alanschu

I don't know, as I replay KOTOR 2 and the like, I suspect the quality of writing and character reactivity in decision making to be closer to PST. I do agree that it'll probably have better gameplay than PST (I trust Josh as the project lead and mechanics guru).

This is an interesting point, and lends to the problem of both parties getting frustrated. It seems at first glance, DeathQuaker sees your response as "just like all the others" so I can understand her frustration. Yet, you were describing your own experiences, and feel a need to defend yourself because you're not trying to be alienating. I'll admit I didn't get the impression that you were just being anecdotal in your first statement, although you do point out the idea that "if they are not playing Obsidian games, they are not going to be here" (but with different words) which is valid. I see similar analogues come up from different perspectives of alienation, however. Comments seen as dismissive towards RPG players (especially the "hardcore" type) definitely lends itself to a frustrated group that may feel such comments are alienating. Changing gears somewhat, I do think that there is a common perspective where people look at it and go "Well yeah, it's a good business decision" or even things like "Maybe most gamers want to play as men" (or whatever). Yet, suggesting that making more FPS style games instead of RPGs is a good business decision would get someone burned in effigy depending on where he says it. Imagine if I came onto this board and just said "Well, maybe most gamers just want to play FPS games?" I don't think it'd be well received. Is the analogy accurate/inaccurate? It's just an observation that I have made in light of a lot of these discussions popping up.

Note, I have backed Torment. I want it to be awesome too. (I want every game to be awesome). It's a personal taste. The exact same game with no expectation will often be regarded higher by myself, in my experience. Now, there's a few things... it possibly wouldn't have received the same amount of funding if it wasn't called Torment, so any assumption that it would have been the same game is not accurate. I'm also, in general, not that big of a fan of sequels. I usually look at a game like Planescape: Torment and say "Thank goodness this was made instead of a sequel." I find this interesting, because I actually had considered Project Eternity to having an excellent shot at delivering something that could amaze me as well as Planescape: Torment did. From a thematic point of view, actually, I see no reason why Project Eternity couldn't deliver on the checklist Torment had.

I agree that the numbers aren't really accurate from a representative standpoint. More just noticing that the numbers seem quite different. Agreed, there could be some level of futility perceived. Which I think might go back to the comments are a stage. By commenting on his blog, they likely wouldn't be trying to convince John, but anyone else that read it. The problem of course, is that John feels that attempts to undermine the point through angles of intimidation that he feels are not valid critiques (but rather, attempts to bludgeon things into silence) is what motivates him to not allow comments at all for this article.

I think that there is a lot of inertia, though I think things are changing somewhat. I remember a poster coming here during Alpha Protocol's development asking if there'd be a female character option. She just mentioned that she struggles with games where she cannot play a female. So in this sense it was "alienating" to her, but I agree it's not an attempt to alienate females as sometimes it's just a design decision. It's more a systemic issue based upon past metrics. If women are starting to increasingly become gamers at an appreciable rate, then there's going to be some level of push back on some of the standard conventions.

There is that, but I was more just looking at the numbers. I would never estimate a 30:1 ratio of Supporter:Opposer based on looking at comments or forum discussions about it. Of course, at a place like this there's no where near the numbers of people involved in this discussion to even allow a ratio like that. Are opposers particularly vigilant (there's little need for them to send John several emails, but they may feel compelled to make several replies) in responding, so a few people end up being overrepresented when examining post count? Is there something about the way John did this that would facilitate responses from people that otherwise would not (it did go viral)?

What I find interesting about this is this type of breakdown is not at all what I see on comments (and certainly not the case on this forum). On some level there's a level of this going viral, and it's easy to be an outside observer that has an email address or a twitter account and can take a few minutes to write something up. I'm also curious if "the stage" is what motivates the more adversarial people. And I mean adversarial as in the types that are itching for a good internet argument (i.e. people like me, although I don't think I'm as intense as I once was... clearly I still have it in me somewhat). Despite a moderator telling me to do so on numerous occasions (on numerous message boards), I have very limited recollection about ever taking a discussion from the public space to the private PM space. It just wasn't as much "fun" then. Sort of like that bit in Thank You For Smoking where Aaron Eckhart's character tells his son that he's not trying to convince his son with the argument, he's trying to convince the hypothetical observers. In this sense, many internet pissing matches end up becoming a competition to see who can win, as opposed to any sort of attempt to educate or promote genuine discussion (I have been guilty of this on numerous times).

Fandom can be pretty insular in general, I agree. At least, I can't think of too much off the top of my head. I absolutely agree that it's frustrating to see people getting on each other's case for other people's fandom. I used to get involved in it too, but I'm no longer interested in getting caught up in PC vs Console or anything of that sort. If people want to play console games, they can play console games. I'm a PC gamer and I'm pretty sure we can both coexist on this planet.

So explicit admission that your response was actually irrelevant to what you quoted? You're right that you didn't talk about shame or instilling it, I did. I brought it up because you addressed a point about how he is not proud of the fact that most of his readers are male. Should he be? You did a poor job of addressing backbone, character, and integrity, given that with this post he displays that he is willing to stand up against those that try to intimidate and bully him into submission, feels it is important to him, and does it all while not hiding behind any sort of anonymity. Artistic integrity? Selling Out? Honestly, selling out would be him keeping silent and not speaking his mind because it gives him a paycheque (you can critique him about other aspects of this if you like. Ask Zoraptor for more information). This is Walker taking a stand, and whether you do or do not agree with it I fail to see how you can accuse him of not having a backbone nor character for doing so. I could reason some level of a lack of integrity, if RPS hadn't been taking steps towards something like this for some time. He closed the comments because because he doesn't want that particular article to be a stage used by those that wish to silent the debate with their irrelevant discourse. It's a lot like what you're doing, which is focusing on the comment issue rather than the article. Dwelling on him not allowing comments is a tactic in obfuscation and misdirection, by shifting the discussion away from the content itself to something else altogether. It's an attempt to discredit an author through the use of red herring fallacy. Furthermore, Walker also came straight up and said it and why he is doing it, all while dealing with mountains of responses (apparently both supportive and against his position) on places like Twitter, a very public forum. It was actually quite entertaining to see people accuse him of refusing to publicly address criticisms while using Twitter. Spineless cowards are the ones that go and spread their hate over comments and internet forums under the veil of anonymity because they know they won't be held accountable for their actions. It's easy for someone to **** all over something when he knows that the likelihood of ever being taken to task on the things he said is virtually nil. EDIT: It should be clear that I'm not insinuating that you're a spineless coward. I'm saying that the accusation of a public person that can can be easily reached as being spineless holds less water with me than the private, anonymous individuals that gravitate towards these things. Although even then, the anonymity still exists on some level simply because I will likely never meet any of these people, so I can see where you are coming from, even if I disagree with the conclusion you reached.

Nothing, although I don't really think that that's what they're trying to do with this article. It's mostly just an awareness piece, specifically at the common counter arguments that typically come up whenever someone brings up sexism in games. John seems to think that the community (probably more specifically, the more "hardcore" community) is insular to a fault. Some will call him a spineless coward for disabling comments, though he states that his intent is to remove the stage for grandstanding of people that use the typical counter arguments in an attempt to derail/intimidate. Obviously not everyone is going to agree that this course of action is the best one, but it seems like the mind of John Walker sees these types of comments as not contributing to the discussion, and in fact serve to undermine it. Although I must admit, in some cases the is at its most delicious when the outrage ends up resulting in increased exposure.

It should be noted he does not say he's ashamed that most of his readers are men. If you look at it, the notion that "most of our readers are men" is not really something someone should be proud of. Ideally, it should be a non-issue. But in his opinion it's not. Furthermore, he was active on Twitter, and openly invited people to send him emails and that he would read each and every single one of them. He encouraged people to write up articles point out that he was wrong, and to even link them to him. Comments are ovestated (and some early studies now showing, perhaps even counterproductive in facilitating understanding).

I had two female friends that played WoW with me, and both found that when it became known that they were female they'd either get snide comments, or be inundated with offers of support and gifts. Neither of these actions were particularly flattering for them, unfortunately, so they tended to lay low.

I got called a bitch once for rejecting a guild invite

There should have been things to tip it off. Ingame sion arrival, Kreia's line, the "new" weapons. HK-51 walking in. A new datalog from the droid repair guy.If those were all not there, it's probably not well installed... Oh it seems to be working. My comment is more "I'm loving it, but at this point probably more because the game itself is awesome as I haven't seen too much from the Restoration Mod" I'm also far enough removed from the game that subtle differences may not be obvious to me. Kreia's line about the Ebon Hawk was obvious because the voice on it sounds juuuust a bit different. I had never seen a Vibrocutter before so that is probably new as well. Some of the stuff like HK-51 walking in is more likely me being unable to tell what's new and what's not as it's probably been 7 years since I last played the game. Something like a Datalog is probably not going to go over my head.

Enjoying it so far, though I haven't seen much that would be restoration mod specific (Just got to Telos). So it's more a reminder that yes, this game was awesome. Love the crafting system in this game.

Gamer ADD has brought me to KOTOR 2 with Restoration Mod

The difference (for me) is that one is an appeal on a mechanical level (how will the game play), while the other is an appeal based on the content in the game (what is it that you will experience in the game). When I first played Torment, the only thing I really knew was what it was going to be like mechanically (since I was familiar with IE). The execution of content within those mechanics was completely surprising for me, which I felt helped my impression of the game. By calling the new one Torment, I am now expecting something of Torment's quality, which is a high bar to reach. Note that misleading mechanical expectations can still annoy me (Bioshock wasn't a spiritual successor for System Shock 2. Despite being a good game, I enjoyed Bioshock less than I would have otherwise). But what excites me about Project Eternity is that it's content is novel to me, and for all I know they might hit a formula that is even more appealing than PST is to me. I might critique the game mechanics compared to the Infinity Engine, but that's an easier hurdle to exceed than PST's narrative. Now Torment can easily have better mechanics than PST, but it's clear to me that the mechanics of PST are a non-issue for me.

How well does the restoration mod for KOTOR 2 work with the Steam version?

You can get World of Xeen from GOG.

@StarWars When I say "Be careful" I'm more meaning "be cognizant and honest to yourself about how things are." The biggest thing I learned through my ordeal is how easy it is for people to be dishonest with themselves because the truth can be scary. The biggest one, obviously, being the ones I made to myself. Sure she did the same, but ultimately realizing how easy it was for me to not realize I was doing the same, despite feeling that she had often done the same throughout the past several years, was a hell of a bout of cognitive dissonance and a giant epiphany. I'm not saying don't try (you'll spend huge chunks of your life wondering "what if" which is worse IMO). I'm just of the opinion that you both make sure you're still able to enjoy life without each other's presence. In my experience, when I care it's easy to let myself be taken advantage of (or at least, was) and because I enjoyed her company so much. The biggest difference (and hugely important, IMO), was that I put myself in a position to be strung along (years ago when I made her choose and she didn't choose me), and your girl has obviously made a completely different choice in this regard. But in my case it was an example of me realizing that I had a large part to blame, and I put myself in that situation because I cared so much without being really honest with myself. Of course, it's a bit hypocritical for me to preach caution, since I'm of the opinion that it was probably an overall good thing to have happen to me, so yeah go figure XD.

My gamer ADD has shifted me back to Master of Magic!

If they wish to maximize risk mitigation, the solution depicted by Spider is a better way to do so. The financial risk doesn't change a whole lot whether you're funding an internal or external studio.

Just be careful. I was once in pretty much the exact same situation as you, and A, B, C, and D all applied to me as well, and I got absolutely scorched because of it. My situation had some differences (she didn't explicitly leave him for me, and it was sometime later - it was super awkward for a long while because I had basically told her she had to choose), but she totally recognized that I still cared for her and ended up taking advantage of that. To add insult to injury, despite being so adamantly sure that C applied to her, I found out it didn't. Turns out, she ended up leaving her husband because she ended up hooking up with a 3rd guy (and in retrospect, I see that she did with the third guy the exact same sequence of events she did with me), lied about it incessantly to me (which I ate up because I thought she was starting to reciprocate). In the end, I ended up becoming the "shoulder to cry on" for her for TWO different guys, one of them obvious and the other one because I was safe and familiar and she was too scared to be honest with me. It ended up exploding when someone had casually brought up that she had plans to go to film school with 3rd guy and I got pissy. To pour salt on the wounds further 3rd guy and I were casual friends (through the girl), and since he was oblivious he tried being all chummy with me after there was a bit of a rift. I tried being the "good guy" until finally I had had enough, told him I found it awkward that he was suddenly trying to be all buddy buddy with me when he never was, spilled the beans about my history with the girl and I haven't seen either of them ever since (and both are firmly in the "I don't care if they happen to be dead in a ditch" category. The way she behaved also moved her into "a bullet I dodged" too). So yeah, be careful. I'd recommend taking it slooooooooooooooooooooow and maybe even "just wait" for some time. You have the unfortunate prospect of being "rebound guy" at the moment, which is certainly not guaranteed to end in badness, but if I were in your shoes I'd make sure to not be a crutch for her and to make sure she's firmly grounded on her own two feet before pushing things too far too quickly. I ended up letting myself become a doormat, and while it was a useful learning experience and I'm much wiser (and ironically more confident) about the whole thing now, it ****ing hurt a lot when it happened. Like, more than my brother dying in a motorcycle accident when I was 13 which for a decade was easily the worst thing that had happened in my life. Regardless, I do hope it works out for you and that things turn out well for you. Good luck!

A mere $20 for me! /cheapskate

Not a picture of my game, but I lol'd https://twitter.com/SmoshGames/status/320325072646721536/photo/1