Larian Banner
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Danielbda
Well as response to that BG3's UI not only is harder to understand and displays less information but is also reminiscent of DOS2.

Really doubt the ui is going to be the same at launch.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Originally Posted by fallenj
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Solasta's UI is better
Solasta's UI is ugly grey & blocky, generally takes up to much of the screen. The best thing Sol has IMO would be the adventure log.

Solasta's UI is WAY more intuitive and way more easy to understand whatever you like the colors or not.
This UI helps players to understand the game and it's rules.
Keep in mind that UI is not only what you see in combats. Every windows and tabs are a part of the UI.

You don't like the colors ? Neither am I.
The main utility of a UI is not to be beautifull.

About the size I'm not sure solasta's UI is bigger, but anyway de don't care, that's still not the point.

It's dumb easy to understand cause its made like a mobile game.

[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]

Oh yeah that's so much better and easier to understand...

Intellectual dishonnesty wink

[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]

Last edited by Maximuuus; 30/12/20 06:36 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Look at the ui and tell me how many things are on their, compared to the other picture. Combat log is stretched out for more info that can be closed btw. you have potions, scrolls, etc that can be thrown in a bag and tossed on the action bar to clear it up. You have 26 characters in that battle, Imagine what the ui would look like with big grey blocks, probably super fantastic right?

Joined: Oct 2020
addict
Offline
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Oh yeah that's so much better and easier to understand...

Intellectual dishonnesty wink

[Linked Image from i.ibb.co]

You ask me if it looks better? Yes, it looks better. + as fallenj already said, you can close and clear a lot of things if you find it "cumbersome".


I don't speak english well, but I try my best. Ty
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by Nyloth
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
Oh yeah that's so much better and easier to understand...

Intellectual dishonnesty wink

You ask me if it looks better? Yes, it looks better. + as fallenj already said, you can close and clear a lot of things if you find it "cumbersome".

No.I don't. There wasn't any question.

Whatever you like it or not Solasta's UI helps players to understand how D&D works whatever we're talking about combats, inventory, character creation and character sheet etc...That's a fact.

You may like the grey block or not... It changes nothing.

Joined: Oct 2020
C
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
C
Joined: Oct 2020
I've been disappointed. The atmosphere/vibe of the game feels wrong. Larian made it too much like Divinity with non-stop comedy and campiness. The NPCs behave like they're in a movie that deliberately cast the very worst actors in the industry, with acting so cringeworthy and hammy that it's painful to watch. While the original BG series had room for comic relief and over-the-topness, this game seems to have almost nothing other than that. Everything is cranked up to 11, nothing is down to earth. Every part of BG3 comes off like it was designed by someone whose main goal was to make things as extreme and unusual as possible. I really prefer my fantasy settings to be tempered against a backdrop of realism, and BG3 utterly fails to be a believable experience. It ruins any chance of immersion for me.

And then it's just too similar to D:OS in all aspects. It feels like playing a D&D mod for D:OS2. The looks, the controls, the playstyle, the way you interact with the gameplay environment; Larian really didn't do enough to make the game feel different. Imagine if Bethesda had made Cyberpunk2077 and it was literally just Skyrim set in Night City, with Skyrim controls and mechanics and everything. Disappointing, to say the least.

Finally, the combat is terrible. Just profoundly unenjoyable. Part of that comes down to the fact that 5e is a tabletop game that translates inelegantly into a turn-based video game experience, but Larian could have alleviated that somewhat by not restricting the party size to four. With just four party members, the player just doesn't get to do enough during fights. Often you sit there for minutes waiting for a turn, and then you get to do one thing with one character and it's time to wait again. I believe Larian will heavily tone down the mindboggingly terrible "elemental surfaces" stuff in time for release, so that's not something I'm too worried about, but combat as a whole is so clunky and boring.

Joined: Nov 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Clawfoot
I've been disappointed. The atmosphere/vibe of the game feels wrong. Larian made it too much like Divinity with non-stop comedy and campiness. The NPCs behave like they're in a movie that deliberately cast the very worst actors in the industry, with acting so cringeworthy and hammy that it's painful to watch. While the original BG series had room for comic relief and over-the-topness, this game seems to have almost nothing other than that. Everything is cranked up to 11, nothing is down to earth. Every part of BG3 comes off like it was designed by someone whose main goal was to make things as extreme and unusual as possible. I really prefer my fantasy settings to be tempered against a backdrop of realism, and BG3 utterly fails to be a believable experience. It ruins any chance of immersion for me.

And then it's just too similar to D:OS in all aspects. It feels like playing a D&D mod for D:OS2. The looks, the controls, the playstyle, the way you interact with the gameplay environment; Larian really didn't do enough to make the game feel different. Imagine if Bethesda had made Cyberpunk2077 and it was literally just Skyrim set in Night City, with Skyrim controls and mechanics and everything. Disappointing, to say the least.

Finally, the combat is terrible. Just profoundly unenjoyable. Part of that comes down to the fact that 5e is a tabletop game that translates inelegantly into a turn-based video game experience, but Larian could have alleviated that somewhat by not restricting the party size to four. With just four party members, the player just doesn't get to do enough during fights. Often you sit there for minutes waiting for a turn, and then you get to do one thing with one character and it's time to wait again. I believe Larian will heavily tone down the mindboggingly terrible "elemental surfaces" stuff in time for release, so that's not something I'm too worried about, but combat as a whole is so clunky and boring.



So true and has been said over and over and over again. Yet larian doesnt even comment on most of the critics and avoids any participation on a dialog on this matter.

Joined: Nov 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2020
About the UI, i hope they go with the standard 5ish quick items. As it is right now they way it handles picked up items is overwhelmingly bad, just a lot of clutter that pushes down new spells and stuff like that.

Joined: Nov 2020
P
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
P
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Baldurs-Gate-Fan
Originally Posted by Clawfoot
(...) boring.



So true and has been said over and over and over again. Yet larian doesnt even comment on most of the critics and avoids any participation on a dialog on this matter.

I get it, you guys simply don't like the game. But stop trying to ruin it (you won't change it anyway) for others who like it as it is. BG3 looks similar to DOS2, because it uses the same engine, but nearly everything else is different, especially the combat.

Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
veteran
Offline
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
Location: Belgium
Originally Posted by pageu
Originally Posted by Baldurs-Gate-Fan
Originally Posted by Clawfoot
(...) boring.



So true and has been said over and over and over again. Yet larian doesnt even comment on most of the critics and avoids any participation on a dialog on this matter.

I get it, you guys simply don't like the game. But stop trying to ruin it (you won't change it anyway) for others who like it as it is. BG3 looks similar to DOS2, because it uses the same engine, but nearly everything else is different, especially the combat.

They're giving their feedback to improve the game. That's what an EA is for.

We won't do another list of similar things between DoS and BG3, I guess.

Joined: Nov 2020
P
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
P
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Maximuuus
They're giving their feedback to improve the game. That's what an EA is for.

I wouldn't call Clawfoot's "EVERYTHING'S BAD" a feedback.

Joined: Mar 2013
S
veteran
Offline
veteran
S
Joined: Mar 2013
unqualified feedback is irrelevant.

Larian cannot change anyhting about a subjective perspective "its like original sin" - well it isnt. so what are they gonna change?

Basically you can tell someones opinion is irrelevant if they cannot even express what they dislike
"Oh it doesnt feel right"
"its too colourfull" (ive disproven this before, look it up)
"it feels like DOS"
"m-muh.."

Last edited by Sordak; 31/12/20 11:18 AM.
Joined: Nov 2020
A
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by pageu
Originally Posted by Baldurs-Gate-Fan
Originally Posted by Clawfoot
(...) boring.



So true and has been said over and over and over again. Yet larian doesnt even comment on most of the critics and avoids any participation on a dialog on this matter.

I get it, you guys simply don't like the game. But stop trying to ruin it (you won't change it anyway) for others who like it as it is. BG3 looks similar to DOS2, because it uses the same engine, but nearly everything else is different, especially the combat.

I don't get this logic, or the entitlement that comes with it. How is op trying to "ruin" the game? It's not *your* game, and he's just expressing his opinion. Why be a fascist about it?

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
It just doesn't have the same sense of scale that I was expecting and hoping it would have. I don't know how to put it much more succinctly

The party is smaller than I would have liked
companions are fewer in number
classes available to play as a PC right now are very limited
char builds in general seem fairly narrow, with each class basically branching along one of two lines.
The variety of Backgrounds doesn't really make up for the lack of variety in core Races/Classes (or the subs within those, like having a variety of magical schools/priest domains etc.)
Char creation and aesthetic customization options like heads, voices, or even clothing/armor sets to define the character's look are pretty limited
level cap is lower than I'd have thought
There is a good number of spells, about 80 altogether, but the spellcasting UI has a way of making this seem on the low end, or maybe its just because some spells are clearly better, so I only use like half of them.
Right now it feels like there are maybe 50-60 NPCs and about as many unique combat encounters on offer
The map is not as large as I would have hoped. I mean like the discrete areas within the broader 'world' map
Basically going to the wiki https://baldursgate3.wiki.fextralife.com/Locations or https://guides.gamepressure.com/baldurs-gate-iii/ and then looking at the aggregate material, its not as much as I'd hope from a first Act. Unless the second and third act are way more expansive. Or if this is like a 5 act game, rather than the 3 acts everyone seems to assume. About 25 hours worth of gameplay is what they said. Its hard to know how much bigger its going to get with the full release, since the EA is being presented more like a teaser.

One thing that is larger than I anticipated is the cinematic element, and it is very pretty too look at on the first run. I was captivated enough on the initial pass to continue playing, despite not feeling totally stoked about the controls and general inside/outside of combat gameplay. The story pushed along well enough, and I enjoyed doing the Goblin and Druid paths. But I had really hoped to spend a lot more time in the game, whereas instead I keep showing up at the forums to nitpick. I feel like that's not a great sign. I played the BG1/2 games and their expansions for like a decade before ever having the urge to try to join a forum about it, or to hunt down mods, or things of that sort. The game just had enough content to keep me humming, whereas with this one, I feel impatient and kinda content starved. I think maybe I just figured the game would be further along at the point of EA. I'm sure I'd have bought it regardless, just on pure enthusiasm of BG, still though...



I don't have the experience to compare this game to other contemporary games in the genre, just talking about the impression coming here the earlier Baldur's Gate games. But then I honestly don't know how I'd have felt about BG1 if it ended after the Kobold mines. Its just hard to assess a game when we only get to see the keyhole version of it.

I think the people who have the chops to go under the hood, to datamine or whatever, probably have a better sense of the full picture we're likely to get. Looking at nexus is encouraging, if only to see what stuff has been unlocked. But there's no roadmap out, so when left to speculate I kind of tend to fear for the worst, rather than assuming that there is a metric shit ton of killer content being held in reserve just to wow me when the full thing drops. I don't have a divinity experience to measure this against, though I gather that seems to be the more natural comparison here, as opposed to the earlier BG1/2 games. But coming from those I just expected it to be bigger. I think because I've heard that there won't be much more content in the EA (I don't know from where, I guess there are better sources of information than the News forum here lol), I'm kind of rationing the material of the game. Like I've tried to avoid hitting the underdark just so I can leave myself something to play around with, if they end up improving the hotbar or tweak the camera/movement UI, or push out another class sometime soon. But otherwise I think its kind of cul-de-sac'd right now. Hoping patch 4 is a lot more substantial than the prior 3.

Last edited by Black_Elk; 31/12/20 01:00 PM.
Joined: Nov 2020
P
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
P
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by adkfina
I don't get this logic, or the entitlement that comes with it. How is op trying to "ruin" the game? It's not *your* game, and he's just expressing his opinion. Why be a fascist about it?

What? Op clearly states, that he doesn't like the core mechanics of the game. Changing core mechanics would ruin current idea of BG3.

Do you even know what 'fascist' means? XD

Joined: Nov 2020
A
apprentice
Offline
apprentice
A
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by pageu
Originally Posted by adkfina
I don't get this logic, or the entitlement that comes with it. How is op trying to "ruin" the game? It's not *your* game, and he's just expressing his opinion. Why be a fascist about it?

What? Op clearly states, that he doesn't like the core mechanics of the game. Changing core mechanics would ruin current idea of BG3.

Do you even know what 'fascist' means? XD

Yeah no it's called a hyperbole and not a literal description. I don't know you obviously or how insufferable you are irl, but it fits in this case.

And since you're slow I'm just going to reiterate, it's not *your* game and *he's* not the developer even. It's his opinion and you should learn to be respectful towards it.

Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Duchess of Gorgombert
Offline
Duchess of Gorgombert
Joined: May 2010
Location: Oxford
Quit snarking, guys.


J'aime le fromage.
Joined: Nov 2020
B
Banned
Offline
Banned
B
Joined: Nov 2020
Originally Posted by Black_Elk
It just doesn't have the same sense of scale that I was expecting and hoping it would have. I don't know how to put it much more succinctly

The party is smaller than I would have liked
companions are fewer in number
classes available to play as a PC right now are very limited
char builds in general seem fairly narrow, with each class basically branching along one of two lines.
The variety of Backgrounds doesn't really make up for the lack of variety in core Races/Classes (or the subs within those, like having a variety of magical schools/priest domains etc.)
Char creation and aesthetic customization options like heads, voices, or even clothing/armor sets to define the character's look are pretty limited
level cap is lower than I'd have thought
There is a good number of spells, about 80 altogether, but the spellcasting UI has a way of making this seem on the low end, or maybe its just because some spells are clearly better, so I only use like half of them.
Right now it feels like there are maybe 50-60 NPCs and about as many unique combat encounters on offer
The map is not as large as I would have hoped. I mean like the discrete areas within the broader 'world' map
Basically going to the wiki https://baldursgate3.wiki.fextralife.com/Locations or https://guides.gamepressure.com/baldurs-gate-iii/ and then looking at the aggregate material, its not as much as I'd hope from a first Act. Unless the second and third act are way more expansive. Or if this is like a 5 act game, rather than the 3 acts everyone seems to assume. About 25 hours worth of gameplay is what they said. Its hard to know how much bigger its going to get with the full release, since the EA is being presented more like a teaser.

One thing that is larger than I anticipated is the cinematic element, and it is very pretty too look at on the first run. I was captivated enough on the initial pass to continue playing, despite not feeling totally stoked about the controls and general inside/outside of combat gameplay. The story pushed along well enough, and I enjoyed doing the Goblin and Druid paths. But I had really hoped to spend a lot more time in the game, whereas instead I keep showing up at the forums to nitpick. I feel like that's not a great sign. I played the BG1/2 games and their expansions for like a decade before ever having the urge to try to join a forum about it, or to hunt down mods, or things of that sort. The game just had enough content to keep me humming, whereas with this one, I feel impatient and kinda content starved. I think maybe I just figured the game would be further along at the point of EA. I'm sure I'd have bought it regardless, just on pure enthusiasm of BG, still though...



I don't have the experience to compare this game to other contemporary games in the genre, just talking about the impression coming here the earlier Baldur's Gate games. But then I honestly don't know how I'd have felt about BG1 if it ended after the Kobold mines. Its just hard to assess a game when we only get to see the keyhole version of it.

I think the people who have the chops to go under the hood, to datamine or whatever, probably have a better sense of the full picture we're likely to get. Looking at nexus is encouraging, if only to see what stuff has been unlocked. But there's no roadmap out, so when left to speculate I kind of tend to fear for the worst, rather than assuming that there is a metric shit ton of killer content being held in reserve just to wow me when the full thing drops. I don't have a divinity experience to measure this against, though I gather that seems to be the more natural comparison here, as opposed to the earlier BG1/2 games. But coming from those I just expected it to be bigger. I think because I've heard that there won't be much more content in the EA (I don't know from where, I guess there are better sources of information than the News forum here lol), I'm kind of rationing the material of the game. Like I've tried to avoid hitting the underdark just so I can leave myself something to play around with, if they end up improving the hotbar or tweak the camera/movement UI, or push out another class sometime soon. But otherwise I think its kind of cul-de-sac'd right now. Hoping patch 4 is a lot more substantial than the prior 3.
Originally Posted by Black_Elk
It just doesn't have the same sense of scale that I was expecting and hoping it would have. I don't know how to put it much more succinctly

The party is smaller than I would have liked
companions are fewer in number
classes available to play as a PC right now are very limited
char builds in general seem fairly narrow, with each class basically branching along one of two lines.
The variety of Backgrounds doesn't really make up for the lack of variety in core Races/Classes (or the subs within those, like having a variety of magical schools/priest domains etc.)
Char creation and aesthetic customization options like heads, voices, or even clothing/armor sets to define the character's look are pretty limited
level cap is lower than I'd have thought
There is a good number of spells, about 80 altogether, but the spellcasting UI has a way of making this seem on the low end, or maybe its just because some spells are clearly better, so I only use like half of them.
Right now it feels like there are maybe 50-60 NPCs and about as many unique combat encounters on offer
The map is not as large as I would have hoped. I mean like the discrete areas within the broader 'world' map
Basically going to the wiki https://baldursgate3.wiki.fextralife.com/Locations or https://guides.gamepressure.com/baldurs-gate-iii/ and then looking at the aggregate material, its not as much as I'd hope from a first Act. Unless the second and third act are way more expansive. Or if this is like a 5 act game, rather than the 3 acts everyone seems to assume. About 25 hours worth of gameplay is what they said. Its hard to know how much bigger its going to get with the full release, since the EA is being presented more like a teaser.

One thing that is larger than I anticipated is the cinematic element, and it is very pretty too look at on the first run. I was captivated enough on the initial pass to continue playing, despite not feeling totally stoked about the controls and general inside/outside of combat gameplay. The story pushed along well enough, and I enjoyed doing the Goblin and Druid paths. But I had really hoped to spend a lot more time in the game, whereas instead I keep showing up at the forums to nitpick. I feel like that's not a great sign. I played the BG1/2 games and their expansions for like a decade before ever having the urge to try to join a forum about it, or to hunt down mods, or things of that sort. The game just had enough content to keep me humming, whereas with this one, I feel impatient and kinda content starved. I think maybe I just figured the game would be further along at the point of EA. I'm sure I'd have bought it regardless, just on pure enthusiasm of BG, still though...



I don't have the experience to compare this game to other contemporary games in the genre, just talking about the impression coming here the earlier Baldur's Gate games. But then I honestly don't know how I'd have felt about BG1 if it ended after the Kobold mines. Its just hard to assess a game when we only get to see the keyhole version of it.

I think the people who have the chops to go under the hood, to datamine or whatever, probably have a better sense of the full picture we're likely to get. Looking at nexus is encouraging, if only to see what stuff has been unlocked. But there's no roadmap out, so when left to speculate I kind of tend to fear for the worst, rather than assuming that there is a metric shit ton of killer content being held in reserve just to wow me when the full thing drops. I don't have a divinity experience to measure this against, though I gather that seems to be the more natural comparison here, as opposed to the earlier BG1/2 games. But coming from those I just expected it to be bigger. I think because I've heard that there won't be much more content in the EA (I don't know from where, I guess there are better sources of information than the News forum here lol), I'm kind of rationing the material of the game. Like I've tried to avoid hitting the underdark just so I can leave myself something to play around with, if they end up improving the hotbar or tweak the camera/movement UI, or push out another class sometime soon. But otherwise I think its kind of cul-de-sac'd right now. Hoping patch 4 is a lot more substantial than the prior 3.


Good arguments and well written. This along with the totally unfun combat (feels soo cheese and unimmersive) is the Impression me and Most Friends had after we all bought the game because it’s named baldurs gate 3. I dont think it was their intention but it surely feels like they used the name baldurs gate3 to sell dos3 beyond expectations.

Joined: Oct 2020
enthusiast
Offline
enthusiast
Joined: Oct 2020
Thanks! Sometimes I ramble a lot, but I do think that it's important to keep those first impressions in mind.

One thing I think would really help the game at this point, would be for Larian to focus heavily on providing more up front content, basically things that the player can see/feel right away. And I do mean right away hehe. This could be stuff from within Character creation (like more Races/Classes/Cosmetics) or in the prologue or early Wilderness Areas (new encounters or NPCs) or the QoL type stuff that becomes immediately apparent when interacting with the user interface at any point in the game.

Stuff that we engage with all the time, like gamesave organization or inventory management for example. Or even menu graphics or load screens could fit in that category I think. Pushing out material that won't go unnoticed because it jumps out at us right away or because we are constantly tooling around with it. But stuff that we see and notice immediately in a replay, not like stuff that's an hour or two into the gameplay. If that makes sense. The sooner they patch in all the classes the better, and I hope they at least give us a 5th party member as a nod to all the noise in the party size thread. I wish they had gone with Merc companions in the EA, and left this whole Origin thing till the full release. I think the Origin characters have kind of overshadowed more important things that I wish were at the forefront here.

Last edited by Black_Elk; 31/12/20 01:36 PM.
Joined: Oct 2020
member
Offline
member
Joined: Oct 2020
Alright, here's my response to the criticism by Black_Elk

>The party is smaller than I would have liked
That's fair. I would have preferred a 6-man party too, but the 4-man party is more in vogue with video games nowadays, and it falls directly in the center of what DnD 5e is balanced for, saying that the average campaign is usually balanced for 3-5 players, with 4 being a happy medium.

>companions are fewer in number
Larian is going for a quality over quantity approach with their companions, making them very interactable and having big personal quests. We also know that more companions are to come, these 5 are just the ones we have starting out. Baldur's Gate has always had a lot of really cool companions, but usually they haven't been this involved with the world.

>classes available to play as a PC right now are very limited
That's an EA thing. The other 6 classes in the PHB will be released as EA goes along.

>the variety of Backgrounds doesn't really make up for the lack of variety in core Races/Classes (or the subs within those, like having a variety of magical schools/priest domains etc.)
Again, this is an EA thing. More races will come, at least the three others in the PHB, and possibly others.

>Char creation and aesthetic customization options like heads, voices, or even clothing/armor sets to define the character's look are pretty limited
Oh yeah totally. I hope they expand upon character creation as time goes on.

>level cap is lower than I'd have thought
Again, Early Access. It's a level 1-4 adventure, fighting goblins and hags.

>There is a good number of spells, about 80 altogether, but the spellcasting UI has a way of making this seem on the low end, or maybe its just because some spells are clearly better, so I only use like half of them.
To be fair, certain spells have *always* been better than others. More will be added as time goes on. Perhaps the reason for the low-looking count is the fact there is little overlap between the Cleric and Wizard spell lists, so right now they each have, like, 40.

>Right now it feels like there are maybe 50-60 NPCs and about as many unique combat encounters on offer
There are definitely more than that. Not a ton of them are super significant, but you can have a lot of one-off encounters with the NPCS. the Tieflings and Goblins especially have a lot of little conversations.

>Basically going to the wiki https://baldursgate3.wiki.fextralife.com/Locations or https://guides.gamepressure.com/baldurs-gate-iii/ and then looking at the aggregate material, its not as much as I'd hope from a first Act. Unless the second and third act are way more expansive. Or if this is like a 5 act game, rather than the 3 acts everyone seems to assume. About 25 hours worth of gameplay is what they said. Its hard to know how much bigger its going to get with the full release, since the EA is being presented more like a teaser.
The areas are, however, highly detailed. Of those 25 hours, you can spend a good few of them at the Druid Grove just messing around. That list also groups the entire Underdark section as one giant area. I'd say that Act 1 was suitably long imo. This is also considering that it isn't the full of the act, as the Githyanki Creche, the Shadow-Cursed Lands, and Moonrise Towers (Which, by the way, was confirmed by Kevin VanOrd, one of the devs, to be part of Act 1.) are totally missing from the game right now.

I don't have a ton to say about the rest of it, but this was a well-constructed criticism. I find some issue, and I hope that as time goes along, most of this will be addressed!


I honestly hope you have a most marvelous day!
Page 4 of 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 9 10

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