WorstUsernameEver

It doesn't. It saves too often to dissuade people from sticking with their choices. What they did right was delaying consequences a-là The Witcher 1 for some of the most pivotal decisions (*SPOILER* taking Onef with your group, for example *SPOILER*). It's not an annoying save system because of that, but it's also not a good one.

Good luck with your future gigs, Alvin!

Comparing a party-based Infinity Engine-style title to Dishonored* seems a bit weird, but I get the point about difficulty. It will largely depend on how they tune the encounters, how fast the combat is (IIRC the ballpark is BG2/mid-level IWD), and whether they'll provide or not a robust and easily customizable AI scripts system. That said, I'd be really surprised if for mid-high level encounters I won't need to micromanage my party and use abilities across the range of my entire party to get through. * I didn't really have any problem with how Dishonored handled ability, it was wonderfully creative with those, but then again, I'm the type that appreciates immensely the level design of Thief but doesn't necessarily care much about its difficulty.

We've heard very little about the Chanters and they seem to be one the classes that got the further away from the usual D&D/videogame design, so I'd like to read about them.

It doesn't really help that in some translated D&D manuals (the Italian ones, at the very least) they're still referred to as thieves.

The way they talked about it, it's basically a Dark Souls clone with ability trees, and, going by the screenshots, a more realistically rendered Darksiders/WoW 90s-comic book art style, which is imo pretty ugly (that kind of art style only works when you're willing to go all the way with the stylization, IMO). They haven't really released any gameplay footage yet though.

I'd like to think they have, and I'm certainly hopeful based on what they've said during and after the KS campaign, but given I don't actually work there I'll wait for release before I say "oh yeah, this is a smooth production".

Edair (now Edér, I believe?) was a Fighter during the Kickstarter too, so, while it's likely that they maintained their class, I wouldn't say it's a given either.

But as long as the frontliner doesn't totally dump res and isn't in a situation where she's fighting a really high-per enemy, she should be fine. And if we're talking about a burly, dwarven defender-kind of fighter, meant more to attract the enemies' attention and mitigate their offensive utility than actually inflicting a lot of damage herself, resolve really doesn't seem all that useful right now. Anyway, much of it will depend on the implementation, but I think it's more of a concern than Perception, which is about as reliant on hitting things as Might and Intellect.

Might have been at the beginning, but now the discussion about the latest attribute revision is going on through 3 threads. For someone who's interested in the topic it's tiring to have to hop on three topics just to see the points people and devs raise, it's all I'm saying. And yeah, I genuinely didn't notice the threads were yours, I'm not really interested in who starts the threads as much as the ongoing discussions.

But I don't see how the solution is opening three or four threads on the same exact subject. It just muddies the discussion. But I don't see how that has any bearing on this, unless you're suggesting that people with different preferences should stick to different threads, which would effectively kill most of the discussion. If one's not interested in the subject, anyway, they can just avoid a topic on it.

It'd be really helpful if the attribute threads were condensed into one so one wouldn't have to go through 3/4 topic to be up to date on the discussion, especially when dev replies are involved. Would probably make it easier for Josh and whoever else from the dev team wants to answer to chime in too, just a thought.

I have no idea about skillpoints, but if I'd have to guess I'd say that no, and I actually doubt attributes will influence skills in general, at least to the degree they do in D&D.

I didn't really participate in the attribute discussion much before, so I haven't really had the time to read the in-depth analysis of the earlier breakout, but I don't mind the current stat distribution, though I'm concerned about two things (note: I use "stat" and "attribute" pretty much interchangeably): 1) Stamina and Health have been grouped again. With the previous stat breakdown, if you didn't want to spend a boatload of points on two stats to have a tank, you had to prioritize between short-term and long-term. Currently you simply pump CON and you're good to go (they're even affected in the same way by the stat). 2) Resolve seems to be the only stat, together with Dexterity, that only has one effect on your derived attributes. And while it's difficult to say without seeing its implementation, it sounds like having an average Resolve might be perfectly enough for most characters (I'm hoping I'm way off here, but that's the vibe I'm getting). Were it for me, and I'm probably not considering a lot of factors, I'd add some measure of Stamina bonus to Resolve to make it a more attractive stat, and make the Stamina bonus of Con less prominent. This way Con would still be a very attractive attribute, but if you wanted the complete package you'd have to put some points into Resolve too, even if you don't have problems with Concentration.

The page seems to have been rmeoved. Guess they weren't supposed to let that slip out.

I'd need to replay the game, but that doesn't really match my experience. I can't really find any info on the net either on removed cancels, as far as I remember Dante had the whole package, including the finicky things like enemy step and jump cancel.

Actually changing styles with the d-pad *is* pretty huge, I'm not sure how you could argue otherwise. It allows you to change your tactics on the fly and move your combos to different directions in a way that wasn't really possible in DMC3. I don't remember moves being removed from him either, honestly, his moveset is slightly different, but that's more of a natural result of having different weapons this time around.

Given Strength (now Might) doesn't seem to influence inventory size anymore, does it mean that every character will carry the same amount of stuff? Or is it going to be determined by something else entirely (class, level, talents) ? By the way, good job to the art team on Twin Elms, the gods and the character sheet UI, it's all really good stuff. I wonder if there will be wilderness areas with less muted color palettes though? So far most of what's been shown was either foggy or fairly desatured, with the exception of the very first screenshot/mockup (though we haven't seen the latest render of it in detail anyway) and the few dungeons we've seen. EDIT: Worked on sentence structure and making the message sound less awkward.

The MMO is already announced and isn't an Obsidian project, though, mostly something they're collaborating on in a small capacity (the team working on it is 15-ish I think?)

DMC4 probably edges out in terms of combat depth, though it's an overall worse game. Doesn't help that they seem to have focused more on further developing Dante's playstyle than fleshing out Nero's...

The game will most likely use Uplay on PC.

If it's a new Kickstarter: reasonably interested depending on what it is and whether Obsidian showcases Pillars of Eternity in a much more significant manner before its start. If it's a next-gen title: skeptical. Obsidian has always struggled with consoles in the past, and I'm worried a new project would be no different there. Before C2B jumps at my throat: I'd be really glad to be proven wrong, I just think there's reason to be skeptical right now. Both things are in development anyway, so it's just a matter of what gets revealed first.

Just a few notes on Tigranes' post: 1) Feargus mentions the "Project Eternity" engine, so presumably we'd be talking about an open-world *isometric* title, closer to an Ultima or, more recently, Divine Divinity/Divinity: Original Sin than Skyrim. I *might* be wrong obviously, but basically I took "like Skyrim" to mean "huge seamless world" not "first person on KS budget". 2) Bethesda only did procedural landscapes with Oblivion, and abandoned the idea pretty quickly afterwards. Nowadays they do everything by hand. I don't necessarily disagree with the rest, though I wouldn't mind if Obsidian attempted an Ultima-like (say, instead of "Skyrim-like", doesn't that sound better?) in the future, when/if they made more money with Pillars of Eternity and other independent projects.

Are you sure they're not just refunding you the credit to the Pillars of Eternity website, given you have to use it to upgrade your pledge anyway? Otherwise the question is best asked via a support ticket, though you'll probably need a bit of patience, right now they're on a holiday break.

Well, the point of making them stretch goals is to develop new companions with just as much depth* as the ones they have already/have been developing. I'm not sure what they're aiming scope-wise, but on a scale from Baldur's Gate 1 to Planescape: Torment, it should be closer to the second. * I'm using depth here as in "amount of reactivity, dialogue trees, time spent developing them", regardless of whether their personalities, looks, voiceset and stats makeup will be developed and interesting or shallow and uninspired