Ieo

Kinda spoilery if you want to play either (especially BG), but good examples if you aren't going to. Planescape: Torment example (note the descriptive narrative text interspersed with dialogic content) Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn example (note the pure dialogic content)

The medieval/"ancient" in the poll is in reference to the instruments themselves, not necessarily the music (there's modern stuff being composed for lute, for example). The hurdy-gurdy dates back to something like the 9th Century CE. I'm not entirely sure what counts as "ancient," but "medieval" probably seems more appropriate...

Here lies Eric. He shot the gazebo with an arrow. It woke up. P.S.: I wouldn't put my real name or even nickname since I do keep such things separate from "real life," but I'd consider putting in a name I used across games including MMOs due to "history." I just can't think of anything else relevant for this, though, because I don't have a clear idea anyway--too many possible quotes and such.

Oh, the Solaufein mod was pretty good. I just think Alistair must be better than Anomen (srsly). I'm unclear about the toolkit--is it that Obsidian said they're opening mod support, but it's up to players to make their own tools, or how does that work? We know there will be mod support, at least. I don't know what you mean by SP games and lack of enthusiasm (in the mod department?); Pocket Plane and Gibberlings 3 for BG in particular...

(Avellone interview) Since you believe Avellone is only speaking complete BS--an actual game dev who knows way more than you about actual game implementation--then I guess it's time for you to leave. (P.S.: It's completely irrelevant what games you played on console. For PE, it's only relevant if you liked PS:T, BG, IWD. Especially PS:T for all the dialogue and choices/consequence content.)

I agree, and it's important not to overlap too much on the tiers or it'll cause more (yes, more) confusion and waffling--you have to remember that changing tier rewards, especially expanding rewards to lower tiers, may very well increase some pledges but can and will also encourage some backers to lower their pledges. It's risky this late in the KS game. The newest digital $165 tier with the addition of Wasteland 2 is good because that's a brand-new addition without stretching the edges of existing rewards. And the expansion. I find the expansion more intriguing myself.

This is no different than saying a video game (video) should have lots of cinematic cut-scenes and talking 3D heads and full VO. It's just a step removed. Tone can be somewhat conveyed in typographical application, but it'd be nice to see the occasional narrative text as well, e.g. the elderly Hive lady standing with her hands on her hips. PS:T is one extreme, so something between BG and PS:T would be my favorite.

No. Sales drive future game development. Forum participation does not, though it may (hopefully or not) help shape it. This is where the meaning crossed, then--I was not considering MMORPGs, though it's all under a giant umbrella, because the co-op people here for PE are insisting they do not want to play an MMO because it's different; I'm addressing that scale of multiplayer. If taking into account MMOs, then yes, those combined numbers could very well surpass all SP gamers. Rest is irrelevant since I don't want MP/co-op in PE either, nor any of its sequels.

I like the BG1 ending (cut-scene closure with a mild 'lead-in' to keep a door open but is still considered closure) and especially the BG2 endings--closure for all party members, preferably more postscripts concerning the various states of the PE regions and such. PST ending was fine too, but too short (it had the BG1-style end cut-scene but lacked party member closure). DA:O-style endings covered party members and major world events, which was great if it actually worked so damn buggy. Above all, I require clear closure. I don't particularly like continuing to play after the main storyline, like in Oblivion; felt weird, just standing around "okay, now what?" Oblivion/Skyrim and those similar games are all different genres, though, because they had weak storylines and poor quests to begin with. For something so story driven, BG or PST or PE etc., there must be an "end." IMO.

I am not convinced there are more MP players than SP. I think whatever numbers you're pulling out of a hat are based on infinitely smaller forum numbers that by no means represent a decent sample--SP players who play by themselves and enjoy the game may write a purchase review or lightly visit forums, but by and large the vast majority of consumers who are satisfied with their purchase do not say so on the internet (nor to a lot of those dissatsified, but that's different). It's more accurate to say MP/co-op supporters may be more vocal, and hence you'd see more of their activity. That means little in full market terms, though. It's very much like the self-selecting sample polls on this forum. You'd have to understand how population statistics work, though.

I'm not in favor of romances in PE, but there has to be equal treatment if there are any, yes--I thought DA:O's Alistair was supposed to be loads, loads better than Anomen, though. Yes, I said it. There won't be co-op/MP, so that problem won't happen. (See sig.) I would pledge more if I could design a quest (high-level tree sketches, anyway).

Baldur's Gate = Pure dialogic text Planescape: Torment = Dialogic with narrative text I prefer PS:T because the narrative descriptions paint very distinct visuals (e.g. body language) that the sprites and dialogue simply cannot do. And no, that's definitely not an argument to add 3D zoom-in cut-scene models. Yuck.

(snip) I don't mind timed exclusive content, and if it's an inconsequential thing (a cosmetic item or a pet) it's no big deal, but when companies start chopping out sets of weapons and armor to sell as bonus material, you end up with situations like DA:O and DAII, where several exclusive and pre-order items were never released (not even on ther DA:O CE) and never will be. Anyone that wants the "complete" edition of the game would be missing out. I think this and similar posts are toeing an idea not fully explicated yet existing in full force out in the gaming nethers. Microtransactions (under the DLC umbrella). Microtransaction DLC is reviled in many quarters because it (1) no longer places emphasis on a "complete ship product," (2) can affect game balance issues between the haves and have-nots, and (3) allows companies to package content for piecemeal purchase in such a way that players may end up paying more for a product than if it was traditional "complete ship" (of course, that also means that smart and not-hardcore consumers may end up saving money too). The advantages to companies are rather obvious. For people unfamiliar with this idea, game microtransaction DLC covers everything from fluff to actual gear and other in-game objects and quest content. Feelings against microtransaction DLC arise from the old-school expectation, I think, that a complete ship game should be complete in all respects, not including future expansions, which is a different topic. However, the pet is one of those weird little things that throws a wrench into the equation yet doesn't fit the above Hate Model™. On one hand, we can draw a line in the sand based on principle--no in-game content should be available exclusively. The problem with this view is that other complete ship games have done it before, and it's an industry standard in that way, e.g. in collector's editions or preorders (Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn CE). And on the other hand, we can draw the line based on effective content such as quests or powerful gear (e.g. BG2:SoA CE and many other games now), because that's "real" content; this can be further broken down, however, between quests and gear. But then there's availability from "third parties" that I won't get into. Evaluative priority varies person to person and determines where this line is drawn, among quests and NPCs, gear, fluff. I personally place fluff at the lowest priority, so this pet doesn't bother me in the least, but let's look at it this way: The pet follows stricter parameters in the existing industry model in that it's available only to Kickstarter backers at a certain tier (a bit different from preordering a collector's edition, which I expect would be available at the beginning of 2014--but would people opposed to the pet really complain about such a thing in a preorder CE that they can't afford at the time?) and, unlike many of the other digital gifts in past and current games, is expected to have no utility whatsoever. With those two points taken in conjunction, this Kickstarter pet in my opinion doesn't fall into the ethical business trap outlined above and even in comparison to a number of the older CE boxes coming at a higher price. Demands for the fluff available at lower KS tiers smells, frankly, of simple entitlement issues. (Also, considering how much Obsidian has been changing the tiers in the middle of the Kickstarter---Obsidian, that's bad form. I know you want to encourage people to bump tiers, but by cheapening the mid-higher tier rewards, you're also encouraging people to drop their pledges. So stop it, please. Upgrades should be pure additions, not lowering existing higher rewards to lower tiers. That's how tiering works--the entire model requires exclusivity as the driving factor for pledges.) Now, I would never support post-ship microtransaction DLC in PE of quests/NPC/gear. Ever. I would light afire copious amounts of canine dung upon the doorsteps of Obsidian if that were to happen. This sort of model cannot be undone very easily, if at all, and I've experienced the steady decline of a gaming community due to the business model shift, but that's a different beast. A proper expansion/full sequel or bust.

Oh yeah. Here is my blow-torch~ :FWOOOOOOOOMMMM: Feargus from the Kickstarter Q&A Oct 6: NO TO FULL VA. GRAR.

Wait.... I thought I read something about this too.... somewhere. Anyone have a cite? Or maybe it was just an idea Josh was tossing around? Tim Cain said it in the first reddit Q&A if I recall? "We aren't going to reward you for your body count" or some such. EDIT: Correction, I think it was actually his first video update http://www.kickstart...ty/posts/314089 Thanks. Ah, I see, it was just tangentially alluded to, but probably not what he meant on its face. A few ways to interpret that, so I'll just leave it alone... Right, I was thinking of scaling mob xp in relation to more static level requirements, so it makes sense alone, but loses value when taken together with other mechanics. Assuming PE will be using that model where higher levels require more and more xp, then this is a bit redundant..

Black Pits is supposed to add somewhere around 6 hours of play, and who knows how much the new NPCs will in terms of their side quests. Not much in terms of the entire BG1+TotSC game, sure, but that's a nice enhancement. Also, a new WEIDU editor is being made for BG:EE-compatible mods. I'm sure the old mods will be ported at some point too.

Wait.... I thought I read something about this too.... somewhere. Anyone have a cite? Or maybe it was just an idea Josh was tossing around?

DA:O is a spiritual successor to BG (the degree of its success in this regard is debated, obviously) and could serve as a good introduction to party-based CRPGs and real time with pause (RTWP) combat despite its differences from the Infinity Engine (IE) games. Also, consider that Rezin plays MMORPGs. DA:O is a far more suitable introduction to party-based CRPGs and RTWP combat for MMORPG players than the IE games (which might alienate some of those players immediately). But DA:O has nothing remotely to do with Project Eternity---despite the difference of opinion* on the enjoyability of DA:O, I think everyone can agree that it actually did not emulate much of anything from Baldur's Gate despite the marketing. Nothing in this thread or other related ones can possibly claim DA:O's world was as large as BG1/BG2's and allowed for free exploration, or that the combat systems were anywhere close to each other (Bioware didn't even try to emulate elements of D&D Vancian limitations), among other things. And yes, I play MMOs too, so I'm very aware of the actual differences in practice (the people who decry MMOs just don't understand that it's a social game genre, not merely twitch play). For the purposes of introducing the gameplay expected in Project Eternity, recommending DA:O would be a great disservice. BG would be more conservative, really, because the proposed cooldowns would loosen gameplay just a bit, but the world exploration, partially voiced lines, stronger storyline, lack of cinematics and 3D talking heads, true isometric view without rotating camera--those details really do matter. Recommending DA:O would create the wrong impression. Besides, I expect he'd adapt fine (it's just a matter of whether he'd actually like it); I think it'd be easier going to gameplay with pause and at-will saves than going to MMOs without pause and no saves. Be aware that playing BG2 first will spoil the major plot revelation of BG. The story may be somewhat confusing if you aren't familiar with the events preceding it, and you won't recognize returning characters and references to the previous game, etc. Also: GOG is fantastic! Glad you purchased the game there. Yes, it's true--I personally prefer BG1's story implementation, but the user interface and some mechanics are simply less polished than BG2's, at least until BG:EE is released, but that's not happening until after PE's Kickstarter ends. Thus my recommendation to go ahead with BG2 to make the judgment while the Kickstarter is still going. The story is still good, and it's mainly to get a feel for the tactical gameplay; maybe OP can read a BG1 synopsis or something. *Still hate DA:O with a burning passion. :D But that was mainly because it was marketed as the wrong thing; if they had left name-dropping alone and admitted to being a different thing, I'd have enjoyed it for what it was. Or more likely, not bought it.

Have fun. If you have questions... there is a TON of information out on the internats since BG2 is old school. Just remember--pause (space bar) is your friend.

I think the fewer the instruments involved, the easier it is for the human ear to pick out whatever timbres and nuances set live instrumentation apart. The more that is added to, say, a synth orchestration, the easier it is to overlook whatever "imperfections" in favor of the thematic whole. Ultimately, as long as it matches the setting and amplifies the immersion, it's great. Still want a hurdy-gurdy, though.

There are really a lot of things going on in terms of "musical appreciation." The ear+brain auditory areas can also be trained, but then there are other interesting factors involved; children who start music lessons between the ages of four and five could learn perfect pitch--14% of Americans compared to 60% of Chinese, and the difference is solely because Mandarin is a tonal language. Then on top of that, truly "tone deaf" are actually quite rare. So I think most people have the ability to hear finer elements of music, but lack of training, exposure, even interest, and all of that together mute the potential particularly with classical instruments. Which is an awful shame, really. We're down to... dumb pop songs with vapid lyrics. But hardware is a good point anyway--people are extremely mobile these days, and earbuds are pretty crappy and laptop speakers are hideous. Hideous.

Just remember that xp scaling goes the other way too. The idea is that if you manage to complete a level 14 encounter with level a level 11 party, then you get more xp than if you were 14. This makes sense to me as a good reward. This is relative, of course, to whether or not there will be exponentially more xp required to reach the next level, maybe a couple other factors like level cap. However... PE may very well have so much content that scaling isn't a big deal, and the content balancing only needs to take into account the main storyline bits. I still don't see why the other way is needed either. The reward for killing that dragon early is that I get that experience early. Its going to be a significant boost in experience at level 11. So its the same amount, but it goes a lot farther towards getting you to your next level at level 11. That requires the xp-per-level requirement to scale as well, right? I don't know if PE will do that, but maybe it will (maybe it's standard, I dunno). There are only three ways to scale in the game--xp relative to level, xp required per level, and content relative to level. I think the last one is the least popular and the most problematic. BG/PST/IWD did the middle way, mostly (some content scaling in BG that I remember). Some games like the MMO I play do both the first and middle, which can create other problems. Fair enough. Wolves? (j/k) I would argue that any field-seasoned adventurer will be able to dispatch enemies of less experience more easily than they would some seasons prior to the encounter. Unless what you want is enemy encounter scaling.

Just remember that xp scaling goes the other way too. The idea is that if you manage to complete a level 14 encounter with level a level 11 party, then you get more xp than if you were 14. This makes sense to me as a good reward. This is relative, of course, to whether or not there will be exponentially more xp required to reach the next level, maybe a couple other factors like level cap. However... PE may very well have so much content that scaling isn't a big deal, and the content balancing only needs to take into account the main storyline bits.

does your level 10 fighter stepping on a rat for 5 exp really warrant him going up a level? I think his beef is that progressive content should never be trivial, but that view seems rather linear and more appropriate for a pure dungeon crawl. I fully expect the Project Eternity world to be quite broad for exploration, allowing multiple visits to different areas. And Obsidian isn't looking at enemy encounter scaling, at least not much; xp scaling seems more appropriate without messing with content design itself.

I like it as a balancing mechanic that touches both difficulty levels and content relevance. I can't think of any cons at this point, either, though I'm sure there are some, somewhere. Probably. Oh, yeah, the poll options look mixed up.