Of course. I'm leaving the discussion in this here thread, though. No need to fuel your anger further.

 

It wouldn't hurt to buy darts to throw at Obsidian devs heads for targets instead of crowding the forums.

And, he exits the discussion....with a retard's straw man.

 

Of course. I'm leaving the discussion in this here thread, though. No need to fuel your anger further.

 

It wouldn't hurt to buy darts to throw at Obsidian devs heads for targets instead of crowding the forums.

And, he exits the discussion....with a retard's straw man.

 

 

He made good points. You were all butthurt about it. 

 

Whining. 

 

Who do you think you are? 

I wonder who is really butthurt here, shadowstorm. People who are making arguments or people unable to make arguments. 

I wonder who is really butthurt here, shadowstorm. People who are making arguments or people unable to make arguments. 

 

Maybe - and I know this is a really shocking idea - no one is actually butthurt, but instead just expressing their personal opinions as best they can over their respective feelings towards playing PoE and how that relates to other RPGs they've played in the past.

 

Hahahah...who am I kidding, right?

I wonder who is really butthurt here, shadowstorm. People who are making arguments or people unable to make arguments. 

 

Well, since Constantine made good arguments, that question answers itself. The one calling other people retards is always butthurt.

What are those people doing in these forums ? Trolling ? The forums are for people who (more or less) like the game, care about its future, want to see improvements and discuss about all that.

 

 

Even if you've paid 25 or more bucks to back the game, bitching in the forums will not get you anywhere or make you a better person.

 

I can't speak for them, but I'm here because I care about the game. I see potential in the game, but I certainly can't say I like it yet. What I'm not doing, however, is telling people that do like the game how wrong they are or that they're somehow not 'open-minded' enough to see the 'truth' about the game.

 

 

It's funny how you put words in my mouth (so to speak).

We're getting this accusation from you?

 

You? The same person who, just a few minutes ago decided to 'inform' us that the only reason we love the IE games more than PoE is because we've grown to "accept" their faults?

 

 

Grow up, already.

 

 

............ ok.

 

 

 

The funny thing is that if you point out obvious problems with the older games they will write forty point rebuttals on why they're not a big deal.  So the ridiculous juggling of piles of things into various containers - which took up a very substantial fraction of my game time in the classics - is somehow "immersive."  Game systems that are incredibly convoluted - like the dual classing of Baldurs Gate, the 2,198 prestige classes of NWN - are not a problem.  Stat systems like IWD where you can set every one that matters for your character to 18 by setting stats that are utterly irrelevant to 3 - well, you get false "dump stat" equivalencies in PoE.  AI that you can defeat by kiting is not a problem.

 

Now, I can also say - at the same time - that I do enjoy these games a lot if I take them as what they are, not as some dreamy ideal.  Icewind Dale is a series of tactical battles - puzzles, really - and it's terrific at that.  They're designed around my all-18 fighters and munchkin designs, so as long as I play that way I do fine.  Baldurs Gate has a nice epic feel to it, and I happily role-play through it and do the various dances that I need to do to progress through it.   Planescape:Torment is a really well-done story embedded in a terrible, primitive combat system.  I pretty much ignore the latter to play the former.  And - gasp - playing something like the Elder Scrolls game as a sneaky thief is *great*, blowing things up in Divinity Original Sin is a hoot, and Wasteland 2 has real consequence down cold.  Fallout: New Vegas has surprisingly deep game play.

 

But we're not seeing clear-eyed and balanced critiques; we're seeing people angry that the designers didn't obey them lashing out.

 

But we're not seeing clear-eyed and balanced critiques; we're seeing people angry that the designers didn't obey them lashing out.

 

 

Not really, the game was pitched as having the best of BG2, IWD and PS:T. Now, it should have been obvious that the first iteration of POE would never live up to this but, debatably, it's not even close to reaching any of these goals; the combat diversity is poor, the companions and exploration are not even close to BG2 and the plot is standard cookie-cutter stuff.

 

The reason most people are disappointed/dislike/hate the game is due to the missed potential, this is also why these people continue to post instead of just leave and forget about it. Some of this blind fanboy defense is ridiculous tbh, this pretense that POE hit the mark perfectly.

Well, since Constantine made good arguments, that question answers itself. The one calling other people retards is always butthurt.

 

Constantine has made no good arguments at all. In fact, anything that's come from Constantine has been utter rubbish.

 

 

But we're not seeing clear-eyed and balanced critiques; we're seeing people angry that the designers didn't obey them lashing out.

 

 

Not really, the game was pitched as having the best of BG2, IWD and PS:T. Now, it should have been obvious that the first iteration of POE would never live up to this but, debatably, it's not even close to reaching any of these goals; the combat diversity is poor, the companions and exploration are not even close to BG2 and the plot is standard cookie-cutter stuff.

 

The reason most people are disappointed/dislike/hate the game is due to the missed potential, this is also why these people continue to post instead of just leave and forget about it. Some of this blind fanboy defense is ridiculous tbh, this pretense that POE hit the mark perfectly.

 

 

Ha, please show me the pitch where they promised the best of PS:T, IWD, and BG2. Actually, don't bother because it doesn't exist. They promised to incorporate aspects of BG, IWD, and PS:T. They frankly made no explicit mention of BG2 or IWD2. I notice you single out BG2 but not IWD2 in your list for some reason, maybe because you idolize BG2 and wanted PoE to live up to it? They never said BG2, you can keep saying that they actually meant BG2, but they did not say it. Expecting them to deliver on promises that you or anyone else imagined is absurd.

 

The assertion that everyone defending the game is a blind fanboy proves that you're not open-minded enough to look at the situation objectively. PoE promised to combine aspects of BG, IWD, and PS:T into an original RPG. The game accomplishes exactly that.

The funny thing is that if you point out obvious problems with the older games they will write forty point rebuttals on why they're not a big deal.  So the ridiculous juggling of piles of things into various containers - which took up a very substantial fraction of my game time in the classics - is somehow "immersive."  Game systems that are incredibly convoluted - like the dual classing of Baldurs Gate, the 2,198 prestige classes of NWN - are not a problem.  Stat systems like IWD where you can set every one that matters for your character to 18 by setting stats that are utterly irrelevant to 3 - well, you get false "dump stat" equivalencies in PoE.  AI that you can defeat by kiting is not a problem.

 

 

 IE fans don't, in general, view the existence of dump stats, a complex character building system that lends itself to power gaming, exploitable mechanics, and limited inventory as negatives -- at least, not pure negatives.  Obsidian does, and they designed POE to try to eliminate them.  Thus, IE fans end up talking about them, largely in the context of "POE sacrificed standard, traditional, statistics in an attempt to eliminate dump stats, and they didn't even manage to achieve their goal" (example only, although a statement that I personally agree with).  The argument that the IE fans are making is that POE sacrifices far too much to try (& fail) to eliminate something, and thus makes the game worse.

 

Tastes obvious vary -- some people obviously do view a limited inventory as a pure negative thing with no redeeming value, for example -- but arguing that "Well, I don't see any value in limited inventory, therefore anyone who claims otherwise are looking for some 'dreamy ideal'".  They, and I, simply have different ideas of what is important in game design, and the folks that "lost" (whose ideals are not expressed in POE) are, unsurprisingly, not happy with Obsidian implementation priorities. 

 

The funny thing is that if you point out obvious problems with the older games they will write forty point rebuttals on why they're not a big deal.  So the ridiculous juggling of piles of things into various containers - which took up a very substantial fraction of my game time in the classics - is somehow "immersive."  Game systems that are incredibly convoluted - like the dual classing of Baldurs Gate, the 2,198 prestige classes of NWN - are not a problem.  Stat systems like IWD where you can set every one that matters for your character to 18 by setting stats that are utterly irrelevant to 3 - well, you get false "dump stat" equivalencies in PoE.  AI that you can defeat by kiting is not a problem.

 

 

 IE fans don't, in general, view the existence of dump stats, a complex character building system that lends itself to power gaming, exploitable mechanics, and limited inventory as negatives -- at least, not pure negatives.  Obsidian does, and they designed POE to try to eliminate them.  Thus, IE fans end up talking about them, largely in the context of "POE sacrificed standard, traditional, statistics in an attempt to eliminate dump stats, and they didn't even manage to achieve their goal" (example only, although a statement that I personally agree with).  The argument that the IE fans are making is that POE sacrifices far too much to try (& fail) to eliminate something, and thus makes the game worse.

 

Tastes obvious vary -- some people obviously do view a limited inventory as a pure negative thing with no redeeming value, for example -- but arguing that "Well, I don't see any value in limited inventory, therefore anyone who claims otherwise are looking for some 'dreamy ideal'".  They, and I, simply have different ideas of what is important in game design, and the folks that "lost" (whose ideals are not expressed in POE) are, unsurprisingly, not happy with Obsidian implementation priorities. 

 

 

As I indicated in my full post, different games excel at different things - so of course I agree that some people will see value in different aspects, and that's great. What seems to be missing, on the other side, is mutual respect.  Quite simply, the harshest and most prolific critics here seem to honestly think that their preferences are objectively superior to those of others, and they seem to honestly think that PoE is objectively terrible.  When you add this to an unwillingness to admit that people who disagree with you have any valid points, and juvenile "butthurt" crowing, you don't have constructive and meaningful criticism.

 

And, no, relentlessly running something down doesn't improve it.

 When you add this to an unwillingness to admit that people who disagree with you have any valid points, and juvenile "butthurt" crowing, you don't have constructive and meaningful criticism.

 

Both sides are guilty of this. Witness the backlash against the Codex review. The vitriol in that thread posted by the game supporters that attacked the Codex, the author, and hell even that it wasn't a 'review'. Then the rebuttal threads that were posted because of it. Both sides are guilty of painting the other with a broad - and unfair - brush. Unfortunately, it seems we've come to the point where you can neither praise nor criticize the game without responses becoming nothing but personal attacks.

 

 

But we're not seeing clear-eyed and balanced critiques; we're seeing people angry that the designers didn't obey them lashing out.

 

 

the companions and exploration are not even close to BG2 and the plot is standard cookie-cutter stuff.

 

 

I give you exploration, but PoE's plot is more cookie cutter than BG2?  BG2 has better developed companions?  Um, nope.

Edited April 29, 201511 yr by bonarbill

I liked the Infinity Engine games, but that was in spite of the ruleset, mechanics, and design.   THAC0?  That...doesn't compute for me.  Nor does the arbitrary limitation of priests to blunt weaponry, or how druids cannot use anything beyond "primitive" weapons.   I can't dual-class Minsc into Cleric, without him losing access to Lilacor.   Limited inventory size.  Many spells that don't scale with levels.  S.  L.  O.  W.  T. R. A. P. D. E. T. E. C. T. I. O. N.

 

Good riddance.

 

The funny thing is that if you point out obvious problems with the older games they will write forty point rebuttals on why they're not a big deal.  So the ridiculous juggling of piles of things into various containers - which took up a very substantial fraction of my game time in the classics - is somehow "immersive."  Game systems that are incredibly convoluted - like the dual classing of Baldurs Gate, the 2,198 prestige classes of NWN - are not a problem.  Stat systems like IWD where you can set every one that matters for your character to 18 by setting stats that are utterly irrelevant to 3 - well, you get false "dump stat" equivalencies in PoE.  AI that you can defeat by kiting is not a problem.

 

 

Ehhhh I have some arguments but I'll try and keep it under forty points

 

The containers thing... no argument.  That's one of my favorite changes from PoE.  Just start me with the bag of holding and give me a nice shortcut (shift-click, in this case) to stick stuff in it. Beautiful!

 

Complex systems in character creation.  I actually like that, personally.  And, to be fair, that stuff is straight from the DnD source material so blame WotC. Plus dualing/multiclassing was totally optional, not what most people did on their first playthroughs, I assume.  Just rolling a straight class was not particularly complicated.  If anything, it was probably simpler than PoE (note, I'm not saying better. I like PoE character creation).

 

Dump stats.  Well DnD definitely had them. They still exist in PoE.  Maybe not 100% worthless stats, but close enough that the distinction is certainly debateable.  PERSONALLY, I don't like dropping anything below 9/10, but that's entirely a player choice.

 

Kiting.  I didn't even know this was a thing as I was never one to kite in the old games.  If someone was beating on my mage he would probably run away, but I don't find that particularly exploitive.  Although I could see that if you played a character wearing boots of speed and a high APR shortbow you could probably pick apart the AI pretty ruthlessly.  I guess I just don't see the point, it doesn't seem fun to me.  It's very easy for me to ignore small AI holes like that because I don't have to change my playstyle to avoid them.  Whereas the primitive AI in PoE seems much more problematic in that simply putting tanks in front completely seems to negate the need for any further tactical considerations. 

 

 

ANYWAY, these are the kind of discussions that I actually like on these forums.  Discussing the various strengths and weaknesses of comparitive titles allows us to get one step closer to the ultimate rtwp rpg game :D

I liked the Infinity Engine games, but that was in spite of the ruleset, mechanics, and design.   THAC0?  That...doesn't compute for me.  Nor does the arbitrary limitation of priests to blunt weaponry, or how druids cannot use anything beyond "primitive" weapons.   I can't dual-class Minsc into Cleric, without him losing access to Lilacor.   Limited inventory size.  Many spells that don't scale with levels.  S.  L.  O.  W.  T. R. A. P. D. E. T. E. C. T. I. O. N.

 

Good riddance.

 

Oh man that trap detection... You are NOT wrong about that one, it's brutal.  Having to stop every few meters and wait 6 seconds is excrutiating.

 

Also THAC0 vs AC was a horrible-to-comprehend system.  Why WotC ever thought that was better than just comparing a positive armor class against a positive accuracy stat I will never know. 

 

The priest/druid weapon stuff I don't really mind.  Someone's gotta use those non-longswords

 

I give you exploration, but PoE's plot is more cookie cutter than BG2?  BG2 has better developed companions?  Um, nope.

 

 

Interesting.  Exploration I would have said was reasonably similar.  BG2 had more interesting stuff in nooks and crannies (liches mostly!) but I wouldn't say they're drastically different.

 

But Companions!  My god I'm truly shocked you'd say PoE has better companions than BG2

-BG2 companions' interjections would actually be responded to in dialogue.

-BG2 companion quests generally had more interesting stuff going on.  Korgan's is kinda weak but most of the rest are pretty interesting and can go down in a couple different ways.  The standouts for me are Anomen and Yoshimo.  Though I haven't done them all so I could be missing a few gems.

-Romances.  How much you care about that differs between players, but they're there.  Also a love-triangle with Haer'dalis, Aerie and the PC

-The sheer quantity.  16(!) in the base BG2:SoA (not including them new ones in BG2EE, as that's not fair and they're not as good.)

-Inter-party banters.  So many and so many of them are actually good!  Having a mixed good/evil party gets so many awesome banters. I would never play this game with self-made npcs for this reason alone.

 

I try not to be a total grognard about BG2 but companions is the thing I think they do the best so I felt the need to reply a bit there *cough*. 

Ha, please show me the pitch where they promised the best of PS:T, IWD, and BG2. Actually, don't bother because it doesn't exist.

LOL

 

Wait a minute. So for the record, you are claiming that they didn't promise that PoE 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?

 

And that this wasn't exactly what they pitched us on the front page of their kickstarter, before asking us for a million dollars?

Edited April 29, 201511 yr by Stun

 

 

 

But we're not seeing clear-eyed and balanced critiques; we're seeing people angry that the designers didn't obey them lashing out.

 

 

Not really, the game was pitched as having the best of BG2, IWD and PS:T. Now, it should have been obvious that the first iteration of POE would never live up to this but, debatably, it's not even close to reaching any of these goals; the combat diversity is poor, the companions and exploration are not even close to BG2 and the plot is standard cookie-cutter stuff.

 

The reason most people are disappointed/dislike/hate the game is due to the missed potential, this is also why these people continue to post instead of just leave and forget about it. Some of this blind fanboy defense is ridiculous tbh, this pretense that POE hit the mark perfectly.

 

 

The assertion that everyone defending the game is a blind fanboy proves that you're not open-minded enough to look at the situation objectively. PoE promised to combine aspects of BG, IWD, and PS:T into an original RPG. The game accomplishes exactly that.

 

 

Did I say everyone defending is a blind fanboy? Or did I say some of the fanboyish defense is ridiculous, mainly that POE is perfect and people should not post criticisms about it on the OE boards? I'll concede the point that they never mentioned BG2 and I haven't played IWD2, so those really shouldn't be included.

 

Note that, with the exception of combat that I can run through on Hard even with +50% requirements to level-up and limiting equipment choices, I'm enjoying POE. I just don't think it's at the point where OE can claim that it captures the best aspects of BG/IWD/PS:T on a notable level. You can check their original kickstarter campaign for information on the pitch.

 

And BG2 companion interactions and quests completely destroy POE, imo. Hell, in BG1 you have infighting, companions that leave your party, companions that won't join your party if you are not strong enough (Shar-Teel), etc. It's an area that definitely needs more work, POE characters may have more detailed background info but their overall interaction and engagement is weak.

Edited April 29, 201511 yr by View619

Also THAC0 vs AC was a horrible-to-comprehend system.  Why WotC ever thought that was better than just comparing a positive armor class against a positive accuracy stat I will never know. 

 

That was actually Gygax/Arneson (and TSR). The BG series and IWD1 were based on the AD&D rules, which used thac0. The more 'sensible' d20 system of higher to hit roll vs higher AC wasn't developed/published until around the time of IWD2, which is why it used the 3.0 rules.

...

Also THAC0 vs AC was a horrible-to-comprehend system.  Why WotC ever thought that was better than just comparing a positive armor class against a positive accuracy stat I will never know. 

...

 

 

THAC0 evolved organically over time -- the original system (in 1st ed AD&D / D&D) was "Look up the AC of the opponent and the level of the character in a class specific chart:  That's the number that you need to exceed on a d20 to hit that opponent".  Players quickly discovered that the chart was generated via a simple mathematical formula, and started recording only the value required to hit hit AC 0 on the character sheet as a shortcut (eliminating the need to consult the for each and every attack).  2nd edition made this official, and that's what the Infinity Engine games used.

 

Now you know.

I have to agree with View619.  If you are going to claim to be successfully drawing the best from IWD, you really need to step up the combat.  Both in dificulty and tactical complexity.

 

I haven't played that series in years (I prefer the more RP/exploration focused games, personally) but I remember them being hard.  As in,  hard for me on normal.  PoE on PotD still isn't really scratching my difficulty itch so...

 

Also, as someone who sadly never managed to really get into planescape:torment due to interface issues, what exactly is PoE trying to pull from that game?  To me, PoE just seems like a spiritual successor to BG1.

Also, as someone who sadly never managed to really get into planescape:torment due to interface issues, what exactly is PoE trying to pull from that game?  To me, PoE just seems like a spiritual successor to BG1.

A very well-written deeply personal and philosophical story with true consequences to your actions/choices.

I have to agree with View619.  If you are going to claim to be successfully drawing the best from IWD, you really need to step up the combat.  Both in dificulty and tactical complexity.

 

I haven't played that series in years (I prefer the more RP/exploration focused games, personally) but I remember them being hard.  As in,  hard for me on normal.  PoE on PotD still isn't really scratching my difficulty itch so...

 

Also, as someone who sadly never managed to really get into planescape:torment due to interface issues, what exactly is PoE trying to pull from that game?  To me, PoE just seems like a spiritual successor to BG1.

 

The way dialogue is presented mirrors PS:T, the description of an NPC's facial expression, non-verbal communication, etc. Debatably, the mature themes vs the standard good & evil of IWD/BG.

They frankly made no explicit mention of BG2 or IWD2.

They named dropped the IP's. Baldurs Gate is a SERIES, as is Icewind Dale. They did not need to mention the specific sequels, the specific expansion packs, and the various patch updates. Because anyone with more than a single brain cell knew what they meant when they promised the best elements of those titles.

 

They didn't, for example, promise Planescape Torments Combat, or Icewind Dale's story writing, because that wouldn't have been good marketing.

Edited April 29, 201511 yr by Stun