Naurgalen

I just shared a folder with the save in dropbox with bugs@obsidian.net . I dont normally use Dropbox so I hope it works. Just a suggestion: As most saves seem to be under 2mb but above 1mb, wouldnt be better if the forum allows 2mb uploads for the users to report bugs?

It may be something in the Old City then, as the saves were my party "works" are before exploring them too. Maybe its related to the stacking curse bug that dissapears when you sleep with food?

Because I have little time I play sporadically now-days so I cant recall when the problem started. I SUSPECT the problems may have started 1) when I installed a patch or ad-on (critical role voices or the other) or 2) by some bugged quest, but what happened is that areas that I explored were covered (both map and in game) and gave me EXP like if I was exploring them from the first time. I ignored it as it was a minor thing. Sadly there were hints that some greater problem was behind it as at least 1 quest I did was"reset" to 0 again: By that time I had killed the mephit captain, but when I approached the zone for a second time it was there again (and allready aggressive). He even dropped his quest item again. Still I ignored it as a minor bug and played a TON more when I tried to change party members for the first time. To my surprise I couldn't pick them. I can "recruit" and press "accept" but when that's done they just don't get added to the party as the ones I was using. I have like 20 saves corrupted that way(15hs of game-play, and that's a ton for me) before a save were I can change party members fine. And I'm not even sure those are not really bugged too: The reason I think it may be a patch induced bug is because I have at least 8 saves on different parts of the story and when I load ANY of them and try to walk in Nehetaka im always intercepted by the quest were Talfor wants to coerce you into giving the letter to Degnos.Its not possible that in saves separated by hours I never did that quest, and it seems strange to me that a bugged quest could affect all the saves at the same time. (Even those were the party swapping isn't bugged) I really love the game, more than the first probably in game-play (except for the new grimoires, I prefer the old FAR more), characters and awesome locations/art, but these kind of game-breaking bugs destroy my experience.I really really hope there is some kind of fix to swap party members again.

I think the OP partially answered his question: 1) XP gain was better when the expansions came out (compared to vanilla) and 2) Yes, you still will reach XP-cap before the end of the game by playing all quests, that is 100% an intended design An IMHO if its not too early (as it was at the beginning) its a good thing: I remember how in Planescape: Torment you could got those awesome end-game spells and only cast them 1 or 2 times!!!! That was some full bull**** thing, specially if you didnt get pharaods sphere to lvl up FAR more than by normal gameplay and the ****ing shadows / or the transcendent were barely injured by 9nth lvl spells with 3mins animations. Reaching cap before the end lets you play with the composition/spells/strategy's etc... and balance better the end encounters without nullifying ALL combat (cause history, the core experience of an RPG, is NEVER halted) - progression (you still get items/armor/weapons from quests + gold to buy more options).

While I understand that people hate uninformed boys/people that think that "katanas can cut though anything" I find equally dumb to hate "katanas" as weapons because "im sooo counter-culture/hate anime sooo much" or "katanas suck vs plate armor/whatever not relevant for their context". Katanas were amazing weapons in their cultural context and epoch, as much as longswords (or other weapons) in theirs. They all reflect many historical and cultural things of the civilizations that made them and shouldn't be discarded by the people or propaganda that modern times surround them.

I have 3 melee characters, Main, Edér, Maneha (used to be Pallegina, will pick her up again) 4 melee if you count Itumaak, then I have 3 ranged Sagani, Aloth, Durance. Normal tactics is to catch their front with my 3 melees, while Durance buffs/debuffs. Aloth cast some CC and AoE. Sagani and Itumaak focus on ranged/casters. And I don't mind enemies using tactics and I would love to see some good tactics that isn't just rush everyone because of HP pool and numbers. If on any difficulty below PotD I need to have meta knowledge about who to bring for every map then no, I don't think the game is well balanced. If I need to rest between every two encounters because I have used all my spell slots then no, I don't think the game is well balanced. It seems that your problem is being underleveled. I did most of the WM without problem (except for certain dragon that I needed to kill later) with only 2 and 1/2 melee "tanks" (Eder, Pallegina and Itumak) If the first fight you get in a new zone is too strong just level a little in other place and then come back. As people said 1 or 2 levels in this game make a huge difference. (+ the items you got when leveling)

Maybe "arbitrary" was not the right word, as it indeed has a logic behind it. What I tried to convey is that "3 levels more" is not really intuitive for a new/average player to fully understand how all the spells will be affected and select the best option. (at least not without hovering for tooltips) That happens because as @Max Quest described some spells may benefit far more than others from 3 extra levels depending on multiclassing or how the spells mechanics work / are calculated. Selecting speciffically " "30%" + damage/healing", ""50%" less casting time" etc... solves that problem while giving more customization. (which metamagics are available will depend on the spell itslef)

While I dont really dislike the "empowerment" of spells (it may be fun if numbers are correct), it seems how they will be "empowered" is arbitrary ("The effect may be more projectiles, a longer duration, more damage/healing, etc. A wizard could empower a Minoletta's Minor Missiles, adding missiles. A fighter could empower Vigorous Defense, increasing the bonuses.") and would make people need to remember both the effects of the normal spell + the new effects of the empowerment. I propose instead using 4 or 5 kinds of "metamagics" that can be selected to empower the spell. (For example: 1.stats increas:damage/buff/heal, 2. Increases/reduces saving throws, 3. increase in effect durations, 4. less or null casting time, 5. area of damage/less or non friendly dmg etc...) This IMHO lets the mechanic being easier to understand and provides the player to better customize the empowerment to what they really need in a battle.

I prefer 6 because: - Lore: It means more companion time. When every companion I have in the party is interesting story-wise (like in Planescape:T) I want to play with ALL of them. I want to know how they will react to the games situations (like facing Ravel, or the Transcendent one), how their story's relate to some locations or situations and what they have to say about their comrades. - Experimentation: I may be wrong but many times we have some core npcs we like more (lore or gameplay-wise) that we don't want to change, having a "redundant" place lets you experiment alternating with the other companions, specially if you want 2 of the same class. - Managing characters is not complicated or tedious per se as more than 4 (old and not UI/UX oriented) games demonstrate, its a core mechanic/desition from those games about managing a "squad". You can even have only 3 characters like in DA:Inquisition and still sometimes really FIGHT the UI and game-mechanics (like commanding in top view) to try having a simple strategic fight (and heck I really like the game, but in those things it sucked). Taking away a character is just the easy way to simplify things. Not necessary the best one.

I just finished it too (university EATS my life/time) and I think the story is really good, FAR better than what Baldurs Gate had to offer in fact. The problem IMHO was that the core game needed more time and polish into how that story should be conveyed. Probably a thing related to time/money because both expansions really improve on that regard and are more fun to play because of it. I really hope to see a PoE2 in the future and as one of the original backers: it feels really good to see ones hope and trust rewarded.

I too don't like the limited supplies: for me resting should be limited in a more rational and old school way: if you rest in the open / a dungeon you can -and probably will- be attacked. The chances would be adjusted by the amount of enemy's in the map and how near you are to them, but the risk should be permanent. Then map designers could have "protected places" (a hidden room, a sanctuary, a cave or whatever) where you could sleep with no problems like an Inn. Stronghold and enchantments may be underdeveloped, but they have potential to be fun systems. Customizing is rarely a bad thing.

Note that I and at least 2 friends haven't finished the game because of time reasons. PoE is a long game and we study and work at the same time.

Yes, the score. But That´s why reading comments is so important: Mass Effect 3 can appear as the most awesome of the trilogy by FAR if you didn't finished it, but almost every single comment warned you of that. Skyrim is a just above average game, but in the comments mods are noted and those are the reason it was so awesome. (Until Valve+Bethesda just murdered it for profit, but that's another topic) People need to read more .

All this hipsterish "metacritic is bull****" thing, is starting to get on my nerves. Is metacritics criticss score bull****? Yes, totally. Is the user score totally bull****? Not really. Ofcs its not perfect and CAN be abused, but the score is just a little PART of what makes useful metacritic, the other (far more important) part being the comments. Just reading a couple + the score you can almost instantly have a good idea of how good the game is, if the score is trying to be manipulated by a playerbase, if the reactions are moderate or totally opposite, if the game is suited to only a limited player-base or the masses and much more. You just need to read between the lines a little. For example: I think a score of 85/100 for PoE is almost on the spot. Its a real solid game with good improvements and some problems that can (and will) be ironed. It certainly isn't a classic just yet, and I feel that most people just bash if because of that. But it is near, and knowing the problems that Obsidian had, the limited budged & time, the built from scratch world, engine (and no, I'm not referring to unity), mechanics, story and so much more + all the inexperience of being one of the first successful kickstarter projects in the world makes me real positive. People totally forget (or don't know) the problems that a big and new project from literally 0 implies. Now that Obsidian has the foundations, they finally can create the new classic.

Well, it seems that my GOG library will be increasing.

Codex this, Codex that.... What does it matter if they don't liked the game? Since when does their opinion matter more than the majority of the bakers of the game? Heck why they even matter more than journalists, reviewers, or other community's? If they cant see how PoE is a decent game that can become a ****ing classic via updates, expansions and eventually sequels... well, their problem. They are too late to bash it to pieces (*). The game was a success, most people - even young gamers that never played this kind of games- liked it and now the genre has become alive again. No codex tears can change that. (*) And there is a really big difference between bashing (bad facts, not event trying to be objective, sensationalist claims etc...) vs constructive examination and/or criticism (The kind of Sensuki has done several times, even if I don't share many ways of thought - FE. I see potential in the engagement system-)

Are people REALLY discussing BG1 as having a REAL meaningful story with deep characters? For real? - Bland story charactes / companions: checked (little to non interactions, basic quests -and not for all-, no real development, basic personality's) - Bland antagonist: checked ("I killed your father" cliche, "Im evil so I must destroy all" cliche) - Bland game story: checked ("Evil man who killed my father wants to become a god by killing all who can" + "I MUST have revenge, but FIRST Ill discover some secrets organization plan to ruin metal") (But a decent meta-story with you being other of thousands of spawns of the same god) - Little indications as were to go or were could be dangerous enemy's: checked (Nahskel as many said, some random enemy's like vampire wolfs that appear at the beginning maps and you have 0 chance of fighting them or heck even running "a nice encouragement to explore") - Little to no impact-full decisions: checked (including the ending) BG2 is another thing, FAR more comparable. (But PS:T still beats all history wise)

My post was by no means intended as a troll (though I admit the title I used is kinda' troll-y). I am unhappy about the state this game was in when I bought it and am communicating my concerns in a manner which I think is likely to ensure Obsidian's awareness of them. Things have evolved from there into a (mostly civil) debate as to the nature, implications, and, if you'll forgive my grandiosity, broader meaning of the bugs which caused my unhappiness. As I have said, (for me) your primary concern is totally valid and will be (almost certainly) adressed with the expasions / next games. And heck, I would totally supported a post made by you asking -in a good way- the devs to increase time into finding bugs for the expansion / next game. But the title + the "unacceptable" thing (as if Obsidian weren't an indie company making an almost AAA game -and some would say a new "classic"- with dwindling resources and risking its future) + the "wont be paying full price" (thats you business, do you really think people will do the same because of you?) just makes a valid concern a rant that looks really trolly.

Finally someone who knows a little of gaming. And we are talking console development (that has a very specific hardware and software) vs PC development (with and incredible amount of hardware, software and OS). Now, given the amount of "game breaking" bugs (quotes are for the fact that even if its probable depending on how you play yo may never encounter them) should Obsidian hire more testers/QA for the expansion or next game? Totally. And I think they will. People need to remember that the kickstarter money was being finished and the game cant be in development indefinitely because Obsidian -like the documentary stated- was not in a very good position. The release date was probably a necessity more than the ideal one. Finally: Should the OP never buy an Obsidian title because of it? OFC! It seem like a totally not overreacted position to troll fans at all.

"I'm too stupid to wait for the enemy to just die, die now!" Int should do the very opposite for DoTs - reduce the time it takes to apply the damage. Same for Crits. And if that is the route Obsidian will take - in b4 "my DoT does X damage in -10 seconds!" If not - the tooltips should update to reflect new total damage (I assumed this is the case now, DPS from spell doesnt change, just the number of seconds) That could be problematic if you have a spell that debuffs and deals damage over time (you want to have the debuff to last) or if you want more "hits" to get some special effects (or a more stable dmg by crits vs a big lucky one) ------ I wonder if this error is just a problem of how it is showed/explained to the players: I think that Dots should be explained with DMG per SEC + TOTAL DURATION & TOTAL DMG, so if the spell is 1 dmg per sec during 5 secs, you know it will deal 5 dmg total. Then INT should increas the "during" part and it will be intuitive to the player to know that the total dmg is increased thnx to int.

But was it same at 2012, long before value of $ incraised stupidly? It was better, but with our constant inflation I cant remember what salary I had at that time to make a real comparison. Still I remember that I could have backed a better tier at that moment but I wanted to pledge to other projects too: Star Citizen and the new Torment. (which I did)

Loled by the fact that 100 dollars in my country is aprox 1/6 of my salary. (and that is a good salary here) Still, I seems that PoE is a great game, and having contributed to create it is really nice all the same.... i really felt the thanks to the backers at the beggining :D

I understood it as "20 damage every second" (for an amazing 200 total damage thnx to the bonus int), but I haven't played enough combat to really test it. (working sucks)

If the game and expansion are good, I will not only back the kickstarter if they do it, Ill in fact buy a better pack even while in my country it costs me "price" x10. But first, they must deliver a real good game.

What is the feature / thing that the dev team is most proud of?