Deadfire - advice and is it worth it?

[Prime Junta]

You make it sound as if PoE 1 didn't have per encounter spells. But after lvl 9? they were unlocked. You also had Ciphers and Chanters with per encounter abilities. I didn't feel that the per rest system that transitioned into per encounter was any better than the system from PoE 2. Neither game had any sense of tension due to resource management in my opinion.

In P1 I'd conserve my highest-level spells for when I needed them and I managed my available spells strategically. In P2 I'd just always open with my highest-level spells because why not? Also in P1 the choice of which spells to unlock per-encounter was a significant character-building decision.

I never really cared for ciphers and chanters for the same reason, neither in P1 nor P2. The gameplay with them is really repetitive.

I agree that in P1 the tension due to resource management was somewhat self-imposed as camping supplies were so abundant, but at least it was there if you wanted it. I always tried to push as far as I could and only rested when I really had to. In P2 I barely even need to rest.

Obviously I can't argue with how you feel about it, but for me that single design decision was what broke the game for me. And yes I did try it with that one god challenge that makes everything per-enc but that doesn't really fix it, it throws it out of whack too far in the other direction.

Simply put, from where I'm standing Josh is so obsessed with stamping out degenerate gameplay that he's lost sight of how important per-rest casting is for this kind of thing.

 

[Silly Germans]

You make it sound as if PoE 1 didn't have per encounter spells. But after lvl 9? they were unlocked. You also had Ciphers and Chanters with per encounter abilities. I didn't feel that the per rest system that transitioned into per encounter was any better than the system from PoE 2. Neither game had any sense of tension due to resource management in my opinion.

In P1 I'd conserve my highest-level spells for when I needed them and I managed my available spells strategically. In P2 I'd just always open with my highest-level spells because why not? Also in P1 the choice of which spells to unlock per-encounter was a significant character-building decision.

I never really cared for ciphers and chanters for the same reason, neither in P1 nor P2. The gameplay with them is really repetitive.

I agree that in P1 the tension due to resource management was somewhat self-imposed as camping supplies were so abundant, but at least it was there if you wanted it. I always tried to push as far as I could and only rested when I really had to. In P2 I barely even need to rest.

Obviously I can't argue with how you feel about it, but for me that single design decision was what broke the game for me. And yes I did try it with that one god challenge that makes everything per-enc but that doesn't really fix it, it throws it out of whack too far in the other direction.

Simply put, from where I'm standing Josh is so obsessed with stamping out degenerate gameplay that he's lost sight of how important per-rest casting is for this kind of thing.

You have the pick spells when you level up in PoE 2 and you only get to cast those spells, unless you are a mage. I think that's more significant than picking the per encounter spells, while still having access to all other spells via slots. In PoE 1 you still have the option to cast all other spells even if the number of casts is limited per day. I agree that you end up using mostly the same skills in PoE 2 and obviously you're going to use your best abilities which are typically the higher level ones, but PoE 1 also had a fairly limited choice of useful spells. Especially if you had the dlc with the spellbook that contained the blue fireball. My mage did nothing else but spamming that overpowered spell for the rest of the game. Knowing that my slots are going to be restored after a fight made me actually try out spells instead of using always the same ones, which is why i don't feel that PoE 2 is more repetitive.

I think that the games are overall almost at the same level and its not strange that someone prefers one over the other if they have a certain preference which only one of the games features. I think that the game is only better by a small margin which is easily overcome if you weigh features differently.

 

[Lawntoilet]

Played PoE 1 unpatched, didn't particularly like it. Later, played PoE 1 all patched up and mostly enjoyed it on path of damned (although the story and lore dumps were pretty bad. Only good part of story was starting that war with that sniveling competing Duke/Count whatever that wanted my land). Need the critical codex consensus on the following:

(1) Will I enjoy deadfire?;

(2) Should I just skip the dialogue or is it better than PoE 1's story?

(3). Any mods or things I should be aware of to avoid terrible experience? Probably will play pretty evil.

(4). Turn based or real-time with pause? (Generally prefer TB but didn't mind the heavily paused PoE 1 combat. I read it wasn't really built for TB so it's balance is off).

Thanks.

Based on this, I think you will like Deadfire.
I'd play RTWP if you liked it in PoE1.
As others have mentioned, the main quest writing is shitty and companion writing is in particular for the most part, but the faction writing is better.
The game looks great and I liked the setting a lot, overall I liked it a fair bit more than PoE1.

 

[Artyoan]

Overall it is better than the first game. The only thing that can make it worse is the setting, but that is purely a question of taste. I don't think that the writing, story telling approach has changed noticeable in comparison to PoE 1, they are very similar in that regard. Combat, character building and itemization are as a whole better. If you got some enjoyment from the patched version of PoE1, you should be able to enjoy PoE 2 likewise. Just don't expect a large jump in quality.

I disagree on most of the specifics although I won't comment on the "overall" other than saying that I get slightly nauseous whenever I fire it up whereas I still get a rush of joy from Pillars 1.

• The setting is solid Josh workmanship on both. Lots of factions duking it out for plausible political reasons. IMO neither one is much better or worse than the other.
• The story in Deadfire is a failure. The faction shenanigans are the interesting part, whereas the story is all about a giant green statue roflstomping everything. They don't gel at all and the game is much worse for it.
• The writing in Deadfire is much better edited, but really dull, typical millennial self-insert bullshit completely disconnected from the setting; throwing in an ekera or gellarde every two or three lines makes it worse. In Pillars 1 the writing had genuine high points which made up for a lot of the rough and/or sub-par stuff. Deadfire's writing is just a uniform flavour-free paste.
• Combat, character building, and itemisation are better – or, shall we say, on par with the White Marches. However, the mechanics have taken one big step back by making everything per-encounter – this in fact pretty much ruined the game for me as it removed any sense of tension or urgency when adventuring.

I did put a lot of hours into it and did complete it, and I occasionally start it up again to see if I could bring myself to do another run for the DLCs that I've missed (I only did one of them), but I just... can't. At least not so far. Maybe if I just told all the companions to get fucked and made an adventurer party instead, or just ran with the sidekicks; I just can't take the woke millennial horniness with them. They even ruined Edér, the bro of bros.

I'm currently playing it again now as I haven't touched PoE2 since release. This is a good summation of my problems so far. I'll add some others of mine though.

The story of a giant green statue roflstomping everything is also a story that implies a sense of urgency. The player is told that he has died, his castle was crushed, 300 of his people died, and more are dying as the god rampages through the Deadfire. There are reminders through dialogue that this is happening and thats the only thing to keep it in play for hours on end. And yet, much like Fallout 4, the world design is completely at odds with the main story hook. Hurry urgently... but don't! Enjoy the Deadfire. Take your time and do these bounties. Supply the poor with food. Immediate dissonance means role playing the Watcher is much harder to do. It was a mistake to return with the Watcher also, a new character would have been better.

The new recruitable companions are all thoroughly unlikeable without any sort of Durance tier payoff. Save for Xoti maybe, I don't care for any of the new ones. Eder transitioned to becoming more of a comic relief character in total as it overshadows his other qualities this time. Aloth is wildly different from the first game.

Empowering was supposed to be the strategic element but it wasn't nearly enough. I'm playing Veteran and never used it beyond the very early levels. The Per Encounter spell change also accentuates micromanagement just that much more while also making each spell feel as if its not doing that much, seeing as you can cast so many every battle.

I don't want to trash the game completely but I'm only level 12 or so and its just okay. Its worth a buy on sale I'd say. For the record, I hated PoE1 when I first played it after its release and when I revisited it I loved it, maybe the patches and a fresh mindset on my part were all that was required. I likely have a much higher opinion of PoE1 than most of the codex. But PoE2 isn't doing much for me on the second try.

And my best guess is the pirate theme is the culprit regarding why its sales were so low. As much as people bitch about traditional fantasy, it seems to have a fountain of youth to it for interests sake. Setting this game only partly in the Deadfire with half or more of the game being in more diverse settings would have been much better. And while many decisions carrying over from PoE1 might sound nice, its a blessing and a curse. If people didn't love PoE1, they might not want to replay a 100+ hour game to refresh their memory and set a world state in which they actually know by memory what happened.

 

[Lawntoilet]

The story of a giant green statue roflstomping everything is also a story that implies a sense of urgency. The player is told that he has died, his castle was crushed, 300 of his people died, and more are dying as the god rampages through the Deadfire. There are reminders through dialogue that this is happening and thats the only thing to keep it in play for hours on end. And yet, much like Fallout 4, the world design is completely at odds with the main story hook. Hurry urgently... but don't! Enjoy the Deadfire. Take your time and do these bounties. Supply the poor with food. Immediate dissonance means role playing the Watcher is much harder to do. It was a mistake to return with the Watcher also, a new character would have been better.

The new recruitable companions are all thoroughly unlikeable without any sort of Durance tier payoff. Save for Xoti maybe, I don't care for any of the new ones. Eder transitioned to becoming more of a comic relief character in total as it overshadows his other qualities this time. Aloth is wildly different from the first game.

I agree with all this.

And my best guess is the pirate theme is the culprit regarding why its sales were so low.

Personally I really enjoyed the pirate theme and setting but it probably did hurt sales with PoE1 fans.

 

[Artyoan]

The story of a giant green statue roflstomping everything is also a story that implies a sense of urgency. The player is told that he has died, his castle was crushed, 300 of his people died, and more are dying as the god rampages through the Deadfire. There are reminders through dialogue that this is happening and thats the only thing to keep it in play for hours on end. And yet, much like Fallout 4, the world design is completely at odds with the main story hook. Hurry urgently... but don't! Enjoy the Deadfire. Take your time and do these bounties. Supply the poor with food. Immediate dissonance means role playing the Watcher is much harder to do. It was a mistake to return with the Watcher also, a new character would have been better.

The new recruitable companions are all thoroughly unlikeable without any sort of Durance tier payoff. Save for Xoti maybe, I don't care for any of the new ones. Eder transitioned to becoming more of a comic relief character in total as it overshadows his other qualities this time. Aloth is wildly different from the first game.

I agree with all this.

And my best guess is the pirate theme is the culprit regarding why its sales were so low.

Personally I really enjoyed the pirate theme and setting but it probably did hurt sales with PoE1 fans.

They make a critical mistake at the beginning of the game. After setting your character data with Berath they start you on a ship, already in the Deadfire. Had they taken a few hours of gameplay and rooted it in the Dyrwood or around Caed Nua then they could have connected the first game to this one in terms of the tone. The shift in tone is offputting by both the pirate theme and the lack of a smooth transition from the Dyrwood to Deadfire. So instead of just perceiving it is a shift in tone via regional difference, its a shift in tone via the game itself.

So I'm not entirely against pirates. But its very rare that a theme dominating the entirety of the game is a good thing. And then coupling it with a tonal shift compounds the issue. Even a brief introduction in the old stomping grounds might have done wonders to make the new setting a lot more palatable.

I know Sawyer said he doesn't consider it a pirate game and I agree. But its a dominant theme. It was the most in-your-face aspect of the marketing. A lot of the other Eora regions would be superior picks for a PoE3, which I do still hope happens.

 

[DalekFlay]

The story of a giant green statue roflstomping everything is also a story that implies a sense of urgency. The player is told that he has died, his castle was crushed, 300 of his people died, and more are dying as the god rampages through the Deadfire. There are reminders through dialogue that this is happening and thats the only thing to keep it in play for hours on end. And yet, much like Fallout 4, the world design is completely at odds with the main story hook. Hurry urgently... but don't! Enjoy the Deadfire. Take your time and do these bounties. Supply the poor with food. Immediate dissonance means role playing the Watcher is much harder to do. It was a mistake to return with the Watcher also, a new character would have been better.

This is the anal retentiveness that lead to Pathfinder's shitty linearity. It's a video game, and the freedom to tackle different quests and factions as you feel like it is a good thing. No one really cares about the realism of that outside of hyper nerds on forums like this.

 

[Takamori]

I dont mind being pressured by Green Thanos, but the fact you just go on a trail just to receive a : "Well Im going to do X thing and there nothing you can do about it" and the game and your character goes "Aight cool" or if you dare to try something different you get soul sucked. Its pretty underwhelming, when I finished the game I was on sleep meds theoretically I shouldn't remember fuck all from the ending but I remember Eothas just going "Well Im going to do thing ok?"

 

[Butter]

You shouldn't tell a story about urgency if you are making a game about exploring every square inch of a vast world. Both Morrowind and New Vegas have looming threats, but without any specific dates, which allows the player to justify fucking around.

 

[Artyoan]

The story of a giant green statue roflstomping everything is also a story that implies a sense of urgency. The player is told that he has died, his castle was crushed, 300 of his people died, and more are dying as the god rampages through the Deadfire. There are reminders through dialogue that this is happening and thats the only thing to keep it in play for hours on end. And yet, much like Fallout 4, the world design is completely at odds with the main story hook. Hurry urgently... but don't! Enjoy the Deadfire. Take your time and do these bounties. Supply the poor with food. Immediate dissonance means role playing the Watcher is much harder to do. It was a mistake to return with the Watcher also, a new character would have been better.

This is the anal retentiveness that lead to Pathfinder's shitty linearity. It's a video game, and the freedom to tackle different quests and factions as you feel like it is a good thing. No one really cares about the realism of that outside of hyper nerds on forums like this.

The problem is having a main story that implies a sense of urgency and is left to simmer in the background. If my infant son is lost in the Boston post-fallout hellscape, I should want to find him asap. If my soul was taken by a mass murdering jolly green giant I should want to get it back asap.

The key is to just not have an urgent main quest with an open world designed to be devoured in small chunks as the player sees fit. In PoE1 they implied the character would go insane but not immediately. Which meant the player had a motive to keep after this mysterious cult figure but could do some sight seeing and so forth along the way. I would not go insane next week if I didn't find Thaos now. If I play Skyrim I usually don't even bother going up the mountain to see the graybeards. Why? Because nothing implies I need to do it urgently, so I just murder hobo roam the lands. Keep game/world design and role playing compatible.

 

[Lawntoilet]

This is the anal retentiveness that lead to Pathfinder's shitty linearity. It's a video game, and the freedom to tackle different quests and factions as you feel like it is a good thing.

You can tackle every piece of content in Pathfinder too. You just have to actually listen to the game about when it is a good time to do that stuff, and when is a good time to address an actually urgent threat. It's not linear, you can do the side content in any order you want to, just that your dicking around is punctuated by the main quest.

No one really cares about the realism of that outside of hyper nerds on forums like this.

I don't care about what these people who don't care about "the realism of that" care about, I care about what I enjoy and care about, and I enjoy and care about having the narrative of the game match the mechanics of the game.
Just because a game like Fallout or Kingmaker or MotB does this doesn't make it "linear."

 

[DalekFlay]

The problem is having a main story that implies a sense of urgency and is left to simmer in the background. If my infant son is lost in the Boston post-fallout hellscape, I should want to find him asap. If my soul was taken by a mass murdering jolly green giant I should want to get it back asap.

The key is to just not have an urgent main quest with an open world designed to be devoured in small chunks as the player sees fit. In PoE1 they implied the character would go insane but not immediately. Which meant the player had a motive to keep after this mysterious cult figure but could do some sight seeing and so forth along the way. I would not go insane next week if I didn't find Thaos now. If I play Skyrim I usually don't even bother going up the mountain to see the graybeards. Why? Because nothing implies I need to do it urgently, so I just murder hobo roam the lands. Keep game/world design and role playing compatible.

I agree it can be written in a way that calls less attention to the "game-ness" of it. Morrowind did that well, as mentioned, though you could still say "the plague is killing us all and you're making money with the fighter's guild?" At some point a game's a game, is what I'm saying. You're not wrong some do it better than others though, I just don't want the obsession with it to result in linear games like Pathfinder. Complain about the linearity or time limits of that game and you'll get a ton of "well if the barbarian horde was coming for your kingdom wouldn't you address it quickly?" Problem is it's not real life, gameplay is paramount, and time limits and linearity are bad for RPG gameplay when overused. Fallout didn't overuse it, Pathfinder did.

You can tackle every piece of content in Pathfinder too. You just have to actually listen to the game about when it is a good time to do that stuff, and when is a good time to address an actually urgent threat. It's not linear, you can do the side content in any order you want to, just that your dicking around is punctuated by the main quest.

I don't care about what these people who don't care about "the realism of that" care about, I care about what I enjoy and care about, and I enjoy and care about having the narrative of the game match the mechanics of the game.
Just because a game like Fallout or Kingmaker or MotB does this doesn't make it "linear."

"It's not linear, you just have to do what the game tells you to do when it tells you to do it."

Yes, obviously you enjoy what you like. I also enjoy what I like, and am therefore advocating for it. The freedom to head right to New Vegas or dick around with Veronica and the Brotherhood is my choice to make, and that choice is part of why I love RPGs. If there was a time limit to get to New Vegas to stop Benny from using the chip or whatever it would do nothing but hurt the game. If stuff like "my son's out there somwhere but I'm gonna do odd jobs" really bothers you, then the solution you should advocate for is better writing, not more linearity.

(P.S. You can mainline the FO4 main quest until you find your son and then do everything else you want to do thanks to Bethesda's leveling system, FYI.)

 

[Lawntoilet]

"It's not linear, you just have to do what the game tells you to do when it tells you to do it."

It's not linear though, you can do (or ignore) sidequests in any way and any order you want, you can still delay urgent quests to a point, and you can resolve them in different ways to achieve different outcomes, all of which are non-linear things.

Yes, obviously you enjoy what you like. I also enjoy what I like, and am therefore advocating for it. The freedom to head right to New Vegas or dick around with Veronica and the Brotherhood is my choice to make, and that choice is part of why I love RPGs. If there was a time limit to get to New Vegas to stop Benny from using the chip or whatever it would do nothing but hurt the game. If stuff like "my son's out there somwhere but I'm gonna do odd jobs" really bothers you, then the solution you should advocate for is better writing, not more linearity.

(P.S. You can mainline the FO4 main quest until you find your son and then do everything else you want to do thanks to Bethesda's leveling system, FYI.)

Sure but none of those things are "there is an existential crisis if you do not do X within time limit Y."
Time limits aren't a good solution in every single game but if there is urgency in the narrative then that should be enforced in the mechanics.
FO:NV isn't structured like that so it doesn't matter in that game.
FO1 is structured like that so it makes sense that there are time limits in that game.
More games should let you do sidequests post-game, though, I'd like to see that.

 

[Trashos]

I will side with DalekFlay on this. Kingmaker is partially nonlinear and open-world, but in reality it features a rather limiting time-limited and chapter-based structure. We have no name for this structure, but we might as well have had a name, and consider it a completely separate thing.

Now, I love Kingmaker myself, but still my favorite structure is the New Vegas structure. No urgency needed there. Explore to your heart's content, and still the narrative is very interesting.

 

[Ramnozack]

Deadfire is very nonlinear I have to admit, I’m level 16 and haven’t even done one main quest after leaving port maje except picking up bird woman and shark orc sniper, nor have I done any faction quests or dlc

 

[Silly Germans]

The main quest is 100% linear in PoE 2, the game just doesn't force you to progress it. I also prefer it that way since it allows you to explore the rest of the game at your leisure but despite personal preference one has to admit that PF:K succeeded in making time matter. I actually liked that during my first play through but it is somewhat impeding my interest to play it a second time. I think that the enforced progress of the main quest in PF:K wouldn't be annoying if you didn't have to manage all those events that take a shit ton of time. Without these you would have more than enough time to explore the surroundings. A bit more leeway would have improved the situation or a simple option that removes the time limits. On the other hand, has someone tried the option where you don't have to manage your kingdom yourself ? That should give you enough time to free roam even if the main plot needs addressing at times. What happens when you play with that option ? Are all events handled by the ai in a good way or do you end up with a subpar kingdom, missing the artisans and such.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

but in reality it features a rather limiting time-limited and chapter-based structure.

I strongly dislike when an RPG makes it seem like something is urgent but I can just wander off and do whatever. Probably one of my biggest pet peeves.
I don't agree with the entire time-limit, but I do agree with the emphasis it puts on resolving important events. If a troll horde is rampaging your barony, that's something that needs to be dealt with ASAP and not put of while you go pick flowers. At the very least, the consequences for not taking care of it should be dire.

 

[Trashos]

If a troll horde is rampaging your barony, that's something that needs to be dealt with ASAP and not put of while you go pick flowers.

Well, that is what I am saying, plot points that sound very urgent should be avoided afaic. New Vegas (and Underrail, in fact, in the base game) show how to do that. That said, see below.

or a simple option that removes the time limits.

Yeah no, the kingdom management module requires that adventuring is time limited. Otherwise the management/adventuring symbiosis does not work. So Kingmaker is really a special case.

I do not know what happens when someone automates kingdom management.

 

[Lawntoilet]

I think that the enforced progress of the main quest in PF:K wouldn't be annoying if you didn't have to manage all those events that take a shit ton of time. Without these you would have more than enough time to explore the surroundings. A bit more leeway would have improved the situation or a simple option that removes the time limits. On the other hand, has someone tried the option where you don't have to manage your kingdom yourself ?

I felt like I had a bunch of time in the later chapters to complete everything before endgame but I also tend to push as far on a single rest as I can in these kinds of games.
Once you get teleportation circles going you cut out a lot of travel time, too.
I'm pretty sure that auto-kingdom management does enough to prevent a game over but doesn't get you all the goodies you get from doing it yourself like artisans and the like.

 

[Falksi]

but in reality it features a rather limiting time-limited and chapter-based structure.

I strongly dislike when an RPG makes it seem like something is urgent but I can just wander off and do whatever. Probably one of my biggest pet peeves.
I don't agree with the entire time-limit, but I do agree with the emphasis it puts on resolving important events. If a troll horde is rampaging your barony, that's something that needs to be dealt with ASAP and not put of while you go pick flowers. At the very least, the consequences for not taking care of it should be dire.

Well said.

Witcher 3's "Hurry, the Wild Hunt is after Ciri!" setup fell flat as a pancake when you spent over 100 hours running round doing every menial task going.

 

[DalekFlay]

I strongly dislike when an RPG makes it seem like something is urgent but I can just wander off and do whatever. Probably one of my biggest pet peeves.
I don't agree with the entire time-limit, but I do agree with the emphasis it puts on resolving important events. If a troll horde is rampaging your barony, that's something that needs to be dealt with ASAP and not put of while you go pick flowers. At the very least, the consequences for not taking care of it should be dire.

This doesn't bother me because I can whip out the "it's a video game" cognitive dissonance, but if it did bother me I'd advocate for RPGs understanding this and writing their plots around it, rather than enforcing quest sequences and timings.

 

[gurugeorge]

I enjoyed it more than POE, mainly because I find the combat much more "readable" in terms of graphics, ability icons, status, etc. Where POE combat was like trudging through ugly, annoying graphics soup, here everything (well, mostly) is clean and definite. It's just small changes a lot of the time, but the overall effect makes the combat much less irritating (for me at least). Only played it turn-based though, so that might have something to do with it. The build system and combat abilities, etc., are also more readable and clearly defined than in the earlier game, and it's even more, ahem, balanced than POE.

Other than that, the setting and overall vibe is pozzed af (full of LGBT and thinly-veiled Whitey Bad teaching moments - although what game isn't these days), but nevertheless quite charming in terms of art design. We're a long way from the gritty European vibe of Ferelden Dyrwood, but it's a semi-plausible extension of the world presented in the first game. The story isn't bad too, maybe a bit more coherent and flowing than POE's. I like reading and lore dumps, and it seems you don't, but you can avoid a lot of the reading if you don't care and it won't really make any difference.

As others have said, the dissonance between urgent over-arching goal and the pull to spend most of your time pissing about and exploring every nook and cranny of the world map is quite glaring, but meh, lots of games have done that. However, if it's something that annoys you in games generally, it'll really annoy you here (there's even a point where you're approaching the climax of the main story, and all the NPCs' hair is on fire, yet you suddenly have all the time in the world to explore the available world map!).

The ship combat - there's a fun mini game there struggling to get out (both the ship phase and boarding phase, which are not really well-integrated with each other unfortunately), but it feels a bit of an afterthought, bolted on (as someone said above, you have a victory against a better ship, but you scuttle the ship and keep the potatoes? Doesn't make any sense, it's not integrated with the rest of the game's progression and economy). But the ship-to-ship minigame is enjoyable enough, in its highly abstracted way, that you might find yourself doing it anyway regardless of poor rewards, at least till you get the hang of it and get bored; the boarding, while optional if you play ship-to-ship right, is pretty cool, but stupidly easy compared to the rest of the game.

 

[Ranarama]

Has anyone warned that TB combat straight up ignores some aspects like the action speed of your characters?

 

[NotSerious]

I liked the game but found the accents of the Deadfire barely understandable.

 

[wahrk]

If you liked the first Pillars you’ll probably enjoy it. The main quest is way worse and the companions are terrible outside of a couple decent ones, but you can always create a custom party and just ignore the main storyline. Visually it’s a very nice looking game and the setting is more unique, although PoE 1 had a darker atmosphere that is missing here.

I hope they make a 3rd one, there’s potential there and even with their flaws I had many hours of fun with the first two. They need to stop focusing the plot on things no one cares about (bickering gods, pointless “watcher” babble), all the side stuff ends up being far more interesting.