Slowtrain

I was under the same assumption but I went over to the forums last time, that did not appear to be a foregone conclusion. I was somewhat surprised. However, as a caveat, I don't go those forums very often so its possible I missed some aspect of the discussions. Anyway, I am still hoping its free for those of us who own the game.

last time I checked the Witcher forums there was a lot of discussion on whether some or all of the enhancements woudl be available as free downloads for people who already own the game. This was a month or so ago, but at the time there was no official word, so who knows, but there's a possibility. For me personally, if I had to buy a second copy of the game to get all the enhanced features and content, I wouldn't even have to think twice. Fallout 3 can wait, if that is the case.

Generally speaking, I only buy a game that I think I will enjoy. WHich is why I bought Hellgate: London in the first place. Sometimes I am wrong, as I was with HG:L, but the intention was to buy the game. However, if I really do like a game, I wil sometimes buy multiple copies of the same game, both to keep an extra copy or two around and to support the developers. As a rule though I'm not inclined to charity for game developers. Better to give it away to a homeless shelter or something. However, I ALWAYS buy my games. ALWAYS. WHich is more than a lot of people can say.

For me, it doesn't matter anyway. I personally don't rank "originality" very high on my list of qualities that make a good computer game. At least not as far as story or characters or world-building goes. Or even graphics so much. In gameplay, yes, there its nice to see something new, or at least something spun around and done slightly differently, at least occaisonally. If DA rips of Tolkien, its ok with me. If I don't like the game, that won't be the reason why.

I believe the enhanced version is supposed to improve some aspects of performance. Perhaps it make make a difference for your computer.

There was a somewhat juvenile aspect to the sex part of the game, which was a bit annoying, but really it was so far removed from the main game, that you could pretty much play the whole game and not even really notice it. I personally, think the game was good enough that it didn't need that stuff at all, but the inclusion of it didn't really damage my enjoyment of it. I would hope that in a sequel, the developers put a little faith in their ability to create a quality game and dump the silly sex card thing.

Well, I kinda made the assumption that you support the concept of the smaller developer as being something worthwhile, but not the actual development house itself. Would that not imply I support the existence of Flagship Studios, as a smaller, independent developer, though? I don't see how it has to imply I buy all their games. I don't even do that with Obsidian. Indeed, ergo my question related to specifically what support did you provide Flagship Studios? I only ask this because in this thread about Flagship Studios closure, you specifically mentioned in your post that you supported them but you did not buy the game. When I read that bit, in view of the thread topic, I stopped and asked myself how does one support a developer without buying their game. When I failed to provide an answer to my question, I thought I would pose the same question to you, Krezack, the originator of the statement. My assumption would be that by "support" you did not mean literal "support" as in help or aid or assistance, but a more general and theoretical "I support it because I think its a darn good idea" type of support. However that was merely my assumption and I have no way of knowing it is correct.

Well, I kinda made the assumption that you support the concept of the smaller developer as being something worthwhile, but not the actual development house itself.

Exactly why, although I didn't buy Hellgate: London, I supported them. How does one support a developer without actually buying the game? If you can read, you should be able to answer your own question. I don't know what that means. And it sounds a little snarky. I'm asking a serious question: You support a developer without buying their game and they go out of business and then you talk about how you supported them without buying their game. What?

I'm really looking forward to replaying the Witcher. But I am holding off until the enhanced version is released. In some that is my most anticipated of al upcoming games, even though I've all ready spent a lot of play time on the original verison of the game.

Exactly why, although I didn't buy Hellgate: London, I supported them. How does one support a developer without actually buying the game?

Seconded. Sir-Tech went out with a bang at least, both their flagship titles released extremely good sequels right before the end. That's what was puzzling, it's not like they ever released a bad game. Wizardry 5 and JA2 just didn't sell enough, for some odd reason. Flagship put a ton of hype into a game that really fell flat. Maybe it has redeeming qualities at this stage after a few patches, but is it really revolutionary? I believe they had major problems with the European sales of Jag 2. The game sold very very well in Europe, especially Germany, but Sir Tec saw no or very little money from any of the sales due to issues with their European publisher or distributor or something. That was all a long time ago, but I believe that was the case. It was something along those line sanyway. If you are interested you could probably Google up the details. They also tried to use the finished Wizardry 8 to generate a deal for funding on Wizardry 9 from a publisher but couldn't make that happen. Basically they just ran out of money.

I paid full retail price for that game. If they can get my $50 for a utterly craptastic game yet still can't stay in business, I am losing no sleep.

If you make one stinky game and go out of business, I can't generate much care. Too many studios like Microprose, Sir Tec and Looking Glass have made many good games and then folded. Those are the ones that make me sad.

I always thought FR was THE uber-derivative Tolkien fantasy world. Well, that and Dennis McKiernan. Originality is hardly the end all and be all of, well anything, anyway.

If Oblivion is anything to go by, we'd best prepare for people who talk like a phone directory: "thank you for asking me about <THAT TOPIC>" "i don't know anything about a <WATER CHIP>" "they say the <BROTHERHOOD OF STEEL> is willing to pay good money for rad scorpion tails" You should send Bethesda your resume/cv. Looking good!

They might be right though. We certainly make their job easy for them. At least as far as marketing video games goes.

Wals is creative. That sort of thing should be encouraged not stepped on.

Dialogue.

bah. I need to win the lottery.

I really need to get a console. The days of being a pc only gamer are through. Other than the occasional STALKER or X universe game, pc gaming is just cast-offs, rejects, buggy ports, and junk. I need some money.

I don't disagree that a substantial amount of BG1 was hack and slash, but I don't recall the NWN oc being any less so. But I haven't played either for a very long time so...

I'm not a huge fan of BG1, but the notion that the single player campaign of BG1 was worse than the single player campaign of NWN...that's just loopy.

No, don't be obtuse. lol. Good enough answer. Indirectly, I was kinda pondering on how accurate a predictor of the final game this preview was. I mean, there is a lot of interesting stuff in there (which is why I said it was an interesting read), but with these sorts of previews it always a bit question mark on what wil make the final cut so to speak.

I'm glad you know what we were thinking when development began, I'd like to get the notes for some of the meetings that I missed. Now now, sarcasm is so unbecoming, don't you think. True, I may be talking out my arse*, but at least I am talking about your game and not ignoring it because I don't care, no? That's gotta mean something right? hmmm. *my arse is pretty smart though. Everybody says so.