Tale

1) Paypal does go to the stretch goals at the end of the Kickstarter. 2) I don't know. 3) The city at 1.1 probably wasn't that big. The entire game is larger than it would have been at the base level of funding. That means more is going to be spent on the main city now than at that base level. And I suspect they want to match that new size. Second, stretch goals are not a budget. Just because it's a 0.5 million stretch doesn't mean they're budging that one feature in that entire stretch. The entire game gets larger along the way.

It would have to be pretty significant clues. You're at a disadvantage if it's merely "impossible!" Impossible is the job. It helps if the math is transparent. Then they can see just how badly they are doing. And if there's enough leeway to make that evaluation before it's a party wipe.

I personaly whouldn't mind a undead (lets say lich) as a primary oponent in eternity, i mean undead that thinks that he is doing something good but his wrong. Lets say a lich soul-eater that think when he take enough power, he will rebulid the world, ending pain, brother-fights, wars, hate and make a perfect world etc. but first he must kill everywon, put there souls in new bodies a make happy new world, better then even gods desinged it ... thats only a example... Play Arcanum.

Have we not been there already? Planescape: Torment, countless vampire media including Buffy/Angel and Vampire: The Masquerade, and A Christmas Carol. D&D has a Lich-like undead that's primarily Lawful Good known as the Baelnorn. Sesame Street has one as a regular cast member.

I think they're going creative for one of them. And given that they have't so much as named the other, probably both. I hope it's a Dromaeosaur.

"If the gods won't answer, it's for us to decide."I don't remember that, either.

Indeed. Everytime I did a character that had any rogue in it, I always went rogue at level 1. The 4x bonus disproportionately benefited him. And almost any dexterity based character could benefit from a level of Warlock in Neverwinter Nights 2, due to Leap and Bounds. That's a really good point I'd forgotten all about.

I think the point of the jumps is to represent just how significant it is. Having to have smaller steps before them would either push them back or subtract from the miscellaneous work done with each increase in budget. These are, to my mind, the two most significant features remaining and would not like to see them hindered. Definitely not just for a Necromancer class.

I was kind of expecting to see some placeholder characters in there. But for pure environment work its fantastic. Now to see it in motion.

Did they say it's a mockup? I'm under the impression it was built with the technology.

Since the update has dropped, let's shift the discussion over to the official thread. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61324-update-20-lore-tidbits-campaign-almanac-big-ol-stretch-goals-and-environment-screenshot/

We have a thread for discussing this update over in the Announcement subform. Check it out. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61324-update-20-lore-tidbits-campaign-almanac-big-ol-stretch-goals-and-environment-screenshot/

That was my question. If you're not cheating, you're not really playing. I would like it to be in, but won't be disappointed if it's not. When it comes to class balance, I'm fairly flexible. I think that limited synergy is good enough of a balancing tactic, though imperfect. I think some synergy should still exist. Mages should have spells that can use sneak attack, though not all spells. That sort of thing.

The only thing I care about is that the default assumptions are tossed aside. If they end up at the same point (undead are soulless bodies, acting as animals), that's cool. If they end up somewhere else (undead are bodies with new souls or old souls returned after death, thus are capable of perhaps higher thought), that's also cool. As long as they come at them for their mythos.

The idea is reminiscent of Dragon's Dogma's Pawn system. And I think I read recently that Feargus was playing Dragon's Dogma. I like it, I mean I really really like it, I just think it would be beyond the scope to introduce the connectivity.

He created the Alpha Protocol stance system, if I recall correctly.

Looked up my childhood best friend and his younger brother on the internet. Both were arrested in the past year. The friend was arrested for drug possession, which is not surprising, last I'd ever heard of him back in the day was much of the same. The brother was arrested for assaulting a family member. I wonder if it was his older brother. Hoped for better than that for the two of them. Especially the brother. Edit: And for fun's sake, I did google myself. I take pride in the fact that I'm impossible to find by my real name. Edit2: Best friend in college. Driving with a suspended license. While intoxicated. Expected better. Edit3: Best friend in High School. Died in 2003. WTH!

Both. Choice in games serve approximately three purposes. I'm pulling this off the top of my head, so forgive me if I miss something. 1) Characterization 2) Agency 3) Challenges I've organized this list in my personal order of importance. I think people will argue on the arrangement of the first two, I can accept that. Of these three, only one is benefited by having a "right answer." Challenges. That's fun in its own way, for a first playthrough. Or subsequent playthroughs several years later after you've forgotten the challenge. Characterization doesn't care about the outcome, it doesn't care if the world is harsh or ideal, it only cares about the player having options. Agency only cares about the outcome and its about making sure the the player's options are validated. One easy way to handle it is be silent on agency. You don't deal with whether or not its a harsh world or an ideal one because you let the player imagine that for himself. The thief is caught, he promises to give up crime, and the player is given the choice to lock him away or set him free after returning the goods. Will he become a benefit to society if freed? Will he turn right back to his old ways? With vigor at how easy it was to get away after being caught? Reluctantly because he finds himself in harsh circumstance again? Will other criminals see how he avoided justice and feel emboldened to their crime? The player doesn't necessarily need to know for all scenarios that arise. Instead, he can make his choice, and have that choice subtly reinforced by an NPC. Whatever he does, someone in the room says "Good job" and "He's a good kid underneath that/never trust a criminal/an example must be set." And we can all move on. That will probably work for more choices than people realize. But not all choices. And this is where compromise comes in. Let us talk about the father and the son. The player needs to have his options, like I said I find that to be the most important function of choice. If the player wants to characterize their character as the one who tries to save father and son, they need that option to exist. I would let agency slide ever so slightly here, however. But I will not let it slide into kick-in-the-face territory. All choices should have effects and all choices should be validated... in some way. Even if it's not necessarily what the player is looking for. So we have our father and our son, one's life for the other. This player, he chooses to try to save both. He fails, yes. But instead of just failing, he gives them both an extra week together. They get to spend just a little more time happily. And they die without anguish. With the mother saying "thank you."

Blast your coffee mugs, I want a teacup. Edit: 3 in a row!

I was doing so well. Hadn't splurged on anything unnecessary. But then I saw this. Then I saw that GOG is doing a special on it.

I like quoting things. I'm going to side with Avellone. http://obsoletegamer.com/we-interview-chris-avellone-from-obsidian-entertainment-part-1/ And I think that should extend to consequences. The consequences of an act should be based on what is either likely to happen or to feed the drama, not to push a particular concept of morality.

If they're going for a colonization period, then they might want some sort of native american analog. The always chaotic evil interpretation has no place, in my eyes. They need to be a culture with complexity or omitted.

1 Let's first acknowledge that stretch goals are not a budget. It does not cost $100,000 for any of the specific features. It can cost more or less and that's just kind of the point where they're comfortable including it given all they're doing already. So it's not like they're dropping $100,000 in Ziets lap. There's overhead and other elements/features that are included in the amount. There's no indication Ziets is paid a rockstar's salary.

I think Sawyer said that was one of the motivations behind the Adventurer's Hall. It lets the player try out all the classes without needing a companion for each.

Likely, Mr. Ziets is just the star of the addition, not the sole addition. They've talked about spreading it out so that the work doesn't end up overloading in any one area with each new addition. Art, writing, sound, programming. But they only cherry pick the most exciting element "NEW CLASS", "NEW WRITER" to advertise as the stretch goal.