Chairchucker

Hell yeah Wizardry 8 rules. Might and Magic games were also turn based first person. The ones I played that were any good, anyway.

They can't because there isn't enough money in their budget and they shouldn't for the same reason.

Obsidian has been pretty OK with Linux releases in the past haven't they?

Ah, my mistake then.

Obsidian don't own Pillars of Eternity, it's owned by some other company which is owned by Feargus. So Microsoft don't own that, but will probably still be able to make games in that universe if they want.

1. No one here seems like they'll be provoked by romances, the overwhelming response from the 'anti-romance' side is 'haven't really seen romance done particularly well in the past, so I'd just as soon see them use resources elsewhere, especially if they're not that enthusiastic about them.' 2. You hope in vain, they've already said they're not having romances.

Truly. I've snipped the rest of your post because it is long and quote pyramids are annoying, but I'm gonna refer to a couple other parts of it. Firstly, to address the latter part of your post, where you started to talk about genres other than RPGs, I was not really considering games like point and click adventure games to be examples of games that gave you options as you were describing them. Firstly because, let's face it, in most point and click adventure games each problem has exactly one solution, the only notable exceptions I can think of being Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis, where you get a choice at a key point in the game which means you're now playing in one of three distinctive ways, or King's Quest 6, where there were two paths you could go (but I only ever found one of them.) Secondly, because I understand the conversation to be framed in the context of RPGs. I mean let's face it, these days there are still games like The Sims or Cities Skylines or Bejeweled or Peggle and heaps of others where you don't have to kill stuff, but they're not really relevant to what I understood the conversation to be about. Of the RPGs I played in the 90s, the Fallouts (1 and 2, not Tactics or whatever that PS2 shooter was) were the only prominent examples I could think of where a pacifist run was possible, and in those cases it was a novelty. It was like finishing FONV in 15 minutes. Sure, it's technically possible, but you pretty much have to have advanced knowledge of the game and take advantage of that knowledge to preplan your character the exact way it could be done. If you thought you were gonna be a diplomat and talk your way out of all the violence, you were all the way out of luck. Baldur's Gate, I recall having for the most part no more choice than Pillars of Eternity. Other prominent 90s RPGs I remember playing are things like Wizardry 8, Diablo, Lands of Lore, Might and Magic, Freedom Force. I like all of these games, but I don't really recall any of them being set up to allow multiple solutions to problems. By contrast, more recent games like Alpha Protocol and Pillars of Eternity have IMO a lot more choice and better reactivity to your choices.

Your recollection of the options in most 90s games diverges wildly from mine.

I'm not really a fan of the writing for Kills in Shadows, but I think that's more of a reflection on my reaction to the writing for beastmen in general. I like both Bleden Mark and Xoti.

Dunno but it shows up on Steam now, so you can wishlist it and it'll probably update you when you're allowed to lob money at them.

Probably not, but it's already clear that's the tone they're aiming for so you may have to prepare for disappointment.

Uh, you may want to reread the OP.

Do you have examples of things she's written that you feel is 'like a highschooler'?

Ah yes, having backer written content has been flawless in the past.

It's possible to read it slightly differently, IMO. I see it as a definite no on mods and just a probable no on third person camera, as he didn't explicitly say 'no third person camera', just juxtaposed the comments about 'we'd love to have things like this in the game' and 'we may not be able to get everything out of the gate on the first game'.

Their impending ownership by Microsoft might not necessarily have any bearing on their budget, given Take Two are publishing this one.

Yeah more options are good. If cost weren't an issue I don't think anyone would seek to deny anyone an optional 3rd person camera. However, as mentioned in the other thread, Mikey Dowling has implied that it might not be in the budget. https://imgur.com/a/0Ty2I24

I never minded the minigames, but I think given some disliked them, we're better off without them.

Hmmm. Prior experience: two games I haven't played, and PoE2 and Tyranny, both of which I liked. Oh no?

What is this conclusion based on besides 'this is the viewpoint I want to condemn'?

I would've said 'as well as' rather than 'over'. I haven't gotten the impression that they've favoured Steam over GOG.

lol ok guys

There are other sentiments that have been posted in the thread that people could be replying to, hypothetically.

To be fair there would also be a long thread if they'd confirmed there were romances. And probably also if it was left kinda ambiguous.

Ugh those darn casuals wanting convenient markers in their games. Those dumb babies don't know the joy that is orienteering simulators. They should be rounded up and placed in the gulags IMO.