Jojobobo
-
Posts
1287 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Jojobobo
-
-
Now that the project's been funded, is there any word on how we sign up for the add-ons we wanted? Or does that come later?
-
I think assuming Joshs words on resurrection to mean the same as perma-death is making a bit of a leap.
For example he talks of characters going unconscious if their stamina reaches zero. Consider a character being attacked who goes unconscious what does the enemy do? Keep hitting the prone character until he dies? That would seem logical but I can see that being a very irritating mechanic for players to live with. They continue fighting with their remaining characters while the enemy beats the unconscious to death. If I was a bad guy and the guy I was fighting was knocked down and out I wouldn't just run off to fight someone else, I would kick him in the face and stick my sword in his head AND THEN run off to fight someone else. In this scenario going unconscious would always equal death for the character.
I think the opposite is true, I think an intelligent enemy would target someone who is actively trying to kill them if they already have knocked one of the PCs out as opposed to killing a knocked out character regardless. People - in general - remain unconscious for a little while when they are knocked out so I think most monsters wouldn't interpret leaving such a character as hedging their bets as by rights they should be able to leave them for a little while.
I guess the optimal situation for me would be a priority targeting system - an enemy would kill a knocked out character if they were far enough away from other hostile characters, however if a hostile character was close by he attack that person as the unconscious character is relatively much less of a threat. I think in a life or death situation that's what the majority of people would do if they were thinking clearly. If they did have a priority system for targeting, maybe some enemy types would defy it anyway as a trait (a particularly brutal species of monster would always go in for the kill regardless).
-
Another race.
-
I think bang in the middle, with elements of both. Just keep those elements in separate parts of the world so the mood changes by location. Fantasy should have wondrous, enchanting locations but a mature game will need dark, depressing and haunting locations too.
-
I didn't realise that unusual comment about a shovel was refering to the fact you thought drugs were fine in the game, I guess you meant that you're completely ambivalent about shovels being in the game so the same applies to drugs. And hey it was just an idea, I'm not advocating they should put things in the game just so I could feel like a drug dealer - that's plainly ridiculous. The point I was driving for is using drugs in the game in a way that was thinking outside the box and had never been done before, something fresh and exciting not GTA: The Fantasy Edition.
-
I posted this thread (http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/61465-raising-more-money/) earlier today but no-one really responded to it and now it's already on page 3 - the forum's getting busy! Still, I think the ideas are still important - not everyone can up their pledge and getting fresh meat would usually bring a fresh $25 pledge.
-
Well they're already in the game, fortunately/unfortunately depending on your stance:
svef - Svef is the Aedyran name for a potent narcotic produced from the berries of small shrub that grows in the dry, distant mountains of Tal Kness. Svef produces hallucinations and, according to some, allows users to actually see their own soul. The narcotic was introduced to the Aedyr long ago, but it is used more frequently in the Dyrwood due to its heavy trafficking by Vailian merchants.
I guess that's only one drug so that might be the extent of it, but at least one drug is definitely in the game. I guess for me taking buffing drugs in a game is no more boring or repetitive than using buff spells, though svef doesn't sound like it has a buffing capacity anyway. I don't really see how becoming a drug dealer is anything like a mini-game as it focuses on PC-NPC interactions, and I like rpgs where you have other revenue streams apart from crafting/finding items to sell and rewards from quests, but each to their own.
-
1
-
-
So does anyone else have any plans to raise money for PE? Obviously the devs have tried their darndest to spread the word by encouraging facebook likes and doing as many interviews as possible; I think the rest should be down to us to drum up as much support as possible.
The main thing that I can think of is creating a thread in any forums that you think would be interested in the off topic section (and obviously if it's not in conflict with the rules of said forum) and provide the link to get as many views as possible to the main site (I've done this already on a few forums that I occaisonally frequent). Furthermore some forums that did make a thread about it (as I found with the UESP forum) have not had fresh responses since September - so now is the time to casually bump those threads with a "What does everyone think about the updates?" or a "How many more of you have backed the project since this thread started?". In a similiar vein, people with a large number of followers on Twitter could also use that as a platform to get the word out.
Beyond that, I guess word of mouth to people you know that are interested in gaming. People I know who are interested in these sorts of games were already backing when I spoke to them about it, still undoubtedly some will have slipped through the net. It's the perfect excuse to give cousin Joe that call you've been putting off because you didn't think you'd have much to talk about; now you can drop in about Project Eternity especially if you know they have used KS in the past or just use the internet often generally.
So is there any other good ideas people can think of? That Big Big City 2 isn't going to fund itself!
-
I think this point is a bit wonky - on the one hand you want more immersion but on the other you would be instantly aware that you're receiving rewards that an average player wouldn't, thereby hampering the immersion. By giving extra rewards to players on greater difficulty it becomes a case of how best can you manipulate those rewards to improve your chances of survival which isn't a very immersive thought process. I wouldn't even want to see token items that aren't actually useful, I think it's more fun without.
So I don't think there should be any changes apart from maybe a nod in the dialogue at some point; players who are after this level of immersion want a "difficult" setting, not a "difficult with a helping hand" setting.
-
1
-
-
I liked Arcanum's format for a journal, which gave the bare bones of what you had to do for a quest and then often had a more detailed section in a more generic notes part. With these sorts of games, and the map they are going to implement map markers would be completely ridiculous so there's next to no chance of that being a problem. I would like the journal to be a bit more sortable (having some sort of search function - even a CTRL + f style one - or letting you make your own subsections for notes) and maybe attach relevant notes to relevant quests (but only when they are overtly relevant - the journal shouldn't make intuitive links that you the player wouldn't be able to).
-
1
-
-
I'd like to see a new take on vampires, werewolves and whatever other monstrosities the devs think are worthy to put in their game. In fact, I don't even want to vampires to be called vampires (like how we have the orlan which seem quite goblinoid and yet they aren't goblins) - they should be only linked to vampires thematically (being parasitic, and gaining power because of it). By not naming vampires "vampires" and only have them losely based on vampires you effectively side-step all the modern incarnations of vampires and you are free to get more creative (also people won't moan as much saying "Well that's not what I thought vampires should be like").
With werewolves, I would like to see them drop the wolf part. It'd be nice if people transformed into something bestial yet also not even related to anything else known to man (thereby making it even more primeval and rudimentary - something that is animalistic ferocity distilled). Again it should have the themes of a werewolf (loss of control - transforming into something violent and terrible against your will) but maybe lack some of the stereotypical tidbits (weakness to silver, full moon forces the change, etc.). However, loss of control is bound to annoy players and is also difficult to mechanically implement well so it would probably only work in an npc capacity.
As for necromancers, the different cultures should have different opinions on how appropriate it is to raise the dead - but I don't think any necromancer should be out and out evil. Maybe one culture holds them in high esteem and it's natural to raise recently dead relatives back to life as zombies, but in another they are frowned upon as they consider their actions as defiling the dead and so they are mostly around in a criminal capacity (selling the secrets of the dead to the unscrupulous).
In a nutshell, if these things are in the game I want them to be atypical - a new take on somewhat tired material.
-
I'd like to see a subrace that is stuggling to become its own individual race - and sees itself as separate from the race proper (they don't culturally allow interbreeding, etc.). I'd also like to see any classic fantasy archetypes which have not been granted their own individual race to be an offshoot of one of the core races (orcs spring to mind, but they may fall loosely into orlan/aumaua anyway).
-
1
-
-
Nice poll, I went for everything but misogyny and class differences and for magic to have a large impact on the societies. It is a fantasy game so the socities should be only vaguely analogous to real societies IMO, and I feel like misogyny and class differences are the least interesting of all the options posed. If I had to pick one, it would be disease as I've never seen that given a good treatment in a game yet.
-
Yeah I'd prefer overland travel too, but I don't think they'd change their stance on it.
-
I'd like 2 more races, but I think what would make them money is a player stronghold and extra companions as that's what people seem really keen on. Honestly I don't think extra companions are necessary as I think the existing ones will be detailed and compelling enough as it is, and as for the player stronghold I don't think it's appropriate for all roles people might want to play (a penniless monk wouldn't have any need for a big blinging fortress, etc.). A fortress also implies the prominence the character acheives in the world - something that may or may not be appropriate to what they have planned for the main character thus far.
-
Yeah I know, I just didn't understand this was quite how the add-ons process worked and that they sent a survey round afterwards; I guess update 4 doesn't really explain the process as well as it could (a line like "and then when you are charged you will recieve a survey with which you can check off which add-ons you want" would help) - unless I'm being stupid and this was explained somewhere really obvious on the home page of the project? Thanks for replies anyway.
-
I'd guess that the expansion add-on being a limited time offer means that it will only be offered for the duration of the Kickstarter (not for post-Kickstarter PayPal/Obsidian store pledges).
That's what I thought, but it could have been made more expressly clear as it is slightly confusing. Hopefully projects like this might prompt Kickstarter to re-design the pledge page so add-ons can be added to a pledge in advance before someone is charged.
-
No it's the addition of the expansion I'm after. From reward 4:
"As a quick tutorial on how to add add-ons, goto the Project Eternity site on Kickstarter and then hit the Manage Your Pledge button. The reward tier you had already selected will still be selected and the amount will be in the big box at the top. All you need to do is add the dollar amount that covers the add-ons you would like to your pledge and enter the new total number. For instance, if you are at the $35 Pledge level and want to add one Digital Download, you would enter $60 as your total pledge."
So that sounds like you just change your pledge and get the option to add stuff on at the end, however from update 19:
"Due to popular demand and for a limited time, we are offering the ability to add our first expansion pack, due out approximately six months after Project Eternity ships. Any money contributed to add-on the expansion now will be used to make the main game larger. The expansion budget is not being created by money from this Kickstarter."
So I don't really realise how these things work in tandem with each other. Also is there any guarantee that if I didn't get the add-on I wanted (for whatever reason) then I could get refunded the amount that I spent to get the add-on in the first place?
-
I can't see an option for this, and I want to add the expansion. Does anyone know how?
Edit: Wait so I've just read update 4, if I'm understanding this right I change my pledge amount and after I'm charged I tell them what upgrades I want? If that's right how does it work with the expansion which is only available for a limitted time?
-
What Death Machine Miyagi said: I'd like to see a situation where evil characters are more well liked by society than good characters. Playing the stereotypical stupid and petty evil character who goes around being a douche/stealing/murdering doesn't make any sense as in time most people would lynch that character on sight. I'd like to see some smart evil options where the evil character decieves a settlement making it appear that their problem is solved (thus getting more liked) when in reality they have screwed them in a way they don't yet realise. Making evocative evil quest options is a great deal more difficult than making compelling good options, and so more time needs to be devoted to those.
-
3
-
-
I for one would like to see him do the portrait artwork, it was great in IDW2 and just looking at the MtG cards he's illustrated (found here: http://mtg.neoseeker.com/wiki/Category:Justin_Sweet) you can see how truly talented he is.
-
I'd rather have half-ogres, they're less used. They were great in Arcanum.
Yeah they were my favourite race in Arcanum, so I'd prefer them too. But if that isn't possible as long as there was an option for some sort of stereotypically brutish race, I'll be happy.
-
1
-
-
I thought the chanter's powers were going to be linked in with what Chris Avellone mentioned in his first obselete gamer interview (found here: http://obsoletegamer.com/we-interview-chris-avellone-from-obsidian-entertainment-part-1/), under the second question. I could be a mile off though.
-
I like orcs and think they'd make an interesting playable race, especially if they were believed to be more savage.
Add-ons
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
Okay cool, thanks for the replies.