Hellraiser789

Huh, I honestly just loved everything about it. Especially all the characters, although a couple of them did get on my nerves every once in a while. (Kinda want to go back and play the BG games all over again now....). Idk, i didn't find the story that shallow, although I am a sucker for cliche stuff. Although, I will admit, replayability was a little low for me - I liked making new games, but to play through the entire game just took forever (competitionist at heart...) and really there werent any major choices that really made a difference in the actually storyline so.... after a good playthrough and an evil playthrough, I usually stopped playing for awhile, although it would always draw me back simply because I could never find anything better. Although this is all just my opinion and I realize not everyone's experience was similar to my own.

O Fire Emblem was great. But yeah, I was one of those people who could never lose a character. Not a single one. I'd reload it over and over until I got it right. Immersion-breaking, maybe. Frustrating - definitely. But I just hated it when they died. Then again, I also remember playing Halo and trying to save all the marines...one time I even blocked them off in a cave on a level...I was devastated when I came back and found them all dead, slaughtered and blown apart by a hunter that had spawned nearby....that was awful. Eventually I gave up though, cuz lets be honest - those guys were useless and got themselves killed all the time (Plus they were pretty much scripted to die anyway so...kinda fighting a pointless cause trying to keep them alive...)

Hey, I only recently found out there was even a term for it! I thought thats just how games work - if its too hard, you die and reload and come up with a better strategy. If you still cant figure it out, come back later. I mean trying to deny metagaming is kinda pointless for me - after the first fight you know exactly what your up against, regardless of whether its your first game, second game, first trial of iron, or second trial of iron, etc. Eventually, you're gonna know whats behind that door, so why bother trying to deny it? I just take pleasure in knowing i beat the challenge and got through it. But I'm also not too big on role-playing or "staying in character". Although its something I've been trying to work on because I think the concept behind it is a cool one

This is a slight derail, but I am interested in your perspective (and I do not have enough to say for a full new topic). What about a Wizard tank work? There are a few spells which really help (spirit shield, bulwark against the elements, mirror image), the classes basic attack (the 2 per encounter AoE) causes daze and there are a lot of CC options. So could a wizard, in your opinion, work as a full tank? If not, how viable do you think a wizard as a off-tank / CC hybrid is? (i.e. is it "doable" but worse than the alternative, or a true alternative) Also curious - I love the concept of a spellsword but I'd rather not gimp myself too badly if I can help it. Although a bit of a challenge isnt bad, especially if its still manageable for a normal difficulty game, but I am curious as to whether its feasible (or how useful such a build would be).

Yeah that kind of thing is actually fairly common, I think, or at least not unheard of. Or like a blood and gore toggle - I've seen that before (of course I just leave the gore on but thats just me ) Although, given how much extra animations and graphics that might (?) have taken, they probably considered it not worth it, especially considering the setting of the game and its grim and dark nature.

Well said on all counts. I mean, I don't get what he means by poorly written for BG/BG2. Those are two of my all time favorite games, largely due to the setting, characters, and the story (so...the writing. Combat was great too though). Sure, I thought Imoen was a bit tacky and unnecessary (supposedly she was supposed to die instead - THAT would have been interesting!) and it mightve been a bit cliche (but what isnt? and cliche doesnt equal bad... although ToB mightve (?) been rushed. Seemed like it to me) but overall I thought it was amazing, especially considering the generally lower quality games we've gotten over the past years (IMO. The Dragon Age games, while good, just arent on the same level). But I still respect his opinion. My brother would actually agree with him completely (although hes not really a fan of party-based RPGs anyway so...). Just saying why I like the BG games so much is all.

Edit: Sorry double post.

Full passive skill wipes, encounter abilities locking as 'Already activated', Ciphers losing the ability to gain focus, Ranger companions vanishing, whole maps being unaccessible, a DoT you can get that will never go away, getting permanently stuck in combat, and save files that break for good. I don't think all these issues came from people being 'drama queens.' But congratulations on your blackscreens, I wish I was just dealing with a game that would crash periodically but that's something that hasn't happened to me yet, so I'm just going to assume you're lying and making a big deal. ....Honestly, what did you expect? A completely bug-free experience? A perfect game on release? Sorry thats impossible for most AAA top-tier budget games, let alone a Kickstarted game that had no where near that level of resources. Just saying, if you want 0 bugs, wait 6 months. Especially with Obsidian's apparent history for buggy games. I wouldn't know anything about that though - I NEVER buy games at release because a) price b) bugs, patches, etc and c) i'd rather wait for an expansion and play it all at once. Lets me get a cheaper, overall better experience IMO. But thats just me.

.....in what game is it EVER a good idea to solo ANYTHING from a low level without getting some experience first? I think, in general, any game that has party based combat the first thing you do is look for more companions. The LAST thing you want to do is fight 1v1 against ANYTHING if you are trying not to die. Strength in numbers, right? Thats not metagaming, that just common sense, no matter how strong the enemy. H***, even in Skyrim you usually died a couple times before you got a feel for the general level of stuff and what to avoid.....the occasional bandit criting you, the random dragon spawns, the Spriggans, the saber tooth tigers, the bears...h*** just about anything that you fought for the first had a chance to kill you if you werent aware and cautious of your surroundings. Thats, what, like RPG 101 stuff. And, yeah, cant recommend soloing first time through - just doesn't make a lot of sense RP-wise (and I don't really RP that much), regardless of whether you "know" the wilderness or have survival techniques or anything really. Fact is, you dont know the surroundings and wandering around by yourself (even with a bear companion) is probably not the best idea.... Call it metagaming if you want, I call it common sense.

Cool story bro. Tell it again? Seriously - you can't compare this game to BG2 at all. its meant as a low level campaign. Think BG1 and thats it. I really didn't think BG1 was that complicated or detailed. You didn't EVER need to change weapon types in BG1, and there wasnt a ton of magical equipment in BG1 (compared to BG2). Plus, it doesnt seem to surprise me that you can steam roll the game with custom made Adventurers after a little experience with the combat system - if you min-max them you can probably make them amazing at each of their roles. Guess what? I could do that in BG1 (and BG2 for that matter) just as easily (actually easier because you can literally do it from the beginning of the game). I don't know what to tell you about progression - if you don't like the level up system, how did you like the IE level up system...? seem pretty similar to me, maybe even more customization with talents and whatnot. I'm not gonna say the combat is perfect, but I think you might be being a little harsh, but thats just me. Honestly thought it was an April Fools joke rant at first....

Personally, don't really have a problem with profanity in general (I tend to curse a little bit myself), and not really big on the whole immersion/roleplay thing (im pretty flexible about it). Although I will say that whenever I'm reading fantasy books that suddenly start using profanity (even sparingly) it throws me a little until I get used to it. I don't know - sure its realistic and it works, but most of my favorite books just don't include that. Sure it might say "Jack cursed to himself and tried to think of a way out" but it doesn't say " 'S***!, I don't know what to do!' ". Idk, just seems like it drops the writing quality a little bit. Nothing major - I usually get used to it if its done right, and I'm sure I won't have a problem with it given the dark and grim nature of PoE, but I can understand where these guys are coming from (just a little bit...). Although I wouldn't mod it out personally - I just accept it as the writer's/developer's vision for the book/game.

Personally, I like Borderlands' approach to scaling. Regions would have a range of levels (say 1-10) and then scaled to your level accordingly. If you were 15, for instance the max level for any enemy would still only be 10 for the region, but by that point it was likely you had moved on to a new region anyway because of the story/loot. Of course, there's nothing wrong with having different leveled enemies in different regions of a map (which I think borderlands did too). For instance, the map might generallly be lvls 1-10, but one building might be lvls 10-20 because its a bandit compound or something (yeah I think borderlands definitely did that actually). Made it so you just avoided some regions until you were stronger, or just pushed ahead knowing it would be risky and you'd probably die, but you could get really good gear. Also, loved the randomization of loot and stuff in that game - that was great! Good times....

I kinda agree there should be SOME way to get out of a fight and leave a zone, but its not game breaking to me. But I also dont really mind "save scumming".

Yeah I remember walking into the basilisk forest in BG1 for the first time and getting my a** handed to me because I was expecting some gnolls or something. I guess those stone statues should have clued me in....what can I say? I was young and naive when I first started playing Baldurs Gate...man that was a long time ago....

Sounds kinda cool actually. Maybe I'll try that at some point....

What?!?! They can ESCAPE!?! That's crazy! And awesome!

So what, you just want to set up tactics and let the game run itself? That seems kinda boring IMO.... I mean, it works in games like Dragon Age where you can just set up your companions tactics then play as yourself, but thats kind of a different combat style. This game is more about party control and managing everyone at the same time using the pause feature (yes that means potentially a LOT of micromanagement), similar to BG 1/2 and Icewind Dale 1/2. Dragon Age is more about playing as your character and having your companions back you up, similar to KOTOR 1 or 2. Just different combat styles. As others have mentioned, tactics just wouldn't have been worth adding when compared to everything else the could have done instead. Would it have been cool - maybe. But the IE games just had basic AI settings for party members (which were generally garbage anyway) and those games were great. In summary, this isnt a spirit successor to Dragon Age, its a spirit successor to the IE games, so tactics are unnecessary as the target audience generally enjoys micromanagement and party management.

Although I think a better option wouldve been to just not give a default bonus. Then you know exactly what stats you have and the culture point just feels like a bonus. Instead you might think "o I have 16 Res, thats good" and then all of a sudden you dont and youre like "wtf?" Wouldve made more sense to me.

People suggested this everyday since the beta came out. They never changed it. Everytime I make a character I still do culture first then go back to the stats. I think they didn't change it because of the way the character creation screen was set up. 3 on the left, 3 on the right, stats in the middle. I think that's right, right?

....but they don't have any dialogue right? ....So why don't you just make 2 adventurer-replicas of them? Wouldn't that be easier? Granted you might not have their portraits and voices, but you could probably find them and use them if you really tried to look for them in the data files....right? Still, thats kinda cool I guess.

Honestly, I think part of it is that if walking is your biggest concern about the game, the game is obviously fine. If it breaks immersion so much..well I dont know what to tell you. I think the reason they didnt include it was because people like to move quickly across the maps. I know in baldurs gate I always cheated in 6 boots of speed for my party so I could move across maps faster. Although I will admit, itd be cool to walk around civilian areas/buildings/stores instead of running all the time (preferable just to have the option to set that up, or permenant walking, or whatever, especially if they already have the animations for it...). However, I think, as others have said, they have bigger concerns than that right now. Although walking is something I probably wouldn't even notice, as immersion was never really a big deal to me, and I dont really roleplay my characters a whole lot. (I enjoy roleplaying games because the stories are generally better, but I don't really roleplay a character, other than like good or evil. Been trying to for a while now, and plan to for PoE, but maybe I'm just not imaginative/creative/focused enough for that...)

Honestly, I think you are quite wrong there. To say it was done "politely" or that they weren't harsh and just pointed out it was "vaguely tasteless" is a complete understatement. Take a look at some twitter posts by icequeenerika (aka #killallmen, the one who started this whole thing). From the way there were acting, I would say that Obsidian had included something that actively, blatantly, and violently discriminated against trans people. Which this joke does not. You can argue its up for interpretation - its not. Its a fairly common joke about a guy getting drunk and finding he slept with a dude. No mention of trans people at all, anywhere. They werent even the butt of the joke - the drunk idiot who killed himself was. The fact is, people were oversensitive about the issue because I guess its common for people to kill themselves after sleeping with trans people? Honestly, never heard of that before, or really any discrimination against trans people. Obviously I am just ignorant and unaware, and that certainly doesn't mean its not hard for them or that they dont suffer because of actually bigoted idiots in the world. But this limerick? Not even about trans people. Not one bit. I swear, I've heard this joke before, maybe seen it in other games or literature or something (or some variation of it - I'd say its pretty common for a dirty limerick). I'm just saying, if they really wanted to stop discrimination against trans people, their efforts are wasted on this limerick. As for the SJW thing, yeah people overreact about the whole censorship thing and the facebook harrassment is terrible and whatnot, but this is the internet - and #killallmen isnt exactly innocent of that kind of thing herself. Her statements for one, but also even bringing this tiny, insignificant joke (that you have to really search for, its not even party of a side quest, let alone the main plot!) and blowing it up to this proportion is kind of ridiculous. Seriously - and all this defense of the SJW - I've got respect for the real SJW who make real change in the world, but these "SJW" on twitter are, as others have said, just using it as an excuse to get attention. From what others have said, they literally jump from cause to cause trying to make "change" but really they just want the attention. Sure all that stuff about facebook and the harrassment is terrible - in a perfect world it wouldn't happen. But to say that she is innocent and "polite", and that she kindly mentioned to take it out is a huge understatement. I'd pull up some quotes, but apparently her tweets are protected now and not open for public view. Which, if she was getting harrassed on facebook and stuff, doesn't surprise me. I'll be honest though, some of the things I've read (on both sides, although the hate for trans is especially cruel and surprising) have been terrible. For the most part, I think the mods have done a good job of keeping that out of these discussions, but I think in another thread someone mentioned some rather hateful messages on steam or something. I can't support that by any means - so good job mod for keeping that stuff out (as far as I can tell).

You make a great point. Hopefully a future expansion will add more NPCs and we can get a rogue NPC that way.

I think, as everyone else has stated, this is NOT a game for children. And its not because of the swearing. But if you want to mod it out, go for it. But there's a lot darker stuff than somebody dropping the f-bomb (which, let's be real - your kids probably use it anyway, or at least they know what it means. If they don't, they're obviously WAY too young and should play with LEGOs or something instead)

The main problem with them is that they break one of the fundamental conventions of CRPGs - that those people who are unimportant don't get names and that characters with names should be talked to if possible. In other words, that unimportant background characters whose main job is to be there such that a setting doesn't seem unpopulated are, at the same time, clearly distinguishable such that players don't waste time on interacting with them. By giving them names, even if with a different backlight, you are indicating to players that these are important and should be talked to as. To make it worse, it requires your very special soul reading ability and plays a sound and graphic effect when you do it, you know, just like that very important event right at the start of the game. Players who don't start out knowing that it is a waste of time unless you want to read flavour stories that are irrelevant to the setting and to the game's story are going to spend a lot of time reading/skimming them and activating soul reading just in case this next one is the one that actually does something. Eventually they will eventually learn it, but even then it adds to the time it takes for a player to get a quick view of who are important in a given setting, because the mind is much better at automatically sorting people by whether they have generic names that appear all over the place, like four commoners next to each other, or unique names, than by sorting them by whether their names have one backlight or another. It is a completely different issue with tombstones/testimonials. Those are normally used in CRPGs to list jokes, silly verse, RIPs, and real world references and not to provide useful information except in the cases where there's a specific mission to find some useful information on a tombstone, and they aren't spread out everywhere but collected in a few locations. Fleshing out the game with named characters that are utterly irrelevant to the plot instead of just adding a bunch more generic people with professions rather than names was, as far as I am concerned, a bad idea where gameplay is concerned. It helped rake in the money, though, so there is that. It just makes for an ever so slightly worse game. Gotta agree. Although I would've loved it if they pulled something like Lost Odyssey, Planescape Torment, and others where examining a person or item would start to tell I story and it would play out in a obviously way where you could tell it didn't advance the story and was just there to add lore and depth to the game (I think someone else mentioned this too). Of course, that would've have required a lot more work, but I think it would've been better. So either have them really spread out throughout the game appropriately (maybe come across 5 at a time, max) or just shove them all in one tavern or something (and make it quite obvious that its not important stuff) would be my solution. Cool also be kinda cool if they were just walking along the street, minding their own business doing their own thing, but then they'd need to be normal looking and rather plain so they don't stand out.