aluminiumtrioxid

As a side note, character portraits (even generic ones, like "peasant" or "nobleman") tremendously improve on dialogue boxes for me.

Not only beautiful, but for me, it also conveys a very Baldur's Gate-y feel in terms of design and color scheme. I'm absolutely in awe.

Interesting approach And, sadly, terribly wrong. In RPG design, your goal isn't to create verisimilitude (as in "semblance to reality") through game mechanics. Rather, aforementioned game mechanics exist to emulate genre tropes. Survival mechanics are necessary when post-apocalyptic wastelands are involved. Chances of getting blood poisoning from a stab of a rusty dagger are only significant if your game seeks to emulate a gritty low fantasy environment. Elaborate combat mechanics are completely unnecessary in a game of modern investigative horror. On the other hand, in-combat powerups which trigger during a suitably dramatic demonstration of Heroic Resolve after getting badly beaten would be an absolute must in a shonen rpg. Since we only have a rather sketchy idea of what tropes are significant enough to warrant mechanical representation in the context of P:E, the point of the whole conversation is moot. Furthermore, it would tremendously improve everybody's mood and digestion if Valorian would just kindly shut his piehole already and accept that the people working on the game may be somewhat more competent and experienced (on the field they've been working on for God knows how long) than he (who probably has no qualifications whatsoever) is, instead of flailing about and screaming in a futile, yet increasingly tiresome manner. Btw., he's still on ignore, so if he raises an actual point instead of spewing some condescending but ultimately useless bull****, please do notify me.

On this note, I'd very much welcome a W40K crpg along the lines of the Dark Heresy tabletop game. Well, they said the sci-fi elements will be heavily dependent on what class do you choose, and what Tides you align yourself with. A Blue Tide-oriented Nano will probably be able to decipher much more than a Glaive focusing on the Red Tide.

It is? Where did you get this? BoNS is my favorite fantasy work. They said it in one of the reddit Q&As. Here.

One of the possible parties consists of a magic-item-eating, crippled junkie, a ball of goo, and a former clergyman who summons cthulhoid abominations through his forearm tattoos. (Plus the main character.) Also, Numenera is a ripoff of Gene Wolfe's Book of the New Sun series. Promising enough for me. (Not to mention the fact that Avellone will presumably keep the folks working on it in line.)

The vision document contains some hints about the original 5 companions. Thoughts, anyone?

Yet you people are still wasting your time trying to make him see reason. He's a fanatic, absolutely incapable of changing his mind, or even the subject. I suggest a "don't feed the troll" policy. "Ignore" also comes in handy.

Well, that kind of settles what race my first character will be

Actually, KotOR 2 had basically the same story as PS:T, and it managed to squeeze in some nonlinearity. Not to mention that Arcanum and FNV had at least as good stories as BG2 or TW2, so I kind of fail to see your point.

While I agree with you, the story was invented on-the-fly, and thus, is subject to some polishing (hopefully by more talented writers than Mr. Long); not to mention the fact that even a fairly simple premise can lead to an enjoyable experience given the unique strengths of the medium (immersion and reactivity). Also, if the characters are written well, I can see the possibility of this story becoming fairly engaging. Besides, it has more of a "side-quest" vibe In that category, you don't really need more than this.

I think it will be around the level of the original PS:T, or KotOR 2. With some, you could easily tell, while you had to work a little more to see it in others.

I want this game more and more with each update.

If he could get there, some sort of connection must exist between the two worlds. Which implies that either the whole soul and magic stuff has a scientific explanation, which kind of kills the sense of wonder in PE, or that magic is real in Numenera, which goes against the established principles of the world. The only explanation that could work IMO is that some sort of entertainment AI created a simulacrum of a character in a video game from an earlier age, and you're actually fighting this simulacrum. Which is actually a pretty cool idea

I'm sorry, but this is a terrible idea. Numenera's science fantasy simply doesn't mix well with PE's worldview. It would be a total moodkiller.

I made several other points that you didn't even address: Nor did I intend to (you were, after all, arguing with alanschu; and I'm not made out of time). But, unlike me, you did not merely imply your opponent has lied about the article, you actually accused him of doing that (" from what I've read it seems that you are misinterpreting the results of these experiments and spining them to justify censorship maybe"). It kind of rubbed me in the wrong way - with the whole thing being totally untrue and stuff -, so I've corrected you. Maybe I will return to the other points you've made when I won't have mid-term (or whatever it's called in english) anatomy and biochemistry exams looming over my head. Maybe I won't, since I don't like arguing with people who make baseless accusations when they don't like what the other person is talking about. Time will tell.

Actually this is great, I took the time to read the article that you posted and the blog posts that talks about. I hope you read this because from what I've read it seems that you are misinterpreting the results of these experiments and spining them to justify censorship maybe? Now what the researcher said is that "In a discussion, when you see people frowning, it influences how you feel about the discussion" this says that comments can affect how you feel about the article and what your opinion on it is, but it doesn't say that they won't understand it or that it will be more difficult to learn. So your take that people "gain" less when there are comments and that these comments "compromise the readers ability to learn" is a complete misinterpretation, it talks about your opinion on the article, not your ability to learn it. "I have contacted the authors and have received and read a draft of that paper. Since it is not published yet, I will not break all sorts of embargoes by going into details, but can re-state what is already out there. An article about nanotechnology, a topic most people know very little about and usually have no a priori biases for or against, was presented to the test subjects. Half the people saw the article with (invented) polite, civil and constructive comments. The other half was given the same article but with uncivil comments – essentially a flame-war in the fake commenting thread. The result is that readers of the second version quickly developed affinity for one side of the argument and strongly took that side, which affected the way they understood and trusted the original article (text of which was unaltered). The nasty comment thread polarized the opinion of readers, leading them to misunderstand the original article." Good-natured as I am, I will conclude that you've only skimmed through the article instead of an in-depth reading. Others may develop different explanations, most likely involving the rather unpleasant term of "bold-faced lying".

Not really. "She grinned. "I have an apple that thinks it is a pear," she said, holding it up. "And a bun that thinks it is a cat. And a lettuce that thinks it is a lettuce." "It's a clever lettuce then." "Hardly," she said with a delicate snort. "Why would anything clever think it was a lettuce?" "Even if it is a lettuce?" I asked. "Especially then," she said. "Bad enough to be a lettuce. How awful to think you are a lettuce too." She shook her head sadly, her hair following the motion as if she were underwater."

It's ****ing AMAZING. Well, perhaps not THAT amazing (his Kingkiller books are pretty standard fare in regard to the story and worldbuilding), but his prose is exceptional, almost on par with Bradbury's. A demonstration: "A Silence of Three Parts IT WAS NIGHT AGAIN. The Waystone Inn lay in silence, and it was a silence of three parts. The most obvious part was a hollow, echoing quiet, made by things that were lacking. If there had been a wind it would have sighed through the trees, set the inn’s sign creaking on its hooks, and brushed the silence down the road like trailing autumn leaves. If there had been a crowd, even a handful of men inside the inn, they would have filled the silence with conversation and laughter, the clatter and clamor one expects from a drinking house during the dark hours of night. If there had been music…but no, of course there was no music. In fact there were none of these things, and so the silence remained. Inside the Waystone a pair of men huddled at one corner of the bar. They drank with quiet determination, avoiding serious discussions of troubling news. In doing this they added a small, sullen silence to the larger, hollow one. It made an alloy of sorts, a counterpoint. The third silence was not an easy thing to notice. If you listened for an hour, you might begin to feel it in the wooden floor underfoot and in the rough, splintering barrels behind the bar. It was in the weight of the black stone hearth that held the heat of a long dead fire. It was in the slow back and forth of a white linen cloth rubbing along the grain of the bar. And it was in the hands of the man who stood there, polishing a stretch of mahogany that already gleamed in the lamplight. The man had true-red hair, red as flame. His eyes were dark and distant, and he moved with the subtle certainty that comes from knowing many things. The Waystone was his, just as the third silence was his. This was appropriate, as it was the greatest silence of the three, wrapping the others inside itself. It was deep and wide as autumn’s ending. It was heavy as a great river-smooth stone. It was the patient, cut-flower sound of a man who is waiting to die." Despite the grimdarkness of the first chapter, it's a pretty light-hearted, fun read

I want Rothfuss on the writing team o.o

I fail to see how being anti-sex by your standards would be wrong.

I expanded a bit on my post, that was, you know, right under his. You mean this one? Right, when i say anti-sex I'm saying that she is against sexuality, not that she doesn't want to have sex herself and hopes to remain a virgin That's like when the religious say "we are in favor of sex... that is only in the missionary position for the sole purpouse of procreation, see? we are pro-sex" Yeah, right buddy. What else you got? I still don't understand the basis of this accusation. She's saying she doesn't like porn, because she finds it degrading (which is a rather problematic statement - she's implying that the women working in porn have no agency and need to be saved from their own decision to work in that industry). But how does this make her anti-sex? She wants to have an enjoyable experience when shagging someone. In what sense is that akin to the religious viewpoint?

I didn't say they've been; I merely remarked on alanschu's observation that in social sciences, it's hard to produce reliable, quantifiable results due to social pressure. No, that's not true, it's equivocation, people are talking about being pro-sexuality which includes pornography, where she is talking about her selfish desires while being entirely dishonest about pornography, clearly she is writing to an audience that hasn't seen pornography in their lives. You can't be pro-sexuality apart from when it's not specifically designed for you, which will be the majority of it. I have to admit, I'm a bit confused. What parts of her article are you referring to? (Please, no "the whole thing"-type of answer )

Based on her she seems disgusted by the character flexibility and call her moves "pornographic", she doesn't like when bayonetta does sexy poses for the players, she doesn't like that the character gets naked, and she doesn't like that she sucks on a lollipop. According to her all of this is bad, she said so herself. I conclude that she is anti-sex, anti-pornography and she doesn't like characters to be overly sexualized, even when we are talking about an artistic medium, besides, the ESRB already accounts for nudity and sexual themes. I hope you do realize that you can be both pro-sex and anti-pornography at the same time.

*is blinking rapidly* Care to elaborate?