Fenixp

Which should also resolve the issue I perceived with PoE, that being all easy fights being easy with all classes, whereas all difficult fights were a lot easier with Vancian casters. By nature, when Vancian casters go nuclear, they're able to dish out a lot more punishment than casters who do not depend on per rest resource, as you tend to rest before difficult fights start. But then we'd get back into 'Balance in SP games' discussion...

Honestly, I just didn't enjoy the world and the writing. The original Baldur's Gate had a lot more free exploration than the second one so I could somewhat stomach it there, which is why I finished that game (it still doesn't rank too high on my cRPG list tho). Second game leans on writing and characters a lot more, which is why I liked it a lot less. I'm pretty sure I finished it at some point, but I can't really remember TBH - that's how unimpressive BG2 always was to me. So, why would I dislike writing? a) I know this isn't Bioware's fault since they were using an existing setting, but Forgotten Realms just doesn't feel like a coherent world to me. It feels like a game space with cool and epic things thrown in there for player to find, and that just doesn't get me immersed into it particularly. b) While the characters fit the greater-than-life nature of the world perfectly, that was also why I disliked them - they all had a characteristic or two that they were sticking with unquestionably and they never really felt believable to me. All of this and Obsidian's promise that they're mainly going to take inspiration from BG is, after all, why I didn't back the original Pillars of Eternity when its kickstarter came up. But a lot of people told me there's more BG1 in Pillars than BG2, so eventually I gave in and bought the game. As you may guess from my reasoning as to why did I dislike BG games, PoE ended up being a perfect fit for me. It had the exploration element from the original Baldur's Gate and the writing's a lot more down to Earth, with companion characters being a lot less extreme and more believable. Add to that the fact that I never really liked combat in IE games and Pillars of Eternity was like somebody was going through my list of complaints with it and removing them one by one, I just irrevocably fell in love with the game and now it ranks as one of my favorite RPGs of all time.

I'm pretty sure Conan: Exiles also includes SP mode. Exploring a huge world while not having to deal with other people is what draws me somewhat towards that game actually, but then I remember the grind.

Oh my, Resident Evil HD added jiggly boob physics! The future is now!

Just sayin', if some of the stretch goals have to be cut, this'll be the first one to go. Which is just savvy marketing really. It's not like they can promise exactly 3125 units of voice acting anyway.

I do like this stretch goal. "Double the voice acting". They can basically leave voice acting as is and then say "Oh we totally doubled it."

I can see that you are an extremely sophisticated and intelligent person. Anyway, exploding kittens got a lot more money because you don't need computer, console, or an extremely niche taste in games to play it. Generally, the bigger the potential audience, the more backers.

A lot of people around the internet seem to share your opinion, actually. I don't, but that's because I didn't actually like Baldur's Gate games all that much - I really loved Pillars tho.

If a significant portion of spells/abilities goes the 'Per encounter' route tho, I'd very much like to see some form of automation - which could be solved if AI customization is deep enough. What I always did before starting combat would be going through numbers 1-6, pressing 'Q' where I have my most efficient start-combat per-encounter ability mapped for all characters. I don't particularly want to do this, but it'll get even worse with the amount of per encounter abilities increasing. So I'd like to do something along the lines of: Aloth: - If (multiple enemies) with (low reflex), use (AoE disable) - If (multiple enemies) with (low fortitude), use (Magic missiles) on (strongest) Y'know, that kind of deal - a bit more in-depth DA: O AI programming. Actually, I'd like to see something like that even in the original game, so... Y'know.

Good decision. As it stands, it seems to me users were either playing combat at normal or slow mode. If 'slow' is the new default, you'll see players using full range of speed options during combat, allowing for more customization. What I'd like to see is an option to automatically put combat into fast mode just as there's one to automatically slow it down.

I love Vancian casting, but... More importantly, I love things that are interesting and fun. I tend to say "We already have an X, we don't need another" - so that's what I'll say here as well. We already have a robust magic system and gameplay mechanics along with huge replayability in Pillars of Eternity, so we don't necessarily need another one of those. Let's see what can Obsidian do with the new ideas they have now. As long as it's not all cooldown-based...

So... If I understand this correctly, Black Isle was developing a 3D engine for Fallout 3. 3D engine that got later bought off by Gamebryo. Gamebryo that then got licensed by Bethesda who later on made Fallout 3 on it. Funny dat. Great stuff.

Yesterday, I have finished Resident Evil 7. I've had a blast with that game. It's a true return to form for Capcom, by far the best RE game since the 4th one. By returning to many design principles of the very first Resident Evil game and PS1/2 era Japanese horror games in general, yet mixing this with its own twists on the formula and taking some cues from games like Alien: Isolation or Outlast, Capcom has created a refreshing blend that works exceptionally well. And from every nook and cranny, it's obvious that developers have enjoyed the hell out of making this game, bringing us an extremely confident Japanese horror with just the right ratio of creepy and cheesy. Thank you, Capcom, for not trying to appeal to western audiences anymore and just doing what you're good at - we'll appreciate this a lot more than your previous pandering. The ending could be a bit divisive (I loved it), the game could be a bit shorter as it does drag on a bit at the end, stealth mechanics could be a bit more fleshed out and puzzles could be a bit more difficult. Protagonists could also be a bit more interesting, but antagonists are so great so that I don't even care.

I never really bought that line of argumentation. Every competitive team-based game has a strong layer of strategy to it simply due to the nature of it being a competitive team-based game, not just mobas. I think it simply comes down to the fact that a lot of RTS players enjoyed the strong focus on competitive play and ridiculous micromanagement, which is exactly what moba games'll grant them in a much more casual environment. With that said, I still don't think there's that much of an overlap between fans of RTS as a genre and moba games outside of them being competitive. Non-competitive RTS games have always been a niche, and the fact that the genre barely ever evolved in any meaningful fashion didn't really help its longevity.

"Wait... Are you... Are you telling me that the exact thing you kept saying will happen to me... Will actually happen to me?"

I would assume it means something like this: An in-depth way to tell the game which UI elements you wish to see and in which for you wish to see them

Oh UI customization's the best thing. There's just not much to debate - you will be able to customize UI, rejoice :-P

You can easily avoid classes for companions too considering all are represented - if all fails, you can create custom ones in an inn.

Yeah, exactly. We already have a defensive/offensive spellcaster in the form of priest and wizard, I don't think a third one's needed - but having a class that's more intricately tied to the shapeshift ability, now that would be awesome

I'm getting a little tired of "We have slower, stamina-based third person combat" = Dark Souls Edit: By the way, was this posted yet? PETA wants WH40k fictional characters to stop wearing fictional animal furs. Nevermind the racism, nationalism, slavery, xenophobia, it's the fictional furs we gotta worry about. I swear, we need another war so that people find something sensible to pour energy into.

To be fair, PoE1 was both significantly more enlightened and adventurous than Tyranny was. If the original PoE showed us something (and Tyranny failed to completely), it's that this doesn't need to be a discussion of per pers vs. cooldowns, but more of a "Why not both?" one. One of the things I loved about Pillars of Eternity was that out of the 9 classes in the game, only 3 were based around Vancian magic (and I'd certainly like to see Druid being reworked somewhat to drop that number to 2). So if you wanted to avoid Vancian casters, you could, very easily - in fact, when building your party, good 90% of your abilities could avoid per rest mechanics altogether. Because Pillars of Eternity system was extremely flexible. So that's why I don't think the second game necessarily needs to drop Vancian magic, but if demand for cooldown-based gameplay is high enough, it could add cooldown-based classes (or even spellmaker class who'd work like Tyranny mages). Obsidian has already mixed several systems that I always thought incompatible in the original, might as well go further in that direction in the second game.

First of all, I understand that you most likely couldn't care less, but if you want to take that tone with me, I'm out. Secondly, "On the FIG comments I complained about the small number of available companions in PoE2 and that it would be great to have more of them, offering a much bigger choice whom you take along for your adventure." is literally the first sentence in the thread, so while reading your post, I assumed the entire time you're starting with that premise and suggesting that we should get more companions who are also more reactive. I apologize if I misunderstood. And lastly, I still don't think there's all that much to discuss about it TBH. I lean towards the first Gromnir's post that got you so riled up. Pillars of Eternity was heavily leaning towards companions being a bunch of exposition dumps and that was a definite problem, but you'll get the same problem seen from the other side if they don't give you enough exposition to fit their characters - lonely introverts shouldn't really react all that much to social interactions, but they'll tell you a lot about themselves in 1 on 1 conversation, whereas choleric extroverts should jump in to talk with others and will adjust themselves to current situation a lot better, but they'll also get bored talking to PC too much. There's no right way to lean, just don't do too much of one thing and keep the companions varied.

Do you have any idea of what kind of split of sales are the investors actually getting? I mean, it's really cool and all that Obsidian is getting cash left and right here, but 'Investing' to me suggests that, long-term, these people will expect to see all their invested money back and then some. Am I getting this right or is 'Investment' on fig not really one? And how will it influence future Obsidian's cash flow?

I ... Don't think much more than this needs to be said, really.

Like Arkane. Which is why I hope they do their own Deus Ex. They did a Thief with Dishonored, they're doing a System Shock with Prey, so hopefully, a Deus Ex is next in line.