archangel979

That is an exception, not the rule. Most of the time the score is based on average opinion of all the people that played it and cared to vote. And you can probably spot these exceptions easily by reading a few reviews or comparing it with critic score. And see, I consider D3 a really, really bad game even if I ignore that I could not play it for 2 weeks after release without network/lag problems although I wanted to play alone and I didn't want any MP. So how does someone appraise a game 10 years from now when you are going to say it is good and I call it trash? Through average score of all player's scores. IMDB works much better in this regard for movies as they have a much much bigger number of people giving scores so the exact score is more realistic.

You don't find out if it be good to you, but you if you do measure is somehow, this is the best way. And since Steam displays MC score on the store page of the game, it cannot be ignored by the devs.

When I talk about metascores I don't care for critic ones, only the user ones. And you can ignore your users opinions but that helps as much as ignoring that speeding truck that is about to hit you.

In this case, it means everything. BG games both had good sales and are high on metascore. So does Divinity: Original Sin. That is why we now have PoE as a spiritual successor, because BG (and other IE games) scored big on both (well PST only scored big on metascore :D).

When you take expected designs and change them a lot and do things your way, of course you are going to get flak. And the people have the right to give him flak just as he has the right to ignore it if he thinks he needs to. The sales and metascore (and history) will be the ultimate judge of his designs.

Ok, people mostly abandoned 3.5e for a reason and switched to 4e and Pathfinder. The problem of 3.x D&D was not that spellcasters could to crazy stuff but that they could with a few spells be better at melee that a fighter. Druid was the biggest offender in this. Still it worked well in singleplayer games like NWN because you actually needed to do all those clicks to cast those buffs. Most of the time I would not bother but kill stuff with true melee characters. There was also elegance in IE games where you would cast Haste with Mage, Bless with Cleric and clean up the map with few melee focused guys. Than if more was needed you would cast spells for that situation. It was fun and didn't need lots of clicking.

I don't know, but people here and there leave posts in different topics where they say IE games were good despite D&D flaws, but never go into much details. Other classes were boring because the game is faster that way and because they mimicked PnP where you played a fighter if you wanted a less complex play. I personally don't like that PoE has so many abilities to manage and RTwP system. It would be perfect for a Turn Based game. They need to take a page out of the D&D 5e book that lets previous "boring" classes get to choose sub-versions that have more active or more passive abilities. Than people that want to play PoE like IE games they will chose fighters with passive abilities and others will choose the active abilities.

Nope. And these polls don't mean anything either way. They only represent few hundred people out of the 1% of player base that post on forums. If they made a poll on KS and few thousand used it, than it would mean something.

It does not matter. D&D is about asynchronous balance of classes. At some levels some are better and at some other the other classes are better. Also different situations put forward one class over the other. Run into a Golem or high SR enemy and suddenly Fighter is at the front doing all the work. And in 5e they made the difference even smaller although it is still designed around asynchronous balance of classes. That balance also gave use the awesome IE games. Some people claim that IE games were great despite their flaws, and I am sure they were great because of their "flaws".

I don't have a clue what you are about. D&D is fine as it is witnessed by 5e having Vancian casting again, and witnessed by Pathfinder overtaking D&D 4e in sales after 4e took out Vancian casting. And witnessed by D&D 5e PHB being a best seller online. If you don't like D&D and how it plays, there are other systems out there that do it different.

At best you can claim MMOs took this from D&D, not the other way around. So in this case you cannot accuse PoE of trying to be a MMO, but trying to be a spiritual successor to a line of D&D games. And there are many more that want PoE to be more like IE games based on D&D system, not less. And let me add a bit more. The whole point of classes is to have predefined roles with little wiggle room within it. When you choose to play your character you choose a role by choosing a class to play. If you don't like fighter class, play something else. What you want is some kind of classless system, and neither IE games or PoE is or will be that. The big advantage IE games (and D&D) have over PoE is multiclassing. That lets you choose you role but also go beyond it. Unfortunately PoE will not have this but they think they can replace this with a more balanced basic attributes system which is a far cry from multiclassing.

D&D from the start had Martial classes with more Health and spellcasters and rogues with less.

Hmm yeah I kinda figured that the rest system would no change and to be honest it does'nt have to, atleast not much in my opinion. Still my opinion is that combined with how the health/stamina system works combined with having resting maxed at 3, 6, 9 depending on the difficulty (if the wiki is correct) at the highest difficulty it will be more of a point of frustration compared to a difficulty increase. So it's 1d100 + acc - def = miss,graze,hit or critical. Makes sense the thing I was more curious about was the dmg point why 21 - 12 = 7 when it should be 9 I mean it's almost a 25% decrease without it showing in the hit why it counts like that, been trying to find info on it but to no avail so far. Still thanks for the feedback on my post to everyone who responded Look at it like this: Hardest difficulty is not for average gamers and not for first play if your primary goal is just to have fun. The difficulty itself should frustrate you, the need to go back to get more supplies will be the lesser frustration. My guess it was implemented so in bigger dungeons you don't rest spam 9 times but can only do so 3 times. Since you don't want to go back all the time, it will force you to only rest when really needed. Also there might be dungeons where you cannot leave until you finish it, and having limited supply will contribute to game difficulty you chose.

No, no. 2 rings, a amulet and a cloak is too D&D like. We cannot have that here. Why? Because we don't want to seem like PoE is a spiritual successor to bunch of D&D games. D&D is so last decade, we must follow MMORPGs for this.. yea I lost it.. because of this AWESOME TRAILER

I realize the original thread is old, but this ties in with you and Sensuki's other thread about attributes where the discussion is also focused on adjustable AoE radii. I was thinking about this and instead of a zone of non-friendly fire, I kind of like the idea of adjusting to a larger size having a reduced effect in some other aspect. What struck me was perhaps as you adjust the AoE for something like a damage-dealer like Fireball, have the damage decrease with the increase radius and vice versa. Not sure how the numbers would work out there (I'm sure you can do the math though, Matt!), since damage is tied to Might, so adding a damage enhancer for INT as well may not be optimal. Letting you adjust AoE but give another penalty just makes raising Int for AoE bad like Josh said in other topic But I 99% sure that OE already decided on parts of AoE being FF safe as they were already in the middle of implementing this.

Well the maps are full of them at the moment. Any encounter directly unrelated to a quest is a trash encounter.

Yea, it will be called an expansion

I hope you read the Kickstarter pitch carefully, their influence for encounters and combat space was IWD not BG1/BG2. People keep on comparing PoE to BG1/BG2 combat-space-wise, when they really should take a good long look at IWD instead... IWD does not have overland trash encounters. Only BG games do. So they cannot use IWD as influence for all encounters.

You got Dragonfall Director's Cut in 24h and Wasteland 2 in 36h. You can wait for new PoE BB till next week.

If this was directed at me, I don't find it an issue. It will reduce min/maxing for the first playthrough and I am sure NPCs you pick up will not have 3 in any stats. And personally I prefer it "because IE games had it".

As soon as you dump one stat to 3 so you can put 18 in 2 other stats you are min/maxing even if there is a mechanical penalty for that 3. And if new players see that even 3 gives a bonus they will think it is OK. But changing 3 to penalty they will think it is bad and will think twice before min/maxing. I actually like being able to leave stats at 3 if I should so choose, though. It's ... I dunno, it's nice. I can't explain this. Hm. What about diminishing returns? Something like the largest bonuses between 3-10, slightly smaller bonuses from 11-15, and slightly smaller still from 16-18? That way, players could spread it out so extreme specialization was still tempting for particular builds, but not feel immediately as though that was always the way to go. Nobody said you will not be able to put stat at 3, just that new players unfamiliar with the system will mostly avoid putting any stat under 10 once they see it gives them a penalty as they don't know how much this penalty affects the gameplay.

- You are not alone in wanting more than 8 slots in inventory. Stash is limitless - Health/Stamina system is highly contested on the forums and there might be some changes so you don't need to rest as often but needing to rest and go back to get more camping supplies is part of the core design and will not change. - all attacks roll 1d100 + your Accuracy - enemy Defense score related to the type of attack. The result is compared to table. In short if you get less than 50 as total score that is either a miss or a graze. - someone else is better fit to answer your conversation question.

As soon as you dump one stat to 3 so you can put 18 in 2 other stats you are min/maxing even if there is a mechanical penalty for that 3. And if new players see that even 3 gives a bonus they will think it is OK. But changing 3 to penalty they will think it is bad and will think twice before min/maxing.

The biggest effect this change will have is that new players will not put stats below 10 as they don't understand the system and they will consider penalties, no matter how minor, something to avoid. If that is what OE wants from their players (less min maxing) this is a good change for them. For me it is a good change mostly because that is how it worked in IE games and I am used to it although I understand math behind does not change.

Haha, those are actually great names for attributes in some jRPG :D