Pillars of Eternity - Review @ Angry Duck Gamer

[TomRon]

I must say I think the review is pretty spot on to my experience, apart from the fact I enjoyed the story and the quests. But I'm in total agreement in regards to the awful balancing which makes it impossible to build broken characters (when all stats have value for all characters no stats have any value) and no class stands out neither as bad nor good.

I enjoyed much of the game, but to me it failed on character building and combat (and both those are two sides of the same coin, mechanics). I'm hoping they will drop the overambitious "balancing" in the second installment, it's a single player game and doesn't need it. Much more fun to be forced to experiment to build a good party than the "anything goes" of PoE.

 

[NewDArt]

He's completely and utterly wrong about BG not having a ton of trashmobs and mostly trivial wilderness areas. PoE is nearly identical in that way - at least from memory.

That said, he does seem to focus on BG2 more - and maybe he sometimes forgets that BG means BG1.

 

[TomRon]

He's completely and utterly wrong about BG not having a ton of trashmobs and mostly trivial wilderness areas. PoE is nearly identical in that way - at least from memory.

That said, he does seem to focus on BG2 more - and maybe he sometimes forgets that BG means BG1.

True. I replayed BGEE last year and while still an awesome game it's full of filler content and many of the wilderness areas are pretty boring.

 

[NewDArt]

True. I replayed BGEE last year and while still an awesome game it's full of filler content and many of the wilderness areas are pretty boring.

Well, I personally enjoy them

But I'm also much more of a fan of BG than BG2.

To me, the best part of PoE was the BG-like exploration of Wilderness areas. The combat, while atrociously bad, was significantly more playable in the open areas of the game than the dungeons.

 

[joxer]

True. I replayed BGEE last year and while still an awesome game it's full of filler content and many of the wilderness areas are pretty boring.

So enhanced edition means boring edition? Or filler edition?

 

[bjon045]

I loved Pillars of Eternity 1, one of my favourite games of all time and backed PoE2 at 240 dollars based on the enjoyment i got from the first one. I rate it nearly as good as BG2. Act3 is certainly a letdown but White March more than made up for it.

This is coming from from a major BG fan who has played through the entire saga about 4 times. It is looking to me like Deadfire might even topple BG2's crown

 

[azarhal]

regards to the awful balancing which makes it impossible to build broken characters (when all stats have value for all characters no stats has any value) and no class stands out neither as bad nor good.

You mean great balancing. Awful balancing means you end up with shit characters unless you pick that one working build/class setup.

hmm. Broken builds means overpowered munchkins in my gaming dictionary. That do exist in POE1.

Also, not all the stats have values for all characters. Did you even try to learn how to play the game? Because, it doesn't look like it to me…

 

[TomRon]

Also, not all the stats have values for all characters. Did you even try to learn how to play the game? Because, it doesn't look like it to me…

You might be right, it could be that I didn't understand the mechanics well enough. But my thoughts seems to be mirrored by alot of others, so at least I'm not alone in my ignorance then.
I was of course exaggerating a bit also, but honestly I felt the impact of stats was way too small to really matter.

In regards to broken I actually mean it both ways, both OP and horrible.

No, I do not consider it good balancing when a party made up of any combination of classes works as good as the next one. Great balancing to me would be the opposite, the requirement to actually plan your party build and character builds. I agree there shouldn't only be "one perfect way", but I still prefer that to "no bad way". All classes should have their uses, useless classes are not fun. But all should not be able to do everything, and that was what it felt like to me.

I understand you definition of balance too, and it's perfectly reasonable in a multiplayer game. In a single player game like PoE the theorycrafting of good parties and builds are half the fun for me. Games like Wizardry and DnD are excellent in that way in my opinion, and are by no means "balanced".

 

[TomRon]

I loved Pillars of Eternity 1, one of my favourite games of all time and backed PoE2 at 240 dollars based on the enjoyment i got from the first one. I rate it nearly as good as BG2. Act3 is certainly a letdown but White March more than made up for it.

This is coming from from a major BG fan who has played through the entire saga about 4 times. It is looking to me like Deadfire might even topple BG2's crown

I've yet to play PoE with the expansions, I plan to rectify that with a replay this year. Perhaps I should ask Azarhal for build advice before I do though.

 

[duerer]

Hmm, my opinion was that BG2 was a wonderful game story-wise, but I really disliked the combat: much too chaotic, much too meaningless micromanagement -- same with PoE.

I've saddened that both games are combat heavy, hence I've tried to solo'em (more understandable micromanagement, hopefully more manageable combat).
Unsuccessfully.

So I've gave up and fired up …
A. Arcanum - for its (mostly) non-combat role playing goodness (Gourmet wine'n'cheese gaming),
B. Icewind Dale - for its dumb-and-fun chaotic battles (Fastfood beer'n'pretzels gaming)

 

[JDR13]

So I've gave up and fired up …
A. Arcanum - for its (mostly) non-combat role playing goodness (Gourmet wine'n'cheese gaming),
B. Icewind Dale - for its dumb-and-fun chaotic battles (Fastfood beer'n'pretzels gaming)

Well if you don't like the combat in BG 2 then I can't imagine you're going to like IWD very much. Arcanum is a great game, but the combat is mostly terrible.

 

[duerer]

Well if you don't like the combat in BG 2 then I can't imagine you're going to like IWD very much. Arcanum is a great game, but the combat is mostly terrible.

Fair question, let me explain:
Since IWD is all about combat, so I could tolerate its imperfection more easily. I'm just mindlessly mowing down monsters and the sole incentive is to level up the party to demigod status

BG2 has an excellent story - which is constantly dragged down by those awful combat segments, diminishing the drama the game wants me to experience (think of those annoying ad intermissions during your favorite TV thriller show)

 

[azarhal]

No, I do not consider it good balancing when a party made up of any combination of classes works as good as the next one.

All class combinations don't work as good as the next one.

I had a difference in TTK (time to kill) and survivability between my two full and my half-done playthrough of POE1 that used different party composition. Funny enough, the party with a Priest* had the hardest time, unless we were facing creatures with "charming" abilities (spell that grants immunity FTW, no other classes has those, Chanter can raise the defensive stats against them though).

*My first playthrough had no Priest…which is why I find it hilarious when people complains they have to bring one in POE1.

and if you want a class with issues. Play a Monk, super good against enemies weak to blunt/fire damage, kinda useless against enemies with DR against blunt/fire which include pretty much all the bosses of the game and a good chunk of the normal enemies.

 

[NewDArt]

Fair question, let me explain:
Since IWD is all about combat, so I could tolerate its imperfection more easily. I'm just mindlessly mowing down monsters and the sole incentive is to level up the party to demigod status

BG2 has an excellent story - which is constantly dragged down by those awful combat segments, diminishing the drama the game wants me to experience (think of those annoying ad intermissions during your favorite TV thriller show)

IWD isn't just about combat. It's essentially the Diablo of the Infinity engine.

Meaning, it's about combat, character progression and loot - as well as a suprisingly decent linear narrative.

That said, IWD combat is pretty meh - much like BG. I mean, it works - but it's not terribly interesting.

Something like Diablo 3 is a million times better for that experience - unless it's because you want a party experience. In that case, I would recommend Dungeon Siege 2 over IWD.

 

[TomRon]

I had a difference in TTK (time to kill) and survivability between my two full and my half-done playthrough of POE1 that used different party composition. Funny enough, the party with a Priest* had the hardest time, unless we were facing creatures with "charming" abilities (spell that grants immunity FTW, no other classes has those, Chanter can raise the defensive stats against them though).

I don't quite remember my party composition in the run I finished, but I will give PoE another chance sometime this year and I'll do my honework this time around. (I went in blind the first time to not spoil anything but OP party would be the goal the second time to see how it feels. Perhaps I'll change my opinion after that).

 

[JDR13]

I don't quite remember my party composition in the run I finished, but I will give PoE another chance sometime this year and I'll do my honework this time around. (I went in blind the first time to not spoil anything but OP party would be the goal the second time to see how it feels. Perhaps I'll change my opinion after that).

You played through the entire game and can't remember the party you used? It's not like PoE has been around that long.

They say the first thing to go is your memory.

 

[rjshae]

I found PoE more enjoyable the second time through, in part because I knew a little better what I was doing, avoided the one companion I disliked (Durance), and included the IWD1/2-like White March 1&2. My favorite companion turned out to be Hiravias, even though he was added very late in the original game. Druids kick arse.

 

[duerer]

IWD isn't just about combat. It's essentially the Diablo of the Infinity engine.
Meaning, it's about combat, character progression and loot - as well as a suprisingly decent linear narrative.

You are right, however, I find the narrative pretty derivative (that's what I call trash fantasy - not good, but fun)
Also, IWD's party based combat is a bit different to Diablo's solo clickfest, perhaps that's why I like it a bit better. (I find Diablo very boring)

Something like Diablo 3 is a million times better for that experience - unless it's because you want a party experience. In that case, I would recommend Dungeon Siege 2 over IWD.

Yup, I've played'em all. Surprisingly, I've found Dungeon Siege 3 a very enjoyable game in this genre - decent on a silly mobtrasher-lootwhore guttural level, but has enough narrative depth and variance to keep my long term interest.

 

[Archangel]

Err… his memory of Baldur's Gate 2 must be heavily filtered by time. There were a lot of trash mobs, and only a few of the fights required a significant level of forethought.

Meh, tastes vary.

More like you memory is faulty. It had nowhere near the amount of trash and c/p combat Pillars had.
And there were more than few battles that would hand you your ass and ask you to try again and again until you succeeded. Unless you played on Easy or something which could be possible when I read your next post in this topic.

 

[rjshae]

More like you memory is faulty. It had nowhere near the amount of trash and c/p combat Pillars had.
And there were more than few battles that would hand you your ass and ask you to try again and again until you succeeded. Unless you played on Easy or something which could be possible when I read your next post in this topic.

More like I've just played it too many times (~4) and my impressions have grown jaded. Too much of the combat seem trivial and uninteresting now. Ah well. No, I haven't played it on easy mode. There are still a few battles that take a reload or two to get right, but they're in the minority.