gloomseeker

The man is not dead. Cheer up. What? Who said anything about him being dead? The whole thread reads like a eulogy. Unless he's retiring from the industry chances are we will be able to enjoy his work in other titles.

The man is not dead. Cheer up. It wouldn't have been a big deal if the new music would have been more memorable. I believe Bell wrote something in the forum about wanting the music for Deadfire to blend more into the background, maybe that's another reason for this. PoE II needed a score that invoces a lust for adventure, whereas PoE I was fine with its rather melancholic score. Deadfire doesn't really know where it stands atmospherically. A good soundtrack doesn't stand out. The moment you notice it is the moment when it fails. It has to support the action, not take the front seat.

That's 2 cents very well spent. Expectation is a prison, as everybody should know by the time they reach the age of about 20. That's a rather bleak outlook.. Bad experiences? I find high expectations are great. Especially if they're exceeded, which luckily happens often. Not with games thou, but then again, if a game sucks, it's just a game. Not bleak, just realistic.

Edér has got a pet now so he probably doesn't care about romance.

Getting hyped is a sure way to end up being disappointed. If you keep your expectations in check chances are you will be pleasantly surprised and happier as a result. My 2 cents.

I played both at release and clearly Fallout 2 was a joke compared to Fallout 1. Sure, Fallout 2 was bigger and added many interesting mechanics but it was also filled to the rim with terrible jokes and silly references. Take away all the inane references to movies and you have the best Fallout game but as it stands Fallout 1 was more subdued and as a result it did work as a roleplaying experience whereas Fallout 2 was nothing more than a spoof. Fallout 2 was the Monty Python's Fallout game and as a result it could never compare to the original. It's the same as playing a pen and paper RPG and having the Game Master breaking out of character all the time to crack some jokes. That sort of thing may look like fun but it does grow old pretty fast.

I've been playing games like BG since 98, I think the biggest difference is that the infinity engine games were more straightforward when it came to engagement so pathfinding issues were not that serious. If you're going to make the entire combat system revolve around engagement and attacks of opportunity you really can't afford pathfinding messing things up; which unfortunately is exactly what happens with the 1st Pillars (and if you want to make the most of it you have to micromanage and turn the party AI off -I've played BG recently and it's certainly not such a hassle). Tyranny was a bit too light with 4 characters but Deadfire hits the perfect balance with a party of 5. In all fairness it's rather easy to get used to having 5 characters and surprisingly so even for a BG or IWD veteran.

The smaller party makes the pathfinding much more manageable. That's one thing that really annoyed me in Pillars 1. Wormerine summed things up pretty well without hyperbole and outlandish comparisons. Deadfire does its own thing and it's probably for the best. Last but not least, the music is absolutely great.

To me that's exactly the opposite when it comes to replayability. I absolutely disliked going out of my way to try and see if things were going to play out differently just to find out that in fact it didn't change much after all. I think I've been spoiled by the Anarchy finale which I've enjoyed a lot. I've got mixed feelings about Tyranny. I liked it a lot better than Pillars when I first played it but then I had such a hard time trying to get back into Tyranny whereas I've been able to approach Pillars in different ways and still find some fun to be had. They really botched the ending for Tyranny and from what I've read the Bastard Wound DLC is no White March so it looks like another missed opportunity. I've had such a great time playing Deadfire with my evil merc character that I took all through the first game but I think that there is room for another run with a decent character this time around. I will probably switch from Brute to Marauder (I like Barbarians) and leave the spellcasting to NPCs.

I had this exact problem with Tyranny. Got it on release and I've been trying to justify getting the DLC and starting over but I simply can't (plus the fact that everyone keeps saying that the Tyranny DLC is underwhelming doesn't help). I've played BG so many times I lost count but I can't find the motivation to replay Tyranny, I did start and lost steam when I ended up taking another route just for the sake of it (the first time I went for the Anarchist path and it was a blast). I think the main difference between Pillars and Tyranny is that Pillars is less focused on what happens off the screen. Tyranny has too much of that (in my opinion there is a disconnection between the narrative and the gameplay). Plus from what (little) I've read about Deadfire DLC it looks like they do a lot more for the game.

Let's look at the bright side here, if like me you've been waiting for all the content to be released in order to start your second run through Deadfire then you have plenty of time to take a character through the first game if you're so inclined.

Of course if the OP is actually talking about Divinity 2, it's not the same game as Divinity Original Sin 2.

For what it's worth Divinity Original Sin 2 is incredibly better than 1, I had a terrible time trying to get into 1 but 2 really clicked for me (to the point that I'm even considering giving 1 another try at a later date once I'm done with other CRPGs). Thanks for pointing out Tower of Time, I remember watching a video some time ago but there are so many games these days it's become very hard to keep track of the new releases and even more difficult to tell which ones are actually worth the time.

Gotta love hyperbolic blanket statements.

In all fairness BG2 is great because it (mostly) adhered to the familiar pen and paper AD&D 2E ruleset and the familiar Forgotten Realms setting which harks back to simpler times. I've always felt BG2 was more linear and more focused on powergaming and metagaming than BG1. There is also some missed opportunities when it comes to NPCs (why no Valygar romance for female characters?) and although I can relate to people who say that BG2 was (and is still) a great game I'm not 100% convinced that it's impossible for a game to be as great. I'm waiting for Deadfire to be complete before making a final judgement on that matter (BG2 without Throne of Bhaal was certainly lacking -no HLAs, no Wild Mages; it was a bit like playing POE1 without White March).

One shouldn't put too much stock in Steam forums and reviews as they tend to feed on controversy and are hyperbolic by nature. I did finish Deadfire once so I know for a fact that it can be played through (which is not exactly the same as saying that it is bug free). The reason I'm waiting is simple, I have a number of other games I've been meaning to play and I want to be able to experience the whole content for my second run. Plus ! still have to make up my mind regarding a class and character and whether or not I'll be going through the first game when I do. Decisions such are these are never easy.

That's a very good point and I believe it's the same with movie soundtracks. Most of the time we only notice them when they stand out and when that happens it usually means that the music takes us away from the experience (i.e. it breaks immersion). A good soundtrack doesn't stand out and therefore often goes unnoticed and this one is simply a great soundtrack. I don't know about you guys but I never felt like it broke the flow of the game which is absolutely remarkable.

Just popping in to say that I think the music does deserve more credit than it has received as there hasn't been enough praise for what you've accomplished with this soundtrack.

That's the one reason why going through the first Pillars felt like a chore to me at some point. Pathfinding in the first Pillars is a disgrace. Deadfire does improve on that quite a bit (I guess the smaller party size helps). Pillars 1 made things even worse with all its focus on engagement. It's as if they stressed the weakest part of the game and piled up on it. In the end I liked the first Pillars but it had more to do with the setting and story than with the fighting (I've enjoyed Deadfire a lot more on that front).

As a side note I have to point out that it's impossible to go through Irenicus Dungeon with the Tactics mod installed without relying on cheesy tactics, foreknowledge and exploits. Mods can be used to alter the gaming experience, they don't necessarily improve it. The best RPG is Fallout 1 but I do agree with you. I think that they're putting too much effort in balancing PoE when it's a single player game. In the end some players will always look for game breaking builds and giving these players something to sink their teeth into in terms of difficulty is probably more important than making sure all classes are perfectly matched. Don't get me wrong it would make sense for a multiplayer game but here it just feels like evening everything out which isn't that much fun to be honest. In BG2 players would go to extreme lengths to play a Kensai Thief or a Kensai Mage because it would end up being godly but it also meant starting out with a character who was a liability. It's certainly not the way things work with PoE.

This might indeed be a factor. And perhaps in tandem with that, the relative development costs: branching and conditional dialogue trees take more work for less reward at least in the sense that fewer players are likely to encounter a particular path the more it branches out. Though of course there is a lot of pay off if it helps improve immersion and make the world feel more cohesive and alive. So definitely, more reactivity and interaction would be great. Though I'd love to see more of that beyond the companions as well, applied to other characters and the world itself; see those vary and change over time and in reaction to events more as well. I would like to see that too but unfortunately the current system in PoE2 makes it all too easy to please NPCs in the party and unless you're going out of your way to make them angry they will like you no matter what. All you have to do is pick some humorous lines and chances are most will approve. Not saying BG2 did it better since without being so elaborate it was roughly the same thing (some NPCs would leave if you made some choices but there were ways to cope with that). All in all I do find it particularly odd that Deadfire doesn't take into account a character's allegiance as much as we would be let to expect it to. For instance raiding ships belonging to a faction to which an NPC has dedicated his or her life should entail some sort of consequence or at the very least some form of acknowledgement and that's simply not the case here. This being the no spoiler forum I won't elaborate but I do believe that in order to have some deeper interaction with NPCs there needs to be some extra verisimilitude when it comes to an NPC's allegiance and life choices.

Yeah, I may have done poor Anomen a disservice here - he's quite a dynamic character and his character growth is really impressive if he gets knighted for a Paladin. That's the point, actually. If he doesn't, well... But that's a direct consequence of player screwing up - what other game does that? And as you mentioned - the list goes on, with Viconia, Sarevok, Aerie, Keldorn, Imoen, even goddamn Jan and Nalia. If I were particularily mean-spirited, I would ask to compare that to Maia, Pallegina, Aloth or Xoti in Deadfire (Xoti's only "development" is to either remain the way she is is - an immature fundamentalist, or become a deranged serial killer - that's not much of a growth IMO). And we are comparing a "pioneer" game from 2000 with a modern RPG with all technical advantages that it entails and years of mastering the craft of writing companion mechanics. As for the character growth being limited to romance - yeah, agreed on that. I atually never romanced Anomen myself, just observed my girlfriend's playthrough, as she bravely decided to romance him "for science" (She was more of a Kesley mod kind of an enthusiast). Although, I'm not sure if the "knighting" alignment change isn't connected to his sidequest. But still, the point stands. Yet again, we are talking about a game from 18 years ago. The entire idea of companions interjecting, getting into fights, having quests and *romances* was revolutionary back then. Usually, back then in Western RPGS we had either full party creation IWD style, or generic one-note companions with no interaction, similar to sidekicks/custom companions in Deadfire. I think the only WRPG back then that tried a companion "romance" was Treasure of the Savage Frontier - and correct me if I'm wrong with that. And suddenly, we have fully fleshed-out romantic storylines, questlines, banters and what-have-you with hours of content in BG 2 (I'm guessing JRPGs may have had some influence there). So, I'm usually cutting the game some slack for not introducing, let's say friendship talks for the rest of the companions. Nah, Chaotic Neutral Anomen is the only fun version of that character.

Scripted encounters where the main character finds him/herself surrounded have been a feature of every CRPG ever made. I for one never liked that. The worst example I can think of is in DAO when your entire party formation would be thrown down the drain (and don't get me started on the sneaking Rogue getting spotted by the NPCs thanks to a scripted event). In a pen and paper game I would personally blame the game master for pulling such a cheap trick. There is such a thing as immersion and there are limits to what is called suspension of disbelief.

There is indeed very little content for Aumaua, especially Island Aumaua to be found. I was looking for something to draw, anyway, so I thought I might give it a try. I'm not terribly happy with the result, but better than nothing I guess. Feel free to ignore it if you don't like them. https://imgur.com/uMTXA1F https://imgur.com/YzISfgi https://imgur.com/C9MLYUZ https://imgur.com/hRgmreB This looks really cool and I really like your style. Thanks for sharing your art with the community.

BG was never about balance, that's for sure. Some may not like that and it's finr but the truth is it kept things interesting. Playing a Beastmaster Ranger could still be done but you couldn't expect to hold a candle to a multiclass Ranger/Cleric. Other kits like the Jester were deceptively weak and had some truly great potential if you care to make use of their abilities. Pillars is all about balance and it shows. I personally can't say I approve of that game design philosophy as it tends to even things out. BG and Pillars are on the opposite ends of the spectrum when it comes to balance and how much it matters to you is certainly going to inform your gaming experience.