Jump to content

Recommended Posts

BG2 isn't a big deal. It was a big deal. If it was a big deal currently, we'd be playing BG2 instead of PoE.

 

I guess I should add: whether Eternity honors its pledge to pay homage to BG2 is currently a big deal.

Video games in general are a big deal. When people have false assumptions about BG2 it's a big deal. I am so serious about this.

 

This freakin' matters.


"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Please explain why I would NEED +3 weapons.

A number of monsters are immune to damage from weapons with an alteration bonus inferior to +3. Plus I believe that the spell to make a mage immune to the same is also relatively low level.

 

Nope. I can kill liches without using level six or higher spells.

They're still immune to spells below 6th level though, which makes a number of parties useless against them. And your proposed solutions are about as good as the good old exploit of resting in the next room to dispel all their contingencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complaining about not being able to kill highest power mages without magic (including magical weapons) seems silly. 

 

It's like complaining about not being able to finish Call of Duty using only a knife. 

 

It's not like it's hard to find +3 weapons in BG2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complaining about not being able to kill highest power mages without magic (including magical weapons) seems silly.

I'm not complaining. Well, okay, I'm complaining about the Lich thing. Those suckers were covered in all sorts of protections against weapons and were resistant to magic, but you couldn't bring those down like you could with any other mage because the spells necessary were level 5.

 

It's not like it's hard to find +3 weapons in BG2.

+3 Daggers and Halberds, I think, are only found in huge quests that takes a lot of time and pits you against very dangerous foes. Respectively, the Astral Prison and the Unseeing Eye, respectively.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nonsense.  There is a brand of toxic people whose entire purpose is to run things down.  They hate every aspect of a game, they mock and attack anyone who likes it, and they flood boards with walls of negativity.  Not all criticism is constructive or right.  And whenever they're called on their approach they resort to some BS claim about how they're just trying to make the game better.

 

The people who obviously hate this game so much want it to fail, they want to shut down anyone who disagrees with them, and the negative feedback can be nothing more than misguided sour grapes.

Nope.avi

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A number of monsters are immune to damage from weapons with an alteration bonus inferior to +3.

We've already been through this. BG2 is a game with 10,000 solutions and even the loopholes have loopholes. On the off chance that your party manages to face a Lich or an Iron Golem before acquiring a +3 weapon (a feat in itself. Why are you under the impression that +3 weapons are rare?), There's always alternatives. Thief traps come to mind. Summons. Spells. etc.

 

+3 Daggers and Halberds, I think, are only found in huge quests that takes a lot of time and pits you against very dangerous foes. Respectively, the Astral Prison and the Unseeing Eye, respectively.

+3 and +4 weapons (including Axes, Quarterstaves and warhammers), can be bought in the Adventurers mart in Waulkeens Promenade.... you know, the Adventurers mart, which is next door to the game's opening dungeon.

 

Oh, and a +5 weapon can be bought at the copper coronet in the slums, the second area you visit in Athkatla. Imagine that. About an hour into the game, you can find a weapon that will be effective against friggin Demogorgon, Mellisan and Baalthazar 200 hours later.

Edited by Stun
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unfair to compare PoE to BG. PoE will never reach the awesomeness and legendary status of such a game. End of.

 

BUT, as I was grinding through 40 rooms with 150 thugs watching hideous graphics, listening to terrible VA and repetitive music over and over and over again, while AI was infuriating me (Yep, I'm playing NWN2), I learned to appreciate just how good PoE is compared to some other games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"It is unfair to compare PoE to BG. PoE will never reach the awesomeness and legendary status of such a game. End of."

 

You say it is unfair then go on to compare them anyways... L0L


DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So are 6th and above level spells for the liches.

Nope. I can kill liches without using level six or higher spells.

 

I can kill a lich using a single 3rd level mage spell. Edited by Stun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can kill a lich without using any spells. :)


DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is unfair to compare PoE to BG. PoE will never reach the awesomeness and legendary status of such a game. End of.

 

BUT, as I was grinding through 40 rooms with 150 thugs watching hideous graphics, listening to terrible VA and repetitive music over and over and over again, while AI was infuriating me (Yep, I'm playing NWN2), I learned to appreciate just how good PoE is compared to some other games. 

 

 

NWN2 is objectively better. And I am not talking about the campaigns, even when I believe that MOtB and SoZ>>>>> PoE. NWN2 simply has better mechanics, which when used judiciously can give us amazing modules like the Conan Saga. As I see it, PoE is totally hampered by its combat design where the attributes have little to insignificant effects and the entire engagement mechanics. Add to that the inability to multiclass and you have a repetitive and shallow gameplay.


"The essence of balance is detachment. To embrace a cause, to grow fond or spiteful, is to lose one's balance, after which, no action can be trusted. Our burden is not for the dependent of spirit."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+3 and +4 weapons (including Axes, Quarterstaves and warhammers), can be bought in the Adventurers mart in Waulkeens Promenade.... you know, the Adventurers mart, which is next door to the game's opening dungeon.

+4 weapons are only available in the Adventurer's Mart after you get out of the Underdark.

 

Oh, and a +5 weapon can be bought at the copper coronet in the slums, the second area you visit in Athkatla. Imagine that. About an hour into the game, you can find a weapon that will be effective against friggin Demogorgon, Mellisan and Baalthazar 200 hours later.

You mean the sling? Good job doing any significant damage with that thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BG2 isn't a big deal. It was a big deal. If it was a big deal currently, we'd be playing BG2 instead of PoE.

 

I guess I should add: whether Eternity honors its pledge to pay homage to BG2 is currently a big deal.

 

Good point- that is exactly what I am doing, and loving it :)  I decided to start BG all over and go from the very beginning.  Playing as a fighter/thief is super satisfying.  My multi-classed elven fighter/thief started with 18/87 STR 19 DEX 15 CON and 10 in everything else.  Now, at the beginning of BG2, he has 19 STR 20 DEX 16 CON and 13 WIS (10 in everything else).  Really pumping pickpocketing paid off royally (literally), with my small party of pure rogues incredibly well-equipped and wealthy.  I've only just gotten out of the dungeon, but he's got -5 AC and a THACO of 5.  Good times.

 

It is totally fair to compare the 2.  Were it not for the BG series, I doubt that POE would have been funded.  I bought it to replace the BG series.  I don't think it succeeded at doing it, but hopefully POE 2 will show all the improvements that BG 2 showed over BG.  I BG, I never felt "epic", mainly because I knew what was possible in BG 2: time stop, dragons, vampires, illithids, improved everything, etc. 

 

In POE, you had the opportunity for some really tough end game fights that would have been more the equivalent of stuff in BG 2, than BG 1, I believe. Given it is supposed to be "low fantasy", that makes me wonder what will come in POE 2, because those are some pretty significant things.


"1 is 1"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+4 weapons are only available in the Adventurer's Mart after you get out of the Underdark.

False. Staff of Rynn. Sold at the Adventurer's mart. The moment you exit Irenicus' dungeon... Like I said. And.... it doesn't matter anyway. We were talking about +3 weapons, and the Adventurers mart sells plenty of those as well.

 

You mean the sling? Good job doing any significant damage with that thing.

6 points *Minimum*. Guaranteed. That's more than we can say for any +3 weapon. And it'll hit any creature in the game. Again, that's more than we can say for Any +3 weapon. Edited by Stun
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is unfair to compare PoE to BG. PoE will never reach the awesomeness and legendary status of such a game. End of.

 

BUT, as I was grinding through 40 rooms with 150 thugs watching hideous graphics, listening to terrible VA and repetitive music over and over and over again, while AI was infuriating me (Yep, I'm playing NWN2), I learned to appreciate just how good PoE is compared to some other games. 

 

 

NWN2 is objectively better. And I am not talking about the campaigns, even when I believe that MOtB and SoZ>>>>> PoE. NWN2 simply has better mechanics, which when used judiciously can give us amazing modules like the Conan Saga. As I see it, PoE is totally hampered by its combat design where the attributes have little to insignificant effects and the entire engagement mechanics. Add to that the inability to multiclass and you have a repetitive and shallow gameplay.

 

 

 

<blinks>.  The AI is wretched in NWN, the graphics are painful, the camera controls are awful.  The flavor of D&D is one that I like, but that is very far down on my list of reasons to enjoy or not enjoy a game.  I actually managed to finish PoE, and I could never force myself to do so yet for NWN2...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I said: Do not play NWN2 OC. It was designed by monkeys. 

  • Like 1

"The essence of balance is detachment. To embrace a cause, to grow fond or spiteful, is to lose one's balance, after which, no action can be trusted. Our burden is not for the dependent of spirit."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is unfair to compare PoE to BG. PoE will never reach the awesomeness and legendary status of such a game. End of.

 

BUT, as I was grinding through 40 rooms with 150 thugs watching hideous graphics, listening to terrible VA and repetitive music over and over and over again, while AI was infuriating me (Yep, I'm playing NWN2), I learned to appreciate just how good PoE is compared to some other games. 

 

 

NWN2 is objectively better. And I am not talking about the campaigns, even when I believe that MOtB and SoZ>>>>> PoE. NWN2 simply has better mechanics, which when used judiciously can give us amazing modules like the Conan Saga. As I see it, PoE is totally hampered by its combat design where the attributes have little to insignificant effects and the entire engagement mechanics. Add to that the inability to multiclass and you have a repetitive and shallow gameplay.

 

 

 

 

I don't know what 'objectively better' means and I am sceptical about the impact elistist rating of 'objectively shallow' games has on the world. Pillars of Eternity has very good overall ratings both from critics and from grand majority of player base. If I won't like it I'll say 'well this is not the game for me' instead of playing with the magical words 'objective quality' and 'overrated' and further diving in unsolvable dispute over whose subjective objectivism better describes a computer game enjoyment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite astute! I will explain myself. It is objectively better because it has more classes, Spells, Multiclassing, Skills, enemy variety. These are the only things objective in any comparison as they are numerical.

  • Like 1

"The essence of balance is detachment. To embrace a cause, to grow fond or spiteful, is to lose one's balance, after which, no action can be trusted. Our burden is not for the dependent of spirit."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite astute! I will explain myself. It is objectively better because it has more classes, Spells, Multiclassing, Skills, enemy variety. These are the only things objective in any comparison as they are numerical.

Theoretically it all sounds right. However, the implementation is so horrible that after spending two hours creating and leveling my char in SoZ (OMG! So many options!) I played for two more hours and gave up. All the theoretical coolness of multiclasses and thousands of perks don't matter if the game is just simply not fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nope. Please explain why I would NEED +3 weapons.

A number of monsters are immune to damage from weapons with an alteration bonus inferior to +3. Plus I believe that the spell to make a mage immune to the same is also relatively low level.

 

You do realize I could just skip +3 weapons and go straight for +4/+5 weapons right? I don't need +3 weapons.

  • Like 1

"Good thing I don't heal my characters or they'd be really hurt." Is not something I should ever be thinking.

 

I use blue text when I'm being sarcastic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But it should have been mandatory for them to have had a company play-through of BG1:EE and BG2:EE after the first beta play through they did...we probably would have gotten a much better game or at least some eyes would have opened because PoE plays much worse than either and I can't imagine that happening if they did a side by side comparison. Any Dev honest with themselves wouldn't have put out this type of rubbish by comparison.

 

This is irrelevant -- the fundamental issue is that the Project Manager (Saywer) simply doesn't believe that the Baldur's Gate games (1 or 2) were very good, and believes that the IWD games are as good as they are despite being saddled with the AD&D ruleset (e.g. they would have been better had a different ruleset been followed).

 

If this had been widely known during the Kickstarter, I suspect that it wouldn't have been as successful as it was.

 

 

Yea so PoE was doomed to be worse by default I suppose...PoE is saddled with his ****ty version of D&D or w/e the hell crap mechanics he wants to call PoE.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

But it should have been mandatory for them to have had a company play-through of BG1:EE and BG2:EE after the first beta play through they did...we probably would have gotten a much better game or at least some eyes would have opened because PoE plays much worse than either and I can't imagine that happening if they did a side by side comparison. Any Dev honest with themselves wouldn't have put out this type of rubbish by comparison.

 

This is irrelevant -- the fundamental issue is that the Project Manager (Saywer) simply doesn't believe that the Baldur's Gate games (1 or 2) were very good, and believes that the IWD games are as good as they are despite being saddled with the AD&D ruleset (e.g. they would have been better had a different ruleset been followed).

 

If this had been widely known during the Kickstarter, I suspect that it wouldn't have been as successful as it was.

 

 

Yea so PoE was doomed to be worse by default I suppose...PoE is saddled with his ****ty version of D&D or w/e the hell crap mechanics he wants to call PoE.

 

People are free to experiment. And the result of early experimentation is more often than not not particularly spectacular. I believe that if they take into account what was good about the game and what wasn't received that well they can improve it and build on it to be really fantastic.

Most people forget that creating games is actually NOT EASY. Especially considering how small their team was. You know, I've seen a lot of games which, when I first read about them sounded absolutely amazing. Were was theoretically nothing wrong with them. In the end: deleted and forgotten very fast, they left nothing but a bad aftertaste on the tongue.

Tarn Adams works on DW for how long... 9 years? And it's still alpha.

So unless you created some fantastic games yourself, please do not be SO judgmental.

Edited by Noin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see: Sawyer was lead designer on Icewind Dale 2 and Fallout New Vegas. His bitter critics here don't appear to have designed much of anything, and the stuff that they are so angry about ranges from 'don't care' to 'flatly disagree' to 'perhaps, but fixable' in my book. I'll give the guy behind Door#1 the benefit of the doubt.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's see: Sawyer was lead designer on Icewind Dale 2 and Fallout New Vegas. His bitter critics here don't appear to have designed much of anything, and the stuff that they are so angry about ranges from 'don't care' to 'flatly disagree' to 'perhaps, but fixable' in my book. I'll give the guy behind Door#1 the benefit of the doubt.

 

This would make sense if the game wasn't released to the public, but...

 

It is.

 

Surely, given a released product one can reasonably pass judgement on it -- understanding, of course, that others might disagree.  If X has released products A, B, and C to widespread acclaim (and possibly to your own acclaim), and has now released product D that doesn't receive widespread acclaim (and/or your personal evaluation is that it is inferior), then it is flatly absurd to argue (as you seem to be arguing here) that "D must be as good as A, B, and C: the defect is in your perception of the product."

 

I don't like the PoE mechanics for various reasons (far beyond "That's not the way it was in the Infinity Engine games"):  those perceptions are valid regardless of whether or not Sawyer (or anyone else, for that matter) agrees with me.  If enough people agree with me, then Sawyer will have to take these ideas into account or risk the financial success of his future products -- if more people agree with Sawyer than myself, then he will best receive success by ignoring my criticisms. 

 

"Past performance is not an indicator of future results", basically.

Share this post


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...