Ieo

I dread such a prospect as the companions I'm fondest of, given my luck, will be the ones last made accessable. There is another possibility. The problem with a "first 25%" and related content assessments is that it requires the world content to be linear. If the world is broad enough, we should be able to go down different questing paths to access companions in different order, like in BG2. Of course, this doesn't help in the first play-through unless you have some foreknowledge... I suppose a related question is, what expected level would a companion have, and would companion levels scale with us when we first discover them, like in BG2? (I don't remember PS:T's implementation there. Maybe some other games do it differently.) Hmm.

Yeah, I posted the interview quote in the current romance thread. Basically, it takes Avellone 2-3 months to write a companion with depth, and he's a fast writer. Ziets is on board now, but we don't know his exact role yet in relation to world-building and writing. If they split the companions to 4 each and ignoring any additional romance content (but who knows how fast Ziets writes), that'd be a minimum 8 months to 12 months total. 8 months is quite doable for the timeframe, but honestly I'd rather have more depth if we only have 8 companions... And then there's narrative and quest writing, all the NPC stuff--maybe they won't be on other projects, but there sure is a lot of other writing to be done. I have no idea if they'll hire more writers. So long as Avellone signs off on stuff, I guess I'd be okay with that.

I never clearly understood what the "forum badge" would be exactly. A replacement for our avatar pic? Text that appears below our forum title?

People have pointed out the 8 = eternity connection too. It would be awesome to see 8 as a motif in the narrative in various ways...... *dreaming*

I really hate this idea. There's exactly one reason why I wouldn't like a separate quest inventory: Pantaloons. Note: We will have a player house AND stronghold (optional). I think there's plenty of room for packratting. I really do like the mystery of some items you run across that may or may not have an immediate purpose. Have an auto-sort can actually be a spoiler. ......Now that I think about it, I originally wanted a separate crafting inventory, but if there are rare weird things dropping from certain enemies, maybe I'd rather not know their importance yet. Hmm, dunno. Undecided on that. Well. I'd like to think any item after "use" (quest turn-in, key use), the item simply vanishes like a consumable. There should be a key ring, though--didn't BG2 have a key ring?

Actually much earlier. First fiction attempt I know of was in the 1800s, but I don't remember the exact details despite having written a paper on it... Not to mention anthropological notes about certain societies now extinct through war. Regardless, I hated the Drow paradigm for being so intellectually cheap about it. But Ziets--now, I haven't played MotB because I don't have NWN2 and hated NWN1, but Rashemen as a magocratic gynarchy sounds like an interesting subversion/twist on the idea without being intellectually cheap (plain mirror image, etc.).

The one thing I liked about PS:T's 3D portraits was how they looked ill and stuff as party members got hurt. Or entered disguise, like the zombie at the beginning.

Since all the points have been made across the entire spectrum already, a topic ban with pointers to all existing locked threads would be best. IMO. As a sticky post.

Yeah, there wasn't much banter in PS:T. The vast majority of character content required that you initiate dialogue with them. I suspect a lot of people didn't do that. And then find out--whoa, reams and reams of content far surpassing all BG2 companions combined.

Romance and feminism are two very different topics. It's hardly only women who are asking for "romances" in games. Feminism is a sociopolitical construct relevant to in-game politics only if Obsidian deems it so; realism is a different topic altogether as well. Hmm didn't mention the desire of women for both subjects,neither referred to a sex in my post. But just making this clear, keep going on thread. ? I didn't mention anything about sex in my post either. Just saying that romance and feminism isn't one subject together, like you said in your first post there. Well, carry on. These threads aren't exactly productive anymore since the very first ones a month ago that got Sawyer to pipe up that he supports realistic but stylish gear for women and all that.

Romance and feminism are two very different topics. It's hardly only women who are asking for "romances" in games. Feminism is a sociopolitical construct relevant to in-game politics only if Obsidian deems it so; realism is a different topic altogether as well.

I don't recall that at all, and I can't rewatch the video at work. What I do remember is that in an interview, Feargus or Tim Cain said that there will be "low stat" dialogue options.

Gah, wrong post. >:| There are several other threads about the big city(s), though. You should read those for a ton of ideas already. (Just do a search, they should show up.)

You just made me think of a brontosaurus with wings.

I'd have to agree. The problem with synchronous chat medium is that it's not conducive to actual discussion. More like twittering.

I'm sure moral quandaries will be present, but there will be no "alignment." You mentioned Skyrim. Did you play any of the games Obsidian made? They have a track record for fuzzy moral edges.

IF YOU KIDS DON'T QUIET DOWN, I'M TURNING THIS PROJECT AROUND AND WE'RE GOING HOME.

I find that highly unlikely. It's not like we could change the PS:T companions, for example. The class weaves heavily into a character's backstory--I don't see how Forton or Cadegund could simply be changed by a few buttons... On the other hand, the related question is whether we can pick their specific sklils/stats/etc. while leveling, maybe going towards a specialization.

This thread confuses me. I mean, the old Bioware games are slathered across the Kickstarter page. My poll certainly shows a goodly number of fans for those games. What?

Where did you hear this? I don't recall seeing any official comment of that sort anywhere...

But that's already on-topic. Obsidian said that players can romance all the dragons in the game. It was official! On the stream!

To me, it depends heavily on the topic and idea proposed... I tend to take a much harder stance of "omg leave it alone, let Obsidian decide" in purely subjective items like.... PLEASE HIRE THIS PERSON TO DO X. Because I honestly don't see any real discussion from something like music that's based purely on taste, and Obsidian has a far, far better frame of reference as they're the ones making the game. Then there are other related threads when Obsidian has their own internal people to worry about first and they're still better positioned to find appropriate people to hire. In terms of high-level systemic decisions like multiplayer or consoles, there's even less reason for "discussion" because a basic business decision was already made, it isn't going to change, and players aren't going to change their own minds either. I mean, that's pretty much off-topic now. In terms of mechanics and other content like races or quest design or party positioning--definitely room for discussion. Mechanics are very complicated and linked to each other, specifically, so ideas around those--especially after Obsidian proposes the big umbrella mechanic, can be interesting, and maybe Obsidian would get an idea or two, with heavy doses of salt. There's really only so much players can say to "help" Obsidian design the game.

IMO, PS:T had 7 potential companions, so PE is already bigger than that. Edit: But depending on how Obsidian decides to implement romances, if at all, then 8 may not be enough.

It's not even a circle if you skip addressing the argument in words and say "money" and expect others to figure that out as a legitimate point. (Really, was it that much work just to say that?) If the debate then can go down to "Obsidian should hire more writers," that's a whole other thing. And no, I don't think Obsidian should hire more writers; Avellone and Ziets should be enough for full consistency. I can't find the BG2 credits for the writers, and for some reason IMDB is listing only Lukas Kristjanson, whoever that is, and PS:T obviously had Avellone. It'd be interesting to see how many writers were used in other AAA games.

It is pretty hard-headed when you refuse to read the post and respond only in dollar terms and not in terms of time, which was my argument based on what the devs actually said as a constraint on the number of companions. Unless people are fine with hiring more writers from someplace like Bioware. Really, your refusal to even address an argument based in fact is very disappointing and doesn't cast your stance in a favorable light. Though if Avellone needed two years to properly write equal-exclusive content for non/romance, I'd be fine with that, I suppose. Found the interview: So if one compromise is to have equal and parallel or exclusive non/romance content per companion, address that.