Jump to content

molarBear

Members
  • Content Count

    183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by molarBear

  1. no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no to all kinds of minigames!
  2. how much did planescape torment cost and how long was it in game hours unit? (so we can have a reference)
  3. I can support this model... If and only if you can both clearly identify to the game why you are doing this and you are obliged to follow through and abuse the reputation that you've gained for the PCs evil goals. Most commonly, though, when I see statements like that what is truly mean is something along the lines of: "An evil character can save the town in order to get the best rewards (XP / items / future quest possibilities) possible, then (well after the game and all possible squeals ends) he / she might do something that is slightly naughty, but only if there is no risk that he/she would get caught. Something like stealing a pen, perhaps. But regardless, he / she is evil because he / she is thinking really evil thoughts!!!" If the game can't distinguish between your actions and the actions of a paladin, either the game doesn't support playing evil or your definition of evil is very different from mine. One easy way to deal with this is to do away with alignment. Just give options. For instance, say you save a town you will not get +1 light side points or something of the sort. Instead it simply increases your reputation (reputation which shouldn't be used to determine if your character is good or evil, Hitler had a fantastic reputation at one time) this reputation opens more dialogue options, some of which could very well be you abusing your power for your own gain. Really, this is one of the reasons people want alignment to be removed from D&D. It's restrictive to actual RPing. I want dialogue options where I can go to the mayor and suggest I get a bonus for saving the town, or possibly that I should be "gifted" the towns magical weapon that was carried by a town founder and if he disagrees I can supply some kind of threat. If he decides to warn the town folk about what I'm saying to him I would love to ask him who would the townfolk believe? The person who saved the town from certain destruction at risk of his own life or the town mayor who hid in his office the entire time? See, doing that is pretty blatantly on the evil side but it's not unreasonably difficult to write and implement. It also gives me incentive to do good deeds but for reasons that are themselves evil. Bare in mind, that's only one example. It can be dealt with in any number of different ways and scenarios. ok, i think i see the advantages of a reputation system. i just hope that my evil deeds of valor will not be for naught say, a high advocate wants me to save his daughter from a monster. i save her but on the way back, i rape her, then kill her and then kill his father. would i somehow be rewarded by an evil faction?
  4. i use linux and i would really like to see the linux port of this game. that's why i like kickstarter and the projects i supported (wasteland2 & df adventure) all have a linux port. it's about damn time we get to see games running on linux natively. one can always install linux if need be but not windows or mac os (assuming that you don't pirate)
  5. i think it's pretty much set in stone that the game will be realtime. although i would rather prefer turn-based.
  6. for once in my life i would like to finish the game as a lawful evil! in ps:t this was near impossible for me. many evil choices led to botching of quests, slaughtering of NPCs and getting jack **** at the end (had to compensate by killing critters). regardless, i still couldn't be lawful, just chaotic evil. so this aspect is quite important for me. obsidian, you hear?
  7. (sorry if there was a topic about this already, couldnt find. also i am assuming here that we will have alignment in the first place) do you think a planescape: torment style alignment system will do for you? i would like that but with a bit of more info: we should get some clues that where our alignment is going (before it changes).
  8. No. It may be implemented as an extra patch after the game profits. Otherwise it is a nuisance for devs (time and money).
  9. i think obsidian can pull of a cant (slang, lingo, jargon...whatever you call it). the cost should be trivial, i think. as for the localization, sorry non-english speakers...i dont care also by localization, i believe that the text (literature) of the game already loses its "magic". so, learn english and dont get a double blow —an enraged localized version gamer
  10. i like the encumbrance factor (as in arcanum). none/light/medorate/heavy. but it shouldn't be an overkill. have only one unit for it (weight). not together with volume.
  11. eh, you want it berk (like ps:t)? well, in ps:t's case they took it directly from planescape's creators but i believe they can also do it for project eternity. shouldnt be that tedious or hard to create one...and i ****ing loved the cant in ps:t. adhered to the role playing aspect a lot.
  12. i liked the factions in planescape: torment but not that much. i mainly became a member because of additional quests and one or two special items.
  13. they should use a 3D engine but in a way that it should make sense to use description text. i don't know how this can be achieved, though. low res and no zoom? :s
  14. is this even a question? of course the holiest of the holies: planescape: torment we want a spiritual successor for ps:t!
  15. i think it is an unknown at this stage. i would prefer the IE because then we can have nice descriptions of NPCs/objects remember pharod's desc from ps:t? : if they use a bleeding edge engine where we can see every detail (also zooming)...then what's the point really?
  16. -will the game have any licenses like planescape or ad&d? -are the licenses expensive to acquire? -can obsidian use an already existing fantasy setting license on this game? questions, questions, questions...
  17. "Avellone asks for your kickstarter ideas" and that was that. no word on if this will be a go or not.
×
×
  • Create New...