Eternity Pillars of Eternity + The White March Expansion Thread

[Delterius]

the game is seven years old how can you not hate it already

 

[Grunker]

Wholeheartedly agree, but can Sawyer really be excused? Like I note in my review, the primary Gilded Vale/Hollowborn/Lord Raedric-storyline clearly shows that PoE's writers are more than capable of show-don't-telling a proficient story.

So was it really the writers insisting on cramming deep lore wikipedia articles into 90% of PoE's NPCs, or was it Sawyer's insistence that they had to communicate all these details of the lore? Maybe Roguey knows.

Without being familiar with Obsidian's development process from the inside, and just based on having seen a number of their games, it's a consequence of turning making RPGs from a fun activity for a small team (a la Fallout) into "work".

Also remember that the main plot of PoE was doomed to be shit by virtue of its concept alone - no matter how good a writer wrote it. Since nothing substantial about anything related to the main plot (Thaos, Leaden Key, anything) can be told due to the nature of the twist, *the main thing you're doing throughout the entire game has to tell you nothing.* So by definition, they were forced to write non-text for the most text-heavy storyline of the whole game.

Doesn't excuse boring sidequests or Wikipedia-dumps, just saying that the main quest would suck by simply virtue of its retarded structure no matter who wrote it.

 

[NJClaw]

I have a feeling you guys have a very incorrect memory of Iovara's dialogue. Even all your companions react with a shock of "OMG!!! THE GODS AREN'T REAL!!!!" then Iovara like a GIRLBOSS!!!! totally BTFOS durance who (was entirely correct) dares to question the queen

Companions' reactions are shaped by how you solve their quests and interact with them over the course of the game:

companions' reactions at Iovara's revelation

ending slides

So much for -all your companions react with a shock of "OMG!!! THE GODS AREN'T REAL!!!!"-

 

[Grunker]

Even all your companions

They react precisely based on your interactions and their own beliefs, reinforcing the point that PoE is fluid in its answer to the question of whether the divine is important or not. Again, there's nothing wrong with how the answer is structured. It's the question itself which isn't structured, posed nor discussed in a very interesting manner.

holy shit what a terrible end to a terrible game

By sheer coincidence I was reading an old thread yesterday and I can't find it now but it had a post by you, something to the effect of "PoE was awesome, Codex is dumb, Deadfire is gonna be awesome." Thought you liked the game

 

[Delterius]

Not really. It's implied multiple times that Eora was better off when actual divinity might have existed, just as you're given multiple chances to ackknowledge that even fake divinity is better than no gods at all. Even if the question is banal, the answer is left almost entirely up to the player. So that part I don't think they got wrong. It's just that question isn't framed very proficiently

theres even a point in deadfire where they say that there were more birth defects before the gods were created. not to meniton the human sacrifices and shit.

divinity literally cured autism. checkmate atheists.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

something to the effect of "PoE was awesome, Codex is dumb, Deadfire is gonna be awesome." Thought you liked the game

That'd be strange considering I joined only slightly before deadfire released and none of my posts from that time period say anything close to that.

 

[Grunker]

something to the effect of "PoE was awesome, Codex is dumb, Deadfire is gonna be awesome." Thought you liked the game

That'd be strange considering I joined only slightly before deadfire released and none of my posts from that time period say anything close to that.

I'll try to find it. Maybe it was just someone else using the Eder-avatar. But my point wasn't to correct you but to ask honestly about the "terrible game" part? Always thought you enjoyed PoE

 

[dacencora]

Iovara is wrong, even if it seems like the game is presenting her words as true. Yeah she’s right about how the gods became gods, but what is the functional difference between an omniscient, omnipotent, immortal mortal and a god?

Thaos even says basically the same thing:

What is a god? Hm? A higher power? A rewarder of good deeds and punisher of the wicked? Something men can turn to in their darkest moments, when their days seem only like bridges from one tragedy to the next? Our gods are all these things

So the "terrible secret" of the gods is that they consume souls/commit genocide to become (and stay?) gods. But gods killing a large amount of humans is not necessarily unusual (Noah's flood, 10 plagues of Egypt, etc) so the premise that Thaos has to keep it a secret might be a bit weak.

 

[Grunker]

God my dudes. She's not "wrong." The game is clearly leaving the question unanswered for the RP-purpose of having the player decide how he tackles it. Game itself doesn't conclude much of anything, just presents a range of possible truths and lets you and your companions embrace or deny those. This is really evident from the fact that a bunch of sources give completely different takes to the reveal.

Of course Thaos' take is what it is - that's not "the game" saying something, it's its biggest proponent for the status quo explaining his reasons for embracing it.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

God my dudes. She's not "wrong." The game is clearly leaving the question unanswered for the RP-purpose of having the player decide how he tackles it. Game itself doesn't conclude much of anything, just presents a range of possible truths and lets you and your companions embrace or deny those. This is really evident from the fact that a bunch of sources give completely different takes to the reveal.

If she's not wrong, then it's impossible to be wrong about anything.

 

[Grunker]

You might conclude that she's wrong. The game clearly doesn't. It wants your character to answer the question for him/herself. It's more interested in letting you RP than in providing a substantial answer itself.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

You might conclude that she's wrong. The game clearly doesn't. It wants your character to answer the question for him/herself. It's more interested in letting you RP than in providing a substantial answer itself.

WATER ISN'T REAL!
"well you aren't wrong because that's just your interpretation..."

 

[Grunker]

Man you are thick. Everything after your underlined point clearly shows she's just saying the gods are constructs, not that the entities themselves literally don't exist.

And I mean, you spent all this time arguing that "the game's perspective" is the atheist take that Iovera is right. Now you're arguing the opposite. Try analysing things through the lense of the work itself rather than your own ideology, it'll be easier to read intentions that way.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Man you are thick. Everything after your underlined point clearly shows she's just saying the gods are constructs, not that the entities themselves literally don't exist.

And I mean, you spent all this time arguing that "the game's perspective" is the atheist take that Iovera is right. Now you're arguing the opposite. Try analysing things through the lense of the work itself rather than your own ideology, it'll be easier to read intentions that way.

"They aren't real because they're constructs!"
ok, water isn't real because it's just made up of atoms bro

 

[Grunker]

what's even your point at this point

 

[PEACH]

divinity literally cured autism

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Main plot just has too much stuff crammed into it, it should've just been about animancy trial and shit.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

what's even your point at this point

water isn't real using the same logic as iovara that you're defending as completely ok and not pants on head retarded

 

[Grunker]

what's even your point at this point

water isn't real using the same logic as iovara that you're defending as completely ok and not pants on head retarded

yes, your point is reduced to "the word 'real' is poorly chosen by the writers". what a terribly uninteresting subject of discussion even if one agreed (which I don't, since I'm capable of reading more than one sentence)

she literally accepts their existence in the same dialogue you posted, so you're arguing against yourself

 

[rusty_shackleford]

what's even your point at this point

water isn't real using the same logic as iovara that you're defending as completely ok and not pants on head retarded

yes, your point is reduced to "the word 'real' is poorly chosen by the writers". what a terribly uninteresting point even if one agreed (which I don't, since I'm capable of reading more than one sentence)

"wow ok maybe they just picked the wrong word and if you change the word then the meaning changes"
uhh, alright, whatever helps you sleep at night and defend this shitpile I guess

 

[Grunker]

what's even your point at this point

water isn't real using the same logic as iovara that you're defending as completely ok and not pants on head retarded

yes, your point is reduced to "the word 'real' is poorly chosen by the writers". what a terribly uninteresting point even if one agreed (which I don't, since I'm capable of reading more than one sentence)

"wow ok maybe they just picked the wrong word and if you change the word then the meaning changes"
uhh, alright, whatever helps you sleep at night and defend this shitpile I guess

your own screenshot literally counters your entire take here

she is clearly saying that the gods aren't gods not that they literally don't exist. i refuse to believe you are actually thick enough to not realize that

 

[NJClaw]

Yeah she’s right about how the gods became gods, but what is the functional difference between an omniscient, omnipotent, immortal mortal and a god?

I kinda agree with what you're saying, but the Engwithan gods are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. Their own nature of being the embodiment of a collection of concepts makes them deeply flawed, and this is especially clear in the second game. They fail in their endeavors, they have to rely on mortals to further their agenda, and, worst of all, sometimes they get bested by a mortal in physical and verbal confrontations. You can defeat the avatar of Rymrgand in his very own domain, and IIRC with enough Intellect/Lore you can "win" a dialogue with Ondra, convincing her of your positions.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

he gods aren't gods

"This thing that acts exactly like a god? Yeah, it isn't a god because it was created."

Wow, they should have dropped this startling revelation on the bhaalspawn about bhaal in baldur's gate

 

[Delterius]

never seen a dead horse beat itself before but rusty did it

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Yeah she’s right about how the gods became gods, but what is the functional difference between an omniscient, omnipotent, immortal mortal and a god?

I kinda agree with what you're saying, but the Engwithan gods are neither omniscient nor omnipotent. Their own nature of being the embodiment of a collection of concepts makes them deeply flawed, and this is especially clear in the second game. They fail in their endeavors, they have to rely on mortals to further their agenda, and, worst of all, sometimes they get bested by a mortal in physical and verbal confrontations. You can defeat the avatar of Rymrgand in his very own domain, and IIRC with enough Intellect/Lore you can "win" a dialogue with Ondra, convincing her of your positions.

Whoa yeah all this would be really weird for gods.
*checks greek mythology*