Namutree

His design isn't complete and is still changing. I agree that as it is it's not very good, but considering Josh is currently changing it I think it's safe to assume he's aware that there is a problem.

I personally liked BG1/BG2 all-round. I liked the combat, the story, the exploration, and the characters (With a few exceptions). EDIT: I almost forgot, the character creation. Plenty of races and classes to choose from.

The true fan argument is pointless. People liked the IE games for different reasons.

Because they could just have their supporters in Kuwait and other countries just fly over to the US. Plus ISIS even having a foothold in Mexico is nonsense. Mexico has almost no Muslims, so it's not a country where ISIS would even have members. Even if it did; they could just fly over to the US. Why cross the border? Seems like a high risk for more effort. Not to mention ISIS has already made a call to it's western supporters to fly over to the Middle East and join the fight; not sneak into the US where it already has supporters. It's already been established that ISIS's main plans to attack the west involve using western members who can fly back home after they win the ground battles. ISIS will be entering America by air; not ground, and certainly not from Mexico. It would be more likely that ISIS would enter the US from the Canadian border than the Mexican border, but you don't hear hunter talk about building a wall over there; do you? I wonder why that is? My guess, it doesn't fit into the policy he is trying to scare idiots into supporting.

That was back when people read the 1 inch thick player manual before playing a game. I never read the manual either. While BG2 wasn't my first RPG; it was my first crpg. In BG2 the attribute system and UI were both very user friendly. So far it looks like poe will be neither.

Anyone who would believe Hunter's claim which makes no sense, came from a rumor he misunderstood, and hasn't the slightest shred of evidence for is definitely a willing dupe.

The point is that they're concealing information American citizens have the right to know. If they're concealing this, you can't be confident in anything they say. They're not concealing anything. Excuses are being made. See when people screw up; they like to blame their failures on other things. They don't lie, they project blame. A bad FPS shooter often goes, "Why didn't you guys cover me!? If you were better teammates I'd have done better." No dishonesty is intended; it's just that there is projection going on. The fact that the fools are making excuses for their failures is far different than outright pretending events didn't happen. Funny that you would go so far as to outright ignore anything the department of homeland security says, but don't seem to have questioned Hunters credibility on this at all. A) Hunter has no evidence. B) Hunter's source says that Hunter misunderstood him. C) The claim that ISIS is crossing the border to get into the US makes no sense. If hunter went on tv and told you that ISIS is harnessing the power of Castle Grey Skull to summon Sauron to destroy the US; would you believe it?

I got my tooth pulled. It was a miserable experience. The chairs were so uncomfortable, and due to some one making a mistake I had to wait in the chair for over an hour. I have never felt such outrageously terrible chairs.

I just cannot agree with you on this. The sheer fact that I played BG2 for more then 10 years without noticing level scaling is a proof in my eyes that BG2 system was perfect. How does not noticing a feature make it perfect? Also, how the hell did play the game so much and not notice it? Level scaling diminishes the reward of leveling up. Even in BG2 it can get so bad that sometimes it can actually punish you for leveling up. Not to mention how it screws up the difficulty. The only reason the level scaling in BG2 was merely a minor problem was that it was kept extremely minor until you reached a high level. So, I'll reiterate. Level scaling if added sparsely doesn't matter except being a minor annoyance, and if added with a heavy hand it's game breaking. So, I would suggest OE avoid it. Also, if you never noticed it; why do you even care if it's in the game?

This is what I was asking about. Why is getting xp for every mob grind-xp exclusively? If I get xp for quests I might be inclined to go and look for every quest in an area just to get xp. Isn't that grinding? If I scour a dungeon looking for every trap to disarm isn't that grinding? EDIT: I too feel that since kill-xp is being replaced with something rather than simply being axed that the system is evolving; although there are no assurances it will evolve into something better.

Practical? No. Possible? Yes, but very crappy.

They're coming up with excuses for their stupid policy; not denying whole events. Big Difference.

Perhaps, but since PoE is following in the footsteps of the IE games, and the IE games didn't present combat as a"grindy" experience, it's kind of a moot point... Again, a moot point since IE games didn't have it to begin with. Well then you'd have to argue that a non-xp combat system is actually evolving. I have to wonder why combat is being singled out as being grind-xp?

You are kidding, right? Diablo is a single char game. And each char has more active skills than any one char in POE. I disagree.. sorry.. If PoE only allowed you to control one character then you may be on to something. The fact that you control an entire party with different skills and attributes that bring different functionality to a fight and that most difficult encounters will require strategy and patience to win.. Diablo 1 / 2 / 3 are all about quantity over quality of enemies.. The amount of abilities do not make it more difficult to play or add more depth to it. At least Diablo has a fair amount of strategy to it. Got to make sure you raise the right attributes & wear the right armor. I don't like anything past Diablo 1, but it's not as simplistic as some people suggest.

My reflexes are sharper than they've ever been, and I'm no teenager.

Hunter's source says guys caught at the border "might" be ISIS. Hunter goes on tv and tells people that they were ISIS members without a shred of evidence (Irresponsibly). The department of justice says this is all just a rumor. The only way his claim could be true is: A) Hunter's source is lying about what he told Hunter. B) The entire government is lying about this whole thing. C) Most unlikely of all; that ISIS is actually crossing the border in order to get into the US.

I'm pretty sure he only said he was considering it. That is the antitheses to the entire concept of leveling up. Not to mention extremely bland. If that's the plan it would be best to simply get rid of leveling altogether. BG2 had crap level scaling. If you were low level it didn't make a difference, and if you were high level it was a pain. It was some of the best level scaling I've ever seen, but that's because Bioware used it sparingly. There is a reason why the best implementation of level scaling is when it's hardly used, and why when it's implemented a lot it ruins the game. That reason is that level-scaling SUCKS!!!

I like exploring a general area of a map and not knowing what to expect. Will there be trash mobs? Will there be a special encounter? Will there be nothing? It creates a greater sense of wonder. Not to mention the it also makes it feel more authentic. Yes.

This is the primary reason, but the sheer magnitude and necessity of combat also suggest it is very combat focused. It's not that it exists; it's that combat is everywhere.

Then you have mistaken my sentiment. I have listed my reasons; none of them were "combat exists". If a game has: A) Many mandatory fights. B) A class system in which how they relate to combat being the primary distinguishing features. C) A development where a great deal more effort was put into combat than needed. D) Dungeons that are teeming with enemies. One of the game's selling points is a mega dungeon filled with enemies. E) The story not relating much to gameplay. Example- OE doesn't care about how the lore relates to the attribute system. Their primary concern is the combat. F) A lead developer who says that he doesn't want players to avoid combat and is altering the game to make combat more appealing. I think it's safe to say said game is combat focused.

They're putting way too much work into it for it not to be a combat focused game. If combat weren't the focus then combat wouldn't have been a big priority for Obsidian. They would have just built something that is simple and fast to save development time for more important things.

There is no level scaling in PoE. And that is not a good thing. Also, it is not level scaling. BG games added more enemies, not scaled all of them to your level. Also it wasn't adjusted for each player level but only at some thresholds. The system was so well done in BG that I didn't even know about the system until I read it on BGEE boards. No level scaling is always good. The biggest flaw of BG2 by far was the insufferable level scaling. God I wish I could find a mod to get rid of it. In some cases the game can actually get harder from leveling up! That's BS!!! Leveling up should always be a good thing with no downsides whatsoever. I've played a lot of RPG's, and I have yet to ever play one that was better thanks to level scaling.

Lots of people keep on saying it's a combat-centric game, that's not the impression I got from reading interviews with the devs (or the Kickstarter pitch). In fact, one interview especially mention that the Endless Paths of Od Nua was the section of the game for the combat lovers (PC Gamer UK November 2014, so it's recent). The kickstarter pitch suggests it'll have the dungeon crawling of IWD. If I recall correctly; IWD's dungeons were teeming with combat. Josh has already stated that there will be many mandatory fights. Not to mention all the classes seem to be geared towards combat. If the beta is anything to go by there will be trash encounters all over the place. Josh has also stated that he didn't want to encourage players to avoid combat why is why OE is tweaking the xp system since the quest xp only model has produced undesirable results. Combat is this game's focus. More so than BG; less so than IWD. EDIT: WAIT THERE'S MORE! Obsidian has put a lot of effort into into getting rid of cheese strategies and re-balancing the game system in order to make the combat more tactical. This would be a huge waste of resources if poe wasn't a combat focused game.

Having an emergency stash of food is always wise. I myself have good amount of food, water, and medical supplies stored in case it is ever needed.