Shadenuat

I'm not sure you know what factually means.

Feels like reading a response written by some bot program.

Right, whatever.

If gods can't stop each other from re-making established world order by possesing random titans and all the power levels are off/unknown it's even worse for the setting. Also, the already incoming retcons just prove that the premise was too big to handle to begin with.

Honestly though, what's up with enchanting recipes. The brains are everywhere. Just to upgrade best 2-handed mace in the game you need what, 4 or 6?

There was already a precedent of fighting a god, so even that is not unreasonable. There probably were even a few, i.e White March. But the reason some people want to see Eothas go down is not because they didn't kill enough gods in JRPGs. What it actually is is a push against one-dimensional main narrative where players don't feel any connection to what is happening and lack any freedom to do anything. They are irrelevant to main story. Plus, the faction play is fairly weak. Many players did not feel much connection to them. It's not New Vegas where players were dead set on saving BoS because it represented something special for them, for example, and where whole story indeed was about faction you support. Thats what i hate about videogames, they're all about that male fahhntasy

It has nothing to do with "egos". You have a very strange idea about people's psychology. Flashing lights, exploding stars and other pachinko-level experiences are not comparable to following a storyline about giant statue. That's a different problem and it lies within realm of immersion and if story is good to explore it's themes correctly or not. If the idea is not to confront the antagonist but to have a revelation from the story, then story didn't do the revelation part correctly. Josh himself arrived to this point at the end of his own post: "maybe I set up story to be told in a poor manner", and is completely correct. And it's getting exploited. What's the actual good thing about choice? The ability to live through consequences of that choice. Not to just read about them later. PS:T for example didn't have any slides, just a single cutscene. Instead of slides you got very long talks with each and every companion who would tell you what they would do after. So slides are not 100% necessary.

Game can't remove anything, but decision to make main narrative about pointless errand which player has no control over did. People don't experience stories to have their "egos" "stroked".

You have no idea what are you talking about. I mean, the newest DLC allows you to fight god's incarnation in his own realm, make a cloak out of his furry ass and when he still spares your sorry life call him a "jerk". It's not like gods have still any dignity or mystery left about them, so killing them wouldn't even provide any gratification for players I'd say. They're all a caricature by this point. Which will be retconned in PoE3. This choice, by the way, is the best example of how not to give player choices. "You can destroy the world!... at the end of the game using dialogue node followed by a picture". Ending slides have nothing to do with the actual game. You can write as many as you want even for almost a linear game. They are the laziest way to add consequences to player's actions and became a crutch for designers - here, we added some slides, so your actions mattered (a-la ME3 ending).

Press 4 to stay silent to deal with implacable gods

Says that games should't copy other mediums Proceeds to remove what makes games unique i.e player's agency interesting twist Josh. I now understand why there wasn't Cyric exploding volcanoes on your head in BG though (aside from FR gods/clerics rules). It's too hard to judge god's power in a narrative + it can just become tasteless and raise unnecessary questions.

PoE is more wizard centric than any IE game ever was. Developer(s) found one mechanic to rule them all (similar to cooldowns in other modern RPGs) that is good enough at applying spell effects, and used it to apply all other effects in the game, by using same resource mechanic for everyone too. That level of uniformity is not terrible for pnp games where you need to play fast and all you can do is roll dice, but in a computer game that means that yes, classes mechanically behave the same.

The fanboyism is right there in the thread title. Specifically, if he wanted a fair comparison that concluded he preferred BG2 he could have written a title like "Baldur's Gate 2 vs Deadfire: which games comes out on top?", or "Why I feel BG2 still holds up compared to Deadfire". But no he wrote Baldur's Gate II is GREATER THAN Deadfire. "This comparison is unfair because it puts that old game I like less as greater than one I like more" Fantastic logic m8.

It's not select all > left click. Most monsters are 16+ level. Final boss has 5500 hp (I hope Obsidian would think of something else next time than that) compared to similar creatures that have ~1500. But after possible beginning difficulty spike (take care of your frost resists) it's the usual, aside from maybe when game surrounds you with archers or throws 4 HoFing barbarians at you. Many (I'd say 60%) encounters are monster closets straight out of DA2. Eder tanks everything. Custom made parties would mostly chunk through all though.

Oh no Quality Obsidian moderator material.

Also features chaotic evil goblin companion written by Avellone, if man doesn't lie.

What game is that, pray tell

I'm honestly surprised they didn't go for low hanging fruit of party slowly returning stolen and missing equipment from previous game as it happened in BG2. Double itemization, double amount of clubs.

There's a lot of fighting but encounters are often not great and they are very disjointed so you never feel like you are going through a series of difficult fights challenging your party to push through more difficult and more difficult things as you change your tactics and equipment to suit challenges better. Gullet underground areas for example are a good example of this done right.

"They are dumb". Hope it helped.

Because of interrupt system and oddly low stats dragons are total pushovers. Weaker than White March ones or Adra Dragon by far.

Speaking of changes in patches, I don't understand why skeletons in first dungeon lost their piercing immunity for just 12 p armor.

welcome to Age of Decadence no wait.

You mean the difference of 1 point of damage between d8 & d10? You know enchantment is more important and banal shortsword with higher enchantment gives you more backstab damage on averages for example than weapon with higher dice? wtf r u even about I dont even In bg1, iwd1 and iwd2 you begin at level 1 and having higher ac means a lot. on higher levels shields provide lots of cool resistances and there are a lot of unique shields with cool properties. what are these numbers you pull of your ass and what do they mean in the context of BG2? Yep. Because instead of going through 1500 hp boss with stages, with correct tactic you can just melt 'em. This is less tedious. What about them? It takes time for them to git good, their buffs can be dispelled, and pure cleric won't get HLA like whirlwind. Multi-clerics are op ofc. In 3d edition they are also op. But then if you go into pnp with some sort of competetive ideas and join tournaments with broken builds and whine that game with 9000 prestiges is unbalanced you're also wrong. And u missed the whole title of this topic. Post-Spellhold is basically endgame content. It's ok since you mastered game at that point. Before that you already can fight most of the stuff you meet there - 2 dragons, illithid, beholder layer, even twisted rune. Then again, it's true for you, and of course SCS makes vanilla look primitive. But look at other people, for them even vanilla is tedious cheating bosses etc.

8 double bronzers galleon master race.