Tale

Well, unlike the suggestion of asking for fans to act as amateur voice actors in the game for free or for reduced pay (which is folly), the idea of having Obsidian fans - many of whom we know to have excellent artistic abilities - chip in their own work for, say, one of the reward tiers on Kickstarter might hold some water. I mean, the fanart community is full of incredibly talented and creative artists who are just bursting with love for the company and the material, and I've no doubt that they would love to see their work featured in-game. Any thoughts? Inconsistency. Artistic styles wildly differ.

Lots of dumbfounded looks, ellipses, and question marks.

Stuff is going to get cut regardless. It's inevitable. I'd bet all my money on it being a guarantee. This is the big thing I like about DLC, the ability to go back and pick that up. If DLC had been popular around KOTOR 2, we probably would have gotten the droid factory or the droid planet even!

Still on Neverwinter Nights 2. Oh man, why's it take so long to get Ammon Jerro? I miss that guy already.

I'm developing a taste for Chianti.

Because you're buying from two different people. Steam and GOG.com are different stores. You can't expect Target to honor your purchases at Wal-Mart.

That doesn't seem to be a strong argument. I've seen philosophies that define gods as omnipresent and even non-sentient forces. Which ends up meaning gravity and electromagnetism are gods if you think about it. So is someone that believes in gravity not an atheist because they agree in a force that another philosophy declares to be god? It's complicated. But what's more important is that it doesn't change anything about their belief system and we are letting the silly corners of language replace actual ideas. For all intents and purposes, a person that rejects the authority of the powers of a fictional settings is an atheist if they want to be considered as such.

I would love to see room for a companion or two that fits in to the main game being able to be released on their own instead of necessarily being part of a pseudo-sequel expansion area. It's more possibilities for the devs to expand with. I like to think that Obsidian wouldn't abuse it for quick cash for cheap content. DLC is just more versatile, it can be well crafted companions, it can be areas, it can be entire sequels and everything expansion packs can be. But there's the public stigma against it. Because versatility means it can also be hats, locked areas that require cash shop keys, and limited access passes. People are afraid of DLC. Too much bad blood. I like the concept, I really do, but it's been subject to some abuse and sadly the good is being tossed out with the bad.

A lot of the posts are from the same people. On both sides of the discussion. People speaking against it generate just as much continued discussion as those speaking for.

Planescape had one rogue, period. I'm getting the impression that we're going to get a more personal party instead of just picking up everyone on the road that happens to have their own dagger and isn't trying to stick it in us. Maybe it'll be a challenge to make sure those characters aren't annoying bleeps. While I do prefer the idea of having variety, I have been delighted by games without it in the past. And further, they may be doing something to mix up party composition needs. I don't really know. I'm conflicted. As I said, I prefer having variety. I'd like to be able to do both a full party jerk run and a full party heart-of-gold run. But the need to have the companions well fleshed out and recognizing their limited means tempers that for me.

Closing thread. We would like to keep discussion on this topic limited to one thread. I know it is difficult to maintain discussion in the other topics due to the passions involved, but this one was derailed right out of the gate.

I ask the same of you. Everyone has a different opinion on what's important to their interests in seeing it be a good game. Trying to tell others that their subject isn't worth talking about seems contradictory. Because you're here talking about it. Clearly it is an important subject to the people involved, yourself included.

I just can't say no to Claudia. I get creepy for Farscape.

I'm on the "I would prefer not to see romance" side, but one type of romance I actually would like to see is a less romantic one. Romantic love as we understand it is only recently so popular. And most adult relationships I see aren't nearly as romance obsessed as I see the romance of video games. Can I at least get it toned down a little bit? Two adults that find each other attractive and share the same opinion on whether or not babies make for good eating. Maybe they have sex. And that's about as far as it gets. But, no, they've all got to plan futures out together, up to retirements, and stare at each other wistfully while talking about how they're the most important thing in one another's lives. I just met you Visas, turn the creepy down. Shakespeare was a warning, not a schematic to be put in mass production.

I thought book author tended to keep the property rights nowadays, unless its some sort of shared universe (Star Wars, Forgotten Realms). Though being contracted for several titles also sounds familiar. I wish games developers could get that kind of leverage. But they need whole heck lots more capital backing them up.

There's too many of us as it is.

My original post actually suggested teleporting past a door. Though I guess a sort of immaterial phasing through would work equally as well. Give him something new with its own drawbacks to express his versatility. My point wasn't combat, it's that he doesn't need to take the Thief's schtick. It's okay to overlap with the warrior's approach to doors because that's the warrior's compromise, not one of his defining features.

If you're coming at it from a story point of view, then how can you simply discredit tossing fireballs at doors in interior spaces? Magic resistant locks would be easier and less expensive for regular use than fire resistant doors.

I don't really favor people getting stuck. In a game like this, I think multiple approaches should be valid. If a player struggles with the puzzle, they can, and perhaps should, have a character based option to overcome. Cutting the knot, as it were.

I'd rather see them blast the door down than use an open lock spell if forced to choose between the two. Being able to open locks like that is such an important part of the thief archetype that he should probably be the best at it.

Here's the thing I don't like about this. The Wizard actually has two ways past that door. They're the same two ways the other guys have, but he gets them both. He doesn't just have an open spell. He can also blast the door with a spell like fireball. So he has the ability to open the lock like a thief and the ability to just bash it in like a warrior. And this strikes me as too much versatility. Now, if we wanted to truly make the Wizard's approach unique, give him something like a teleport spell. The wizard can make it past the door better than the other two, but only for himself. It's a new way, with its own advantages and drawbacks. That's what I'd like to see out of utility.

I don't know that any calls for civility can salvage the thread at this time. So I am closing it. The subject is free to restart in a new thread in its own time. I'm noticing a pattern with the participants and would like to reiterate that if something about the topic makes it difficult for you to be respectful, then leave the topic.

Do you have some kind of "prove" about this statement? Here's MCA on Alpha Protocol. http://www.gamasutra...lep__Part_2.php Sawyer's gone on record saying he doesn't hate romances, but he doesn't think the player should necessarily be able to win. And that people tend to want them even when the author doesn't think it fits the character, like with Neeshka. That was 6 years ago. I don't know if he's changed or if he's willing to take it up as a challenge to write some to his satisfaction.

But if something is rarely being done good it doesn't mean the whole idea should be discarded period. I don't support discarding it "period." I'm making no argument that Dragon Age and Mass Effect should stop. The publisher tends to be the one asking them to include them. I suspect your idea of a well done romance and their idea would conflict. Sawyer himself was saying after NWN2 that if they can't be done well, they shouldn't. All those conditions you state seem like a better argument for avoiding it. That said, I'm about 90% certain they'll be included. Maybe just 1 or 2. And they might not even be traditional. Won't dare guess on that, I was betting against Dwarves and Elves. But I suspect they'll be closer to Neeshka or Annah than Jaheira and Morrigan.

Please stick to discussing the topic and not each other. If you must make claims and insinuations about other people, it would be advised to ignore the thread.