Wormerine

Yeah. To be honest I never even liked solo runs - to me difficulty should be about making game more complex and nuanced, not imposing extreme limitations.

“Like Skyrim” might mean anything: possibly just moving away from top down, to FP open (or openish) world. Witcher, Gothic, Deus Ex might be to some extend described “like Skyrim”, whole not being “like Skyrim” at all. I would like for them to wrap up current storyline in a classic isometric/top down format before branching out. My attachment to PoEs comes from them being great isometric RPGs. If Obsidian makes a different genre game in PoE world, my interest in it will be more due to it being an Obsidian game, rather then a PoE game.

On my recent turn based playthrough, the only fight I wasn’t able to beat was the Dorudugan. The issue comes once again from certain abilities working differently - his AOE attacks hit all at once, without any warning as to were they might hit, massacring my entire party in one attack if my party placement was unlucky. I am yet to beat megabosses in RTwP but I feel they are easily the toughest enemies in the game, though it’s mostly due to required metaknowledge.

No, mostly going based on Kickstarter funds. While it not the whole budget game got, it it still less then 1/4 of Deadfire campaign, plus year of pre-fig development and its coming after a financially successful first instalment.

It can't be ignored that Owlcat worked on a far far tighter budget. One might make argument against making massive RPGs without resources to match the ambition, but crowd has spoken, game has been funded, and to be honest I have been fairly impressed with Kingmaker so far. It also cater to a very specific crowd - it is not bad thing in itself. Kickstarter games are a great place to do those kind of projects. I don't long for a faithful table top adaptation, but some people do. That's also a very backhanded compliment: "compared to X you are great!" Deadfire is great without being compared to other games. It is not "one or the other" situation.

For me the biggest addition is giving reason to care for factions politics for characters without roleplaying political affiliations, and some additional insight into Gods' actions.

Did you check what was the cause of death? (disintegrate?)

I don't think I understand. I don't understand how is Deadfire approach supposed to be different (it's not like we can loose our soul permanently) and most games don't provide gameplay mechanic to support the narrative (not that it is good, but...). In BG Seravok won't proceed in his quest, in BG2 you can't actually die due to getting your soul sucked out. Narrative is there to get readers/player attention and keep the "hooked". Whenever stakes are genuine or not it doesn't really matter. Personally, Pathfinder's timers did nothing to me, considering how dull the rest of the opening was. Tyranny opening and timer was great, even though the timer was so generous it might have not existed (fun fact: you can wait till the day of the swords before reading the edict and then you will have entire year to fulfill its requirement )

Both games have hooks: in PoE you will loose your sanity if you won’t find Thanos and gain answer to your question In Deadfire you have to find Eothas to regain your soul. Both hooks act more as excuses, and aren’t explored well throughout the game. That said, I am not quite interested in RPG telling me what my motivation is, and I found it fairly easy in Deadfire to define my characters motivation and act on them. I thought that the ending of PoE1 was well worth the metaphysical gibberish. Deadfire doesn’t really get a punchline though.

While i have a problem with the ending, it is more with „How” then with „what”. No, Pillars has never been about fantasy, adventure, power and choices. The genre it comes from was about that, but PoEs have been subverting those expectations. While you do have a certain freedom your character has never been able to influence events of cosmic scale - you might have stopped Thanos, learn the truth about the nature of Gods, but there is nothing you can do about it. You can interact with kith, and you do act as a link between kith and gods, but you are never a Gods equal. Gods after all, be it good or bad, helpful or parasites are beings well beyond your understanding or power. yes, you are Herald of Berath, but that makes you a puppet. It limits your ability to make choice, not enhance it. While you might hold some level of influence over other kith, it is only because Berath allows you, or forces you to do it. You might have felt powerful if you willingly used Beraths power to scare those soldiers at the harbour. And you would feel powerless if you tried not to do it. It was Berath’s action made through you, whenever you will it, or not. Unfortunately for them, Gods ability to directly attack Eothas are limited, and what might scare random soldiers won’t make an impression on a massive statue of ADR inhabited by a god. And even the most mythic creatures you get to slay in the game, are merely mortal creatures or aspects of a god. Keep in mind what took to kill Eothas when he used a mortal body. Think of what would be required to destroy him in Deadfire. If volcano eruption and tsunami wasn’t enough... what can YOU do? If you were able to challenge and defeat Eothas that would be very unlike PoE. However, the way it is handled is not ideal. Players to have certain expectations, and game doesn’t put a twist on them - just under-delivers on an expected finale. Meeting with Eothas would make for a nice epilogue, but not the climax of the game.

My wish list is short (less then 10). Big chuck of it are games that didn’t comeout yet, but got a steam page. Couple games I want but wait for deep deep sale.

I think it refers to overall theme, treatment of hero and its relative power to enemies around him.

I do think he is well written, just doesn’t have much to do or say about in Deadfire. I thought his personal quest was interesting, though a to brief to be properly explored.

Yes! There are some minor overall improvements to combat and UI, but most of all, there are additional story missions! Two I can recall on top of my head were related to companions (Gloria and the decker guy). Good stuff, and they make the most out of systems available in dragon fall. It is well worth the 2nd playthrough I think.

Well, why not. Here is my list: 1) PoE: Deadfire - in spite of my gripes: Deadfire represents what RPGs I like, and it does so many things, so very well. My main issues are when the game doesn't so as well, what the original did, but judging on its own, it's a pretty stellar RPG. 2) Shadowrun: Dragonfall - really good time with a limited scale. Replatibility isn't great as it's a very directed experience, but I played it twice and had great time both times. 3) Divinity Original Sin - very subjective. I played a big chunk of it with my friend and had a grant time. Still, finished it single player and it was brief enough to still be enjoyable. 4) PoE1 - mid game just wasn't interesting enough, but destiny was well worth the journey. 5) Tyranny - I liked the setting, characters and opening chapter, but there just was too much combat, and combat was too shallow to not drag it down. 6) Wasteland 2 - I would need to replay it, as it's been a while. And it was the first one I played in a long time, so my memories might be a bit too positive. BREAKING POINT Me do not like: 7) Pathfinder Kingmaker - game in early stages (finishing opening chapter I think) so it might change. So far it's alright - the system gives me some Nwn2 nostalgia. But it has so many problems. Combat can be tedious, balance seems out of wack, pacing is real bad, enemy composition dull. Writing is not done great - I don't have an issue with the light tone, but how unnatural, unlikable and awkward it feels. Divinity Original Sin2 - a big *I need to try it with a friend (preferably THE friend from D:OS1). Single player experience was really bad for me. Really tedious, too much time spend managing trash equipment, quests were so undefined and freeform it felt more like cleaning a map, then doing anything specific. 9) Shadowrun: Hong Kong - quite disappointed in this one. On paper it is a bigger and better Dragonfall - but nothing really worked for me here - didnt care for companions, areas felt large and empty, and Hong Kong made for a surprisingly dull setting. 10) Torment: Tides of Numenera - meh 11) Shadowrun Returns - really meh

Pretty much this. The whole crisist system is there (it's clunky) but I remember maybe two instances it was utilized. I enjoyed reading through the game, but the whole thing felt a bit too disjointed to be satisfying.

Good one.

Never played it so can't say. Dark Soul was dope though. But, unless Demon's Souls is more of an RPG, in roleplaying sense, then I don't think it's an apt example. Doom is supposed to be great, and it has demons, but it's not a story drive RPG. I don't question demons as an appealing theme for visual design, but their narrative flexibility to become something interesting. Ah maybe. I mean to check the Inquisition out, but I am not interested enough (D:O is supposed to be still the best, and I didn't even like that one) to download Origin for it. I has been off my PC after the midsappointments that were DA2 and ME3.

I am liking it alright so far, though it is quite tedious experience. Writing is a mixed bag, though one thing which really annoys my is how your protagonist is all over the place - you can't really define him in any coherent ways. And then you have things like that: I don't think Bioware was ever that bad, and their love for massive exposition dumps is legendary (Yes, tell me about the history of dwarven race). I am trying to figure out if Owlcat are parodying RPG tropes of if its a genuine attempt.

Awww, I missed the sign up deadline. I have fond memories of original Desperados, and Shadow Tactics has been delightful. Having high hopes for D3. Looks great.

Lootboxes then?

Entering the thread I assumed it will be about realistic scope of the game, and was about to make a joke about realistic weapons scopes, only to find that the thread is about weapons scopes.

To some extend the way items are handled might be the case of preference, though I would agree that the way Deadfire implemented items fits more the overall game structure and progression. Personally, I am not much into making my character more powerful - I treat leveling system as a way to define my character, but I don’t look forward to leveling because of getting more powerful. I like my enemies to pose an engaging and fun challenge, and so I would be interested in an RPG which abandons numerical powercreep entirely, and uses levels to expand your and enemies tactical options, instead of just giving flat bonuses to rolls. I mention it, because I don’t enjoy finding weapons which are simply better then what I have. Looters fail to engage me, and if I find a weapon which simply replaces my previous one, I don’t find it rewarding. Remembering BG2 I liked having multiple weapons with different effects I would use for different situations, but I didn’t enjoy finding weapons which would make the rest obsolete. As such Deadfire is a perfect system for me, giving plenty of interesting weapons, which synergise with different builds or strategies. It also encourages to have couple weapons at hand. However, like most of the systems in those kind of RPGs - you don’t really need to engage with this system to get by. It might be the case of the difficulty being too low, but at the same time you wouldn’t want to fall into trap of requiring to have certain weapons to win, I found great satisfaction of equipping my team for megabosses, and seeing my team counter enemies with a smart application of weapons. A benefit of turn-based mode, is that such things are easier to track. Weapon effects are easily noticeable, while in RtwP majority of player will loose track of what’s happening in the noise (I know I usually do). i also love that Deadfire doesn’t punish switching weapons - proficiencies don’t contribute to your chance to hit (for the most part) so one isn’t reliant on meta-knowledge.

I am trying to think of a one example and can’t.

Overall, I found companions disappointing, as I found PoE1 companions to be one of the strongest aspects of the game. I liked how they implemented them this time around more - the way they join you feels more natural, and having them respond to things around you, rather then delivering their stories in big chunks has a better flow. However, because their character arcs are independent from locations you visit I found that: each individual story feels underdeveloped, while characterisation feels very one note. If the game were decided into linear chunks, your companions could develop over time. As it is, Takehu will always be irresponsible, selfish, spoiled brat, and no matter how he develops in the future it is something which is suggested but rarely seen. Here is my personal take on companions: RETURNING COMPANIONS - all disappointing, mostly due to how they transfer from PoE1 to PoE2. 1) Eder - I like the guy, but it feels to me like he doesn’t fit in. Considering how important Eothas is to him, I expected him to have a compelling part to play. I feel he is not very well explored. His personal quest really disappointed me. After reading short story for PoE1 which included his relationship with Elafa it makes a bit more sense, but before that it really felt like something which came out of nowhere. He felt like a baby’s first henchman with likeable personality but little relevance. He could have been an interesting counterpart to Xoti, but as his personality has to for the most part cover both faithless and faithful Eders, he ends up in a vague, indecisive inbetween. He does get couple good lines regarding current events and Saints Wars though. 2) Aloth - disappointed how Deadfire undermines growth he had in PoE1. Certainly disappointing if you happen to suppress Iselmyr, as it doesn’t change his character - it simply cuts a lot of content out. His encounter feels the most artificial and convenient. Like Eder, he feels like “that mage” character. 3) Pallegina - I think she is the one who suffered the most when merging PoE1 endings into something manageable. As she becomes an unrelenting mouthpiece for Valians, she looses a lot of complexity she had in the original. Her personal quest doesn’t further her character, but fills plot points, which I just didn’t find compelling. Considering how I loved her confrontation with Hylea in PoE1, I am sad her personal story and conflict wasn’t explored. Just like Eder she gets some good lines, but they don’t lead anywhere. NEW GUYS 4) Xoti - my definite favourite of the companions, in spite my early hate for her. Being independent from factions (though one might argue she represents Gods) she seems better developed and more rounded as a character. I liked her personal quest, and she felt more involved in the overall story then most of the others. 5) Takehu - I really disliked this guy, until my last playthrough. Siding with Huana and taking him as my regular companion, showed me parts of his character and arc I didn’t see before. It also helps that with two dedicated story quests (watershapers/gullet) and some really relevant story bits (Sanctuary Island and landing on Ukaizo) he has space to grow and respond to things around him. 6) Maia - never found her interesting. I like her quips, but she never got deeper then that. It always felt to me, like she didn’t get much content. Even when playing as Rauatai supporter she never gave me much cause to care about her or her faction. 7) Serafen - I liked him. Just a fun guy to keep around. His waves of past memories, bursting under emotional duress was a nice touch. Also, the only faction guy likely to stick with you until the end - gotta respect that. SIDEKICKS: I pretty much liked them all. Small story arcs and quips added in DLCs helped to flesh them out. Sometimes all you need is just a bit of context to like them.