PoE2 ANTI-wishlist thread. What should remain the same?

[demeisen]

There's a PoE2 wishlist thread for changes players want to see in PoE2.  I wanted to start an ANTI-wishlist thread.  What do you NOT want to see changed for PoE2?  The implicit assumption is that tweaks, balancing, and additions are OK, but the core or spirit of the item in question isn't broken and doesn't need to be "fixed".  Here are some of mine:

​

• Overall style of art and music.  Both are excellent.
• ​General magic, skill, and combat design.
• ​6 character parties .
• ​Story tone.  I'm partial to dark / serious stories, moral ambiguities, and so forth.
• ​The "choose your own adventure" cards.
• ​The narrator guy, if possible.  He has a great voice for that style of narration.
• ​General size and scope of game.  I don't feel it needs to be bigger, grander, or longer.
• ​The GUI.
• ​RTwP.
• ​No-DRM ethos.​

​

[Harry Easter]

Oh, nice Thread.

 

Hmm, I would add:

 

- stay close to the setting. Don't retcon or change it for broader tastes. It's great as it is.

 

- The separation between hit- and enduranceppoints. It adds a good tactical feature and makes resting actually necessary.

 

- Keep the more dark sense of humour. It fitted the tone of the story. 

Edited August 21, 2016 by Harry Easter

[Ink Blot]

Isometric.

[Climhazzard]

Oh, nice Thread and more difficult.

 

Hmm, I would add:

 

- The separation between hit- and enduranceppoints. It adds a good tactical feature and makes resting actually necessary.

 

Agreed.  Also..

 

- The engagement mechanic

 

- The fact there are no dump stats

Edited August 20, 2016 by Climhazzard

[Labadal]

Isometric.

The funny thing is that PoE doesn't use the same camera angle as the IE games.

 

I want 6 characters and not 4 as Tyranny.

Crafting wasn't intrusive in my opinion.

I liked some weapon and armor designs, keep up the good work.

[cabanos]

I'd leave plenty, but i'd like them to change:

 

bad writing,

cliche main story,

no realism whatsoever.

 

Sagani, Maneha are the most cringe, boring and "You've gotta be kidding me" characters i've ever seen.

In other words, get rid of your writers and hire new ones. 

[Elric Galad]

Most of the class system shall be Adragan-gazed.

 

The lore and tone are excellent too. And WM was even better than the original game for this.

[demeisen]

The fact that getting punched, stabbed, burned, frozen, shocked, sliced, or clubbed hurts your characters less if they've knocked back a few beers.

​

​(And people say this game isn't realistic. Bah.)

​

​

[PangaeaACDC]

Don't see the need for party members to get bent out of shape and leave if you do a certain quest, kill a certain person or have a certain disposition. It's arguably more realistic than the alternative, but it's also one aspect I didn't like in Baldur's Gate. And if we're given relatively few recruitable NPCs again, it could be a huge slap in the face if somebody important left. Most likely it would just cause people to reload or use a wiki to prevent such events, or mod it out like happened with BG.

 

Keep 6-member parties. Don't drop it further down.

 

Keep separation of health and endurance. It was a good change, once I got used to it, and meant we didn't have to mass-heal after every big combat, but could move on unless our health was diabolical. I'm one of those players that don't like to rest every 2 minutes and like to go on for as long as we can, so this was a good change for my playstyle.

 

[Very important] Stay DRM Free and support Linux. If I can't buy the game on GOG for Linux, I won't buy it.

[pi2repsion]

6 character parties, definitely. I've been partial to 6-8 character parties since 1985 for their tactical flexibility and really dislike the move to 3-4 character parties seen in many recent CRPGs; The larger party sizes grants much more leeway for the player to experiment, to determine his own tactical approach, and makes combat feel more like a team effort.

[Rolandur]

• All attributes matter
• Min/Max'ing attributes don't matter, though it can be beneficial
• Disposition system (though I do dislike there's an ability to remove disposition for the Paladin)
• RTwP

 

About it, they can change up the game as much as they like so long as it doesn't make PoE2 easier than this game.

[darqleo]

Overall, I just hope the developers stick to the rule of thumb of making the PoE series a spiritual successor to the Infinity Engine games (which was more or less based off of AD&D 2nd Edition rules). I'm all for progress and improvement, but I'm not interested in anything that's going to put it into the realm of something that comes out of Blizzard or Bethesda. Those type of games are already out there for people to play and what soured me on CRPGs in general since 2003 (having played them since 1985). PoE and Wasteland 2 brought me back. Sorry, I'm just reacting to a lot of "complaints" on here the past year or so, plus people suggesting "improvements" that'll turn it into World of Warcraft, Diablo or Skyrim. People complaining about camping supplies? I wish they would go further and make it as difficult as Oregon Trail to get from Point A to Point B and ration out food and maybe have horses to take care of. 

[SkySlam]

My three points wishlist:

 

• Isometric
• 6 characters party
• Companions' banter and interactions (the more, the better!)

[theBalthazar]

* I approve the 6 character party.

 

In Tyranny, Obsidian chose 4 character. I love the number of 6. 

 

I love team-play and synergise.

 

* Indeed, the narrator is a good choice/voice.

[Archaven]

great post! but not all that i agree to. but here's mine:

• overall style of art and music.  Both are excellent.
• ​6 character parties
• ​The GUI. i fell in love with the GUI but i think it can still be room for improvement!
• ​RTwP. nuff said
• ​No-DRM ethos.​ yeah!.. PoE are games i'm going to replay. not much other games that i love replaying. Yeah i spent a lot of time in Dragon Age Inquisition (around 300+ hours) but PoE is what i be replaying!

Edited August 29, 2016 by Archaven

[Jojobobo]

I was quite impressed with the Endless Paths in the end. During the Kickstarter campaign I thought I would hate it, and as it got more and more levels added to it I was worried that far too much time and effort were being thrown its way when ultimately it was just an optional dungeon.

 

However, when I actually played it in game I thought it was a lot of fun. I liked a lot of the little quests and subplots you find in there, and I like how the tragic story of the place gradually unfolds as you travel deeper. Exits of the paths seemed to be placed just frequently enough to not make the place a huge chore either. Plus, unique loot and enemies are always enjoyable.

 

So, some sort of mega dungeon remaining in the game would be good by me. Maybe not as mega as the Endless Paths, but I think it added a lot of unexpected worth to the game in terms of a unique location.

 

Apart from that, I agree with everything in the original post more or less - and as others have said I think the no dump stat idea was a great one, as well as making the attributes more of abstract representation of an idea rather as a metric for pure physicality (e.g. Might being general potency, not limited to physical strength). While the length and scope of the game were fine, I think branching paths in the main quest wouldn't go amiss - but as these seem to be the focus of Tyranny I'm sure they wouldn't be skimped on in the first place for PoE 2. I also think slightly more hope and levity could be injected into the game here and there, a dark and serious tone is all well and good (and definitely the side of the spectrum I prefer) but if things are too unrelentingly grim then that itself can undermine the tone as it rings a little hollow.

 

Overall however, Pillars is now a well balanced game that hits enough of the right notes across the board for me to really like it. More of the same for the most part would keep me happy.

Edited August 30, 2016 by Jojobobo

[anameforobsidian]

I also really liked the Endless Paths, enough that it would be an enjoyable short game in its own right.  However, I think any future megadungeon would be better as an expansion location or a separate campaign.  The problem with putting it in the main campaign is that you hop in and out, which isn't how I like to play.  I like to complete one location at a time and then move on to the next one.  Taking it farther off the crit path would make it more obviously optional.

 

But as it stands, several levels of the Endless Path's particularly stood out.  I loved the xaurip fight by the pit, the drake fight, the vithrak level, and the Od Nua level.

[pi2repsion]

I loved the inclusion of a good dungeon crawl as well, and the way they provided an overview and shortcut when navigating it via a gradually unfolding image of the layers of the dungeon and a master staircase was brilliant.

Edited August 31, 2016 by pi2repsion

[FlintlockJazz]

As others have said but who I want to throw my support behind, I want them to keep:

 

Engagement.  **** those who say otherwise, engagement was great.

Guns.  I'd actually want more gunpowder stuff in fact.  And bring in the printing press!

Disposition.  I loved this.

The separate hit point and endurance system.

Six party members.  Hell, they could increase this in my opinion, just don't lower it.

[Archaven]

i love the dungeon crawling too!. pls dont take away for those who love combat. the only thing that got me bored was it was tedious once it's too easy.  one of the reason (to be honest) was engagement. warrior/tank should require taunt and only effective for couple of rounds.. and other party members should have some kind of escape mech. it will make that the players to be more "alert" and to really put up some effort in combat.

[FlintlockJazz]

i love the dungeon crawling too!. pls dont take away for those who love combat. the only thing that got me bored was it was tedious once it's too easy.  one of the reason (to be honest) was engagement. warrior/tank should require taunt and only effective for couple of rounds.. and other party members should have some kind of escape mech. it will make that the players to be more "alert" and to really put up some effort in combat.

No taunt, for the love of all no taunt please!  

[Multihog]

 

i love the dungeon crawling too!. pls dont take away for those who love combat. the only thing that got me bored was it was tedious once it's too easy.  one of the reason (to be honest) was engagement. warrior/tank should require taunt and only effective for couple of rounds.. and other party members should have some kind of escape mech. it will make that the players to be more "alert" and to really put up some effort in combat.

No taunt, for the love of all no taunt please!  

 

Why?

 

And yes, I agree about the dungeon crawling. It's an important part of any RPG like this!

Edited September 1, 2016 by Multihog

[pi2repsion]

 

 

i love the dungeon crawling too!. pls dont take away for those who love combat. the only thing that got me bored was it was tedious once it's too easy.  one of the reason (to be honest) was engagement. warrior/tank should require taunt and only effective for couple of rounds.. and other party members should have some kind of escape mech. it will make that the players to be more "alert" and to really put up some effort in combat.

No taunt, for the love of all no taunt please!  

 

Why?

 

And yes, I agree about the dungeon crawling. It's an important part of any RPG like this!

 

Taunt mechanics takes a lot away from tactics, rendering positioning and blocking less relevant and, in the worst cases, making it completely safe for some people to have few or no defenses, because regardless of use of the battlespace enemies will mindlessly be glued to "tanks" that are buffed to the gills with defenses.

 

They are suited for MMOs where the real challenge is coordinating different people according to a common plan and classifying people's avatars by simple roles such as tank, damagedealer, and healer, makes it easier to make them work together as tiny cogs in a machine. In such MMOs you generally don't want the AI enemy to act as if it was intelligent; You want it to be predictable such that people can follow a plan.

 

However, taunt mechanics of the MMO type are ill suited for any game that tries to present the illusion of a tactical experience fighting intelligent opponents, and that's an illusion that most roleplaying games are reluctant to shatter for reasons of immersion.

 

If "taunting" enemies forces them to follow a specific action that is not in their own interest, then logically it has nothing to do with the dictionary definition of taunt and everything to do with mind control. And if you are into mind control, why have your enemies attack one of your own friends rather than their friends? Or why not just confuse them as to who are friends and who are enemies, if you are capable of directing them?

 

So, if you will, Pillars of Eternity already has the taunting that makes sense for the setting: magical domination of the mind; Something that is restricted to a few magic specialists and not guaranteed to succeed.

Edited September 1, 2016 by pi2repsion

[Climhazzard]

From an immersion standpoint taunt is completely ridiculous.  Just because the guy hunkering down behind a tower shield is making bad mom jokes (or whatever), doesn't mean you would attack him instead of the wizard next to him chanting the ultimate spell of doom.

 

The engagement mechanic is more than enough, even that was a bit ridiculous when it was so effective that you could min max all your party members.  It took away from tactical depth, made every encounter tank and spank.

 

As it is now it's actually pretty good, melee enemies will engage with your front line, but it's not guaranteed that it will stay that way.  Every class does have a way to escape or deal with engagement, unless you build them as defenseless glass cannons.  Your back line has many options for dealing with attention and controlling the battle.  Wizards have massive amounts of CC options, as well as extremely impressive defensive buffs.  Druids can shape shift, have defensive buffs, and can use some great CC.  Priests have powerful defensive buffs.  Also don't forget every class can carry defensive consumables as well, many are quite strong.

 

My point is that, no taunt = tactically complex, taunt = tactically shallow.  The current design is pretty good, tactics will include body blocking + engagement, CC, buffing, and much more, but never just tank and spank everything.

 

This is why my first reply just said the engagement mechanic.  Combined with body blocking it is similar to taunt but not as powerful, which forces you to use more meaningful tactics (though doorway tank and spank is still quite effective if you can find a doorway...).  Also don't forget that some melee classes have their own ways of using CC, which has the same effect as using a single target taunt to save a party member.  Some dude beating on your ranger?  Force of anguish, knock down, clear out, stunning blow, etc.

Edited September 1, 2016 by Climhazzard

[Multihog]

Yeah, good points. It's already easy enough to protect your backline. And if nothing else works, just find a doorway and block the enemies with your tanks.