Trying to decide whether to give this a second chance

[Amentep]

Again, NOT trying to anger anyone

(╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻)

 

How dare you not anger me!

 

 

Seriously, haven't played the expansion or the new patch stuff yet, so mostly here to hopefully bring good cheer.

[Infinitron]

 

Dragon Age: Origin was a classic. You can tell PoE took a few notes from DA:O:

 

- The "noble savages" of the Dalish Elves vs. Six Tribes

- The pro-life subplot with Morrigan and Grieving Mother

- The post-colonial politics of Ferelden vs. Dyrwood

- The "is God real" factor with Andraste vs. Eothas

- Orlais vs. the Valian Republic etc.

 

Bioware may not have the best writers on a technical level. But they are always socially conscious and try to reflect the real world zeitgeists at the time. They were the first to do it and now everyone's doing it.

 

PoE too tries to rise above the fantasy subgenre but somehow never manages the same impact.

 

 

I don't know about the other writers, but last I heard, Josh Sawyer, who came up with all the basic elements of the Eora setting, had never played Dragon Age.

 

The relationship between Ferelden and Orlais is in no way "post-colonial", unless you think England "colonized" northern France during the Hundred Years War.

Edited September 18, 2015 by Infinitron

[Zherot]

OP, I had the same problem. I got most of the way through Defiance Bay and got bored. Part of  my problem was that I did too many sidequests but I balanced that by not leveling up when I could. I had enough points to be around level 7 but only leveled through level 4. I like that you can choose to level up or not in PoE. Even with that, the game was somewhat boring for me so I quit for a while. The bounties were pretty fun at level 4, though.

 

I switched to solo PotD. It was a lot of fun for me. I had to be very careful during many of the fights. To be honest, I probably would have struggled more with some of them if I hadn't already been through those areas either with the party I'd abandoned or in the beta. I also did a run where I tried to sneak and avoid combat. It was pretty fun to go through the Endless Paths with as few fights as possible.

 

I agree that paying attention to afflictions makes the game more interesting. I didn't do that in the beginning but I did after a while just because it was more fun for me to use my party members to help each other. It gave me a way to vary the tactics I used.

 

 

 

A funny thing, guys who say combat in PoE sucks always compare it to classics like BG, but overall, despite some flaws combat system is pretty similar, but in all honesty, no one can name SINGLE cRPG in last 10 years which has better combat or overall roleplaying feeling than PoE. That's something, isn't it?

 

Cant EDIT:  I refer you to my previous remarks.

 

 

Which game you like more is very subjective. I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE. E.g., it was a lot of fun to teleport enemies, set them on fire, etc. However, for me, combat in D:OS became much too easy after the first few levels. Overall, I prefer PoE's combat, although both have repetitive encounters. I liked the writing, dialog, and companions more in PoE, though all of those areas had problems in PoE as well. I know other people who didn't think that the combat was much too easy in D:OS, or at least not until pretty far into the game. Understandably, they like D:OS's combat, and generally D:OS itself, far more than I do.

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

"I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE" ---> "I prefer PoE's combat"

 

Cant EDIT:  Please refrain from personal attacks and name-calling.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[LaSpeakeasi]

"I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE" ---> "I prefer PoE's combat"

 

Cant EDIT:  note post above.

I'm not explaining this to address you. I don't address trolls as a rule. But others might be interested in the D:OS comparison in a civil way.

 

Combat isn't just the mechanics. As fun s D:OS was, and as much as I wish PoE play more like D:OS, it has one class and a total of 4 companions to choose from. It's also a 4-member party system. For many people who grew up with the IE games, 6-member, class-based gameplay = automatic preferable, myself included.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[LaSpeakeasi]

The relationship between Ferelden and Orlais is in no way "post-colonial", unless you think England "colonized" northern France during the Hundred Years War.

It is because both the Fereldens and Orlesians were both colonizers. The Dalish and the Chasind Wilders were the indigenous population of the land.

 

The same way how the Brits and the French were both colonizers to N. America.

Edited September 18, 2015 by LaSpeakeasi

[Zherot]

 

"I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE" ---> "I prefer PoE's combat"

 

Cant EDIT:  You know the drill.

I'm not explaining this to address you. I don't address trolls as a rule. But others might be interested in the D:OS comparison in a civil way.

 

Combat isn't just the mechanics. As fun s D:OS was, and as much as I wish PoE play more like D:OS, it has one class and a total of 4 companions to choose from. It's also a 4-member party system. For many people who grew up with the IE games, 6-member, class-based gameplay = automatic preferable, myself included.

 

 

We are talking about combat not the classes or anything and in DOS there is no classes, you can build your characters the way you want.

 

So... having 2 more party members makes it preferable for some strange reason... thats a fanboy excuse. BTW having less party members would be even better in POE because in reality the combat in POE is just a zerg fest.

 

POE has some stuff better than DOS but we are talking about combat here in which not in a million years POE is better than DOS.

 

BTW keep calling me a troll, thats another sign of fanboyism, if someone dares to say anything about my precious or my incoherence then it must be a troll.... SURE.

 

Cant EDIT:  Notice I didn't remove every use of 'fanboy?'  I think your remarks are clearly meant to be provocative.  That's fair enough.  Just refrain from personal attacks.  I even left the last 'fanboyism' use in there since it seems more part of a defense than an attack.

[oaktownbrown]

 

 

 

Which game you like more is very subjective. I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE. E.g., it was a lot of fun to teleport enemies, set them on fire, etc. However, for me, combat in D:OS became much too easy after the first few levels. Overall, I prefer PoE's combat, although both have repetitive encounters. I liked the writing, dialog, and companions more in PoE, though all of those areas had problems in PoE as well. I know other people who didn't think that the combat was much too easy in D:OS, or at least not until pretty far into the game. Understandably, they like D:OS's combat, and generally D:OS itself, far more than I do.

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

"I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE" ---> "I prefer PoE's combat"

 

Cant EDIT:  :Cant's long suffering grin icon:

 

 

Combat is more than the mechanics. (I didn't even like all of the mechanics but I liked being able to teleport, being able to combine spells like oil and flame or oil and flame arrow and I liked the way Larian handled AP. I thought Larian did an excellent job with that.) You can have great mechanics and boring and repetitive encounters, bad enemy AI, etc.,  i.e. bad combat if you look at actual gameplay and not some hypothetical construct of how great these mechanics would be if they were used well. In D:OS's case, the encounters were boring for me because they were far too easy after about early level three. That's very early in the game. I could use the same tactics in every fight and even when I tried switching tactics, the fights were pretty much the same. The fights were too easy even with house rules like no healing in combat, only wearing low level robes, no using companions, etc. At least in PoE, I could make the combat fun with house rules, e.g., not leveling up when I could, limited resting.

 

If you like D:OS better than PoE, that's fine with me. As I said, it's very subjective. You seem to be the one who can't stand it if someone doesn't like your favorite game as much as they like other games.

 

Cant EDIT:  Removed more fanboy stuff.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[Teioh_White]

I didn't really get any Dragon Age vibes off of Pillars. Well, unless you mean, 'fantasy take on a real world's historical culture.' In which case, yeah, Dryford is clearly colonial America, cept the Native's kinda kicked ass back making an uneasy truce. Dragon Age hasn't really hit on that in it's various takes on fantasy broadstrokes of different nations.

 

While I've always been in a huge minority in this, for modern RPG's, I've always really enjoyed Dragon Age 2's combat. Not the most in depth system, but a good execution of how the mechanics that are there play out. Most folks just lost it at the fact it wasn't Origins system, and combined with the clearly rushed launch, game never got much of a chance. I do like Origins too, just filled with so many ways to break the game open. It's honestly harder in that game to -not- break the combat system in half than it is to play fair.

 

The new Shadowrun games have a core system I like, but the games themselves haven't really tried to both balance the combat, and design challenging encounters yet, so it's not all good there.

[Rosbjerg]

Yeah, 'cause dogmatically calling someone a fanboy when they disagree is such a more level headed approach. "rolling eyes"... Lets stick to beating the topic and not so much each other.

[Zherot]

 

 

 

 

Which game you like more is very subjective. I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE. E.g., it was a lot of fun to teleport enemies, set them on fire, etc. However, for me, combat in D:OS became much too easy after the first few levels. Overall, I prefer PoE's combat, although both have repetitive encounters. I liked the writing, dialog, and companions more in PoE, though all of those areas had problems in PoE as well. I know other people who didn't think that the combat was much too easy in D:OS, or at least not until pretty far into the game. Understandably, they like D:OS's combat, and generally D:OS itself, far more than I do.

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

"I liked the combat mechanics of D:OS much better than the combat mechanics of PoE" ---> "I prefer PoE's combat"

 

Do you even listen to yourselves fanboys?.

 

 

Combat is more than the mechanics. (I didn't even like all of the mechanics but I liked being able to teleport, being able to combine spells like oil and flame or oil and flame arrow and I liked the way Larian handled AP.) You can have great mechanics and awful, boring, repetitive encounters, i.e. bad combat if you look at actual gameplay and not some theoretical construct of how great these mechanics would be if they were used well. In D:OS's case, the encounters were boring for me because they were far too easy after about early level three. That's very early in the game. I could use the same tactics in every fight and even when I tried switching tactics, the fights were pretty much the same. The fights were too easy even with house rules like no healing in combat, only wearing low level robes, no using companions, etc. At least in PoE, I could make the combat fun with house rules, e.g., not leveling up when I could.

 

If you like D:OS better than PoE, that's fine with me. As I said, it's very subjective. You seem to be the one who can't stand it if someone doesn't like your favorite game as much as they like other game

 

 

 

 

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

 

 

 

Now you talk about repetitive encounters and that it was "too easy" when you leveled up... POE is the same Zerg vs ZERG all over again your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive **** and this game is the epitome of repetition... and its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

Cant EDIT:  same

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[oaktownbrown]

You keep calling others fanboys but you seem like the fanboy here. If you like D:OS better than PoE, that's fine with me. As I said, it's very subjective. You seem to be the one who can't stand it if someone doesn't like your favorite game as much as they like other game

 

 

 

 

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

 

 

 

Now you talk about repetitive encounters and that it was "too easy" when you leveled up... POE is the same Zerg vs ZERG all over again your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive **** and this game is the epitome of repetition... and its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

Fanboy.

 

 

 

What? Is this a response to what I said? What's a zerg?

 

Are you disputing that I found D:OS's encounters repetitive, boring, and far too easy? Many others felt the same way. In D:OS you automatically gained a level. You couldn't delay it like you can in PoE. So when I went to areas with enemies far above my level in D:OS, I gained a lot of XP and automatically gained a lot of levels and vitality very quickly, making the combat even easier when I was trying to make it harder. I appreciate that PoE lets the player decide when to level up because it's a good way to allow the player to control the difficulty of the game. You can stay at a low level but go to areas with tougher enemies. It's also a callback to the IE games so that reminder of those games is nice for me. Player controlled leveling is a mechanic that many RPGs don't have and I really wish that they did.

 

You may like being able to sleepwalk through 90% of a game's combat like I did in D:OS but I don't. I prefer either being able to avoid combat altogether or else have challenging combat. For me, PoE's combat was far more challenging than D:OS's combat, although I think PoE also suffers from repetitive encounters. If you think D:OS's combat was more challenging than PoE's, what did you find more challenging about it? How would you make PoE's more challenging? That might make for a far more interesting discussion than you repeatedly calling people fanboys.

Edited September 18, 2015 by oaktownbrown

[Cottonmouth]

Especially amusing was when he [Zherot] complained the spells are all damage, crowd control or buff.

 

Why yes, spells deal damage, alter the enemy or alter the player. So monotone, we can all think of many more types of spells!

 

Cant EDIT:  Removed personal attack.  Please bash arguments and not each other.

[Oralaina]

 

As I said, it's very subjective. You seem to be the one who can't stand it if someone doesn't like your favorite game as much as they like other game

 

 

 

 

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

 

 

 

Now you talk about repetitive encounters and that it was "too easy" when you leveled up... POE is the same Zerg vs ZERG all over again your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive **** and this game is the epitome of repetition... and its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

 

 

 

What? Is this a response to what I said? What's a zerg?

 

Are you disputing that I found D:OS's encounters repetitive, boring, and far too easy? Many others felt the same way. In D:OS you automatically gained a level. You couldn't delay it like you can in PoE. So when I went to areas with enemies far above my level in D:OS, I gained a lot of XP and automatically gained a lot of levels and vitality very quickly, making the combat even easier when I was trying to make it harder. I appreciate that PoE lets the player decide when to level up because it's a good way to allow the player to control the difficulty of the game. You can stay at a low level but go to areas with tougher enemies. It's also a callback to the IE games so that reminder of those games is nice for me. Player controlled leveling is a mechanic that many RPGs don't have and I really wish that they did.

 

You may like being able to sleepwalk through 90% of a game's combat like I did in D:OS but I don't. I prefer either being able to avoid combat altogether or else have challenging combat. For me, PoE's combat was far more challenging than D:OS's combat, although I think PoE also suffers from repetitive encounters. If you think D:OS's combat was more challenging than PoE's, what did you find more challenging about it? How would you make PoE's more challenging? That might make for a far more interesting discussion than you repeatedly calling people fanboys.

 

 

"Zerg" is an MMO term referring to a group running at full speed through an instance that's supposed to be challenging for an at-level party.  It's a cakewalk for an over-geared or over-leveled party, and generally done repeatedly to enable various of the group members to attain specific gear.  It wouldn't seem to have much relevance in a game like PoE - unless that poster is perhaps running the entire game on God mode (in which case, yeah, it's probably a zerg....)

 

Cant EDIT:  again

[Zherot]

 

If you like D:OS better than PoE, that's fine with me. As I said, it's very subjective. You seem to be the one who can't stand it if someone doesn't like your favorite game as much as they like other game

 

 

 

 

 

DOS combat >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> POE combat, there is nothing subjective in that.

 

 

 

 

Now you talk about repetitive encounters and that it was "too easy" when you leveled up... POE is the same Zerg vs ZERG all over again your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive **** and this game is the epitome of repetition... and its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

 

 

 

What? Is this a response to what I said? What's a zerg?

 

Are you disputing that I found D:OS's encounters repetitive, boring, and far too easy? Many others felt the same way. In D:OS you automatically gained a level. You couldn't delay it like you can in PoE. So when I went to areas with enemies far above my level in D:OS, I gained a lot of XP and automatically gained a lot of levels and vitality very quickly, making the combat even easier when I was trying to make it harder. I appreciate that PoE lets the player decide when to level up because it's a good way to allow the player to control the difficulty of the game. You can stay at a low level but go to areas with tougher enemies. It's also a callback to the IE games so that reminder of those games is nice for me. Player controlled leveling is a mechanic that many RPGs don't have and I really wish that they did.

 

You may like being able to sleepwalk through 90% of a game's combat like I did in D:OS but I don't. I prefer either being able to avoid combat altogether or else have challenging combat. For me, PoE's combat was far more challenging than D:OS's combat, although I think PoE also suffers from repetitive encounters. If you think D:OS's combat was more challenging than PoE's, what did you find more challenging about it? How would you make PoE's more challenging? That might make for a far more interesting discussion than you repeatedly calling people fanboys.

 

 

i already addressed what you say, so no, im not gonna repeat myself.

 

Cant EDIT:

[iLurk]

DOS is by far a much better game when it comes to combat, many of the reasons were mentioned already. Shadowrun also has an enjoyable combat especially in Dragonfall. Those are turn based games.

 

Dragon Age Origin has a better combat mechanic for a real time with pause and a better AI and companion management.

 

A lot of the mechanics in PoE would have probably worked great if the game was turn based, but it just sucks for a real time with pause.

[Teioh_White]

DOS is by far a much better game when it comes to combat, many of the reasons were mentioned already. Shadowrun also has an enjoyable combat especially in Dragonfall. Those are turn based games.

 

Dragon Age Origin has a better combat mechanic for a real time with pause and a better AI and companion management.

 

A lot of the mechanics in PoE would have probably worked great if the game was turn based, but it just sucks for a real time with pause.

I've actually thought that myself about PoE. If you don't want to use the Cheese, the game requires a ton of micro, almost the the point where I was thinking this could have tighter and less annoying gameplay if it just bit the bullet and went turn based. Or at least, maybe try a good version of Acarnum(arcanum didn't exactly do it well, but idea's there), which had both turn and real time. Real time existing mostly for clean up duty/ utter trash pulls, if trash pulls have to be something in the game.

 

Not a request for a change or anything, it's too late at this point, only thing to do with the gameplay at this point is just some minor balance changes.

 

As for D:OS, can't speak to it myself, haven't given it a shot since the very beginning, where it was clear that hadn't really tried out how the various abilites would actually play out, and balance was hilarious out of whack.

[oaktownbrown]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now you talk about repetitive encounters and that it was "too easy" when you leveled up... POE is the same Zerg vs ZERG all over again your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive **** and this game is the epitome of repetition... and its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

 

 

 

What? Is this a response to what I said? What's a zerg?

 

Are you disputing that I found D:OS's encounters repetitive, boring, and far too easy? Many others felt the same way. In D:OS you automatically gained a level. You couldn't delay it like you can in PoE. So when I went to areas with enemies far above my level in D:OS, I gained a lot of XP and automatically gained a lot of levels and vitality very quickly, making the combat even easier when I was trying to make it harder. I appreciate that PoE lets the player decide when to level up because it's a good way to allow the player to control the difficulty of the game. You can stay at a low level but go to areas with tougher enemies. It's also a callback to the IE games so that reminder of those games is nice for me. Player controlled leveling is a mechanic that many RPGs don't have and I really wish that they did.

 

You may like being able to sleepwalk through 90% of a game's combat like I did in D:OS but I don't. I prefer either being able to avoid combat altogether or else have challenging combat. For me, PoE's combat was far more challenging than D:OS's combat, although I think PoE also suffers from repetitive encounters. If you think D:OS's combat was more challenging than PoE's, what did you find more challenging about it? How would you make PoE's more challenging? That might make for a far more interesting discussion than you repeatedly calling people fanboys.

 

 

 

 

Here are the points you made:

 

1. PoE is zerg vs zerg.

 

I asked what that meant bc I don't play MMOs. How can I answer when I don't know what you're saying? Apparently, it refers to an overleveled or overgeared group running through an area in order to get specific gear. I don't see how that applies to PoE. I never did that in PoE. It could apply to D:OS's loot, though, bc of the Diablo-style loot that was severely leveled. I hated that in D:OS and rarely used the gear I found bc it made the combat easier and I was trying to make it harder. The loot I found in D:OS was almost always for many levels beyond my characters anyway. So I don't see how that applies to the way I played either game.

 

I agreed that the encounters in both PoE and D:OS were repetitive. I think that's a weakness of both games.

 

2. your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive ****

 

I agree but I'd add debuff. Debuff spells were the spells that I used most often in PoE except for my solo PotD run, where I used CC more. I don't have a problem with that. Just bc it's a drawback for you doesn't mean that it will be a problem for everyone.

 

Most of the spells in D:OS are also CC, damage, or buff spells. I did like the teleport and featherfall spells in D:OS. I liked being able to use them to solve problems out of combat as well as in combat. One problem that I had with those spells was that it didn't seem like the enemy AI in D:OS used spells like teleport or many of the best spells or tactics, especially using good combos. I think that this is a problem that both D:OS and PoE have, along with many other games unless you use a great mod like SCS. Unfortunately, mods that fix poor enemy AI are very rare.

 

I wish that PoE had more out of combat spells but I thought that was because of the limitations of Unity where IIRC even using a spell like "charm beast" starts combat.  (Ideally IMO it would not and you could use charm spells to solve problems and completely avoid combat.) IMO out of combat spells are less important and, given the limited budget of PoE (and games like Shadowrun: Dragonfall), I didn't expect them to be in PoE. I hope that Obsidian will add some as well as non-combat solutions for problems for PoE2.

 

3. its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

I also addressed this. I disagree, especially if you're talking about becoming very powerful before you even leave the starting town like I did in D:OS. I prefer that I either be able to avoid combat or that combat be challenging. Obviously, we have different preferences but that doesn't mean I didn't address the issue.

 

You also suggested that I stop playing RPGs if I don't like being really powerful. I love RPGs and there are many where I don't become very powerful until near the end of the game. So I'll keep playing RPGs and give preference to those which have a better power curve than D:OS did for me. In some of those, like PoE, I need to not level or play solo in order to do that but that is fine with me. You can keep playing the RPGs that quickly let you become a god or that otherwise have the kind of power progression you prefer. I don't have a problem with that since we'll both play the RPGs that we like best.

 

What other points did you make that I haven't responded to?

 

You, OTOH, have not responded to my points:

 

1. People have different preferences in RPGs. That is normal and there is nothing wrong with ppl who like different RPGs than you do (or I do or any of us do).

 

2. Many people thought that combat in D:OS became far too easy too quickly. Why should they like combat in D:OS?

 

2b. If they thought combat in PoE was more fun or challenging than combat in D:OS, why should they prefer D:OS's combat to PoE's? Why are they any more of a fanboy than someone who thought D:OS's combat was more fun or challeging who prefers D:OS's combat to PoE's?

 

3. What, specifically, did you like about D:OS's combat, besides less micro-management than PoE's combat and a few spells that were not damage, buffs, or CC? In what ways was it more challenging than PoE's?

 

I like the micromanagement in PoE. I understand that some ppl don't like it but others do. Just like some ppl prefer turn-based combat and others prefer RTwP.

 

4. What would you change about PoE's combat to make it more challenging? I don't think adding more spells would make it more challenging. If anything, it would make it less challenging, unless the enemy AI also used those spells well.

 

Cant EDIT:

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[Zherot]

Here are the points you made:

 

1. PoE is zerg vs zerg.

 

I asked what that meant bc I don't play MMOs. How can I answer when I don't know what you're saying? Apparently, it refers to an overleveled or overgeared group running through an area in order to get specific gear. I don't see how that applies to PoE. I never did that in PoE. It could apply to D:OS's loot, though, bc of the Diablo-style loot that was severely leveled. I hated that in D:OS and rarely used the gear I found bc it made the combat easier and I was trying to make it harder. The loot I found in D:OS was almost always for many levels beyond my characters anyway. So I don't see how that applies to the way I played either game.

 

I agreed that the encounters in both PoE and D:OS were repetitive. I think that's a weakness of both games.

 

2. your spells are damage/buffs/CC, THATS IT, talking about repetitive ****

 

I agree but I'd add debuff. Debuff spells were the spells that I used most often in PoE except for my solo PotD run, where I used CC more. I don't have a problem with that. Just bc it's a drawback for you doesn't mean that it will be a problem for everyone.

 

Most of the spells in D:OS are also CC, damage, or buff spells. I did like the teleport and featherfall spells in D:OS. I liked being able to use them to solve problems out of combat as well as in combat. One problem that I had with those spells was that it didn't seem like the enemy AI in D:OS used spells like teleport or many of the best spells or tactics, especially using good combos. I think that this is a problem that both D:OS and PoE have, along with many other games unless you use a great mod like SCS. Unfortunately, mods that fix poor enemy AI are very rare.

 

I wish that PoE had more out of combat spells but I thought that was because of the limitations of Unity where IIRC even using a spell like "charm beast" starts combat.  (Ideally IMO it would not and you could use charm spells to solve problems and completely avoid combat.) IMO out of combat spells are less important and, given the limited budget of PoE (and games like Shadowrun: Dragonfall), I didn't expect them to be in PoE. I hope that Obsidian will add some as well as non-combat solutions for problems for PoE2.

 

3. its normal to become powerful in an RPG and feel that some stuff is easier when you level up, maybe you should stop playing RPG if you dont like the reward of becoming powerfull in a game.

 

I also addressed this. I disagree, especially if you're talking about becoming very powerful before you even leave the starting town like I did in D:OS. I prefer that I either be able to avoid combat or that combat be challenging. Obviously, we have different preferences but that doesn't mean I didn't address the issue.

 

You also suggested that I stop playing RPGs if I don't like being really powerful. I love RPGs and there are many where I don't become very powerful until near the end of the game. So I'll keep playing RPGs and give preference to those which have a better power curve than D:OS did for me. In some of those, like PoE, I need to not level or play solo in order to do that but that is fine with me. You can keep playing the RPGs that quickly let you become a god or that otherwise have the kind of power progression you prefer. I don't have a problem with that since we'll both play the RPGs that we like best.

 

What other points did you make that I haven't responded to?

 

You, OTOH, have not responded to my points:

 

1. People have different preferences in RPGs. That is normal and there is nothing wrong with ppl who like different RPGs than you do (or I do or any of us do).

 

2. Many people thought that combat in D:OS became far too easy too quickly. Why should they like combat in D:OS?

 

2b. If they thought combat in PoE was more fun or challenging than combat in D:OS, why should they prefer D:OS's combat to PoE's? Why are they any more of a fanboy than someone who thought D:OS's combat was more fun or challeging who prefers D:OS's combat to PoE's?

 

3. What, specifically, did you like about D:OS's combat, besides less micro-management than PoE's combat and a few spells that were not damage, buffs, or CC? In what ways was it more challenging than PoE's?

 

I like the micromanagement in PoE. I understand that some ppl don't like it but others do. Just like some ppl prefer turn-based combat and others prefer RTwP.

 

4. What would you change about PoE's combat to make it more challenging? I don't think adding more spells would make it more challenging. If anything, it would make it less challenging, unless the enemy AI also used those spells well.

 

 

Holly **** thats a huge answer an bassically you say "yes DOS has better combat but I MYSELF prefer POE combat" thats fine, you dont have to like it better but thing is DOS has factually better combat than POE something you even said.

 

POE combat is just a zerg vs zerg, meaning is just a bunch of characters going against each other and making a huge mob in the middle of the battlefield where everybody is clustered, looks ridiculous and plays ridiculous. When that happes and it always happens in POE all you need to do is unleash your AOEs in them (CC or damage or whatever) and thats every combat in POE. EZ as ****.

 

DOS sin combat is more strategic and plays better, you really need to think where you are going to position your characters and where are you going to unleash your AOE because there is no safezone for AOEs in that game (something that is good and bad at the same time) and i dont remember that DOS had any only foe AOE so thats a lot harder in the end,also the AI of enemies is better they rarely or never go all for the same characters or cluster temselves in cells near each other just to be easy prey of AOEs. Magic in DOS is just 1000000000000000000000000000000000000 times better than in POE i shouldnt have to explain why seriously, is more fun to play with the enviorements and the different effects of the magics than what you have in POE where everything does damage and the only difference is the color of the effects thats it, nothing interesting at all and the other spells are cc and buffs/debuffs (it was hilarious how you added debuffs as if somehow now because i forgot to say debuffs then suddenly the magic is not crap... LOOOL), both games become rather easy as you progress in the game, thing is DOS is WAAAAAY more fun adn have more challenge and strategy in the end because in POE all the combats go in the same direction mob vs mob gets clustered in the middle--->Unleash AOE, thats it, stop pretending there is more to it because it isnt.

 

What i would change, well there is nothing left to be done in here, better think about another combat system in the future sequel, we have what we have now there is no way (and i dont expect them to) the devs are going to make mayor changes in the combat at this point.

 

If theya re going to stick to the same combat mehcanics they need to look at how Dragon Age (the original not the garbage sequels specially that aberration Inquisition was) handled the AI and how you could customize how the AI would use their skills/spells etc, also they REALLY need to improve the enemy AI seriously all they do is like i said ove and over, cluster altogether around your party making a HUGE mob that just becomes too easy to just AOE and be done with it.

 

They need to add more ACTIVE mechanics instead on just passive BS happening on the bakcground, i mean all of those debuffs and buffs that you most of the time dont even notice because you dont even care and there is too much **** going on to begin with that you just ignore all that, better do more active stuff, i dont know what but something that makes the combat more interactive, someone already said how ME 2 for example added at higher difficulties some stuff like the armor,shield and barrier mechanics that made you think how to deal with enemies and how you would build your characters etc, obviously im not suggesting they do exactly the same thing but there should be someting they could do to make the game feel more alive and fun and not jsut a bunch of passives on the background.

 

If they cant do that then just make the game turn based and improve your magic, learn from what DOS did to magic and also bring more interesting physical skills for non magical classes its not fair they cant do some fancy **** here and there, obviously they cant be as versitile as spell casters but they need some love.

 

Cant EDIT: Along with other things, cut down on the quote tree.

[Rathlord]

They need to add more ACTIVE mechanics instead on just passive BS happening on the bakcground, i mean all of those debuffs and buffs that you most of the time dont even notice because you dont even care and there is too much **** going on to begin with that you just ignore all that, better do more active stuff, i dont know what but something that makes the combat more interactive, someone already said how ME 2 for example added at higher difficulties some stuff like the armor,shield and barrier mechanics that made you think how to deal with enemies and how you would build your characters etc, obviously im not suggesting they do exactly the same thing but there should be someting they could do to make the game feel more alive and fun and not jsut a bunch of passives on the background.

 

Are you referring to ME2 where you had armor that was resistant to certain damage, shields resistant to others, and health resistant to others still? Because this is essentially mirrored by damage reduction in Pillars anyways. You should be tailoring your spells and attacks to be the right type of damage in most cases. But, I'm assuming you've never tried this game on Path of Iron or any of the harder difficulties so you probably wouldn't have needed to.

 

 

I even agree with you in many cases- you can read my post earlier in this thread heavily criticizing the game over several points. Please don't call me a fanboy, I haven't even beaten the game. But you aren't helping your point. If you want to discuss the relative merits of the game, grow up and do it without insulting everyone that disagrees with you. Having to resort to name-calling in an argument is a bad sign.

 

Cant EDIT: please no direct personal attacks.

[Teioh_White]

Yeah, I'm surpised by how....tolerant...the mods are on this forum, heh. I can't say I read his rants though, so not sure what the point about ME2 was, but I don't think much overlap of any kind exists between it and pillars. (Which is reasonable; they're pretty far apart from one another as they can be, and still be in a similar genre). ME2's defense layer was mostly you had to use certain attacks to strip the defense (armor/shields/barrier), and once they got down to health, you had finish attacks they would take them out. Not super complex, but enjoyable.

 

Pillars has lots of stuff going on, but none of that really fits that peg (nor does it need too, of course).

[Zherot]

Yeah, I'm surpised by how....tolerant...the mods are on this forum, heh. I can't say I read his rants though, so not sure what the point about ME2 was, but I don't think much overlap of any kind exists between it and pillars. (Which is reasonable; they're pretty far apart from one another as they can be, and still be in a similar genre). ME2's defense layer was mostly you had to use certain attacks to strip the defense (armor/shields/barrier), and once they got down to health, you had finish attacks they would take them out. Not super complex, but enjoyable.

 

Pillars has lots of stuff going on, but none of that really fits that peg (nor does it need too, of course).

 

Yeah, it seems no one read the part where i said that i wasnt suggesting the same thing, just saying that the devs should focus on a more interactive combat so its more fun to play, isntead of the passive BS we have now, everything is on the background thats not fun srsly is just there happening and you dont give a single ****.

[oaktownbrown]

 

 

"yes DOS has better combat but I MYSELF prefer POE combat" thats fine, you dont have to like it better but thing is DOS has factually better combat than POE something you even said"

 

I never said that. I even explained the difference between combat mechanics and how combat plays out in game bc it seemed like you didn't understand this basic distinction. Apparently, you either still don't, you can't read, or you are intentionally lying about what I said.

 

"When that happes and it always happens in POE all you need to do is unleash your AOEs in them (CC or damage or whatever) and thats every combat in POE. EZ as ****. DOS sin combat is more strategic and plays better, you really need to think where you are going to position your characters and where are you going to unleash your AOE because there is no safezone for AOEs in that gamea bunch of characters going against each other and making a huge mob in the middle of the battlefield where everybody is clustered, looks ridiculous and plays ridiculous."

 

Your description of combat in PoE doesn't match my experience. I can let that happen if I want or I can avoid it. I usually avoid it. I also rarely had any problems with AoEs in D:OS. I used positioning more in PoE than I did in D:OS, where CC made positioning (and almost everything else) irrelevant most of the time. It sounds like we had very different playstyles in both games. Parenthetically, I think one of the weaknesses of PoE's party combat is that positioning is often too important so we really disagree about this.

 

"Magic in DOS is just 1000000000000000000000000000000000000 times better than in POE i shouldnt have to explain why"

 

OK, but if you aren't going to explain why, don't complain about ppl who disagree with you or say that you aren't contributing to the discussion. "Because I said so" isn't a good answer. 

 

"DOS is WAAAAAY more fun adn have more challenge and strategy in the end because in POE all the combats go in the same direction mob vs mob gets clustered in the middle--->Unleash AOE, thats it, stop pretending there is more to it because it isnt."

 

You must have rested far more often than I did in PoE. Even when soloing with a caster, I didn't use AoEs all the time bc I didn't have that many spells, even at level 9, which I think is the highest level I got to. You can choose to play that way and if you enjoy it, that's fine. I'm not sure why you'd do that if you don't find it fun, though.

 

"both games become rather easy as you progress in the game, thing is DOS is WAAAAAY more fun adn have more challenge and strategy in the end"

 

I disagree. D:OS was very easy by the time I got to the lighthouse, much less by the time I got to Evelyn or anywhere near the end of the game. Other players on Steam had a similar experience. Don't make it sound like you have to "progress in the game" before it gets easy in D:OS. And PoE stayed hard for me until the end when I played solo PotD or when I used sneak to avoid most combat. The two games may have been similarly difficult for you (and that is fine) but that was not my experience with the two games. I'm sure there are ppl for whom D:OS stayed challenging to the end and who found PoE easy from almost the beginning. Stop acting like your experience of the two games is the only valid one.

 

I don't use party AI. I hate it. It makes sense that you like it since you don't like to individually manage your party members. I know that some others also like to use party AI so it make sense to offer good party AI if it's not too expensive to implement. Maybe now that they have it, they can tweak it to make it better.

 

 

"They need to add more ACTIVE mechanics instead on just passive BS happening on the bakcground, i mean all of those debuffs and buffs that you most of the time dont even notice because you dont even care and there is too much **** going on to begin with that you just ignore all that, better do more active stuff, i dont know what but something that makes the combat more interactive,"

 

I really like the buffs and debuffs. I've paid attention to them since I picked up Durance in my first playthrough and they are one of the things I like the most about PoE. It's fun to have all the party members helping each other by using afflictions that target a spell or damage from melee or ranged. But I like managing my party and you don't so it's not surprising that you would ignore that and find it boring. We clearly have very different playstyles and find different things interesting in combat. To me, paying attention to an enemy's saves and how various debuffs affect them is active and enjoyable. It sounds like you want different kinds of active stuff bc you don't like the kind in PoE.

 

I like how D:OS handled stealth. I'd like to see PoE come closer to that. And the different types of arrows in D:OS were also fun to play with. To me, that is a lot like how debuffs affect enemies in PoE, bc you need to pay attention to combos and often have different party members work together, but it sounds like it isn't for you.

 

Thanks for the suggestions.

 

Cant EDIT: just cut down on the quote tree. The post itself seems perfectly fine as it is.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[oaktownbrown]

This is all I could find about why you thought magic was better in D:OS:

 

"is more fun to play with the enviorements and the different effects of the magics than what you have in POE where everything does damage and the only difference is the color of the effects thats it, nothing interesting at all and the other spells are cc and buffs/debuffs (it was hilarious how you added debuffs as if somehow now because i forgot to say debuffs then suddenly the magic is not crap... LOOOL)"

 

Other than teleport and featherfall, which I have already agreed are good spells and that I wish that they had some out of combat spells (like teleport) in PoE, I can't figure out anything else from what you've written, except that you don't like the magic or spell colors in PoE. Unless the spells are OP (which I wouldn't like), a couple of spells are not going to make or break magic in any decent RPG. So it boils down to "D:OS magic is better bc I say so". And if you think that anything that you wrote there was clearly stated, we disagree about that as well.

 

Cant EDIT:

Edited September 19, 2015 by Cantousent

[Cantousent]

I haven't had the chance to post lately, but it seems we're getting a lot more reports from this thread. I want to mention a couple of things first of all:

 

1. Please don't goad folks. I mean, a little heat isn't so bad. We *are* pretty tolerant here. We *want* folks to stay and debate and even argue. Just don't go postal on one another.

 

2. If you use an epithet to describe someone, our usual hands free approach will change and you'll be put on moderated status. That's actually one of the rare things that irks me personally. Now, to be fair, I only saw one thing that might have been an epithet (and I don't count 'fanboy' as an epithet). Since I only saw it once and I wasn't sure, the benefit of the doubt goes to the member.

 

Guys, you might be bitterly divided with someone on one point today and be on the same side of another issue tomorrow. Please be gentle with one another. I took the time to edit the huge assed posts in this thread so I wouldn't have to close or remove it. Reward me by making forceful and piercing attacks on other *arguments* and not other *people.* Don't type with angry fingers. Don't resort to name calling. Don't intentionally try to pick fights with folks.

[oaktownbrown]

Cant EDIT: just cut down on the quote tree. The post itself seems perfectly fine as it is.

Cantousent, how do I cut down on the quote tree? I tried deleting a lot of it in most of my posts ITT. I deleted the text but couldn't figure out how to delete the names of the people with the prior (now empty) posts. Thanks for any help.

Edited September 19, 2015 by oaktownbrown