You are the judge and executioner of Kyros’ law, acting under the watchful eye of the Overlords Archon of Justice, Tunon the Adjudicator (pictured right) Your words shape the lives of thousands. Will you use that power to bring justice and inspire loyalty? Or will you bring fear and cruelty to the beaten people of the Tiers?
A Fatebinder’s word is law, and you decide the fate of the Tiers. Even the smallest of choices shape the land and its people. Tasked with making decisions that truly matter to theTiers and to the factions of Kyros’ army, you will develop a reputation based upon your deeds -- and you will find the world a drastically changed place each time you play Tyranny.
I like how it's an alternate take on the traditional good vs evil narrative we get in RPGs. Looks to be more a decision between lawful evil and chaotic evil, else I feel the purpose of the game is void.
Considering Obsidian was the company that did Fallout: New Vegas (and the original Fallout games) and how much more morally complex it was compared to Fallout 3/4, the whole concept seems really intriguing.
Edit: I'd like to comment more on the actual game play, but it doesn't seem like there's anything much on that atm unless I missed it somewhere.
I'm pumped for this game... As someone who loves his evil playthrough in BG2 and was a bit let down in that regard by PoE (even tough I think this game is amazing nonetheless), I'm very much looking forward to it.
hopefully they can "copy" divinity original sin gameplay or do something fun, PoE was a great game, one of the best rpgs lately but the gameplay lacked "flavour".
Looks pretty good to me! Obviously, a lot still up in the air (classless system, choices at character creation, ...) but I still have high hopes for it.
The game is currently in Pre-Order with a release for November 11th.
12 Minutes of Gameplay Trailer -
I'm taking a wait and see approach myself but Obsidian does not make shit games but I've been burned too often in the past by other companies I considered "not shit" so....
Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
On October 17 2016 09:08 hexhaven wrote: Never pre-order, never surrender.
I agree. I am confident I will like the game even if it is poorly reviewed since I've liked all their other games, even when not acclaimed. They suit my tastes but that isn't enough to pre-order.
On October 17 2016 12:24 Psyonic_Reaver wrote: It's crazy that people still knock unity because it's unity.
That Engine is going places and if I had the money to get stock in that, I would.
This would be a good bet. The biggest gambling software developer in the world switched to developing exclusively on Unity a few years ago.
Engines are as good as the people that use them. Some fantastic games have been developed on Unity. Lots of shitty games have been developed as well. Couldn't that be said about any engine, really?
People like to shit on unity but Xcom 1 and Xcom 2 were made on Unreal 3 and both were buggy mess with Xcom 2 having serious performance problems that were never fixed.
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
It depends on where you live. In Europe, physical PC games are very much still alive, same with Japan. The advantage of not buying digital games is that you can spend more on importing stuff. 80€ for some Japanese PC game (not counting shipping)? No problem.
Pillars of Eternity is digital only too, so I haven't played it. I really dislike the Unity engine because it looks terrible. So artifical and sterile. Just ugh. I prefer my games to have a more gritty, organic look instead.
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
It depends on where you live. In Europe, physical PC games are very much still alive, same with Japan. The advantage of not buying digital games is that you can spend more on importing stuff. 80€ for some Japanese PC game (not counting shipping)? No problem.
Pillars of Eternity is digital only too, so I haven't played it. I really dislike the Unity engine because it looks terrible. So artifical and sterile. Just ugh. I prefer my games to have a more gritty, organic look instead.
I do live in Europe so I can say your assertion isn't true for the entirety of it. None of my friends are buying physical copies of PC games any longer. General stores that used to have a lot of games have slimmed down to just a few top titles for gifting. Game stores themselves only have a shelf of PC content with consoles being their main business and taking up the rest of the space.
As for your graphics opinion. That is up to you, I can simply state that I don't agree since it is a personal opinion.
I don't think PC games were ever alive in Japan, physical or otherwise, with the exception of hentai games. I'm planning to buy a new PC next year and am actually wondering if it's feasible to drop a dvd drive altogether.
Obsidian games are notoriously buggy at release, even compared to the low standards that we have today. I usually enjoy their games and am planning one more run of PoE. That said, looking at my games calendar, I'm not going to have time for this one until late next year.
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
It depends on where you live. In Europe, physical PC games are very much still alive, same with Japan. The advantage of not buying digital games is that you can spend more on importing stuff. 80€ for some Japanese PC game (not counting shipping)? No problem.
Pillars of Eternity is digital only too, so I haven't played it. I really dislike the Unity engine because it looks terrible. So artifical and sterile. Just ugh. I prefer my games to have a more gritty, organic look instead.
I do live in Europe so I can say your assertion isn't true for the entirety of it. None of my friends are buying physical copies of PC games any longer. General stores that used to have a lot of games have slimmed down to just a few top titles for gifting. Game stores themselves only have a shelf of PC content with consoles being their main business and taking up the rest of the space.
As for your graphics opinion. That is up to you, I can simply state that I don't agree since it is a personal opinion.
When I buy games I buy physical copies at a store. Why? Because games nowadays being big sized (upwards of 20GBs) I don't want to blow my whole monthly limit on downloading 1 game. Not to mention the time it would take to download that many GBs on my connection. Annnd while downloading I wouldn't be able to do literally anything else related to the internet on the PC for the duration of the download. Reinstalling is also a much smaller pain in the ass down the road. You just have to download patches, not the whole game. I can't possibly fathom downloading huge games like Witcher 3, GTA V or an any kind of MMO.
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
It depends on where you live. In Europe, physical PC games are very much still alive, same with Japan. The advantage of not buying digital games is that you can spend more on importing stuff. 80€ for some Japanese PC game (not counting shipping)? No problem.
Pillars of Eternity is digital only too, so I haven't played it. I really dislike the Unity engine because it looks terrible. So artifical and sterile. Just ugh. I prefer my games to have a more gritty, organic look instead.
I do live in Europe so I can say your assertion isn't true for the entirety of it. None of my friends are buying physical copies of PC games any longer. General stores that used to have a lot of games have slimmed down to just a few top titles for gifting. Game stores themselves only have a shelf of PC content with consoles being their main business and taking up the rest of the space.
Well, here, the shelves are full of games at least. The platform doesn't matter at all. As for friends...none made the transition to digital. Most either dropped gaming or play an MMO or something like that occasionally.
On October 18 2016 00:23 andrewlt wrote: I don't think PC games were ever alive in Japan, physical or otherwise, with the exception of hentai games. I'm planning to buy a new PC next year and am actually wondering if it's feasible to drop a dvd drive altogether.
They used to be alive in the 80s and 90s. After that, it's mostly been VNs which aren't necessarily hentai games.
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
It depends on where you live. In Europe, physical PC games are very much still alive, same with Japan. The advantage of not buying digital games is that you can spend more on importing stuff. 80€ for some Japanese PC game (not counting shipping)? No problem.
Pillars of Eternity is digital only too, so I haven't played it. I really dislike the Unity engine because it looks terrible. So artifical and sterile. Just ugh. I prefer my games to have a more gritty, organic look instead.
I do live in Europe so I can say your assertion isn't true for the entirety of it. None of my friends are buying physical copies of PC games any longer. General stores that used to have a lot of games have slimmed down to just a few top titles for gifting. Game stores themselves only have a shelf of PC content with consoles being their main business and taking up the rest of the space.
As for your graphics opinion. That is up to you, I can simply state that I don't agree since it is a personal opinion.
When I buy games I buy physical copies at a store. Why? Because games nowadays being big sized (upwards of 20GBs) I don't want to blow my whole monthly limit on downloading 1 game. Not to mention the time it would take to download that many GBs on my connection. Annnd while downloading I wouldn't be able to do literally anything else related to the internet on the PC for the duration of the download. Reinstalling is also a much smaller pain in the ass down the road. You just have to download patches, not the whole game. I can't possibly fathom downloading huge games like Witcher 3, GTA V or an any kind of MMO.
Here, the available download speed increased from 88 KB/s to 2 MB/s (unstable thanks to hybrid) just last year.
On October 18 2016 00:25 LaNague wrote: the game world is handdrawn, does the engine even matter?
With an engine with such a distinct look? Definitely.
On October 18 2016 00:41 BLinD-RawR wrote: engine affects performance not look.
Pff, that stealth edit. Still got the old one though. From the screenshot in the OP I was able to name the engine. So tell me again how it only affects performance
On October 17 2016 08:31 Lucumo wrote: Obsidian does create good games, so it's probably worth it. Too bad they don't offer a physical version, so it's a "no buy" for me. Also, they are using the shitty Unity engine, meh.
Isn't like half the physical games now a days bascially just a CD key for Steam/Battle.net/Origin etc? I personally only buy physical games to get the key and then never use the disc included. Last time was for Dark Souls since it was ~10€ cheaper at the time, after that I have just waited for sales or ignored the physical editions.
As for unity. It seems like a normal engine to me. A lot of games, some good, some bad. Might be a bit harder than others to use but Obsidian has used it for Pillars of Eternity before and if you liked those then the engine isn't an argument for this. Since it is basically the same usage with some improvements they had time for this time. If you disliked PoE then you should not get this since videos invokes similar mechanics even if story and those mechanics are different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Unity_games
It depends on where you live. In Europe, physical PC games are very much still alive, same with Japan. The advantage of not buying digital games is that you can spend more on importing stuff. 80€ for some Japanese PC game (not counting shipping)? No problem.
Pillars of Eternity is digital only too, so I haven't played it. I really dislike the Unity engine because it looks terrible. So artifical and sterile. Just ugh. I prefer my games to have a more gritty, organic look instead.
I do live in Europe so I can say your assertion isn't true for the entirety of it. None of my friends are buying physical copies of PC games any longer. General stores that used to have a lot of games have slimmed down to just a few top titles for gifting. Game stores themselves only have a shelf of PC content with consoles being their main business and taking up the rest of the space.
As for your graphics opinion. That is up to you, I can simply state that I don't agree since it is a personal opinion.
When I buy games I buy physical copies at a store. Why? Because games nowadays being big sized (upwards of 20GBs) I don't want to blow my whole monthly limit on downloading 1 game. Not to mention the time it would take to download that many GBs on my connection. Annnd while downloading I wouldn't be able to do literally anything else related to the internet on the PC for the duration of the download. Reinstalling is also a much smaller pain in the ass down the road. You just have to download patches, not the whole game. I can't possibly fathom downloading huge games like Witcher 3, GTA V or an any kind of MMO.
They are just 40-60 GB. That is 1-2h when leaving enough room for normal computer usage (2MB/s free for other stuff). Which you then have on your HDD recovering 10 minutes or something similar in faster installation time. Unless it is steam where the unpacking for small stuff can take longer than downloading it.
So the major difference we see here is in connection speed. I can't get anything below 10/10 in speed where I live without going back to ADSL. 100/10 isn't that much more expensive so most people have that.
As for unity, of course it effects looks. How shadows works is often tied to the engine in one way or another.
On October 18 2016 00:41 BLinD-RawR wrote: engine affects performance not look.
Pff, that stealth edit. Still got the old one though. From the screenshot in the OP I was able to name the engine. So tell me again how it only affects performance
Because you were arbitrarily lucky on a guess when there's like 3-4 major engines that probably make up the vast majority of games (Unity, Unreal, Source, CryEngine)?
Anyways I'm curious what the structure of this game would be, I'm hoping with some of the replay promises being made, the game length is actually of a reasonable length that you can get through rather than a 50-100 hour slog.
On October 18 2016 00:41 BLinD-RawR wrote: engine affects performance not look.
Pff, that stealth edit. Still got the old one though. From the screenshot in the OP I was able to name the engine. So tell me again how it only affects performance
Because you were arbitrarily lucky on a guess when there's like 3-4 major engines that probably make up the vast majority of games (Unity, Unreal, Source, CryEngine)?
Anyways I'm curious what the structure of this game would be, I'm hoping with some of the replay promises being made, the game length is actually of a reasonable length that you can get through rather than a 50-100 hour slog.
RPG Maker and Ren'py probably has 10x as many games as the mentioned engines but has very distinct styles so could be excluded in guesses here.
I would also like a shorter game if replay is the main feature. Around 15 hours is probably the longest if they want many replays. 100h means a maximum of one replay if the game is great and has a ton of different ways to approach combat so you want to replay with a different class or alignment. Likely a second replay will stop before finishing at that length.
pillars with expansions was too long for me, i dont think i ever finished that, might have to give that another go at some point.
Im normally not a person that feels a game is too long, but pillars just went on and on. And the frequent "balance" patches didnt help that completely redid classes or mechanics.
15 is too short for an RPG for me, 30-50 would be welcome, i would replay that. With 15 its over before you even get used to the world.
On October 18 2016 03:01 LaNague wrote: pillars with expansions was too long for me, i dont think i ever finished that, might have to give that another go at some point.
Im normally not a person that feels a game is too long, but pillars just went on and on. And the frequent "balance" patches didnt help that completely redid classes or mechanics.
15 is too short for an RPG for me, 30-50 would be welcome, i would replay that. With 15 its over before you even get used to the world.
I never got the expansions since I played enough with three times on the first game. Mechanics were played out for me by that time. I would probably like the expansions as well if I ever get them but I doubt I will.
That took me 73 hours. So I guess 30-50 is something I do replay. Since the first time is always the longest due to learning combat system and having sub-optimal builds slowing it down. One was even a semi speed run to fit in three in those hours.
It took me roughly 100 hours each on both my pillars of eternity runs. I played both expansions and they were 15-20 hours each. I think I ended up with around 70 hours total playing both expansions on both runs.
Pillars has the same problem Baldur's Gate had. During the big city segments, or anything that needed constant going back and forth, I think I spent just as much time playing the game versus staring at loading screens and waiting for my party to walk the length of the map. Some of the "hours" I logged playing Pillars were me playing Pokemon while waiting for something in Pillars.
Day9 got an early access version to play and streamed about 12 hours worth of Tyranny.
I gotta say. While I don't find his way of streaming my style, the game looks FANTASTIC. He was very through in looking at/reading everything which was great.
Seems good from the stream, I like the concept of a shorter version of PoE with more meaningful choices, although we'll need multiple full playthroughs to confirm if that's true.
On October 18 2016 20:49 LaNague wrote: and its free of 1000 mary sue backer NPCs, so thats good.
This, I kept reading all these "Oh-My-God-I'm-Being-So-Fucking-Literary" style gold-name-NPC "stories" thinking there must be something to this, after I couldn't take another one I looked it up........yeah...
PoE was a dissapointment imo, I tuned my hopes for Numenara waaay down since.
Still buying Tyranny though, they got us all by the balls :[
Ok, I am interested; I don't play RPGs so what is this "1000 mary sue backer NPCs" and "Oh-My-God-I'm-Being-So-Fucking-Literary" style gold-name-NPC "stories"" you guys are referring to?
On October 19 2016 01:39 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Ok, I am interested; I don't play RPGs so what is this "1000 mary sue backer NPCs" and "Oh-My-God-I'm-Being-So-Fucking-Literary" style gold-name-NPC "stories"" you guys are referring to?
It was a kickstarter backer reward where you got to write up a story/vision that an NPC would recite to the players in the game.
Obsidian let their kickstarter backers write overly pretentious drivel and included them in the game. You can read them by talking to NPCs who have gold plated names. People who didn't follow the game's development didn't know about this and accidentally read multiple below 50 Shades of Gray level fanfics. I read a few before looking it up online and realizing how pointless it was.
It comes from the same human emotions that lead English and Literature majors to act superior by pretending to enjoy a James Joyce novel.
On October 17 2016 17:49 -Archangel- wrote: People like to shit on unity but Xcom 1 and Xcom 2 were made on Unreal 3 and both were buggy mess with Xcom 2 having serious performance problems that were never fixed.
Xcom 2 performs great now, even on low spec systems (including my lower end laptop) and has for a long time. You should really verify your claims if you haven't played since release... Especially if your going to say things like they were "never fixed".
the thing about the backer NPCs is that they use a central story mechanic and its not apparent that the golden names dont mean that it has to do with your story, so you start reading that drivel until you figure it out.
the game was ok though, the combat was good considering they reinvented it from scratch and the world was interesting to me. The enviroments are very pretty if they want them to be. It just dragged on a bit with all the quests. The xpacks were big improvements in everything in my opinion and so should this game.
Its using a better skill system allready from what i saw. I didnt watch much combat because spoilers and also day9 is bad at it and triggers me
what i wish they would do is seperate the last difficulty and the "hordes of enemies", difficulty increasing enemy stats and HORDE option being 2 seperate things.
Ok thanks No Swear LaNague Logo and andrewit. I can see how reading a bunch of pretentious dribble thinking that it is part of the developers questlines can be unbelievably irritating.
RPS said the game is great, but it lacks "something" in the story department
"Muddled? I am. There’s so much going on here, but I never really feel like I’ve got a proper grip on it. It feels like a puddle the size of the Atlantic – this vast concept, but too gossamer to sink in deep. Huge stories, but minor roles in them. Exquisite detail, but all going by too fast. And yet, pretty good with it. Just not as good as what’s come before."
On November 11 2016 00:51 Faruko wrote: RPS said the game is great, but it lacks "something" in the story department
"Muddled? I am. There’s so much going on here, but I never really feel like I’ve got a proper grip on it. It feels like a puddle the size of the Atlantic – this vast concept, but too gossamer to sink in deep. Huge stories, but minor roles in them. Exquisite detail, but all going by too fast. And yet, pretty good with it. Just not as good as what’s come before."
Depending on what the reviewer meant by his words it sounds like they have a good setup for their ideal of a re-playable game. Going a different path and learning a bit more the next time. Yet they failed in wanting to make you do that from how I read that paragraph.
edit, I should never pre-download. Takes longer than downloading after the lock period is up, 5 min to download, 15 min to unpack.
It looks very interesting and find it appealing how the gameplay seems to give you a lot of choice and seems accurate. I really like how they decided to come back to this type of view for the gameplay too, it feels more "old school", more meaningful and nuanced choices, more accurate gameplay. Replayability is really a great quality for a game to have. Will try it out later~
On November 11 2016 01:30 ProMeTheus112 wrote: It looks very interesting and find it appealing how the gameplay seems to give you a lot of choice and seems accurate. I really like how they decided to come back to this type of view for the gameplay too, it feels more "old school", more meaningful and nuanced choices, more accurate gameplay.
But are the choices meaningful? Impossible to say without multiple playthroughs and I don't know Tryanny suffers from it but for example I really enjoyed the choices Deus Ex - HR gave you until I played it a second time and discovered doing the exact opposite changed nothing of consequence.
On November 11 2016 01:30 ProMeTheus112 wrote: It looks very interesting and find it appealing how the gameplay seems to give you a lot of choice and seems accurate. I really like how they decided to come back to this type of view for the gameplay too, it feels more "old school", more meaningful and nuanced choices, more accurate gameplay.
But are the choices meaningful? Impossible to say without multiple playthroughs and I don't know Tryanny suffers from it but for example I really enjoyed the choices Deus Ex - HR gave you until I played it a second time and discovered doing the exact opposite changed nothing of consequence.
Yeah good question, will have to find out! I'm just keeping an eye on this game, later buy a new PC and maybe get it!
Conquest choices at the start has huge effect on initial approval of different factions and some early dialogue options. Noticed a lot of stuff already in the third small area. Likely I would not have been able to get one or two of the first 4 quests depending on other choices. Might be they don't want to cut out extra content though.
Been playing for a few days (yay being press) and I have to say: hard difficulty is... hard. Few fights made me remember my first times with Dark Souls, where I would stare at the loading screen mumbling "how on earth do I defeat that?" repeatedly. Which is good, mind you!
Consequences seems both trivial and big. Trivial short term, but when looking at the big picture I can see a lot of player's decision making big impact. I believe some NPC might even be dead and unrecruitable just because you said A instead of B during the conquest.
I'm about 6 hours in and while i enjoy the game, it does feel a bit weird compared to previous titles. Just a few thoughts. You are being pushed into the story pretty fast. Combine that with the fact that the outcomes of some of your choices aren't clear shortly after you make them, you are often left guessing in a "meh" way. I do think the story is interesting though.
While it is nice to have many evil choices, most of the time there is no good answer. In general you have to support Person A or B, maybe C. It rarely feels like you are the one deciding stuff, other than deciding who to back.
Looks like the game has a lot of replayability in terms of story/dialogues but much of the gameplay/fights will be the same.
About 6h in I had a scene where my party member was the opponent in a random encounter. Thus I had two of it in the same scene. That showed one scene I would have missed normally due to how I choose to handle various scenes up to there. Feels like combat will be mostly the same but character interactions and unique lines will change a lot. Been many times I lacked favour with a faction to get the dialogue I wanted.
I really like the setting and some of the characters. Making decisions and rulings is definitely the stronger point of the game. Decisions do have a fairly large impact.
The biggest issue I have with the game is depth of combat. Compared to Pillars of Eternity, you have a lot fewer tools to customize and min-max your party. You are only allowed to take 4 companions and you cannot create custom characters. While the party members the game hands you are not as bad as those in Pillars in terms of usefulness, I still find it annoying that I have to make do with what I get. Most of the frustration stems from the fact that the amount of enemies per encounter are similar to Pillars, but you only have 4 party members. The enemy will still prioritize your casters/ranged and will, at times, just run after those despite engagements. As a result you pretty much have to fight in corners/doors or build your party extremely tanky, because it's nigh impossible to keep the massive amount of enemies locked to your tanks otherwise. I went for the latter and focused on defense (1h+shield) and spells on pretty much all my party members. Playing on hard, a few hours into the game that combination just becomes stupidly strong and I certainly don't want to go back to the way I did it at first (2 tanks, 2 ranged), which was just so much harder. I think that only the beginning is somewhat hard, since you have very little tools to use and very little control over what tools you can actually use. Also some enemies have abilities that, when they hit, deal like 90+ damage against a tank with ~150 HP.
Those are things that you don't know during character creation, though. Which is another big point of annoyance that made me restart the playthrough with a fresh character. -putting points into combat skills is fairly pointless, since those level up insanely fast anyway -picking frost/lightning is essentially a waste, because you get those sigils less than an hour into the game pretty much for free, while I haven't seen Atrophy sigils at all thus far. -get at least 30 points in Lore, Subterfuge and Athletics. Those come up in dialogue and environmental interactions a lot and level slower than combat skills. That is especially true when you start with low values, since you gain points in those for using them, so if you cannot use them due to a low starting value, you level much slower, etc. -you get to spend only 1 point per level on your skill trees. For the playstyle I picked, selecting the right "class" combination at the beginning saves a few valuable points. Sunder, for example, is further down the Power tree than Shield Slam (or whatever it's called) in the defense tree. So unless you plan on leveling those trees anyway, Sunder is just a much better choice in terms of skill point distribution
The companion combo system would be nice, if it weren't for the low range and the annoying engagements. If you select a combo while the main and companion are too far away from each other, they tend to run towards each other and ignore all engagements on the way, in some cases instantly killing a character. Because you are locked into engagements, it's really hard to get in a good position to use the consistently. It also requires the actions of both characters, which, in some cases, is simply less efficient than just using normal skills with both of them without having to struggle with proper positioning.
ok the combat and class system is bad, it has no depth nor balance. Pillars was better. Story and dialogues feel better to me, it feels more alive than pillars and i feel like i actually am an arbitrator at times.
Its also too short and i do not appreciate sudden endings. I can live with cliffhangers like for example mass effect 1, it still ended in a satisfying way. But just rolling credits and leaving you wondering will not exactly make me buy the next one.
Ok somethng longer on combat as thats is my area of expertise:
They tried to make it "easier" for people more interested in the story i think, but thats what difficulty is for. Systems like the accuracy and deflection one are defanged and your choices matter much less in both good and bad directions. Crowd control and debuffing is also MIA, so what you do is spam damage faster than the enemy. And then you give everyone a defensive buff and heal spell because everyone can cast spells. Autoattacks seem useless to me, spamming abilities is the way to go and magic has a alot of abilities for no investment.
There are not enough good talents, so pillars feels superior with its strict class system that ends up producing a lot of exciting level ups. And also pillars with the last patches managed to produce a lot of different ways to play classes, tyranny for now at least feels very samey for every char.
So yeah, dont buy the game for combat, they failed that. I do hope POE2 does not go this route, then they slowly become bioware.
I like the story component of the game. A lot of dialogue is bland since you talk about the same thing with 6 different people from the same faction and thus get next to identical answers.
What it does great though is having impact from your alignment with factions. Meaning your previous choices can force combat on you or allow you to talk your way through things. Occasionally this gets annoying since it is impossible to solve it as you want since the situation doesn't allow it due to previous choices.
I did not play it for combat, so don't really care about that portion. Agreeing with abilities being much better than auto attacks and that everybody should have a spell or two on them.
I will have to disagree with the CC comments. Later on with a lot stacked into duration increase and with high lore so the spells could be improved one can aoe stun for 3 seconds with a spell that takes 3 seconds to cast. I assume one could build an entire party to chain CC with different types of spells so they don't hit their resistances and do fine in combat since CC spells also deal good damage.
My biggest problem with the combat was with the "monk" character one gets. It would not auto attack unless a weapon was equipped. I assume that gets somewhat solved later on when there are a lot of skills for the ai to use but I ended up not using unarmed combat due to that.
Roughly 20 hour long campaign. Assume different choices would make it take different amounts of time since you go to different areas and face other kind of opponents. I realise as I am writing this that I forgot to go back to small areas that were locked when you first hit them to see if I could open them in act 3.
I think I will replay this in a while when it isn't as fresh and do a different faction or none at all.
Btw, was there any way to grind experience and money in the game? Didn't notice any when playing, guess money can be made with followers making stuff and then selling it I guess.
On October 19 2016 02:09 andrewlt wrote: Obsidian let their kickstarter backers write overly pretentious drivel and included them in the game. You can read them by talking to NPCs who have gold plated names. People who didn't follow the game's development didn't know about this and accidentally read multiple below 50 Shades of Gray level fanfics. I read a few before looking it up online and realizing how pointless it was.
It comes from the same human emotions that lead English and Literature majors to act superior by pretending to enjoy a James Joyce novel.
They did the same with Pillars, the gravestones especially really broke the fourth wall. Better or worse than Pillars? I enjoyed Pillars immensely.
On October 19 2016 02:09 andrewlt wrote: Obsidian let their kickstarter backers write overly pretentious drivel and included them in the game. You can read them by talking to NPCs who have gold plated names. People who didn't follow the game's development didn't know about this and accidentally read multiple below 50 Shades of Gray level fanfics. I read a few before looking it up online and realizing how pointless it was.
It comes from the same human emotions that lead English and Literature majors to act superior by pretending to enjoy a James Joyce novel.
They did the same with Pillars, the gravestones especially really broke the fourth wall. Better or worse than Pillars? I enjoyed Pillars immensely.
That comment was regarding pillars. There is no such thing in Tyranny.
I personally enjoyed Pillars more but Tyranny feels like the better game. I enjoyed Pillars more since it was a long time since I played a game of that type while I now don't have that same feeling amplifying it. I enjoyed the game anyway.
On November 13 2016 11:12 Yurie wrote: I did not play it for combat, so don't really care about that portion. Agreeing with abilities being much better than auto attacks and that everybody should have a spell or two on them.
I will have to disagree with the CC comments. Later on with a lot stacked into duration increase and with high lore so the spells could be improved one can aoe stun for 3 seconds with a spell that takes 3 seconds to cast. I assume one could build an entire party to chain CC with different types of spells so they don't hit their resistances and do fine in combat since CC spells also deal good damage.
Btw, was there any way to grind experience and money in the game? Didn't notice any when playing, guess money can be made with followers making stuff and then selling it I guess.
As I mentioned earlier, I went to the extreme and played 1 tank with 3 spellcasters in the back, which made the difficulty pretty much trivial. Since I was using Lightning/Frost spells as my main source of damage, I got a lot of free CC. With 3 characters spamming AoE spells, encounters would usually end within seconds, regardless of how many enemies were present. I suffered 1 death early on and had to use less than 10 rests due to my party setup.
It's a shame that the game ended right when I was starting to get to the juicy spell combinations (requiring 150+ Lore), which made the sudden ending even more obnoxious. There were no really big or challenging bosses either. Just slaughtering groups of 5-10 braindead enemies certainly didn't appeal to me.
I didn't see the need to grind money, I had >30 iron rings towards the end and a ton of valuable items in my inventory. Speaking of items: As someone who used mainly 1h+shield and staffs, there were very little artifact items of those categories in the game. It felt like more than half of all artifact weapons (or other weapons of higher quality) are 2h swords/hammers/whatever. I didn't notice any experience grinds either, just more efficient ways to level. That includes always spending money on training at every level and always picking lore/subterfuge/athletics choices during dialogue and environmental interactions.
On November 13 2016 20:25 iPlaY.NettleS wrote: Better or worse than Pillars? I enjoyed Pillars immensely.
Pillars was way more satisfying and challenging to play. The combat was more complex, character classes had more depth, more interesting skills... and, most importantly, the fights were much much more difficult and tactical. Tyranny felt likes a dumbed-down version of Pillars with a focus on telling a story (or more like a "pick-your-story thing) that ended prematurely halfway through. I played through Pillars 3 times back-to-back right after release to try new class combination and higher difficulty (hard, PotD and PotD solo). I don't see myself playing through Tyranny again, it simply doesn't offer enough in terms of gameplay mechanics that would warrant it.
On November 13 2016 11:12 Yurie wrote: I did not play it for combat, so don't really care about that portion. Agreeing with abilities being much better than auto attacks and that everybody should have a spell or two on them.
I will have to disagree with the CC comments. Later on with a lot stacked into duration increase and with high lore so the spells could be improved one can aoe stun for 3 seconds with a spell that takes 3 seconds to cast. I assume one could build an entire party to chain CC with different types of spells so they don't hit their resistances and do fine in combat since CC spells also deal good damage.
Btw, was there any way to grind experience and money in the game? Didn't notice any when playing, guess money can be made with followers making stuff and then selling it I guess.
As I mentioned earlier, I went to the extreme and played 1 tank with 3 spellcasters in the back, which made the difficulty pretty much trivial. Since I was using Lightning/Frost spells as my main source of damage, I got a lot of free CC. With 3 characters spamming AoE spells, encounters would usually end within seconds, regardless of how many enemies were present. I suffered 1 death early on and had to use less than 10 rests due to my party setup.
It's a shame that the game ended right when I was starting to get to the juicy spell combinations (requiring 150+ Lore), which made the sudden ending even more obnoxious. There were no really big or challenging bosses either. Just slaughtering groups of 5-10 braindead enemies certainly didn't appeal to me.
I didn't see the need to grind money, I had >30 iron rings towards the end and a ton of valuable items in my inventory. Speaking of items: As someone who used mainly 1h+shield and staffs, there were very little artifact items of those categories in the game. It felt like more than half of all artifact weapons (or other weapons of higher quality) are 2h swords/hammers/whatever. I didn't notice any experience grinds either, just more efficient ways to level. That includes always spending money on training at every level and always picking lore/subterfuge/athletics choices during dialogue and environmental interactions.
I ran out of money since I used the forge a lot. I ended at 11 artifacts I think, might have been 12. I found one shield that I had to research to make. Think there was 3 one handed weapons I had and 2 staffs. Found 0 helms though. Upgrading all the equipment everybody was using at the forge also racked up huge expenses. Was easy to burn through money if one tried, would have liked to be able to spend more on random stuff, not that they would have made me stronger, just that I could hoard 10 pages in the stash that way. :p
As for xp, I realised one had to use trainers to get high levels. Having to go to a center or spire to do that just sucked though, so would end up missing levels here and there due to progressing between the story areas instead. Was really visible when companions not in the party ended up 5-6 levels higher than the ones actually being used.
Something that bothered me was how random equipment found quickly escalated to near the best one could find on high level enemies or from doing multiple forge upgrades on something. The world setting saying forging was a limiter for the armies, then having masterwork stuff becoming common suddenly.
edit. Played a bit on a second play-through just to test other paths and the difference is massive. Even in act 1 I managed to see new scenes and I think I got one of my companions permanently killed. We'll see once I continue it sometime in the future. In the start of act 2 I got new path choices due to that as well, interesting stuff.
On November 14 2016 21:00 No Swear wrote: Only played like 8 hours so far but already had more fun then the entirety of PoE, expectations weren't high but still....not dissapointed so far
Most common complaint seems to be in combat and abrupt ending (feels like a set up for DLCs). I honestly suggest a replay since the game has 3-4 major paths you can play with different scenes even if the areas are mostly the same. Even the early conquest choices has fast impact. From my limited play they seem to have succeeded in making replays different.
Started my second character yesterday, going for totally different route and even the beginning feels different.
The choices really matter, the world is quite interesting (even if a bit undeveloped), dialogues are good and the whole war is done in such a way even simple quests feels like important matter. Combat is a bit worse than PoE. There's still the issue with difficulty: playing on Hard the first time there were like few major fights that gave me trouble, but around halfway of second act my party become so strong I didn't even had to micromanage them all at all times. Big difference how the combat works once you unlock all those skills or obtain high level spells.
I chose the Disfavoured at the start and thought i would play a mostly neutral, lawful clerk of my Master Tunon and Kyros. However, what i got is a killing spree from start to finish. I how now finished the Kingdom of Stalwart and the only person i did not have to outright kill was the infant regent. I do understand that the Disfavoured are not the good guys, they are racist sociopaths, but basically going to every quest, having to talk to the people, trying 2 or 3 sentences to persuade them to surrender and then they prefer to die is stupid. At least before you had to decide, you sometimes were able to frcefully bend the knees of some people, as that is the rapist serial killer way of the Scarlet Chorus, now it's just boring. I then went to Lethians Crossing and this time there is no way to cross a simple bridge then, again, kill the people. The most frustrating thing about it though is, that all the detail of the more nuanced plot for the scarlet chorus (or independent) way is there, you just can't do anything with the information and have to kill the people that just told you what troubles them and all as if you were not their sworn enemy. If this continues with me having to kill every single guard in lethians crossing i will consider restarting.
Then there is the matter of the balance. The game seems to be all over the place with stats being somewhat unimportant or equipment being stupid. Let's take the heavy armor. The fact that a person clad in heavy armor reduces it's damage by at least 50% compared to leather is ridiculous, especially as using metal means you get nothing for your finesse. Having a tank use only leather armor might in some cases be better then having him use metal, in the same time he would do more damage. Quickness is super unimportant as it doesn't affect your recovery so beside mages it is basically useless. Mages on the other hand can run around in full plate and not really feel bad about it as the only thing that goes up is the recovery after the skill, but as you are usually cycling through 5 or 6 spells anyway with cds of 20 seconds upwards, who cares. In the end though, the biggest problem so far for me is that there are so few different enemies. Playing 5 hours against the same groups of people is kinda boring.
After reading this thread, you guys made me wanna play PoE again. I quit that game after a short while cuz it was to hard for me, so much stuff i didnt understand.
So poe is better than this game? Thinking of installing PoE again someday and perhaps play it after reading about it, also it got patches appaerantly, didnt know that.
I chose the Disfavoured at the start and thought i would play a mostly neutral, lawful clerk of my Master Tunon and Kyros. However, what i got is a killing spree from start to finish. I how now finished the Kingdom of Stalwart and the only person i did not have to outright kill was the infant regent. I do understand that the Disfavoured are not the good guys, they are racist sociopaths, but basically going to every quest, having to talk to the people, trying 2 or 3 sentences to persuade them to surrender and then they prefer to die is stupid. At least before you had to decide, you sometimes were able to frcefully bend the knees of some people, as that is the rapist serial killer way of the Scarlet Chorus, now it's just boring. I then went to Lethians Crossing and this time there is no way to cross a simple bridge then, again, kill the people. The most frustrating thing about it though is, that all the detail of the more nuanced plot for the scarlet chorus (or independent) way is there, you just can't do anything with the information and have to kill the people that just told you what troubles them and all as if you were not their sworn enemy. If this continues with me having to kill every single guard in lethians crossing i will consider restarting.
Then there is the matter of the balance. The game seems to be all over the place with stats being somewhat unimportant or equipment being stupid. Let's take the heavy armor. The fact that a person clad in heavy armor reduces it's damage by at least 50% compared to leather is ridiculous, especially as using metal means you get nothing for your finesse. Having a tank use only leather armor might in some cases be better then having him use metal, in the same time he would do more damage. Quickness is super unimportant as it doesn't affect your recovery so beside mages it is basically useless. Mages on the other hand can run around in full plate and not really feel bad about it as the only thing that goes up is the recovery after the skill, but as you are usually cycling through 5 or 6 spells anyway with cds of 20 seconds upwards, who cares. In the end though, the biggest problem so far for me is that there are so few different enemies. Playing 5 hours against the same groups of people is kinda boring.
You can talk past those people. The problem you have is the faction approval system. If you are known as an ally of the Disfavoured then the rebel factions will attack you. Any attempt to approach them will be seen as you trying to convert them as spies or imprison them when it is known the Disfavoured kills prisoners. If you don't go with either of the two starting factions it is possible to talk through future choices depending on other choices you make.
Basically the previous choices you have made exclude those options. Doing other choices will create enemies of other factions and so on. Pretty dynamic based on choices but static once they are made, maybe a bit too much.
There are mostly the same kind of enemies the entire game. They get stronger, groups get bigger and some random bosses are here and there but there are basically just humans, intelligent beasts and banes. The humans are part of different factions using different equipment and skills which is very noticeable on higher difficulties.
On November 17 2016 13:34 Foxxan wrote: After reading this thread, you guys made me wanna play PoE again. I quit that game after a short while cuz it was to hard for me, so much stuff i didnt understand.
So poe is better than this game? Thinking of installing PoE again someday and perhaps play it after reading about it, also it got patches appaerantly, didnt know that.
I think this game is better than PoE. PoE has more varied combat and something else I can't define right now going for it though. I have not played the DLC for the game so don't know if they are good or not. Will get around to it some day, was just not a huge fan of the combat system since there were too few skills at low levels, which the DLCs would not have a problem with. Kind of the same thing I had a problem with in Baldur's Gate 1, even if it is more realistic it isn't fun.
Just finished this game and I am a huge fan. I enjoyed it way more than PoE. Yes for the addons they should really work on fcombat balance and setup ,but that is basically my only complaint. The story is amazing! First time I ever felt like my decisions changed the game on a fundamental level. Usually you get one of three endings or something, but here I often thought "Wow, this just happened just because I did that?". I also never felt this much drawn into my own character. Also the thoughts I had during the game and my involvement in the actions of my own character was something I never experienced before. If you imagine some kind of character in PoE or BG for example, it kinda went down into being good or bad in the long run. But here you could oftentimes decide things on different levels, with completely different outcomes (that didnt feel forced to me). My ending didnt feel abrupt at all tbh. Granted I had read people were having a shorter game, but this is kinda to be expected if u bloat the amount of decisions like this. I knew I was coming near the end kinda from having been on every part of the map and I was also kinda happy that I didnt have to go into the drow-underworld and some strange fish-mosnter city I had nothing to do with. I was actually very surprised by my ending, especially since I hoped it to be like this, but usually you can't forge the game to have the ending u imagine. Even though I played on the second to last hardest difficulty the game got really easy towards the end. I completely fucked up my main character but the tidecaster and the beastman fucked shit up badly. Especially the beast man was extremely fun to play. I kinda disliked how u have to many spells, especially the synergy and artifact spells just got too much in the end. They should find a way to limit this. I found it kinda sad how the relationship towards my party was very based on the loyalty - fear system. Something not as obvious or at least not visible might have been more interesting. But still I liked how the party members commented on decisions and the story, even though they could have been a bit less flexible. If I betray everything one of my party members holds dear, he should just leave my party. But maybe I was jsut lucky. Overall I had a lot of fun playing this game and would recomment it to everyone, especially people who like BG2/PoE in a less combat and more story driven universe. Since I don' t care that mch about combat I'd give the game a 9/10.
On October 18 2016 20:49 LaNague wrote: and its free of 1000 mary sue backer NPCs, so thats good.
This, I kept reading all these "Oh-My-God-I'm-Being-So-Fucking-Literary" style gold-name-NPC "stories" thinking there must be something to this, after I couldn't take another one I looked it up........yeah...
PoE was a dissapointment imo, I tuned my hopes for Numenara waaay down since.
Still buying Tyranny though, they got us all by the balls :[
On November 14 2016 21:00 No Swear wrote: Only played like 8 hours so far but already had more fun then the entirety of PoE, expectations weren't high but still....not dissapointed so far
Ok, finished the game last night and Obsidian finally did it.
There is no way in hell I'm paying full price for Numenara, fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me, fool me thrice ? I don't think so. The short of it:
- Writers stop giving a fuck mid paragraph, most characters are complete schizzo's. Every little detail noted everywhere ("you see a ragged looking man, his clothes wear the grit and grime earned by many a hardship fought, although it's not quite clear if coming out on top would be something he's used to. His shoes-JEZUS CHRIST I GOT IT ALREADY) doesn't invoke imagination, it shuts it down. Mostly bad writing in general.
-No "CRPG" quests to speak of, zero creativity.
-Forgettable music (what music ?).
-Massive railroading in a game about choices, oh the (T)irony.
-Combat/equipment balance is all over the place.
-The "AAAAAAHOOOOOUUUAAAAAA HAAAAAOOOUUUUUU" had me in stitches coughing up my drink the first couple times, after that it made me want to just alt-f4/find the nearest Obsidian employee and kick his teeth in (so to speak).
-Towards the end it just completely falls apart, making the character feel like a total Mary Sue. A nice mix of cringe and nothing-makes-sense railroading.
-Replayability is nice, too bad I don't see myself touching it ever again.
-Obs:"I've got three words for you, Dee. El. Cee. Para:"Those aren't words" Obs:"Who cares?" O+P:"HARHARHARHARHAR"
-I don't think any game other than fighting-games and danmakus ever made me actually angry, and in those cases it's usually at myself. Didn't even watch the credits.
-The engine is (still) shit.
Yes I'm being a negative nancy, sorry not sorry. Learned my lesson though.....I hope lol.
edit: aaaand numenara is an inXile game, thank god
On December 01 2016 02:00 Waxangel wrote: Just finished replaying planescape: torment.... I guess I could pick this one up?
This game is much more combat focused. You will be forced to fight a lot of fights, your choices boil down to which factions you are fighting and helping. From none to one of the three different ones. Each area plays a bit differently depending on choices previously and not all can be completed in one play-through.
The entire game is built to show a compelling story the first time and then show totally different scenes if you pick another faction. The people giving the quests are different and the ones helping in different areas are also different.
I quit liked it but it is not very similar to planescape if you compare isometric cRPGs. That is Numenera that is coming soonish (don't know how good it is).
I enjoyed this game quite a bit, but I there were some things that kind of bothered me. Playing on hard, the combat started off difficult, but it kinda peaked for me around the first Havok fight (second tower). After that it kind turned into a cakewalk. Not only that but at that point they stop introducing new enemies, so it gets doubly repetitive.
About the choices, they felt impactful in the beggining, but I kinda felt unnecessarily forced into a path. For example, when going to the stone sea, my thoughts were "I want to investigate why the stone giant dude defected (that's my job) and meanwhile investigate another spire for myself". Instead I was forced to do the Disfavored questline and do a bunch of random shit for them to even reach the spire (my only alternative was to murder some random disfavored but that made no sense). I kind of wish they had focused more on your role investigating instead of it being "pick a side and play it out". The ending itself I didn't mind, there was no way they would have you taking on the big baddy without another game's worth of buildup
In PoE I was stuck in the final boss for a short while because it was the first time I actually faced a single strong enemy rather than constant grey mass of indifferent mob minions. Even the few supposed villains before that were all pretty much mob fights. It's amazing how little variation there was in 50+ hrs that it takes to complete the game.
Well I'm maybe halfway through act 2 on hard and it's been quite easy so far.A few challenging fights but nothing too crazy. What team are you guys running with and are you running seperate teams for bane areas?
My current party Charname (Fighter 1h/Shield) Verse Kills-In-Shadow Lantry
Sometimes i switch in Eb for the AOE spells when fighting larger groups but this current group does a decent job of just steamrolling everything.
Finished my second playthrough. First time was normal game on hard difficulty, second time I went for normal diff. but solo.
And it was super easy to be honest. The only hard fight was + Show Spoiler +
Voices of Nerat, because of the stuns which caused my char to lie down for minutes and absorb all damage in the world
. Fightint rest of archons was surprisingly easy, altho + Show Spoiler +
Ashe was a bit nasty with his tactic of sending bunch of people before him. Had to use some potions
.
Played 2h, heavy armor + magic. Started as a "debuffer/buffer" kinda mage, but I stopped with vigor and changed it to illusions + some fire weapon buff. Worked quite well.
First playthrough: Party and Scarlet Chorus allies (Normal) Caster. Second playthrough: Solo and rebel alliance (Hard, Iron man mode) 1h/Shield heavy armour.
Just finished my third playthrough, Solo, no allies (path of the damned.) 1h/Shield, Only light armour/leather evasion parry build.
Good stuff! PotD starts kinda rough but pretty soon it becomes way to easy just as it was on hard solo. Sword/Shield with 100% riposte is easy enough but when you factor in the fact that youre always gonna be hasted, mirror imaged and have 3 different weapon enchantments active (with volcanic weapon on them) it's a cakewalk. If you get the Bronze Brotherhood max favour ability as well you're indestructible. Just pull 2-3 packs, even on PotD, activate the BB favour ability with all your stuff active and everything dies soooooooooo fast. You don't even have to activate abilities. Everything gets riposted to death in seconds.
When surrounded by dual wielding opponents you're making like 20 AOE exploding shocking knockdowning attacks per second. It's hilarious. You just walk into mobs and your screen explodes ;d.
Additionally, bosses can't even touch you with 220+ (around 400 with mirror image) parry etc. I believe I ended with 25 might, 22 finesse, 21 vitality, and at least 15 in all other stats except quickness (useless stat).
Fun game, but too short, too abrupt and unsatisfying an ending with combat being too easy.
Will still play again after having played it through 3x for the disfavoured path . That should be compliment enough. Doesn't hold up to BG2 and PS Torment though with immersion and storywise for me personally.
Will still play again after having played it through 3x for the disfavoured path . That should be compliment enough. Doesn't hold up to BG2 and PS Torment though with immersion and storywise for me personally.
I think the DLC will be a big thing in this title considering the open end and that they even have a lot of empty tower markers in the game. After that is probably when one can decide the overall impact of the title. On its own it is weaker than either title but still a great game.
Based on PoE they will keep balancing the original game and updating the AI and balance when releasing them which is why they matter for the base game as well. BG2 was the same I think, less classes without the expansion.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
Pillars by far IMO; while Tyranny is considerably more challenging on PotD difficulty, Pillars' RP setting and party customization are simply excellent and allow for amazing combat and gameplay flexibility in general.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
Pillars by far IMO; while Tyranny is considerably more challenging on PotD difficulty, Pillars' RP setting and party customization are simply excellent and allow for amazing combat and gameplay flexibility in general.
How about the skills and stuff? Lots of auto attacking for melee chars? Is it the same mechanics from poe, "per rest", "Per encounter" is still there? Still "2 spells per encounter" and such or is it changed from unlimited casts? For example, barbarian can use 1ability infinite times in combat?
Any "new" stuff to classes? Or just something new from poe?
How is the class specialisation in tyranny? I have many questions i know, i have read about the game and watched videos but i cant find much at all about the skills and mechanics. I saw that its 4companions now at most? I like that if its the case. Also saw some talent trees which is good to.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
Baldur's Gate 2
I have tried to play it but i lose interest fast iam afraid. When i play PoE i read tooltips alot. In bg2, there are like no tooltips.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
Baldur's Gate 2
I have tried to play it but i lose interest fast iam afraid. When i play PoE i read tooltips alot. In bg2, there are like no tooltips.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
Pillars by far IMO; while Tyranny is considerably more challenging on PotD difficulty, Pillars' RP setting and party customization are simply excellent and allow for amazing combat and gameplay flexibility in general.
How about the skills and stuff? Lots of auto attacking for melee chars? Is it the same mechanics from poe, "per rest", "Per encounter" is still there? Still "2 spells per encounter" and such or is it changed from unlimited casts? For example, barbarian can use 1ability infinite times in combat?
Any "new" stuff to classes? Or just something new from poe?
How is the class specialisation in tyranny? I have many questions i know, i have read about the game and watched videos but i cant find much at all about the skills and mechanics. I saw that its 4companions now at most? I like that if its the case. Also saw some talent trees which is good to.
Yes per encounter abilities exist Yes per rest abilities exist unlimited casts for spells tho they have a cooldown. No this game is not a direct 1:1 copy of PoE. There are different classes/skills/talents
Party size is limited at 4. The player and all companions have unique talent trees.
On January 30 2017 14:34 Foxxan wrote: which combat is best, Pillars of eternity or this? The easy difficulty-no challenge aside, just the pure combat mechanics.
Pillars, a billion times. Tyranny is 100% based on cooldowns that you keep mashing for you main char and let the AI do it for you companions. Boring as fuck. Against the same enemies all game long. Again, not that exiting. While the story is somewhat decent, the gameplay is void. I mean, not saying you're not going to like it but you've been warned
Many consider combat in Tyranny to be quite boring, but I like it a lot, more than PoE's combat. In Tyranny there are a lot of skills that you can use during combat and since there are no distinct classes (you can progress your character in any way you want and companions have some variety as well) you can learn (and create) many spells. Abilities and spells can be used many times during combat (with cooldowns), combos with other party members are per encounter/rest since they're more powerful. So, even melee fighters have some abilities and spells beside just swinging their weapons around.
What I don't like about PoE's combat is the encounter design. I prefer fighting against enemies with some sort of personality, rather than just monsters. I also don't like that my mages have limited amount of spells and even some xaurip priests have simply cooldowns (I checked that by blocking on of those guys - he never ran out of spells).
I don't like combat in BG2 as well, it forces you to rely on mages to deal with protective spells.
Wanted to let you know that i will get this game. Now or when its on sale, probably now because i am not the waiting guy. Would be better if i waited actually since some patch might come along for example but i know me. The combat.. sounds better than PoE after reading the comments, ofcourse its hard know for sure.
In PoE, i amove my fellows, even after scaling up in the expansion. But i played on normal difficulty. Was frustrating to play against those banshees in the expansion since they CC you so hard, spells which makes you not able to do anything. So with priest you have to use the immune to those things which isnt the greatest gameplay.
So might have missed some kind of depth since i played on normal difficulty. Ah well, these kind of games are good to killing irl time, i usually skip alot of text in them.
I've been a follower of Josh Sawyer's posts across the Internet for quite a while, even more so now that PoE2 has been announced and you really should rest assured that appart from the infolink type of stuff (which was actually cool), not much is being borrowed from Tyranny. Have faith in the guy, he knows what he's doing!
I believe the experience varies aswell into what difficulty you play, also what kind of party you have. I played normal and i just amoved pretty much in poe.
EDIT: Just bought the game. Why the hell should i wait for a sale when the sale can take several months.
Idk, you probably should've waited for a sale. It's worth a playthrough but it can't really stand up to standards set by Pillars. Also you might well be in for a bummer if you don't care for lore/plot much, cause I'd say that's the only thing Tyranny excels at (up until the late game hits atleast (^: ).
On February 02 2017 07:56 Merany wrote: I've been a follower of Josh Sawyer's posts across the Internet for quite a while, even more so now that PoE2 has been announced and you really should rest assured that appart from the infolink type of stuff (which was actually cool), not much is being borrowed from Tyranny. Have faith in the guy, he knows what he's doing!
If he knew what he was doing, PoE would have been a good game LOL. He just made a weaker game system than BG games by all his "I know better" shit.
BG2 (emphasis on 2, BG1 was average at best) being the greatest RPG ever created (and I know what I'm talking about, I've been doing full SCS playthroughs religiously every year since I'm 15) does not make PoE a bad game. Quite the contrary. I had a blast playing it the first time at release and an ever greater time replaying it in PotD with 3.0 patch and expansions...
But I guess I'll not convince you since I recognize your username from a well known RPG website
On February 03 2017 21:12 Merany wrote: BG2 (emphasis on 2, BG1 was average at best) being the greatest RPG ever created (and I know what I'm talking about, I've been doing full SCS playthroughs religiously every year since I'm 15) does not make PoE a bad game. Quite the contrary. I had a blast playing it the first time at release and an ever greater time replaying it in PotD with 3.0 patch and expansions...
But I guess I'll not convince you since I recognize your username from a well known RPG website
No you will not
I spent 100h playing PoE and nothing you can say can beat my own extensive experience.
On February 03 2017 23:23 iLovePartinG wrote: That is, unless he whips out his own extensive experience and starts measuring it against yours, the way customs go on the internet forums (^:
The point of my post was that stuff like this is mostly subjective and at best you can argue the other person didn't spend enough time to fully experience the product and as a result missed something really important. My 100h here says I didn't miss anything so game changing that would magically turn PoE into a good game.
So first impression is that the games combat is just terrible. I have more motivation to start over in poe and play through than to continue with this game.
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ciE9R2p.png)
