More like BG2 please

[Mayama]

They said "spiritual successor" not "copy with better graphics". Looks like some people dont exactly know what a spiritual succcessor is.

[Namutree]

 

Why is it so hard for you to understand that not everyone wants to play a Wizard? Why should Wizards be the only fun characters (sorry, I don't consider a character who spends his whole time auto-attacking to be fun)?

 

You get to create a main PC in these games, they are the only character you get to directly create at the start of the game and they will be with you for the entire play through. They will be the ones you control in dialogue. I would like my main character to be interesting and fun to play in combat, regardless of if he's a fighter, a rogue, a wizard, or a anything else. I also find trash fights that are trivial a waste of time, this game has a strategy game combat system, it should require at least a modicum of strategy to win any fight.

 

Because your idea of fun is for the classes to have the same play style. Sure the wizard and fighter have different tactics, but they now both focus on tactics in battle; while in the IE games fighters were more about strategy in setting up their gear. Not to mention the fact that the old fighters made exploration simple by allowing you to dispatch trash mobs without much effort or mental energy. 

 

This is just another major departure from the IE games. One that some may consider better, and others consider worse. Whether or not it's better isn't important; it isn't something that can be co-exist with the feel of an IE game.

[GreyFox]

Oddly, the more I play this beta the more I'm noticing that my Wizard is my lowest maintenance character. After discovering that his offensive spells are pitifully inconsequential, I have equipped him with a rifle and just made him shoot things from a distance. He's far more effective that way. He's a heavier hitter than my rogue.

 

Wow that is pretty disheartening I hated what 4E did with wizards and I hope this isn't what PE did to them...

 

You are saying his spells are too weak to be worth using or the selection he comes with stinks?

 

Call me crazy but a wizard + rifle shouldn't be doing more than his spells lol...

[Mayama]

 

Oddly, the more I play this beta the more I'm noticing that my Wizard is my lowest maintenance character. After discovering that his offensive spells are pitifully inconsequential, I have equipped him with a rifle and just made him shoot things from a distance. He's far more effective that way. He's a heavier hitter than my rogue.

 

Wow that is pretty disheartening I hated what 4E did with wizards and I hope this isn't what PE did to them...

 

You are saying his spells are too weak to be worth using or the selection he comes with stinks?

 

Call me crazy but a wizard + rifle shouldn't be doing more than his spells lol...

 

Depends on which spells you use, the AoE spells actually hit rather hard but are not that easy to use. You need good tactical placement of your party to not roast your team with fireballs.

[Malekith]

 

No but i sure as hell excpect more passive abilities so i  have the choice to make a comletely passive fighter if i want, that plays just like the IE ones. Something that Sawyer said it will be in, so i'll hold him on that.

BB Fighter is already pretty passive.

 

Seriously, not kidding.  He has 1 per rest ability and 1 ability he can do twice an encounter.  The other two are just modals you either turn on or off.  He and BB Rogue are by far my lowest maintenance characters.

 

Cool, i didn't knew that as i haven't played the beta.

So, if there is the choice to have your characterm be more or less IE levels passive, why the complaining? Combat being chaotic seems mainly due to bugs and not a systemic flaw.

[Answermancer]

 

 

Why is it so hard for you to understand that not everyone wants to play a Wizard? Why should Wizards be the only fun characters (sorry, I don't consider a character who spends his whole time auto-attacking to be fun)?

 

You get to create a main PC in these games, they are the only character you get to directly create at the start of the game and they will be with you for the entire play through. They will be the ones you control in dialogue. I would like my main character to be interesting and fun to play in combat, regardless of if he's a fighter, a rogue, a wizard, or a anything else. I also find trash fights that are trivial a waste of time, this game has a strategy game combat system, it should require at least a modicum of strategy to win any fight.

 

Because your idea of fun is for the classes to have the same play style. Sure the wizard and fighter have different tactics, but they now both focus on tactics in battle; while in the IE games fighters were more about strategy in setting up their gear. Not to mention the fact that the old fighters made exploration simple by allowing you to dispatch trash mobs without much effort or mental energy. 

 

This is just another major departure from the IE games. One that some may consider better, and others consider worse. Whether or not it's better isn't important; it isn't something that can be co-exist with the feel of an IE game.

 

 

My idea is of fun is for every class to have active things they can do, which I do not consider in anyway "the same playstyle," and for there to not be encounters you just walk over without any thought. I want a Rogue to have active abilities that make it more rogueish, but I still want it to focus on sneak attacks and hit and run maneuvers, I don't see how that's the same playstyle as a fighter or wizard.

 

I get that you don't like that, and that's fine, but your claim that it can't coexist with the feel of an IE game is not only false it's arrogant as **** since you are assuming that your personal idea of the "feel" of an IE game is the only valid one.

 

None of the things you mention make the game feel more or less like an IE game to me, because it's not what I liked about them. I never once while playing an IE game thought "Gee it sure is nice that I only have to micromanage one character" or "Man I'm glad I could just stomp those guys without any thought, so relaxing".

 

Clearly plenty of people feel the same way I do, so stop acting like you're some great moral authority on "how an IE game should feel" because it's completely subjective.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Answermancer

[Namutree]

 

Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment.

Doesn't sound to me like they're failing to live up to any promises. They promised to deliver on what made those games fun, not on exact copies of them or their mechanics. If they had promised to make Baldur's Gate 3 I never would have pledged.

 

Seems to me they are. Let's start with the epic exploration of Balders Gate:

 

The trash mobs amplified strength, combined with the health/stamina divide,  combined with the lack of combat xp completely eliminates any sense of exploration resembling Balders Gate.

 

As for the fun combat of Ice wind dale:

 

The combat/dungeon crawling is VERY different than Ice wind dale; not only mechanically, but even in feel. The tanks and melee fighters feel nothing like their old selves since they require active micromanagement. Combat itself definitely has a different pace than Ice wind dale; though this might be rectified after bug fixes and balancing. This is after all; this is just the beta so we don't know how combat will be, but so far it seems very different.

 

As for the writing of planescape torment:

 

They might get that right. I have no reason to believe they won't.

 

So overall, it looks like they will fail 2/3 of the promises they made in the pitch. It is almost certain, really. I really hope they nail the narrative; as that seems to be the only promise they intend to keep.

[Grand_Commander13]

... You know that Bioware, the people who made Baldur's Gate, called Dragon Age: Origins a spiritual successor, right? They changed the mechanics up, down, left, and right, and they were pretty upfront about it. Cry foul all you want, but they never said they would implement IWD's exact combat system any more than they promised a tearful mid-game reunion with "Blimoen" and an insightful examination of what can change the nature of a man.

[Sir Newbie]

Hello to all the members, i'm new to this forum, not a backer but anticipating this game since a long time.

 

This kind of thread worry me and you don't seem the only one to want another upgraded copy of Baldur's Gate. It pains me to see so many players being frisky or having cold feet with the novelties of Pillars of Eternity now that the beta is out. I hope the majority doesn't want that. I really like to see a system where all kind of builds are viable, a system that is intuitive without being simplistic, without requiring an encyclopedic knowledge of the rules.

 

I appreciate the changes in the skills and attributes systems (i didn't play the beta but i did watch a lot of game-play video). The fighters are now active and can really hold a line of defense. i see myself again and again in Baldur's gate 1 having to move my wizard, to make him run like in a Benny Hill's clip video because a freaking trash moob (it's too embarrassing to say which exactly) success to bypass a ranger, a cleric/warrior (my pc), a druid/warrior, a warrior !! (You can easily guess the name of the 6th character). Thanks obsidian for that engaging melee mechanic (not sure of the name)! The stamina/health mechanic and the per encounter/abilities need perhaps some balancing but the objective of these rules (not having to rest after each fights and make each rest a strategic decision) is a great improvement and make exploration more challenging. The godlike are a fresh touch (maybe more choices for the faces) and daring too, it brings character to this game.

 

 

My two cents is that I think that obsidian has done a great job of capturing the spirit of BG2, and it does fill me with nostalgia and tender emotions to play this game, and I'm excited to see what kind of stories I can get out of the main campaign. No, this game is not BG2. It does look amazing, it feels right, and it's also making changes that define it as it's own game that can stand on its own merits. Personally, I don't want to just play an upgraded copy of BG2. I want a game like BG2 with updated gaming sensibilities and better balance. 

 

I couldn't agree more. The spirit of the old games are here, a new system always requires some testing and some boldness (bad engrish i know) let's not shy away from the novelties. I want the developers to persevere in that direction, an original set of rules that will bring a new breeze to this type of game (tactical view, an all team to manage, an immersive story you know the pitch). Mr. Sawyer says at day 2 of Gamescon they (the developers and him) don't want that type of CRPG to die out and hope that PoE will mark the rebirth of that genre by appealing to a new generation of players. I almost cry when i heard him say that (i am joking). For me and that's my very humble opinion the only game that come close to Baldur was Planescape (even if the fights were easy even for a new player like me). Arcanum and the Fallout series were obviously great but you couldn't manage all the aspects of your team. Icewind dale serie and Temple of Elemental evil were great games too from the other's perspective but don't have an immersive stories and i cannot bring myself to like this set of rules.

 

I want that genre to reborn : a full team to manage, interactive and immersive story, 3D isometric, tactical combats, puzzles to solve. I don't think it will be possible if every time something new is inserted in the story, the settings, the game-play we start complaining and asking to go back in the past. The beta needs some balances but it is in the right direction

 

This type of game is old (at least for a video-game) and if a new lifting can be done without betraying the spirit of the IE games let's welcome it !

[Namutree]

 

 

My idea is of fun is for every class to have active things they can do, which I do not consider in anyway "the same playstyle," and for there to not be encounters you just walk over without any thought. 

Whether or not you want trash mobs to be more of a hassle to deal with does not change the fact that they were quick and simple in the IE games, and changing it will objectively change the game pace.

 

 

 

 

 I want a Rogue to have active abilities that make it more rogueish, but I still want it to focus on sneak attacks and hit and run maneuvers, I don't see how that's the same playstyle as a fighter or wizard.

 

Because all of these classes will require a great deal of attention to use effectively. Which makes them play the same. One of the best things about the fighter was how he made trash mobs a breeze. Just send them in to attack and you were done. Nice and simple. The mage however; had a much more tactical feel to him. Thus the classes played very differently.

 

Poe has objectively changed this. Poe was not pitched on change; it was pitched on familiarity. This is a MAJOR change, and only one of many.

 

 

I get that you don't like that, and that's fine, but your claim that it can't coexist with the feel of an IE game is not only false it's arrogant as **** since you are assuming that your personal idea of the "feel" of an IE game is the only valid one.

 

There is nothing arrogant about pointing out that different mechanics mean a different experience. Change the mechanics a lot and you will get a very different experience. Not that mechanics are the only thing changed.

 

 

None of the things you mention make the game feel more or less like an IE game to me, because it's not what I liked about them. I never once while playing an IE game thought "Gee it sure is nice that I only have to micromanage one character" or "Man I'm glad I could just stomp those guys without any thought, so relaxing".

It doesn't matter that you seem to filter out experiences you don't like. They were there, and thus a part of the experience. We were promised a return to that experience; it looks like we were deceived. 

[Namutree]

... You know that Bioware, the people who made Baldur's Gate, called Dragon Age: Origins a spiritual successor, right? They changed the mechanics up, down, left, and right, and they were pretty upfront about it. Cry foul all you want, but they never said they would implement IWD's exact combat system any more than they promised a tearful mid-game reunion with "Blimoen" and an insightful examination of what can change the nature of a man.

They didn't ask people to give them money to develop it. Not to mention as far as I know they didn't invoke anything about BG specifically. Obsidian did. They said they would take in the exploration of BG. So far it looks like they didn't. They said they would add the combat of Ice wind dale. They didn't. 

 

Not that I think Bioware was even being honest about DA:O being a successor to BG as it is almost nothing like it.

[Shevek]

I think its silly to assume that a game made in 2014 with its own custom made rpg rule set (tailored made to work for a pc game) should have to be a carbon copy of a series of games made 15 years ago using a pen and paper ruleset adapted for computer play. 

 

They promised to give us, as Sawyer has said, "the feels." They delivered. Those asking for a carbon copy do not speak for the vast majority of backers who knew full well what the devs were promising. Hell, most of the departures from the standard IE design were outlined DURING THE KICKSTARTER CAMPAIGN. I mean, come on.

 

EDIT:

 

I want to echo the words of the folks at RockPaperShotgun:

 

Nostalgia may be the initial draw, for some of the audience at least, but Pillars doesn’t map directly onto any of the Infinity engine games. The layers of interaction and intricacy of class roles are evidence of a developer comfortable with the familiar, and able and willing to flex the creative muscles where appropriate. It may be partly an exercise in nostalgia and looking backwards but, along with Original Sin and a few other potential bright spots, Pillars is making me super excited about the future of CRPGs for the first time in years.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Shevek

[Stun]

 

Oddly, the more I play this beta the more I'm noticing that my Wizard is my lowest maintenance character. After discovering that his offensive spells are pitifully inconsequential, I have equipped him with a rifle and just made him shoot things from a distance. He's far more effective that way. He's a heavier hitter than my rogue.

 

Wow that is pretty disheartening I hated what 4E did with wizards and I hope this isn't what PE did to them...

 

You are saying his spells are too weak to be worth using or the selection he comes with stinks?

 

Call me crazy but a wizard + rifle shouldn't be doing more than his spells lol...

 

I'm finding them very hit and miss. A wizard's defensive spells are amazing at keeping a wizard alive when he's in a dangerous situation. So they can be described as both powerful and successful. But offensive spells? No. They're not that good at all. PoE's version of Magic missile and fireball do exactly the same damage as their BG2 versions. But in PoE, that just means they're pitifully weak, because POE's health system is so different. Everything in PoE's beta has triple digit health. even the little insects.

 

Ditto with mind effecting spell effects like Confusion, Daze and fear. They're weak. They last about 5-10 seconds. What's the point?

 

On the other hand, The firearms in this game are super powerful. Again, my mage is doing upwards of 60 points of damage per hit with his Rifle. That's quite a bit more than he can ever do with any of the missile spells. And there's no per day or even per encounter restrictions on Rifles.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[Namutree]

I think its silly to assume that a game made in 2014 with its own custom made rpg rule set (tailored made to work for a pc game) should have to be a carbon copy of a series of games made 15 years ago using a pen and paper ruleset adapted for computer play. 

 

I don't want the game to be a carbon copy; I just wanted it to have a similar game pace which is essential to game feel.

 

 

They promised to give us, as Sawyer has said, "the feels." They delivered.

Nonsense. Try exploring in poe for an hour without a quest. Then do so in BG with a mid-level party. I can assure you will spend at least twice the amount of time fighting in poe, and thus only half the time enjoying the scenery and atmosphere. Exploring in poe will feel more tense since trash mobs pose a serious threat; exploring in BG will feel relaxing since it is generally safer. After you are done exploring in poe you will have nothing to show for it. After exploring in BG you will have made progress towards a level up.

 

Don't even get me started on combat... This idea that poe feels like an IE game is a farce. The only way poe at all resembles an IE game is if you ignore both game pace and mechanics; which are at least 80% of the game.

[hairyscotsman2]

 

Oddly, the more I play this beta the more I'm noticing that my Wizard is my lowest maintenance character. After discovering that his offensive spells are pitifully inconsequential, I have equipped him with a rifle and just made him shoot things from a distance. He's far more effective that way. He's a heavier hitter than my rogue.

 

Wow that is pretty disheartening I hated what 4E did with wizards and I hope this isn't what PE did to them...

 

You are saying his spells are too weak to be worth using or the selection he comes with stinks?

 

Call me crazy but a wizard + rifle shouldn't be doing more than his spells lol...

 

Weapons, especially heavy vs light ranged need serious balancing. This has been brought up already.

They don't want a wizard with a rifle to be useless though...

 

Well compared to older D&D, I liked what they did to balance classes in 4e, even though the wizard, combat speed and ease of RP suffered. As I've said, for D20 PnP play, 13th age did it much better than 4E.

 

The BB Wizard's 3rd level spells in PoE Beta are mostly AoE. I've found his (chain) lightning spell to be effective.

I prefer the PoE 1st level missiles spell to the D&D one.

 

Interestingly, you can build a wizard with an up-close buff and debuff, stamina stealing build. Not had a chance to try it yet.

Edited August 21, 2014 by hairyscotsman2

[Shevek]

They provided us a town off the main quest. That means that we are not presented with either of the large cities where the majority of dialogue heavy stuff (factions, etc) is likely to take place. This beta town reminds me alot of Trademeet, Beregost or Nashkel with regards to the amount of fighting in the related areas.

 

I for one am glad that the combat feels different. Prebuffing, steamrolling through enemies and then rest spamming was not terribly satisfying in the IE games. The mage battles in the ie games were dumb (either it was spell protection/breach/spell sequencer "battles" or the web/stinking cloud/other aoe cheapness on everything else).

 

The combat in this game may not be perfect but it is leaps and bounds better than the snooze fest in the IE games.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Shevek

[Stun]

The combat in this game may not be perfect but it is leaps and bounds better than the snooze fest in the IE games.

I'm gonna have to disagree with this. I'm having serious trouble getting myself immersed in PoE's combat. I'm trying my hardest, but it's just not doing it for me. It's too fast, it's too chaotic, it's too action-y. It's too unrewarding (and no, not just talking about the lack of XP and any meaningful loot drops) The animations are mostly dull and overly repetitive. And again, it feels like they sucked all the magic out of magic.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[Namutree]

 

The combat in this game may not be perfect but it is leaps and bounds better than the snooze fest in the IE games.

Thus we reach the real issue. It's not that this game feels like an IE game; because it doesn't. It's that you just don't like what the IE games were. If something different is what you want; fine and dandy, everyone has different wants. We were not promised something radically different though. 

 

Obsidian seems to have deliberately tricked fans of the IE games in order to get donations they never would have gotten if they had been honest about they were making. Poe as it is does not deserve to be associated with the IE games. They tapped into an audience hungry for an IE game; only to give us something totally different.

 

It's not just that they change a few things; THEY CHANGED EVERYTHING! Nothing works like an IE game:

 

The combat is not like an IE game.

 

The classes are not like the IE games.

 

The exploration is not like any of the IE games.

 

The inventory is not like the IE games.

 

The xp system is not like the IE games.

 

I could go on, but that would make this post WAAAY too long.

[Tartantyco]

It's not that this game feels like an IE game; because it doesn't.

 

 

It's a good thing that we have you here to dictate what does and does not feel like an IE game.

[Shevek]

 

The combat in this game may not be perfect but it is leaps and bounds better than the snooze fest in the IE games.

I'm gonna have to disagree with this. I'm having serious trouble getting myself immersed in PoE's combat. I'm trying my hardest, but it's just not doing it for me. It's too fast, it's too chaotic, it's too action-y. It's too unrewarding (and no, not just talking about the lack of XP and any meaningful loot drops) The animations are mostly dull and overly repetitive. And again, it feels like they sucked all the magic out of magic.

 

 

1. The combat my be fast but you can pause it and slow it down. Also, I am sure that with enough player input they can come up with solutions to make targetting and combat feedback better.

 

2. IE animations were not terribly dynamic either. The characters random either stabbed, slashed or bashed depending a % anim chance in some 2da file (by weapon type). I agree this could be better in PoE but it seems a bit nitpicky to point that out as if its a dealbreaker. Hey I want sketched item images in item descriptions but that sorta thing is pretty minor.

 

3. If you think the magic is underwhelming, make a detailed feedback post and if enough people agree then they can rebalance it. Thats the kind of stuff betas are for.

[Stun]

Pausing doesn't solve the issue. It helps, but its not enough. the second you unpause the problem returns.

 

Edit: before this beta, I was pleased with the concept of the engagement/disengagement mechanic as it was being described to us. But now that I've seen it in action I don't like it. It adds some tactical elements to combat, absolutely, but it also removes just as many. And it seems to be one-sided....totally stacked against the player. I've been playing the demo since monday, and not ONCE have I seen an enemy attempt a disengage. Apparently, Obsidian decided to utterly perfect enemy AI to ensure that we can never enjoy those disengagement damage bonuses. Enemies strictly run right to their target and then stay put...at all costs.

 

Lastly, right now I'm not even noticing any functional difference between heavy armor and light armor on my toons. I got hit with the disappearing gear bug on my fighter. He was wearing a brigadine chest piece (heavy armor). And it disappeared. So I equipped him with the only spare I had: Leather. He's not being damaged in combat any more than he was before, and right now I really can't tell if his attack speed has increased. I would prefer that armor in this game have a real function...instead of just being cosmetic.

Edited August 21, 2014 by Stun

[Namutree]

 

It's not that this game feels like an IE game; because it doesn't.

 

 

It's a good thing that we have you here to dictate what does and does not feel like an IE game.

 

Happy to help. As I have pointed out; the game mechanics are objectively different in virtually every regard. Unless people think that mechanics (Which are the majority of the game) are not a part of the IE feel; than I am simply right. If mechanics aren't important than I could say that HALO "feels" like an IE game.

[Shevek]

 

 

The combat in this game may not be perfect but it is leaps and bounds better than the snooze fest in the IE games.

Thus we reach the real issue. It's not that this game feels like an IE game; because it doesn't. It's that you just don't like what the IE games were. If something different is what you want; fine and dandy, everyone has different wants. We were not promised something radically different though. 

 

Obsidian seems to have deliberately tricked fans of the IE games in order to get donations they never would have gotten if they had been honest about they were making. Poe as it is does not deserve to be associated with the IE games. They tapped into an audience hungry for an IE game; only to give us something totally different.

 

It's not just that they change a few things; THEY CHANGED EVERYTHING! Nothing works like an IE game:

 

The combat is not like an IE game.

 

The classes are not like the IE games.

 

The exploration is not like any of the IE games.

 

The inventory is not like the IE games.

 

The xp system is not like the IE games.

 

I could go on, but that would make this post WAAAY too long.

 

 

I REALLY hate people putting words into my mouth. I think the combat FEELS very similar to the ie games. Its just that I dont have to wait till ToB to have my melee characters have active skills and I am not just micro managing my arcane characters. In other words its SIMILAR but not the SAME. Also, the differences feel BETTER to me. I am sorry if thats a bit too nuanced for some on this board but all this overly partisan ranting is just plain dumb. It seems like its all or nothing with some folks around here.

 

You claiming that OE is tricking IE fans is ludicrous. Absolutely, ludicrous. They said up front that they were making changes to the system and they OUTLINED MOST OF THEM DURING THE MONTH LONG KICKSTARTER AND IMMEDIATELY AFTERWARD. Why did you not cry foul then?

 

They promised an isometric, rtwp, crpg in the same STYLE as the IE games. They clearly stated that it would be THIER OWN IP, THEIR OWN RPG SYSTEM and it would have significant gameplay changes. All they promised is the feel of late 90s crpg gaming. THEY DELIVERED.

[OnAPaleHorse]

Wow. If I had been aware of Sawyer's dislike of BG2 before the Kickstarter I never would have pledged the amount I did.

 

^ This.

 

 

And also: just because you don't have an AD&D license doesn't mean you can't incorporate most if not all mechanics and the 'spirit' of tabletop, albeit secretly. Case in point: Arcanum. I felt like Arcanum captured the spirit of BG2 and AD&D rather well. Perhaps intangible?

[Grand_Commander13]

It would have to be intangible, because Arcanum was almost nothing like either.