anubite

Speak for yourself please, I am thoroughly sick of porn and romance is just another kind of it. Both of these things are done to death in video games and I cannot even be bemused by either at this point. Give me another hypersexualized Mass Effect inspired game and I will vomit. I want characterization that is "believable" and "captivating". Porn and romance are things developed by people who are out to make a quick buck or have no taste, shame, and cultiviated sense of beauty. Finally, let's use some existing examples here. Please name romances/sexual relationships Obsidian has helped create or added into their games. Were any of them so spectacular you can honestly say you want more of that? I mean, I enjoyed KOTOR2, but none of the romance was especially deep or evoking. Some aspects (like the Handmaiden's mother or Visas' master) added some interesting context, but those kinds of romances don't seem to be the kind people want. It sounds to me like they want BioWare-style romances. Which is fine, if they want that kind of thing, but Obsidian has never written something quite like that before. Do you honestly expect them to deliver on the kind of romance you want? I don't think so. What Obsidian has delivered on, is great characterization in other respects. All of FO:NV, or Kreia from KOTOR2, or all of PS:T -- Obsidian does really well when its characters have a deep philsophical backbone, or when they're involved in a conflict which is wrenching. Romance doesn't suit any of that, usually. The romance I hear people clamoring for is the kind that happens when you're having a walk in the park or in a fashionable night club, which I doubt PE will turn out to be.

It would be interesting perhaps, if only weak health recovery potions are in the game -- they're there to help new players in the first 10 levels of combat or so, but your party rapidly outgrows their use as an emergency aid. But I suppose that's a bit too detailed of a request, this is far too early in development to make such design decisions. But I do hope the developers consider impactful potions. I also hope they do not balance gameplay around potions. I don't want potions removed from the game. But I want them designed such that they're almost like an ability, one you can cast very rarely, but one that benefits you in a distinct, strategic way. Many new RPGs are forgoing potion use altogether, rapidly replenishing your mana/life when you leave combat, or adding... God of War style health globes. I don't like either system at all. I also don't care for "food-based" systems. Especially in Fallout 3, where you're pausing the game to chew on some bread to recover just enough life to kill some radscorpion? That's not only immersion breaking and silly, it's dumb. Food items in those games recover so little life you need to have a feast every time your health gets a dent in it. If there is a "food system" I'd like my character not to have a bottomless stomach, thanks. Balance the food around someone consuming only one or two food items before/after battle, not thirty or more.

It probably will require multi-core processors, since more and more low-frequency, high-core-count computers are entering the market by the day (looking mostly at laptops/ultrabooks). The benefit of using two low frequency cores is far higher than using a single high frequency one (lower temperature, more simultaneous processes). If the engine can support it, and their intention is to support current-gen low-end systems, I'm certain it will support multiple cores . The game will rely a lot more on CPU than GPU, seeing as things like advanced AI & path finding is all handled by the CPU. Sure, I pity people who are using AMD processors this generation too, but I'm just saying - BG2 has sufficiently good path finding and it runs on 200 MHZ processors. Its AI isn't the greatest, but not even Arkane bothered to put any effort into giving Dishonored's guards AI. If a high-budget stealth game isn't going to invest in AI, I doubt we'll see any processor-hungry AI in PE. Since Unity does support multicore, it's not a big deal I guess, but I will be very surprised if this game can't be run on a tablet (in theory anyway, I doubt the control scheme will lend to playing it on a tablet).

You can't assume such things. This is still a "low budget" game, even if it magically hits 4.0 million dollars tomorrow. You can assume at best 2 paths per companion, maybe three, maybe, but I honestly doubt it with the number of companions being considered. Romance is a dangerous thing and it shouldn't just be assumed to be a given, or that resoruces aren't being "wasted" when it is developed. I say leave it up to the modders after the game is released.

I was thoroughly confused when they announced this feature, as I'm not sure it fits too well. I mean, I liked the various pubs and places in BG, but a fortress? I did enjoy being able to acquire a "lair" such as that brat's castle, or the druid grove, but those were mostly little side-areas you could do one or two fun quests for, they were zones you'd already cleared of monsters repurposed as a non-combat zone, not something designed from the ground up to be your "fortress". I'd rather always be on the move, than have a place I'm encouraged to return to. To me, RPGs are about travelling. A sRPG like Fire Emblem or something might invite you having a "fortress" but I'm not sure it makes a lot of sense here. If nothing else, I'd like this fortress to be something you TAKE OVER much like BG2. This shouldn't be some heirloom or ancient thing you find lying around in the wilderness and just set up camp there, that just seems too contrived. I'd prefer if this 'fortress' of sorts was just a hub that had some interesting quests associated with it. I'm not so sure I care about the concept of "upgrading" it - unless it's going to be used as an end-game "hold out against a bazillion enemies attacking your fortress" kind of deal. Nor am I particuarly interested in playing a "castle dress-up game" - not that I dislike such games, but it just doesn't feel like it fits within the scope of a low-budget IE knock-off. I'd rather dialogue branch 10% more often than have a house that I can change the color of the drapes or decide whether to raise or lower the draw-bridge.

I doubt this game will require the use of multiple processors, unless the Unity engine is far worse than I understand it to be. This is an IE knock-off, not Dwarf Fortress.

Which is more fun? A 5 minute potion for +5% to critical hit rating, or a 10 second potion with 100% critical rating? The 5 minute potion might provide more critical hits, but I would think the latter potion would be more fun and strategic. Which is more fun? Drinking a dozen potions while fighting a boss? Or perfectly managing restoration skills, your party's positioning and its non-restoring support skills? I would think the latter. That's what I'm advocating.

Romance is fine so long as it is tasteful. What qualifies as not-tasteful? Anything from BioWare circa KOTOR1 and beyond. Even BG2 was kind of pushing it, though the romance in BG2 was clearly an optional, tacked on affair and all of the party members had sufficient depth without you having to bed them. All of the greatest RPGs I can name off the top of my head do not have romance. They might have sexuality in them (such as the clubs in VTMB), but 'romance' implies a kind of relationship that is inappropriate for most game narratives. In a best-case scenario, romance is an added thing that is optional. It does consume developer time to create, but I'd like to think it's time that would otherwisse be spent nowhere better. Since PE is going to be mod-able, I would prefer if the game had little/no base romance in it, as I'm sure many deveoted fans will be happy to create romance mods like they did for BG2.

As much as I like BG2, it's hard to take the game's plot remotely seriously when you engage in almost what amounts to ERP with Viconia if you decide you'd like to help her overcome her bitchy attitude. Romance can make a game fall off a cliff, as noted by most of BioWare's recent releases - which I think where all the romance-backlash is coming from. People don't want a BioWare RPG and all of Obsidian's great work has come from situations where romance took a pretty heavy backseat (though romance was not necessarily devoid from the game). KOTOR2 - Exile can romance a wide array of characters, to interesting effects, but the core story does not change significantly as a result; the Exile also doesn't get a "happy ending" PS:T - Romance plot core to the story, but also, not a "happy ending" FO:NV - Never played any of the DLC, but any romance here I believe is extremely shallow and does not impact much of anything NWN2:MOTB - NWN2's core story was quite possibly one of the worst I've ever encountered - I don't know who was responsible for the single player story or characterization, but I hope it was just a bad day for Obsidian; MOTB however was glorious, the romance in this expansion contrasts starkly with the base game's saturday-morning-cartoon writing Fallout/Fallout 2 - Any romance or love in these games is put waaaay in the background of the game, very little impact on anything Erm anyway, I could go on, but to put it succinctly: Right now we're in a BioWare vs Obsidian environment. DA2 was needlessly oversexualized. DA:O's core story was needlessly tied into the sexuality of its characters. People care about romance in games because you honestly just "can't" initiate romance with a character, because games have limited content, it's likely you can ONLY romance character X or you can do nothing else of note with them. It's seldom you can cultivate a deep friendship with a character that you can also develop a deep romance. I'd rather we were able to cultivate a deep friendship (or animosity) with all of the characters in the game, rather than be restricted to befriending two or three characters, because you're afraid smiling at that other guy will result in triggering a romance arc. Silly romance also hurts the core story. We need to think of tone here. If you can get your fiendishly ugly dwarf to seduce some arrogant elf, and much of the game's story devolves into this relationship, it'll be hard to enjoy whatever believable story might otherwise be present. I also don't usually enjoy situations that result in "harems" - where the protagonist is surrounded by several voluptuous or beefy females/males adoring them and draping their bodies overtop them. It's really just a mood-killer. Granted, I can name RPGs that have done relationships and sexuality well. One might be Persona 4 - notably though, because the ENTIRE GAME's theme is about sexuality. All of the character conflicts are based around the characters realizing they're bisexual/gay, have lost their first love, have gender identity-issues (tomboys wanting to be effeminate), etc. and the game is designed such that these relationships and conflicts matter and impact the core story. DA2 or ME3 are examples of games where sexuality is just a marketing ploy and a result of tastelessness. If you want romance in an RPG, you need to design the game such that it not only makes sense and "feels right" but also connect correctly with the existing themes in the game, and feed into said themes.

Sure, I don't disagree with that. But Skyrim's potiion systems has to be one of the worst in history. And the 'potion finger' syndrome is something I was mostly talking about with Diablo 2 -- 'potion finger' is a worst-case scenario, since PE is supposed to be semi-turn based, or round-based real-time combat, I doubt this situation will occur, but it was still worth mentioning in the original post in order to hopefully remind the developers how situations can degrade quickly when designing a game. TES's potion system only works because you can procure an extremely finite number of potions from vendors. It's a pretty lame system, especially the non-healing potions, which provide mostly useless benefits (+60 to your conjuration skill for 5 minutes?). Sure you can get an "edge" with these things, they do their effects, but they're not fun nor do they invite any kind of strategic depth, say - like a potion that turns a character into protective stone, or gaurantees critical hits for a short duration, or makes a character's fire damage freeze targets in place for a short time, or anything really. Potions that last less than 5 to 10 seconds (or only several rounds) and provide powerful, battle-altering effects, are more impactful, which is important when developing strategic gameplay. Skyrim's potion system is lazy and insipid and really something to be avoided. I guess I would be fine if PE just used BG2 or some other IE game's potion system/potion balance (those systems at least work, to a degree), but I think the potion system is one area where PE can innovate from the older style IE games, rather than copy.

Certainly, I don't want to imply that I think PE needs 3 stats, just that, the more stats you add, the harder it is to create a sublime system where all stats are useful to all classes, which I think it is something all RPGs should have. A warrior might want to stack only strength, but I feel it should be viable for a warrior to be exceptionally wise, and benefit in some manner because of it - while still functioning like a warrior should. If all stats aren't useful to all classes, then suddenly, the challenge of min/maxing a character is reduced. Furthermore, the possible number of creative builds is reduced.

If I know anything about games these days, you can't expect developers to create AI more dynamic than a vegetable. As much as I like Obsidian, I'm pragmatic here. It's better to just ask for a good potion system, over AI that might try to exploit your use of potions.

BG2: Health restoration potions cheapen encounters. If you have them, you chug them and that's that. If you don't have them, especially in the early game, you're ****ed. I recently replayed BG2 last year and although I still love the game, the potion system is just lacking. The game would be more fun if it were balanced around the fact you probably won't have potions. Skyrim: All of the potions in the TES series are horribly designed: They last 60 to 300 seconds and give you some marginal, usually un-impactful buff (+20 to skill X for 5 minutes). They aren't fun to use and seldom make a difference in a fight. Is there ever a moment when you say to yourself, "I better go stock up on frost resist potions for the next journey!" Nope. They're just a hassle. In BG2 non-restoring potions are better than Skyrim's, but they still don't feel that impactful. They're "fire and forget" - you don't critically time their use at all. The major issue with potion systems can be seen in a game as old as Diablo 2: They take up tons of inventory space, you're often just using them to restore life in critical moments where you screwed up, and boss encounters need to be balanced around them. They slow down combat and feel cheap, most of the time. Your finger just sits on the potion key and you sometimes sleepily spam it, even if your health is full. That's a worse-case scenario though, IE games never had that problem. Non-restoration potions are often horrible because they're designed to last a long time. They can't possibly be that good, or they'd break the game. Most RPG games that come out never solve the issue of potion management. They either make them worthless, or a crutch. I hope Project Eternity can put some conscious effort into developing a sensible potion system, but allow me to offer my own suggestions: Make all non-restoration potions "big gains with short durations" - potions that gaurantee critical hits, make you immune to cold damage, make you attack 200% faster, etc. - huge increases and powers - but they last only a very short time (less than 5 seconds). They are uncommon, expensive, have long cooldowns, and/or be risky to utliize. Players should feel like they are using potions as a conscious strategy and not a button you just click when you're doing bad. I don't really like having cooldowns on potions, but it is one common solution. A better one might be, to have a "potion tolerance" system like the witcher, where you can only drink a certain number of potions in a day, or you will critically poison and kill yourself. Another system is present in Path of Exile, where potions are not transient items, but permanent equip-ables - magical flasks that refill when you defeat enemies. Potions get stats on them and are balanced around the number of drinks you can procure from them per number of kills made in combat. But please do not use the "traditional" potion systems we're familiar with. This is something we can improve upon, but most game designers neglect to.

First of all, I'm going to put this here, because it pertains from where I'm coming from, please take a moment to notice this game's passive skill tree and the ridiculous amount of freedom it offers: http://www.pathofexi...ive-skill-tree/ Secondly, I'm going to state something I hope Obsidian is aware of: Dragon Age 2 had an atrocious equipment, stat and character progression system. 1. Classes only had 2 useful stats to utilize 2. Equipment required each 2 high stats to be equipped. It would look something like this: Wizard's Robe Requires 12 Intelligence Requires 12 Wisdom If you were playing a mage in DA2, any and all equipment you would want to use would look like this. Meaning, when you level up in DA2, your only option is to add an equal amount of stat points to Int/Wis. You have no choice in the matter, or you cannot equip things you find. This system is absolutely atrocious and doesn't make any sense. It means you cannot actually develop a character in the way you want. You are forced to distribute your stats in a manner the designers expected you to. This also means you could not make a mage character with high strength, or even unusually decent strength. Path of Exile's stat sytem, however, is absolutely beautiful and perhaps, ideal. 1. There are only three stats (Str/Int/Agi) [this is not the ideal part, but simplicity does allow for easier balancing] 2. Stats confer weak increases (If you have 300 STR, which is quite a bit, you only get about 600 life and 60% increased physical melee damage, which isn't much in the game) 3. Stats are required to equip gear - but you need a marginal amount of a stat (an end-game piece of +armor equipment, intended for a Marauder/STR user, only requires between 120 and 160 STR), freeing up your distribution of stats, but forcing you to make decisions on what you wear 4. All stats are implicitly useful to all classes, at least to a certain degree (DEX gives evasion and accuracy, STR gives life and melee damage, INT gives mana and energy shield (another kind of life)); you may not want high amounts of all 3 stats for your class, but you could build a character from any of the 6 classes that utilizes large amounts of any 1 stat; there is no inherent reason not to take dex or str as a Witch, as they confer useful bonuses you can create a build from To summarize: In Path of Exile, character development is skill-based and fluid. Attributes are a means to an end, but finding gear with high +DEX, even if you're a pure spell-caster, is not horrible! In-fact, it can be something a Witch might really want (due to how attributes are required to equip certain pieces of Witch-related gear). I think my most fondest memories from the IE games is their flexibility of character development. You can pick a class, and kind of build it any way you want. Granted, Path of Exile lets you take a Marauder class and turn it virtually into a Witch class, so IE games were far more constricting than that - but even so - class and skill-based games need to allow for flexibility. Thus, I would like to outline three principals I hope Obsidian will follow through with, when balancing the game's core design: 1. All attributes can be useful to any class. Intelligence as a stat might raise mana, spell damage, and/or other mage-y things, but it might also raise critical strike chance or magic resistance. Not only that, but intelligence might be a core requirement to pick up a rare, legendary blade a melee class might want to utilize. Or, to get the most out of a melee figher's skill, it might require a high amount of intellect. 2. The point is: Classes should be able to hybridize. RPGs are often about min-maxing, but a good RPG allows players to successfully and "fairly" hybridize their characters. A "pure" class should be good, but there should be a convincing reason to play and utilize a hybrid class; they should not be "inferior" to pure classes just because. The best, most balanced way to do this, is simply to make hybrid vs pure classes different;not better or worse. There should be reasons why a hybrid melee-fighter spell-caster should cast spells and use melee attacks; there should be a reason for such a hybrid class to get as much spell damage and attack damage as they can, not focusing too much on either (though, perhaps a player should be allowed to build that way if they choose to). 3. Classes should have roles, boundaries, guidelines; but there should NEVER be a reason why you cannot or should not try to break these roles. A priest SHOULD be able to specialize as a warrior-fighter, and succeed in some manner. The extent the game allows a player to do this, the better. 4. Gear should be designed such that there is a variety for everyone. Gear for pure min/maxers, gear for hybrids, and gear for inbetween-ers. What I think many of us find fun about CRPGs - at least one aspect of fun from them - is buliding characters and exploiting mechanics. People think they are having fun when they play the game their own way and find unusual ways to succeed. Please, give us as many options to customize our characters as much as possible. Let us make them unique. It should be an uncommon thing for two players to "wind up" with two identical parties and play-styles.

Obsidian isn't ready. It takes a lot of logistics to prepare a serious kickstarter project. There are legal issues, game design issues... you need to decide what reward tiers are, how they will promote the kickstarter, how much it's going to cost... even if Obsidian were keen on Kickstarting something in December (which I'm sure they weren't) they'd probably still need a month or two more to prepare. If they have decided to kickstart, we'll probably hear about it before July. If they aren't going to kickstart anything (sadface) we'll know for sure by then. After july... well they could kickstart something, but it seems like they'd be far behind the wave at that point. Right now the iron is hot. Everyone who's an RPG fan is buzzing over kickstarter. Wasteland 2, Baldur's Gate 3, The Banner Saga, Zombie State... Obsidian should strike fast, but they can't rush stuff. If Obsidian doesn't decide to kickstart, it will be for very good reasons. But I think Kickstarter presents a really strong opportunity. For one, your game is 100% risk-free funded (provided you manage your time/money well and estimate what kind of money you'll need correctly). You're getting this money from a relatively small amount of people (So far, less than 60k kickers for Wasteland 2 or Double Fine's adventure) so the potential of selling 60k more copies of the game after it's released -- at the VERY least is pretty good! So not only do you stand to bring much needed capital to Obsidian, but you now have a product which you can put on the online marketplace and reap the benefits of for years to come - ESPECIALLY if you make it a good game. Which will happen, if you cater to a dedicated niche audience. Baldur's Gate, VTMB, KOTOR2 all have very strong cult followings even today, with new people being convinced to try these games today. If you make a good niche game, you will make money from it using a quality, DDL DRM-free system. Just not the kind publishers want (instant gratification). The marketing aspect is also unncessary. Hype it up for a month on kickstarter via viral stuff, produce the game, then put it on Steam or other DD enterprises. Having it on the front page for a few days or putting it on-sale is all the marketing you need to sell 100k+ copies of a good game.

Except Wasteland 2 is proving you so wrong. Go back to your console, kid. Let real "gamers" enjoy themselves while you wallow in your filthy games.

"Apparently, by holding the position that the PC is not a platform for some Master Race, " Consoles are what hold back the gaming 'industry'. So while PC is far from some haven admist the darkness, consoles deserve no amount of support by the consumer as they hold back the advancement of the medium, the consumer's entertainment, and the value they get for their dollar. That said, I do agree that an RPG with "Walls of Text" is bad. Torment pulls off its copious amount of writing for various reasons, but the most important reason to understand today: You care about the narrative. You want to understand the narrative. If you don't have those two qualities coming into the RPG experience, then you're not going to like RPGs. It's that simple. It's why BioWare's decision to go after the "Call of Duty Audience" really doesn't make any sense. People who play Call of Duty don't like scrawling text, conversations, or intrigue and moral choice. They like marching through hallways with assault rifles and watching overly dramatic war cinema. Obsidian obviously cares about the narratives they produce. So, I'm willing to put up with a wall of text if it's one that will really give me a good interactively-narrative experience. Certainly, walls of text aren't interactive, but they give basis to the world you interact in. Portal / Portal 2 show how subtle storytelling works - and I think any modern RPG can be improved by utilizing the elements of a silent narrative - but walls of text are not entirely out of place, provided that they're justified. Kreia's massive speech during the death scene of the three Jedi masters (which was cut, unfortunately, from the final release) was basically a wall of text -- but it was an incredible wall of text. Such excellent writing helped to bring meaning to everything you had just done leading up to that moment and gave closure the choices you had made leading up to that moment (Kreia's words differ a little depending upon some specific choices you make throughout the game). That is a good example of how wall of texts can work, though I do agree that we should strive for SHOW and not TELL. All good writing does this to some degree (though all good writers also admit the necessity of "Telling"). For instance, BioWare's DragonAge 2 had some elements to it that would have severally improved its story, but for some reason, they weren't utilized. The city you spend over a decade in was built by slaves. There was iconography for the slaves everywhere. The story of a city, of a civilization, is immense, bound up in so many images and experiences you can witness throughout the game. Or at least, in theory. BioWare for some reason never makes the city come alive, but a good producer of DA2 would have made certain that world around you "rhymes" with the activities, actions, and dialogue you experience in the game.

I do think we need to talk $$$ at some point though. What does Obsidian need? Just 1million? That should be easy given DoubleFine's success. Five million? After 31 days you might be able to raise that much. But that's stretching it a bit. How much do you need for an Isometric RPG of decent length and quality? For a full 3d NWN-esque one?

looong comment I would probably donate to a project started by Obsdian -- provided you give us more than what DoubleFine did (it's why I have not donated to them yet). I want a game concept, more than a genre and a promise that it will either be great or horrible. What is the setting, what elements do you want to try? The game can fail, in a sense, but we need to know more about what you want to create. We know we're taking a risk, but we need to be a little more informed about this risk. When a lot of the big picture is laid out, then I will support you. What would I like to see? First of all, Obsidian does great work, but you guys also have made some big flops. You've not always had the best gameplay ideas, though your narrative and the general flow of the game tends to be incredible. I would like to see a unique, unused setting. Perhaps something pre-historic and/or anachronistic. Maybe something political? The Indus valley civilization. The ancient Olmec, the forgotten people of Teotihuacan, the people of Ankor Wat. Something quietly sinister. Something unknown. Something mystical and ancient combined with modern elements (Perhaps the cities surrounding these great ruins are really anachronistic, with some modern inventions like guns or steel or machinery or very advanced mathematics or philosophy). I would absolutely love to see "Kreia" return. As far as I'm concerned, she's the best character to have been featured in your games. A "neutral", unreliable yet wise character with a complex motive. If you can promise someone like Kreia, I will shell out sixty American dollars. You don't need a large cast of party members. Three to four will suffice, if they're all of sufficient depth and design. The scope of the game does not need to be "epic"; though it should obviously be of some decent length (longer than the newest Final Fantasy we were just graced with, which clocks in at under 25 hours). As for gameplay, you can do "traditional" Baldur's Gate-like combat with its isometric perspective. Or you could do something real-time like Skyrim (though please, please don't copy Skyrim's abominable combat system). I would only ask that spells and abilities be unique or at least interesting. Skyrim is exactly the antithesis of this, in terms of spells and abilities. If you were to use the mesoamerican setting, you could easily do an interesting ability system using blood sacrifice (or some kind of sacrifice to the gods) or something different like that. Actually, green /obsidian/ was of immense importance to the central american cultures... it symbolizes rebirth. That could easily be your currency too... A 'Planescape 2' is a bad direction to go in. But to call it that to get more donations? Go right ahead. Grim Fandango is an excellent example of how a creative 'morbid' setting can go. Planescape's right up there with it. Why I love Planescape so much is because of its setting... so getting the setting right is important. I want female characters that matter. That just aren't pieces of ass like Tali or Miranda from Mass Effect. I like Visas, but I think you can create a strong female role which is more complex than hers. Of course, 'keep it simple stupid' is also not a bad strategy to undertake. For this kind of project, you're getting all the money up front (though I suppose you want to consider selling this on Steam or something afterwards too), so I expect there to be a little level-headedness. You can't go overboard with your freedom, as that, in my experience, tends to create a lesser product. Some self-constraint is good. Romance? Well, a little bit is fine, but female characters exist to capture that other 'essence' of humanity and sex hardly has to do with that. Graphics don't matter. Voice acting does not matter. I don't want loads of money poured into either of these. In fact, you can have "average" graphics and that will more than suffice. Voice acting? It can be completely unvoiced. The only RPG which has ever had voice contribute to its atmosphere and value was Vampire Bloodlines: The Masquerade (though I guess some of Obsidian's Voice Acting has been good in the past). I doubt you will be able to achieve quality voice actors on a budget, so just skip this. A good soundtrack is great though. But just look at how bad voice acting detracts from the The Elder Scrolls games - don't do it! I don't think I need to tell you how to write. You do a great job at it. You can write the game like it's meant to be followed up by a sequel or not. But please, please, please make choices matter. Mass Effect is such a disappointment. Don't be afraid to go all out with this. Plan from the very beginning to make choices matter thoughout the game. If I **** up and the world ends, great! What you decide in the first five minutes of the game should directly effect what happens halfway through it, if you can manage that! The game being easily mod-able and open-world are big pluses but not required. I hope you're not teasing us by asking this question. I think a lot of us are serious. We would pay you $60 or more if gauranteed us another jewel like KOTOR2 or Planescape.

Modding AP would be interesting, especially since Sis is mute ... modders could easily enlarge her role in the story, I think, with a little work. But beyond that? I don't think much else can be done with this game, the stealth mechanics don't seem salvageable to me. At least when I compare this game to Thief or Hitman Bloodmoney. I mean, shadow operative, really? And the levels are just too linear, not enough routes to complete missions (ala Deus Ex). I doubt there will be a community patch - I mean, Mass Effect was much more popular at release than AP was, has numerous aspects that could be improved, uses the same engine... and I'm pretty sure there aren't any mods/community patches for ME.