Pillars of Eternity - Thoughts & Impressions

[Sacred_Path]

You can control him directly by clicking on his icon on your ranger's portrait.

I know, but you can't change his position in the party roster (AFAIK). Stuff for a patch... maybe?!

 

[ChienAboyeur]

The only thing about the interface/ controls that bugs me is the lack of shortcuts for my bear companion. It hangs around at the rear end of the group when it's supposed to be up front, tanking. Sort of tiresome, but far from something major.

Custom formations allow to put it in front.

Wont make it for the lack of shortcut though.

 

[SteveTownsend]

The only thing I have taken away from the last 2-4 pages of this thread is there is people have alot passion about this game. it is nice to see though I do feel a few of the post got a little personal.
.

OT: shouldn't your handle be Triptykon?

 

[Sacred_Path]

Custom formations allow to put it in front.

Wont make it for the lack of shortcut though.

Ah, thx!

 

[azarhal]

I know, but you can't change his position in the party roster (AFAIK). Stuff for a patch… maybe?!

You can use a custom party formation and set the pet where ever you want on the grid though.

 

[CelticFrost]

OT: shouldn't your handle be Triptykon?

I really like Toms new band, much better than later Celtic Frost.

Though I have been using this name since Ultima 3...listening to
Morbid Tales.

 

[DArtagnan]

Now that I've had a full 6 member party for a while, the combat is - sadly - starting to bother me again. Since the game is full of battles, it really doesn't flow well when you have to painfully micromanage everything. The no XP for defeating enemies is just insult added to injury, really.

Sure, there are easier battles - where you can get by just by selecting all members and attacking one enemy at a time - but on Hard, you really need to adjust everything in the majority of fights.

Hard being the difficulty level the game was designed for, going by the developers.

So, while I really, really like most of the game - the combat is, overall, just not that good. The mechanics are great - but the AI is crap. I just don't understand why they'd release the game without basic AI settings.

There's just no way this is a 10/10 or even 9/10 with that kind of issue.

If the game keeps this level of detail, exploration and overall high quality level - I could see it being an 8 or even 8.5 - but I can't see any way of being reasonably objective and going beyond that. Not unless you really, really love micromanaging in combat - or you don't think it should be played on the difficulty designed for IE fans.

Ironically, I think the game would have been much easier to optimise and develop with turn-based combat - and everything about it just screams for that instead of real-time.

It would have made it a much better experience. For me, at least.

 

[Deleted User]

Well, I think combat is a blast. I love managing my party members against tough groups of enemies and seeing my strategies play out. I have no problem at all with it. The game is still a 10/10 for me.

 

[Sacred_Path]

It's Arcanum without the flaws. [/sortoftrolling]

 

[Deleted User]

I need to play Arcanum sometime soon. I only got to the first major city in my last try at playing it. I remember being a bit overwhelmed with the amount of content in the game and exploring that massive, massive city. Good lord they built some massive and complex RPGs back in the day!

 

[DArtagnan]

Well, I think combat is a blast. I love managing my party members against tough groups of enemies and seeing my strategies play out. I have no problem at all with it. The game is still a 10/10 for me.

That's what I meant by having to be reasonably objective to give it a fair score

Your approach is a great one if you want to hype yourself and forget reality.

To me, however, even the best games have flaws - and to ignore them is to deceive not only yourself - but also the people looking for feedback.

I mean, if we'd all been like you - we'd still be playing Space Invaders

 

[Deleted User]

Right. Your opinions are objective and right, and the rest of us are just subjective loonies who hype ourselves and 'forget reality' (whatever THAT means - your reality maybe?).

Thank you for showing me the light, DArt.

 

[DArtagnan]

Right. Your opinions are objective and right, and the rest of us are just subjective loonies who hype ourselves and 'forget reality' (whatever THAT means - your reality maybe?).

Thank you for showing me the light, DArt.

Not the rest of you, no, just you and the other loonies

Reality being that which isn't perfect.

But let's talk about it in a few months, when people aren't so emotionally invested in the gaming having to be perfect. Some people can't enjoy a game if they realise it has flaws - and that's ok.

Eventually, they'll see them.

 

[you]

Is there any use of pets? I found a cute little wyrm. As for combat I think my biggest issue is that battles are a bit too brutal. Not enough time to figure out what to do without a reload. Even worse there is almost no way to retreat. I rembmer in bg2; if one party member could make it out alive that was enough. I think it would be a bit better if scout could somehow tell something bout the brtuality of your opponent. That would be a real use for scouting

 

[Deleted User]

Gaming having to be perfect? What are you even talking about?

If you don't realize by now that one person's "flaw" is another person's "well implemented idea", then we are in different realities, for sure. And as you would say, that's okay.

It's amazing human beings can communicate at all when everyone experiences their own reality.

I've already said combat isn't perfect. No game is perfect. I would have liked to have seen better pathfinding at times. The game is still a 10/10 for me, because that is a minor issue. The game is that good. For me, anyway.

Then again, I'm not the type who's going to endlessly harp on minute design details and call them flaws. I'm sure you could find enough people to do that on the Codex or something.

 

[DArtagnan]

Gaming having to be perfect? What are you even talking about?

If you don't realize by now that one person's "flaw" is another person's "well implemented idea", then we are in different realities, for sure. And as you would say, that's okay.

It's amazing human beings can communicate at all when everyone experiences their own reality.

I've already said combat isn't perfect. No game is perfect. I would have liked to have seen better pathfinding at times. The game is still a 10/10 for me, because that is a minor issue. The game is that good. For me, anyway.

Then again, I'm not the type who's going to endlessly harp on minute design details and call them flaws. I'm sure you could find enough people to do that on the Codex or something.

Since a game can't be perfect, it wouldn't make much sense to expect it. But it's the rational ideal to measure against, when being critical. Not that you'd know much about that

At least you admit it's not perfect, and that's a start. If you're going to claim that having no custom AI and glitchy pathfinding is a "well-implemented idea" or a minute detail - then I'd have to call bullshit on that.

But I'll settle for you not having a big issue with it, personally. Doesn't mean it's not a flaw, though.

I'm happy you're enjoying the game - I am too

I'd love to hear your thoughts in a few months, when you're not so committed - and when you're actually done with the game.

Despite your desperate intention to overlook flaws in most games (except modern ones with high production values), you have a good measure of insight into design - and you have a lot of experience with the history of gaming.

That's valuable

 

[Deleted User]

The bottom line here is that you are trying to have some superiority to say what's a flaw and what isn't. Not having custom AI is not a flaw, it's a design choice.

Despite your desperate desire to cling on to some sort of 'objective truth', it's quite amusing watching you dance around.

But, I'm not committed to the game (whatever that means) and I'm certainly not committed to going round after round with you. So, have your last word and be done with it.

And I deeply apologize to everyone for getting dragged into yet another "endless debate" with our master debater, DArtagnan.

Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

[DArtagnan]

The bottom line here is that you are trying to have some superiority to say what's a flaw and what isn't. Not having custom AI is not a flaw, it's a design choice.

Not so much superiority as a sense of reality about what a flaw means. In this case, it's the omission of a feature that's an integral part of what PoE is overtly emulating - and which the developers themselves have declared a desired feature that they simply didn't have the time to implement.

You can't get a much clearer picture of reality.

Hardly about me having superiority. It's more that you're stubbornly refusing to look beyond your own little nose and appreciating that a lot of people have mentioned this as a serious detriment.

Despite your desperate desire to cling on to some sort of 'objective truth', it's quite amusing watching you dance around.

It's not about establishing objective truth, but about a reasonable estimation of it - given insight into preferences and general feedback from people who're not blind to flaws.

But, I'm not committed to the game (whatever that means) and I'm certainly not committed to going round after round with you. So, have your last word and be done with it.

Why, thank you

Committed means being emotionally invested in the game to the point where you can't see things for what they are.

For whatever reason, you can't accept that the game has flaws - even while still being very good to those who see them.

It's completely subjective how big a flaw it is, though, but to deny it's a flaw is to demonstrate to everyone that you don't care about being reasonable.

As such, I trust even the most dedicated fans around here can see where you're not quite on the side of fair criticism.

And I deeply apologize to everyone for getting dragged into yet another "endless debate" with our master debater, DArtagnan.

Deeply is appropriate, for there can be no greater sin than exchanging thoughts about a game in a thread dedicated to the game.

But instead of exaggerating and playing the usual Watch-against-DArt card, why not just stand a little on your own?

We're all friends here, anyway, in a manner of speaking.

 

[Thrasher]

Not having AI is not a flaw for me. AI is crappy even when it's there, so I always micromanage my parties. And I never play these kind of games in coop mode, so the lack of multiplayer is not a flaw, either. I'd prefer turn-based combat, but I wouldn't call the game flawed because of my preferences.

 

[JDR13]

Hard being the difficulty level the game was designed for, going by the developers.

That's the first time I've heard that. Did the developers actually state that?

How do you feel it compares to default BG or BG2 difficulty-wise?

Thing is, the only difference between the 3 difficulty levels in PoE is the amount of enemies you encounter. Nothing else changes. At least according to their website.