[A kickstarter backers first playthrough and some thoughts.]

Not having any obvious way of telling how fast is a fast weapon, compared to a slow weapon. Does a fast weapon hit twice as often as a very slow one, or ten times faster? First choose your build and then try out with a stopwatch and a spreadsheet? The mechanics are made by such gamers for such gamers? Disappointing. But then I'd prefer simple, simulationist and damn the balance.

 

This, as well as a number of other mechanics that are unexplained. Honestly, I like exploring builds and game mechanics as much as the next guy, but some accurate documentation/explanation would really be appreciated. Hopefully for POE2.

[Pillars of Eternity 2 Wish List and Suggestions]

My wishlist: better loading times, reduced savegames size, the game launching even with 100+ saves in the folder, game mechanics better explained, stats/item/skills/keybinds easely editable ideally through notepad. And some kind of tool checking for out-of-range values, especially after few reloads, and eventually resetting values to default.

All of the above, especially the explanation of game mechanics.

[Pillars of Eternity 2 Wish List and Suggestions]

But other people could beat the Adra on PotD. So what's the issue here?

 

Reduce the party members seems rather questionable. If you don't want more than four, then... don't take more than four?

 

Natural regeneration: while I don't have a big beef against it, why would one class have better regen than another? Wouldn't it make more sense to tie that to an attribute like Constitution?

 

Ugh. Epic levels? No thanks.

[Favourite/Least Favourite Things About PoE?]

I'll just say this: if you like the game, you'll probably love it. This seems to be the trend, anyway.

 

I found it... okay. I like the story and the companions, but don't care a whole lot for the attribute system and I absolutely hate the engagement mechanic and found combat nothing short of tedious. So much so, in fact, that even though I got the expansions via Kickstarter rewards, I've yet to play through them. The thought of slogging through the combat makes me shudder. Although, since I've not played since patch 1.06(?), I believe, I'll just wait until the patch cycle is completely finished (I think there's one more in the works) and try to give it a go again.

[When is the next patch coming out?]

 

Thanks jbritch, however I notice there won't be fix for double trigger proc?

We sneaked this fix in as well.

 

(Forum Link)

 

Slap hands!

Sking 

 

Ooooh, a crisp high-five for you, sir!

[Game title a reference to song on Down album 'NOLA' ?]

Doubtful, as the working title on KS was 'Project Eternity', so Eternity was there from the beginning. They changed it to Pillars once they started working the story. So likely a coincidence. But one never knows. Hopefully a dev can chime in for an official word on it.

[Immersion and how to achive this level of Zen in PoE]

Immersion is a term that's been bandied about so much and has such a different meaning to everyone that it practically has no meaning at all.  Basically it's become a buzzword for "I don't like this game mechanic and want it changed to suit me".

 

You note that PoE is like an interactive book and this contributes to your inability to be 'immersed'. For myself, I find it so easy to be 'immersed' in books/text that I get to the point that I don't even hear anything around me. I'm totally involved in that world about which I'm reading. And like Nonek, I find any game with FP view doesn't do it for me at all (in fact, I loathe that perspective so much that I actively avoid games that don't offer an alternative).

 

Skyrim? Great game. I love it. But I'm far less 'immersed' in something like that than I am in a game like BG, PoE, or even IWD. And make no mistake that you're dealing with numbers and math in Skyrim as well.

 

Anyway, no one can tell you what you're missing or how your perspective is flawed, because it isn't. This just isn't the type of game that 'immerses' you.

[Deflection and Resolve...]

I don't think there's any logical way to explain it. All they did was put it on Resolve in order to try to eliminate some uber builds, from what I understand.

[Eric Fenstermaker Narrative Interview at RPG Codex]

"to me he's not saying a 60+ hour game automatically means a lot of time wasting content"

"he's observing that many games with a lot of 'content' are actually just mediocre time wasters"

 

Those 2 statements seem in direct contradiction. All you did was replaced "60+ hour game" with "a lot of content"

 

We could easily flip those to read:

"to me he's not saying a lot of content means a lot of time wasting content"

"he's observing that many 60+ hour games are actually just mediocre time wasters"

 

Oh and you also switch out "saying" with "observing" - which I find interesting since everything is coming from a single article.

 

The most common way to achieve longer gameplay hours is to... add a lot of content

 

Seems we're running in circles here for whatever reason. So I'll bow out.

 

*edit*

 

Actually, I'll make one more attempt. You're cherry picking what you take out of my statement. I said "to me he's not saying a 60+ hour game automatically means a lot of time wasting content". Note the bolded part. The emphasis here means I'm not contradicting this: "he's observing that many games with a lot of 'content' are actually just mediocre time wasters". Again note the bolded part. The single quotes I put there were to indicate content that is less than quality.

 

What I think he's saying is a game can be long, yes. And it can be a game with quality content. But many long games tend to end up with 'filler', 'time wasters', 'low quality content'... choose your descriptor. This is what I feel he's pointing out.

 

If you want to nitpick my use of the word 'observe' as opposed to reiterating 'saying' and attach some kind of significance to that, then I don't think we can further the discussion.

[Eric Fenstermaker Narrative Interview at RPG Codex]

Some people are old, and so they wanna play as many different games as possible. Good for them. The gaming market shouldn't have to change entirely just because someone got old.

 

I think you're reading far more into his statement here than he meant. Granted, I'm interpreting as much as you are, but to me he's not saying a 60+ hour game automatically means a lot of time wasting content. Or that the industry should change. I think he's observing that many games with a lot of 'content' are actually just mediocre time wasters. And he'd rather put out and play something short of high quality than something long and mediocre.

[Eric Fenstermaker Narrative Interview at RPG Codex]

There are lots of things about the gaming industry that are exhaustively documented, and usually when people make generalized comments like "as if time was free" they are ignoring the entire economic expectations of anyone entering the gaming market. If someone is making a game purely for the $$$, then that's probably a game I would never want to play. The "zero sum game" theory is just an excuse, in my opinion, since even in a 12-20 hour game it can easily apply, and a loss is still suffered; yet the game was made anyway. Minimizing loss is good, but loss is almost always guaranteed in gaming unless there is a monetary offset via pay-to-play scenario's, like Subscription services or in-App purchases.

 

Some of the best gaming experiences come from Mod's, which historically have entailed amazing work from people that received 0 dollars. Like the top Mod for Skyrim which lead to a job at Bungie for the creator; or the Mod(s) that saved NWN 2 from being a total flop.

 

I prefer quality over quantity as well, but that doesn't mean that quality can only be achieved in small quantities. Again referring to the Stick of Truth example, the developers had already invested time in the 'bad' areas that ended up being cut out. The work was put in to making the bad parts, then work was put in to analyzing and cutting them out. Adding more work to refactor them for a few more hours of quality is completely feasible; and using the "zero sum" theory is really just an excuse in these situations. If someone is really building a business and design strategy around the zero sum game theory, then the design architecture during the projects conception should have excluded time investment in to what was eventually labeled "bad" to begin with. Thus reducing how much needs to be "cut out" in the end.

But it is a zero sum situation, whether you want to believe it or not. There are only finite resources and only a finite amount of time in which to utilize those resources. Dedicating time/resources to one area necessarily means you can't dedicate them to another. What it seems you're overlooking (forgive me if I'm wrong; this is just what your posts seem to convey) in the Stick of Truth example is that the cut content meant that time and resources that would have been spent to make it better (note: not great, but likely only mediocre, is the feeling I get from Fenstermaker's comments on it) would mean this time and those resources could not be spent improving the quality of what was kept to make it the best they could.

 

And I doubt it's as easy as it seems to know what will and will not work when the project is in the conception stage.

[Eric Fenstermaker Narrative Interview at RPG Codex]

 

The only problem I see is that there is an assumption that 30+ hours automatically equates to garbage. I don't agree with that at all. That's great the designers can cut out the bad stuff, but if you cut out the bad stuff and realize you have 50% of the total product left, then that's a problem with the product, not the philosophy. In the Stick of Truth example, after trimming the gameplay down to 20 hours, they should have analyzed the difference in the "bad" vs "good" and then focused on another 10 hours of more good. Is it impossible to take 20 hours of bad and refactor the content in to 10 hours of good? Stopping after trimming the fat defeats the purpose of iterative development, and is kinda lazy.

 

It's entirely possible to have a 30, 40, or 60+ hour gameplay experience that is mostly good. It just take a ton of time, and following quality assurance processes like the CMM or IDEAL (SEI).

 

I don't think there's any assumption that 30+ hours automatically means a garbage game. I think what he's saying is that lengthier games tend to have a lot of time wasters and filler.

 

As to your latter comments, I hardly think it equates to 'laziness'. You said it yourself in the last line: 'It just takes a ton of time'. And Fenstermaker noted several times in the interview that game-making is a zero sum game. You just don't have that extra time or resources.

[Eric Fenstermaker Narrative Interview at RPG Codex]

 

Sorry, I don't agree at all. In fact, one of the first things I look at when deciding to purchase a game is how long it is. Since I only play RPGs, really anything less than 30 hours kills my excitement, and less than 20 hours is almost a guaranteed no buy. The reason is simple: to me the purpose of an RPG is to build and roleplay a character, and to interact and investigate the lore of the world - something that is difficult to do in a short period of time. I'm looking for something similar to a novel, but with gameplay. It's the same reason I don't read short stories - not enough meat on the bones. That said, I don't like 150 hour + adventures since it's guaranteed you'll burn out, but I want an epic adventure that feels like the characters have been though a lot.

 

I completely agree with Fentermaker on this. Here's the full paragraph, btw:

 

Personally, I would like to see us make shorter games (e.g. 30-40 hours instead of 60-80) where we cut the worst of our content and spend time iterating on the best. But there is pressure from the market itself (or at least perceived pressure) to make longer games so as to justify the game's sticker price with its "value" as measured in dollars spent per hour of gameplay. And I'm not sure if people understand that when you're on a budget, there's a zero-sum tradeoff between gameplay length and gameplay polish. There was some backlash for Stick of Truth, for example, for being "too short" at 12-20 hours. But that was a game where we cut the bad stuff and spent extra time on the good stuff, and I prefer that model. As a gamer, I'm getting old. I'm short on time. I'd rather spend $60 on a 12-hour experience that makes me laugh my ass off than on a 100-hour experience that routinely wastes my time. If any of you are in agreement, be vocal about it, because I think the dollars/hour guys are usually louder. Come to our forums and ask for a shorter, more polished game. If you don't feel that way, shhh, you, shhh.

 

Shorter games where the crap and filler (my words) is cut out, but the quality of the remainder is much improved? Yes, please. Shorter doesn't mean you can't build and roleplay your character effectively. I completely disagree with you on that. A well crafted and edited short story can have just as much meat as an average and relatively poorly edited novel.

[GAME OF THE YEAR]

Okay, I'll be the vote of dissension. While I thought Obs did a good job on PoE and it shows a lot of potential for future installments, I wouldn't give it GOTY. It didn't 'wow' me like I was hoping it would. In fact, I haven't played through either WM1 or WM2 yet (even though I got them as backer rewards) and I have a bit of an issue finding enough motivation to fire up the game to go through it again even with new content and all the changes that have come since I finished it (I believe it was patch 1.06 that I finished on).

[Ready the cannons(spoiler)]

You realize this is the no spoiler forum right?

Apparently many people don't.

[cloak of comfort bug- not producing +3 damage reduction]

as said in title please report as bug

I believe it's been pointed out where the bug report forum is. Please report it there in proper fashion. Then maybe it will actually get looked at and fixed.

[No need for a romantic dinner, but autosave would be nice.]

Oh and by the way: No teleporting of the whole group directly in front of an enemy. That is so ... no.

This, IMO, is even worse than the lack of autosave. I absolutely hate the fact that you get your characters positioned defensively, as one would when there's the likelihood of violence, but the game takes control and dumps your party right in front of the bad guy - and sometimes positioning your squishies right in front. Ye gods, that ticks me off.

[St Ydwerns redeemer still not working!]

 

 

The tooltip is vague, but it will probably not be fixed because it would require larger changes to the UI system to display the information correctly.

 

This is something that's always bothered me when games get updated (sometimes they're actually just released this way) where tool tips or information about classes/skills/abilities/etc is either vague or has changed due to patching and it's not updated in-game. Is the reason always because there's too much work for too little benefit? I find it extremely annoying to look in-game at the description/explanation of some aspect of the game and it's either totally wrong or too vague to interpret properly.

[Balancing games - Can it be too much?]

 

 It takes me quite a while to play these games, and it would bug me slightly if the classes kept changing throughout my playthrough.  Its not just PoE I do this with, but virtually all PC releases these days I hold off for sometimes over a year before playing these days.

 

I love the post release support that obsidian has shown, but can it some times be too much in the case of balancing?

 

Similar here. I tend to wait until after a game has all its DLC and patches released before playing it (even though I may purchase it sooner than that). And yeah, it bothers me a lot when changes to the game systems/classes/etc. 'break' my characters. And that's why I wait. As for PoE, I can understand the need for tweaking and balancing since release (I played through the whole thing soon after release, planning on another go once both expansion parts were out), but I kind of get the feeling it may have gone beyond necessity. But then again, I didn't particularly like the game, so I may be biased in my assessment. Hopefully the changes will make it a more enjoyable experience for my next try.

[Missing DLC Upgrade Paths on GOG.com]

I will bring this issue up to Paradox to see if this is something they want to pursue.

 

There were no bad intentions in not selling the upgrade paths to GOG users, it was just that not many people have requested it. Since there is inherent overhead in creating DLC (in terms of initial setup and maintenance) there usually needs to be enough people requesting it before it makes sense for us to do it.

 

I will let you know what the answer is in the next day or two.

There's generally a rather loud vocal minority that complains (on the GOG forums) about things like this when they occur on GOG. Whether enough would buy upgrades to make it worthwhile or not is another matter, but I'd seriously suggest trying to get Paradox to greenlight it. As a GOG user myself, I'd like to see GOG be able to compete with Steam and they'll certainly never have a chance if their customers are shut out of benefits and options that Steam users get.

[Please tell me I heard incorrectly]

It's not cringeworthy, imo...your central character is a Watcher, remember, and several things in the story only begin to unfold after you have communed with a soul--the extras I don't mind as it's exactly what you'd expect--not every soul you read will provide information directly bearing on your life, etc.

 

I think you misunderstand me. At least, your comment doesn't seem to address what I wrote. My point was nothing to do with whether or not the personal snippets you get from doing your Watcher mojo on the backer characters have anything to do with the plot, story, or your character. What I meant is I seem to recall many of those stories are just... poorly written. Which is why it would surprise me to learn that Obs' writers did them. Of course, I'll fully admit that my memory may be faulty and I'm mixing up those stories with some of the gravestone comments. But I don't think so.

[Please tell me I heard incorrectly]

Game was for sure happening, easily, without the npc backers. I wonder what 114 000$ less would mean wasn't in the game, in exchange for the severe blow to immersion and atmosphere that we got as a result of the npc backers. Maybe it would be something serious, but with the staggering amount of money Obsidian raised, I rather doubt it.

 

Don't make the mistaken assumption that the backers who pledged enough to have their NPCs in the game knew the game was going to be funded to that degree. I, for one, pledged on day one, not having any idea they'd hit the 4M mark. No one knew for sure the game was even going to be funded right away. (It was pretty obvious a short way into the campaign, but I'll wager many of the higher tier backers backed right away)

 

Anyway, as noted, they're easy to avoid and have no impact on immersion (IMO) and they do serve to populate what may otherwise have been a rather empty game world. Really, this shouldn't bother you at all now that you know exactly what to avoid.

[Please tell me I heard incorrectly]

 since Obsidian's writers wrote the stories.

Are you sure? I seem to recall many of them being poorly written and cringe-worthy. Not at all something I'd expect from the actual Obs writers.

[[3.0 beta]Outlander's Frenzy still 1 use per rest]

You should probably post your found bugs in the Patch Beta Bugs and Support Forum

[On Strongholds and why we should care]

*snip*  And the reason isn't what most of you would think.

 

The real problem is that it's useless.  I played through the entire game twice now and only go back to the stronghold for attacks or to take advantage of the rest options.  Oh, and the bounties.  That's it.  The shops are insignificant, the adventure rewards aren't anything significant, and the main keep doesn't really house anything.  More to the point, though, it doesn't feature in the story at all, except for occasional mentions that you've taken it over.

Actually, this is pretty much exactly what most of the complaints I've seen about the Stronghold were about. So, it is what many of us think.