The definitive, last Pillars of Eternity rating thread!

[ilitarist]

I don't know what you guys are talking about about PoE vs BG2 difficulty. I will explain why I find BG2's curve and difficulty much superior, and why BG2's Hard difficulty (not even Hardest) is much superior to PoE's PotD. But here are the rules:

See, that's the problem. I don't need house rules to make chess or scrabble or StacrCraft a balanced experience. Besides, there's so much of that cheese I'd never be sure if I had a struck of genius or stumbled upon a cheese. When my Wild Mage accidentally kills a dragon - is it cheese?

PoE made pre-planning quite interesting to me. Granted, it still often happened after a reload (don't like that in games, I have to be able to Iron Man everything in theory - after all, my in-world character did) but I've eaten precious finite food and thought what to do. I used everything I could and the vicoty felt satisfying in itself; it's completely different from "invent your own fun" approach where I have to first see an easy way to win, consciously decide I have to do it less optimal way and then I'd have some fun. And I don't see how can you beat some of those fights by simply adapting, Arda dragon certainly requires you to reflect on what you doing, same with many other fights - more so in locations added later, granted.

Obvious question: why don't you apply same standards to PoE and don't make it immensely hard game by applying some sort of house rules?

 

[ilitarist]

This reminds me of a rare fight I still remember from my first walkthrough of Knights of the Old Republic.

I think I was a consular Jedi, i.e. fighter-mage hybrid. Probably a bad choice: he got more skillpoints and that was useless in combat. The final boss was a tank running around force draining people. I could do the same but that would be EVIL. So I had my own force drain: medpacks. 99 of them. If you use them from inventory they don't take time but you can only use one per round. So it was a little hectic but I did it. It was a memorable fight obviously. Now I'm thinking if it was cheese. Because even then I felt like cheating. Still I'd rather say that design was wrong. And this was the first time the game forced me to do it so the difficulty curve wasn't all that good too.

 

[FreeKaner]

I don't know what you guys are talking about about PoE vs BG2 difficulty. I will explain why I find BG2's curve and difficulty much superior, and why BG2's Hard difficulty (not even Hardest) is much superior to PoE's PotD. But here are the rules:
- No ToB. I emphasize Shadows of Amn for a reason. ToB removed the level cap and destroyed SoA's beautiful balance. I haven't played ToB for ages, don't even remember much about it. SoA is where it's at.
- BG2 SoA has some extremely beautiful and difficult fights, that can also be cheesed through various cheesemaker tools (protection from undead, shooting from out of sight, summoning). Personally I think this a good compromise. Serious players can play the fights seriously, weaker players can cheese them and be done with them. This way, Bioware did not feel obliged to make the fights easier, like Josh obviously does.

Now, take any lich or dragon fight in SoA, on Hard (not Hardest). I actually have to pre-play the fight in my head to get ready for all the steps I have to follow to implement my winning strategy. These fights, without cheese, have a very complex solution. This is what I call beautiful, and have never seen it repeated in a full RPG game other than some DAO (Bioware again) boss fights.

Now take any PoE fight on PotD. I 'll be talking about the base game again. PoE is designed in such a way that you don't have to pre-plan anything, other than making sure you have a priest with you (with the possible exception of 2 fights IIRC, the adra dragon and the final fight, which are still not as satisfying as SoA's fights). Anything else you can beat just by -easily- adapting to what is going on on screen.

The difference in quality is immense. The whole strategic layer has been removed from PoE. IWD was like PoE too, which is why I don't like it, and have never actually finished it.

I agree with BG2 having more strategic depth overall but when you talk about DAO positively like this it just gets silly. That "Jarvia" fight can be done in 3 spells, sleep, blood magic paralysis or whatever that was called and then you cast your damaging aoe spells, in fact you can do this in any fight that isn't close quarters that would risk your own party, there is no depth to it. Another fact again is that DAO has a spell called mana burst or something of that sort that oneshots any creature with mana in an aoe. It oneshots even one of the supposedly "hardest" fights in the game against a mage in a building by dealing something absurd like 3k damage.

BG2 has nice strategic depth that you are required to take some steps to ensure you can survive a fight beforehand, which is good but to me it gets invalidated completely by how easy it's to cheese the game.

 

[ilitarist]

I have already commented on Bioware's strategy of letting people cheese, which I find acceptable. Josh made it his mission to remove all cheese, and then dumbed everything down so that average gamers wouldn't despair. I much prefer Bioware's style.

Another point: it's not acceptable to see cheese as something optional. I have a set of challenges and set of tools, if some tools make the challenges ridiculously easy it's just a bad design.

Compare it to adventure game. Many of more recent ones have in-game hint system. It's not a tool you use, it's a meta thing - probably something from menu. At the same time you can get in-game hints by, say, talking to people. BG2 and other games already have similar stuff. If you want to just complete the game or don't like a particular combat - just go into menu and switch the difficulty to easy mode. Perhaps it could be made more elegantly - can't remember specifics but some games make encounters easier if you repeatedly die on them or silently lower overall difficulty. What they did instead is similar to adventure games having a magical item that could solve most puzzles by applying it instead of the item you need. PoE allows you to switch to story mode if you're having troubles and if you chose Path of the Damned you're clearly stating you're here to master the combat so you are not allowed to lower difficulty. Best approach I ever saw.

 

[Trashos]

See, that's the problem. I don't need house rules to make chess or scrabble or StacrCraft a balanced experience.

Another point: it's not acceptable to see cheese as something optional. I have a set of challenges and set of tools, if some tools make the challenges ridiculously easy it's just a bad design.

I have already talked about the alternatives that have been presented to me by the industry. Either cheese (BG2) or not cheese but dumbing down (PoE). I prefer the former, because there are actually excellent fights under the cheese.

Besides, there's so much of that cheese I'd never be sure if I had a struck of genius or stumbled upon a cheese. When my Wild Mage accidentally kills a dragon - is it cheese?

That's just fun. It is not a dependable strategy, so it is not a serious solution to the problem.

it's completely different from "invent your own fun" approach where I have to first see an easy way to win, consciously decide I have to do it less optimal way and then I'd have some fun. And I don't see how can you beat some of those fights by simply adapting, Arda dragon certainly requires you to reflect on what you doing, same with many other fights - more so in locations added later, granted.

The point is that these "house rules" have obviously been considered and catered to by the designers as a legitimate style of play. So it's not "invent your own fun", it's "play it seriously or not; up to you".

Obvious question: why don't you apply same standards to PoE and don't make it immensely hard game by applying some sort of house rules?

I did try various things. No food, no Eder, no cipher. But I didn't discover any additional beauty.

I did mention the adra dragon as a highlight of the game. I don't like the fight much, I won't easily like any RTwP fight that involves a big number of enemies, but at least it was a highpoint for PoE.

 

[FreeKaner]

I played PoE without a priest, the game was sufficiently more challenging.

 

[ilitarist]

The point is that these "house rules" have obviously been considered and catered to by the designers as a legitimate style of play. So it's not "invent your own fun", it's "play it seriously or not; up to you".

No there were not. Because nowhere in the game it says so. I suspect nowhere in the manual you are made aware that some of the spells are deliberately secretly made more useful so that you can win the game in an unfair way. You can switch the game to highest difficulty and those spells and tactics do not disappear, you can still throw a death cloud and close the door evading an interesting fight by cheese also known as using your head.

I don't get this at all. I can't find any other explanation other than the fact that BG2 atmosphere is enchanting enough so you can try to redeem its gameplay while PoE throws so much boring text on you that it's easy to feel actual combat is contaminated by that boringness too.

 

[Sizzle]

That fight is so memorable I had to Google it to even remember it :D

PoE all but requires a Priest in the party, and BG all but requires a Mage.

No it does not. You can fight enemy mages with potions and scrolls. Also Mage's favorite antiweapon spell - Protection from Magical Weapons - is easily beaten by carrying non magical version of weapon you are using.

Hence the all but part.

Trashos, did you play PoE with TWM? There are some good fights in there. Also, bounties.

 

[Trashos]

when you talk about DAO positively like this it just gets silly. That "Jarvia" fight can be done in 3 spells, sleep, blood magic paralysis or whatever that was called and then you cast your damaging aoe spells, in fact you can do this in any fight that isn't close quarters that would risk your own party, there is no depth to it.

It has been 3+ years since I last played DAO, but I certainly do not remember such a simple solution. Maybe I never had the spells (I doubt it), maybe they hit my own party too, maybe the enemies moved out of the aoe or maybe the enemy archers interrupted my mages and I did not find it to be a dependable solution. Or maybe this specific solution never dawned on me. I don't remember. Is that a dependable solution on highest difficulty?

I am happy with DAO boss fights in general. The issue for me was all the filler combat in between.

 

[FreeKaner]

when you talk about DAO positively like this it just gets silly. That "Jarvia" fight can be done in 3 spells, sleep, blood magic paralysis or whatever that was called and then you cast your damaging aoe spells, in fact you can do this in any fight that isn't close quarters that would risk your own party, there is no depth to it.

It has been 3+ years since I last played DAO, but I certainly do not remember such a simple solution. Maybe I never had the spells (I doubt it), maybe they hit my own party too, maybe the enemies moved out of the aoe or maybe the enemy archers interrupted my mages and I did not find it to be a dependable solution. Or maybe this specific solution never dawned on me. I don't remember. Is that a dependable solution on highest difficulty?

I am happy with DAO boss fights in general. The issue for me was all the filler combat in between.

As I said also there is a spell now that I looked up, called mana clash, that you can get at level 5 that oneshots every caster in the game. Sleep to set up then bloodmagic paralyses for a long time then you can just cast AoE dot spells like inferno or whatever else you have and you'll just watch them melt in basically any fight. This works in higher difficulties as well as that just scales up enemy HP and potentially there is no limit to damage you can deal. I remember another person mentioning they had difficulty with that fight but I think it was that they were also melee oriented. DAO is a critically messy game that only has few savings points, I didn't hate it while playing it but it was just "ok". Most interesting part was spell combinations and those were interesting.

The dragon fight in the game was ok (although amounted to basically facetanking with the tank and just healing it while dealing damage with rest of your party á la a MMO), other than that I think the only fight that was impressive was that broodmother boss fight, everything else is just meh. I would say in PoE all dragon fights and especially alpine dragon, concelhaut fight (and that whole area), most of the bounties are basically better than anything DAO has to offer.

 

[Trashos]

No there were not. Because nowhere in the game it says so. I suspect nowhere in the manual you are made aware that some of the spells are deliberately secretly made more useful so that you can win the game in an unfair way. You can switch the game to highest difficulty and those spells and tactics do not disappear, you can still throw a death cloud and close the door evading an interesting fight by cheese also known as using your head.

Most games do that, it is not a big secret or sth. Even indie games often do it. You design a good fight (if you have talent), and then give the player the option to cheese out so that he doesn't complain "can't beat the fight, worst game evah".

I don't get this at all. I can't find any other explanation other than the fact that BG2 atmosphere is enchanting enough so you can try to redeem its gameplay while PoE throws so much boring text on you that it's easy to feel actual combat is contaminated by that boringness too.

I like PoE's atmosphere, actually. Even wrote an essay on its characters. I just walked by the painfully boring backer material.

Trashos, did you play PoE with TWM? There are some good fights in there. Also, bounties.

No, unfortunately I haven't. I have heard that there were improvements, so I am waiting to see them in PoE2.

 

[ilitarist]

Most games do that, it is not a big secret or sth. Even indie games often do it. You design a good fight (if you have talent), and then give the player the option to cheese out so that he doesn't complain "can't beat the fight, worst game evah".

Where did you get that idea?

The only game where that can be true is Dark Souls series, I think. You can almost always summon a helping hand. Yet it means using external help and it's a clear meta-advantage.

Another thing is most RPGs allow you to grind to become over-leveled. In this case you spend your time to make game easier and it feels earned. Still don't see it as cheese. Most of the time devs only create easier or more difficult starting classes in addition to difficulty choice. Designing the system that is balanced enough and adding a cheese to it sounds like a horrible idea - it's probably more work than just creating a properly balanced interesting system and most people would just think they're using the system in a right way by using best stuff. I'm convinced you're imagining this conspiracy.

 

[Trashos]

BG2 obviously did it, Arcanum did it, FO2 did it, New Vegas did it, Civ4 did it, I have heard that Knights of the Chalice also did it etc-etc. After the first couple of playthroughs just avoid the obviously overpowered options.

 

[ilitarist]

This is wishful thinking. Or developer's cop out - saying that they screwed up balance intentionally.

In any case it creates a subpar product. I refuse to believe anyone would do that intentionally.

 

[ArchAngel]

That fight is so memorable I had to Google it to even remember it :D

PoE all but requires a Priest in the party, and BG all but requires a Mage.

No it does not. You can fight enemy mages with potions and scrolls. Also Mage's favorite antiweapon spell - Protection from Magical Weapons - is easily beaten by carrying non magical version of weapon you are using.

Hence the all but part.

Trashos, did you play PoE with TWM? There are some good fights in there. Also, bounties.

Buhuhuhu, evil BG magic touched my fighter where it should not so I decided to switch games.. this is how your pointless argument looks to me.

So problem of BG is that it has high level magic and everyone needs to find way to beat it? You rather play a mindless stupid system like PoE where you solve all problems with sword?
Fuck that. You Poetards are even more retarded than I thought.

 

[ArchAngel]

If we break down last 14 pages into simple words this comes down to if one prefers managing counters or managing percentages.
People like me that prefer BG and old Xcom prefer to manage counters and invent smart plays (what others call cheesing), other group that prefers PoE and nuXcom like to manage percentages.
I consider this second system decline and stupid way to play or design games around.

EDIT: What BG allows is that you can take a solo Rogue and set traps around the map and lead enemies into them to get xp and level up.
PoE with solo rogue still just manages percentages.

 

[ilitarist]

And by inventing smart play you mean playing the game for an hour (or reading guide) until you stumble upon a universal solution and then using it for 20 hours more without any brain activity.

This old system is a soliraire game you solve once and have to play again and again after you see a reliable algorithm of solving. New system is a set of multitude of chess puzzles, you can never be sure how to solve the next one before you approach it.

 

[ArchAngel]

And by inventing smart play you mean playing the game for an hour (or reading guide) until you stumble upon a universal solution and then using it for 20 hours more without any brain activity.

This old system is a soliraire game you solve once and have to play again and again after you see a reliable algorithm of solving. New system is a set of multitude of chess puzzles, you can never be sure how to solve the next one before you approach it.

Why would you read a solution?
And no, same way to play didn't work for every fight, not in BG games. But it did work for my Hard PoE playthrough.
(EDIT) I would use same encounter spells and skills in 99% of combats. Makes no difference to all those stupid little fights BG has where you just left click and need no permanent resource consumption except they ended faster, needed less management and were less irritating because of that.

 

[ilitarist]

Why would you read a solution?
And no, same way to play didn't work for every fight, not in BG games. But it did work for my Hard PoE playthrough.

The point is *there is* a solution. Once I've played the game it is solved, I have to invent some limitations for it to not feel like a chore. I have to use objectively worse tools.

In a well thought out game my toolset - even if it's not balanced - is all useful. BG is not about thinking, it's about learning. PoE is not like that and I find it strange you had no problems with playing it at the same time as finding any joy in repetitive fights of BG2.

 

[ArchAngel]

Why would you read a solution?
And no, same way to play didn't work for every fight, not in BG games. But it did work for my Hard PoE playthrough.

The point is *there is* a solution. Once I've played the game it is solved, I have to invent some limitations for it to not feel like a chore. I have to use objectively worse tools.

In a well thought out game my toolset - even if it's not balanced - is all useful. BG is not about thinking, it's about learning. PoE is not like that and I find it strange you had no problems with playing it at the same time as finding any joy in repetitive fights of BG2.

There is a best solution for enemies most dangerous attacks, but it is not the solution (also their other attacks can fuck you over often with bad random numbers just like in PoE). Each enemy can be approached and beaten in different way. Finding a way that works for you is most of the fun. In PoE you just find way to manage so your hit chances and defense percentages that are in your favour and you load the save as many times as needed to get the winning outcome (and on Hard even no loading was needed). That is boring. And unlike nuXcom there isn't really a permanent punishment mechanic (unless you play ironman and everyone dies).

As for second or third or tenth playthrough in BG, why not have different challenges for yourself?
I had lots of fun playing all mage party, or all fighter or solo X class. Or making LotR group with not all maxed out stats and such.

 

[ArchAngel]

Also I want to add since you are hang up on BG system ruining subsequent playthroughs, PoE is not much different. Each next playthrough is just same managing of percentages, but with ability of different name. And still with no permanent punishment mechanic that nuXcoms have. And on always same playfield vs same enemies. You should play nuXcom instead if you prefer that kind of gameplay, you will get a much superior game than PoE.

 

[FreeKaner]

You do understand a dice roll is a percentage right, or do you need to be told this?

 

[ilitarist]

Each next playthrough is just same managing of percentages, but with ability of different name

You can describe chess like that.

Maybe my third playthrough of PoE would be boring. The problem is that last 66% of my BG2 playthrough were boring. I remember joy I felt when I came to that castle with trolls unprepared and discovered I can throw poison cloud and close doors and then wait for enemies to die inside. Or how the power of precasting makes everything trivial. But then I needed nothing else apart from tricks I got in the beginning.

Recent Tyranny was like that too. At least you got new glyphs you used to enchant your spells to do more damage. But apart from that game had thrown new skills and mechanics like crafting at me - and it was very very sad to me that I don't need them. PoE and, say, modern XCOM are much better about it - on higher difficulty there's nothing in the game you don't use or don't understand. It's not just about percentages or hard counters. BG2, like Tyranny, can be solved early. PoE is never solved, my next party composition might be little better or a little worse than previous one but it will have enough tools to invent a unique solution for every hard time. In BG2 I could, I suppose, force myself to never use mages. It would even sort of work because you can have personal aversion to specific characters. That - using a specific limited party - would probably add a proper challenge but again, it's about playing suboptimally.

You do understand a dice roll is a percentage right, or do you need to be told this?

The game doesn't tell you about it directly so you don't have to use this knowledge. Taking dice rolls into account is cheesing and makes the game too easy.

 

[ArchAngel]

You do understand a dice roll is a percentage right, or do you need to be told this?

Yes I do know, I even mention that in my post. Learn to read. And they are for people that don't care to find the solution and would rather load the game X times until they beat the encounter through random rolls.
But PoE only has that, you increase your percentage to succeed attacks and spells and load the game if you failed.

EDIT: The trick Ilitarist mentions in above post about casting Cloud spell and closing door is a smart play. It also only works in some battles.

 

[Jimmious]

You do understand a dice roll is a percentage right, or do you need to be told this?

Yes I do know, I even mention that in my post. Learn to read. And they are for people that don't care to find the solution and would rather load the game X times until they beat the encounter through random rolls.

In BG 1-2 bad rolls can mean death though. Unless you replay the battle 10 times of course and have the exact necessary buffs ready. Is this what you mean by "finding the solution" ?