Worst game balance ever

[Brimsurfer]

To OP, no point in criticising anything about this game on this forum, its teeming with fanboys and 5 year olds...

 

Come to reddit to have meaningful discussions and to get realistic and useful tips about strats and builds........

 

This game's difficulty curve and scaling is badly messed up as the devs failed to manage it properly, its a known fact so there is no point in wasting any breath about this......many gaming websites have also highlighted this in various articles and online shows......

Edited April 3, 2016 by Brimsurfer

[Nauzhror]

I see no fanboys. The only people acting in a manner similar to that of a fanboy is actually you and kracken actually. Not that you're blindly defending the game, you're just blindly bashing people and/or the game instead.

 

No one in this thread claimed the game was without flaws. Not one person. No one claimed it couldn't be balanced better either. Virtually every game could be balanced better, developers don't decide their games are perfect, they decide they're good enough. If they aimed for perfection games would never be released as there'd always be "just one more" thing they wanted to add before release.

 

That aside, your party requiring spellcasters to tackle the hardest end-game content (not all spellcasters, just some) is not a sign of imbalance, build diversity is a thing, and has been, in games, for decades.

 

If anything I'd deem a game imbalanced if six fighters did faceroll everything, similarly if six wizards was the best party, I'd consider that an issue. Neither of those are the case, the best party is typically a balanced and diverse party - which is the goal of every developer striving to create a balanced game which contains character classes.

 

Additionally; comments like: "To OP, no point in criticising anything about this game on this forum, its teeming with fanboys and 5 year olds..."

 

are ridiculous. The only childish comment in the thread is the comment above, the one making asinine assumptions about people simply on the basis of them having opinions that differ from your own. It's a strawman, and an obvious one.

[anameforobsidian]

I see no fanboys. The only people acting in a manner similar to that of a fanboy is actually you and kracken actually. Not that you're blindly defending the game, you're just blindly bashing people and/or the game instead.

 

No one in this thread claimed the game was without flaws. Not one person. No one claimed it couldn't be balanced better either. Virtually every game could be balanced better, developers don't decide their games are perfect, they decide they're good enough. If they aimed for perfection games would never be released as there'd always be "just one more" thing they wanted to add before release.

 

That aside, your party requiring spellcasters to tackle the hardest end-game content (not all spellcasters, just some) is not a sign of imbalance, build diversity is a thing, and has been, in games, for decades.

 

If anything I'd deem a game imbalanced if six fighters did faceroll everything, similarly if six wizards was the best party, I'd consider that an issue. Neither of those are the case, the best party is typically a balanced and diverse party - which is the goal of every developer striving to create a balanced game which contains character classes.

 

Additionally; comments like: "To OP, no point in criticising anything about this game on this forum, its teeming with fanboys and 5 year olds..."

 

are ridiculous. The only childish comment in the thread is the comment above, the one making asinine assumptions about people simply on the basis of them having opinions that differ from your own. It's a strawman, and an obvious one.

 

While I agree wholeheartedly with most of your post, six Chanters are supposed to be gamebreakingly effective.  Six rangers are supposed to be pretty good too.

Edited April 4, 2016 by anameforobsidian

[Nauzhror]

Hmm, not played Chanter much (as in, only Kana), but 'd have figured they'd have relatively slow clear speed simply due to the need to basically sit there doing nothing (literally, but nothing spectacular) till they could cast invocations, which would likely take longer than six of something else would take to finish the entire fight. I suppose even autoattacking would be pretty effective though if you also had every buff/debuff up imaginable at the same time.

[house2fly]

You cast prayer against fear, then you weaken his accuracy and boost the accuracy of your party. WITH spells.

This i see as minimum requirement to bring him down. (and not plan to reload for like 50 times until i get lucky)

 

Dragons aside (ok they should be hard) untill that the game was bordering on boring because it was so easy.

So for me the game balance is just not there. Dunno if its the worst ever, but its certainly close...

It's impressive that you could beat every non-dragon fight without casting spells, to the point that you've somehow got the idea that casting spells is an exploit.

[mc_kracken]

Additionally; comments like: "To OP, no point in criticising anything about this game on this forum, its teeming with fanboys and 5 year olds..."

 

pretty much. Usually they call you a troll if you critize the game too much.

 

Offtopic: and yes, in BG 1 or 2 you'd be fine without a spellcaster. 

Edited April 4, 2016 by mc_kracken

[JerekKruger]

It's not about criticising the game too much, it's about the way in which you criticise it. It's hyperbolic and often based on false statements about what is or isn't possible.

 

I agree that the difficulty balancing in PoE is not great (bad even) and I agree that WM 1&2 made things worse, but to say it's the "worst ever" is just rubbish. The difficulty balancing in BG 1 was terrible: if you followed the story and headed straight to the Nashkel mines then mages and rogues could be one shotted (depending on the difficulty setting you were playing, in such a way as to disallow rezzing) and even sturdy fighters could be two shotted; but if you spent time doing every single annoying fetch and carry subquest between the Friendly Arm Inn and Nashkel, particularly if you did this with a small party, the mines (and indeed the rest of the game) would be a complete walkover. It was still a good game.

 

Also I challenge anyone to say, with honesty, that BG 2 without spellcasters is fine in a way that PoE isn't. It's definitely doable, but then so is PoE solo on PotD with a non-spellcaster class, but it's significantly harder than playing through with a mage and priest or three.

[mc_kracken]

but to say it's the "worst ever" is just rubbish

 

Man, you guys are thick. Worst ever is just an expression. It's not the worst ever, but it certainly feels that way. Jesus, it's not meant to be taken literally.  Pillars, in that regard tough IS a huge embarassment for such a seasoned game company.

Edited April 4, 2016 by mc_kracken

[Tigranes]

but to say it's the "worst ever" is just rubbish

 

Man, you guys are thick. Worst ever is just an expression. It's not the worst ever, but it certainly feels that way. Jesus, it's not meant to be taken literally.  Pillars, in that regard tough IS a huge embarassment for such a seasoned game company.

 

"I talk in massive hyperboles but man, you guys are so thick for thinking I actually mean that."

 

Pillars has a terrible problem with leveling / XP tables that it never solved and only got worse, which can wreck individual playthroughs' difficulty curve. That's a very different issue from the complaints in this thread, which basically is "me and my party had trouble with this fight so it must be too hard for everybody" + "me and my party found these fights easy ... etc".

[Zenbane]

but to say it's the "worst ever" is just rubbish

 

Man, you guys are thick. Worst ever is just an expression. It's not the worst ever, but it certainly feels that way. Jesus, it's not meant to be taken literally.  Pillars, in that regard tough IS a huge embarassment for such a seasoned game company.

That excuse works fine when in a verbal conversation, but when typing something up (forums, email, chat, tweets, etc), you actually have time to preview and think about what you are saying and can adjust accordingly. Calling folks "thick" for holding you to your words would be like calling you "dense" for not taking the time to articulate better, na' mean?

 

Either way, the combat balance in Pillars is fun and diverse and really doesn't leave room for overly negative balance complaints. At least not like the true balance issues found in games like DAoC, WoW, etc.

[Blunderboss]

Im Playing PoTD ( not first playtrough ) , with upsclled WM , WM 2 , Act 3 , im lvl 12-13 now and i can say that im not gonna "overlevel" anything , i completed everything up to WM 2 and ACT3 and started doing quests in both areas now and remaining fights are hard as hell , not even talking about Alpine , Sky , Adra ( not sure how is this fight because its the only one that doesnt get upscalled ) dragons , and both archmages that i have left , but even simple "trash" fights are challenge . i actually wish sometimes that next fight vs common enemies in area would not be that tough , but it is always is tougher than expected .

Basically play on fully upscalled POTD and u wont have problems with exp/level curve at all .

Edited April 4, 2016 by Blunderboss

[Caribou]

but to say it's the "worst ever" is just rubbish

 

Man, you guys are thick. Worst ever is just an expression. It's not the worst ever, but it certainly feels that way. Jesus, it's not meant to be taken literally.  Pillars, in that regard tough IS a huge embarassment for such a seasoned game company.

 

Are...are you praying right now?

[Grape_You_In_The_Mouth]

The game balance is pretty awesome compared to Baldur's Gate and D&D, both of whom had a much bigger team than Obsidian's PoE team.

[Elric Galad]

The game balance is pretty awesome compared to Baldur's Gate and D&D, both of whom had a much bigger team than Obsidian's PoE team.

Totally agree with the above. You can also add Skyrim in the list. And about Ultimate Endgame Optional boss being too powerful... I guess the OP never played a Final Fantasy where such kind of battles are what fans expected.

 

For a non linear game, I really think PoE balance, even if far from perfect, is significantly better than average.

Edited April 6, 2016 by Elric Galad

[Crucis]

but to say it's the "worst ever" is just rubbish

 

Man, you guys are thick. Worst ever is just an expression. It's not the worst ever, but it certainly feels that way. Jesus, it's not meant to be taken literally.  Pillars, in that regard tough IS a huge embarassment for such a seasoned game company.

 

No, "worst ever" is absolutely NOT just an expression.  It's an example of an inability to express one's self, to communicate in a competent manner without having to fall into hyperbole.  Saying that something isn't meant to be taken literally is nothing more than an excuse for an inability to express one's self competently.

[nipsen]

 

Often, this says more about how your party is built, the tactics you favour, and the game mechanics you understand/exploit the best. E.g. some people wailed and gnashed their teeth about shadows being 'impossible' and the game having terrible balance, but once you had to understand several core aspects of the game system they were simply 'above average' difficulty.

 

I can't speak about Alpine Dragon since I haven't run into it yet, so perhaps it really is ridiculous. If we look back at how people treated the Adra Dragon, though, it was often the case that an enemy requiring a different set of tactical considerations was often considered 'impossible' because the same tactics people had been using from xaurips to animats to trolls were no longer working.

 

This is so true.  People who just attack every monster and enemy with the same old tactics they use in every other battle are eventually going to run into some enemy against whom those same old tactics don't get the job done.  And dragons are almost always going to be one of those enemies that require different tactics.

 

 

Which, ironically, is also how we lost the most interesting crpg attribute system the video-game industry has never seen, in the beta. To people who insisted the game was broken because their one "tactic"(read: routine spell and ability sequence) didn't work /optimally/. So the system had to be changed so the "tactic" could work every time, and all "tactics" would become "viable".

 

It's also why the enemies were changed from having certain weaknesses and strengths, and into having a million hitpoints and triggering wipe abilities that can't be interrupted or countered. To specifically address the feedback that insisted the game was too complex, and/or "unbalanced" when their single-mindedness wouldn't be enough to beat the boss.

 

So how did that work out for you, Obsidian? Clearly, after feedback like this, it's time to initiate another 6 month streak of fundamental design changes at random directions again, no? But how to pay for that. Wait, I know, you can go to kickstarter to ask for money! Because everyone will go along with this again one more time after the unparalleled success the first kickstarter campaign was.

[Teioh_White]

Depends on the tactics if they remain viable; generally, dragons die to most tactics that work for the other stuff. A CC based strat can still pretty easily stun-lock them to death, and a buff strategy can still just face tank them, assuming you've enough Endurance to survive a breath. Just requires some debuffs for the former, and even more buffs for the latter.
Luckily, dragons are slow, so you can have the party in a corner buffing up while a decoy initiates.

[prodigydancer]

I don't get it. Why do people still complain about difficulty one year and a thousand guides after release? The game is soloable on PotD. Heck, there are videos of people soloing Alpine Dragon on PotD. Do a YouTube search if you can't figure out a fight on your own. Or switch to Story Mode if you're too lazy.

 

/sigh

Edited April 6, 2016 by prodigydancer

[house2fly]

Soloing the alpine dragon is old news.  Spoilers:

 

Edited April 6, 2016 by house2fly

[nipsen]

..would you say that that is relevant to anyone who picked up the game with the intention to put perhaps.. a measly 100 hours into it?
 

I don't get it. Why do people still complain about difficulty one year and a thousand guides after release?

*cough* ...because if you try to play the game in a way that seems to make narrative sense, rather than exploiting the weaknesses of the system, you will play a very nasty war of attrition with ability-spamming endless waves of AI that you will eventually lose?

 

You know, just a suggestion.

Edited April 6, 2016 by nipsen

[mc_kracken]

"The game is soloable on PotD"

 

Probably not if you have a job.

Edited April 6, 2016 by mc_kracken

[anameforobsidian]

"The game is soloable on PotD"

 

Probably not if you have a job.

 

You can make time to do it if you clear your schedule of trolling boards for a game you apparently don't like.

[nipsen]

...on the other hand, some people can type faster than 1 word an hour.

[Grimo88]

How about some RESPECT when talking to a company that has made this game through hard work, passion and dedication? People are more than willing to discuss difficulty on these forums, but you are being a little turd about it. 

[Zenbane]

"The game is soloable on PotD"

 

Probably not if you have a job.

 

Correction: "probably not if you have a bad job"

 

But doable if you have a good profession. It doesn't have to be done in a single week, afterall.