5anitybane

This would be great to see on PC!

I personally like how it is currently, was just thinking of people with visual impairment, .

Anywhere outside of combat I think is fine. You'd have the ability to take time to think, opposed to thinking for a second while enemies start a conflict. Additionally, being able to level up in combat might allow people to 'cheat' the system, because they could enter combat with a foe weak to fire, find they have no fire spells, then use the newly gained level to equip fire spells for an easy win. I don't agree with being able to do that, hence my choice of anywhere outside of combat, .

I'm pretty accepting of however they do the trees, really. The core of the game is the depth of the adventures and lore, rather than AAA visual fidelity, which is fine because it's an adventure RPG, really. It's like playing a story; focus should be on the adventure itself, characters and character and plot development, rather than how a tree animation looks. If it has a static image with a moving sliver akin to mid-2000 RPGs, that's fine, it just compliments the setting.

Maybe a half-scroll could work, just to see things a little more clearly, but nothing as close-up as NWN2 or Grim Dawn due to reasons Lephys highlighted. A half-scroll worth of zooming might be enough to sate some of the non-zoom concerns and keep graphical assets crisp. It would allow people who might have impaired vision to perhaps see the UI, characters and other environmental assets more easily.

Playing a variety of games. I've been playing Battlefield 4 and World of Tanks with friends, Eschalon: Book I, Hellgate: London, Skyrim and Vassal40k when solo. Gotta love single-player immersion!

Happy to help! Let me know if you want a hand with anything else, unemployed and soon-to-be Uni student, so I have all the time in world.

I concur wholeheartedly, there's something that feels lost in spoken dialogue, and if there's bad voice acting, potentially ruined entirely. At least with verbose conversations it leaves the player to imagine the voices for their own epic adventure, instead of a possibly drone-pitched dwarf because he had a cold at the time of voice acting (an example only, haha), .

Thanks for the addition, and also for the clarification. Also, I noticed in the massive list of fellow brothers and sisters, that four of us had Obsidian spelled wrong. Seems a shame, so in case you wanted to notify them, they are: aran665, Chevalier of the Obsidan Order DeDawg65, Obsidan Order Crate Slayer Glinch, Obsidan Dragon Necto, Travash of the Obsidan Order

Forgive any ignorance following, as I am avoiding knowing much about the game before release. If the game is going for a more story-focussed angle, then keeping XP to quests and such makes a bit of sense, but removing it entirely from killing creatures is a bit illogical. I think it should still be there, but if story is to be the focus, then to have the XP from kills minimal and give an additional perk to killing; perhaps there could be certain items only found from monster drops? That way one game-play method - included in the game to begin with - isn't entirely hung out to dry and discouraged. As for the current debate, I guess preference of XP relates to how you play as a gamer, rather than any 'yes there should be' vs. 'no there shouldn't' debate. Traditional RPGs had general XP and levels to raise attributes, but then in the late 90's and onwards things started leaning towards XP for whatever weapon you're using. Logically, both make sense, as general level XP could be viewed as the character itself becoming stronger (Str), agile (Agi) and robust from taking damage (Vit), or XP per weapon style and/or the type of monster engaged, such as using a sword to kill a Fiend would add XP to your one-handed or swordsmanship as well as proficiency XP for killing a Demonic-class monster.

So true regarding modding! I'd forgotten about importing portraits because I never made my own; I can't draw, only matte paint, . Given the amazing talent on the web I wouldn't be surprised upon release to find a fair few portrait replacers or add-ons.

An interesting proposal, I agree but think maybe a blending of both challenging the player as well as requiring character proficiencies would work best? That way it ties into something not necessarily under your own control, thus requiring strategising for the situation, and also having to strategise if the problem is one requiring problem solving.

Nah, I never self-gimp. Im a powergamer and I want the baddest mofo's I can put into a party. The reason Ill only play once are that since Im directly controlling six different classes, I usually feel satisfied that Ive seen everything the game has to offer. Im not interested in replaying games to see a few different dialog choices or stuff like that. Are the examples you provided your preferred way to play? Ah, okay. Haha, those examples aren't exactly how I play, but I do like to self-gimp my characters. I also only play once but because of story reasons, if I'm heavily immersed in a game and its settings and story, when I finish the game it's similar to ending a book for me. Replaying it would lessen how it felt playing the first time and have a lot less impact, so it feels kinda pointless. I also don't really care about exploring every choice, I play as if I was in the game itself so I structure my characters around what I am like, and make decisions that I'd actually make.

Do you have a specific reason you could mention? I'm curious because the statement is so vague, . Hard to say really. More than anything they seem out of place most of the time. They don't really add much to the story. So it's not exactly puzzles in games you dislike, but how they're implemented? Would you enjoy, say, a puzzle involving magic and a numerical sequence involving hand-eye coordination to slide things across a metal bar to open a vault, that was tied into the lore? Or would that be tedious as well?

Is there still a lot of unspoken dialogue in the game? I actually like unspoken dialogue, partially as a sort of reminiscence.