PrimeJunta

@Sensuki true, but most of those projects have had a good deal smaller bestiaries, or many of the beasts have shared rigs (e.g. small, medium, large humanoids).

As much as I resent it, we live in an economy of scarcity with this thing called "money" used to ration goods. Capitalism stinks but there you are. With a limited amount of money, developers will have to make choices. For example, for a given amount of money, they can choose to make a few different kinds of monsters with highly-refined models and polished, varied animations, or lots of them with cruder models and limited animations. This is not a false dichotomy; it is a genuine trade-off. So keep going, Malignacious. Your tears are delicious.

Asperbergers?

Wow, that was epic. Unfortunately Kickstarters are non-refundable, as you know, but post a YouTube video of yourself doing something like this only featuring the best bits of the post that started this thread, and I will personally gift you the IE game of your choice from GoG. But only if it's properly emoted, truly from the heart. No cheating!

@GrinningReaper re intentionally limiting graphics: that is so very true. Visually the BioWare game that I still find the most appealing by far is Jade Empire, and a big part of that is due to the relatively low graphical fidelity. It's a lot less work to create assets with those poly counts and textures than it is at, say, Mass Effect 3 level fidelity -- and I'm fairly certain that's one reason Mass Effect 3's environments all look like malls, office buildings, or bombed-out parking garages while Jade Empire has much broader variety. Sometimes less is more, even with graphics. And, FWIW, I like the overall look of P:E a lot -- like, really a lot. If anything, some things like the spell effects need toning down rather than up. More animations would always be nice, of course, but they're nowhere near the top of my priority list ATM.

What's particularly endearing about Malignacious's <cough> critiques is that most of them go directly against the concept of the game. This was made for us annoying nostalgia people, and at least I'm enjoying his upset at us a great deal. We've had enough ragdolls thrown at us at the expense of choice and consequence, writing in both quality and quantity, depth and breadth of lore, variety in bestiary, number and variety of classes and so on and so forth that it's positively delicious to have the boot on the other leg for once. As to the IE-ness of the game... I think a lot of us are a bit myopic about this. Think about it folks. Three years ago, if someone had told you that a party-based, class-based, 2D-isometric, sprawling, richly written, fantasy RTwP game inspired by the Infinity Engine would be coming out from a major studio, how many of you would have even believed it? Compared to that, the fiery disagreements about XP, health/stamina, rest mechanics, per-rest vs per-encounter, healing etc. are ripples on a pond. We're getting something really big and really cool here, which has huge overlap with the IE series. It's just that after a while it becomes easy to take the similarities for granted which makes the differences stand out more.

If they can manage something as cool as the lower levels of the Death God's Vault in MotB I'll be happy. If they remember to put in all the pieces of the Death God's scythe, that is.

Unless you take Hold the Line. That's two.

Me too. Can't talk to Dengler, which makes resting... problematic. Has this been reported with detail?

Since a knockdown effectively disables an enemy for the duration, unlimited knockdowns would be way OP.

Funny. The better the game gets, the louder the Bitter Brigade complains. Very early impressions on 301: yep, another major leap forward. The attribute system is now good enough. I still prefer the S&M take on it, but this will get the job done. It feels more natural, more understandable, and more DnD-ey. Making 10 the baseline did a lot for that, even if it's purely aesthetic. So no more complaints on attributes from me. Big, big, big, BIG thanks for getting rid of the ranged/melee accuracy split for classes. I suddenly feel way less pigeonholed, and it simplifies things too but in a good way. Please keep that! The new talents are... nice to have and serviceable but not supremely exciting. Many are also relatively minor in impact, so I think it might be worth seeing how it feels if we got one every other level instead of every third. I'm taking back my criticism of the no-FF AoE INT bonus fringes. Now that I see it in practice, it's perfectly fine, and makes INT genuinely more valuable for wizards (without being a must-pump stat), which is also as it should be. Keep it. The new stealth system is an enormous improvement over the old one. The tension is back. Individual stealth would still be nice, but I won't complain if it stays this way. Not entirely happy with the engagement indicators. A lot better than nothing, but still hard to make out. I still think simple flat arrowheads pointing out from the selection circles would work better, or perhaps mouseover with targeting reticles. (Yes, it does still need those.) I don't have a ready solution, but it does need some work. I have no problem with the shader effect on characters. Spell effects, however, are still to blingy and obscure too much of what's going on. Combat in general is coming together nicely. It now feels responsive, and although I can't put my finger on the cause, the pacing seems better. Fights are shorter but sharper. Perhaps weapons have been balanced better? I like the adjustments to the health/endurance mechanics as well, although I'll have to play some more to figure out how I feel about the specific splits for individual classes. I've almost completed by BG1 playthrough, and at this point I'm enjoying the P:E combat more. It still needs some work to get to really good, but for me it's now past the point of being a liability. Nice to see some better inventory on the BB party. Too bad (apparently) traps don't yet work as intended; I'm looking forward to trying those out. The new icons and stuff also look sweet. Can't wait to see more of those bags of flour and arquebuses replaced by proper ones. In other words, excellent job: this is coming along really nicely.

Retro game is retro. Scandalous.

Tactical suggestion. IMO it's better to identify the currently most pressing problem, or at most top three problems, and push for change on those. The attribute system appears to be a big improvement over the previous ones, which may mean that it should no longer figure in that top three list even if it's not "good enough" by whatever criteria. I.e, I would suggest using your formidable lobbying power on whatever is now the most pressing concern, even if the areas where you pushed previously were not addressed exactly as you had hoped. You can always return to them later as they rise in priority when the other things are being addressed.

Gaaaahhh.... can't wait to play this. Unfortunately won't be until Sunday since I'm away from my main computer...

That's not quite his position I believe. I think it's more like, he doesn't like systemic incentives that favor one playstyle over another, if the game provides the possibility for multiple playstyles.

@Malignacious How nice of you to look out for us backers, despite not being one.

Except that the choice of fight or not to fight may be contextual. Suppose you've built your party to be especially good at facing undead, but, conversely, not so good at facing spiders. That means that you'd want to fight the undead but avoid the spiders, no?

1. is in P:E. Lots of abilities and spells that push enemies back. Fireballs don't though. 2. is cosmetic; P:E certainly has higher priorities than that. It wouldn't add much of value to the game IMO for the effort needed to do it.

No, 100 damage. It goes from health, not stamina. Trust me, those spiders are badass.

Because within the game world's logic, it makes sense to rob a chest because there might be something valuable in it, while it makes no sense to unlock a door or untrap a trap that's already behind you. I don't like incentives that nudge you towards doing things that make no sense within the game world's logic.

When I'm already past it, e.g. by having taken an alternative route. Does that mean the chests shouldn't have items either? Or should they teleport in your inventory because you decided to skip the dungeon. wat

When I'm already past it, e.g. by having taken an alternative route.

Hello. I would like to introduce you to some spiders. When they bite you, you're petrified. That means that they'll still be targeting you, and all subsequent damage will come directly out of your health, bypassing stamina, four times faster than normal, and you will have lousy defenses.

+1 on exploration and bestiary XP. -1 on trap and lock XP. It would just encourage mindlessly unlocking and untrapping things whether it makes sense or not. Finer-grained objective XP would help a lot too. Context: I would prefer to have XP doled out frequently and in small doses rather than rarely in large doses, but I like the incentive structure of quest/objective XP. The bestiary XP would, I think, go a long way to creating the "feel" of IE game combat XP without screwing up the incentives. The XP system is not among my top five priorities for the game though ATM, and I could certainly live with coarser-grained quest XP as well.