archangel979

Didn't OE say there would be an option to turn off such bars completely?

I would add a Sensuki NPC that follows you around like Noober in Bg1 and pesters you about movement during combat :D

Yea. I don't want the game to be balanced around pulling single characters. Enemies should be smart about what they see and should react to anything within sight and ear shot. The game is not good enough in that atm. I watched a stream today where a guy was fighting one cultist in a dungeon where another 2 in room really close by with no door ignored it. And when is combat music going to be changed into something good?

And where is IWDEE? And Blackguards?

Actually I would like to play BG2 with such detailed maps. No point in giving cool stuff to a inferior game like PoE.

yes but I don't know if it can be used for amulets. Maybe someone else knows. Neck to me indicates any thing that can go around the neck specifically but I could be wrong. Neck slot allow both amulet and cloak to be placed in it. But still not both?

So, how is this in new build?

But neck slot is for cloaks?

So good it requires quoting I agree, spellcasting should be multitude of effects, not mostly damage or minor debuffs to stats. We want REAL fear, hold, slow, confusion and charm. We also want REAL petrification (to balance it make it slow target for X seconds and then target gets another save and if it fails it gets petrified, if it passes he is just slowed for the rest of the duration).

So still no amulet body slot? Are backer NPCs still with wall of text and nothing else?

Are backer NPCs still stupid?

I know the fight, the "thief" is hasted and does not land each attack, you might have got unlucky. But the mage casts Cloudkill which is instant death spell. But in PoE neither Haste of such power will exists and Cloudkill will not for sure. As I said, compare PoE fights to fighting Bears or Cave Bears in BG1 at lvl 4-5

Because one of the enemies used spells that instant killed you. It is a terrible example. Compare anything you run in PoE to fighting Bears because that is as interesting (or complex) as it seems to get. I would mention to compare it to some adventuring groups you can fight in BG1 but those uses Horror and Hold Person spells which don't exist in PoE in same dangerous version.

Yea, that sounds terrible. In IE games fighter would also go down to 4-5 bear attacks but bear would need many more tries to hit him 4-5 times so combat seemed to last a reasonable time

PST focus was totally different than other IE games. As a result it lacked in many other aspects (which were not really needed for its focus). And PST is the least inspiration for PoE. As for NWN, of course a later Bioware (and ex Black Isle) games are going to improve upon what they did with IE games. But in IE games charisma and reputation gave you more options. It still does not make PoE attribute system better. I was talking about combat use of attributes and OE goal which was to force players to not max same 3 attributes for each class. They failed at that but trying to do some made a less realistic attribute system that has bull**** like Might increasing spell damage and Perceptions increasing melee weapon accuracy. As for armor class in IE games, it is no more or less realistic than what PoE uses. It is just a game mechanic to represent Armor advantage in combat. D&D also has optional rules where armor works like in PoE (gives flat reduction of damage) and only Dexterity and class level gives evasion. And I don't understand what you mean by "same stat control damage evasion, damage negation and damage reduction". In IE games armor only gave damage negation. If you missed your target it received no damage. Well that can be called damage evasion as well, you need to explain the difference between these two terms. It for sure didn't also give damage reduction as well.

You will have incentive on 2nd or 3rd playthrough.

You're talking about a system where you could make characters with the mental capacity of animals (3 CHA/INT/WIS) and they would have the same dialogue as a character with 18 CHA/INT/WIS. And a system where your physical strength determines the accuracy of your attacks is far from realistic. And you are talking about putting a feature into a game that was already huge, a feature that outside of F1/F2 was not seen anywhere. You got no case here, only empty talk. As for Strenght, of course Strenght decides accuracy in a system where armor reduces hit chance. Strength of the wielder decides its speed and power. You need both to punch through armor. Still no case here, only empty talk. Return once you understand what you are talking about.

I just saw this topic for 1st time and I cannot stop laughing. So funny, Bioware and return to former glory. HAHA! They only got further away from it! In the past I bought their games, then I pirated their games, now I don't even bother pirating. That is their "glory"!

Gromnir: I agree with you on Arcanum, I also found it boring although I loved F1 and F2. I also agree that WL2 could have been done better and it is not a shiny example of good old gaming done right. D:OS is that more. But I still consider that olden games (from end of 90s) overall are better than what we get today. Their stories and gameplay options still beat what is done today.

20 Might, 18 perception a? So much for attributes all being needed for PoE. We just replaced maxing Str, Dex and Con for Might and Perception. But in IE games, attributes were more realistic and less gamist so now PoE system is crap when compared.

I get that. I was referring more to the effort quantity. Not so much in just raw effort. I realize hundreds of people work their arses off on every new version of Call of Duty, but someone decides "make it basically exactly like the last one, but with a more ridiculous single-player campaign that starts in space and has an action dog, and no one really likes it anymore" on the conceptual level. Instead of "Hey, let's try to make some improvements and put out something that's very similar, but has actual new stuff that isn't just new for the sake of being new." It's like they're robotizing the creative process. And you can't do that. You can't calculate creativity. And I realize they gather mountains and mountains of numbers, and crunch them all, but, I dare say they always make far more conclusive decisions than the data actually provides. That's why, after 5 iterations of some game, the 6th one finally ends up selling like half as well as the previous. And they're all scratching their heads, "Hmmmm, what went wrong?! We followed the ultimate formula precisely!". It's clearly not the ultimate formula, then. Then, you have indie games come through, from people who are just like "I thought this would be a really great game idea, and I objectively thought about it to make sure it was feasible and intelligently designed." They didn't collect a Hollywood's worth of consumer market research data to design that game. They just mixed their imaginative creative design with their objective technical smarts and make a cool game, and it sells like hotcakes on Steam. People who didn't even like that GENRE say "Hmmm, saw a friend playing it, and it's actually pretty awesome, so I picked it up." My point is just that businesses tend to run things like everything can be calculated with certainty. If they at least took into account that that information only tells you so much, and that there's a whole 'nother factor to human function when it comes to appreciating creatively-designed things, we'd all be better off. Only difference between Obsidian (PoE) and Rockstar (GTA 5) is that Rockstart can invest 100 mil $ and earn 1.5 billion $ while Obsidian can invest few million and will earn about 10 million back. Both games take a few years to make. Now, why would anyone able to invest 100 million $ ever want to make games Obsidian does?

Because their suits said that their programmers time costs money and their calculations show better return on that money if all programmers work on games that sell well to casuals.

Thank you for that detailed explanation...

I agree with you. If you're doing flat reduction (which is easy to understand and easy to tweak), you have to be really careful that the damage with all the extras applied doesn't make those DT values meaningless. If I can reliably crit every 3-4 attacks for 100 dmg against a DT of 15, damage types, armor types etc. are rendered meaningless. That could be solved by giving armors two DT values, one for normal attacks and one for critical attacks. It is reasonable that some armors are better vs attacks coming at critical parts than other armors (lighter armors that don't come with helmets or leg armor should be less resistant to critical hits).

Well to me this sounds more like giving us what we wanted - slower combat through receiving less damage per hit - but not calling it that. OE does not admit we were right and we get what we want. Win, win for all :D