[too many objects, collecting]

"That was not the point I made. The way it is done, somehow influences the MC ( you, the player) to collect an endless assortment of items inside your inventory for selling them later to get enough money to buy a high quality item needed for higher level and difficult combat. ... it is the “Trade, Identify, Repair” interface concept that I do not find particularly interesting."

Repair is realistic, and I don't really see it as being something that can be ignored. Identify is much less necessary. Perhaps a powerful enchantment on something might need a wizard to decipher and activate, but as it works in Divinity, it just keeps you from using powerful equipment before teleporting back to town. That I agree about.

For trade... I don't really want to do away with gold, since I would like to see a shop where you could custom order the most powerful equipment (perhaps after gathering rare ingredients). A bounty on monsters could have gold only being dropped, leaving just purchased equipment...
Siege of Avalon is set in a city under siege (surprisingly enough). Pretty much all equipment is obtained by taking it off the bodies of the enemy. You can carry loot back to sell, but the main use of gold is to purchase training in various skills, and after awhile there is little point in even checking the equipment your enemies carry.

I don't really see one design being superior to another, just different. Certainly too much collecting loot to trade for better equipment can make a game a boring treadmill. No loot could lead to less variety in weapons and the required tactics. I can't say I found this to be a problem in games designed to have certain weapons available in certain shops as you advance in the game, though.

In Gorasul (very short game) you start off with a 'sentient' weapon, which gains experience and levels up. Perhaps a loot-less, gold-less, trade-less game could give you a certain amount of 'energy' per level you could infuse into your equipment to improve it.


"Design the game in such a way that makes a specific weapon more effective against a specific class of enemy and THAT should be your better choice as a combat pretext."

Agreed. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/up.gif" alt="" />


"You do lose reputation points by joining the thieves’ guild and dogs begin chasing you as an enemy."

Your reputation is based on the general population's opinion, which tends to frown on thievery. Never the less, thieves in the guild are friendly, so attacking them unprovoked is seen as a bad thing. Dogs become hostile after killing a dog or killing a wolf near a dog. I think Lar the dog is always hostile (maybe), if you enter the back room in the Blue Boar inn after the dwarf leaves.


"A thief with level five of lock picking cannot pick the lock of a game critical door!"

While not the only way to restrict access to certain areas until relevant quests or plot developments occur, I don't see lockpick-proof locks as unreasonable. There have been a couple discussions about this, where warriors should be able to break down a door if they are strong enough, and mages should have a spell to open locks.


"I do not see what is so cool about having to sleep or to drink a potion after you repair your weapon because it was charmed with a very large vitality and a very large manna stones!"

Any bonuses have to be removed when you remove the equipment. If re-equipping something with a vitality bonus brought your health up, that would lead to other problems, like being able to heal yourself by swapping equipment back and forth. I agree it is a pain when you have to remove your equipment for some reason, though. I don't recall another game that had a better design for this situation...


[survivors (thieves) helping people]

"I am talking about inconsistency again dear RAZE.
Are you supporting the game on teaching young gamers that steeling is not evil?"

Of course not. I have a rather Machiavellian approach to games; Divinity does not penalize stealing if you do not get caught, so I steal.

I would like to see a game designed with much more emphasis on a system of honour (I have not seen a recent one). Your actions could affect your aura, which at least some of the general population can read. Any stealing would have negative consequences (higher prices, etc). Repeated robberies or murder would be investigated my powerful mages and could result in a bounty on your head or being barred from towns. As a save-the-world game, evil characters could not succeed. In order for thieves or assassins to be viable characters, the game would have to be set up as good-vs-evil, and you influence the outcome of the conflict.


"Games could be very dangerous psychological tools if they were not carefully designed."

No comment. A debate on that would very likely be unproductive.


"You have no problems with tens of (passive) skills showing up in your selection tablet covering your screen!"

Actually, that is quite annoying, especially for a warrior who tends to have more passive skills than active. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" /> I wouldn't mind being able to rearrange the layout, either.


"The design concept of reaching an experience level through “kills” after which you may learn bless is definitely ridiculous. Being taught the skill of blessing spells after saving a child from a vampire is absolutely wonderful. The more you fight with a sword the higher your skill with swords is quite reasonable, but selecting a higher skill in bow arching after gaining points by sword fighting seems to be acceptable for you."

Agreed, this level of detail would certainly make a better game. It is just a question of the time and resources to put into something I think would be a minor point to most people buying the game.


"So it must have been quite boring for you to start out in DD with a chair leg with which you smashed skeletons. I hope you did not steel from Lanilor’s house while he was frozen or from George while he shows you his plant to get a better weapon to begin with. I think that giving that weapon to you by your mentor is much better than teaching you how to steel it, don’t you agree oh divine one?"

Of course I stole from them. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/badsmile2.gif" alt="" /> A gift/reward after training could be a better method of getting a weapon, though.


"Food and activity builds the muscles in real life so why cannot they do the same in a game!
Offence is measured from the fact of initiative attacks rather than being a response to aggression stimuli while defence is inseparable from armour and the skill of using a shield."

Food by itself does not increase your strength, but does effect your general health. In Divinity, defense affects whether or not you are hit; the armour rating helps determine how much damage is done once you are hit.


"I never disputed switching weapons. I only suggested the timing of introducing a new weapon to enjoy learning the differences. This reminds me of the redundant vampire issue. ... That vampire should have been killed by a silver dagger poisoned with garlic and charmed with manna drain for example to be agreeable with mythology. Naturally you may choose another weapon and die. The vampire of Verdisitis was absolutely redundant and boring."

Agreed on the method of killing (a pointy stick should have been required, at least), but I don't think two of a monster type is particularly redundant. Maybe the first vampire could lead you to its master in verdistis, with a couple gouls guarding the entrance...


[Bow of hilfin]
"You can take out mighty opponents early in the game by such a ranged weapon without being mighty but agility is a must."

Agreed; weapon classes in Divinity are not equally balanced.


"In Iona’s dungeon first prison I could have killed my guards by electric bolts and took the key by telekinesis if magic was not disabled to force being rescued by the cat Arhu."

Would you lock up a mage without neutralizing his ability to kill your guards and bypass your restraints?


"I also wished I had the option to escape from the castle and humiliation through a dungeon hatch and a corridor from which I fall at unavoidable rotten wooden flooring into Iona’s prison unconscious to wake up on her mocking voice then escape by using my magical skills."

That would work.


[side quests]

"I do not understand your point in considering “linearity” to be against game play.
Side quests and branching are very welcome when the game designer abides by the branching rules and hierarchy. I can have a major quest containing four sub quests each of which with different branching levels."

The game could certainly handle out-of-order actions and long quests better.
If you mean linear just in terms of little cross dependency between quests, that is ok (as long as it doesn't result in short, simplified quests).
My problem with linearity is referring to your choices at any one point. If you have to deliver something to get some information to find an item to trade for passage to the next area to defeat a monster to get the next quest, that is not very fun.


"The story and the game design do have a huge space for improvement but it is too late to say that with a game already out."

It is probably not too late to influence Divinity 2, though.


[keys/lever being close to what they open]

"I know that RAZE but where is the fun in stumbling into a key to a door right outside doors?
Entering closed places should be given by a quest that hands the key over or give hints on its place and there is the fun."

True. There did seem to be more locked gates under ground that required to give you a shortcut back somewhere after you had cleared the area, or to separate groups of monsters.


[the easter egg area]

"With all my respect to your taste that area is totally outside the game.
You lose your teleporter in there which is a very dear price for a silly enhancement of armour."

You can use the teleporter stone without dropping it. Click on the stone in your inventory, or use the appropriate teleporter icon on the right column in the skills selection menu.


"You talk to the teem that created this game, which I said was very cute but completely irrelevant to the story.
You kill the bugs (debug) which is also very cute, but what the hell does 2002 gold coins and five “Dwarfish-Ale” bottles have got to do with this game?"

An easter egg often refers to a hidden area or feature that is usually trigger by something obscure enough that it could not be found by trial and error or by accident. There was a certain combination of mouse clicks, button presses and the MS Excel 95 help screen which would pop up a window with a 3D maze. Upon successfully navigating the maze and getting up a narrow ramp (not trivial with the 1st person perspective), you got to a room with paintings on the wall, and the one at the end had all the names of the programmers scrolling by.

The Divinity easter egg was not meant to be relevant to the game plot, and if they wanted to be known that wasn't the most effective tactic. I don't see a problem with it, though they could just have easily made it an option after you complete the game, for example, and provided a different method of upgrading the silver armour.


"It sounds right, linear or not. The game could be made very interesting through a better story line and exceptionally clever riddles now and then interleaved with combat. I do not think that that would be boring at all. The “enemy” should be based on guards that guard the riddle and to have access to the riddle you have to fight your way through. How can that be boring!"

Myst with occasional fighting? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />
More puzzles would be nice, though I don't know if a puzzle RPG cross would work.


[elven love / necklace quest sucking]

"I am glad you agree with me on this."

Actually, I'm agreeing with you a bit more in general with this reply.


"I do not even find any good reason to be given a quest to save Zandalor at all while he is the mighty mage. ... A much better story plot is showing Zandalor and the third marked one in a flashback clip after a clip on the death of the second marked one at the D. B. Inn when the hero goes to meet Zandalor there."

Zandalor can not be too strong, if your character is the only hope to save the world. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggrin.gif" alt="" />
That part of the plot could have been setup differently, though (such as your suggestion). If you pretty much know Janus is evil and he may suspect you could be the Divine One (or at least realize your good deeds are interfering with his plans), there is not much to explain the lack of confrontation. He may not be powerful enough to act openly, and you may not be ready to become the Divine One, but the plot could use something to justify just being tossed in a dungeon. I did not have a problem with that at the time, and am not particularly disturbed by it after over-analyzing the plot now. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/winkwink.gif" alt="" />


"You see, in my opinion, the story is really bad and the game design could have been a lot much better."

Perhaps if the plot was written as a book, then adapted to a game it would hold up better to your scrutiny. As far as game plots, though, it is pretty good (at least in my experience).


[getting the key for the quarantine area from Lain]

"Does he tell you about it or you just randomly grab all keys that show on pressing the “Alt” key all over the game locations and then begin opening doors illegally?"

He talks about visiting a friend just before the quarantine went into effect. Later, you can ask him if he still has access to his friend, and he admits he has a key to the back door of the house, and gives it to you when you ask.