Fiach

Can't tick it on either the in-game menu or main menu. Rebooted the game, it let me tick from main menu, got into the game, still restricted. Tried changing difficulty, still can't tick it.

Thanks for taking the time to explain the system more clearly, you are correct, I don't fully understand the mechanics. But, regardless of it being fit for purpose, it is the "only game in town" and until that is changed, I would suggest that Donald Trump won democratically within that systems rules? but keep in mind, the US judiciary is not appointed democratic save for some oversight by the senate. this does not bother you because your irish high court justices is also appointed as 'posed to elected by the people in a popular vote? your demand for democracy seems a bit selective, no? to avoid hypocrisy, should you not be demanding elections for judges, US and irish? 'course if you see judges as different and not requiring or benefiting from a more pure democratic selection process, then why not consider the possibility the US executive deserves a different approach? HA! Good Fun! Sorry if you considered my post hypocritical, it wasn't my intention to appear that way. I don't have a dog in this fight, I was just mentioning how it appeared to me, looking at it from the outside. I'm not entirely sure why you are bringing up Irish and US judiciary appointments, I was only talking about the college system for presidential elections and how that's currently the only system available in the US, So it's result is person deemed to be democratically elected. Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to differ, cheers! if lack o' democracy were the actual concern, then should you not be bothered by Justice selection too? but again, we noted how Irish high court judge selection suffers from a similar lack o' democracy. doesn't make much sense to make a carte blanche condemnation o' lack o' democracy in the process o' chief executives while ignoring similar failings for other offices, does it? oversimplification or misunderstanding to say we disagree. HA! Good Fun! Maybe m not making my my point clearly enough. it's not that I have a "concern for the lack of democracy". I couldn't care less about the judiciary either. My point is, There are many forms of Democratic elections...for clarity sake, specifically for government leaders. Each country I mentioned , democratically elects their leaders, but with different forms of democracy, PR, First past the post and Electoral College. Ireland and England elect their leaders with their versions of Democracy and after voting, consider the winner, legally elected. America has its own form of Democratic presidential election, Electoral College. That is it's legal democratic process to elect a president. So, Donald Trump won that democratic process, therefore he is legally the president. It doesn't matter that Hillary got more votes, she still lost, because getting the most votes isn't legally the system used for voting for president in America. Hope that helps clarify my thoughts on the matter

Thanks for taking the time to explain the system more clearly, you are correct, I don't fully understand the mechanics. But, regardless of it being fit for purpose, it is the "only game in town" and until that is changed, I would suggest that Donald Trump won democratically within that systems rules? but keep in mind, the US judiciary is not appointed democratic save for some oversight by the senate. this does not bother you because your irish high court justices is also appointed as 'posed to elected by the people in a popular vote? your demand for democracy seems a bit selective, no? to avoid hypocrisy, should you not be demanding elections for judges, US and irish? 'course if you see judges as different and not requiring or benefiting from a more pure democratic selection process, then why not consider the possibility the US executive deserves a different approach? HA! Good Fun! Sorry if you considered my post hypocritical, it wasn't my intention to appear that way. I don't have a dog in this fight, I was just mentioning how it appeared to me, looking at it from the outside. I'm not entirely sure why you are bringing up Irish and US judiciary appointments, I was only talking about the college system for presidential elections and how that's currently the only system available in the US, So it's result is person deemed to be democratically elected. Anyway, I guess we'll have to agree to differ, cheers!

J I think the American people had a horrific choice to make, in the choice, of the last two standing, I would have voted for Donald Trump, Hillary, for the myriad reasons that have already been thrashed out during the election and her actions while in government, prior to the election, scares the beejeesus out of me and I'm not even American

It was actually a pretty sore point in 2000 as well when Gore (D) lost the election while holding a .5 lead (not as gigantic of a lead as Hillary's 2.1, but sizeable enough). As for the rest of what you said, with no explanation/context, I'm not sure what you mean. (e: oh, the last point: yes, american liberalism is not the same as classic liberalism) If you mean the democracy bit? There are many forms of democracy, in UK its first pat the post, in Ireland, we have a vote transfer system called Proportional Representation, in USA, it's Electoral College. The democrats don't seem to accept the fact that Donald Trump was democratically elected, because they say Hillary got more votes. That would be ok in England, where it's first past the post, but the election was in America, where a different democratic system prevails. That's why I say the democrats don't seem to believe in Democracy. Hope that made it a bit less muddy you make a common european mistakes. first, our fed government is far less powerful than most people (including some americans) realize. our individual state and local governments has more influence on day-to-day life o' citizens than does the fed. in fact, the fed is specific prohibited by our Constitution from the kinda interference which is commonplace in ireland and elsewhere. our democracy happens much closer to home, and you ain't even considered local and state elections. furthermore, the electoral college is only a means by which our President is elected. as much as europeans fail to understand the limits o' our fed government, confusion 'bout the Presidency is even greater. is not the President who writes our laws but Congress. the President's powers is most vital in regards to foreign affairs and administration of the executive branch of government, but even then, the executive is a massive organization staffed by career bureaucrats who, for practical if not legal reasons, are largely insulated from Presidential whim. the President is not our Prime Minister, or anything even close. don't let tv and movies mislead you. use electoral college to somehow represent american democracy is, at best, myopic. HA! Good Fun! Thanks for taking the time to explain the system more clearly, you are correct, I don't fully understand the mechanics. But, regardless of it being fit for purpose, it is the "only game in town" and until that is changed, I would suggest that Donald Trump won democratically within that systems rules?

It was actually a pretty sore point in 2000 as well when Gore (D) lost the election while holding a .5 lead (not as gigantic of a lead as Hillary's 2.1, but sizeable enough). As for the rest of what you said, with no explanation/context, I'm not sure what you mean. (e: oh, the last point: yes, american liberalism is not the same as classic liberalism) If you mean the democracy bit? There are many forms of democracy, in UK its first pat the post, in Ireland, we have a vote transfer system called Proportional Representation, in USA, it's Electoral College. The democrats don't seem to accept the fact that Donald Trump was democratically elected, because they say Hillary got more votes. That would be ok in England, where it's first past the post, but the election was in America, where a different democratic system prevails. That's why I say the democrats don't seem to believe in Democracy. Hope that made it a bit less muddy

Wow! This is the most mature and we'll behaved political discussion I've ever seen on a game forum! By page 2 on GOG it would be closed down for fear the forum would catch fire from all the flaming! I'm not American (Irish), but looking at American politics from the outside is really weird. Some observations The Electoral College system was fine until Hillary lost. Democrats don't believe in Democracy Liberals are anything but liberal. I'm not being a smart ass, that's what it looks like to outsiders Anyway, great thread!

Ah, so you've already read his next novel!

I think you mean controller, not tv Actually, I was concerned about the TV too, with the text size, needless to say, it's perfect!

Please make a PS4 version of Tyranny!

I don't really like MP versions of SP games, I get my mp jollies in MMOs, I think they are more considered creations, whereas I find mp in sp games more "twitch" gaming than an enhancement of the sp portion and a waste of resources that could have enhanced the sp portion of the game.

Reamde by Neal Stephenson, very game friendly material as it's about MMO gold farming.

Playing Pillars of Eternity on PS4 after playing it on PC, it is a brilliant port of a brilliant game!

I agree wholeheartedly with these sentiments, I played the game on PC, it was with a certain amount of trepidation I bought the PS4 version, I was afraid it would be terrible, but my faith in you guys was totally justified! I can't wait for Pillars of Eternity 2, hopefully you will consider a PS4 iteration! Please also consider a console version of Tyranny too. Regards and thanks!