Don-Esteban Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Only 5 members in PoE II? Sad! I read this in a Donald Trump voice... Sad! Hahaha Trump-mode would be: "Obsidian deny 6th party member for hard working backer. VERY UNFAIR! Make party great again!" :D Edited February 22, 2017 by Don-Esteban Chief editor of World of Gothic, the (unfortunately for this audience) German Gothic community since 2000.
Leeuwenhart Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 "See you in COURT! OBSIDIAN" #BUILDAWALLAROUNDTHEWHITEMARCH -i made a deal with the Doemenels. Its a fantastic deal. Its really fantastic. Its the most fantastic deal you'll ever see. Also: my hands arent small. #dwarfhands #paleelftanning #orlanhair 1
Karkarov Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Whitout 6 Groupmember, without me. The same pigs like in Exile. At the beginning still advertised it will be like IE. After the money was there and the artificial hype around the first part, you now make your own thing. I was an idiot, who gave them more than $ 250! I read it only yesterday: http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/156419783766/hallo-josh-es-wird-gemunkelt-das-f%C3%BCr-deadfire As in Exile, no clear and direct communication. No information on the Mainpage of the fig campaign side. This deliberate concealment. I understand you are upset but they were totally upfront about 5 party members, it is right there in the original fig promotion. I am really really confused how people think having one less character is all that impactful? My 6th person in Eternity 1 was just a gun mook who simply sat back and passively shot someone every once in awhile, because I literally didn't need them for anything else. Edited February 22, 2017 by Karkarov 1
JerekKruger Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 I am really really confused how people think having one less character is all that impactful? People really don't like change. 1
Karkarov Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 People really don't like change. Fair enough. This is true.
Heinrich Bhaal Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Whitout 6 Groupmember, without me. The same pigs like in Exile. At the beginning still advertised it will be like IE. After the money was there and the artificial hype around the first part, you now make your own thing. I was an idiot, who gave them more than $ 250! I read it only yesterday: http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/156419783766/hallo-josh-es-wird-gemunkelt-das-f%C3%BCr-deadfire As in Exile, no clear and direct communication. No information on the Mainpage of the fig campaign side. This deliberate concealment. I understand you are upset but they were totally upfront about 5 party members, it is right there in the original fig promotion. I am really really confused how people think having one less character is all that impactful? My 6th person in Eternity 1 was just a gun mook who simply sat back and passively shot someone every once in awhile, because I literally didn't need them for anything else. Oh, you mean, how Zahua missed in the main game? Although with him in the kickstarter campaign was advertised? And it is only available from White March? An addon that came later? http://www.pcgames.de/screenshots/original/2014/08/2431951-pillars-pc-games.jpg And this kickstarter artwork shows only five characters. How to close this change? Women's logic? Because the screenshots are analyzed by feelings?
Karkarov Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Women's logic? Because the screenshots are analyzed by feelings? No, I mean if you had actually listened to the video and read the original information on the fig page you would have known. I wouldn't call that "women's logic" just plain old logic. Also sexist much? Seriously, you are being too emotional and reactionary. Just cancel your backing and leave the forum if it is critical for you. If you change your mind later you can always just buy the game at normal retail. Also they have already said it will be possible to add a sixth character with mods. 2
Heinrich Bhaal Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Women's logic? Because the screenshots are analyzed by feelings? No, I mean if you had actually listened to the video and read the original information on the fig page you would have known. I wouldn't call that "women's logic" just plain old logic. Also sexist much? Seriously, you are being too emotional and reactionary. Just cancel your backing and leave the forum if it is critical for you. If you change your mind later you can always just buy the game at normal retail. Also they have already said it will be possible to add a sixth character with mods. Please give me the exact link from the campaign, where I can read it. True, I have not read all the updates.
Karkarov Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Please give me the exact link from the campaign, where I can read it. True, I have not read all the updates. I am not going to spend my time finding the exact spot they say it, but just go watch the fig video and pay attention to the combat scenes. Notice something? There are always five party members fighting. Never four, never six, just five. Common sense rules the day at the Friendly Arm.
ArnoldRimmer Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 "I am really really confused how people think having one less character is all that impactful" Then if you can't sse that it's a problem, you will have no problem with the game being made for 6 not 5 if it isn't impactful- Needful Things mod at Steam | Nexus
Karkarov Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 "I am really really confused how people think having one less character is all that impactful" Then if you can't sse that it's a problem, you will have no problem with the game being made for 6 not 5 if it isn't impactful- You are misquoting. That first line is me, and I have posted many times that I think five is fine. In my opinion the sixth character in eternity was always just dead weight.
Varana Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 (edited) Also, most people here actually wouldn't have a problem if there were six in the party. They just don't see the world ending in flames with five, either. Edited February 22, 2017 by Varana 3 Therefore I have sailed the seas and come To the holy city of Byzantium. -W.B. Yeats Χριστός ἀνέστη!
JerekKruger Posted February 22, 2017 Posted February 22, 2017 Also, most people here actually wouldn't have a problem if there were six in the party. They just don't see the world ending in flames with five, either. Bingo! I've said before, if Obsidian had come to me and asked "what should be the limit on party size" with no additional information, I would have answered "six" because six seemed to work fine in PoE and in the old IE games. However Obsidian have decided to go with five and I can't see any particular reason why this should make the game significantly worse. 3
Leeuwenhart Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) 5 can start a boy band Edér Aloth Serafen Mooncalf & Me :D Edited February 23, 2017 by Leeuwenhart
Kadayko Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 6 at least, I would even go for more if it was possible.
molotov. Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 6 is the best number, specially for this game. There will be 3 companions reintroduced, I'm quite sure that almost everyone will likely use Edér and Aloth again, so you will have to choose 2 of the 3 - hopefully 4 - new companions, to sum it up, you will not know the interactions between the old companions and the news ones in only one playthrough, that is the lore reason why 6 is the best number.Combat wise, 6 is by far the best number, 4 is really simplistic, generic and full casul, 5 is just weird and casul, PoE1 had the perfect party, 3 melees: 1 tank, 1 semi tank, 1 melee dps; 3 ranged characters: 1 healer, 1 dps, 1 dps/support. You could make a party with any of the classes without limitation, with 5 you will have a huge limitation, you will have to choose between 1 semi tank and 1 support/dps, both of them are great for CC and battlefield control, without them the battlefield will turn into a mess - just like Dragon Age. Please, go back to 6...
JerekKruger Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 6 is the best number, specially for this game. There will be 3 companions reintroduced, I'm quite sure that almost everyone will likely use Edér and Aloth again, so you will have to choose 2 of the 3 - hopefully 4 - new companions, to sum it up, you will not know the interactions between the old companions and the news ones in only one playthrough, that is the lore reason why 6 is the best number. This is a pretty terrible reason. Firstly, there are going to be seven companions, so even with a party of six (and even with your arbitrary assumption that people won't want to bring Pallegina) that's going to mean one companion is left out. This means one of two things: either you're still going to miss out on companion interactions even with a party of six, or your logic extends and, in fact, seven in the best number (or eight for those of us who plan to bring Pallegina). But the argument is flawed on a more fundamental level in that a player isn't locked into a single party setup. You can cycle through your companions throughout the game and, in doing so, experience all their interactions. I've been doing this since Baldur's Gate 2. Combat wise, 6 is by far the best number, 4 is really simplistic, generic and full casul, 5 is just weird and casul, PoE1 had the perfect party, 3 melees: 1 tank, 1 semi tank, 1 melee dps; 3 ranged characters: 1 healer, 1 dps, 1 dps/support. You could make a party with any of the classes without limitation, with 5 you will have a huge limitation, you will have to choose between 1 semi tank and 1 support/dps, both of them are great for CC and battlefield control, without them the battlefield will turn into a mess - just like Dragon Age. "Simplistic" "generic" "weird" and "casual". None of these words really means anything in this context*, they're all just ways of saying "I don't like it". As for your perfect party: that's an awfully specific set of roles that you must have. It's almost like you've gone out of your way to come up with six roles in order to support your view that six is the best number. Here's another role: support/tank. Now I have come up with this role I am afraid that seven is the best number, not six. Also I find comparisons to Dragon Age (or other games) bizarre. You do realise that there were other differences between PoE and Dragon Age than the size of the party, and that these might have had an effect on their differences? Please, go back to 6... I'd focus your attention of getting used to the idea of five person parties, as Josh seemed pretty clear in the Q&A stream that they are not going back to six. *Well, that's not true, I agree that five person parties is "weird" in that it's unusual, but unusual does not mean bad. 3
molotov. Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 6 is the best number, specially for this game. There will be 3 companions reintroduced, I'm quite sure that almost everyone will likely use Edér and Aloth again, so you will have to choose 2 of the 3 - hopefully 4 - new companions, to sum it up, you will not know the interactions between the old companions and the news ones in only one playthrough, that is the lore reason why 6 is the best number. This is a pretty terrible reason. Firstly, there are going to be seven companions, so even with a party of six (and even with your arbitrary assumption that people won't want to bring Pallegina) that's going to mean one companion is left out. This means one of two things: either you're still going to miss out on companion interactions even with a party of six, or your logic extends and, in fact, seven in the best number (or eight for those of us who plan to bring Pallegina). But the argument is flawed on a more fundamental level in that a player isn't locked into a single party setup. You can cycle through your companions throughout the game and, in doing so, experience all their interactions. I've been doing this since Baldur's Gate 2. Combat wise, 6 is by far the best number, 4 is really simplistic, generic and full casul, 5 is just weird and casul, PoE1 had the perfect party, 3 melees: 1 tank, 1 semi tank, 1 melee dps; 3 ranged characters: 1 healer, 1 dps, 1 dps/support. You could make a party with any of the classes without limitation, with 5 you will have a huge limitation, you will have to choose between 1 semi tank and 1 support/dps, both of them are great for CC and battlefield control, without them the battlefield will turn into a mess - just like Dragon Age. "Simplistic" "generic" "weird" and "casual". None of these words really means anything in this context*, they're all just ways of saying "I don't like it". As for your perfect party: that's an awfully specific set of roles that you must have. It's almost like you've gone out of your way to come up with six roles in order to support your view that six is the best number. Here's another role: support/tank. Now I have come up with this role I am afraid that seven is the best number, not six. Also I find comparisons to Dragon Age (or other games) bizarre. You do realise that there were other differences between PoE and Dragon Age than the size of the party, and that these might have had an effect on their differences? Please, go back to 6... I'd focus your attention of getting used to the idea of five person parties, as Josh seemed pretty clear in the Q&A stream that they are not going back to six. *Well, that's not true, I agree that five person parties is "weird" in that it's unusual, but unusual does not mean bad. Well I don't know how to make that quote stuff, so this will be a ratter big post. "This is a pretty terrible reason. Firstly, there are going to be seven companions, so even with a party of six (and even with your arbitrary assumption that people won't want to bring Pallegina) that's going to mean one companion is left out. This means one of two things: either you're still going to miss out on companion interactions even with a party of six, or your logic extends and, in fact, seven in the best number (or eight for those of us who plan to bring Pallegina)."Arbitrary assumption? I've made that assumption because of her popularity in the forum and Steam forum, no one talks about her. And the populatiry of palladins, a lot of people love to use palladins and, therefore, it's logical that people don't want two palladins in the same party. Yes, of course that one companion is left out I'm not stupid, what I meant was: MORE OPTIONS. With 5 members we have less options and with 6 we have more, it's a pretty simple argument. "But the argument is flawed on a more fundamental level in that a player isn't locked into a single party setup. You can cycle through your companions throughout the game and, in doing so, experience all their interactions. I've been doing this since Baldur's Gate 2." No! REALLY? You can cycle through your companions? Wow! I've never thought about that! Again... I want more options, Josh is always talking about options in their Q&A in twitch, so I'm using this as an argument. "Simplistic" "generic" "weird" and "casual". None of these words really means anything in this context*, they're all just ways of saying "I don't like it"." Really? I thought that someone from a game forum would know their meaning, that is why I didn't explained, because of the context of the forum, but I guess I have to explain... 1- Simplistic, 5 companions is a small and weird number because there were a set of class roles that the community created to play the game, 3 melee characters - 1 tank, 1 semi tank, 1 melee dps - and 3 ranged characters - 1 healer, 1 dps, 1 cc, now that we have only have 5 slots someone is left out of the combat system, maybe it's the semi tank or maybe it's the cc - I don't imagin a RPG without a tank, dps or healer -, therefore the combat is more simple. 2 - Generic, same reasons, now we don't have some of the cool roles that we had before, the semi tank and the cc, those are roles that you can find in MMORPG games and old CRPG games, nowadays it's hard to find a party with more than 4 members because it makes the combat system more complex, that is why I said generic, because it's something that everyone is doing. 3 - Weird, because it's a weird number, because of the reasons I already said, but I'll explain once again, we had 3 melee 3 ranged, what happens now? 2 melee 3 ranged, it will be hard to control the enemy front, 3 melee 2 ranged, it will be hard to dps the enemy team. 4- Casual, because the combat was complex and the community loved it, now with less people to micro it will be more casual to play, simple. "As for your perfect party: that's an awfully specific set of roles that you must have. It's almost like you've gone out of your way to come up with six roles in order to support your view that six is the best number. Here's another role: support/tank. Now I have come up with this role I am afraid that seven is the best number, not six." Well, I thought that everyone knew about those roles, because it's used by everyone that plays on hard or PotD, just check the forum, or just search "pillars of eternity guide" on youtube you can find Nerd Commando he has a video with more than 30 k views explaining this. But let me help you, I'm playing the game on the hard mode trying to beat the game with 0 deaths, and in order to do that I had to make a balanced party, I realized that 4 melees and 2 ranged was bad because my front was too busy and my wizard/druid couldn't do a big AOE spell so easily, so I switched for 2 melees and 4 ranged, even worse, now the enemies are breaking my front and going after my squishes, so I switched for 3 dps 3 ranged, just perfect, now I have to balance out the roles, 1 tank of course and 2 melee dps, it's not working so well, the enemies are hittin hard and fast, my 2 dps are dying so fast, so let's switch for 2 tanks and 1 dps, not good, 2 tanks means little damage, so... 1 tank 1 semi tank 1 dps, perfect, want an example? 1 fighter (tank), 1 rogue (semi tank), 1 barbarian (dps) they can control the enemy front that is 6 or even more enemies in the hard mode. Now let's balance out the 3 ranged characters, those one were easier, 1 healer of course and 2 dps, well... it's working out but there are some crazy enemies that can break my front what sould I do? Oh... wizards have a lot of cc abilities... well guess what? I'll use an specialized wizard just to cc the enemy front and then my melee and ranged dps can make quickly work of the enemy front whilst the enemy mages are petrified! It's a pretty basic concept well known by the community. "Also I find comparisons to Dragon Age (or other games) bizarre. You do realise that there were other differences between PoE and Dragon Age than the size of the party, and that these might have had an effect on their differences?" Do you realize that I used Dragon Age just to compare the chaotic battlefield? I didn't compared the combat or anything like that, it was only the chaotic battlefield. "I'd focus your attention of getting used to the idea of five person parties, as Josh seemed pretty clear in the Q&A stream that they are not going back to six." Well I'm pretty good with micro, so I'm more worried about the fact that the game will get casual than worried about the idea of getting used to five.
DigitalCrack Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 @molotov for someone using "more options" as an argument for 6 vs 5 man party you came up with a very rigid set of roles and party makeup... the design philosphy of the game was built around people being able to go with whatever roles and party comps they wanted and still be viable. So it doesnt make sense to argue that YOUR pigeon holed view of roles and party comp is enough reason to justify 6 over 5. your arguement is totally premised on these "community defined must have roles" thats no different than saying "well some us really like playing this way and it works better with 6 than 5.."
molotov. Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 @molotov for someone using "more options" as an argument for 6 vs 5 man party you came up with a very rigid set of roles and party makeup... the design philosphy of the game was built around people being able to go with whatever roles and party comps they wanted and still be viable. So it doesnt make sense to argue that YOUR pigeon holed view of roles and party comp is enough reason to justify 6 over 5. your arguement is totally premised on these "community defined must have roles" thats no different than saying "well some us really like playing this way and it works better with 6 than 5.." You do realize that 1 class can fill almost all of the roles? For example, the fighter class can be a tank - and the best tank in the game in my opinion - a semi tank and a dps - even a ranged dps-, that is the beauty about this game. Yes, the roles are rigid but the classes aren't. It's something that the community realized pretty quickly, there are hundreds of builds, even I created one with the help of Nerd Commando. Josh talked a little about all of the builds we created and he told us that he used the builds to balance the game, I think that the Q&A he said that is on the youtube. The only role that is static is the healer, there are only 2 classes that can heal well, priest and druid, but priests are much better in healling. You played PoE1? You do realize that party centered RPG's tend to have rigid roles?
demeisen Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 Seems to me that when PoE1 allowed 6, both camps were happy, because you could play just fine with 5 if you liked that better.
JerekKruger Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 Yes, of course that one companion is left out I'm not stupid, what I meant was: MORE OPTIONS. With 5 members we have less options and with 6 we have more, it's a pretty simple argument. And seven gives more options than six, and eight gives more options that seven, and so on. If you're going to argue specifically in favour of six you've got to explain why seven or more is worse. Your argument with regard to companion interactions does not do this. No! REALLY? You can cycle through your companions? Wow! I've never thought about that! Again... I want more options, Josh is always talking about options in their Q&A in twitch, so I'm using this as an argument. So why aren't you arguing in favour of eight? 1- Simplistic, 5 companions is a small and weird number because there were a set of class roles that the community created to play the game, 3 melee characters - 1 tank, 1 semi tank, 1 melee dps - and 3 ranged characters - 1 healer, 1 dps, 1 cc, now that we have only have 5 slots someone is left out of the combat system, maybe it's the semi tank or maybe it's the cc - I don't imagin a RPG without a tank, dps or healer -, therefore the combat is more simple. Your arbitrary list of roles isn't universal, and won't become so no matter how many times you repeat it. 2 - Generic, same reasons, now we don't have some of the cool roles that we had before, the semi tank and the cc, those are roles that you can find in MMORPG games and old CRPG games, nowadays it's hard to find a party with more than 4 members because it makes the combat system more complex, that is why I said generic, because it's something that everyone is doing. I really can't parse this sentence, other than the final part about things being generic because everyone is doing them. I agree that that's a fine use for the word generic, but it is not, in of itself, a criticism. 3 - Weird, because it's a weird number, because of the reasons I already said, but I'll explain once again, we had 3 melee 3 ranged, what happens now? 2 melee 3 ranged, it will be hard to control the enemy front, 3 melee 2 ranged, it will be hard to dps the enemy team. It will only be hard if Obsidian don't also tweak encounters to take this into account. I don't have any reason to assume they won't though, do you? 4- Casual, because the combat was complex and the community loved it, now with less people to micro it will be more casual to play, simple. We don't know that it will be simpler, because we don't know what other changes Obsidian will be making. Well, I thought that everyone knew about those roles, because it's used by everyone that plays on hard or PotD, just check the forum, or just search "pillars of eternity guide" on youtube you can find Nerd Commando he has a video with more than 30 k views explaining this. But let me help you, I'm playing the game on the hard mode trying to beat the game with 0 deaths, and in order to do that I had to make a balanced party, I realized that 4 melees and 2 ranged was bad because my front was too busy and my wizard/druid couldn't do a big AOE spell so easily, so I switched for 2 melees and 4 ranged, even worse, now the enemies are breaking my front and going after my squishes, so I switched for 3 dps 3 ranged, just perfect, now I have to balance out the roles, 1 tank of course and 2 melee dps, it's not working so well, the enemies are hittin hard and fast, my 2 dps are dying so fast, so let's switch for 2 tanks and 1 dps, not good, 2 tanks means little damage, so... 1 tank 1 semi tank 1 dps, perfect, want an example? 1 fighter (tank), 1 rogue (semi tank), 1 barbarian (dps) they can control the enemy front that is 6 or even more enemies in the hard mode. Now let's balance out the 3 ranged characters, those one were easier, 1 healer of course and 2 dps, well... it's working out but there are some crazy enemies that can break my front what sould I do? Oh... wizards have a lot of cc abilities... well guess what? I'll use an specialized wizard just to cc the enemy front and then my melee and ranged dps can make quickly work of the enemy front whilst the enemy mages are petrified! It's a pretty basic concept well known by the community. I play almost exclusively on PotD, I've never come across this list of roles that "everyone" knows about. Oh also, I spend almost all my time here on the Strategies and Character Builds subforum and haven't come across the list there either. Nerdcommando's builds are pretty bad: he's far too tied up in the idea of min-maxing attributes, but the way attributes work in PoE, together with the changes in patch 2.0, make this a suboptimal way to play PoE. Trust me, go use some of the builds Strategy subforum here and realise just how much better they are than any of his. A side benefit of not min-maxing attributes is that the enemy is much less likely to bypass your front line (this is due to how their targetting works), which in turn makes it much less necessary to have three frontliners. But no, your list of roles is not universal, and if you know what you're doing (rather than following Nercommando's bad advice) you absolutely don't need to follow it. Do you realize that I used Dragon Age just to compare the chaotic battlefield? I didn't compared the combat or anything like that, it was only the chaotic battlefield. We're talking about party size. If you bring up the chaos of Dragon Age's battlefield then you're implying that it's a result of the smaller party size (actually you said this outright). I am saying that there are many other differences between the two games that contribute to it's chaotic nature, and that therefore using it as an argument against smaller parties is flawed. Well I'm pretty good with micro, so I'm more worried about the fact that the game will get casual than worried about the idea of getting used to five. Well we'll see I guess. All I can say is that with a higher level cap, and all spells and abilities becoming per encounter, I am guessing there will be more, not less, to do in combat even with smaller parties. Combine this with multiclassing and subclasses (giving a total of 1007 class combinations) and I am not at all worried about Deadfire becoming simplified (I refuse to use the term casual as it's such a stupid term).
Katarack21 Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 Really dislike the 5 char limit. The 4 char limit was one of the few things I disliked about Tyranny.
molotov. Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 "So why aren't you arguing in favour of eight?" Because the game already was balanced towards 6?"Your arbitrary list of roles isn't universal, and won't become so no matter how many times you repeat it." So you are implying that a tank, healer and dps is not a universal role in the RPG genre? Ok." play almost exclusively on PotD, I've never come across this list of roles that "everyone" knows about. Oh also, I spend almost all my time here on the Strategies and Character Builds subforum and haven't come across the list there either. Nerdcommando's builds are pretty bad: he's far too tied up in the idea of min-maxing attributes, but the way attributes work in PoE, together with the changes in patch 2.0, make this a suboptimal way to play PoE. Trust me, go use some of the builds Strategy subforum here and realise just how much better they are than any of his. A side benefit of not min-maxing attributes is that the enemy is much less likely to bypass your front line (this is due to how their targetting works), which in turn makes it much less necessary to have three frontliners. But no, your list of roles is not universal, and if you know what you're doing (rather than following Nercommando's bad advice) you absolutely don't need to follow it." If they are so bad why I'm almost finishing Hard mode without a single death? To be honest I don't use a mercenary party full of min-max, my only min-max character is the PC which is a fighter tank, he is almost invencible, the only abilitie that almost killed him was that laser from the big sentinels from WM II ( I can't remember their names), but the others in my party Edér, Aloth, Kana, Durance, all of them have builds created by him, of course with some tweaks."Well we'll see I guess. All I can say is that with a higher level cap, and all spells and abilities becoming per encounter, I am guessing there will be more, not less, to do in combat even with smaller parties. Combine this with multiclassing and subclasses (giving a total of 1007 class combinations) and I am not at all worried about Deadfire becoming simplified (I refuse to use the term casual as it's such a stupid term)." Casual is the same thing to say simplified... it's just a term used in video games. Dark Souls II pve is more casual than Dark Souls I pve to attract more players, that is fine for the company that created the game but bad for their old fans. I guess Obsdian is trying to do the same thing... but I really don't care about party size that much, I only made a response because I like to train my english. My biggest disappointment so far is that Ydwin will not be a fully companion, instead of her we got some boring sidekicks... here is a question for you... why PoE 1 can have 8 companions in the vanilla, but PoE 2 can't? Why we had to endure that boring grieving mother but we can't have a interesting necromancer?
Leeuwenhart Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 (edited) Dude. Ydwin is the 8th companion. Shes in. 5 mill is easy. Stretchgoals keep going AFTER fig with the backerportal. Already at 4 mill now. (400k investments being vetted) 4.25 minimum when fig stops. So only 750k Next week the paypall boost and then it will trickle in slowly to 5mill over tge next month Edited February 23, 2017 by Leeuwenhart 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now