Darkpriest

Obviously slavik countries, Poland and Russia. Poland, because it's a land of awesomeness (women and RPG devs). Russia, because they also have nice women and if you won't comply you'll have Mr. Putin staring at you...

Well 3 games is plenty enough. I am full of hope for the Cyberpunk 2077 and TW3, but I'd like to see them using some other licensed fantasy world, or homebrewed, where you can have also customization of your character.

Well they had plenty of time since the last Witcher to get the story and world concept going. They've also have been developing the new engine since then. I am fairly sure that most of the work now will go on using the engine and the tools they've created to build the worlds efficiently and fast. They'll probably have to spend some time testing all th eplatforms once they will be in advanced stage of production. They've doubled the team size for this one too. I think it's plenty of time to get the "technical" work done. Art style and so on, are probably already pretty much fixed. That said there might be some tweaking, but 1,5year is plenty enough time. Also, it isn't said WHEN in 2014 it will be shipped... so it might be almost 2yrs of development ahead. Oh Joy seems like late 2013 and 2014 will be the golden age for RPGs I can already see Wasteland 2 into P:E into TW3 cycle... to quote a classic -> "nothing else matters"

If they will be able to do this, then it might be a first sand-box game, which I will praise... Generally I am against sand-boxes in RPGs, because that results mostly in a shallow content (All Bethsheda's games I've touched made my angry and not progress beyond 4-5h mark)

Who could have done that... *employs the Orlan cipher for Forensic work*

Hmm, I would not mind if they would go more into Dark Souls combat style

Shame... I was hoping for some more than a one page statement by the developer... I hoped for some more "meat" - CGI trailer, gameplay teaser, etc... oh well...

For me it's more about the product itself. We are entering the area, where the games become very basic in what they offer at launch, and for everything else you pay extra. Then in order to fully experience the game you have to pay far more than for the original copy of the game. It's also the area of so called "moral hazard". I will have zero complaints if the DLCs are fully optional to the game experience (outfit packs, color packs, etc.) but if it is released on Day 1, with extra weapons/armors, missions, etc. what's the justification for such a process? If it was developed during the game development, why this experience is removed from the game, unless you pay extra? DS3 is not my type of a game, so I won't be buying it, but if I would, then I'd have concerns about the design of the game. There is some fear of a game designed in a way, that it will "force" the player to reach out to that paid content, because otherwise the game is lacking in experience or repetitive, boring or too difficult. For example, the reason for me, why Diablo 3 is a failure IMO, is because the game is designed to be FULLY dependable on gear and hard gear checks, instead of skill builds and player's skill. Then if you drop things like Auction House, etc. which basically encourages a player to use it, or otherwise the game is way too time consuming mindless grind of repetitive areas. The design philosophy is clear. Get people to use AH as often as possible, best if that's RMAH, cause that adds to profit. I have nothing against DLCs in general, IF they add new experiences on a quality level or if they add some additional options to the gear modifications, choices (FO:NV got that right) , but if it's on Day 1 or within the first month post release, there is something distasteful about this practice, although it's a sound choice from the revenue perspective (as long as the customers are backing this up)

Just when you thought that EA cannot do better with DLCs, they prove you wrong... http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidthier/2013/02/01/dead-space-3-launching-with-11-pieces-of-day-one-dlc/ 11 Day 1 DLCs for "Dead Space 3" + microtransactions

Well in 2h there should be an official reveal by CDP RED hopefully with some video trailer

Yeah, it's not gonna be so much gonna be a dichotomous alignment as it's going to be an adherence to A moral code (rather than "the" moral code). And yeah, the whole "but that person was innocent! Just the wrong place at the wrong time! HOW DARE YOU KILL THEM?!" thing is a bit weird. I liked how Samara (aka Asari justicars) worked in Mass Effect. She was basically all "Look, I'm on a holy mission, and your innocent life is but a speck compared to that. If I can help it, I won't harm any innocent people, ever. But, if you impede my mission, I am not only AUTHORIZED to kill you, I'm REQUIRED to. u_u" I think Paladins should be brimming with zeal. 8P Actually the concept of a justicar is really close to my perception of a paladin. They have their code, to which the adhere, their code is defined by the laws of the god they serve. The code is everything and breaking it, would be breaking oneself. That said, if the paladin is on the mission, only his patron god or superiors who sent him on the mission can stand in his way. They respect the others, and abide to laws, as long as it does not impede significantly their mission or endangers following their code. Rulers of lands would be well familiar with how these chapters/brotherhoods, etc. work.

Oh for crying out loud. That's just ... I am not sure... should I laugh or cry in this case? That's how irrational this is. The thing is, that the same person who accused of racism used a racists description, of a WHITE girl... c'mon... she is not white, but has euro-influenced heritage, similar to the fact that there are afro-americans, etc... Gees. this PC (polit.-correct.) **** is reaching beyond believable levels of absurd...

Probably it would be fruitless, as I can hardly be convinced to change my experience with a game by anything else than the game itself. That said, I would definitely support the idea of allowing the Obsidian to continue expansion of the West coast plot line, or even mid-state (remember Fallout Tactics), while Beth could stick to the East Coast. The FO:NV introduced many interesting lore tidbits on which they could expand, although I think it would be better if any Fallout would be just loosely tied to the previous ones and would fallow a canon ending picked by a developer (We can visit Utah, Arizona, go back to California, etc.). It worked well on the previous Fallout titles, and it would work in the future as well. They could probably work with some different backgrounds, but it would be better another story designed from beginning to an end of the series and having in mind coherence of the world throughout the series, which would be then probably more about personal choices and developments than big world changing factors like we could have on so many levels and occasions in Fallout:NV - the sequel would be either watered down in matter of consequences presented in game, or would be such an enormous money sink, that no publisher would find financial justification for such a project.

I'll just re I'll just say this from my perspective. Fallout 3 was an utter crap - storywise, NPC wise, and combat wise - It only had the nice feel of wandering post apocaliptic landscape... Fallout: NV brought two redeeming factors - story and plot with connections to the previously well established lore. This was coherent and well executed. (add all the different factions to the play as well). Much, MUCH better NPCs and dialogs. The one thing that remained is the crappy combat, but that's inherited from the design of Fallout 3. S.P.E.C.I.A.L. + skill system tied to it, just does not fit this type of combat, because it was designed to a completely different combat system. If my skill completely overrides my character's skill, then the combat design is bad. I can one-shot kill enemies at a range of the viewscreen, while activating VATS is not even possible on those targets. In general I do not like Bethsheda's games. Morrowind was unfun (again the infamous trio - combat, story, NPCs), Oblivion was even worse, and I did not decide to touch Skyrim, because it continues to follow same design philosophy. Dishonored seemed to me overhyped, although it also had a bad luck of getting released at the same time as the new X-COM, so I did not even buy Dishonored. My ideal game would be the same quality in story, factions, lore and NPCs as it was presented in Fallout: NV, but when a combat sequence would be triggered, then the camera would pan out from a FPV/TPV to a tactical view and be played in turns (can be simultaneous) and with use of APs, and also would give you full control on your party members. The other idea is to completely redefine the combat system and make it full action with some special abilities with cooldowns based on perks and skill progression unlocks. Somewhat similar to ME or other FPP/TPP action games

Isn't Josh actually growing the production beard? During the KS he was shaved, now he has quite a beard :D Or is it just a coincidence to change own image?

To be honest, I'd rather have dragons being represented like this: 1) powerful but avoiding the lesser beings. Manipulative though, when it fits their interests. 2) more in classic style - if you want some aberration then call it something different than a dragon... I do not care what classic style it will be, either western/european, far east, or even more serpent like in style with the first seal of the Project Eternity. 3) near impossible to challenge. If you fight a dragon in the open, you are screwed, if you fight it in some narrow and rather small cave, pressing it against a wall, then you MIGHT have a chance... since it's highly unlikely that there will be a form of flight implemented due to a nature of the design of the game, I'd rather see them more as great mysteries, or sometimes interacting with some agents or polymorphed dragons, but I'd rather not have combat scenarios, where you cannot do justice to the dragon (air attacks with scorching fire, wing buffet, tail attacks, bites and swallows, etc., being very intelligent beings on the top of the food chain, why would they ever feel that it's a good idea to sit on the ground and engage in a battle where they can get injured?)

To be honest there is quite an easy way of getting north. You find fairly early one 2 stealthboys. You easily get to Sloan without much trouble, when you start seeing first deathclaws, you activate a stealthboy, run straight towards neil's shack, then you most likely need to re-apply your second stealthboy and just run straight line to REPCON HQ, from there it's easy trek to New Vegas. I had my high luck (9 luck at start) character going to Vegas, bought naughty sleepywear at Mick&Ralphs, won all the funds at Black Jack table at Atomic Wrangler, went to The Strip, broke all The Strip casinos at Black Jack tables and voila, I was level 5 with over 40k caps... I would have been lower level (2-3) if not for the fact that once you hit the strip and marks They-went-that-way as a completed quest and that's a **** load of xp at that low level

Oh come on! Oghren was a laugh with his drunken tirades, his utter lack of social graces and anything resembling hygiene. Besides that, what made him funny was that he stuck out among his kind exactly because he acted so much as what we perceive to be the stereotypical dwarf. I'm pretty sure they're talking about Khelgar Ironfist, the dwarven fighter you pick up as the first thing once you leave the starting village in Neverwinter Nights 2. Actually Khelgar was awesome, and it's because it has shown that the common misconception of ale drinking brawling machine being the typical dwarf, is wrong in the D&D FR. Have you done sidequests related to him, showing the tidbits from dwarven lore and culture in FR? Did you see his evolution, where he was realizing what means to be a dwarf? The archetype of drunk brawler dwarf is overused, but overused by players, not the story/lore writers in the D&D. I'd urge you to read some sourcebooks regarding dwarves in FR D&D. To be honest I do not get, where and when the concept of a dwarven drunkard came into the common view as the REAL DWARF, because it's flat out wrong - at least in D&D terms. Sure they like to drink and praise their beverages and stamina, but they have pride, dignity, honor, they are concentrated on creation and perfection, they are both loyal, and stubborn, on top of that they value their traditions and clans. There are some things that tick them off, but you get that in their racial background and history - orcs, giants, goblins, etc.

Bosses should always have a set level but mooks should be capable of surpassing their bosses? A legitimate boss fight (i.e. not one meant as an anti-climax or used for comic effect,) should always be a challenge. What is a boss, if not a challenge? Err not really... for example. Is a king the toughest opponent or his best knights? Bosses can be masterminds, people with influence and money and other similar power giving attributes, not always being the raw magic/physical power and resilience... It's just how you design the things out in relation to a confrontation with such a boss...

This may be old but I am not sure why more people aren't commenting on this impending MMO. It looks like it will offer a real D&D experience, also Perfect World is releasing the Foundry which will allow players to create there own modules and adventures in the game for other people. I am obviously missing something that explains the lackluster excitement from these forums? I avoid MMOs. my fix for on line play is with MOBA games (DotA2) or RTS (CoH, DoW). Used to spend a lot of time, I mean A LOT, on the original NWN PWs... the difference here is, that NWN used a mechanic where a character was doing all the combat, with instruction from the player (skills, spells). While this game is full player controlled combat. The other difference was that PWs that I've played, were really good on retaining the RP core, no silly builds, that have little to do with RP, etc. - It was an on-lline RPG experience, nearest to P&P, this, is way away from that from what I've seen... A standard MMO...

Well in this game I have yet to play anything else than a sniper type of character... The RT combat feels for me rather bad, especially when you start to face very fast moving opponents. Varmint rifle + scope + silencer and ED-E companion made me play the game almost on easy mode. Once I've found Ratslayer - enhanced Varmint rifle with all the upgrades on it already, then I started to clear up the whole map, with exclusion of Super Mutants and Deathclaws. Once I got my hands on sniper rifle though, it was easy mode all the way. It's just the time spending hunting a good sniper spot, but there are so many of them, that you really have to not care about them to miss them. I've cleared the whole Quarry Junction solo without taking any point of dmg. All you need is a sense of space and patience. (+some silenced and scoped weapon of a long range death) Guns Sneak Silenced weapon with scope = Godmode 9mm can also have a scope, but it's shorter range and 9mm dmg is more in the rate of fire, which makes armored opponents rather tough... Radscorpions, people in medium and heavy armor, (not to mention Deathclaws - I was really shocked when I had to use AP rounds vs them to be effective)...

Hmmm, It really is a hard choice, but: NWN2: Khelgar - who doesn't want a solid fighting comrade with some comic relief in his dialogs? KOTR 1&2: HK-47 - ::vield threat:: - just try to not agree with this choice... PS:T: Annah - love thieves with their cant BG1&2: Jaheira - one of most memorable characters PS:T: Morte - 'nough said There is a lot more of really memorable and nice companions, thus it was hard to pick only so few Garrus (ME) Viconia (BG) Edwin (BG) Minsc (BG) Sarevok (BG2) Ammon Jerro (NWN2) Bishop (NWN2) Keldorn (BG2) Yoshimo (BG2) Zaeed (ME2) Fall-From-Grace (PS:T) Dak'kon (PS:T) Gannayev (NWN2 - MotB) Dove (NWN2 - MotB) Sand (NWN2) Montaron&Xzar (BG) Kreia (KOTR2) Bao-Dur (KOTR2) GOTO (KOTR2) Carth Onasi (KOTR) Bastilla (KOTR) Canderous "Mandalore" Ordo (KOTR1&2) Atton (KOTR2) Argh.. I will stop here, otherwise it will take too long :D

Well to be honest in the old days the maturity was perceived to be earlier than now. Look at marriage customs etc. It was also related to relatively shorter life expectancy in society. People living 50+ were rather rare... (look even at late 19th century, when retirement plans were implemented in countries like Germany (Prussia) - they assumed that a tiny fraction of society will be living long enough to actually get the benefits of the "old age (60-65+)". These benefits, are now obtainable by much larger fraction of society, leading often to an increasing public debt in many countries and social discontent when the bar of being eligible for the benefits is being moved higher) As for the future, I'd say the with longer lifespan, new medicine, etc. we will be displaying "immature" behavior for longer periods of time, but in no way that implies that the "maturity" won't be displayed still in 16-17yrs old. It will be even more rare than it is today. People at this age can already start to work, raise families, handle weapons, etc. It's only the experience they may lack, but the age has nothing to do with experience. As example, who is more experienced - a 18yr old who is living on his own for 2 years already or 28yr old eternal student, who lives off his parents and never touched any kind of job? As for sci-fi, well how many alien species do you know and how well do you know their cultural and psychological background?

Cipher looks to me like a CSI: P:E Great stuff - 'nough said.

Geez, I really do not get the issues that people have with some of the mentioned characters. You may _personally_ dislike them, but that does not mean they were badly written... 1) Do they represent the class archetypes? 2) Do they represent their assumed alignment and moral stance? 3) Do they represent their stats? 4) Do they represent their cultural background? Now the things that are also important and make a mediocre character turn into a great one 5) The reason for joining the player's team and staying with him to the end 6) Their own story and own mission within the game that shows something slightly exceptional about that character, when comparing to more common NPCs I see some whining on characters which had strong personal beliefs, such as Casavir, Carth, etc. - they are not badly written, and they would really lose a lot of their appeal, if they were different. Given points 1 to 4, they work well. In fact, if their personalities and their character coherency is what makes you annoyed, that means they work well. The worst that can happen is a character that you've played with and don't even remember it now. The ones that drive indifference car. The things that make a character bad are generally ideas pulled out of the ass and not really fitting the world that's been presented around you (example - for me it was the space child and space ninja in ME3). I have to admit that most of characters in DA2 I hardly even remember, and from DA:O I need to think for a while to recall them all and their roles. In BG series I'd also have problems with describing all of the potential companions, but that is just because all of them were completely optional and I have never taken some into the party (because I was full already )