RPGCodex Review #1 - Hŵrpa Dwrp

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Lot's of rustled jimmies here. If you think Roxor is wrong, argue where he is wrong.

 

PoE tried to be balanced and failed miserably at it. The one thing that is balanced in theory, weapons, is unbalanced due to the rarity of low-DT enemies to make fast weapons worthwhile. As it is, high damage/DT penetration is the way to go, which is why guns and estocs will see more use than other weapons. Armor balance is awful, the options in between clothes and plate are fluff for RPing, because only those two extremes are worthwhile. Class balance is worse than the IE games. Cipher destroys everything else with it's ability to cast 6th powers indefinitely and a 20% bonus to damage in most circumstances.

 

The only combat I find difficult is where enemies spam status effects. Otherwise the tactic is to let the tank(s) draw aggro while the rest of the party uses ranged weapons and spells. This doesn't change for any battle. I use the IE mod and this doesn't change with engagement in or off. If anything, it's slightly harder with engagement off.

 

The megadungeon and stronghold were fluff, and the game would have been better off with a few more areas instead. The Endless Paths aren't particularly fun or well designed and the stronghold adds tedium more than anything. Not to mention if I'm pretty much anywhere but Defiance Bay and a few wilderness areas, I will miss special events because travel takes too long.

 

The writing is dry for long spells. Durance and Grieving Mother are interesting, but the rest of the party feels bland and I couldn't give a **** about most of them. The text reads like a Game of Thrones knockoff with various fantasy creatures and not-Welsh words slammed in. Act 2 has to be the most uninspired act of a RPG I've ever played, and the side quests are rarely attention grabbing.

 

While the art is pretty and the music is good, the VA is overused. While I won't judge the quality of it too harshly, it is annoying as hell to be almost done reading text when a voice cuts in and starts repeating what I just went over. Less is more in this case.

 

Overall, Pillars of Eternity is a decent game with good ideas but a bland execution. In some way it would have been better if it was gawdawful, in that I could have just quit without the feeling I was missing much, but the few good bits keep me slogging through. It certainly wasn't what I expected Obsidian to put out, and if PoE is Obsidian without the constrains of a publisher perhaps having publisher constraints aren't such a bad thing.

[Ohioastro]

Why should I bother to argue with a misinformed hatchet job of an article?  One where the reviewer either doesn't understand some systems (e.g. how the stats work),  misstates facts (the absence of unique items is wrong), doesn't understand the class system, dismisses the writing with a couple of unexplained sentence.  I could go on, but basically it's a worthless article for a different reason.

 

I get really, really tired of having people dress up hit jobs as reviews.  This guy hated the game during development.  The only reason he played the game was to extract things that he could pick apart to attack in a writeup.  Every single aspect was taken in the most negative way possible; every flaw exaggerated; every virtue minimized if it was mentioned at all.  You could pull this crap on every single game, every single book, every single movie.  It achieves nothing.

 

For example, I really liked that the dialog options weren't telegraphed to you, Bioware style, with exactly what would happen if you pressed the button.  Some special options were counterproductive; you could even close off options in dialog without even knowing it.  The reputation system is clever and could develop into something very cool.  You didn't have glowing arrows over the heads of people giving quests; on replay I keep finding ones that I missed the first go around.  I found the lore really interesting - the science vs. magic / religion aspect was well done; the world was a hell of a lot more interesting to me than any generic D&D world (I'm looking at you, Baldurs Gate and Icewind Dale..)  If you actually read the lore, read the responses in conversations, and so on.  It didn't have the "everyone is horrible" Game of Thrones or Dragon Age 2 vibe to it.  Now, maybe all of the people who wrote reviews about how they liked this were all wrong, and maybe the flocks of users who went to the rating sites and talked about how much they liked it were all misguided.  But it's more likely to me that the people who claim that they don't like the story are a small minority.  That's fine, but it's completely the inverse of reality to take a recognized strength of a game and call it a weakness because it's not "my style."

[Yellow Rabbit]

Lot's of rustled jimmies here. If you think Roxor is wrong, argue where he is wrong.

Rights and wrongs are irrelevant here, it's just the traffic going both ways. Roxor's biased about the game, so, let's say, I am biased about his rev... errr, opinion.

 

When someone tells me with a great deal of exaggeration that the thing I enjoyed much is complete and ultimate ****, I feel natural urge to ask him GTFO regardless of constructive criticism he may rely on somewhere further along the road. And Roxor DOES blow things out of proportion.

 

It's not the content of his "review" is inflammatory, it's the form.

[Junker]

I'm still chunking away at PoE but the mediocrity of it all slapped me across the face within the first ten hours or so. It feels like work much of the time, but the beautiful presentation keeps me coming back for more. Really, if PoE was your standard 3D fare it would be a terrible game. I'm not going to write a novel like the reviewer did, but a lot of my criticisms are echoed in his review:

 

1. Story doesn't grab me. The hollowborn aspect was the only redeeming quality in an otherwise forgettable tale.

 

2. I don't care about any of my companions. I click to talk whenever possible to better understand their motivations but they're more like robots, five of them, sharing my life for whatever reason two hours into the game.

 

3. Nothing I do matters, there is little to no room for role playing, exciting loot, exploration and character progression is non-existent. The trademarks of the CRPG genre are either lackluster or not even here. Conversations make me feel like I'm clicking on Wikipedia links to be spoon-fed lore rather than defining the type of character I want to play as.

 

The bottom line is I feel like the game falls flat. It seems like they ran out of time or money or both (rampant bug squashing post release seems to support this) because so many aspects of the game are half-baked. I was equally excited for Shadowrun: Returns and was likewise disappointed (for similar reasons) but Hairbrained redeemed themselves with Dragonfall so maybe Obsidian can make something out of this. It has some cool ideas like the interactive story elements that use your character's traits but many games have done everything PoE is trying to do only better. In some cases waaaaaaaay better.

[Zwiebelchen]

ps:t had two ha-ha party companions.  so too does poe.  

 

I don't think you can compare any of the PoE companions with Morte... that just isn't right.

[Volourn]

"In D&D terms, this was First Edition; in video game terms, this was BG 1, not BG 2. It's got some flaws but for what it is and within its limitations it is excellent."

 

\That's ridiculous comaprison. BG1 was made by an inexperienced development team that had made two low key games and had absolutely no rpg development expefrience at all. obsidian is full of employees/owners who have 10+ years experience and have had their hands in some of the top rpgs ever at one level or another INCLUDING the BGs as publisher. BIo at the time of the BG, as I said, had no crpg dev experience, limited game experience, and when first start working on BG1 they weren't even trying to make a RPG but a RTS.

 

\On top of that since PE was meant to be a 'spiritual successer' it has had decades of looking at the IE games to see their strengths and weaknesses. There should be noe xcuses at all.

 

That said, I think PE  may be technically (in terms of C&C and the like) better than BG1 but it doesn't have the 'soul' (lol) of it  when I first played BG1. In fact, all you who hate me can blame BG1 for having to deal with the likes of me since it is what motivated to come online. L0L and it doesn't even close to BG2's majesty or PST.  My favorite part of PE is levelling my characters.

\

\

PE is a fun game. But, it has plain stupid flaws. This review points them out in the Codexian way. Stop being so butthurt over it.

[bronzepoem]

"In D&D terms, this was First Edition; in video game terms, this was BG 1, not BG 2. It's got some flaws but for what it is and within its limitations it is excellent."

 

\That's ridiculous comaprison. BG1 was made by an inexperienced development team that had made two low key games and had absolutely no rpg development expefrience at all. obsidian is full of employees/owners who have 10+ years experience and have had their hands in some of the top rpgs ever at one level or another INCLUDING the BGs as publisher. BIo at the time of the BG, as I said, had no crpg dev experience, limited game experience, and when first start working on BG1 they weren't even trying to make a RPG but a RTS.

 

\On top of that since PE was meant to be a 'spiritual successer' it has had decades of looking at the IE games to see their strengths and weaknesses. There should be noe xcuses at all.

 

That said, I think PE may be technically (in terms of C&C and the like) better than BG1 but it doesn't have the 'soul' (lol) of it when I first played BG1. In fact, all you who hate me can blame BG1 for having to deal with the likes of me since it is what motivated to come online. L0L and it doesn't even close to BG2's majesty or PST. My favorite part of PE is levelling my characters.

\

\

PE is a fun game. But, it has plain stupid flaws. This review points them out in the Codexian way. Stop being so butthurt over it.

Am I the only one who love BG1 more than BG2？

[Namutree]

 

Am I the only one who love BG1 more than BG2？

 

I like them both equally once BG1 has BG2's engine via mods or enhanced edition.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Namutree

[Marceror]

 

"In D&D terms, this was First Edition; in video game terms, this was BG 1, not BG 2. It's got some flaws but for what it is and within its limitations it is excellent."

 

\That's ridiculous comaprison. BG1 was made by an inexperienced development team that had made two low key games and had absolutely no rpg development expefrience at all. obsidian is full of employees/owners who have 10+ years experience and have had their hands in some of the top rpgs ever at one level or another INCLUDING the BGs as publisher. BIo at the time of the BG, as I said, had no crpg dev experience, limited game experience, and when first start working on BG1 they weren't even trying to make a RPG but a RTS.

 

\On top of that since PE was meant to be a 'spiritual successer' it has had decades of looking at the IE games to see their strengths and weaknesses. There should be noe xcuses at all.

 

That said, I think PE may be technically (in terms of C&C and the like) better than BG1 but it doesn't have the 'soul' (lol) of it when I first played BG1. In fact, all you who hate me can blame BG1 for having to deal with the likes of me since it is what motivated to come online. L0L and it doesn't even close to BG2's majesty or PST. My favorite part of PE is levelling my characters.

\

\

PE is a fun game. But, it has plain stupid flaws. This review points them out in the Codexian way. Stop being so butthurt over it.

Am I the only one who love BG1 more than BG2？

 

To me they're one big, beautiful game. Start with BG1, and then take your character through BG2. I happen to enjoy BG2 a bit more, but I enjoy BG1 plenty too. But anymore, if I'm going to play this series, I start with the first and make my way through to the SoA and finally ToB content.

[NegativeEdge]

 

"In D&D terms, this was First Edition; in video game terms, this was BG 1, not BG 2. It's got some flaws but for what it is and within its limitations it is excellent."

 

\That's ridiculous comaprison. BG1 was made by an inexperienced development team that had made two low key games and had absolutely no rpg development expefrience at all. obsidian is full of employees/owners who have 10+ years experience and have had their hands in some of the top rpgs ever at one level or another INCLUDING the BGs as publisher. BIo at the time of the BG, as I said, had no crpg dev experience, limited game experience, and when first start working on BG1 they weren't even trying to make a RPG but a RTS.

 

\On top of that since PE was meant to be a 'spiritual successer' it has had decades of looking at the IE games to see their strengths and weaknesses. There should be noe xcuses at all.

 

That said, I think PE may be technically (in terms of C&C and the like) better than BG1 but it doesn't have the 'soul' (lol) of it when I first played BG1. In fact, all you who hate me can blame BG1 for having to deal with the likes of me since it is what motivated to come online. L0L and it doesn't even close to BG2's majesty or PST. My favorite part of PE is levelling my characters.

\

\

PE is a fun game. But, it has plain stupid flaws. This review points them out in the Codexian way. Stop being so butthurt over it.

Am I the only one who love BG1 more than BG2？

 

Nah, I prefer 1 by quite a margin, replaying it now in fact (original not EE).

I love BG1. I enjoy the danger of low level combat, the huge wilderness maps, companions are less intrusive and there's a different ambiance about it compared to 2 which is hard to describe but I definitely prefer.

I remember reading a retrospective on BG2 by the BioWare docs and they talked about how some of the big goals in 2 were to makes sure the player felt like the universe revolved around him, every companion had to hang on his every word etc and I dislike that kind of thing. BG1 feels more like a quest and world where sure you are important but you could also just die to wolves outside Candlekeep and nobody gives a damn.

The environmental art design is better in 1 too imo, all the little details in those areas mean that even if they are not content heavy they're a pleasure to explore and just look at.

[Volourn]

"BG1 feels more like a quest and world where sure you are important but you could also just die to wolves outside Candlekeep and nobody gives a damn."

 

That happens in BG2 too. Wekll.. not the wolves part for obvious reasons but you could die and the world would move on. Just not the game. <>

 

Anyways, BG1 was fun when I played it. But, as far as RPG making it is subpar.

[Jasta11]

Typically for the Codex, the good points are buried beneath an avalanche of self-righteous bile. Yes, engagement needs work. Yes, encounter design could be better. Yes, Dragon Age manages to have better itemization. The game does have problems, and it's important to ackowledge them. But the reviewer obviously has an axe to grind and was visibly determined to hate the game before even playing it. So his feedback is lackluster, if not worthless.

 

Plus, some of the complaints are just mind-boggling. The writing is bad? Compared to what, Baldur's Gate or freaking Icewind Dale, to say nothing of D:OS's borefest? The oh so clever ''not-D&D'' tripe that could easily be leveled at any fantasy game on the market? Obsidian's worst game to date? This is clear attention whoring. 

[Zwiebelchen]

It´s an interesting world i would like to see more of.

 

So much this. I found the setting of PoE extremely interesting and I can not understand how one can say that it's bland and generic. I liked the soul thing as a unique twist to the high fantasy setting. I liked some of it's quirks; like animancy being more science than magic (the sanitarium quest was great and somehow managed to make me shiver ... possibly also because of the background music) and some of the descriptions of far away places. Yes, Dyrwood was probably the most generic of all the described areas, but it's a great start to get familiar with the new IP.

 

For the expansion, I'm pretty sure we are about to see amazing places. The world lore allows for it. I'd love to see for example the Aumaua city.

[WebShaman]

I find it all rather amusing.

 

The thing is, that review gets more attention than anything said here, one way or another (that also tickles my fancy, no shouting it down like a lot was in the backer forum).

 

And since it is spot-on, that is a good thing.

 

So I am eating my cake and enjoying it too!

 

And to be honest - this game doesn't come anywhere near to BG (not to mention BG2).  Not even close.  The only area where it tops those are in the graphics (which are well done, btw) and the music, somewhat.  Which is to be expected (and thankfully there Obs succeeded).

 

Everything else...nope.

 

From Plot, to Companions, to Writing, to Mechanics, to IP Lore, on and on...BG and BG2 are just better.  The areas are bigger, there is more to explore, there are more "monsters" to encounter, items, puzzles, quests, you name it.

[Starwars]

But I prefer PoE to those games. Certainly in terms of plot, companions, writing, mechanics (mostly) and lore. PoE is just better!

 

I think it's good to have reviews that point out negative things in the game obviously, and I think a good deal of the positive reviews miss the mark on a lot of things that need work in the game as well. But this review is so obviously... hipster-ish in that codexian way. OBVIOUSLY, the developers never played Ultima Underworld and Arx Fatalis, I mean come on... And saying that it's Obsidian's worst game is just... what the hell are you smoking man?

 

Clearly there is an axe to grind as mentioned above, it would be clear to anyone who followed the reviewer's posts in the PoE threads prior to the review. 

 

I'm looking forward to the next review, hopefully (and probably) it will also point out the actual negative things in the game without being pants-on-head idiotic about it.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Starwars

[WebShaman]

No-one is saying that you can't have a different opinion, for whatever reason.

 

All that is being said is when one examines (compares) X with Y, that there are differences.

 

You prefer PoE.  Fine.  No-one is saying that you can't, or that you are not allowed to.

 

But I wonder...

 

Did you really want the Stronghold to be as it is?  Exactly as it is?  That is what you, personally, wanted?  And the combat system (mechanics, etc) - that is exactly what you wanted?

 

The things pointed out in the review negatively - are you saying that you wanted all those?

 

I'm curious.

[Starwars]

The last sentence in my post addresses that, and I've had (and have) plenty of complaints about the game. Not the point at all.

[middydj]

Sometimes I don't know why the Codex bothers reviewing anything, as they seem to like about four games made in the late 20th Century.

 

It's a perfect example of how cognitive dissonance creates a hill tribe of in-bred opinion. No, not opinion, dogma.

 

I agree with (easily) a third of this review, is just the holier-than-thou tone that makes my gorge rise.

 

 

 Love the 4 games comment haha.   Sure does seem that way. I had just found out about that place sometime last year.  In the end. Im going to play what I like. Could give a damn what rpgcodex or anyone here or on the net thinks.  Play what you like......

[Zwiebelchen]

And to be honest - this game doesn't come anywhere near to BG (not to mention BG2).  Not even close. 

 

Seriously? Like seriously? I will simply stand here, mouth open, in awe at how someone can possibly say that.

 

I'm okay with people saying they liked BG2 better. But BG1? Really? Did you even play it? BG1 was a collection of boring fetch and kill quests, with an extremely lame story, cardboard-cut-out NPCs with absolutely zero personality and dialogue, copy & paste encounter designs (seriously, how much different enemies were there in BG1 aside from human parties? 10? Maybe 15? How often did you grind your way through hordes of Gibberlings, Hobgoblins and Goblins? Like every friggin' map? Did your character choice change anything about any of the quests, except for those 3 reputation checks across the entire game?

 

I can understand why people like BG1. It's a great game and - when combined with BG2 and ToB into a real trilogy - serves the purpose of "humble beginnings" perfectly. But saying that BG1 is better than PoE is just ridicolous.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Zwiebelchen

[scrotiemcb]

I haven't played any Obsidian games before this. Or BG. Or really anything CRPG, except Divinity OS.

 

But outside of those potential points of contention, the Codex review seems pretty accurate. To be honest, I don't think I'll ever end up beating the game; I'm already pretty bored with it.

[Luckmann]

Lot's of rustled jimmies here. If you think Roxor is wrong, argue where he is wrong.

 

PoE tried to be balanced and failed miserably at it. The one thing that is balanced in theory, weapons, is unbalanced due to the rarity of low-DT enemies to make fast weapons worthwhile. As it is, high damage/DT penetration is the way to go, which is why guns and estocs will see more use than other weapons. Armor balance is awful, the options in between clothes and plate are fluff for RPing, because only those two extremes are worthwhile. Class balance is worse than the IE games. Cipher destroys everything else with it's ability to cast 6th powers indefinitely and a 20% bonus to damage in most circumstances.

 

The only combat I find difficult is where enemies spam status effects. Otherwise the tactic is to let the tank(s) draw aggro while the rest of the party uses ranged weapons and spells. This doesn't change for any battle. I use the IE mod and this doesn't change with engagement in or off. If anything, it's slightly harder with engagement off.

 

The megadungeon and stronghold were fluff, and the game would have been better off with a few more areas instead. The Endless Paths aren't particularly fun or well designed and the stronghold adds tedium more than anything. Not to mention if I'm pretty much anywhere but Defiance Bay and a few wilderness areas, I will miss special events because travel takes too long.

 

The writing is dry for long spells. Durance and Grieving Mother are interesting, but the rest of the party feels bland and I couldn't give a **** about most of them. The text reads like a Game of Thrones knockoff with various fantasy creatures and not-Welsh words slammed in. Act 2 has to be the most uninspired act of a RPG I've ever played, and the side quests are rarely attention grabbing.

 

While the art is pretty and the music is good, the VA is overused. While I won't judge the quality of it too harshly, it is annoying as hell to be almost done reading text when a voice cuts in and starts repeating what I just went over. Less is more in this case.

 

Overall, Pillars of Eternity is a decent game with good ideas but a bland execution. In some way it would have been better if it was gawdawful, in that I could have just quit without the feeling I was missing much, but the few good bits keep me slogging through. It certainly wasn't what I expected Obsidian to put out, and if PoE is Obsidian without the constrains of a publisher perhaps having publisher constraints aren't such a bad thing.

 

I hate to say it but.. you're mostly right. I'd add Edér to the list of CNPC:s that are good, and the note on publishers I can't read as anything other than frustration - because **** publishers - but.. I can't disagree with most of it, certainly. And that makes me sad, because as you say, had the game actually been god-awful, we could just quit and leave, but PoE still has that potential we really want it to have, and that's why we're sticking around.

 

A lot of resources went into the development of all the bits and pieces that was necessary for making the game. I really look forward to seeing what we'll get in terms of expansions and sequel, because by then, they should have the actual development of areas and how everything fits together down to a science, and I want to see how things go when the factory is humming along.

 

 

"In D&D terms, this was First Edition; in video game terms, this was BG 1, not BG 2. It's got some flaws but for what it is and within its limitations it is excellent."

 

\That's ridiculous comaprison. BG1 was made by an inexperienced development team that had made two low key games and had absolutely no rpg development expefrience at all. obsidian is full of employees/owners who have 10+ years experience and have had their hands in some of the top rpgs ever at one level or another INCLUDING the BGs as publisher. BIo at the time of the BG, as I said, had no crpg dev experience, limited game experience, and when first start working on BG1 they weren't even trying to make a RPG but a RTS.

 

\On top of that since PE was meant to be a 'spiritual successer' it has had decades of looking at the IE games to see their strengths and weaknesses. There should be noe xcuses at all.

 

That said, I think PE may be technically (in terms of C&C and the like) better than BG1 but it doesn't have the 'soul' (lol) of it when I first played BG1. In fact, all you who hate me can blame BG1 for having to deal with the likes of me since it is what motivated to come online. L0L and it doesn't even close to BG2's majesty or PST. My favorite part of PE is levelling my characters.

\

\

PE is a fun game. But, it has plain stupid flaws. This review points them out in the Codexian way. Stop being so butthurt over it.

Am I the only one who love BG1 more than BG2？

 

BG1 is superior to BG2 in all ways except mechanically and, arguably, graphically. The storytelling especially. BG2 has terrible motivations and terrible literary pacing, and drops you in the middle of Athkatla, already knowing the main villain, and with an uninspiring goal. BG1 also has better areas, pacing in terms of relative power levels, better exploration, and, mostly, better quests.

 

Curiouser and curiouser. It continues to amuse me that people continuously compare PoE1 to anything with a 2 in the name. Or New Vegas. All of those had massive lore and asset backing. None of which is available for PoE. Combine that with a completely new gameplay system all on a budget that would be laughed at by most developers. The sheer ignorance of what is actually possible, it burns.

Stop making excuses. What you are offering are excuses and explanations as to why there are issues in PoE. You're not actually refuting anything. We all know that PoE is the first of it's kind. But knowing that does nothing to alleviate the issues that are there, nor is it an argument as to why we should refrain from exploring those issues.

 

Also, he probably compared it to Icewind Dale 2 because Icewind Dale 2 is considered the weakest Infinity Engine game by most. Comparing PoE to IWD2 is doing it a service for the sake of argument. Hence the "at least" IWD2.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Luckmann

[Zwiebelchen]

BG1 is superior to BG2 in all ways except mechanically and, arguably, graphically. The storytelling especially. BG2 has terrible motivations and terrible literary pacing, and drops you in the middle of Athkatla, already knowing the main villain, and with an uninspiring goal. BG1 also has better areas, pacing in terms of relative power levels, better exploration, and, mostly, better quests.

 

 

Sorry, I can't take you seriously if I read something like this. I'd say that both BG1 and BG2 had a pretty weak story, so saying that BG1 was slightly better due to a better pacing is justified. I'm totally okay with that. But saying that BG1 had better quests... really? I mean; really? Name me just one quest that wasn't just "go there, beat **** up" in BG1? Certainly not clearing the endless levels of Nashkel Mines. Or all the pointless dungeons filled with hordes of copy & paste encounters.

 

I can name you dozens of memorable quests in BG2:

The Unseeing Eye, the De'Arnise Keep, the Planar Sphere, Getting the dragon eggs in Ust Natha, the Skinner of the Bridge district, the Umar Hills deaths, etc.

 

Literally every zone of BG2 had at least one memorable, multi-stage optional quest that you will definitely remember in almost every single detail. In comparison, I can't even remember almost any of the sidequests in BG1. Like literally, I played BG1 at least 5 times now and I still struggle remembering the quests.

[gkathellar]

 

Acts 4 & 5 of BG2 completely walled you off from literally every place you had been prior.

 

Just sayin'.

 

No. Can you stop telling lies?

 

If Acts 4 & 5 walled you off from literally every place prior, then how come I can go back and do quests from Act 2 AFTER I do Act 5?

 

Just sayin'.

 

 

Because Act 6 doesn't wall you off from those places. If I'd meant "acts 4-6," I'd have said, "acts 4-6." I'm sorry if that was unclear.

 

I raise the comparison because, just like losing access to Defiance Bay in PoE, it's temporary. You just have to progress the story further.

[anameforobsidian]

It's just not a great review.  Pretty standard "this game sucks, and its over too quickly" fare from the codex.  The reviewer hated the game so much that he played 15 levels of an optional dungeon.

 

Let's go point by point otherwise:

Stats leading to samey -builds, because the game wants you to play with one tank and five nukers.  Then he recants and says, unless you go for something crazy like a 6 wizard party.  This is a non-criticism.  The game leads to boring builds if you choose a boring playstyle?  Wow.

 

Talents being boring.  I didn't find this to be the case, at all.  You can strongly change a character based on talent selection, and there's a whole thread complaining that the game autoselects skills and talents for you.

 

Druid being the best class in the game.  Except it can't revive, it's heals are slow, so its not the best healer.  It's certainly not the best melee, and beastform can disable spells anyways.  It does have strong damage potential, but it's not better than the other classes.

 

The cipher is terrible because its unbalanced, and balance is killing the game.  Sure.  Waves of repulsion is overpowered, and the cipher could do with less focus, but its a pretty solid class design.

 

Crafting does the job.  It needs access to more unique status effects, but you only get to make one superb weapon and piece of armor, so it needs to count.

 

Engagement could use a shift/5step system, but it makes combat more interesting by meaning that you have to structure and plan your movements.  Enemies break engagement all the time, but more enemies could play with it.

 

The health/endurance complaint is ridiculous.  Regenerating endurance is bad, because your characters lose more health is a terrible argument since if one of your characters drops a lot of characters lose a lot more health.  There are quite strong consequences to letting characters lose health.  But even more problematic is his praise of limited resources (and healing potions were barely limited resources in the IE games), yet complaints about the rest system being ineffective.  The health+rest system means that you do have to carefully manage limited resources, far more so than the IE games because there's no resurrection.

 

He says buffs are terrible in the game, but then complains that there's no stat to control accuracy.  Buffs are the main way you tactically alter accuracy.  Also, the whole it only works if it's a hard counter schtick is tired.  Buffs can make a situation better or worse, the control is graduated in a way that binaries don't allow.

 

The stronghold does need more interaction.  It's three screens, not four from the paths to the stronghold.

 

The writing does need stronger focus on one theme.  However his criticisms of Thaos are mostly unjustified.  Of course Thaos isn't going to fight you.  Guards are everywhere, looking for someone to kill.

 

The text adventures do need more variety in skill checks, but failures have penalizing debuffs.

 

"This is literally the worst Obsidian game I’ve played to date. That’s right, I even had more fun with Dungeon Siege 3 - at least it was a fun beat ‘em up, as opposed to this lifeless, uninspired husk."  That's just stupid and wrong.

[FlintlockJazz]

I have to admit, it's impressive that the Haters have got people agreeing with their flaws in an attempt to meet them half-way without the haters making any effort to do so in return, when really what should happen is that the Haters are just ignored and left to their own bile.  I think this video is rather appropriate to what is going on here by the way.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc

Edited April 23, 2015 by FlintlockJazz