PoE is total SHIT, therefore BUY IT NOW - Steam Curator Page X Review

[Delterius]

If a lost Kubrick film was unearthed I wouldn't give the final verdict to Armond White, if an unfinished Wittgenstein manuscript turned up the last person I'd turn to would be Slavoj Zizek, and if I was sitting in front of the biggest RPG release in years I sure as hell wouldn't put it in the hands of Darth Roxor.

PoE is so bad that the only person willing to waste time writing a review for it is Roxor. Kinda telling.

Sounds legit. Took me three months to survive the fetal paralysis that DA:I inflicted upon me, I wonder how much longer until we get the official VDGrunkering.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't see many people complaining that PE isn't an Avellone narrative heavy game with shit combat like PS:T and KotOR2 I think there's quite a few people here that liked F:NV but think Pillars of Eternity ain't that good. One guy that lurks here, Raszius, for instance - F:NV is one of his favourite games but he thinks PE is dogshit in comparison.

Because?

FNV was a very good game. It shined like a star because Fallout 3 was so goddamn retarded. At the same time it inherited the clunky engine, the bastardized combat and special, and everything else that came with the engine. Obsidian did a great job with quests and role-playing (their trademark), but not everything made sense and the main plot and the casino were kinda questionable. I don't recall great encounter design because combat was shit and easy, I don't recall amazing itemization, etc.

The game's strongest points were the non-retarded setting, atmosphere, and role-playing. That's what made it good. PoE's strongest points are the setting, atmosphere, and role-playing.

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less. Plus all them BG fans who think that BG RtwP is better than PoE RTwP.

 

[Sensuki]

It's got nothing to do with subtlety for me, at least.

 

[Eyestabber]

Of all the people I've read criticizing the game, Sensuki's insights on game mechanics are (to me, at least) the most valuable.

IMO, the curator's page should link to THIS: http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...at-contributes-to-banality-of-gameplay.98429/

 

[7/10]

While I'd agree, that the game is a pretty bland, cargo cult clone of BG, at least it's not "actively bad", which is more than I can say about all the other nostalgia cash ins, that make me look forward to not playing them. So I guess this means that PoE is pretty good.

 

[Sensuki]

Because?

System Design, Mechanics and I don't think he liked the writing style or something? Can't remember.

FNV was a very good game. It shined like a star because Fallout 3 was so goddamn retarded. At the same time it inherited the clunky engine, the bastardized combat and special, and everything else that came with the engine. Obsidian did a great job with quests and role-playing (their trademark), but not everything made sense and the main plot and the casino were kinda questionable. I don't recall great encounter design because combat was shit and easy, I don't recall amazing itemization, etc.

The game's strongest points were the non-retarded setting, atmosphere, and role-playing. That's what made it good. PoE's strongest points are the setting, atmosphere, and role-playing.

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less. Plus all them BG fans who think that BG RtwP is better than PoE RTwP.

Never played F:NV (because of the engine) but their strengths and weaknesses don't sound too dissimilar. Personally I don't care about role-playing. Power gamer, etc. I pick options usually based on the reward so fluff RP options don't mean anything to me. In rare cases games have made me care enough to make a content-based decision over a reward decision (usually because of liking a character, or hating a character).

 

[Immortal]

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less.

I just wanted something fun to play that felt like the games it was sold as being a spiritual successor of in the marketing hub bub - back when us retard grogs were throwing cash at it and not just so we could be the Brothel door stop.

Plus all them BG fans who think that BG RtwP is better than PoE RTwP.

Gross Over simplification of the issues people have.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Because?

The game's strongest points were the non-retarded setting, atmosphere, and role-playing. That's what made it good. PoE's strongest points are the setting, atmosphere, and role-playing.

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less. Plus all them BG fans who think that BG RtwP is better than PoE RTwP.

You forgot 'terrible encounter design'

 

[Vault Dweller]

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less.

I just wanted something fun to play that felt like the games it was sold as being a spiritual successor of in the marketing hub bub - back when us retard grogs were throwing cash at it and not just so we could be the Brothel door stop.

Did you think BG was fun to play? Just curious.

Plus all them BG fans who think that BG RtwP is better than PoE RTwP.

Gross Over simplification of the issues people have.

It seems that the main issues are:

- combat (the system, engagement, encounter design, balance, etc).
- poor itemization
- story (not very engaging)
- infodump dialogue style

Since I think that RTwP sucks by default, I can't say I enjoyed either system and they all look like the same shit to me. Then again, can't say that I enjoyed any Obsidian's combat - not KOTOR2, not FNV, not AP, not NWN2 and expansions. Didn't play the Stick of Truth or Dungeon Siege 3, but I suspect it wasn't great either.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Since I think that RTwP sucks by default, I can't say I enjoyed either system and they all look like the same shit to me.

Imagine if we asked someone who doesn't like RTS to review Starcraft. How retarded would that be? Just as retarded as you reviewing PoE.

 

[Sensuki]

Then again, can't say that I enjoyed any Obsidian's combat

You can say that again.

 

[Immortal]

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less.

I just wanted something fun to play that felt like the games it was sold as being a spiritual successor of in the marketing hub bub - back when us retard grogs were throwing cash at it and not just so we could be the Brothel door stop.

Did you think BG was fun to play? Just curious.

Absolutely.
Baldurs Gate has always been one of my favourite games.

Should I INB4 you discredit everything I say now? Because Wilderness Zones?

- combat (the system, engagement, encounter design, balance, etc).
- poor itemization
- story (not very engaging)
- infodump dialogue style

Yea I feel comfortable with this list as a baseline. I would also include Area Design and Progression, Several gripes would be things like Reward Structure.

Examples:
I can get 8000 Experience by listening to Durance's problems in a field but 120xp for slaying a dragon.

If I go into a cave or cottage, it's likely to be empty unless there's a flag from a quest that flags it as "READY FOR ENCOUNTER". There is almost no reason to explore off the beaten path.

 

[Sensuki]

if Baldur's Gate is Action Adventure, then Knights of the Chalice and many old old school RPGs must be too ... lol

 

[Vault Dweller]

Since I think that RTwP sucks by default, I can't say I enjoyed either system and they all look like the same shit to me.

Imagine if we asked someone who doesn't like RTS to review Starcraft. How retarded would that be? Just as retarded as you reviewing PoE.

Except for PoE isn't an RTS and there is more to it than combat. PST, MotB, even Arcanum had awful combat, which didn't stop them from making the Codex top 10 list. Not saying that PoE is a top 10 game (it's not), just drawing parallels.

Anyway, my opinion on RTwP is well known. I was asked to review the game with Grunker. I agreed. That's all there's to it.

My only guess here is that people expected more and got disappointed when they got less.

I just wanted something fun to play that felt like the games it was sold as being a spiritual successor of in the marketing hub bub - back when us retard grogs were throwing cash at it and not just so we could be the Brothel door stop.

Did you think BG was fun to play? Just curious.

Absolutely.
Baldurs Gate has always been one of my favourite games.

Why?

if Baldur's Gate is Action Adventure, then Knights of the Chalice and many old old school RPGs must be too ... lol

A turn-based game can't be an action adventure. What heresy is this?

 

[ZagorTeNej]

Strategy games =/ action games. IE games always played like small scale RTS games with pause function on top of it.

 

[Brotherman Bill]

If a lost Kubrick film was unearthed I wouldn't give the final verdict to Armond White, if an unfinished Wittgenstein manuscript turned up the last person I'd turn to would be Slavoj Zizek, and if I was sitting in front of the biggest RPG release in years I sure as hell wouldn't put it in the hands of Darth Roxor.

PoE is so bad that the only person willing to waste time writing a review for it is Roxor. Kinda telling.

There's actually several reviews of the game in this very subforum. I don't think the admins approached anyone asking for a review. If they made a "pls submit ur review to us and we'll look at it" I'm sure they'd get many submissions. It's just typical ineptitude and incompetence on their part.

 

[Immortal]

Why?

That's long fucking post.. Wanna do a talk show review together?

If I was gonna quickly jot my thoughts down.

Where PoE Improves on BG 1:
- User Interface
- Artwork
- Writing / Dialogue (Less Jokey Characters / Less Nod Nod Wink Winks )
- Companion Depth
- More abilities and depth in leveling / character creation
- RPGCodex Brothel

Where BG is better than Poe:
- Literally everything else IMO
- Areas are better designed (Just in general - creatures and encounters are spaced out better minus wilderness areas)
- Itemization (Static loot, proper gear progression, Items feel unique when they should be)
- Encounters ( Hard Encounters are Hard unless cheesed)
- Reward Structure (XP and Item Rewards are in proportion to the challenge of getting them, Decisions between items and XP need to be made, Progression doesn't solely happen by sweet talking companions or progressing through Acts)
- Level Design ( Secret Areas, Side Quests hidden in the world, World Feels Lived In)

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Strategy games =/ action games. IE games always played like small scale RTS games with pause function on top of it.

They were supposed to be RTS too. The engine was made for one.

 

[tyrannosaurus rex]

Except for PoE isn't an RTS and there is more to it than combat. PST, MotB, even Arcanum had awful combat, which didn't stop them from making the Codex top 10 list. Not saying that PoE is a top 10 game (it's not), just drawing parallels.

Anyway, my opinion on RTwP is well known. I was asked to review the game with Grunker. I agreed. That's all there's to it.

The infinity engine games were focused on combat. As you put it yourself in your reviews, purely as RPGs they suck. They would give it a better story and that was the pitch for PoE.

If you have someone we can blame that isn't you then say who's fucking fucktard moron ass sucking faggot gets to decide who writes reviews and which reviews are branded official.

 

[Sensuki]

Yeah the IE games control like an RTS and play a bit like an RTS too. When playing the Warcraft 3 single player non-base building missions it always reminds me of the IE games a bit.

Pillars of Eternity controls like an RTS but plays a bit like an MMO that wishes it was a turn-based game

 

[Vault Dweller]

Why?

That's long fucking post.. Wanna do a talk show review together?

If I was gonna quickly jot my thoughts down.

Where PoE Improves on BG 1:
- User Interface
- Artwork
- Writing / Dialogue (Less Jokey Characters / Less Nod Nod Wink Winks )
- Companion Depth
- More abilities and depth in leveling / character creation
- RPGCodex Brothel

Where BG is better than Poe:
- Literally everything else IMO
- Areas are better designed (Just in general - creatures and encounters are spaced out better minus wilderness areas)
- Itemization (Static loot, proper gear progression, Items feel unique when they should be)
- Encounters ( Hard Encounters are Hard unless cheesed)
- Reward Structure (XP and Item Rewards are in proportion to the challenge of getting them, Decisions between items and XP need to be made, Progression doesn't solely happen by sweet talking companions or progressing through Acts)
- Level Design ( Secret Areas, Side Quests hidden in the world, World Feels Lived In)

No arguing here.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

They were supposed to be RTS too. The engine was made for one.

I know, it's one of the main reason I believe RTwP system in those games worked.

 

[Pope Amole II]

They don't like turning the tide in battle with a well-placed -10% recovery time debuff, which they find boring, but want something more spectacular, a la BG mage battles.

Actually, that's kinda untrue. Sawyer might tell any kinds of things in his interviews (I don't give a fuck so I haven't read any), but all the "effects in the game are too unnoticeable" is absolutely untrue. There are lots of high-impact, incredibly noticeable spells in the game, even on the first and second level.

The druid, for example, has his 20 seconds of blindness AoE nuke at level 1 (which is an incredibly strong debuff), 60 endurance heal on level one (which, at this stage of the game, pretty much doubles the party's HPs) and the 6 DR increase buff at level 2 (which is also insanely strong and noticeable through all of the game, especially on hard and lower difficulty). Not to mention the fucking AoE charm beast spell at level 1 (and there's a crapload of beasts in the game).

The wizard has chill fog at level 1 (lots of damage & blindness), concelhaut's staff at level 1 (allows him to use melee tactics), mass-blindness at level 2 and the -10 to Per/Res/Int at level 2 (which is -20 deflection, -40 will in an AoE). A bit less flashy than the druid but, on the other hand, the druid is much less impressive at spell levels 5-6.

The cleric is probably the least impressive on early levels. And even then, it's +4 DR as a 1st level spell, +20% damage in for of blessing (which is not all that bad for a 1st level spell), more than a hundred endurance healed by a second level spell, almost a hard counter against enemy debuffs on level 2 and about -25% enemy DPS also on level 2.

 

[Immortal]

Why?

That's long fucking post.. Wanna do a talk show review together?

If I was gonna quickly jot my thoughts down.

Where PoE Improves on BG 1:
- User Interface
- Artwork
- Writing / Dialogue (Less Jokey Characters / Less Nod Nod Wink Winks )
- Companion Depth
- More abilities and depth in leveling / character creation
- RPGCodex Brothel

Where BG is better than Poe:
- Literally everything else IMO
- Areas are better designed (Just in general - creatures and encounters are spaced out better minus wilderness areas)
- Itemization (Static loot, proper gear progression, Items feel unique when they should be)
- Encounters ( Hard Encounters are Hard unless cheesed)
- Reward Structure (XP and Item Rewards are in proportion to the challenge of getting them, Decisions between items and XP need to be made, Progression doesn't solely happen by sweet talking companions or progressing through Acts)
- Level Design ( Secret Areas, Side Quests hidden in the world, World Feels Lived In)

No arguing here.

Really? I must be misreading your posts then.
If you visit KW I'll buy you a beer.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The infinity engine games were focused on combat.

Yet they were all very different. BG2, IWD, PST, etc, so you can't review the game accurately (or at all) just by focusing on combat.

As you put it yourself in your reviews, purely as RPGs they suck. They would give it a better story and that was the pitch for PoE.

It's not that simple. PST has been a top game around here for more than a decade. PoE has more role-playing options than all the IE games combined. Of course, the question is, is it enough to make it a good RPG that can be praised despite its combat, the same way PST and MotB are praised. Sadly, I'm not the one who can answer this question as I stopped playing in Act 2 and can't force myself to continue. Maybe after they patch it a few times.