Just hit me that Raedric's Keep is basically a Raubritter Castle from Darklands but with narrative relevance. There are differences sure, but the concept, setup and entry points are more or less the same. Which is awesome, since I've always felt that Raubritter Castles were brilliant.
Shame we can't use our alchemic skills with the right potions and start a fire to just burn everyone inside.
to be fair, a "fish out of water" story is a good way to introduce a world to you. I think the problem stems from how common it is moreso than it being utilized here.
I do like how you are more or less a colonist though.
True, the story bit is just more a personal preference. I just like that they for once let you explore and enjoy the world from your own perspective.
Why do people keep using the RPG Codex? The last thing we need is another group of grognards who felt role playing was perfected back in 1998.
They are able to at least clearly dissect mechanics and explain why they do or don't like something. People in this thread have been guilty of fanboying this game with nothing more than "this is the best RPG ever made" type of statements. Being specific is helpful, even if the people doing it are notorious for being over the top while doing so.
It's not my forum of choice by any stretch, but the level of knowledge and acumen can't be debated - they have people who are close to CRPG experts as there likely is to exist.
As an aside, been playing this for about 25 hours now...not bad so far.
Could be better though. I have a lot of problems with the games setup and execution when it comes to the very crunchy combat system. I feel like the Endurance tied to the Health mechanic was added because HP scales so damn quickly in this game, it was almost necessary to keep the numbers down for players to follow the action. Not to mention the fact that long term healing is more or less negated by having a steady supply of campsites ready, plus a get out of death free card with the maim status.
Now I understand the harder modes give a better challenge and less campsites, but it's still something that can be exploited if you are that good.
Yes, but any rest mechanic can be abused. I think the wide degree of difficulty levels and toggles (that allow from everything from permadeath to "no one ever can truly die unless a TPK happens" is very well implemented. If you think its too easy, crank it up. If you think it is too hard, dial it down. If it is way too hard regardless of how low it gets, there are bound to be some guides coming out that can help with tactics and builds within a very short amount of time.
I also find the game to be very 4th Edition DnD. That's not necessarily a bad thing, but it is something I noticed in the design of how defenses and abilities work in the game. Personally, not a big deal but one of the problems with 4th Edition was an emphasis on complex fighting mechanics, pushing and pulling targets, abilities hitting numerous resistances. It is definitely a game where you need to track what you are doing, more so than Dragon Age in some cases where it's either a straight up immunity or a resistance percentage for magic. Here if you have to hit a certain defense and you have no investment in your abilities or might score, you are screwed, or at the very least not going to have an easy fight.
I can get behind this. It has that "abilities matching" over direct build matchups. But given the wide variety of classes and abilities, I don't think this is a bad thing. The game doesn't revolve around all-combat, all-the-time like I feel 4E does, but rather offers some interesting means around fighting to solve every quest. So far I'm liking it, but we'll see how it stands the test of time.
Another issue is the experience system. I get they are trying to curb grinding in the game, but tying almost all the experience to quests I feel is not a good idea. Early on I take Caed Nua at level 2, so I had to grind out some of those early fetch quests just to get my party up to speed to fight off some phantoms and ghosts. The thing is along the way I cleared three zones of their monster population just through naturally exploring, and the goal was to do Caed Nua before any side quests, so I can start earning money for the keep.
Pacing wise this can ruin the main storyline at the very least and make the game artificially difficult at worst. Ive also noticed that some questlines don't yield any experience at all. There was a questline in the Gilded Vale involving farmers and millers that I did at level 4, and I got nothing out of it except some money.
Not sure if it's a bug or an effect of leaving the quest open for too long.
It's funny, folks complained about Dragon Age Inquisition having too many sidequests, but they were at least not tied to you leveling up in the game.
I like how the game isn't afraid to throw encounters that are way beyond your party or level mix at you, even during the crit path. Some may see it as the game forcing you to grind, but I disagree - I WANT to complete the side quests the game gives me. And that's the difference on your DA:I analogy. DA:I side quests felt like filler, through and through. More than that, they ALSO were dreadfully linear. The quest you mention, about the grain miller, is a great example of simple side quest design. You can side with the miller, you can side with the other family. You can fight your way or you can smooth talk your way. You can solve it by throwing coin at it or you can recognize the cues that let you get what you need for free, like realizing the inn keeper is vested in keeping the grain supply intact.
Its a piddling, short, entry level side quest and it has more options and involvement than any of Astarium quests for DA:I, which take hours to work through and complete. That, to me, is the difference. I feel like I'm not just checking off a box on the To Do list, I feel like I'm approaching a problem and dealing with it how my character wants to. That's not filler side quest... that's a good quest that just doesn't have anything to do with the main story.
As for companions...some of them are all right. Eder has grown on me, Kana is pretty good, and I like Aloth but I really don't like where they are going with him, which has been more or less hinted at since you first met him. I am not too fond of the create your own companions, even a level below the main cast i've found them to be powerful since were feckless, perfectionist players who know how to build these guys with few flaws. I know people complain about that but when I can create a Dwarven Rogue that can nearly one shot a forest troll with a fine arbelast without a critical hit...well yeah. As for the rest, either kind of boring or really one note so far. Durance in particular i'm waiting for the knife in the back.
I haven't found Grieving Mother yet. I hear she is pretty good though.
I haven't gotten to many of the companions yet. Eh. As ironic as it is for someone who haunts a Bioware forum, I always considered companions a fluff part of the experience, at best. Which is likely why I've felt diminishing returns on Bioware games as of late.
I don't know. I like it a lot more than Shadowrun Returns, Wasteland 2 and Original Sin at least. It's a nice throwback but it feels like it doesn't have to be in the end. I also don't like the "Jack of All Trades" sort of vibe I keep getting from the game, it's doing so much at once, it's rarely a master at any of it. The story is hit or miss, the writing has a few spelling mistakes in it, the world is gorgeous to look at but dead once you clear a zone, and Caed Nua is a nice sidebar but is such a time sink I am not sure if it's worth investing in still. i like the backstory of the world too, but the main plotline is skirting a very "old vs new" kind of vibe to it, which is a decent change of pace compared to a save the world storyline but it really depends on the world itself not being so one-note for one side or the other. Thus far it's been rather one-note if you ask me.
A lot of good in it, but its not the best RPG I ever played. Not by a longshot.
In terms of the main story and the world in general, I think you make fair points. But I'll counter with two feelings I've gotten:
1) Its the first installment in a new IP. So the chance for world building may be better tackled as the world itself is expanded.
2) In an almost mirror opposite narrative philosophy, Obsidian, in my mind, does the exact opposite of Bioware. The series is not a story about the world, like Dragon Age, but rather a story about the player's character. And not in a deeply personal way, like DA2 attempted. But rather a way that let's the player create a character that gets to do, see and experience things how they see fit. The world is an environment for this to all occur in, but its not front stage and center, its merely the stage for the player to fill. In many respects, I think it strongly resembles BG1, where the main story isn't even really all that well understood until mid-to-late game, as opposed to BG2, where the ball is rolling with the antagonist right from the get go.
As an aside, what IS the best RPG you've played?
to be fair, a "fish out of water" story is a good way to introduce a world to you. I think the problem stems from how common it is moreso than it being utilized here.
I do like how you are more or less a colonist though.
Agreed. Colonist is much more understandable than "newest recruit of the Jedi order" type of intro that an uncountable number of games use. Even if you do wind up being a Chosen One, it still is a bit more palatable as a introduction to your character.
Downloading it right now. It should be ready to play when we get back from church.
What pushed me over the edge in deciding to buy were all the comments about its potential modability. Modable games >> non-moddable games simply because it expands the available stylistic and play choices. Even if it also means 8 zillion varieties of bikiniwear.
Well, if the BG/other isometric game mods that have come out are any indication, the amount bikini mods should be few and far between.
The number of text changes to allow for romances... oh boy. Get ready for all THAT, to be sure.
No romance = No Pillars of Eternity for me, thanks. Maybe when it goes on sale on GoG with Tides of Numenera and other such stuff.
For now, I'd rather pay for the games that respect my choices.
LOL
Dunno. I do like RPGCodex sometimes, for the folk who want to have long discussions about gaming mechanics. I can do that.
I do find there is a big contingent there that seems to be anti-Bioware because a) they think romance doesn't belong in anything but dating sims b] they have rampant homophobia and can't seem to get over the fact that they have gay developers - as well as characters and c) they seem to sneer about the studio's interest in bringing shall we say "social themes" into their games.
These parts of Bioware games are what I like (for anybody wondering why I haunt this forum, even if I don't like the direction of their games, at least mechanics-wise.)
I ... can't even remember any good romances from Obsidian...? NWN2? Not impressed, Fallout NV? Did that one have romances at all? Kotor2? Again, I can't remember to have had some interesting relations in that game, true it had romances but...not the good kind imho (maybe stupid and annoying Kreia and the rather...non-star-warsy-story-mess distracts my memory in that regard ^^)
Anyway, I think bioware is still king in that playing-field, not Obsidian, and I think they know this and jsut said "screw it" ... ahem...whatever...
And from the chars so far I have to say: I actually don't see anyone really interesting in terms of a romace for my char...I mean I like them all so far, but a slightly deranged priest, a rather dull elf, a blonde peasant-warrior, and a cool yet rather unattractive big bard? well...maybe the warrior might do...But all in all, not my cup of tea on the potential romance-frontline. Males are not much better off I suppose so...
However: As long as there is no Anomen Delryn around, that's also good news...better alone than this guy ^^
Heh, thats where we obviously differ and thats why I tried to clarify myself by restating that its not really the romance that gets me but the characters that Obsidian makes.
Obsidian never had any full romances a-la Bioware style. But personally while I absolutely love romance in games, I'm becoming less and less interested in Bioware's approach. For me they all kind of blur into the same arcs which basically all end up on a note "we exhausted all our conversations so lets bang now. Bam. Culmination of romance."
I think Bioware usually plays it safe with characters, its like they have this checklist that the characters have to fit in order to become romance content, and most of them are very likable by almost everyone. They are also all good (you could argue for Morrigan or Isabela, still Isabela is good-hearted and Morrigan is more practical, she also warms up to male PC a lot if romanced) and somehow became rather bland and repetitive for me.
While i believe Obsidian wasnt afraid to experiment. NWN2 - Gann was horribly narcissistic, got into jail for trying to get laid and was probably prettier than a female PC, Safiya was a fracture of someone's soul, was bald and probably liked PC initially because the person that her soul belonged to was in love with the person that had PCs curse, Bishop was a chauvinistic ass who did not respect the female protagonist, plus he betrayed the PC, Casavir did not talk at all until the end, Neeshka was a thief with horns, tail and zero morals, Elanee was moon-eyed stalker. Kotor2 - Atton ogled Exile while she was in her underwear, Visas did not have eyes and worshiped the PC, she also acted like some sort of a slave, Handmaiden was torn between duty and reverence for Jedi, her way of getting to know PC was through battle in undergarments, Disciple was PCs ex-student and had a thing for her. (Oh, and Kreia is probably one of my most favorite characters ever, obviously she isnt a romance 
just thought I'd mention her since you brought her up.) New Vegas didnt have romance so I dont mention it.
So none of them were very safe choices and certainly very controversial. It is purely my personal opinion but even for a lack of full romance arcs a-la Bioware, this crazy bunch and their rare comments or situations throughout the games left much more impact. Thats why I said Obsidian was good at it.
So yeah, for PoE I would not have wanted a full romance with snuggles, kisses, etc and culminating in sex, but rather hints here and there that people care for your character more than a comrade in battle. Because for realism sake if you spent so much time in someone's company, fight together, bleed together, help each other, there's bound to be some sort of attraction between people that qualify.
Actually, its weird that you didnt find anyone qualifying. While the priest is obviously out of the question I thought Aloth, Eder, Pallegina and Sagani were obvious. Not sure how weird the Grieving Mother would be (because Chris Avellone) and Kana Rua is strange because Aumaua and teeth.
Aaanyway Im loving the game too much to care about it. The companion interactions that are there are enough for me.
As an aside, what IS the best RPG you've played?
Also answering to what you said about sidequests. I will freely admit that they are poorly designed in DA:I, well alot of them. But at the same time they have a different purpose. To make the Inquisition grow. Both in power and fame or infamy all depending on your view. The problem again is that this is never fleshed out later, some result in a wartable operation which can have different outcomes, but it doesn't shape Thedas the way it should. That beeing said solving the grain problem quest in PoE didn't change Gilded Vale for the better. You have to go Raedric for that. But yes it had better options of how to solve it and that i like.
The best RPG i have played? Dragon Age Origins is still at the top and PoE won't budge it i think and wont take out Baldurs Gate 2 or Planescape Torment either. As i said earlier i prefer Bioware's storytelling technique (when done properly) vastly over Obsidian and the characters are more in line with what i like. Also i am not that psyched about high fantasy. In regards to lore and names etc. Dragon Age feels more in tow with European medieval time and at the same time has the right amount of fantasy elements to make it stand out.
That beeing said PoE is brilliant and the best RPG i have played in awhile, since DA:I. Yes i like DA:I. Shoot me 
Scooped up Eder and moved the plot along a bit last night. I have to admit, I rather enjoyed the amount of ways the resolution to the Eothas' temple quest could play out even from just a dialogue standpoint. Animancy is an insanely fascinating concept imho so I'm looking forward to hearing more about it as the plot goes on.
As of now I'm going to hold off trying to complete the A Mother's Plea quest just yet cause the cave spores currently **** my world up. 
2dank4me
Ciphers seem to get a lot of unique dialogs. Having regrets picking wizard now 
Dunno. I do like RPGCodex sometimes, for the folk who want to have long discussions about gaming mechanics. I can do that.
I do find there is a big contingent there that seems to be anti-Bioware because a) they think romance doesn't belong in anything but dating sims b] they have rampant homophobia and can't seem to get over the fact that they have gay developers - as well as characters and c) they seem to sneer about the studio's interest in bringing shall we say "social themes" into their games.
These parts of Bioware games are what I like (for anybody wondering why I haunt this forum, even if I don't like the direction of their games, at least mechanics-wise.)
I'll break my cardinal rule and say something here on this.
I don't give one single, tiny rip if Bioware includes social themes in their games.
Now, before any goes to grab a torch to lynch me, I don't OPPOSE them, I just don't care if they are included. At all. In the least. Not even a tiny bit.
Because one only need to take a step back on the issue at hand and slide in something else and it becomes pretty clear how silly the entire concept is. Take, for instance, alcohol prohibition. There was a time when distilling, owning or imbibing in alcohol was illegal. It was hotly debated and forced many people to live in secret or be branded as misanthropes. If Prohbition was still in effect today, it might be a HUGE hot button topic if Bioware were to include alcohol in their games. Mentioning it, showing others with it, allowing the main character to engage in it... it would be seen as hugely taboo and draw lots of attention to even have a standard RPG tavern where the player could saddle up to the bar and order a brew.
But the presence (or absence) of such a feature is a silly reason to support a game. The presence of alcohol in an RPG is a flavor feature to the game, at best. I'm not going to demonize those who would decry alcohol being added anymore than I'm going to excitedly support anyone who is in favor of it. If someone wants to trash a developer for wasting resources on it, I'm going to ignore what they say about alcohol, but I'll pay attention to what they say about anything else if it has merit. If someone calls me a bigot because I don't support the real life cause of freedom to drink anywhere, even a video game, because alcohol has been underrepresented for decades, I'm not going to listen to anything they say about it either, unless they have other points that they can bring to the table that, again, have merit.
Now, I know the issues in question are much more personal than whether or not you can go to the store and buy a fifth of whiskey or not. My problem in many cases is that the people who are vehemently against social issues being added to games often have a better track record (in my own personal experience) of being able to talk about other aspects of the game that are relevant to me. While those who are vehemently for social issues being included have a much worse track record about being broken records on that aspect of the game and that one alone. Again, in my own personal little worldspace view.
So I don't dislike the Codex because they get riled up about stuff I don't genuinely care about. I just ignore them and dig out the nuggets of wisdom I find useful.
Ciphers seem to get a lot of unique dialogs. Having regrets picking wizard now
They do? Damn, I really need to play Cipher now!
They are able to at least clearly dissect mechanics and explain why they do or don't like something. People in this thread have been guilty of fanboying this game with nothing more than "this is the best RPG ever made" type of statements. Being specific is helpful, even if the people doing it are notorious for being over the top while doing so.
It's not my forum of choice by any stretch, but the level of knowledge and acumen can't be debated - they have people who are close to CRPG experts as there likely is to exist.
Yes, but any rest mechanic can be abused. I think the wide degree of difficulty levels and toggles (that allow from everything from permadeath to "no one ever can truly die unless a TPK happens" is very well implemented. If you think its too easy, crank it up. If you think it is too hard, dial it down. If it is way too hard regardless of how low it gets, there are bound to be some guides coming out that can help with tactics and builds within a very short amount of time.
I can get behind this. It has that "abilities matching" over direct build matchups. But given the wide variety of classes and abilities, I don't think this is a bad thing. The game doesn't revolve around all-combat, all-the-time like I feel 4E does, but rather offers some interesting means around fighting to solve every quest. So far I'm liking it, but we'll see how it stands the test of time.
I like how the game isn't afraid to throw encounters that are way beyond your party or level mix at you, even during the crit path. Some may see it as the game forcing you to grind, but I disagree - I WANT to complete the side quests the game gives me. And that's the difference on your DA:I analogy. DA:I side quests felt like filler, through and through. More than that, they ALSO were dreadfully linear. The quest you mention, about the grain miller, is a great example of simple side quest design. You can side with the miller, you can side with the other family. You can fight your way or you can smooth talk your way. You can solve it by throwing coin at it or you can recognize the cues that let you get what you need for free, like realizing the inn keeper is vested in keeping the grain supply intact.
Its a piddling, short, entry level side quest and it has more options and involvement than any of Astarium quests for DA:I, which take hours to work through and complete. That, to me, is the difference. I feel like I'm not just checking off a box on the To Do list, I feel like I'm approaching a problem and dealing with it how my character wants to. That's not filler side quest... that's a good quest that just doesn't have anything to do with the main story.
I haven't gotten to many of the companions yet. Eh. As ironic as it is for someone who haunts a Bioware forum, I always considered companions a fluff part of the experience, at best. Which is likely why I've felt diminishing returns on Bioware games as of late.
In terms of the main story and the world in general, I think you make fair points. But I'll counter with two feelings I've gotten:
1) Its the first installment in a new IP. So the chance for world building may be better tackled as the world itself is expanded.
2) In an almost mirror opposite narrative philosophy, Obsidian, in my mind, does the exact opposite of Bioware. The series is not a story about the world, like Dragon Age, but rather a story about the player's character. And not in a deeply personal way, like DA2 attempted. But rather a way that let's the player create a character that gets to do, see and experience things how they see fit. The world is an environment for this to all occur in, but its not front stage and center, its merely the stage for the player to fill. In many respects, I think it strongly resembles BG1, where the main story isn't even really all that well understood until mid-to-late game, as opposed to BG2, where the ball is rolling with the antagonist right from the get go.
As an aside, what IS the best RPG you've played?
A lot to take in here, one second...
For one, the combat is not a bad thing, just an observation. Interestingly enough their Health/Endurance stat blocking system was done before in SaGa Frontier, where it was HP and LP. Literally the same mechanic in the end.
I find the power and stat distribution a bit over the top though. One of the reasons why I didn't like 4th edition DnD was the over-emphasis on the four defenses, and how to build characters who can be a master at killing one defense (a nuke basically) or who can take on all four at the same time in a pinch. I never really cared for it, even in the variations found in Pathfinder or other tabletop games, so to me it feels complex for complexity's sake most of the time.
I also don't mind the encounters being difficult, but I do kind of question the design choices of the difficulty itself. I would bet many folks would head to Caed Nua quickly because of not just the main story, but also due to the fact that it's your stronghold and folks want to start upgrading as soon as possible. Going too early makes it a grind that yields a good reward in of itself, but an unnecessary grind I feel because of the game progression. The Nakshel Mines in Baldur's Gate was a fairly easy dungeon to get through for a level 2 party compared to Caed Nua, and that feels like a conscious design choice so you wouldn't be wiped so quickly. Ironically enough, it was the encounters leading up to Nakshel that were tough, the wizard near the inn, the giant Ogre raid, all of those fights that proved a challenge.
And I like that better honestly. Let the main story be tough, but let it be tough and even over a case of underpowerment for the main story.
As for the side-quest writing...i'm just not really feeling it. The miller quest is more or less the same as any binary choice and consequence action in the game mechanically. I like that we get a reputation out of it, but I dislike the fact that we have to do it to keep up. The Astariums and a lot of the questlines in Inquisition was very straight forward, outside of the main quests to be sure, but as entry level side missions they were always optional. You also had some gems in there, the Blades of Hessarian, the Cult in the Hinterlands, the recruitment of agents, Fairbanks and the Dragon in the Desert, and passing judgments, that are on par with the decisions of the Miller questline. Few and far between, but ultimately serve the same purpose.
Not to say that all of the quests are bad, despite being a bit fluffy in their prose. One quest I really liked, which was a complete side mission, involved a boy in Defiance Bay. It was short, funny, and to the point, but it was memorable in the end despite being a scavenger hunt that had a comedic payoff. I also am enjoying the main plotline a bit more, although I am finding the animancy story stuff to be very one note so far. It's a cool concept that is slowly turning into the "big bad" of the world. At first I thought it would be tech vs magic sort of thing, now it's tech vs. morality based on what ive seen so far.
So it's really hit or miss. My complaint I guess is I have to do these quests to be competitive with the game itself, which to me is not good game design by any stretch of the word. It would be like BioWare telling you to close all the rifts in the Hinterlands so you can move on to In Your Heart Shall Burn, it is gating your progress to side-content which people may object to as a game mechanic. I think this is why the gathering of power in Inquisition is so easy, doing all of those side-quests to unlock new levels or to progress the main storyline, the choice is yours ultimately. I remember my first playthrough and i left alone the Hissing Wastes and Emprise Du Leon to beat the game first, then I would visit those area's later post-credits.
That is another difference in design, Inquisition is going to have content after the main quest is finished, Pillars I will be surprised if you can continue afterwards, so they need you to see everything before you get to the end.
I guess I am being overly critical of this all (and I have to be since I get to review this one officially) but those are some big mechanical design flaws that I can't help but raise an eyebrow too at it in the end. It is a restricting aspect of the game to me.
As for the best RPG I ever played...now a days I waffle between Planescape Torment and the Mass Effect Trilogy. The reason for the two is most likely story and presentation, the narrative aspects that really held it together, even when it's mechanics were mediocre at best. I remember cheating in Planescape Torment just to get full HP progression for the first few levels, so I can actually survive the game in the end.
That's not good game design (or good tabletop design but i'll save that for another day) but I loved the story and it's presentation, warts and all. I am just not feeling it with Pillars of Eternity yet. Maybe as we get further in that will change, who knows.
Honorable mentions include the Suikoden games, which if you ever play are really damn good, Chrono Trigger, Pokemon and the Ogre Battle series.
The best RPG i have played? Dragon Age Origins is still at the top and PoE won't budge it i think and wont take out Baldurs Gate 2 or Planescape Torment either. As i said earlier i prefer Bioware's storytelling technique (when done properly) vastly over Obsidian and the characters are more in line with what i like. Also i am not that psyched about high fantasy. In regards to lore and names etc. Dragon Age feels more in tow with European medieval time and at the same time has the right amount of fantasy elements to make it stand out.
Do you find PoE high fantasy? I thought its the opposite actually, and something I really liked about it. I agree about Origins that its very close to medieval Europe (which I believe gave it a nice melancholic feeling), but its the Inquisition that feels very high fantasy to me to be honest.
You are awful
And you should feel awful.
Just
Awful.
Kreia is Best Girl.
So I don't dislike the Codex because they get riled up about stuff I don't genuinely care about. I just ignore them and dig out the nuggets of wisdom I find useful.
Including social themes in your games is a design decision which like any other design decision can be either applauded, or denounced. I don't mind seeing that debate done with the proper dispassionate argument, which you just did. I know we agree on many other design decisions or lack-of-decisions I might say by Bio 
- perhaps not this one.
The problem is, I just don't like it couched in some of the venomous homophobia that seems to spill forth when some folk on RPGcodex do it. (And, incidentally, I don't think homosexuality is the only social theme they try to deal with in their games. It just seems the most talked about.)
And, as someone straight-but-not-narrow, I really find it put in such a way that while ignorable, still smells up the conversation. That's all.
It's a perfectly legitimate argument to say Bioware games waste resources on romance narratives and shouldn't include them. You don't have to call people "fags" who disagree with you though.
They are able to at least clearly dissect mechanics and explain why they do or don't like something. People in this thread have been guilty of fanboying this game with nothing more than "this is the best RPG ever made" type of statements. Being specific is helpful, even if the people doing it are notorious for being over the top while doing so.
It's not my forum of choice by any stretch, but the level of knowledge and acumen can't be debated - they have people who are close to CRPG experts as there likely is to exist.
To be honest RPG codex is no different from these forums sometimes.
A lot to take in here, one second...
For one, the combat is not a bad thing, just an observation. Interestingly enough their Health/Endurance stat blocking system was done before in SaGa Frontier, where it was HP and LP. Literally the same mechanic in the end.
I find the power and stat distribution a bit over the top though. One of the reasons why I didn't like 4th edition DnD was the over-emphasis on the four defenses, and how to build characters who can be a master at killing one defense (a nuke basically) or who can take on all four at the same time in a pinch. I never really cared for it, even in the variations found in Pathfinder or other tabletop games, so to me it feels complex for complexity's sake most of the time.
I also don't mind the encounters being difficult, but I do kind of question the design choices of the difficulty itself. I would bet many folks would head to Caed Nua quickly because of not just the main story, but also due to the fact that it's your stronghold and folks want to start upgrading as soon as possible. Going too early makes it a grind that yields a good reward in of itself, but an unnecessary grind I feel because of the game progression. The Nakshel Mines in Baldur's Gate was a fairly easy dungeon to get through for a level 2 party compared to Caed Nua, and that feels like a conscious design choice so you wouldn't be wiped so quickly. Ironically enough, it was the encounters leading up to Nakshel that were tough, the wizard near the inn, the giant Ogre raid, all of those fights that proved a challenge.
And I like that better honestly. Let the main story be tough, but let it be tough and even over a case of underpowerment for the main story.
That's all fair, but at the same time... one isn't required to go for Caed Nua first. Many players DO (I know I was tempted to beeline for the Stronghold), but that doesn't make it a requirement, like gaining X amount of power to leave the Hinterlands. I think you are laying a lot at the feet of what you perceive as a forced grind section of the game that isn't truly the case.
As for the side-quest writing...i'm just not really feeling it. The miller quest is more or less the same as any binary choice and consequence action in the game mechanically. I like that we get a reputation out of it, but I dislike the fact that we have to do it to keep up. The Astariums and a lot of the questlines in Inquisition was very straight forward, outside of the main quests to be sure, but as entry level side missions they were always optional. You also had some gems in there, the Blades of Hessarian, the Cult in the Hinterlands, the recruitment of agents, Fairbanks and the Dragon in the Desert, and passing judgments, that are on par with the decisions of the Miller questline. Few and far between, but ultimately serve the same purpose.
I had this discussion with someone in the DA:I forums a few weeks back, except it was in regards to DA:O's side quests instead of PoE's.
I really appreciate options in quests. Even moreso than true narrative storycraft. Bland dialogue doesn't hop out to me nearly as much as linear quest design.
So the options you gave of good side quests, while they may have been written well, still fall flat with me. For the Blades quest, you aren't given any options - you either craft the item to challenge the leader or you don't. Sure, you can kill him without challenging him (which does nothing except leave all of the Blades hostile to you), but that's more of a quest failure than a choice, in my eyes.
Same thing for the Hinterlands Cult - nearly everything is handled very linearly minus the rewards for certain quests, like Analis giving different Influence or recruit bonuses. While that may have more meta-story applications, it isn't that much different than deciding between 100 gold or a +1 Sword of Smiting.
The judgments I feel are the few side quests that offer true choices. And those are done fairly well, if sometmes a little flat. But that is a vast sea of linearity to find the one oasis of non-crit path choice. YMMV, as always, but I was nearly giddy with the choices in the first dungeon of PoE, where I could solve the puzzle, I could attack the imp, I could avoid both obstacles altogether... options that have next to zero writing and which ultimately don't affect much of anything... but still, choices. Choices which let me define my game experience and define what my character does. Those things are worth more, to me, than a mountain of linear, excellently written quests.
Not to say that all of the quests are bad, despite being a bit fluffy in their prose. One quest I really liked, which was a complete side mission, involved a boy in Defiance Bay. It was short, funny, and to the point, but it was memorable in the end despite being a scavenger hunt that had a comedic payoff. I also am enjoying the main plotline a bit more, although I am finding the animancy story stuff to be very one note so far. It's a cool concept that is slowly turning into the "big bad" of the world. At first I thought it would be tech vs magic sort of thing, now it's tech vs. morality based on what ive seen so far.
So it's really hit or miss. My complaint I guess is I have to do these quests to be competitive with the game itself, which to me is not good game design by any stretch of the word. It would be like BioWare telling you to close all the rifts in the Hinterlands so you can move on to In Your Heart Shall Burn, it is gating your progress to side-content which people may object to as a game mechanic. I think this is why the gathering of power in Inquisition is so easy, doing all of those side-quests to unlock new levels or to progress the main storyline, the choice is yours ultimately. I remember my first playthrough and i left alone the Hissing Wastes and Emprise Du Leon to beat the game first, then I would visit those area's later post-credits.
I guess I haven't encountered the feeling of gating yet... but I'm a completionist at heart, so I naturally "grind" side quest content first anyway.
That is another difference in design, Inquisition is going to have content after the main quest is finished, Pillars I will be surprised if you can continue afterwards, so they need you to see everything before you get to the end.
I guess I am being overly critical of this all (and I have to be since I get to review this one officially) but those are some big mechanical design flaws that I can't help but raise an eyebrow too at it in the end. It is a restricting aspect of the game to me.
I'd be interested in your review, Rob. Let us know when you post it.
One takeaway I have is that, as you know from tabeltop experiences, sometimes being underleveled doesn't mean you need to grind. It just means you may need to engage in tactics you might have never thought of normally. This is usually much more prevalent in tabletop, because if that level 20 lich in the next room your 5th level party just spotted is in your game, you can't reload a save to an earlier point to grind out some levels.
Maybe there are other solutions outside of direct combat. Or maybe it is forcing the player to do things like scout, set traps, switch weapon sets, plan out encounters... get good at the actual gameplay mechanics instead of steamrolling through with the most direct approach based off of character level strength alone. One thing I think PoE is guilty of is the same thing nearly every other RPG (or video game period, honestly) is guilty of - a poor approach to teaching the player to use the more nuanced game mechanics. The game tells you how to click the sneak button and what it does, but it doesn't encourage the player to do things like scout out an area, lay down some traps, lay down a slick spell, switch to a long range weapon, attack an enemy, snipe it as it takes damage from the trap and slipping, switch back to melee weapons as the enemy gets up and appraoches, then begin the encounter as normal, but with a big chunk of damage and penalties inflicted on the target.
Not saying you don't do or know how to do these things, but many gamers just want to rush in and attack every enemy using the same rotation of skills and cooldowns over and over again and get frustrated when it doesn't work every time. Maybe it is forcing grinding, yes. But maybe it is encouraging people to get better at aspects of the game they aren't fully utilizing.
But that's more of a tirade than a true response to your statement.
As for the best RPG I ever played...now a days I waffle between Planescape Torment and the Mass Effect Trilogy. The reason for the two is most likely story and presentation, the narrative aspects that really held it together, even when it's mechanics were mediocre at best. I remember cheating in Planescape Torment just to get full HP progression for the first few levels, so I can actually survive the game in the end.
That's not good game design (or good tabletop design but i'll save that for another day) but I loved the story and it's presentation, warts and all. I am just not feeling it with Pillars of Eternity yet. Maybe as we get further in that will change, who knows.
Honorable mentions include the Suikoden games, which if you ever play are really damn good, Chrono Trigger, Pokemon and the Ogre Battle series.
Interesting honorable mentions. What Crono Trigger did as a time traveling video game has yet to be matched, in my experience/opinion. For Planescape, I'll say that is a solid choice, although one with mechanic and leveling issues, as you freely admit.
I can't agree on Mass Effect. What it does well is truly impressive, but narratively speaking it was such a dumpster fire from ME2 on (not even just the ending of ME3, but pretty much the entire story outside of stopping Sovereign and Saren) and the progressive shift towards more of a FPS over an RPG made it seem like it almost fell outside the scope of the genre by the end. But that's a total derailment of the topic at hand.
Guest_simfamUP_*
Kreia is Best Girl.
The best NPC-to-Player interactions I've had are with her.
She is indeed #based and #bestgirl.
P.S
I finally bought it.
Split the money 50/50.
Guest_E-Ro_*
Damn we got dem big old walls of text all up in here.
The best NPC-to-Player interactions I've had are with her.
She is indeed #based and #bestgirl.
P.S
I finally bought it.
Split the money 50/50.
Yeah, I doubt anyone can beat Kreia. Ever.
Downloading it right now. It should be ready to play when we get back from church.
What pushed me over the edge in deciding to buy were all the comments about its potential modability. Modable games >> non-moddable games simply because it expands the available stylistic and play choices. Even if it also means 8 zillion varieties of bikiniwear.
No bikiniwear so far, but one of the three first mods on Nexus is the NSFW female portrait pack. Which... I find quite disturbing.
Damn we got dem big old walls of text all up in here.
Wall of text is thread done right. Aslong as it is constructive and informative.
Do you find PoE high fantasy? I thought its the opposite actually, and something I really liked about it. I agree about Origins that its very close to medieval Europe (which I believe gave it a nice melancholic feeling), but its the Inquisition that feels very high fantasy to me to be honest.
You made me think and it makes it alot harder to reply. No i don't find PoE to be high fantasy, and i do agree that DA:I is more that way. I guess since both DA:O and PoE has that more personal down to earth story which is more focused around the individuals. I can't find the words! I will come back to this
Guest_simfamUP_*
Yeah, I doubt anyone can beat Kreia. Ever.
No bikiniwear so far, but one of the three first mods on Nexus is the NSFW female portrait pack. Which... I find quite disturbing.
Nexus mods always start like that.
Oh, and since I bought the game how's the writing so far guys?
Retour en haut
