novander

I can buy the idea of (for example) rather than making a strength based character you make a damage based character, but there is some disconnect in my head as to how that would actually work. I can't think of a physical attribute that should affect both swords and fireballs but I can see it working if there's a more substantial paradigm shift and all the attributes are more Soul or Mind based. Focus for damage, Compassion for healing etc.

I'd like to add my voice to the number of people wanting to see the protoype in action. It's been great getting weekly updates but concept art, stills and theory only go so far to give a sense of what the finished product will be like.

Gameplay. The story is what I'll remember; if it's a good story I'll go back and play it again, but if the mechanics are bad I'll give up before I see how good the story is.

No, I'd agree with Piccolo. I don't go into Dragon Age wanting the same thing I wanted from Diablo. I'm not trying to engage with Planescape: Torment in the same way I am with Skyrim. There are different types of RPG. All three of those elements help make them great games, but I'd rather have a tight focus on whichever hook is used to draw me in. In this case, I'm expecting a really well told story and if I get that I can overlook a generic setting.

A vast world with no plot sounds like MMO territory to me (disclaimer: never enjoyed MMOs, I could well be wrong there). I'm here for some Story. That said, PS:T had a kick-ass story but the reason it hooked me so well was the uniqueness of the world. No elves, no dwarves, no swords and bows. It was Baldur's Gate, the most generic setting of all, that got me into Role-Playing Games but Sigil and the Planes are the D&D setting I'll always love the most because of how PS:T introduced them.

Assuming stats are generated using a point-buy system or something similar, rather than the infuriating Random Roll (just keep going 'til you get what you want. We are patiient mofos over here) I'd like to see penalities for wearing armour and carrying weapons the character is not physically strong enough for, so the penalty for having the strength to wear plate and carry a claymore would be less natural ability with magic. Great for some types of mage, maybe, but not for my arcane overlord.

I'd like complete control over how skill points are spent, but maybe unlock new options through plot choices or just talking to the character.

"4 million and we use that last million to buy the IP rights for all the PS:T NPCs" I'd up my donation for that.

Instead of working on extra content, if they need extra time I'd rather it be spent on testing. Due to the nature of the worlds they create Obsidian games have a reputation for being a bit buggy. I have no problem at all with them delaying the release as long as necessary to put out a game (relatively) bug free.

27 Planescape: Torment, Mass Effect trilogy.

I often go into games thinking I want the tactical challenge, hearing about the clever ways they've balanced difficulty to test players but as soon as I hit that first really difficult fight - not a boss fight, that's a fair challenge I'll do that a few times, I'm talking about that pack of bandits that should be a walkover - I'm turning down all the settings to get to the next piece of story. I can totally see the fun in doing the same battle fifty times until you've found a cunning strategy, but that is not for me.

The Dragon Age 2 style is my favourite. I loved how the companions all had their own houses, lives and identities, even if Merrill's room in the poor quarter is five times the size of anything I've ever lived in.

And with that, Anek found a sensible middle ground and won the thread.

I was aware of the Resi 5 controversy but since I'm not a resi fan, I didn't pay that much attention to it. I'd guess, however, that nobody complained about white zombies because there is no history of white oppresion pretty much anywhere in the world. I'm not saying everyone loves white dudes, in fact there's quite a lot of people who don't love white dudes, but I can't think of anywhere in the world where white people make up a sizable chunk of the population and are so openly treated as second class citizens. Oh man, I did not mean to join this forum to bring down the patriachy. I don't even identify as a feminist, I just can't stand it when feminism is dismissed out of hand as unnecessary. Gaming often falls back on tired old tropes, often reinforcing the idea of women as secondary characters. It's pretty easy to see why that might put off female gamers and that's an issue that the OP and myself both feel should be addressed. The actual number of female gamers doesn't really matter, whether they're a large minority or a small one. Monte Carlo, if you think the thread isn't important, stop commenting. Let it die. Though I would like to thank you for commenting often because your signature means I don't have to check the kickstarter page to see how much has been pledged. Edit: sorry, it was BadMojo complaining most recently about the thread existing. Still, I like your sig.

Sorry, let me clarify. edit: Completely re-written this post because I don't feel the last clarification actually clarified anything, I am sometimes not making it clear when I am talking about treatment of women in the game world and when I am talking about treatment of women in the real world. In the game world, society can be sexist but in the real world it shouldn't be. So, if a culture in the Project Eternity world is sexist, I would like that sexism to be presented as unjust.

The audience for the game will be mostly male, yes. This doesn't mean it should be targetted at men. That's not to say I want things put in specifically to attract a female audience, only that things to attract a male audience too often means things to attract a horny 15-year old male audience, and can leave what female audience there is feel excluded at best. I want a game of heroic, often violent, badassery, tackling mature issues with complex ethical decisions beyond a simple "good" or "evil" choice. I don't see why we can't have that and have women treated as equals.

Not being actively misogynistic is not enough. The social norm - particuarly in male-dominated subcultures like gaming - is already one where women are treated as second class citizens. I'm not suggesting this game should be a feminist haven where every NPC the character meets screams about the cruelties of patriachy, I'd just like to see gaming progress towards a more liberal, equal society, and game companies like Obsidian, known for the quality of their writing, should be leading the way. Edit: which they are already. Reading through again it sounded like I was criticising them, I'm not. I just want to see that continue.

I think the OP is more asking for female characters who actually have their own character and personality, not just another female trope, even one arguably seen as positive sexism. I do want a politically correct game, not in the sense that everyone gets along all happy and smiley - I agree, that would be boring - but in the sense that racism is highlighted as vile, and that female characters get equal screentime and agency within the world. I don't like the argument "it's a fantasy setting", it's rings too similar to "it's just a game." The problem is that games don't exist in a vacuum. Selling a fantasy setting where most of the female characters players meet work as prostitutes to an audience that is - let's face it - mostly male may seem like good marketing, but would only end up reinforcing the notion of women as sex objects. (I'd like to make it clear I'm not suggesting that this is what Obsidian plan on doing, I'm just using it as an example.) That said, I don't think Obsidian need Sarkeesian's help on this, they've shown themselves pretty good in this regard already. I donated to her kickstarter and look forward to seeing the results. I may not agree with everything she says, but oh man did it piss me off that people were saying she shouldn't be doing this. The reaction to the video - provoked or not, I choose to believe not - shows that someone really does need to highlight the gender politics of gaming.

I agree with the first sentence, but for me it's a big no on everything else. Locks of varying difficulty, sure, but players shouldn't be punished for trying something difficult early on. For me, getting locked out of a chest is a reload situation. I want to explore everything everywhere; the game should never close off avenues of exploration for anything other than narrative purposes. For example, if I choose to kill the bandit chief and burn down his hut then sure, the trapdoor leading to his treasure room is buried under rubble and I can't get to it. That's fine, that was my choice. But if I've managed to sneak into the hut past his guards, I should be able try the lock and if it's too difficult for me, know I can come back later.

For tabletop roleplaying I prefer a points-buy skill system, but I dunno call it nostalgia or whatever, I could really buy into a class and level system for this. Ideally I'd like really broad base classes that can specialise in areas really evocative of the world, like the fighter class can become a mage-hunting gunslinger, the wizard class can become a soul-burning pyromancer.

Using traditional tropes such as elves and dwarves does have some advantages. Our PC is very unlikely to be an amnesiac, PS:T style, so is expected to have some familiarity with the world. I see a band of warrior elves heading towards me, I have a reasonable idea of what to expect. These guys can be talked to, probably won't attack on sight. Having talked my way out of a fight with them I carry on down the road to see a band of warrior xnarfoids heading towards me. The PC would know whether to run, fight or smile and offer candy. I, the player, do not. I don't want D&D elves and dwarves, I do want unique races to have a large role, but I'd like something that I can connect to as a player to give me a grounding in the world.

Option 1. With such a limited number of companions, I'd want them to provide a lot of world lore and plot hooks, so I'd want to be able to bring any of them with me at any point without feeling like they were dragging the party down.

I don't mind becoming enemies of one faction if I join another, I don't mind the racist factions banning my Godlike character outright, I'd quite like to be able to join one of the many thief-catering organised crime groups (and possibly take them down from the inside); that's all part of the game world. What I don't want is my companions leaving if I join the wrong group. Companions are a great link to the world, so when I turn up in New Heomar for the first time and everyone throws glass shards at my face, I want to know that I can turn to my trusty friend Dwarface McRangerzard and say "hey, what is going on here?"

We have concept art of a dwarf ranger already, so ranger is a likely option, though it could be a subclass of fighter- or rogue-type if they're going the subclass route. Magic user will probably be another core class, but whether that takes the form of Sorcerer, warlock, mage, cleric, druid, psion, etc. will depend on how magic works in the setting. Rogue or Thief is the class I usually aim for, so I hope something like that is one of the cores.

Spending a lot of time writing great dialogue and then going back to shorten it for the lazy players sounds kind of depressing for the writer. I don't think this is the kind of game for people after instant gratification. If it was, I don't think Obsidian would have needed a kickstarter for it. Let's all just enjoy our walls of text.