Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#693247 13/10/20 10:08 AM
Joined: Oct 2020
V
Valtaya Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Lets go straight to the feedback. Only 6 hours in (and only in the Druid Grove) and already hate the game. No fun so far, only frustration. After every "situation" I fear what Larian will throw at me around the next corner.
That for the short version.

The long version:
I am GMing D&D games for about 35 years now, so lets say I have "some" experience. When I look at what I went through in BG3 so far, Larian falls into a typical GM trap: they mistake difficulty without reward with challenge. If a game becomes too difficult without reward, it is just frustrating. And yes, when its too easy, it could become boring. I can say, all the people I ever GMed a D&D session for, noone would return to that "campaign" after the first evening. Maybe if some "difficulty" settings would be introduced (like easy + 2 to saving throws/+2 to skill checks, but do not fall into the trap to think "well its easy, so lets reward the players with less exp).

So lets dive a little deeper... it starts with the tutorials, that are shown as extra videos. That is not going to work, especialy when not everything is explained, and right now, not everything is... ie my first jump, tutorial says jump, ok, but then I had to search for 5min before I found a spot from where I could jump to the other side. That is frustrating.
Then we go to the first battle with 3 imps, again, not much explained there (actualy nothing). And why is there no "wait" option that puts the character at the end of the que? So I can actualy just perform my actions or skip. Hm (do not forget, this isnt just pen&paper d&d but also a video game). Then I activate a spell, select a target, it all looks good, the character moves on her own to a spot closer to the enemy so she can actually cast (good) but the char moved to a spot from where she could not cast and it failed, and I could not revert it.... f... sorry, reload (learned lesson: do it yourself, funny enough, original sin had that sorted out and worked)
Then you run a bit more through the ship and finaly enter the helm.
Thats where it gets interesting for the first time. 3 imps in the way, actualy you do not have to kill them (d&d style) and just rush past them to finish your objective, but that is not said anywhere. How shall a regular player know it? Its a video game, that is usualy "first kill everything in the way and then go for your objective". The not so funny part here is, if you rush past the imps and dont kill them and you activate the device, you are rewarded no exp!... so it would have been better to kill all imps fast enough... btw I only figured out I can skip the fighting, because the game crashed after the cutscene and I had to go through again, not wanting to waste my time with the fight... surprise it worked, surprise no exp. yay
And then you are in the wilderness. At some point you encounter a dying Ilithid with 3 charmed people. They stop fighting in the second round. Then you can approach the Illithid. And you have to pass 2 "rather" difficult (both times 14) checks one for wisdom and one for int to not die and kill the mind flayer and... are rewarded no exp for that. So, totaly pointless (btw no skill check so far rewarded anything).
And it continues, first, it is a video game and party based, so why isnt the best person available taken for a job automaticaly (like Wasteland), why do I have to manualy select a person who does the interacting? I can understand it when just one person does the interaction (like with the Ilithid before), but when the whole party is involved? When that happens, it is as if noone else would exist. Second, a good gm offer his players a variety of options so they can succeed with different means (ie checks for str, dex, con, int, wis, cha and/or even various skills), BG3 not so much, there is always the default option that is like 99% the bad one. And just one special option, and you do not dare to fail that, or it gets worse even more. Like with the girl you have to "save" from the druids, no matter what you do, she dies. Except you pass various checks (not just one, nope, its always at least 2), and difficult ones at that too... I had to pass all with 16... wtf, at level 2? (what is the goal of the game, fail everything, finish the game, somehow, export your char, import it, replay BG3 with a lvl 20 char for real now, is that actualy a good plan? I dont think so.)
Same with the Druid Healr (Netti?)... so she poisons me, and then I had to pass 3!!!!!!!!! checks (and no reward)... sorry but who designed that, why do I have to pass 3 checks? Well of course 2 were 14 and one 16... fail. Had to reload, so I did not let her poison me... learing from the situation before, I took my high dex rogue wo talk to her and did an average dex skill check, succeeded and ... nothing, had to pass 2 more. Again no reward, but why 2 more (btw there is a bug, my companions talk to me now as if I were poisoned, I had to talk to Nettie again, so now I have 2times the wyvern poison) and no exp reward. So frustrating and pointless.
To sum it up: default action = bad, failed skill check = bad, skill checks are so difficult that they 90% fail, at least 2 skill checks in every interaction
There is no progress unless you reload and reload and reload (thats why I am still in the grove after more then 6 hours)
And last but not least, the fighting... my party lvl 2, enemies so far lvl 2, enemies 100% success at saving throws, 100% hit chance. my party 0% saving throws and every 2nd hit is a critical miss. do you know why d&d is so good (at least in my opinion)? Because npcs follow the same rules as pcs. A lvl 1 fighter is a lvl 1 fighter, does not matter if it is a hero or a bandit. But in BG3 the npcs act all like as if they were at least 5 levels higher.

so, after about 1 day of playing BG3, just frustration, no fun

Joined: Jun 2014
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Jun 2014
Oh come on, a TPK on the first session is quintessential D&D. Tomb of Horrors?

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
It's been mentioned in a few places now, but Larian's idea for this EA release was to 'encourage' people to play in a more evil role, so they could gather more data on this aspect as more people tend to go for good options all the time. So the situations you mention are pretty much railroading you into the evil option, ie. killing Nettie to get the antidote (btw I have also experienced this bug, where she talks to you as if you are poisoned even if you persuaded her not to previously).

As others have mentioned, the idea is that the game will (eventually) have enough depth so that 'winning' every conversation check is not required in order to make satisfactory progress - by save-scumming checks you are potentially missing out on 'alternative' content from the failed check, which may have repercussions later on in the story.

The situation with the imps and the helm objective, well that requires a little 'outside of the box' thinking on the part of the player. Same with the illithid and fisherfolk - when they become hostile that doesn't mean you have to attack them, you can target the illithid with your first attack which will release them from it's control. As a DM of 35 years I'm a little surprised that this not only didn't occur to you, but you think it is a fault of the game. And a level 1 player attempting to battle wits with a mind flayer... how do you really think this action should play out?

I and many others agree that there needs to be a system for rewarding non-combat XP, perhaps this is something they have in the pipeline. Also some of the other issues like spell movement are clearly bugs that need to be rectified. Again, EA.

In summary though, I think there are reasons for most of your issues which hopefully now make a bit more sense to you.


Joined: Oct 2020
V
member
Offline
member
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by jonn
It's been mentioned in a few places now, but Larian's idea for this EA release was to 'encourage' people to play in a more evil role, so they could gather more data on this aspect as more people tend to go for good options all the time. So the situations you mention are pretty much railroading you into the evil option, ie. killing Nettie to get the antidote (btw I have also experienced this bug, where she talks to you as if you are poisoned even if you persuaded her not to previously).

As others have mentioned, the idea is that the game will (eventually) have enough depth so that 'winning' every conversation check is not required in order to make satisfactory progress - by save-scumming checks you are potentially missing out on 'alternative' content from the failed check, which may have repercussions later on in the story.

The situation with the imps and the helm objective, well that requires a little 'outside of the box' thinking on the part of the player. Same with the illithid and fisherfolk - when they become hostile that doesn't mean you have to attack them, you can target the illithid with your first attack which will release them from it's control. As a DM of 35 years I'm a little surprised that this not only didn't occur to you, but you think it is a fault of the game. And a level 1 player attempting to battle wits with a mind flayer... how do you really think this action should play out?

I and many others agree that there needs to be a system for rewarding non-combat XP, perhaps this is something they have in the pipeline. Also some of the other issues like spell movement are clearly bugs that need to be rectified. Again, EA.

In summary though, I think there are reasons for most of your issues which hopefully now make a bit more sense to you.



But it is the game's fault, because Larian expects you to know everything about the DoS system, the D&D system in the latest edition and have a really good grasp of gameplay tactics and an inquisitive mind with good intuition, as well as an awful amount of luck. That is way too much to ask for.

Your example is great. I did not even know I could attack the Illithid, because I did not even see it under the debris, and he never lit up. Oh the loading screen tells me that I can attack environment objects and neutral people with STRG, but they do not tell me how I see all of the possible interactions. For me the only visible options were persuasion and attacking.

Nettie is another great example of the game not giving you crucial information. Again you are presented with attacking and persuasion. However there are at least 5 ways to deal with the situation, including pickpocketing, something never explained to me so far. There apparently is also a cauldron to brew up your own potion. But again, it does not light up, so is it just fluff like chairs and benches, a container like the thousand empty bookshelves, something I can interact with in combat, or an actual tool for bringing forth the story? I never noticed it. My solution was to look for a secret backdoor that led me to a cave, where I could not progress. At that stage I was so invested with this possibility than naturally the others did not occur to me at all. So I reloaded until I passe all three checks, because I could somehow anticipate the outcome.

In combat it is even worse, because it varies between ridiculously easy and incredibly hard depending on your knowledge and willingness to exploit mechanics.

Joined: Sep 2017
Location: CARDIFF
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Sep 2017
Location: CARDIFF
There is a LOT of tactics and possibilties in this game. There are so many opportunites for thinking outside the box to deal with situations. At times it almost feels like 'cheating' because I have managed to make a 'difficult' encounter
really easy that it seems like an exploit. The thing is it's not because NPCs then do the same thing to me later in the game. So you really have to think sometimes.

Without doing spoilers. I solo'd a boss and it's deputy(hench) as a rogue by hiding in the rafters/wall, throwing a tin cup at the 'hinge' holding a huge candelabra onto the large hench, knocking it prone. The boss was facing the other way
because I had used sneak, so couldn't see me. So this enabled me to use ranged sneak attack on both, then hide as a bonus action before ending my turn. Because I was so well hidden they couldnt return fire. Conversely when deciding
the 'good guys' group where infact evil for hiring to kill an innocent person, when combat began, their mage stayed on the roof taking potshots at me then pulling back so I couldnt return fire.

I have said before in other threads the 'push' ability is loads of fun. I have used that to push bossed over a cliff essentially one-shotting them. Again, when I fought a group of clackers one of them pushed the Githyanki over a cliff mid combat
killing her and I had no way to ressurect her as she was gone from the map. So going forward I have made sure not to leave my characters vulnerable.

I am constantly learning new things. My first playthough I convinced the 3 fishers that the illithid was evil and managed it that way. then on a playthough with a friend, she failed and it went to combat and we killed the 3 fishers. But just now
I see in jonn's post we could have killed the illithid and the fishers would have lost hostility.


Love and sausages xx
Joined: Oct 2020
V
member
Offline
member
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Don't get me wrong, I like that the game offers you possibilities and let's you think outside the box. It is just that Larian does not bother about teaching you those things. They tell you that you can jump and that is it. Not that you can use it to disengage, get out of environmental effects, act as a way to gain combat advantage or as a additional movement.

Issue is that knowing all of that is pretty mandatory in combat and at the very most they showed you a short tutorial clip and a sentence, yet expect all players to come up with these creative solutions on their own. That is like understanding how a motor works and then being expected to repair it.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
So, if you didn't come into this expecting to fight against the game at least a little, you made a mistake. Early Access, not a finished game. Not even a Beta version of a game. Some things don't work right.

The expectation for playing this should be to get a bit of a sense for the game, sure, but also to be figuring out how to break it. How to do things laterally and not go through the front door, to find out what you can get away with.

I can't help but wonder if our DM for 35 years runs into a lot of situations where his players out think him, or if he railroads them on the regular. I might say, try playing it like the DM is actively trying to screw you over, assume everything is a trap and act accordingly.

Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Valtaya

...Larian falls into a typical GM trap: they mistake difficulty without reward with challenge. If a game becomes too difficult without reward, it is just frustrating. And yes, when its too easy, it could become boring...


I've played about 40 hours of BG3 EA so far and while it I have a lot of critique points for improvement, I've also enjoyed it immensely for the most part. I don't really agree much with any of your listed issues as I think of lot them are simply because you haven't played the game enough to discover it's (very well hidden) intricacies and features but this quote I very much agree with.

Last edited by Khorvale; 13/10/20 11:27 AM.
Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by jonn
It's been mentioned in a few places now, but Larian's idea for this EA release was to 'encourage' people to play in a more evil role, so they could gather more data on this aspect as more people tend to go for good options all the time. So the situations you mention are pretty much railroading you into the evil option, ie. killing Nettie to get the antidote (btw I have also experienced this bug, where she talks to you as if you are poisoned even if you persuaded her not to previously).

As others have mentioned, the idea is that the game will (eventually) have enough depth so that 'winning' every conversation check is not required in order to make satisfactory progress - by save-scumming checks you are potentially missing out on 'alternative' content from the failed check, which may have repercussions later on in the story.

The situation with the imps and the helm objective, well that requires a little 'outside of the box' thinking on the part of the player. Same with the illithid and fisherfolk - when they become hostile that doesn't mean you have to attack them, you can target the illithid with your first attack which will release them from it's control. As a DM of 35 years I'm a little surprised that this not only didn't occur to you, but you think it is a fault of the game. And a level 1 player attempting to battle wits with a mind flayer... how do you really think this action should play out?

I and many others agree that there needs to be a system for rewarding non-combat XP, perhaps this is something they have in the pipeline. Also some of the other issues like spell movement are clearly bugs that need to be rectified. Again, EA.

In summary though, I think there are reasons for most of your issues which hopefully now make a bit more sense to you.



on the non combat reward I know only one place. Underdark fish folk praying to a redcap pretending to be the good of murder. Or rather the fihs folks good of murder. If you become his champion you get a blue sickle as his avatar. If you defeat him you get a normal sickle and the fish see you as there god now. The quest is bugged and cant be finished. Switches in single player to multiplayer dialogue and you are forced to only select answer but choose it. Its weird you can tell build a temple, stop blood sacrifices or raise a army for you.

What ever thats the only time I have encountered a non combat better reward then combat so far. MAYBE its the other way around and having a fish folk army and being seen as deity is far more rewarding in the long run.

Joined: Oct 2020
M
stranger
Offline
stranger
M
Joined: Oct 2020
To me its the character development, I want to think and plan my character development like I used to do in DND 3.5.

I feel like i'm playing World of Warcraft after playing Everquest for years. It's just too shallow. All prestige classes addition doesn't bring much to the table.

Skills shouldn't be lock under an ability score. If I want to make a fighter archer, I should be able to do so. Fighters used to have a feat developmeent every lvl.

Ability increase shouldn't be an option between a regular feat. Current Feats are totally boring.

I miss DND 3.5

Joined: Jul 2014
R
stranger
Offline
stranger
R
Joined: Jul 2014
I really wonder whether I'm playing a different game, but why is everyone saying that this game is too difficult? So far I died twice: first was the 3 imps in the wilderness, because I missed Shadowheart and did it alone. 2nd try together with her was pretty easy. Second time was against the Goblin party at the windmill, because I didn't want to rest and entered the fight with like 20% of my HP. I did not min max anything so far. And I do not prepare the area (blocking paths with chests etc) nor did I use the environment to my advantage so far. I mean, even if they down one of your characters it takes one simply turn to have them back in the fight again. That's a lot easier than other games. I think the game's difficulty is on a decent level and I hope for some tougher boss fights.

Regarding the dice rolls: I failed a lot the above mentioned rolls (got poisoned by the Druid for example) and just accepted it and played on.

Joined: Sep 2017
I
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
I
Joined: Sep 2017
Additional to BG3 being in EA, this is cRPG game that is supposed to be harder than usual RPG. It doesn't have to tell you everything. Use your brain, imagination and startegy.
There is no need for experience from every little thing you do.
Have you every got experience by sneaking on enemies in BG1/BG2/IWD? No! You have it for quest objectives and killing creatures.
Also, the vast number for experience that you are getting in this game makes your characters level 3 after 1 maybe 2 hours. And the max level in EA is lvl 4.
You can reach the limit quite fast, comparing to leveling up in previous BG games.
Personally for me, only two or three parts of the game were challenging. It's fun to level up quickly at the beginning, but you are missing a lot of fun later on.

Joined: Oct 2020
V
Valtaya Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020

Originally Posted by Dark_Ansem
Oh come on, a TPK on the first session is quintessential D&D. Tomb of Horrors?

sorry non english player, what is TPK? Never liked Tomb of Horros, also know noone RL who likes it (but I know there are people who love it, so not denying it).

I know D&D life is "hard" when starting (levels 1 to .... hm 8), especialy 1, but that? It is forgotten realms after all. There are people who can enjoy this kind of stuffe and those who do not.


Originally Posted by jonn
It's been mentioned in a few places now, but Larian's idea for this EA release was to 'encourage' people to play in a more evil role, so they could gather more data on this aspect as more people tend to go for good options all the time. So the situations you mention are pretty much railroading you into the evil option, ie. killing Nettie to get the antidote (btw I have also experienced this bug, where she talks to you as if you are poisoned even if you persuaded her not to previously).

As others have mentioned, the idea is that the game will (eventually) have enough depth so that 'winning' every conversation check is not required in order to make satisfactory progress - by save-scumming checks you are potentially missing out on 'alternative' content from the failed check, which may have repercussions later on in the story.

The situation with the imps and the helm objective, well that requires a little 'outside of the box' thinking on the part of the player. Same with the illithid and fisherfolk - when they become hostile that doesn't mean you have to attack them, you can target the illithid with your first attack which will release them from it's control. As a DM of 35 years I'm a little surprised that this not only didn't occur to you, but you think it is a fault of the game. And a level 1 player attempting to battle wits with a mind flayer... how do you really think this action should play out?

I and many others agree that there needs to be a system for rewarding non-combat XP, perhaps this is something they have in the pipeline. Also some of the other issues like spell movement are clearly bugs that need to be rectified. Again, EA.

In summary though, I think there are reasons for most of your issues which hopefully now make a bit more sense to you.



Have not heard that anywhere, on the other side, truth be told, I usualy do not follow games, learned the hard way, when I do, it usualy leads to disappointment. And thats why I posted a feedback to EA and not a review smile.

I do not need to win everything, but then, there have to be differences, and rewards. Maybe this is going to have enough depth, but right now? Also, EA is not some early stage, its actualy open beta, I doubt where will be much changes. As of now, there are just 2 outcomes... either default or at least one fail, the other is all check succeed. And since there are at least 2 checks in each conversation, the chance for failing is realy realy high and therefore the game have just one outcome. I realy hope you are right and there will be more depth later on.

It did, but I could not target him laugh
Nono, that the checks are high and a fail result in death is perfectly normal. But WHEN you win, where is the reward? As you mentioned, a lvl 1 winning a battle of wits with a mind flayer? As GM, if I wouldnt give the player at least one level up for that, I would be skinned alive...
My "problem" is not the high skill checks, but the lack of a proper reward.
Lets talk about that guy in the ruins (behind the door), you can persuade him and as reward you get the initiative when you enter the room (I would give the player a small xp reward, but getting initiative is good enough).
What with the halfling and his 2 companions before you go there? You can persuade him or intimidate him (or some third option I do not have in mind), when you fail: fight, when you succeed, they walk away, no exp reward (so it would have been better to fight them). And when you fight... as said in the initial post, NPC lvl 2... 100% saving throws 100% hit, my party level 2 0% saving throws, 50% critical miss...
And whats with the girl in the next room? Ok you have to pick the door... shouldnt she hear that? Obviously she did not, she was still patrolling the corridor. When she turns her back to the door, I open it... and... well the party should actualy have a high change to start the round, but not in BG3, reload a dozen times, a dozen times she had the initiative and killed my mage with the first strike because it was always a critical hit... always, aha.
There is not much going on on the first map, but enough to see the pattern.

I certainly hope so. And yes, EA. We will see.

As said, feedback for this EA, not a review. It did make sense, before and after your post. But it does not change my opinion, as of now BG3 is frustrating (for me).

Originally Posted by VincentNZ

But it is the game's fault, because Larian expects you to know everything about the DoS system, the D&D system in the latest edition and have a really good grasp of gameplay tactics and an inquisitive mind with good intuition, as well as an awful amount of luck. That is way too much to ask for.

Your example is great. I did not even know I could attack the Illithid, because I did not even see it under the debris, and he never lit up. Oh the loading screen tells me that I can attack environment objects and neutral people with STRG, but they do not tell me how I see all of the possible interactions. For me the only visible options were persuasion and attacking.

Nettie is another great example of the game not giving you crucial information. Again you are presented with attacking and persuasion. However there are at least 5 ways to deal with the situation, including pickpocketing, something never explained to me so far. There apparently is also a cauldron to brew up your own potion. But again, it does not light up, so is it just fluff like chairs and benches, a container like the thousand empty bookshelves, something I can interact with in combat, or an actual tool for bringing forth the story? I never noticed it. My solution was to look for a secret backdoor that led me to a cave, where I could not progress. At that stage I was so invested with this possibility than naturally the others did not occur to me at all. So I reloaded until I passe all three checks, because I could somehow anticipate the outcome.

In combat it is even worse, because it varies between ridiculously easy and incredibly hard depending on your knowledge and willingness to exploit mechanics.


well said, agree with everything you said smile


Joined: Jun 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Jun 2020
This might sound shocking to you, but I actually solo'd the ruins with one single character (using some of the environment to my advantage). As could be seen from the Larian first public presentation in BG3, bad dice rolls are realz in D&D.


Last edited by Sven_; 13/10/20 01:22 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
V
Valtaya Offline OP
stranger
OP Offline
stranger
V
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by 0Muttley0
There is a LOT of tactics and possibilties in this game. There are so many opportunites for thinking outside the box to deal with situations. At times it almost feels like 'cheating' because I have managed to make a 'difficult' encounter
really easy that it seems like an exploit. The thing is it's not because NPCs then do the same thing to me later in the game. So you really have to think sometimes.

Without doing spoilers. I solo'd a boss and it's deputy(hench) as a rogue by hiding in the rafters/wall, throwing a tin cup at the 'hinge' holding a huge candelabra onto the large hench, knocking it prone. The boss was facing the other way
because I had used sneak, so couldn't see me. So this enabled me to use ranged sneak attack on both, then hide as a bonus action before ending my turn. Because I was so well hidden they couldnt return fire. Conversely when deciding
the 'good guys' group where infact evil for hiring to kill an innocent person, when combat began, their mage stayed on the roof taking potshots at me then pulling back so I couldnt return fire.

I have said before in other threads the 'push' ability is loads of fun. I have used that to push bossed over a cliff essentially one-shotting them. Again, when I fought a group of clackers one of them pushed the Githyanki over a cliff mid combat
killing her and I had no way to ressurect her as she was gone from the map. So going forward I have made sure not to leave my characters vulnerable.

I am constantly learning new things. My first playthough I convinced the 3 fishers that the illithid was evil and managed it that way. then on a playthough with a friend, she failed and it went to combat and we killed the 3 fishers. But just now
I see in jonn's post we could have killed the illithid and the fishers would have lost hostility.


Thats what you say, the problem is, nothing is explained and as player you see almost nothing, most items you can interact with are highlighted when pressing ALT. Do the player have to pause and scan each battlefield pixel by pixel to see what we can use and what not? A real problem here is, to think outside the box is not going to do the trick.... because either everything works, or just streamlined.

With the hiding... in the ruins there is a spot, where your companion tells you "we can use the darkness to our advantage" when the fight starts. Hm so? No matter what I do, the NPCs still see me everywhere. Use the darkness in what way then??

Joined: Oct 2020
C
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
C
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Valtaya

Originally Posted by Dark_Ansem
Oh come on, a TPK on the first session is quintessential D&D. Tomb of Horrors?

sorry non english player, what is TPK? Never liked Tomb of Horros, also know noone RL who likes it (but I know there are people who love it, so not denying it).

Total Party Kill. Generally regarded as a failure state in a game. I can't imagine anyone citing Tomb of Horrors as an example to follow in 2020 - that form of adversarial GMing is... let's say an acquired taste.

Joined: Oct 2020
K
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
K
Joined: Oct 2020
Im having more fun here than i did with any of the recent crpg lines. I dislike divos because i feel its not serious enough, and i dont like the classless system, its combat is good and thats it. I disliked pathfinder because i hate the meta of the character sheet having more classess than any individual class actually even has levels that the system creates. Class systems strenght is class identity, and that gets stripped when half the entire world seems to have spent some time perusing asceticism or vivisection. I disliked pillars combat, build, and most of the dialogue.

Really everything has been bad. So far this game feels better than the rest. Im brought back to playing nwn modules, which was the most fun ive had on a computer playing anything based on a tabletop system. I can easily see things getting worse as it progresses and changes are made but so far so good. Hopefuly they stick to the sweet spot of combat, character identity, and setting they have carved out.

Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
I agree with the op that so far the difficulty of the game is far too high, the deaths too frequent, and TPK too likely in situations the player has no tool to realize could warrant one.

I also know (for having played DOS 2) that Larian understands this. I would expect the level of difficulty of this early access to be the one I'd experience if choosing a higher difficulty setting at start.

Let us all be reminded that a lot of the difficulty we are experiencing isn't due to design but to lack of polish/features not being present yet. That is normal at this stage of development.

Last edited by Corren; 13/10/20 03:21 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
old hand
Offline
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
Get another 100 hours or so under your belt and itll give you a different perspective on some of those. You've been a GM too long and maybe not a player enough ^.^ there are other ways to deal with almost everything youve mentioned - you saidas much in there a few times. One problem might be that gamers these days...want to win everything the first time, and DEFINITELY the second. Can you imagine what Dark Souls and Demon Souls EA would have been like?

Their encounters are too hard because the IMPACT of those encounters is broken resting, resurrecting, resource management, and combat mechanics. The encounters and even the quests (hey, dont always finish a quest instantly, might be a one directly related to it that you will be getting a different result if you mess with it now - you chose to talk to Netti, the apprentice when you are trying to save the MASTER HEALER. You CHOSE the apprentice. You got the apprentice experience!) are very dynamic in how they can be handled. You also mentioned the girl dying. Did you charm or dominate person on the druid that wanted to kill her? Did you disguise self as an elf? Did you create a fog cloud or drop darkness and tell the girl to run with a character that wasnt engaged in conversation by switching to them (dont know if that works, but worth trying!). If people are looking for a game you can walk through, one time, and have pretty good odds of everything going swimmingly I dont think that is reasonable. You have a brain slug, they arent trying to make this an easy journey. Like D&D, gets easier at higher levels.

With over 800 hours and still finding stuff in DOS2 and reloading being as natural as breathing in that game as I try crazy stuff, it feels more like a thumb print of theirs and a "seriously, try stuff out!" flag than a gross oversight on the fact you can't run headlong into enemies and win every time.

That being said, the nature and design of the encounter should be different. An orc cave should have 2 guards outside with a drum and more inside rather than 12 orcs sitting out front. They don't phase you through challenges partifuclarly well. I think for quests, talking to people with guidance, thaumaturgy, disguise self, charm person, etc...start using those tools. You get a rest right after the conversation anyway.

Last edited by Orbax; 13/10/20 04:57 PM.

What is the problem you are solving? Does your proposed change solve the problem? Is your change feasible? What else will be affected by your change? Will your change impact revenue? Does your change align with the goals and strategies of the organizations (Larian, WotC)?
Joined: Oct 2020
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
Joined: Oct 2020
I think the game would definitely benefit from a comprehensive tutorial - maybe there is too much to learn to fit it all into the main story. I've suggested elsewhere that maybe something like the Black Pits (I think it came with the enhanced edition of BG2) - basically a battle arena, totally separate from the main game, with progressively harder opponents and/or different environmental effects/surfaces to consider. Maybe something like this, if you were given instructions or hints, would be the best way for people to learn the mechanics of the game, and serve as a tutorial of sorts?

Last edited by jonn; 13/10/20 04:55 PM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5