Stun

The first thing I'm gonna do when I get my hands on the beta is create a barbarian, then turn on Big Head mode, then do a Barbarian sprint.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Interplay_games

Interplay was the publisher.

^Assigning accurate development credit for the BG games is indeed a convoluted task with a crap ton of technicalities and semantics that can actually mean something. The truth is that Bioware and Black Isle worked together on those games. But credit belongs to Bioware for Irenicus. Completely and utterly. Luke Kristjanson wrote him. And he was on Bioware's staff and payroll when he did.

I think we should all post in first person plural from now on.

Poorly written Emo caricatures do not "break up". They break down, turn everything into an epic drama, then take others down with them.

Hey, Volourn. I fixed your quote problem. Look: That doesn't even make sense. That's like me saying I hate FO1 and FO2 now when I used to like them because I loathe FO3. Illogic, thy home is the internet. No, I get exactly what he's saying. It's not illogical at all. It's psychological. A bad game in a series can taint the memory of the entire series in a player's mind. I've had the same thing happen to me with Dragon Age. I played Origins and absolutely loved it. Then I bought DA2 and played it. It was so painfully bad that it soured me on everything associated with the Dragon age world. Consequently whenever I try to go back and replay DA:O, I find myself unable to get past Ostagar before sheer disgust kicks in. The Lore, the gameplay, the companions...the world itself conjures memories of DA2 -which for me were really bad. I imagine this phenomenon is only magnified for a series like Mass effect, which is far more episodic than Dragon Age.

The point, Volourn, is that one of the big concerns has always been that DA:I will feel like just another Console port. Well? here we are, getting some evidence of that already.

There are a few here that I got a chuckle out of: An O.G. Representin' in the 'hood. lol In other words, Hippies. The 1960s Woodstock type.

Obviously. Promancers aren't very picky.

It's a good thing, then, that I have never argued such a thing. And while I agree that haunted crypts filled with ghouls, vampires, the stench of death and the ritualistic chants of Necromancers are just the perfect settings for a romantic story, I still think that you are ignoring the narrative importance of atmosphere and mood in a good RPG.

Lets say the resource requirement wasn't an issue But Bruce, the resource requirement is an issue.

^Same. And I find myself wishing the old IE games had that feature. How cool would it have been if Planescape Torment had Big Head mode? Dakkon, Fall From Grace, Ignus...... MORTE... Big Head mode was the $4M stretch goal, wasn't it.

Well, PoE is not part of this discussion anyway, since even if it WAS a pure dungeon crawler, it's still a Kickstarted game who's developers do not have the resources to make into a Dungeon Crawler-Soap Opera hybrid. While traversing Ancient haunted crypts filled with Flesh rotting Ghasts? (Ie. the example of mine that you're attempting to counter)? Aaah. No they don't. Except maybe in poorly written Bioware fantasies.

Oh! Ok. For a minute there I thought you were claiming that it was my personal preference (which kinda confused me a bit since I did not state my personal preference. I was simply pointing out that Love, intimacy, and other emotions commonly associated with Romance are, in fact, thematically at odds with the notion of, say, gathering a party of trained killers and delving into an ancient crypt filled with undead in search of treasure....and challenging you to show me how it isn't)

Huh? Prove? It's a matter of personal preferences. What is?

I would say that, Objectively, Love, intimacy, and other emotions commonly associated with Romance are, in fact, thematically at odds with the notion of gathering a party of trained killers and delving into an ancient crypt filled with undead in search of treasure. Prove otherwise.

That's not a great analogy, since accurate, non-cringeworthy portrayals of gender roles can be done in a game without any writing at all. The same cannot be said for Romances. But to address the point: there's far more at play here than simply the track-records of past games. Josh Sawyer has already addressed the resource problem. And there are about 10 other fundamental issues that are just as valid. You mean, like, like Dwarves romancing Elves? Or, like, exchanging emotion-filled embraces with that attractive Monk? Or Engaging in playful flirtations with your party's Sorcerer while exploring ancient haunted crypts filled with deadly traps and flesh-rotting Ghasts who want to feast on your bones? Romances don't *fit* in games like these. They are thematically at odds. THAT is why people are ditching them on principle.

Or, maybe it simply won't be as jarring as our side envisions it. On the "No XP for kills" discussion, I've been approaching it from the perspective of the infinity engine games, which, except for PS:T, were all extremely combat centric. Encounters occurred in rapid fire fashion from start to finish, and enemies were very numerous. In light of that kind of pacing/design, a "No-xp-for-kills" rule seems absolutely retarded. But if PoE is set up in a way where those scripted events things replace a sizable portion of the combat frequency, then I think that'll make things feel more natural. But even so, I still worry about those long, drawn out situations.... like the 15 level mega dungeon. When I'm halfway down it, I do NOT want to dread the thought of having to do the next 5 or 6 encounters...and getting NOTHING as an XP reward. Nor do I wish the thing to be a 15 level pacifist's playground.

ALL Bioware games have 'big head mode'. It's just not a visual setting.

Well, They're a fantasy RPG trope. If there's no Brothel, then it's not a fantasy RPG.

Mask of the Betrayer also did its evil path really, really well.

A couple of things... Nitpicks really. First, Evil does not mean that you can't help people. An intelligent evil person will gleefully help an entire village with its trivial little problems, if it serves his/her greater goals, or if there's profit in it. Second, IWD2 gives you at least one, major, and fantastic, opportunity to do evil and be rewarded greatly for it. Try siding with the Deurgar and when they tell you to lay waste to the Black Raven monastery, do it. By contrast, The first Baldurs Gate does not even give you *that* much of an opportunity to role play evil. Third, IWD2's plot is not "save the world". It's not even "save the north". Isair and Madae's greater goals are not evil, unless you see "a homeland for half-breeds" as an evil goal. It's only their methods of achieving that goal that are evil.

Right. We've been through this already. This is why I support kill XP and non-kill XP. And why I OPPOSE the totally arbitrary elimination of one or the other.

Sure, that happens all the time in RPGs. It's a hilariously illogical flaw in the system. In BG2, for example, a Rogue can become a better archer by.... disarming traps. Is that your idea of an accurate representation.... of anything?