This is a great game, but ....

[LaSpeakeasi]

 

Origins was a great game. Maybe even a bit better than Pillars. It was a bit more polished. But pillars is also awesome and has so much potential.

 

DA 2 was garbage and i didnt even bother but it sounds like DA 3 was more of the same crap.

 

Original Sin I thought was buggy and weird. I didnt enjoy checking 200 vases and picking up random garbage that I had no idea what it was used for. When I got to the first city and started talking to the NPCs i started to dislike the game even more. I found it to be very weird, stupid and confusing.

 

Wasteland 2 was terrible. But Im curious to check out the game of the year edition when it comes out. It sounds like they have been working hard to make it into a game worth playing.

I always find peoples' opinions interesting. I loved DA:O, liked Divinity:Original Sin a lot, and thought Wasteland 2 was fantastic (I played through to the end 3 times, to the end of Arizona 6 times, and part way through California 3 times - all in rapid succession). Sadly, I found Pillars to be just decidedly average. There were some great aspects to it, some really crap aspects, and it left me with an overall 'meh' impression. I don't regret backing it, and would back another Obs kickstarter in a heartbeat (but not at the same pledge level), but I did not find it came close to my expectations. I thought Wasteland 2 was far superior.

 

"Average" isn't the word I would use. "Conventional" is probably more like what I have in mind. Not a lot of wrongs with it, but it banks on nostalgia rather than brings anything new to the table. I get what it's trying to do and what it does it does well. And no one else is really doing it.

 

Except for the atrocious quality control. It's like they never bothered with debugging and just put it out there.

 

Wasteland 2 is a good game too. Since we're on the topic of "new"-ness tho I have to complain it, well, just doesn't look 2015 for a $60 game... That's my only complaint.

Edited August 22, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[wanderon]

 Since we're on the topic of "new"-ness tho I have to complain it, well, just doesn't look 2015 for a $60 game...

 

 

Thank the Gods for that! 

[Failion]

Dragon Age Inquisition had bad AI. You only realize it in boss fights how useless and and dumb the AI was. 3d and isometric is all about perspective. What I think pillars could of done is flesh out the setting and races in it. Its a multiethnic colonial setting with little chracterization. I loved how baldurs gate 2 handled races like the drow were these goofy evil dark elves that living underground. They lived in a matriarchy and the men would fight in gladiatorial battles to the death in hope to win the chance to impregnate the females. The similarity of their society and spiders in real life is comical. In pillars you KIND of had this in barebones form with the snow elves in their temple and how orlans treated by knights in defiance bay. O well it achieved its goal in being like baldurs gate 1 a hack and slash dungeon crawler.

[rasicking]

This is a fantastic game.  I wish it had a higher budget, can you imagine what this game would be like if it was like Dragon Age: Origins. By this I mean:

 

Scrap the isometric look and go for 3D.

Have full blown cut scenes, including the scripted ones.  Either in game or pre rendered.

Fully voiced characters (with better voice actors).  [ Yes, I know DA:O had a silent protaganist, but still]

The ability to customize your character's looks better.

when the big switch to 3d came i was sure designers would recognize how tedious it was to constantly switch angles to look for secrets. it still bugs me today that i am forced to do a 360 in every room to discover every secret in games like wasteland 2.

i am fine with 3d in first or third person, but highly strategical games like chess, starcraft and pillars do not benefit from 3d imho.

 

i would be cool with full voice acting, but it's not that hard to get back into reading. little or no voice acting also has some perks like dialogue can be changed more easily in and after the production process, be it by official patches or mods.

voice actors were fine. voice quality could have been better. (de-esser anyone?)

 

more character customization always is great. but graphics quality wise the char models of PoE look absolutely stellar compared to wasteland 2 and SC2 and even DA:O.

 

Anyways, the main point of my post is that this game would benefit from a similar tactics system as Dragon Age.

1st: it's coming

2nd: i am a big fan of the easy ai scripting system in DA:O, but i also revel in micromanaging my whole team in PoE, and thus in my case the game will not greatly benefit from its implementation. but i see the appeal for less tactics oriented players and it was probably an oversight by Obsidian to ignore it completely.

[Blarghagh]

i am fine with 3d in first or third person, but highly strategical games like chess, starcraft and pillars do not benefit from 3d imho.

 

Chess isn't in 3D? o.O

[View619]

 

i am fine with 3d in first or third person, but highly strategical games like chess, starcraft and pillars do not benefit from 3d imho.

 

Chess isn't in 3D? o.O

 

 

I think he means pc versions of chess (2d, bird's eye view). There is no benefit in changing the view for these games to 3d.

Edited August 23, 2015 by View619

[rasicking]

 

i am fine with 3d in first or third person, but highly strategical games like chess, starcraft and pillars do not benefit from 3d imho.

 

Chess isn't in 3D? o.O

 

well

 

 

 

i am fine with 3d in first or third person, but highly strategical games like chess, starcraft and pillars do not benefit from 3d imho.

 

Chess isn't in 3D? o.O

 

 

I think he means pc versions of chess (2d, bird's eye view). There is no benefit in changing the view for these games to 3d.

 

yes, i was thinking of chess on pc, where usually it's displayed in 2d. i guess technically rl chess and starcraft 2, dota etc (and even the character models in PoE) are 3d. however, changing perspectives is not required and little can be gained from changing views, whereas in wasteland 2 and neverwinter nights it absolutely is required.

[Kilburn]

 

Origins was a great game. Maybe even a bit better than Pillars. It was a bit more polished. But pillars is also awesome and has so much potential.

 

DA 2 was garbage and i didnt even bother but it sounds like DA 3 was more of the same crap.

 

Original Sin I thought was buggy and weird. I didnt enjoy checking 200 vases and picking up random garbage that I had no idea what it was used for. When I got to the first city and started talking to the NPCs i started to dislike the game even more. I found it to be very weird, stupid and confusing.

 

Wasteland 2 was terrible. But Im curious to check out the game of the year edition when it comes out. It sounds like they have been working hard to make it into a game worth playing.

I always find peoples' opinions interesting. I loved DA:O, liked Divinity:Original Sin a lot, and thought Wasteland 2 was fantastic (I played through to the end 3 times, to the end of Arizona 6 times, and part way through California 3 times - all in rapid succession). Sadly, I found Pillars to be just decidedly average. There were some great aspects to it, some really crap aspects, and it left me with an overall 'meh' impression. I don't regret backing it, and would back another Obs kickstarter in a heartbeat (but not at the same pledge level), but I did not find it came close to my expectations. I thought Wasteland 2 was far superior.

 

 

 

I tried out wasteland soon after it was released and it was a shell of a game. The updated version with the perks added and everything polished might be a good game.

 

Pillars will get better and better with time hopefully.

[Crucis]

This is a fantastic game.  I wish it had a higher budget, can you imagine what this game would be like if it was like Dragon Age: Origins. By this I mean:

 

Scrap the isometric look and go for 3D.

Have full blown cut scenes, including the scripted ones.  Either in game or pre rendered.

Fully voiced characters (with better voice actors).  [ Yes, I know DA:O had a silent protaganist, but still]

The ability to customize your character's looks better.

 

And most importantly, tactics.

 

Imagine how powerful Grieiving Mother would be if you could tell her that if x enemies are between her and Eder, cast Ectopsychic Echo.  Even better if you can also tell her to cast soul shock on Eder if x amount of enemies are arround him, but only do so if she has over 50 focus.

 

It woulld allow you to use your party far more effectively and make combat flow a lot better as a result.  No more having to pause all the time, just set up the tactics correctly and let the battle unfold. This is a game that most certainly would benefit from that.

 

Granted for big fights, like the adra dragon, you would still have to do some hand holding.  After all, in DA:O you have to do that with the high dragon regardless of tactics.

 

Possibly romance as well, gay or straight, or both.  I am not prejudiced.

 

 

1. I think that Isometric 2D is vastly better than 3D.  Personal taste, of course.

 

2. Cut scenes: I wouldn't mind some of these.  They were used in the BG and IWD games, as I recall.  That said, the style of telling the story through pictures on scrolls can be rather effective as well.  And can seem very in character with the genre, IMO.

 

3. Fully voice acting.  Not just no, but heII no.  I have nothing against voice actors, except that the cost is so high that it would drain resources away from more critical parts of the project.

 

4. Customizing of looks.  Sounds good in theory, but it seems to me that when you get right down to it, how the character looks in the inventory isn't as important as the game play.  Now, if you're talking about customizing how the paperdoll appears in-game, again sounds good in theory.  But it seems to me like that's a LOT of work for very little actual reward.

 

5. Tactics.  Personally, I think that combat tactics scripting is a waste of time.  I want to personally control each of my characters' actions, not have them running according to scripts and turning the game into some sort of movie.  I want to PLAY the game, not program it and watch it.

 

[rojay]

 

Rotating the camera would also be greatly appreciated if possible in any future game.  Not sure if that would work in a fully isometric/2d game, though?

 

No that wouldn't be possible and I'm glad it isn't. That would kill the feel of the game.

 

I played a game called Myth: The Fallen Lords around the same time that Baldur's Gate came out. It was a fully-3D real time tactical game - no resource management, all tactics. The camera rotated 360 degrees and you could zoom in and out. 

 

I can see how that would be difficult to pull off in a game where the environments need a lot more detail, but I'm not sure why it isn't possible. Can you explain?

[CaptainMace]

I read the OP just now, can't stop laughing at the irony of this thread :')

[Jakonian]

This is a fantastic game.  I wish it had a higher budget, can you imagine what this game would be like if it was like Dragon Age: Origins. By this I mean:

 

Scrap the isometric look and go for 3D.

Have full blown cut scenes, including the scripted ones.  Either in game or pre rendered.

Fully voiced characters (with better voice actors).  [ Yes, I know DA:O had a silent protaganist, but still]

The ability to customize your character's looks better.

 

And most importantly, tactics.

 

Imagine how powerful Grieiving Mother would be if you could tell her that if x enemies are between her and Eder, cast Ectopsychic Echo.  Even better if you can also tell her to cast soul shock on Eder if x amount of enemies are arround him, but only do so if she has over 50 focus.

 

It woulld allow you to use your party far more effectively and make combat flow a lot better as a result.  No more having to pause all the time, just set up the tactics correctly and let the battle unfold. This is a game that most certainly would benefit from that.

 

Granted for big fights, like the adra dragon, you would still have to do some hand holding.  After all, in DA:O you have to do that with the high dragon regardless of tactics.

 

Possibly romance as well, gay or straight, or both.  I am not prejudiced.

 

I actually like the Iso3D element. The world is rich and vibrant, the artwork is detailed and I can really immerse myself in the fantasy of the game. This is my first PnP style game and I'm fairly pleased with it. There are a few things I would like changed, but apparently, those things are coming on Aug. 25 with the patch update. Perfect timing.

 

 

Isometrick look is fine, and works well with cRPG where stroy/mechanic/gameplay are more important. It also allows for more interesting design for less time/money.

Isometric cutscenes and paragraph book cutscenes are fine.

DA:O was nice for the time it come. Good job on character models, but locations had little details.

 

To be honest I thought the same about Isometric graphics.  They were just fine for the time it came, back in the days in Fallout 1 and Baldur's Gate.  But that was 17 years ago, now they seem to lack any detail at all especially when it comes to characters.  The text was also okay back then, but it completley lacks the emotional depth of modern day voice acting.

 

As a result of this lack of detail and connection I have a harder time getting into it.

 

I disagree. The combat animations are pretty sweet. I rather enjoy the reloading of the crossbow. Yeah it takes a while, but to see the animation of the figure bending over to wind the tensioner back and load the bolt. C'mon now, that's pretty sweet!

 

Isometric view was a selling point of the kickstarter campaign. A spiritual successor to the IE games without isometric view wouldn't make sense, it would not capture the same feel as the IE games.

I concur. From everything I saw on the KS, it seems like they've delivered. 

 

Overall, I'm very pleased with this title. I wasn't used to PnP, but I've found that when played slowly, and more like a traditional table top style game (meaning 2-3 hours a week) it really lets me get into the story, the lore and enjoy everything the community, the devs and the designers put in to it.

 

Sorry you're not enjoying the game the same way. It happens. :D

[Hassat Hunter]

Can't say I ever disagreed with a OP this much on this forum so far...

 

Seriously, this guy was a troll, right, RIGHT? Please tell me this wasn't someone serious.

[Hassat Hunter]

 

 

DAO is trash

 

 

just no

 

 

yeah no

 

 

 

 

 

no one here cares about voice acting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

youre in the wrong forum buddy

 

DAMMIT... now I'm agreeing with Luj1 of all people.

 

Make this nightmare stop!

[Bryy]

You all are getting trolled so hardcore.

 

Bioware don't seem to know what they want Dragon Age to be like.

This is the truthiest truth.

[Gizmo]

I played a game called Myth: The Fallen Lords around the same time that Baldur's Gate came out. It was a fully-3D real time tactical game - no resource management, all tactics. The camera rotated 360 degrees and you could zoom in and out. 

 

 

Myth had a 3D landscape (that was put to good use), but the character graphics were all 2D sprites.  Pillars is kind of the exact opposite; where the character graphics are 3D and the landscape is a 2D plane; though with some 3D effects on (and in front of) it.

 

Edited August 25, 2015 by Gizmo