Why do some people/reviewers dislike the story of Pillars so much.

[Crucis]

That just tells you what these people know. 

 

A slow start is actually perfect for an RPG because it allows the player to build up his character. Remember the exchange with Calisca in PoE1? That's the sort of things that help flesh out a character and make him or her a little more than some numbers on the character screen. 

 

With that being said I still think PoE1 did a poor job introducing its setting. There is just too much information when you're getting started and it can only be overwhelming. 

 

I can't really say how Deadfire's introduction would feel to someone who hasn't played the first game but I think it's following the same pattern mostly. Having played the first game makes things much less confusing though. 

 

IMO the problem is not that the story is bad, it's more about those people not wanting to invest in the story. Perhaps they feel the path to be taken is not obvious enough. Maybe they want dragons to show up right after character creation just like in Skyrim (which is absolutely terrible and something no self respecting Game Master would do in a pen and paper RPG). Frankly I don't really know. I'm just glad we still get the opportunity to play games that provide a "slow" start. 

 

The problem is that with the BG and IWD games, they existed in a familiar setting, at least for many D&D veterans, and the games didn't have to spend an enormous amount of time and effort to set up much of anything, except perhaps your immediate surroundings.  They could take for granted that you knew some things, like who the deities of the Forgotten Realms were.  But PoE1's Eora was a totally new and unfamiliar setting.  It seems to me that there's bound to be a pretty fair amount of information they feel is needed to be passed along.

[Crucis]

 

 

I'll not play PoE2 for a few months, but I'm reading a few reviews.

 

The opinion on the story that got me most worried was Rock Paper Shotgun's on-going review. It said that the main story was too disconnect from every other quest (kinda similar to PoE1 actually). In PoE1 however, it was more forgivable because the main story was you seeking a way to get rid of your soul-awakening. It did not feel very imediate - which was a complaint from a lot of people - but at least it made sense when your character was dealing with a slow-progressing illness and chose to adventure here an there in sidequests.

 

Now, however, there's a giant god that took your soul stamping cities (apparently) and it just feels weird (according to the review) to be doing anything else besides following that god. This is a very poor story design decision and it god me less excited to play the game .

 

Can anyone who have played the beggining of the game give their thoughts about that?

 

 

LuccA, the problem is that if the only thing the game cares about is chasing the main story line, it can end up feeling like the IWD games where the game was literally a single direct line of maps one after another, and the closest thing to a side quest was something that could occur within a single map, or at best a multi-map area (like the final building/castle/tower in IWD2).  That can get exceedingly boring after a while, and can make the game less enjoyable for multiple replays because there's largely only one way to play it, and replayability depends more on party composition than an an ability to change the order in which you do things.

 

 

Exactly.  There's always going to be a disconnect there, it's an unavoidable consequence of games with any kind of open-ended exploration.

 

 

And as I recall, even the magnificent BG2 had tons of unrelated side quests as well.  It's one of the reasons it was so beloved.  You didn't have to play them in the same order.  They took you to many different areas that were unrelated to the main story line.  Frankly, without those side quests, I'd think that even the best (main) story line would get rather boring after the first or second play-through. 

[Yosharian]

Yes, exactly. And the side quests are just as epic as the main quests, well, some of them. Firkraag for example!

[Crucis]

Yes, exactly. And the side quests are just as epic as the main quests, well, some of them. Firkraag for example!

 

And while the BG2/TOB was rather straight line as I recall (been a LONG time), that side quest dungeon was pretty epic.

Edited October 1, 2018 by Crucis

[jf8350143]

I'll not play PoE2 for a few months, but I'm reading a few reviews.

 

The opinion on the story that got me most worried was Rock Paper Shotgun's on-going review. It said that the main story was too disconnect from every other quest (kinda similar to PoE1 actually). In PoE1 however, it was more forgivable because the main story was you seeking a way to get rid of your soul-awakening. It did not feel very imediate - which was a complaint from a lot of people - but at least it made sense when your character was dealing with a slow-progressing illness and chose to adventure here an there in sidequests.

 

Now, however, there's a giant god that took your soul stamping cities (apparently) and it just feels weird (according to the review) to be doing anything else besides following that god. This is a very poor story design decision and it god me less excited to play the game .

 

Can anyone who have played the beggining of the game give their thoughts about that?

It's the same with Skyrim or Fallout 4, you can travel around in your ship the moment you leave the first island, and the main story is completely optional from that point.

 

Personally I have 0 problem with this, the gods want you to pursue Ethoas, whether the watcher want to do it or not is competely up to you. In PoE 1 you will become crazy if you don't find Thaos soon enough, but this time you yourself won't be dead or anything if you just running around being a pirate.

[Mikeymoonshine]

I guess, as I said I am not saying their aren't issues with this story and I get having problems with the way it's presented too. I just find issues in so many games it sometimes seems like Pillars is singled out a little. Like the point about urgency (it makes no sense fot you to be doing side quests while *insert plot* is happening). That can be applied to so many rpgs I honestly roll my eyes when it comes up. I get that it's a problem but it exists in so many games as people expect side quests in rpgs and ,many rpgs have some level of urgency to their main quest so it can be all epic and save the worldy.

[adreeasa]

I for one found the story in the first game just meh. It was interesting to learn about the new world they setup, some history and religion ,etc. But your character really has NO reasons to go chasing some peeps because he has nightmares. And if curiosity was a good enough reason, it would have died quickly when finding a decrepit keep full of angry spirits and a dungeon crawling with monsters.

 

Hell, half way through the game i actually opened the journal to try and remember what the main quest was. You do get an explanation in the final chapter that somewhat ties it all together but for the most part the story is weaker than what IWD 1/2 threw at you, and those were combat focused games.

 

At least the second game starts with a giant god stomping your keep and ppl, which is a good enough reason to go chase his ass. Lets hope that you don't just forget that after 10 hours while you go painting your ship pink.

[LilithMV]

I have also seen a few people who dislike the start of the story of POEII but like the story in the first game. Which I find interesting since personally it took me 5 tries to get into POEI due to the start feeling uninteresting. I never felt this with Baldur's Gate I and II. However, POEII had me hooked right from the start. It feels more like the BG games, which is good. 

 

Also the main story being disconnected; Well I like that. It's more like BGII in this regard. Unlike BGI where there was not much of any side quests, it was all about the main story really.

[sucinum]

I'll not play PoE2 for a few months, but I'm reading a few reviews.

 

The opinion on the story that got me most worried was Rock Paper Shotgun's on-going review. It said that the main story was too disconnect from every other quest (kinda similar to PoE1 actually). In PoE1 however, it was more forgivable because the main story was you seeking a way to get rid of your soul-awakening. It did not feel very imediate - which was a complaint from a lot of people - but at least it made sense when your character was dealing with a slow-progressing illness and chose to adventure here an there in sidequests.

 

Now, however, there's a giant god that took your soul stamping cities (apparently) and it just feels weird (according to the review) to be doing anything else besides following that god. This is a very poor story design decision and it god me less excited to play the game .

 

Can anyone who have played the beggining of the game give their thoughts about that?

 

I am a few hours into Deadfire and can confirm that, the pacing just feels wrong at the start. One day, you watch the gods discussing and get the feeling that this is an important matter. The next day (actually a week later, since you travel by ship) you start running errands in a really huge city. Eder even makes a comment about losing track.

 

Also you have a lot of stuff to micromanage, especially your ship, but also companions, factions and your personal fame. You have to make a lot of choices, like distributing skills on a borderline overwhelming skill tree, but can't really judge their outcome, since combat is very rare. And select a ship crew out of lots of NPCs, which all have different skills and character traits. And spend money you don't have on ship stuff you can't judge what it does. And hey, your cook broke her hand and morale goes down, since you don't have beer on board, manage that! Also there are several factions you can side with or not, but don't really get an idea how and why that matters and what consequences this will have in the future. There is one larger dungeon (a mansion of some kind), but the reason to enter it seems miniscule and also requires to take a side between two factions, where you can only talk to one of them. All other fights are simple brawls, a lot of buildings and persons have no meaning (yet).

 

I feel very lost and without a red thread. I know sooner or later everything will be pieced together, but the start is really rough. First you are drawn in, then you are let go. Everything you do feels pointless compared to your really important main quest.

 

It's still a good game, don't get me wrong

[Mikeymoonshine]

I do agree with the general issues with the plot. For example the other stuff going on in gilded vale is more interesting than what is going on with the main plot. The main plot doesn't really get interesting until defiance bay and then lady Webb kind of ruins it by just telling you everything. Like I kinda worked out the big reveal at the end of pillars before the end but they could have dropped a few more hints I guess. The stuff in the white march dlc is a bit better for that but that came out after the game so many players including myself played that after they had already finished the game.

 

On the other hand I appreciate what they were going for with the story. There are aspects of it that are very interesting and in general the writing is good.

 

The slow start helps push you to explore and learn about the world. So I don't really see that as much of a problem.

 

The info dumps are a little irritating I agree but it's not exactly a new thing either.

[Mikeymoonshine]

 

 

I am a few hours into Deadfire and can confirm that, the pacing just feels wrong at the start. One day, you watch the gods discussing and get the feeling that this is an important matter. The next day (actually a week later, since you travel by ship) you start running errands in a really huge city. Eder even makes a comment about losing track.

 

Also you have a lot of stuff to micromanage, especially your ship, but also companions, factions and your personal fame. You have to make a lot of choices, like distributing skills on a borderline overwhelming skill tree, but can't really judge their outcome, since combat is very rare. And select a ship crew out of lots of NPCs, which all have different skills and character traits. And spend money you don't have on ship stuff you can't judge what it does. And hey, your cook broke her hand and morale goes down, since you don't have beer on board, manage that! Also there are several factions you can side with or not, but don't really get an idea how and why that matters and what consequences this will have in the future. There is one larger dungeon (a mansion of some kind), but the reason to enter it seems miniscule and also requires to take a side between two factions, where you can only talk to one of them. All other fights are simple brawls, a lot of buildings and persons have no meaning (yet).

 

I feel very lost and without a red thread. I know sooner or later everything will be pieced together, but the start is really rough. First you are drawn in, then you are let go. Everything you do feels pointless compared to your really important main quest.

 

It's still a good game, don't get me wrong

Isn't this just the same as bg2 thouh? The begining sets up the plot and then you are dumped into athkatla where u then do a whole bunch of unrelated side quests and explore the city/surrounding area. For the most part the plot doesn't pick up again until about halfway through the game. Despite the fact that there is definitely a sense of urgency there too.

[adreeasa]

In BG2 you spend the first part of the game gathering a party to help you get revenge/save Imoen/both, and you tell them that from the start. You explore to find someone who can help you track Irenicus down and do odd jobs to help you fund said expedition.

 

I am curious if Deadfire gives you the same sense of purpose in the first half , the first game certainly did not.

[Mikeymoonshine]

In BG2 you spend the first part of the game gathering a party to help you get revenge/save Imoen/both, and you tell them that from the start. You explore to find someone who can help you track Irenicus down and do odd jobs to help you fund said expedition.

 

I am curious if Deadfire gives you the same sense of purpose in the first half , the first game certainly did not.

Sure but it's not like you have much on an idea how to start tracking Theos in pillars either. Just a few leads.

 

Deadfire isn't as much of an urgent thing for one thing your task is kind of updated as u go along.

[adreeasa]

The question is, why would i care about Thaos ? He said some mambo-jumbo near a big statue and i have nightmares or stuff ? Is that reason enough for some dude who is(or wants to be ) a farmer to go fighting trolls ?

Edited May 11, 2018 by adreeasa

[Mikeymoonshine]

The question is, why would i care about Thaos ? He said some mambo-jumbo near a big statue and i have nightmares or stuff ? Is that reason enough for some dude who is(or wants to be ) a farmer to go fighting trolls ?

You go to see maerwald to get answers on the whole watcher thing and it's on the way to defiance bay which is the most reasonable place to go next as staying in gilded vale isn't an option. Once u have seen maerwald you learn about the whole losing your mind thing and there you have your reason.

 

This is just about as reasonable a motivation as any other RPG of this type but for some reason people defend other games and act like it's a big problem here.

[DarthWhite]

Oh my. An interesting point, I can relate to that with both POE and POEII. Must say I do enjoy Deadfire itself very much, but the story... it does have problems im my opinion, yes.

 

First I'd like to mention, "dry" and "boring" don't make any story bad for everyone. Remember your books written by classics. Many of them are slow-paced, overly detailed, filled with unnesessary descriptions... but they are still considered great. Because they are. They just don't usually strike you as stories you'd fall for instantly and forget to eat and sleep while dwelling into them.

Now what makes an RPG plot catch your attention? When it feels personal. When it's feeled with emotions, when you can easily relate to what your character does. Look at POE2 for example. A God had awoken right in your house and killed everyone you knew there. Good. I mean quite personal, yes. But hey - you don't see it yourself, you are just told about that ((12) Mage made a great point about hearing vs expiriencing). You are given no chance to feel the loss or anger. In the next 30 minutes you speak with another God that gives you "mission", find out that you have a ship for some reason, fight with pirates, explore caves, travel to some town and are basically overwhelmed by info about world, races, fractions and so-very-important local sidequests. And that's what POE is all about. Can you relate? What emotions did you experince? Most likely you are taken away by all the small problems and gameplay itself. That's exactly what "dry story" means.

Compare it to Baldur's Gate 2 where you wake up in the cage, are tortured, watch some of your friends die and meet with the powerfull enemy face to face for the first few hours of the game. Compare it to NWN2 (which I really consider the best Obsidian game even now ) where you first make relationships with your foster father and some village folk and then see them almost-killed by brutal attackers who try to get some strange artifact which you are now are asked to hide... If you don't like "they killed my relatives!" beginig, try remembering Planescape: Torment, DAO... all that games start with YOUR feelings, your motivation and your very personal quest. That's what's not boring. That's what makes game feel closer to you.

 

On a side note

 

Where as a relatively simplistic story like in the Divinity OS games does not seem to be getting this kind of response (and I am not bashing those games I loved those too). 

Are you sure? Oo Because if you look at steam revievs I think you'll find that every fifth or them or so says that Divinity OS plot is the worst part of the game Even the positive ones It has the same problems actually but just... on another level. Makes all POE story problems look small in comparison x)

[Varana]

The problem with that "losing your mind" thing, though, is that it doesn't seem too severe, or even mildly irritating to you. BG2 at least had a few cutscenes with the Slayer but essentially, suffered from a similar issue.

Luckily, BG2 had Imoen, and PoE1 had the Hollowborn - so you could use them as secondary motivation while the game failed to make the primary one seem urgent.

But while both purposes coincided in BG2, in PoE1 it's not readily apparent that both are connected. Even if you wanted to solve the Hollowborn problem, you only charge after Thaos because it's the only thing the game offers, until you do certain quests in Defiance Bay.

That's (one aspect of) what people mean with "telling not showing": You don't _experience_ your Watcher problems, and growing insanity. You are being told that it's really bad and you should do something about it but it never seems to actually affect you. That disconnect is, imho, one core problem with the storytelling, and many other problems are a result of it.

Also, the info dumps - Lady Webb but also the anti-Thaos girl (don't remember the name) right before the end. Much of what you find out about the whole story is told to you at very few points during the main quest. It's not that the story in itself is bad - it is not, on the contrary, I think the general idea behind it is very interesting - but that the pacing is quite off, and makes the story shine a lot duller than it could've been.

That the main quest is only loosely connected to the rest of the quests, doesn't bother me at all. I'm a fan of the Bethesda approach to main quests - point the player in its general direction but if they don't care about it, that's entirely fine. :D

 

The urgency problem ("why am I saving a kitten in a tree while I'm the Chosen One to fight the world-destroying bad guy?") - yes, that's a very common issue, and very hard to write around. The main difference is how good you can hide that dilemma, mostly.

[Jayngo]

I have to admit, the story/world building in Pillars is not my favorite, when compared to Baldur's Gate/Icewind Dale. I give Obsidian full marks for creating their own world from the ground up. That's no small task.

 

I think for me, I'm not crazy about how heavy the story depends on multiple god's and the whole reincarnation thing. It's just too much heaviness. I will say, Deadfire seems better, even though there appears to be more god stuff than PoE had so far. I love the idea of this big statue walking through the islands and you are giving chase. Cool concept. I think having the key words able to hover over, like in Tyranny helps a lot. Almost like a cheat sheet or cliff notes on the spot.

 

With regard to characters and character building, I really love Eder and Aloth. I also like the rogue animated robot from WM (forget her name currently). Other than that, the other characters were just ok.

 

Typically, I play CRPG's for the story and character development first, then leveling aspect, then combat, in that order. Even though I don't generally like the PoE world as much as say, D&D, it's still really fun and usually intriguing. Plus, the nostalgia factor of playing new CRPG's has not and will not wear off on me!

[No idea]

That just tells you what these people know. 

 

A slow start is actually perfect for an RPG because it allows the player to build up his character. Remember the exchange with Calisca in PoE1? That's the sort of things that help flesh out a character and make him or her a little more than some numbers on the character screen. 

 

With that being said I still think PoE1 did a poor job introducing its setting. There is just too much information when you're getting started and it can only be overwhelming. 

 

I can't really say how Deadfire's introduction would feel to someone who hasn't played the first game but I think it's following the same pattern mostly. Having played the first game makes things much less confusing though. 

 

IMO the problem is not that the story is bad, it's more about those people not wanting to invest in the story. Perhaps they feel the path to be taken is not obvious enough. Maybe they want dragons to show up right after character creation just like in Skyrim (which is absolutely terrible and something no self respecting Game Master would do in a pen and paper RPG). Frankly I don't really know. I'm just glad we still get the opportunity to play games that provide a "slow" start.

 

Cant say about poe 2 but I liked the poe 1 history quite a lot. Rich and original, imo. However, I also think that it was too much lore at the begining. It felt a bit overwhelming. I started to really enjoy the lore in my sedond run, when I knew what the lore was about and could make more sense of it and not having to "memorize it" to find out what was all about.

[sucinum]

It's not that the story in itself is bad - it is not, on the contrary, I think the general idea behind it is very interesting - but that the pacing is quite off, and makes the story shine a lot duller than it could've been.

[...]

 

The urgency problem ("why am I saving a kitten in a tree while I'm the Chosen One to fight the world-destroying bad guy?") - yes, that's a very common issue, and very hard to write around. The main difference is how good you can hide that dilemma, mostly.

 

Sorry for cutting your post into two sentences. I think that is the same problem. The background story is great, but it doesn't really unfold and also doesn't really connect to the personal story.

 

How about this setup for PoE2: You have Caed Nua and stuff, everything fine, and then decide to go seafaring to solve whatever threads PoE has left open. A little quest or two, maybe an introduction to seafaring and then, boom, storm, stranded on beginner island. You do sidequests, repair your ship, get staff etc and set sail home to Caed Nua, only to find it devastated. You get some leads, Berath tells you stuff (basically the intro) and find out that the storm almost sinking your ship is connected to the devastation of Caed Nua. End of Act 1 (or probably 0), THEN you go charging for Eothas. You could even introduce a NPC (Serafen probably) who gets lost somewhere in between that and you recover him again.

 

It's almost the same start, but now your motivation is actually in the game and not some flashback. The sense of urgency is introduced later, after giving the player a proper tutorial and introduction. As it is now, there is too much tiny stuff to do, contradicting the epic story. Maybe the game is better the 2nd time you play it, when you don't have to find your way around.

[gloomseeker]

I guess, as I said I am not saying their aren't issues with this story and I get having problems with the way it's presented too. I just find issues in so many games it sometimes seems like Pillars is singled out a little. Like the point about urgency (it makes no sense fot you to be doing side quests while *insert plot* is happening). That can be applied to so many rpgs I honestly roll my eyes when it comes up. I get that it's a problem but it exists in so many games as people expect side quests in rpgs and ,many rpgs have some level of urgency to their main quest so it can be all epic and save the worldy.

 

Definitely. 

 

I'm clearly not the only one who did find the writing a bit too "heavy" in the first Pillars of Eternity and Yosharian has illustrated this point perfectly. 

 

Still, I don't believe the story is limited to the quality of the writing as it is important to take into account pacing and the way the main plot and side quests work together (something that has been brought up in this thread already). 

 

To make a great story we need a few basic things, mostly an antagonist and a reason that drives the protagonist to progress through a series of events. 

 

Some of these things are up to the player. 

 

It's entirely possible to embrace the story of the first Pillars of Eternity in different ways simply by considering the way you choose to react to the visions of the Watcher's past. Sure, you're still looking to thwart the villain's plans but your choices do inform the relationship with Thaos (and Iovara for that matter). 

 

I've played only 12 hours of Deadfire but so far I didn't feel like my guy wasn't properly motivated to look for his antagonist. Nor did I feel that it was out of character for him to look around for opportunities to make some dough on the side. Sure it may be easier because I am playing an antihero (or a very reluctant hero at best) and becoming the pawn of supernatural powers is not high on his list (nor is he very respectful of these powers). 

 

A pally or a more religious type may feel obligated to focus on the main quest and ignore the rest but even then the sense of urgency is entirely up to the player (sure getting his/her soul back is probably a priority for the Watcher but all things considered it is a tall order to confront a god whether you're prepared or not and in the meantime  a Watcher still has to eat and pay his crew). 

 

What I'm trying to say is that the most important part is the actual roleplaying. 

 

In the BG series you had a few elements that were predetermined and you could build around them. The game gave you enough leeway to allow you to expand upon these elements and make them yours. Going through the events in the game allowed you to flesh out your character by creating a past for what had been a blank slate. 

 

Pillars is like that. We do have certain elements that won't change but we also have some room to maneuver (which is why I like trying different things and why I enjoyed my last playthrough of PoE1 in which I played a self centred mercenary type who enjoyed being blunt when he could and devious when he had to). By the way, my guy never really considered Thaos to be the antagonist. It was less about defeating Thaos and more about moving on and getting closure for his Awakening. In some ways my character was an unwilling participant in the events that lead him to end up on a boat in the Deadfire Archipelago (after all he does hate boats). 

 

Sure, some may argue that all that doesn't make a difference and that whatever story you may choose to spin you still end up going through (roughly) the same events and (mostly) doing the same thing. They may even say that all we have is the illusion of choice. The pretence that our decisions matter and have a direct consequence on the story as a whole. 

 

The truth is that when it comes to roleplaying the only thing that matters is for the player(s) to believe in this illusion that is carefully woven by the game master. Things may take unexpected turns but most of the time the game master will adhere to a script and even if very good game masters can make it look effortless and give the impression that things are entirely up to the player it's never really the case. 

 

When it comes to videogames things are even more restrictive but in the end as long as the player is willing to suspend his disbelief then it's possible for the player to invest in the story and make it more personal and thus more relevant. 

 

If the player doesn't embrace that opportunity to fuel his or her imagination then all that is left is a by-the-numbers approach that will only be about facts and mechanics with decisions motivated by game logic instead of actual roleplaying in which case the fun will probably come from crunching numbers rather than getting immersed in a story. 

 

That's why a slow start is a boon for the roleplayer because it gives him or her time to fill in the blanks leisurely without having to worry about the action whereas a more down to earth approach will probably want to be entertained with more action and less introspection. Of course things may not be so clear cut and I don't mean to say that roleplayers don't want any action in their games but It seems to me that both ways of playing the game are at odds and I think Pillars of Eternity is more skewed towards roleplayers. If anything in the first game the whole series of events leading to Caed Nua could be viewed as a long tutorial. We could also say that both need different things from the game. The ones who focus on roleplaying need enough space to build their stories within the story whereas the more practical gamers probably want to be shown and take an active part in the action on the screen. It's only logical because what happens on the screen is the most important thing to them whereas the roleplayers use what is happening on the screen to cater to their own stories (and for them it's these stories that make what's happening on the screen interesting, not the other way around). 

 

In any case I've been going long enough with this post so I think it's a good time to stop. I just want to stress the fact that I don't think things are so clear cut in reality (I believe there is a bit of the roleplayer and of the number cruncher in all of us) but it may offer a clue as to the reasons why people seem to react so differently when it comes to the story in a CRPG. I know full well not everyone has an experience in pen and paper roleplaying but this is definitely something that you should consider getting into if you ever find yourself writing stories about your character in a video game.

Edited May 11, 2018 by gloomseeker

[morhilane]

A God had awoken right in your house and killed everyone you knew there. Good. I mean quite personal, yes. But hey - you don't see it yourself, you are just told about that

The entire In-Between segment mention memory lost, it's like the first thing you are told. You the player might care about losing Caed Nua, your character isn't really in a condition to do so, yet the game gives you one dialogue choice that reflect a personal stake still.

 

Also, I'm not sure how you missed the intro cutscene right after "new game" and the intro narration that shows Caed Nua destruction.

 

That's (one aspect of) what people mean with "telling not showing": You don't _experience_ your Watcher problems, and growing insanity. You are being told that it's really bad and you should do something about it but it never seems to actually affect you.

Am I the only one who had translucide creepy stuff popping here and there while playing POE1? Or dialogue choices after talking to ghosts that went like "I think I'm going crazy"? I doubt it. The translucide creepy stuff and the talking to ghosts is was cause Watchers to become insane, but you, the player, decided how much your Watcher was mentally affected by what he/she was seeing in POE1, not the game.

[Guest Ontarah]

What is it about the way these stories are told that is putting people off?

Cannot speak to Deadfire as I'm still replaying PoE1. I can tell you what irks me about PoE1 though obviously it's just my opinion.

 

Basically, I hate fantasy that turns magic into science. It comes off like "I like how magic/fantasy/fairy stories make me feel, but I'm embarrassed that it's magic/fantasy/fairy stories that make me feel that way so I'm going to turn it into bad sci-fi instead." Not only does it sap all of the, well, magic out of the story, but it can't help but have this thinly-veiled declarative statement about how the world "really" works embedded in it.

 

Obviously, this was not enough to stop me from playing the game but that was mostly for the characters, lore, and side quest stories more than the main one.

Edited May 11, 2018 by Ontarah

[Voss]

It is a problem. I'd rather just be an adventurer and fall into a natural story.

 

These 'Chosen One and Epic Plotz!!!!' stories are consistently terrible. Where these games are good at all, its in the exploration and side quests, and sometimes the party.

 

Baldurs Gate handles it probably the best of these games. The hook is the iron crisis, a regional problem that has discernable motives and moving pieces. Sadly its completely wrecked and abandoned to focus on the ridiculous Child of Bhaal thing.

 

Can't grasp why being a wizard, warrior, or whatever isn't considered enough of a power fantasy.

 

Its also weird since if they're putting so much effort into a world, why put so much into 'Epic Plotz!!!' that will destroy\reshape it?

[Guest Ontarah]

Eh, one other choice. I *really* hate all the descriptive "his eyes shift furtively" and "he wipes sweat from his brow" descriptive junk in the dialogue. The Infinity Engine games did not need it. Good dialogue in books doesn't need it. It's just baggage that slows everything down for no particular reason.

Edited May 11, 2018 by Ontarah