Metabot

I don't want that either. What I'm talking about isn't simply having factions and being able to join one or the other. What I'm trying to get at is to incorporate some principles of RTS or TBS games like Civilization but in an RPG setting. So for example, you could join x guild or faction and there would be game systems in place that would allow the player to influence the way that faction goes, what other factions they ally with, and many other options hopefully. This is just an idea I have and I'm guessing Obsidian has a good idea what they're going to do with the game at this point. These are just ideas to add upon existing ones to add replayability and some spontaneity.

Instead of just using the tropes of horror fiction, video games can do so much more to instill fear. I'd much rather them try to use some of the principle of survival horror rather than to try to use cinema style horror tropes to scare the player. Here's an interesting extended comment on the subject. http://m.edge-online.com/opinion/japanese-games-arent-gibberish-just-different

I would like something like that, a la a reputation system, but combined with stats like I said before. NPCs should have their own stats as well, say perception for detecting lies, etc.

Why? An RPG is more about character skill as opposed to player skill. So say, you try to lie to someone and they call your bluff you might get to try again or try another tactic but your character's skills will determine how successful they will ultimately be.

Haven't played Alpha Protocol yet, but that sounds pretty interesting.

Tying dialogue options to attributes only limit dialogue options if your purposedly made a character that has low points in everything. Only if the dialog system is built that way. Tying dialogue options to attributes does whatever the person programming it wants it to do. R-P-G, sound it out. What does that have to do with anything? If I'm roleplaying a character I want it to be as realistic as possible. I want actions and relationships to determine what I can say and how I can say it, not some number on an arbitrarily linear scale. If I want to play a lying son of a ***** as my character, I don't whether people believe me to depend on a bluff stat I choose at the beginning of the game. I want whether people believe me or not to depend on what lengths I go to convince them within the game. Right but what lengths you can go to and how good your character is at it should be determined by stats.

R-P-G, sound it out.

I think a combination of the first two would be perfect.

I'd really like to see the political relationships between the various factions play a major role in the game. I think there's a possibility for incorporating some aspects of strategy games here, but in an RPG manner. If the proper systems were in place for the player to make unscripted actions that the game then reacts to, the possibility for replayability and roleplaying are really endless. I don't know if this is even possible or if Obsidian would even want to take this direction, but with their previous focus on the dynamics between factions in their previous games I think this is something to consider.

Why? Historically accurate where? On Earth? You forget this is a fantasy universe having nothing to do with our own.

Seriously, it has been on kickstarter for 3 days. Give it some room.

How many companions do you need? Aren't you one of those rpgcodex retar*s?

I think good music and good writing add more than voice acting ever can. I like to imagine what the characters sound like and that can be accomplished with great writing.

lol what? Tell them to go f*** themselves. That being said, minimum voice acting please. I think reading is more interactive actually, and thus more "immersing". God, immersion is such a buzz word these days that it means absolutely nothing now.

"With class based systems many times you get "pigeon" holed into a specific focused area, mages are range dps or healers, warriors use armor/weapons and no magic. Some of them offer a few "hybrid" classes but many don't." That's really the point of them though....

Weekends, what are those?

Momentum has really faltered it seems. I'm sure you guys are working on it.

I think a skill based system can be used in a party based game, but the player would have to make classes that worked well enough together in order to complete quests, etc. So, for example, you'd need one character that is highly proficient in one skill and another character that is highly proficient in another skill that the first character cannot be proficient in due to their attributes.

It made sense somewhat for Caesar's Legion to be less represented, though. The NCR and even House were much more of a presence in the setting of the game whereas Caesar was trying to make headway in that area. I don't really see why every faction would be equally compelling, equally good, and equally bad. They should have different motivations, different things they'd be willing to do to accomplish their goals, etc.

I like these ideas a lot. The main one for me is make the player make interesting and tough choices. The other main thing is don't design the damn game around the quest marker. If you have to leave the compass marker as an optional thing when you get stuck or better yet implement some kind of a hint system that helps you out but doesn't tell you exactly what to do. Along those lines, I'd love to see quests involve multiple uses of non combat skills and combat skills alike. In other words, these quests should be somewhat of a puzzle where your characters' skills have to be used effectively in order to succeed.

I was talking about stats more than skills. With some systems only a few types of builds are really good. The tradeoff is between "viable" and "has difficulty". But if each combination of skills was viable you'd have more choices. Yes there are tradeoffs. If I drop strength to make charisma better that is a tradeoff. However by doing that I had better still end up with a viable character. Most games have you discover only later that charisma is only used in a couple places and that you're stuck with a gimped character unless you reroll. Of course on second or third replay players know this stuff but for the first time player you're really unsure what matters. I'd like a system where you can not completely gimp yourself out of ignorance because you mistakenly thought you were making some valid tradeoffs. I guess we agree then in a way, however I think that it should still be possible to make "nonviable" characters which is simply a result of giving the player the freedom to make different characters. It could be that rather than being "nonviable" there's just a better way to make a character. Obviously there will always be the best way to make a character given what kind of character you want to make. If you make it so that no matter what you choose you're going to end up with just as good of a character that lessens the weight of your decisions. I mean if your character is simply "gimped" it doesn't mean it's nonviable, it just makes the game a little more difficult, which is fine.

So what? Maybe this world has a different morality than our own or yours. That adds to the gameplay and the world in my opinion.

And? Choices and consequences. Again, and? That's the point. Give and take. That's just a matter of making all skills useful. Your previous criticisms would make skills less useful because it wouldn't matter what you picked. Another issue of fine tuning and balancing. This is another "...and?" That's exactly the point. Luck was useful in New Vegas at least. It's a matter of making each stat useful in some way and also a matter of making it so that if you don't have a high number in a certain stat you can't do certain things.

Right exactly. No one character should be able to do everything. It defeats the purpose of a party.

" When conversing with Morrigan, for example, I often found myself redoing conversations with her so that i could get the highest influence possible. I would rather play a game where I can say what I want without being punished." No. "in KOTOR you won't get dark/light mastery bonus." So what?