Your retrospective thoughts on Pillars of Eternity | State of Contemporary Gaming | What is good?

The Madman

New member
Dec 7, 2007
4,404
0
0
Synigma said:
And why all the hate on Dragonfall and Wasteland2? They were two of the best turn based games to come out in a long time... Good tactics games are few and far between.
The only one in this topic 'hating' Shadowrun or Wasteland 2 is BloatedGuppy, and really that's just more passive dismissal if I had to classify it, not outright hate. I for one think both are amazing rpg as do many other people. Don't worry, so far as I'm aware there's no growing anti-Wasteland2/Shadowrun movement out there, both games are well loved and received.
 

Synigma

New member
Dec 24, 2014
142
0
0
The Madman said:
Synigma said:
And why all the hate on Dragonfall and Wasteland2? They were two of the best turn based games to come out in a long time... Good tactics games are few and far between.
The only one in this topic 'hating' Shadowrun or Wasteland 2 is BloatedGuppy, and really that's just more passive dismissal if I had to classify it, not outright hate. I for one think both are amazing rpg as do many other people. Don't worry, so far as I'm aware there's no growing anti-Wasteland2/Shadowrun movement out there, both games are well loved and received.
Just felt like everyone was throwing them into the same pile as PoE (the 'meh' pile) and I thought they were so much better than that. I mean not perfect but they weren't $60+ AAA titles either.

DLC though... I tend to stay away from any DLC released for games with 'season passes' (a concept that I LOATHE to the very core, more than pre-order bs) because most of it feels forced. However good DLC can make a good game great, see the Civ games for an example of how much better games can get with some good DLC.
The best DLC improves the base game, makes you want to play the whole thing again, but even if it's just a few more missions for a game you enjoy then it can be worth it.
 

The Madman

New member
Dec 7, 2007
4,404
0
0
Synigma said:
Just felt like everyone was throwing them into the same pile as PoE (the 'meh' pile) and I thought they were so much better than that. I mean not perfect but they weren't $60+ AAA titles either.
I don't even think Pillars of Eternity belongs in a 'meh pile'. Having played all the games, I'd say there are some things PoE does better than either Shadowrun or Wasteland 2 and that all three are fantastic rpg experiences in their own rights. Also considering it was only a few years ago that tactical isometric rpg were considered a dead genre, I'm just happy there's suddenly so much variety again we can even be having this debate.

It's a great time to be an rpg fan!
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
Synigma said:
And why all the hate on Dragonfall and Wasteland2? They were two of the best turn based games to come out in a long time... Good tactics games are few and far between.
Honestly, neither one of them is a good tactics game. I would go so far as to say they're both LOUSY tactics games. It's nice that there are technically tactics in both of them, but it's on par with the tactics you'd find in one of those tactical mobile games you buy for $1.99. XCOM/Jagged Alliance level tactical gameplay this is not.

Divinity is the only isometric throwback RPG of the last few years that has any real claim to being a good tactics game. PoE was "okay", but had a lot of wonk to it.
 

Synigma

New member
Dec 24, 2014
142
0
0
The Madman said:
I don't even think Pillars of Eternity belongs in a 'meh pile'. Having played all the games, I'd say there are some things PoE does better than either Shadowrun or Wasteland 2 and that all three are fantastic rpg experiences in their own rights. Also considering it was only a few years ago that tactical isometric rpg were considered a dead genre, I'm just happy there's suddenly so much variety again we can even be having this debate.

It's a great time to be an rpg fan!
Ya I shouldn't be so hard on PoE, like I said I was really enjoying the world and the story of it and it is probably stronger in those than Shadowrun/Wasteland. Just felt the gameplay aspect was meh which unfortunately kills my drive to finish it.

Couldn't agree with you more that it's a great time though! Just playing through XCOM: The Long War right now... it hurts so good.
 

Godhead

Dib dib dib, dob dob dob.
May 25, 2009
1,692
0
0
It was fun for what it was even if I didn't think it was as good as the old Infinity Engine games. I also wish that Durance's and Grieving Mother's arcs weren't as heavily cut as they were since I thought they were easily the best written characters in the game. A lot of the Watcher vision dialogues were also needlessly dense, like one paragraph consisting of 5 commas and two periods.
 

BloatedGuppy

New member
Feb 3, 2010
9,572
0
0
lax4life said:
A lot of the Watcher vision dialogues were also needlessly dense, like one paragraph consisting of 5 commas and two periods.
I believe those were all backer contributions, although I may be wrong. Explains why the quality of the writing in them was...uh..."variable".
 

Godhead

Dib dib dib, dob dob dob.
May 25, 2009
1,692
0
0
BloatedGuppy said:
lax4life said:
A lot of the Watcher vision dialogues were also needlessly dense, like one paragraph consisting of 5 commas and two periods.
I believe those were all backer contributions, although I may be wrong. Explains why the quality of the writing in them was...uh..."variable".
I meant more the story related Watcher visions you get. Especially the corpse hanging from the tree in the Gilded Vale. I only ever read the backer visions that were in the Gilded Vale before realizing that they were too varied in quality for me to spend my time on them.
 

Lightknight

Mugwamp Supreme
Nov 26, 2008
4,860
0
0
I backed this game. Got the physical box and disk copy and everything.

I love the game, it was exactly what they promised and I was very happy to play it.

I don't think it rates in my top ten. But it does rate very highly as a particular kind of game that scratched a very particular itch. I mean, it was very rich in story telling and gameplay. Characters and places were diverse. I can't complain at all. It was a skyrim sized universe from an isometric perspective and Bethesda's games do have a home in my top ten.
 

beastro

New member
Jan 6, 2012
564
0
0
Extremely bland and boring game. A huge let down.

I quit close into Act 3 because there was just nothing compelling to keep me going in the game.

So much of the game was ruined by Sawyer's balancing shit.
 

pookie101

New member
Jul 5, 2015
1,162
0
0
i backed it and got what i was expecting that said i suffered restartitis with it rerolling characters to find a class i liked and just recently finish it. tended to drag near the end then BOOM its over
 
Dec 16, 2009
1,774
0
0
I only ever played 10 hours.

I'm a backer, and it was released roughly when our baby was born, and I just couldn't invest the energy. From that 10 hour investment, it seemed to what it said on the tin.
 

Pirate Of PC Master race

Rambles about half of the time
Jun 14, 2013
596
0
0
I almost forgot to add that PoE lacked the FUCK EVERYONE option.
Even restoring power to the *her* leaves her chosen elven race alive, yes?

Baldur's gate 2 has option to do opposite of doing what Solar tells you to do, NWN2 MoTB allows you to eat everything, etc.

Also, in Act 3 I found myself hating the game doing things for the *special interest groups* to progress in the main story.
FUCK THOSE SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS. All of them.
Yet there is no option to NOT to what they tell you to do.

The Madman said:
it does feel like it has the potential to be the stepping stone towards something special ala NWN2 and Mask of the Betrayer. Engine is done, the world is established, the stage is set, now I'm just hoping and waiting to see what comes next.

Also the new Shadowrun games have been excellent. Dragonfall and Hong Kong standing out as two of my favourite recent rpg's and both those stemming from a similarly 'meh' first Kickstarter success in the form of the more mediocre Shadowrun: Returns. I want to see if Pillars of Eternity can accomplish the same thing and I'm cautiously optimistic they will.
I share your sentiment. I hope you are correct. I still remember the disappointment of NWN2.
Rocks fall Everyone dies
 

StoleitfromKilgore

Regular Member
Jul 4, 2014
57
0
11
I haven't played it yet, but I have been following the general (and somewhat controversial) discussion on it. But one thing that I haven't been able to glean from reviews and threads is how PoE actually compares to BGII in terms of structure. You know, size of world, number of quests, how combat-focussed, how central the story is and so on. How, roughly, do the city/ies in the game compare with Athkathla or Sigil? Please nothing to specific. As said, I still have to play it.
 

Fhqwhgod

New member
Apr 7, 2015
112
0
0
sky pies said:
Did they do what they promised?
Yes they did but

sky pies said:
Were you satisfied?
I don't think they did it well. The game was boring and I lost interest mid chapter 2 and just stopped playing. I have no intention to ever go back.

sky pies said:
Where does this game rank in your all-time lists? Does it rank at all?
I have played worse in my life but I also played too many better games to even consider putting it on any list. It's not the worst it's nowhere near the best. It's meh.

sky pies said:
What would you choose - Pillars of Eternity or Mass Effect? Is there a better comparison?
I don't think I'd ever replay Mass Effect but I did enjoy the first one. The second not so much and the 3rd one has not been released outside Origin so it doesn't exist.
 

sky pies

New member
Oct 24, 2015
395
0
0
Fhqwhgod said:
sky pies said:
What would you choose - Pillars of Eternity or Mass Effect? Is there a better comparison?
I don't think I'd ever replay Mass Effect but I did enjoy the first one. The second not so much and the 3rd one has not been released outside Origin so it doesn't exist.
Gosh that reminds me of a time in my life when I had Origin! I can't think what that was for! Maybe it was for The Old Republic... But yeah I played Mass Effect 3. I don't think it was awful but in my memory I think only the second one really stands out.

That series was great - very stylish, very muted, pacific even in it's action sequences - but I would never say it's the best series I ever played or anything. Still it was a really great step in the right direction for gaming, bringing in that kind of molded-white-plastic aesthetic and sci-fi techno music.
 

f1r2a3n4k5

New member
Jun 30, 2008
208
0
0
It's a tough call.

You should know that I love BG2. Everything about it. All-time favorite game.

PoE didn't have that hook for me. I was able to put it down and I've been dreading to go back and pick it up since the plot is so convoluted, I'd need to look up every word to remember.

It's too in love with its own plot.

And I like heavy-plots! I like difficult plots.

Here's the difference. If I had to sum up the game experiences you mentioned in a line:
Mass Effect 2: "Fly around space and make friends to fight aliens."
Baldur's Gate 2: "You've been kidnapped! Go make some money by punching dragons in the face."
Planescape: "Why can't you die? Dunno. Go find out. Then die."
Pillars of Eternity: "You're a fallaquand who needs to find a shilem-bopple because you got caught in a tala'dazanar!" (Am I pronouncing those correctly?)

Granted, other modern RPGs have suffered from this too. It's *hard* to write compelling plot. Baldur's Gate 1 was pretty unremarkable, so I'm hoping it gets better.
 

sky pies

New member
Oct 24, 2015
395
0
0
veloper said:
Kickstarter game projects are best suited for relatively simple ideas with modest presentation. Great for gamers who don't mind primitive gfx in their games and who can spare a little change to give some motivated uglies a chance to realize their cool, but modest plans.

Everybody else should probably just stay away, or more gamers will just become disappointed with the whole thing. I expect a lot of crowdfunding gamers are going to learn this the hard way however.
How does the source of funds dictate the applicability of those funds to ambitiously scoped projects? I mean kickstarter as an arena for otherwise underrepresented game makers of internationally worthy talent is a given, but i don't quite see the logic in saying it cannot make the leap from 2D indy-style games to 3D "epics".

Sure, perhaps if a newbie is asking for support in making the next Mass Effect or KOTOR like series it us obviously going to flop, but isn't that the fault of the newbies, not the funds?

PoE was of course made by seasoned professional game makers who had the tools and wanted to specifically counter industry norms, so I don't know, I guess in saying here that intention and skill can, theoretically, turn an ambitious kickstarter into a winner, regardless of it's being a kickstarter.

----

Also, I don't think enough credit is being given to the makers of the game for what they have delivered. You guys are disappointed with the story above all else, it seems, and perhaps it was a bit flat I still don't know personally, but let's count our blessings with this game.

They took seriously so much that has long since been brushed under the carpet: the BG aesthetic and storytelling style, spell systems, difficulty. They have not set the game to spark an epic trilogy. They have not released micro payment content. They have not released developer mods.

They are *always* tweaking the game. Last time I checked it's a single player experience but they have been making changes and fixing bugs like a nest of MMO developers. They're seemingly tirelessly devoted to getting it right and keeping it enjoyable.

I mean these guys may have made a somewhat unexceptionable game, but they have done it in an exceptional way.
 

veloper

New member
Jan 20, 2009
4,597
0
0
sky pies said:
veloper said:
Kickstarter game projects are best suited for relatively simple ideas with modest presentation. Great for gamers who don't mind primitive gfx in their games and who can spare a little change to give some motivated uglies a chance to realize their cool, but modest plans.

Everybody else should probably just stay away, or more gamers will just become disappointed with the whole thing. I expect a lot of crowdfunding gamers are going to learn this the hard way however.
How does the source of funds dictate the applicability of those funds to ambitiously scoped projects? I mean kickstarter as an arena for otherwise underrepresented game makers of internationally worthy talent is a given, but i don't quite see the logic in saying it cannot make the leap from 2D indy-style games to 3D "epics".
Because a smaller scope and cheaper presentation, means less work and a smaller(dedicated) team, which means less chance of critical elements failing.
The source of the funds matters insofar a lot of little crowdfunders together still don't make a replacement for the project manager such as a publisher would place, but are just a bunch of nobodies, who only happen to be some dollars lighter.

The only control you have is deciding to become a backer in the first place and you have to make that choice based on the information you have at that point. That information will be less complete, the bigger the project is.

A good pitch for a small project tells me a couple things:
-what should the finished game look like: simple (yet cool) ideas that require fewer hours and less skill are less risky
-who's making it and why: here I want to get an impression of what makes those ugly mugs tick and how they work together
-scope and how long would it roughly take: if you've got just a small band, you can make a decent guess of how much they would need to make to stay warm during the entire project.

The bigger it gets the more question marks remain.
Sure, perhaps if a newbie is asking for support in making the next Mass Effect or KOTOR like series it us obviously going to flop, but isn't that the fault of the newbies, not the funds?
It's the fault of the backers for being so dumb, if the project flops and they become disappointed.
All that money from a successful kickstarter campaign, is assurance to the newbie team that they could make it. They get nicely paid to practice and learn at the very least. The only real losers are the backers. It's no longer their money.

PoE was of course made by seasoned professional game makers who had the tools and wanted to specifically counter industry norms, so I don't know, I guess in saying here that intention and skill can, theoretically, turn an ambitious kickstarter into a winner, regardless of it's being a kickstarter.
PoE still had a couple things going for it: they went for 2D scenery and they aimed for something very similar to what some of their ex-BI employees already managed to create in the past.

I gave Obsidian the benefit of the doubt and threw just a small amount at them anyway, but I wouldn't have done so, if they had pitched a project with AAA values.
Also, I don't think enough credit is being given to the makers of the game for what they have delivered. You guys are disappointed with the story above all else, it seems, and perhaps it was a bit flat I still don't know personally, but let's count our blessings with this game.

They took seriously so much that has long since been brushed under the carpet: the BG aesthetic and storytelling style, spell systems, difficulty. They have not set the game to spark an epic trilogy. They have not released micro payment content. They have not released developer mods.

They are *always* tweaking the game. Last time I checked it's a single player experience but they have been making changes and fixing bugs like a nest of MMO developers. They're seemingly tirelessly devoted to getting it right and keeping it enjoyable.

I mean these guys may have made a somewhat unexceptionable game, but they have done it in an exceptional way.
It's only the results that count and I already gave them enough credit.
PoE's good for what it is, but it's not great. I can't expect more from it since the project wasn't exactly what I would normally even consider to back.