motorizer

I don't want to see any special abilities for no magic classes that are basically reskinned magic spells, like your dragon age example, as I've said in other threads, I prefer to pay as a non magic user, and I'd rather it felt like a non magic user special abilities should be things like special combat moves for fighters or targeted shots for archers I do think it should be reasonably balanced though, each class should have their strengths and weaknesses, there shouldn't be one uberclass that defeats all others

Because if it wasn't, no one would call it magic, if one person can fly, it's magic, if everyone can fly, it's just flying....

Yep, look at lord of the rings.... huge fatasy epic, and even Gandalf doesn't cast all that much magic in it...rarity makes magic seem more....well...magical

I think stuff like this can end up leading to a bunch of cloned jack of all trade characters..so no I'd rather see specialists and I'm not a big fan of magic, ...I tend to play characters who can't do it, and would rather not be forced into it (as in skyrim if you did the main quest)

Project zomboid and dwarf fortress spring to mind...

If the rewards are too big in a game with loads of quests it leads to money and rewards becoming meaningless later in the game as you are so rich you can afford everything. They have to balance the money...otherwise it becomes pointless even having money in the game....

I was going to agree with this, then I noticed that the shared pack is only availiable outside of combat... This is fine by me....given all the time in the world when not being attacked you should be able to access an unconscious companions stuff

Probably the best inventory system in a game, could certainly be good in expert mode if some find it a bit too hardcore I also liked the inventory in hidden and dangerous 2, you had stuff attached to your belt, which showed on your character model, and a rifle slung over your shoulder(s) plus the option to wear a backpack if you wanted to carry more gear Carried gear showing up on your character model is good, I'm not a fan of appearing to pull huge weapons out of your ass, or your bow disappearing into thin air because you equipped your sword, silent storm did it years ago, mount and blade had it very early on when they had a team of 2 people...so it can't be that difficult.

I might go back to it, but I'll restart from my old save and try to remember what i was doing rather than doing that first bloody village again I've only played it with the circle of eight modpack, never even tried vanilla, since i only got it last year, and the first thing I did was search for mods and fixes

That your avatar is an armour that presumably you think looks cool rather than one which offers protection, a blow which would have otherwise missed could potentially break the wearers neck.... therefore I assume you don't want to see anything like it in the game My avatar isn't in the game. Nor have I asked for it. Yes, I think it looks cool. No I don't think it would be a good armor choice (unless the wings are actual feathers and thus weigh almost nothing and wont' catch a blade, in which case it would be OK) No I'm not against having some rare boobplate armor or codpiece armor. I'm against such armor having actually good protective value. So if oyu want your character in a chainmail bikini, you can have it...as long as you accept the consequences. Don't assume to much. But you said armour isn't a fashion statement, when your avatar has armour with a bloody great fashion statement stuck to it....Just seemed a bit contradictory to me, and it looks more dangerous to me than boobplate ever would be, after all you'd have to get a direct hit on a very small area central to the chest for the "boobs" to direct a blow inward, with helmet wings you're making yourself a bigger target, and adding leverage to a blow that catches them, and possibly directing it to your head... I'm not too bothered about the boobplate having good armour value, or even being in the game, I actually like the direction the devs are taking. Don't assume I want a chainmail bikini

Except those wings on the helmet in your avatar..... Point being? That your avatar is an armour that presumably you think looks cool rather than one which offers protection, a blow which would have otherwise missed could potentially break the wearers neck.... therefore I assume you don't want to see anything like it in the game

I thought the combat was great, but I found the setting and early quests a bit dull, didn't get far in because of that, though I've read it does get better, is that right?

Except those wings on the helmet in your avatar.....

I'm personally not a fan of spells having swirly coloured lights just for the sake of it, and I definitely don't want my character to sparkle because an effect is active, an icon on the portrait would do for that less is more IMHO if a spell has a spectacular effect then it should be doing something spectacular, a load of light and sound energy given off to heal 4 hitpoints seems like a waste to me.... Effects like dust and sand from the ground congealing to form a golem, or ivy like plants creeping over an enemy and entangling them = Yes Sparkly lightshows for each and every minor spell = no

I'd be happy with needing food and water as long as it is consumed automatically, manually eating with 6 characters would be a bit of an unnecessary chore I don't really want to starve to death either, I think a drop in party morale and some stat penalties would be enough to make you think about it. If we must have fatal starvation then it should take a long time

Not a bad idea on the beauty stat, though that in itself might provoke attention (wanted and unwanted) from the opposite sex

They can reverse it and make it sexist against men and racist against humans as far as I'm concerned, I don't mind either way, but I don't want a homogenous sanitised world where everyone is treated the same and race and gender choice means nothing and gains or loses nothing. Why even add races if you're going to do that? Boooring...

Less content. Less interesting challenges. Less interesting gameplay. Bloodlines is an excellent example of how to do it right. The Nosferatu had particular challenges they had to surmount, and the game experience was different because of them. You didn't get the social intricacies of playing as a Toreador, but you got something else instead. So it's kind of correct to say that the the world of Bloodlines treats Nosferatu as second-class citizens, but the game of Bloodlines totally doesn't. Nosferatu gameplay is fully fleshed-out and every bit as interesting as playing as any other clan. Then thats how it should be, as I said I never tried a nosferatu in bloodlines, but I agree that it should have been very different, but just as rewarding.

I don't know if this is in or not, but giving a 35 year old man a -1 to strength seems a bit ass backwards to me, -1 to agility maybe, at a a push

I think it's one thing that DA:O got wrong, having weapons magically float on your back Skyrim did it better, with proper scabbards on your hip, as did mount and blade, actually M&B did it best, since your bow didn't disappear just because you pulled out your sword (You can mod this into skyrim by changing one line in the .ini, makes me wonder why they didn't include it in the end, they must have been intending it) though both these games still had two handed swords stick to your back

Yeah that was kind of my point earlier about caesars legion in NV, it should have been massively different for a female character, but it was pretty much the same, which didn't feel right to me again that could be down to time and publishers, I don't know

But it makes sense for a nosferatu to have to hide from human characters, would be stupid if you got exactly the same game as a character who looks human when you look like a monster. I never played vampire as a nosferatu so I don't know how it was, but the idea of being a terrifying unseen predator can be fun, in the original AVP it was ace (not an RPG I know,, but the feeling was there) if it was a poorer game for that then they got it wrong Vampire got a lot wrong but I think it was the fault of the publishers and a rushed release rather than the devs, what they got right was brilliant

Yep Whilst women might complain about a "men only" club for example, if done right it could actually add a bunch of extra gameplay for a female character as she finds another way in, or a way round it......or burns the place down,with the sexist pigs in it One thing I think new vegas got wrong was that they made this outrageously sexist faction, then let female characters join them with no difference from the males except for a few lines of dialogue and not letting them fight in the arena, they should have either gone the whole hog or toned it down a bit. I think the game should be just as rewarding, but different depending on your race and gender, people who are unwelcome in one place could have a much easier ride elsewhere nobody should be liked everywhere.

Voted yes, it would be a dull game and would in no way reflect reality if everyone was politically correct all the time, nothings more boring than a game world that is so sanitised even the bad guys are PC whats needed is some well written dialogue choices or threats for the player to snap back at the bigots/sexists if he/she chooses...should the player be able to be bigoted or sexist? that's roleplaying but it's also a can of worms... I think a couple of bigoted or sexist companions would be fun too...like baldurs gate had outrageous sexists like Viconia and Shar teel

I come here because it's the most popular thread...seems like the place to be