SunBroSolaire

Never played Arcanum, but this sounds rad. I love the conspiracy stuff in Deus Ex and Alpha Protocol, and any game quest where I wonder whether I should trust the people giving me instructions. It would be neat if there was some side quests like this that were really well hidden, so most people would be totally oblivious first time through.

Didn't Chris Avellone have an interview a couple years ago where he said that quest markers and fast travel were ruining exploration in modern RPGs? I hate quest markers. I would prefer it if they are not in the game at all to them being an optional feature. It seems like games that have a quest marker system invariably have awful quest instructions; because they can rely on fantasy GPS, they have no need to explain each objective thoroughly. I just played Dishonored, which had the option to turn quest markers off, which was cool. I did beat it without ever using them, but there were quite a few parts where they didn't even try to tell the player where to go. One specific instance I can remember is where they tell the player to talk to Pindleton. Naturally, I checked his room, with no luck. Then I scoured the entire house. Checked in the yard, the basement, and finally found him outside, hidden behind a small tower in an area I had never been to before. They could have just said, "talk to Pindleton by the tower" or something, but because they knew people could just turn on quest markers at any time it wasn't important to them. If people are ever really, really stuck, there's always the internet, so that's not a big danger. This is one of my most hated modern gaming trends. I really hope Obsidian does not include it in any form. This is the kind of thing that can ruin a game for me. This was on of the few things I really hated about New Vegas. If we have a journal to keep track of quest instructions, that should be plenty of info for an experienced gamer to go on.

will black screens or naked portraits* add anything significant to the game? i think no. more likely they would cheapen it and take away it's credibility as adult entertaining game**. _________________ *how would that even work? **putting M ratings or (adult only) appendages to things rarely means they will be more entertaining for adults. I have to admit, I don't understand this line of thinking. I'm sure we're all excited to discover the overarching themes and ideas behind Project Eternity. I know I'm interested in how they design the politics of the world, and how they handle race relations. I can't wait to find out where they're going with the souls concept. But. This is still supposed to be fun, no? I mean, killing goblins is appealing to our base instincts just as much as seeing a nude elf. I don't think the Conan The Barbarian power fantasy is any more sophisticated or "mature" than say, a suave cassanova fantasy or whatever the female equivalent of that is. I'm not saying this game needs loads of sexual content, I just think the argument that sexy stuff would somehow degrade the artistic integrity is a little puritanical. Obsidian has the opportunity to actually make a game for adults, meaning they can put stuff in that adults enjoy. Well, last time I checked, just about every adult likes some type of sex. And not just as some sort of BioWarian relationship validation; it can be a legitimate end all on it's own. I don't know... I like sexual content. I don't like my media to be completely sexless, e.g. The Elder Scrolls. Stuff like The Witcher and Game of Thrones would be less enjoyable without the raunchiness. Is it low brow? To paraphrase Louis C.K., you don't have to be smart to enjoy nudity in media, but you'd have to be stupid not to enjoy it (except he was talking about fart jokes, which I would also love to see in PE ).

I'd be happy with some sexy stuff, with or without deep, meaningful relationships... *shrugs* ArchBeast. You may have gotten better results if you weren't solely focused on boobies.

So think of it as a stealth/action game OT: I agree, AP is a fantastic game and one of the best RPGs this generation. That conversation system is in a class of its own, the RPG mechanics are great, the action and stealth are solid, and the writing is top shelf. Human Revolution could have taken a cue or two from AP in terms of player freedom and making NPC interactions interesting. It's sad that it got raked over the coals so badly by the game "journalists". Especially considering the reaction ME2 got, while being worse in almost every way.

That's actually why I was suggesting removing it from being hard scripted to being down to party influence. Ie certain character may / may not betray you due to low influence with them. In fact I used Yoshimo so little after his betrayal, I forgot he betrayed the PC when I was making this thread... That would be very cool. Although I don't want to feel pressured to always have positive rep among all my companions. I liked how in Alpha Protocol sometimes you would get better results if a character didn't like you. There should be some big consequences to your companions opinions of you anyway, and betrayal is definitely one option there.

I hope "fate" has nothing to do with the story, I'm so sick of that crap. Dark Souls was a good example of a game that avoided the "chosen hero" cliche. You start out as a weak undead, and the only way that you're such a ****ing badass by the end is through your own blood, sweat, and tears. You were also totally free to form your own opinions about the deities that controlled the world, to the point where you could actually wipe them all out and foil their plans. Great example of providing a lot of roleplaying potential with relatively few choices. Dark Souls was also heavily inspired by Berserk, coincidentally.

Are OE owned by investors, at least partially? I know a lot of game developers are, but I'm sure some are not.

Unnecessary. There won't be enough voice acting in the game for that to be a Big Thang. Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Just avoid it, and if it is ever necessary to call the PC by name in the voiceover, just use a nickname. There really isn't the same pressure to give the PC a cannon name in a game that is 95% text dialogue.

Please no I don't want games messing with stats behind the scenes in any way. I don't want monsters to auto-level, I don't want big fights to be secretly tuned down in difficulty, and I don't want my party's stats changing by a single solitary XP point for any reason other than my manually leveling them up. If this were an option in easy mode I have no problem with that, but I think it should be kept out of medium and higher difficulties.

I love NG+. If they let you carry levels over, that would fee them up to make some really brutally hard sections and hidden content, because even the less hardcore players would have the chance to clear it in NG+. I'm also a huge fan of unlockable content, but I think ideally any content should be possible to unlock on the first play through. I don't love the idea of being forced to play three really long campaigns to collect everything.

I did not like how in Skyrim you can't walk 15 ft without falling into a Nord ruin. As beautiful as that game was, it frankly could have benefited from less content. I hope that in PE there are some "empty" areas that are just there for the sense of exploration and journeying. I want to hike through a wild mountain range in search of an ancient temple, or cross a vast desert to reach one of the big cities. There could be enemies and encounters along the way, but I don't think there needs to be quests and dungeons everywhere.

I like thinking up first names, but I really do not like coming up with appropriate last names. I don't know what reasonable last name choices are in the PE world, don't make me choose! I would be happy with a default name, or maybe one for each gender/culture combo, but let the player change it if they so desire. I will only use letters, but there's no reason not to allow other characters. Regarding the voiceover... Just avoid calling the PC by name, is my suggestion. Use a nickname or title. Lots of games do this, and it works fine. Calling me "Shepherd" might be more casual than "Commander", but it's still pretty formal. Kind of awkward when Ashley is confessing her love, but still won't use my first name due to the fact that I'm her commanding officer. Makes me feel quite skeevy.

I do not. Maybe for another family unrelated to the PC. It really limits what type of character I can roleplay as if they have to fit into a bunch of pre-existing relationships.

I like both blank slates and prebaked characters. For this kind of game I definitely want a blank slate. Predefined characters don't work so well in games where freedom of choice is a big component. They can be great in more linear stories, though. It would be a much sadder world without Tim Schafer's protagonists.

Huh? Look closer. There is a mook about to deliver a claw attack to her exposed southern boreal region because she is wearing a fur miniskirt. Totally unrealistic armor for dungeoneering. A+ sir

Since this game will have crafting, I think equipment should make a decent amount of difference. Not to the point where it overshadows character's strength, but enough to encourage tinkering around with the crafting, and also enough that finding new items is rewarding.

It's on the main page, just scroll down a ways. It didn't get finished though *grumble*... edit: ninja'd

Vampires are so played out, I hope they are not in PE. I don't care strongly one way or the other about werewolves.

Probably not on my first play through. The companions are what I'm most pumped for, and I don't want to miss any of it. When I go for the super hardcore mode play through I will probably create most of my own party.

I think what Adam Brennecke said sounds perfect. I'm okay with sacrificing some openness in favor of a more structured experience. As long as there's no fast travel. Town-to-town wagons are fine, though.

As a good example? I haven't played too far into that one yet, but so far I have liked the way CD Projekt handled both gender roles and sexuality. I didn't see them attempting to make any statements about either, but like I said, I still have a lot to play. Honestly I think it should be a mix that is dependent on the cultures created. Ie one culture may be egaltarian and another not or something. And within each should be people who don't conform to the norm as opposed to *everyone* believes X (for whatever X is). Definitely there should be people who don't conform. I would love to have the chance to roleplay that, and actually have the people in the society react to that fact.

So, aside from "boobplate", how do people actually want gender relations presented in the game world? Should societies have modernized, egalitarian views of gender politics, and just avoid addressing inequality? Or should they be more similar to real medieval civilizations? I want them to address gender issues on some level. I do not want it to be grimdark ultra-misogynist world. I would like to see gender concepts explored in a way that's relatable to my own life, including relationships, sexuality, and gender performance. This seems like such a natural fit for an RPG, but I don't think I've ever seen it explored in any depth.

Fluff? The lore updates are my favorite That and I just love watching/listening to Josh Sawyer talk. In a totally heterosexual way.

Depends on if the fetching is interesting. There were some quests in New Vegas that were basically total wastes of time. Finding all of Cass' Caravans and the Brotherhood of Steel initiation quests come to mind. If a fetch quest involves exploring a new area, clearing a dungeon, or doing anything that's actually fun I have no problem with it.