Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Very disappointed with Divinity: Original Sin

Sjukob

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Messages
2,052
You got it pretty good I should say. I finished the game once and it was before EE, I tried to give it another go after it's release and couldn't understand how the fuck did I play that game. What's even better is that they've managed to ignore nearly all the issues and carried them over to the sequel. Unfortunately I see plenty of people happily taking Larian's cock in the ass even on codex. DOS2 was the only game I bought in something like 2 years, may be more, and I regret wasting 160 hours on it, I will never buy another Larian game and I hope they go bankrupt as soon as possible.

Now you just have to admit that Elex is a shitty game as well and you can join the incline forces.
 

Sjukob

Arcane
Joined
Jul 3, 2015
Messages
2,052
If you hated it, why did you play it so long?
The usual case that happens with me sometimes. Play the game, get involved, finish it, think about what you've just played, realise you've been blind to something, change your oppinion. Besides I was pretty hyped and was following the game for quite some time, so those factors helped me to get detached from reality so much in fact, it took me 2 playthroughs to understand it.
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,087
Location
Bulgaria
You got it pretty good I should say. I finished the game once and it was before EE, I tried to give it another go after it's release and couldn't understand how the fuck did I play that game. What's even better is that they've managed to ignore nearly all the issues and carried them over to the sequel. Unfortunately I see plenty of people happily taking Larian's cock in the ass even on codex. DOS2 was the only game I bought in something like 2 years, may be more, and I regret wasting 160 hours on it, I will never buy another Larian game and I hope they go bankrupt as soon as possible.

Now you just have to admit that Elex is a shitty game as well and you can join the incline forces.
This sounds like mangle your hand with a hammer for days and then say "I hope that the firm that makes hammers goes under!". Are you retarded mate? Honest question.
 

Sizzle

Arcane
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
2,471
When enemies have 25 different moves it feels boring, generic and like they're more or less all the same.

Enemies having a lot of abilities and options in combat makes the game feel boring and generic? WTF are you on about, mate?

Now granted I only played for a few hours but I did not see anything that compelled me to go further with the game, quite the contrary actually.

And yet, you found the story in Numenera compelling :lol:

Crocodiles, to me, should not have magic spells. It was almost as if to showcase their AI or have every enemy be "interesting" according to the developers, they had to give them all at least one of every type of attack imaginable. The human thief or whatever I fought had so many abilities it was like fighting a 10th level Wizard in D&D, except here it was at level 1. It was just "too much" and felt like they threw everything plus three kitchen sinks into it all. So I uninstalled it. Even after winning the fights.

The crocodiles were void-corrupted, that's the only reason why they were like that.

As for the thieves, would you rather they be passive "go into stealth, attempt backstab, move out of the way, drink an invisibility potion, attempt backstab again, pelt with arrows until end of combat" IE-likes?

I guess I prefer "low excitement" RPGs, or at least RPGs that ease you into throwing the kitchen sink into things. I'm having more fun playing BG:EET on Hard with all the Sword Coast Strategems content installed with the highest difficulty encounters, because even if you fight a very tough enemy there they have lore and level-appropriate amounts of spells and tactics. They often have one or two "unique" type of traits, rather than just "everything goes!" at all times. And an Ogre Berserker is not going to cast a Magic Missile on me at ranged, then turn invisible, then throw an AoE grenade, shoot a flaming arrow and then become visible again and cleave my party. An Ogre Berserker is tough because they have massive strength and go berserk in melee.

Oh. I guess you would prefer thieves like that :D

My initial hours with D:OS2 felt like every enemy had an indiscernible amount of traits and tactics at their disposal that it felt more like a mishmash than a tightly handcrafted experience.

The beginning is a bit uneven, at least until you properly build up your own arsenal. Then the combat gets a lot more fun.

Like there were no real "classes", more of just "everyone can do a million different things."

Did you miss the part about this game being classless?

Not sure if I'm making it clear but those combats combined with the huge amount of "stuff" to sift through in the inventory just turned me off for now. I didn't think a game could have too much stuff but I may have been proved wrong.

Dude, you don't like the game, fair enough.

Now, there's a lot to criticize about D:OS2's combat - the silly armor system, the HP and damage bloat. But the part about the combat being bad just because the enemy has a lot of options to throw at you is complete and utter BS.
 
Self-Ejected

vivec

Self-Ejected
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
1,149
I could not agree more OP. Modern games are terribly written and designed. Even with the return of TB can't save this mess.
 
Self-Ejected

Davaris

Self-Ejected
Developer
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
6,547
Location
Idiocracy
I could not agree more OP. Modern games are terribly written and designed. Even with the return of TB can't save this mess.

But they look so damned sweet.

Could it be the inordinate amount of time and money devs spend dicking around with 3D engines and making assets for them, trying to outdo their competition in how they look, takes away from making the games themselves?
 

Andhaira

Arcane
Joined
Nov 25, 2007
Messages
1,868,966
I could not agree more OP. Modern games are terribly written and designed. Even with the return of TB can't save this mess.

Yeah this was my main complaint with D:OS; the writing was retarded and really, really took you out of the game. I enjoyed the game as much as I could as the combat was indeed turn based goodness, graphics and animations were great, etc but in the end couldn't finish it due to the game not taking itself seriously at all.

Is D:OS II better in this regard? And I don't mean a little better, but actually better with bearable writing and a serious story and dialogue?
 

Deleted Member 16721

Guest
When enemies have 25 different moves it feels boring, generic and like they're more or less all the same.

Enemies having a lot of abilities and options in combat makes the game feel boring and generic? WTF are you on about, mate?

Now granted I only played for a few hours but I did not see anything that compelled me to go further with the game, quite the contrary actually.

And yet, you found the story in Numenera compelling :lol:

Crocodiles, to me, should not have magic spells. It was almost as if to showcase their AI or have every enemy be "interesting" according to the developers, they had to give them all at least one of every type of attack imaginable. The human thief or whatever I fought had so many abilities it was like fighting a 10th level Wizard in D&D, except here it was at level 1. It was just "too much" and felt like they threw everything plus three kitchen sinks into it all. So I uninstalled it. Even after winning the fights.

The crocodiles were void-corrupted, that's the only reason why they were like that.

As for the thieves, would you rather they be passive "go into stealth, attempt backstab, move out of the way, drink an invisibility potion, attempt backstab again, pelt with arrows until end of combat" IE-likes?

I guess I prefer "low excitement" RPGs, or at least RPGs that ease you into throwing the kitchen sink into things. I'm having more fun playing BG:EET on Hard with all the Sword Coast Strategems content installed with the highest difficulty encounters, because even if you fight a very tough enemy there they have lore and level-appropriate amounts of spells and tactics. They often have one or two "unique" type of traits, rather than just "everything goes!" at all times. And an Ogre Berserker is not going to cast a Magic Missile on me at ranged, then turn invisible, then throw an AoE grenade, shoot a flaming arrow and then become visible again and cleave my party. An Ogre Berserker is tough because they have massive strength and go berserk in melee.

Oh. I guess you would prefer thieves like that :D

My initial hours with D:OS2 felt like every enemy had an indiscernible amount of traits and tactics at their disposal that it felt more like a mishmash than a tightly handcrafted experience.

The beginning is a bit uneven, at least until you properly build up your own arsenal. Then the combat gets a lot more fun.

Like there were no real "classes", more of just "everyone can do a million different things."

Did you miss the part about this game being classless?

Not sure if I'm making it clear but those combats combined with the huge amount of "stuff" to sift through in the inventory just turned me off for now. I didn't think a game could have too much stuff but I may have been proved wrong.

Dude, you don't like the game, fair enough.

Now, there's a lot to criticize about D:OS2's combat - the silly armor system, the HP and damage bloat. But the part about the combat being bad just because the enemy has a lot of options to throw at you is complete and utter BS.

You might have a point if I actually said that, but I didn't. I just found the game boring for my tastes, i.e. my opinion. If you liked combat, cool, good for you.

To further expound on my opinion, it's not just the fact the enemy has a lot to throw at you, it's the way they do it. It felt like the enemies I fought all had "an attack for every situation." Crocodiles too far away from you? They can buff, teleport and cast magic at you. The thief or whoever I fought used so many abilities I couldn't keep track of them all, buffs, debuffs, grenades flying. And this was all level 1 gameplay.

Maybe I'm getting old but the shit was just too much. Too many junk items everywhere, too many items to keep track of in the (terrible) inventory, too much everything. And this is from someone who is currently managing inventory for 6 characters in late-game Baldur's Gate with SCS turned on Hard/Tactical difficulty, i.e. there's a TON of inventory management in that game and it's more necessary to do it all for the tougher fights. It just feels better to do it in BG to me. And BG eased into it, whereas I felt like early game enemies in D:OS2 all had kitchen sinks and more to throw at you, just making it feel inconsistent and not like an old-school, handcrafted RPG (the kind I like most.)

Higher level thieves in BG w/ SCS go invisible, backstab, cast stinking clouds/cloudkill, take out weaker/vulnerable characters like mages, poison you and more. SCS improved the AI quite a bit.

I also wasn't thrilled with D:OS2 because the exploration felt cramped, wasn't interested in the story or characters and the graphics reminded me too much of World of Warcraft. And I had the feeling the whole time that I'd seen this all before, i.e. it was too much like every other party-based RPG I'd played already.

The shit just turned me off. Your mileage may vary.
 

Sizzle

Arcane
Joined
Feb 17, 2012
Messages
2,471
When enemies have 25 different moves it feels boring, generic and like they're more or less all the same.

Enemies having a lot of abilities and options in combat makes the game feel boring and generic? WTF are you on about, mate?

Now granted I only played for a few hours but I did not see anything that compelled me to go further with the game, quite the contrary actually.

And yet, you found the story in Numenera compelling :lol:

Crocodiles, to me, should not have magic spells. It was almost as if to showcase their AI or have every enemy be "interesting" according to the developers, they had to give them all at least one of every type of attack imaginable. The human thief or whatever I fought had so many abilities it was like fighting a 10th level Wizard in D&D, except here it was at level 1. It was just "too much" and felt like they threw everything plus three kitchen sinks into it all. So I uninstalled it. Even after winning the fights.

The crocodiles were void-corrupted, that's the only reason why they were like that.

As for the thieves, would you rather they be passive "go into stealth, attempt backstab, move out of the way, drink an invisibility potion, attempt backstab again, pelt with arrows until end of combat" IE-likes?

I guess I prefer "low excitement" RPGs, or at least RPGs that ease you into throwing the kitchen sink into things. I'm having more fun playing BG:EET on Hard with all the Sword Coast Strategems content installed with the highest difficulty encounters, because even if you fight a very tough enemy there they have lore and level-appropriate amounts of spells and tactics. They often have one or two "unique" type of traits, rather than just "everything goes!" at all times. And an Ogre Berserker is not going to cast a Magic Missile on me at ranged, then turn invisible, then throw an AoE grenade, shoot a flaming arrow and then become visible again and cleave my party. An Ogre Berserker is tough because they have massive strength and go berserk in melee.

Oh. I guess you would prefer thieves like that :D

My initial hours with D:OS2 felt like every enemy had an indiscernible amount of traits and tactics at their disposal that it felt more like a mishmash than a tightly handcrafted experience.

The beginning is a bit uneven, at least until you properly build up your own arsenal. Then the combat gets a lot more fun.

Like there were no real "classes", more of just "everyone can do a million different things."

Did you miss the part about this game being classless?

Not sure if I'm making it clear but those combats combined with the huge amount of "stuff" to sift through in the inventory just turned me off for now. I didn't think a game could have too much stuff but I may have been proved wrong.

Dude, you don't like the game, fair enough.

Now, there's a lot to criticize about D:OS2's combat - the silly armor system, the HP and damage bloat. But the part about the combat being bad just because the enemy has a lot of options to throw at you is complete and utter BS.

You might have a point if I actually said that, but I didn't. I just found the game boring for my tastes, i.e. my opinion. If you liked combat, cool, good for you.

To further expound on my opinion, it's not just the fact the enemy has a lot to throw at you, it's the way they do it. It felt like the enemies I fought all had "an attack for every situation." Crocodiles too far away from you? They can buff, teleport and cast magic at you. The thief or whoever I fought used so many abilities I couldn't keep track of them all, buffs, debuffs, grenades flying. And this was all level 1 gameplay.

Maybe I'm getting old but the shit was just too much. Too many junk items everywhere, too many items to keep track of in the (terrible) inventory, too much everything. And this is from someone who is currently managing inventory for 6 characters in late-game Baldur's Gate with SCS turned on Hard/Tactical difficulty, i.e. there's a TON of inventory management in that game and it's more necessary to do it all for the tougher fights. It just feels better to do it in BG to me. And BG eased into it, whereas I felt like early game enemies in D:OS2 all had kitchen sinks and more to throw at you, just making it feel inconsistent and not like an old-school, handcrafted RPG (the kind I like most.)

Higher level thieves in BG w/ SCS go invisible, backstab, cast stinking clouds/cloudkill, take out weaker/vulnerable characters like mages, poison you and more. SCS improved the AI quite a bit.

I also wasn't thrilled with D:OS2 because the exploration felt cramped, wasn't interested in the story or characters and the graphics reminded me too much of World of Warcraft. And I had the feeling the whole time that I'd seen this all before, i.e. it was too much like every other party-based RPG I'd played already.

The shit just turned me off. Your mileage may vary.

Almost all the options that the enemies have - you have as well.

So bitching about them buffing, teleporting and casting magic seems a bit odd, especially considering that every type of skill/character you play also has those very same abilities.

And I don't really care about you not liking the game, I'm just defending the fact that, yes, having more options in combat is a good thing, not a bad one.
 
Self-Ejected

Brayko

Self-Ejected
Joined
Feb 11, 2012
Messages
5,540
Location
United States of America
I don't know why these Divinity games get such praise, when I played D:OS for the first time my literal "fabulously optimistic"
clear.png
clear.png
clear.png
meter went off the charts. Makes you think.
 
Self-Ejected

vivec

Self-Ejected
Joined
Oct 20, 2014
Messages
1,149
I could not agree more OP. Modern games are terribly written and designed. Even with the return of TB can't save this mess.

Yeah this was my main complaint with D:OS; the writing was retarded and really, really took you out of the game. I enjoyed the game as much as I could as the combat was indeed turn based goodness, graphics and animations were great, etc but in the end couldn't finish it due to the game not taking itself seriously at all.

Is D:OS II better in this regard? And I don't mean a little better, but actually better with bearable writing and a serious story and dialogue?

Neither the writing has improved nor has the design. The wacky humor has been turned down a *bit* though.
 
Last edited:

Deleted Member 16721

Guest
When enemies have 25 different moves it feels boring, generic and like they're more or less all the same.

Enemies having a lot of abilities and options in combat makes the game feel boring and generic? WTF are you on about, mate?

Now granted I only played for a few hours but I did not see anything that compelled me to go further with the game, quite the contrary actually.

And yet, you found the story in Numenera compelling :lol:

Crocodiles, to me, should not have magic spells. It was almost as if to showcase their AI or have every enemy be "interesting" according to the developers, they had to give them all at least one of every type of attack imaginable. The human thief or whatever I fought had so many abilities it was like fighting a 10th level Wizard in D&D, except here it was at level 1. It was just "too much" and felt like they threw everything plus three kitchen sinks into it all. So I uninstalled it. Even after winning the fights.

The crocodiles were void-corrupted, that's the only reason why they were like that.

As for the thieves, would you rather they be passive "go into stealth, attempt backstab, move out of the way, drink an invisibility potion, attempt backstab again, pelt with arrows until end of combat" IE-likes?

I guess I prefer "low excitement" RPGs, or at least RPGs that ease you into throwing the kitchen sink into things. I'm having more fun playing BG:EET on Hard with all the Sword Coast Strategems content installed with the highest difficulty encounters, because even if you fight a very tough enemy there they have lore and level-appropriate amounts of spells and tactics. They often have one or two "unique" type of traits, rather than just "everything goes!" at all times. And an Ogre Berserker is not going to cast a Magic Missile on me at ranged, then turn invisible, then throw an AoE grenade, shoot a flaming arrow and then become visible again and cleave my party. An Ogre Berserker is tough because they have massive strength and go berserk in melee.

Oh. I guess you would prefer thieves like that :D

My initial hours with D:OS2 felt like every enemy had an indiscernible amount of traits and tactics at their disposal that it felt more like a mishmash than a tightly handcrafted experience.

The beginning is a bit uneven, at least until you properly build up your own arsenal. Then the combat gets a lot more fun.

Like there were no real "classes", more of just "everyone can do a million different things."

Did you miss the part about this game being classless?

Not sure if I'm making it clear but those combats combined with the huge amount of "stuff" to sift through in the inventory just turned me off for now. I didn't think a game could have too much stuff but I may have been proved wrong.

Dude, you don't like the game, fair enough.

Now, there's a lot to criticize about D:OS2's combat - the silly armor system, the HP and damage bloat. But the part about the combat being bad just because the enemy has a lot of options to throw at you is complete and utter BS.

You might have a point if I actually said that, but I didn't. I just found the game boring for my tastes, i.e. my opinion. If you liked combat, cool, good for you.

To further expound on my opinion, it's not just the fact the enemy has a lot to throw at you, it's the way they do it. It felt like the enemies I fought all had "an attack for every situation." Crocodiles too far away from you? They can buff, teleport and cast magic at you. The thief or whoever I fought used so many abilities I couldn't keep track of them all, buffs, debuffs, grenades flying. And this was all level 1 gameplay.

Maybe I'm getting old but the shit was just too much. Too many junk items everywhere, too many items to keep track of in the (terrible) inventory, too much everything. And this is from someone who is currently managing inventory for 6 characters in late-game Baldur's Gate with SCS turned on Hard/Tactical difficulty, i.e. there's a TON of inventory management in that game and it's more necessary to do it all for the tougher fights. It just feels better to do it in BG to me. And BG eased into it, whereas I felt like early game enemies in D:OS2 all had kitchen sinks and more to throw at you, just making it feel inconsistent and not like an old-school, handcrafted RPG (the kind I like most.)

Higher level thieves in BG w/ SCS go invisible, backstab, cast stinking clouds/cloudkill, take out weaker/vulnerable characters like mages, poison you and more. SCS improved the AI quite a bit.

I also wasn't thrilled with D:OS2 because the exploration felt cramped, wasn't interested in the story or characters and the graphics reminded me too much of World of Warcraft. And I had the feeling the whole time that I'd seen this all before, i.e. it was too much like every other party-based RPG I'd played already.

The shit just turned me off. Your mileage may vary.

Almost all the options that the enemies have - you have as well.

So bitching about them buffing, teleporting and casting magic seems a bit odd, especially considering that every type of skill/character you play also has those very same abilities.

And I don't really care about you not liking the game, I'm just defending the fact that, yes, having more options in combat is a good thing, not a bad one.

Well that's a blanket statement. More does not always automatically equal better (although I am more in the camp of quantity over quality in RPGs. Far too many modern RPGs streamline everything when more quantity could be added to make gameplay more interesting, i.e. more party member choices for different party synergies, more class kits and so on. But I digress.)

It's cool that player characters have the same abilities, but it doesn't really address what I posted. I think every enemy having every ability (exaggeration for emphasis) does not make for great combat encounters.

To use the crocodile example, to me, a croc like that should be more along the lines of:

Slow, but armored.
Bite attack that can cause bleeding, possibly short-term poison, maybe long-term disease.

And honestly, that's about it.

But when I see a crocodile, "Source tainted" or otherwise,

A - buffing in various ways at the start of combat
B - teleporting to new locations in combat via magic
C - using ranged magic attack spells

It just gets into territory that I don't really care to explore right now.

The underlying idea behind my opinion is that the enemies, at least the few I remember, *felt* like they had every trick in the book, already, at level 1. It was like "stuff overload". Scrolls, grenades, potions, status effects, etc., even for player characters. If I use the Baldur's Gate example again, early game BG is very slow. Typical low-level stuff, i.e. a single Potion of Strength is a big deal, or finding a scroll or Luck can make a big difference in an encounter. Now some would say early level D&D is too slow and paltry compared to higher level D&D, but for me that's my favorite part of an RPG, the slow, "low excitement" type of start. But I like to start slow and ease into things.

I am a staunch old-school head so maybe it's just me, but D:OS2 just felt like "too much, too soon." 3 hours into the game isn't enough to already be dealing with Inventory Hell in an RPG, IMO. And my other opinions about the graphics, inventory and overall presentation had an effect as well in me not wanting to continue, I'm sure. It honestly just felt like more of the same to me, too.

That said, I enjoyed the first D:OS for 140 hours and completed it, so they must be doing something right with their ideas. But I probably won't re-play it, and my future RPG choices for the moment are going to be old-school flavored CRPGs (Pillars 1 or 2, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, etc..)

I hope more RTWP RPGs get made. I find the turn-based RPGs starting to drag a bit, at least when extensive combat field movement is necessary. Elminage turn-based I still enjoy greatly, but find myself moving further from D:OS's style of turn-based right now. Then again, I'd be up for another ToEE anytime, but that also has the D&D Factor which increases my willingness to play it by at least +5.

That's another thing. I hope more CRPGs get made with real pen and paper rulesets. I find myself getting a bit tired of rulesets that are sort of non-consequential in that they are made for a single game and then either abandoned or changed completely for the sequel. We need more really good rulesets, which is a big reason why I'm still playing D&D RPGs from 10+ years ago in 2018 (and consequently not as excited to play through RPGs like D:OS2, Tyranny or others at the moment.)
 

ilitarist

Learned
Illiterate Village Idiot
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
857
D:OS2 to me was just too much. Yes, it seems a CRPG can actually have "too much stuff". Inventory was a mess, too many items, convoluted, and the enemies all felt like they had the same endless and too-huge bag of tricks to draw from, a move (or three) for every occasion and then some.

You are describing DOS1. DOS2 is more balanced in this approach.

Also DivDiv has very questionable design. The very first level of the very first dungeon throws a random puzzle at you - have to place magical orbs in specific places - with nothing even suggesting it AFAIK. By that point you aren't even taught that the game has puzzles or "physics"-based puzzles. It looks like Diablo with dialogues so I'm pretty sure people back then couldn't even fight through demo. Strange that it doesn't bother you yet DOS2 abundance of tricks does. Yes, it makes combat more reactive and unbalanced - you basically use stupid OP tactics against enemy stupid OP tactics and see which one is more bullshit - but there's fun in that.
 

Deleted Member 16721

Guest
D:OS2 to me was just too much. Yes, it seems a CRPG can actually have "too much stuff". Inventory was a mess, too many items, convoluted, and the enemies all felt like they had the same endless and too-huge bag of tricks to draw from, a move (or three) for every occasion and then some.

You are describing DOS1. DOS2 is more balanced in this approach.

Also DivDiv has very questionable design. The very first level of the very first dungeon throws a random puzzle at you - have to place magical orbs in specific places - with nothing even suggesting it AFAIK. By that point you aren't even taught that the game has puzzles or "physics"-based puzzles. It looks like Diablo with dialogues so I'm pretty sure people back then couldn't even fight through demo. Strange that it doesn't bother you yet DOS2 abundance of tricks does. Yes, it makes combat more reactive and unbalanced - you basically use stupid OP tactics against enemy stupid OP tactics and see which one is more bullshit - but there's fun in that.

DivDiv's opening dungeon is great to me, but the game gets better when you can explore. I didn't have any issue with that puzzle. I guess if you aren't used to CRPGs and don't have previous experience with games like it then it could be an issue. I personally never or very rarely get stuck on stuff like that because I've seen it all before for the most part. And I played DivDiv years after its release.

DivDiv just feels more like a handcrafted CRPG to me. More of a style i like. It has tons of items you can interact with but it's not overkill. I wish combat was RTWP but I'm glad it's not turn-based. There are little secrets hidden around, and the world is dangerous to explore with a feeling of handcraftedness due to lack of level scaling. Surprises around every corner, and the graphics are way more immersive to me because they are a detailed and lovely isometric style, my favorite type. The modern isometric doens't even look as good, let alone modern 3D/isometric. But I'm not arguing that DivDiv is some perfect game (spoiler - nothing, game or otherwise, is without flaws), but it's an experience I like to return to and am more likely to return to it than the Oriignal Sin series.
 

ilitarist

Learned
Illiterate Village Idiot
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
857
I've played DivDiv years back but never got to finish it (and you probably know where I gave up, that faraway location, third act). I've tried it recently after playing DOS2 and I thought I was prepared for the quirkiness. Still I wasn't prepared to puzzles that are so abstract and meta-gamey - of course it's strange when people leave notes with reminders of how to hack their security, but it's even worse when you have to throw stuff around just because the game has highlighted it. I expected that firing up candles in that starting area would do something and then I ran around the level again and thought that I've encountered some sort of bug, so I googled it.

For me DOS2 feels like the least offensive game of the series. It has less of that boring kind of pseudo-Pratchett humor other games have, that made DivDiv and Divinity Original Sin 1 hard to play for me. It doesn't have those generic dungeon packs of monsters DivDiv has (I have fuzzy memories of DivDiv but I distinctly remember hordes of Orcs with some shamans and later hordes of lizardmen with some shamans). It still has atrocious inventory (same as every other game in the series) and unnecessary crafting system. It has good puzzles but not of the cryptic nature of DivDiv - and most of them are optional. DOS1 had even worse puzzles than DivDiv, most of those required pixel hunting and some were unsolvable without a special animal language skill.

I have not yet played Divinity 2 but as I understand it's unremarkable. Haven't played Dragon Commander but it's more of a strategy game as I understand. It seems to me you value dungeons as a place to explore, not as a place to fight. A random question: what do you feel about Might & Magic series?
 

Ash

Arcane
Joined
Oct 16, 2015
Messages
6,235
This thread is interesting. D:OS was Codex's golden baby and saviour from the dark forces of decline a couple years back. Never did play it myself, despite intending to one day getting around to it.

I still didn't even play this series yet but

good comedies actually have a serious background, against which the humor is contrasted.

uJk01CI.gif


Too bad it's been ages since I last saw a content creator from whatever branch of the gaming industry that seem to have a good understanding of this. Even visually.

It's the reason why this

monkey-36-bottom1.gif


Was much funnier and better than this

hqdefault.jpg

Wow, humour contrasting aside that art style is decline and

:prosper:
 

Valky

Arcane
Manlet
Joined
Aug 22, 2016
Messages
2,418
Location
Trapped in a bioform
D:OS non enhanced edition was enjoyable, but Enhanced and 2 just went fully after the popamole audience with its muh multiplayer and casual shit like quest markers. Leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
 

Althorion

Learned
Joined
Apr 22, 2017
Messages
111
Multiplayer was as pronounced at EE as before, nothing new was added for it.
 

Deitti

Augur
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
111
This thread is interesting. D:OS was Codex's golden baby and saviour from the dark forces of decline a couple years back. Never did play it myself, despite intending to one day getting around to it.

I personally think this thread is pretty perfect example of another fine year at the Codex.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom