Nonek

Muskets could sustain a higher level of fire even though they were less accurate than rifle barreled firearms of the period, the legend was that a veteran redcoat could sustain a firing rate of four shots a minute. They were also cheaper to produce, there were lots of them and the men were all trained with them. The rifleman did began his ascent to dominance in this period however. Strangely enough the soldiery were also against abandoning their muskets, much like with their famous red tunics in Britain, they were very unwilling to change or trust anything new such as rifles.

Wonder how accurate those firearms are, reading about Waterloo lately and even with the focused fire of Arthur Wellesley's thin red line, the rate of misses was absolutely horrendous with musketry. Obviously riflemen were a different matter, but they were a small component of the armies.

Add Vizima into the mix from the original Witcher as well, each of those cities had a very striking cultural identity. Simple things such as the cant in Sigil or the town criers of Athkatla, they added so much to the feel, even the merchants wishing, "a pearl to you." Hope to see something like this, but I can understand if it's too much of an endeavour.

Oh the player would still have total control over the party as always, just not the protagonist character. Only the narrative choices would be railroaded if we fail to intervene successfully, well in my mind anyway.

Bohemian earspoon.

No i'd say that killing the party leader is a perfectly valid option in such a game, especially if done well. One of many options to get your own way. You could slaughter him and roar at the other party members that you're the daddy now, for the more berserker type chap. You could poison him or use other underhanded methods, and perform a fairly bloodless coup. It would simply be a matter of finding a way to nobble his efficacy, circumvent or totally neutralise it in some manner. For a dialogue based character it would simply be a few more opportunities to use the old gift of the gab. But i've got to agree, it could be seriously frustrating to be constantly having to steer a character in your own direction, especially when we're used to being the undisputed final authority. Ah well just kicking the old cranial hamster wheel.

In practise I can see it being a jolly old pain if implemented poorly, but in some ways I can see it working. The game would (I think) play out exactly the same in all respects except for two points, conversations and area transitions. 1. In conversations it would be the party leader initiating and guiding the conversation, with our dialogue skills allowing us to chip in and highlight points he may miss or investigate options he is not interested in. 2. The party leader would decide on which area you next travel to, reflecting his personal agenda, but this is one of the points where you can challenge, persuade or browbeat him into changing his destination. Obviously the endgoal of this particular situation would be to wrestle control of the party from him as soon as possible, and thereby pursue your own goals without the need for the challenge, ergo as a few people have said it becomes the standard game. But an even more interesting proposition might be to play the party leader like a marionette, be his loyal Grima Wormtongue all the way until the game ending.

Is this another romance thread? Sorry.

Yeah I just thought it would be interesting to enable a more logical and legitimate rise to power, within the party framework, but I can see the downsides.

What if it were not taken as a given that our protagonist was master of all he surveys, what if he had to work to persuade the party to follow his course, and pursue his personal objectives. Currently doing a playthrough of Origins, and the character of Alistair has gotten me wondering what would happen if the man had possessed a functioning spinal column, if he had taken control of the party and decided its actions and strategy after the battle of Ostagar. Say for instance he had chosen which quests to pursue and we had merely a chance at persuading him otherwise within dialogue and asking additional questions, so that originally it seems we are more a junior partner in his struggle against the blight. If we kept persuading him to follow our path or challenging his decisions eventually we'd have to resolve our roles within the party, through persuasion, threats, violence or even blackmail we might try to seize control. Obviously other party members would have something to say on these matters, and an unpopular player character might be challenged by all and sundry if he tries to seize control without the proper legwork. Then again the opposite might be true, and a protagonist who has pleased all the companions and advised the party leader well might be approached to lead the party as everybody sees the benefit of his leadership. Would this be feasible I wonder, would it create too much of a dissonance when we are controllling the party but our character is not the primary decision maker. Would it take away too much of our sense of agency, when we are not driving the plot but rather steering from the sidelines. We could still be fairly free in the short term, free to wander where we choose within areas, begin converstaions with who we please and conduct business with merchants and craftsmen, but in the long term we'd be bound to follow the party leaders mandate and path. Or perhaps work against it, so as to harm his reputation? I'm not sure what to think of my own idea honestly as I can think of as many bad points as good, and it might be a nightmare to implement.

One thing a tragedy can do well is serve to illuminate the lighter moments of a narrative, if in the midst of a dark and grim tale such as Dead Money you have Frederick Sinclair the one good man in the whole story, who will not compromise his ethics for the sake of petty vengeance or wounded pride. That counterpoint is brought shockingly into focus when compared to the amoral obsessed behaviour of Dean Domino and Father Elijah. I prefer those little victories over the super happy fun time endings that frankly should never happen.

BUT THOU MUST!

For me every Obsidian game has been deeply satisfying, so I see no need to expect anything else from Eternity. The Sith Lords made the Star Wars universe bearable because it approached it with a mature and reasoned critical eye. Neverwinter 2 had a brilliant single player campaign as opposed to its predecessor, and some of the best expansions there have ever been. Alpha Protocol was an innovative and reactive marvel, that was unfairly castigated by a press all too happy to forgive big budget releases numerous problems. Fallout: New Vegas brought life and heritage to the Wasteland, making it so much more than an overpowered hiking simulator. Dungeon Siege 3 was a highly enjoyable game, with a reactive plot that made me actually take an interest in the gameworld, despite my utter disdain for it (and the automated combat) in the original. Some of their games have had bugs, big deal, i'd rather see ambition and innovation than an annual dull as dishwater franchise rollout.

Nah, leave that in MMO's. Perhaps you could have smiths design you armour however, for an arm and a leg, that matched your visual preferences. But no magically transforming plate mail option.

On one hand i'd like everything to have a weight even if it's remarkably negligible, on the other hand i'd prefer it if for once we were not rich as Croesus come mid game. A gold coin should be a rare item used by banking interests and merchant houses because of its high value, while for the most part our protagonist might consider himself well off if he's got a fat pouch of silver marks on his belt.

I'm sorry Ilhdr but i'm not sure I understand your question. To clarify i'm not in favour of stopping mid combat unstrapping my backpack, rummaging around for a flask of healing fluid, unstopping and drinking the flasks contents, before closing my pack and shouldering it again, then resuming combat. If you were a foeman, would you stop and allow this, obviously not you'd stab the character doing it. The least we can expect is an automatic critical hit, and the worst would be an automatic kill, rendering the potion pointless, so why settle for this old system just because it's present in older games? As I said in the opening paragraph, let's just make up another system to make the healing of combatants mid melee more sensible. We have magic, the power of souls, prayer and numerous other methods of implementing a more consistent method. Why not?

I wouldn't mind seeing the protagonist turned down multiple times, be a slap in the face for those who argue that they should never experience any kind of rejection in any form. From my experience of dating back in the day that was a far more likely outcome than the object of my advances suddenly being overcome with passion and jumping me, don't know if times have changed, is it wrong to turn someone down now, no matter your feelings or sexual orientation?

Town criers, tavern rumours and other such mediums would be a great idea, however I don't believe it needs to pertain only to the protagonists actions. To build a more believable setting we could have news arriving from the far corners of the lands, as well as local points of interest being raised. For example: Eggs a dozen for a ha'penny, fresh milk and live chickens all at farmer Doone's market stall. Lord Rutherford has ruined another young lady, her father has vowed to horsewhip the scoundrel. Viscount Donagh the esteemed merchant and adventurer has sent out the call for sellswords and mercenaries of proven worth and sober diposition to join his latest venture, rivers of gold and exotic native women await those daring enough to answer his challenge. The wheat crop of Bywater town has failed, cries of witchcraft have been raised and some have even called for the intervention of the holy church. Smith Murdo's lad has run from his apprenticeship, anybody returning him can earn a silver penny for their troubles. He is described as a rat faced ungrateful little bastard with a womans hair and an aversion to honest work.

Enjoying the game, not fond of the stylised graphic style but it in no way diminishes the gameplay, the build possibilities and the variety of the gameworld.

Thank you, these modes are just what I was hoping for, hopefully this will affect not only combat but various recuperation aspects.

Well the answer is obvious, avoid getting injured so frequently. If we triumph without hardly a scratch upon us due to superior tactics and strategy, then there's no need to spend time dealing with potentially life threatening injuries, (or time sinks as you would have it) though magic and abilities may still need to be recuperated. Also what mandates that we have to have lots of battles, as i've said before i'd prefer more gruelling and intensive occasional melees than this modern obsession with endless waves of meat waiting to be butchered. Also with the multiple skills and routes one may be able to take through the gameworld, we may not have to indulge in slaughter whatsoever. I do apologise if I appear somewhat impassioned on this matter, but a strategical approach, gruelling combat and no easy answers are something that i've missed in the software of recent years. Handholding and accessibility being prioritised over verisimillitude and accomplishment have in my opinion belittled both the player, the genre and any sense of challenge.

I'll stick some more coins in the pot when Paypal is implemented.

Not fond of romances, they usually come across as mawkish, overly sentimental and generally as cheesy as hell. Don't think you need a love interest to complete a character, especially if he's got a few years on his back, all this teenage angst and romanticism dries up as one gets older.

Our Souls. Tagline: We are all our souls, the lucky few know this. Eternity: Raymond Luxury Yacht Throatwobbler Mangrove. Warning: You may have to read the manual, the journal and pay attention to the plot. Please do not purchase if you have the attention span and problem solving ability of a hyperactive gibbon.

Didn't really get on with Dragon Age's tactics system for various reasons, but one thing that really rubs my rhubarb about fairly much every game is when you're put in control of soldiers or a militia. No sooner have you turned your back than the morons have charged forth from a defensible location into the fire pits you've had dug, archers leading the charge, and are happily roasting en masse. Honestly they shackle you, you're more effective when not babysitting the creche. The logical thing would seem to be having general orders, such as stand your ground, advance, fire, rally etcetera. Beats relying on the all too easily flummoxed AI. I don't even want to think about escort missions.