Best part is the start

[petrivanzyl]

Recently restarted with a new play through, everytime I do it strikes me how action packed the start of the game is, the music, the scripted events, the text thingy story book even the trap inside the first dungeon.

 

The rest of the game never really seems to maintain the same intensity.

 

Is it just me?

[WebShaman]

I absolutely agree 100% and I am so glad you posted this (I was going to do it).

 

It is really the best part, and I was thinking at the time "Oh man, this is what I paid for, this is what I want!"

 

 

Until my Companions were killed off, without reason.

 

And I had some sort of flashback like an LSD Junkie.

 

And CAST OUT ALONE AT BEGINNING LEVELS IN A WILDERNESS ENVIRONMENT?!?!?!

 

 

At that point I was thinking "WTF?!  Get to safety ASAP!"

 

And then I read on the forums about everyone bitching and complaining about the Bear(s) (depending on difficulty) and such...

 

After that, everything went into the ****ter.

Edited April 22, 2015 by LadyCrimson
kinda spoilery, tag added

[Gromnir]

the ability to leisurely explore the game world and complete non critical path quets in whatever order you desire makes the kinda pacing you enjoyed during the intro impossible to maintain.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Sedrefilos]

The only problem with content for me, was Defiance Bay. It felt unfinished. The rest was good.

[Hebruixe]

The intro was pretty great.

Edited April 22, 2015 by Hebruixe

[b0rsuk]

I kinda agree, but please note the beginning is very linear. That's the price you pay.

 

I'm a bit angry about the biawac. It reminds me of the spirits and possessed children in Prey. Both appeared in exactly ONE point near the start of the game. Both were there only to make trailers/openings look more dramatic. I hoped for more biawacs.

[Wulfram]

The only problem with content for me, was Defiance Bay. It felt unfinished. The rest was good.

Heh, defiance bay was my favourite bit.

[Luckmann]

The intro and prologue is definitely the best part. There's choices for almost everyone, the interaction when going to get the water, etc, all of it is superb, there are multiple meaningful outcomes from very early decisions, etc. It plays like it's showcasing all the strengths of the system and all the stuff it should offer.

And then.. it drops off, yeah. Rather sharply, too.
 

the ability to leisurely explore the game world and complete non critical path quets in whatever order you desire makes the kinda pacing you enjoyed during the intro impossible to maintain.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

It has nothing to do with the pacing or linearity. It's the fact that the scripted interactions are engaging and meaningful, with a sound and intensity you don't seem to see anywhere else, there's loads of various choices in the ending dialogue of the prologue; it even matters what weapons you have equipped, when it comes to the final scripted interaction.

Nothing in the rest of the game even comes close to the prologue, and it paints a pretty false picture of things to come, unfortunately.

It's hard to explain to the intellectually disinclined without spoilers.

[Sedrefilos]

 

The only problem with content for me, was Defiance Bay. It felt unfinished. The rest was good.

Heh, defiance bay was my favourite bit.

 

This is why I believe so (scroll down to that part -highlighted; "biggest dissapointment i nthe game"- if you're bored reading the rest )

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/77841-i-finally-finished-the-game-and-heres-what-i-liked-and-didnt-like-about-it/?do=findComment&comment=1664797

Edited April 22, 2015 by Sedrefilos

[luzarius]

Recently restarted with a new play through, everytime I do it strikes me how action packed the start of the game is, the music, the scripted events, the text thingy story book even the trap inside the first dungeon.

 

The rest of the game never really seems to maintain the same intensity.

 

Is it just me?

 

Voice Pack DLC would take care of this.

 

This game is as good as Skyrim in which it deserves to be moddable.

[sivasdahling]

Its not just the Prologue!  The two best dungeons in the game are Raedric's hold and the temple of Eothas.  You have some light puzzles, clever stories scripted interactions, etc. Both are also quite large! The second act dungeons (the Skaen temple and Ila) are much less vivid.  And the third act dungeons are cool areas but are small and far too simple. 

 

You would think that they ran out of time, but Raedric's hold was one of the last areas built!

[Ink Blot]

 

Recently restarted with a new play through, everytime I do it strikes me how action packed the start of the game is, the music, the scripted events, the text thingy story book even the trap inside the first dungeon.

 

The rest of the game never really seems to maintain the same intensity.

 

Is it just me?

 

Voice Pack DLC would take care of this.

 

This game is as good as Skyrim in which it deserves to be moddable.

 

Voicing has nothing to do with it. I don't see the connection here other than your apparent obsession with voicing every line of dialog.

[Jojobobo]

I thought the intro was the weakest bit (even a lot of the Gilded Vale), I found getting to Defiance Bay and having much more compelling things to do (as well as more trivial things on the side) far better.

 

I mean who really cares about

childbirth potions, finding supplies and getting remains from a contentious god's temple who at that stage we're not really sure why they are contentious in the first place? Sure the Raedric stuff is better, but if you're planning to kill Raedric and not Kolsc you'll probably need to hold off on that anyway.

 

 

The opening section, whilst not exactly dull, didn't suck me in much either (apart from, you know, the opening tree scene).

Edited April 22, 2015 by Jojobobo

[WebShaman]

Its not just the Prologue!  The two best dungeons in the game are Raedric's hold and the temple of Eothas.  You have some light puzzles, clever stories scripted interactions, etc. Both are also quite large! The second act dungeons (the Skaen temple and Ila) are much less vivid.  And the third act dungeons are cool areas but are small and far too simple. 

 

You would think that they ran out of time, but Raedric's hold was one of the last areas built!

The only thing I didn't like about Raedric's Hold is that you can storm the keep (I mean...you would be riddled with bullets and arrows and bolts and...yeah.  Totally unrealistic).  Or you can "sneak" around in broad daylight (right by the walls, under the watchful eyes of the guards) and either climb up the walls itself (again, in broad daylight under the watchful eyes of the guards) OR "sneak through" a place that was broken into and sneaked through before!  Also in broad daylight under the watchful eyes of the guards.

 

Should only be possible at night (there is a day/night cycle in PoE). 

 

But other than that, yeah, it was pretty good.

[Zwiebelchen]

The intro and prologue is definitely the best part. There's choices for almost everyone, the interaction when going to get the water, etc, all of it is superb, there are multiple meaningful outcomes from very early decisions, etc. It plays like it's showcasing all the strengths of the system and all the stuff it should offer.

 

And then.. it drops off, yeah. Rather sharply, too.

 

the ability to leisurely explore the game world and complete non critical path quets in whatever order you desire makes the kinda pacing you enjoyed during the intro impossible to maintain.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

It has nothing to do with the pacing or linearity. It's the fact that the scripted interactions are engaging and meaningful, with a sound and intensity you don't seem to see anywhere else, there's loads of various choices in the ending dialogue of the prologue; it even matters what weapons you have equipped, when it comes to the final scripted interaction.

 

Nothing in the rest of the game even comes close to the prologue, and it paints a pretty false picture of things to come, unfortunately.

 

It's hard to explain to the intellectually disinclined without spoilers.

 

I was wondering: does anyone of you play with the developer commentary enabled? I did. Basicly, what the commentary says at this point is that the starting area of the game was developed at the very end of the game developement cycle, when all the systems were fully fleshed out and they could play with them to the fullest.

 

This is basicly what makes me believe that a possible upcoming expansion will be a huge step upwards in RPing and complexity.

 

You can definitely see the differences in area quality depending on when they were designed throughout the developement cycle.

[Luckmann]

 

The intro and prologue is definitely the best part. There's choices for almost everyone, the interaction when going to get the water, etc, all of it is superb, there are multiple meaningful outcomes from very early decisions, etc. It plays like it's showcasing all the strengths of the system and all the stuff it should offer.

 

And then.. it drops off, yeah. Rather sharply, too.

 

the ability to leisurely explore the game world and complete non critical path quets in whatever order you desire makes the kinda pacing you enjoyed during the intro impossible to maintain.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

It has nothing to do with the pacing or linearity. It's the fact that the scripted interactions are engaging and meaningful, with a sound and intensity you don't seem to see anywhere else, there's loads of various choices in the ending dialogue of the prologue; it even matters what weapons you have equipped, when it comes to the final scripted interaction.

 

Nothing in the rest of the game even comes close to the prologue, and it paints a pretty false picture of things to come, unfortunately.

 

It's hard to explain to the intellectually disinclined without spoilers.

 

I was wondering: does anyone of you play with the developer commentary enabled? I did. Basicly, what the commentary says at this point is that the starting area of the game was developed at the very end of the game developement cycle, when all the systems were fully fleshed out and they could play with them to the fullest.

 

This is basicly what makes me believe that a possible upcoming expansion will be a huge step upwards in RPing and complexity.

 

You can definitely see the differences in area quality depending on when they were designed throughout the developement cycle.

 

 

Nope, haven't played with dev commentary, but that's definitely interesting to know. Hopefully the expansions will actually review existing content, too, not just add new content, then. But I actually just said in another thread that I'll love to see what they can do in expansions and sequels, precisely *because* the nuts and bolts are now in place, and they should be getting content-making down to a science.

[Zwiebelchen]

Nope, haven't played with dev commentary, but that's definitely interesting to know. Hopefully the expansions will actually review existing content, too, not just add new content, then. But I actually just said in another thread that I'll love to see what they can do in expansions and sequels, precisely *because* the nuts and bolts are now in place, and they should be getting content-making down to a science.

 

 

I highly doubt that they would revisit old content in a possible expansion. That's not a good idea from a developer perspective, as it takes away production resources from making new content and - let's face it - the current content is functional. Any improvement would be a waste of effort.

 

What I could imagine in regards to the old content, however, is a makeover of certain gameplay elements (that will in turn affect the old game aswell) that will still matter in future content. Possible candidates for that would be the stronghold or the enchanting system/item system. Or more variety in talent selection.

 

 

What is very unlikely are changes to quest/encounter design or dialogue in the present game. They will probably focus on new areas instead and put all those improvements there. And this is fine to me. No reason to stick to the past needlessly.

The only exception would be if they intend the first expansion as a supplement to the original game, instead of a direct continuation.

 

So basicly, instead of continuing the story after Thaos, they would add new dungeons and side-quests to the original game, not raising the level cap.

But that would be extremely lame imho, so I hope they don't go that route. I'd be fine with one new dungeon/quest for the original game (kind of like the Watcher's Keep in ToB, which was also accessable from the original game), but I would definitely prefer the developement focus on epic level content.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Zwiebelchen

[WebShaman]

I play with the Dev Commentary on.

 

Pretty interesting insights.

 

It becomes very obvious that they were really feeling the economic squeeze.

[Luckmann]

 

Nope, haven't played with dev commentary, but that's definitely interesting to know. Hopefully the expansions will actually review existing content, too, not just add new content, then. But I actually just said in another thread that I'll love to see what they can do in expansions and sequels, precisely *because* the nuts and bolts are now in place, and they should be getting content-making down to a science.

 

I highly doubt that they would revisit old content in a possible expansion. That's not a good idea from a developer perspective, as it takes away production resources from making new content and - let's face it - the current content is functional. Any improvement would be a waste of effort.

 

[...]

 

I doubt it too, but I still hope they will. I don't agree that it's not a good idea or that improvements would be a waste of effort. It's not a waste of effort during core development any more than it's a wasted effort afterwards. It's really easy to do "functional" content. It's harder to do good content.

 

Revisiting and revising old content, polishing broken questlines and fixing up narrative issues is what could move Pillars of Eternity from an OK game to an amazing game.

 

'sides, I would much rather see the Endless Paths expanded, that to see another mega-dungeon á la Watcher's Keep or Durlag's Tower, and see the Stronghold reach it's true potential. Neither is possible if you stick to adding new content, rather than expanding on and revisiting old content and adding to that.

 

[...]

 

The only exception would be if they intend the first expansion as a supplement to the original game, instead of a direct continuation.

 

[...]

 

Which many of us are hoping for anyway, and it is confirmed that at least one of the expansions (probably both, but it's not clear) will be TotSC-like. So, supplement to the original game. A direct continuation is almost universally underwhelming and tacked on. If there's going to be sequel content, I'd prefer it to be in an actual sequel (even though I would also prefer any sequel to be stand-alone).

Edited April 23, 2015 by Luckmann

[Zwiebelchen]

The reason why this is not a good practice - from a developement point of view - is that you want a maximum amount of players to see the content you've created. You definitely don't want "limited" content in a way that it's restricted to only a small number of players.

 

Many players will only play a game once. If you add too much backtracking content that isn't relevant to the continuation of the game, lots of players will skip these content pieces. Supplementary content expansions only make sense for sandbox and rogue-like games, where the player is expected to play the game multiple times. It works for games like XCOM: Enemy Unknown, simply because you don't play XCOM for the story and roleplaying, but for the mechanics.

 

An expansion with supplementary content basicly forces the player to restart the game to see all the new stuff, which will affect your sales by making the expansion less attractive for one-shot players.

[Luckmann]

The reason why this is not a good practice - from a developement point of view - is that you want a maximum amount of players to see the content you've created. You definitely don't want "limited" content in a way that it's restricted to only a small number of players.

 

Many players will only play a game once. If you add too much backtracking content that isn't relevant to the continuation of the game, lots of players will skip these content pieces. Supplementary content expansions only make sense for sandbox and rogue-like games, where the player is expected to play the game multiple times. It works for games like XCOM: Enemy Unknown, simply because you don't play XCOM for the story and roleplaying, but for the mechanics.

 

An expansion with supplementary content basicly forces the player to restart the game to see all the new stuff, which will affect your sales by making the expansion less attractive for one-shot players.

 

There is little difference between that, and adding other content to the base game. By improving upon the base game in a meaningful way, you're essentially creating new content to be experiences by replays - no different than if an expansion would add content on to the sides. Pillars of Eternity (and CRPG:s in general) are finite experiences with a beginning and an end. Whether the "one-shot players" play on the sides of the game or at the end of the game, or play content added to the core game, doesn't matter in that context.

 

The reason it would be a good practice - from a developer point of view - is the same reason "a delayed game will eventually be good, but a bad game will be bad forever" exists as a proverb. If the interest is to make a great game, release should not be a reason to stop making it one. If a developer keeps working on core aspects of the game as well as adding new content, it has the potential to be remembered for decades as the best of the best, instead of "that rough start", or "the core game is meh, but the expansions were better":

 

A game is judge by the merits or lack thereof of it's core, and everything around it will only ever be judged by comparison. There are many things in PoE that could be better, and I think PoE deserves the chance to be all it can be as a game in it's own right.

[b0rsuk]

The reason why this is not a good practice - from a developement point of view - is that you want a maximum amount of players to see the content you've created. You definitely don't want "limited" content in a way that it's restricted to only a small number of players.

 

The game may have some initial sales + kickstarter, but 5 years from now it will really matter if the base areas are well done or not. The game will still look good 5 years from now. It has the best from 2D and 3D graphics (not counting inability to rotate camera in combat), a great settings, music etc.

 

We are living in the age of Youtube, "Let's plays", and rediscovering of old classics. GOG is a thing. It's easier than ever to find and replay old classics.

Edited April 23, 2015 by b0rsuk

[Zwiebelchen]

 

The reason why this is not a good practice - from a developement point of view - is that you want a maximum amount of players to see the content you've created. You definitely don't want "limited" content in a way that it's restricted to only a small number of players.

 

Many players will only play a game once. If you add too much backtracking content that isn't relevant to the continuation of the game, lots of players will skip these content pieces. Supplementary content expansions only make sense for sandbox and rogue-like games, where the player is expected to play the game multiple times. It works for games like XCOM: Enemy Unknown, simply because you don't play XCOM for the story and roleplaying, but for the mechanics.

 

An expansion with supplementary content basicly forces the player to restart the game to see all the new stuff, which will affect your sales by making the expansion less attractive for one-shot players.

 

There is little difference between that, and adding other content to the base game. By improving upon the base game in a meaningful way, you're essentially creating new content to be experiences by replays - no different than if an expansion would add content on to the sides. Pillars of Eternity (and CRPG:s in general) are finite experiences with a beginning and an end. Whether the "one-shot players" play on the sides of the game or at the end of the game, or play content added to the core game, doesn't matter in that context.

 

The reason it would be a good practice - from a developer point of view - is the same reason "a delayed game will eventually be good, but a bad game will be bad forever" exists as a proverb. If the interest is to make a great game, release should not be a reason to stop making it one. If a developer keeps working on core aspects of the game as well as adding new content, it has the potential to be remembered for decades as the best of the best, instead of "that rough start", or "the core game is meh, but the expansions were better":

 

A game is judge by the merits or lack thereof of it's core, and everything around it will only ever be judged by comparison. There are many things in PoE that could be better, and I think PoE deserves the chance to be all it can be as a game in it's own right.

 

 

And yet nobody remembers MotB for what it added to the base game, only what it added after the base game.

 

Storm over Zehir, which was basicly what you described as side-content (note that it wasn't supplementary content for the NWN2 main campaign, but rather a second campaign) wasn't even close as popular as MotB.

[Luckmann]

 

 

The reason why this is not a good practice - from a developement point of view - is that you want a maximum amount of players to see the content you've created. You definitely don't want "limited" content in a way that it's restricted to only a small number of players.

 

Many players will only play a game once. If you add too much backtracking content that isn't relevant to the continuation of the game, lots of players will skip these content pieces. Supplementary content expansions only make sense for sandbox and rogue-like games, where the player is expected to play the game multiple times. It works for games like XCOM: Enemy Unknown, simply because you don't play XCOM for the story and roleplaying, but for the mechanics.

 

An expansion with supplementary content basicly forces the player to restart the game to see all the new stuff, which will affect your sales by making the expansion less attractive for one-shot players.

 

There is little difference between that, and adding other content to the base game. By improving upon the base game in a meaningful way, you're essentially creating new content to be experiences by replays - no different than if an expansion would add content on to the sides. Pillars of Eternity (and CRPG:s in general) are finite experiences with a beginning and an end. Whether the "one-shot players" play on the sides of the game or at the end of the game, or play content added to the core game, doesn't matter in that context.

 

The reason it would be a good practice - from a developer point of view - is the same reason "a delayed game will eventually be good, but a bad game will be bad forever" exists as a proverb. If the interest is to make a great game, release should not be a reason to stop making it one. If a developer keeps working on core aspects of the game as well as adding new content, it has the potential to be remembered for decades as the best of the best, instead of "that rough start", or "the core game is meh, but the expansions were better":

 

A game is judge by the merits or lack thereof of it's core, and everything around it will only ever be judged by comparison. There are many things in PoE that could be better, and I think PoE deserves the chance to be all it can be as a game in it's own right.

 

 

And yet nobody remembers MotB for what it added to the base game, only what it added after the base game.

 

Storm over Zehir, which was basicly what you described as side-content (note that it wasn't supplementary content for the NWN2 main campaign, but rather a second campaign) wasn't even close as popular as MotB.

 

 

For all intents and purposes, MotB and SoZ were both standalone, though. Completely different campaigns, or modules, as it worked in NWN2. We know that they're going for a TotSC-approach to PoE (thank heavens).

[Zwiebelchen]

Don't get me wrong; I like the fact that they go for the TotSC approach and add new content to the base game... but I also fear that by doing this, they are also taking away from the momentum that PoE has generated. I want to see more of the world, because the world, by lore, sounds awesome. I wouldn't want to stick to the "humble beginnings" setting for too long, especially if the base game's story content would still be the "grand finale".

It's always weird when the side content is more epic than the main content. This was basicly my gripe with Durlag's Tower.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Zwiebelchen