Hassat Hunter

I'LL NEVER LOVE YOU! [/Drama] Anyway, finished Holy Avatar... for it's price (free) it's good... wouldn't suggest paying much for it though, the other 2 Grotesque Tactics are longer, and more importantly, much funnier (and the turn-based combat sucks in all).

You read the journals... about how they generate maps? That should explain "compiling"... You're doing real-time lightning with actual time progression upon that, taking into account source of lightning, obstructions, etc.? Somehow, I somewhat doubt that... "Weather, 3d characters and whatever else they will animate isn't that complex" Eeeeh, well, I will pass along to the OE staff they're wasting their time with simpleton stuff. Maybe we should just throw 5 interns on it (actual The Old Republic forum suggesting for porting stuff over to another engine on a game, I kid you not). It's the 'new' "They should implent that, IT SHOULD BE EASY TO DO"... :/ Also, hint on company licensing, they need it *per* PC that has the software on it. That adds up. Just a little other hint to show how way off your economic projections here are. But really, it seems in the end all you talk about is power for the *end user*, which explains a lot. I'm talking on the side of Obsidian. Apples and oranges.

And now it makes perfect sense why you come across as such a weirdo...

You've just reduced my interest in PoE... stop that

Still yes. Areas and bigger, more detailed, higher res. All in all, more compiling time and resources. Not to factor in modern stuff like real-time lightning, weather effects, layers of maps, and 3D characters. They are definitely pushing tech with this game. Especially out of an engine like Unity, which seems unfitting for all the stuff they do to it. The software which does 'much more' is also much more expensive. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Personally I wont mind if they tone down, but a LOT of people really expect "current-gen" (ugh) isometric looks. It looks fantastic, true, but that look has it's pricetag.

No. This is true, due to DD compared to physical release. 15 years ago. Not to mention, this never been much of a moneysavior in the past, budgets get bigger and bigger. Though they do have to UNITY, Kickstarter and who knows what other tech used in the game.

Since when is DoTA2 a RPG? The system is so different, I can't honestly use it as comparrison in this case...

Ehm, Ffordesoon , Icewind dale? Instead of making 1 char in an unknown setting, immediately create 6... and probably pick wrong and screw yourself over? I... don't think that's the best way to get introduced to a system. Also, no, this isn't a BioWare game where "we save the world"... it's much more personal. To that effect, instead of the BG's I suggest playing either * Planescape Torment (also getting a feel for the isometric). * Knights of the Old Republic II (if you just want the OE-feel).

"The game it needed to be" according to online press is something no sensible man would want to play. No RPG fan would want to play. Remember it's the same press that gives 10's to Oblivion or Call of Duty. That's the games they want. If AP was 'the game the press wanted it to be' it would simply be a hollow pretty shallow game, devoid of life and substance. That maybe suit the press... but I'm certainly not going to agree all games need to be as bad as the 10's of the gaming press...

But... wages aren't like back then... there are more technical thingathingies needed to make the game 'current-gen' looking (which again takes more time and manpower). And I think Double Fine has oodles of experience, they've been around a long time. As company, longer than Obsidian. And the adventure-legends worked at LucasArts on legendary games there, before Black Isle. I can't really say lack of experience was at hand with Broken Age. Don't know about SR, but BA... definitely not. We might... but we're just a part of the 75.000 backers. You've seen some of the comments about just getting a publisher for boxed versions. I've seen many KS comments about the same, or delays, or "betrayals"... No, we might, but if they do the same, the majority of backers will probably respond very, very differently. For all the 'we can now make quality games without publishers' many backers are even worse than any publisher. I suppose for many we can count that to ignorance, but not all... not all.

I don't need a book for that... "Most Americans are stupid" There we go, was that so hard?

The colorisation... it's horrible. I sure hope it's just screen caps on a f***ed up monitor setting rather than ingame screens. Aaaaanyway, as for "buy 1 year later" pretty much all games have that. All DLC (no more additional nickle-and-diming), patches, cheaper... Yup, sign me up. I suppose it's one of the only good things DLC did, I no longer feel any remorse what-so-ever waiting a long time to get it cheap and complete. Thank you publishers.

Or just back along at http://eternity.obsidian.net/ (psst, it's cheaper. Atleast for the few months after release)

Not all games need to be 500 spreadsheets of data to wrestle through. Actually, I usually don't like games like that... 0_o

* Well, they don't need to add mechanics for exploration. Just, interesting maps. * Crafting I suppose. I personally hate crafting with a deep passion, except done BG2-style. But since they aren't doing BG2-style... * Puzzle solving is mostly conversation. While there could be puzzles with interactives in the environment, I still think the majority will be conversation. * Stronghold minigame is not really a minigame... it's a gold-sink. I suppose 'economy' is a mechanic, but that's heavily tied to combat, conversations (quests) and exploration.

Ehm, they publish games, plenty of games, of others in Poland... I'm not sure where you guys get the 'only their own games from' And, of course, they are the owners of GOG.

Seems both are backers, the badges just don't appear for them (you can see them listed on their userpage)... guess that's a case for... EDIT: And Sarex too. That makes 3 backers without obvious badges here. I probably agree, but aside from conversation and combat... what exactly would you say are these other mechanics/gameplay elements?

Just finished Holy Avatar... good for it's price (free). Wouldn't want to have to spend that much money on it though, it's short, and it's not as funny as it's Grotesque Tactics predecessors. And... what game to play now? *browses through GOG and Steam library of many unplayed games*

Why there are few mages? Cause groups of adventurers come killing them by the dozens, Baldur's Gate II style Yup. All those MMO's where, due to PvP every class is just a clone of the other. It's the worst thing imaginable (and also why most MMO's are really bad, this PvP balance making them more and more symetrical and less fun to play per patch). Let's not wring a fun system with that kind of MMO clone balance.

Never heard of Riot games. Who are they?

But why should you take a talent for that? Instead of just being allowed to place your points in wilderness lore instead? That's really my question and ultimate problem with the suggestion. I don't mind them being split in 3, with each class focusing on one, but I do that you have no choice to add points of which of the 3 you desire yourself. Which, IMO, kind of defeats the point of a skill system. Lore being 70 is kinda extreme for a 12-level game . But, why not? I don't mind those scripted events, they add to the game. Aslong as they aren't PC only, and for example a cipher teammate can budge in if they have said requirements. Dialogue is very important to the overall gameplay, why say it isn't?

No, since you want to, in the end after a few levels, want to bind them together again. Also, there's the matter if you want 2 wizards, and you want wilderness lore and magic lore, there's no choice to do so. No choice, why build a RPG character. I still think, if you make 3 distinct skills, don't force people down a predetermined path (skill 1 > skill 2 > skill 3), just let them pick, sure add a bonus to one, but don't force it. In the end; the solution; 1) Either reduces the players choices to build characters (bad) or 2) With said "feat/talent" the entire distinction is useless anyway. So again; why make it in the first place? We don't have enough feats otherwise?

So... it diverts skills into 3 subsections (which despite what you say, is making 1 skill 3 skills) then allows you to turn those 3 skills back into 1 skill at higher level? If so, may I ask; What's the point? (I know in the previous post it was like 70% or 80%, but still, what's the point?)

Aaaaaw... why not? That's like, a big part of the fun. Druids should have it easier to convince the lone old man in the wilderness, and the Godlike should have more difficulty getting information, etc. @ Hormalakh; That's not dissecting skills, that's just adding more skills, using the same qualities. So instead of 'cure' being healing+poison you now have 'healing' and 'poison'...