ogrezilla

do you realize what you've done!?

that would be cool. Maybe even allow some shields to be used by fighters as a sort of off hand weapon like you said. Not as good as actually attacking with a sword, but a little extra damage. I like the general idea of more item type differentiation.

While I understand the sentiment, my experience with food mechanics is actually the opposite of urgency. You stock up on all the food you can carry at town, then use rations to get to the dungeon, then 1/3 of the dungeon is cleared you run low on food, now you HAVE to go back to town NOW or else run out of rations before you can get to a store, so you go back to town then restock and go back to the dungeon and now you have to walk back down to where you left off (hope monsters don't respawn) and so on. So while I understand in theory food mechanics make you go "We can't just stand around here - our food is going to run out!", my experience with them is that the instead make you go "Wait evil baddy, I need about 12 more days to go restock on food and return because I don't want to starve and die while stabbing your horde to death." While that's a fair point, making it hard to apply urgency to games that inherently doesn't have any (although they should); Why the hell would you only carry the bare minimum, or wait going back to town until you are practically starving? And if you only make it to 1/3 of the dungeon before you absolutely have to go back, going there straight from your last stock-up, then yeah, there is clearly something wrong with the system, because once you're back there, you're going to run into the exact same problem again, in the exact same spot. I've never, ever had what you describe happen in a game, though. which means its typically a complete non issue that boils down to did I remember to buy food or not without actually adding anything to the game.

While I understand the sentiment, my experience with food mechanics is actually the opposite of urgency. You stock up on all the food you can carry at town, then use rations to get to the dungeon, then 1/3 of the dungeon is cleared you run low on food, now you HAVE to go back to town NOW or else run out of rations before you can get to a store, so you go back to town then restock and go back to the dungeon and now you have to walk back down to where you left off (hope monsters don't respawn) and so on. So while I understand in theory food mechanics make you go "We can't just stand around here - our food is going to run out!", my experience with them is that the instead make you go "Wait evil baddy, I need about 12 more days to go restock on food and return because I don't want to starve and die while stabbing your horde to death." right. it only really works if acquiring food is an enjoyable part of the game by itself. Honestly, buying basic ammunition for ranged weapons is pretty much exactly the same. It's never "I should conserve arrows" its "I should go back to town and buy more arrows." Limited upgraded and magic arrows are good though. Or there should be some reason for me not to go back to town for more arrows while I'm in the middle of a dungeon.

The difference in managing one character and managing six is miniscule in this regard. When one eats, everyone eats according to their needs. That's how I've always done it before, anyway. When the orc (high metabolism) needs to eat, you feed him two hams, which removes his Hunger entirely. By this time, your elf (low metabolism) doesn't need to eat, but you still feed him a bit of bread, to remove his hunger entirely, too. The odds that someone in your party will be starving while someone else in your party doesn't need to eat at all is exceedingly remote. if we are in a setting where food might be scarce then sure, it could be an interesting gameplay addition because it becomes a necessary goal to find food. That adds to the gameplay. If we are in a setting where we can walk back to town and buy food every time we need it, then all it does is force us to walk to town occasionally. That's tedious and adds absolutely nothing to the game. So I guess it depends on the way the game is designed. It prevents you from constantly sleeping/resting until you are fully healed and adds urgency for long-term or far-away exploration. "Forcing" you to walk back to town once in a while in an adventuring/roleplaying game.. makes perfect sense. Unless you're hunters, foragers or rangers, of course, in which case you should definitely be able to utilize their skills, incentivizing the use of such skills (and spending effort to improve them). it might make sense. But it doesn't mean its a good addition to a game. There are better ways to limit people from rest spamming and walking back to town for food simply is not enjoyable. And I was actually on the pro-urgency side of an argument on this board a few days ago, but the long term exploration parts of the game are exactly where I don't want the game to add urgency.

I really don't get how I could say what I'm saying more clearly so I'm going to stop trying. What you just described has nothing to do with what I'm saying though so you are clearly misunderstanding me. I don't care enough to try to keep explaining it. But hopefully you can rest easy knowing that I have never said the things you just attributed to me.

I have no problem with it. I likely won't use it, but I know it was popular in the older games. I have no idea how hard it would be to implement as far as taking up time and resources. edit: apparently more than its worth. ok then.

definitely. I'm at 20 dollars too. Give me some options in the 30-60 dollar range and maybe I'll consider it. I would probably go to 30 or 35 if it just adds the novella for example. But I don't want to go from nothing to a pile of stuff.

The difference in managing one character and managing six is miniscule in this regard. When one eats, everyone eats according to their needs. That's how I've always done it before, anyway. When the orc (high metabolism) needs to eat, you feed him two hams, which removes his Hunger entirely. By this time, your elf (low metabolism) doesn't need to eat, but you still feed him a bit of bread, to remove his hunger entirely, too. The odds that someone in your party will be starving while someone else in your party doesn't need to eat at all is exceedingly remote. if we are in a setting where food might be scarce then sure, it could be an interesting gameplay addition because it becomes a necessary goal to find food. That adds to the gameplay. If we are in a setting where we can walk back to town and buy food every time we need it, then all it does is force us to walk to town occasionally. That's tedious and adds absolutely nothing to the game. So I guess it depends on the way the game is designed.

Ok, then. Piece by piece here. * What has been suggested on the last few pages in order to appeal to the "Sims-playing girlfriend" or the "Game-hating brother"? and * Why is Obsidian, in your mind, concerned with these people? 1. Nothing. That doesn't mean Obsidian wouldn't be happy to have as many of them as possible change their mind on the type of games they enjoy. I'm not suggesting making the game more accessible to them. I'm just arguing that they should NOT make the game less accessible than the classics already are. Keep things like easy mode. 2. Money and the ability to continue making this type of game.

You insinuited it by claming Obsidian would very much like the business of people who do not understand, enjoy or are unfamilar with this type of game. no I didn't. that's the miscommunication. Are you reading the parts of my posts where I flat out say they shouldn't change the game for those people? I said they very much want those people to get the game. That doesn't mean I think the game should be changed in any way shape or form. And I've said just that quite a few times now. Wanting average gamers to like the game is not the same thing as making the game for average gamers.

I'm sure there are...but compromising the integrity of the genre in order to lure them in is not the right approach. Teaching them the virtues which patience for this type of gaming requires is the answer. I never said they should compromise anything at all. I'm pretty sure we have agreed for a while now and are just having a miscommunication issue.

I really don't want this. All it does is add tedium. I don't have any interest in this being more hardcore than the old IE games. They did a nice job of keeping out mechanics that didn't actually add value beyond realism for the sake of being hardcore.

ya I don't want that to happen at all. We've seen that happen and we know what games it leads to. I just feel like there are a lot of people out there who have probably never played a classic RPG like this and if they did I bet a lot of them would really like it.

The main purpose of a video game is to provide enjoyment and some people enjoy games with less difficulty. This game should not cater to them. why not? does it hurt your experience with the game? To put it bluntly: in every project, games or not, when you try to do two conflicting designs at the same time you end up reaching bad quality in both aspects. That's why I am supporting this system which doesn't try to do two conflicting designs at the same time. They are doing an easy mode instead. And to the people saying they already serve a niche market so that is their target, I understand that the niche market is their main target. I hope it stays that way and all indications are pointing to them doing just that. But there is just no way you are going to convince me they don't WANT other people to see a game designed for that niche market and decide to try it. I want average joe frathouse to pick this game up -- a game designed for the niche market -- and love it. I want him to spread it to his madden and call of duty friends. I want my wife to pick it up and give it to her Sim loving friends. I want the type of game that we currently enjoy as a niche market to become popular in the form that we enjoy them. There is just no way Obsidian doesn't want that too. Is it realistic? No, not at all. But its still the ideal scenario. They aren't making games for a niche market because they prefer serving a niche market. They are making games for a niche market because that is the only market the type of game they want to make currently appeals to.

Oh really? See, and here I thought this is actually the EXACT OPPOSITE type of game Obsidian would love nothing more to make. Since, you know, the whole sell was "a return to classic IE games" and not "Yet another cinematic, next-gen, mash the 'awesome!' button in order to win" type game. I think you misunderstood me. They would love if girlfriends and the like became fans of the type of game this is meant to be. They want classic style RPGs to become popular. They are in the business of making money and they are good at and seem to enjoy making classic style RPGs. Nobody who is in the business of making money wants to only serve a niche market. That doesn't mean they will change the type of game they make to pander to a wider market, but there is no way Obsidian doesn't want as many people as possible to enjoy the game they do make. The ideal outcome of this game isn't for it to sell to only hardcore RPG fans. The ideal outcome is for this game to appeal to RPG fans while also being a commercial success. Thus, creating new RPG fans and proving that this type of game is financially viable. But if this game is not a at least a moderate success commercially, then this will likely be a one time thing.

looks like a solid list to me.

I have a feeling this is in too much flux to give a good update on at this point.

what? I want Obsidian to help bring classic style gaming to a newer audience. I don't want them to pander to them. That seems to be exactly what they are doing. I want games that people like you and I enjoy to become the type of game lots of people enjoy. "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions" © I keep hearing this since yearly 00s. Still waiting a decade after. hey its worth a shot. when was the last game like this released? I at least want it to be successful enough for Obsidian to be able to keep making them even if its just them.

what? I want Obsidian to help bring classic style gaming to a newer audience. I don't want them to pander to them. That seems to be exactly what they are doing. I want games that people like you and I enjoy to become the type of game lots of people enjoy. Then there will be more of them.

I agree - but so what? Obsidian have already agreed to go over and above on the hard mode, (if you suckers can raise 2.3 mil ) I really don't know what my point was there haha Yes, and that difference exists exactly because Obsidian does not hope to sell PE to every girlfriens and game-hating brother. Obsidian would love nothing more than to get girlfriends and game-hating brothers to buy this type of game. I'm sure a part of this project is them taking a chance to see if they can get some of the newer generation of gamers to try out an older style of game and hopefully have them enjoy it.

There is massive difference between the sales of Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening, (I really hope that is the working title of Fallout 4, btw), and what Obsidian hope and dream for this game. Fallout 4: The Elder Scrollsening - will sell millions of copies, hell - I know I'll buy it. Obsidian will still want to sell over a hundred thousand copies of P:E though, (and hopefully a lot more). If you don't think that's the intent - your delusional. indeed. they are a business. they want it to sell. that way they can make more games like this and those can also sell.

Yeah - the game is being Kickstarted, because it's never gonna get backed by a publisher - that doesn't mean that Obsidian don't hope to sell 500K copies of it. It's totally a niche title, but in NO WAY are they gonna limit themselves to the 50K Kickstarter backers. Now as for "Easy Mode" - there is NO WAY that the game won't have an Easy setting. You know it - I know it. The only thing that weird is that you have some kind of issue with it being there. There's a reason there is no stretch goal for "Easy" or "Normal" difficulties - because every game has them. I actually disagree with that last bit. Too many games these days are designed with what used to be easy mode as the normal mode. Not only that, the general mechanics are largely dumbed down or streamlined to make them less complicated which typically means shallower. Then if there is a hard mode, they usually just bump up enemy hp or damage and call it a day. That is the problem I have with a lot of modern games. I would love nothing more than to see this game be difficult and complex as the default settings and actually be a success commercially. That way more publishers might be willing to follow suit.

what concessions are being made? Easy mode was in the oldschool RPGs this is a tribute to.

Thats exactly why we are pledging money for this Kickstarter, so that the company will have no need to sell the game to your GF. but it is in your best interest if they do, so long as there is a mode you each like. That way games like this don't need kickstarter to get made in the future. The key is to get a base game we enjoy with an easy mode that they like. The problem is that too many modern games have been defaulted to easy mode.