lychee26

I would like more of those sequences too, plus more voice acting - only for those sequences. I reckon they would be twice as awesome with a narrator.

Well, I think if they removed the unarmed part of the monk and just had them use weapons, it would be fine, they just turn into warrior monk fanatics that like to hurt themselves (which is what I thought they were supposed to be). But they would have to change a lot, like the icons, animations, some of the lore.

Yeah I get that. I'm not actually expecting it to change or anything. It's mainly wishful thinking, just dreaming of this druid that only has access to corrosive-ish spells and pretty much nothing else. ('cos the druid is one of favourite classes, idea-wise)

Druids/Priests are the prototypical hybrid class. Yet wizards have more limitations than they do. Versatility should come, for example, from shapeshifting in and out of different forms. Not from being able to cast 50 different spells. Generally druids use their aoe on group pulls, and on the occasional tough fight use their other spells. But for the vast majority of their time they stand in the back and auto attack. This doesn't seem like versatile gameplay. It appears that because druids are such strong pure casters, that spiritshifting currently sucks. Well, technically in this game, druids and priests are pure casters rather than being hybrid classes. My biggest concern is that all other classes have some level of choice when it comes to their class abilties. Druids/Priests (mainly druids) on the other hand feel a lot more limited in their choices (limited to talents you pick) - druid talents mainly revolve around their wildshape and that's pretty much it. Priests are better 'cos they get more varied talents but still.

I think what Bazy meant was for them to not get all their spells at once, and have more like a sorcerer who has to pick the spells he can cast with each level. It's something that I would prefer too, if only for roleplaying reasons, but also so that you have a chance to read over all the spells in a nice list or grid rather than having to hover over little icons. And seeing that people have been saying that the druid is stronger than the other classes, it would also help to limit it just a bit and, dare I say it, balance it a tad more, especially when comparing to the wizard, which has a lot more limitations put on it.

Yeah, there's nothing wrong with a bit of decoration. It would be nice to have something that fits in a bit more with the rest of the art, but that being said, I do get the whole 'keep it simple' argument. I just happen to fall under the 'throw as much ornamentation as you can' side of things. So I happen to like things like the NWN2 or even Dragon Age origins spell targeting look - what with the symbols and such. And seeing as you mainly do your spell targeting when you're paused and it's over as soon as you click, I don't think it adds that much to the clutter. But, yeah, I am biased.

Well, to answer your question about grimoires - I think the reason you can pick them up is so that you can equip a different set of spells for your wizard. So if your wizard has only equipped certain kinds of spells and you suddenly realize you need some other spells you can just switch to your other grimoire. In theory anyway. I think that's right? Someone can correct me if I'm wrong (I haven't really been keeping on top of things lately, 'cos yeah this forum went crazy at some point).

The thing is is that PoE does feel similar to IE games. Obviously not the same, but you can't say that it isn't obviously inspired by it in many ways. Assuming you only just found out about it today, knowing nothing about it previously, what is the first game that would pop into your head after playing it. I do have to agree with some of your points though. I don't like Might being both magical and physical - 'cos it makes me never want to play a wizard as a physically strong wizard is just something that I never want to play. I also don't quite understand why we can't wear a cloak and wear an amulet at the same time. Some of the other aspects, such as the high damage and life are just things you have to accept as part of this game - a part that differs from the IE games (in a somewhat good way for me as starting out with 4 health was never attractive to me - not that I really minded it, but I won't miss it, just like I won't exactly welcome having 100s of health at level 5, but I don't mind). And about the maps - I think that is mainly a budget and time thing. Considering the small budget and the goals of the game I think the trade-off was either fewer larger areas, or a greater amount of smaller areas. Though I do wish that all the areas were of the same quality (that lion area west of town really doesn't stand up as well). Oh and about grazes, just think of them as having bad rolls of 1 or something. They do need to happen less often though.

Well I'm still under the opinion that resolve and duration go together, so I was pretty happy when they changed it to that. It just makes sense to me. However it does create a problem with Intellect. I still reckon it should have healing, but I guess that's not going to change any time soon. I think the problem with the attribute is that everyone has a different opinion on what they should achieve. I come under the 'it should make sense in a role playing sense' (I'm also the kind of person who had characters with 8 strength 18 charisma and a constitution that is never higher than 10, mages with no damage dealing spells, and bards when playing BG and other such games - needless to say the characters I play are always as useless in combat as I can make them), so I reckon: Might: Damage, Interrupt Constitution: Health, Endurance Dexterity: Action Speed, Deflection Perception: Accuracy, (I'm fine with range but I know you don't agree) Intellect: AoE, Healing (which I know kinda keeps Intellect as a rather sub-par stat) Resolve: Duration, Concentration But I also know there's probably a whole bunch of arguments against this, so I'm not really sure what's for the best. But honestly all I really want is for duration to stick with resolve, 'cos to me the words resolve and duration really go together (and that's all the reasoning I need).

I think the main problem with no combat XP in the beta comes from the fact that there's so much of it. Because there aren't a huge amount of quests the most predominant aspect of our experience comes in the form of combat. If most of the game came in the form of quests/dialogue, then the no combat XP thing would make sense. As it stands right now, with what we've been presented with, it doesn't seem quite right. I'm sure in bigger cities with a greater amount of quests - and I'm assuming less combat - it would become less of an issue, but when out exploring the wilderness - like what we can do in the beta - with the maps filled with enemies, the lack of combat XP does become quite noticeable.

I definitely agree with this sentiment. It seemed strange to me that wizards had to pick the spells they could learn and have to deal with the grimoire, chanters and ciphers have a limited selection of 'spells', while druids and clerics get everything at once. It doesn't help that some of the spells I kinda wish that I didn't have to know for a certain type of character, e.g what if I don't want my druid to be able to cast fire spells or the contagion like spells. It just helps with role-playing just a bit. Obviously I could just not cast them - which I don't - but still, at the very least, it makes leveling up as a druid and priest a bit more meaningful if we have to pick and choose which spells we want rather than just automatically getting every spell (it doesn't help that they seem to have more spells than everyone else anyway). It's almost like playing a sorcerer and getting every spell, which would obviously be a bit overkill (though obviously it isn't quite at that level).

You left out the forest shamblers on the map, bringing it up to five creature types, which I think is the greater problem than the actual density of the encounters (though I do agree that it feels a bit much). I think that they'd be better off with a few more non-combat wilderness encounters (like a group of hunters, the local ranger or even just more non-aggressive animals like the deer) in place of some of the monsters if they want to prevent the areas feeling too sparse and empty, though that may be the case with other areas in the full game. I also have to say that whomever decided to set up a village in that area was an idiot. Giant poisonous beetles and spiders on one side, lions on the other, with wolves, ogres, and dragons thrown in as well. I mean forget about the ogre stealing pigs, how does someone not die whenever anyone tries to leave or enter the place. Unless there's a smarter way to travel to the village that we can't access.

Which is why you should never go into a beta expecting the full game, and then judge it based on that assumption. The beta is all about fixing bugs and testing gameplay and functionality, so it's obvious at this point the game doesn't feel like a sprawling, story-driven rpg just yet. I, myself, find myself skipping most of the dialogue in this beta because I don't really care that much about it in this small, out of context section of the game.

Nope you aren't. I thought they looked fine. Plenty good enough considering you only see them on character creation and the equipment screen. They are considerably better than the pretty darn terrible Wastleland 2 character models that's for sure. Agreed. And even if they are low-res, the actual armour design still looks pretty good (aside from the barbarian armour, and that's mainly because of the plasticy skin in the overly bright lighting).

Well, I don't really care either way as I always turn the circles off in any game I can (or I mod it out if the game doesn't allow it). I understand the need for them, but in the end I just can't stand those glaringly (and purposefully) jarring circles. That being said, I do wish they went with green instead, only because the blue does remind me of ToEE, and I never got past the first few minutes of that game after I experienced that awful and essentially non-existent exposition (I understand that the combat in that game is supposed to be great. I just never really got to that part...).