descalabro

Yes, I completely agree. It felt so frustrating to beat some hard challenge so I could obtain the materials to craft an item that sometimes I kept it just for the sake of it. I would eventually sell it, but it really was frustrating.

Same here.

1) I don't see how. It was never said that hte setting is swimming in magic 2) Why would it be bland? Plenty of games feature exactly that. I hate the notion that CRPG are becoming so loot-centric. I guess it's the MMO/Diablo influence. That mastercrafted sword I had made by the master smith in town? It served me trough the game faithfully. Why should it be "bland"? A weapon that served your from beginning to end..that fact alone makes it legendary. Even better if you can customize such weapons (apperance) or simply because you wielded it for so long, you get a bonus to it because you're so familiar with it (easily done by tracking number of kills/strikes for a specific weapon) I agree with Darkpriest, having the same magical gear during the whole game gets tiresome. It feels great to find magical items, even when they are cursed or your race/class can't use them. You read the description and you feel it's an awesome item, but you later realize that item was nothing when compared to other ones you end up getting. It's also cool having to decide which magical item to use for each situation, and having to decide which magical items to sell, because sometimes an item is so cool you hesitate on selling it even if it's not that powerful. I usually prefer items which have some kind of power (fire, ice, acid, enchantments, etc) besides the + atributes. So it's also a matter of combat strategy; I remember once playing a Black Isle game in which you had to switch to normal items because that particular beast couldn't be killed with magical items, and that added a clever touch to the game. In IWD it made more sense to have magical items because normal ones got broken with use. In BG2 you would find a lot of them, but you still felt great satisfaction when there was one that could be of some use instead of being just one more magical item. Lower level magical items became a burden at higher levels, and that also made things interesting. Besides, if the game is well balanced, and has the right amount of magical items, and the right difficulty getting them, they will only make the game more interesting, and I don't really see a problem if you end up with a lot of them as long as they are relevant and fulfill the gameplay advantages I described. Magical items can make some truly epic battles where you have to consider them for strategy purposes.

I'm feeling quite dumb right now, because I'm not finding the option to edit the poll options...

I think what's most important it that they don't give away too much information. I can understand they showed a lot of levels from the mega dungeon, for example, because they knew it would be a good way to get more funds, but now that the game is funded I hope they won't reveal anything else specific about the game. It's enough to me knowing how many companions we'll have in the game, I prefer to be kept unaware of their story and portraits until I play the game.

well. Let's see how well the game mechanics will work once the game is completed. I think only then we may or may not guess future cRPGs will have some of those changes applied. In what concerns the effect of Kickstarter on future games, I have no doubt that this is going to continue bringing big changes, not only RPG-wise but for games in general.

It's a small poll. Forum polls aren't very good scientific indicators at all, so don't get so fixated on that. You know, your post sounds just like those people who were against adding translations as part of a stretch goal. Notice, I said "part." The point of adding this to a stretch goal, just like the translations, is that the goal pays for itself. There is no waste. (At least, we hope Obsidian doesn't waste it.) I guess you're right, and like I said, I'm glad the game's going to have live recordings. I should point to the first poll about this subject, where Bell's post is shown: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61018-would-you-like-to-see-orchestral-score-as-a-stretch-goal/page__mode__show I hadn't even listened to those samples before. The second one sounds truly amazing, but getting such results from a virtual instrument is truly a challenge, and it seems to take longer than recording it live, even though it's obviously cheaper.

First of all, I'm not weeping for anything, i'm merely expressing my opinion, because I'm old enough not to weep for a computer game. I hope you are too. And second, as I have posted before, there were valuable sub-options for people who voted "yes" and for people who voted "no". Because if one person votes for "no live music", then he should know what the alternatives are as to what Virtual Studio Technology allows. And if one doesn't know, then there's a whole internet world of information about it. And I would never be so arrogant as to trying to convince someone he's wrong for wanting something, I just feel this poll was biased because the voting options were not well balanced, and no one cared to explain the potential of VSTs. You know, most people used to complain about digital photography when it came out, and now even those people use it. Is it as good as analogical photography? No, but most people can't tell them apart. Of course I'm glad this game is going to have live recorded music, but I have my concerns about that being the best option to spend money on. And I have every right to have those concerns even though it's up to developers to decide. This is "general discussion" about the game forum, and that's what I'm doing: discussing.

VSTs do not mean synthesized music: synths can be either analogical, fully electronic or VSTs (either sampled from one of the previous or completely generated from pure sound waves inside the computer). Games for which composers have used orchestral VSTs usually don't have any relation to synths at all. I wish people would be better informed about this.

Well, it's true, you did fail to understand the poll: 41 votes for no inclusion of live instrumentation 101 votes for some kind of live instrumentation 25 votes not caring Just for the top poll. Then you're just pointing out how biased this poll was? Thanks for showing us that. What was the bias? The break-out was suggested by Bell because small ensemble/solo is a lot cheaper than orchestral. A "no" option is clearly included. I'm just pointing out your failure to understand numbers. A poll like this is biased because you have 1 "no" option, 3 "yes" implied options and 1 "don't care" options. First poll section should merely be 1 "no", 1 "yes" and 1 "don't care". THEN we should have the specific preferences for options "no" and "yes". Examples for "yes": 'full score', 'small ensembles', 'just the required musicians for instruments which don't sound as natural when sequenced'; examples for "no": 'synth based music', 'mostly plucked strings and percussion/piano', 'full score of virtual instruments' etc.

Well, it's true, you did fail to understand the poll: 41 votes for no inclusion of live instrumentation 101 votes for some kind of live instrumentation 25 votes not caring Just for the top poll. Then you're just pointing out how biased this poll was? Thanks for showing us that.

I fail to understand why Obsidian is going to spend money with live instrumentation if they reach 4million considering most people on this poll voted NOT to spend money on that and also considering Justin Bell said "It's impossible to fake, though you can get *pretty* close with virtual instruments." You know, most people can't tell the difference when it's done right. And very often the recording of ensembles gets worse results than those recorded for VST's purposes. Maybe they wanted it from the beginning and they thought the other options got enough votes, but on the other hand they've always made it look like this game would be a fairly small investment in which any dollar would count, and considering how close to the real thing VST's have become lately, it really makes me question how much of these poll results are they taking into account. Maybe they'll just record some strings so that articulations sound more fluid. I hope they won't spend a lot on this, because the votes didn't ask for it...

IWD had a completely different atmosphere from BG. I enjoyed some locations in Fallout too, but the visuals rarely allowed them to stand out. That's what usually happens with tiled games, there rarely anything unique in the visuals.

small ensembles usually don't have enough "aural" dimension to dungeon and exterior areas, and medieval instruments seem to work better for some city streets, fairs and taverns. And a large ensemble is too expensive, that's why I voted for virtual instruments I wouldn't even mind a completely synth based soundtrack if it was done properly. How's that for old school atmosphere?

I just hope they don't show us the whole dungeon, because they're already showing too much as it is.