GhostofAnakin

The thing is with each stretch goal they've achieved, they're adding features. So it's not quite as simple as them making the same game they were going to make at $1.1 million, but with twice the funds now available to do it.

The latter thought was something I meant to add, but forgot. I don't think NWN can be used an example to counter what I originally said anyway, because the main portion of NWN's longevity is its MP functionality. If NWN had no MP feature and had to rely on just mods to its single player game, would it have lasted this long?

It worked wonders for Neverwinter Nights. I'm not trying to be snarky. That seems to be a commonly held opinion. I think where we differ is that I don't believe NWN's core game sucked. It was what I'd call an "average" game, made much better overall because of the MP persistent world stuff.

For me, once I'm through with my current slew of games, I'm going to replay BG and PS:T in preparation for PE. More than likely those two games (some combination of them) will be what PE ends up being similar to.

This. It's the quality of the game that will determine PE's longevity. Being the most mod-friendly game ever, and having millions of mods made for it, won't matter a lick if the core game sucks and people have a hard time pushing through it.

The deeper the character creation process, the more those differences between the characters you can make should be noticeable in the actual game. In other words, I want a really in depth character creation process, but I want my different decisions to actually have an impact on the game world. If we're to choose actual backgrounds for our characters, then maybe a background-specific sidequest needs to be added. That way my thief who grew up on the street will have to deal with a situation that my paladin from a wealthy family does not have to in my travels.

This, as well I think they should react to your actions. For instance, if people see you praying at a certain deity's alter all the time, or doing "quests" for the priest of that deity's church, then people should react based on that, not because you picked "religious nut" as your starting class in character creation.

Agreed, especially with your points about ME3. On the subject of ME3's financial success, I think it was a financial success but I don't think those sales correlate with it being a product that fans loved. ME3 is a financial success because fans were excited about the ME series and looking forward to the conclusion to the trilogy. How many of the sales were pre-orders? How many were Week 1 sales, before news of the endings spread? How many sales were from folks who owned the first two games and had the mindset of "I might as well see how it ends"? It's similar to George Lucas' prequel trilogy, IMO. I'm sure it's made Lucas a boatload of money, but the general feeling on the quality of the movies is poor despite the fact it was a financial success.

Don't you need a credit card to sign up for Pay Pal? I used it a looooooooong time ago, but I can't remember if I signed up with my credit card or what.

Okay, I laugh too much at Scooter's dialogue in BL2. I think it's because he reminds me of a friend I have that acts just like him around the ladies.

This x1000. It's not the "kind" of story that makes it a great story, it's how it's written and implemented into the game that does.

http://www.nowgamer.com/news/1609815/mass_effect_fan_negativity_was_too_much_for_ray_greg_exbioware_dev.html Apparently it's the gamers' fault Ray and Greg left. The problem with the article, however, is it's speculation based on the theories of someone who is not Greg or Ray. The Bio boards have a thread about the article, with some fans now feeling guilty. Really? If a fan doesn't like a game, he should keep that to himself just so he doesn't hurt the feelings of those making the game? I'll hold back on my criticism the day I'm not paying $60+ to play the game.

I've played PS:T, BG1 & 2, IWD1 & 2, and loved all of them. Those old IE games, and the fond memories I have of playing them, are basically the reason I'm super excited about Obsidian making Project Eternity.

An incredibly bad ending that would ruin the overall journey for me, leaving a negative last impression that would make me not want to replay the game again. So Obsidian, even if the ending doesn't end up being great, at least make sure it doesn't suck the desire out of me to play through ever again (I'm looking at you, Mass Effect 3).

That's the benefit of having a "flexible" deadline and being their own bosses. They don't have to rush a product to meet a publisher's deadline and can work on things that need working on, even if the "release date" is coming up.

Cadegund? Race, faction, character class, or the artist's last name?

I like this, but instead of good vs bad king, it could be simply the king supported by the assassin's is also supported (unknown to the PC) by a faction that seeks to impede the PC, and if this king gets control of the area in question, the faction could become openly hostile to the PC, attacking with impunity or going after a faction that is allied with the PC. Well, obviously my scenarios can be tweaked to fit whatever story the devs want to tell. But the overall point being you've got two different "scenarios" that are sort of linked, and the PC has an effect on both scenarios simply by tackling one of them (and potentially without him/her realizing it until later).

Speaking of dunce caps, it was painfully bad in Dragon Age: Origins. The best (stat-wise) headgear for Morrigan and Wynne also made them look incredibly stupid, with big pylon cones on their heads. So I ended up taking a hit making them weaker instead of making them wear those ridiculous looking things.

One area that was bad for it, especially because I didn't like the enemy type, was that underground area (forget its name) where you have to push the mine cart into a crusher. Those thresher things were annoying, especially the one that pulled you close to it. Worse, the XP you get from killing them wasn't even close to the difficulty of killing them. I'd waste ammo on that area and come away with like 47 XP or 59 XP per kill only. On the topic of leveling up, my cousin has a different idea about what's fun than I do. He called me yesterday to suggest I join him and his group of friends in a game of BL2. But his reason for it is because his friends are really high level, and so we could level up quicker (more XP per kill at that level) by sitting back and letting them do all the killing. He was excited that he went from level 1 to level 20 in about a couple of hours playing with them, even though he missed out on the majority of the story and even though he didn't kill a sole. Maybe it's me, but I find the whole enjoyment out of leveling up is because I actually accomplished it. He seems less interested in the journey, and more interested in the end result of having a high level character.

What I'd like to call "A chain reaction of events". Basically, through your decisions and corresponding actions, you can change the landscape of the game world. For example, you've got two different factions at odds with one another, but an action against one could have consequences for both scenarios. The first scenario sees two individuals vying to become King of a given area. One is more of a "good" person, while the other one relies on intimidation and fear to rule. The latter's strength comes from his association with the assassin's guild, which he uses to methodically eliminate anyone who opposes his challenge to the throne. The second scenario sees that aforementioned assassin's guild being threatened by a rogue group of assassins trying to take over as the preeminent guild. The thing is, the rogue group is a lot more violent, a lot less discriminating about what contracts they'll take on, while the current guild, while not "good", have a code of conduct about who they'll kill (ie. no children, no priests, etc.). So with those two scenarios in mind, this is where the player's choice could set off a chain of events. If the player decides to take sides in the assassins guild conflict, his choice could affect the battle for king even if the player isn't even aware yet that there *is* a battle for the throne, simply by siding with one or the other assassin group. If they side with the current guild, then the "evil" potential-king takes the throne because of his alliance with the guild. If the player sides with the rogue assassins, then the "evil" potential-king is weakened and the good king takes the throne, but at the expense of a violent, uncontrollable guild of assassins now running around. This has two main selling points for me: 1-The player has a noticeable impact on the game world without even knowing it. It could provide a "holy crap, what did I just do" moment later on in the game when you learn about what your actions earlier with regards to the guild wars had on an entire kingdom. 2-The player has to think choices through more carefully, and more importantly, pay attention. Perhaps there are hints throughout the quest to side with one guild over another about the alliance to the "evil" would-be king, so the player has to take that into account when deciding who to side with.

I'm kind of the same. Most games that allow me to play on even after I've finished the main story, I find I don't even end up bothering. I guess in a way I see the main story as the reason I'm playing, with the sidequests acting as sort of ... depth or added flavor to the main story. So when the main story is over, I no longer have a reason to keep going.

Borderlands 2 is starting to bore me. It doesn't help that enemies re-spawn seemingly constantly, so every time I go through an area I end up having to fight waves of enemies all over again. The main story is pretty good, but I'm tiring of the fetch quest-esque sidequests -- yet need to do them to gain enough XP to level up for the main story missions.

I don't mind romances that aren't intrusive or forced upon me. The difficulty is making it a believable romance, and not one that looks like it was forced into the story "just because". I also don't want romances included if it means sacrificing a more important -- to me -- feature. In other words, if none of the essential stuff isn't sacrificed AND the romance is written into the story in a way that makes sense and flows well with the rest of the game, I'm okay with them being included.

If BioWare is serious about their multiplayer component of Mass Effect, they might want to introduce more game modes. IMO, the current MP is incredibly dull because there's basically one mode, and it's the exact same 10 waves (differing only in enemy type) you have to get through until extraction. Co-op missions, team death match, variations of capture the flag or domination. Whatever. They need to do something other than introduce new maps and weapon packs in order to keep MP fresh and people interested.

To add on to my previous post, if there is a tutorial at the beginning, make it skippable at least.