Atheosis

What truth? DA:O was bad... yes, bad for you perhaps... It's always good to try and keep some perspective. Other people do like things you don't... Oh I'm aware but that's kind of what we are doing here right? Discussing opinions on games? And from my perspective the "truth" is that DA:O was an awful game. Obviously I find the notion that it was better than PoE amusing...

What truth? DA:O was bad...

Everyone has their opinions, but this one cracks me up...

I had fun with it and it took me over 80 hours to beat. I also didn't read that much of the game's text. Yeah that's totally shallow...

I always see this come up all the time. No one has ever asked for a perfect game. No, they just wanted a game that completely and totally emulated BG2 in every way possible (even though BG2 was itself very flawed).

Hey Sensuki, move the **** on already. Most people enjoy this game. You don't. Get over it.

Huh, after the **** I saw he had been doing I was amped to kill him so I didn't notice.

Can you actually do that? Sacrifice a party member to the blood pool in game? Well, canon is what the writers say it is. If it's a direct sequel, then it will probably be assumed that you recruited all party members and that they survived. God, please no. It utterly destroys the feeling of telling my own story. If you're not going to take my decisions into account, don't pretend like they matter, don't give me ending slides you're going to ignore. BG2's beginning made no sense to me whatsoever because Khalid died long before and I never traveled with Minsc. I hope Obsidian doesn't go this way and imports our decisions from the first game - or if not, then simply doesn't show people with uncertain fate. This is part of why I'd like PoE2 to be stand-alone. I really, really hated BG2 for just assuming that Minsc, Jaheira and Imoen were in my core group, and that I had even met Viconia (Who was extremely easy to miss, as opposed to, say, Xan, or Kivan, or practically anyone else) and others. I never even *liked* Minsc, Jaheira, or Khalid. I really liked BG2, make no mistake, but stuff like that is part of why I still put the storyline and storytelling well below Baldur's Gate. I agree. I'd rather them have a game in the same world but only tangentially connected to the first game. Unless they can manage to accommodate every possible result of the first game, which seems highly unlikely.

I don't see that many people claiming the BG games had such awesome writing. I think the OE drone squad just likes to bring it up a lot because it helps to distract from everything else BG2 clearly beats PoE at. I'm sure you've heard this before, but it's unfair to compare PoE to BG2. Better to compare it to BG1. Why is it unfair ? BG1 was made by a heap of noobs who had never before made a game. Why should that be the comparison point ? Even compared to BG1 it falls down anyway. I don't agree. BG 1 wasn't as good as PoE and I found BG 2 so monotonous I never even beat it. Of course this all just opinion...

If you only ever use fast mode when moving you probably cut a few hours off a playthrough. I don't think it makes that much difference honestly. And PoE is probably somewhere in between BG 1 and BG 2 lengthwise.

Why just 4 vs 6? That strikes me as rather odd.

Of course hardcore players are going to be more thorough in doing side content. Are you serious?

This prediction is clearly not based on past events. And if you didn't think PoE was good you should just let go of your dream because it's unlikely anything better is going to be made anytime soon.

I'm pretty sure you get interrupted when using a bow and are hit by an attack just like spellcasting. I think that and a lack of engagement are the only downsides to it.

Sorry man, Call of Duty and Battlefield totally disprove that theory. Actually most "AAA" games disprove that theory. Though Skyrim is vastly better than most schlock that sells millions of copies while offering no substance. It's just a really, really, really flawed game, like everything Bethesda makes. They don't, you just don't like what they offer. That's what I'm talking about. Sales drop when worse ones come out. I don't like what they offer because they offer virtually nothing. That's the hallmark of AAA gaming really. Completely without substance most the time. Just pretty graphics and lots of violence.

Sorry man, Call of Duty and Battlefield totally disprove that theory. Actually most "AAA" games disprove that theory. Though Skyrim is vastly better than most schlock that sells millions of copies while offering no substance. It's just a really, really, really flawed game, like everything Bethesda makes.

Grieving Mother is most certainly a "good" person. Her alignment would probably be Neutral Good in D&D. Grieving Mother doesn't believe people have agency or rights. She does not seek to cultivate the good in people. She is manipulative in the extreme. Her only interest is the welfare of children. She is principled in the extreme. That makes her lawful. She is benign. That makes her non-evil. You can make the argument that she's Lawful Good. I would say she's decidedly Lawful Netural, as a matter of intent. She follows her own beliefs in what is right rather than external principles or laws. That generally means she would not be Lawful. Her actions are generally oriented towards doing that which she feels will benefit others (the question of means vs ends is immaterial relative to the core motivation). That means she is Good. How you could see her as Lawful Neutral is beyond me. An argument could be made for Neutral I suppose.

How many of these VO threads is the OP going to start before a moderator does something?

Grieving Mother is most certainly a "good" person. Her alignment would probably be Neutral Good in D&D.

I don't get the negativity from some backers. I think you guys were expecting something that just wasn't realistic from the things you guys say.

Honeymoon stage? I played the game nearly 100 hours and plan on going back soon once I'm done with some other games. Negative posts on forums do not reflect general opinion.

Compared to cipher, fighter, priest, wizard (mid to late game), rogue, or chanter? Yeah they're underpowered.

True, but there are crossover genres with science fiction, where what looks like high fantasy is either "science so advanced it looks like magic," or some blend between traditional fantasy and sci-fi explanations. And sometimes that takes place on a future Earth. Two examples would be Gene Wolfe's "Book of the New Sun" series, and the more recent Richard K. Morgan "A Land Fit for Heroes" trilogy. Both take place on a radically transformed future Earth with a vaguely Medieval high fantasy culture. The world of Eora in PoE is probably just a typical Tolkien-esque secondary world. But with all the references to old technology, the resemblance to present day Humans and so on, I don't think a future Earth could be completely ruled out, unless the devs make it more explicit. The "two moons" actually remind me of Morgan's idea of a Saturn-like ring around the earth, caused by the fragmentation of the original Moon during an epic war. The Book of the New Sun is not even remotely high fantasy. And yeah I think it's safe to rule out the idea that Eora is a future Earth. There is absolutely no reason to think it's anything but a secondary world.

It should be considerably more than what you are describing if it follows the model of BG expansions. What you are describing is more like the crappy DLC we see all the time these days.

Yeah I have agree that Ranger is a bit rubbish right now. Overall class balance is pretty bad if we're being honest.