Pillars of Eternity - Review#3 @ RPG Codex

[HiddenX]

The Codex seems to be facinated by Pillars of Eternity. After Darth Roxor and Decado a third one is now released. This time Vault Dweller and Grunker analyze the game:

It’s a better Baldur’s Gate, with more depth and role-playing that goes beyond playing dress up. Still, it’s Baldur’s Gate, not Torment, Fallout, or even Mask of the Betrayer. Presented with the first and possibly the last Great Opportunity to do something memorable, Obsidian did what they’ve always done – played it safe and went after the BG fans, long abandoned by Bioware.
(…)

Pillars of Eternity stays true to the spirit of Baldur’s Gate, which is a nice way of saying that it’s a combat heavy game with crappy combat but pretty backgrounds. I’m happy to report that the backgrounds are spectacular and the combat is every bit as crappy as you remember.
(…)

The system's "flatness" is also its greatest weakness, however. The version of D&D that Sawyer is trying to emulate here is its 4th Edition. This system compromised on the fundamental difference in feel between classes to instead use uniformity and universal rules to provide balance instead: while some builds were better than others, all builds were useful. In contrast, earlier editions of D&D have classes which are so underpowered compared to others that comparisons are meaningless. In many ways, PoE completely succeeds in the objective to shed itself of this problem, but it comes at a price: you consistently feel that the changes you make to the characters are fairly miniscule. A huge part of this is thanks to the universality of the abilities the character system bestows upon you. Because most of your abilities continue to be relevant throughout the game, you are rarely that excited to gain new abilities and spells. You might be exited to get access to a new level of Cipher spells for example, since some of these are certainly a step up in power compared to your earlier abilities, but you have no reason to care when you gain further Cipher spells from that same level. Since the Mass Charm that worked so well for you in the last 20 encounters will work equally as well in the next 20, switching tactics is, for the vast majority of encounters, reduced to a matter of style. In dire cases, even gaining access to high levels of spells will yield no excitement, as you sometimes completely disregard newly learned abilities in favor of spamming that Level 2 AoE immobilize you’ve grown so fond of. In other words: you could switch from the aforementioned Mass Charm to a damaging AoE spell and knockdown… but why would you want to?
(…)

More information.

 

[HiddenX]

And I heard a 4. review is in the making...

 

[Couchpotato]

Whats the point of publishing four reviews when one was enough?

Anyway I'm not going to read it as I hate that site.

 

[HiddenX]

After reading all this reviews on the Codex, it seems that many had very high expectations for PoE and were disappointed by the final game.

My case is the reverse thing. I had very low expectations, because I saw some fundamental flaws in the 'balanced' character development and RTwP combat before release.
I was positively surprised by the game and had fun to finish it. It's a not a great, but a good game which is better than the sum of its parts.

 

[Ripper]

I sometimes wonder if all the online promotion and analysis I ingest these days detracts from my enjoyment of games. I loved BG, for example, and don't think many of its myriad flaws would have even registered while I was busily engrossed in it.

 

[Nephologist]

I sometimes wonder if all the online promotion and analysis I ingest these days detracts from my enjoyment of games. I loved BG, for example, and don't think many of its myriad flaws would have even registered while I was busily engrossed in it.

I'm the same exact way. If I'm playing a game I ESPECIALLY avoid any Codex reviews or discussions about it until after I'm finished and have formulated my own opinions.

 

[borcanu]

i usually see other flaws than the ones in the reviews.

so its N.A

 

[Archangel]

Whats the point of publishing four reviews when one was enough?

Anyway I'm not going to read it as I hate that site.

Because Codex does not have official reviews and anyone can have their posted if it looks like a review.

And I object to them calling PoE combat as crappy as BG1 one. Bg1 one was much better
When you got higher level spells and used them, you could feel their power and there was never a question if a higher level one is more useful.

 

[Couchpotato]

Because Codex does not have official reviews and anyone can have their posted if it looks like a review.

Good for them it's still not going to change my opinion of the site.

I sometimes wonder if all the online promotion and analysis I ingest these days detracts from my enjoyment of games. I loved BG, for example, and don't think many of its myriad flaws would have even registered while I was busily engrossed in it.

It seems we all watch to many videos , and read to many articles. So by the time a game finally gets released we have already made up our mind if it sucks.

Sometimes I miss the early 1990's when the only information you got was from printed magazines, and more gamers were actually excited to play the released games.

Nowadays the internet is just full of nothing, but entitled/jaded gamers.

 

[you]

It was an ok game but not super duper. Of the big kickstarts I really liked playing D:OS; it did not have the best writing/story but the game play was a blast. Sadly (or gladly) I will replay all three - D:OS EE, wastland EE and P;OE (when the expansion+patches are ready). Hum. Right now I'm playing shadowrun director cut. I think it is better than some and not as good as others. Hum. But to be honest I don't think it really matters what I like or dislike; you should play what you like

 

[lackblogger]

I sometimes wonder if all the online promotion and analysis I ingest these days detracts from my enjoyment of games. I loved BG, for example, and don't think many of its myriad flaws would have even registered while I was busily engrossed in it.

I couldn't disagree more. I long for the more critical reviews and debates precisely because I've been burned far too many times in the past by standard propaganda hype. I'm quite adult enough to be able to read between the lines as to whether something might interest me even if it enrages other people, because I'm experienced enough with a wide enough variety of games to know which aspects I like and which I don't.

I feel a whole lot more disappointed with a game if all I've heard is good things and then I'm presented with a bugged mess or a simpleton's banal ride or just outright lies ("this is a 'tactical' game, cough cough).

Take Drakensang: The River of Time, for example. I was looking for a new game at the time and had been suggested about 20 different games, all in glorious positivity hyperbole, so I read some reviews, watched some intro and gameplay vids on Youtube, checked out their Metacritic and etc etc and eventually chode D:RoT from the 20, and had a great game that suited me really well.

I haven't bought a dud targeted purchase (as oppose to a random cheap bundle of games) for years (since Dragon Age 2, cough cough)...

 

[Zloth]

Sometimes I miss the early 1990's when the only information you got was from printed magazines, and more gamers were actually excited to play the released games.:

So a big picture having little-at-best to do with the game, three small screenshots along the bottom, a pack of logos, and you're good? I think I would like a little more, thanks.

(Thought that string of elf-soft-porn we had for a time... <ahem> Nope! I want proper reviews!)

 

[Archangel]

It was an ok game but not super duper. Of the big kickstarts I really liked playing D:OS; it did not have the best writing/story but the game play was a blast. Sadly (or gladly) I will replay all three - D:OS EE, wastland EE and P;OE (when the expansion+patches are ready). Hum. Right now I'm playing shadowrun director cut. I think it is better than some and not as good as others. Hum. But to be honest I don't think it really matters what I like or dislike; you should play what you like

I only finished PoE out of these 3 games. D:OS got boring half way and WL2 I kept waiting for more patches and then for promised rebalance patch that got turned into EE version.

As for Dragonfall, I find it best game out of these 4 games. When you finish it once or twice (there is good C&C there, worth 2nd play) you can tell us how you feel about it then.
It has by far the best story, and pretty fun combat that does not get boring half way. The companions are also more interesting than what those other 3 games have (and DC cut gave us companion missions).

 

[sakichop]

Good for them it's still not going to change my opinion of the site.

It seems we all watch to many videos , and read to many articles. So by the time a game finally gets released we have already made up our mind if it sucks.

Sometimes I miss the early 1990's when the only information you got was from printed magazines, and more gamers were actually excited to play the released games.

Nowadays the internet is full of entitled gamers, and huge spoilers.

That's why I don't, I follow very little pre release stuff. Yes it's cause me to buy some stinkers thinking they were something different but I think overall my gaming is better for it.

Quite honestly I read very few reviews also. I stick mainly to posting my own thoughts and responding to others.

 

[CelticFrost]

A comment above about D:OS getting boring half way through, I am not sure if they played the same game as I did. Though each to there own.

As for POE if they could have filled the cities with more, figured out how to get rid of the horrible load times and kept the great story they had going in the beginning it would have been a 8.5 to 9 out of 10.

Also little bugs in a game are find, but serious ones that stop quest dead in their tracks???

 

[Saxon1974]

I couldn't disagree more. I long for the more critical reviews and debates precisely because I've been burned far too many times in the past by standard propaganda hype. I'm quite adult enough to be able to read between the lines as to whether something might interest me even if it enrages other people, because I'm experienced enough with a wide enough variety of games to know which aspects I like and which I don't.

I feel a whole lot more disappointed with a game if all I've heard is good things and then I'm presented with a bugged mess or a simpleton's banal ride or just outright lies ("this is a 'tactical' game, cough cough).

Take Drakensang: The River of Time, for example. I was looking for a new game at the time and had been suggested about 20 different games, all in glorious positivity hyperbole, so I read some reviews, watched some intro and gameplay vids on Youtube, checked out their Metacritic and etc etc and eventually chode D:RoT from the 20, and had a great game that suited me really well.

I haven't bought a dud targeted purchase (as oppose to a random cheap bundle of games) for years (since Dragon Age 2, cough cough)…

+1. There can be many morons on the rpgcodex but if you can get paste that and know how to filter it out it's a great place to get honest and critical opinions with very little PR and fanboy reviews.

 

[Maylander]

I actually agree to a certain extent with the review. The game does feel too "flat", and I'm not a big fan of RPG systems where classes, skills and abilities all feel more or less the same. There's just not enough "UMPH!", which is more and more common these days, probably thanks to the emergence of MMOs, PvP and e-sports. Everything has to be totally balanced, Blizzard style, or people will whine about how class X feels weaker than class Y.

So what if a wizard feels weak in the start and overpowered in the end? Just carry the wizard in the start with some fighter type character and then let the wizard do the heavy lifting near the end. For me, that's the main advantage in party based RPGs: It's about balancing out individual strengths and weaknesses. If you're just going to ignore all that, you might as well just stick with a solo character RPG (Skyrim, Gothic, Witcher etc).

 

[SirJames]

Seems like people will complain either way?

Balanced its flat and boring, unbalanced half the classes are useless.

This reviewer complains about low level spells being useful late into the game and how it ruins getting new spells. I have a feeling if low level spells became useless he'd be complaining about that instead.

The trouble with game development is there's so many viable ways to achieve every goal. Even way back with decisions like player perspective. First person, third person, isometric, locked camera, etc, etc. None of these is "correct".

When reviewers negatively judge a systems perfectly suitable implementation with their own personal bias then the article becomes more about finding out about the reviewer than the game.

 

[lackblogger]

Reading some responses to the review it appears the reviewer is biased against Real Time With Pause systems anyway, so why they are playing a RTwP game is beyond me...

Didn't he read any reviews and investigate it first...

 

[azarhal]

Reading some responses to the review it appears the reviewer is biased against Real Time With Pause systems anyway, so why they are playing a RTwP game is beyond me…

Didn't he read any reviews and investigate it first…

It's the Codex, critiquing games for not being turn-based is like a posting requirement overt there.