Ieo

In revisiting this video, at 2:20-ish onwards, there was one thing that bothered me: the legs. Stance and gait, specifically. Mechanically, bipedal humanoids don't stand with their legs that far apart--the center of gravity stress on certain joints would be all wrong. It looks and feels awkward to me. I couldn't really tell from the small avatars moving, but I wonder if that too-wide stance translates into the actual gait as well (our feet in a proper gait are not very far apart but nearly a straight line). Could you guys tighten that up a bit, maybe?

I can't believe I forgot to comment on this. NEW OLD SCHOOL ALL THE WAY.

Interesting thread in general. There are people whose goal in life is to spend as little as possible as a point of pride; these are the ones who brag about their piles of pirated software, music, and TV/movies. These people can never be converted because they place no value on the concept of "intellectual property" as well as the developer investment. The only thing that matters in the modern software market is your target audience of legitimate users: Do Not Piss Them Off. I'm talking about basic accessibility, not the actual product content; the going rule from the consumer perspective is to make things easy for honest buyers. Otherwise, you'll end up in a situation where someone like me will spend half a grand on a legit software suite, spend days on tech support to get the thing working due to some insidious DRM, and then be told you have to reformat your entire machine just to run the applications. Never again. I will be a pirate for life for certain things based on such experiences. It's a simple relationship similar to what you find in the customer service industry: If a customer is polite, service will tend to be better. When a client is polite to my team, we go the extra mile to help them. If you treat me with courtesy when selling your product, I will throw money at you. Edit to add: ...Which I did when GOG was announced. Under this philosophy, it's the approach that sells, the product merit that piques interest. Seems a bit backwards, but there have been plenty of times where a software game/general application piqued my interest, and I declined a purchase solely on something like an online activation scheme.

Yeah, my eye went straight to the gigantic plumage: How will this look in isometric play view? Will Giant Feather Hat confer some kind of character bonus like Ego Boost, temporary charisma? Will it be extra flammable and reduce fire resistance? I like all the little avatar sketches.

I'm a fan of interactive and setting-appropriate lore. Some types buried in books or chiseled across walls are great. Like an abandoned dungeon or a historical archive. That makes perfect sense and other players who aren't interested can just run right past those. Baldur's Gate handled that just fine. The type where you have to converse with NPCs like in PS:T would be even better, with the option to tell the NPC to bugger off, of course (especially interesting if the lore you get from NPCs may change depending on your race or sex or whatever--just a thought). The reason why I despised Dragon Age's codex style was because it was immersion-breaking for me: You ran to a spot on the map and instantly learned something about that statue over there, and then there's an annoying popup, and a bunch of nondescript computery icons stuffed into the user interface. The noninteractive nature of that type of information was more metagame to me (I'd rather peruse an online wiki than have my combat flow interrupted by a codex notification). So I say NO to a codex and YES to interactive lore sources--AND a robust player journal that feels appropriate to in-game character use. No blinky computer icons, please. I think for a game like this, a combination of BG-style passive lore and PS:T active lore would be wonderful, and it's best to err on the side of Lots; just make the access element optional.

Excellent. *fingersteeple* Thanks for the detective work, C2B!

Thank goodness P:E won't have "good/evil" in the classic D&D alignment sense. I'd rather the terminology not even taint the P:E philosophical infrastructure. No "evil." No "good." Just a person's motivations. Thus, moral relativism. (I'm not a fan of the purest relativism, but it's interesting and requisite for understanding our world anyway, since we have groups like Judeo-Christians and Muslims believing very much that they're in the absolute moral right and not the other guys.)

From the official FAQ: So that's the entire purpose of the Steam version, really. As for me--the less meta-gaming there is, the better. No codex popups, no achievement flags, etc. Edit to clarify: So long as those meta-gaming "extras" are limited to the Steam version only and neither the disc nor GOG versions, I'll be perfectly happy.

I like the ancient Chinese elements. The thing about "classical" elemental offensive attacks that we see in most fantasy settings is that these are very accessible to human understanding per their expected effects, which means from the gaming perspective, they're easier for players to quickly grasp. I'm fairly neutral about it overall, though. Animations may be problematic for fancier concepts.

October 12, 2012 PC Gamer live interview (3:54) I expect a healthy range of diverse confrontation options, but a 100% noncombat run will probably be impossible, and I'm fine with that, because it was impossible in the likes of PS:T as well. There's also the mod possibility.

Right, it wouldn't be possible if you intend to play all of PE and interact significantly with all its factions, I imagine. A faction-based reputation system without alignment would be a far more difficult (or even impossible) system for a pacifist proposal unless a player intends to only interact with a select few factions and NPCs of interest in a given playthrough. In that respect, it might be possible only in the sense of skipping content. Depends entirely on how Obsidian designs the main campaign, maybe. And Project Eternity is definitely not going to be a "linear dungeon crawler." The scope is intended to be similar to the BG franchise, which wasn't linear (taking into account all side content exploration) and didn't have that many pure dungeons. The only major dungeon crawl we expect at this point is the mega-dungeon.

Obsidian confirmed a full pacifist run won't be possible. I can try to dig up the link later, though I'm sure it's actually buried in a forum thread somewhere. It wasn't possible in PS:T, either. There were at least a few required combat scenarios. Ravel was one.

(Yeah, well. ) Anyway, back to Project Eternity. Looking forward to the fulfillment site; I think it's good to take a bit longer to ensure there aren't technical hiccups, considering the sheer number of people it will have to support. Once it's announced, I'll wait for a few days after the rush myself to avoid server crush. Looking forward to more art/technical/mechanics updates!

Earlier thread in more general, non-PE forum: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/63124-torment-sequel-qa-with-brian-fargo/ My response is in that thread. I'm definitely not keen on the idea, certainly not by that January article.

I'm only attacking the idea of putting co-op in games that were explicitly stated to be designed without co-op; had PE been stated from the beginning to have co-op play I'd have not said anything as its inclusion is a neutral to me provided it doesn't compromise the single player game. However since the developers have stated that including co-op play in the game would take attention and limited resources away from the single player game, since co-op was not part of the original pitch for the game, I personally find the continuing clamor for co-op play to be included puzzling. Who supports a game that doesn't have co-op, a fact explicitly stated early in the campaign, and then agitates for it to be added (drawing resources away from things already promised) once the game is going to be made? Its about as silly - in my opinion - as supporting a PC only game, explicitly stated to be PC only, and then demanding it be ported to a console. It makes no sense at all - unless that development option was one under consideration from the very beginning. Which it wasn't (and I say that as someone who has consoles and could certainly play PE on a console if it was ported to one - but that's not what the scope of the game was ever about!) You're talking about people who are generally completely irrational and not very good in the common sense department. It's exactly like the people who demand right now that the game NOT be isometric and should be 3D with rotating camera just like Skyrim. Really? Also, the very notion that this pathetic little backwater forum poll (there are many other threads too, and all of them have those wanting MP/coop as the minority ) is somehow representative of the over 70,000 backers is ridiculous and very stupid. Come on. If your primary priority for a game is co-op/MP, then I hope you didn't back Project Eternity (if you did, it's your own fault for assuming or not reading things). If you didn't back PE, then just go away and play Mass Effect 3. I heard ME3 is perfect and awesome because it added MP into that franchise. Interviews in my sig. Co-op/MP is not happening for PE. Get over it and move on, kids.

Believe me, if it was up, the news should probably be stickied all over the forums, Obsidian's front page, the Kickstarter page, the PE page, various gaming news venues, besides your inbox (including a spam box check). Be patient. I know it's horribly painful to wait on confirming the swag, but assuming you kept all receipts, I wouldn't worry.

"Collapse-proof business" sure shows lack of common sense. It's irrelevant for the GOG version whether or not the vendor itself sticks around in seven years because the whole point is that the game will never try to call home or require online activation or something after you buy and download it from GOG. But the fact that you can save the DRM-free version of the game into your Steam library is the nail in the coffin for OP's irrational ranting. Hate DRM, then get DRM-free. Like centralized Steam whatever, add it to the library. http://en.kioskea.net/faq/15180-steam-add-non-steam-games-to-your-library I'm not sure if anyone brought that up in the OP's previous thread about this very topic, but there it is.

Here's my feeling on minigames ilke this from a similar topic-- I don't mind the rare minigame of this nature, so long as it does not gate any "primary" content (anything major for the main campaign path or each faction, although it might make sense for a "thieves' guild" if there will be one). I HATED those that were required to move onto the next step of the main storyline, like the ship chase in ME, or the door puzzle locks requiring fast and accurate mouse clicking, or the obstacle race in KoTOR. The optional mega-dungeon I think is the best place to showcase more unique challenges that shouldn't be stuffed in every corner of the game.

The godlike look weird. Antonio animates stuff. Ya?

Depends on how pure the water godlike is, since pure water is rather resistant to electrical current, and even if the water godlike wasn't pure water but a conducive solution, the current should pass through--maybe electrocute everything else around them that's wet? Hmmmmmmm. Edit to add: Would love if the godlike concept by Polina was a party NPC being developed.

Polina! EARS! And angry horns. I like. ....That's all I got. I hope there's significant social/societal disadvantages for choosing a godlike PC race; I mean, being overpowered compared to a regular elf/dwarf/human has to have certain drawbacks, right? Edit: Wait! I didn't click the image for the complete version! That is an awesome outfit/armor set.

Your post did not display logic, and the straws were grasped by your own fingertips. Here's the logic that you're missing: It's irrelevant how many other versions there are without DRM. If DRM isn't needed somewhere, then that's called "good news." Here's another bit of logic which slipped by you: you don't speak for people who use Steam, and to say that people who use Steam don't care about DRM is, honestly, idiocy, and complete arrogance. And yet you managed to cower from my actual point and didn't even attempt to address it. Good job. Here's another point you won't be able to address since you haven't been around since the beginning nor paid attention: It was a big deal when Obsidian ended up in union with GOG because many users on this forum and on KS begged Obsidian to do so. Originally they were only going to do Steam (and the backer discs). GOG carries only DRM-free games. I'll put the two logic points together for you so you'll understand: People specifically asked for a GOG version equating that with DRM-free. When Obsidian and GOG finally made the announcement, it was all over Twitter and mentioned in a number of articles. It wouldn't make sense to offer two types on Steam and another on GOG when DRM is part of the reputed business model for both; actually adding a DRM-free version or whatever on Steam would potentially dilute business from GOG and that would be bad for their agreement with Obsidian, and frankly insulting to the entire effort to get the DRM-free GOG version in the first place. So again, why shouldn't someone against DRM NOT get the GOG version?

Meh, never mind. I wanted to reply to the poll thread.

OP, you're missing a basic piece of logic, so I'll spell it out for you. There will already 2/3 forms of the game without DRM. People who use Steam already don't care about DRM. Because if they did care and did hate it, they would not be using Steam at all. Ergo, there is no purpose to putting PE on Steam at all unless it takes advantage of meta-account features not available on the other two DRM-less forms, which Obsidian did say they wanted to do for the Steam version. "Limited and worse product"? You're desperately grasping at straws here; you've given absolutely no good reason why someone who doesn't like DRM should not download the GOG version instead.

The official hook: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/60221-update-3-game-basics-your-party-your-characters-and-races/