LokiHades

BG1 approach personally. Sarevok wouldn't have been the same without his deep booming voice for the few lines he did speak. At the same time, most lines should be text only.

Hear, hear!

Options should all be toggles in the "Difficulty" Menu under options. I like my enemies hitting hard on harder difficulty, while not suddenly becoming monstrous tanks. If my enemies can kill me in a single blow, I should be able to do the same (within the limits of context, I would not like this for a boss, for example). I'd like it. To me choosing how difficulties work is an awesome way to allow player freedom. If I played my mage, I'd want my enemies to have more resistances, so I'd have to strategize around them. I wouldn't want everything to have over 9000 HP, taking infinite arrows to take down, just because I cranked the difficulty to the 9th degree (Oblivion). Basically, more HP and more damage on average=/=more difficult, but more tedious. Every option should be separate.

I'm willing to disagree on the throwing of classic literature. Classic mythology perhaps, but not history as a whole. There are many feats in history itself done by people who were not god touched in any way more than a person in a myth. Genghis Khan, was a great conqueror, conquering most of Eurasia in his life, and was not born in the vein of vast wealth or abilities beyond the average man. I believe that a man who has enough willpower and who happens to find himself in a situation (protagonists in many stories, real or fictional), can go beyond a person born and bred into greatness. Chosen ones tend to imply the person was fated to be, no matter what happened, the great hero of a saga or epic. And to me, that is bull****, because people should make their own destiny. It's why FO2 was so awesome despite me cringing at being the "chosen one". As the game progressed, you find that you're just another person stuck in the Wastelands, and being "Chosen" was as much coincidence as many of the other events that happen in the best of stories. Mary Sues tend to start appearing when the entirety behind their powers and abilities are external. He was a great warrior because he was the son of a God, not because he made himself great. She's a brilliant mage because someone infused her with the power of an old archmage. To me those stories have their place, but have very little appeal.

Well production beards are always awesome, but sometimes I feel sorry for the devs... Voted yes anyway because the alcohol in blood says so.

I voted BG but in agreement that DAO's UI is good. Multiple windows are not important, but a minimap is always good. Everything should be optional though, and a toggle key to hide the UI for those epic screenshot moments.

I voted No No Yes... I'll explain why: I voted no for the first because I don't want to categorize choices in a binary manner as stated by members previously. Choices should always have a shade of grey and doubt, and the trustworthiness of a person should be judged by the player (and possibly party members) based of both their personal feelings/conclusions as well as evidence. There should be acts worthy of both terms, true evil, and true good as well as more neutral choices, but they should not be limited to black or white. Essentially a full morality that reflects real life (The Witcher games are excellent examples of this). No, there should be no indicators for your "alignment", beyond the comments from others and reputation gained for your actions. People should react, refusing you quests, or giving you sinister ones to fit your reputation. If people know you are a ruthless, careless murderer for hire, they should hire you for such actions, as they should ask help from a paragon of justice, however people should have their own sense of morality too, like a person who sees your goodness and wants to use that against you (such as sending you into ambushes, having you kill someone under pretense that they are "evil" or "unjust"). Yes, I think some form of power should come from your "alignment" per say. For example, A blade stained with the blood of many innocents might be more proficient at slaying innocents, but within context of the game's magic and artifacts, and classes.

Personally? Boss Fights: Legendary enemies should hold legendary artifacts, but they should not be push overs. Lore reference: Lore references should be a way to find them, though they should be extremely hard to locate without unconventional thinking, or while fulfilling a great challenge (clearing an entire haunted fortress and being rewarded with a single weapon or armor piece). Morrowind's still my favorite example with daedric armor.

I'd rather not be the Chosen One. Coincidence brought me to where I start the game, nothing more. The reason? Mary sues are tiring. [spoilerS FOR GUILD WARS 2] Look at TraHURRRn in Guild Wars 2. He totally steals your story, multiclasses (when it's not possible) gets magic artifacts, destined to lead armies, etc etc. He stinks so bad and he infiltrates and steals your story. There's no gratification. [End Spoilers] I like starting small and making the legend myself.

A tutorial before the start of the game... And you have the option to select whether or not to go through it (puts you to the end of the tutorial, or the start of the game).

Big fights only. That or completing a zone. Like say you were doing a map, and you avoided everything through wit... You should be able to kill everything and get the same exp.

Culttttttttssss. But seriously, hoping we'll hit at least 5m. It does cost a looooot to make a great game of this scale.

21 - Baldur's Gate 2.

I'd prefer a BG1 approach over a BG2 approach. There's still a sense of exploration there.

DT, Penalty system (basically people who aren't trained to use their armor effectively), and Multipiece. I always hated % reductions or DR. Essentially armor is useless at the cap (and there is always a cap), and would require the creators to either lower the cap on light armors/robes and keep the best armor maxed just to give them distinction. Lord knows this doesn't work if you want specialties for classes that have to do with armor (lets say, a warrior using armor more efficiently doesn't get that benefit in the endgame because his armor itself already hits the DR cap, thus his benefit is rendered moot or pointless). it's a problem both Skyrim and Oblivion suffered as well as FO3 (Remember how everyone and their grandma would use Riley's Ranger armor?), where as in FO, FO2, and FONV, getting things like powered armor felt progressive. I agree with the penalty system, but think an endgame class should receive benefit for their armor mastery (essentially, armor has become a part of them). Warriors won't be as impeded as when they start out, and mages robes will be infused with their energy for extra protection (neither of them outdoing each other though). Multipiece is a must. Why? Sure a single set is easier to put into the game, but it's always satisfying when you're at the end game, and you have to retrieve 5-9 pieces of armors to complete what is essentially the best set for your class. Morrowind is a brilliant example of this with Daedric armor, where as Oblivion was bandits in glass and daedric and Skyrim didn't matter since you could craft it all the way. I'd like to see ability based DR though. Like getting a % reduction from a passive skill, or an active shield. Also should be a part of certain enemies and mobs (mainly bosses, so even high end players will have a bit of a challenge).