Jump to content

Recommended Posts

You thought Siege of Dragonspear had good quests and PoE didn't? ^_^ Well, each to their own.

 

tenor.gif?itemid=4993854

Edited by TheisEjsing
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny. I played BG1 and BG2. But the game that really blew my mind was NWN. BG1 fell too short storywise and lacked content, a good series intro anyway. But for me was kinda worse or on par with PoE1.  Both games felt rushed in the final act.

About the leveling system. Well, i don't quite agree. I don't like when you get your most powerfull skills close to the endgame, and that is a really overused trope. The incredible power/weapon is only for the last dungeon.

But i do agree that BG2 was really, really packed with content. I took about 120 hours do everything it had to offer, while POE2 (without expansions) gave me about 70 hours, both not rushing content or anything.  But, if each DLC adds about 10 hours, and i hope it does, it will hit the 100 mark and that is on par with my average DA:O Playtime.
However, if you pick the core storyline (main game and all the companions and npc quests) and non-gimmick quests NWN, DA:O, POE2 and BG 2 have around the same playtime.

 

And companions, well, the companion quests from POE have about the same length of NWN/BG2/DA:O.
Sure DA series and ME the companions have more development because how they react to your choices, but POE2 also did this in a subtle and economic way. But that's not what we are talking about.

https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=809
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=2767
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=44045
https://howlongtobeat.com/game.php?id=6515

What changed was my age, my reading ability and problem solving skills. I used to be stuck on a quest for quite a lot. I was a 12 years old kid with limited english knowledge (not my native language).

About the spells argument. Well I'm happy playing with a barbarian that I actually can use something and not just fury and auto attacks. Fighter/Barbarian/Monk/Ranger/Rogue on D&D computer games sucked hard, the only thing you had to do was to use one or two active abilities and maybe a modal one.
Ok you had a large amount of spells, but at the endgame every spell under level 6 was useless, because the new ones does the same as the old, but better.  Level 1 armor give you +3 ac, Level 6 Spirit armor you have the ac of a full plate mail. Level 3 protection from fire/ice/acid/elec you have 50% damage reduction from a single element. Level 7 Protection from elements you have 75% from all ****.
So what's the point?  In POE2 every spell is usable due power level.

Content, for me POE series and BG are on par.
 For me  the POE world is more interesting than the Forgoten Realm setting.
The gameplay of POE2 is better as expected.
The player adventure on BG2 is better. The Bhaalspawn is a great concept for me, even more when you can turn urself in an avatar.  Also the lack of a classic vilain on PO2 gave me mixed feelings. Felt fresh, but also empty. Inarius is a better villain than Eothas (not quite a vilain anyway) or Thaos.
Loved the exploration on POE2, but imo the VTC and RDC could have their own cities and the world map could be bigger.
 

Edited by Siegdarth
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Ok you had a large amount of spells, but at the endgame every spell under level 6 was useless, because the new ones does the same as the old, but better.  Level 1 armor give you +3 ac, Level 6 Spirit armor you have the ac of a full plate mail. Level 3 protection from fire/ice/acid/elec you have 50% damage reduction from a single element. Level 7 Protection from elements you have 75% from all ****.

So what's the point?  In POE2 every spell is usable due power level.

 

Magic Missile, Mirror Image, Haste, Dispel Magic, Stoneskin, Greater Malison, Breach, Cloudkill, Animate Dead.. Sure, many spells were useless at higher levels, but definetly not all of them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Ok you had a large amount of spells, but at the endgame every spell under level 6 was useless, because the new ones does the same as the old, but better.  Level 1 armor give you +3 ac, Level 6 Spirit armor you have the ac of a full plate mail. Level 3 protection from fire/ice/acid/elec you have 50% damage reduction from a single element. Level 7 Protection from elements you have 75% from all ****.

So what's the point?  In POE2 every spell is usable due power level.

 

Magic Missile, Mirror Image, Haste, Dispel Magic, Stoneskin, Greater Malison, Breach, Cloudkill, Animate Dead.. Sure, many spells were useless at higher levels, but definetly not all of them.

 

 

Funnily enough, the best way to kill dragons was to hit them with Lower Resistance until their magic resistance was nullified then dump Magic Missiles into them.  You could alternatively murder their saves with Greater Malison and one-hit quit them with Finger of Death or similar spells.  The shadow dragon could be killed with Heal (reduced it to 1 HP.)

 

Besides, the point of the lower level spells was that they were still useful and it meant you weren't using your higher level spells.  I don't know if Siegdarth hasn't played games with Vancian magic before, or what.  Just because Melf's Acid Arrows isn't as flashy as Cloudkill doesn't mean it was useless - far from it.  Most such spells scaled with caster level, anyhow - Magic Missile added additional missiles, Flaming Arrow added additional arrows, and almost all spells gained damage based on caster level.  Maybe they just never bothered to read spell descriptions or something.  Deadfire's encounter-based system is pretty much identical to how D&D and Pathfinder magic is, except for it not being Vancian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Deadfire's encounter-based system is pretty much identical to how D&D and Pathfinder magic is, except for it not being Vancian.

 

Pathfinder's magic system is still closer to AD&D than to PoE's

Pretty much all spells are reseted after a rest, I can't recall anything right now that would be available again after every encounter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Ok you had a large amount of spells, but at the endgame every spell under level 6 was useless, because the new ones does the same as the old, but better.  Level 1 armor give you +3 ac, Level 6 Spirit armor you have the ac of a full plate mail. Level 3 protection from fire/ice/acid/elec you have 50% damage reduction from a single element. Level 7 Protection from elements you have 75% from all ****.

So what's the point?  In POE2 every spell is usable due power level.

 

Magic Missile, Mirror Image, Haste, Dispel Magic, Stoneskin, Greater Malison, Breach, Cloudkill, Animate Dead.. Sure, many spells were useless at higher levels, but definetly not all of them.

 

 

Funnily enough, the best way to kill dragons was to hit them with Lower Resistance until their magic resistance was nullified then dump Magic Missiles into them.  You could alternatively murder their saves with Greater Malison and one-hit quit them with Finger of Death or similar spells.  The shadow dragon could be killed with Heal (reduced it to 1 HP.)

 

Besides, the point of the lower level spells was that they were still useful and it meant you weren't using your higher level spells.  I don't know if Siegdarth hasn't played games with Vancian magic before, or what.  Just because Melf's Acid Arrows isn't as flashy as Cloudkill doesn't mean it was useless - far from it.  Most such spells scaled with caster level, anyhow - Magic Missile added additional missiles, Flaming Arrow added additional arrows, and almost all spells gained damage based on caster level.  Maybe they just never bothered to read spell descriptions or something.  Deadfire's encounter-based system is pretty much identical to how D&D and Pathfinder magic is, except for it not being Vancian.

 

Yep, on Pen and Paper there is no such thing as useless spell. However, on CRPG  most encounters are level based the lower level spells become somewhat useless, even with increased level cast. And yeah, the magic missile strategy on dragons is still something really stupid until this day. That was carried to NWN2, lowering their defense and empowering magic missiles.

Close to the endgame  most players' spellbooks had about the same spells on their slots.

 

And yes I do hate Vancian magic systems, everytime i played a caster class was a Sorcerer, less flexibility but I didn't had to preload **** and avoiding the GM to do something fishy.  (like stealing my spell book, or doing an orc invasion in a cemetery that killed the necromancer we are suposed to defeat and all my "**** the undead" spells are wasted.)

And no, the 3.0 and 3.5 editions the spells are daily based not encounter as we are taking BG2 as comparision and not the 4th and 5th edition. The POE1 rest based spell recharge is more close to BG2.

So, on CRPGs if you know the encounter previously ok, you can "min-max" your spell book to have max utility. That does not happen in a Pen and Paper game, you can't say "Ok group, lets ignore they are taking the girl away. Now that I know we are facing these enemies I will go back, prepare my spells again and take a nap. Let's do it tomorrow"  

Anyway, i know i kinda overdid with the "Everything below 6 is USELESS" but i'm ok with trading some of the 200 Arcane Spells, ( i think that was the number- around 160 - to 200, can't remember anymore, but it was a selling point of the game at the time) for close to 100, so other non casting classes can have a good amount of active skills.

 

 

 

 

Edited by Siegdarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the double post but I made a more quantitative analysis of the Spell amount of BG2 vs POE2, since I read a lot of "Too few spells".

BG2 had 2 casting classes - Priest and Wizard  (lets ignore the Sorcerer, Bard, Paladin, Ranger and Druid since they pick the spells from the Arcane or Divine Polls)

POE2 have Priest - Wizard - Cipher - Druid - Chanter. With their unique spells and even more modals thant the bard.  3 more pools than BG2

Talking about solid numbers, only considering spells.

BG2
195 Arcane spells
118 Divine

313 Spells (291 without expansions)

POE2
Arcane - 93
Druid - 53
Priest - 53
Cipher-  40
Chanter - 54

293 spells

So if we don't consider the BG2 expansions and the POE2 other active abilities from the other classes. POE2 still have 2 more spells than BG2. Now Bard (Chanter) and Druid can have their own dedicated spell polls. This is a way better solution imo.
Imo, if you consider the other classes abilities to be on par to spell as content, you can say POE2 have way more content than BG2 Classwise.

Edited by Siegdarth
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^But isnt the difference that there are no redundant spells in D&D while PoE has 2-3 versions of the same spell but stronger? Because PoE spells dont scale and D&D spells do scale? 


image,Gfted1,black,red.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't done the math, but I'd say BG2 had an awful lot more useful spells than PoE1. Again, no comments on Deadfire from me, as of yet.

 

PoE1's must-have spell was Gaze of the Adragan, everything else was essentially replaceable. Some early-level spells, such as Slicken and Halt, were astonishingly powerful right to the end, while there were many higher-level spells I never found any use for. For the record, I never once cast any buffs on Aloth (mirror image and stuff like that).

 

(I also never drank any potions, except for Power and the Visage one, can't remember what it was called, but the one that improves your Accurcacy. Never once did I drink any healing potions, ever.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^But isnt the difference that there are no redundant spells in D&D while PoE has 2-3 versions of the same spell but stronger? Because PoE spells dont scale and D&D spells do scale? 

Some D&D spells on CRPGS are improved spells with gradative bonuses or damage or are a combination of two diferent spells. But yeah on P&P there are almost no reduntat spells. This is because some effects in a game are mechanically impossible or unfun like feather fall , magic mouth , modify memory and many others.

 

As an example on BG2 : armor/ Spirit Armor/ Ghost Armor. Each one of them gives increasing AC and other effects.

 

Blindness/Glitter Dust /Power Word: Blind/ Prismatic Ray

 

on D&D 3.5 we have only a handfull of redundant spells, but is about the roleplay and no the system itself.

 

We have Massa sugestion/Charm/ Hypnotic Patern/ Dominate Person. Are kinda the same affects with diferents aplications, and the important part is the roleplay, not the system. 

 

On Pen and Paper D&D based RPGS the Spells on a low level Wizard should be balanced around damage,control and utility. When you level up past level 10, all the low levels spells are used as utility/situation. Because the encounter rolls and dungeons are designed around your party level. So, its more valuable a Comprehend Languages, Locate Object, Alter Self, Knock and many others on the low level slots than a Burning hands or Shocking Grasp.

Also, if you intend to Maximize, Empower or apply any feat on a Spell, it will cost a Spell Slot from higher Casting Level. This is ok for some spells to bypass defenses or prolong the duration for roleplaying reasons, but in general there are more powerfull spells that could ocupy that slot.

 

On POE 1 there are a good buch of redundant spells, but this has been mitigated on POE2, however we only have the same problem on Ilusion spells, this has been talked a lot lately.

But i don't think the same in the case of single target and mass target buff spells, since they have reaaaally unique cast times. Instant for single cast and 3 to 6 seconds to  mass cast. However Cipher also suffers from a bit of redundancy from charm spells.Also the Chanter invocations are "hibrid" spells, and i like this, with normal and improved versions of the same spell.

 

Unlike the P&P, CRPGS Game Designers have to create spells around Control (stun, blind, knock, slow, roots and etc) Damage and Support( Buffs , Healing and Protection) and a lot that make spellcasting so fun on PndP is lost.

 

If you look to the general CRPG spells and abilities i think POE2 has done a good job, not perfect, but still good.

 

Hope the 2.0 patch make it great.

Edited by Siegdarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PoE has very little summon spells which bother me, esp as a Druid.

Sadly, all the summons spells are from chanter.  If you really like summons you should play a Wilderhymer (Ranger + Chanter) Is fun, even if you make a melee character. Beckoner/troubador and Ghost Heart/Stalker are amazing combinations for players that love pets.

Edited by Siegdarth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading this thread I personally think alot of you guys are missing the point here.

 

There is a reason that Bg2 is a better game then Deadfire even though it uses technology that is nearly 20 years older.

 

That reason is the story in Bg2 is interesting, the plot is immersive, the narrative is great and the writing is well done. Being able to tap into Forgotten realms lore was also a huge boon. Deadfire absolutely cannot lay claim to being anywhere near as well written. Deadfires narrative is to girly and instead of concentrating on letting the player character build power and influence the world around him/ her it concentrates on a  bizare and boring quest line that seems nothing more then a distraction from the more fun things to do in the game like take on bounties or kill dragons and go treasure hunting.

 

To summarize BG2 had an awesome Dungeon Master and Deadfire has a Terrible Dungeon master

Edited by no1fanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That reason is the story in Bg2 is interesting, the plot is immersive, the narrative is great and the writing is well done. Being able to tap into Forgotten realms lore was also a huge boon. Deadfire absolutely cannot lay claim to being anywhere near as well written. Deadfires narrative is to girly and instead of concentrating on letting the player character build power and influence the world around him/ her it concentrates on a  bizare and boring quest line that seems nothing more then a distraction from the more fun things to do in the game like take on bounties or kill dragons and go treasure hunting.

 

To summarize BG2 had an awesome Dungeon Master and Deadfire has a Terrible Dungeon master

Something else really nice about BG2 is that the game takes you to a bunch of extraordinary locations - planar prison, Spellhold asylum, sahuagin city, the Underdark, the lower planes, Suldanessellar, and Hell. You also encounter equally bizarre and intriguing monsters as you progress. The contexts of your getting to all these places and why are well written too, so to me the whole ride feels quite smooth and I never have to feel like I'm forced to go somewhere remote without any good reason. Basically the game does a really good job of letting you explore many major locations within its scope, with a smooth flow throughout.

 

I'm trying to recall my playthrough with Deadfire and it seems most of the time it's kith, xaurip, spirit, walking dead, then back to kith. There's a bunch of vampires (ok, fampyrs) at two or three locations, I believe? Then there's the occasional animated armors. As for locales, mostly you just travel back and forth among a few islands. I might have missed a few things that are more interesting, though. Only played through it once. I don't deny that some places look very beautiful though.

Edited by try2handing
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That reason is the story in Bg2 is interesting, the plot is immersive, the narrative is great and the writing is well done. Being able to tap into Forgotten realms lore was also a huge boon. Deadfire absolutely cannot lay claim to being anywhere near as well written. Deadfires narrative is to girly and instead of concentrating on letting the player character build power and influence the world around him/ her it concentrates on a  bizare and boring quest line that seems nothing more then a distraction from the more fun things to do in the game like take on bounties or kill dragons and go treasure hunting.

 

To summarize BG2 had an awesome Dungeon Master and Deadfire has a Terrible Dungeon master

Something else really nice about BG2 is that the game takes you to a bunch of extraordinary locations - planar prison, Spellhold asylum, sahuagin city, the Underdark, the lower planes, Suldanessellar, and Hell. You also encounter equally bizarre and intriguing monsters as you progress. The contexts of your getting to all these places and why are well written too, so to me the whole ride feels quite smooth and I never have to feel like I'm forced to go somewhere remote without any good reason. Basically the game does a really good job of letting you explore many major locations within its scope, with a smooth flow throughout.

 

I'm trying to recall my playthrough with Deadfire and it seems most of the time it's kith, xaurip, spirit, walking dead, then back to kith. There's a bunch of vampires (ok, fampyrs) at two or three locations, I believe? Then there's the occasional animated armors. As for locales, mostly you just travel back and forth among a few islands. I might have missed a few things that are more interesting, though. Only played through it once. I don't deny that some places look very beautiful though.

 

Yeah this is what i meant when i mentioned tapping into Forgotten Realms lore. 

 

I definitely did not find any of Deadfires locations, monsters ect interesting similar to the way i experienced when i played BG2.  

 

What i did enjoy in Deadfire was the combat, bounties and treasure hunting and like i said the lore was just a boring distraction for me. For example in Deadfire when the narrator screens came up with the gods who started talking my thoughts where like " cant wait for this crap to finish so i can get back to playing the game"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Ok you had a large amount of spells, but at the endgame every spell under level 6 was useless, because the new ones does the same as the old, but better.  Level 1 armor give you +3 ac, Level 6 Spirit armor you have the ac of a full plate mail. Level 3 protection from fire/ice/acid/elec you have 50% damage reduction from a single element. Level 7 Protection from elements you have 75% from all ****.

So what's the point?  In POE2 every spell is usable due power level.

 

Magic Missile, Mirror Image, Haste, Dispel Magic, Stoneskin, Greater Malison, Breach, Cloudkill, Animate Dead.. Sure, many spells were useless at higher levels, but definetly not all of them.

 

 

Funnily enough, the best way to kill dragons was to hit them with Lower Resistance until their magic resistance was nullified then dump Magic Missiles into them.  You could alternatively murder their saves with Greater Malison and one-hit quit them with Finger of Death or similar spells.  The shadow dragon could be killed with Heal (reduced it to 1 HP.)

 

Besides, the point of the lower level spells was that they were still useful and it meant you weren't using your higher level spells.  I don't know if Siegdarth hasn't played games with Vancian magic before, or what.  Just because Melf's Acid Arrows isn't as flashy as Cloudkill doesn't mean it was useless - far from it.  Most such spells scaled with caster level, anyhow - Magic Missile added additional missiles, Flaming Arrow added additional arrows, and almost all spells gained damage based on caster level.  Maybe they just never bothered to read spell descriptions or something.  Deadfire's encounter-based system is pretty much identical to how D&D and Pathfinder magic is, except for it not being Vancian.

 

Yep, on Pen and Paper there is no such thing as useless spell. However, on CRPG  most encounters are level based the lower level spells become somewhat useless, even with increased level cast. And yeah, the magic missile strategy on dragons is still something really stupid until this day. That was carried to NWN2, lowering their defense and empowering magic missiles.

Close to the endgame  most players' spellbooks had about the same spells on their slots.

 

And yes I do hate Vancian magic systems, everytime i played a caster class was a Sorcerer, less flexibility but I didn't had to preload **** and avoiding the GM to do something fishy.  (like stealing my spell book, or doing an orc invasion in a cemetery that killed the necromancer we are suposed to defeat and all my "**** the undead" spells are wasted.)

And no, the 3.0 and 3.5 editions the spells are daily based not encounter as we are taking BG2 as comparision and not the 4th and 5th edition. The POE1 rest based spell recharge is more close to BG2.

So, on CRPGs if you know the encounter previously ok, you can "min-max" your spell book to have max utility. That does not happen in a Pen and Paper game, you can't say "Ok group, lets ignore they are taking the girl away. Now that I know we are facing these enemies I will go back, prepare my spells again and take a nap. Let's do it tomorrow"  

Anyway, i know i kinda overdid with the "Everything below 6 is USELESS" but i'm ok with trading some of the 200 Arcane Spells, ( i think that was the number- around 160 - to 200, can't remember anymore, but it was a selling point of the game at the time) for close to 100, so other non casting classes can have a good amount of active skills.

 

Sounds like you weren't spending gold on consumables and leaving spell slots open - you didn't learn how to play a Wizard instead of a Sorcerer, in other words.  Wizards trade on-the-spot flexibility for much more raw power.  You are expected to use consumables like scrolls, wands, staves, rods, etc to compensate for your lack of on-the-spot flexibility.  You should never be in a situation where all of your eggs are in one basket unless you arrived there through attrition (haven't had time to craft new scrolls or recharge wands, haven't had time to rest and reset spells, etc.)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That reason is the story in Bg2 is interesting, the plot is immersive, the narrative is great and the writing is well done. Being able to tap into Forgotten realms lore was also a huge boon. Deadfire absolutely cannot lay claim to being anywhere near as well written. Deadfires narrative is to girly and instead of concentrating on letting the player character build power and influence the world around him/ her it concentrates on a  bizare and boring quest line that seems nothing more then a distraction from the more fun things to do in the game like take on bounties or kill dragons and go treasure hunting.

 

It can and it is. Anyhow, wtf does it even mean for a narrative to be "girly"?

  • Like 3

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mediocre: BG2 party members were extremely forgettable --Kel-who? In all serious, aside from a few characters whose repulsive lameness/genericness have somehow seared themselves into my mind, I have actually already forgotten the names of most the companions in my party in less than a month. cue ad hominem attack: if you're nostalgic for BG2 party members it's because you have no style and need to leave the house more, look at more art and for god's sake read some literature. "well written"? hardly.

 

BUT since I am conducting work abroad and bored and I have played BG2:EE, part of IWD:EE, most of IWD2 and then neverwinter nights 2 and Mask of the Betrayer in quick succession, let me just say: storytelling in MotB hands-down slaughters all Infinity Engine storytelling as well as both Pillars games. The same is true of party member design and companion quests, which are both more serious and mature in their implications and more compelling in general than either classic or neo-classic rpgs. particularly Gann and Kaelyn are compelling and fun, but even Okku and Safiya just have more to depth to them than anybody in the classic games or the POE games. the real golden age of CRPG storytelling was not the nineties, it was the 2000s, excepting the vapid cliché that was Neverwinter Nights 2 vanilla, and even that had /some/ highlights (Sand).

 

 

 

This is reverse-nostalgia goggles. The BG2 party members are iconic for a reason. Minsc became a canon D&D character for a reason. I can promise you that absolutely nobody will remember Pallegina for example.

 

Saying MotB slaughters all IE games in the storytelling when PS:T exists is ridiculous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That reason is the story in Bg2 is interesting, the plot is immersive, the narrative is great and the writing is well done. Being able to tap into Forgotten realms lore was also a huge boon. Deadfire absolutely cannot lay claim to being anywhere near as well written. Deadfires narrative is to girly and instead of concentrating on letting the player character build power and influence the world around him/ her it concentrates on a  bizare and boring quest line that seems nothing more then a distraction from the more fun things to do in the game like take on bounties or kill dragons and go treasure hunting.

 

It can and it is. Anyhow, wtf does it even mean for a narrative to be "girly"?

 

Hey I love girls dont take it personally what I am getting at is this:

 

May i respectfully show the difference between the old starwars movies that where made in the 80's and the new starwars movies made now in the last few years:

 

So for example in the last starwars movie " The force awakens" Disney attempted to appeal to the masses by doing stuff like this:

 

- having a female jedi (Rey) instead of a male jedi like luke skywalker

- they had a very mixed race and mixed gender cast eg one white male cast member, one black female cast member , one asian female cast member, one latino  male cast member but never did they do a majority of each.

- they also wrote a script and story where they attempted to appeal to everyone not just one type of audience like they did in the first star wars movies years ago. For example there moments in the movie for children and there where parts that where extremely girly and some parts that where appealing to men.

 

After watching the movie i got the impression that Disney where not  actually trying to make a good movie. They where trying to make a politically correct revenue raising tool to appeal to the masses and the corporations that paid for advertising during starwars adds.

 

I get the same feeling with Deadfires writing and narrative. Its not as bad as The force awakens but you can tell they implemented the same kind off thinking here.

Edited by no1fanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- having a female jedi (Rey) instead of a male jedi like luke skywalker

 

How is this a problem?

 

 

- they had a very mixed race and mixed gender cast eg one white male cast member, one black female cast member , one asian female cast member, one latino  male cast member but never did they do a majority of each.

 

How the heck is this 'girly' or, again, a problem?

 

 

- they also wrote a script and story where they attempted to appeal to everyone not just one type of audience like they did in the first star wars movies years ago. For example there moments in the movie for children and there where parts that where extremely girly and some parts that where appealing to men.

 

 

How the hell do you assume the first saga did not go for mass appeal exactly? It's STAR WARS, ffs, not Marketa Lazarová.

 

 

After watching the movie i got the impression that Disney where not  actually trying to make a good movie. They where trying to make a politically correct revenue raising tool to appeal to the masses and the corporations that paid for advertising during starwars adds.

 

Where's that "acknowledges the user's agenda" icon again?

 

Lay off the Kool-Aid, kid.

  • Like 5

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made my point. Im not going to argue with someone who has clearly taken offence to another person being open and honest.

Have a good day.

Thankyou

Edited by no1fanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have made my point. Im not going to argue with some who is clearly taken offence to another person being open and honest.

 

Have a good day.

 

Thankyou

 

Made your point? Where? :huh:

  • Like 2

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I have made my point. Im not going to argue with some who is clearly taken offence to another person being open and honest.

 

Have a good day.

 

Thankyou

 

Made your point? Where? :huh:

 

 

I mean, he's right that Disney deliberately chose a cast that would appeal to the widest possible audience.  The fact that Force Awakens and Last Jedi have a cast that covers pretty much all of the major ethnic groups can't have been accidental - but whereas they seem to be implying this is bad, I think it's both good (because it means kids from all different ethnic and social backgrounds probably have at least one character in the show they can easily identify with) and it's smart from a financial perspective.  I have no idea how any of this is "girly," though or what that even means in context to what seems to be their only point.  Personally, I feel like the casting is the only thing that Disney got a slam dunk with in the new movies.

Edited by PizzaSHARK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have made my point. Im not going to argue with some who is clearly taken offence to another person being open and honest.

 

Have a good day.

 

Thankyou

 

Made your point? Where? :huh:

 

 

I mean, he's right that Disney deliberately chose a cast that would appeal to the widest possible audience.  The fact that Force Awakens and Last Jedi have a cast that covers pretty much all of the major ethnic groups can't have been accidental - but whereas they seem to be implying this is bad, I think it's both good (because it means kids from all different ethnic and social backgrounds probably have at least one character in the show they can easily identify with) and it's smart from a financial perspective.  I have no idea how any of this is "girly," though or what that even means in context to what seems to be their only point.  Personally, I feel like the casting is the only thing that Disney got a slam dunk with in the new movies.

 

Yeah they arguably got a slam dunk with appealing to the masses with the the gender and racial diversity. But by introducing these policies to appeal to the masses did they damage there brand?

 

For example the little asian girl Rose in the Force awakens certainly didnt look like someone in real life who would take on evil head to head or engage in a hardened battle to the death. She was introduced because she would help appeal to the wider masses. But I think the cost of introducing her was that it made the movie feel " Less Real" . 

Edited by no1fanboy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...