Jump to content

Welcome to Obsidian Forum Community
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

BG2 and POE2 (not what you think)


  • Please log in to reply
72 replies to this topic

#21
Bleak

Bleak

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 95 posts

I used to just prefer the DnD system as I said in another post, but replaying PoE II recently has made me replay Pathfinder again instead and also made me even more nostalgic for the DnD mechanics, especially when it comes to casters they are just terrible in the PoE system. Anyway though, comparing Deadfire with BG2 is ridiculous, there is too large of a time gap. Story/writing-wise is the only aspect they could compete and personally I'd prefer BG, but it's still not fair because BG has only a margin of the content Deadfire has and could focus on it better.


Edited by Bleak, 30 December 2018 - 12:14 PM.

  • daven likes this

#22
EdwinOdesseiron

EdwinOdesseiron

    (1) Prestidigitator

  • Members
  • 23 posts
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

A small thing that bugs me with PoE 2 is that the cities still don't feel alive somehow. The art is so much more beautiful and detailed than in BG but many corners there feel empty. What adds to it is the rather bland sound design. If you disable the music you can experience it better. Sometimes you might hear distant, very quiet chatter but nothing that would compare to the vivid & atmospheric sound of a big city like Athkatla with voices of arguing couples and drunken, burping men echoing in the alleys.

I also enjoyed the characters more in BG. They were exaggerated but more interesting, a recipe the Coen brothers use for their movies too. And I found the progress of power way more satisfying in BG. It was a good decision to keep BG1 low level and expand on it in BG2 instead going high level on both.
The story in BG was more involving because it was more personal and also had an inner conflict with your character. You could argue that stealing a part of your soul and destroying your house is very personal too but I just didn't feel it. The fortress is out of reach anyway and the soul thing wasn't really a problem. Deadfire is pretty straight forward without any twists.

It beats BG in UI & graphics obviously and the combat mechanics in my opinion.
 


Edited by EdwinOdesseiron, 01 January 2019 - 04:59 AM.

  • Blutwurstritter and daven like this

#23
Verde

Verde

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1574 posts
  • Steam:DragonSoundxSG

A thing that still bugs me with PoE is that the cities still don't feel alive somehow. The art is so much more beautiful and detailed than in BG but many corners there feel empty. Another thing that adds to this is the bland sound design. If you disable the music you can experience it better. Sometimes you might hear distant, very quiet chatter but nothing that would compare to the vivid & atmospheric sound of Athkatla with voices of arguing couples and drunken, burping men echoing in the alleys.

I also enjoyed the story and characters more in BG and I found the feel of progress of power way more satisfying. It was a good decision to keep BG1 low level and expand on BG2 instead going high level on both, and then resetting in the second game.

I always chuckle when a guard says "For the glory of Amn!" and does a silly spear shuffle. It's the little stuff.

Edited by Verde, 30 December 2018 - 01:39 PM.

  • xzar_monty, EdwinOdesseiron and daven like this

#24
Grimo88

Grimo88

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 154 posts
  • Pillars of Eternity Backer
  • Kickstarter Backer
  • Deadfire Backer
  • Fig Backer

By your own admission TC, BG2 does thing just as good or better than Deadfire and it's an 18 yr old game. I'd say that's impressive. I've replayed BG2 a few times in the last 5 years and I can say with confidence I think everything is better than Deadfire minus the non-magic aspects of combat, the graphics, and quality of life issues. Story, dialogue, characters,quests, conflicts...it all blows Deadfire out of the water (pun intended).

 

Don't get me wrong - BG1 and 2 will always be my favourite games. But POE1 and 2 have very much replaced them as my go-to CRPG itch to scratch. The combat in particular in BG2 I just found unbearable in my latest play through fresh off the wonderful Forgotten Sanctum.  


Edited by Grimo88, 31 December 2018 - 12:30 AM.

  • kanisatha and draego like this

#25
Verde

Verde

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1574 posts
  • Steam:DragonSoundxSG

By your own admission TC, BG2 does thing just as good or better than Deadfire and it's an 18 yr old game. I'd say that's impressive. I've replayed BG2 a few times in the last 5 years and I can say with confidence I think everything is better than Deadfire minus the non-magic aspects of combat, the graphics, and quality of life issues. Story, dialogue, characters,quests, conflicts...it all blows Deadfire out of the water (pun intended).


Don't get me wrong - BG1 and 2 will always be my favourite games. But POE1 and 2 have very much replaced them as my go-to CRPG itch to scratch. The combat in particular in BG2 I just found unbearable in my latest play through fresh off the wonderful Forgotten Sanctum.

I can understand that.

#26
Elric Galad

Elric Galad

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1569 posts
  • Location:Paris

The only thing that you sometimes regret from BG2 combat system was the depth of the spell system (especially for wizzards).

 

Unfortunately, it was this system which threw the balance out of the dungeon.



#27
Verde

Verde

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1574 posts
  • Steam:DragonSoundxSG

The only thing that you sometimes regret from BG2 combat system was the depth of the spell system (especially for wizzards).

Unfortunately, it was this system which threw the balance out of the dungeon.

But it is more fun then the tunnel vision we have in PoE. And like others said, its about fun.

One thing I've mulled over is just how combat centric Deadfire feels...like everything but the graphics took a backseat.

Edited by Verde, 31 December 2018 - 12:29 PM.


#28
gloomseeker

gloomseeker

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 166 posts

The only thing that you sometimes regret from BG2 combat system was the depth of the spell system (especially for wizzards).

 

Unfortunately, it was this system which threw the balance out of the dungeon.

 

To be fair there was never any semblance of balance in BG2 and some builds could break the game. 

 

Spellcasters were incredibly weak at lower levels and they only came into their own after gaining enough levels. Wild Mages are just great in BG2 TOB but I have to say you have to be patient playing a level 1 Wild Mage in BG EE. I always preferred Wild Mages to Sorcerers because they are more "fun" (in the sense of entertainment value provided you don't mind getting into trouble from time to time -especially at lower levels). 

 

I'm not getting into the balance debate but I don't believe the obsession for balance makes for fun games (especially when it comes to single player games). 


  • Blutwurstritter and daven like this

#29
daven

daven

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 677 posts
  • Location:Yorkshire

How would you compared Deadfire to something more contemporary such as... Dragonfall? That is one of the best of the ISO resurgence.



#30
Triple - A Foxy Lad

Triple - A Foxy Lad

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 306 posts

How would you compared Deadfire to something more contemporary such as... Dragonfall? That is one of the best of the ISO resurgence.


Dragonfall is wonderful and its exploration of community, 'family' and bereavement sets it above and apart from many other games, not just crpgs.

Learning about monkias past, bit by bit, and wondering if ull ever be more than a poor replacement was compelling. To borrow a term from china mieville, ur playing the 'unchosen' but sometimes the unchosen is beautiful and necessary in its own way.

When you consider how much in vogue open worlds are, dragonfalls a great argument for keeping things geographically tight. It makes a great contrast to almost everything else.

Dont think the games that replayable and system-wise there aint much to it, but eh that dont really matter for what the game does.

dont think id want pillars to emulate it too much - such focus doesnt lend itself to enough different experiences to meet the franchises spec - but i like to think anyone creating a smaller hub within a larger game could learn a hell of a lot from dragonfall.

I need to go back to that game at some point but it emotionally drains me. dietrich, eiger and glory really capture the 'distant-yet-closer-than-kin' relationship u have with old colleagues. Esp dietrich, hes great.

Man, now i just want glory to come home, live a normal life with people who care, poor girl. Maybe this is how parents feel when their kids leave or something.

#31
gloomseeker

gloomseeker

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 166 posts

Dragonfall has a rather classic structure with a central hub and missions. It doesn't try to reinvent the wheel but there is no reason for it to do that (the bad thing is that if you don't plan your runs you may end up missing out on content or vendors because you can't go back to these mission specific areas). 

 

Dragonfall did NPCs right (well except for Blitz but nobody likes Blitz) and more importantly they did have some good reason to stick together. 

 

In Deadfire you have your pal Eidér and even if some returning characters have some motivation for joining the Watcher due to their history together (or not) the rest of the band doesn't necessarily give you a real incentive to take them along (except for the strength in numbers argument). 

 

The real problem is that most companions in Deadfire are tied to factions but that doesn't mean you can't take offensive actions against these factions while these NPCs are tagging along. The relationship system is a bit off as well (crack some jokes and they will love you no matter what).

 

To me it's a bit of a deal breaker. If you want to make NPCs that feel like real people then they have to be believable and that means that they should be able to leave if you stray too far (I know of one character in Deadfire who will leave but all the others have very flexible morals). 



#32
xzar_monty

xzar_monty

    (6) Magician

  • Members
  • 686 posts

The real problem is that most companions in Deadfire are tied to factions but that doesn't mean you can't take offensive actions against these factions while these NPCs are tagging along. The relationship system is a bit off as well (crack some jokes and they will love you no matter what).

 

 

 

Yeah, I just noticed this. Serafen seems to have a lot to say in general, which is fine with me. Now, I'm not particularly fond of the Principi, and there was this one discussion where I ended up being quite clearly against them. And this time, much to my surprise, the ordinarily loquacious Serafen said nothing. I would have expected him to give me an ultimatum (given how unforgiving he can be in questions like slavery), or at least a veiled threat concerning his leaving, but he just ignored the whole thing.


  • gloomseeker likes this

#33
Elric Galad

Elric Galad

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1569 posts
  • Location:Paris

 

I'm not getting into the balance debate but I don't believe the obsession for balance makes for fun games (especially when it comes to single player games). 

 

 

I think this depends on personal opinion.

 

There is nothing I feel more epic than having a party with complementary talents.

Same for action movies (that's why I enjoyed so much Seven Samuraïs or Rogue One :-) ) 

 

If a couple of builds steal the spotlight from everyone else, I feel sad.

Also, in a tactical game, I like feeling a bit of challenge, while not being constrained to use a couple of semi-obscure builds (IWD2 was even worse in this aspect).

 

That's the reason why I was playing exclusively with companions in BG2. Their builds were not so OP and rather balanced between them, which adressed a bit the problem of OPness. (It's OK if MC is a bit above the pack.)

 

That's the reason why PoE series finally feel like "my favorite system".

I had tons of fun with BG2, but I cant' prevent myself from finding the system "old".

The whole game, of course, is as ageless as a high level druid.


Edited by Elric Galad, 01 January 2019 - 04:18 AM.

  • kanisatha likes this

#34
Triple - A Foxy Lad

Triple - A Foxy Lad

    (4) Theurgist

  • Members
  • 306 posts

To me it's a bit of a deal breaker. If you want to make NPCs that feel like real people then they have to be believable and that means that they should be able to leave if you stray too far (I know of one character in Deadfire who will leave but all the others have very flexible morals). 

 

all the faction npcs have triggers that make them leave, and tbf theyre all misfits one way or another, tekehu resents his obligations, serafen dislikes the principi leadership, palleginas loyal to the republics, but that loyalty only goes one way. maias become jaded. feel theyre all taking time out from their lives for whatever reason even if they plan on going back. like maia pursues a relationship with cloud-cuckoolander xoti of all people, if that aint indicative of wanting to escape *something*, i dunno what is.

 

i really dont feel their presence is that much of a stretch when there are plenty of people in FO, BG, Arcanum etc. that have no reason to be hanging with u other than they were standing on certain road when u passed.

 

also i dont think is helpful to consider npcs as real people, even if they can be catalysts for very real emotions. devs are constrained by resources. only so much time in day for narrative designers to compose different variations of each encounter. judging work by how well it reflects 'reality' without acknowledging limits and tendencies of medium just not productive imo. like u can go through every conversation in deadfire and say 'serafen should say this', 'serafen should say this' yadda yadda but suspect alex scokel needed to sleep and eat at some point - and liam o'brien costs money.

 

characters in other games may be written more thoroughly and to the same end - every conversation bespoke and complete - but expecting big open-world, branching crpg to reap benefits of linearity just recipe for disappointment. i feel is better to start from bare minimum of content required to satisfy form then consider why certain things were added - rather than start from simulacrum of real world and subtract.

 

as i mentioned earlier in thread, more writing means more holes to pick. back in day, peeps wouldnt have imagined computer game acting remotely lifelike. branching conversations were a rare treat ud excitedly count on ur fingers. u wouldnt think of comparing it to natural conversation, wouldve been like holding cave painting to standard of photograph. we now getting to the uncanny valley where were falling between abstraction and replication.


  • IndiraLightfoot likes this

#35
gloomseeker

gloomseeker

    (3) Conjurer

  • Members
  • 166 posts

 

 

I'm not getting into the balance debate but I don't believe the obsession for balance makes for fun games (especially when it comes to single player games). 

 

 

I think this depends on personal opinion.

 

There is nothing I feel more epic than having a party with complementary talents.

Same for action movies (that's why I enjoyed so much Seven Samuraïs or Rogue One :-) ) 

 

If a couple of builds steal the spotlight from everyone else, I feel sad.

Also, in a tactical game, I like feeling a bit of challenge, while not being constrained to use a couple of semi-obscure builds (IWD2 was even worse in this aspect).

 

That's the reason why I was playing exclusively with companions in BG2. Their builds were not so OP and rather balanced between them, which adressed a bit the problem of OPness. (It's OK if MC is a bit above the pack.)

 

That's the reason why PoE series finally feel like "my favorite system".

I had tons of fun with BG2, but I cant' prevent myself from finding the system "old".

The whole game, of course, is as ageless as a high level druid.

 

 

In all fairness in BG characters do have different roles. 

 

The big fighter type may make fun of the thief but if they're going in a dungeon it will be the thief's turn to shine simply because the entire party would die without him or her. 

 

That's why I like playing thieves in the BG series. A thief character is definitely not the strongest in a straight fight but there is the self reliance factor and it opens up possibilities to recruit NPCs without having to worry about having someone on trap finding and lockpicking duty. 

 

To me a balanced party is not exactly the same thing as having balanced classes. 

 

 

 

To me it's a bit of a deal breaker. If you want to make NPCs that feel like real people then they have to be believable and that means that they should be able to leave if you stray too far (I know of one character in Deadfire who will leave but all the others have very flexible morals). 

 

all the faction npcs have triggers that make them leave, and tbf theyre all misfits one way or another, tekehu resents his obligations, serafen dislikes the principi leadership, palleginas loyal to the republics, but that loyalty only goes one way. maias become jaded. feel theyre all taking time out from their lives for whatever reason even if they plan on going back. like maia pursues a relationship with cloud-cuckoolander xoti of all people, if that aint indicative of wanting to escape *something*, i dunno what is.

 

i really dont feel their presence is that much of a stretch when there are plenty of people in FO, BG, Arcanum etc. that have no reason to be hanging with u other than they were standing on certain road when u passed.

 

also i dont think is helpful to consider npcs as real people, even if they can be catalysts for very real emotions. devs are constrained by resources. only so much time in day for narrative designers to compose different variations of each encounter. judging work by how well it reflects 'reality' without acknowledging limits and tendencies of medium just not productive imo. like u can go through every conversation in deadfire and say 'serafen should say this', 'serafen should say this' yadda yadda but suspect alex scokel needed to sleep and eat at some point - and liam o'brien costs money.

 

characters in other games may be written more thoroughly and to the same end - every conversation bespoke and complete - but expecting big open-world, branching crpg to reap benefits of linearity just recipe for disappointment. i feel is better to start from bare minimum of content required to satisfy form then consider why certain things were added - rather than start from simulacrum of real world and subtract.

 

as i mentioned earlier in thread, more writing means more holes to pick. back in day, peeps wouldnt have imagined computer game acting remotely lifelike. branching conversations were a rare treat ud excitedly count on ur fingers. u wouldnt think of comparing it to natural conversation, wouldve been like holding cave painting to standard of photograph. we now getting to the uncanny valley where were falling between abstraction and replication.

 

 

I was specifically comparing Deadfire to Dragonfall on the subject of NPCs. 

 

You can't keep a straight face and say that the NPCs in Deadfire have such good reasons to tag along compared to the NPCs in Dragonfall. 


Edited by gloomseeker, 01 January 2019 - 07:30 AM.

  • daven likes this

#36
AFA

AFA

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 80 posts

Not really fair to compared Deadfire to Baldur's Gate 2, since things have moved forward so much as far as tech and storytelling. BG2 had brilliant sidequests and good banter, but the main quest was only held together by Irenicus. You still had pointless, pace-destroying bits like the Underdark and the shark city. You had cliched, one-dimension characters, etc. BG2 is kind of like Starship Troopers. It has been copied so many times that the original comes off as a cliched mess, when it was actually breaking ground in its day.

 

The whole "Baldur's Gate spiritual successor" trend is getting old. It has been going on since Dragon Age Origins. Strange that no one, not even Bioware, has really tried to recreate DAO. Hell, even they tried to shoehorn two Irenicus ripoffs into Inquisition.



#37
Verde

Verde

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1574 posts
  • Steam:DragonSoundxSG

Not really fair to compared Deadfire to Baldur's Gate 2, since things have moved forward so much as far as tech and storytelling. BG2 had brilliant sidequests and good banter, but the main quest was only held together by Irenicus. You still had pointless, pace-destroying bits like the Underdark and the shark city. You had cliched, one-dimension characters, etc. BG2 is kind of like Starship Troopers. It has been copied so many times that the original comes off as a cliched mess, when it was actually breaking ground in its day.

The whole "Baldur's Gate spiritual successor" trend is getting old. It has been going on since Dragon Age Origins. Strange that no one, not even Bioware, has really tried to recreate DAO. Hell, even they tried to shoehorn two Irenicus ripoffs into Inquisition.


Blasphemy! Underdark was one of the best parts!
  • Elric Galad and daven like this

#38
AFA

AFA

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 80 posts

 

Not really fair to compared Deadfire to Baldur's Gate 2, since things have moved forward so much as far as tech and storytelling. BG2 had brilliant sidequests and good banter, but the main quest was only held together by Irenicus. You still had pointless, pace-destroying bits like the Underdark and the shark city. You had cliched, one-dimension characters, etc. BG2 is kind of like Starship Troopers. It has been copied so many times that the original comes off as a cliched mess, when it was actually breaking ground in its day.

The whole "Baldur's Gate spiritual successor" trend is getting old. It has been going on since Dragon Age Origins. Strange that no one, not even Bioware, has really tried to recreate DAO. Hell, even they tried to shoehorn two Irenicus ripoffs into Inquisition.


Blasphemy! Underdark was one of the best parts!

 

 

The Underdark is what would happen if the worst parts of the Fade and the Deep Roads from DAO had a baby.



#39
Verde

Verde

    (10) Necromancer

  • Members
  • 1574 posts
  • Steam:DragonSoundxSG

Not really fair to compared Deadfire to Baldur's Gate 2, since things have moved forward so much as far as tech and storytelling. BG2 had brilliant sidequests and good banter, but the main quest was only held together by Irenicus. You still had pointless, pace-destroying bits like the Underdark and the shark city. You had cliched, one-dimension characters, etc. BG2 is kind of like Starship Troopers. It has been copied so many times that the original comes off as a cliched mess, when it was actually breaking ground in its day.

The whole "Baldur's Gate spiritual successor" trend is getting old. It has been going on since Dragon Age Origins. Strange that no one, not even Bioware, has really tried to recreate DAO. Hell, even they tried to shoehorn two Irenicus ripoffs into Inquisition.

Blasphemy! Underdark was one of the best parts!

The Underdark is what would happen if the worst parts of the Fade and the Deep Roads from DAO had a baby.

The Fade is one of the worst RPG levels of all time. There is no comparison.

#40
AFA

AFA

    (2) Evoker

  • Members
  • 80 posts

 

 

 

Not really fair to compared Deadfire to Baldur's Gate 2, since things have moved forward so much as far as tech and storytelling. BG2 had brilliant sidequests and good banter, but the main quest was only held together by Irenicus. You still had pointless, pace-destroying bits like the Underdark and the shark city. You had cliched, one-dimension characters, etc. BG2 is kind of like Starship Troopers. It has been copied so many times that the original comes off as a cliched mess, when it was actually breaking ground in its day.

The whole "Baldur's Gate spiritual successor" trend is getting old. It has been going on since Dragon Age Origins. Strange that no one, not even Bioware, has really tried to recreate DAO. Hell, even they tried to shoehorn two Irenicus ripoffs into Inquisition.

Blasphemy! Underdark was one of the best parts!

The Underdark is what would happen if the worst parts of the Fade and the Deep Roads from DAO had a baby.

The Fade is one of the worst RPG levels of all time. There is no comparison.

 

 

As far as bad sections in great games goes, the whole second chapter of Neverwinter Nights 2 is this. Seriously, the docks and the orcs are both giant slogs and a waste of time. The Fade is at least short.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users