AGX-17

Because crafting usually involves grinding for crafting materials and having to keep track of increasingly complex "recipes" all the while? And it's all fundamentally inventory management. It's a distraction. And in some games it's just a way to make ludicrously overpowered gear and ruin the game balance. If you like dragging and dropping pictures of animal guts and mineral ingots from one grid window to another, why not develop your own game which is about dragging and dropping animal gut sprites and mineral ingots from one window to another?

That sounds completely arbitrary and unbelievable. You can't rest in this location because, what, rest is a magical ether which is depleted every time you rest, and you have permanently depleted the "rest" resource from this area? How do you explain/justify cities existing in the game in this proposal? How is it that they exist if nobody can rest more than an arbitrary number of times in a given location? Everybody would have died from sleep deprivation shortly after the P:E world's creation. it would be a lifeless wasteland. How would you even have a game in this scenario? An erosion simulator with plate tectonic DLC? And why does being able to rest make someone a "noob"? Aren't you a noob for sleeping when you're tired? Or are you saying you've gone for decades without sleeping and you're totally fine and not dead?

So you want to create a protagonist, and then remove all forms of player agency by having an NPC make all the decisions for you? Isn't that like CoD mode in Mass Effect 3 where the game just makes all the dialogue choices for you? Why should you even be the protagonist if you want someone else to be the leader? Why should they write an entire game storyline for every possible party member as protagonist? The entire point of these things is player agency. If positioning is a problem, then say "don't put the wizard in the front alone," not "make some other character the leader who makes all the decisions because I don't want difficult battles." Do you even know that wizards and the like are allowed to wear heavy armor in P:E? Without having to multiclass or be "bad wizards" in Sawyer's words?

Magic isn't overlooked. Have you played any of these games? Wizards and Sorcerers and so on are the heaviest hitters (figuratively,) in terms of damage in every cRPG I've ever played. The priority targets for NPCs in RPGs and PvP players in MMOs are spellcasters. Healing, buffs, debuffs, damage, they're always the biggest threat. Secondly, Obsidian doesn't buy into the D&D alignment concept outside of D&D games, which they haven't made in about 5 years. Just play KotoR2 and listen to Kreia if you don't believe it. In New Vegas it's faction reputation that matters. Karma is still there, but it's largely irrelevant. In NV you can complete the endgame without killing any of the antagonists of your particular story path. You're even betraying your black & white sense of morality/character by referring to "bosses" and "villains," rather than "antagonists." An antagonist isn't equivalent to a villain. If you're playing an "evil" character, it's "good" characters that will be your antagonists. Or in your terms, "villains." Which is contradictory to the common use and dictionary definition of the word. You're making a bunch of points that are irrelevant as they were never issues to begin with.

You answered too truthfully. It took you four hours to do that?

Have fun with those bullet-sponge enemies and raid bosses with 10,000,000,000 HP. Especially that Hammerlock DLC. Even in normal mode with level 50+ characters the humanoid enemies are all bullet sponges. Honestly, Gearbox has a Bethesda-level concept of increasing difficulty (instead of making tactically different enemies with roughly similar stats to the player they just exponentially increase the HP and damage of them.) In UTVH mode, the basic psychos you encounter on the Southern Shelf have about a million HP. No, literally, it takes three shots with a sniper rifle doing about 300k damage per-headshot to take them down. By the way, don't bother with Maya unless you're playing co-op and acting as a healer, phaselock is nerf and doesn't work on bosses (it's a pretty cheap tactic to force players using Maya to play medic.) Even at level 50, it only does about 10-20k damage to enemies with hundreds of millions of HP. People have soloed those sorts of bosses with her, but it's generally agreed that it's hardest to do with her because her action skill essentially ceases to exist in those situations.

It's not a sandbox or online PVP multiplayer game, it's a single player, story-heavy RPG. You're practically begging them to ruin the game as an experience. And I'm sure there'll be at least a few beta backers who would love nothing more than to divulge spoilers to people whether or not they like it.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/7105-BioShock-Infinite

I don't like the fact that this fallaciously equates rule of law with politicians themselves/as a class, and that wealth and power are two separate, unconnected spheres, when in fact they are the same. In feudalism, wealth flowed to power, in capitalism, power flows to wealth. But anyway... Chaotic Neutral Human Wizard/Sorcerer (2nd/1st Level) Ability Scores: Strength- 13 Dexterity- 10 Constitution- 14 Intelligence- 13 Wisdom- 15 Charisma- 11 ...though I tend to play/aim for chaotic good when actually playing RPGs. I prefer the rogueish vein. Dextrous/Charismatic types. Obviously I'm ignoring the D&D context in that respect.

P:E is likely going to be more in the BG/ID vein than P:T, from what little we know. After all, Torment: Tides of Numenera is the acknowledged spiritual successor to P:T. And since ID2's combat is the best, it'll probably be the closest in terms of gameplay mechanics, though it's certainly going to be significantly different after 11-odd years and abandonment of licensed RPG systems. If New Vegas taught me anything, it's that Sawyer can balance the hell out of a game system.

Well, Larry Fishburne probably lost it after his daughter decided to become a porn star. And the idea of a Hannibal Lecter TV series is absurd and likely a lazy attempt to rip off Dexter. Meanwhile, I thought last night's Doctor Who was quite good.

FTL. If you count "losing" as "playing." I have never seen so much pretentious hogwash written about a computer game (games journalists = contradiction in terms) as I have about Bioshock Infinite. According to the online hivemind it was like John Paul Satre meets The Seven Samurai. I watched a live feed and it looks like a very average steampunk-ish FPS. WTF? http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/7105-BioShock-Infinite

We already know that all doors in P:E will be double-hinged for convenience. Firstly: Slamming a door is closing a door forcefully, not locking it or barring it. There's no way you could possibly lock every door in the entire world; after all, you'd need every key to every door, and if every door has a lock, that's a lot of goddamn keys. Not to mention doors that happen to have bars or deadbolts that just happen to be conveniently open for the player to run into and block behind them. Doors in this context tend to exist in design purposes to block the player and/or NPCs' views, and doorways to act as chokepoints, which is already where traps naturally would be placed to delay enemies. Sticking a tank character in front of a wooden door isn't going to increase the DT of the wooden door. There's not much/any balance if you get a free panic room/roadblock for every instance of a doorway in the game. It makes sense if you've got your player house or stronghold or whatever under siege, but not as a universal gameplay mechanic.

Obsidian didn't make Arcanum, Troika did. Wasteland 2 and Torment: Tides of Numenera are inxile's, not Obsidian's. Arcanum isn't even steampunk, it's full of magic (and Arcanum's magic and melee combat are blatantly superior to all the tech areas.) Guns are less effective than throwing crap with your bare hands in Arcanum. Even the name "Arcanum" betrays the blatant high-fantasy bias.

The difference is between selling someone a game that they end up not liking and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halliburton#Controversies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon-Mobil#Environmental_record http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/04/14/enemy.trading/index.html

That's... not new.

see "Attack Resolution I've talked about this a bunch on the forums, but not in an update. All attacks in Project Eternity compare the attacker's Accuracy value to one of four defenses: Deflection (direct melee and ranged attacks), Fortitude (body system attacks like poison and disease), Reflexes (area of effect damage attacks), and Willpower (mental attacks). A number between 1 and 100 is generated to determine the attack rules. If the Accuracy and target defense are the same value, these are how the results break down: 01-05 = Miss 06-50 = Graze 51-95 = Hit 96-100 = Critical Hit A Hit is the standard damage and duration effects, a Graze is 50% minimum damage or duration, a Critical Hit is 150% maximum damage or duration, and a Miss has no effect. In a balanced Attack and defense scenario, the majority of attacks wind up being Hits or Grazes. If the Accuracy and defense values are out of balance, the windows for each result shift accordingly, while always allowing for the possibility of a Graze or a Hit at the extreme ends of the spectrum."

Dr. Who games have already been made, and they've all been bad. To be done properly it must either be a puzzle game or an adventure game. Neither is Obsidian's forte. Also the character of The Doctor is sacrosanct, you couldn't let the player make choices for him.

They haven't announced anything on how reputation would work in P:E. How is this even supposed to work? Like Bingo? Reputation is a broader concept than individual reaction, and the words you've placed tend toward personal perceptions. How can an entire faction feel "affection" for an individual? Unless this entire faction is a hivemind, your idea doesn't make sense. You haven't actually added an additional dimension to the concept of reputation, all you've done is placed a linear reputation scale vertically, repeated it three times and given positive, neutral and negative reputations different names in each column.

Aww cmon, they should get him to do at least one romance. That way on my third playthough I'll have a delightfully twisted relationship to go through. The point is that MCA hates them and hates having to do them.

You seem to be mistaking linear game design with linear narrative. Fallout 3 had a linear, railroad narrative. Just because you could accidentally stumble into a later station on the metaphorical rail-line didn't change the route. There was one story with one endgame (the "choices" tacked on at the end were just that; tacked on.) There's no room for player agency in a linear story. If you want a linear story sans player agency, there are plenty of JRPGs out there. Fallout wasn't a game about a strong narrative, it was a game about the world itself more than anything else. Few people would argue that "find the water chip" is an enthralling story hook, but a well-executed nonlinear story can be much better than a railroad surrounded by invisible walls and rubble heaps just as a well-executed linear story can be much better than an open-world nonlinear story. It's not a matter of "x is objectively better than y."

I don't find Honor to be all that useful, unless you're playing with the "Raging Barbarians" option on. The problem is that most of its benefits accrue towards the production/effectiveness of melee units. And a melee-heavy army is a decidedly sub-optimal choice. Ranged combat rules in this game-- it's the only way to damage an opponent while not taking any damage yourself. 4-5 Archers + your inherent city defenses can repel just about any early invasion force from a single AI. And if I'm planning on doing some offensive warring early in the game (absent an appropriate Unique Unit) I'm doing it with an army of 5+ Archers or Composite Bowmen (which are a G&K addition: an archer upgrade that unlocks at Construction) and as few as 2 Warriors to take cities and to keep enemy melee off of the archers. I find that I'm much better off taking the growth benefits of Tradition and leveraging that into a larger/earlier/more advanced army than I am spending culture on early Honor policies. In my experience, the 2 best windows for conquest in Civ V (with G&K) are Composite Bowmen, and Great War Bombers. (Again, assuming that you're playing a civ without a useful Unique Unit-- if you're China or England, for example, you're nuts if you're not facerolling some rivals with your Crossbow replacements.) 5 CBs and 1 Warrior can take out the capital of your nearest enemy most of the time. And it's not too difficult to get some GW Bombers into the air before your opponents have any actual air defenses, beyond maybe an easily-neutered Triplane or two. For at least half the game (I haven't bothered to quantify the time ratio between the pre-industrial and industrial/post game,) you're going to be dealing primarily with barbarians and occasionally hostile/militaristic civs who are geared toward just churning out military units as quickly and at as high a rate as possible, so it's at the very least worthwhile to take the basic one for the anti-barbarian bonus. I never go for the full Honor tree, but I still feel the barbarian combat bonus is a necessity. A barbarian brute hitting an archer or a composite bowman is going to come out on top in that fight unless the archer was a scout that got "promoted" by ancient ruins allowing them to ignore terrain movement penalties (which is terrible because it makes your former scout dramatically more vulnerable,) so it's necessary to have some melee units, and it works both ways. You have no choice but to defend yourself, because barbarians are guaranteed to throw themselves at your cities with no concern for their own lives. If you get spearman-rushed by some douche like Napoleon or Alexander circa 2000 BC,(which did happen to me the other day,) you're in deep if you've just got a half dozen archers to defend yourself. Simple attrition is how they win. An archer can only hit one enemy at a time, and if they've got 3-4 spearmen coming for each archer, they're el ****ed. Even if you have strong defenses in your cities, the sieges can last for a thousand or more years of game time (still an absolute absurdity about Civ combat,) and that's a lot of lost productivity and growth because you can't work tiles while under siege. Not to mention that those sorts of civs focus on the Honor tree so they get all manner of combat buffs and great generals while you might have, say, a couple of pyramids that helped you make tile improvements faster. Improvements which just got pillaged by those besieging troops for a quick heal in the middle of the siege. And they can and will use that +50% experience bonus to get instant heals to outpace the rate of damage dealt by the city. Even if they lose 4 out of 5 troops in the siege, a conquered city is still a conquered city. Plus that whole archer thing works both ways, they can surround that front line of melee attackers with a line of ranged attack units. CONCLUSION: Don't let yourself be caught off guard by a sudden declaration of war or barbarian horde. Yep. Even in real life, cultural genocide usually doesn't give you a great rep. It's not actually genocide unless you raze all their cities. ANYWAY Had a hilarious time in Dark Souls today, started a new character because I goofed up on Ornstein and Smough (killed Ornstein first, don't want manboobs' soul or armor,) and on the use of Quelaag's soul (made chaos blade instead of furysword,) got summoned by some newbie player for the Taurus demon, he got invaded, I backstabbed the douche with a +2 Drake Sword for what must have been 99% of his health and then he took a little fall off that trap stairway with the flaming barrel, landed on the ledge below and took 8 damage from the fall, which killed him.

@OP So what you're saying is that they should use things that have been standard in games since the mid/late-90s and which are practically a given already. Of course a "dark alley" is going to be "dark." They had things like torches and flashlights in games in the 90s. Ever heard of Thief? Hiding in shadows (and great AI with guards who aren't fooled if you just jump into a dark corner while in their vicinity/line of sight.) There are lighting modifiers to accuracy in classic cRPGs throughout the late 90s. The lower the amount of light, the lower the accuracy of characters when attacking targets in the dark, lower chance of detection if sneaking, etc. You might as well be saying "I am concerned with swords in the game. Let me start with a real world example, as I am sure this forum's users will not understand the concept. Swords are sharpened metal blades that deal bodily harm to creatures they strike which are not properly armored. I am concerned that swords will not function as weapons in this game, I hope Obsidian implements swordsin this fashion." Hell, just look at the latest update and ask yourself, "if they can and are implementing these visual elements, how could they fail to implement more technologically primitive concepts?" http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63633-update-49-water-trees-daynight-lighting-all-that-jazz/?do=findComment&comment=1321978

..."That" region is also called the "breast" on males.

The good one. Also, suggesting Obsidian should make a video game of a manga/anime = AHAHAHA Also a laugh-worthy statement given the reality that Bethesda owns the Fallout IP and there's strong evidence Fallout 4 is in development at BGS.