Also, I'm curious what everyone's impressions of the game are? Things are a little...passionate...over on their forum, so I thought I'd ask here.
They made a game that is inferior in every possible way to a game that was made 15 years ago. That takes talent.
Woa woa woah.... It's not even out yet, ok? @danathion as you can see, everybody's very excited, but as usual I shall attempt to reserve judgment until I have concrete information.
You know, I was thinking about this, and it seems to me(from my very limited involvement) that everything has been decided by backers. Everything is a poll on the forum. Do you guys want romances? How big should our dungeon be? How many ability scores should we have? I just stumbled across something that said most of the portraits where done from backer photos. This worries me. See, it's like @Quartz's discussion about videogames catering to the audience. If try just serve the audience exactly what they ask for, they're 1, not necessarily taking the thought to make a good game, and (more importantly) 2, not allowing for as much creative expression on the part of the developers and artists(I term in which I includes writes, animators, drawers, characterideaers, ect). And the fans want(it would seem) the infinity engine back. Every time something is announced to be slightly different than bg was, or simply what we though bg was(see the modding in PoE discussion) we flip. So while I continue to look forward to the game, and i think all the original content they have come up with is *amazing*, I'm apprehensive about how obviously dnd-wannabe it looks. *sigh* Only time will tell if they can pull it off. *crosses fingers*
Well, it's a tight rope I guess. They can't very well just ignore what their backers were expecting. It's my understanding that it hasn't been quite that strong though, from what little of it I've followed. With romances, for instance I think they were largely left out because Josh Sawyer simply didn't want to write them.
Well, it's a tight rope I guess. They can't very well just ignore what their backers were expecting. It's my understanding that it hasn't been quite that strong though, from what little of it I've followed.
Well yes. If they just go off and do thier own thing... Someone might buy it.... Maybe.... Clearly you have to listen to your audience, but it just looks so completely shameless. Listen, but do it subtly. E.i. Don't use select backer photos for portraits, or at least put it in as an Easter egg(screw you, legal issues). You need to compromise. What they're doing now is delivering exactly what was ordered straight to the door, while what they should be doing is paying attention and getting to know us and remember what our favorite meal is.
I will clarify that this is just the idea I'm getting from a rather distant perspective. Does anyone else more involved have comments? @Buttercheese@jaysl659@ZanathKariashi. @LiamEsler?(can I do that?)
And like I said, I'm not saying I don't think I'll like the game or anything. I'm(try, anyway) not one to jump to conclusions. I'll play the game *at least* once through before I make that kind of judgment.
I have to agree with @Sergio here, Obsidian rock pretty hard. Though I bet the game will have all sorts of problems when it comes out, but at it's core, the game will be brilliant.
@meagloth A few pieces of feedback does not a game make. There's a lot more to it than, say, a couple of portraits made for backers who donated quite a bit of money to the project. If you really think that kind of thing is what constitutes a game, you should probably do a little more research into what goes into a game.
You'd be much better off reserving judgement and not jumping to conclusions - you'll enjoy the experience more, for one. Trying to make judgements with the (very) limited information and misinformation you have won't give you an accurate idea of anything.
Romances weren't included because a) Josh didn't want to do them, and b) the effort could be expended elsewhere to greater effect.
Edit: Also oh my god people this is a beta, why are you playing it and construing from that what your actual play experience will be? A beta - of any project - does not constitute the final experience. Hold off your judgement.
The problem is that most people expect a full experience from beta software. I blame all the companies who used "beta" as a marketing term to attract attention to their products. I still remember the outcry here in the forums when Overhaul made the BG1EE beta closed and all the participants under NDA...
I have to agree. My only concern was the portraits, but that's easily rectified. There are countless replacements available. Aside from that, I am extremely pumped for this game. I don't regret my backing for a second, but there's a reason I didn't purchase beta access. I am that parasite that waits for the released product before playing.
Perhaps I have not been clear... I am sure that this is going to be a wonderful game. I intend to get it as soon as it comes out, and I'm not trying knock the project in any way, believe you me. But I am pointing out that it occasionally appears(like I said, from a distant outsiders perspective) that there has been a lot fan-serving, and I was wondering if anyone else got this feeling. Of course, I'm not familiar with this sort of thing. BG is essentiall the only 'real' videogame I play, so maybe this is totally normal. So
meagloth, I understand your reservation. But it's Obsidian. Never forget that.
Frankly doesn't mean anything to me. I couldn't name any other game that they made.
And I'm not saying that listening to fans is bad. I'm not so much worried that the fans are having such a big part of the decision making(as it would seem. Like I said, I'm just putting it out there to see if anyone else got the idea) but I'm more worried that the fan base is so caught up in it's nostalgia that they end up begging for an new IE game and PoE can't be it's own game, or it ends up going too far down it's own path and nobody likes it.
Really I just want it to be it's own game, I think. I've been *really* intrigued by the original stuff, and I don't want it to cling to dnd or the infinity engine games to much. But perhaps that is not a valid fear, after all it did just pop into my head today. Like I said, time will tell. Now, where is the spam rest until something interesting happens button?
You'd be much better off reserving judgement and not jumping to conclusions - you'll enjoy the experience more, for one. Trying to make judgements with the (very) limited information and misinformation you have won't give you an accurate idea of anything.
I hope it doesn't come across like I'm trying to make judgment. I really don't want to be that guy. I just saw a few things this morning which sparked a worry in my head(especially since just the other day the issue had come up in Quartz's thread and with kidcarnival in the movie thread) and I wanted to see if anyone else had had similar thoughts.
@meagloth You couldn't name a game they made? Really?
Fallout 3:New Vegas - aka the real Fallout 3, Neverwinter Nights 2 and all of its addons, Knights of the Old Republic 2, Alpha Protocol and South Park: The Stick of Truth.
And for all the naysayers, they made a bug-free game: Dungeon Siege 3.
Their developers were the driving forces behind games like Planescape Torment, Fallout, Fallout 2, the Icewind Dale series, Arcanum, The Temple of Elemental Evil and Vampire the Masquerade:Bloodlines.
Most of their senior staff worked at Black Isle Studios, which should be quite familiar with everyone here.
@10thLich I've only heard the titles of those games, let alone who made them. I'd heard that some IE devs where on the project(Liam, at least) but that's about it. I'm pretty out of the loop. like I said, BG is pretty much the only "real" game I play. Everything else is just iOS stuff that barely deserves the title videogame.
@meagloth brace yourself because this is probably going to be a long post lol.
I think you're off base in thinking that any sort of pandering to the backers or wanting to be like D&D has much affected the game. As for the portraits, some of them are based on the photographs of backers that contributed a good deal of money, based on that being offered to them during the Kickstarter campaign. Whatever the thoughts on whether it's a good thing or not, the Kickstarter rewards Obsidian chose to offer seemed to work. Just to be clear, though, not all the portraits will be based on backers and for those that are, you wouldn't know it unless you were told. They all look great to me, they're quality fantasy portraits and I wouldn't know any of them were based on real people without being told so.
As for heeding the ideas of backers that want to turn PoE into BG 2.5 or twist it into an imitation of D&D, I don't see that happening at all. The worst I could say to this is that the designers may have given in to cosmetic changes to appease backers. Some IE game related things are necessary because they were promised during the Kickstarter, such as 2d backgrounds, isometric view, six-member party, and RTwP combat. For those that aren't necessary and weren't promised, the designers haven't budged much on anything that they really cared about along the way as far as I can tell. No combat XP has been in since the Kickstarter was still funding, and they seem to be sticking to their guns with that design decision.
I think certain things such as the 6 attribute system was included as an attempt to pacify those more concerned with familiarity and nostalgia than good gameplay. The system itself is fine and I believe it adheres to the vision of the designers, but the layout of having six attributes with names similar to the D&D attributes while being functionally different was an interesting one. Truth be told, the attributes don't define the characters like they do in the IE games, which was a decision made by the lead designer (Sawyer) because he didn't want the attribute system full of trap choices that ultimately result in a multitude of bad builds. Although I like a challenge, I agree in concept that creating an attribute system where one specifically needs to "win" the attribute game by min-maxing correctly and can lose by not doing so is pointless. Any experienced RPGer knows which attributes to pick anyway, so really it seems to me that some experienced RPGers just like the idea that someone else won't know and will build a character that can't beat the game. Then again, I'm thoroughly enjoying Age of Decadence Early Access right now and that game has infinitely more bad builds than good ones, but that's another story; so I guess I'd say that either of these types of systems can be a lot of fun if done correctly.
So, the attributes are secondary (or even tertiary after skill choices throughout level progression) defining characteristics, the class defines the character and the attributes determine the focus and bonuses of that character. Ultimately I think that Sawyer's attempts to placate those wanting an IE game failed in instances such as this because he made a system that still angered those people by being radically different from what they wanted, but he also gets an eye-roll from those that like the new system and don't see the need for the slight changes that conform it to make it appear to be like D&D. In my opinion, though, the changes are only cosmetic and Sawyer built the attribute system that he wanted for the game, so making it look cosmetically like the D&D attribute system doesn't hurt anything. The attribute system certainly needs some tweaking and I'm hoping that it will eventually have a greater effect on the character, but it's far from a bad system I'd say.
The designers did end up budging on a couple of things I believe, notably the equipment degradation system was highly contentious (I never really liked the idea myself) and was eventually scrapped. The UI was a hot issue on the forums and although I think the minimalist crowd won out, the UI didn't end up looking too hugely different from their original plan. I just wish they'd let us move the UI elements around and flip them as I believe will be possible in Wasteland 2 (both using Unity engine). The stash inventory system has been argued against quite a bit (I'm not really a big fan of this either, but then again I can't think of an objectively better system necessarily so I don't have much constructive to say about it) and yet the designers haven't scrapped it and I doubt they will.
Essentially, it seems to me that the couple of things that they did give in on were things that weren't a valuable part of their design vision in the first place and when they wanted to keep something, it stayed in. At the end of the day, this is no D&D game, nor is it actually trying to be. Because of the designers sticking to their guns, I believe they're on their way to delivering what they promised, which is a new fantasy RPG in a brand new setting that evokes the feels, if you will, of the IE games. The boldest promise of the campaign was that "Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment." So I'd say that if they can even touch on each of these reasonably well within their own system and their fantasy world, then the game will be great. It's a matter of opinion of course, but from what I've seen of the beta, the game is going to live up to the promise.
The fact that they already have a track record for bastardizing the Fallout series hardly instills confidence.
This is really ironic given that not only was it Bethesda who purchased the UP and turned it into the 1st/3rd Person Shooter based RPG with F3, like @Chow said, but the people that's now on Obsidian where the very ones who led the development of Fallout 1 and 2 as well as designed Van Buren (the originally planned F3 that never got developed). A lot of what they designed for Van Buren went into New Vegas in one way or another.
At the end of the day, what will really tip the scales for me is the quality of the writing and characters - something that can't truly be judged based solely on betas and previews.
I like some of what I've seen so far, but other things that the makers have said have raised some red flags for me (i.e: the lack of romances, or the seeming disinterest in character portraits). But I'll reserve my final judgement until the game is actually released.
I will say one thing: anyone who invokes the name of BG in order to sell their product has set one helluva high bar for themselves. It's one thing to create another IWD or ToEE, but to attempt to follow in BG's footsteps is a whole other mountain to climb.
These negative comments, to me, come as a result of high expectations.
When you enter the PoE site, the first thing you notice is: "Miss classic cRPGs like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment? So do we! Introducing Obsidian's PILLARS OF ETERNITY."
From the very start of the whole project they have positioned their future game as the one that can stand in the legendary line of BG, IWD and PST.
And to me this is a nearly impossible task. No matter how many effort you put into a project, it's EXCEPTIONALLY hard to become so good that people would stop criticising this or that - taking into account the heaviweights of BG, IWD and PST as comparisons which the company itself has chosen as the examples.
So, such high expectations automatically demand high results. And when people don't find them, the negativity rises.
Personally, having seen the videos, having read pillarsofeternity.gamepedia and having been monitoring this game closely for more than one year, I'm excited.
I'm glad they make an isometric RPG that in many ways reminds me of those classics they call themselves: BG, IWD and PST.
I think it's a wonderful idea to make such a game. Maybe after PoE other companies will make new games that in one way or another will be similar to BG?
And I'm sure that problems and things that do not answer all the demands of the community are essential parts of the job to make such a game.
Even if this game would not be 100% like I wished it to be, so be it. I'll still get mass fun and excitement from playing it. How can I not try an isometric RPG with stunning art, a battle pause and a party? Of course, I will try it.
As for negativity, the example of BG:EE shows to me that you can't go without negativity these days. It seems you can't please all people.
So,
Will I play the game? - Surely Will I like the game as much as I like BG - We'll wait and see. Do I think this game is worth trying if you like BG - Absolutely.
Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose of releasing a beta. I thought the whole point was to receive criticism while there is still time to act on it before the final release. That is why we're waiting for a BG patch, isn't it.
if we are to reserve all our judgements until the final release, what is the point of releasing a beta and what is the point of having a discussion forum.
All the issues are of their own making. what did they think would happen when from the beginning and at every opportunity since, the IE games' names have been emphasised. Sure, they got a lot of supporters and a lot of money but with that comes a lot of justified expectation. So when the work in progress is revealed of course people have opinions/judgements/questions/concerns, many of them strong and, they have a right to voice them.
The main issue is that, many of the expectations are unrealistic. But, they are that way because the developers have not done anything until now to correct them. I'm fairly confident that no one playing the beta expected it to be bug free, but they did expect elements of the game to be moving in a particular direction in a particular way. Finding that they aren't is why there is debate, made necessary because it seems to be clear that there wasn't enough discussion earlier.
The attribute system for instance, (and I'll admit I haven't been keeping abreast of the updates as I should have, so it's possible I missed something - I've been busy playing Baldur's Gate). I understand that it was asked if there should be an attribute system, and if so how many attributes it should consist of. Perhaps someone can tell me if it was asked what the six should be and what functions and impact they should have. It's a bit like asking someone if they want you to make them a sandwich and not asking them what they want in it. if you have the discussion at the start there doesn't need to be an argument when they walk in the kitchen and see you using bread or fillings they don't like. It seems sensible to me to present options at each step: which bread, meat, salad, dressing - rather than asking if they're happy with what you're making them just before you add the dressing. if you're not going to do that, you need to be honest, open, transparent and specific about what you will do at the start - then if they want it great and if they don't, there are no arguments.
Kind of like how after the Destiny beta there was a strange outcry about the game world being too small, despite the fact that it's the largest world Bungie has ever created.
Beta tests are great for catching bugs, but they're also terrible for managing expectations. Someone who plays the beta is absolutely getting a limited perspective, and if they choose to base their opinion of the game's entirety on that limited perspective, they're doing themselves and the game a disservice.
The primary purpose for a Beta should be to catch any bugs that the dev team may have missed, to make sure that the game works the way it was designed. It shouldn't be to brainstorm ways to redesign the game as a whole. There's always going to be feedback to that effect, of course, but it should never be the goal.
Comments
@danathion as you can see, everybody's very excited, but as usual I shall attempt to reserve judgment until I have concrete information.
This worries me. See, it's like @Quartz's discussion about videogames catering to the audience. If try just serve the audience exactly what they ask for, they're 1, not necessarily taking the thought to make a good game, and (more importantly) 2, not allowing for as much creative expression on the part of the developers and artists(I term in which I includes writes, animators, drawers, characterideaers, ect).
And the fans want(it would seem) the infinity engine back. Every time something is announced to be slightly different than bg was, or simply what we though bg was(see the modding in PoE discussion) we flip.
So while I continue to look forward to the game, and i think all the original content they have come up with is *amazing*, I'm apprehensive about how obviously dnd-wannabe it looks.
*sigh*
Only time will tell if they can pull it off. *crosses fingers*
Clearly you have to listen to your audience, but it just looks so completely shameless. Listen, but do it subtly. E.i. Don't use select backer photos for portraits, or at least put it in as an Easter egg(screw you, legal issues). You need to compromise.
What they're doing now is delivering exactly what was ordered straight to the door, while what they should be doing is paying attention and getting to know us and remember what our favorite meal is.
I will clarify that this is just the idea I'm getting from a rather distant perspective. Does anyone else more involved have comments? @Buttercheese @jaysl659 @ZanathKariashi.
@LiamEsler?(can I do that?)
And like I said, I'm not saying I don't think I'll like the game or anything. I'm(try, anyway) not one to jump to conclusions. I'll play the game *at least* once through before I make that kind of judgment.
Though I bet the game will have all sorts of problems when it comes out, but at it's core, the game will be brilliant.
You'd be much better off reserving judgement and not jumping to conclusions - you'll enjoy the experience more, for one.
Romances weren't included because a) Josh didn't want to do them, and b) the effort could be expended elsewhere to greater effect.
Edit: Also oh my god people this is a beta, why are you playing it and construing from that what your actual play experience will be? A beta - of any project - does not constitute the final experience. Hold off your judgement.
I don't regret my backing for a second, but there's a reason I didn't purchase beta access. I am that parasite that waits for the released product before playing.
I am sure that this is going to be a wonderful game. I intend to get it as soon as it comes out, and I'm not trying knock the project in any way, believe you me.
But I am pointing out that it occasionally appears(like I said, from a distant outsiders perspective) that there has been a lot fan-serving, and I was wondering if anyone else got this feeling.
Of course, I'm not familiar with this sort of thing. BG is essentiall the only 'real' videogame I play, so maybe this is totally normal. So Frankly doesn't mean anything to me. I couldn't name any other game that they made.
And I'm not saying that listening to fans is bad. I'm not so much worried that the fans are having such a big part of the decision making(as it would seem. Like I said, I'm just putting it out there to see if anyone else got the idea) but I'm more worried that the fan base is so caught up in it's nostalgia that they end up begging for an new IE game and PoE can't be it's own game, or it ends up going too far down it's own path and nobody likes it.
Really I just want it to be it's own game, I think. I've been *really* intrigued by the original stuff, and I don't want it to cling to dnd or the infinity engine games to much. But perhaps that is not a valid fear, after all it did just pop into my head today.
Like I said, time will tell. Now, where is the spam rest until something interesting happens button?
I just saw a few things this morning which sparked a worry in my head(especially since just the other day the issue had come up in Quartz's thread and with kidcarnival in the movie thread) and I wanted to see if anyone else had had similar thoughts.
You couldn't name a game they made? Really?
Fallout 3:New Vegas - aka the real Fallout 3, Neverwinter Nights 2 and all of its addons, Knights of the Old Republic 2, Alpha Protocol and South Park: The Stick of Truth.
And for all the naysayers, they made a bug-free game: Dungeon Siege 3.
Their developers were the driving forces behind games like Planescape Torment, Fallout, Fallout 2, the Icewind Dale series, Arcanum, The Temple of Elemental Evil and Vampire the Masquerade:Bloodlines.
Most of their senior staff worked at Black Isle Studios, which should be quite familiar with everyone here.
I think you're off base in thinking that any sort of pandering to the backers or wanting to be like D&D has much affected the game. As for the portraits, some of them are based on the photographs of backers that contributed a good deal of money, based on that being offered to them during the Kickstarter campaign. Whatever the thoughts on whether it's a good thing or not, the Kickstarter rewards Obsidian chose to offer seemed to work. Just to be clear, though, not all the portraits will be based on backers and for those that are, you wouldn't know it unless you were told. They all look great to me, they're quality fantasy portraits and I wouldn't know any of them were based on real people without being told so.
As for heeding the ideas of backers that want to turn PoE into BG 2.5 or twist it into an imitation of D&D, I don't see that happening at all. The worst I could say to this is that the designers may have given in to cosmetic changes to appease backers. Some IE game related things are necessary because they were promised during the Kickstarter, such as 2d backgrounds, isometric view, six-member party, and RTwP combat. For those that aren't necessary and weren't promised, the designers haven't budged much on anything that they really cared about along the way as far as I can tell. No combat XP has been in since the Kickstarter was still funding, and they seem to be sticking to their guns with that design decision.
I think certain things such as the 6 attribute system was included as an attempt to pacify those more concerned with familiarity and nostalgia than good gameplay. The system itself is fine and I believe it adheres to the vision of the designers, but the layout of having six attributes with names similar to the D&D attributes while being functionally different was an interesting one. Truth be told, the attributes don't define the characters like they do in the IE games, which was a decision made by the lead designer (Sawyer) because he didn't want the attribute system full of trap choices that ultimately result in a multitude of bad builds. Although I like a challenge, I agree in concept that creating an attribute system where one specifically needs to "win" the attribute game by min-maxing correctly and can lose by not doing so is pointless. Any experienced RPGer knows which attributes to pick anyway, so really it seems to me that some experienced RPGers just like the idea that someone else won't know and will build a character that can't beat the game. Then again, I'm thoroughly enjoying Age of Decadence Early Access right now and that game has infinitely more bad builds than good ones, but that's another story; so I guess I'd say that either of these types of systems can be a lot of fun if done correctly.
So, the attributes are secondary (or even tertiary after skill choices throughout level progression) defining characteristics, the class defines the character and the attributes determine the focus and bonuses of that character. Ultimately I think that Sawyer's attempts to placate those wanting an IE game failed in instances such as this because he made a system that still angered those people by being radically different from what they wanted, but he also gets an eye-roll from those that like the new system and don't see the need for the slight changes that conform it to make it appear to be like D&D. In my opinion, though, the changes are only cosmetic and Sawyer built the attribute system that he wanted for the game, so making it look cosmetically like the D&D attribute system doesn't hurt anything. The attribute system certainly needs some tweaking and I'm hoping that it will eventually have a greater effect on the character, but it's far from a bad system I'd say.
The designers did end up budging on a couple of things I believe, notably the equipment degradation system was highly contentious (I never really liked the idea myself) and was eventually scrapped. The UI was a hot issue on the forums and although I think the minimalist crowd won out, the UI didn't end up looking too hugely different from their original plan. I just wish they'd let us move the UI elements around and flip them as I believe will be possible in Wasteland 2 (both using Unity engine). The stash inventory system has been argued against quite a bit (I'm not really a big fan of this either, but then again I can't think of an objectively better system necessarily so I don't have much constructive to say about it) and yet the designers haven't scrapped it and I doubt they will.
Essentially, it seems to me that the couple of things that they did give in on were things that weren't a valuable part of their design vision in the first place and when they wanted to keep something, it stayed in. At the end of the day, this is no D&D game, nor is it actually trying to be. Because of the designers sticking to their guns, I believe they're on their way to delivering what they promised, which is a new fantasy RPG in a brand new setting that evokes the feels, if you will, of the IE games. The boldest promise of the campaign was that "Project Eternity will take the central hero, memorable companions and the epic exploration of Baldur’s Gate, add in the fun, intense combat and dungeon diving of Icewind Dale, and tie it all together with the emotional writing and mature thematic exploration of Planescape: Torment." So I'd say that if they can even touch on each of these reasonably well within their own system and their fantasy world, then the game will be great. It's a matter of opinion of course, but from what I've seen of the beta, the game is going to live up to the promise.
I like some of what I've seen so far, but other things that the makers have said have raised some red flags for me (i.e: the lack of romances, or the seeming disinterest in character portraits). But I'll reserve my final judgement until the game is actually released.
I will say one thing: anyone who invokes the name of BG in order to sell their product has set one helluva high bar for themselves. It's one thing to create another IWD or ToEE, but to attempt to follow in BG's footsteps is a whole other mountain to climb.
When you enter the PoE site, the first thing you notice is: "Miss classic cRPGs like Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment? So do we! Introducing Obsidian's PILLARS OF ETERNITY."
From the very start of the whole project they have positioned their future game as the one that can stand in the legendary line of BG, IWD and PST.
And to me this is a nearly impossible task. No matter how many effort you put into a project, it's EXCEPTIONALLY hard to become so good that people would stop criticising this or that - taking into account the heaviweights of BG, IWD and PST as comparisons which the company itself has chosen as the examples.
So, such high expectations automatically demand high results. And when people don't find them, the negativity rises.
Personally, having seen the videos, having read pillarsofeternity.gamepedia and having been monitoring this game closely for more than one year, I'm excited.
I'm glad they make an isometric RPG that in many ways reminds me of those classics they call themselves: BG, IWD and PST.
I think it's a wonderful idea to make such a game. Maybe after PoE other companies will make new games that in one way or another will be similar to BG?
And I'm sure that problems and things that do not answer all the demands of the community are essential parts of the job to make such a game.
Even if this game would not be 100% like I wished it to be, so be it. I'll still get mass fun and excitement from playing it. How can I not try an isometric RPG with stunning art, a battle pause and a party? Of course, I will try it.
As for negativity, the example of BG:EE shows to me that you can't go without negativity these days. It seems you can't please all people.
So,
Will I play the game? - Surely
Will I like the game as much as I like BG - We'll wait and see.
Do I think this game is worth trying if you like BG - Absolutely.
if we are to reserve all our judgements until the final release, what is the point of releasing a beta and what is the point of having a discussion forum.
All the issues are of their own making. what did they think would happen when from the beginning and at every opportunity since, the IE games' names have been emphasised. Sure, they got a lot of supporters and a lot of money but with that comes a lot of justified expectation. So when the work in progress is revealed of course people have opinions/judgements/questions/concerns, many of them strong and, they have a right to voice them.
The main issue is that, many of the expectations are unrealistic. But, they are that way because the developers have not done anything until now to correct them. I'm fairly confident that no one playing the beta expected it to be bug free, but they did expect elements of the game to be moving in a particular direction in a particular way. Finding that they aren't is why there is debate, made necessary because it seems to be clear that there wasn't enough discussion earlier.
The attribute system for instance, (and I'll admit I haven't been keeping abreast of the updates as I should have, so it's possible I missed something - I've been busy playing Baldur's Gate). I understand that it was asked if there should be an attribute system, and if so how many attributes it should consist of. Perhaps someone can tell me if it was asked what the six should be and what functions and impact they should have. It's a bit like asking someone if they want you to make them a sandwich and not asking them what they want in it. if you have the discussion at the start there doesn't need to be an argument when they walk in the kitchen and see you using bread or fillings they don't like. It seems sensible to me to present options at each step: which bread, meat, salad, dressing - rather than asking if they're happy with what you're making them just before you add the dressing. if you're not going to do that, you need to be honest, open, transparent and specific about what you will do at the start - then if they want it great and if they don't, there are no arguments.
Beta tests are great for catching bugs, but they're also terrible for managing expectations. Someone who plays the beta is absolutely getting a limited perspective, and if they choose to base their opinion of the game's entirety on that limited perspective, they're doing themselves and the game a disservice.
The primary purpose for a Beta should be to catch any bugs that the dev team may have missed, to make sure that the game works the way it was designed. It shouldn't be to brainstorm ways to redesign the game as a whole. There's always going to be feedback to that effect, of course, but it should never be the goal.