Sedrefilos

O Welcome to the Obsidian forums mate, Where most threads are clickbaity! Or at least you try quite hard to make them

My optimism doesen't come out of fanboyinsm or blind faith but from my experience of the original game and its expansions. Seeing how the White March improved upon the base game and what the team has elaborated on the features of Deadfire I find it extremely difficult for them to screw the entire experience up.

Well, I'm more optimistic: I have no doubt. Just as you, though, I'd prefer they just improved upon the original than doing questionable drastic changes. Even though I'm not a "hardcore" player (meaning I'll probably just play the game once in normal difficulty) I do care about mechanics and combat as they add a lot to the experience.

These doesen't look like they're from PoE at all Maybe some early work or stock image for reference.

It's way better than mine that's for sure. I was being sarcastic of course. Your english is great as english but you talk internet-ish and that comes out as you being a troll... So... are you one or not? If not, just use normal thread titles instead of click-baity-internet-slangish catch phrases. This'll help our attitude towards you too. I seriously can't tell if your posts are serious or not, not untill you've elaborated over 3 or 4 posts at least.Oh thanks To clarify, no I'm not s troll but a few people who don't like my posts have made me to be. I love the game and Obsidian really want both to succeed. My posts are designed for people to have fun and I'm not sure why they are always taken in a negative manner. Click-bait is key for a good thread, I have always believed but that doesn't mean the author is a troll. Or at least that has been my belief in it. The internet lingo like "lol" or "XD" probably comes from facebook or forums where I've talked to different kinds of people from more diverse and varied dialects, I don't write like that on paper though. This is the only forum I participate because I'm interested in the game and the genre it tries to revive but mostly because people don't talk internetish. You'd notice that that by the fact that there are not any clic-baity thread titles

It's way better than mine that's for sure. I was being sarcastic of course. Your english is great as english but you talk internet-ish and that comes out as you being a troll... So... are you one or not? If not, just use normal thread titles instead of click-baity-internet-slangish catch phrases. This'll help our attitude towards you too. I seriously can't tell if your posts are serious or not, not untill you've elaborated over 3 or 4 posts at least.

Advice @SonicMage117. The reason most people don't get your initial points is because most in here use english as a language of communication. You use internet. I know it sounds like american english but its not quite the same. Try switching to english yourself too. It'll be easier for everyone.

Well... reviewing and asking about games can barely qualify as journalism Is like chefs that consider themselves scientists

I think the game has all firearms of the 16th century. What more would one want? Unless, of course, you imply you want more modern stuff and/or fantasy firearms, which is ok, but unfitting to the setting imho.

Why rename an arquebus to "rifle"? It's a blunderbuss. Else we ahould translate estocs and greatswords etc to just sword (long, medium, short etc). Meh. Who's bothered with these anyway? Just leave them as they are; they add to the character of the game.

You're in luck: Deadfire will have twice the voice-over at least

I know what I want in the sense of I know what kind of games I like most and what I like most in games. I believe most of us mean it this way when we say "I know what I want". Overanalysing (others') similar statements is boasting imo Anyway, the truth is that beta has its controversial parts in mechanics design up to this point but saying "most people hate it" is hyperbole. Mostly there is constructive critisism or just pointing out things that don't feel that good. Thankfully the devs are open to change and have their backup plans and ideas of their own.

Spirituality is a personal thing, a way to try to explain things to youself and maybe become better. Religion is a dogma of how the world should work under the commands of a supernatural dictator. Two different things. I believe in no deity myself, no greater power from the beyond; but I'm ok with the first. Not so with the latter. Pillars deals good with both

They don't mess that much with regilion, tbh, as more about what gods are and how they act. This is different that dealing with relegious topics. (I assume religeon = religion, so I'm not off topic eh? )

Well, in a fantasy setting you can justify gods and whatnot, that's for sure @PneumaticFire, dismissing religion is not a trend. It's happening since centuries.

I wanted to ask this from the dev team so much long ago but I though it would be much of demand Thanks a lot people from the dev team!

Funny how many people curse Bioware about their characters and romances while on the other hand they claim they don't like romance in games. Guess what: you're not forced in a romance in any of Bioware's games and no character is going to talk about their sexual preferences if not asked after being in a good relation with the PC. That mens they feel comfortable enough to open themselves to you. What happens is this imo: people are intrigued by romance, they want to fakk as many npcs they want, they stumble upon a character that was not what they expected to be and then they rage about it. That's writers doing great job in my book

Eh... Pillar's score was good but not THAT good so I'd travel anywhere to watch a live concert of it Maaaaybe if it was here in Athens I just might went if the ticket was at a "right" price

Even if skill checks are more common overall, the beta has enough examples of attribute checks in dialogue and scripted interactions that it seems premature to conclude that the developers are planning to make them irrelevant to roleplaying aspects of the game, especially with the introduction of a requirements system that allows them to check for multiple distinct categories (e.g., skills, backgrounds, race, class, attributes, etc.) when determining if you qualify for particular options in dialogue/scripted interactions. At various points throughout the beta, it checks for Strength (if you try to force the door open at the Poko Kohara ruins), Dexterity (during the scripted interaction at the desert well to catch the gems - after the Athletics check), Intellect (I think it was an alternative to background check in dialogue), and Perception (passively checked during a dialogue in Tikiwara and also later on the notice some details about the door to the ruins in Poko Kohara, if memory serves). It's good to hear attribute checks are still in. My assumtion, though, is based from what devs said ("attributes are checked way fewer times than skills and than Pillars 1" - at some Q&A) and what beta testers claimed here and there in the forums. Also, from what let's plays I watched, I don't remember seeing any attribute check while I've seen numerous skills checks. Haven't watched any let's play to the end, though - mostly parts here and there from various let's plays.

Skill checks are fine but if attributes don't matter in roleplay anymore why bother having them in the first place? What does intellect 20 vs intellect 10 mean now? That I can spread my attacks wider? Meh. This is mid 00's mmo mentality. If attributes don't define your character as a character better remove them and keep bare mechanics. AOE, damage, healing, interrup etc as stats and give us points to spread 'em there instead of attributes. To my surprise, Bethesda realised that and removed them from Skyrim. Since attributes never meant anything for the world why have them? Just pick special perks to define what you do. It worked great imo (I never expected to say something that positive for Bethesda regarding mechanics :D ).

I don't think there are better mechanics for a party-based rpg out there yet. The mechanics change was a bit "whoot?!" for me too. Although, I got to admit, as Wormerine said, some are for the better. But still...

In modern US english, words like "hate" and "fail" are so misused to the point they're empty of their true meaning. OP, for starters, since you're worried about the game and the devs, your thread title doesen't help much. Second, yea, there is some concern and criticism about Deadfire's mechanics (though I never saw anyone hate it) and the "atmosphere" of us taking close look to the beta is a bit... hm... miserable? I would say or, at least, not that full of excitement. But this, imo, happens because the beta is so focused on mechanics and mechanics seem to need some more work. There are a ton of other aspects of the game that are very promising to point that, if they're done correctly, this can be one of the greatest fantasy rpg experiences in gaming ever. Beta for Pillars 1 had the same mood but, at the end, it worked pretty well and the devs are more experienced this time around and also, it seems, more confident. So, with only one update thus far, it's premature to dub the beta as a failure. Because the true fail of the beta would be, after all, if the devs didn't get or neglected all the feedback. Having so many people playing it and care to stream, upload and give feedback shows quite the opposite I would say. It works pretty well up to now.

Since the gods aren't real in Eora, at the end, I'd like to see how this affects religious population as it starts to be revealed to more people (if so - I hope, at least, we, as watchers with this knowledge, can see to it). Also, irl, religion tends to unite communities of the same religion, usually against the communities of a different one

@Ninjamestari, there is no real life tight on how magic works. If you're intelligent, as you say, you should know that. It can work with strength (I don't care about stat names, only their function), dexterity, resolve, body heat, bone mass or farts (yeah, in South Park TSOT you use fart power for magic - why not?). Thus, the only illogical thing about might (or strength) is how it affects guns. If you want to argue about that it's ok by me but saying might is no good for magic effetcs is equally logical as resolve or intellect is good for magic effects. The only real issue here is the design philosophy: do you design around traditional D&D dump-stats mentality or you go for the opposite? You pick one, stick with it and design around that. This new change, eh, it might work better for Deadfire, true, but there might be other ways to buff resolve without moving away from your initial design goal (no dump stats - no useless build, which D&D that you constatly praise, is full of). And DnD may get away with the above problems because it is a tabletop game and you get to roleplay whoever the hell you want and the DM and team plays around that so you can have a great time since the campaigns are constatly evolving and designed around specific players/characters. But when you have a standard video game you have to make it anjoyable for all those who care about it and the DnD style is, maybe, the worst design for such a game. Its system is one that translate badly into video games imo.

Gattling guns is a bit off technologically tbh But pistols, blunderbusses and arquebi are common in PoE. Blow darts have only the langufaeth in the White March and maybe some Xaurips? I'm not sure about the latter but you can't use them as a player. Also, what is this about Mad Max and Waterworld lol? You know people used to live in more... "simple" structures through the years in different places of the world (even now, unfortunately), right? The game takes inspiration from 16th century earth.