Elerond
-
Posts
2620 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Elerond
-
-
It isn't good policy to let any population group secede from general population. But I see fault to be more in housing, schooling, and employment policies than in immigration policies of past. But of course if we can't make our domestic policies work then adding more stress to system that don't work isn't solid policy either.
BruceVC: I am sorry that I have failed in my attempt of sarcasm. I tried my best to make it so over the top that nobody would take it serious.
Elerond when you say your domestic policies dont work are you referring to the refugees and intergration?
I am referring to all domestic policies that fail to prevent people seceding from general population.
Okay and just to be clear does this bother you? How widespread is it and does it apply to all immigrants who come to Finland
I'm just trying to understand the issue
People and population groups that secede from general population are according to statistic more likely commit crime and participate in extremist ideologies that are against general population.
Immigrants in Finland according to statistics commit more crimes than general population. But they aren't only population group for which such is true, although as aliens for Finnish culture and habits they are easy target to point out.
Immigrants that have moved to Finland because of higher paying job or Finnish family are according to statistic less likely to secede from general population than for example those that have come here through refugee programs. Also lower income people have higher their changes are to secede from general population.
I would say that Finland isn't really country that has big problems with its immigration population (although there is quite many that hold opposite view) at least yet. But there signs that in future there maybe more of general issues with immigrants that other countries already have, like for example districts where immigrants start to become majority population, need for schools that use some other language than Finnish, Swedish or Sami (Finland's official languages) as their main language, etc. issues that can lead population groups to secede from general population.
-
1
-
-
It isn't good policy to let any population group secede from general population. But I see fault to be more in housing, schooling, and employment policies than in immigration policies of past. But of course if we can't make our domestic policies work then adding more stress to system that don't work isn't solid policy either.
BruceVC: I am sorry that I have failed in my attempt of sarcasm. I tried my best to make it so over the top that nobody would take it serious.
Elerond when you say your domestic policies dont work are you referring to the refugees and intergration?
I am referring to all domestic policies that fail to prevent people seceding from general population.
-
I would buy the first half of your argument if all human behaviour in different groups manifested itself similarly for all, but it doesn't.
Criminal behavior and extreme violence are much more common within those people that are secede from general population than in general population, regardless of their origin. Like how our school shooters and that man/boy that exploded himself in mall were all pure breed Finns that all had seceded from general population and found people with similar mind from internet that feed their feelings of separation to point where they committed their acts of mass murder. And we have those pseudo nazis that commit petty crimes and violence and some case murders, we have our motor cycle gangs, we had our extreme leftist groups that idolized non-existent communism to point where they were willing to do heavy crimes, we have our very miss guided nature protectors that are willing to go extreme measures to stop/prevent things that they see to be against their world view and so on.
Of course every society have their own Morlocks causing trouble in their own way and they are handled accordingly. But adding more Morlocks from other places and effectively having no preventive measures for this new kind of Morlock behaviour will not help one bit and as in worst cases, what the host nation consider as Morlock behaviour is a-ok or understandable by the imported Eloi.
But in this case problem isn't in imported Eloi, but that some children or children's children of said imported Eloi become Morlocks. So like I said reason why these Morlocks pop-up isn't necessary in fact that we let their Eloi parents in the society, but how our society's systems have failed to make them Eloi.
-
I would buy the first half of your argument if all human behaviour in different groups manifested itself similarly for all, but it doesn't.
Criminal behavior and extreme violence are much more common within those people that are secede from general population than in general population, regardless of their origin. Like how our school shooters and that man/boy that exploded himself in mall were all pure breed Finns that all had seceded from general population and found people with similar mind from internet that feed their feelings of separation to point where they committed their acts of mass murder. And we have those pseudo nazis that commit petty crimes and violence and some case murders, we have our motor cycle gangs, we had our extreme leftist groups that idolized non-existent communism to point where they were willing to do heavy crimes, we have our very miss guided nature protectors that are willing to go extreme measures to stop/prevent things that they see to be against their world view and so on.
-
That article comos off as more patronizing than what it wishes to be.
If a culture or a group of people start to blow up airports and subways, do mass shootings and suicide bomb themselves sporadically because they are simply bored, too stupid, depressed, have high unemployment and think it is cool, then why even bother allow them to Europe to begin with if they are so fragile?
But that would require responsibility for failure in policy, of which Drowsy already pointed out that the current establishment will not do. Rather race further down the cliff than admitting that you're wrong, i guess.
Article uses assumption that this attackers are European born and grown. Which means that nobody allowed them in Europe in first place.
"European" as second or third generation North Africans and Middle Easterners. The result of an ongoing policy since the end of WWII.
You can't come to Europe because your children or your children's children may grow to become terrorists because of things that have happened yet. Sounds reasonable policy, too bad that our politicians didn't understood need for such caution decades ago.
The article being dumb aside, creating a policy where middle eastern and north african muslims become ghettofied over the generations and not part of society is the reason why we are here we are. I see little reason to continue with the same.
It isn't good policy to let any population group secede from general population. But I see fault to be more in housing, schooling, and employment policies than in immigration policies of past. But of course if we can't make our domestic policies work then adding more stress to system that don't work isn't solid policy either.
BruceVC: I am sorry that I have failed in my attempt of sarcasm. I tried my best to make it so over the top that nobody would take it serious.
-
1
-
-
That article comos off as more patronizing than what it wishes to be.
If a culture or a group of people start to blow up airports and subways, do mass shootings and suicide bomb themselves sporadically because they are simply bored, too stupid, depressed, have high unemployment and think it is cool, then why even bother allow them to Europe to begin with if they are so fragile?
But that would require responsibility for failure in policy, of which Drowsy already pointed out that the current establishment will not do. Rather race further down the cliff than admitting that you're wrong, i guess.
Article uses assumption that this attackers are European born and grown. Which means that nobody allowed them in Europe in first place.
"European" as second or third generation North Africans and Middle Easterners. The result of an ongoing policy since the end of WWII.
You can't come to Europe because your children or your children's children may grow to become terrorists because of things that have happened yet. Sounds reasonable policy, too bad that our politicians didn't understood need for such caution decades ago.
-
Emphases mine:
Jihadi Cool: Belgium’s New Extremists are as Shallow as They are Deadlyby Kurt Eichenwald
Anyone surprised by the murderous attack in Brussels has not been paying attention. On a per capita basis, Belgium has been Europe’s hotbed of young Muslims who travel to Syria to fight alongside the Islamic State militant group (ISIS) and then return home, often ready to kill. But the world should hesitate before crediting this attack to ISIS, because doing so tends to infuse the group with power that it does not have.
These European attackers are not like the Al-Qaeda members of old—the radicalized adherents to fundamentalist Islam. Many of these new age killers were small children when the World Trade Center fell in 2001 and have spent much of their lives watching major wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and now Syria. Their knowledge of Islam is quite limited; they are more like jihadi hipsters than dedicated Islamists, or what some experts in the intelligence community call “jihadist cool.” They celebrate what the Dutch coordinator for security and counterterrorism called “pop-jihad as a lifestyle.”
These are youths who gather in groups, such as the recently dismantled Sharia4Belgium. They know less about Osama bin Laden than they do about Tupac Shakur; Belgians who travel to Syria to fight often revere the deceased American rapper on social media, identifying themselves with his lyrics about life in the inner cities. But these attackers also have their own rap music, hip clothes popular with young Muslims that are sold by companies like Urban Ummah and slogans akin to what might be found on a bumper sticker (“Work Hard, Pray Hard.”) Their tweets often end with terms like #BeardLife and #HijabLife. While in Syria, they send selfies to their friends showing themselves wearing kohl, a traditional Middle Eastern eye shadow.
In other words, these are not intellectual Muslims with long beards and Korans in hand; labeling them jihadis or radical Islamists would be, to them, the highest compliment. In another time or another circumstance, these are young people who would be called losers or narcissistic punks—although they are punks who murder.
It’s easy to confuse Belgium’s new extremists with the ones from the previous decade. The murder of Ahmad Shah Massoud, the leader of the Northern Alliance who was killed just before the 9/11 attacks, was committed by men who plotted their attack in Brussels. A Belgian extremist cell that was part of the Groupe Islamique Marocain Combattant participated in the deadly Madrid train bombings in 2004. The next year, a Belgian named Muriel Degauque blew herself up in an attack in Iraq, making her the first known female suicide bomber from the West. But the old-line extremist networks have no connection to the “jihadist cool” aficionados.
These shallow Islamists have proved to be a challenge for European countries that use a traditional de-radicalization program for Muslims lured into the world of radical fundamentalists: It’s hard to re-educate people about Islam when they knew almost nothing to begin with. In what may be the most representative event depicting the nature of these new Islamist extremists, two British Muslims, both 22, purchased copies of Islam for Dummies and The Koran for Dummies in August 2014 just before they boarded a plane on the first leg of their trip to join ISIS fighters in Syria.
The numbers of young European Muslims who have traveled to Syria to fight alongside ISIS is frightening. Recent intelligence estimates peg the number at more than 5,000, with about 470 coming from Belgium alone. While that is the largest number per capita of any country in the European Union, France is the leader in raw numbers, with 1,700 travelers to Syria.
What lures these youths into the brutal culture of radical Islam? The answer, according to intelligence officials, would be laughable if it was not so deadly: peer pressure and what might be called Rambo-envy.
“For foreign fighters the religious component in recruitment and radicalization is being replaced by more social elements such as peer pressure and role modelling,’’ said a January 18 report by Europol, the European Union’s law enforcement agency, which deals with militant networks. “Additionally the romantic prospect of being part of an important and exciting development, apart from more private considerations, may play a role.”
Here is where things always get politicized. Trying to stop this conversion of young European Muslims into attackers requires understanding what underlies the change. Political blowhards, unable to tell the difference between hard-core Islamic radicals and practitioners of pop-jihad, rage that trying to figure out ways to intercede in that transformation amounts to excusing the attackers, an argument that plays well for the ignorant but that leaves intelligence officials rolling their eyes in frustration. Proclaiming “this was ISIS!”—when it was just punks inspired by the group—grafts the perception of worldwide power onto the organization, making it seem stronger than it actually is, which markets it as even more attractive to young Muslims seeking adventure and attention.
Let the blowhards blow. Here is what needs to be understood about the murderous practitioners of jihadi cool. Based on interviews with European Muslims returning from fighting in Syria, foreign intelligence agencies estimate that about 20 percent of them were diagnosed with mental illnesses before they left for the Middle East. A large percentage of them have prior records for both petty and serious crimes. And the vast majority of them come out of urban neighborhoods torn apart by economic hardship.
Rik Coolsaet, a professor of international relations at Ghent University in Belgium and a senior associate fellow at the Royal Institute of International Relations, recently wrote about the environment that has caused the development of this youth subculture in his country. Young Belgians, faced with a bleak job market, have higher suicide rates and more high school dropouts than most member states of the European Union.
“Youth representatives in Belgium recently warned that many young people are depressed and feel hopeless,” Coolsaet wrote.
The result, intelligence analysts say, is those European Muslims that become fan-boys for ISIS are taking not a rational stand but an emotional one. “Areas where there are close-knit groups of susceptible youth, often lacking a sense of purpose or belonging outside their own circle, have proved to generate a momentum of recruitment that spreads through personal contacts from group to group,” says a December 2015 report by the Soufan Group, a private intelligence analysis and security company.
In other words, attraction to the ISIS philosophy among European Muslins is like a virus, where proximity to the infected is the most common cause. And the locations where the beliefs are spreading can be just as easy to find as the sites where a disease emerges; in November 2015, Belgian Interior Minister Jan Jambon identified Molenbeek, a poor immigrant quarter of Brussels, as a hotbed for young Muslims traveling to Syria and back. So it should come as no surprise that the investigation into the Brussels attack immediately tracked suspects to Molenbeek.
And this is what’s so frustrating about the new hipster pop-jihadism. Intelligence officials know most everything. Belgium publicly identified the location where potential terrorists were most likely to be living. On January 25, Europol announced that the threat of an attack was at its highest level in a decade, warning that both France and Belgium were at the highest risk of an attack by those attacking soft targets in the heart of a large city. That is almost as specific as it gets.
Even with all that knowledge, however, disrupting an attack from this new breed of Islamic fans—rather than religious devotees—is enormously difficult. These are small cells of like-minded young people with operational autonomy, not some organization with top-down leadership like Al-Qaeda. Many of them do travel to Syria to learn tactics from ISIS before heading back home on their own. All it takes is some guns, some homemade bombs and some desire for fame to transform a loser into a hero among his friends and allies. And then the world eagerly attributes the attack to ISIS, which takes a bow for an attack its leaders probably knew nothing about and earns more cred that it uses to attract even more devotees.
So here the answer for solving the problem is quite different from the military strategy that was needed to deal with Al-Qaeda. Europe and America can’t simply attack ISIS and expect the problem to be solved, not unless the Western nations want to stop bombing themselves. This time, it is a law enforcement issue, one requiring sources, informants and sting operations, along with economic plans to create some hope for a future among Europe’s youths.
Or the bombastic politicians and talking heads can continue perpetuating ignorance, banging the once-correct drum about a clash of civilizations; riling up the public about a vast, ISIS-controlled network; and ignoring the less-dramatic solutions that need to be pursued. The West is facing a threat from its own residents who want to be Rambo; it should resist the temptation to do the same.
That article comos off as more patronizing than what it wishes to be.
If a culture or a group of people start to blow up airports and subways, do mass shootings and suicide bomb themselves sporadically because they are simply bored, too stupid, depressed, have high unemployment and think it is cool, then why even bother allow them to Europe to begin with if they are so fragile?
But that would require responsibility for failure in policy, of which Drowsy already pointed out that the current establishment will not do. Rather race further down the cliff than admitting that you're wrong, i guess.
Article uses assumption that this attackers are European born and grown. Which means that nobody allowed them in Europe in first place.
-
PoE doesn't have companion reputation system. System sound to be similar with Bioware's rivalry/friend system and what we saw in Alpha Protocol and because of this is Obsidian's game I would guess that implementation is closer to Alpha Protocol than those of Bioware
Faction system seems to be similar to one that you find in PoE, but maybe in bit wider scale (more factions more intersect quests and choices).
PoE's disposition system seems to be missing.
-
In Greek Teratus (Τέρατος) = beast
Maybe people fear their world
-
I don't think the work on Armored Warfare is anywhere close to being finished. They are very busy making more content for it all the time and just because the game gets officially released won't change that fact.
That is nature of MMOs. But I was thinking them actually changing status from open beta to released. Then game moves from production to post release support. Of course classic phases of development are bit poor to describe products that continue to evolve after they are "finished".
Which is why we have seen in past quite lot of web services that are in beta for years, just because their developers didn't have better vocabulary to describe state of their product.
Yes, but even with post release support AW is going to have big team working on it. They can't really slack around in terms of updates when they are going against WoT. The playerbase is constantly expecting new maps, tanks and other updates.
Yup, but that will depend quite lot how my.com feels that game is doing. Some MMOs get lots of content after release and some just die because their publisher don't feel that they bring enough cash in the house. Obsidian most likely has contract for this year to produce content with option to additional content in future if game does well.
Although Obsidian is hiring quite lot of people which usually indicates that they have secured projects that engage quite lot of people. And it would not be surprising if AW is one of the those projects.
-
I don't think the work on Armored Warfare is anywhere close to being finished. They are very busy making more content for it all the time and just because the game gets officially released won't change that fact.
That is nature of MMOs. But I was thinking them actually changing status from open beta to released. Then game moves from production to post release support. Of course classic phases of development are bit poor to describe products that continue to evolve after they are "finished".
Which is why we have seen in past quite lot of web services that are in beta for years, just because their developers didn't have better vocabulary to describe state of their product.
-
I'd guess Obsidian has three projects in various stages of development. That seems to be what they are comfortable with based on their history.
They have at least four and five if you count post mortem of PoE.
Armored Warfare (which is in its final states of production I think)
Pathfinder Card game (also seems to closing end of its production cycle)
Tyranny (also in closing release)
Project Louisiana (seems to be just started)
Pillars of Eternity (post expansion release patching and bug fixing, on its way to grave figuratively speaking, but still takes some man hours)
There is also possibility for (because of what Obsidian's people tell in their social media and professional networking accounts like linkedIn)
1 or 2 unannounced projects (that can be somewhere from pitching to production)
-
What I wanted to say was that Torment's combat (you know the thing why we call RPGs usually RPGs and not Adventure game) was AWFUL.
It is called RPG because players have control over what makes and defines their characters, where in adventure game they don't. Combat has nothing to do if game is classed as RPG or not. Although for some people combat seems to be only thing that defines games for some reason.
-
6
-
-
EDIT: It seems that I don't know how to post in right threads
-
It seems that in US Paradox own the trademark, which is probably why sequel is there called Graviteam Tactics: Operation Star
EDIT: Piranha Bytes had sold JoWood temporal rights for Gothic, which is why after the split JoWood renamed Gothic 4 to Arcania - Gothic 4/Gothic tale, so that they get series fans to buy their new game and start new IP from that. And Piranha Bytes created Risen when they waited to get their rights back.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2011-05-05-why-gothic-dev-piranha-dumped-jowood
"Currently, JoWooD has no more rights on developing any further Gothic titles, so the rights are back - they will be back I think next year. I don't have the contract here. Very soon the contract runs out and we will get the rights back. And we knew that from the start."
-
You wouldn't make an AP sequel anyway, not with Sega owning the rights and given the contemporary setting there's little point buying them out just for Mike Thorton (whose name everyone gets wrong anyway), Stevie Heck etc. Some sort of kickstarter funded spiritual successor- a sort of Fallout KS to PoE's Baldur's Gate one- using AP's strengths as a selling point would be better, less limited and avoid baggage.
They own game's most important IP, which mean that there can't be sequel that uses word Tyranny without Paradox giving permission to its use. Other IP rights that games have aren't as important as they mostly determine who owns art assets, music, writing, etc..
Trademark is not that important. Achtung Panzer Kharkov 43 has two sequels despite Paradox (laughably, since it's from Heinz Guderian's book) owning the trademark and not being involved in those sequels. JoWood would still be making 'Gothic' games (with that name filed off) under the Arcania trademark if they hadn't gone bankrupt, that was the point of calling Gothic IV Arcania, to get a trademark JoWood owned plus their own copyrighted world thus getting around Piranha Bytes owning Gothic's ip. It's probably, overall, the least important part of the IP, though still important- it's useful to us primarily because it's obvious and easy to check whereas contracts and the like are best part of impossible. To illustrate further, EA owned System Shock as a trademark but it wasn't much use if you can't use Shodan or any of the other games' plot because an insurance company owns them, otoh if you're that insurance company you can just wait for the TM to expire and re-register it.
Plus Paradox does have a history of IP reversions, unlike most every other publisher, so there's substantial precedent.
It's more likely that Paradox owns it wholesale than the alternatives, but it isn't certain by any means.
Trademarks are classed as most valuable and most fought IP.
What comes to Achtung Panzer, Graviteam owns right to that name not Paradox.
With Gothic JoWood owned trademark for that to the end. Edit: Which is why Piranha Bytes created their Risen series.
EDIT2: Gothic thing is actually good example why trademarks are valued. Your post gives implication that Arcania: Gothic 4 is for you forth game in Gothic series, even tough Risen and its sequels are made by original developers of Gothic series as sequel for their Gothic (parts 1 and 2) series.
EDIT3: Removed text that said that Piranha Bytes didn't make Gothic 3. They didn't make Gothic 3: Forsaken Gods which is only addon to Gothic 3.
-
Just as an aside, Obsidian does not have the rights to Alpha Protocol either.
Yes, that is a well known fact. Otherwise I'm sure they would have tried making a sequel to it by now.
Would they though? I love the game, but they are running a business. It didn't sell well, it isn't even really a cult hit. If they really wanted to give it another go, they could probably easily lease or buy it from Sega. But I don't see the profit in it.
From what I've understood/remember it did end up selling quite good... eventually. Naturally the horrible reviews it got from the weirldly biased NA press did hurt the sales a lot iniatially but the sales picked up with gamers recommending the game to each other. Can't remember if it ended up making profit for SEGA, but in proper hands I'm sure the development time for any sequel would have been much much shorter.
I don't think it's a stretch to think they would have shopped around the idea for a sequel. Obviously they wouldn't have had the capital to make one on their own nor would have Kickstarter covered the costs either. But if the IP was theirs, they could have asked around other publishers if they are interested in publishing the sequel with certain changes being made to the game to get better reviews even in NA and not just Europe.
It sold more than PoE, but it is second worst selling game in Obsidian's roster (lifetime sales are still estimated to be 1 - 1.1 million copies, consoles 700k (sega's only official information)-850k (VGChartz - which is inaccurate and often overestimates sales), Steamspy estimates steam owners to be 250k-270k), but PoE most likely will give it its first place back soon (if haven't already thanks to WM part II's release). Without knowing its budget it is hard to say if it was profitable, but for Sega it was quite bad as their other games also flopped same time.
-
No one is surprised, except for the swedes themselves perhaps.
Some could find it bit that they were escorted by far right group and they or those who escorted them didn't report assault to police (as according to Swedish media they only reported car incident).
-
New York Times that I have seen often praised for their high journalistic standards (in past) seems to have quite low standard this years even for biased magazine (One that endorses publicly single presidential candidate)
-
1
-
-
This is a regular publisher/developer deal this time, the publisher has the IP so I don't think that Obsidian would use the Pillars Of Eternity IP. As far as lore goes, this time they don't have the weight of the Kickstarter's promises so they can limit themselves. For example, it seems we will only get two species (humans and beasts, whatever that is) this time rather than the five we has in Pillars.
How come everyone is so sure the IP will belong to Paradox?
It say so in http://www.tyrannygame.com/ if you scroll bottom of the page
Tyranny™ is a trademark of Paradox Interactive. All rights reserved.
2016 Paradox Interactive
But doesn't that mean that they just own the rights to the game (as they are the publisher, that's pretty much given), not the actual IP, the setting and possible sequels. There could be clauses in the contract that revert all rights back to Obsidian after number of years or if Paradox isn't interested in funding a sequel with a certain timelimit. Etc.
They own game's most important IP, which mean that there can't be sequel that uses word Tyranny without Paradox giving permission to its use. Other IP rights that games have aren't as important as they mostly determine who owns art assets, music, writing, etc.. Because they make it possible to create spiritual successor, but not real sequel without trademark holders permission and they really can't prevent trademark holder to make sequel for the game if they want to do so.
Setting ownership can make things complicated, but owning rights to it don't really make possible to create sequels for Tyranny even though they make possible to create other games that don't have Tyranny in their name to that setting, but they can be used to prevent new game with Tyranny in their name made in said setting. We can see example of this in our Torment "sequel" (Torment Tides of Numenera).
EDIT: But it is because there is not mention about setting IP in the site like for example game set in Eora™/©. Eora™/© is a trademark/copyright of Obsidian Entertainment. All rights reserved. 2016 Obsidian Entertainment. It is highly probable that Paradox owns also rights to the setting.
-
Quite optimistic words.
Quite out of date words- five months out of date. First thing to check on any article, especially any article posted by Bruce and in this case it's in the url.
Well, it was a nice quiet few days. Now we just wait to see if oby mysteriously turns up again as well.
My words were bit sarcastic as said deal that article spoke with Turkey has already failed and new one has been struck, which has been met with great skepticism
-
This is a regular publisher/developer deal this time, the publisher has the IP so I don't think that Obsidian would use the Pillars Of Eternity IP. As far as lore goes, this time they don't have the weight of the Kickstarter's promises so they can limit themselves. For example, it seems we will only get two species (humans and beasts, whatever that is) this time rather than the five we has in Pillars.
How come everyone is so sure the IP will belong to Paradox?
Tyranny is a Paradox owned trademark. Pillars of Eternity is an Obsidian owned one. While that is not an absolute indicator, especially for Paradox*, it's usually a good one for how things stand IP wise, and the publisher owning the IP is most usual practice.
*historically at least a lot of Paradox games have reverted to the developer- Penumbra, Mount & Blade, Elven Legacy, Lead and Gold; probably 6 years after publication since AKP'43 got pulled from GOG six years after its initial release. Whether that's still true or true for Tyranny is impossible to tell, as you'd have to wait six years to find out.
Paradox owning the game's most important IP, which is trademark to it's name, there isn't really ways to sell game anywhere without Paradox giving their permission.
Obsidian probably owns some IP rights over the game, like for example technical solutions over Unity that give them ability make the game, they also probably have ownership over at least some of the art assets used in the game. But Paradox probably has permanent license to use these in the game and its marketing, and Obsidian gets lump sum or percentage compensation or combination of two as payment of use of their IPs.
-
Quite optimistic words.
-
This is a regular publisher/developer deal this time, the publisher has the IP so I don't think that Obsidian would use the Pillars Of Eternity IP. As far as lore goes, this time they don't have the weight of the Kickstarter's promises so they can limit themselves. For example, it seems we will only get two species (humans and beasts, whatever that is) this time rather than the five we has in Pillars.
How come everyone is so sure the IP will belong to Paradox?
It say so in http://www.tyrannygame.com/ if you scroll bottom of the page
Tyranny™ is a trademark of Paradox Interactive. All rights reserved.
2016 Paradox Interactive
Brussels Airport Explosions
in Way Off-Topic
Posted
Yes, it has caused and will cause problems in Finland and governments (these aren't new problems and have continued through several governments) have failed to solve them. And that failure cause quarrels in general population, which of course can lead that these problems expand and become even worse.