wbn

Pretty sure you've just cursed the project. Take it back!

Team Rocket

I like #1, but I also want things that can *only* be chosen by CHARNAME.

I absolutely agree with this. Punishment alienates the people that don't want to be rushed, so positive reinforcement is the way to go.

This was puzzling until I played FO3 in a drunken stupor one night and realized that the Bethsoft grunts were too afraid to notify Todd Howard about his unlikable/unkillable typo in one of the design docs and then just stuck with it over the years in favor of consistency. You read it here first.

Regarding unkillable kids: First off, I think if you vote for making children unkillable but on the other hand are okay with killing adult innocents you're a bit ****ed in the head. I suppose Bethesda does this for promotional reasons - it saves them from having to deal with Fox News labeling their new blockbuster as a child abuse simulator. I get that. Bethsoft, in turn, has to get that I will never manage to give a damn about any of the kids they put in their games - they're not vulnerable and in need of protection as in reality, they could outlive my lvl 259 cybershamanwarlockbarbass when a titan starts throwing giraffes at us. Roleplaying is NOT just what we make up in our heads, it's the sum of all the game mechanics _and_ what our brains add to it. I doubt that this would be a smart decision for a niche project such as Eternity - the demographic for this game is very adamant when it comes to being able to roleplay in as many ways as possible. Let's not even talk about the fact that most people want that feature, but only the very fewest actually ever play a character ****ed enough to kill a kid. It's not about that, it's usually about being able to and then deciding not to do it. Give me that power, and test my ability not to use it. Kids obviously would be great to have in general - not just as backdrop, but as characters - simply to enrich the world in a relatable way. ... ... ... Should dampening the media backlash turn out to be a necessity while you're still aching to make the sociopaths fans happy, an invulnerability flag attached to the lil' sluggers that could conveniently be disabled by creating a dummy file called IM_A_MONSTER_AND_I_LOVE_IT into the Binaries/ folder would be appreciated. To give me a reason not to throw that fireball into the orphanage to resolve their rat problem.

How do you feel about killing in game, though? Or lying?

I did not like stealing in BG2/PS:T/IWD at all. Nicking 10gp from someone out of dialogue and only being able to steal proper items in stores did not provide as much fun to me as stealing in, for example, Fallout did. What I'd love to see would be the ability to use my Stealing skill via conversation options (with the possibility of failure), and, most importantly, to steal from random NPCs out in the world without initiating dialogue. Of course it wouldn't make sense to steal the armor off someones back, but I'd love it if any item that is not currently worn would provide me with the option to go for it. The chance of success could be influenced by the weight or type of the item, and in special cases by how protective the owner feels towards the item. In the interface that'd show me the contents of his/her backpack and the chance of success, you could fuzz the numbers stronger by how little Dexterity/Perception/Intelligence/Streetsmarts/Awareness the protagonist and the target has. As the last ingredient, add a cooldown to stealing (5 times within 5 minutes or something) much like the gambling/reload cooldown in New Vegas worked, and I would be one happy sonofabitch. ...Okay, this got a little out of hand, I'm not designing the game after all... but do my fellow career rogues think about making Stealing more interesting?

Hey, so.. I really, really liked the portraits in BG2, but only very important characters had them. Then I started installing mods for the game (some of you might've read my outdated guide), and I was blown away by the atmospheric difference triggered by a Portrait mod. And those portraits weren't even good - they rarely matched the characters because they weren't custom-made, but grabbed from random portrait sites and resized to fit the game. But if it were done professionally, with input from the writers and designers - the original creators - and with a uniform style, I think a brilliant thing could be achieved and immersion would profit greatly. How 'bout it?

The last thing I'd want with a single player title is to ruin an experience that'll only be extra double plus special once with a beta.

If it fits the game and character, that's great. If it doesn't, it's not an attack on anyone's sexual freedom - it's just how the game is. This might end up being a universe in which sexuality is unheard of completely. Maybe there's same-sex love exclusively. Maybe the writers don't even want to hint at anything sexual. I mention this because many of the more vocal BioWare fans seem to have bullied BW into injecting every character with acute pansexuality under the guise of political correctness, even going as far as calling them bigots. Such a ridiculous notion. Forcing characteristics on characters just to have those in the game does nothing but dilute him/her into a caricature.

I'd like to have the vile Fallout 2 flavor text. I remember reading about someone's eyeballs being shot out of their skull, or people turning yellow from being kicked in the liver (I might be making both of these up, but they were of similar ilk. Now translate this to spells affecting someone's groin, and you're as unable to eat while playing PE as you were in 1999.

I want as much player choice as possible too; but since I don't want to play the bad guy, any development effort spent on bad guy options is taking away real choices for me. I never manage to play "evil" consistently, but I can't get behind that. Since our choices and our perception of freedom (of choice) are directly influenced by what choices the writers thought out and made available for us - they design the whole moral compass. Those options should be there, if only to amplify the selfless choices you make. Knowing that you could rob someone of all their riches instead of accepting a measly 1000gp for overthrowing a kingdom makes the peaceful path much more noble, but if accepting that reward is your only choice, it's not a good deed at all. You didn't sacrifice anything, because you never had another chance.

The one I feel strongly about is 'no voice acting'. You pretty much have to pay for every spoken sentence, severely limiting the writer's freedom. It's an obvious thing not to include in a project of this kind, which is why Obsidian has already said that there will only be flavor VO for few lines. The BioWare idea did not resonate with me either. I trust Obsidian to do Housing/Romancing right, even though I don't care for it -- just take solace in the fact that people wanting to play house are, likely in large parts, funding a game you want to be made except for a few trivial gripes, and suddenly you don't have to be so grumpy anymore.

Would be great if it were a completely separate skill(set). In BG2, I either ShadowKeepered my Charisma up to 18, permanently wasted a ring slot, or if I didn't want to feel like cheating scum, I'd roll a Sorcerer pretty much every time - just so my high Charisma wouldn't cripple me.

This is a public troll. Other members will be able to see which options you chose.