Sarex

That is not cheating.

So much for learning tactics. Kangaxx- Used spell immunity and spell shield and resist fear on my melees, put my paladin(with holy avenger) closest to the lich and cast death ward on him and let the lich cast all his spells on him. Took me a few reloads to find out hot to position my characters so they all survive.(I think I beat him on my second try but lost half of my party) So you see the encounter isn't impossible without finding out a "simple piece of information that is obvious in hindsight". Not to mention that what you said is a go to guide that you find online on how to beat the lich. Mindflayers in the sewers I beat by summoning creatures and letting them take on the mindflayers psionic attacks. Took me maybe one reload to get through it. I don't remember this last one, but this is simply learning patterns. For the encounter to be what you want, the devs need to make an AI for the game that will change the behavior of the enemy every time you enter a fight. As you can see, what is impossible to you isn't to others. That is why I am so confused with your comments about "impossible" fights. There wasn't a single fight that you couldn't beat in multiple ways in IE games. It's your choice to look at online guides and spoil your encounters, but that is not the devs fault. Even if it somehow was their fault I seriously doubt it that they will manage to make PoE a perfectly balanced game where no fight can be cheesed.

What this all boils down to is that you always want the game to tell you what the next fight is going to be, or you want the ability to escape from any fight. To be perfectly honest I wouldn't want to play a game like that. It would feel too much like holding my hand. They will probably do what they did in IWD - wilderness lore and in BG - tracking, to let you scout levels for advance warning. To me that is more then enough. Half the fun in playing a game like this is figuring out those hard encounters and finding those obscure ways to beat them. As for the key thing you mentioned, for me there wasn't such an encounter in the IE games, yes there where fights which could be won by an easy combination of spells but those things where usually learned from online guides, I on my first play trough didn't use guides and thus had no issues with small pieces of information making a fight easy. Those things where probably possible because the devs couldn't predict them and they just got figured out. If you think that PoE is going to be so perfectly balanced, that those things won't happen well I think you are going to be disappointed. I am also curious for an example of "Reloading because the fight has some strange very specific thing that will be obvious in hindsight but impossible to tell in advance is bad. " in a IE game. Maybe that would help me see what you are aiming at.

IWD had wilderness lore, BG had tracking. You also had detect evil. There where ways to find out what you would be facing. Also as far as I remember, all IE games had a couple of weapons stashed when you where facing creatures that could only killed with specific items. In fact I remember in BG when you where facing those creatures that could only killed with normal weapons and I only had magic weapons (first world problems) there where a bunch stashed thorough out the level, you even had a book telling you how to kill them and to be honest that felt kind of lame to me.

Reloading because the fight was difficult is good. Reloading because the fight has some strange very specific thing that will be obvious in hindsight but impossible to tell in advance is bad. I think that's the argument that (most) people are making here. Silly example: You walk into a room (that you had no way of scouting in advance and onto an immediate dispell invisibility trap) and a guy hurls the 'Kill Your Party Instantly With No Save' spell and kills your party instantly with no save. You reload and go the store to buy six 'Protection From Kill Your Party Instantly With No Save' scrolls and then read them before going back in the room. Victory! vs. Less silly example: You walk into a room and there's a beholder elder orb in the room who starts casting true sight. You know what a beholder is. You run back out before the true sight finishes, go to the store and buy things to protect you from petrification, imprisonment, magical damage etc. or maybe you even have them with you already. Better than the first example; some would argue that it's not a lot better. vs. Much less silly example: You walk into a room and there's a party just like yours, maybe a few levels higher and maybe there's eight of them. You might lose and need to reload, but that's ok. So we don't want traps, we don't want fights to surprise us because we might be low health (stamina?!?), we want to be told everything about the fight before hand or to be able to retreat and make preparations (how this is different from reloading I don't know), and we want the enemy to have equal resistances to everything (so there isn't any weakens we can exploit on our next play-through).

I don't really get it, what is so bad with reloading? Don't you want the game to be challenging to play? Is Dark Souls bad because you reload/die a lot? You guys dream of some idealistic game where no fight will catch you unprepared, but will still be hard to play. To be perfectly clear every fight can be beat the first time, it's just that most people aren't good enough at the game the first time they play it to succeed in doing it without reloading. Every fight you played gave you enough time to do something that will make you win the first time you encounter it, otherwise you wouldn't be able to win it. Would you guys like to get rid of fights like the skull of the lich or mind flayers or beholders or dragons because you couldn't beat them the first time around. Please don't substitute your own deficiencies with that of the game, because you aren't good enough at playing it(not an offense). Also the online guides I hear mentioned, how do you think the people who made them won the fights in the game? No fight is impossible, you just aren't good enough at the game, plain and simple (again, this isn't meant to be an offense). You can't make challenging fights without making them unfair. Anyone who doesn't like that can play on easy mode, that is why it exists. edit: I think you guys want a game that has a real AI, because that is the only way to make the fights the way you want them. Because even DS is just about learning the movement of bosses and that is the game that everyone says has the best and most challenging fights. So you heard it Obsidian, make us a real AI. We will accept nothing less. Also it would be preferable if it doesn't go terminator on us.

Whaaaat, that is my favorite series. I heard the game rights were in limbo. Would be awesome if Obsidian could take a crack at it.

The only problem is that maybe not all the loot was in obvious places and was easy to miss (same as some of the side quests, which produced the said loot). While we are on the subject of IWD2, will PoE have the same type of difficulty slider where when, for an example, we turn the "heart of furry" mode on we get a boost on all non standard items (and new names for items)? That was an incredibly cool feature in IWD2.

They where trying to branch out, but they weren't brave enough to abandon Dante entirely, so they got pulled in two directions.

Tbh, I don't remember if I used a mouse (or if you could use a mouse at all), but I remember giving up on the bat lady with the guitar, until I went out and bought a cheapo gamepad. DMC3 is still very playable even today, in my opinion it had the best combat gameplay out of all the dmc games and it's something I can always come back to.

Especially if the came from IE games.

Try playing DMC3 with m&kb it's like someone is pegging you with a pineapple. Not that I....ugh...know anything about that, mind you.

Yeah, see what happened to DA2 concerning limited loot and gold. Doing that would be an epic mistake on Obsidians part. Loot and gold should be plentiful, what should change though, is that more of the items should be viable and not only the 10% of the top tier items. BG and IWD series were spot on, on how and where you acquired loot and gold, what was lacking, as I said, was item viability. There should still be tiers of items, that when you progress through the game get better and better, but what should not happen is that when you get to end tier weapons or armors you regret not putting skill points in to great sword expertise, because the best item in a game is a great sword. And it would not be bad if there were 2 best (top tier) items for each type of weapon, each having a different trade off. I think it would be a very bad move scaling down on items and gold and in my opinion that was one of the best parts of IE games.

Does this whole thread have sexual undertones, or is it just me?

What you say may apply to the initial funding, but it doesn't explain this madness. In my opinion this snowball started rolling downhill and the bigger it got the more snow it started to pick up, or in other words the bigger the budget became the more people wanted in on it. If I didn't know any better I would call this a pyramid scheme. The sad thing is that it may still prove to be one as I am not sure that this studio can even make a game that would justify this kind of a budget. I guess time will tell, but if this game fails I think that it will lead to the death of kickstarter for gaming no matter how many other game prove successful.

All the games to come in the next year or two. (there are a lot of them!) http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/01/04/the-best-pc-games-of-2014/ Edit:For Pillars of Eternity - "Obsidian recently held a vote to determine whether combat would be turn-based or real-time-with-pause; it was a close contest, but turn-based won out in the end." So yeah, at least they got the names of the games right, that is what counts. XD

Be it story or gameplay, this is kind of their make or brake moment, if they don't pull out all the stops on this one there won't be a sequel. This game is not an instant classic as everyone here seems to think, it has yet to prove it self. So go all out on this game, don't hold anything back and even if it doesn't do well then at least you can say that you gave it your all.

You would think that doesn't happen in real life, but you would be wrong. All I will say is that women are willing masochist in the name of fashion or looking pretty.

http://www.sorcerers.net/Games/IWD2/Walkthrough/chapter5/area3.php

It is not cheating if the game is broken and you use a console command to advance further, as for DA2 that is the way they wanted the combat to be, nothing there requires cheating(some people even liked the combat if it's to be believed).

No game requires cheating... That is just plain stupid.

How far did you make it?

Just download it and try it.

So most of the US?

Ugh I can't for the life of me remember the demons and I finished my last playthrough a couple of months ago. Though this time around I went trough watchers keep like a breeze, I think I was too high a level for it to be much of a challenge. I did have a paladin with crom faeyr, so maybe that's it.