Jump to content

Durandal.IV

Members
  • Content Count

    19
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

36 Excellent

About Durandal.IV

  • Rank
    (1) Prestidigitator

Badges

  • Deadfire Backer Badge
  • Deadfire Fig Backer

Recent Profile Visitors

218 profile views
  1. Question: Is there anyone that's good with photoshop who might be willing to assist me? I'm not looking for help with the watercolour, since there's a fantastic tutorial. What I am looking for is someone who can help me recolour a portrait I found. I love playing pale elf, but the lack of selection for portraits in a style that is visually similar (both in the game and among custom portraits) is incredibly frustrating. More annoying is the fact that every single one has white hair! Don't get me wrong. It's a good look. Really drives home the whole "we're winter incarnate" thing. But I wou
  2. It was NOT definitive. It was open-ended and vague. Why would you spend money then? You knew it was not definitive. You knew it was open-ended and vague. So you knew there was no certainty in that regard. You knew there was no guarantee. So you knew there was a risk. And based on that knowledge you decided to spend money on it. And now you are blaming Obsidian for that. You took a gamble. You lost. But you don't want to take any responsibility for taking that gamble in the first place. You're comparing the ending of the final product to the marketing of said product. Nice t
  3. Don't look at me. I was just arguing about the role of trust in a kickstarter campaign. Completely different subject... In that it was sparked by discussion of possible romance options... Maybe a quick glance, or out of the corner of your eye?
  4. Yes, he does. It's pretty short though. Most of them are just a line or two, and relatively vague and open ended. Xoti's are the most detailed. I like vague and open-ended better than super detailed anyways. Gives you more room to imagine what happens. I just hope there's a version of the ending that allows him and the watcher to stick together after the story. There is, I saw someone post his other ending on a different forum. But now I'm also wondering about the other companions. I don't think all of them did. Some were parting of ways, others were just "Til we meet
  5. It was NOT definitive. It was open-ended and vague. Why would you spend money then? You knew it was not definitive. You knew it was open-ended and vague. So you knew there was no certainty in that regard. You knew there was no guarantee. So you knew there was a risk. And based on that knowledge you decided to spend money on it. And now you are blaming Obsidian for that. You took a gamble. You lost. But you don't want to take any responsibility for taking that gamble in the first place. You're comparing the ending of the final product to the marketing of said product. Nice t
  6. Yes, he does. It's pretty short though. Most of them are just a line or two, and relatively vague and open ended. Xoti's are the most detailed. I like vague and open-ended better than super detailed anyways. Gives you more room to imagine what happens. I just hope there's a version of the ending that allows him and the watcher to stick together after the story.
  7. True, but that was part of the problem. It may not have said they were all romanceable, but it certainly didn't say that some of them weren't. It was not definitive. It was open-ended and vague. And I remember that video because I was surprised how well he was rocking that blush. The part that needed clarity is the term relationship. It's such a broad and general word that it is open to misinterpretation. This is where clarification would have been needed. Is a relationship a romance? Not necessarily, but do you ever hear people talk about their romances? Nope. You hear them talking about thei
  8. People get what you are saying. They disagree that Obsidian was misleading. (Also tangential, but "trust" is absolutely needed with stocks inasmuch as you trust that given company 1) is putting out accurate information about their earnings and such and 2) that they are managed well enough to be competent. There's a reason people prefer investing in Google over, say, junk bonds from Venezuela and trust has everything to do with it). Honestly, I'm just being contrary right now. Concerning your first point, there are laws in place to force them to do that. I would argue fear of t
  9. Yes, he does. It's pretty short though. Most of them are just a line or two, and relatively vague and open ended. Xoti's are the most detailed.
  10. Investments do not have a good faith component. Investments are about risks and gains. You don't need to trust a company to invest in it. It's a game of probabilities. Crowd funding is not. Is there risk? Certainly. They can abscond with your money and run off. Hence why trust is needed. The issue is not that something was not provided, but that there was no clarity. This isn't about having all the facts. I don't want all the facts. I'd have no motivation to play the game if I had all the facts. I do want an indication of what I am funding. You can't have crowd funding without the crowd, and y
  11. As I just stated, crowd funding is about good faith. You are trusting them to deliver a product with your money. To sit there and say that people have no right to feel slighted because they were mislead is even harder to fathom than my thought process. The issue is not that they failed to deliver. The issue is that there was no explanation given for why. Crowd funding cannot work if there is no trust between the funder and the funded. How can companies expect to get funding without making people feel as if they can be trusted with their money? But people already explained in this thre
  12. I have a somewhat different perspective. When I participate in crowdfunding a game-- and I've done so over a dozen times-- I'm paying the developers to make the kind of game that couldn't or wouldn't be made using "traditional" funding sources. I want the developers to stay true to their artistic vision, not (say) add multiplayer because it helps sell DLC. Because I trust that people with decades of game-making experience can make better games when they don't have to go through design by committee. I certainly hope the developers listen to crowdfunder feedback, and incorporate good idea
  13. My recollection is that Obsidian was very careful to say "relationships" and not "romances," and that they clarified that not everyone would be romanceable. I remember that because I was excited about relationships that weren't romances. My Watcher wants to be bash brothers with Eder and shield sisters with Pallegina, not get into their pants. There in lies the issue. The wording is very precise and very misleading. It's rhetoric 101. Regardless, this is a kickstarter project. It's fundamentally built on the principle of good faith. People should not have to pay attention to wording
  14. I think you are massively misunderstanding the issue: transparency. Considering the number of people who backed this game and were looking forward to romances, myself among them, the manner in which they portrayed the "relationships" in the game during development comes across as a bit underhanded. I mean, considering that it appears that Eder and Pallegina can't be romanced, with Eder probably being the most sought after romance, it seems slightly mean-spirited/spiteful to say "We've added relationships!" only to reveal that it's not with the characters everyone wanted. If they had been trans
  15. This is actually kind of disappointing. Concerning character creation, it looks like the same distribution concerning races and classes. Culture makes sense, but I am disappointed that the Snow elves have been shafted again. You'd think with how rare they're supposed to be that people would gawk more. It also surprises me how many references Orlans get, considering how few portraits they have.
×
×
  • Create New...