Pillars of Eternity II Review Thread

[Yenkaz]

 

 

Does anyone actually read these "professional" game reviews any more? Speaking for myself, I haven't taken these paid shills seriously for years, I look at user reviews and nothing else.

 

You think major corporations don't disrupt those?

 

It's far more worthwhile to see that:

 

1: There's a general consensus among the professional reviews.

 

and

 

2: Fan and professional reviews match up.

 

A good example of the latter being remarkable is Dragon Age Inquisition, likely due to the reviewers focusing on the core game and players expecting more from the side content.

 

In other area, why rely on "professional" media when random blogs and my cousin's facebook page are so much more trustworthy?

 

Well normaly atleast when i read player commnets/reviews i read atleast 15+ and read the comments. When you read a "professional" review theres ALOT more filler lines and with the same time you can maby read 2 reviews and they are prob from similar sites. But best way i think is find smaller review sites/youtube channels that try to be professional but don´t got thet backing from the industry and therfor prob got a more health view on the game.

 

 

The smaller youtubers can often be bought more cheaply and some are actually just extensions of companies. Far from all, mind you, but your point doesn't really convince me.

[taviow]

Word of mouth and a few youtubers that share my tastes is what I use decide my purchases. Both professional and user review aren't too trust worthy to me, although if deadfire can lock a 94-95 score at metacritic I'll be giggling like a little girl, maybe cause I can use that to convince some of my friends to get into CRPGs through it.

 

Well, if not, you could have used DOS2 as well.

[acelinob25]

Gamestar.de just gave it 92.

[HAWmaro]

 

Word of mouth and a few youtubers that share my tastes is what I use decide my purchases. Both professional and user review aren't too trust worthy to me, although if deadfire can lock a 94-95 score at metacritic I'll be giggling like a little girl, maybe cause I can use that to convince some of my friends to get into CRPGs through it.

 

Well, if not, you could have used DOS2 as well.

 

I do think DOS 2 is overrated honestly, good but overrated especailly as a single player game. It also is honestly nothing like the games that's I'd suggest after it (The IE games) and is more like ultima etc....

Edited May 7, 2018 by HAWmaro

[anathanielh]

 

 

Word of mouth and a few youtubers that share my tastes is what I use decide my purchases. Both professional and user review aren't too trust worthy to me, although if deadfire can lock a 94-95 score at metacritic I'll be giggling like a little girl, maybe cause I can use that to convince some of my friends to get into CRPGs through it.

Well, if not, you could have used DOS2 as well.

I don't think DOS 2 is overrated honestly, good but overrated especailly as a single player game. It also is honestly nothing like the games that's I'd suggest after it (The IE games) and is more like ultima etc....

So do you think it’s overrated or not?

[HAWmaro]

 

 

 

Word of mouth and a few youtubers that share my tastes is what I use decide my purchases. Both professional and user review aren't too trust worthy to me, although if deadfire can lock a 94-95 score at metacritic I'll be giggling like a little girl, maybe cause I can use that to convince some of my friends to get into CRPGs through it.

Well, if not, you could have used DOS2 as well.

I don't think DOS 2 is overrated honestly, good but overrated especailly as a single player game. It also is honestly nothing like the games that's I'd suggest after it (The IE games) and is more like ultima etc....

So do you think it’s overrated or not?

 

It's a really great Coop experiance, and an average single player RPG at best. eitherway not 94/100 game. Of course this is just my opinion.  

EDIT: OPS I just reread my comment I wrote "don't" instead of "do". sorry my bad.

Edited May 7, 2018 by HAWmaro

[XANi]

I loved the gambit system in FF12. Unfortunately, when it comes to CRPG's, I love to micro manage every single character during battle, so not sure how much I'll use the AI truthfully.

 

I wonder if this reviewer actually finished the game through to completion. When they say I could spend 100 hours in the game, I hope they meant that and it wasn't a rough estimate.

 

I do too but if system to program is complex enough then *basically* it is same as you'd micromanage it but without extra clicking. And tweaking it to do what you want is minigame in itself.

[Infinitron]

Gamestar.de just gave it 92.

 

https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/pillars-of-eternity-2-deadfire-pirat-auf-goetterjagd,3329390.html

[Yosharian]

> Angry Joe

 

> professional reviews

 

Lmao

[Vyrulisse]

I'm glad to see good review scores even if they aren't supposed to be out yet. I can't wait until tomorrow!

[Ignatius]

Thanks for posting the news, Infinitron!

 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Ignatius

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

Gamestar.de just gave it 92.

 

https://www.gamestar.de/artikel/pillars-of-eternity-2-deadfire-pirat-auf-goetterjagd,3329390.html

 

Very nice review! They even dig the shanties!

[Cerulean Shaman]

 

 

 

 

Word of mouth and a few youtubers that share my tastes is what I use decide my purchases. Both professional and user review aren't too trust worthy to me, although if deadfire can lock a 94-95 score at metacritic I'll be giggling like a little girl, maybe cause I can use that to convince some of my friends to get into CRPGs through it.

Well, if not, you could have used DOS2 as well.

I don't think DOS 2 is overrated honestly, good but overrated especailly as a single player game. It also is honestly nothing like the games that's I'd suggest after it (The IE games) and is more like ultima etc....

So do you think it’s overrated or not?

 

It's a really great Coop experiance, and an average single player RPG at best. eitherway not 94/100 game. Of course this is just my opinion.  

EDIT: OPS I just reread my comment I wrote "don't" instead of "do". sorry my bad.

 

 

I fully respect your opinion, but I think it's just a different kind of game. Larian wasn't looking out to make another IE game (turn based, for example) and they have very unique features in their game that are decent departures from IE games.

 

So it's maybe just not your cup of tea. In all honesty, the game plays much better as an RPG solo, as you get to experience a full party of your own making including companions (very well written ones in DOS2!) and make all the important story decisions yourself. Even the ending of the game forced the "coop" partners to either magically agree on a very important moral choice or fight over who gets to basically capstone a 80+ hour story.

 

Imagine if you liked RPing a chivalrous knight and your friend went around just killing people and being a jerk and stealing dialogue choices from you to piss off people you liked? So while it's definitely a really fun coop experience it's only really true if that's all you use it for, because as a story-based RPG where you care about the story it was really difficult for me to play with friends (and brothers). Became a lot easier when I had my own save that I actually cared for.. then the one we played together where I didn't give a **** what happened. 

 

Anyway, both Divinity Original Sin games are fully deserving of their praise imo. I backed both, I backed both Pillars, and I backed both Wasteland games so... I'm invested, I guess, in seeing any and all forms of these RPGs sprout up. 

Edited May 8, 2018 by Cerulean Shaman

[aeoncs]

> Angry Joe

 

> professional reviews

 

Lmao

 

Gonna tell you a little secret: If you're paying your bills by doing any given thing, you're doing said thing professionally. But pssst! Don't tell.

[Dk Slayer]

 

> Angry Joe

 

> professional reviews

 

Lmao

 

Gonna tell you a little secret: If you're paying your bills by doing any given thing, you're doing said thing professionally. But pssst! Don't tell.

 

Truth right here!

[M4xw0lf]

golem.de also has a review out; it's without a numerical score, but also very favourable.

[IndiraLightfoot]

Now, Wired has released their review as well, and it's very favourable as well:

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/pillars-of-eternity-2-deadfire-tabletop-gaming

[morhilane]

Now, Wired has released their review as well, and it's very favourable as well:

http://www.wired.co.uk/article/pillars-of-eternity-2-deadfire-tabletop-gaming

 

That reads more like an hands-on preview. There is even developer's quotes.

[vetiver]

Someone's been a very naughty reviewer. LOL! 

[Karkarov]

Gonna tell you a little secret: If you're paying your bills by doing any given thing, you're doing said thing professionally. But pssst! Don't tell.

Absolutely concur, and I like Angry Joe for the most part though he has gotten a bit uh old hat lately.

 

That said, there are always degrees of professionalism.  While I just said I like Angry Joe for the most part, I would not rank him very high on the charts of said professionalism if you feel me.

[rheingold]

I have zero faith in reviewers to be honest. Most of the time they can't be bothered to finish the game. And it's pretty obvious in spite of their claims to the contrary.

OS 2 is a perfect example - it's an absolute dogs breakfast of a game - story is a mess, gameplay garbage, level design appalling BUT if you only played the first act - Fort Joy you would think its one of the greatest games ever, the problems only manifest after that... when they get exponentially worse, so much so, that by the end of the second act, what started as a promising, potentially great rpg is an absolute mess. I couldn't even finish the game - got to Arx and that was that. And there are very few games I can't finish. Reading the reviews it was abundantly clear that pretty much all the reviewers didn't get much past Fort Joy.

Because even if you loved the game you'd have to admit that it had issues as time went on - and none of the reviewers raised any issues - the game was perfect in their eyes - which is absolutely crazy. The reviews were way, way to good, frankly unbelievable.

 

My favourite review though, had to be one of DAI - from a well known website, just can't remember which, where he absolutely loved the game, and praised it extensively for the fact that you didn't start at level one, and had some cool abilities because of that - which meant he didn't play past the intro scene - 2 minutes in the game...

 

So frankly I will read the reviews out of interests sake - but I've long since given up on expecting any honesty or integrity from the reviewers.

 

Having said that it would be nice if there are glowing reviews which would drive some good sales.

[aeoncs]

 

Gonna tell you a little secret: If you're paying your bills by doing any given thing, you're doing said thing professionally. But pssst! Don't tell.

Absolutely concur, and I like Angry Joe for the most part though he has gotten a bit uh old hat lately.

 

That said, there are always degrees of professionalism.  While I just said I like Angry Joe for the most part, I would not rank him very high on the charts of said professionalism if you feel me.

 

 

Oh yeah, I absolutely agree. There are definitely quite a lot of reviewers who are more professional when it comes to the structure and seriousness of their reviews, but I do like me some comedy in my reviews lol.

But that's basically why I mentioned Easy Allies, ACG and Angry Joe in that particular order - all of them are great at what they do but they each have their own style. And obviously all of them have "meh"-quality reviews every now and then.

[Mannock]

I have zero faith in reviewers to be honest. Most of the time they can't be bothered to finish the game. And it's pretty obvious in spite of their claims to the contrary.

OS 2 is a perfect example - it's an absolute dogs breakfast of a game - story is a mess, gameplay garbage, level design appalling BUT if you only played the first act - Fort Joy you would think its one of the greatest games ever, the problems only manifest after that... when they get exponentially worse, so much so, that by the end of the second act, what started as a promising, potentially great rpg is an absolute mess. I couldn't even finish the game - got to Arx and that was that. And there are very few games I can't finish. Reading the reviews it was abundantly clear that pretty much all the reviewers didn't get much past Fort Joy.

Because even if you loved the game you'd have to admit that it had issues as time went on - and none of the reviewers raised any issues - the game was perfect in their eyes - which is absolutely crazy. The reviews were way, way to good, frankly unbelievable.

 

My favourite review though, had to be one of DAI - from a well known website, just can't remember which, where he absolutely loved the game, and praised it extensively for the fact that you didn't start at level one, and had some cool abilities because of that - which meant he didn't play past the intro scene - 2 minutes in the game...

 

So frankly I will read the reviews out of interests sake - but I've long since given up on expecting any honesty or integrity from the reviewers.

 

Having said that it would be nice if there are glowing reviews which would drive some good sales.

As a former reviewer of a print magazine I feel I have to defend the profession a bit.

 

I agree that most likely, very few reviewers finishes games like long RPG's and the like. The reason for this is that from the time you get a copy in your hand (back in the days, when I reviewed, it was actual physical copies, those were the days my friends) to the time you have to submit the review usually ranges from short to very short. I can imagine the hellish time table the lads and lasses have reviewing Deadfire (if they want a review out on release day, that is, which most wants).

 

I remember reviewing Storm of Zehir and there was no chance in hell that I had the time to finish the entire game, and that was just an expansion. You do the best you can to get a feel for the game.

 

With that said, of course there are reviewers who are more interesting than others, in the way they describe the game and their experience. Some are better and some are worse but that is true for every job out there. It's just a matter of finding the one's you find interesting and follow or subscribe to. I think it's unfair to bash them all and claim the lot of them as without integrity and dishonest. It's a pretty unfair statement.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

I have zero faith in reviewers to be honest. Most of the time they can't be bothered to finish the game. And it's pretty obvious in spite of their claims to the contrary.

OS 2 is a perfect example - it's an absolute dogs breakfast of a game - story is a mess, gameplay garbage, level design appalling BUT if you only played the first act - Fort Joy you would think its one of the greatest games ever, the problems only manifest after that... when they get exponentially worse, so much so, that by the end of the second act, what started as a promising, potentially great rpg is an absolute mess. I couldn't even finish the game - got to Arx and that was that. And there are very few games I can't finish. Reading the reviews it was abundantly clear that pretty much all the reviewers didn't get much past Fort Joy.

Because even if you loved the game you'd have to admit that it had issues as time went on - and none of the reviewers raised any issues - the game was perfect in their eyes - which is absolutely crazy. The reviews were way, way to good, frankly unbelievable.

 

My favourite review though, had to be one of DAI - from a well known website, just can't remember which, where he absolutely loved the game, and praised it extensively for the fact that you didn't start at level one, and had some cool abilities because of that - which meant he didn't play past the intro scene - 2 minutes in the game...

 

So frankly I will read the reviews out of interests sake - but I've long since given up on expecting any honesty or integrity from the reviewers.

 

Having said that it would be nice if there are glowing reviews which would drive some good sales.

As a former reviewer of a print magazine I feel I have to defend the profession a bit.

 

I agree that most likely, very few reviewers finishes games like long RPG's and the like. The reason for this is that from the time you get a copy in your hand (back in the days, when I reviewed, it was actual physical copies, those were the days my friends) to the time you have to submit the review usually ranges from short to very short. I can imagine the hellish time table the lads and lasses have reviewing Deadfire (if they want a review out on release day, that is, which most wants).

 

I remember reviewing Storm of Zehir and there was no chance in hell that I had the time to finish the entire game, and that was just an expansion. You do the best you can to get a feel for the game.

 

With that said, of course there are reviewers who are more interesting than others, in the way they describe the game and their experience. Some are better and some are worse but that is true for every job out there. It's just a matter of finding the one's you find interesting and follow or subscribe to. I think it's unfair to bash them all and claim the lot of them as without integrity and dishonest. It's a pretty unfair statement.

 

Yeah, many of them are trying to do a journalistic effort under very tough restraints, but at least they usually try, and I've enjoyed countless reviews over the years. I'd say that those cases where the reviewer is "bought" or just not a very good journalist, they shine through, often miles away, at least if you're an avid reader. I've read gaming magazines since Zzap!64, where I even contributed a bit, and I don't regret reading most of it. It sure beat tabloids (It's about one of my biggest pastimes, so no wonder.)

Edited May 8, 2018 by IndiraLightfoot

[rheingold]

 

I have zero faith in reviewers to be honest. Most of the time they can't be bothered to finish the game. And it's pretty obvious in spite of their claims to the contrary.

OS 2 is a perfect example - it's an absolute dogs breakfast of a game - story is a mess, gameplay garbage, level design appalling BUT if you only played the first act - Fort Joy you would think its one of the greatest games ever, the problems only manifest after that... when they get exponentially worse, so much so, that by the end of the second act, what started as a promising, potentially great rpg is an absolute mess. I couldn't even finish the game - got to Arx and that was that. And there are very few games I can't finish. Reading the reviews it was abundantly clear that pretty much all the reviewers didn't get much past Fort Joy.

Because even if you loved the game you'd have to admit that it had issues as time went on - and none of the reviewers raised any issues - the game was perfect in their eyes - which is absolutely crazy. The reviews were way, way to good, frankly unbelievable.

 

My favourite review though, had to be one of DAI - from a well known website, just can't remember which, where he absolutely loved the game, and praised it extensively for the fact that you didn't start at level one, and had some cool abilities because of that - which meant he didn't play past the intro scene - 2 minutes in the game...

 

So frankly I will read the reviews out of interests sake - but I've long since given up on expecting any honesty or integrity from the reviewers.

 

Having said that it would be nice if there are glowing reviews which would drive some good sales.

As a former reviewer of a print magazine I feel I have to defend the profession a bit.

 

I agree that most likely, very few reviewers finishes games like long RPG's and the like. The reason for this is that from the time you get a copy in your hand (back in the days, when I reviewed, it was actual physical copies, those were the days my friends) to the time you have to submit the review usually ranges from short to very short. I can imagine the hellish time table the lads and lasses have reviewing Deadfire (if they want a review out on release day, that is, which most wants).

 

I remember reviewing Storm of Zehir and there was no chance in hell that I had the time to finish the entire game, and that was just an expansion. You do the best you can to get a feel for the game.

 

With that said, of course there are reviewers who are more interesting than others, in the way they describe the game and their experience. Some are better and some are worse but that is true for every job out there. It's just a matter of finding the one's you find interesting and follow or subscribe to. I think it's unfair to bash them all and claim the lot of them as without integrity and dishonest. It's a pretty unfair statement.

 

Unfortunately the problem is that you can't review a game or anything else without finishing it. I understand the time issue, but games often get worse as they progress. If you are only playing the first half of the game you are getting the wrong impression of the game.

Regarding ethics - well this is a major problem for reviewers. In theory, there should be no gifts, no limited access and you should pay for your own copy of the game.

Every other reviewer, from films to food pays for themselves and most importantly access is not an issue. Whereas for game reviewers - you get on a companies **** list you are not going to get early access, either for previews or for the actual review. Why do you think it's almost impossible to find a bad review of a game produced by the large companies? Whereas you get plenty of bad reviews for smaller companies (even taking into account that they are smaller - have less budget, experience) there are still way to many good reviews from the major companies.

Bottom line - they have to much control over access - and if you as a reviewer can't get early access to a game you are finished...