Nakia

By the way for anyone who thinks a sword and board ranger is going against OE's intention for the ranger IMO that is what players do. The devs mnake a game then the player does his/her own thing with it. I love seeing if I can do something differently from what appears to be the intention of the developers. If they anticpate me that is great as it shows they are smart and actually play games themselves.

When IE games are mentioned we need to remember that the IE games covered a wide spectrum of games. How man D&D games were made with IE and how many non-D&D games? A spiritual successor does not mean a clone. I also think Obsidian's name was a draw. Having C. Avalone as the lead writer was a big selling point for me. I agree this was designed as a ntche game, PC users and those who played the various IE games as well as those drawn by the Obsidian name.

I like the animal companion but then my favorite character in DA;LO was Dog. The ranger and his animal partner are bound together. Just how this should be shown I am not sure. Maybe the animal could be tweaked a little. Maybe give the pair an endurance bonus? The sword and board ranger is quite viable and ranged weapons can still be used.

I made a "battle" ranger based on what Sock posted and am very happy with him. He and his animal partner work well together. I picked a lion as his companion. I like cats.

A story can be simple but still set the theme for the game. Both Morrowind and Planescape/Torment both favorites of mine have a simple theme "Who am I?". In both games you can do a lot of wandering around, doing side quests and developing your character. Fallout NV is another favorite of mine. The theme is there but your are not tightly bound by it. Maybe I like a bit of mystery to my games. I like having good antagonists too, ones that stand out in my mind However they do not need to dominate the game, sometimes you don't know who the real enemy is until near the end of the game. On the question of combat in a game I have been thinking about it and I don't think the actual system of combat is important. You need to be able to win in order to progress so yes for that you need decent mechanics but how many of us actually know the combat system used in a game? The system can change in a series. I don't remember the name of the game but I passed on a game when I played the demo and simply was not able to stay alive for long enough to complete the demo. Mechanics are important to gameplay but I think if they stand out to much they detract from the game. They should be subtle only word I can think of to describe what mean. If I can block, strike, crush, pierce, have spells that do the job I don't need to know the actual mechanics of how it works. Baldurs Gate 2 was fun for me because I could role play, actually rescuing Imoen was secondary. I didn't like her anyway. I also like ambiguity in games, good and evil are not as clear cut as we like to think. I think we sometimes get tied into a "system" and have a hard time thinking outside the box. We humans need variety, of all kinds because we are ourselves varied.

I have never understood what people mean when they talk about gameplay. To me gameplay is the overall "feel" of the game. From the first character build to the final battle or confrontation. Arcanum had both real time and turn based combat. I mostly played in turn based. I have no idea what "system" of combat Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim have but have played those games for hours and enjoyed them although Oblivion and Skyrim IMO have no real story theme. I also like city builders and when I find one I like I switch off and play those. I was familiar with the PnP D&D games. I guess I am just bothered by the emphasis I am seeing placed on D&D rules or systems that I am seeing. In ovation or evolution may not always be good but sometimes it means the difference between survival and extinction. Following in the footsteps of tradition or clinging to the past can be stifling. I am a long time member of a fan-site forum set up in 2000 to support the infinity engine games specifically at the time BG 1. D&D rules have to be learned. Many people came on the forum confused frequently asking what AC was and not understanding that it was a minus figure. The lower the number the better. Someone finally made a thread listing the spells in order of usefulness with discription. My point is that there is no perfect game, no perfect spell system, no perfect combat system etc because we each like different things. There is simply no way to please 100% of the people 100% of the time. I do not expect to be 100% happy with PoE but from what I have read and played so far I think I will be at least 90% pleased and maybe even more. I will be happy.

Just one personal note - I would not have backed the Kickstarter if this had been a D&D game pure and simple. What license would they have been able to buy 2.5, 3.5 or 4ed? Not that it would have mattered to me although IMO edition 4 would have been the worse. I wanted what they offered something in the spirit of the early games including Arcanum and Planescape/torment not a clone of those early games. Story, characters, dialogue, quest choices are what are important to me.

Arena the first game in the series was not originally conceived as an RPG. The idea was to have the player take a team of fighters through the world fighting other teams until they became the Grand Champion. However strongly influenced by other RpGs of the period more and more role playing elements were added until finally the arena fights were dropped. It became a story driven rpg and was released in 1994. A fact not known by many players is that there was no arena in Arena. I think the mistake that Bethesda made was in dropping the story driven element from Oblivion and Skyrim. This in my opinion has changed the dynamics of the game so that it is no longer a true RPG.

So maybe it isn't the class that sucks but the name of the class? I think I will try what you are doing my next play through.

I liked BG2 much better than BG!. Had a lot of fun with that game. My very first CRPG was Betrayal at Krondor and that ancient game blew my mind and got me addicted to CRPGs. I was also a fan of the Riftwar stories so loved meeting some old friends in that game.

Thought the topic was about animations which IMO is opinion and imagination. Considering the limitations of the isometric view I am happy with the current animations in PoE.

I agree with you. I think all the discussion and complaining in the BB forums has me muddled. PoE is not a D&D game and in fact if it had been advertised as a D&D game I probably would not have backed it. For me it is the story and characters both companions and NPCs that I look forward to. The quests which I think will be interesting and replayable. Combat is just something I have to get through in order to complete quests and explore. I like the spell system in PoE and disliked the spell system in the D&D games. I enjoyed Arcanum and Planetscape/torment because they were different. Not long ago I tried BG I EE and was not impressed.

Back on Monday the 5th

There is definitely a learning curve in PoE. I hope they have a good tutorial. I think easy is good for learning about tactics if people realize that it is good for that. Friendly fire, AoE damage or debuff. Does a spell or weapon work on that particular enemy. Normal difficulty certainly isn't easy. They are still working on combat so it will probably change in the next Backers Beta update. I like the spell system in PoE much better than the one in the BG games. People complain about the wizard but I have had good success with him, the BB wizard. Once they fix the bug in the party management I want to make my own party. Overall I like what the devs have done. Now IMO they need to concentrate on fixing bugs, making sure spells etc work properly. I am looking forward to playing PoE.

I found his comments about "fun" interesting. I do say that games should be fun but what do I mean by that? I actually mean different things depending on the game. In the current 392 PoE build I have played on easy. Easy is easy because you can just use the AI in combat and win most of the encounters. Is this really a good thing for new players? At first I thought so but now I am wondering. They don't need to learn tactics, don't really need to think about what the party members are doing. I find easy boring, not "fun" because it isn't challenging.So for me challenging can be fun. Skyrim is a fun game if I play it as an adventure game and not as a RPG.

What makes a good role playing game really depends on the opinion of the player. I have two friends playing DLOS. One seems to like the game fairly well and the other has issues with it. Skyrim is considered an RPG but I see it as an adventure game and play it that way and enjoy it as long as I ignore the RPG aspect. For me a good story is important, a theme that runs through the game and is important to it. Choices that have consequences. I consider Arcanum a good RPG because what you do does matter. I also look for good protagonists and antagonists. For me a RPG should be immersive, I want to care about what I do, about the people I meet or dislike some of them. In games that have companions are they interesting, do I like them or dislike them as people? What happens if I play a very good, kind, benevolent character or if I play a more self-centered one or even an evil one. Do the people in the game come to life for me?

Hopefully feedback will be used in the expansion or in a sequel. Eora is large and the Eastern Reach relatively small so there is a lot of potential there. Brainstorming is IMO always useful. I also think that it is important that the more casual player give feedback and no just those who understand the mechanics and are more expert at playing the game.

I like the cipher but do not think all the spells are working properlyor maybe I just don't understand when and how to use them. I haven't played a barbarian as a PC but have added him to the party. Again I may not know how to use him properly but his endurance seems to drop quickly.

Too much Happy New Year?

Depends on what you are doing to it. I understand the graphics have been revamped extensively. I would want to see more conflict between the factions. Pathing could certainly be improved. Freeing the slaves quests could also be improved. Someone did try that but I found the mod a bit buggy.

Happy New Year to all

Discussions like this always make me think of Prince of Qin and how amazed I was at the combat animations that it had. Like PoE it had a 2D background but the combat was far from simplistic. The main character was a Paladin and then you had three companions. The combat was very artistic IMO. It was like a fierce dance, a dance of death. The Beastman could leap over enemies and as he leveled up leaps became greater and stronger. The magic casters where more static in movement but still interesting. AoE spells rolled across the ground and of course being an oriental game it included the belief that different elements affected each other in different ways. I would have to go and do some research to refresh my memory but you had to be careful how you combined things.

Has anyone been able to do any crafting, enchant any weapons? So far all I could do some a very little food and I did manage a couple of minor potions. That is it.

Osvir, I almost struck dumb but not quite. I am probably not the one to answer you because I have an eye impairment and in PoE the combat animations are not as clear to me as they are to others. For me I would say the abstraction is what counts. Not some minor detail that I will probably miss any way. I do enjoy seeing the animations in a game like Prince of Qin. The combat is turn based and the combat quite fun. Skyrim IMO which should have been recent graphics had very boring combat. Spell casting was more interesting but not melee or even archery. I think combat moves can be interesting but it depends on the game. I think there is room for both abstract animation and detailed animation but how important is it? I guess that depends on the individual playing the game. For me it don't see detailed animations as important in an isometric game but that is my opinion.

Could we please stick to the discussion of animations in games? Otherwise we will end up with another closed thread. Animations are important and even if it is too late to expect any changes in PoE there is always another game or expansion to be made. Also it is fun to discuss things and get different opinions.