Just speaking for myself, I expected something in the realm of what Chris Avellone and Obsidian have shown themselves capable of before and was sorely disappointed (and I'm not even touching on gameplay). I'm considering purchasing the WM combo and giving the gameplay, at least, another chance since they've been diligently working on the game in the meantime.
I think that PoE does have some really good parts and interesting writing. So I personally don't call it dissapointing, I liked it. The execution is just uneven (good parts alternating with bland parts, brilliant parts alternating with cringeworthy parts). PST was more reliable with maintaining high standards, I agree with that.
I don't know... I think if you expect literary quality from a videogame's writing, you only have yourself to blame when you end up disappointed. Those guys are doing their best, and that is their best. Manage your expectations.
I am trying to manage my expectations and I do understand that a videogame is a different medium with different needs and goals. There is a lot I enjoy in PoE (eg, the Thaos-Lady Webb meeting was nicely executed, the Hunter Brother quest was interesting to go through etc).
But they didn't always do their best. Eric F admitted himself in his message that he dumped down the Maerwald part to cater for lower attention span players. That part of the story had great potential, but it ended up garbage. They can't expect me to appreciate that.
Dat stewpid stewpid fasbok crowd amirite ?
Well, I don't hate them or anything, but they (their majority) belong to a different consumer group than I do.
Anybody can understand anything given they're interested in it. If somebody doesn't get into Kafka, chances are he's not into philosophy, which is the case of a great deal of people. I frankly have yet to meet somebody who's into philosophy and doesn't understand Kafka, Nietzsche or Rousseau. The very point of philosophy is to clarify concepts/ideas. A good philosopher is someone that does it well. You're denying the existence of the XIXth century Europe right there.
NB : yeah as i felt, i confused kafka and kant again. Owell, i'll leave the message as it is anyway.
Now maybe you're confused with another fact, the fact we leave in a fucking desperately debilitating and mentally creepling world. People would rather watch Top Gear than read anything and some even think reading is hard. Doesn't mean they couldn't if they wanted to.
I don't agree. It is very hard to test seriously (and anyone who tries is going to have his career prematurely finished as well), but I can draw some parallels:
Engineering/Math can be complicated and too challenging for some. Why can't literature/philosophy be?
Competitive sports can be too hard for many. Why can't reading be?
The above examples indicate that, while we all can train and improve in something we are interested in, everyone has their own limitations. I won't be Michael Jordan no matter how hard I train or want to.
I haven't attended a philosophy school and it isn't my occupation, it a is hobby for me. But philosophy isn't there just to clarify, it also has to provide new concepts! I see no reason why philosophical concepts can't be too challenging for some (regardless of their interest), as mathematics or sports can be.
I think it is all much simpler if we talk about attention spans instead of intelligence or interests. For whatever reason, some people have longer attention spans and can watch Odyssey 2001 with sincere interest, while others have shorter attention spans and need an explosion every 3 seconds to keep awake. Obsidian seem to be a bit confused right now as to who they should be catering for.