about your spoiler part that would be because everything up to that point has been agreeable with nerat so you wouldn't get other options
Is it half a game??
- Thread starter amanis
- Start date
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
about your spoiler part that would be because everything up to that point has been agreeable with nerat so you wouldn't get other options
In addition to being extremely short, it's also extremely unpolished and quite buggy. I wrote a short review, where I said that the game needs about 10 patches and 2-4 major, major expansions, and I stand by that judgement.
I'm not usually one to whine and moan, and I realize it sounds entitled and childish, but I genuinely do wonder if the game went through any QA/playtesting at all, and I genuinely feel like it's got a definitive beta feel to it, at least from the moment you claim the first Pillar and end the prologue.
It's also kept basically all the issues of Pillars of Eternity (cluttered, messy combat, arbitrary teleporting enemies to make choke point tactics impossible, the engagement system, etc.), and even managed to make some things worse (such as the UI, which was something I would've considered impossible). That being said, some things are flat-out better, such as the magic system, the character progression system, etc. I miss the Disposition system, though, I think it could've made a good part of Tyranny.
I also think that the world is genuinely better and more interesting, simultaneously more magical and more down to Earth, less fantastical on a "personal" level, but with world-defining magic. A iron-age/bronze-age world with a Greco-Roman-esque Empire invading the lands, while still avoiding the narrative and artistic tendencies that usually entails. Not a gladius in sight.
There's a tremendous potential in Tyranny, but it's a diamond in the rough, horrifically marred by issues that really shouldn't be issues. Much like PoE, I hope the developers takes the issues to heart and works on them, and are willing to actually go in and revise actual content. This never happened with PoE, which is why it'll never really stand out in the way it really should've.
That's a bit of an uncool spoiler in the middle of a seemingly unspoilery post, but either way, was anyone else tremendously annoyed at the fact that you're forced to take a side?
It just seems to me like picking "I refuse to take a side in this petty squabble" or "Do as you're told, so commands Tunon, by the will of Kyron!" should've been an option, even if that meant leaving the choice up to the RNG, alienating both of them, losing all Favor with both, gaining a ton of Wrath, or whatever (gaining a ton of Favor with Tunon?). Hell, I would've been fine with them uniting against me and hating me forever, or something. I genuinely don't care - the choice is paramount, the outcome largely irrelevant as long as it makes a modicum of sense.
As a nobleman, a servant of the Kyron, a Fatebinder and a member of Tunon's court, it felt extremely out of place for my character to pick a side at that point, in that way, even though I had been pretty much flagrantly favouring the Disfavored - but never at the expense of the war effort or the law - simply because I considered the Chorus worthless, disgusting rabble unfit to rule.
I'm not usually one to whine and moan, and I realize it sounds entitled and childish, but I genuinely do wonder if the game went through any QA/playtesting at all, and I genuinely feel like it's got a definitive beta feel to it, at least from the moment you claim the first Pillar and end the prologue.
It's also kept basically all the issues of Pillars of Eternity (cluttered, messy combat, arbitrary teleporting enemies to make choke point tactics impossible, the engagement system, etc.), and even managed to make some things worse (such as the UI, which was something I would've considered impossible). That being said, some things are flat-out better, such as the magic system, the character progression system, etc. I miss the Disposition system, though, I think it could've made a good part of Tyranny.
I also think that the world is genuinely better and more interesting, simultaneously more magical and more down to Earth, less fantastical on a "personal" level, but with world-defining magic. A iron-age/bronze-age world with a Greco-Roman-esque Empire invading the lands, while still avoiding the narrative and artistic tendencies that usually entails. Not a gladius in sight.
There's a tremendous potential in Tyranny, but it's a diamond in the rough, horrifically marred by issues that really shouldn't be issues. Much like PoE, I hope the developers takes the issues to heart and works on them, and are willing to actually go in and revise actual content. This never happened with PoE, which is why it'll never really stand out in the way it really should've.
That's a bit of an uncool spoiler in the middle of a seemingly unspoilery post, but either way, was anyone else tremendously annoyed at the fact that you're forced to take a side?
It just seems to me like picking "I refuse to take a side in this petty squabble" or "Do as you're told, so commands Tunon, by the will of Kyron!" should've been an option, even if that meant leaving the choice up to the RNG, alienating both of them, losing all Favor with both, gaining a ton of Wrath, or whatever (gaining a ton of Favor with Tunon?). Hell, I would've been fine with them uniting against me and hating me forever, or something. I genuinely don't care - the choice is paramount, the outcome largely irrelevant as long as it makes a modicum of sense.
As a nobleman, a servant of the Kyron, a Fatebinder and a member of Tunon's court, it felt extremely out of place for my character to pick a side at that point, in that way, even though I had been pretty much flagrantly favouring the Disfavored - but never at the expense of the war effort or the law - simply because I considered the Chorus worthless, disgusting rabble unfit to rule.
Last edited:
- 1
One of the disadvantages of having 3 very different paths from the start, I think. When looking at games like Pillars of Eternity or Mass Effect, you're following the same "path", roughly speaking, regardless of what sort of character you are. It is just how you resolve the challenges that change.
That said, I was surprised that I finished my first run (Disfavored loyalist on Hard) in about 25 hours, even when going out of my way to do side-quests. Though, I will say, I think 25 hours is a respectable length for a game in general, it was a little disappointing after PoE. Now to start over with a character that stands against both the Disfavored and the Chorus.
That said, I was surprised that I finished my first run (Disfavored loyalist on Hard) in about 25 hours, even when going out of my way to do side-quests. Though, I will say, I think 25 hours is a respectable length for a game in general, it was a little disappointing after PoE. Now to start over with a character that stands against both the Disfavored and the Chorus.
I took my sweet time creating the charachter and I'm reading almost every single description and dialogue (minus the ones I don't think fit my charachter choices). I'm 10/15 hours into the game and I'm just after the discovery of the first Mountain Spire.
This game is finely crafted texts wise and narrative wise and I do think rushing through it without savouring what is clearly one of the strong points will undoubtedly shorten and worsen the experince.
This game is finely crafted texts wise and narrative wise and I do think rushing through it without savouring what is clearly one of the strong points will undoubtedly shorten and worsen the experince.
- 1
As someone that has been seeing an astonishing number of spelling and minor grammatical errors and as someone that chose to go straight to Lethian's Crossing after Tunon's Court just to hit a small mountain of show-stopper narrative quest continuity bugs, I must ask you what you're smoking, and if I can have some.
Tyranny is a great many things, much of it good, but it's not "finaly crafted", texts-wise or narratively.
- 1
Spelling and grammatical order go into the 'proofreading' category. I didn't notice any btw. Maybe because I was enthralled by the narrative, the charachters and all the details of the world.
If you put typos in the narrative and texts category quality you are making a logical mistake. Maybe there was mishandling in the proofreading process, but narrative wise I find the story so far very well crafted.
If you put typos in the narrative and texts category quality you are making a logical mistake. Maybe there was mishandling in the proofreading process, but narrative wise I find the story so far very well crafted.
You're unironically claiming that spelling and grammatical errors have nothing to do with text quality. I'm not sure how to respond to that, because that's patently ridiculous. The fact that this can be largely attributed to nonexistent proofreading doesn't change that. At best, it's a possible explanation, at worst it's a poor excuse.
The countless spelling errors, sloppy writing (I've seen at least two "to" that were clearly meant to be "the") and (albeit minor) grammatical errors have nothing to do with the narrative issues, though, nor did I intend to imply that it did. But to claim that they're not there when directly linked to an entire area full of issues is a bit disingenuous.
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...bane-bug-spoilers.981576/page-2#post-22097969
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/index.php?threads/lethians-crossing-as-vendiran-guard.982524/
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...-bugged-beyond-any-hope-of-redemption.982496/
https://steamcommunity.com/app/362960/discussions/0/217691032445242804/#c217691032445916991
You pretty much highlighted my issue with Tyranny.
If you think of it now - Conquest gave a definite clue to how all game is going to unfold. You can change little details, but you are unable to change the course of action, whether you like it or not. At the end of the day, your choices doesn't really matter
Narrative and story quality has nothing to do with typos. End of story.
If a book from Stephen King comes out full of typos you are going to question his narrative ability or the person who had to proofread the text?
And if there was no 'other' person, would you question King's narrative ability on the ground of the typos?
As for the bugs and the typos go read my first post and see that I was not interested at all at discussing such matters. I was talking about hours of entertainment that this product can offer. Too bad the only answers I got was from someone pointing out typos... :-(
Yes, that's exactly what I said. You're apparently being argumentative and confrontational without reading my posts.
With such a dichotomous choice, I'd obviously blame the proofreader. Stephen King's narrative ability has nothing to do with text quality. But if the book is released with poor text quality and poor proofreading, I'll still criticize the book based on that fact, regardless of where in the chain of production the developers or publishers choose to assign blame.
What 'other' person? But no, obviously not. Nothing I've said related narrative to typos. I even attempted to clarify your apparent mix-up, wanting to make sure that what I said weren't taken the wrong way, but it's obvious that you didn't bother to read that.
In your first post in this thread, you make no claim that there's some matters you are not interested in discussing. You do claim, however, that the game is "finely crafted texts wise and narrative wise", to which I offered two counter-points highlighting issues with both the text and the narrative. Like I said, Tyranny is a great many things, much of it good, but it's not "finaly crafted", texts-wise or narratively. It's demonstrably lacking in both regards, at multiple points in the game, objectively.
- 1
Yes. I took the time to read your posts and respond, it's not too much to ask for the same courtesy.
You're literally saying "Narrative and story quality has nothing to do with typos. End of story." and argue against me connecting typos with narrative quality immediately after I said that "... spelling errors, sloppy writing and grammatical errors have nothing to do with the narrative issues, though, nor did I intend to imply that it did."