[New interview with Chris Avellone on VG 24/7]

"Dark’s a little boring to me, and it’s also too easy to fall down that hole in storytelling in an attempt to be pseudo-hardcore. Some of our strongest releases kept the dark on the backburner and cloaked it within a blanket of humor, and people responded to both."

 

This is exactly what I wanted to hear. Some writers go overboard with "being dark", and it just becomes silly and results in unlikeable characters that are hard to empathize with or care about. Obsidian has always done a great job of not falling into this trap, in my opinion, and I'm glad to hear that they are aiming to keep it that way.

[Where is everyone from]

Being George Bush, I'm from Texas, born and raised.

 

In that case you were born in Connecticut (or Massachusetts if you mean H.W.).

 

Anyway, I'm from a city in northern California called Chico. By car it's 1-1.5 hours south of redding (that one city with the gold mines in Fallout 2).

[NPC Portraits]

I would like to see such a system. Persona 3 and 4 had something like this in their dialogue system where a picture of the character who was speaking would appear next to the dialogue text, and they would use different pictures to show different emotions. It seems like a reasonably inexpensive way to liven up the characters.

[Voiced NPCs]

A great voice actor can really add to a character. However, voice acting is expensive and it's implementation would restrict the scope of the game's dialogue. If they want to use voice actors for key dialogues, that's fine, but I'd honestly prefer no voice acting at all and having the money for voice actors spent on expanding the dialogue options we get instead.

 

*EDIT*

 

 

Having only first line of a dialogue read (BG) feels weird for me.

 

I agree. I always find it a bit jarring when the first part of a character's line is voiced, but then it suddenly becomes text only. They should either have key dialogues voiced and everything else text only or else have no voiced dialogue at all.

[Would you like the project to produce a short story series]

I voted yes but with one big exception: I do not in any way shape or form want them to touch the player character(s)....those should be strictly for the player to create in terms choices, morality, power alliances, gender and looks.

 

Seconded; I don't want them to create a cannon version of the protagonist (like what Bioware did with Revan and the Exile).

 

As for creating tie-in stories to help introduce us to the world, I don't have any objection to this on principle, but I'd prefer if they spent their resources on the game and not on creating extraneous ancillary material.

[Bloodsports]

Have they said that people keep their memories and personalities when they are reborn? Reincarnaton could could work like this in PE, but that's not how it works in Buddhism or Hinduism. If your consciousness doesn't continue on with you into the next life, then bloodsports would be pretty much the same as they are in any other world. Still, it could be fun to have some sort of side quest where you could become a manager who recruits and trains gladiators to pit against rival managers' fighters--kind of like a really hardcore version of pokemon. This might be beyond the scope of the game, though.

 

A less resource intensive alternative, which is more traditional anyway, would be having some sort of arena that players can fight in (always a fun addition to a game). I loved the boxing in Fallout 2 and the trial by combat in NWN 2. I hope that if they do put in some sort of optional gladiatorial combat, that there are non-lethal versions like Fallout 2's boxing. Unless souls work like OP has envisioned, I would feel kind of bad about killing people for money (and even if they did work that way, there's the chance that the sould could come back shattered, rather than strengthened).

[Movement: walking, flying, digging, jumping, climbing, swimming]

They could maybe have climable buildings like in Jagged Alliance 2 (and maybe extend this to low cliffs, as well), but overall I think the 2D nature of the game will not be conducive to jumping and swimming. I guess you could do some sort of flight similar to what they had in Freedom Force.

 

All in all, this isn't a huge priority for me. Climbing could be kind of fun if shooting down from higher elevation gave archers some sort of bonus like in Final Fantasy Tactics, but overall I'm not sure if it would be worth the resource investment.

 

I would like for it to be possible to climb through windows like in Arcanum, though. That was great for thieves and would help open up multiple solutions for obstacles.

[Ideas for Souls]

How about undead souls? Souls that died and were brought back to life by a meteor crash that leaked radiations. Now they eat the brains of other souls. RAAAR.

 

Seriously, what about dead souls? Are some people born with dead souls? What would they do? How would they act?

 

Psychopaths maybe? Their dead soul makes them unable to empathize with other humans.

 

Anyway, I'm not sure what I think about OT. Could be interesting, although as a rule I don't like alignments. I think they usually fail to capture the nuances of human behavior. It sounds like they already have some soul variety with whole vs. fragmented souls, but I'm sure they could expand on that more. I guess it could tie in with OP's idea if the steps of the soul were tied to the level of fragmentation.

[Unique NPC Companions?]

I'm not sure which of the poll options to pick. I'd say either two or five.

 

The diversity of the followers in Planescape made sense given the setting, but in a traditional fantasy world, it seems better to have companions that are not overly exotic (at least not all of them). This is especially true since this is our introduction to the IP. Our companions are going to be one of the key ways for us to gain insight into the nature of the world. This will work a lot easier if they are more-or-less typical members of the world. If one or two are bizarre and/or xenomorphic, that is OK for flavor, but I think it will be better to have a group that is representive of the different local cultures and backgrounds. If our companions represent the standard range of diversity in the setting, we can learn about the various viewpoints and cultures that predominate in this world through our interactions with them.

 

If they want to include more unusual companions in later games in the IP, I could see that working because by that time we will be more familiar with it. Sort of like how the unconventional set of companions in Mask of the Betrayer worked because we were already familiar with the Forgotten Realms setting.

[Suggestions on the important "must haves" for Project Eternity to be awesome/successful]

Ultimately, this is Obsidian's game, and they know their craft much better than I, so I trust them to make a game up to their usual standards. Still, here are some of my preferences. Some of these will probably be non-issues judging from the developers' past work, but just to weigh in, here's what I would like to see/not see (in no particular order):

 

1. A setting without a simplistic black and white system of morality. This is not to say that there can't be characters that view the world in such a way, or that the player him/herself can't view the world as such. It means that the game doesn't give the player two solutions to every problem: one clearly "good" and one clearly "evil." Present the issues with more complexity and nuance and give players a variety of responses so that we can make our own decisions on what's right (shouldn't be an issue since Obsidian is usually good at this sort of thing).

 

2. A mature setting with complex characters doesn't mean that the characters should all be an unlikeable jerks who are emotionally unequipped to deal with the trials of whatever demanding situation they find themselves in (I've never noticed this problem in Obsidian games before, but it's fairly common in things that bill themselves as dark and mature).

 

3. Fun, tactical combat where your party members actually carry out your orders when you give them, rather than ten seconds later or never.

 

4. Don't dictate how my character feels about situations. Give me several options. Don't assume that I will be upset about an event in the plot. Give me the option to be upset or traumatized, but don't make that the only response; different people respond to things in different ways.

 

5. Don't have enemies deal us humiliating defeats in cutscenes fights where we have no choice but to be spectators to our own characters. If the narrative demands that we lose a fight, let us actually fight the adversary and lose in-game. Once we've lost, you can give us a cutscene of the villain getting away with whatever, but at least give us the illusion of agency in the encounter. There are few things more annoying to me when I'm playing a game than having control yanked away from me so that something bad can happen.

 

6. Multiple solutions to problems: diplomatic, martial, sneaky, etc.

 

7. The ability to argue with the villain (e.g. Fallout, PS:T, Alpha Protocol). It's fun to prove that he's wrong and you're right.

 

8. The ability not to argue with the villain. Sometimes I just want to let my fists do the talking. This generally comes up when a lot of tension and urgency has been built up prior to an encounter and then (probably after wading through an army of minions) I finally get to the boss, and the game makes me chat with him even though the story has been telling me that time is of the essence, and I'm all amped up for a fight. I like that the game gives me the option to try to be diplomatic, but I would also like the option right from the get-go to say, "no talking; let's do this" instead of making me go through a long dialogue if I've already decided that this will only end in violence.

 

9. Have cultural and linguistic variety within each race. All elves everywhere in the world shouldn't speak "Elvish" and share a single pan-global culture (although from Josh's posts, it sounds like this isn't going to be a problem).

 

10. Don't try to create a medieval feel by throwing in elements of Elizabethan English (no "thees" and "thous").

 

11. Make it possible to flee from combat like in Baldur's Gate or Fallout. Don't lock us in an area until all threats have been neutralized.

 

12. Magic should have applications outside of combat (such as in dialogues).

 

13. Choices should matter. Don't have all choices lead to the same outcome (obviously you can't have every choice lead to divergent outcomes, but at least with the big ones, don't make the choice purely cosmetic).

 

14. Try to minimize the disconnect between story and gameplay. If the game tells me something is urgent, don't let me dawdle without consequences.

 

15. I'm on the fence about romances. I think that attraction forming between people who spend a lot of time together makes sense, but I don't need it to turn into a full-fledged romantic relationship (although I'm not opposed to such a thing either). The kinds of unconsumated, and at times unrequited, romances that we had in PS:T or KotOR II would be enough to satisfy me in this area. That said, if romances of any kind are beyond the scope of this project, or if the devs just don't feel like doing them, I won't be upset. If they're in, great. It will probably add a new dimension to the characters and our interactions with them. If not, then I'm sure the effort that would have gone into them will be spent on some other form of character development.

[Mega-dungeons. I want one. With tunnels.]

Sorry, but I'm not a huge fan of dungeon crawling. It can be fun in pen and paper games or MMOs because you are doing it with other people, but in a single player game I find it to be pretty dull. Even with diablo's great atmosphere, I was only able to get about as far as the Butcher before I got bored and quit. A 10 or 20 level dungeon would probably be shear drudgery for me, and I'm not sure I would be able to get through it, even if it meant not being able to continue with the rest of the game. If it was an optional dungeon like the one from Tales of the Sword Coast, then I guess it wouldn't be an issue since I could skip it, but I still would prefer to have development resources spent on other things. I'd rather have fewer fights but have them be unique, challenging, and memorable.

[Character generation processes should be fun.]

I enjoy going through the process of answering questions to generate a character like in Jagged Alliance 2 or Daggerfall, but I want to have the option to make manual changes to whatever the end result is, like in Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines.

 

Also, I'd rather have character creation done out of character, before the game starts, rather than have some sort of in-game sequence that you have to play out like in Fallout: New Vegas. I thought the New Vegas thing was kind of fun the first time, but it got really old on subsequent playthroughs. Character creation in Arcanum, on the other hand, is always fun, no matter how many times you go through it.

[Evil characters]

Sounds like a great idea on paper. As you point out, however, it might be a lot of work to implement the extra dialogue.

 

I guess you could just have a generic "you're an evil man!" type of spiel that characters would give you until you made a persuade check or paid them or something then dialogue could revert to normal. You'd only have to write a couple different interactions to use depending on the character's reaction (scared and submissive vs. defiant/angry). Admittedly, if you did a lot of illegal stuff, having to go through the same dialogue each time would probably be a bit tedious, but it seems like it might work if you only killed someone in cold blood/got caught stealing/whatever nefarious thing a few times.

 

It would still be extra work to set and test the extra dialogue for each character, but it seems like a more manageable amount. But then, I don't know much about the technical process involved, so I could be way off.

[Number of available companions]

Since they've said that all your companions will have some stake in whatever it is that your trying to do, I'm guessing they're initially going to be grouped with you out of necessity. As such, personality conflicts may be less important than "the mission", whatever that may be.

 

Anyway, I'm tempted to say that I would prefer a small number of well developed characters over a large number of less developed characters, 'cause the promise of well developed characters always sounds better than the promise of poorly developed ones. When I think about it, however, I realize that there's always the chance that I won't like any of the characters in the smaller cast, however deep they may be. This was sort of a problem I had in the Mass Effect games. All of my favorite companions were introduced in ME2, but then they were reduced to bit roles in ME3 so that they could, supposedly, develop a small group of characters more fully. However, the purportedly deeper character development in ME3 didn't end up appealling to me as much as the larger cast of ME2 because I didn't care all that much about the characters they chose to focus on. In contrast, the greater quantity of characters in ME2 meant that I was able to find a group of comanions that I actually liked, even if my relationship with them remained pretty shallow.

 

So, Obsidian focusing on a small group could be great if I like the characters or disappointing if I don't. Obsidian has a pretty good track record of creating characters that I enjoy, though, so I'm not too worried, and given the limited budget of the project, I think it's reasonable for them to focus on a smaller cast.

[Character graphics: Please have multiple body types, heights]

Ideally I would like to see more variety in body type than we saw in the Infinity Engine games, but I would prefer them spend money on story, dialogue, encounter design, making multiple solutions to problems, etc. than on cosmetic variations. While I like having interesting visuals, I don't think they make or break a game--I haven't been playing Fallout 2 for fourteen years because of the character models.

 

So, if they can implement varied character models without negatively impacting the development of other areas, then sure. But I don't think it should be a priority.

[Ideas/Requests not demands and My view on RPGs]

It's funny to me that you use BG II and DA:O's companions as the yardstick for "memorable characters" since I actually found them to be completely unmemorable. Different strokes for different folks I guess. Luckily for me, I've found most of the companions from all of Obsidian's games + PS:T to be very memorable, so there's a good chance the same will be true in Project Eternity.

 

As for romance options, I would ideally like these to be possible because I think attraction naturaly develops when people spend a lot of time together. It would feel a bit odd if they didn't crop up at all, although cropping up doesn't need to entail Bioware style romance (not that I think there's anything inherently wrong with that sort of thing). I thought Sion's obsession with the Exile (if female) was a neat touch in KotOR II. Still, I usually don't end up pursuing the romances in games, so their absence/presence probably won't affect me much.

 

I'm completey on board with you when it comes to number two. As we've discussed in other threads, I always find it kind of immersion breaking when you supposedly have some imminent threat to deal with, but it will wait for you to get around to it in your quest log. This always seems like a strange disconnect between story and gameplay.

 

As for the politics angle, I'm indifferent. I can see how it could be cool to be kingmaker or become king yourself (I enjoyed that aspect of DA:O, and the politics were my favorite part of Awakening), but honestly I'm fine without becoming involved in such things. If my own quest doesn't become tangled with the power games of the rulers, that won't bother me in the least. In PS:T I never missed not being able to become a key player in the goings on of sigil. If your quest is deeply personal, then I think it's possible for the story to feel fulfilling without your character becoming entangled with the fate of the realm/world/whatever (not that the two are mutually exclusive).

[Random stats or Bought Stats?]

In pen and paper games, I prefer point buy systems because you don't get rerolls like in BG. In computer games I'm on the fence. Rerolling allows you to get better stats than with a point buy system, but I also feel kind of guilty about gaming the system (which is stupid, I know, since it's a single player game, and it's not like my party mates will be feeling upstaged by my character's superior stats). So really, I don't have a preference. On the up side, someone will surely make a save editor for the game at some point, and it will be possible to give your character whatever stats you want, so in the long run, the character creation process may not be a major concern.

[The Dark Side of Romance]

I want to ROLE PLAY a character with AIDS. I will then ROMANCE all of my companions and every important NPC in the game. I will then use CRAFTING to invent a cure which I'll keep to myself. Then I will return to my PLAYER HOUSE and watch television.

 

Wow, that's... uh... a disquieting fantasy. Anyway, I don't really have a preference on this issue. If they had such a thing it would be interesting (The scene in DA II where you go to visit Anders' clinic, and you see him treating Isabella for an STD definitely changed the way I viewed the possibility of sleeping with her), but I suspect the writers have more important things to focus their energy on than adding an awkward footnote to the hypothetical romances that may or may not even exist in Project Eternity.

[It's a Kind of Magic]

I'm all for giving mages opportunities to use their spells outside of combat. And many of the things suggested are not unprecedented. In the KotOR games you could use the force to "force persuade" people during dialogues, and in Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines you could use the Dominate discipline, and I think also Dementation, during dialogues. In Arcanum you could use fireballs to blast open doors and windows. And I'm pretty sure there was a Knock spell to open doors in the Baldur's Gate games. Including these options and expanding upon them with some of the other suggestions that have been made would make being a mage much more immersive: you wouldn't be inexplicably unable to use magic outside of combat.

[Sense Motive Skill]

I think this would be a great addition to the dialogue system, assuming skill checks are used during dialogue. If so, a character with a high sense motive skill could get extra dialogue options to reflect his/her hightened awareness.

[Solutions to the Degenerate Rest]

I thought Arcanum had a very good solution to this problem.

 

In Arcanum you had to sleep in a bed, right? So it's basically the same as the "you must rest at the campfire" one.

 

I don't think you needed to rest in Arcanum, did you? It's been a while, but I just remember that they had a wait for x number of hours mechanic like in Fallout. I used this a lot rather than wait for ten minutes of real time while my my stamina slowly recovered.

[Solutions to the Degenerate Rest]

OP's approach to resting reminds me a bit of the system in pre NGE Star Wars Galaxies where you would accumulate wounds and combat fatigue over time as you fought. Getting incapacitated or dying caused you to accumulate these even faster. Eventually your combat ability would be reduced so much that you'd have to go back to civilization to rest and recuperate. I always liked this system.

 

Anyway, OP's suggestion seems viable to me, and preferable to the resting system in most D&D type CRPGs. Being able to rest less builds a kind of tension that you don't get when you are always entering combat in top shape. One thing I really liked about Mask of the Betrayer was that I became increasingly terrified of resting as the game went on because the less time passed, the less my hunger would build. As such, by the end of the game, I hadn't slept in like three days and my spell casters were completely out of spells and basically just served as spectators. For all my character knew, all the epic stuff that happened at the end of the game could have all been a hallucination brought on by the lack of sleep. Anyway, the limited resting gave the game a great intensity and feeling of desperation that did a wonderful job of capturing the essence of the situation.

[[merged] Vancian Magic System and cooldowns]

Arcanum had an interesting magic system based more on stamina then mana. Fallout didn't have any magic. KoTOR2, NWN2, TOEE, V:tMB and the Infinity Engine games were based on existing IPs. While something new could be very interesting, I'm placing my vote for the Arcanum style with maybe a bit more polish.

 

And now I really want to play some good old games.

 

I liked Arcanum's system too. The fact that both spells and physical attacks were tiring meant that it didn't have the imbalance that D&D has where spellcasters only can use a handful of big damage spells per day while a fighter with a two handed sword can power attack multiple times per round, every round to deal out some pretty heinous damage. In Arcanum, any kind of sustained attacking would exhaust you, regardless of whether you were shooting fireballs or swinging an axe.

[Regarding powers and sense of urgency.]

The idea is that if you don't complete it in time, the demon will be summoned and you will have to destroy it. And as I stated, I would not necessarily wish these time limits to all quests. A quest like kill the bandit chief before my trading caravan arrive, would be an example of a side quest where this could be more easily implemented.

 

EDIT: I would only wish these where it makes sense. Warlock in temple suggestion would have been a general assassination mission that must be completed within a 2 days, or you won't get the bounty. Quests where danger is imminent, should be made clear that they must be completed in time, or you fail.

 

Hmm... OK, I think I agree about the time limits, then. I'm not very familiar with 4e, so I can't comment too much on the other stuff.

[How important is for you that the gameworld is both interactive and animated?]

If it won't detract from other things, I would enjoy more animation, but it isn't a priority for me. Descriptions can get the job done if they don't have the time/budget for animation.