Sedrefilos

Devs need to understand sometime, imho, that different mechanics work well in single-character action rpgs and in party-based tactical rpgs. Leveling skills by using them and have no classes are good for the 1st category, classes and pick-skills at level up is good for the 2nd category. It is tested and it works. Tyranny mixed those systems and gave birth to boring leveling up character system and an interesting spell-crafting system that it could be good or bad to use depending on character lore. Hope they see this and make something more focused next time; and a larger game - short is not good for rpgs, unfortunately.

I'd rather they make a spin-off to Pillars game based on multiplayer (co-op or competitive) than trying to squeeze it in the original game.

Lots of scum playing rpgs you see...

It would have been a much cooler idea if the game was 3D so that you could pause and rotate the camera during the replay. Like Dawn of War did. Of course I wouldn't object if they chose to include the option.

Resting is an outdated mechanic in such games imo. Dragon Age Origins did the right thing: you either survive the encounter or not. And if you do, those that fell during it suffer from injuries. That said, I believe Pillars did a nice job with it. Thematically and strategically right. Resting is more imortant in pure tactical games. Like Darkest Dungeon for example.

Combat is important but only to the extent the game makes it. For example, Torment: ToN has hardly any combat encounters and when they occur, they can be avoided. But is it a simplified game? It has turn-based combat, a thing many in here will dub as hardcore by itself. I didn't find any problem with Tyranny combat but I can see why people find one. Again, it had to do with the opponent/encounter design and not with cooldowns and party size, imo. Same thing's gonna happen with Pillars 2. It is a combat-heavy game, so combat mechanics should be important. But how they play, wether they are cooldowns or vancian, it'll have to do with how the developers will design the encounters and the opponent behavior.

@Gregorovitch and firkraag888 I know how it is used by many, though not all, I know for fact that others use it literalily. And I am sure many just parrot the word because it's hip in the gaming "world" without caring what it implies. But if you don't mean it as derogatory, then don't use the word. The word by itself has derogatory meaning. Also, even if you don'e mean it as to belittle people, it's unclear what you mean by using this word. Like I open the thread and I see someone saying "dumbed down" and pointing at Tyranny. Not the best game ever but not the simplest one either. I'm pretty sure most people don't think it is a "dumbed down" game. They might say so about Mass Effect for example. Hardoce rpg players think they're really special don't they? Because they like complex games that are "smart" and not "dumb ones" like in consoles. Because, yeah, one that plays a "simple game" is dumb and incapable of doing complex things because gaming is all that matters. That's what "dumb down" implies. Well, fakk this term. If you want to discuss Pillars 2 mechanics compared to Tyranny or whatever other game do just that. Say "will Pillars 2 have cooldown mechanics like Tyranny did? Because I don't like them for the a,b,c reasons". That's the way you do it and from then on we can have a normal conversation. But gamers are gamers I suppose. Whatever "gamer" means...

I'm secure enough, thank you, and I've been called worst things directly from people in this forum but I don't care on personal matter. But this whole "dumbing down" talk implies generalization and superiority and I'm starting to dislike the term (not that I ever liked it to begin with). And no matter how sure I feel for myself, it's always irritating to hear derogatory generalizations. If you hear someone talking racist in the bus, won't you call them out even if you're not a target? It's not about me, it's about people thing they're better because they do A and think that others that doing the B they don't like, are dumb (or whatever).

Tyranny is nice experiment. Maybe that's why it didn't sell so good? Short game (for an rpg), epxerimental mechanics, not a real world to go and explore, just small areas that are situation focused etc. But it isn't dumbed down -it just uses a different system than PIllars- it has very good writing and choice-and-concequence variety which shouts "hey, Im short but I have many outcomes! Come play me again and find out!". Also "dumbed-down" is *very* derogative term. Are you implying people who enjoyed the game are dumb? I'll start being impolite...

Bulk of people playing games is 20-35 years, male; statistic-wise. It makes sense as they are more financially (at least) independent than teenagers and less probable of having families.

All these people who can't stand videogame mechanics such as cooldowns and mana... were do they get their joy from the medium? I mean the only games that use vancian systems are really old DnD games (IE games included) and Pillars. Tyranny sucked?... That's an exaggertion if I ever heared one. Anyhow, OP you can check out the campaign videos, streaming or not, in Obsidian's youtube channel. Here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4xyf_Z-pEQOTaRVyjXfA1g

You were ready to end the game? But you knew there was another city. Also it was too soon for it to end at that point... Anyhow, just one big city in the sequel. Hope it'll be around from start to finish

Dammit. Is it only me that I liked Twin Elms so much? I though it was a breath of fresh air after the tediousness of Defiance Bay. Also the companions strat to feel more alive at that point. They interjected and participated in conversations whay more (I almost forgot I have them with me till then!). The city itself felt more alive than Defiance Bay; it was more densly populated and its inhabitants were more active. Also the factions and the quests were more interesting. *Spoilers!* The druids who wanted the baera and the cat to fight, the pale elves with their god, the druids that helped the suciders etc. Waay more interesting! EDIT: oh, the Orlan baby!...

The problem with Pillars not being the uber rpg we all dreamed of was, I believe, that the team had no clear vision from start other than the general idea of aspiritual successor to IE games. It looks as different lead members took a portion of the game, developed it by themselves and then they met and stitched it together. White March (again) has a more clear vision of what it want to be that's why it's so good compared to base game. Also, I'm ok with choices' concequence revealed at the end slideshow. I'm fan of that kind of ending in rpgs. Story, as linear as it may be, turns out great at the end (in both base and expansion) and has some tough choices to make. I know I said it many times, but I'm trying to point out how it's totally worth to play the game to the end

Quest logs are always helpful imo. Pillars has the expert mode though, that "hides" the details from your questlog, leaving each to just a simple note (or something like that anyway). So that might be somekind of a solution to you. As what you said about the reading, I agree with you in the part that it is too much. It doesen't fit much in Pillars; it's more Torment-y imo (maybe that's why I got bored with Torment Tides of Numenera so quick). White March doesen't have that problem and the "boring" reading parts are shown through the scripted interactions with pictures and choices. So my opinion about questlog and reading is, leave questlogs as they are - they are helpful - develop a writing style that fits in a game like Pillars.

Don't forget people who played it via GoG and pirated the game too. There may be more that finisehd it than steam suggests. Also, Twin Elms was great. Defiance Bay sucked.

I was reading JFSOCC's post about why he/she (sorry don't know you gender ) didn't finish the game (here's the link: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/92127-i-never-finished-pillars-of-eternity/) and at some point he/she complains about hating combat because of its score. Although I liked combat music and didn't got bored of it, I understand why it can become annoying being 3-4 tracks and combat encounters being all over the place. So, wouldn't it be agreat thing if the sequel has unique music tracks for specific encounters and even places? Like if Cancelhaut had his own music only during wis combat encounter or if Raedric's Hold had its own score as an entire area? I believe this is going to make parts of the game more memorable.

OP, try installing the expansion(s), go finish it, then come back to Twin Elms. White March was a much better design than base game and Twin Elms and forward is much better than midgame (imo). Also, I believe the plot is so good at the end (it doesen't seem so during the game up to that point) that you should try and finish it just for that.

For someone that likes a challenge from poe, party composition is important. Not some fetishes like you smugly state.Well, if you think the game is not challenging enough (to me it was) or no good, play something that actually is. What are you doing here? This is no political debate; Pillars is not affecting your life. If you don't like it or don't believe the sequel's gonna be good, well... don't play it. The review at Codex may say "why" it is, but it's just the reviewer's opinion based on his or her personal tastes. I can point you to reviews that said the exact opposite. Again, we don't know how challenging the game's gonna be yet. I am literally dumbfounded by the stupidity of this post. You have serious problems with talking with people about superficial hobby stuff, aren't you? Where's this attitude coming from? We're talking about a video game and I venver offended you as far as I know. Good luck out there.

For someone that likes a challenge from poe, party composition is important. Not some fetishes like you smugly state. Well, if you think the game is not challenging enough (to me it was) or no good, play something that actually is. What are you doing here? This is no political debate; Pillars is not affecting your life. If you don't like it or don't believe the sequel's gonna be good, well... don't play it. The review at Codex may say "why" it is, but it's just the reviewer's opinion based on his or her personal tastes. I can point you to reviews that said the exact opposite. Again, we don't know how challenging the game's gonna be yet.

I never have enough party space for all companions so I swap them from time to time. Where am I going? Who do I need atm? Is this a place some companion has a quest? Who do I feel I enjoy most right now? Stuff like that. I don't care about party archetypes and the best of all... NEITHER DOES THE GAME. If it was WoW we're talking about, then yes, you can't go adventuring without a tank, a healer and 3 dps because the game is DESIGNED AROUND THAT. Pillar's isn't. It's just personal fetishes about 6-member parties and archetype lineouts. To be clear, I'm not saying the games is goind to be better with 5. I don't know it yet but I don't believe the party size per se makes for good or bad gameplay rather the encounter and location design. So it's an issue I need to actually play and find out. And its game mechanic so I believe the issue is objective than subjective (like if we were talking about graphics style or weapons design or music score).

There is no basis to either agree or disagree with 5 member party at the moment. We just have to wait and see, THEN talk about it. It's not like they're re-publishing Pillars 1 with shorter party limit. They're designing the whole game around it. If nostalgia is the problem, it's understandable but unreasonable at the same time. If gameplay is the problem... well we don't know how it'll play so I believe it isn't the real problem (of complainers) at the moment. It's either nostalgia or some personal fetish with 6-member parties.

"If players during beta don't like it, we change it". Has anyone of the complainers played the beta yet? Yes? Upload a video in youtube if you're so kind; I'd like to see how the game looks!

Like Divinity Original Sin plus the listening radius. Neat.

Maybe we can ask Obsidian to drop companions to 4. That way we can have them all together and don't miss any chatty stuff.