Helm

I believe an additional 30,000 people backed this game after the kickstarter ended (I can't remember where I saw that, google might help though), so like 1.5m to 2m dollars on top of the 4m from the Kickstarter. The average team size was about 20 to 25 developers. So, yeah, I have no idea where that money went either.

My roflcopter just took off. The class system has been streamlined and casualized, it can't even compete with the one in Diablo. And so on. Anyway, I asked you to describe the core mechanics. I didn't ask you to make a list of superficial aesthetic stuff, half of which is wrong anyway.

IF there is an expansion, that is. ...If you catch my drift.

Aha. Let us once again look at what they promised us in context: "Non-combat skills are gained separately from combat skills. [...] They should be separate types of abilities, and you should spend different points to get each one." When I level up I can spend points on separate combat and non-combat abilities. Sounds great! "Combat can be avoided with non-combat skills. [...] Perhaps you can re-sanctify a desecrated cemetery to prevent any further undead from rising, or maybe figuring out a way across a ruined bridge will always avoid the bandits on this side of the river." If I re-sanctify a desecrated cemetery using a non-combat ability, then I don't need to fight the skellies! Wow, that sounds fantastic! But do I get (extra) XP for doing so? "Avoiding combat does not lead to less experience gain. You shouldn't go up levels any slower by using your non-combat skills rather than your combat skills. We plan to reward you for your accomplishments, not for your body count." I would still get XP for using my head and re-sanctifying the desecrated cemetery and not just obliterating them in close combat. Hell yeah! It sounds like the typical description of an IE game actually (maybe with just a bit more flavor though). I am not surprised that the IE fans threw their money at Obsidian after reading this, because they promised to reward us accordingly for our accomplishments and promised us that non-combat skills can be used to avoid combat in certain situations. And most important of all, they promised to reward these choices accordingly. I am not seeing any of this in the game. "We will only reward the player for doing the bidding of villagers. You can only get XP by doing these quests and nothing else. Our combat is not rewarded accordingly, so you can just skip it (almost always possible) with your always-on stealth ability. Oh, and I hate Baldur's gate, so don't expect anything similar. Trollolololol" This is what we got. Sounds like a classic bait and switch if you ask me. I am very disappointed.

We don't care what you think is fun either.

It looks like BG, it has good writing like in BG, but it doesn't feel like BG. At all. I probably wouldn't complain if we were actually given what we were promised.

I don't know why you think that engaging in unrewarding and risky combat is not pointless. We might as well just remove XP from another core activity of the game, which is questing, if XP rewards are not required to give the player an incentive to do stuff. Just let the party level up while you advance through the main storyline. Questing, combat and exploration are all "just for fun". Sounds great. GOTY I think.

Because quest only XP makes many of the core activities of the game pointless. Like combat, exploration, etc. It should be rewarded additionally and not solely.

Why is it that almost every advocate for combat xp is an irritating zealot on the issue? You're not more of an IE game fan for preferring a certain XP reward system so stop trying to monopolise the right to define what is and what isn't a spritual succesor to the Infinity Engine games. PoE isn't a spiritual successor because the core mechanics of the games that we loved are not there. That is something that happens when the lead designer hates the game he is supposed to be making a spiritual successor to. Obsidian promised us an Infinity Engine experience (Baldur's Gate to be specific) and what we got was an RPG with a casualized character system, always-on super stealth mode, quest only XP where you must do the bidding of villagers to get XP, pointless and unrewarding combat, lack of choice (all choices matter equally), lackluster music, no exploration, the itemization appears to be lame, HP bloat and so on. It probably wouldn't be so bad if it was actually good, but it isn't. But at least the writing is good. lol BTW we are advocating for ways to get XP other than by doing the bidding of villagers, for example by exploring or engaging in combat. You know, like in the IE games. Really? You mean other than the isometric view, the companions, the tactical group combat and engaging storyline that reacts to your decisions/actions? Which game are you talking about? Arcanum? Darklands? Fallout? You have to be more specific and describe the core mechanics of the game.

Ahh, so now even the advocates of this borked design are also admitting that this game doesn't resemble the amazing IE games. Good, very good. We thought we had backed the spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate!

I think the icons are way too small and I don't like that the inventory is not limited by weight and/or volume. The endless stash mechanic also trounces on my feeling of immersion.

No, it's a combat oriented roleplaying game that passively encourages the player to avoid the completely optional combat. I guess you could call it a pseudo combat oriented RPG... or an isometric fantasy party-based uh... sneaky game? I'm not really sure what you should call it, because it feels like a new genre... I think i'll just call it isometric hybrid-crap or a Sawyer RPG for now. BTW the BG series had diplomatic and non-violent solutions too. They had a lot of flavor just without the completely borked core design. Gromnir, you don't need to do every possible activity in an RPG just because it rewards the player with XP. You also don't need to always take the choice that gives you the most XP or loot and you don't have to finish every quest. My roleplaying choices are more important to me than XP or even loot in many cases anyway. I will abstain from huge chunks of XP or good loot if I think that my choice is meaningful. I do however also enjoy being rewarded with extra XP or loot for making smart choices, like somehow exorcising a graveyard full of skeletons so that I don't have to engage them directly in combat. BTW you can't even do that in PoE. These Sawyerisms like balance and all choices matter equally amd always-on super stealth mode make me cringe, I hate it when a game designer removes choice from the equation. "Oh noes, I can powergame in Fallout by metagaming because of the wonders of the Internet. Game sux." That is real smart Gromnir.

Hi there, common sense man. This is like trying to love Janet Reno. I can't love this. They need to delay the game and fix it.

Real men dual wield their pistols. Everyone knows that.

Your post has inspired me to create the Definitive Experience Points Poll. It will be the mother of all XP polls, you'll see.

I've been wondering, do you hate combat XP or are you just an extremely loyal fan?

Doctor Jones, Jones, Calling Doctor Jones Doctor Jones, Doctor Jones, Wake up now Ah-yippie-yi-yu Ah-yippie-yi-yeah Ah-yippie-yi-yu-ah

Funny, I didn't have any problems with D:OS or Shadowrun:Returns. WL2 is looking good too.

Well now we have avoidcombat XP and useless loot drops. GOTY quality gaming.

^ I agree, but it isn't Justin Bell's fault, he just composes what he told is to compose.

The worst bugs in this game are the Sawyerisms that plague it.

^ He's saying that D:OS is a fantastic game and that this won't be a fantastic game.

So they really want to shove this game out the door this year? Oh boy.

Indira inspired me to check out update #7: I hightlighted the interesting stuff. They sugar coated the truth real nice.

You have no idea what you are talking about. They are dumbing quite a bit down as it seems. I think you'll like it.