Divinity Original Sin 9

#51 Posted by BPoole96 (22814 posts) -

My GOTY so far, even beating out Dark Souls 2

#52 Posted by cfisher2833 (2150 posts) -

@foxhound_fox said:

And so begins the era of crowd-funded games outscoring AAA high-budget blockbusters.

Pretty much. FTL, Shovel Knight, and now this. It'll only get more embarrassing for "AAA"s once Wasteland 2, PoE, Star Citizen, and Elite Dangerous get released.

#53 Edited by madsnakehhh (14994 posts) -

Honestly, this looks pretty good, might get it in the near future, there's been ages since i played a good RPG on the PC (but not because the lack of this, mostly because i don't play that much on the PC as much as i used to.)

#54 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

I am playing Ultima VI project on the Dungeon Siege engine right now, and I hear you. Hunting down NPCs to turn a quest in simply isn't fun.

And even with my Ultima knowledge, its still tough to find dungeons.

#55 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@kozzy1234 said:

@texasgoldrush said:

Nice score, but still, best RPG of 2014 is between Dark Souls II and DA: Inquisition.

Nope, Divinity is better in every single aspect imo when compared to Dark Souls II. As for new Dragon Age, Bioware has been crap lately with SWTOR and Dragon Age 2 not expecting much. More looking forward to Wasteland 2 and Pillars of Eternity more to be honest.

Especially the combat, from the videos we have seen it looks pretty meh.

Wasteland 2 and Pillars of Eternity look like nostalgia trips, nothing more, and Pillars of Eternity looks like the same old fantasy.

Tides of Numenera looks very interesting however.

And really, I am not even a big fan of the conservative direction the narrative of DAI is going. However, its an easy RPG of the year candidate, barring catastrophe.

#56 Posted by cfisher2833 (2150 posts) -

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

#57 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

#59 Posted by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@chronoschris said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

Sorry, don't play games to read through endless amounts of text. I've played and completed many WRPGs and JRPGs on their hardest difficulties with ease but this one is just putting me to sleep. Has nothing to do with brain power.

In fact, all those books in Skyrim. Didn't read a single one of them, I found a better use for them. Dropped my entire collection on the highest mountain and fus ro dah-ed them straight off a cliff. That was fun.

Yea, reading am dum. I don need word lernin in my games.

#60 Posted by uninspiredcup (12847 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

#61 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

and yet where you have NPCs wondering around town, and have schedules, a marker is needed. And once again, for a game as big as Bethesda's games, you need a map marker.

Even Fallout New Vegas uses these markers.

#62 Edited by uninspiredcup (12847 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

and yet where you have NPCs wondering around town, and have schedules, a marker is needed.

Bethesda titles have tiny hub area's. They aren't needed, they just exist to cater to the LCD.

For old school hardcore pc's, learning mechanics, exploring, familiarizing is part of the joy. Bethesda titles have no magic. None. No magic whatsoever. Just a big thing with some snow and a dragon ever 15 minutes. Care level incredibly low.

#63 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

and yet where you have NPCs wondering around town, and have schedules, a marker is needed.

Bethesda titles have tiny hub area's. They aren't needed, they just exist to cater to the LCD.

For old school hardcore pc's, learning mechanics, exploring, familiarizing is part of the joy. Bethesda titles have no magic. None. No magic whatsoever. Just a big thing with some snow and a dragon ever 15 minutes. Care level incredibly low.

Bethesda games are flawed, but the map marker is simply not one of those flaws. When NPCs wonder around town, I do not want to spend 15 minutes turning in a quest.

Even Obsidian knows this.

#64 Posted by cfisher2833 (2150 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

and yet where you have NPCs wondering around town, and have schedules, a marker is needed. And once again, for a game as big as Bethesda's games, you need a map marker.

Even Fallout New Vegas uses these markers.

No, you don't. People got by perfectly fine in Morrowind and that didn't have giant arrows telling you exactly where you need to go at all times. And it's not like NPCs in these games are trotting around the world. At best, they stay in one general area during the day and go to their beds at night.

#65 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

and yet where you have NPCs wondering around town, and have schedules, a marker is needed. And once again, for a game as big as Bethesda's games, you need a map marker.

Even Fallout New Vegas uses these markers.

No, you don't. People got by perfectly fine in Morrowind and that didn't have giant arrows telling you exactly where you need to go at all times. And it's not like NPCs in these games are trotting around the world. At best, they stay in one general area during the day and go to their beds at night.

and Morrowind was smaller than Oblivion and Skyrim. Nevermind Oblivion started using Radiant AI which made NPC behaviors more complex. And there were many NPCs that traveled in Oblivion, including a dark brotherhood target.

And Obsidian uses these map markers as well in some of their games.

#66 Edited by uninspiredcup (12847 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@uninspiredcup said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@chronoschris said:

I'm trying to like this game but it's just way too old school for my liking. There is zero hand holding and way too much reading involved to actually know what the hell you're doing. I like the combat, puzzles, graphics, soundtrack and all that. But I at least need some kind of waypoint system to tell me where the hell I'm going or I will just run out of patience.

My god! They actually expect you to use your brain while playing--the horror! And no, you don't need a waypoint to tell you where to go constantly (one of the worst elements of modern RPGs). What you need to do is actually bother to read the dialogue and think logically.

however, NPC hunts in town are annoying, and for a big world such as a Bethesda game and upcoming Witcher 3, they are necessary.

My friend, the Witcher 3 will be incredibly tight levels much like the Witcher 2.

Perhaps you fellows are so yummy yummy yum yum to PR bullshitty but, as someone with a memory, I specifically remember watching the Witcher 2 live demo with the CDP developer pointing and saying "oh, see that village in the distance, that will be in the final game".

Bullshit, inflated tripe, like pretty much every piece of nonsense from the highly overrated CDP.

Likewise, In Bethesda titles, simply having someone say "x is here" and having the player bring up a map, with logical deduction as a guide while also encouraging exploration (as a superior title like Divinity does). Instead, the player has a huge DINGDONGDINGDONG pointer to the exact location. Along with the option to fast travel, practically anywhere making the open world aspect, moot.

It's no very good imo. Which is factually correct.

and yet where you have NPCs wondering around town, and have schedules, a marker is needed. And once again, for a game as big as Bethesda's games, you need a map marker.

Even Fallout New Vegas uses these markers.

No, you don't. People got by perfectly fine in Morrowind and that didn't have giant arrows telling you exactly where you need to go at all times. And it's not like NPCs in these games are trotting around the world. At best, they stay in one general area during the day and go to their beds at night.

Excellent point about the thing Mr Fisher.

It's interesting as well, regardless of terrible combat, lower production values, most people still seem to point at Morrowind as the best. Part of this reason can probably be attributed to what we are talking about here. Morrowind feels far more like a place whereas Oblivion onward feel like a set of presetup destinations. Like a theme park.

#67 Posted by with_teeth26 (6288 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:


No, you don't. People got by perfectly fine in Morrowind and that didn't have giant arrows telling you exactly where you need to go at all times. And it's not like NPCs in these games are trotting around the world. At best, they stay in one general area during the day and go to their beds at night.

What made Morrowind work though is detailed directions. Like go up this road, turn left at the fork, past the mountain. Directions in Divinity are really damn vague. Like " the item you need is stashed in the forest" when the entire area is a forest. Or "look for the witch in the North."

I dislike quest markers in RPG's but I do think the quest objectives in D:OS are too vague. I think Morrowind is one of the few games to get that just right. You still needed to be aware of your environment but finding objectives wasn't overly frustrating like it can be in Divinity.

#68 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@with_teeth26 said:

@cfisher2833 said:

No, you don't. People got by perfectly fine in Morrowind and that didn't have giant arrows telling you exactly where you need to go at all times. And it's not like NPCs in these games are trotting around the world. At best, they stay in one general area during the day and go to their beds at night.

What made Morrowind work though is detailed directions. Like go up this road, turn left at the fork, past the mountain. Directions in Divinity are really damn vague. Like " the item you need is stashed in the forest" when the entire area is a forest. Or "look for the witch in the North."

I dislike quest markers in RPG's but I do think the quest objectives in D:OS are too vague. I think Morrowind is one of the few games to get that just right. You still needed to be aware of your environment but finding objectives wasn't overly frustrating like it can be in Divinity.

On Divinity....this.

Also story problems keep it back....do not compare this game to Ultima or Baldur's Gate. The storytelling is not great here.

And regarding map markers, there a good ways to do this. NPCs can mark the players map, making it reasonable to have a map marker. But then, this doesn't solve the NPC hunt problem, which would be a nightmare with Oblivions Radiant AI.

#69 Posted by cfisher2833 (2150 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

On Divinity....this.

Also story problems keep it back....do not compare this game to Ultima or Baldur's Gate. The storytelling is not great here.

And regarding map markers, there a good ways to do this. NPCs can mark the players map, making it reasonable to have a map marker. But then, this doesn't solve the NPC hunt problem, which would be a nightmare with Oblivions Radiant AI.

The story of Ultima I revolves around the evil wizard Mondain and his rule over the kingdom of Sosaria. According to the game's back story, Mondain created an evil gem over 1000 years ago that granted him immortality.[8] Since then, Mondain has released monsters and beasts upon the land that ravage the villages and towns of Sosaria and cause most of the nobles to bicker amongst themselves.[5] In an effort to stop Mondain's dominion, Lord British searches for a person to bring about the wizard's end.[5] This call is answered by the player.

The player is informed that the only way to defeat Mondain is to travel back in time and kill him before the gem of immortality is created.[9] The majority of the game is spent searching for a time machine, and a way to activate it. Four of the lords in the game, one from each realm, hold a gem that will allow the time machine to work once all four gems have been found. In exchange for the gem, the lord will ask the player to complete a quest that involves traveling into a dungeon and killing a specific creature. Once this has been achieved, the lord will hand over his gem.

The time machine itself also needs to be found. Purchasing a space shuttle and traveling into outer space is a prerequisite of this —the player must become a space ace, by destroying 20 enemy ships, in order to complete the game.[10] Once this task has been completed, rescuing a princess will reveal the location of the time machine, which always appears to the north of the castle in which the princess was held prisoner. The main character will then travel back in time and face Mondain before he has completed the gem of immortality. Destroying the gem is a requirement for beating the game as well as killing the wizard himself. Once Mondain is dead, the player is transported one thousand years into the future and rewarded by Lord British.[11][12] The game narration does not attempt to explain away the temporal paradox caused by killing Mondain 1000 years in the past, thus preventing the events which cause the player to be called to the world in the first place.

Yeah, how could Divinity possibly compete with that amazing story! /rollseyes

#70 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:

@texasgoldrush said:

On Divinity....this.

Also story problems keep it back....do not compare this game to Ultima or Baldur's Gate. The storytelling is not great here.

And regarding map markers, there a good ways to do this. NPCs can mark the players map, making it reasonable to have a map marker. But then, this doesn't solve the NPC hunt problem, which would be a nightmare with Oblivions Radiant AI.

The story of Ultima I revolves around the evil wizard Mondain and his rule over the kingdom of Sosaria. According to the game's back story, Mondain created an evil gem over 1000 years ago that granted him immortality.[8] Since then, Mondain has released monsters and beasts upon the land that ravage the villages and towns of Sosaria and cause most of the nobles to bicker amongst themselves.[5] In an effort to stop Mondain's dominion, Lord British searches for a person to bring about the wizard's end.[5] This call is answered by the player.

The player is informed that the only way to defeat Mondain is to travel back in time and kill him before the gem of immortality is created.[9] The majority of the game is spent searching for a time machine, and a way to activate it. Four of the lords in the game, one from each realm, hold a gem that will allow the time machine to work once all four gems have been found. In exchange for the gem, the lord will ask the player to complete a quest that involves traveling into a dungeon and killing a specific creature. Once this has been achieved, the lord will hand over his gem.

The time machine itself also needs to be found. Purchasing a space shuttle and traveling into outer space is a prerequisite of this —the player must become a space ace, by destroying 20 enemy ships, in order to complete the game.[10] Once this task has been completed, rescuing a princess will reveal the location of the time machine, which always appears to the north of the castle in which the princess was held prisoner. The main character will then travel back in time and face Mondain before he has completed the gem of immortality. Destroying the gem is a requirement for beating the game as well as killing the wizard himself. Once Mondain is dead, the player is transported one thousand years into the future and rewarded by Lord British.[11][12] The game narration does not attempt to explain away the temporal paradox caused by killing Mondain 1000 years in the past, thus preventing the events which cause the player to be called to the world in the first place.

Yeah, how could Divinity possibly compete with that amazing story! /rollseyes

any gamer knows that the series truly started with Ultima IV.

#71 Posted by lostrib (42797 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@texasgoldrush said:

On Divinity....this.

Also story problems keep it back....do not compare this game to Ultima or Baldur's Gate. The storytelling is not great here.

And regarding map markers, there a good ways to do this. NPCs can mark the players map, making it reasonable to have a map marker. But then, this doesn't solve the NPC hunt problem, which would be a nightmare with Oblivions Radiant AI.

The story of Ultima I revolves around the evil wizard Mondain and his rule over the kingdom of Sosaria. According to the game's back story, Mondain created an evil gem over 1000 years ago that granted him immortality.[8] Since then, Mondain has released monsters and beasts upon the land that ravage the villages and towns of Sosaria and cause most of the nobles to bicker amongst themselves.[5] In an effort to stop Mondain's dominion, Lord British searches for a person to bring about the wizard's end.[5] This call is answered by the player.

The player is informed that the only way to defeat Mondain is to travel back in time and kill him before the gem of immortality is created.[9] The majority of the game is spent searching for a time machine, and a way to activate it. Four of the lords in the game, one from each realm, hold a gem that will allow the time machine to work once all four gems have been found. In exchange for the gem, the lord will ask the player to complete a quest that involves traveling into a dungeon and killing a specific creature. Once this has been achieved, the lord will hand over his gem.

The time machine itself also needs to be found. Purchasing a space shuttle and traveling into outer space is a prerequisite of this —the player must become a space ace, by destroying 20 enemy ships, in order to complete the game.[10] Once this task has been completed, rescuing a princess will reveal the location of the time machine, which always appears to the north of the castle in which the princess was held prisoner. The main character will then travel back in time and face Mondain before he has completed the gem of immortality. Destroying the gem is a requirement for beating the game as well as killing the wizard himself. Once Mondain is dead, the player is transported one thousand years into the future and rewarded by Lord British.[11][12] The game narration does not attempt to explain away the temporal paradox caused by killing Mondain 1000 years in the past, thus preventing the events which cause the player to be called to the world in the first place.

Yeah, how could Divinity possibly compete with that amazing story! /rollseyes

any gamer knows that the series started with Ultima IV.

apparently not

#72 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@cfisher2833 said:

@texasgoldrush said:

On Divinity....this.

Also story problems keep it back....do not compare this game to Ultima or Baldur's Gate. The storytelling is not great here.

And regarding map markers, there a good ways to do this. NPCs can mark the players map, making it reasonable to have a map marker. But then, this doesn't solve the NPC hunt problem, which would be a nightmare with Oblivions Radiant AI.

The story of Ultima I revolves around the evil wizard Mondain and his rule over the kingdom of Sosaria. According to the game's back story, Mondain created an evil gem over 1000 years ago that granted him immortality.[8] Since then, Mondain has released monsters and beasts upon the land that ravage the villages and towns of Sosaria and cause most of the nobles to bicker amongst themselves.[5] In an effort to stop Mondain's dominion, Lord British searches for a person to bring about the wizard's end.[5] This call is answered by the player.

The player is informed that the only way to defeat Mondain is to travel back in time and kill him before the gem of immortality is created.[9] The majority of the game is spent searching for a time machine, and a way to activate it. Four of the lords in the game, one from each realm, hold a gem that will allow the time machine to work once all four gems have been found. In exchange for the gem, the lord will ask the player to complete a quest that involves traveling into a dungeon and killing a specific creature. Once this has been achieved, the lord will hand over his gem.

The time machine itself also needs to be found. Purchasing a space shuttle and traveling into outer space is a prerequisite of this —the player must become a space ace, by destroying 20 enemy ships, in order to complete the game.[10] Once this task has been completed, rescuing a princess will reveal the location of the time machine, which always appears to the north of the castle in which the princess was held prisoner. The main character will then travel back in time and face Mondain before he has completed the gem of immortality. Destroying the gem is a requirement for beating the game as well as killing the wizard himself. Once Mondain is dead, the player is transported one thousand years into the future and rewarded by Lord British.[11][12] The game narration does not attempt to explain away the temporal paradox caused by killing Mondain 1000 years in the past, thus preventing the events which cause the player to be called to the world in the first place.

Yeah, how could Divinity possibly compete with that amazing story! /rollseyes

any gamer knows that the series started with Ultima IV.

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

#73 Posted by lostrib (42797 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

#74 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be. And a lot of games have their roots in Ultima.

And really, most RPGs fail to compare to the depth that Ultima IV had.. Divinity is one of them.

#75 Posted by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be. And a lot of games have their roots in Ultima.

And really, most RPGs fail to compare to the depth that Ultima IV had.. Divinity is one of them.

So lets say someone doesn't really care for RPGs so they didn't know that. Yet they play hundreds of games that fall under other genre's and know most gaming history. You're saying they're not a true gamer?

#76 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be. And a lot of games have their roots in Ultima.

And really, most RPGs fail to compare to the depth that Ultima IV had.. Divinity is one of them.

So lets say someone doesn't really care for RPGs so they didn't know that. Yet they play hundreds of games that fall under other genre's and know most gaming history. You're saying they're not a true gamer?

yep....because Ultima influenced games outside the RPG genre.

#77 Edited by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be. And a lot of games have their roots in Ultima.

And really, most RPGs fail to compare to the depth that Ultima IV had.. Divinity is one of them.

So lets say someone doesn't really care for RPGs so they didn't know that. Yet they play hundreds of games that fall under other genre's and know most gaming history. You're saying they're not a true gamer?

yep....because Ultima influenced games outside the RPG genre.

But if they didn't play Ultima, why would they have to know that obscure fact about the series that has nothing to do with it's influence on other games, in order to be a "true" gamer?

#78 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be. And a lot of games have their roots in Ultima.

And really, most RPGs fail to compare to the depth that Ultima IV had.. Divinity is one of them.

So lets say someone doesn't really care for RPGs so they didn't know that. Yet they play hundreds of games that fall under other genre's and know most gaming history. You're saying they're not a true gamer?

yep....because Ultima influenced games outside the RPG genre.

But if they didn't play Ultima why would they know that relatively obscure fact about the series that has nothing to do with it's influence on other games?

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

#79 Edited by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what the game's influence on other titles was. It could have had the same characters and setting as previous Ultima games and still been equally as influential, so long as it was equally as well made.

#80 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what it's influence on other titles was.

Because Ultima IV changed the series and influenced a lot of games with its morality system and how it tells story, as well as building a credible fantasy universe, which is why the first two games got retconned.

#81 Edited by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what it's influence on other titles was.

Because Ultima IV changed the series and influenced a lot of games with its morality system and how it tells story, as well as building a credible fantasy universe, which is why the first two games got retconned.

Yes that's nice, but the retcon itself doesn't influence other titles, which is the fact you are attempting to argue is mandatory to be known. Assuming someone doesn't play the series but knows structurally all the things it does for other titles, why would they need to know the specifics of the stories just to be a "true" gamer?

#82 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what it's influence on other titles was.

Because Ultima IV changed the series and influenced a lot of games with its morality system and how it tells story, as well as building a credible fantasy universe, which is why the first two games got retconned.

Yes that's nice, but the retcon itself doesn't influence other titles which is the fact you are attempting to argue is mandatory to be known. Assuming someone doesn't play the series but knows structurally all the things it does for other titles, why would they need to know the specifics of the stories just to be a "true" gamer?

because as a pioneer franchise, the first two games have influenced other developers on making a realized world the first time around.

And most definitely, knowing the specifics of Quest of the Avatar's story is important, because it was revolutionary.

#83 Edited by cfisher2833 (2150 posts) -

Sorry I didn't play a fucking game that was released three years before I was even born. Typically I am all for going back to play the classics, but when your game looks like this, it's a bit much to go back to.

#84 Posted by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what it's influence on other titles was.

Because Ultima IV changed the series and influenced a lot of games with its morality system and how it tells story, as well as building a credible fantasy universe, which is why the first two games got retconned.

Yes that's nice, but the retcon itself doesn't influence other titles which is the fact you are attempting to argue is mandatory to be known. Assuming someone doesn't play the series but knows structurally all the things it does for other titles, why would they need to know the specifics of the stories just to be a "true" gamer?

because as a pioneer franchise, the first two games have influenced other developers on making a realized world the first time around.

And most definitely, knowing the specifics of Quest of the Avatar's story is important, because it was revolutionary.

lol that has so little to do with what I asked I don't even know where to go from here. It really would kill you to be wrong or let someone else have a point, wouldn't it?

#85 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what it's influence on other titles was.

Because Ultima IV changed the series and influenced a lot of games with its morality system and how it tells story, as well as building a credible fantasy universe, which is why the first two games got retconned.

Yes that's nice, but the retcon itself doesn't influence other titles which is the fact you are attempting to argue is mandatory to be known. Assuming someone doesn't play the series but knows structurally all the things it does for other titles, why would they need to know the specifics of the stories just to be a "true" gamer?

because as a pioneer franchise, the first two games have influenced other developers on making a realized world the first time around.

And most definitely, knowing the specifics of Quest of the Avatar's story is important, because it was revolutionary.

lol that has so little to do with what I asked I don't even know where to go from here. It really would kill you to be wrong or let someone else have a point, wouldn't it?

Because I already answered your question...because the importance of how Ultima IV built its world showed the importance of building a consistent world and lore and having it matter, not throwing a bunch of random crap together as what was done before (Ultima I and II and the genre as a whole before IV). You simply do not want this to be relevant in your argument.

And why should I concede? Simply put, you just don't like what I have to say.

#86 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@cfisher2833 said:

Sorry I didn't play a fucking game that was released three years before I was even born. Typically I am all for going back to play the classics, but when your game looks like this, it's a bit much to go back to.

Than play the NES version.

#87 Posted by lostrib (42797 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be.

No I think that's more along the lines of like a historian or anthropologist

#88 Edited by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

because that fact you think is obscure did have an impact on gaming...meaning, its not obscure.

That doesn't make any sense, the story being retconned in and of itself has nothing to do with what it's influence on other titles was.

Because Ultima IV changed the series and influenced a lot of games with its morality system and how it tells story, as well as building a credible fantasy universe, which is why the first two games got retconned.

Yes that's nice, but the retcon itself doesn't influence other titles which is the fact you are attempting to argue is mandatory to be known. Assuming someone doesn't play the series but knows structurally all the things it does for other titles, why would they need to know the specifics of the stories just to be a "true" gamer?

because as a pioneer franchise, the first two games have influenced other developers on making a realized world the first time around.

And most definitely, knowing the specifics of Quest of the Avatar's story is important, because it was revolutionary.

lol that has so little to do with what I asked I don't even know where to go from here. It really would kill you to be wrong or let someone else have a point, wouldn't it?

Because I already answered your question...because the importance of how Ultima IV built its world showed the importance of building a consistent world and lore and having it matter, not throwing a bunch of random crap together as what was done before (Ultima I and II and the genre as a whole before IV). You simply do not want this to be relevant in your argument.

And why should I concede? Simply put, I am right and you don't like it.

But you aren't right, you're not even remotely close to right, what you're saying is beyond absurd. What you're saying is that everyone must know every important detail about every single influential game ever made from every genre, and only then are they a "true" gamer. Give me a fucking break. Like you know every detail about every important game ever made.

No one needs to know the story of Ultima to be a gamer, simple as that. It isn't a requirement.

#89 Edited by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be.

No I think that's more along the lines of like a historian or anthropologist

no, this ignorance of how things came to be, doesn't make you a true gamer.

#90 Posted by lostrib (42797 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

"@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be.

No I think that's more along the lines of like a historian or anthropologist

no, that just doesn't make you a true gamer.

yeah...I think the only correct response to this is "lol, 'true gamers' "

#91 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

@lostrib said:

@texasgoldrush said:

"@lostrib said:

apparently not

apparently so....the first three games had most of the plot and setting retconned after Ultima IV, and games after Ultima IV used the same characters and setting except for VII part 2, and VIII.

why is that something any gamer would know?

because if they do not know, they aren't true gamers....true gamers know how things came to be.

No I think that's more along the lines of like a historian or anthropologist

no, that just doesn't make you a true gamer.

yeah...I think the only correct response to this is "lol, 'true gamers' "

and yet I corrected my response before you posted...nice try

And no, you can't be ignorant on some things and be a true gamer....case closed.

#92 Edited by GreySeal9 (25100 posts) -

This "true gamer" nonsense is really sad.

If being a true gamer means behaving like texasgoldrush, I'd rather be a false gamer.

#93 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

Sorry, but face facts here.......Ultima IV is simply put, one of the most influential games ever made, and the series is probably the most influential ever in gaming along with Mario Bros.

This isn't even gaming 101, its elementary..

"No one needs to know the story of Ultima to be a gamer, simple as that. It isn't a requirement"

And that's the difference between true gamers and casual gamer.

#94 Posted by CrownKingArthur (5262 posts) -

i want to hear more about this true gamer demographic.

#95 Edited by GreySeal9 (25100 posts) -

@CrownKingArthur said:

i want to hear more about this true gamer demographic.

If texasgoldrush is an accurate representation, they exhibit obnoxious neckbeardian behavior, lack the maturity to handle opinions contrary to their own, and are slightly mental.

#96 Edited by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

Sorry, but face facts here.......Ultima IV is simply put, one of the most influential games ever made, and the series is probably the most influential ever in gaming along with Mario Bros.

This isn't even gaming 101, its elementary..

"No one needs to know the story of Ultima to be a gamer, simple as that. It isn't a requirement"

And that's the difference between true gamers and casual gamer.

Yes and this is the difference between a neurotic jackass and a normal human being.

#97 Edited by Seabas989 (11039 posts) -

I may pick this up during the holiday's whenever I get a new PC.

#98 Posted by texasgoldrush (9481 posts) -

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

Sorry, but face facts here.......Ultima IV is simply put, one of the most influential games ever made, and the series is probably the most influential ever in gaming along with Mario Bros.

This isn't even gaming 101, its elementary..

"No one needs to know the story of Ultima to be a gamer, simple as that. It isn't a requirement"

And that's the difference between true gamers and casual gamer.

No, that's the difference between a neurotic jackass and a normal human being.

No, that's me saying something you don't like and you whining about it.

#99 Posted by Vaasman (11809 posts) -

@texasgoldrush said:

@Vaasman said:

@texasgoldrush said:

Sorry, but face facts here.......Ultima IV is simply put, one of the most influential games ever made, and the series is probably the most influential ever in gaming along with Mario Bros.

This isn't even gaming 101, its elementary..

"No one needs to know the story of Ultima to be a gamer, simple as that. It isn't a requirement"

And that's the difference between true gamers and casual gamer.

No, that's the difference between a neurotic jackass and a normal human being.

No, that's me saying something you don't like and you whining about it.

I can't argue with that. Other people being objectively wrong does upset me.

#100 Posted by uninspiredcup (12847 posts) -
@BPoole96 said:

My GOTY so far, even beating out Dark Souls 2

It's great to play a game in which your dagger doesn't break every 20 seconds.