Nonek

When they say Barbie do they mean the war criminal or the doll? Though certainly a rather bemusing notion upon first reception, the idea has actually grown on me since. The sacred cows of rpgs could ocassionally benefit from a good ridiculing, South Park would be an ideal candidate for the deliverance thereof. Or mayhap i'd just enjoy a day inside the twisted mind of young master Cartman.

Tough opposition from the new kid on the block, but eminently well deserved, well done.

Might also allow both parties to be proactive in seeking advantage over the opposing side, striking at assets that they know the other side will try to capture and setting traps or false trails. Given a standard choice of which four or so quests to pursue, the smart antagonist could wait to see what the protagonist chose to do and while he is busy with that go after one of the others. While the protagonists could set his own snares and misdirections in the quest areas he has conquered. I can see Oroguns point in that the stranger and the threat not shown can be more dramatically effective than the more symbiotic relationship though, Omen Deng as opposed to Conrad Marburg I suppose.

For some reason reading your posts Orogun I began to think about the relationship between Clarice Starling and Hannibal Lecter in silence of the lambs, polar opposites who shared a strange empathy. Obviously that is more drawing on older myths of the hero(ine) bearding the ancient evil in its lair and coming forth with the weapons or knowledge to slay the dragon, but an antagonist who begins the game at the opposite end of the usual scale, bound by the protagonists faction and answering questions to shape his opposing personality (and maybe the protagonists) would be a very easy way to formulate later responses and actions. Something along the lines of an inverted virtue test as used in the old ultimas.

Just off the top of my head: A city converted could be plagued by banditry or terrorist attacks such as the dapper old gent did in stonebridge, weaken infrastructure. The quest to repel these attacks would come at the cost of some other asset being gained, so you do not have an option for an optimal ending unless certain infrastructures have already been developed (a draconian secret police or such like.) An artifact could be corrupted by its guardians through infiltration of their ranks, an easily overlooked comment on a guardians strange behaviour being the only indicator that wrongdoing is afoot which if not followed up would see you losing the asset or seeing it corrupted. Companions and allies could be brought over to the antagonists side if the protagonist fails to gain sufficient influence with them or fails to live up to their expectations. Dispossessed noblemen could be promised the return of lands and titles, religious leaders could be manipulated by church decree or doctrine, charismatic freedom fighters could rise up amongst the common folk to lead suspiciously well funded and equipped revolts or plague might break out in the strongholds of the protagonist due to tainted water supplies or the collusion of a prominent trader. Most of these would be combatable by quest or side mission that hides their importance I would think, but certain acts such as the artifacts corruption or plague outbreak could spill over and raise up other antagonists or factions that can be swayed by either side of the conflict or manipulated into ignorant service. A clever antagonist could take advantage of almost any situation where the player is given a choice or performs some service, automatically courting the opposing side or spinning negative aspects into the protagonists deeds. The variables and world states might be a touch beastly to keep track of unless some method of chokepoint is implemented, but replay value and reactivity would be out of the court and it would be interesting to see a protagonist lose through poor planning and lack of attention.

I do believe there was somewhat of a nod to this in the first witcher game, specifically the confrontation with Azar Javed in the second chapter. In case you're not familiar with the game i'll not spoil it but while the protagonist conducts a rather noire inspired investigation the malefactor makes his own moves and delightfully if the hero makes a misstep he can be thoroughly thrashed in the following confrontation. Obviously this is not quite as exhaustive as I believe you are suggesting, with a strategical game of chess being played between protagonist and antagonist but for an old crpg fan it was very refreshing. I suppose with the reactive nature of alpha protocol and the various aspects playing into the mission hubs that there is a gesture towards this kind of idea, but there are very few counter measures enacted against Mr Thornton (Grigori informing to the U.S. embassy guards?) while he blazes a trail across the globe. I would definitely like to see something like this brought into games, very interesting idea.

Just finished the game and i've got to say it was both enjoyable and very stable, only had one crash and that was when I was exiting the game so didn't really bother me. Liked the logical and tragic story that slowly revealed itself along with the sensible supporting cast and their realistic motivations, and even though i'm a rather ham fisted ape I found the combat none too taxing, which for me was suprising as action rpg's and I don't often gel. I did like some of the more unusual and outlandish designs that permeated the gameworld and the vast array of choices that were presented to you along the way were suprisingly effective, still regret sending down the dapper old gent. I've made a save just before leaving to give old Jayne a damn good thrashing in preperation for the forthcoming dlc which i'll be snapping up when it comes out. In summation: I found this to more than equal the original dungeon siege game, which quickly became tiresome to me without a strong narrative to hold the long bouts of automated combat together. I would however have liked the ability to look up and behold vistas at some points in the game (The forests of the Rukkenvahl, the grand chapterhouse and Jaynes spire to name but a few.)

I was just trying to be friendly as a relative newcomer to the boards, for some reason my attempts at affability are always misinterpreted as sarcasm for some reason (probably because of my verbosity.) No offense intended Wombat, which is why I was admitting that I had rambled somewhat off-topic in my previous post.

That was a trifle off topic wasn't it my marsupial friend, still least said soonest mended. Personally i'll just keep buying, playing and recommending obsidians games no matter the platform as sterling examples of what the modern genre should be aspiring to. The sheer amount of innovation, depth and reactivity that they manage to cram into their products such as alpha protocol, new vegas etcetera is worthy of brand loyalty in my opinion.

Always wondered in Torment, when you get to the practical incarnation and he states that he is so disgusted by your constant questioning. Is that Chris Avellone stating that he'd like some other form of gaining information in games other than through dialogue, so much of the game expresses disgust at the tired old forms used by the fantasy genre and then flips them on their heads with amusing and fresh approaches that invigorate the genre and i've always wondered if this was one of those situations.

Playing through Torment once again, my gut coiling with trepidation and scarred hands shaking as I approach Ravel and know that eventually the question will. Must. Be asked. What can change the nature of an industry? Is it potent and clever protagonists who can shape the world through their actions, is it confrontations with unique and dangerous enemies who you can hate and pity but must always respect, perhaps it is the women, strong, broken, devious and blunt whose writing humbles the two dimensional barely discerned sketches we see in other games or maybe it is the reactive worlds and factions that shift and slide around the hero swimming in the seas of self forged fate. Probably not, most likely it is sales and latching on to powerful franchises and then repeating infinite permutaions of the same weak stories and solid gameplay with minor tweaks each year so that another edition can be bought. (An infinite modron maze.) But it shouldn't be, the industry lumbers forward on the whipped and bloody backs of lumbering oxen and nobody sees that they have lost the path and the few lone wolves who still dart into the mists of originality and innovation clouding the road ahead are cast out and mocked for the smallest of flaws. Yeah, i've had a couple of shandies but i'll say this: In vino veritas. Hell I was tepid on the charms of the new wasteland until a bullet in the head opened my eyes and let me see a new fire burning in an old fireplace.

Apparently twenty eight people had previously escaped from the camp over the last few years and reported the situation, one has to wonder what the local constabulary were doing.

Usually i'm on the side of detesting most crafting, there are two notable exceptions: Ultima 7 (no idea why) and the original witcher which was not actually crafting just taking rare ores, runes and what have you to a smith and telling him to crack on with it. In the sequel when we have to gather every little component such as twine, iron and cloth I just felt like I was in bloody trade not a feared monsters bane, strangely enough the alchemy system they slimmed down by removing potion bases and extra ingredients which is a core feature of the profession, odd. I'll have a pint busty serving wench. Okay, i'll need hops, a barrel, a pint glass, water and.... You get the picture, daft.

Cheers for the answers Nathan, however I was more wondering about the systems themselves as in the players skill and responsiveness as opposed to in game charcter statistical skills and which you prefer to design for and play. Personally if implemented well as in dungeon siege 3 I can adapt fairly easily whereas in the witcher I found combat somewhat over twitchy and at points unresponsive despite generally liking it. Poorly written question I suppose, mea culpa.

This is a breath of fresh air, playing through recent games i've felt like a stupid dog being patted on the head and fed treats when i've done what the devs wanted and there's been no sense of accomplishment or immersion. The dude bloody gets it, give me a challenge and let me fail if i'm stupid because the payoff when I win will be all the sweeter.

Was Lukas modelled off of Kyle MacLachlan in dune. What would be the ideal intellectual property you would like to work with. Both Dungeon Siege 3 and the Witcher 2 mix the players skill and in game character skills in their combat systems, which do you prefer as players and designers.

Voted NWN2 mostly because of Mask of the Betrayer.

Damn good game, needed a lot of trimming I think but hell I can't fault anybody for ambition and the simple mechanic that tied the main character into the plot, the harvest festival tutorial and the awkward distant foster father were masterfully done in my opinion. And for some reason Nolaloth the long dead dragon will always stick with me, don't know why. Never got the vitriol that was spat on it.

There is always something in obsidian games that hooks me in and won't let go such as the survival horror opening and confrontation with Atris in kotor2, the cold and haunted Daeghun in nwn2 and the realisation of your accidental role in the entire conflict, going off radar for alan (raziel) parker during the training mission in alpha protocol and once i've weened myself off the witcher 2 this weekend i'll be tearing the cellophane off my copy of dungeon siege and giving it some large. So yeah I agree keep on buggering on obsidian with all your ambition and innovation, we love you but not in a creepy uncle kind of way.

Yes, yes I do.

Being an old AD&D nut i've never minded character creation, it gets me salivating for the main campaign but I can understand how somebody not versed in the rather OCD nature of roleplaying games might be somewhat bewildered by all the stats and such. Would a system such as the old Ultima gypsy questioning system work better for making a character but rather than questions based on the virtues have it be actions based on your circumstances. Say for instance in the prologue chapter you awaken in a prison cell with slain guards all around you (original eh) having no real conception of your character other than their looks and voice, you hear the sound of guards running to investigate and get a number of options that will begin to shape your character say: A, Pick up a sword from one the dead bodies and prepare for combat (strength). B, Change clothes with and hide among the dead bodies (cunning). C, Wait patiently in your cell and try to reason with or bluff the guards (persuasion). D, Gather your will and summon the shadows to hide you in the gloom of your cells depths (willpower/magic). E, Sneak through the shadows, hiding amongst empty cells and such (agility). Be a lot of work keeping track of such things but thinking about it Alpha Protocol kind of does this with its perks and makes the game all the more reactive in my opinion.

Wondering if they'll be using any of the original dungeon sieges soundtrack (Jeremy Soule?) as it was one of the brightest points of the first game, well that and you could go and make a sarnie and a cuppa during combat.

Enjoyed it, played as Lucas 'cause I dig the classical greek hero look he's got going on which is a refreshing change for a protagonist and really enjoyed the easy and intuitive controls and absolutely stunning visuals which though not of witcher 2 quality were still eye catching. The engine seemed steady as a rock and though Ravens Rill seemed a bit lifeless i'm not expecting Assassins of Kings depth from a dungeon siege game, the other characters appearances gave interesting hints as to their involvement (i'm guessing Kat's sis isn't destined for a happy fate) and all in all I think i'll nab it when it comes out.

Just finished my second run through of the game and just had to say this is what games should be: ambitious, innovative, reactive and utterly engrossing, when I sat back after my first run through I just thought next weekend i'm going to start again as a veteran and when I finished that I let out a contented sigh (after stopping laughing at someones demise) and stated "now that is quality". I ran across three bugs while playing none of which bothered me in the slightest and though I did not exactly like Michael Thorton (too baby faced and the voice was a little too nasal for my tastes), he did his job of immersing you into the world and the characters who loom large within it. The scene with a prominent antagonist in the mediterranean sent chills down my spine thanks to the music, dialogue and voice actor really conveying a sense of cold menace. As usual your games continue to enthrall me with their depth and sophistication, thanks obsidian.