IE Veteran's feedback

[Sleazebag]

I don't miss prebuffing at all, and I didn't find it tactical in the least. For most fights in BG it just involved casting the same list of spells over and over again at the start - how the hell is that tactical? It's merely repeating an incredibly boring action, far too many times. No wonder the games had mods that allowed you to autobuff.

[Lightzy]

Why does pre-buffing automatically translate for some of you to "500 mouse clicks, 5 buffs and 10 potions each character"? Are you dumb?

 

Can you not for the life of you think of a system which will naturally limit the buffs you could have, and make it so you don't have to click alot? Which would still allow you to decide to dedicate a spell slot to a buff instead of to another magic arrow? To buff and spread your party to a tactical formation instead of a "buff-clump" ?

 

Ever played Arcanum, for example, where you could just keep a buff "on" at the expense of your ability to cast during combat, because every active spell drained your constitution to a certain extent?

 

There are a million ways you can do this in PoE.

Have buffs which are perma-on, at the cost of casting speed for spells during combat. Just one example.

Be creative instead of arguing "yes" and "no", you lousy specimens

Edited March 31, 2015 by Lightzy

[kat7ra]

Being able to kill one of the biggest bosses with a lvl 1 spell, stealth and one shot the enemy caster before combat starts, and being able to prebuff before you've technically met your encounter.

these things are not part of a good tactical gameplay.

Don't get me wrong here, I loved BG 1 + 2 and I don't have any problems with the prebuffing and the stealthing around, but calling it out and saying it's better from a tactical point of view is like saying that force-talking to an enemy before combat so he'll stay "friendly" while you hit him is immersive and tactically deep.

you might not enjoy the new system here, and I agree it sometimes feels a bit weird, but don't give out random praise to old IE games on stuff that was not praise worthy, neither from a strategic or immersive point of view.

[DragonDai]

I feel all I can add to this conversation is that this game was sold, especially early, on the idea that it would be a decent spiritual successor to the IE games. And, on the surface, it is exactly that. Sadly, as soon as you slip below the surface, it's anything but. It's a standard, modern RPG with IE window dressing. That doesn't make it a bad game. It has plenty of redeeming qualities. But as someone who Kickstarted the game BECAUSE it was sold on the idea that it would be a decent spiritual successor to the IE games, I am more than a little disappointed. It certainly didn't scratch the itch that I've had since Throne of Bhaal. And, as many people pointed out, the shape the mechanics went in is largely based on the direction Sawyer took with the game, for better or for worse. I, personally, will be looking at anything he does in the future with a LOT more skepticism (or not at all based on the whole backer tombstone kerfuffle).

[Fun3z]

How can you say prebuffing isn't tactical? You guys must of played BG2 etc with easy or normal with no mods or anything if u can say that. Try fighting Firkraag in bg2 modded with scsii and insanity on and come talk to me about prebuffing after he one shots your whole party.

 

My experience with the game has been 50~ hours, 95% playtrough with all the "hard" content done on my main save.

 

The fighting in this game is pretty lame, to be totally honest, you pretty much abuse choke points and certain spells, on all the hard encounters, rest u just tank and spank like its nothing. Priests are just way overpowered aswell, the constant aoe heal spam and the seals are just ridicilous if used right or cheesed with. Also I pretty much only used a couple of spells, because I didn't need to use anything else. I tried buffing etc, but it wasn't worth the time or the spells, rather use them on heals and seals.

 

I never had to worry about enemy spellcasters, they were non existant. There was only a couple of them that I actually had to watch for, that's pretty much an insult to wizards overall. Remember Semaj or Krystin from bg1 on your first playthrough? You actually feared them, you knew if u get hit by the cloud kill, you are pretty much done. There was pretty much none of that in this game.

 

I just dont understand why make this new combat system and lore? There was SO much you could of done with forgotten realms world... shame. Maybe im too old fashioned and maybe I have played too much bg1 and bg2 to enjoy something new.

 

Good game tho, I enjoyed it to a point, the story and lore was ok and the game was very beautiful overall.

[geobio]

Prebuffing was one of the worst things in IE games. 

Just your opinion man.

 

That said, for my opinion , they should have adressed this to mobs, difficulty and AI.

Not on limitation uppon player.

 

I am really feeling as the OP, betrayed at some point with restrains on all freedoms IE games had.

Yes you could abuse those freedoms, but hey, aren't we supposed to play the way we want ? Now there are no turn arround and we are stucks with mechanics that really give a "restrains" feeling as the Op explained well.

 

Adding limitations on the player where you could be more creative uppon the univers arround is really a shame at some point.

[Monte Carlo]

I feel all I can add to this conversation is that this game was sold, especially early, on the idea that it would be a decent spiritual successor to the IE games. And, on the surface, it is exactly that. Sadly, as soon as you slip below the surface, it's anything but. It's a standard, modern RPG with IE window dressing.

 

It's like you were promised a juicy steak, char-grilled, medium rare.

 

Then you bite into it and realise it's a cleverly-camouflaged nut cutlet.

[kat7ra]

Spiritual successor =/= Carbon copy, this game gave what it promised, if you're not happy with that, that's fine. But don't call it a liar.

[PrimeJunta]

This place also needs the official Whaa it's Nothing Like Baldur's Gate thread.

[TheisEjsing]

This place also needs the official Whaa it's Nothing Like Baldur's Gate thread.

Or should it really be called, The Baldur's Gate Gate thread.

Edited March 31, 2015 by TheisEjsing

[Monte Carlo]

This place also needs the official Whaa it's Nothing Like Baldur's Gate thread.

 

Or howabout the Cleverly Marketed but Ulitmately Misleading thread?

[Jimmious]

 

I feel all I can add to this conversation is that this game was sold, especially early, on the idea that it would be a decent spiritual successor to the IE games. And, on the surface, it is exactly that. Sadly, as soon as you slip below the surface, it's anything but. It's a standard, modern RPG with IE window dressing.

 

It's like you were promised a juicy steak, char-grilled, medium rare.

 

Then you bite into it and realise it's a cleverly-camouflaged nut cutlet.

 

 

I think it's different. It's more like you had sometime tried a steak that you found amazingly awesome and since then you had no steak at all.

Then someone tells you that he can also make a similarly awesome steak and offer it to you if you help him a bit.

You do and then ,eventually, try the steak. It's very tasty but not exactly similar to the one you remember.

Edited March 31, 2015 by Jimmious

[zephiris]

Interesting topic.

 

I honestly am not bothered that much with the combat system, I have not much prior experience with older RPG games like the D&D/BG or something.

 

I come into this game as a fresh 'new' person, though not new to the RPG scene in general even though I missed some of the classics.

 

Only thing I personally dislike is that I have to redo the same circle of combinations each fight. It would be really nice (like the chanter class) that you can

pre-configure certain skills that you want activated as soon as combat starts. Especially when it comes to certain encounter buffs that you have available each encounter, I find it annoying that I have to activate them manually each fight. Would be nice if I can control a bit more which abilities can be activated at the start of each fight.

 

But, I can live with that for now as I am really enjoying the game (If I remove for a moment the current bugs plaguing (affecting) the game.

Edited March 31, 2015 by zephiris

[broknight]

Interesting topic.

 

I honestly am not bothered that much with the combat system, I have not much prior experience with older RPG games like the D&D or something.

I have played Dungeon Siege III which I really loved as well, but I really love the combat in this game too.

 

Only thing I personally dislike is that I have to redo the same circle of combinations each fight. It would be really nice (like the chanter class) that you can

pre-configure certain skills that you want activated as soon as combat starts.

 

Especially when it comes to certain encounter buffs that you have available each encounter, I find it annoying that I have to activate them manually each fight.

Would be nice if I can control a bit more which abilities can be activated at the start of each fight. But, its still a minor thing  

Instead of having to click stuff over and over, they shouldve put in ai scripts, which are a glaring omission.

[PrimeJunta]

 

This place also needs the official Whaa it's Nothing Like Baldur's Gate thread.

 

Or howabout the Cleverly Marketed but Ulitmately Misleading thread?

 

I believe my title is more accurate.

[quechn1tlan]

I really dislike so many mechanics in this game, the bugs don't help either. However I still find it engaging and interesting to play.

 

Possibly it's because shortly after development started and the "Sawyering" of the game was announced I read it all and fully assumed the game would turn out as complete and utter garbage. I distanced myself from all further info and waited patiently till release. Now it is released, and I find myself annoyed by all the streamlining much less than I expected to. No battle experience? Classes that feel super similar with just a handful of feats being unique to classes, doubled by the fact that everyone can use anything? Unlimited inventory? Idiotic resting system where they made a giant fuss about how offended they were by people resting in IE games and then made a system where you have extremely limited supplies but if you don't give your casters Athletics they get fatigued three fights in, making you go back to town? Very few in-world skill checks with every skill other than mechanics, and mechanics so prevalent that you have to crab-walk everywhere with the double speed on because there are secrets everywhere? This list can go on and on and I'm not even touching the world or the story. Thing is - I expected it to grate me much more than it does.

 

However, there's still a number of things that I do like. And the game is generally enjoyable to play. Provided you beforehand abandon the thought that it is a successor to IE games, and look at it with 0 expectations of anything good. It's a decent RPG. I like decent RPGs. They can't all be masterpieces with nigh unlimited customization that will be played 10-15 years later and remain a constant occupant of so many hard drives.

 

What Josh Sawyer can't seem to grasp is that imballance was ultimately what made those old games so compelling and replayable. Be it by giving you enough options to write a PhD on min-maxing it, or playing a suboptimal character and triumphing over adversity.

 

But I digress. He has his tenets of game design, I have my issues with them. At the end of the day - he's the professional here and despite my problems with it, I find Pillars enjoyable.

 

Still wish it was better, though.

[Monte Carlo]

+1

[geobio]

I really dislike so many mechanics in this game, the bugs don't help either. However I still find it engaging and interesting to play.

 

Possibly it's because shortly after development started and the "Sawyering" of the game was announced I read it all and fully assumed the game would turn out as complete and utter garbage. I distanced myself from all further info and waited patiently till release. Now it is released, and I find myself annoyed by all the streamlining much less than I expected to. No battle experience? Classes that feel super similar with just a handful of feats being unique to classes, doubled by the fact that everyone can use anything? Unlimited inventory? Idiotic resting system where they made a giant fuss about how offended they were by people resting in IE games and then made a system where you have extremely limited supplies but if you don't give your casters Athletics they get fatigued three fights in, making you go back to town? Very few in-world skill checks with every skill other than mechanics, and mechanics so prevalent that you have to crab-walk everywhere with the double speed on because there are secrets everywhere? This list can go on and on and I'm not even touching the world or the story. Thing is - I expected it to grate me much more than it does.

 

However, there's still a number of things that I do like. And the game is generally enjoyable to play. Provided you beforehand abandon the thought that it is a successor to IE games, and look at it with 0 expectations of anything good. It's a decent RPG. I like decent RPGs. They can't all be masterpieces with nigh unlimited customization that will be played 10-15 years later and remain a constant occupant of so many hard drives.

 

What Josh Sawyer can't seem to grasp is that imballance was ultimately what made those old games so compelling and replayable. Be it by giving you enough options to write a PhD on min-maxing it, or playing a suboptimal character and triumphing over adversity.

 

But I digress. He has his tenets of game design, I have my issues with them. At the end of the day - he's the professional here and despite my problems with it, I find Pillars enjoyable.

 

Still wish it was better, though.

 

+2

[saif3r]

Supply restrain is an advange in my opinion. Make the game more challanging, especialy in bigger dungeons. Same with movement while engaging with enemy. Once you turn your back on the enemy, you are immediately punished.

I agree with the buffs though, I think we should be able to buff before battle, and the buffs should last longer. The duration is quite short, even with high Int.

[archangel979]

Over the years I given up on real IE games successor so I didn't KS this project as I didn't really trust it to be anything like it (and Obsidian's NWN2 games were mediocre). Then when the beta version came out I decided to back it as it looked closer to IE games than DAO did.

Now that it is out, it is as I expected not close enough to IE games but I am now happy to compromise a bit to get just a part of that IE games feel from a new game.

 

It is not the second coming of IE games but it is a good game in its own, lesser, way. And it is best Obsidian game yet.

Edited March 31, 2015 by archangel979

[Eurhetemec]

 

I feel all I can add to this conversation is that this game was sold, especially early, on the idea that it would be a decent spiritual successor to the IE games. And, on the surface, it is exactly that. Sadly, as soon as you slip below the surface, it's anything but. It's a standard, modern RPG with IE window dressing.

 

It's like you were promised a juicy steak, char-grilled, medium rare.

 

Then you bite into it and realise it's a cleverly-camouflaged nut cutlet.

 

 

Nope, that's a rubbish analogy, because you were not promised a re-make of the BG games, nor that it would use rules that were in some way, and yet virtually every complaint, grouse, and moan in this thread (and there is a lot of moaning) boils down to "It's not exactly like it was in Baldur's Gate!"

 

I mean, you disagree, go read the Kickstarter:

 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/obsidian/project-eternity/description

 

"Project Eternity aims to recapture the magic, imagination, depth, and nostalgia of classic RPG's that we enjoyed making - and playing. At Obsidian, we have the people responsible for many of those classic games and we want to bring those games back… and that’s why we’re here - we need your help to make it a reality!"

 

"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.

 

Combat uses a tactical real-time with pause system - positioning your party and coordinating attacks and abilities is one of the keys to success. The world map is dotted with unique locations and wilderness ripe for exploration and questing. You’ll create your own character and collect companions along the way – taking him or her not just through this story, but, with your continued support, through future adventures. You will engage in dialogues that are deep, and offer many choices to determine the fate of you and your party. …and you'll experience a story that explores mature themes and presents you with complex, difficult choices to shape how your story plays out.

 

We are excited at this chance to create something new, yet reminiscent of those great games and we want you to be a part of it as well."

 

Are you claiming that any of that is untrue, inaccurate, or the like? Because I'll help you out - it isn't.

 

Most pertinent is perhaps the last line, repeated here:

 

"We are excited at this chance to create something new, yet reminiscent of those great games and we want you to be a part of it as well."

 

Bolded to help you out. There's no question that Pillars of Eternity is, indeed, something new that is reminiscent of the IE games. It's closer to them than anything since them, is a superb game, and is it's own game.

 

If you don't like that, BG3 is in development!:

 

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2867837/15-years-later-a-new-baldurs-gate-game-is-finally-coming.html

 

It'll probably be complete and utter twaddle compared to Pillars, but hey, at least the complaints you have here will be answered! Good luck with that!

[Monte Carlo]

STUFF

 

Dude we've been having this conversation for two years. People have their own view on what was promised in the KS and what wasn't. Sorry I moved your cheese, but the POV that the game as-is fails to meet the initial pitch is hardly (a) controversial or (b) unreasonable. 

 

I don't even like 2E AD&D, upon which the IE games are based. I like them despite the ruleset.

 

So the idea that PoE isn't BG2 - WAAAHHH! is a fallacy.

 

The design team made a conscious decision to make a radically different crpg ruleset. For me, it was a self-indulgent hobby horse. There were a gazillion ways they could have delivered something different but fresh, for me it isn't. Deal with it, I'm genuinely not alone.

 

You never know, I might grow to love this game *despite* the ruleset.

 

Am looking forward to a Pathfinder CRPG. Would even be happy to see Sawyer on it, as I think he's good at working with existing rulesets. He did a great job on IWD2 with the 3E McGuyvering. I'm just not enjoying his homebrew system. It's like HAL is the dungeon-master (you need to do it this way, Daaaave).

Edited March 31, 2015 by Monte Carlo

[archangel979]

That is not BG3, only a standalone expansion to Bg1.

[Eurhetemec]

 

What Josh Sawyer can't seem to grasp is that imballance was ultimately what made those old games so compelling and replayable. Be it by giving you enough options to write a PhD on min-maxing it, or playing a suboptimal character and triumphing over adversity.

 

But I digress. He has his tenets of game design, I have my issues with them. At the end of the day - he's the professional here and despite my problems with it, I find Pillars enjoyable.

 

Still wish it was better, though.

 

What a lot of arrogant nonsense.

 

You think JE Sawyer doesn't understand that some people like that kind of thing? I assure you, he does. I've read his posts and thoughts on the internet for the past decade or more, and he's very well aware that some people love highly exploitable games that reward cheesy munchkin-type behaviour. The thing is, there aren't that many people like that. They're a small minority of the people who buy games, even games like Pillars of Eternity.

 

So he does understand, and you need to understand that he understands, understand?

 

He's chosen to design away from that for the very simple reason that it provides a game that more people enjoy, and that is much easier to design and balance in a way such that everyone who buys it can actually play through it.

 

As a very long time AD&D 2E DM and min-maxer, and DM to some appalling munchkins (luckily, they all grew out of it, what can I say, we were all teenagers!), I find your whole spiel about a "Phd in min-maxing" very silly. Min-maxing in 2E, finding exploits in 2E, abusing 2E, none of these things were hard, none of these things were challenging, and none of them required great intellect or imagination. A Phd? More like a particularly easy and short no-credits class.

 

Also, you don't "wish it was better", you wish it was poorly balanced and full of exploits!

[Monte Carlo]

 

 

What Josh Sawyer can't seem to grasp is that imballance was ultimately what made those old games so compelling and replayable. Be it by giving you enough options to write a PhD on min-maxing it, or playing a suboptimal character and triumphing over adversity.

 

But I digress. He has his tenets of game design, I have my issues with them. At the end of the day - he's the professional here and despite my problems with it, I find Pillars enjoyable.

 

Still wish it was better, though.

 

What a lot of arrogant nonsense.

 

Mate, you aren't doing badly on the arrogance front yourself. Just a friendly nudge.