Sensuki

I agree, if anything it actually removes some depth, and adds trap choice (not using ability) and repetition. I can totally understand Wizard spells at higher level becoming per-encounter, but that will mean that they will no longer need to use any weapons at all OR the lower level damage spells could actually become obsolete in a sense, because ammunition is unlimited - why not just use a Superior Firearm instead? For other classes, they should be kept extremely limited.

It's not a mess. It's just got a long way to go before I consider it to have reached it's target. I really enjoy Icewind Dale 1 & 2 as well but outdoor Wilderness exploration - is not one of it's strengths.

The Lion has a roar. I think the Stag might have a Rake or something, but yeah ... that's about it I think. They're kind of lacking in depth.

That's why the videos are NOT public. They are for the beta backers and public only. All of those things just sound like an utter waste of time to me, none of that will contribute anything constructive to the game at all. My time would be better spent focusing on the issues with the game. I disagree with you that PE's encounters have more tactical depth than the IE games. I also think the enchantment system is worse than the BG2 and SW:TotOR 2 crafting systems. I like the fact that you can upgrade anything though. I think Pillars of Eternity needs more improvement than you think it does. Combat is a far cry from fun at the moment and falls far short of the Infinity Engine games. My assessment of Wilderness Exploration is limited to the two wilderness areas we have, but the Dyrford Crossing feels like an Icewind Dale area to me. I do realize that this was like the second ever wilderness area they made for the game, so hopefully the ones we don't have access to will be larger, more spaced out encounters and have less limited navmesh.

I dunno, Knock Down if it hits gives you X seconds where that character is disabled. So I don't think it's required to chain anything with it because while that character/unit is down, they are not helping the rest of their allies at all.

As I've said - I have given praise when it feels natural to give, but I don't feel it's necessary to go out of my way to compliment the good things about something I am critiquing. I only do it when it feels natural to do. Forced positivity is something that personally irks me (and yes I think my mother, who is a primary school teacher is like that often ).

The Ranger is boring. I really like the animal companion mechanic but they are essentially glorified auto attackers with a shared health pool. They really need to look at some of the stuff you can do with Lone Druid in DotA or whatever. They need some active abilities. The Animal companion itself could have it's own active that is gained through the Ranger advancement. If they don't want the Ranger to feel as half-arsed as Rangers do in every edition of D&D then they need to put more work into it. Good concept - not very good implementation.

I don't know if that always applies. In a team-based environment that's absolutely true, as captain of my various Call of Duty 2 and 4 teams (including Archaic Esports, #1 in Aus 2010, 1st or 2nd in every tournament for 2 years straight) a completely positive attitude is required and needs to be reinforced [in competitive matches, anyway]. Some people are also more sensitive than others (we had one guy who would literally flare up at any negativity whatsoever, so it required delivering it to him in a certain manner in order for him to not get offended). If we were able to produce those results for 2 years in a row, I must have been doing something right, yeah? I'm sure that's how Obsidian's managers and leads operate as well. For beta testing, I am submitting bug reports and feedback and suggestions on specific issues with the game. I really don't need to add in "Guys I really like this and I really like this and I really like this and I really like this" for every single criticism I have, because that's just obtuse. There are not many things in the game that are perfect, and I think I handle my suggestions in a precise manner - Issue, Reason, Suggestion. That's all that's required. Positive feedback towards Obsidian does not need to be delivered in bug reports and suggestions - it can be done externally to those. Those of us who are submitting many bug reports and suggestions have often given each other a hi-5 for our work and dedication. I've exchanged many PMs with such people. If anything that team-based attitude is more critically applied to the beta backers collective.

They are on the UI ?

The video in this thread is essentially that, right ? I say what I think works, other people who may read more of my posts will likely chime in on that. I have said multiple times various things like I really like the main menu art, I like Kaz's portraits and I like how he has captured the IWD feel with his UI art work - but I have also said that I think the 720p limitation and small pop-up UIs are really bad, especially for people with larger screens. For the music I have said that I like the main menu, I liked the first reveal trailer music and I like the Defiance Bay theme (which I pulled out of the game files) but I don't like the production style and the fact that Justin has not incorporated the 'method' used by Michael Hoenig and Jeremy & Jim Soule in the IE games music (forward melody, background instrumentation) and I don't like the overall lack of percussion. I have done that for pretty much everything I critiqued - just not in the videos, because the videos are for a specific purpose. They outline an issue, why I don't like it/why I don't think it works and offer suggestions for improvement. I do not need to add pandering into the videos, that is just unnecessary.

Depends what it is - the cool thing about the Rogue Finishing Blow is that it sucks when you don't use it properly. Fighter's Knock Down isn't like that. I think they get access to the second Knock Down too early in character progression to be honest.

I don't think that's necessary. This is a beta test, not a school. My mother (who is also a teacher like you) finds me very cynical and always prefers positive things to negative things. I think this is a good attitude for beta testing to be honest. My videos are not meant to make people like me, they are meant to outline issues with Pillars of Eternity. Most of my videos are unlisted on youtube as well, so that they will not come up for the general public when they search Pillars of Eternity on youtube. They are for the eyes of the beta testers and the developers. I do mention things that are good, I just don't force them in, only when it comes up naturally.

You're probably right. I do like per-encounter and per-rest, but I think that in order for per-encounter to not trivialize standard actions, they really need to be kept at a minimum so that they can be used tactically, rather than just all spammed at the beginning. Usually it makes most sense to open with per-encounter abilities because that gives you a bigger head start. I find that boring.

You're reading that statement wrong, and I'm also not sure how many of my videos you've watched based on that. You might want to check out this thread for some extra information Search my post history and you'll find plenty. I just haven't done many videos that really focus on one of these issues (other than Dyrford Crossing Area Design) like this because there have been more fundamental issues to rectify before this can happen. I've also done a lot less of them since the new patch because I was busy focusing on my Attribute paper. Currently Matt516 have some things in the works about weapon balance and a few other tidbits as well. One thing at a time, and in a certain order.

That's just BruceVC *shrug*. I think romances are often boring and forced, there's a lot of other types of interesting personal and interpersonal relationships to explore, besides romance.

16 Slots should feel better the next patch, but I really think the system needs another look at further down the track, I find it incredibly annoying to use.

I think per-encounter actually trivializes ability use in general, because if you have more per-encounter things, those things are always going to be more advantageous to use over your normal actions. Take the Fighter's Knock Down for instance. You can use it twice per encounter. If you do not use it twice per encounter, that is essentially playing bad/not playing optimally. I don't really like that to be honest. I like having to manage strategical resources rather than being pidgeonholed into using the same stuff over and over again to play optimally. The less per-encounter stuff - the better IMO. Granted I haven't had a real look at class functionality yet, I've been mostly focusing on testing / critiquing the basics, because Obsidian haven't got the basics right yet, I think over the next few months class design and ability design should come under a lot of scrutiny.

Yep, that's definitely not Rectify haha. It's southern though!

Rectify isn't gloomy o_o I don't know why it's called a southern gothic either, there's nothing remotely gothic about it!

Some classes do need a bit of a look, yes - Ranger, Rogue, Fighter and Monk are probably the four in the most dire need of a look at IMO. Ranger is by far the worst class in the game atm.

Mine does this sometimes as well.

Can you also make it so that you can select a weapon set and attack people with it ? Currently you have to select the weapon set and then click the attack button in the center UI. It would be far more useful if you could click weapon sets to attack people.

To me the most obvious thing is the writing. Quests seem to have both reactivity and choice and consequence, which is good. Character Art is better than I expected overall. I think some of the system design is turning out well (attack resolution, for instance) and the amount of choice between weapons and armor is really good. That's only a small list and it's not absolutely everything but pretty much everything else could do with some improvements. The game needs to hit higher targets in combat and exploration feel and tighten up it's User Interface screens to be more usable and uniform. Those are the main areas that need improvement in broad strokes.

After you watch all of Season 1 and Season 2 you might change your opinion on that. I liked True Detective as well and I thought episodes 1-5 were perfect but it fell down in episode 6-8. While still good, I think those were a bit disappointing even if they had some great moments. I have had one moment of disappointment in Rectify and that was due to the direction of an episode, the director did not quite get the best acting performances out of many scenes (S02E09) and if they were just a little bit better it would have been awesome, but that's just IMO. Other than that I can't find a fault really. Whereas in True Detective it was the writing that caused the problems (which is usually the case).

No, just Attribute-influenced Interrupt.