Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sad that metacritic scores are dropping. Even more sad for this review's main criticism:

 

http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/31/pillars-of-eternity-review-baldurs-gate-3-by-any-other-name-5128346/

 

'It’s almost entirely backwards-looking'.

"Cons: Extremely Difficult"

When is difficulty a con? Especially when there's difficulty slider with the first 2 or 3 being quite easy :p

 

And I quite liked Durance... "If doubts and curiosity plague you, you're skinning your knuckles on the wrong door."

Edited by vikke
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good sportsmanship costs nothing, except maybe a box of cookies.

 

Here's the thing: the type of games many companies make depends on how successful the product actually is. The reason shooters became popular is because they are successful products, and they appeal to a wide audience. They are also extremely difficult to screw up from a story standpoint, and are in many ways fairly simple games with well-understood rules and mechanics. That doesn't make them incomplex as a genre and there is a lot of variety, but there's only so many ways you can shoot someone. Shooters are very focused on one strong mechanic of gameplay.

 

RPGs differ widely from one another, and there are dozens of rulesets and paths to dealing with how to present the game, and that's really the problem. Since RPGs are heavily story-based, the myriad of different ways to tell a story means that you have nearly as many ways to present that story. Even looking at the different way Obsidian has handled their recent RPGs is telling. South Park: SoT uses a more Final Fantasyish approach with their combat, while Pillars is familiar to people who play games like Neverwinter Nights or Balder's Gate. KotOR 2 used a first-person system that had elements of PnP rulesets for hits and spells. 

 

RPG and RPGish games probably now encompass the largest range of games, and many genres that would not be RPGs at all have taken to use RPG-like elements like leveling, side-quests, story progression, and character customization. Even games like Cities:Skylines kind of have that leveling-up feature, as you need to gain population in order to unlock things like new buildings, vanity objects, and open new spaces for development. 

 

Because of this increase in the genre, I think a lot of what made more traditional RPGs was lost. I think a lot of developers saw that the RPG had moved from being a genre in itself and instead birthed an era of RPG-like games that had none of the difficulty of creating an RPG game from scratch but kept a lot of the elements of RPGs while keeping to relatively familiar mechanics. Shooter-type RPGs began to dominate, the Skyrim/Fallout/Mass Effect game becoming the norm rather than the exception, and appealing to a much larger population than your traditional RPG. 

 

But a lot of other things that made RPGs were lost, like the rulesets, strategy, and tactics. Parties in these games usually consisted of maybe two other people at most, and micromanaging them is almost always sub-par. A lot of the complexity was lost, and a lot of the thought process involved in boss and even normal fights was lost. In games like Fallout or Skyrim, defeating enemies and advancing relies on basically having the biggest/fastest/best weapon and shooting/swinging it a lot, with the occasional spell or blocking of an attack. 

 

The recent success with a relatively small game like Pillars may actually help to revitalize the more traditional computer RPG game and help developers to realize what made these games actually fun, and I hope it does, because it's been an incredibly fun and rewarding experience so far. It's far from perfect, especially on the balance end, but it's refreshing as hell. I hope Bioware and others wakes up and realizes how untapped and successful that this niche can really be. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thing that Bioware still loves this type of games, and have good taste on RPG and cookie.

Bad thing that Bioware improved KB/M control scheme in DAI dramatically, and move from Baldur's Gate dialog to beautiful cutscenes with same frame rate.

 

You know what, internet hates changes :dancing:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good thing that Bioware still loves this type of games, and have good taste on RPG and cookie.

Bad thing that Bioware improved KB/M control scheme in DAI dramatically, and move from Baldur's Gate dialog to beautiful cutscenes with same frame rate.

 

You know what, internet hates changes :dancing:

 

You mean like this?  

 

:no:

Edited by floyd ryan
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll just sum this up this up with DND Alignments.

 

EA as a company is Lawful Evil

 

Bioware used to be Neutral Good, but once bought up by Lawful Evil EA they slowly became noting more than Lawful Evil EA minions.

 

When I think of Bioware I'm sad... not mad. For they used to be one of us... now they make MMO fetch quests in a single player RPG.... oh how the mighty have fallen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very awesome. I for one don't think of Bioware as the evil empire. I don't care much for EA but think Bioware is still full of people who love games and love to make games.  Things change, you just have to get used to it.  I wish they were still a private company like they used to be but they're not.  They've made some pretty big mistakes lately but still have enough clout to fend off the evil leeches at EA, or at least partially anyway.  DA: Origins was great, DAII was okay, DA: Inquisition a step in the right direction.  Regardless I think it's very classy of them.  They have a big connection to Obsidian and I'm sure they wish them all the best. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do people speak of Bioware like some sort of sentient supra-human being. There has been such a turnover since 2008, the only thing it shares with the baldur's gate dev studio is the damn name.

"-Heard the news ? We sent some cookies and congratz to Obsidian Entertainment ^^

-Who the f**k is Obese Fan Entertainment ?"

...is pretty much how I believe some bioware employees perceived this gift.

Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

So many bitter vets.

After getting used to prime rib, ground chuck is more than a little disappointing to many.

http://cbrrescue.org/

 

Go afield with a good attitude, with respect for the wildlife you hunt and for the forests and fields in which you walk. Immerse yourself in the outdoors experience. It will cleanse your soul and make you a better person.----Fred Bear

 

http://michigansaf.org/

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bioware said Baldur's Gate is the thing of the PAST. Glad Obsidian shows them Otherwise.

 

Why do people speak of Bioware like some sort of sentient supra-human being. There has been such a turnover since 2008, the only thing it shares with the baldur's gate dev studio is the damn name.

 

"-Heard the news ? We sent some cookies and congratz to Obsidian Entertainment ^^

-Who the f**k is Obese Fan Entertainment ?"

...is pretty much how I believe some bioware employees perceived this gift.

 

So much salt. It's like when people realized Notch had invited Anita Sarkeesian to his housewarming party. "No, there has to be some sort of justification. It can't possibly be because I'm petty."

Edited by Bryy
Link to post
Share on other sites

Salt about what ? Who are your favorite game designers from Bioware right now ?

Beside, how does that answer my point at all ? Why would we speak of "bioware" when there's such a turnover and a close management with EA, we have no idea who's actually leading projects there ? What does bioware mean when a random development studio in charge of Command and Conquer bears its name ?

Edited by CaptainMace

Qu'avez-vous fait de l'honneur de la patrie ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

The only way the statement doesn't work is if you insist on conflating EA with its employees.  EA - any company - is more than simply the people working for it.  It's the philosophy, the business practices, the history, etc.

Exactly. The company's philosophy and history didn't send cookies to Obsidian, yet people are cursing EA in direct response to "Look! People at EA sent cookies!" Maybe someone from Bioware BAKED those cookies.

 

That's what gets ridiculous. There are people who hate "EA," then there are people who, if they saw an article about how an EA/Bioware employee were in the hospital after a car wreck, they'd be like "KARMA, BEECHES! THAT'S WHAT YOU GET FOR SUCKING!"

 

I hate how they're steered, but there's plenty of good in their games, too. I enjoyed playing Mass Effect 3, even though I don't like it at all as a complete narrative. I enjoy playing DA:I, even though there are countless changes I'd make to it. It's not like "Oh, THE TREES SUCK! AND THE WATER SUCKS! And CHARACTER MOVEMENT SUCKS! ALL THE ANIMATIONS SUCK!" No. Parts of their games suck in certain ways, and if they fixed that they'd have excellent games. Instead, they have "meh, kinda fun" games. In fact, if they weren't claiming to make RPGs, the scores for their games in most people's eyes would skyrocket immediately. "Oh, well yeah, if this isn't supposed to have a super-well-written story and significant character choices throughout, it's pretty good!"

 

Too many people are just children who discover that they can form powerful opinions about things, and share them on the internet to feel like they're part of a big horde of the same opinion. They could actually take the time to form more useful ideas regarding such things, instead of "yeah, any time someone mentions EA or Bioware, I'm gonna just act like it's a kid down the street whom I hate! 8D!"

  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Link to post
Share on other sites

Salt about what ? Who are your favorite game designers from Bioware right now ?

Beside, how does that answer my point at all ? Why would we speak of "bioware" when there's such a turnover and a close management with EA, we have no idea who's actually leading projects there ? What does bioware mean when a random development studio in charge of Command and Conquer bears its name ?

Mike Laidlaw is in charge of DA. No idea about Mass Effect 4.

 

Salt at even mentioning that BioWare did something. Why do you care if a dev at BW doesn't know who Obsidian are? And if they are in the industry, and in the RPG genre, and they work at BioWare, you can 100% bet they know who Obsidian are. I get that it's cool to hate on BioWare because of EA (and let's face it, that's the only reason), but getting angry simply because one group of people did something nice for another group of people? That's lame. There are better things to get upset about.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lephys: Actually I brought up EA to redirect the hate towards Bioware, where I don't think it rightfully belongs.  I like Bioware.

 

Well, Bioware Edmonton.  Not overly fond of Bioware Austin.

Edited by sparklecat
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is a great gesture.  The industry as a whole does better when it props each other up (the microbrew industry in S.California and probably elsewhere is a great example of this) and who knows....perhaps Obsidian, Larian and inXile helped pave a way for companies such as Bioware to get back their roots and we can see more of these great RPG's in the future.

Edited by Byeohazard
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Very awesome. I for one don't think of Bioware as the evil empire. I don't care much for EA but think Bioware is still full of people who love games and love to make games.  Things change, you just have to get used to it.  I wish they were still a private company like they used to be but they're not.  They've made some pretty big mistakes lately but still have enough clout to fend off the evil leeches at EA, or at least partially anyway.  DA: Origins was great, DAII was okay, DA: Inquisition a step in the right direction.  Regardless I think it's very classy of them.  They have a big connection to Obsidian and I'm sure they wish them all the best. 

I have to say DAI is actully a huge step in the wrong direction..Why?

 

First...this video explains a lot about their decision making

https://www.youtube.com/embed/O0Dp7HeW9vs

 

Second, the decision from the engine, to gameplay including weird tatical view control, to the writing, to the horse ride that stops you from bantering, to the old silly MMO style questing, to the 8 limited skill slots, to 30fps limit choppy cutscene, to the elven noddle arms, to the lazy inventory,...none of these went to the "right" direction. Well, the characters design is the only thing that is still good enough...

 

DAO was great and epic, DA2 was good enough. The  problems with DA2 were the reused of the map and the story feels rushed after Act 1.

DAI...well..

 

But at least they still have good taste on cRPGs and know how to appreciate it! :yes:

But!! I still mad at them losing BG source arts...so it made BGEE harder to work on :banghead:

Edited by junk11
Link to post
Share on other sites

Pillars of Eternity by itself shadows all the 3 Dragon Age games together!

 

You're very young, aren't you? Bioware literally invented this type of game with Baldur's Gate. Pillars of Eternity is so clearly directly inspired by Baldur's Gate II, in almost every single possible way, that your link to Dragon Age (a game nothing at all like either PoE or BG) is just confusing.

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...