How would you rate Pillars of Eternity?

[Mareus]

I went with 8/10 based on something like 20+ hours of play. To me the 9-10 range should be reserved for genre-defining classics, which PoE isn't, but the game's definitely at least as good as I hoped it would be, probably better. I mean, for example I enjoyed WL2 but it really felt like a "Kickstarter game" all the way, lots of good things about it but not much polish, and the limited budget really showed everywhere in the game, but PoE is gorgeous and so well made that you stop thinking about it in Kickstarter terms and instead compare it directly to the classics that influenced it, and it doesn't fare too badly in comparison. It doesn't beat Torment or BG2, but it's definitely better than either of the Icewind Dale games (which was pretty much the target I initially set for it), and unless there's a notable drop in quality later on, it will beat BG1 as well.

Pretty much how I feel about the game, but I do consider the game a classic, even if it is not on the same level as BG/PST. I do hope Obsidian fixes the encounter design, which is my biggest complaint actually, along with all the forced Kickstarter characters they shoved in. Hopefully modders can improve the game further and fix these things if Obsidian refuses to do it. Still, with a good expansion and hopefully better sequels, PoE might even surpass the classics of old. Lets not forget BG1 is nowhere near as good as BG2.

 

[Sensuki]

PoE has better music than BG1's.

..........................

 

[Broseph]

I thought about it and here's my judgement:

PoE is better than BG2 but not as good as Arcanum.

 

[Zombra]

Posted in honor of Jackie's birthday?

 

[Lhynn]

they forgot one thing that made (...) BG good ,the writing and the lore.

He should have clarified, the non intrusive lore and the writing that calls for adventure and exploration. Either way the execution of both is better in BG for the most part.

 

[Reapa]

I thought you would not be responding to my posts anymore.

i thought you'd let it go, but instead you put a lot of effort into this and i'm gonna honor that.

i had a problem with the bad writing, the bad combat, the bad stats design, the bad story, the bad pathfinding, the bad AI, the bad itemization, the bad focus on balance, the bad inventory design, the bad companion design, the bad choice of putting fucking backer npcs where npcs should be with various connections to the game itself, the big bad dragons, the bad quest design, the bad reputation design, the bad design of character housing, the bad resting design, the bad choice and consequence design, the bad random loot generator, the bad pricing and economy design... i don't know, there might be more but this just comes to me naturally at the moment.

Calling things bad still doesn't qualify for a coherent argument, nor does it explain why it is bad. Jesus Christ... you are retarded. But ok... I will just assume here that it doesn't differ from the points others have raised. Let us examine it a bit:

you wanted to know what i thought was bad about the game. you also said i didn't need to write an essay on it so shove it.

Bad writing: I agree the writing is better in the infinity engine games, but to claim that writing is bad or average in PoE is just retarded. It is more an oscillation between average and great. I mean if you qualify PoE writing as bad, what would you qualify the writing of Skyrim or Oblivion? Ultra-mega-super bad? Look, I consider Bethesda games to have bad writing. Average is what you get with games like Dragon Age or Mass Effect. D: OS had decent writing, Arcanum just slightly better, but I still don't think it is on the same level as PoE. So you have all those games that have worse writing than PoE, and yet you describe PoE writing as bad? Am I the only one to see how retarded your statement is? But even if I granted you that PoE had bad or average writing, writing is just one element of the whole game, and I have played some amazing games with horrible writing. Morrowind being one of them. So even if I granted you this, which I fucking don't, you still have a lot of work ahead of you.

there you go, the standard has been set about 15 years ago and the writing here has not managed to be better but worse. i don't see how that makes any sense due to the fact that this time there was no publisher involved to censor, hurry up the production and cater to special interest groups.
Skyrim and Oblivion had writing/writers?
PoE has better writing than Arcanum?
Let me explain something about writing. The base of it is a fairly simple concept. It needs to motivate and be coherent.
Arcanum told you that your blimp was attacked and crashed. After the crash a dying gnome gave you a ring together with his last wish. Some Virgil guy came along and said something about a prophecy you seem to be the center of and he believed in it so strongly that he would follow you around. Exploring the map will eventually lead you to find another crashed flying machine. the one from the attacker, inside of which there's a strange amulet.
Right from the start Arcanum gives you 3 motives to start/continue playing. the fact that you have been attacked and almost died should make you wonder why and who did it. the fact that some cult thinks you are the chosen one should make you wonder why, whether it is true and what they expect you to do. and the fact that a dieing gnome made a request of you with his dieing breath should make you try and fulfill it.
PoE tells you you are on a caravan and it stops because you have fucking tummy aches. To top that you have to search for berries yourself. (1st incoherence and the motivational value ist beyond shitty) then the caravan gets attacked and the people who mindlessly and mercilessly and without any fear or doubt killed everyone, stop to chat with you about their god and their wives and how their day has been and even make weird requests of you to drop your weapons while holding a knife to a hostages throat. why the fuck do they need a hostage? why the fuck do they talk with you in the first place? they're on a fucking killing spree!!! (2nd incoherence) so you're the only batman in that caravan and despite what seemed to be major health problems (the caravan stopped to cure you, remember?) kill them after everyone else only managed to die. (3rd incoherence) suddenly you're in some caves and the first thing you find is resting supplies, but you get told by that idiot companion that if you rest she leaves and if you do she actually does because it seems the people who just killed the entire caravan were piece of cake for her, she's not even scratched. Never mind that the other two, you with stomach aches and the need for berries and that rogue who has an open torso or whatever really need to rest. what is important here is that the game shows you that it's hard core. (4th incoherence) somehow you manage to get out of the cave and both your companions get one hit while you get superpowers. but you're some hipster health activist that has to see a problem with that cause maybe you will die about a hundred years from now due to radiation poisoning or something. so you need to find the guy that did that to you so you can discuss things out or maybe sue him, i don't know, the game doesn't really bother to give me any real motivation to finding him.
then you get to the first village and you see dead people hanging from a tree so you guess the best thing to do is to brag about superpowers...

Bad combat and bad stat design: Again, I agree that IE games had better combat. Well.. IWD and BG anyway. PST... not so much, but that is a story driven game and combat is not in such focus.

:D you're such a genius. who would have thought that PS:T was a story RPG? I've got news for you: Arcanum and BG/BG2 were also story RPGs. But that's not all: PoE is also a story RPG even if sawyer will talk about combat more than about the story.

But just as it is the case with writing, I do not think the combat is bad. I justify my reasoning with comparing the combat with IE games and observing just how similar it is and even superior in some elements. There are of course differences due to the new ruleset and engagement system, but nothing too drastic. If PoE has bad combat, then IWD and BG have average combat at best, while PST has ultra-mega-super bad combat. And again, compare PoE combat with Arcanum combat. If PoE has bad combat, then Arcanum has ultra-mega-super bad combat with a shit topping. Still doesn't change the fact Arcanum is one of the best RPGs ever created. Oh and if you want an objective evaluation of combat, you will not get it by whining only about the bad stuff. You also have to take a look at improvements and then take both the bad and the good stuff into account.

you should think the combat is bad. RTwP is bad by definition. it's just a clusterfuck of nonsense. arcanum at least had action points based turn based combat as an alternative.

For example, the fighter class in BG didn't really have any abilities until Throne of Bhaal.

yes he did you dumbfuck! he had the ability of being able to wield any kind of weapon and wear any kind of armor. he also had the ability to improve proficiency with any kind of weapon and above any other class. not knowing that disqualifies you from discussing stats and combat. I'm not gonna explain why the stats and combat mechanics are stupid to someone who doesn't understand that the very principle of party based RPGs is having highly different classes with very strict distinctions.

Bad story: Riiiiight... Can you elaborate on this one, because this is completely new to me. From what I read people usually complained about minor annoyances. Not the story. But I am sure it will be brilliant.

of course i can. it has a lot to do with the writing. read the arguments about the writing and you also understand how such a story can't be good from the get go.

Bad pathfinding: This was a problem in older games as well. I don't see any difference really.

i see a big difference. 15 years of difference. newer technology. gps and stuff.

The bad AI: You mean like being a carbon copy of the older games except this time the enemies won't be running between your party members like a confused chicken while you pick them off with a bow and arrow? Somehow I fail to see how this qualifies for bad AI.

i'm sure the AI challenges you to the max.

Bad itemization: Are you talking about random loot here? Yeah, I am not a big fan of that either. But I do get some nice stuff from time to time. I wouldn't call it horrible.

no, i'm not talking about the random loot generator twice. bad itemization has a whole thread here on the pillars of eternity subforum. inform yourself. it's about that unique sword you get for finding all the pieces and then a smith to put it back together only to realize you could have just enchanted one. nothing unique about shit like that.

Bad focus on balance: And... IE games were balanced... right? Need I remind you that certain classes could solo the game, while it was impossible for others? Not really ideal balance, is it? Or perhaps you mean getting wiped because you stumbled all of a sudden on an opponent that you couldn't beat? Hmm... reminds me on my playthrough of BG when I stumbled upon a flying skull that wiped my party in 4 seconds, or a similar experience with eye of a beholder. Or with my first encounter with a dragon. Each time I got wiped. But I learned, leveled up, came back and then fucked them royally. I mean, you wanted people to compare it to older games, so when I do that, I don't really see a problem.

bad focus on balance does not mean bad balance. it means the focus is badly made. you shouldn't make a fucking story RPG and then focus on combat balance.

Bad inventory design: PfffffffffffftttthahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA! Really now?

Ok.. ok... lets compare it to original IE inventory system. In IE games, when you wanted to check what your party has in their inventory, you had to open each character individually. In PoE, you see the inventory of a whole party in 1 screen, while retaining individual inventories for each party member. Yep... you are retarded. I mean,... if PoE improved 1 thing it improved the inventory design.

yes, a bottomless pit is a bad inventory design.

Bad companion design: worse than BG2 and PST, better then BG1 and IWD&IWD2. Better then Arcanum and Fallout 1 and 2. Need I say more?

maybe it's just me but i didn't really care for any of my companions in PoE.

The bad choice of putting fucking backer npcs where npcs should be with various connections to the game itself: I agree.

you could just agree to the whole package and get this over with...

The big bad dragons: Why?

that actually criticizes everything about the setting. you have new names for every possible race and a bunch of lore to go with that but you have the same fucking races you see in every other generic piece of shit game. and of course you have to have dragons because dragons are awesome (aka the skyrim design)

The bad quest design: Disagree. It is on the same level as BG trilogy.

it's generic. the fact that it's not worse doesn't make it better. the fact that it came 15 years later does make it worse because it's the same old soup.

The bad reputation design: Please explain.

if you can have good reputation based on deeds and cruel reputation based on what you say it kinda makes a mess of the whole reputation design.

The bad design of character housing: I think it could have been better, yeah.

can't argue with that.

The bad resting design: Because resting for 72 hours after each fight is superior and more realistic than to actually having camping supplies and being limited in the amount of rest you can take. You........bumbling........imbecile........

so basically every fight takes the same amount of rest time to heal various wounds. recovering from a scratched knee or bandaging a flesh wound takes the same amount of time as recovering from a broken foot. also you're heading to a 15 level dungeon with a party of 6. why don't you take the same amount of resting supplies with you as when you stroll around the city? you blow your resting supplies on the first level or the first 2 levels and go back to the village and again you take the same amount of resting supplies with you because obviously you don't need more. It's a stupid fucking design decision and it's only there because it inflates the time you need to play the game. it also distracts attention from bad encounter design. there's a lot of thrash encounters out there that require no thought at all during the fight but will hurt your tank enough to make him have to rest once in a while whether you use your spells or not. also per encounter abilities make no sense at all. none. there is simply no justification of having any ability that is only possible to use once per fight but then every fight. having abilities you used to have to rest for turn into per encounter abilities is even stupider although not by much.

The bad choice and consequence design: Because having choices and consequences is worse than not having any, as it was the case in Baldurs Gate and IWD. Ok... BG had some c&c when it comes to companions and romances, but not even close to PoE. PST of course is superior to PoE in that regard. Still I don't think you make a valid point here.

you'd think the redrick hold quest would be a big enough matter to have some real consequence. it doesn't.

The bad random loot generator: Isn't this the same as bad itemization that you already mentioned?

no, it's the lazy approach to the rewarding mechanism. the game is filled with hidden stuff and it's all random generated crap. kinda beats the point of having hidden stuff in the first place.
it keeps obsessive compulsive people busy but it is in no way smart to keep switching between running and stealth mode to find good stuff. and even these people the game caters to: the obsessive compulsive completionists will flip you off if you don't reward them properly.

The bad pricing and economy design: Every game has a problem with that.

so no improvements here even if you are right.

now even if you exchange the word bad before each example with the word average, the game is still a piece of average shit. and make no mistake, if i were to annalize each example it would turn into a detailed 10 pages report on the game, so i'll just assume you've played the game and know what the fuck i'm talking about or at least read some threads here.

Yes, I read through the complaints and majority of it is utter and total bullshit. If people were to put older games under the same scrutiny, it would turn many of the older classics into shit/average games as you put it.

no it wouldn't. bad combat will not make arcanum or PS:T suck because they have solid writing. a good structure of motivation and reward. this one doesn't and if it focuses on balance and combat although it shouldn't it does make it suck.

the art style might be the only good thing about the game.

Oh, there is plenty of good stuff that you didn't mention. Its not just art and music, although I hear some people complain even about art and music.

ahh, the smartphone master race.

LoL! What is that supposed to mean? Jesus Christ dude. Don't project your idiocy on to me. I just like to take a shit in the toilet from time to time while reading stuff from my smartphone. It doesn't mean I am a smartphone/tablet gamer for fucks sake. And even if I was, how does that invalidate anything I said, or prevent me from liking PC games as well?

it doesn't. it just says ahh, the smartphone master race

if you did any comparison to the really good old games and still come to the conclusion this is a 8/10 you're stupid as fuck.

Perhaps it is you that need to do the comparison, because more than half of the things you complain about exist in older classics or are even done worse there.

and yet there they don't matter. must have something to do with the writing when it comes to story RPGs. duh!

yeah, i usually don't enjoy conversation with people using words like lol, rofl, swag, yolo and whatever else the smartphone degeneration incorporates in their language.

Because using a smartphone while you take a shit is degenerate... Makes sense.

People using words like lol, rofl, swag, yolo often don't know what the big deal is. it might have something to do with the writing

 

[Sceptic]

I don't know about the game, but the thread definitely rates a 10/10

 

[Ninjerk]

reapa just fucking rekt

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Bad combat and bad stat design: Again, I agree that IE games had better combat. Well.. IWD and BG anyway. PST... not so much, but that is a story driven game and combat is not in such focus. But just as it is the case with writing, I do not think the combat is bad. I justify my reasoning with comparing the combat with IE games and observing just how similar it is and even superior in some elements. There are of course differences due to the new ruleset and engagement system, but nothing too drastic. If PoE has bad combat, then IWD and BG have average combat at best, while PST has ultra-mega-super bad combat. And again, compare PoE combat with Arcanum combat. If PoE has bad combat, then Arcanum has ultra-mega-super bad combat with a shit topping. Still doesn't change the fact Arcanum is one of the best RPGs ever created. Oh and if you want an objective evaluation of combat, you will not get it by whining only about the bad stuff. You also have to take a look at improvements and then take both the bad and the good stuff into account.

Wait, so the decline has reached the stage where we're supposed to see IE games as good old times? IWD and BG have bad combat, PST has super-bad combat, Arcanum has double-super-bad combat. Now, if PoE combat is worse than BG1 and ID, then it has a serious problem.

 

[One-and-a-half-Ivan]

Finished. 9/10, would replay. Missed a LOT of content, even though my playthrough took me ~50 hours.
Now I can sleep well again

 

[Mareus]

Bad combat and bad stat design: Again, I agree that IE games had better combat. Well.. IWD and BG anyway. PST... not so much, but that is a story driven game and combat is not in such focus. But just as it is the case with writing, I do not think the combat is bad. I justify my reasoning with comparing the combat with IE games and observing just how similar it is and even superior in some elements. There are of course differences due to the new ruleset and engagement system, but nothing too drastic. If PoE has bad combat, then IWD and BG have average combat at best, while PST has ultra-mega-super bad combat. And again, compare PoE combat with Arcanum combat. If PoE has bad combat, then Arcanum has ultra-mega-super bad combat with a shit topping. Still doesn't change the fact Arcanum is one of the best RPGs ever created. Oh and if you want an objective evaluation of combat, you will not get it by whining only about the bad stuff. You also have to take a look at improvements and then take both the bad and the good stuff into account.

Wait, so the decline has reached the stage where we're supposed to see IE games as good old times?

Congratulations! You win the whiner of the year award!



You can leave now.

 

[Crooked Bee]

A lot has changed on the Codex in recent years, including the attitude to IE games.

 

[Mareus]

i thought you'd let it go, but instead you put a lot of effort into this and i'm gonna honor that.

Well, at least I helped you raise the intelligence of your posts. for the Codex.

you wanted to know what i thought was bad about the game. you also said i didn't need to write an essay on it so shove it.

Yes, but calling stuff bad still doesn't qualify for a coherent argument. You can write an argument without writing an essay, you know? Just saying...

I consider Bethesda games to have bad writing.

Skyrim and Oblivion had writing/writers?

Oh, I see what you did there. Nice L1 troll maneuver.

PS. Oh.. and bolding the part where I said how I agree that IE games had better combat as if this somehow proves something, does not mean the combat in PoE is bad. You can have great combat with some other game having even better combat. Me having to explain these basic concepts of rational thinking however proves you are an idiot, which is why this is the last post I will spend on you.

PoE has better writing than Arcanum?

Yes.

Let me explain something about writing.

Oh, this is going to be rich... Lets hear it.

The base of it is a fairly simple concept. It needs to motivate and be coherent.

That is only one aspect of it. Another one is how the characters talk and behave, plot holes, convenience plots, quality of how sentences are formed, diversity of characters, etc. Me having to point this out to you just tells me that you don't even know what writing is. Which is what I expected from you based on the quality of your previous posts.

Arcanum told you that your blimp was attacked and crashed. After the crash a dying gnome gave you a ring together with his last wish. Some Virgil guy came along and said something about a prophecy you seem to be the center of and he believed in it so strongly that he would follow you around. Exploring the map will eventually lead you to find another crashed flying machine. the one from the attacker, inside of which there's a strange amulet.
Right from the start Arcanum gives you 3 motives to start/continue playing.

Yes, it does motivate me to continue playing from a perspective of a player, because it tickles my curiosity and I want to know where the story will go from that point on - just like in a movie or a book. But from a perspective of a character - which is what good writing in games is about - it doesn't necessarily motivate me to go on this quest. Here is what I mean.
1. Being a survivor of a crashed blimp and getting a ring from some dying dwarf doesn't mean I have to go onto this adventure. It only motivates the character if you play a character who wants to fulfill the dying wish of a dead dwarf. If you play a coward, or an evil prick who doesn't give a shit about all of this, there is no reason to continue.
2. Virgil in the beginning sounds like a fucking lunatic or an imbecile at best. Taking anything he says seriously at face value is just weird. I mean, if you consider Virgil's tripping all over his words as a convincing motivation for your character, you don't know what good writing means, son.
3. Exploring the map and finding a strange amulet is optional. And even if it wasn't, it doesn't mean you have to go on a quest to solve this mystery.

On the other hand in PoE:
1. You fall sick to a mysterious sickness right from the start (Its not just a tummy ache as is later revealed). It doesn't matter if you are a coward or an evil prick, you are sick so you want to make yourself feel better, so right there you have a much better reason to do something, and once it is revealed that its not a tummy ache but symptoms of being a Watcher, you have even more reason to dig deep into this both from a perspective of the character and the player.
2. You are attacked. It doesn't matter if you are a coward or an evil prick, you don't want to fucking die, so the same rule applies.
3. You were on your way to Gilded Vale anyway, and you get to choose your own motivations while you speak with Calisca. It doesn't matter if you are a coward or an evil prick, you get to choose your motivation for doing it.
4. You start seeing dead people, spirits, you can't sleep at nights, you have visions, and all sort of crazy shit starts happening. It doesn't matter if you are a coward or an evil prick, you care about what is happening to you, so the same rule applies.
5. When you get to Gilded Vale, your plan to settle down or do whatever your motive there was has changed, because:
a.) The lord of the place is a major prick and you staying there is risky. It doesn't matter if you are a coward or an evil prick or a do-gooder, you don't want to fucking die, your priorities will have to change - and you get a bunch of options how you will proceed from that point onward.
b.) You talk to the hanged lady and she tells you where to search for answers, so for your own fucking good you want to do just that.
6. And if all of that is not enough, you still have the alternative to get to the bottom of the whole hollowborn mystery, which is plaguing the whole land and you being a part of that land now, might make you wanna check into it with your new powers. Even if you play a villain it still makes sense to check into hollowborn stuff, because its not good for anyone that this is happening. Not even yourself.
7. After meeting another watcher that has gone mad, you have another reason to check into it.

Do I need to say more, or did you have enough whipping?

the fact that your blimb has been attacked and you almost died should make you wonder why and who did it

No, because it is obvious from the words of that dying dwarf that the attack had nothing to do with you. The attack was about the boy and the ring the dwarf was carrying. If you play an evil character or a coward or just a selfish dude, why would you care about it? Its like surviving a plane crash and then saying that you should become an investigator. And funny how you ignore the fact that in PoE you were also attacked and have every reason to fight for your survival, and from that point shit just keeps happening that keeps pushing you forward whether you like it or not. Like I said, try to be consistent with the rules you yourself are putting out.

the fact that some cult thinks you are the chosen one should make you wonder why

Or you should perhaps think that this here is someone you should steer clear off? Especially since Virgil is such a blundering idiot in the beginning of Arcanum. Jesus Christ, son. Why don't you join the Jehovas witnesses then? I am sure how they will tell you that your very soul is at stake? You should investigate

the fact that a dieing gnome made a request of you with his dieing breath should make you try and fulfill it.

Why? What if I just want to get to safety? What if I am a thief and just want to sell the ring? What if I am a coward and want to throw the ring, because I don't want to get involved? What if I have pressing matters of my own to attend to? No, son. PoE handles it batter, but I know there is no fucking way you will accept my argument, because then you will have to admit all the things I said about your posts. So you will keep writing retarded stuff and hoping you prevail by sheer persistence. Well good luck with that, because I won't be answering to you anymore.

PoE tells you you are on a caravan and it stops because you have fucking tummy aches. To top that you have to search for berries yourself. (1st incoherence and the motivational value ist beyond shitty).

Well, you don't really give the whole story here, do you? And you over exaggerate to make a point. Read my 7 points of motivation in PoE to get the whole picture. With that being said I think that searching for the berries for yourself while being sick is a bit silly (it is actually something I already mentioned before as an example of convenience writing, but I only wrote it because I missed the part it was the case of "Rumbling rot" aka Tummy ache as you put it). Therefore it is only a problem if you assume the sickness is something serious. And as you put it yourself it is nothing more than a tummy ache. And you do get an escort. So not much of a problem when you think about it.

And the caravan didn't stop because of your tummy ache, but because the path was blocked and needed to be cleared.

then the caravan gets attacked and the people who mindlessly and mercilessly and without any fear or doubt killed everyone, stop to chat with you about their god and their wives and how their day has been and even make weird requests of you to drop your weapons while holding a knife to a hostages throat. why the fuck do they need a hostage?

Again, you over exaggerate to make a point. They ambushed the caravan and you arrived just as they were ready to finish things yp. They use Heodan to get an upper hand, so he is not really a hostage. And even if he was, perhaps they had questions for him about where other people have gone? You do know that there was another group of people that traspassed into the cave before your caravan arrived? It's not as crazy as you want to make it sound and asking questions 1 guy that you keep alive is usually a smart thing to do. And to not try and use the merchant to get an upper hand when you arrive would be kind of stupid. You trying to talk reason into them is a completely believable scenario and just because you are a retard and perceive it as a friendly chat does not mean that it really is a friendly chat.

why the fuck do they talk with you in the first place? they're on a fucking killing spree!!!

They don't stop to talk to you. You just made that shit up. And as I said, perhaps they had questions for Heodan, so they didn't immediately kill him. It is usually smart to leave 1 or 2 people alive so you can ask questions. Or perhaps they saw how you dealt with the guards just before you arrived in the camp and thought, hmm.. perhaps I can get them to drop their weapons. There is a million of good reasons why they would do exactly what they did and the game doesn't need to spell every single thing for the player, you know? If you have a problem with this scenario, which is taken from million books and million movies, you are just stupid as fuck.

(2nd incoherence) so you're the only batman in that caravan and despite what seemed to be major health problems (the caravan stopped to cure you, remember?)

No it fucking didn't! Play the fucking game before you speak bullshit. I thought so as well the first time I started the game for testing purposes, but upon actually listening to the intro narrative it says quite clearly:
One of the travelers signals for the caravan master to stop on your behalf. He pulls just in time to avoid plowing into the trunk of a fallen tree THAT BARS THE WAY AHEAD. YOU WILL GO NO FURTHER TONIGHT.

So, one of the travelers signals the caravan master to stop, but that doesn't mean the caravan master would decide to stop if he wasn't stopped by the trunk blocking the path. And the caravan master even says they need to clear the path before being able to continue. So nobody stopped because of you having tummy-ache as you put it. They stopped because they needed to clear the path. You could at least get your facts straight before you decide to speak about a certain topic.

kill them after everyone else only managed to die.

If they were ambushed, which they probably were with the trunk being in the way and everything smelling like an ambush, this is nothing strange.

(3rd incoherence) suddenly you're in some caves and the first thing you find is resting supplies, but you get told by that idiot companion that if you rest she leaves and if you do she actually does because it seems the people who just killed the entire caravan were piece of cake for her, she's not even scratched. Never mind that the other two, you with stomach aches and the need for berries and that rogue who has an open torso or whatever really need to rest.

Omg.. she has a selfish personality and a will of her own. Bad! Hhhhhhhhh...hhhhh...hhhhhhhh! Away!... Away with you good writing! Everyone needs to be good and think of others, because... because... because if you create anything other than a loving and caring character it will be bad writing. HHHHHHHH! HHHHHHH! We can't have selfish characters. She even has a backstory and she has more important people to live for... like her sister that she mentions. But we cant have that! HHHHHHHHHHH! HHHHHHHHHH! *creates a cross with his fingers*

At this point I am not sure if you are trolling or are you seriously stupid as fuck.

(4th incoherence) somehow you manage to get out of the cave and both your companions get one hit while you get superpowers. but you're some hipster health activist that has to see a problem with that cause maybe you will die about a hundred years from now due to radiation poisoning or something.

At this point you are just making stuff up. There are plenty of reasons for you to look into this. You know... like trying to find out what is happening to you. I know.. logic, right? And why you survive the biawac is explained is by the dwarven animancer in Gilded Vale: Your soul was too strong for the biawac to be taken.

Bad combat and bad stat design: Again, I agree that IE games had better combat. Well.. IWD and BG anyway. PST... not so much, but that is a story driven game and combat is not in such focus.

:D you're such a genius. who would have thought that PS:T was a story RPG?

Again, L1 troll maneuver.

I've got news for you: Arcanum and BG/BG2 were also story RPGs.

Yes, they were and I never claimed anything to the contrary, you idiot. All I was saying is that the focus on combat was much bigger in BG/BG2 than it was in PST. Me having to point this out to you demonstrates you are an imbecile.

But that's not all: PoE is also a story RPG even if sawyer will talk about combat more than about the story.

Soooo... if its a story RPG, then we have established that combat is not necessarily the thing that can determine how much the game sucks by itself. Thank you for agreeing with me, now you can go away.

you should think the combat is bad. RTwP is bad by definition. it's just a clusterfuck of nonsense. arcanum at least had action points based turn based combat as an alternative.

And this here is the crux of the problem. You personally hate RTwP systems. PoE has RTwP -> therefore PoE sux. And like I said in my second post to you. Nobody gives a shit what you personally like or dislike. Compare the system with its predecessors and see how it stands in comparison with other RTwP games. And when you do that, it stands up to the best. It is worse than BG just by a small margin and BG had excellent RTwP combat. Anyone who says RTwP is bad by defualt is a moron.

Actually, if you say you personally dont like it, I am ok with that. But to claim how you personally don't not like RTwP and from there conclude the system is objectively bad - that is what makes you a retard. I am ok with people having personal preferences, but to say "I hate RTwP -> therefore RTwP sux" is retarded beyond belief. Its shoving your personal preferences into reviews and trying to make an objective claim out it.

Arcanum has turn based combat, but objectively horrible turn based combat. So I am not saying I hate turn based combat and from there making an analysis. I look at how the turn based combat behaves in comparison to similar games that do TB combat, like Fallout. And I can say objectively that the fact how you cannot aim at different body parts makes the combat much worse than in Fallout. I could go on, but this is not about Fallout vs Arcanum. It is just to illustrate the difference between how I think in comparison to you.

For example, the fighter class in BG didn't really have any abilities until Throne of Bhaal.

yes he did you dumbfuck! he had the ability of being able to wield any kind of weapon and wear any kind of armor.

Those are proficiencies you idiot. They are not abilities, and even if they were, which they fucking ARE NOT, it is completely irrelevant to what I was talking about. I was talking about abilities like knockdown, etc which make your fighter a much more interactive experience to play, whereas in BG 90% of the game you just position him and let him absorb damage while you actually play with other characters. I mean, if you need to trivialize my points to absurdity to make a point, then you don't have a point by definition. Yes, I know he can use any fucking armor he wants, while the mage cannot. Yes I know he can become an expert in various weapons, while other classes cannot. But that does not change the fact he has no abilities until Throne of Bhaal which would allow you to play the class in a more interactive way.

he also had the ability to improve proficiency with any kind of weapon and above any other class.

You just called it proficiency you moron. Proficiency .... NOT AN ABILITY? Ok?

Not knowing that disqualifies you from discussing stats and combat. I'm not gonna explain why the stats and combat mechanics are stupid to someone who doesn't understand that the very principle of party based RPGs is having highly different classes with very strict distinctions.

Wow.... you really are stupid as fuck. First you confuse proficiency with abilities while completely missing the point of what I was trying to say, and then you tell me that I don't understand the distinctions. Look in the mirror, you dumbfuck.

Bad story: Riiiiight... Can you elaborate on this one, because this is completely new to me. From what I read people usually complained about minor annoyances. Not the story. But I am sure it will be brilliant.

of course i can. it has a lot to do with the writing. read the arguments about the writing and you also understand how such a story can't be good from the get go.

So the story complaint is actually the writing complaint? Ok... I addressed that already, so that probably means you have no story problems. Good. You see... that is why I wanted you to give me examples, otherwise fucktards such as you can just put an adjective bad in front of everything and claim certain aspects of the game suck, while not even understanding what they are talking about.

Bad pathfinding: This was a problem in older games as well. I don't see any difference really.

i see a big difference. 15 years of difference. newer technology. gps and stuff.

That is not a difference in the game, though. And if it is the same as in IE games, then your argument fails, because your whole point was that we didn't compare it to older titles and how PoE sucks in comparison to older titles.

The bad AI: You mean like being a carbon copy of the older games except this time the enemies won't be running between your party members like a confused chicken while you pick them off with a bow and arrow? Somehow I fail to see how this qualifies for bad AI.

i'm sure the AI challenges you to the max.

Again, when you have no arguments you just resort to L1 trolling. How adorable.

bad itemization has a whole thread here on the pillars of eternity subforum. inform yourself. it's about that unique sword you get for finding all the pieces and then a smith to put it back together only to realize you could have just enchanted one. nothing unique about shit like that.

Still a minor annoyance at best.

Bad focus on balance: And... IE games were balanced... right? Need I remind you that certain classes could solo the game, while it was impossible for others? Not really ideal balance, is it? Or perhaps you mean getting wiped because you stumbled all of a sudden on an opponent that you couldn't beat? Hmm... reminds me on my playthrough of BG when I stumbled upon a flying skull that wiped my party in 4 seconds, or a similar experience with eye of a beholder. Or with my first encounter with a dragon. Each time I got wiped. But I learned, leveled up, came back and then fucked them royally. I mean, you wanted people to compare it to older games, so when I do that, I don't really see a problem.

bad focus on balance does not mean bad balance. it means the focus is badly made. you shouldn't make a fucking story RPG and then focus on combat balance.

Wot?! I can't even make sense of that sentence.

Bad inventory design: PfffffffffffftttthahahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA! Really now?

Ok.. ok... lets compare it to original IE inventory system. In IE games, when you wanted to check what your party has in their inventory, you had to open each character individually. In PoE, you see the inventory of a whole party in 1 screen, while retaining individual inventories for each party member. Yep... you are retarded. I mean,... if PoE improved 1 thing it improved the inventory design.

yes, a bottomless pit is a bad inventory design.

That is not inventory design though. It is a convenience created because of a huge number of items created specifically for crafting and enchantment and cooking. IE games didnt have crafting, so they didn't need extra room for those items. And there is a limit as to how much you can carry per person in stash, so its not bottomless. if you don't like it, you don't need to use it you know. Just pretend its not there. All it will put there is the crafting items. Other stuff still goes in inventory by default. Besides, BG had bottomless bag too, although you had to buy or find it if I remember correctly.

Bad companion design: worse than BG2 and PST, better then BG1 and IWD&IWD2. Better then Arcanum and Fallout 1 and 2. Need I say more?

maybe it's just me but i didn't really care for any of my companions in PoE.

Its probably just you then.

The big bad dragons: Why are dragons bad?

that actually criticizes everything about the setting. you have new names for every possible race and a bunch of lore to go with that but you have the same fucking races you see in every other generic piece of shit game. and of course you have to have dragons because dragons are awesome (aka the skyrim design)

So does almost every single RPG or fantasy book ever made. Still don't see how this is bad. It goes back to Tolkien who had 2-3 names for every race, village, town and mountain. Why is that bad? Forget it.. its a rhetorical question because I won't be answering to your bullshit anymore. I don't have time for retards.

The bad quest design: Disagree. It is on the same level as BG trilogy.

it's generic. the fact that it's not worse doesn't make it better. the fact that it came 15 years later does make it worse because it's the same old soup.

Look, you fucking moron. You told me to compare PoE with older titles. THAT WAS YOUR WHOLE POINT. I did just that and now you turn it into... oh well.. it could be better because 15 years has passed.
You........bumbling........imbecile.......

if you can have good reputation based on deeds and cruel reputation based on what you say it kinda makes a mess of the whole reputation design.

Well, I usually play a consistent character, so I must have missed this. But if it is true, I guess you make a good point.

The bad resting design: Because resting for 72 hours after each fight is superior and more realistic than to actually having camping supplies and being limited in the amount of rest you can take.

so basically every fight takes the same amount of rest time to heal various wounds.

I agree on that part. However, that does not address the point which I raised - that spam resting is no longer allowed which is a good thing. And even with a good point that you raise here, I still like PoE resting system more overall, because I had a huge issue with spamming rest in previous games. I guess what they could do is add different amounts of resting time for different kind of injuries as it was the case in IE games. That would make it perfect.

also you're heading to a 15 level dungeon with a party of 6. why don't you take the same amount of resting supplies with you as when you stroll around the city? you blow your resting supplies on the first level or the first 2 levels and go back to the village and again you take the same amount of resting supplies with you because obviously you don't need more. It's a stupid fucking design decision and it's only there because it inflates the time you need to play the game.

Actually its there to prevent rest spamming. Which is a good thing. And wait.. .you are complaining about having a bottomless bag, but you want to have limitless camping supplies? ... *facepalm*...

also per encounter abilities make no sense at all. none. there is simply no justification of having any ability that is only possible to use once per fight but then every fight.

Yes there is. Its called being winded and out of breath. And its not like this rule applies to all abilities. It applies only to those that it would make sense for, like knockdown which you would expect requires some extra force. Some abilities are modal, some are passive etc, so its nothing like you describe it.

you'd think the redrick hold quest would be a big enough matter to have some real consequence. it doesn't.

It actually does, but not in the big picture. Its the same kind of choices and consequences you get from Telltale games, where choices and consequences are more of an illusion. Still, the fact that BG had almost 0 c&c, maks PoE superior in that particular department, and again your complaint was that we didn't compare them to the older titles, which we fucking did and PoE has many advantages over BG. Its not better overall, but it only misses that mark by an inch.

The bad pricing and economy design: Every game has a problem with that.

so no improvements here even if you are right.

No improvements does not equal bad in comparison to older titles, now does it you dumb idiot? The only way you can prove that PoE is bad is to first prove BG trilogy is bad, because as you can see when we compare these things you complain about, they existed in both games. So, if you now want to change the argument to BG sucks, and PoE is even worse, good luck with that because any person who knows anything about games also knows that BG is a classic and an amazing game. One of the best in its genre.

bad combat will not make arcanum or PS:T suck because they have solid writing. a good structure of motivation and reward. this one doesn't and if it focuses on balance and combat although it shouldn't it does make it suck.

The points that you raised, I demonstrated are full of shit. The only part where you have a valid complaint is the random loot and some minor annoyances which are easy to ignore.

Now piss off.

PS. Don't take it personally. I insult people for fun, not because I really mean it. But I do think your post is for the most part full of crap.

 

[Mareus]

A lot has changed on the Codex in recent years, including the attitude to IE games.

Yeah, it got infiltrated by a bunch of whiny faggots.

 

[Ninjerk]

^ And obtuse fanboys

 

[Sothpaw]

A lot has changed on the Codex in recent years, including the attitude to IE games.

Yeah, it got infiltrated by a bunch of whiny faggots.

I first found this site last month and when I saw that there were crpg fans out there who thought BG was shit I was kinda shocked. I get it now even though I personally love the game. It was just weird coming from a (terrible) place like neofag where having played BG makes you superhardcore rpg guy.

 

[Shevek]

A lot has changed on the Codex in recent years, including the attitude to IE games.

Some of that may be a product of the lack of viable rpg alternatives.

If you're starving and somebody throw you a cracker, you gonna be like this: Goddamn, that's the best cracker I ever ate in my life! That ain't no regular cracker, was it? What was that, a saltine? Goddamn, that was delicious. That wasn't no saltine. That was... That was a Ritz. That wasn't a Ritz? God, that was the best cracker I ever ate in my life.

 

[Mareus]

A lot has changed on the Codex in recent years, including the attitude to IE games.

Yeah, it got infiltrated by a bunch of whiny faggots.

I first found this site last month and when I saw that there were crpg fans out there who thought BG was shit I was kinda shocked. I get it now even though I personally love the game. It was just weird coming from a (terrible) place like neofag where having played BG makes you superhardcore rpg guy.

From my experience with the Codex, there is a lot of people here who think that if the game is not turned based it is shit, and they think this makes them superhardcore rpg fans, which is of course a ridiculous condition to make. Usually these people think they can win any argument just by pointing out how something is or isn't turned based. Its quite funny to see this disregard for common sense or any logic. Then you have a bunch of faggots who have been whining about the decline so much that they forgot why they enjoyed games in the first place, and they think that whining about everything makes them hardcore. A perfect example of this can be seen in these debates I have with some of the more obtuse morons. And then there are people who blindly follow the work of Vault Dweller who is hopefully going to release his Age of Decadence game one of these days, and some of these AoD cultists think they will make AoD the next classic by shitting on everything else.

Still, I like the codex for its lack of political correctness, GamerGate support and somewhat better taste in games than what you generally see on the mainstream sites like IGN, Gamespot and *puke* Polygon. But in general, a lot of people here are still clueless in the sense that they let their whining and personal biases get in the way of objectivity.

 

[Mareus]

^ And obtuse fanboys

Yes. I totally agree. obtuse turned based fanboys who can't stand anything else.

 

[Owlish]

Critiquing a video game doesn't make you a "whiner," retard. You don't have to love it just because it has some good aspects and is pretty.

 

[Ninjerk]

Critiquing a video game doesn't make you a "whiner," retard. You don't have to love it just because it has some good aspects and is pretty.

Shut your mouth, knave. No one criticizes m'lady Obsidian.

 

[Sothpaw]

A lot has changed on the Codex in recent years, including the attitude to IE games.

Yeah, it got infiltrated by a bunch of whiny faggots.

I first found this site last month and when I saw that there were crpg fans out there who thought BG was shit I was kinda shocked. I get it now even though I personally love the game. It was just weird coming from a (terrible) place like neofag where having played BG makes you superhardcore rpg guy.

From my experience with the Codex, there is a lot of people here who think that if the game is not turned based it is shit, and they think this makes them superhardcore rpg fans, which is of course a ridiculous condition to make. Usually these people think they can win any argument just by pointing out how something is or isn't turned based. Its quite funny to see this disregard for common sense or any logic. Then you have a bunch of faggots who have been whining about the decline so much that they forgot why they enjoyed games in the first place, and they think that whining about everything makes them hardcore. A perfect example of this can be seen in these debates I have with some of the more obtuse morons. And then there are people who blindly follow the work of Vault Dweller who is hopefully going to release his Age of Decadence game one of these days, and some of these AoD cultists think they will make AoD the next classic by shitting on everything else.

Still, I like the codex for its lack of political correctness, GamerGate support and somewhat better taste in games than what you generally see on the mainstream sites like IGN, Gamespot and *puke* Polygon. But in general, a lot of people here are still clueless in the sense that they let their whining and personal biases get in the way of objectivity.

That was the other thing I was shocked by. A videogame site (crpg site no less) that doesn't suck SJW cock and ban anyone who disagrees? Finally. Also, I like how while everyone here has different opinions, we can all agree that anyone who thinks DAI was a good game is a complete moron.

 

[Hell March]

Which begs the ageless question of how it ended up in the Top 50 CRPGs list.

 

[Owlish]

Which begs the ageless question of how it ended up in the Top 50 CRPGs list.

Not a lot of competition.

 

[AN4RCHID]

Finally finished this last night and started again on Hard. I would give it an 8 or 9. Far from perfect, but it's some of the most fun I've had with a game in at least a couple years.

Combat is good. The engagement system is good. I feel like I'm taking crazy pills reading some of the complaints about it on this board. First off, it's not that punitive to break engagement. I do it all the time with Aloth and Durance. They take a small amount of damage, big deal. The benefits of the system, such as making defensive characters more consistently useful, far outweigh the problem areas for me. Second, I am more sympathetic to the complaint that engagement leads to a dominant strategy of tanks out front, squishies pew-pewing from safety, but this problem gets over-exaggerated here to a ridiculous degree. Here is a brief list of enemies that partially or completely circumvent this strategy: Wood Beetle, Stone Beetle, Adra Beetle, Caen Gwla, Dank Spore, Giant Dank Spore, Xaurip Priest, Delemgan, Lion, Elder Lion, Troll, Forest Troll, Phantom, Shade, Shadow, Spectre, Fampyr, Ogre Druid, Vithrack, Will-O-Wisp, and human enemies of the classes Druid, Wizard, or Priest. It's not rare at all to find a fight that throws a wrench in the standard tank-and-pew-pew strategy. There could always be more variety in encounters, but most of them have a mix of ranged and melee enemies with various classes and abilities. Fighters having a consistently useful role in combat =/= stale gameplay. Pathfinding is the biggest problem that occasionally pulled me out of the combat.

Writing is solid. Not the best Obsidian has done, but it shines in certain areas. The lore and world building are excellent. Eora and the Dyrwood feel like believable places. When Eder tells you about the purges, that sounds like something that real people would do in that situation. The war of Broken Stones sounds like a plausible event. All through the writing there's a realism in how societies behave, how superstition and religion work, how different groups conflict, that is missing from most high fantasy. Not surprising since this was one of the main strengths of the writing in New Vegas as well. The other highlight of the writing is the companion characters. It's the best roster Obsidian has done imo. They're all relatable, and they're all tied into the main story and themes very tightly. My biggest complaint about the writing is that there aren't many memorable characters outside of the companions and crit path main cast. Almost nobody besides the companions has a portrait, or shows up more than once during the adventure. Even faction leaders aren't very developed. As a result, places like Dyrford and even Twin Elms felt a little lifeless.

Some assorted other thoughts:

Camping supplies are a good addition. I didn't expect to like them, but they ended up making the longer dungeon crawls much more enjoyable.

The inventory is a clusterfuck. Sometimes I would pick something up as one character and it would automatically get sent to another characters pack. Sometimes it would get sent to the stash. It makes finding specific items, and therefore makes selecting gear, a huge pain in the ass. Limited inventories serve the function of front loading some of the weapon comparisons and gear decisions. In PoE, I felt like I was sifting through a landfill anytime I wanted to check if there was a better one-hander for Eder to use, and so I ended up playing most of the game with old items. As a result, I also didn't pay much attention when I got a new item.

The rep system is excellent - this game probably has the best use of game mechanics in dialogues that I've ever seen. There are skill, stat and rep checks everywhere and tons of flavor text for race and background. There isn't much good long-term C&C unfortunately, so the dialogue doesn't get to shine as much as it should.

The dungeons layouts are mostly very good. Standouts for me were the Temple of Skaen, Clian Ruilag, and Raedric's Keep. The final dungeon was probably the most disappointing part of the game, due to being almost completely linear and having some of the least fun enemies to fight. Temple of Eothas was also a bit of a slog early in the game due to over-relying on ghost type enemies, which is a shame because the dungeon map and quest content there are great. Od Nua was some of the most fun I had in the game, though the floors are pretty inconsistent - the Drake floor, the Fampyr floor, the spiked floor floor, and the Vithrack floor were all a ton of fun.

The stronghold sux.

Overall, game could have used more content and more time to polish the existing content, but it's a great start to the series. There are a few areas where Sawyer's innovations backfire, but they're outnumbered by the areas that he improved on. I'm optimistic about what the team can do with more time to polish and a bigger budget and production scope.