Merin

I'm going to go so far as to add that character creation is more than twice as important to me as story and companion characters combined! I just like making characters.

Query - if this isn't a game for you it, the wrong game as you say... did you donate to it? Why - to just support Obsidian? And whether you donated or not (especially if you hadn't, but it's not that important) - if it's isn't for you, why are you advocating for changes to it?

I'll be the stick-in-the-mud who says, "Boo, multi-classing." Also, not having stuff limited by race makes me a little sad. I like content locked out by choices the player makes, even in character creation. Choosing to play the thief, for example, should stop you from doing the "uphold the law" quest, or being the dwarf should prevent you from picking up the "elves attacking the dwarves" quest. Simplistic, broad examples... but it's what I'd prefer. That said, these aren't deal breakers for me at all.

Dragon? Uhm, WotC took the license away from Paizo and made it part of the WotC D&D website first, then part of DDI. Back in like 2007-2008.

Creating my character is the number one reason why I play cRPGs. Everything else comes in behind being able to create my own character. I have fun with questionnaires, or playing through character creation, as long as it is skipable and I get to see a character sheet at the end and edit it to my tastes.

Everything I've heard the devs say says that more or less IS their goal, and when the first screens come out, though they are sure to be lovely, I think a lot of pledgers are going to feel awkward because they didn't really understand the kind of game they were funding. Wasteland 2 graphics, maybe, but certainly not Wasteland. That said - Obsidian said Infinity Engine and listed, specifically, Baldur's Gate... ... Icewind Dale ... ... and Planescape: Torment

Yes, most are very reasonable, but for example things like semi-permanent companion death are just creating unnecessary reloading, or if you don't want to do that then you just walk to nearest priest and after formal fee, your companion is revived anyway. Some might say this is immersion. I would say it's just waste of time. Deaths should be made unwanted in some other way and (I know some won't like this) I think DA:O did great job by making revived characters "wounded" until you could cure them. Also I think the old "spell and ability memorizing" system is outdated. It's just another version of cooldown mechanic. In old RPGs you had to sleep to memorize spells, which again is waste of time because all you need to do is go to nearest tavern or other place where you can rest and *poof*, spells are again usable. Nowdays you just have to wait certain time until you are going to be able to use the spell again. Just more streamlined version of the old system without unnecessary running around. I know in some dungeons you couldn't rest and so you had to think carefully your use of spells and abilities, but they can be made hard in so many other and IMO better ways that it's not really worth it. There is a difference between "clumsy" and what I would say is instead "out of style." Out of date implies inferior to new... and when it comes to most of the requests, they are matters of taste and opinion - not a quantifiable "inferior or superior" in the sense of game design advancement or technology. Wanting CGA graphics instead of at least XGA - that's clearly inferior, out-dated tech. Wanting text instead of voice - that's not "out dated", it's a matter of choice. Characters being unkillable existed in early video games, it's not a new phenomenon. So the difference between companions being invulnerable or able to suffer death is a game design choice, or a player's preference, not inferior or superior. It may be out of style, but it's not out dated. I don't want spell memorization, but it's not inherently inferior or out-dated... it's a matter or opinion or taste if it is good or bad. Just my two cents on this.

Pacifica!

I can't say for certain if they are going to do something, but if Trey and Matt do decide to make some reference in the show... it'll be hilarious.

I don't want them in my cRPG's, but action RPGs I don't mind certain kinds. The BioShock ones, for example (and, yes, that's stretching the RPG concept, but still), I found fun. I didn't mind the hacking mini-game in Alpha Protocol. Wasn't fond of the lock-pick one (but, then, I'm not fond of ANY lock pick mini-game I've experienced.)

I'd make the same offer, Sylvius, except I already doubled mine today to help push it over 2.1 million. That's about where I'm likely to cap it. I don't have any money, either, and this is already more than I should spend.

I think a lot of "no" votes are confused. Not all, maybe not even most, but enough. Those who want to be able to create their own party are NOT asking that companions be removed, or that the game's story be redesigned to have less story / companion interactions. Like being able to play solo, this would be like playing solo (no companion story hooks, banter...) but having help in fights.

I want this option.... but I'm not holding my breath at this point.

Don't get me wrong, I love Alpha Protocol... but I wouldn't call the endings "great" just because they are so reactive. The ending was good - not as good, IMO, as the multiple endings to Bloodlines, mind you.... I'm currently (trying (hard)) to play MotB. I'll update on how I think the end of that game rates. I really don't believe I'll ever get through PS:T, however. I'm sorry - I love story, text and dialog... but that game is too tedious for me. *ducks tomatoes* Tedious like BG1 was, at least.

Yeah, the confusion from backers over what "Wasteland" meant... too many heard "grandfather of Fallout" and through Fallout 3. Boy, the headaches those conversations caused....

I was so excited for that game, and the look of the graphics and the 3D view and bad cameras were the first (of MANY) things that turned me off to NWN. Not even when it was released... had that look come out five years earlier I'd have been as equally "Blech" on it.

To each his own... I thought IWD's ending was completely unremarkable and uninteresting. PS:T on the other hand had some of the most satisfying endings I've ever seen in a video game. ... Yeah, to each their own. I know IWD is remembered as a dungeon crawl, but the difference between IWD and BG were really two-fold: 1 - player made party vs. recruited companions (the latter could, arguably, lead to a deeper or more compelling story - I'd vehemently disagree it means a BETTER story) 2 - more linear story and where you go from where vs. much more free-form exploration (arguably, the former leads to a better story) Because of 2, BG was "longer" as you could wander around more. But there's nothing inherently different between the two games that means one should have a better story. I, personally, feel IWD is one of the better, if not the best, realized stories (with a beginning, middle, end, clear plot points and protagonist, etc) that Black Isle / Obsidian has done. And, for me, IWD indeed has the best story ending of any of their games (with the acknowledgment that I've never finished, nor gotten far, in PS:T so I can't fairly judge it) I hadn't thought about endings before in regards to IWD but, yeah, I'm on the "better if not best ending to a story B.I./Obs has done" train. EDIT - yes, above, mentioned PS:T - and yes, BG wasn't mentioned and the BG series was BioWare... it's just that BG and IWD are often compared, and I mostly see it as BG was the story heavy series and IWD was the dungeon crawl, and I feel that's a false dichotomy... IWD was a dungeon crawl, mostly, yes, but BG was more open world exploration. Story wasn't the difference. Anywho, yes, when I say "best of B.I./Obs", I know BG wasn't theirs, and I include in the actual list Fallout's, KotOR 2, Alpha Protocol, NWN2 (not finished MotB or SoZ yet, so those COULD be better), ToEE...

If I had more money, I'd donate more. But there's little they could say that would make me add or subtract money - without majorly changing things they have already established, at least.

- everything is grey: I'm so tired of moral ambivalence.... make the world where good, bad and indifference all unhappily co-exist - skill imbalance: if a skill cannot be used often in the game, don't have it as a skill in the game - overabundance of loot: more money and sell-able items from defeated opponents, less iron daggers; let us buy (or build) our good items, with a very few rare exceptions of named item drops on important opponents - magic-user OP: please balance it so that the wizard doesn't rule the game - voice-over: there will be some, understood... but hopefully very little to none for the MC, and most of the dialog will be text only to add for more depth and options - random encounters: the absolutely random ones, where you travel the world map (or are just walking through an area) and completely randomized monsters groups can hit you, repeatedly... just no - affliction storyline / mechanic: I think it may be too late to say this at this point, but I don't want my main character to be saddled with some plot device sickness or curse that slowly eats at him over the game or drives him forward in very specific ways... this also feels tired right now - excessive tragedy in the story: some downers are expected, and heartache makes for compelling storytelling... however, make sure there's enough humor to balance it out - Dragon Age 2, for example, was a depression fest of constantly killing off family members, friends, half of cities, those people you save the previous chapter... just, let the protagonist do some lasting good sometimes, and have the occasional bit of humor that isn't dark humor - all companions being dark, tragic, or of questionable character: I'm sure a pattern is showing here... but I am so sick of "dark fantasy" and "grim and gritty" storytelling; how about a couple happy companions, or at least stoic without horrible pasts they are running from... - multi-classing: just no - excessively complicated combat mechanics: stuff like attacks of opportunity, facing, shields only protecting one side, weapon types (like slashing or piercing or bludgeoning) and the need to paper-rock-scissors the basic combat implements against foes who are resistant to types, too many levels of buffing, spell combos.... combat should be fun, tactical, and open to multiple ways to approach any given fight...but when you get to the ridiculous level of, say, ToEE and five-foot stepping.... gah, no... - everyone's friend: in one playthrough the player should not be able to befriend all factions ... at least a few should be "either/or" situtations; players also shouldn't be able to join every available group in one playthrough, either - completionist: the player shouldn't be able to see the entire map, finish every quest, and see every part of the story in just one playthrough... there should be stuff that is dependent, in many different ways, on player choices (at character creation AND during the game) so that the weight and meaning of said choices last welly outside of the choice itself ... and that's enough from me for now.

Only correction I'd make here is that a good portion of the "multi-player" that happened in the 90's into the early 00's was done by LAN. People had LAN parties. Internet speed wasn't an issue.

You'll get the "answer to life, the universe and everything" birthday twice... save that 42! Happy birthday!

Given my druthers, I want more control over my character and more options... but too many options, especially if they are completely a la carte, is a balancing nightmare and a pain in the butt for a player like me who doesn't want to whip out a spreadsheet, calculator and spend hours figuring out DPS. So sub-classes are nice. You pick your class, that limits you on some stuff, then eventually you pick a sub-class that specializes your character in a specific way. To be clear - I'm vehemently against multi-classing, though. That can burn in a fire until it's no longer even a bad memory.

I went with FO/BG, number 3, random stuff... just because I know there'll be combat animations and, since there will be, some random things happening at different times keeps down the monotony. I'd rather the combat WASN'T animated, at all, maybe a sword swing like in the old Gold Box games... but I fully accept this as a losing battle, so option 3 was my choice.

I bought Baldur's Gate right when it was released - but I've never finished it. I pre-ordered the Collector's Edition to BG2 from Electronics Boutique (R.I.P.) and played it to completion, including Throne of Bhaal, twice. I've played Icewind Dale more times than I can count. I also played Icewind Dale 2 a couple times, and... well, I own Planescape: Torment, so I guess it counts, but I didn't buy it until years after it came out and I've never gotten very far into it.