Grimlorn

Good thing I don't believe in hell, then. It's a saying not to be taken literally. Geez.

I'm right. Being right I recognize wrong.

In my opinion, I don't think I've seen any forum where this wasn't true, so I don't see that as a very valid criticism .... depending on one's definition of "useful," of course. Is a long debate on a movie or armchair politicking useful? People like to gather together and discuss wants, likes, dislikes on stuff they're interested in. From the frivolous to the more serious. I see nothing wrong with that. And sometimes the constant exchanges of constructive disagreement is even how good ideas - or at least ideas that spark other inspiration - come about. Let me know when we get those good ideas. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Personally, I'd like some realism when it comes to differences between males and females. For instance, if there is a Strength stat it should be like it is in real life. Say 18 str is the max a male can have then 9 should be the max a female can have since they are only about half as strong as men on average. It ruins my immersion when I see men and women being physically equal with no realistic differences between the genders like in real life.

And that's what it comes down to. People are dumb and if you don't chastise and berate them, then they won't learn and they won't know any better. This isn't just people's opinions, these are fundamentally wrong views people have. This protecting everyone from criticism doesn't work and people advocating for this are scared of criticism. About 90% of these forums have nothing useful in them. Just people asking for random crap that no one cares about. A lot of it isn't in the spirit of old RPGs and should be criticized. Otherwise, people will think their opinions are valid. Personally, after reading these forums, I think Obsidian would be making a huge mistake trying to listen to people in these forums. That includes me I guess. Bioware fell into this trap of listening too much to their fans and that's one of the reasons they make crappy games, because their fanbase is wrong. The best RPGs were made with minimal to no feedback from consumers. And there is no reason to start listening to consumers when it's created nothing but bad communities (Bioware/Bethesda forums) and bad games.

How about a romanceable dragon and when you kiss, she transforms into a hot, busty chick and you live happily ever after?

It'd be cool if MCA put options for your character to hit on and flirt with other NPCs and as soon as you did you were rejected and insulted. If you continued to try to romance your companions they would leave your party because they were being harassed. And after the romance crowd tries to romance every companion and scares them all off, they then have to complete the game alone. It's the way it should be.

yeah you guys aren't exaggerating and making it worse with this thread and complaining about people's, who you don't know, feelings. The party looked fun and stream went fine. There were probably 10k people watching that stream. There are going to be a few bad apples. When you try to crusade against these people, you just give them more power by making the situation worse. And you make the rest of us normal people annoyed for having to explain this to you and put up with your misconceptions and PC attitudes.

Yeah they portrayed him in an earlier episode and there was no controversy. Probably because it was before 9/11.Here's a link to the episode. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Best_Friends But now it's wrong because terrorists might get them. I don't really care if he's in the game, I just hate that CC or Viacom or whatever gave into terrorist demands and sacrificed freedom of speech for security.

I disagree. They should take the money and create a great RPG with little to no feedback from the forums. Think about a lot of the great RPGs out there. Developers had little to no feedback back when they created the best RPGs. Why should developers all of a sudden listen to consumers? I think you guys are too entitled. You're donating, not investing. You should trust them to make a great game, not expect them to listen to everyone and make a game designed by consumers. They never promised that. You know another company that listens to consumers and tries to give them everything they want? Bioware, and they make bad games because of that.

Perspective has nothing to do with RPG. Games don't become less of an RPG just because they aren't isometric, turn-based or rtwp. Has nothing to do with what I said. I didn't mention third person camera. I mentioned third person shooter. Which is again irrelevant, a third person shooter can be an RPG, just like an FPS. Read my original post again, then point out where I say that a TPS can't be a RPG. I just said ME series isn't really RPGs because they're mostly shooter with only some RPG elements like leveling. You can of course disagree, but I don't care.

Everything is better on drugs.

Perspective has nothing to do with RPG. Games don't become less of an RPG just because they aren't isometric, turn-based or rtwp. Has nothing to do with what I said. I didn't mention third person camera. I mentioned third person shooter. What about the Bioware formula?

A desperate move to sell copies so EA doesn't close down Bioware and/or roll their studios into EA. I also find the comment by Epler funny. Pretty sure most gamers would agree that people interested in FPS games like COD aren't going to be interested in RPGs. Even games like DA2 where there is a lot of dialogue and managing a party in combat. He makes that comment about interpreting reality wrong, but apparently they don't even understand the COD fanbase and choose to "believe" they'll be interested in a game like DA2. It's really just a comment to catch CODtards attention and get them to check out DA2 by saying it's something they would like. Of course it didn't work. That's an interesting view point. Would you say that there is no chance of mass-effect appealing to COD audience as well? Meh I don't know about ME type games. I would guess most wouldn't though. I think there is too much walking and talking to hold CoD players' attention. Although It would be an easier medium for them to break into a RPG shooter type game. I also haven't really tried ME3's multiplayer. The comment was made in reference to DA2 though. ME isn't really a true RPG. It's more of a TPS with RPG elements.

The Codex is currently locked in a war of ideology. There are those who believe in the pureness of RPGs. They will never support cooldowns of any kind. The other side doesn't care if cooldowns and the dnd sorcerer system are chaotically mixed together as long as it creates a strong combat system, and therefore a strong RPG. Those who support PE are currently labeled traitors. This war won't end until Project Eternity is released and judged. It will either be the greatest RPG ever or the worst RPG ever. There is no room for middle ground. Such is the nature of the Codex.

Nah the real pressure is in the kickstarter model. If these companies fail to make good games then no one will want to kickstart games anymore and the power will be back in the hands of the publishers. Future devs won't be able to develop the games they want. However, if they succeed then there will be more kickstarters and devs will have the opportunity to free themselves from publishers and make them obsolete/put them out of business. The future of the gaming industry and freeing developers from publishers is all on their shoulders. That's all.

What happens to all the data and stuff when a project is cancelled? I mean if BG3 was 80% complete then it doesn't sound like it would cost much to finish compared to developing a new game. So would it ever be possible to finish that? I'm guessing Interplay would have the 80% finished game, and you'd have to buy it and the rights to the DnD license to finish that game? Or would the game simply have to be developed from scratch?

I think it was just because people were starved for a good party based RPG so even though DAO came out so flawed, people forgave it because they had something and something is better than nothing. A lot of people weren't aware of Knights of the Chalice which was released the same year. Had turn based combat, but the encounters were really great and varied too. It's more combat focused. There is little dialogue and no party dialogue. It does combat great though which is rare in a lot of RPGs these days. Seems like we get RPGs that either have really great combat, or really great story, characters, settings. We don't really get RPGs that do both well. I really hope to see KotC 2 kickstarted some day. The guy that created KotC needs 100-150k but he's in Great Britain so he can't use kickstarter yet and he doesn't think Indiegogo is popular enough to raise the money. So KotC 2 is on hold for now.

A desperate move to sell copies so EA doesn't close down Bioware and/or roll their studios into EA. I also find the comment by Epler funny. Pretty sure most gamers would agree that people interested in FPS games like COD aren't going to be interested in RPGs. Even games like DA2 where there is a lot of dialogue and managing a party in combat. He makes that comment about interpreting reality wrong, but apparently they don't even understand the COD fanbase and choose to "believe" they'll be interested in a game like DA2. It's really just a comment to catch CODtards attention and get them to check out DA2 by saying it's something they would like. Of course it didn't work.

Why do people even care if someone kills children in their single player game? I don't get it.

Forever alone OP. Forever alone.

You belong in the Biotard group.

High exploitabiltiy and some very slogicly silliy situations are not a weakness? I don't get the high exploitability point. That just sounds like bad design in games if you can exploit. Unless you're referring to the logic of taking turns in combat being bad, then I don't know what you're talking about. Those are really just preferences imo. Same with if you prefer more fast paced action. Mechanically I think turn based doesn't have problems as long as it's designed well.

So is all combat in all games. This isn't found just in turn based combat. I can create examples out of other combat modes.

The Bioware/New Age crowd should be referred to as the devolutionists not evolutionists. You can't seriously believe RPGs have been evolving.