Search the Community

So several months ago when I got PoE I got some great advice from players on making a character. I ended up giving up on the cipher simply due to the cheese factor of the class. It's not a bad class and I enjoy the "swordmage/arcane archer" archetype but it felt overpowered (I understand they've been nerfed now and have had their power level adjusted). After trying out the chanter and rogue I finally settled on the barbarian and had some fun. Made it the keep then got about 10 levels deep into the dungeon beneath the keep before I stopped playing and moved on to other games (re: my summer got busy). My biggest complain about PoE was how my party felt like it was slowing me down and combat became an endless slog of micromanagement. While it brings back fond memories of the old infinity engine games, I've become spoiled by the modern gaming advancements where I can set companion spells/powers and behavior and basically forget about them until boss battles came around. One of the purported changes in 2.0 is improved companion AI and I'm curious if it holds up. So does the new companion AI work? Or at least well enough for the casual player just playing on Normal? I'd like to play and not have to micromanage Aloth every 2 seconds because he either isn't fighting or being useful (or more importantly not dying every encounter because of the old trope that Wizards have to suck until endgame where they become overpowered). Tied into that question; I'm seeing a lot of complaints now on the interwebs about monsters ignoring engagement due to their improved AI. Is the companion AI smart enough to counter this? Or will I just end up micromanaging Eder (or any other tank) constantly?

This problem is not unique to Pillars of Eternity. However, it is still interesting from design perspective and overall enjoyment of the game. Casual players usually stick to the main quest, don't feel compelled to check every corner of the game, look behind every rock. They don't do every single side quest and therefore they have lower level and worse equipment. It's funny because they would prefer the game to be easier but their play style make it harder. Hardcore gamers on the other hand don't want to miss anything. They will walk into every house, look for every hidden stash and usually complete every single side quest before moving the story forward. This result in them having much better equipment and more experience than the former players. For the people looking for a challenge the game becomes less challenging. System of additional quests and rewards seems broken as it does exactly the opposite. People who should get more challenge get more smooth experience while people looking for an easy game get it on hard mode... It would be boring to remove side quests, having quests without rewards would also be rather bad. How to fix this?

Hi everyone, Contributor to Project Eternity looking forward to my shiny, sexy badge at whatever the $250 level is making my first post. I'm just starting to poke my head around here and get a feel for the Obsidian community, so my apologies if i talk about anything that's been already discussed to death. The theme of this post, as the title indicates, are which things you want to make sure that Project Eternity does NOT have in it. My list, off the top of my head, is as follows: 1. Multiplayer 2. Co-op 3. Motion Control support 4. Social gaming of any kind 5. Any sort of casual tie-in like a facebook or phone apps 6. An overabundance of bugs My reasons for this are as follows. With regards to Multiplayer and Co-op, I agree with that theoretically it is possible to have these things and not detract from the Single Player experience, but in general I view that as being similar to how Unicorns and Elves could potentially exist in the depths of rain forests that have not been fully explored. In other words, I acknowledge that it has not been entirely DISPROVEN to be possible, but that the odds tend to be low. With motion control support, I simialrly acknowledge that there might be some games significantly made better by having it. I'd be hard pressed to name these games at this time, but I do admit to the possibility. In particular, I think there's a good chance that, say, a Golf game or a Zelda game could be made better. With a traditional RPG, I'd prefer, at this time, to stick with what has been known to work. My reason for not wanting social gaming is pretty straightforward. I hope that Project Eternity has an immersive, compelling story with fascinating characters that I grow to love a great deal. Just like how trying to read a book socially or watch a movie with someone constantly talking would be detrimental to such things in my opinion, I see social gaming as something that HINDERS narrative, plot and character development rather than helps it. Casual tie-ins like facebook and phone apps strike me as money grabbing and general bloodsucking. See: Mass Effect 3. Don't do this pretty please Obsidian? On the subject of bugs...this is one that I have to be a bit delicate on I think. I like Obsdiian's games for the most part. I enjoy the writing. I think they do good characters. If I didn't like this company, I wouldn't have donated at the level that I did. But I DO view that donation as being inherently risky because of Obsidian's track record in this area. I have often seen publishers blamed for incomplete, unfinished and unpolished offerings from Obsidian and I am sure there is some truth to that. But...Obsidian seems to not be able to release a polished and finished product REGARDLESS of who the publisher is. Hopefully the Kickstarter model will fix this, but I would be remiss in not mentioning this issue with past titles. Anyway, what about others? Is my list comprehensive? Do you have your own suggested additions or subtractions off of it?