[If Obsidian + Kickstarter = ?]

Look at modern sequels and go back to what made them great. People hated on skyrim for taking out a lot of the character custimization options i.e. stats, tag skills, pants. In a game without classes its cool that any character can potentially do anything, but it needs to come at a cost. There's no point when every character can do everything. When I decide to be a swordsman not only do I want it to mean I'm good with swords, but I want it to mean that I won't be good with bows, or if I want to be good with swords and bows then I'll be giving up social skills, or magic. I don't want to be punished by having all difficulty/challenge removed from the game if focus on combat. I don't want the game elements of equipment upgrades, and loot/gold to no longer matter if I focus on crafting.

 

People hated on dragon age 2 for "streamlining" everything to appeal to the masses. Its okay to have lulls in the action. RPGs are about role playing and not combat 24/7 with "another wave" of enemies being slaughtered by the dozens. Combat should be risky and only one of a few ways to solve problems. Some characters/parties might avoid combat if its not nessicary. You should be concerned how your character would feel about risking their life or killing someone, not what they will drop or how much experince they yield.

 

I want to be able to customize my party. I want to be able to specialize their abilities to fill the roles I want them to fill and I want to be able to equip them with gear upgrades. I want to have to decide between buying a better bow for my archer to help take down enemy mages faster, or get better armor for my fighter so he can better keep melee opponets away from my back lines. Even in my specialization I want there to be situations where I might be forced to adapt tatics; fights where the usual rules are shaken up to provide a unique challenge.

 

I feel like games have been dumbed down, and I want you to "smarten" them back up. Choices have been reduced to cosmetics (axe or sword with the same animation) or something you make once at the start of a mission (choose your party) and are stuck with because tactics don't matter and the combat is so easy that you can get by with any randomly choices. I want to have to make choices on the fly and I want to be allowed to fail if I don't.

 

I don't want failure to mean some specializations are objectively worse or not viable. I want the strength/viability of a specialization to depend on the context of the party and the situation. I want my success or failure to hinge on my assessment of the situation and response. If I stack a party full of combat focused characters I want to run into problems because I don't have social skills, utility magic, theif skills etc. Brute force or any other strategy shouldn't always be the best option.

 

I don't want sidequests to feel forced, or added after the fact. Older games had areas and maps specificly for sidequests. Bring back the idea that things in the game world exists for the world and not for the player. A castle should have a kitchen even if its not plot essential. The player might be able to do things in some of these areas but they don't exists soley out of necessity for the game. Have the sidequests originate from NPCs that would exist in the world instead of creating an NPC thats only purpose is to need an item that is conveniently in the bad guy's lair.

[If Obsidian + Kickstarter = ?]

I know buying the rights to make a sequel would be a bit much for a kickstarter, but I'd love to see a "spiritual successor" to games like the infinity engine games, arcanum or even lionheart. I think a new IP would offer some great possibilities for gameplay and mechanics. What was great about all those games for me was the setting, story and overall immersion. PS:T for example was fairly light on combat/action but there was a lot to explore that actually rewarded the player. Another key element is having the game respond to your character(s). Its awesome having attributes or skills unlock dialogue options, or having your character with a low intelligence be too stupid to realize an NPC is tricking them. In the same vein, having consequences for choices and multiple ways to complete quests with the same of varying outcomes really makes the world feel alive. I don't really care if the graphics are infinity engine quality, but obviously it would be nice to have widescreen and higher resolutions supported. I absolutely loved how temple of elemental evil was able to capture the feeling of the infinity engine while technically being a mix of 2d and 3d, mainly all the flavor clothing items and how the "sprites" would show the hats/cloaks/armor/boots instead of just weapons/shields.

 

as for settings I'd personally like to see:

-alternate histroy with magic, like lionheart

-steampunk with magic, like arcanum

-magitech where magic is abundant and comercialized

-an untamed frontier in a world of kingdoms at war in an age of exploration

-a "generic fantasy" world post apocalypse

 

I don't particularly favor one type of combat. Turnbased can be awesome like fallout 1+2, but realtime worked well in the infinity engine games. I think lionheart was a little too fast paced (and thus less tatical) at times, but the speed slider helped. Arcanum had the options for both which is idea, but probably demands a lot more work and attention to balance.