drael6464
-
Posts
87 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by drael6464
-
-
I'm talking the final act is a massive battlefield that you have to fight your way through seigemachines, dragons and giants to achieve various objectives that turn the tide of the battle. Really the inspiration would be more something very adult- like game of thrones, rather than a video game, that typically has a safely targeted teen audience. You know, nudity sex, blood, intrigue, crap tonnes of sweating, severed heads, people dying all over, and magic. The desperate struggle to survive, and win in the midst of crushing chaos and depravity.
And this, my friend, is Witcher 2.
Ah, well if that's true it's a shame I don't play first or third person games. Sounds like i'd enjoy it, if I enjoyed that format of game.
-
the game is fine. User reviews have been, and always will be, 99% complete crap. You shouldn't even read them, much less consider their views. Also no, it is a much better game than Eternity 1, the main plot may be shakier, but every other aspect is better. Considering how short the main plot of the game is, I don't really consider that one thing being weaker when everything else is better a big problem.
How is the game better ? The combat is boring as hell, the maps are small and really take away the concept of exploration, the world map is a text based "Press NEXT to continue and collect some random crap " , ship combat is not even worth mentioning, leveling up never felt less exciting, items are a big meh...
Sure you have voiced dialogue , and some interesting stories here and there but it all feels waaay too disconnected and i end up wondering " why am i going after that ship .... eh some bounty given by whom ? oh well, lets play the same boarding ship combat the n-th time and move on "
Pretty sure the overall size of actually isometric terrain is bigger.
The issue for me, and here I can agree with you, is I really enjoyed the dungeon in poe1. Some people hate that style of play, but I prefer a single, complex area, to hundreds of small areas. There's more sense of challenge in getting to the lowest level of a deep dungeon. And probably more sense of discovery in exploring a single area IMO too. A lot of areas in this game I was like 'this is great. Oh is that it?'. Still loved the game but I feel you on the area size thing.
I'm hoping and I think this is realistic, that the DLC's will give us some single, detailed areas to explore.
-
1
-
-
I'd like to see an single character arpg from them in the same world. They write good stories.
An arpg with a single character could make use of cut scenes and 3d animations and tell a grittier, sexier, bloodier story. Something very adult with an epic war and intruige backdrop. Game of thrones kinda, in game form. Affairs, power politics, prostitution, beheadings, impalings, battlefeilds with huge monsters and siege machines.
It would also make a good console game, or even mobile platform game if one was inclined. Most arpgs these days are absent any compelling plotline, or meaningful choices. They also often take place in bland detailless worlds. Which this wouldn't be.
I mean I am not huge on the genre, although I enjoyed the original diablo games. But I think they could do it well, create something quite original. Something genre breaking. Mainly because they are not a mainstream studio and have an eye for artful detail.
Narrative based action games in general are so one dimensional from the big studios these days. They don't even have anything resembling player choice impact. Even something with a few different endings and a decent story would be a vast improvement.
First - Why is this under this Topic?
Second - Just hard no, that is terribe Idea. Almost every game nowdays is mix of some Action type game with rpgs elements. We don't need more of that. Specially not from Obsidian and this franchize.
As for mobile games the world map in deadfire is now a mobile game basically, and it is bad.
Game needs more and bigger maps to play with your party on, actual cRPG style and less meaningless world map travel.
Why? Because the action driven story games of mainstream studios are bland and uncreative. I think much more could be done with the genre, that focuses more on an original take, with genuine rpg elements. It would be top down, like diablo, but instead of meaningless battles, all the action and story would take context in a genuinely compelling story that the character can influence.
Unlike diablo, it would be more like a stoy of war and power politics, richer with grit - swearing sex, ultraviolence. Unlike dragon age inquisition it would tell an interesting story, and no be bland and tame-ish.
I'm talking the final act is a massive battlefield that you have to fight your way through seigemachines, dragons and giants to achieve various objectives that turn the tide of the battle. Really the inspiration would be more something very adult- like game of thrones, rather than a video game, that typically has a safely targeted teen audience. You know, nudity sex, blood, intrigue, crap tonnes of sweating, severed heads, people dying all over, and magic. The desperate struggle to survive, and win in the midst of crushing chaos and depravity.
Not just your dull everyday, "extra blood" type game phenoma - but a whole depth of grit - something that pushed boundaries. It would be hard. With a real sense of do or die - something that punches into a human place, and doesn't just entertain with hero plotlines. Not gore, swearing and sex etc for the sake of it - but rather as narrative punch. People you care about dying. Killing despicable people. Sex as a way to convey hedodism, self-servingness, degniracy.
Just because other people do this badly (narrative driven action), is exactly the reason I think obsidian could do it with a whole raft of unique and creative elements that would make such a game entirely fresh. Stories in games could take serious ques from prestige TV and new books. They don't, they are redunctive, and train trackey. Like clones of each other. Obsidian is the company that doesn't want just a commercial product and money. They want to serve their consumers, by creating something with love.
I mean it wouldn't have to be how I describe, it would just need to have better rpg elements, challenging tactical elements, and a story that really pushes into new territory. I'm sure they could do it, position they are in, in gaming.
-
I haven't played the game yet. I won't have time to do it for many more months. (Regarding spoilers: I don't mind mild spoilers, or I wouldn't be hanging around here).
The thing is, from my point of view, it is very hard what to expect from Deadfire. While the game has relatively high scores on Metacritic and Steam, I see many people here and also on Steam who express what they don't like about the game.
Not only is the main storyline allegedly mediocre to very bad. But the characters are allegedly bland with no depth at all. The side quests are boring. The music is bad. I'm reading so many negative things here and on Steam.
Do I need to expect one of the "worst games ever" when I play the game? And that is how a Steam review actually called the game, "the worst game ever".
I don't understand how that matches the relatively high scores on Metacritic and on Steam.
A thread like this also worries me. "In Defense of the Story" - such a title makes me wonder why the story would need someone to defend it in the first place. If there was nothing wrong with the story why would anyone feel they need to defend it?
All of this makes me want to ask you: Is Deadfire really THAT bad?
I wouldn't agree with much of that. The music scoring is fantastic. Very atmospheric and potent. The little sea shanties are an excellent touch. The main storyline isn't bad, it's just....it's an ending you personally have slight influence in, and it's a bit of a cliffhanger. It's still has its moments thoroughout, and the substories that all tie in very well to it, are quite compelling.
The chacters are memorable. They aren't all nessasarily relatable characters, but they are not bland - indeed quite amusing, or interesting. The graphics and the gameplay are superior to PoE1. Balance still needs a little tweaking, but it's an overall enjoyable game. Just remember that being a critic is a popular form of contrarianism and that entertainment is subjective. The only area I felt was weak was the ending, but it still wasn't aweful, and has some satisfaction especially in all the little details that you influenced throughout the world. The balance could be improved, and they are working on that - just some of the combats are less challenging than they could be (but some are).
For all it's little flaws, it's the most enjoyable rpg I've played, so much so, I played it twice through - I've literally never done that for any game, not eve baldurs gate 2.
I think it's fairer to say there is room for improvenment - but that of a game with a new RPG system, new rich world, the best graphics of any isometric rpg, fun combat mechanics, and some engaging stories, entertaining companions - those criticism should be put in context with all they do really well.
-
2
-
-
Famyprs. They are unbound to the wheel. I guess you could still die a violent death. What happens to the soul of a dead famypr?
-
I'd like to see an single character arpg from them in the same world. They write good stories.
An arpg with a single character could make use of cut scenes and 3d animations and tell a grittier, sexier, bloodier story. Something very adult with an epic war and intruige backdrop. Game of thrones kinda, in game form. Affairs, power politics, prostitution, beheadings, impalings, battlefeilds with huge monsters and siege machines.
It would also make a good console game, or even mobile platform game if one was inclined. Most arpgs these days are absent any compelling plotline, or meaningful choices. They also often take place in bland detailless worlds. Which this wouldn't be.
I mean I am not huge on the genre, although I enjoyed the original diablo games. But I think they could do it well, create something quite original. Something genre breaking. Mainly because they are not a mainstream studio and have an eye for artful detail.
Narrative based action games in general are so one dimensional from the big studios these days. They don't even have anything resembling player choice impact. Even something with a few different endings and a decent story would be a vast improvement.
-
I'd probably play this as a straight ranger for the flavour of using it with that kick arse arqeubus (the one with the flame attack). Although with rogue might be fun, using sneak attacks. Those few unique weapons and items that give extra spell like powers are great for giving your warrior class tactical options.
Equally interesting might be wizard illusionist or enchanter, for more of a controller/buff angle. You'd be less able to stand in the blast, but you'd get some more tactical variation (fighter classes are powerful and all, but I always eventually get tired of the lack of options. Between stun and fear/confusion you'd be a might fine controller.
In pnp at least you can pull out some flavour and to a disarm, or some other move. Be fun to play a bomber/wizard as a crazy MF.
-
I've never actually played any game pnp or crpg where ranger companions and wizard familiars aren't either useless or OP (usually the former).
Personally I don't think they should be a class focus. There are great in pnp for non-combat purposes - sneaking, getting spaces, nightvision, scouting etc. Fun for role-play. But in a crpg, as the class focus of ranger? No, I'd rather not.
To me, a ranger isn't a companion class, or indeed merely a ranged class - but a nature skill based warrior with some rogue skills. More of a hunter or wilderness survival expert.
For poe, I'd probably have given a subclass with druid spells, and a subclass with backstab. Although you can multi-class most combinations are not optimal, and some are OP. Multi-classing is not an ideal system IMO either. That said, druids also have a shapeshift focus, that I also feel should be optional. That every nature focused class has to have some animal tag along is limiting.
-
1
-
-
The side stories are definately better. However the main story, the watcher isn't even the protagonist. I can definately see how that might be disappointing to some - because it's central to the ending, it makes the player feel like their actions are irrelevant. It's also a cliff-hanger - you have no idea how the main story actually ends.
Personally I enjoyed he side stories enough. But it's not without flaw!
-
gimp mask and a car battery
W-what is the battery for?
Well said person has just assumed you like a little light electrocution while tied up in a gimp mask. So they climb into your bed with a gimp mask and a battery for some fun. Oh what you don't what a little light electrocution? Are you sure, it gets lonely in here. Okay, my bad, I'll see you up on deck.
-
2
-
-
And it was like that in IE games, the problem is that didn’t work. That’s why resting supplies were introduced.In pnp games, you can also just camp in the middle of a dungeon. The mechanic that stops you doing this too often, is that encounters can get the jump on your while half the party is sleeping - not in armour, and without weapons drawn.
So I can actually see how this could be fixed the same way. But you'd need to introduce random encounters to resting, and make it so the party is not wearing armour, and have some extra unarmed "weapon slot".
When you rest and get ambushed you either:
1) can handle the encounter and it’s annoying
2) you can’t so you reload.
It is a mechanic which can work ONLY in a setting with perma death and no reloading.
Just a note - it makes no sense to have no armor and weapons when ambushed. It’s an adventuring party, not a Holliday trip. It’s not like they put up a tend and change into pijamas.
Okay, you try sleeping in full plate. The most actual medieval soldiers slept in was something like a chain shirt. You can barely get up from a lying position in full plate anyway, so if you did sleep in plate, you'd spend half the fight getting to your feet.
But I still don't think resting is the major problem in terms of producing tactical encounters. It's buffs, debuffs, ailments, specific DR resistances, spell resistances, gaze weapons, breath weapons etc.
The vulnerability, invulnerabilities and abilities that make pnp encounters tactical. The most tactical combat I had was either too low level with golems, or high level combat with the fampyrs - that's because with the golems only crush weapons and spells worked, and with the vampyrs, I had to manage getting attacked by own own party.
Imagine what it could be like if certain encounters had basically invulnerability to piercing, or slashing, or complete spell resistance, or deadly cone attacks, or paralyzing vision, or death touch - invulnerability to flame, or a swift assasin mob with poisoned backstabs and quick weapons (good luck to their cleave fighter monk then)
Each one of those would require a different approach, and be deadly. Even if people can reload, they can't just "get lucky', they have to change their tactics, like people do with these situations in pnp games.
I think the paladins resistances would have to be lower anyway, but that's what makes for a challenge and requires tactics - when your opponent has unique attributes that make you revist your whole normal approach.
In this case it's about the underpowering of enemy special attributes. Not so much they need a general scale up, but rather in specific areas. Golems should be basically untouchable with swords and daggers. Liches should be - oops he touched you, you lost a level (or two).
Life drain of some significant note would be an easy tactic thing to add. Your front line fighters would also switch to range, and everyone would start running.
-
1
-
-
I just don't know then, i've had 3 party members want to come back to the captains quarters almost immediately. I feel like the dialogue must be being initiated too quickly or something. I'd had Maia in my party for all of 5 minutes before she wanted my pole.
I will accept it is bugged dialogue and hope a patch sorts it.
If not, the writing is horribly forced and ham-fisted.
Never mind the companions. I can't keep my pirates at bay. I've had three ship's crew burst into my quarters and think we are going to have mad, ravenous sex.
Joe
Yeah, I gotta say, that's pretty weird. They just assume you are down for it, whatever gender too. It's like someone showing up with a gimp mask and a car battery and just getting down to business, being surprised if you have reservations....
-
1
-
-
In pnp games, you can also just camp in the middle of a dungeon. The mechanic that stops you doing this too often, is that encounters can get the jump on your while half the party is sleeping - not in armour, and without weapons drawn.
So I can actually see how this could be fixed the same way. But you'd need to introduce random encounters to resting, and make it so the party is not wearing armour, and have some extra unarmed "weapon slot".
But I kind of agree that rest isn't really broken. It's not the thing that makes the game unbalanced, or less strategic. I reckon the empower ability is OP, is one thing. Things like cleave and flurry need to be tweaked, and in particular bonus attacks should have a stacking maximum.
AoE spells would be easy enough to tweak. Either you lower the damage done, scale down empower, or beef up enemy immunities to fire, ice, lightning etc.
In general I think it does relate to the system, and the enemies. Trolls in pathfinder/dnd are hard because you can't kill them without fire or acid damage. One enemy I found quite hard in this game were the fampyrs. Even at high levels, because of that charm/domination. So I someone hit the nail on the head here about players having too many immunities. Those times you get stunned or dominated, is when you really start thinking about your approach.
One of the reasons, side comment, that cyphers could be great, but aren't - those charm, stun, domination powers could be game changers, but it's not the focus of the character.
More backstabbing enemies might help too - with all the reliance on cleave and furry - usually in a pnp game you don't always rush in to be surrounded by enemies because you get flanked. If the battlefield was filled with for example some poison wielding assasins, that poleax wielding fighter monk might think twice. Likewise a stone golem with an insane DR to peirce might discourage bow users.
The more I think about it, beyond the lack of 'stack limits', and the OP of empower, one of the core issues relates to the buff/debuff system and general vulnerabilities. Those are often the things that make you alter your approach. I never once had to change my weapon set in this game to get a different form of damage. Or rely primarily on ranged weapons, or spellcasters. And those are all things you sometimes have to do in pnp games - Plus - a breath weapon wielding dragon will fry your front line fighters. A vampire will screw them too. As will a medusa, or beholder. Some beefy enemy abilities and defenses is what creates this.
Those little sigils have the sort of power that some creatures could have, if you really want to beef up the drama. There's a death one that within a certain range, basically auto-kills the whole party. If you could have some attacks, debuffs, and defences that were not easily overcome - things like gaze weapons, breath weapons, high specific DRs, spell resistance and so on, that would bring in the strategy. Make people not just bomb AoE, and run in swinging.
-
I'm not sure I want to get involved in the probability/likelihood debate because I don't really have a firm position on that. I mean you could argue that its a fantasy world, and thus more people are bi. Or that there's a culture like the greeks. Without limits, a high fantasy world is hard to define in terms of "realism" - audiences may like relateability, but that doesn't mean there's any logic to it, or indeed to the world itself.
And because the estimates vary wildly, it's hard to weigh in on. However, according to gallup daily tracking roughly 3.8 percent of the population is personally identifying as gay, bi or lesbian (which is the largest such statistical collation I know of). Higher estimates usually use something like a "bisexual spectrum" or similar abstraction to come up with a higher figure - but those are not people who identify as bi, or people who practice it.
Amongst those who identify as bi, pew research 2013 found that around 84 percent of bisexual people are actually in an opposite sex relationship, with the vast minority in same sex relationships. If you were to factor that by five, yes, you'd have an extraordinarily uncommon grouping. Consider that when you combine probabilities like this, it's factorial. You are talking like odds less than 1 in a billion especially once you factor in the fact that most bi people date the opposite sex.
You certainly might get that in an grouping that has a particular kind of culture - like student liberal arts students, or a workplace that has a very cosmopolitan culture, where like minds gather together but I think it's fair to say, that it is very unusual, statistically in the general population.
-
You still seem to be confusing and conflating two completely seperate things that I was saying. (Progressive lean versus my idea of going gritty, which is entirely seperate and unrelated)
Perhaps a story can be gritty with magic or gods, but it's harder. If you can resurrect people, it tends to lower the stakes. This is why gritty stories tend to take place in low magic, or harder sci-fi environments - the idea is with a gritty story is that it's relatively easy to die, and at least almost impossible to undo.
A good example might be game of thrones. They have gods, the gods do things. They have magic. But its rare, comes with a price and the will of the gods is impossible to predict. So people have been resurrected, but you could never do so reliably.
I completely agree that progressive storylines can be gritty or dark. The AO has some, it's also supernatural and its very dark.
Magic and resurrection in GoT is really not all that rare in the story itself. It's established that it's rare in the world as a whole and that the characters are important people and therefore outliers, but really there's a lot of magic going on there.
I used game of thrones, because yes, despite being a low magic world, with more distant gods, there is a lot more in the main story - but the main point I was trying to illustrate, is that despite resurrection and such being possible on GoT, it keeps the stakes high by using those two methods - magic both has a high cost/risks and is unreliable.
So if someone dies, they generally don't come back (it's happened, but generally doesn't). If someone is poisoned or injured they generally don't get magicked back to health. The two obvious cases of resurrection, one was just a zombie, and the other one was a hail mary and no on thought it would actually work.
I think it's just a really good example of how to constrain magic so that everything feels on edge and impactful from a story-writing POV. High magic and high divinity create a scenario where the audience doesn't know the limits. It's like in sci-fi where characters are always brought back, via some parallel dimension or something. It cheapens everything.
-
I don't think I was making an argument, just sharing my thoughts.
With the backer thing, I was just saying that "trying to please everyone" might be a tendancy that direct engagement and dependence on crowdfunding could produce, whereas in a conventional art as commerce company, you would look to your major demographics rather than trying to please everyone at once. IDK, if this is true or not. But it seems like a reasonable, logical possibility. Much like direct engagement and dependence on your consumers as a salesperson would give you a less detached view than being a CEO (as well as a more detailed picture)
My comment on "more adult" was really just a seperate opinion. The first game kind of broke ground by having a fair bit of swearing etc, and not being mainstream or under the control of a distribution company seems like an ideal time to go full game of thrones - and have gore, sex, swearing, drug use as central elements in the main story. Whilst there are things like slavery in the game, and caste systems, it's not super punchy. Some of it is. I did like the sense of desperation in that poor distrinct. That seemed colourful, and compelling. The miai quest had some punch too.
Perhaps you are right though in your statement about optimism - there are plenty of darker themes in the game, and some of them are quite compelling. And it is probably safer using species as a metaphor for race than actually using race (not safer as in bad, safer as in a smarter commercial choice, less divisive way to handle the same topics). There is certainly some optimism in the plot though, it's not really dark or optimistic. Sort of a mixture. Some of the gods rants are a tad bleak.
When it comes to adult, IDK, I look at something like "black sails". for comparison here on the pirate setting. The social taboo in that plotline (outside of the pirate community) for the main characters gay relationship was very compelling. The grit of the violence and betrayal, the greed. I guess this is not typically, what crpgs do, this whole prestige TV style grit, but it would IMO, be fun to see. To be visceral, such a story would need to be more than words on a screen though - it would need to be imagery at least, something with a more visual/sonic punch. Emotive.
Fantasy is a traditionally more optimistic and family friendly genre. Game of thrones/fire and ice has shown us, that it doesn't have to be. I just wonder what a story of betrayal, scheming, affairs, war would look like in a crpg.
I guess such a game would be slightly less divine/magic oriented, and probably need to be more action/difficulty oriented. Not exactly the same kind of game, but a story rich arpg with adult themes, meaningful choices and a sprinkle of moral greyness, could really push an envelope in gaming. Put in some saucey storylines and place some battles in the centre of an epic battlefield. It would be very interesting to see conflict of that scale in this unique setting too. But as I say, maybe that would be a different game altogether.
It seems like you are operating under certain assumptions that I don't agree with. I don't agree that gods or magic make a story less dark or gritty. Less grounded, sure, but you can have dark or light, mature or immature, stories with magic. I also don't think that so-called "adult" content e.g. sex, cursing, violence, drug use is diametrically opposed to progressive values. It's about how those things are presented within the story. You can write a progressive story that takes place in a very bigoted world, it depends on whether that content is presented critically or uncritically, and whether it is gratuitous or purposeful, and if it is purposeful, then what message it's conveying.
You still seem to be confusing and conflating two completely seperate things that I was saying. (Progressive lean versus my idea of going gritty, which is entirely seperate and unrelated)
Perhaps a story can be gritty with magic or gods, but it's harder. If you can resurrect people, it tends to lower the stakes. This is why gritty stories tend to take place in low magic, or harder sci-fi environments - the idea is with a gritty story is that it's relatively easy to die, and at least almost impossible to undo.
A good example might be game of thrones. They have gods, the gods do things. They have magic. But its rare, comes with a price and the will of the gods is impossible to predict. So people have been resurrected, but you could never do so reliably.
I completely agree that progressive storylines can be gritty or dark. The AO has some, it's also supernatural and its very dark.
-
I ended up using a mod. https://fearlessrevolution.com/threads/pillars-of-eternity-2-deadfire-2018-05-24-unity-console-v0-19.6745/
With this you can add superb quality to clothes, and extra +1 and then a bunch of damage based DRs. Bringing it up to spec with a really good robe, or decent light armour. Now 3 of my people are in actual clothes, 1 in aloths armour and only one wears medium armour. It comes across as so much better for the setting. Waaay more piratey.
-
1
-
-
I managed to trigger it - she needs a very high disposition (higher than miai) as well as her quest done. Miai trigger for me at +1, but xoti will only trigger at +2, and given all her particulars that's hard to do.
The story doesn't seem to have any interesting end however, unlike the other girl. I guess in the context of all the working up to it, it might run better
-
Apologies for such a simple question, but I can get something seemingly simple to work no matter how much it makes sense in my head to set it up how I have.
I just wanna cast certain buffs in a certain order at the start of a fight.
A simple example of what's going wrong. 2 Buffs set up - Start of fight, dude proceeds to use all resources casting the first buff in the list multiple times.
Why?
How does one set this up properly?
Could be the cooldown time. If it's set to zero, it'll just retrigger the list over and over.
-
Huh, I thought orlans were supposed to be furrier.
She's a meadow orlan. It's the forest orlans that are furry. Or as the SLAVE MASTERS say, Hearth Orlans and Wild Orlans.
Isn't she the same type as Serafen? He sure looks furrier than her, she looks like a small blue human or elf.
Could be the effect of orlan testosterone. Maybe the boys are furrier.
-
You can just go to the village. But therer's a bounty set by someone in the dock of dunnage that leads to it - you kill all the bounties and they all have peices of a map to the island. It's quite a fun one, once you get there. There's an "upstairs" through the eyes that I recommend checking out first, gives a bit of flavour.
-
2
-
-
Since when paying full price means:
-I will be getting frustrated because of numerous bugs ruining my first ( and most important ) experience with the game ?
-I have to create an extra account so I will report some of the bugs I encounter, essentially being a tester? ( and in my case your posts being ignored for no reason , but this is more of a personal matter so you can ignore I even mentioned this ).
-I will be playing an unbalanced game?
-I will be thanked constantly for my feedback or whatever like I joined some kind of cult that wants my money and keep saying Thanks in the most polite way. Or I will be getting free DLC one week after release date just so I can close my mouth or immobilize my fingers and think "you are the best"?
I got ton more to speak of and I will leave the paid DLC release 2 months after launch day.
I am not some uptight axxhole that won't tolerate bugs or unbalancing issues on newly launched games, but in this game they are not even close to the limits of my tolerance meter( and shouldn't be in any paid customer's meter ).
My biggest problem is why I will have to pay full or ANY price to be a tester, when the 80% of the current bugs would be easily identified if you paid 5 guys to play the game for 3-4 days and give them 1 day to report their bugs.
I won't imply I know how companies works and what makes them rushing games like that but this is unacceptable, you are selling a product not a service.
Of course I am at fault too since I trusted this(and whatever "this") company and did a day one purchase.
This post is mostly saying my piece of mind and if my mentality on this matter is wrong please you are free to tell me why. I will take your words in full consideration.
As much as I dislike bugs in a game, some portion of them will be hardware dependant (like game crashes). It's quite impossible to test that with five people in 3-4 days. Not saying they are all like that (probably most aren't), just pointing out there are always going to be bugs.
I guess what you are saying is that 'this game is a bit buggier on release than it ideally should be', and that's probably true. It's not quite of Arcanum and steamworks obscura but it's not as clean as a first release as some other games. It's a small studio I suppose. I don't personally know enough about the whole coding workflow to know what is typical.
-
Several people have said that. Why is it a problem to discuss an idea, even a bad idea (or, maybe, especially a bad idea)? Seriously, have you read the arguments against the points of the OP? What are you concerned about? Do you think that people can't understand an argument and come to a reasonable conclusion? Do you not understand that censorship has the opposite effect from what you want it to have? Do you just not understand that if you can censor someone else, then others will censor you?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance
Intolerance cannot and should not be tolerated. The intolerant are not engaging in debate in good faith; they are attempting to use the tools of good faith debate to destabilize and dominate.
At this point these days in America, if your first reaction to a work of fiction with actual female characters in it is "UGH SJW," there's no point to further discussion. Social justice is not a pejorative, it is a moral imperative.
If you can justify being intolerant of one thing to protect society, you can probably justify more than one using the same kind of logic. Also who gets to define whats intolerant? This is Antifa's line of reasoning, and it seems to me, pretty unreasonable - attacking people without any real examination of their ideas and their validity.
I'm reminded of Jordan Peterson's line of thought- speech and discourse is a way of exploring and refining ideas. If you restrict via authoritarian means what can and can't be said, then you restrict the ability to explore and refine ideas and worldviews and at the same time you empower the state in a way that is wide open to abuse - to control peoples speech for the benefit of their own interests rather than the public interest.
And of course there's the idea you are replying to, which is that an idea can breed more in environments where it cannot be rebutted or responded to.
Anyway, I suppose in the age of the internet, it's impossible to suppress ideas. Try as some organisations might. If you can't stop shanks in prison, or drugs in the general populace, then your hope of suppressing ideas is pretty low.
-
Sagani is 57, which puts her at middle age for a species with an average lifespan of 110, and has already had five children--so if "breeding" is a factor, then she's already accomplished that. Beyond that, though--it isn't even true. Some hunter-gatherer societies have division of labor like that, other's don't. Among the Aeta people of the Philippines, who are a modern-day hunter/gatherer tribe that live in isolated groups on the tropical jungle-covered mountains, 85% of women hunt together in small groups using dogs and are almost twice as successful at it as the groups of men--although interesting fact, *mixed-gender groups* are the most successful of all.
There might be a couple of reasons that Boreal dwarves send women rather than men on the type of long-hunting expeditions that Sagani describes.
Firstly, assuming that dwarves are like humans in this respect, women have a higher percentage of fat in their cells than men do on average. That means that we get drunk faster - but it also means that we're usually slower to freeze and/or starve to death. While pregnant and lactating women eat a lot, women need less food to simply stay alive than men do. For people who go on hunting expeditions across icy terrain, that could be a more significant survival factor than pure strength and endurance. (Besides which, PoE dwarves are stronger and tougher than humans anyway, so Sagani and the other wives are evidently more than capable of drawing light hunting bows or dismembering a caribou to drag home.)
Secondly, while it's usually the people who are capable of lactating that end up doing the child care in most societies, if attacks on settlements are common then maybe it makes sense to leave the pregnant and lactating women, the children AND all the men at home while the women not currently carrying or feeding babies go far from home. That way the most vulnerable people in the village are protected by the strongest if enemies or predators show up, but someone is still out finding meat.
(Look, this is at least as on-topic as the Star Wars discussion was.)
That's good. I like that.
-
1
-
Poll - Size of Deadfire Compared to POE1
in Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
Definately took me longer to finish poe2. But I was also more interested in the subplots.
I found white march pretty short actually, but I didn't do all the side quests.