Divinity Divinity: Original Sin 2 - Definitive Edition

[made]

Anyone that has updated their GOG game to the latest version (v3.0.150.760) through GOG Galaxy that could throw together a .zip/.rar for me with EoCApp.exe and SupportTool.exe (from /bin/) and patch4_hotfix.pak (from /data/)? GOG still hasn't updated with a standalone patcher, and I'm not going to install Galaxy just because they're a bunch of lazy gits that thinks that weekends are a reason not to work.

I'm finding the battles pretty hard on tactical mode in the Fort Joy dungeons. Have to resort to cheesing a lot by teleporting single enemies away from the group, setting up labyrinths with objects, and reloading a lot. Does it get easier later on or is that how the entire game plays out? Party is knight/enchanter/wizard/wayfarer. Should I head to the swamp first and return to mop up later? The game said returning to FJ would turn all magisters hostile, I'm worried I might lose out on content by doing that.

You shouldn't have that much difficulty already, so it's hard to tell if it's going to get easier for you. You say you have Teleport, so you should be the right level, even higher level than I was (unless you're just using the gloves).

The only fight you should possibly be having some troubles with should be the dogs (if you fight them at all, but you can make it easier by standing by the door) or Kniles (which can be a bit of a hard fight). Everything else should be easily handled by proper positioning.

What set-up are you using?

from the sound of it, Tactician Mode doesn't sound like fun. it sounds like busywork.

Nah, Tactician isn't actually that hard, and although there's some bloat unless you mod it out (and I strongly suggest everyone does), the main benefit is that the enemies actually make use of some tactics they don't use otherwise, and actually behave a little bit differnetly, which is neat. It is a problem, though, that people that go Tactician can't turn down their difficulty, but by the time you realize that Tactician may be too difficult for you, you've already sunk a ton of hours into the game.

However, compared to the entirety of the game, if you truly can't hack Tactician, I recommend simply starting over. You can always go up, but if you go Tactician, you can never go down. So until someone has learned the ins and out of the system, it's perfectly reasonable to not play Tactician.

Skipped the dog battle with dog with diplomacy lol. Yea Kniles is the fight I currently have trouble with. Then theres one with a prisoner left in the fort and the arena. Cleared everything else. using the gloves. Also what's LW?

 

[Iznaliu]

for maximum SocJus DoublePlusGood

I think the explanation is simpler: people don't want to be told no to their preferred romance.

 

[Luckmann]

for maximum SocJus DoublePlusGood

I think the explanation is simpler: people don't want to be told no to their preferred romance.

5% bitching so that 95% get worse characters that are Schrödinger's Faggots is pretty much maximum SocJus DoublePlusGood.

 

[thesheeep]

Thinking of getting this.
Not gonna read the entire thread so just give me some opinions:

A) Combat better than in OS1?
B) Writing better than in OS1?
C) Not too much cringe?

I am probably getting it since it looks a bit like a more boring and linear Ultima 7 but with tactical combat instead of whatever disaster of a combat they had in U7.

Please tell me it's at least okay, I am on ELEX withdrawal...

A) Depends. Skill trees are more numerous and better, there are synergistic skills requiring two different trees, there is more and more involved surface/cloud mechanics, and there is elevation mechanics. Those are big improvements no matter how you look at them. However, the way actual damage dealing and statuses work is just shit with massive HP bloat, short status durations and idiotic armor system that shields against statuses until ablated. Awfulness of cooldowns is still in too, so you basically have to pile on a single enemy with basic attacks for large part of a battle because using skills would be wasteful - which saps like 75% of fun from excessive elemental mayhem. There are mods that change how stuff works, mind you, and saving throws mod is probably the single most essential mod for this game (basically % armor left after damage calculation = % chance of stopping status, with some modifiers on top of that) making the ablative armor idea work in at least somewhat sane manner.

B) It's no PS:T but it's massively improved and no longer cringeworthy. YMMV regarding indirect dialogue options - basically describing what you say instead of spelling it out - but I consider them a reasonable compromise between standard dialogue and keyword system. Plus it removes the otherwise inevitable moments where you are given exactly spelled out dialogue options that are all moronic, out of character for YOUR PC or otherwise undesirable. Other than that it's much more serious and less inane than D:OS1, but still retains some Larian's traditional humour - this time actually funny and less overdone (so, yeah, traditional Larian's humour, as opposed to DOS1 one). So far it seems like it might be a well constructed story specifically for coop purpose as well which would be quite an echievement as well.

C) Seems much better than D:OS1 and actually a good game overall, even if someone missed their prescription clue-by-four when designing combat and level progression. I'm having much fun so far.

Fully agree with this.
I'd say it is just a better game overall, but not everything was an improvement.
Especially the armor changes are pretty bad, but they could be salvaged - most likely only mods will do it, though.

The "chosen one" aspect will bug some people, but I really think the game handles it VERY differently than other games have. The game is really open about it and it is clear that you are not the only one and that there are bigger things at play than chosen-or-not working behind the scenes.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

The combat *system* is, on the whole, worse than the first game, though personally I'm more bothered by the initiative nonsense than the armor. I would however say, that the total combat experience is a bit better - encounter design is quite good, verticality and los/range add a lot of tactical considerations, and the AI is pleasantly capable. At least on Tactician, the combat AI was probably the biggest positive surprise for me, considering how complex all the systemic interactions are, it does a really good job of navigating its way through them. It's also vicious as hell and targets vulnerable characters without mercy, which you rarely see in TB games in general.

It also feels like the game has less filler combat, though I might be misremembering DOS1 here.

 

[Puukko]

I'm finding the battles pretty hard on tactical mode in the Fort Joy dungeons. Have to resort to cheesing a lot by teleporting single enemies away from the group, setting up labyrinths with objects, and reloading a lot. Does it get easier later on or is that how the entire game plays out? Party is knight/enchanter/wizard/wayfarer. Should I head to the swamp first and return to mop up later? The game said returning to FJ would turn all magisters hostile, I'm worried I might lose out on content by doing that.

I had a few battles on tactician in FJ where I did have to reload a good number of times and play around with teleports but as a whole it's been manageable. Some of the fights are easier than on my first playthrough on normal, but that's because I know how they work now and am playing with lone wolf.

 

[AwesomeButton]

The combat system was more compex than its designers could handle balancing, so they decided the matter by cutting mechanics away - initiative, and relying on just one thing to increase difficulty - stat bloat, until it became simple enough for them to ensure an encounter was as "difficult" as they needed it to be at any particular point of the linear path through the campaign areas.

That's what I would write if I was writing a review.

 

[Iznaliu]

5% bitching so that 95% get worse characters that are Schrödinger's Faggots is pretty much maximum SocJus DoublePlusGood.

There are issues with this line of reasoning:

• Even though lesbians/gay people may only be a small portion of the population, many straight people may be interested in playing out lesbian/gay romances; in fact, many men find the idea of lesbian romance/sex appealing; similarly with many women and gay romance/sex
• Most people don't care about the options that they don't pick and don't necessarily see them as part of the character's characterisation. Even if they do, they wouldn't see gay/lesbian romance options as a big deal, just like they don't find the ability to play as a reptilian lizard a big deal.

 

[AwesomeButton]

Every party member is "bisexual" in DA2, but yeah, that's part of their character.

No, staying "open" to diametrally opposed player decisions and going along with them is commendable when it comes to gameplay, but characters can't have a personality that's "by client preference", or they will have no character at all.

I would extend this to their skills and attributes as well. Their profession is part of their character, there is no real excuse to make them "be what the player wants them to be".

It's just another area where the devlopers cut corners for their convenience, not to give the players more meaningful choices.

 

[DraQ]

5% bitching so that 95% get worse characters that are Schrödinger's Faggots is pretty much maximum SocJus DoublePlusGood.

There are issues with this line of reasoning:

• Even though lesbians/gay people may only be a small portion of the population, many straight people may be interested in playing out lesbian/gay romances; in fact, many men find the idea of lesbian romance/sex appealing; similarly with many women and gay romance/sex
• Most people don't care about the options that they don't pick and don't necessarily see them as part of the character's characterisation. Even if they do, they wouldn't see gay/lesbian romance options as a big deal, just like they don't find the ability to play as a reptilian lizard a big deal.

Well, at the very least Schrödingays are much better (and, by definition, much less intrusive) than single-trait characters built solely around their sexual orientation. You can, of course, have good characters that are gay, lesbian or whatever, but good characters are complex and writing them is a complex matter, so if when summarizing a character you have to mention their orientation, this usually doesn't bode well for their quality as it means they don't have enough more relevant traits and intricacies to fill even a brief summary.

The combat system was more compex than its designers could handle balancing, so they decided the matter by cutting mechanics away - initiative, and relying on just one thing to increase difficulty - stat bloat, until it became simple enough for them to ensure an encounter was as "difficult" as they needed it to be at any particular point of the linear path through the campaign areas.

That's what I would write if I was writing a review.

I think the main problem was that someone forgot that bloat is also a wrong kind of hard, just like dying randomly.
The other problem, that was already present in DOS1, is lack of understanding of why consistent abstraction levels are important and thus making them deeply incongruent.

Fix those and you would block the very downhill slopes combat systems in this game slid down.

The upside is that because only the raw, number dealing part of the mechanics is broken, fixing it should be perfectly doable with even relatively modest modding effort.

 

[Jasede]

Schroedingays and forced gay/bi characters are both horrible writing.

 

[DraQ]

Schroedingays and forced gay/bi characters are both horrible writing.

They are, but Schrödingays' badness is at least disjoint from the rest of their character writing (as they are basically undetermined orientation characters with possibility of both options bolted on top).

It's like game having a badly designed dungeon you don't really have to visit VS all of it being badly designed.

 

[Jasede]

Last question before I buy, can I fuck the Red Prince?

Very important for true diversity and RPG experience.

 

[ilitarist]

Yes you can.

And this whining about everyone is bi is like an oldman using spying glass to discover every neighbour is privately amoral. Or Fallout New Vegas playing taking a secret bachelor perk and discovering there are too much gay people around him. That's the best implementation of that thing in a heroic adventure game. None of companions are defined by their sexuality, apart from Red Prince no one has any love story included. But if you want to - OK, have a romance with whoever. The game is whimsical enough for it to be OK. This approach wouldn't work in something more serious and dramatic like, say, Dragon Age game where characters are supposed to be more realistic. There cop-outs like that look cheap compared to the rest of the plot. In DOS2 you can have a roleplay sex with a seductive lizard. They are not making any point or push any agenda by allowing you to bone a snobbish skeleton, they're doing the same thing as when they allow you to make head puns to a head on a stick 10 times in a row.

 

[Belegarsson]

Last question before I buy, can I fuck the Red Prince?

Very important for true diversity and RPG experience.

Yes and you can even develop sexual tension through his personal quest

 

[Jasede]

To be honest I'm a lot more willing to overlook this kind of thing in a goofy game with light-hearted humor such as this one as opposed to when both the game and the designers take this too seriously and it becomes pure pandering cringe.

 

[Luckmann]

To be honest I'm a lot more willing to overlook this kind of thing in a goofy game with light-hearted humor such as this one as opposed to when both the game and the designers take this too seriously and it becomes pure pandering cringe.

Take Sebille as a companion.

I dare you.

 

[DraQ]

Yes you can.

And this whining about everyone is bi is like an oldman using spying glass to discover every neighbour is privately amoral. Or Fallout New Vegas playing taking a secret bachelor perk and discovering there are too much gay people around him. That's the best implementation of that thing in a heroic adventure game. None of companions are defined by their sexuality, apart from Red Prince no one has any love story included. But if you want to - OK, have a romance with whoever. The game is whimsical enough for it to be OK. This approach wouldn't work in something more serious and dramatic like, say, Dragon Age game where characters are supposed to be more realistic. There cop-outs like that look cheap compared to the rest of the plot. In DOS2 you can have a roleplay sex with a seductive lizard. They are not making any point or push any agenda by allowing you to bone a snobbish skeleton, they're doing the same thing as when they allow you to make head puns to a head on a stick 10 times in a row.

Of course the game is much more sirius than DOS1, but I am unable to tell how sirius, because sheer goofiness overdose in DOS1 might have permanently discallibrated my inner siriusmeter (although there were good parts among mostly forced DOS1 funnies - for example earth demon statue "see the future" gag was genuinely funny and had me laugh out loud) - sort of like after watching the SW prequels I was mortified by how much the old trilogy seems like hard SF in comparison.

In any case, DOS2 is somewhere between mostly serious and Divinity 2.

 

[DraQ]

To be honest I'm a lot more willing to overlook this kind of thing in a goofy game with light-hearted humor such as this one as opposed to when both the game and the designers take this too seriously and it becomes pure pandering cringe.

Take Sebille as a companion.

I dare you.

ackbar.gif

 

[ilitarist]

Of course the game is much more sirius than DOS1, but I am unable to tell how sirius, because sheer goofiness overdose in DOS1 might have permanently discallibrated my inner siriusmeter (although there were good parts among mostly forced DOS1 funnies - for example earth demon statue "see the future" gag was genuinely funny and had me laugh out loud) - sort of like after watching the SW prequels I was mortified by how much the old trilogy seems like hard SF in comparison

I'd say it's more of a leveled seriousness. DOS1 has two modes - complete goofiness and seriousness. You had animated statue playing "I see with my little eye" for eternity and exploding skeletons hiding in a chest on one side. On the other you had a plot about cosmogonic world-defying sin, love triangle with powerful mages, the whole saving the world thing... And very little in between. DOS2 has outright silliness and horrific serious things but there's a lot in between. More leveled, more like Terry Pratchett novel, less like Monthy Python mixed with Tolkien. I remember mid-game quest with a fisher who lost his wedding ring and is afraid his wife will kill him. You get the ring after fighting some monsters and can give it to him. Later you learn he dumps his nagging wife because he's bored of her. That's a lighthearted slightly funny quest. Than you have those heads on spikes telling you to open the trap chest, one of them wishes you well but if you are impolite it hates you and advises to still open the chest. That's outright farcical. But then you have a story of a little bear or Magister's dog and those are short sad stories. You have straight heroic stuff with ice dragon and evil sorceress. When you start a quest you don't know if it ends with a joke or with a tragedy and that's fine in my book. DOS1 was much more predictable.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

JRPGs usually open up by the end, probably cause half of the game is a glorified tutorial. E.g. Final Fantasy X gives you an airship right before sending you to the final dungeon and you can finally explore optional dungeons, fight bosses etc. You also don't have any cutscenes and voice acting and that's an improvement.

Yeah, but that also tends to outright kill the pacing and de-incentivize completion. Also, there are pleny to JRPGs where the final area and/or boss are an outright chore.

Thinking of getting this.
Not gonna read the entire thread so just give me some opinions:

A) Combat better than in OS1?
B) Writing better than in OS1?
C) Not too much cringe?

I am probably getting it since it looks a bit like a more boring and linear Ultima 7 but with tactical combat instead of whatever disaster of a combat they had in U7.

Please tell me it's at least okay, I am on ELEX withdrawal...

The only way to know is to get it and try for yourself.

I thought that it was, overall and on average, not worse than DOS1, and certainly worth the $$$ at full price.

 

[Darth Roxor]

in a goofy game with light-hearted humor such as this one.

 

[Jasede]

I dunno, I am just guessing, I haven't played it yet.
D:OS had stupid goofy Belgian humor.

It's reasonable to assume this one will be goofy as well.

Seems like reception is negative. However, you can fuck a lizard, so I will get it at a discount. Sigh. The things I do for tail.

 

[Darth Roxor]

It's reasonable to assume this one will be goofy as well.

 

[Jasede]

What!

By the way, I brought pizza guy to the people after I shamelessly stole him from Something Awful.