Director

I have to agree that the "Super Hardcore Difficulty", "massive dungeon", and the "Adventurer's Hall" don't really appeal to me either - but they obviously appeal to a vocal few, and additionally Josh really likes those kind of things, and so he's gonna enjoy getting them put in and playing around with them. The game was advertised as more of a BG/IWD successor and less of a PS:T one, but let's face it - the game mechanics didn't really make PS:T anyhow. So the GAME MUST HAVE VANCIAN MAGIC OR WORLD ENDS crowd don't really care about the story / interesting characters, and the Story / Romance / cool companion crowd could care less about WHY IS THE GAME NOT TURN BASED ? IF IT'S NOT WORLD WILL END discussions. We've already been promised - a new setting, mature topics and detailed companions. So - we pretty much had all we wanted, (or were likely to get). And what "story" or " stretch goals could they put in? Any "Extra Romance" or "Talking Tree Companion" or whatever would cause a firestorm from the GAME MUST NOT HAVE AN EASY MODE I SHOULD HAVE TO PLAY THE GAME WITH EXCEL OPEN crowd. THB - I think we'll get the weird cool stuff, and a great story. We'll just have to wait for specific companion / faction lore to come out later.

It's standard fair for every game kickstarter, and obviously the Devs get final say over everything in the game. Although - maybe we should scratch together $1000 for a set of boob-plate?

Loved the "100 goblins rush to attack" in the Gold Box games. I doubt this engine will make that kind of battle possible though - still larger groups 10+ of weak creatures are fun to fireball.

Good idea - and thanks for dong that!

Did Arcanum have cooldowns? I don't recall.

Josh and Tim both have a lot of experience in creating game mechanics - so totally cool with whatever they come up with. The Vancian system doesn't make sense for thematic reasons as well: 1. Characters are drawing on Soul-Power to cast spells - not memorising spells. 2. All Characters will likely have Spell-Like powers, it doesn't make a great deal of sense that the Fighter and Rogue would have to memorise all the Soul-Powers they want to use in a day.

Yeah - the in game models will probably only show a difference between leather / chain / plate / robe / cloak / helm - with maybe 3 or 4 styles of each. I doubt it'll represent the exact gear you equip to a great degree, (although I look forward to being proved wrong) So we're basically just arguing over what the character portraits / NPC portraits will look like.

This is also 100% Historically Accurate and Realistic - for the people that seem so concerned about that.

Cheers - and boo! Still hoping for evil mages in evil slinky dresses then.

Make it an optional toggle - but it would be great. Awesome for finding bugs / abilities that don't work the way you thought they did.

Is that P:E concept art - or just stolen from something else? Actually this argument is even dumber than I first thought - it's not like we'll be able to see any detail on the character models so it's really only the character portraits that we'll be seeing.

I agree - totally like hot women to look hot. I think they want to give the game a more serious tone but hopefully we get some mages in slinky dresses or something

Lol - they are totally just throwing stuff from a "we totally want to do" list. Take the Godlike race - they talked about the Godlike from day 1, now it's a stretch goal? lol. Also - this game isn't even in pre-production yet. They will wait until the end of the kickstarter before they plan a single thing. It's not like the game is a work in progress and every time we make a goal they have to staple extra stuff in. All they have so far is some concept art and some vague ideas about a setting. Now - if your concern was "for this amount I don't think they can add feature X" - that might be valid.

Doesn't "magic" basically make any "realism" argument irrelevant? If you can enchant a leather belt to provide the same protection as Plate Armour, (or whatever), then realism got thrown out the window a while back. So the only real complaints are "it's sexist" and "tone / art style". Sexism - ok, sure, it totally is. I don't have any problems with that argument. I suspect that most women playing the game, (a minority - face facts), will want their character to be appealing at least to them. I suspect that as long as bikini armour and stilettos of haste are avoided, their requirements aren't gonna be "all realism - all the time". Tone / Art Style - it looks like Josh wants to set the tone for this in a pretty "realistic way", just to perhaps give the game a more authentic historical feel. Certainly all the concept art we've seen seems to support that. Although - as he's pointed out it's a fantasy game, so hey - "magic". TLDR: Lets wait for more concept art before we waste more time on this, Josh is already on board, and also "magic".

Wasn't that a free DLC because people complained about the length of IWD though? (Too short).

What? You said that "permission" from a Publisher was the reason that games don't get patched. I said - that's essentially untrue, as the "permission" is the withholding of funds the devs need to do the work. That's just reality. It doesn't mean I don't "trust" Obsidian - whatever that even means. It's also a reality that this could be an issue in production of this game, unless Obsidian budget for a months extra coding time after release to fix stuff up.

The licensing would be a complete nightmare, and I don't think that WoTC even support Planescape anymore, (and therefore probably wouldn't allow a game in that setting). Even if they could arrange the licensing - the costs and restrictions that WoTC would impose, would probably ruin the game. (Too much - in a word - pandering). Oh - unless you meant a "unofficial" "In Spirit Of" - in which case, yeah sure - I'd back that as well, but let's not count that chicken.

I backed because it's the closest to a sequel to Planescape:Torment, that I'm likely to ever see. Your reason for backing is different. 50,000 backers = 50,000 reasons. Additionally - Obsidian is a business, I fail to see why wanting them to be successful is a bad thing.

Totally OT - but I had to add that part of DA2 was REALLY DUMB.

Cool - but I'm unable to agree that having an "easy" mode, such as BG1,BG2 and countless other cRPGs had is "pandering".

I agree - but so what? Obsidian have already agreed to go over and above on the hard mode, (if you suckers can raise 2.3 mil )

There is massive difference between the sales of Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening, (I really hope that is the working title of Fallout 4, btw), and what Obsidian hope and dream for this game. Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening - will sell millions of copies, hell - I know I'll buy it. Obsidian will still want to sell over a hundred thousand copies of P:E though, (and hopefully a lot more). If you don't think that's the intent - your delusional.

Yeah - the game is being Kickstarted, because it's never gonna get backed by a publisher - that doesn't mean that Obsidian don't hope to sell 500K copies of it. It's totally a niche title, but in NO WAY are they gonna limit themselves to the 50K Kickstarter backers. Now as for "Easy Mode" - there is NO WAY that the game won't have an Easy setting. You know it - I know it. The only thing that weird is that you have some kind of issue with it being there. There's a reason there is no stretch goal for "Easy" or "Normal" difficulties - because every game has them.

It's impossible for me to like both? Your mistaken.

You do realise that Obsidian intend to actually sell this game - correct? And make a sequel, (hopefully)? They are hoping to reach an audience much larger than just the people who kickstart it.