Merin

I don't want gold to have weight, but I'm all for it being a toggle (and part of that Expert mode or whichever it fits into.)

I could use a new ballcap. Setting up something at a site like Cafepress isn't too hard, too.

Okay, everyone, calm down. He's not serious. To give him the benefit of the doubt, he's gently mocking everyone. Just ignore it. If it really bothers you, you aren't bad to /ignore someone who posts like that. Eventually the mods will catch up with those who post about raping dragons.

I'd be fine with it. I've played games where I was forced to work with a terrorist organization, forced to have to choose between letting one or hundreds die, forced to leave the vault that I had saved only to wander the wilderness no matter how much good I did for them, forced to have to listen to the elven emo whining of David Warner pining endlessly for his lost pointy ears... If you want good story, and you choose to play a game... some things WILL be forced on you. Gonna happen. Romance doens't bother me anymore than being stuck as a Jedi (far less, actually - I really dislike Star Wars and especially Jedi.)

Well, that's exactly how a "goal driven" exp system is supposed to work. No one said it needs to be necessarily a wordy quest written on your journal. I realize this. But too many people act as if it's "XP only for doing something for the guy with the ! over his head."

I still think a more elegant solution is broadening your definition of "goal" or "encounter." If you run into a random encounter of monster, for example, your only goal may be survival - which requires that you kill / drive off the monsters. XP rewarded. It wasn't a quest given to you or a goal in your journal... but when the encounter is generated, the reward condition is generated as well. For the "sneak past or kill all in your way", it's obvious - the XP is for getting in the door... once you get in the door, plot flag drops. You can't get it for going through the door again, and fighting the guards after you sneak in gives you nothing but (if you're into that sort of thing) a fun combat. Quite simply, you can arrange for the game to award XP for players who run characters that are only combat-oriented and kill their way through goals without resorting to XP per kill. On some occasions it will look similar or identical, but the subtle difference really de-emphasizes killing everything in sight "for the extra XP" strategy guide advice.

I wouldn't stop you... you'll probably be on your way to rescue Chris Avellone from whomever had staged a military-style coup at Obsidian.

Yeah, in the end I just hope Obsidian does their thing. Investors? Since when was spending money required to make people feel like their opinion is the only one that matters? People really don't understand Kickstarer.

That's an interpretation I hadn't considered. I don't think you're right, but I don't know that you're wrong. Hmmm.

Like - 52.22% / Dislike - 24.04% Want - 55% / Don't want - 21.83% Soft support isn't quite the same as hard support. My take away is that there's a whole lot of people who could go either way or just don't care. "I'd rather it is part of the game, but if Obsidian decides to not include it I'll adapt." That's not exactly soft support - that a vote for it but a clear acknowledgment of being able to enjoy the game without what they want. I can't speak for everyone choosing that option, sure, but when I wrote it to mean support but not necessity. Kind of like "Hardcore, really want, want but can live without." I'm that way with making my own party. I want it... I'll always vote for it... but I can still enjoy the game with recruited companions. --- And even accepting your "take away the middles" - 34.79 currently "hard" want and 14.11 "hard" don't want. Still more than double. Still a 20 point spread. Still a landslide in any election. And before you come back and say 34.79 isn't enough, you can't lump the other 65 some percent together - you have to look deeper... hence the so-called "soft" answers. Here's the difference between you and I - if the "soft" don't want was larger and the "soft" do want smaller, I'd concede freely that more don't want than do. Whereas you'll say - when it's actually 52/24. There's more than a little attempting to manipulate the numbers on your part there. Look - this is a silly poll, excessively unscientific, and Obsidian certainly isn't going to grab ANY poll from any thread (especially with a sample size of 300 out of nearly 50,000 without some kind of sample controlling) so... why not just say: 1 - You don't want romance, don't like it, oppose it in PE 2 - The numbers, while showing what they show, don't really matter. Those would be accurate statements. "50/50" is factually false.

Like - 52.22% / Dislike - 24.04% Want - 55% / Don't want - 21.83% Only if you ignore one simple thing -

While not the player, per se, in Dragon Age 2 Aveline lost a loved one and then moved on to a new love. As much as I was disappointed in that game, Aveline wasn't disappointing to me nor her story. In Dragon Age: Origins you could be romancing two people and have to come to a decision, usually forced, but that didn't have to be until after you had slept with one of them. Unlike Mass Effect 1, where you are forced to a decision before it even gets too serious with either. But Mass Effect, the series, does try to deal with being with one person, that person having moved on and you choosing to either stay true or move on yourself, then in 3 you can reconcile with your old love or stay with your new (I don't think you can pick a third... I only played the game once as that ending all but entirely ruined the series for me, sadly.) Now Alpha Protocol... Alpha Protocol you can sleep with every love interest save Sis (if you consider her a love interest - underage, your call on what that was to you)... and you could sleep with all three (Mina, Scarlet and SIE) in one play through and get an achievement for it. But these relationships weren't what you'd traditionally consider romance - in a nod to the genre of the game story, they were "Bond" romances. Still, I can't think of another game quite like this (maybe The Witcher, but I only played a little of that.)

With 305 people having voted (at the time I did the calculations,) here's where we stand in the non-scientific, practically meaningless for any purpose save taking the temperature of those on the Obsidian forums who cared to voted in this poll... 1. Feelings on romance in cRPGs? Enjoys romances most of the time (or more): 53.11% Doesn't enjoy romances most of the time (or more): 23.61% Mixed (sometimes enjoy, sometimes don't): 18.69% Indifferent / Don't care: 4.59% You can keep the Mixed separate, team them up with Indifferent, or divide them equally between Enjoy and Doesn't... I'd probably keep them out of the thing entirely as they are effectively Indifferent for figuring out whether people like or don't overall. Regardless - 53% is a clear majority. again, of those who take the poll... but that's what we got 2. Quality of romance in cRPGs? Romances have been more bad than good (or worse): 45.25% Romances have been more good than bad (or better): 32.46% Mixed (sometimes bad, sometimes good): 19.67% No opinion: 2.62% Not as clear a result. Mixed, again, probably best to consider it negates itself. More think they were mostly bad than think they were mostly good. I don't think this is that surprising, but one thing to possibility take from this is that it's not a clear majority who think romances are mostly done badly. 3. Desire for romance in Project Eternity? Prefer romances in PE (up to need them): 56.39% Leave it up to Obsidian (including no preference, which is practically the exact same thing): 22.62% Prefer romances aren't in PE (up to abhor them): 20.98% This is surprising. More people want romance in the game than say they usually enjoy them - meaning you have some benevolent people crossing over for more inclusion. A very clear majority, especially when you compare 56.39% vs. 22.62% - that's almost a 34 point spread. Saying you have no preference is essentially the same as leaving it up to Obsidian, I just included it in the poll for completions sake (for those who want to vote - don't care - clearly on all three polls.) Those not wanting romance in PE (not any game, period, but PE specifically) are the very clear minority. ... of those who voted in this poll. It's a very interesting result. I actually expected romance to be more on the losing end... but that's what very loud, very repetitious voices can do... they can make the minority seem more numerous than they are. Of course the poll is still open, you never know if there will be some wild surge of votes that changes things.

Untrue. You can choose the color in which you want to **** up the galaxy. Which is a slight cosmetic difference in narration. And its not like the trilogy has some wonderful choices and consequences that are marred in the last minute by a lackluster finale - it was always always a narrow rail road from day one. You're preaching to the choir. I was merely being derisive. Okay, take the Mass Effect conversation over to a different forum, thanks.

The friendship with Garrus, I'll agree, is one of the best written I've seen in a game ever. One of the most meaningful and moving scenes in the entire series was Shepard and Garrus in ME3, in the Citadel shooting and drinking beers.

I've never used reddit, and I really don't want to learn how to... don't tempt me! EDIT - Dang it...

Man, all the cool interviews and such seem to happen at reddit lately. Reddit must love Kickstarter as much as Linux users.

Thank you. I tried my best.

The bioware community isn't bizzare because biowarian romances aren't unskippable (at worst they are thrown at your face in a uncomfortable and cheesy manner that is only surpassed by the 'romance' itself) - but rather that the bioware community seems more concerned about this sort of thing than the game itself. A mere mention of bioware doing something (it can totally be closing itself) springs 10 threads about possible stereotypes for love interests. .... Okay, this I can't deny. But BSN also has fine people still bashing their heads against a wall advocating for silent PC, despite all of BioWare telling them "ain't going to happen", so... yeah. There's also one of the most popular and long going threads (I don't know what incarnation it's on) which is "What are you listening to right now?" Fun thread to post in.

I wasn't attacking you, SqueakyCat, just the argument given. "When you come to the forums and daily see threads requesting something outside the classic approach" You didn't say BioWare in THAT post, no - though a post prior you did say something (in reference to me) about report functions on BSN, so you'll have to forgive me for connecting BioWare bashing with you. But the general argument against thist, that you are speaking of, comes with much gnashing of teeth over "sex in tents" or "the BioWare method" which, again, are not the focus of the thread, the poll, or the vast, vast majority of the "indifferent to pro" romance people. I again apologize if you felt like I was singling you out, it was not my attention to upset you. That said - my point has plenty of basis. Every single snide jab at BioWare or rude comment about people's personal lives is the basis of my point. The point being, again - "It is a straw man because there's not a majority, or even vocal minority, advocating for "tent sex" or "fapping material." At worst I've seen mentions by people that "it wouldn't bother me if there was sex depicted", but that's almost always in the same post that will also state "It wouldn't bother me if romances weren't included at all" as well as "I only want them if they are of good quality." It's darn near universal that nobody really wants Obsidian to include them if they don't fit their vision of the game." I guess the next thread needs that additional poll question: "Should BioWare's model serve as inspiration for Project Eternity?" That would be targeted immediately as "biased" and wouldn't possibly help anything. It would probably make things deteriorate faster as everyone quoted just that part as proof of some kind of grand conspiracy to get PE to be a hentai dating sim or some such nonsense.

But here's the rub - who is asking for BioWare style romances? I'm sure some people who voted would like them. Full disclosure - I don't nearly have the problem with them that some people seem to, I've enjoyed them well enough. But, then, I enjoyed stealth and combat in Alpha Protocol and apparently that makes my judgment skills impaired... But I've only seen the word BioWare or BSN appear in these threads as cautionary tales, at best, or subjects of ridicule, at worst. This is a straw man. I didn't put the word BioWare in any poll questions. I didn't give the option for BioWare style romances to be selected - except for Question 4, which I've not seen one person say they wanted BioWare style romances in response to the question. It is a straw man because there's not a majority, or even vocal minority, advocating for "tent sex" or "fapping material." At worst I've seen mentions by people that "it wouldn't bother me if there was sex depicted", but that's almost always in the same post that will also state "It wouldn't bother me if romances weren't included at all" as well as "I only want them if they are of good quality." It's darn near universal that nobody really wants Obsidian to include them if they don't fit their vision of the game. So all the fear of BioWare or tent sex or whatever is almost baseless. Almost. I'm not denying some people will want that. But it's not the "barbarians at the gate " that many of the people are trying to make it out to. It's not even close to equivalent. There are far more people harassing others and, against the Forum Guidelines, mercilessly bashing BioWare or David Gaider or the boogeyman okay, that last one was sarcasm. Or a metaphor?

I love the world changing and showing signs of what my character did. Sometimes the subtle stuff, like Fallout radio or newspapers in Arcanum, are the best kinds of signs. I'd be strongly for this.

just a gentle reminder... If you feel like someone is harassing you or attacking you for simply stating your opinion on the topic, it is probably better to not engage them. If you feel it is particularly egregious, use the report feature. I know it's hard not to respond... but nothing good can come from it. Nothing is gained from commenting on each other's personal lives and levels of maturity. and now back to our regularly scheduled discussion...

I'm not personally a fan of random encounters, especially if they happen too frequently and make traveling a pain. It's not a deal-breaker for me if they are included, but I've rarely felt they've added anything to my game - save the specially scripted encounters that happen randomly. And there's a distinction - randomly generated, never-ending random encounters is my concern. Scripted, unique encounters that happen at random times - that's fine with me.

It was, sort of. Given at the end of a session or campaign even, and, yes, XP was for killing things and for gold. So you got triplely rewarded for killing something: one, you got XP for it - two, you got loot from it - three, you got more XP for the gold value of the loot it carried. Clearly, focus was on killing things. And you really liked killing things that had loot. But D&D was, at the time, morphing out of table top war gaming, so this makes absolute sense. It hadn't evolved yet into being more about storytelling yet. Not until later editions.