Lucas

Normal house that I can decor and store stuff in would be enough for me . Stronghold with a structured side-quest that goes along with it would be even better, but hey...

Hehe, I would like to vote for all of them (I'm referring to the first question of the poll) :D. Ideally, they should: - Be integrated in the story of the world - Depending on your class and race , you could be totally unable to meet/join some of them - Joining and raising the ranks might create conflict with another, so that you can't join other factions at that point (in other words, the opposite of Bethesda route, where you can join whatever you want at any time) - Companions might react to your faction choice. Of course it also comes down to how much development time (and budget) Obsidian wants to pour into this particular feature.

Awesome news about GOG and...I'm suddenly even happier that I decided to shell out $140

I don't think all that is necessary. I think forced attack, with opinion penalties ala Arcanum, does just fine. Everything you mention about altering companion stories, scripting dialogue, etc. is great for when the writers choose to do so as part of their companion's story. I think we all expect that if the writers present us with the choice of killing a character in a scripted scene, that it be suitably detailed. But if the player can decide that they don't care about seeing a particular companion's story through to the finish (especially if the narrative never presents the player with the choice of killing the character), I think it is enough to let the player simply gank the character and leave them where they lie without the game having to add anything to that (aside from from opinion penalties where appropriate). That's just a personal roleplaying thing, and you don't need scripting for decisions that you reason through on your own iniative. If the game never presents me with a scripted scene that makes me confront the villainy of Korgan Bloodaxe that doesn't mean that I, as the player character, cannot conclude that "this Korgan dude is a ticking timebomb who is probably going to slit my throat in my sleep and then go murder some villagers" and then deal with the problem as I see fit. Even if there were a scripted scene to face the problem later, that doesn't mean that my character, thinking the way he does, shouldn't get a chance to preempt it. Simply removing plot armour from companions, and leaving it up to the player to justify how they take advantage of that lack of plot armour, would resolve a great deal of frustration. And of course, giving the player this freedom doesn't mean that the writers can't still write scripted scenes involving companion death. It just means that if you kill the companion before those scenes come up, you don't see those scenes. Which is a perfectly fair decision. I understand what you're saying: regarding the decision on what armour your companion should wear (unless there are class/racial restrictions of any kind, of course), weapons, how he/she should behave in a fight...That is fine, but I think it also depends on the approach Obsidian is going to take with the game in general. For example, I put personal roleplaying restrictions on my character in Bethesda games, because they're designed like that (sandbox approach), so my fighting character will never join the mages guild or dabble in enchantments or alchemy, even though the game allow you to do that (but he's great at blacksmithing) Companions in this game, though, could be a little more interwoven with the plot and your choices, so that Obsidian take a more "cinematic" approach to the whole thing that makes them unkillable (hence a "force kill" would be useless).

Heh, in a perfect world, having every single companion (a fully fledged one, not just another character created by the player, like in the Icewind Dale series) killable would be perfect, but I'm not sure they have the time or budget to do that. If killing a companion means more than a "forced attack" (combat mechanic) on him/her, you would need motivation for that, which means dialogue options, the possibility of partially altering the companion side-story; then, you have to take into account party size vs. the world when it comes to encounters (or, you can leave this last aspect unchanged, so that the player knows in advance that killing a couple of companions would mean having a VERY hard time during the subsequent fights).

They're experienced developers, I'm sure they participated in forum discussions, flame-wars, debates and all the package in the past, so they should be able to recognize what might be valuable input, feasible mechanic design suggestions and so on; no matter what, they'll make questionable decisions that a portion of the playerbase may not agree with or despise, but we shouldn't consider them like an unsure bunch constantly changing ideas whenever a topic pops up in the forum

It's absolutely important, it greatly enhances immersion and makes the whole world created by the designers more believable. Like I wrote in a topic yesterday, this would be achieved by created some sort of "codex" or lorebook akin to the one in Dragon Age: Origins or even The Witcher.

I really like how it was handled in DA: O, would like to see something similar (if it makes sense for the story, of course), but I'm not sure it's feasible for this kind of project (and inherent budget); I hope I'm wrong

I fully trust Obsidian on this matter, so the last option is fine with me

Generally speaking, I wouldn't really like a "countdown" for any of the main quest plotlines. But, it would be interesting to have time in general interwoven with some side quests, especially if shops/building close at night and certain events only happen at certain times of the day, maybe mentioned by the quest giver/quest journal. So, if the Devs plan to implement the possibility of failing quests (not just abandon them) as in Arcanum, time could be a factor, among other things (dialogue choices, combat, etc.)

You mean the tactics system like in Dragon Age? In all honesty, I never used it because I've always micro-managed my entire party in the infinity engine games and NWN2 as well. While I'm not against an A.I. Tactic system at all, in that case I really hope the Devs will include a "puppet mode" as well, with the possibility of deactivating the companion A.I. during combat.

I like all those ideas, game mechanics (class abilities) that enhance the map, like the "tracking" feature in NWN2, for example . And yeah, another game who implemented an excellent codex was The Witcher, of course (still have to play the second episode).

A combination of all of them

IMO, they're useless in CRPGs; you already chase achievements (see "quest rewards", solution of plot lines etc.) in them, without needing more, "artificial" ones. But on the other hand, I don't understand why they were included in any game in the first place, so.... I'm totally uninterested in them (again, simply my opinion).

Map: - We'll likely get the standard minimap + world map, of course, but: 1) Map "FoW" (Fog of War) or more like NW2, where you can already see the entire area (of a dungeon, for example)? 2) Would you like to have the possibility to add custom map notes, with different colored icons, beside the already implemented points of interest marked by the developers? 3) Any other idea for the map/minimap feature? ---- Journal/Quest Journal: - Various sorting options, hopefully, just like NWN2; hide/show quests; completed and in-progress quests (and maybe even failed ones, if that's a possibility) 1) Would you like to see an in-game "notepad" section where you can write your own notes? 2) Any other idea for the quest journal? ----- "Codex" feature: - Would you like to see some sort of lorebook, or in-game codex, akin to the one included in "Dragon Age: Origins" ? I surely would do. Still, it would be nice if you can complete the codex only if you are a "scholar like" character, so that you have some in-game reason to seek as much info on the world you live in as you can. Instead, those more focused on fighting all the time, or that doesn't have access to written forms of info, will learn about the world in a more casual way (books and notes here and there, but that's it).

Nicely composed poll, I like it I voted for Mana/Needs to be protected/Combo: on a second thought, regarding the second question, I actually prefer "both". Instead, regarding the first question, it could be a combination of mana and weariness/exhaustion: I stil think that when a mage concentrate for a spell, his/her entire attention must be focused on gathering the necessary mental power to cast it. So yes, the mage drains his "mental power" reserve, while also getting fatigued after performing such tasks, especially if he/she does that often. So yeah, I suppose I still find the D&D 3.5 wizard (or sorcerer, if you don't want the "memorize" mechanic") quite the perfect solution.

Tamed or ERSB at most: a world is believable also when things are simply implied. Otherwise, *in a computer game* , it becomes a parody of itself and/or simply laughable, where things are artificially forced on you on a visual/narrative level, instead of making sense in the context of the world.

Personally, I think I'll somehow safely survive a romance-less CRPG , but if they really want to include them, yeah, 3rd option is the way for me.

For some nice "hardcore", look for the first couple "Realms of Arkania" games (or even the SSI gold box)...Now that was some hardcore stuff :D. I just want a complex, mature (and for me, it doesn't necessarily mean "rape", "same sex romances" and whatnot) environment with a UI that, while "2012 looking" does retain some elements from the '90s games, like inventory management and verbose character sheets, not some watered down console looking appearance.

I don't like level scaling, but I also think it's heavily dependent on how exploration is designed: free-roam, Bethesda style, or more plot-driven? (Bioware). If it's more like the latter, where the plot itself, the narrative brings us to various parts of the world, I don't care, as long as encounters make sense for the plot and they're challenging enough.

That would be nice to have, but maybe as a future expansion, like it happened with Storm of Zehir (Neverwinter Nights 2 xpack).

Yeah, why not, if they make sense in the game world (and lore?). Plus, that doesn't mean they're going for a full steampunk/fantasy hybrid like Arcanum if that isn't your cup of tea. Like Josh Sawyer briefly mentioned, it's more like the "dawn" of a certain technology.

Hehe, I saw the map when I first landed on the Kickstart page and thought: damn, this really looks like one of those maps in the Forgotten Realms atlas. Figures

Heya, Didn't want to open a new topic, because this is somewhat related. I read that, currently, setting both AA and AF in the graphic card control panel causes problem with dialogues and whatnot. What about setting them through the ini (APEngine.ini -MaxAnisotropy and MaxMultisamples) Are those lines "active" or nothing will change? - Also, I noticed a line, currently set to "False", supporting Nvidia PhysX; then, regarding shadows: MinResolution is at 64. Max at 512; maybe we can dabble with them as well. - At the beginning of the aforementioned .ini, in [Engine.Engine] "bAllowMatureLanguage" is set to FALSE. - Also, what about the arrow indicators that point you to an objective? Can they be turned off through some .ini setting? Sorry if they actually go off, I'm only playing the tutorial, so it might change later on Thanks!

As of NOW, I'm finally downloading the italian version of the patch via auto-updater (not listed on the Lucasarts patch page). So, fellow spanish, german and french ppl, this may be a good time to run the launcher Finally, I bought the game two months ago and now I'm gonna play it for the first time! Hope to have an awesome time like I had with the first episode!