Elerond

Better question is why money is being spent on Linux version if all steam games will be on Linux? It doesn't work that way, all games that will be available through Steam on Linux/Mac OS X will have to be ported. Now that porting will be more or less work depending on the game in question. Steam is just a platform. All games from steam will be ported and PE is on steam, so it will be on Linux and Mac. PE=Steam=Linux Where does this break down? Valve will port only steam client and its own games to linux. If other developers want their game to be ported on linux they must do that themselves or pay to someone else to do it.

I enjoy difficult fights were preparation and right tactics are the key to victory. But I also some time like cake walk fights when I have feel to only explore world/plot choices/dialogs/etc.. So I would like to see hardcore difficult level where fights take time and effort, but I would also like to see casual difficult level where fights don't have so great focus and you can focus on to take delight in game's writing.

I see how one use in battle musket could add tactical depth to fights. So your character has this weapon which pierces even heaviest armour easily, but you can use it only one enemy so you much choose whom of the enemies you shot down and then be ready to defeat rest in close combat. And magic will have new perspective also, as you must decide do your mage go to all in assault or will he/she protect your party form return fire. So in my point of view there is good place in game for cumbersome and impractical guns , even in fantasy setting.

Justin Bell because he is talented composer and he already works for Obsidian. Mark Morgan because his name could spring new backers for Project Eternity as he is somewhat cult composer thanks for his brilliant work with Fallout 1&2 and Planescape: Torment's soundtracks. But I will most probably enjoy of the game's soundtrack regardless who Obsidian decides to be perfect match for the game.

Yes as long guns are muskets or something similar. Muskets were in most cases inaccurate weapons in long range and they were slow to reload, which was reason why musketeers also carried swords. In most fantasy games you can have full plate armour, but there is no black powder weapons, although in our world they were invented in same era.

If project gets same ammout backers as Wasteland and average backer give $40 (as they have now) then project will reach little under 2.5M dollars and if project gets as many backers as Double Fine and average backer pledges above-metioned $40, then project will reach over little under 3.5M dollars. So final number is most probably somewhere between those sums.

While that would be super cool, my bet is for something between 2-3 million (closer to 3 than 2). Still I would love to see 10+. That would be totally awesome, but I'm not holding my breath. That is probably true when you look other bigger video game projects in kickstarter http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/66710809/double-fine-adventure#chart-exp-trend http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/659943965/planetary-annihilation-a-next-generation-rts#chart-exp-trend http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/inxile/wasteland-2#chart-exp-trend versus http://www.kicktraq.com/projects/obsidian/project-eternity/#chart-exp-trend

http://www.kicktraq....oject-eternity/ But you can always use kicktraq to make enlightened guesses

Melee fighter (Fighter=Soldier) Ranged fighter (Ranger= Hunter) Magic user (Mage=Wild Mage=Necromancer) Shadow class (Roque=Thief) Entertainer (Jester=Joker) Evil class (Witch hunter=Inquisitor) Exotic class(Witch=Gypsy) Could you please elaborate on the differences? Fighter is some one who knows how to fight where soldier has military background. There is not much difference. Ranger is more like guard for the forrest who seeks poachers, where hunter is one who really hunts animals. Mage is classical magic user who uses all magic what there is, Wild mage uses unbalanced magic which results you can't always tell and necromancer is one who is specialized only to necromantic magic. Roque is one who ambushes people on the road, where thief is one who steals people pockets on city streets. Jester and Joker are same, but sometimes joker is used to descript darker version of jester. Witch hunter is one whos proffession is find witches and report them to inquisition. Where inquisitor is faith cleaner who looks every body who don't follow faith 'correctly' Witch is herbalistic magic user where gypsy is traveller and fortuneteller/clairvoyant. My idea was use those archetypes and in parenthesis I wrote some examples which could be name for that archetype class in game.

My girlfriend confessed her love for me on our first date after drinking contest in bar without any real conversations, so I agree that if you need to have one or two meaningful conversation before NPCs are falling over you is very unrealistic requirement.

Melee fighter (Fighter, Soldier, Paladin, Gladiator) Ranged fighter (Ranger, Archer, Hunter, Sniper) Magic user (Mage, Cleric, Druid, Sorceress, Wild Mage, Necromancer) Shadow class (Roque, Thief, Assassin) Entertainer (Bard, Jester, Blade, Joker) Evil class (Witch hunter, Inquisitor) Exotic class(Witch, Inventor, Gypsy)

Fat nerds with heart of gold, of course not .

I probably throw least hundred bucks more when they tell more information, like technology level (which Sawyer alredy promised to be in near future updates), some estimation how long story arc they aim, etc. over all information which don't necessary tie them down, but gives better picture of the game still. And I don't oppose against specific information if they care to give it, especially I would like to know is world high/moderate/low in magic (so are it full of magical artifacts or are those rare, can you find wizard from every corner or they rare breed and etc.) . I would be also nice to know if over all tune of the game will be more light (in end good conquers over evil) or dark (world is dark and some one always suffers).

That will not work, because Obsidian will probably release linux version for x86(-64)-processors only and PS3 uses PowerPC variant processors and those two platforms (x86 and PowerPC) are not binary compatible.

Romance plots usually add something to those three bolded things. And sometimes they pawn new items like baby in your inventario . In BG2 that evil vampire woman can kidnap your romance intress and make her/him to vampire and you will get a quest to find out cure to her/his condition. Also most of the romance is dialogue between characters. And when you make character as romance intress you must also add that NPC's depth or you only make something awful. Sex scenes or sex dialog is not the important thing in romances even if modern rpgs give such picture, but those rpg element where romance plots add depth.

I don't think that is what they meant. I think that you can have 0-5 companions with you and in end it depend on your decision how many companions you have following you.

Game is simulation not reality. So if game has romance plot it's also simulated not real and it don't try to be real and nobody should take it as if it is real. It's same thing as in books, where two fictional character can be in love, but it's also not real as it's fictional simualation about romance which purpose is to entertaing reader not make him/her to fall love with this fictional characters. Relationship simualation can be as entertaining than fighting simulation. And in most cases relationship simulations especially dialogs what you character can go through with other characters are what sets great rpgs apart from mediocre rpgs. Romanaces are one part of this relationship simulations, not most important but also they are not least important part.

They said that they have desinged companions so that they will support you on your way and that they are vital part of the game. But thay also give you change to try go game without them, which is probably very hard. You could try same thing in IE games, nobody didn't make you take any companions with you in BG/BG2/IWD/IWD2, nearly always you did as they make game more compeling, fun and easier to play. But trying game through with only with one character was nice challenge.

This sentences fight against each other or you think that professional writers write in very low speed.

In my opinion best magic system is one where you don't have mana bar, cooldown or number of spell what you can cast in one day. In my opinion best magic systems are those where you can cast unlimited numbers of spell, but spells take their time to be cast. For example if we you combat phases and magic levels then level 1 spells would take 2 phases to cast, second level spells would take 3 or 4 phases and so on. This of course will drop casting rate of high level spells what is it purpose. But there should also be compensating system, which gives you limited number of fast use spells for example mage can bind spell on item/rune/etc. where he/she can invoke it instanly but is one use only. Or sytem could be some soul based, like your mage can store your enemies souls in his/her staff/wand/crystal ball/etc. and invoking spell instantly eats one or more souls depending on factors, which could be spell level, spell's range, spell's area effect and etc.. In this system mages can be very powerful and they could have battle ending spells, but they need rest of the party protect them while they cast that powerful spell and in end game mage has ability to invoke several spells instantly so he/she will not never change as hinderence for the party. And if you want system where adventure party can get tired then create stamina system, where fights/running around/casting/etc. slowly eats yours partys stamina to zero when you must rest.

I would like to see more slower spell casting system from those what we usually see, like runic magic, where spell casters can write spell runes on their flesh, armour, weapons and other items. Runes can any sort of efects, for example they can add armour's protective capacities or make sword burn every one it touches or they can be one use invokations which gives their wearer nice edge in battle when one can call fireball from rune. Or ritual magic, where spell casters can do massive spells, but they take time, for example summoning demon, elemental or some other planar greature to help you can take a day forth of rituals, but in fight they give your party an superior edge. Or spell caster can bind animals to help him in battle, but this needs that spell caster first catch animal in question. Or mage can call ghost and sent them haunt his/her enemy which causes that said enemy nearly mad and fatiqued to protect him/her self when adventure party attacks his/her castle. One thing what I don't want see is resurrect dead spell which can return dead to life without major disadvantages. Because then one must ask why important peoples can be killed in that world. For example if king , queen or noble is killed, why his/her family/supporters just make some one to resurrect him/her. This is one thing which has mystifyed me in Forgoten Realms games and books. http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/SRD:Resurrection Also I would like see non-combat spells. In BG/BG2/PS:T/NWN/NWN2 and many other games I was bit bothered how there was only couple spell which haven't meant for combat (and those were Knock and Find Traps). Arcanum was in this sector somewhat better as it has much more non-combat spells, like Conjure Spirit which I loved most as it gave you ability to speak for dead and you found couple very hilarious dialogs this way.

I voted for option 5, but really I don't really care lot of the option 2 and for options 1 and 3, want is too strong of the word, prefer would be better word. Truth is that I don't mind romance options I usually go them through if they are writen well, but they are not deciding factor for me to support this game. More important for me are understable relationships, logical reasons for companions to travel with me and stay with me. In most of the new RPGs you can be very abusive towards your companions and play against all their beliefs and goals and still they don't leave you and some games even reward you for doing this (read DA2, with it rivalrity option). I would like see same kind relationships what they were in Arcanum, which had characters who join with you for common goal, but if you slip of from that they leave you or some cases they even try stop you. And of course there was those companions that hate each other from reason or other and attack target of their hatred on sight and even you if you are with the target. If there are romances the reason for romance should be reasonable, but I would like see some other plot twist than PC actively chase after his/her companion/s. I would like see companion who have case of hero worship toward PC and actively try seduce PC and if PC say no companion tries even harder and this kind thing leads in most of the cases in absolute disaster, but also add game's fun factor.

Mostly I would like to houses type depending on choices what player makes on his/her way through plot, but if it must be only one thing then I would it be castle or inn because in my experience those two are best places to include in a fantasy story and they are brilliant places to start many small voluntary quests to add play hours (like bandits on the road, why some one don't go clean them up?, etc.).

Personally games what make me to throw money for this project are all games in questionary (+plus Alpha Protocol, Fallout: New Vegas and Dungeon Siege III, which I liked too), especially Arcanum, Fallout 1&2 and Planescape: Torment.

In my opinion it would do only good for game use existing archtypes for races, because inventing arctypes which we have never seen before is hard and time consumptive and rarely till produce anything really new and especially anything forth all that work. Much faster and easier route is take existing archtypes and give them some twist what makes your world to look different from other fantasy/sci-fi/etc. worlds. But on the other hand I don't want see another Forgotten Realms which have absolute everything what you can or can't think about and then more, variety is good but some time it can go over the top. One thing what I wouldn't want see is that races are divined to good, bad and neutral. I think every race should have different agendas and philosophy, which gives them to different perspectives and ideologies about good and evil. And every race of course should have good and bad apples (those who live full on for race's ideology is good apple and those who broke this ideologies are bad apples) . Addition for that every race should have several different nationalities, which can have different ideologies, for example human nation 1, elven nation 2 and orc nation 5 could have nearly similar philosophy about life whereas dwarf nation 1,, elven nation 1, succubus and incubus (or demon) nation and human nations 3, 87, 177 have similar belifs, philosophies and agendas. And some factions in game could consist from these groups with same ideologies (of course same ideology don't always mean peaceful coexistence, as nations who see them better than others probably have very volatile relations with other nations with similar beliefs). And it would nice to see also nations like Australia or USA where old European nations dumb their lesser criminals and other folk which nation leaders didn't like and where all fortune hunters go find their luck or market towns like Venice, L