alanschu

Wrong thread.

Given how I feel this morning, more likely just feeling ill :S

Makes sense. I mean, look at the original Baldur's Gate. Most people completely skipped over that one because it wasn't a sequel of another game.

The crusade goes quite a bit beyond a massive dose of skepticism, particularly when you aim to scrutinize aspects that you can't be anything more than completely oblivious to the finer details. I don't think there's anything he could show that would make you happy, at this rate. At least, you certainly seem to be taking great joy in pointing out how we've all been hoodwinked out of our money by a shyster. But I guess you're at a place where whether the game is good or not, you have a position by which you can be satisfied with. Unless you make it a habit of contributing to the bank account of millionaire CEOs that you don't trust to deliver on a project that you think is done in bad faith while also being misrepresented. Or maybe I'm just cranky because of some insomnia.

I haven't been the biggest supporter of the new Torment by any means, but this isn't necessary and is basically just latching onto something without understanding the contexts that may have occurred to have caused this to happen and so forth. At this point I think it's safe to say that a sizeable number of people have enough faith in Brian, inXile, and the crew recruited in by the Kickstarter team to take a flyer on the Kickstarter itself. Which would still include me.

Does it actually need to be called "Baldur's Gate 3" then?

Originally, they were looking at something along the lines of what PE is using, I believe, but that was before they had to rewrite a bunch of core systems for infinity - I have no idea what their current plans are, but I think you'll be looking either at their rewritten infinity or 3d characters on 2d backgrounds. Considering the collective reasons stated by the Overhaul people for leaving Bioware, I doubt they'd do what you're suggesting here. And, so far, the worst thing I've heard said about Overhaul's writers was something along the lines of them not being quite as good as Bioware as at their prime. Let's face it, nobody apart from Obsidian's people are. Still leaves room for being better than anybody else. What were their stated reasons?

Just be careful with terms like this. You'll need to set a really low threshold for "consensus" IMO.

It's more about how it manifests. It just comes across as organic and if you distill down most quests to smaller components, you can often find that it is "Go to a place... do a thing." Where it really shines in Ultima VII is that you can accomplish a lot of this stuff in a truly non-linear fashion (as opposed to faux non-linearity that many games have today, which is "Do stuff not related to the main quest line in any order that you want"). It's wrapped in a pretty eloquent (especially for its time) narrative, however, and still stands as one of my favourite games of all time. All the while having an open world complete with excellent NPC scheduling systems that comes across as well ahead of its time IMO.

As an aside, I actually really enjoy the story/narrative of The Missing Link! (though I'm less of a fan of "We will remove all your augs" at the start... haha)

A plethora of new parts (like... 18 I think). Starting

Still spliting time between BF4 and DXHR. Today was a DXHR day.

As stated by Keyrock, Zenimax owns id Software now (and has for some time). Further, starting his own 3D headset might not be what he's interested in doing, especially if Oculus was all "Would you like to join us?"

Pun intended? Capital S, I'd say YeS.

That he wants to move on and try something else?

Ugh stop and frisk....

Seeing the "Doesn't even look up what THAC0 means" is not an indictment against the reviewer, IMO. But then I always disliked AD&D and enjoyed the BG games despite it.

I'm hoping that it has meaningful combat too. I am just indifferent to how it is presented. Heh, so I should argue for the game mechanic that you like because in your mind I would prefer that more? At this point I'm more inclined to vote Turn-based almost out of spite. To be clear that I don't care about the combat mechanics does not mean I want poor combat, nor that I want combat to be resolved in a particular way. If the developers feel that they can provide a fun combat experience with turn based, and the advantages that affords them, then by all means. While I may have granted your defense about not being disingenuous with other features, asking posters to do this leaves an absolutely sour taste in my mouth and does much more for pushing me away from your perspective. You might as well just say "If you don't care, please vote for what I like because I do care a lot." I'd give you points for just being honest. Let me go back to a point you made in the previous post: Mechanics is most definitely not orthogonal to focus. Every feature represents an opportunity cost. And if they don't have any sort of RTwP system implemented, but already have a working model for turn based combat, then you're completely overlooking that cost. How much other things are you willing to sacrifice in order to get RTwP combat? What story features are you okay cutting? What areas are you okay not visiting?

Not too surprising given he had jumped over to Oculus. Still, feels a bit weird haha.

You're missing the point that I am making is that PST's encounter design is affected by the focus the developer had on the game (which was not one of focus). I also feel you're being exceptionally disingenuous in your other posts since you clearly recognize this and as such continually make comparisons to Baldur's Gate 2. I think that you also miss the point when people say "the combat of PST wasn't the same as BG or IWD" despite the fact that they use the same engine and mechanics. The games have very different focuses. Eh, in retrospect I misunderstood what you were referring to. Though to be honest this whole ordeal is just the thing that I was worried about with respect to Kickstarter (and to be fair, you're hardly the only person the contributes to this). People have this false notion that there's consensus when they say "I want a sequel to <game I love>" but there hardly is. Do you not believe that the game can be a "Torment experience" because it has a turn based combat system? Is it safe to assume that for you, the combat of the original game is something you consider significant value added?

You're making an assumption that the combat in PST would've been identical had it been a turn-based system. We don't know that. All I know is that the combat for the game isn't something that concerns me at all. I don't even want Baldur's Gate 2 style combat in this game. I am trying to decide if I'd even miss combat if it didn't exist and I am not sure if I would. Stating, however, that this "fact ... obviously isn't clear" will just antagonize people. I think I could just as easily point out that the fact that some are okay and flexible with the combat style is not very clear to you (for the record I'm in the "do not care" camp).

It's more a situation of fans liking different things out of the original game. Given that PST's combat was, in my opinion, quite poor, I am perfectly okay with them trying something different. Heck, if it's what they want to do, I say go for it since it's better to have devs exploring features they want. I could maybe see reservations with Eternity, but I admit I am a bit surprised at how many have dug their heels into their ground over this particular aspect of the game.

Nice. I have a few coworkers that have taken tomorrow off and are at a midnight launch right now.

Fair enough. TIE Fighter games (as well as games like Freespace, though I haven't played them too much) are definitely still games I consider hardcore space flight sims. (And I'd love love love for EA to give another TIE Fighter game a shot). EDIT: Follow up: What other games come close to X in terms of what it tries to do? I never did play Elite, though Privateer games worked well enough (though I missed the mouse based flight system from WC1/2 over being forced to use the keyboard since I didn't have a joystick at the time).

Gee, how did I know this was going to be your angle all along. X:Rebirth awaits you and your gamepad then. I rarely use a gamepad on my computer (I guess you predicted that too). I have, however, used one in the past for Battlefield before I picked up a joystick. I did so by primarily using only one hand on it and having it act as a flight stick with the right analog stick. What I got by asking my question, however, is why the gamepad isn't acceptable. X:Rebirth is already a game that isn't particularly interesting enough for me to pick up, and I doubt I'll be picking it up any time soon (as previously stated in this thread). X3 didn't do it for me, while I was a big fan of X1 and X2. I did map most of the game's controls to my Saitek Cyborg Evo Force for those games because I preferred to not use the keyboard if I could avoid it (especially for anything resembling close to the actual flying part of the game). Maybe X3 wasn't for me because it was just trying to do too much compared to the other games? I'm wondering if there's a differing definition of the term "hardcore space flight sim" however, since I would consider games like Wing Commander and TIE Fighter to be included and so forth to be applicable (the latter of which I played with a Sidewinder 3D Pro), and even using a controller with one hand is significantly better than playing Flight Simulator with the original Gravis Joystick. Is the X series the new measuring stick for hardcore space flight sim and those older games simply the arcadey games? I love the X Games for them basically being Privateer++ on some level, but it's combat model was always rather poor IMO compared to other space flight sim games that I was able to survive with without having nearly the amount of buttons available to me on one handed gamepad let alone something like the 3D Pro (though hell, most of my TIE FIghter experience came on a damn mouse).