Bos_hybrid

Thanks for this update Obs, I enjoyed listening to the music. Have to say Dirge of Eir Glanfath is my favorite.

No, just no..... Please don't go there. Some things just don't have a place, this is one of them.

Bethesda has created better characters than Geralt. Going from what TW 1&2 displayed. Again the books might be good, but I judging the game writing. Not books. Then the game is doing something wrong. I had never played dnd when I played BG/BG2 and PS:T. Didn't stop me from enjoying the story. TW was boring and uninteresting story with one of the stupidest features ever implemented. TW2 was a far better showing in the story department(I actually managed to finish it), but the main characters Triss & Geralt were still forgettable. Letho, Ivoreth, Roche and the setting were what saved it.

Are you talking about the boomers who's desire is to have a plane so they can do bombing runs on other settlements? Or the brotherhood the take any advance technology for themselves and their own benefit? Both add danger and death to the Mojave and the rest of America without any benefit. Lest get the facts right here, NCR wants rid of him, so they can claim NV and it's wealth and resources as their own. In the short term letting the Legion and NCR makes sense for the benefit of NV. He's not aiding Legion, he's just standing idle for the time being. There is nothing evil or dark there. History has many states/powers doing this. You mean groups that are allied with a nation that was hostile to NV? Sounds eerily familiar to something........ In the end you're thinking about rainbows and butterflies good. Classic fairytale good, which has no place in Fallout. Under Legion, the Mojave is destined for oblivion. Under NCR, the Mojave becomes part of a larger nation with the protection that brings. But it's also nation filled with instability, corruption, and quite frankly stagnation. Under PC/Yes, the Mojave is 'free'(Or under a tyrannical PC) but is nothing, and would be eventually eaten up by NCR, Legion or another power. . Under House the Mojave has a stability, protection, but most importantly a actual future. But not just that, a hopeful one. House was a genius with a plan for the future. Not one where the survivors just survived but one where they flourished. Good is not just about being 'I won't hurt a fly'. It's about making the hard choices for the best of the majority. In that world, killing House is almost a death knell for it. Not because he had power, or because he resources, but because his way had a future. None of the rest did. NCR was a repeat of past failures, Legion was a dead end. And the yes man one was a selfish power grab or a delusional anarchy attempt. For those reasons going forward, there was only 1 choice for an actual good character to make. House. Legion and the power grab evil. NCR and free NV, grey/neutral.

Meh, Obs have told better stories and created better characters than TW already. Of course I basing this on the games and not the books.

I'm still waiting for someone to point to me a game in which Obs had an over sexualized character that didn't make sense in the context.

While I can't say they were bad games, they just weren't RE. It's like buying vanilla ice cream only to open it up and find it's chocolate.(And in this hypothetical example, I'm allergic to chocolate) http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/stainlessgames/carmageddon-reincarnation

Obviously you didn't play, because you would know there was a choice where you sided with none of them. aka Killed them all. And took control of the Securitrons, for your own purposes. Caesar Legion, while it might of been though up as a grey faction, it's implementation in the game was far from it. Rapists, slaver and a devolution of society is what they represented in NV. There was nothing grey about them in the final product. NCR was perhaps the only 'grey' faction choice. House was clearly one of humanities last hopes, someone that could bring society and technology back. By killing him you made the Mojave and the rest of the world a darker place. House was the future. Some might claim he was a grey choice but I don't see it. And then there was plenty of evil and good choices all throughout the game, if you can't see that I can't help you. But don't make a baseless claim that there was no good or evil in NV. That's not even mentioning the karma system that was left in place from FO3.

I made choices, as a murdering, sociopathic cannibal, that matched my PC desire. NV is the perfect example of good, evil and grey choices. Obviously you didn't play NV.

Resident Evil 2 was the best. Massive game, that encouraged another playthrough which was different from the first. RE1+remakes RE3 RE: Code Veronica RE4 I didn't like that much, was the beginning of the end in my book. RE5 just wasn't Resident Evil anymore. Shame to see a franchise that I enjoyed so much when I was younger become what it is today.

And what if I want to RP a immoral character? What if I want to RP a cannibal that goes from town to town eating it's inhabitants? Or a PC that goes around devouring souls because he desperate to have more power? Choice to be good, evil and everything in between is what works best in RPGs.

How is this such an important issue? Was NWN2 bad with this? Was FO:NV? I can't think of one time where I went wow Obs, you really over sexualized there in those games.

No I don't agree with this. Just grey choices is horrible. What is up with all this grey business that's so popular these days? Should there be some choices that aren't clearly good or evil? Of course, but you don't ditch hero and villain choices. Can't stress this enough. Volourn got it right. There is nothing deep or edgy about 'grey'.

Sweet just seen this. Thanks for the link.

:aiee: :aiee: :aiee: :aiee: Pledged.

Still not sure what to make of this game.

Criticism maybe, but that's not what she got. Although I do think that it was handle wrong, by replying to the crap that came from people, they did exactly what the crap spewers wanted.

Spyware. It's main use is that devs can determine what the majority of the players of their game do. Then use that information going forward.

Good games are what is truly remembered and played time and again. FO 1&2, PS:T, BG 2 etc, would still be played even if you couldn't mod a single thing.

No, not really. Maybe it's just me, but I don't want to be the psychiatrist to the majority of the companions.

Hero and anti-hero PC path. (Hero and villain Obs, hero and villain.) No PC voice over(this is a given, but I will continually state my loathing of it) Level scaling(Obvious, I don't care that BG had it, it's still offensive) Everyone is grey. ( People are good, bad and in between, not all grey) Class equipment restrictions ( Mages should be able to equip armor)

Forcing the issue much? As for increasing the amount pledged, no there isn't anything.

But it is open to being discussed just like every other feature. Just so happens that both sides are like dogs(or a gorilla in one case) with bones, they aren't letting go or giving up. That was always going to happen, you have several groups of gamers meeting here, BSN, Codex, Obs etc. All with different opinions on what makes rpgs. Happened on the Wasteland 2 forums too. Not going to happen. If Obs make romances, they aren't going to bow to the those that don't want them. Just like they won't bow to those that do want them.

Just a STR requirement? To use effectively, armor would require training (skill/feat). After all, it takes traingin to learn how to most efficiently move in armor, how to position yourslf for best protection/deflection. Also to build up stamina and get accustomed to wearing it. Of course, anyone can equip armor if strong enough, but wihout proper training, it's not as effective. Without training you'd get less protection, bigger armor check penalty and bigger fatigue drain. That's more to do with plate and chain armor, what about leather? What reasonable excuse is there to restrict mages from wearing leather armor?

So why are you posting in favour of romances? It works both ways. Don't demand romance, and people won't demand no romances. Obs will do whatever they feel is best anyway. Well, the idea was to make a point that romance is typical in fantasy literature, so lobbying against it specifically is strange. And the obligatory and true "devs should make what they want either way". These two points don't really have to contradict each other. So are a thousand other things, it doesn't mean they need to be in PE. Always trying find reasons why romances need to be included. Just state you want them in, instead of trying to come up with some reason or credibility on why they should be in.