aluminiumtrioxid

Although you are a filthy heretic, I have the same preference regarding the DA franchise.

And this could be perfectly balanced by some kind of point-buy system, where you can get more advantageous backgrounds, better starting equipment etc. if you go with a "cheaper" race.

KotOR 2 because of G0T0 and Kreia.

My advice: read the Hack & Slash blog. It has some amazing materials and GMing advice.

Environmental hazards and combat abilities which move enemies around are also fun.

Yes, this sounds wonderful exactly as long as you're in a phase of your life when you can afford dumping hours into familiarizing yourself with the system instead of playing the mother****ing game. For anybody else who doesn't have nearly unlimited free time, it's a lot less attractive. Wow. I guess saying "U Mad?" Would be appropriate here. No really, I've never heard the "LOL ive got better things to be doin with mai time LOL nerd I have only a limited time to play gaymes so please design games for me to play em casually", no really completely unique, never heard it before. You might want to throw in something like "I have a girlfriend" to spice it up though. Also, saying that it's "just a game" is quite immature. Perhaps instead of asking developers to downscale a game to the lowest common denominator (ie those who only have time to play games casually), instead try and upscale yourself to the game. I was saying "since I have a limited amount of free time, I'd prefer to learn the workings of the game while actually playing it, as opposed to doing an undefined amount of 'test runs' during which I get to experience nothing meaningful from a roleplaying perspective". Way to misconstrue my point. Where did I say "it's just a game"? Are you even literate? (And besides, how would that be in any way "immature"?) Yes, of course, "upscaling yourself to a game" is the noblest of all full-time occupations one can dream of. Best use of my time. (Shouldn't the majority of the people who played the IE games of old be around 30 now, by the way?)

Says who? That sounds like the competitive gamer who does that. I always restart cRPG's multiple times to try out multiple character types before I settle on one. Sounds to me like PE is being designed as a system which stops players from failing. And most modern gamers who play "old-school" RPGs always then go and blame the system if they fail, instead of trying to master the system. Yes, this sounds wonderful exactly as long as you're in a phase of your life when you can afford dumping hours into familiarizing yourself with the system instead of playing the mother****ing game. For anybody else who doesn't have nearly unlimited free time, it's a lot less attractive.

Another point worth considering: due to the limitations inherent in making a cRPG, there is only a finite amount of reactivity the developers can cram into the final product. So, any meaningful choice you can make at character creation takes away from the amount of meaningful choices you encounter during the game. Ergo, a "simulationist" attribute system would either end up working exactly as a gamist one would (no reactivity besides the combat modifiers you get), or would literally limit your freedom during the game. I much prefer to make the important choices during the game, as opposed to doing so before it would even begin.

Hold on, little pal. It's one thing to distance themselves from the games/rulesets that, during the marketing phase, were going to be the spiritual predecessors blabla-bla -- -- and another thing to distance themselves from attributes designed using common sense. Since it's pretty much confirmed that the game will have some kind of background system, I think worrying about how gamist attributes tell nothing about the character aside from what his/her strengths are in combat is pretty meaningless. Want an intelligent character? Pick up a background like "well-educated", (which, say, gives you a bonus to lore skills and reputation bonus among academics). Want a persuasive guy? Invest in the speech skill. Et cetera. I see nothing inherently wrong with the division of roleplaying descriptors and combat capabilities. (Hell, Alpha Protocol didn't give you an option to customize your character's attributes at all, yet it's still considered to be one of the most reactive games ever, with really deep roleplaying aspects.)

The difference is that PE was sold to us as a successor to Infinity Engine games, four of which used AD&D 2E and the other using 3E. If not a D&D style system, what else is an "IE-like" game about? Would you say the only thing Obsidian meant by "IE-like" is isometric perspective? That's it? They namedropped BG, PST and IWD and yet the only influence this game seems to be taking from those games is completely cosmetic? Gameplay focusing on exploration, tactical combat and awesome dialogues? Since tabletop D&D was never about combat, I fail to see why would distancing yourself from that (frankly horrible) ruleset be counterintuitive for the aforementioned goals.

Yup, it's nice, but I like the lower-powered 40k lines (Dark Heresy, Only War) more.

Paladins sound mechanically awesome, and the wild orlans look badass despite being essentially ewoks. Keep up the good work!

Obyknven - demonstrating how you don't need religion to be a fanatic nutjob since 10 Mar 2013.

Internet privacy doesn't exist. Also, "he who has no secrets cannot be blackmailed" - I really don't care whether someone monitors what kinds of gay bondage porn do I show to my close acquintances after jerking off to it.

A ridiculous notion that characters with big breasts (and we're not even talking about nudity here) would alienate an entire gender. I mean more than half of the posts have been plain trolling on this thread but are you for real? Not to mention that the whole "entire gender" beign alienated is not even close, just a vocal minority of feminists or what have you and the internet white knights that will unquestioningly support them by default, no matter if they're right or wrong. So you either don't have boobs in games or you offend an entire gender? Ever heard of a false dichotomy? Thank god you're not the one making the games But dude, what the hell? Depictions of gigantic boobs will... well... pretty likely not harm anybody. On the other hand, not depicting gigantic boobs will not do any more harm, either. I see little point in arguing whether big boobs are good or bad for a game. Even if their size has no effect whatsoever about how women are perceived, the game will be not an ounce better (and, I'm led to believe, will not sell better) because it includes **** bigger than their owner's head. So if there is no actual loss by ditching them, I think it is really irrational to bitch about it. Not to mention the fact that even the most staunch anti-feminist can probably see the advantages of not having to listen to the shrill shrieks of those pesky wimmynz.

It seems I'm not the only one who disagrees with this.

No offense, but this really doesn't make any sense.

Supreme Commander, any Heroes game (H5 was perhaps the best, but 6 is pretty awesome, too... 3 was quite nice when it came out, but the later installments offer more tactical depth and the races are better differentiated IMO), Deus Ex, Alpha Protocol, PS:T. The other IE games, for some unfathomable reason, seem to be incompatible with my PC, so they've fallen out of my favor. Aaand I think that's it.

Amen. Although the horrible character generation system plays a huge part in it (for me, at least).

Every class will have unique "soul abilities", which kind of function as magic.

That's the paradox of tolerance -- the only thing it can't tolerate is intolerance. This tends not to go down well among champions of intolerance. I think that's a horrible misconception. But, then again, it's still slightly less absurd than people screaming about how they are terribly oppressed when someone asks them not to behave like an offensive f***wad.

They are a big studio, they have many voices. I'm cautiously optimistic. (Not to mention that if they do make a W40K RPG, it will probably be about Space Marines, and therefore have little significance to me. I'd love to see a Dark Heresy-based game in the style of CoC: Dark Corners of the Earth, though.)

Feel free to use your native language. The worst that could happen is that we won't understand a word out of it, which will have the same effect as if you hadn't said anything.

I think it's important to point out that the gypsy problem isn't a racial, but a sociological one. Also, you can't expect hundreds of years of tradition to just go away overnight. The "toss them free money" idea didn't work, and, in hindsight, it was a pretty retarded one. It doesn't mean that there are no other possible solutions short of "chase them away and let others deal with them". And it most certainly doesn't make racism against gypsies justified.

What about drug usage? Won't someone who has faced that problem in real life find it disturbing? How about rape? Slavery? Hunger?Child killing? If someone is close to child killing incidents in US may have negative emotions about this. I disagree partly with your stance because if a creator sit and think what someone out there can find disturbing,, he will run out of options very fast. Mature themes based on real life from their nature can rub some people the wrong way. For me the creators should be free to put everything they want in their work. If their creative vision doesn't include sexism for example because in their setting it doesn't make sense to have it, then good. The highlighed part is the key. If their artistic vision is of a bleak world where nothing good happens and racism,sexism and whateverism are the norms, they should go for it. There seems to be a misunderstanding. I don't endorse a "politically correct" (for a lack of better term) stance purely on ethical grounds. I don't really care if a statistically irrelevant (on general principle, <5%) minority of the potential buyers finds the game offensive - so I think hunger or drug use are almost certainly fine, slavery and child killing are probably okay. On the other hand, rape and racial issues should only be used with a good reason, because I'd prefer if there was no backlash of any kind, which could adversely affect sales. P:E is already a niche product. (Although, one could argue that this niche has not much overlap with those who would get offended by these themes, so they could be included anyway; a sentiment I can get behind, but keep in mind that those customers will also not boycott the product if it lacks the aforementioned themes - so why put them in?) I couldn't agree more. If the developers feel that their artistic vision would be compromised by a lack of racism, bigotry and rape, they should include these themes. But there can be a million (logical!) ways to have a setting without these, and grimdark is already getting tired.