruins the challenge, but if they are too weak, it breaks the immersion. Hopefully they manage to get the balance right.

JDR13 said:

I wouldn't mind seeing something like that, but I hope Piranha Bytes doesn't attempt it. I like their games because of the unique atmosphere they've always provided, and going party-based would undoubtedly change too many things for my liking. They need to stick with what they're good at doing.

Click to expand...

I also wouldn't want to see PB attempt such a thing for the reasons you just mentioned. If Bethesda could poach some good writers who are experienced at writing dialogue and creating character back-stories, I wouldn't mind seeing them try such a thing - but then again, they kind of fall in the PB category for the same reasons already stated. Also, they already have enough problems with things such as path-finding and A.I. that would be crucial for a smooth party-based/open-world experience .

JDR13 said:

Dragon Age: Origins was close to that kind of experience, but was held back by the linear level design.

Click to expand...

Ah, yet another disappointing aspect of Bioware being…well, Bioware, and mutilating the DA setting. Origins left a very strong base for a larger game world with mechanics that would work quite nicely in a more open but not quite open-world design template. Then again, Bioware has always been very story-driven, and even if a true DA2 had been created, it would have never been strong in exploration (not that that's a bad thing - I love story-driven experiences more than open-world exploration most of the time). I also feel that real-time/action combat would be the only way to make a party-based RPG work in an open world; I have a feeling that tactical systems - as much as I adore them - would cause combat to take too long in a game as big as a Gothic or Elder Scrolls game.

JDR13 said:

Ironically, Baldur's Gate is probably the closest thing to what you describe.

Click to expand...

And BG is also the best example of why such a thing would be so difficult to achieve. Compared to BG2, BG1 just doesn't quite feel right in terms of pacing, content, balance, encounter design, and other various issues. But it does serve as a good template for any future designers who would ever want to attempt such a thing.

…And now i have gone completely off-topic…sorry for that, maybe I should start a new thread if the "dream game: a party-based RPG in a true open-world" discussion continues

Nerevarine said:

If Bethesda could poach some good writers who are experienced at writing dialogue and creating character back-stories, I wouldn't mind seeing them try such a thing

Click to expand...

I've been saying they should just outsource all their writing to Obsidian and be done with it, for years now

Nerevarine said:

A fair point - but would it "punish" players who do travel with companions or discourage people from traveling with one if a "killer takes all, but you don't have to bring a companion" system was implemented, thus wasting the effort to put them in the game in the first place?

Click to expand...

Not imo. I think the player would have a choice that makes sense. Bring a companion and earn less XP but have an easier time… or go solo and earn more XP by facing a higher difficulty.

It's a moot point though. What's done is done.. PB isn't going to change something like that at this stage. Like I said… I just hope the companions don't end up being overly powerful.

Nerevarine said:

And BG is also the best example of why such a thing would be so difficult to achieve. Compared to BG2, BG1 just doesn't quite feel right in terms of pacing, content, balance, encounter design, and other various issues. But it does serve as a good template for any future designers who would ever want to attempt such a thing.

Click to expand...

Hmm.. I definitely don't agree with that assessment of BG compared to BG2, but that's probably a discussion meant for a different thread.

JonNik said:

I've been saying they should just outsource all their writing to Obsidian and be done with it, for years now

Click to expand...

Not just writing... about the only thing Bethesda does well is world design. I'm quickly growing bored with picking master locks in Skyrim for 32 gold and being sent to a random location across the map for some meaningless item. And then you come to Radiant quests... which seemingly work so well because their bland nature blends in so well with other bland facets of the game

Of the hundred? two hundred? quests that I've completed in Skyrim, perhaps a dozen have been memorable. With a PB game, you can at least be assured of handcrafted content that is interwoven to tell a larger story.

True that, I usually have writing and quest design a bit grouped in my head but they are two distinct areas and Obsidian is miles ahead of Bethesda in that department too…

And (to get back on topic) actually the only hopeful thing I get for Risen 2, by the previews and the feedback from our guys that went through the beta (in addition to the fact that the general feel and atmosphere is good old PB of course), is that quest design got a lot of love this time around, which is great really.