BSoda

Unless it's for something like gambling mini-games: random = boring

Cherrypick companions without any character, which imo makes the whole companion idea kind of moot...but I guess many people are satisfied with playing everything out in their head.

That's why we need boob-plate. (just kidding...or am I ?) Muscular arm, masculine jawline. I'm strongly guessing it's a he...though imo the rest of the interview is a lot more interesting, imo. Especially the part where he says story-execution-wise he'd stick more to FNV than to AP.

They are not similar ? What exactly is the point you are trying to make here ?

I loved the part where you equated the "starved out" traditionalists (who apparently are only distinguishable to the rest of all backers -aka "Biowarians"- by their strong preferences for turn-based combat mechanics) to johns willing to pay top dollars for prostitutes and than, at the same time, belittled the "Biowarians" (love the term btw) for wanting romance in PE (of course the backhanded insult that what they really want is just virtual sex was a nice ironic touch as well).

Another thread successfully derailed. There are certainly points worth discussing in here somewhere (like the danger of falling victim to the PC police) but this thread is going nowhere fast.

Fus Roh D...ahh wrong game. But yeah, sure. Why not ? It adds a certain amount of emotion to the spell.

Bad timing, imo. They should have waited a little after PE finished its kickstarter. Right now PE cannibalizes a lot of their potential backers. Still...I'm definitely interested. Perhaps I'll cough up some money for this one as well. Won't be as much as I pledged for PE, though.

As has been mentioned before I think displays of prejudice (including gender-based) in a cRPG can add to the game. Especially if you can prove them wrong through the actions of your character. That's a basic power-fantasy whose fulfillment plays into the core of what could be considered "fun" in a RPG.

Except physical differences do not stem entirely from nature. If you separate identical twins and have one work on a farm doing hard manual labor and the other sit in an office, they will no longer be physically identical after a while. Both will still have the same physical potential, however. This doesn't change just because one of them isn't tapping into it. The maximum physical potential stems entirely from nature...only what you achieve inside of that potential stems from society...also nature outfitted men with greater potential on the physical level. That's just how it is. And my whole point was that it's rarer for women to achieve their maximum physical potential due to social factors. For example, female athletes have disadvantages other than just their maximum physical potential. From infancy up until they get into their sport, they have different diets and physical regimen than male athletes. After they get into their sports, they get different supplements, not to mention drugs. It's much easier to detect steroid use in female athletes than male athletes. In societies where there is greater separation of gender roles, you would expect greater differences in the physical, and mental, capabilities of men and women compared to societies in which there is less separation of gender roles. If society would heavily support and push women to greater physical performance the average would certainly shift a bit more in the direction of the male average...and at the end men would still have a greater physical capacity -on average- than women...which than again would lead society to actually push men more into doing physical intense stuff, coming full circle.

Except physical differences do not stem entirely from nature. If you separate identical twins and have one work on a farm doing hard manual labor and the other sit in an office, they will no longer be physically identical after a while. Both will still have the same physical potential, however. This doesn't change just because one of them isn't tapping into it. The maximum physical potential stems entirely from nature...only what you achieve inside of that potential stems from society...also nature outfitted men with greater potential on the physical level. That's just how it is.

Pretty much, yes. Potential is there, and that doesn't change depending on social factors (which stem at least partially from it). Again, look at the top athletes or any sport there is. If a female PC is the top performer among woman, then the male PC is hte top performer among males, and should still physicly outperform the female PC...if you want to be realistic about it. And you still have to keep in mind that those athletes were not raised the same way. Diet, exercise, leisure activities, etc., diverge between boys and girls very early. For example, the suggested caloric intake are different for boys and girls just one year old, when there's practically no sexual dimorphism. A one year boy is certainly not stronger than a one year old girl and yet it's suggested that one year old boys have a 5% greater caloric intake than girls. A 5 year old boy is not likely to be much stronger than a 5 year old girl and yet it's suggested that 5 year old boys have a 10% greater caloric intake than girls. That difference increases to about 15% at the beginning of puberty, up to 20% during and after that. So while there may be a 40% difference in upper body strength and 30% difference in lower body strength between men and women in this society, would the difference be that great in a society in which men and women were raised the same? Considering that this physical difference stems from nature and not society -Yes. Yes, it would.

That's a pretty redundant poll, isn't it ? Do I really want a good game is what you're asking. Of course.

Cadegund wears (boring non-boob) armor and a musket. That doesn't seem overly generic to me.

Yeah... Whatev' .MP is out (or to be more precise was never "in") so this thread is moot.

...as well as those who'd do the same simply because Obsidian doesn't plan a multiplayer feature for PE. ah but see, those aren't pledges pulled - those are pledges unmade. You'd simply need to wait for kickstarter to be over and announce multiplayer and then you'd get that flood of people donating right to the paypal page (and avoiding the kickstarter fee). Underhanded as it may be, people are silly sometimes and must be dealt with in silly ways. Luckily, I do not think Obsidian would betray their supporters in such an underhanded way.

...as well as those who'd do the same simply because Obsidian doesn't plan a multiplayer feature for PE.

Funny, cause I would withdraw my 110$ pledge if Obsidian would announce that PE would feature a mp / coop mode. I simply don't want any resources wasted on that. I'd feel betrayed if they actually would plan such a thing with my pledge.

Well, I have every faith in this project, but this update didn't do much for me. I also think that a new stretch goal at the 2.4 million mark is just way too conservative. I was really hoping we'd get 2-3 more stretch goals up to 3 million. Lowering the beta access key to the 25$ tier was also a mistake, imo.

Agreed. Even just an overplayed sense of urgency can harm the gaming experience.

Maybe that's the perfect idea to adress the problems brought up in agewisdoms post! If they wanna keep their initial release date then maybe they should include everthing else that is achieved by this kickstarter campaign in an expension pack. So that all stretch goals after 2,3 million have their content intended for the expension. I don't think an expansion pack as stretch goal for PE is a good idea. That's almost like adding the sequel to PE as stretch goal for PE itself...and though I have every faith in Obsidian, they first need to establish PE as a brand. PE needs to turn out to be a great game -than we can talk expansion pack and sequels.

Graphics are often kind of...scoffed at by the hardcore cRPG crowd...but they are important. You know, for immersion and stuff.

Projected release date for PE: April 2014. I think you will need a bit more than just 3 games...but: PS:T F:NV BG2+TOB

my faith has been offended by this blasphemy. Well...the IWD series was a lot more linear and combat focused (they didn't even have real companions...you had to create your whole party at the beginning). No comparison with PS:T for example. Just not my cup of tea.

You people just don't quit with that do you. ...the only group more insistent than the pro-romance camp is the small band of anti-romacers (that's not even a word, isn't it ?). Those 4-5 ppl that seem to police every thread that pops up with that theme only to vehemently express their displeasure -often getting the thread locked in the process.