Why the hell are they dumbing down the game?

[Baramos]

Edit: Gonna rewrite later.

Edited March 21, 2018 by Baramos

[Guest]

 

 

 

Why are people still getting so worked up over this? It's very simple. If you like the edits use them, if you don't like them don't use them. Someone using/not using the edits does not in anyway effect your playthrough.

If a topic bothers but you isn't breaking any rules you don't have to participate in them. Roll your eyes and move on. Commenting hostilities and snark contributes nothing to the discussion.

Did you just reply to your own post?

You cut out all of the context. I mentioned right above the quote

Similarly to what I said about the portraits

So no I was not replying to a quote from myself.

Not at all clear that the sentence above had anything to do with what followed, but thanks for clarifying nonetheless

[rheingold]

I have some concerns about the game, but dumbing down is not one of them. Yes, it is going to consoles, no that does not mean dumbing down, just that it's a good business decision. From what I can see of the beta, it's still far from dumbed down. But people should remember that gaming companies don't ever make games for you - the individual, unless you want to donate 4 million dollars... there always has to be a compromise between the small minority of hardcore gamers and the more casual players who in essence keep the company in business.

Just to reiterate from what I can make out the changes have not been made to dumb down. Still a bit concerned about some issues, but I'll give Obs the benefit of the doubt. There are very few devs with Sawyers experience and incredibly considered approach to game development.

[Gairnulf]

PoE combat already played nothing like the IE games, although it was advertised as a successor to IWD and BG's with regards to combat.

 

However it's endearing to watch the camp of PoE "old-skool" purists vs Deadfire "innovation" proponents.

[Wormerine]

PoE combat already played nothing like the IE games, although it was advertised as a successor to IWD and BG's with regards to combat.

Really? I assume straight up plagarism is the only thing you would categorize as "inspired by" then.

[Guest]

 

PoE combat already played nothing like the IE games, although it was advertised as a successor to IWD and BG's with regards to combat.

Really? I assume straight up plagarism is the only thing you would categorize as "inspired by" then.

”Spiritual successor”

[Gfted1]

 

 

PoE combat already played nothing like the IE games, although it was advertised as a successor to IWD and BG's with regards to combat.

Really? I assume straight up plagarism is the only thing you would categorize as "inspired by" then.

”Spiritual successor”

 

 

"Spiritual successor" basically boiled down to "party based RPG with isometric view"?

[Guest]

 

 

 

PoE combat already played nothing like the IE games, although it was advertised as a successor to IWD and BG's with regards to combat.

Really? I assume straight up plagarism is the only thing you would categorize as "inspired by" then.

”Spiritual successor”

"Spiritual successor" basically boiled down to "party based RPG with isometric view"?

Right. All the other classic high-fantasy RPG tropes ended up on the cutting room floor.

[Gairnulf]

There is a mean between "nothing like" and plagiarizing something.

[Guest]

His extreme was ridiculous, but yours is beyond doubt?

 

Step 1: introduce hyperbole

Step 2: ridicule hyperbole, then argue that “the true is somewhere in between” in your very next post.

[Gairnulf]

It's not a hyperbole. The combat plays nothing like the infinity engine games. Or you mean to say that having an isometric (in a different angle) perspective and 6 party members is enough to qualify it as "something like" the IE combat?

[Guest]

“Nothing like” means no DR, or saves, or any of the other combat mechanics. “Nothing like” means literally no crossover of any kind. It’s clear that you don’t think there was enough fidelity to the predecessors (even though we were never told there would be), but perhaps it’s time you found other words to express your displeasure.

[Gfted1]

Huh, so youre saying "spiritual successor" can mean literally anything, as long as it slightly looks to the reference material, and was not in fact used as a hook to reel in the IE game devotees? K.

[Guest]

Go back and rewatch the Kickstarter vid. Pay close attention to the words that come out of Feargus’ mouth at 1:40.

 

EDIT: then hang out for Josh’s part @ 2:00

Edited March 23, 2018 by Achilles

[Faustus2]

What does "Spiritual Successor" mean anyhow?

 

That doesn't sound like a game-designing term...

[Gfted1]

What does "Spiritual Successor" mean anyhow?

 

"Anything that ever happened in any game before." I kid, I kid. I obviously don't know what it means but it seems to be a term that is open to wide interpretation.

[Guest]

Feargus and Josh define it pretty well in the Kickstarter video I’ve already recommended that you review.

 

Can’t claim bamboozle when they told you up front what they were doing.

 

I have a sneaking suspicion you won’t be watching though.

[Gfted1]

You would be correct in that suspicion. You can crow all day about how its crystal clear to you, but Ive seen this come up often enough to understand that isn't the case for many others.

[Guest]

I’m guessing you won’t look up “confirmation bias” either. If you aren’t here to argue in good faith, please feel free to go moderate something somewhere else.

[Gfted1]

 

"If you don't agree, youre wrong!" *stomps foot*

 

Or, you know, you can read the very examples in this thread to see that its not a clear concept for everyone.

[injurai]

I find the concept of a "Spiritual Successor" quite self-explanatory.

[Gairnulf]

“Nothing like” means no DR, or saves, or any of the other combat mechanics. “Nothing like” means literally no crossover of any kind. It’s clear that you don’t think there was enough fidelity to the predecessors (even though we were never told there would be), but perhaps it’s time you found other words to express your displeasure.

Nothing like means, for example, no personal initiative round. You take that out and there is no way combat will be anything like an IE game.

[Gfted1]

Yup, it can be anything you want it to be!

 

 

[Guest]

 

"If you don't agree, youre wrong!" *stomps foot*

 

Or, you know, you can read the very examples in this thread to see that its not a clear concept for everyone.

Right, because people never hear what they want to hear, then cry shenanigans when they don’t get what they think they were promised.

 

My hats off to you, sir. It takes really balls to post bull**** like that right after admitting that you’ve made up your mind that you’re right and not even interested in looking at something that may force you to admit that you aren’t.

[Guest]

 

“Nothing like” means no DR, or saves, or any of the other combat mechanics. “Nothing like” means literally no crossover of any kind. It’s clear that you don’t think there was enough fidelity to the predecessors (even though we were never told there would be), but perhaps it’s time you found other words to express your displeasure.

Nothing like means, for example, no personal initiative round. You take that out and there is no way combat will be anything like an IE game.

Ok, sport