Deadfire vs Divinity OS 2

[Sedrefilos]

 

Never understood why people like big blocky superbright things, but it seems to be very popular for gamers.

 

I thought about that too - the development of XCOM answered my curiosity, though: they stand out from afar. In isometric games it makes sense.

[draego]

Me sitting at DoS2 Character Creation screen, and comparing (without any prior knowledge) base numbers for phys attacks, damaging spells and heals:

 

Crippling Blow 50-56 dmg; Electric Discharge 7-8...

 

Also me, 5 minutes later: my knight hits like a little girl. Where do I get a two-hander on this ship?

 

I built a spear with rope/rod/knife on the ship something like that but it doesnt scale with strength so.....

Edited October 15, 2017 by draego

[Fardragon]

 

Me sitting at DoS2 Character Creation screen, and comparing (without any prior knowledge) base numbers for phys attacks, damaging spells and heals:

 

Crippling Blow 50-56 dmg; Electric Discharge 7-8...

 

Also me, 5 minutes later: my knight hits like a little girl. Where do I get a two-hander on this ship?

 

I built a spear with rope/rod/knife on the ship something like that but it doesnt scale with strength so.....

 

 

Spears are 2-H finesse weapons. Which are fine, all the Warfare abilities scale fine with Finesse, you don't have to go with strength.

 

Brooms, mops, spades etc. are 2-H strength weapons, or you can make a crude 2-H axe by tying a rock to the end of a long stick.

 

 

It's worth knowing that you can respec later in the game.

[PrimeHydra]

Coming late to this discussion, I really hope they knock Deadfire out of the park. D:OS2 sets a high bar, but Obsidian are more than capable of clearing it.

 

Personally, I enjoyed the first D:OS but have no desire to play the sequel; the UI is too finicky and involved for my taste, while the writing and art just didn't do it for me. Bright/colorful/silly just isn't my thing. While the combat and interactivity lured me through the entire first game, the thought of playing another seems like a chore.

 

Have some irrational anxiety about D:OS2's glowing reviews, because I want Pillars to remain the king of the RPG renaissance. Can they win the crown back from Larian? I mean Jeez, 10/10 on Gamespot is like...no pressure.

 

On the other hand, perhaps one RPG doing well is a boon to all of them, and competition will result in better games for years to come. You'd think a game like D:OS2 was the final word on RPGs from some of the reviews, but the revival is just getting started.

[Wormerine]

Have some irrational anxiety about D:OS2's glowing reviews, because I want Pillars to remain the king of the RPG renaissance. Can they win the crown back from Larian? I mean Jeez, 10/10 on Gamespot is like...no pressure.

 

On the other hand, perhaps one RPG doing well is a boon to all of them, and competition will result in better games for years to come. You'd think a game like D:OS2 was the final word on RPGs from some of the reviews, but the revival is just getting started.

Still didn’t play D:OS2. I do have high hope for Deadfire, but RPGs (and Obsidian) can do much better than PoE. Not a fan of scores and I really don’t care who scores higher metacritic though I do understand that lower score might impact sales and therefore PoE future. Competition is good (for us). FIGHT!

[HooAmEye]

I'd reccomend it, the UI is still a hot mess, but the story/ aesthetic/ pacing is miles beyond the original. Also, why do you place PoE as the king of the current renaissance. Personally, I'd place Dragonfall and Heroine Quest above it

[Lephys]

On the other hand, perhaps one RPG doing well is a boon to all of them, and competition will result in better games for years to come. You'd think a game like D:OS2 was the final word on RPGs from some of the reviews, but the revival is just getting started.

It's a boon to the genre, UNTIL EA and Activision and every single major company decide "this style of RPG is the way to go!", and 50 of them get made in one summer, more than half of which are just phone-ins to extort the boon. Then the boon will crash and become a blight. Then the industry will decide "Those kinds of RPGs don't sell well" for another dark age.

[Sedrefilos]

This kind of rpgs seem to do well enough for them to continue existing and experimenting. You don't need to want to become the next EA by making them and Obsidian can still have their big blockbusters to develop in parallel.

DOS 2 has definately raised the bar and even if we don't care about scores, Obsidian definately does; for good or for worse.

[Skaddix]

They have very different art styles, it's not about which one has more polygons or whatever. DOS1 has a very cartoony/Blizzardy look with gigantic pauldrons, three or four massive rock pieces filling up a rock outcropping like it's some kind of stage prop (exhibit A), and superbright colours. POE goes for more sombre and realistic in all those regards. (DOS2 is slightly more in that direction.)

 

Never understood why people like big blocky superbright things, but it seems to be very popular for gamers.

 

[

 

 

Legacy of Warcraft I assume. 

 

But it stands out and lets you show personality.

Edited November 7, 2017 by Skaddix

[daven]

I'd reccomend it, the UI is still a hot mess, but the story/ aesthetic/ pacing is miles beyond the original. Also, why do you place PoE as the king of the current renaissance. Personally, I'd place Dragonfall and Heroine Quest above it

Yes, Dragonfall was better then PoE. In fact the writing was on a much higher level, I'm not sure Deadfire will even reach it. 

[Wormerine]

 

I'd reccomend it, the UI is still a hot mess, but the story/ aesthetic/ pacing is miles beyond the original. Also, why do you place PoE as the king of the current renaissance. Personally, I'd place Dragonfall and Heroine Quest above it

 

Yes, Dragonfall was better then PoE. In fact the writing was on a much higher level, I'm not sure Deadfire will even reach it.

I disagree. I did enjoy Dragonfall a lot but I found it too much on rails for my taste and it was a pulpy story is really silly world. Characters, world and gameplay of PoE are much more engaging to me. Dragonfall was also a sequel, and original Shadowrun was a big disappointment as it was more of a point&click than an RPG. Bloated Hong Kong didn’t manage to engage me either.

 

Dragonfall is absolutely worth a playthrough but it’s so limiting it loses its appeal very quickly. UI is terrible.

[Sedrefilos]

Both Dragonfall and Hong Kong got me by surprise of how well they were written and had me keep going only for that, even though the overall mechanics were not that good and the stories were quite linear.

Pillar's writing was inconsistent and that was a minus to the game for me, but the overall experience was better than the latest two Shadowruns.

[Mateuszk]

I love PoE, even more Tyranny, liked Torment and I am really looking forward to PoE2. When it comes to DoS1 it cough my attention, I played a bit, but then I stopped and I am definitely NOT buying DoS2, because DoS1 disappointed me.

 

My issue with DoS1 was world, that was too open, which is often without criticism taken for granted that more options should be better. For my taste, too many events unfolded at the same time, I couldn't determine their importance and lost my interest and couldn't continue playing. Also story somehow was childish, not serious and not involving such that I would feel desire to continue. I always judge games mostly by story and DoS1 disappointed me.

[PrimeHydra]

I'd reccomend it, the UI is still a hot mess, but the story/ aesthetic/ pacing is miles beyond the original. Also, why do you place PoE as the king of the current renaissance. Personally, I'd place Dragonfall and Heroine Quest above it

Wish I could play Dragonfall and friends, but they crash on my PC.

 

I loved all the Hero's Quest (Quest for Glory) games so I take your word for it that Heroine's Quest is awesome. I just like PoE the most out of the stuff I've played. It feels closest to BG2 for me, which is my fave RPG of all time.

 

One killer feature that could set Deadfire apart is the customizable AI scripting. The scripts in PoE are very rudimentary, mainly good for making sure your guys don't stand around once their target is gone. But scripting, combined with Real Time combat...with a little experimentation, you could set up a smart team and watch them go to work, pausing only to issue exceptions to your general strategy. Then RTwP helps the flow of the game rather than hindering it. In many fights on high difficulty, I pause so much it may as well be turn-based.

Edited November 8, 2017 by PrimeHydra

[daven]

OK PoE isn't anywhere near the level of BG2. Superficially maybe.

[Sedrefilos]

OK PoE isn't anywhere near the level of BG2. Superficially maybe.

As an overall experience maybe not, but it does many things better.

[Gyg]

OK PoE isn't anywhere near the level of BG2. Superficially maybe.

Am I the only one who think BG2 was nothing special? I like PoE more than BG2. Heck, i liked BG1 and IWD1 more than BG2

[daven]

 

OK PoE isn't anywhere near the level of BG2. Superficially maybe.

Am I the only one who think BG2 was nothing special? I like PoE more than BG2. Heck, i liked BG1 and IWD1 more than BG2

 

Then you are truly lost!

[Pidesco]

 

OK PoE isn't anywhere near the level of BG2. Superficially maybe.

Am I the only one who think BG2 was nothing special? I like PoE more than BG2. Heck, i liked BG1 and IWD1 more than BG2

 

 

It's perfectly normal to like IWD1 more than BG2. IWD had different design goals, and its quality comes from aspects that are BGs didn't share. BG1, however, I would argue is objectively worse than BG2. BG1 and BG2 are essentially the same game. BG2 can certainly be described as BG1 but better. It has better writing, better art, better quests, better gameplay, and better encounter design.

 

Pillars of Eternity does a bunch of things that are a marked improvement over BG2. It's technically better to start with what goes without saying. The combat is also much better. The writing too. I also like the lore and world building in PoE a lot better than in BG2. The latter just benefits from the familiarity of the Forgotten Realms.

 

The main plot was somewhat underwhelming, however, compared to BG2. I never felt the urgency and engagement I felt with BG2. Irenicus made for a much better antagonist than Thaos.

[Gyg]

But Theos' agenda was far more interesting than Jon's. BG2 was just a standard troupe of evil guy desiring more power while Theos could have some merit if not sacrificing entire nations. I really disliked the art of BG2 and prefer more medieval of BG1. Also Eora is more interesting than forgotten realms.

[Sedrefilos]

But Theos' agenda was far more interesting than Jon's. BG2 was just a standard troupe of evil guy desiring more power while Theos could have some merit if not sacrificing entire nations. I really disliked the art of BG2 and prefer more medieval of BG1. Also Eora is more interesting than forgotten realms.

I mostly agree with this (except art), but, I believe, Pillars' inconsistency in many aspects made it a worse overall experience than the one I had when I played BG2. BG2 knew from the start what it was. Pillars didn't. Thankfully Deadfire knows better

Of course, if someone asks me now "hey, what rpg do you think I should play?", I'd propose Pillars over BG2 only because it is more accessible to 2017 players and I know they won't get into BG2 that easy.

Edited November 9, 2017 by Sedrefilos

[MortyTheGobbo]

I've never got into either of the Icewind Dale games. They have no plot to speak of, only endless grind through combat encounters... and their combat systems are both very poor. Having to constantly rest because your team is taking a beating isn't particularly fun. In IWD2, I made the mistake of making my divine caster a druid, rather than a cleric, as well.

 

As far as Irenicu vs. Thaos go... Irenicus is far more typical, to be certain, but he just has a certain charisma Thaos lacks. This is, of course, entirely subjective and very likely coloured by nostalgia. I freely admit I consider the Baldur's Gate games to be better than they actually are.

Edited November 9, 2017 by MortyTheGobbo

[Sedrefilos]

I've started watching some let's plays, recently, of old games I skipped back then, on my laptop laying waiting to sleep and I've come to the conclusion (in conjunction with some replays of old games I did by myself) that older games tend to have more "charm" to them and more "surprises" than the newer ones but they lack of mechanics and gameplay.

 

Edit: they lack of story too

Edited November 9, 2017 by Sedrefilos

[Lephys]

^ It's the approach that's changed. Lots of newer tech and coding is WAY better. Older games couldn't do a lot of stuff. But then, in the new games, instead of taking something like BG and trying to do all the stuff you wish you could've done in it, they tend to do what Bethesda's done to Fallout -- throw out anything old because it's all horrible crap. Which is silly. This is why the recent indie surge has been so successful. You've got games like Stardew Valley that took Harvest Moon and spruced it up a bit.

 

"Charm" is, indeed, one way of putting it. Back then it was still about making fun worlds, etc. So, sure, you had some unnecessary, purely simulationist elements, but the approach helped the game out in other ways, because of how they tied things together and just designed the big picture. Also, because the graphics and coding were so limited (compared to today), you had actual chunks of the budget going towards writers and good writing of stories. Now, it feels like the Hollywood approach; a wealthy, successfull producer comes up with a bunch of "wouldn't it be cool if" scenes and set pieces that string together in a statistically money-making way (action, explosions, cool powers!), then they pay some writing interns $3 and give them a month to fill in the parts in between with script. Nowadays it's more about "Hey, I bet putting a half a cup of open-worldness in this game would make people like it more!", instead of "Hmmm, do I have a good game idea that lends itself to being open world?"

[Sedrefilos]

Low to mid-budget games make it right nowadays (mostly). They are the only ones that make me feel how I used to feel when I was playing a very good new game back then. There's always something new and interesting about either gameplay, story or aesthetics that will give it that "charm". I haven't felt that way about games since long and that's why I became more involved with the industry since 2012 (when Pillars started its kickstarter).

DOS 2 blew me away. The next stop is Deadfire and after that, Phoenix Point. These are the games I'm looking forward to play the most right now.

Edited November 9, 2017 by Sedrefilos