Tick

Yeah, curiosity killed the cat was the kind of vibe I got from it. Not malicious. Though based on how cavalier the gods are about kith lives, I wouldn't be surprised that he'd go that far to do it. The whole thing comes off as very Wael and it's on the same island as a Wael ruin that you can get something from, so I think that makes sense. Also, Wael can actually show up, so there you go.

My Watcher was an orlan druid from the Ixamitl Plains. When I looked under the hood it was Handsome Eliam, which was especially horrifying after trying to save him from an awful life earlier. The whole thing came off like you were punished for too much curiosity, but that's only me trying to read into it. It was a very creepy, cool, weird encounter. I'm kind of curious if the characters you meet at the camp otherwise are at all meaningful/from something, or if they're just illusions. E.g. people that died during the cataclysm a long time before.

Ha! I can definitely see why. For me, it was cool to see something that felt more "real" and complicated, but it is disappointing (not writing quality wise, in-story wise). Like one's assumptions would be that he's better than that.

I actually really wanted to make a thread just about Eothas. Eothas is really interesting to me. When I played the first PoE, I loved the kind, optimistic, forgiving, redemption type of mythology around Eothas. Compared to most of the other gods, he seemed to genuinely care about kith and ethics in general. When I slowly realized that he had actually died in a permanent sense, and things like the Council of Stars hit that home (his symbol was basically gone when the others lit up), it was a gut punch. So seeing him actually in Pillars of Eternity II was awesome, and seeing what he was actually like moreso. Because he is a kind, benevolent god that cares about the kith and right and wrong, but he's also kind of a twisted, more messed up and human version of what you'd assume and expect. He recognizes the pain and damage he causes, and the serious risk that he's dooming all of life, but he's still 100% ready to accept the sacrifice of unwilling participants for what he thinks is everyone's (eventual) benefit. I liked Eothas the most because while what he's doing is ****ed up, the actions are understandable and believable and his character isn't a bad person (you could argue a good person), but is absolutely doing bad things to try and fix something else. There are elements of his story that remind me of when a main character makes a "difficult choice" that kills a lot of people for the seeming sake of a greater good. Super cool character, I loved the writing for him, and I'm really glad we actually got to see him in the series.

That's awesome haha. Indirectly, I've seen the game act kind of silly because it seems to auto-recognize keywords/phrases. E.g. an ability grants "Barring Death's Door," and only death is highlighted, explaining the mechanic of companions and the player dying in the game.

For most or all things, you don't have to be something to get the end goal you want, but there are quite a few times the game has shown me dialogue options I couldn't do because of my background/set-up. The ones I've seen the most are for the Deadfire Archipelago background, the godlike race (I can't remember which specific one or if it was for any godlike), and maybe priest/Eothas priest. I've also seen a couple for Rauatai. I've also seen a couple changes because my character is an orlan, but nothing huge.

That's all I needed to know! Thank you!

I got Maia a little while ago, but only just started having her in the party because I wanted some other people around to do certain quests in Neketaka. Despite this, she just brought up the romance option. I'm guessing because of my reputations in personality traits or my choices in Neketaka or something. I wasn't really planning on doing the romance, but I've only had one intro conversation with her and I really like Maia as a character so far, so I'd be bummed to miss out on Maia stuff. Is there going to be many interactions after this, if I reject the romance thread? Like conversations and reactions?

I was looking into modding levels, quests, etc., and I enjoy the interesting system and world PoE's made, and wanted to make something with it. Is it possible, in any meaningful way, to mod the game? Do I need a decompiler?

Oh, it's you again. 'Do not cave in to the women or the gays' LOL LOL LOL. Don't ruin this for me, Psychevore.

I can't say anything on BG2, as I never played it, but PoE is not worse than BG (played the main campaign w/i the last two years). The characters had extreme traits sure, but most felt like something stripped from a stereotype/regurgitated old trope, and the characterization was simple and shallow. There was hardly anything to them. Even when it comes to content, which I feel PoE could have had more of in companions and other things, it's a ton more than BG. I think this is forgivable, as Bioware's first game, and the world was very cool and felt weirdly grounded, but the characters were bland and barely there beyond their mechanics. What it had was amazing for it's time, but that was up to 20 years ago. I'm easy to please when it comes to NPC's I give a **** about, and I didn't care about those guys. I liked that this game gave roughly even attention to all the companions. No one was completely ignored, with one really fleshed out guy - which unfortunately happened in New Vegas. I liked each companion, their conflicts were fun looking into and dealing with, I liked their unique points of view, the way they were affected by the world and vice versa. It was really good and interesting writing. It had Obsidian's excellent level of detail about the world and the characters in them, so that it didn't feel like they lived in a vacuum. I think all pull from known tropes, but they felt like their own thing. They felt more complicated that a cut-out. They were awesomely integrated into conversation, scripted events, etc. I think that was the most consistent flow of casual, in the background dialog I've seen. Especially nice touch was the few times when a companion would react to what another said while the protagonist spoke to a stranger or whatnot. It'd be cool if they could expand that to the stranger reacting to the companion(s). . I will say that, at times, it would feel more impersonal than expected - even with personal matters. I don't know if the writing was too dry, or why else that vibe might come off. I wouldn't want to push the writer's to do cheesy emotional scenes to "fix" that, though. That makes a different sort of alienation. The other problem was, as said, not enough content. I feel like some characters would have benefited from more content unrelated to their issues in direct conversation, or more build-up. Durance felt really well-paced, but Eder and Aloth's quests felt like they were supposed to have more text/writing discussing or delving into it (though I liked Aloth's general character arc, including pace). Grieving Mother felt like it happened near all at once, despite the fact that she's extremely evasive, deceptive, and mistrusting. There wasn't much or any convo with her beyond the things she wouldn't discuss. Pallegina felt like she could've had more there, somehow. Kana was pretty good, I think. Hiravias felt like he should've had more general content and a bit more on his quest - but the quest was enjoyable.

Absolutely. It'd be great to have people mess with the game's lore or mechanics. I'd pay for a solid improvement for modding on its own, for its own sake.

Is the elf girl wisp not enough for you, OP?

I'm one of the ones glad to see they didn't develop multiplayer, and instead focused on a quality singleplayer game. That said, for people that wanted it, would it be...remotely..possible to make a mod? I thought Fallout 1 and/or 2 had managed it at some point, but I'm insanely ignorant when it comes to both modding and multiplayer.

Cool, thanks. I don't expect a perfect track record with consistency, but the convo a while back in these threads got me confused.

There's a lot of fans that don't like all of what Bioware's done the last 1-3 games to varying degrees, but still want to buy/like Bioware games, or hoping the games go toward a direction they like better. I think if they advertised, "DA3 is basically a souped-up action RPG with romances and lots of cut-scenes," it'd get a batch of critics and discourage customers. I don't like Bioware's marketing, or most game marketing in general, but I wouldn't expect much otherwise. Also, you can technically be ex-German. Expatriates and all that. Unless you're referring to culture/origin of birth. And just checking: Kossith is the term for the race as a whole, then?

So it's getting a rating of 7.3 on IMDb? Wait, are the comparisons to Skyrim/Witcher bad as comparisons, or just bad because that means DA3 would be a Skyrim/Witcher clone?

The Devil's Dictionary is cool, sarcasm's fine, what made it seem petty and overly defensive is that it's related to criticisms of Bioware's most recent games - any of the common ones - and acting as if all are invalid and unfair. E.g. "Yeah, I was thinking we'd write some new characters, but evidently we only write old ones. Good to know!" or "I have no problem with criticism, so long as people don't try to justify it by using words they clearly don't understand." The reference to things I've seen disgruntled Bioware fans complain about most, such as retcons, cliches, plot holes, lack of resolution, deus ex machinas. What actually bugs me is the superior, passive-aggressive vibe I get from it, because it reminds me too much of bad fanfiction writers who get offended by reviews that don't gush over their work. I don't know Gaider, and I get why someone would get frustrated by BSN (even not as an employee of Bioware), but if I'm reading it right, that's a bad attitude to have.

Sodomy means all sexual acts that don't aim to procreation. Which is thing that many people forget when they shout their bible references. I'm pretty sure some people had the intent to procreate when committing sodomy laws, however... Humans and elves, asari and everything else.

Mass Effect 3 was good. A bad ending might keep something from being excellent, but it doesn't make the entire game bad. That said, between ME 2, DA 2, and ME 3, I've come to the conclusion that BioWare has forgotten how to do good endings. A BSN guy I saw a while back made a great point about that. They made an exercise of fixing the ending (going off memory): You could only write and change within the last few minutes, either while chasing the teleport beam or just after getting at the Citadel, and you can only use the original elements of the ending and/or whatever elements were built up in the game before that point. The problems of the ending is partly a consequence of the game/series, which kept changing direction in tone and focus and giving itself plot holes. It's pretty impossible for a writer earn a proper ending in ME3. They could have made it less galaxy-destroying and more based on TIM, they could have given the player a medal scene, but it still wouldn't be a good ending in the way it should be. Though, admittedly, I'd take a "Reapers die" button over the buttons given.

I don't mind if the words' spelling cause those words to be difficult to figure out how to pronounce. The spelling fitting the language is partly what makes it distinct, and usually the time that pronunciation is a problem for me is when I have to actually say the term in conversation, which is a minor inconvenience. I do appreciate avoiding intuitively ridiculous sounding names, though - like "bean," in what's generally referred to it. Bean wouldn't be a problem, if it was said in a voiced line once or twice, or the player was told in writing how it was pronounced. It's a problem because of the way the mind would tend to imagine it, so establishing it sets it straight. Or helps, at least. Maybe an extra that fans could buy would be a guide book on all the constructed language's words, any slang, and how to pronounce them. ;] Thanks much for posting about these details, I've always been a big fan of fleshed out worlds, and it's cool to see that effort brought into realizing them.

Do you lose companions in DA2 with too much rivalry? On combat, my problem is that everything said about it - and everything else - is generic. They're claiming what the game will accomplish without saying how the game works, or a possible rough sketch. It'll be "all about freedom for the player," it's "taking RPG's to the next level," it's "immersive," and "open-world." Also, anytime the word "refining" is used in reference to Bioware games, it's bad.

Well, some Bioware dude (supposedly) believed that Call of Duty was an RPG, so I can see where the genre confusion is coming from. I'm looking forward to a game where each companion gives a cinematic one-line introduction and stares blankly, menacingly, at something far off in the distance the rest of the game - the intro line will state what archetype they're playing and make fart/sex jokes. Any preexisting characters will state a complete shift in their personality. DA3 will be a horror-action-RPG.

Fighters have abilities in DA? I'm pretty sure mages do all the work. The fighters' abilities are to make the mages do all the work.

I didn't play DA2; I'm only speaking generally: A bad past, or bad luck, and the character that experienced it shouldn't come off as whiny and unlikable, unless they're a complicated character where the writer somehow makes it interesting. In my experience, this is always a symptom of bad writing (e.g. Carth in KOTOR, or Connor in Angel). It comes off like crappy middle-school diary - fanfiction bull. A history is meant to add to a character, to explain motivations and how they shaped themselves, or how they ended up where they are, or to make them sympathetic. A writer can make a character persecuted and oppressed due to an aspect of themselves and make it sympathetic, a writer can make a bad event that happens to them sympathetic. Planescape Torment, Fallout: New Vegas, does a good job of this. Every background I have seen in Torment is a giant Kick-the-Dog story, and the characters don't come off as obnoxious for it. Some F:NV characters could be at risk of being obnoxious, but many were done excellently. A history should not detract from someone - one can show anger, regret, etc. without it being petty and stupid. One of the problems is they often show a character complain constantly without showing the horror/event itself, or expressing why it sucks very well. For example, by showing the character in a near-death event, dragged down to subhuman status for being a mage, etc. The other problem is they often use it as a constant excuse for being an ass (again, without establishing - well - why they would be, or where it would make sense), while taking no responsibility for anything. Having a bad burrito does not licence attacking everyone else, and it's obnoxious. If a story can make a player feel bad for a mad, mass-murdering pyro that constantly goes against the wants of said player, it should be able to make a player feel bad for a character that "means well" and has lost family or gotten the shaft in life because they were born with _____.