Miquel93

Considering he still hasn't finished his Wasteland 2 novel, probably won't know about it for a long time.

What is this travesty, Justin!? Don't encourage decline in my incline!

Well, I actually thought you would need to know the origins of the reapers and go to really ancient and bizarre places to find information on how to defeat them, or something like that (I'm not a very imaginative person). But I really didn't expect a superweapon to pop up out of the blue, from the Mars archives nonetheless. But if you think that is good storytelling, well, good for you, I guess.

Bioware's marketing did not tarnish the Dragon Age name. Dragon Age 2 did that all by itself. ^ Pretty much. Theres a reason Bioware managed to come from being one of the most loved companies after Mass Effect 1 and 2, which was done because of the success of these 2 games but add to that Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights 1 and KOTOR, which are all epic games, to being one of the most joked about companies recently. Bottom line is, make bad games, you'll have a bad name. Bioware has it now because of the greatest joke of the century: Mass Effect 3, but add to that DA2, SW TOR (cant believe they wasted 200 million on that ****) and DA:I (which is the embodiement of mediocre) haha oh look it's another one of those guys who think ME3 was "the greatest joke of the century". No-one would give a toss about ME3 if it wasn't for the stellar quality of the series up to THE VERY LAST 5 minutes of the game. Conveniently enough everyone brushes that aside. ME 3 is a narrative monstruosity from the very begginning. I really don't get all this "great until the ending" thing. The prologue on earth was cheap but tolerable, but Mars? Absolutely unforgivable from a narrative standpoint. Using a Deus Ex Machina out of the blue as the engine to fuel the plot when you had 2 previous games to set things up, I'm sorry, but I can't be on board with this, specially when that Deus Ex Machina is the ridiculous concept of a "superweapon" (I thought that Bioware couldn't go cheapper than that, but actually they could, as the ending demostrates)

Yeah, how dare he to provide feedback and criticism after obviously enjoying the game. The nerve!

Dude, it's a joke, in a "you can thank him for this" kinda way, like the big heads toggle. Most likely event he didn't even participate in giving feedback on how the icons should look. Hell, he might have even discovered them the same time we did, when the game was put on sale.

Most likely they've been re-written by someone at Obsidian, retaining the story the backer wanted to have.

It' because agency. In open world rpgs games, like Fallout, Arcanum, elder scrolls... etc, you can do pretty much all you want when you want. It's not rare to want in some evil playthrough, or just for fun, to try to wipe out an entire village. That's why essential npcs (including children) are so annoying, because the developers want you to believe that you can do everything inside the game mechanics limit, but in reality you get a "lol, you can't kill this guy, he's important to the plot/quest guiver/children. **** you and your sense of agency"

I think they are well integrated tematically, considering how jarring this stuff usually is. In any case, they're highlighted in yellow, so they're easy to identify and ignore like all the common villager/citizen/peasant... no-name NPC.

Why don't you deactivate the auto-pause toggle for cases like low health and such if you unconsiously will pause manually anyway? Don't really need a new toggle for "pause everything despite what's going on or settings that are on" to solve your issue here.

No, the conversation bubble above the portrait is to iniciate conversation with the companion, like in Planescape. What the tooltip refered to was, when they have new stuff to tell you, INSIDE their portrait you will see the bubble pop up. What you're seeing right now is just the way to talk to companions.

You mean the guys from the forum that raised 10K for the game and are interested in it's success even if it ends up bad because they want to see more RPGs in that style? Sounds about right More than enough people on that forum who are emotionally invested in the failure of PoE. Emotional engagment... from the Codex? That's kinda funny Dude, if there's a "community" (as a whole) that is interested in the success of both PoE and Obsidian outside this forum, it's the Codex, so... please.

You mean the guys from the forum that raised 10K for the game and are interested in it's success even if it ends up bad because they want to see more RPGs in that style? Sounds about right

Not all the rewards will be available on launch. The documentary and the novella are not yet ready. Here's the post by Darren: With a bit of luck they will put the rewards up today if they finish testing early, but I wouldn't count on it.

Is there any particular reason why things like the almanac, guidebook, wallpapers... any reward outside the ones you mentioned and the strategy guide (because spoilers) can't be available previously to launch? I would have loved to be able to read a bit of the guidebook before playing the game.

I've been on the internet for a while and Sensuki is literally the only person I've seen use the term like this. And even if people are using it the way you describe it, it is wrong and should be corrected (like people who say "for all intensive purposes" or "I could care less"). For a guy that has been in the internet for a while, you've managed to avoid a certain place that doesn't scale to your level, then. We all know what Larp stands for. But I didn't invent the meme. Linguistically accurate or not, it's used in cRPGs to describe scenarios like the ones I listed. We do and it means Live Action Role Playing. Whatever other meaning was added to it, it is wrong. Why? What's wrong with adopting a word (well, words) to another context because it fits with the behavior listed? When someone roleplays a guard in Oblivion, he's not actually roleplaying, because the game doesn't support it or respond to it, he's pretending. Hence LARPing in computer role playing games. It's not rocket science.

Yes, you can. We don't know how they've handled major characters though, so those involved in the critical path may or may not be killable

If I had to value my hopes for PoE based on DAI, I would be happy to recieve something along the quality of Neverwinter Nights 2 Act 1. That bad.

I really doubt rolling stats was ever at the table. it just leads to degenerate behavior (Roll, reroll, reroll, reroll... until you arrive to the one that has optimal stats) and it doesn't add anything in the context of a videogame. Sorry, but I doubt you'll ever see this feature again in any RPG, most certainly not in one designed by Josh Sawyer.

I don't think a new game plus type of thing is in the game, I might be wrong though. The game should be soloable, although is not balanced around that. As a curiosity, there's an achievment in the steam version for beating the game solo, with iron man mode activated, and in the path of the damned difficulty (think of it as the PoE version of Heart of Fury from Icewind Dale)

Thank you for making me search for this panel. Absolutely hilarious.

The purpose of the bounty quests are just to give you a cool, tough combat encounter with neat loot (I assume, they might be something different, but I really doubt it). What you suggest is just unfeasable for the type of content these things are (simple tasks, not even really side quests).

Actually there is a great overlap between GTA and PoE. No, the games have no similarities whatsoever, but GTA attracts a massive number of players, like, really massive. A lot of PoE potential buyers would be GTA buyers as well. Massive releases such as GTA can hurt the initial sales of games that theoretically are no direct competition like PoE, just because of the tremendous different types of gamers that they atract, be it people that play mostly shooters, RPGs, strategy games...etc.

I'm not making fun of it. I'm approaching it with the dead-seriousness it deserves. You are right about one thing: Your viewpoint is legion. There's too many of your ilk around. The RPG genre as a whole has had no choice over the years but to give you guys what you want. And the result is plain for all to see. Bioware, the company that once gave us stunning time-honored Classics with unmatched gameplay like Baldur's Gate, Baldurs Gate 2 and Knights of the Old Republic, is now reduced to releasing interactive soap operas like Mass effect and Dragon age - Games with terrible one dimensional combat and zero gameplay depth. Why? Because they can't afford to spend money and time on such things. Because the majority of their budget is being spent on f*cking Romances and drama-filled relationships instead. You people aren't real RPG fans, so stop abusing that term for your own ends. I don't want to go off topic, but... KOTOR unmatched gameplay? Seriously? ****ing seriously?

So, to be a promancer you have to have a specific set of preferences of how romances should work, so the people who like Bioware romances (very likely the largest segment and most significant of the lot) don't fit in it. Got it. Things are a lot more complicated than they seemed, aparently. And here I thought that being a promancer only ment to be in favor to the inclusion of romance in RPGs, go figure.