Preview Pillars of Eternity Gameplay Video, Previews and Interviews

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Is this a ruleset for a SuperMario game or an BG style cRPG?

D&D pseudo-simulation can fuck right off. Balance uber alles. If Josh had his way there wouldn't even be any attributes.

So, you want a game that's like the D&D cRPG Baldur's Gate, huh? Well, ok!
Let's see, remove the D&D system and lore, come up with a new stat system that doesn't even try to be like D&D and there you go: a game just like the D&D cRPG Baldur's Gate...except without anything resembling the D&D...or Baldur's Gate.

"They did pay in advance," he shrugs.

*sigh*
Well, I'll wait and see on this one, but I'm not nearly as pumped as I was before. I guess I haven't been following this as closely as I should have and when I saw it I went all fanboy with excitement.

 

[Shadenuat]

pointed at their direction, barbarian swung axe, they literally explode half the time, (default difficulty, which is what I assume this is.) wolves, more wolves, bear, gibberling, lather, rinse, repeat

There are no barbariains in BG1. If you're playing BGT/Tutu, it's a lot easier, because BG1 is not balanced for BG2 kits (Ranger-Archer can destroy whole maps of enemies, druid can turn werewolf/summon spirits, etc.).

 

[Excommunicator]

Game looks very impressive visually - a lot better than I'd have expected from a Kickstarter game with this sort of budget.

Don't agree with the comments about the UI. It seems tidy, functional and unintrusive - people asking for more screen to be obscured just so it's more like their games of old really should think a bit more about how they form their opinions. Especially if they're trying to be designers themselves.

Not overly excited about the playing of the game though. RTWP doesn't excite me and I guess while the rest of the gameplay I saw was functional, it doesn't solve any problems or improve on much. I guess I'm not really the target audience though

If I can play a solo character with increased difficulty and no forced restrictions then I'll probably buy it anyway

 

[tuluse]

I get what the idea was, but the implementation of said idea doesn't make much sense. Make INT modify crit damage or give a bonus to chance to crit. The idea being that due to greater intellect, the barbarian knows where to hit his opponent to cause the most damage. That at least would be plausible vs what, "due to the power of his mind he can make his arms longer and have more endurance"? Seriously, what's the explanation for this?

Intellect lets you unlock your soul power in a specific way.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

I think I must be one of the few people who prefers low level combat in RPG's and especially D&D. I like the low level combat in BG and Icewind dale and my favorite parts of the game are from 1-6 or 7th level, after that it starts to get stupid to me. In fact I am almost the complete opposite in the games I seem to prefer of the IE variety, I liked BG1 over BG2 to the point I could not even be bothered to finish BG2 because it became so silly and too magic oriented with the constant pre-fight buffing, then the spells that counter spells and then even counter spells to counter counter spells. I hate every character on screen walking around surrounded by glowing humming globes of invulnerability combined with numerous magical energy shields combined with everybody swinging flaming swords and lightning and fire shooting out of every bodies eyes and ass.

I didn't finish TOB for that reason, but I completed Baldur's Gate many times and still love it. PoE is going to have the same level cap, by the way. The only thing I don't like about it is the graphics. Unity is ugly, let's face it.

I am okay with the graphics because I really have not played any RPG's since ToEE and before that icewind dale.... once the decline began in earnest (for me it was when black isle and then Troika shut down) I switched to playing wargames like War in the Pacific or Anglo German War (by Schwerpunkt), or even board wargames like DAK II or The Devil's Cauldron.

Its almost as if I am seeing these new RPG's like Divinity OS and Pillars with a 2003 idea of what good graphics are. For iexample I was simply blown away by the graphics in DOS, things such as the way water looks and all the other details are amazing to my eye... similarly Pillars looks just as if not more stunning, and the art style is much more to my liking than the more colorful and cartoon like DOS.

I would have been elated to simply get more modules/adventures from the latest IE version, this new stuff is way beyond what is needed to please me.

 

[holla_cabezas_de_mierda]

Why the fuck is isometric important? I couldn't care less about the fucking camera angle as long as it's effective.

its not that it needs to be a specifically isometric camera view IMO, but that such a view seems to lead to game and art design choices that many codexers favor-- such as tactical party based combat and enhanced hand painted graphical details.

For my tastes I think games like icewind dale, POE etc, have more beautiful and engaging art design than any first person 3D game I have ever seen. Not to mention it means the combat can be more detailed and tactical as I mentioned above.

 

[Korron]

though am unaware if it's age, way my life developed, or my (looong) list of complexes taking the better of me..
I falted previous games, watching this now however made me realise;
This Iso(tm) view of 5,4 or 6 meatbags that i gotta drag through everything, watch them fight, and scratch my balls while they do everything and i am Peeping-Tomming is way, way past me.

many thanks to Josh and team however, and i mean it. Pledge money well spent far as i am concerned.

a) it set a trend. For quality over quantity. Unlike most of you fuckers, i support quality even in types of RPGs i do -not- like. Shocking innit
b) that nostalgia induced smile on my face watching this vid..if only i could get back to that emotional/intellectual state once again..heh (slap the grin of my face)

This genre needs an alienation effect
/summoning Brecht

You are fucking high on crack. Seriously, this is why we should shut down the internet. Your psychobabble bullshit is sufficient to kill the internet. WTF are you talking about?!?!?!?!?!? I'm totally above this game, but I'm so glad I backed it because it's quality? You are on drugs.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

D&D pseudo-simulation can fuck right off. Balance uber alles. If Josh had his way there wouldn't even be any attributes.

You really are doing more harm to Josh than good. It's irrelevant whether Josh would have had a statless/classless system in his "perfect" RPG, the man is good enough at his job to recognize that the IE crowd (for whom this game is largely meant for) wants attributes (heck there are even 6 of them because IE games) and a good number of classes to choose from.

Also, the primary reason for stats being the way there are is not balance but to support a variety of different viable builds, It enhances the game's replay value.

 

[Shadenuat]

I don't understand why use balance uber stats when they already allow any class use any weapon or armor. So even with d&d stats you could build mages with high str/con/dex. Fighters could just use int for feats.

 

[Shannow]

Char creation: Show us what classes/attributes/races/backrounds do in a gameplay sense. There's enough room on the right side (which otherwise looks very empty). A barbarian? Ok, what actual skills does he get? How does his progression look like? 14 int on a barbarian? Well, by how much are his AoEs increased by those 4 points? 10%, 40%, XX%? Any other benefits? Are they worth getting as opposed to whatever benefits the other attributes would have given? Etc., etc...

Read the fucking manual. All this will probably documented.

UI: Random buttons opening up...Weird. Stamina red over the portraits and HP a green line next to them. Really?

This will change as Josh said it.

Pacing: If you're kicking butt and chewing gum right from the start how will you get any sense of progression?

I will make a wild guess. The tutorial area is easier, to easy new players into the game. And it's the fucking tutorial area. It's not that they haven't said a million times that the game will be hard.

Fanboy faggot.

 

[Suicidal]

How does INT influencing the AOE of physical attacks differ from charisma influencing the sorcerer's spell casting abilities in D&D?

 

[Shannow]

Are you saying D&D had a sensible explanation for all of its rules?

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

I get what the idea was, but the implementation of said idea doesn't make much sense. Make INT modify crit damage or give a bonus to chance to crit. The idea being that due to greater intellect, the barbarian knows where to hit his opponent to cause the most damage. That at least would be plausible vs what, "due to the power of his mind he can make his arms longer and have more endurance"? Seriously, what's the explanation for this?

Intellect lets you unlock your soul power in a specific way.

What "specific way" would that be, hmm? That the official line? Pretty weak. It takes more than "because magic" to make a proper explanation.

How does INT influencing the AOE of physical attacks differ from charisma influencing the sorcerer's spell casting abilities in D&D?

The 3E PHB says on p51:
Sorcerers create magic the way a poet creates poems, with inborn talent honed by practice. They have no books, no mentors, no theories -- just raw power that they direct at will.

At least it's a non-physical (partly as I think CHA governs attractiveness too?) attribute affecting a non-physical ability. A meta-physical ability at that, so you can pretty much write whatever rules you want on that as no such abilities exist in the real world. That's why I'm not quite as pissed by the strength affecting magic damage, even though it is almost as retarded.

INT affecting the barbarian's AoE and ability duration stretches believability because analogous abilities exist in the real world and it doesn't work at all close to that way in the real world. It's dumb.

 

[Azalin]

That's why it's dumb. Is this a ruleset for a SuperMario game or an BG style cRPG? They need to put thought into how believable the ruleset will be or suspension of disbelief will go out the window. Next you'll be telling me that strength affects all damage, including spellcasting damage.

It does.

 

[J_C]

You are a retarded piece of shit who should be banned. You don't know what are you talking about. The opening area of the IE games being hard as fuck was awful design. You can (and you should) make a hard game, but you have to design the opening a little easier, so the new players are eased into the ruleset and the game. Fuck you for turning up from nowhere (who are you anyway) and start bitching.

This game looks amazing and everybody should fellate Josh and Obsidian instead of nitpicking on small things, or just being plain retarded as this guy.

You thought the IE games were hard? Are you mentally disabled, or in other words, the target market for games like NWN2 and Pillars of Eternity?

I dare you to say that IWD Heart of Winter or Icewind Dale 2 was easy, you little piece of shit.

 

[Suicidal]

I get what the idea was, but the implementation of said idea doesn't make much sense. Make INT modify crit damage or give a bonus to chance to crit. The idea being that due to greater intellect, the barbarian knows where to hit his opponent to cause the most damage. That at least would be plausible vs what, "due to the power of his mind he can make his arms longer and have more endurance"? Seriously, what's the explanation for this?

Intellect lets you unlock your soul power in a specific way.

What "specific way" would that be, hmm? That the official line? Pretty weak. It takes more than "because magic" to make a proper explanation.

How does INT influencing the AOE of physical attacks differ from charisma influencing the sorcerer's spell casting abilities in D&D?

The 3E PHB says on p51:
Sorcerers create magic the way a poet creates poems, with inborn talent honed by practice. They have no books, no mentors, no theories -- just raw power that they direct at will.

At least it's a non-physical (partly as I think CHA governs attractiveness too?) attribute affecting a non-physical ability. A meta-physical ability at that, so you can pretty much write whatever rules you want on that as no such abilities exist in the real world. That's why I'm not quite as pissed by the strength affecting magic damage, even though it is almost as retarded.

INT affecting the barbarian's AoE and ability duration stretches believability because analogous abilities exist in the real world and it doesn't work at all close to that way in the real world. It's dumb.

To me both of these things seem equally stupid, so the meaning behind PoE's stats doesn't bother me in the slightest. Actually if Josh manages to truly make it so that every stat is always useful in some way to your class/build, so whenever you level up you have to choose from 6 attributes as opposed to 2-3 then I will applaud him and completely ignore the fact that the stats don't make any sense.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

To me both of these things seem equally stupid, so the meaning behind PoE's stats doesn't bother me in the slightest. Actually if Josh manages to truly make it so that every stat is always useful in some way to your class/build, so whenever you level up you have to choose from 6 attributes as opposed to 2-3 then I will applaud him and completely ignore the fact that the stats don't make any sense.

Oh, I didn't realize that you agreed that it was stupid and didn't make any sense. No need to argue then...

 

[Infinitron]

So, you want a game that's like the D&D cRPG Baldur's Gate, huh? Well, ok!
Let's see, remove the D&D system and lore, come up with a new stat system that doesn't even try to be like D&D and there you go: a game just like the D&D cRPG Baldur's Gate...except without anything resembling the D&D...or Baldur's Gate.

Obsidian decided that realistic/simulationist attributes weren't a crucial element of replicating the Infinity Engine experience for most players. If this is a deal-breaker for you, you might be able to get a refund.

 

[J_C]

I get what the idea was, but the implementation of said idea doesn't make much sense. Make INT modify crit damage or give a bonus to chance to crit. The idea being that due to greater intellect, the barbarian knows where to hit his opponent to cause the most damage. That at least would be plausible vs what, "due to the power of his mind he can make his arms longer and have more endurance"? Seriously, what's the explanation for this?

Intellect lets you unlock your soul power in a specific way.

What "specific way" would that be, hmm? That the official line? Pretty weak. It takes more than "because magic" to make a proper explanation.

How does INT influencing the AOE of physical attacks differ from charisma influencing the sorcerer's spell casting abilities in D&D?

The 3E PHB says on p51:
Sorcerers create magic the way a poet creates poems, with inborn talent honed by practice. They have no books, no mentors, no theories -- just raw power that they direct at will.

At least it's a non-physical (partly as I think CHA governs attractiveness too?) attribute affecting a non-physical ability. A meta-physical ability at that, so you can pretty much write whatever rules you want on that as no such abilities exist in the real world. That's why I'm not quite as pissed by the strength affecting magic damage, even though it is almost as retarded.

INT affecting the barbarian's AoE and ability duration stretches believability because analogous abilities exist in the real world and it doesn't work at all close to that way in the real world. It's dumb.

To me both of these things seem equally stupid, so the meaning behind PoE's stats doesn't bother me in the slightest. Actually if Josh manages to truly make it so that every stat is always useful in some way to your class/build, so whenever you level up you have to choose from 6 attributes as opposed to 2-3 then I will applaud him and completely ignore the fact that the stats don't make any sense.

INT affecting combat might not be far fetched if you think of it this way: there are different types of intelligence. A barbarian might not solve difficult mathematical equations, but he has the intelligence to asses the combat situation, and fight more effectively, thus making his AoE bigger for example. Just to draw a real life example. Some of the greatest soccer players can barely speak 2 coherent lines when doing an interview, but on the pitch, during an attack, they just take a glance at the field, and see the opportunites. They know where to pass, they know how to make an attack combination.

 

[Shadenuat]

They have high Perception

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Obsidian decided that realistic/simulationist attributes attributes that make sense weren't a crucial element of replicating the Infinity Engine experience for most players. If this is a deal-breaker for you, you might be able to get a refund.

fixed, but I get what you're saying.

*sigh* It's not a deal-breaker. It just pisses me off that they're going so close to the formula I enjoyed years ago, but are mucking it up with such ridiculous design philosophies that seem to be aimed at making it more forgiving for newbies (I'm getting that from the references to him talking about not "picking the wrong stats" at char creation and "people who may be new" etc). It's the very definition of and from a kickstarter game at that.

There are still a lot of positives to the game though and I hope it will turn out great.

INT affecting combat might not be far fetched if you think of it this way: there are different types of intelligence. A barbarian might not solve difficult mathematical equations, but he has the intelligence to asses the combat situation, and fight more effectively, thus making his AoE bigger for example. Just to draw a real life example. Some of the greatest soccer players can barely speak 2 coherent lines when doing an interview, but on the pitch, during an attack, they just take a glance at the field, and see the opportunites. They know where to pass, they know how to make an attack combination.

The more hoops you have to go through to justify it, the worse the idea is.

Anyway, I think we're going in circles here, so I'll just bow out rather than spam the thread.

 

[Infinitron]

(I'm getting that from the references to him talking about not "picking the wrong stats" at char creation and "people who may be new" etc). It's the very definition of and from a kickstarter game at that.

But it's not just that: http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/04/18/p...rld-building-magic-psychic-warriors-and-more/

Josh Sawyer: I just try to avoid doing things that I don’t personally like. For example, the class balance stuff was done because I’ve made a bunch of these games, and I’ve been playing D&D for most of my life, and I keep seeing very strong trends towards behaviour that I don’t think makes players happier. It doesn’t give them as much choice as the systems claim to give them, and I think we can do a better job. If someone wants to make a brilliant, weakling fighter, that is a build that is viable in our game, and it’s rewarded within the conversations and the fiction of the world. That’s not something that’s really true of playing Dungeons & Dragons.

If you want to make a muscle wizard, who is mighty and powerful and a stupid idiot, you can do that. Mechanically what happens is that you’ll do a lot of damage, but their durations and areas of effects will be very small. Then in conversation they’re total idiots. [laughs] You can bully people and you can pick them up off the ground and slap them around. It’s not like I’m setting out to subvert stuff. I play tabletop games with a lot of people who have really great ideas for characters, but mechanically they’re shitty characters. So when I try to fix that stuff, it’s not because I think it’s inherently better, but that it gives more opportunities to players to create more diverse characters, and feel rewarded for doing so.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

 

[Shadenuat]

Halfling barbarians and dumb wizards - pinnacle of roleplaying.

 

[Volourn]

"How does INT influencing the AOE of physical attacks differ from charisma influencing the sorcerer's spell casting abilities in D&D? "

D&D charisma (at least outside of basic D&D) is not just about appearance/looks. It has to with force of personality. It's why fukkin' undead, dragons, and other so called 'ugly' creatures can have good charisma which is why dwarves having minuses to charisma was stupid.