Redwulf

That's fine Cantousent, I'm just an idea sort of guy, I like launching ideas, whether or not they are good is up to each individual to decide. (And I agree this $8 order was an excellent idea) You know if all the current backers added $8 dollars to their pledge that would be over 350,000 dollars added? Yikes!

An idea that may appeal to some small few (not me because I'm not quite that rich!): We could have "Lords of the Obsidian Order" or some such; Who up their contributions by $88 dollars. Just a thought.

On kickstarter I am known as KOCollins The Obsidian Orders Royal Pain That's right. ;p I am join now?

Urgency is good, as long as we are not punished for taking time to sniff the forest air. A good book will keep the reader turning pages by increasing the conflict bit by bit, making it more serious, more deadly. A good game should probably follow a similar system. So I'm not so sure if at first you want the main character to face an epic challenge, you should probably start with smaller conflicts. However these conflicts can and should at the time seem like a big deal to the player, though by the endgame they are small potatoes. Urgency is good, but, one has to watch out about spoiling a climax too. But with the people they have working on this game, I'm sure they will handle all this rather well. EDIT: In my view no part should be timed, if it were, it wouldn't be as enjoyable for quite a few players(me included). However, in the scene Jarmo talked about above with the fort being attacked, you could make it so if you do defeat the enemy slowly there will be noticeably less defenders still alive, thus giving one motivation to defeat the enemy as fast as possible. Perhaps you could even gain bigger quest rewards if you complete certain missions faster. However you should be able to play at your own speed and still be able to beat the game. Afterall, all a timed game would do for slower/methodical players is make them more frustrated and just have to reload again and again until they finally complete it in the time allotted, and that doesn't serve the gamer's enjoyment in my view.

I believe that the deadline should be flexible even if they don't get a penny more as of now if that means a better game. However, there are limits to how far it should be stretched, say six months maximum in my opinion. If the game is still bad after going that far over, spending more time on it won't fix it. Not that I think it will be bad, it should own, after all it already owns my wallet now.

"Evil shall never triumph!" However, there should be an evil path/ending to the game, for those demented souls who eat Paladins and drink priests' blood. However, I remember reading in I think it was PC Gamer years ago that most gamers never play the "evil" path in games, so I think the primary focus should be on the "high" road, since that is what most people will be playing anyways. Now if they get enough time and resources then they should expand on the evil route and make it quite different then the path of the white-clad smiters. That would be a major plus and add good role-playing for all.

I agree that a variety of different/unique races is good. However, I also enjoy the regular fantasy races as well. I primarily like them because the game creators understand these races themselves, and so it will be easier for them to inject an interesting/enjoyable personality into each of them. Who doesn't love the boisterous orc-crushing dwarf? Or the aloof elf, who is distant at first but then warms up to you and tells you tales of the ancient days that all others have forgotten? Grant it, they could do that with any race, but a dwarf "character" is a dwarf and an "Elf" is an Elf, making them look different, calling them something else, doesn't change who they really are. I think the best solution would be to have the most common races, but, also add a few truly unique races along side them, instead of just modeling another race after the ones we know and love, and calling them something else. That, to me, is just busy work.

This has probably already been said but... Let there be dragons. Or maybe just one. Maybe have a dragon be the main goal of a quest or something. I could see multiple ways of solving it: kill the dragon, trick the dragon, or join the dragons unholy cause! Having more then 1 or 2 dragons though is a tad much I think. Speaking of 2 dragons, maybe you could have a quest where you try to reunite the lovebirds so that they may create a super horde of wyrms to dominate the land...of course giving you a 10% royalty fee for playing matchstickmaker.

Personally I vote for Metallica. :D Really though, I'm sure I'll be satisfied with whoever they pick. Music is a big deal, but, game play is the biggest, and that's what needs to be focused on first. If the gameplay is made awesome, I have little doubt the music will follow suit. To cut to the point if the game play was really fun, and the music was just satisfactory, I have no doubt I would still love the game.

If people want level scaling let them make mods that add that instead of having the majority of us go on an egghunt to find mods that take it away. Just add difficulty levels that let us hardcore gamers play it hard, and others play it not as hard. That is the only level scaling any game needs.

Thanks for the DRM free GOG option. Achievements are useless to me, and cloud saves? I just have one computer and have no use for such a feature. Lastly, Steam has a near-monopoly on digital sales anymore, it's nice to spread around the sales and give consumers an option, and GOG is the best digital site to do that in, in my opinion. Thanks a lot!

Why bother with guns? They will still have bows, and you know the two will be balanced....Now give me a chainsaw, plop me on some mars moon, and unleash the demons, that would be fun. Anyways, in truth, adding gunpowder for me really takes away from a fantasy setting and its believability. Think about this, guns have now become the dominant weapon in this world, it made bows, armor, and sword-fighting obsolete. True one could make a world that just recently discovered guns, but, that means the world will be changing fast, that the past will soon be wiped away and forgotten, and a new age of long distance mass killing will come into effect. Guns mark the death-knell of a fantasy universe to me, because once they develop there will be no more high-end predators the "civilized" races would have killed them all. What threat is a troll versus a M-16 or a cannon? None. No, there are enough FPS's with guns in them, I don't need to have my fantasy world filled with gun powder, that really marks the end of the fantasy world, and the beginning of a world far too much like our own. I don't know about all of you, but, I have enough of this world already as it is. EDIT: Well, I guess it will have guns as said at the end of this: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-09-18-project-eternity-interview-new-information-tentative-spring-2014-release-date Well, I can live with it, though I would of rather it had been different. I'm sure they will balance it, though I doubt I will use them personally. Still I enjoyed Arcanum, so guns aren't a deal breaker for me.

I must admit that the thought of owning an Inn is at the top of my want list. Every Tom, ****, and Harry can have a keep, but to own an inn one needs to have puffy-red cheeks, a loud booming voice, and a handy club behind the counter. In a fortress everyone obeys your every whim, in an inn you get to smack some drunken heads. And I want to smack some heads in my game. :D