Prime-Mover

That misses the point. The premise of the world is that it is a fantasy setting, and that magic exists. We accept that premise going in. But beyond that, certain things will affect our ability to suspend disbelief. Clearly you must agree with this since you're playing POE, and not Diablo. So a discussion is about where to feasibly draw the line, is entirely relevant. I personally think the line should be drawn when realism makes the game unfun.

Make it better by destroying artistic integrity and freedom of expression? But if Obsidian decided to remove it isn't that what you are doing? They removed it AFTER someone complained. They removed ORIGINAL content in order to appease one hateful individual. What next? Is someone gonna take offence to Durance's hilarious and often "inappropriate" dialogue and demand the removal of that? Where does it end? When there's a chance it will hurt Obsidian's image. As has always been the case. This is a business decision, that's how business work. Obsidian is not part of your wierd outrage vs. outrage trip. Also : "In the case of this specific content, we checked with the backer who wrote it and asked them about changing it. We respect our backers greatly, and felt it was our duty to include them in the process. They gave us new content which we have used to replace what is in the game. To be clear, we followed the process we would have followed had this content been vetted prior to the release of the product." - Backer email So calm your t*ts guys and gals and get a hobby. E.g., play this new cool game.

Like Walder Frey sending Bran Stark a birthday cake

The reason could be that it takes some extremely talented people to pull it off, and their skills have from a purely monetary perspective, been put to better use in trying to develop other games, especially catering to the typical mainstream console gamer. Like Bioware moving away from CRPG's to make theatrical action adventure RPG's like KOTOR, better suited for cross-platform gameplay. Really, it was Bioware that brought the genre back to life in 1998, and it was bioware that through it's own success killed it. And since Black Isle (and Interplay) were busy being dead, no one was there to take over or fund these games. Thanks Ray and Doctor Zee!

That's a terrible excuse. It's a fantasy game, and so of course that is going to be the setting, and it will make certain aspects of the game unrealistic in that sense. So we accept the premise of the world being aproximately like our own, with the exception that "here there be monsters" etc. But within that setting, things better be realistic, to the extent that it doesn't make the game un-fun. So that some game-mechanic or feature isn't realistic can certainly be excused, e.g. I don't miss being able to go to the toilet, because it would just be a chore. But if some mechanic is needlesly unrealistic, or the unrealistic-ness of it, kills immersion, that's a completely valid complaint. I agree that the notion of resting just next to some monster is kind of annoying because it's unrealistic, so I woulnd't mind if they included some chance encounter based on the hostility of the place. On the other hand, back in the old IE games, I honestly just reloaded. And that's worse, and less immersive than the current system. And a note on RP. Some people play these games because the game does most of the RP'ing for them. I want a game where I can sit back, and let it do that work for me.

Ah, good to know other people have a different experience. So maybe it's a bug, or an oversight on my behalf. Something that would be cool however is that if the "consumability" (or some other word - ah, the joy of not being a native english speaker), was an event in itself, like you could try to dislodge the graplinghook after usage, with some probability of success based on certain skills.

Can anyone confirm this? I just started a new game yet again, and I still have the hammer and chisel after breaking down the wall.

Love the game, few bugs and all. That being said, I have a comment with regards to the scipt-relevant tools you come across. I should note that I'm not very far into the game (only just got Caed Nua), so maybe these comments are a bit premature. Regarding the tools: I originally thought it was a cool implementation with regards to the scripted events. But now my attitude towards them is just kind of "meh,". I think the reason is that these tools are just way to easy to come by, and cheap, so it never really adds any challenge to the game. It's not like camping supplies where there is some degree of resource management to it, because apparently they are indestructable. And so far, aside from the very begining of the game, where you need to find the hammer and chisel to progress in the game, your progress isn't really challenged by them. In most cases, it will already be in your stash, unless you went out of your way not to pick them up or buy it. So I guess my overall point is, I don't see what they add to the game so far. Again, maybe because it's still early days.

Doing something that many people dislike for nostalgia sake doesn't necessarily make something good game design. I wouldn't mind having to rest if I could regain my spell slot usages without having to rest to do it. I dislike that. A mana bar would be so much better. There are two health bars, but no mana bar? it's just backwards and has been abandoned by every single RPG maker in modern times. I just want fights to last longer without my wizard/priest/monk dying in two hits every single time. Everyone and i mean everyone, friend and foe alike, doing less damage across the board would preserve difficulty and make the fights more about strategy than about hitting as hard as you can as fast as you can while spamming "Heal" spells that don't actually heal. Can you elaborate the point about making fights more about strategy, if damage is lowered? I get that it will change certain aspects of the game, e.g. make battles longer, but why would it make it more about stragegy?

lol WHAT?! First time I heard of anyone being upset with PoE, it's actually first time I heard anyone even saying anything about this tombstone (and yes - I did see it in a game). He is very aware of that, he points it out at the beginning of a podcast. I should be more specific: he does not see the implication of the distinction between whether it's put there by a backer or the devs.

TB doesn't seem to be aware that this joke isn't part of the lore, but something put there by one of the backers. If a person in the game says something controversial, there is usually a point to it, like TB suggests, to underscore some view or personality trait of the NPC. But in this case, it's more akin to a forum post, possibly expressing some view of a real person. Not saying this settles the matter, but it's a distinction TB misses.

I don't understand the purpose of this post. Are you holding out for a patch which will make it the game that you wanted?

Actually, I don't go back to the inn to rest that much. The title was hyperbole to convey the urge I feel to run back to the inn to save some coppers, get a buff, or speed along the stronghold. Overall Pillars of Eternity is excellent, but giving players in-game incentive to waste real time is just bad game design. So far, about 14 hours in, I still don't see any big urge to run back to safety. Part of this presumably comes down to the difficulty setting. So if someone e.g. has spent all their camping supplies after four battles, this is perhaps more a hint that they need to lower the difficulty setting, rather than the game is inherently flawed. Still, Obsidian perhaps ought to give players a better hint that the difficult setting is too high, say be penalising backtracking somewhat.

I would say that the recently kickstarted 'Shadowrun Returns' (especially the Dragonfall campaign) is pretty darn close to what you're looking for. It's a bit more combat heavy than PoE, but the writing is still very solid.

Indeed it would. In the heat of battle, if a group of my guys(or gals) are engaged with a number of enemies, e.g. behind partial cover (tree or building), it can be difficult to figure out who's actually selected, and their positions. Of course, with enough patience, it is possible to distinguish partymembers, but since there's enough stuff to keep track of, it would be an improvement with some mode of distinguishing between them more clearly, e.g. like what you suggest. +1

Do you mean "they failed to make a game that suits my particular preferences"? Because that's cool. No one will have any beef with that. It's when you have an oppinion about it being an objectively bad game - like the title indicates - that people will react. Calling it an 'oppinion' doesn't make it any less objectionable.

It's perhaps a matter of personality, but insofar as a game will reward you not to roleplay, I think many people will be turned off from the idea of skipping rest just to make it more challenging. It's kind of like handicapping yourself when playing a game with children, to amuse them. Sure, it's fun the first couple of games, but then you start looking for a non-fake challenge. And if you like me, are not a roleplayer at heart, you prefer to let other people create the fantasy and reactivity for you.

IMO, so far (only at Raedric's Hold), I think it's great. The allure of going back to the inn, is usually outweighed by the hassle, so I almost always rely on camping supplies, and approach combat and exploration with a conservation of resources mindset. Not that I would mind some consequence of backtracking, but so far, it's not really been all that relevant.

None of the above constitutes bugs as such, or even if they were counted as bugs, I fail to see how/why they are worse, than any other developer in this regard based on this game. Virtually every game released has bugs in it, and patches is the norm for the first couple of months. But this game is relatively bug free, with the exception of the double-click gear-swap, which is frustrating as heck.

Kill 'em all or, yeah, reload.

There is a difference between "This doesn't suit me" and "This is just bad". A good move would be to familiarise yourself with that distinction before posting, and apply it with an appropriate degree of humility, that's if you want people engage with you in an open and reasonable manner. Also, writing in CAPITALS is not a good move if you want to come off as a levelheaded rational poster. Try italics for emphasis instead. You came accross as being so annoying and arrogant, that I never really let myself consider whether you had any good points or not. Which is a shame.

Not everyone is going like going out of their way to roleplay something like that, and would prefer the system handled those limitations, especially when the game is actually rewarding and thus encouraging you not to role-play. A simple menu toggle which only allowed smithing/crafting to be done when resting, would be nice. Just like there is an option with the stash.

The only benefit I see to the current stealth-model, is that when moving the whole party while one of the characters is sneaking in front, they don't catch up to him, or overtake him, but rather keep in formation at the same speed. In the old IE-games - if I recall corectly - you would usually let the main party stay behind, while the rogue was in front, and then keep moving the rest of the party up every few seconds, to make sure they weren't too far behind, if action were to ensue. If they patch the system, it would be nice to keep the party-sneak option for this reason, or replace it with a "move in formation/keep relative distance" button.

It's not really a spoiler? He hasn't said what any of the text is, hasn't given away anything about the story, and it might help someone avoid confusion when they go to play the game? I don't see any way of answering his question without it constituting a spoiler regarding these NPC's role in the game, even if that is "no role besides flavour". I'd like to find that out for myself. And I can't really see how not knowing could lead to confusion, since the notion of reading their soul's understandable through following the game's story.

Do we though? I mean, sure, we all agree that this game being made without full voice-acting, is better than it not being made, with full voice-acting. But everything equal, I fail to see what makes written english superior to spoken english. Sure, there is the whole imagination aspect, where we ourselves get to give the characters a voice in our heads, but when most important characters are already voiced to an extent, that kinda makes that a mute point (pun intended). All that being said, the relative improvement of the game being fully voiced is not a huge issue for me, but honestly, everything equal? Yeah, I'd prefer it being voiced.