Osvir

I suspect he's onto the mechanical bits, "High Int, Low Wis". Though, doing some research, there is no "Intelligence" stat (Cunning I suppose, but in DA:O and DA2 Cunning ~ Charm/Accuracy/Intelligence Hybrid stat. A Rogue stat). http://social.bioware.com/forum/Dragon-Age-Origins/Dragon-Age-Origins-Characters-Classes-and-Builds-Spoilers-Allowed/Morrigan-Starting-Stats-837130-1.html Taking a gander at the Attributes in DA:O I come to the realization that they are strange from a roleplaying perspective. D&D got it right, the attributes reflects the character. But in Dragon Age they reflect more or less a mechanical "power". * Magic = Spellpower, in Baldur's Gate it's more spells per level (in a redundant sense, "Spellpower") and some other bits (Lore and something else) ** Cunning = Admittedly this is the best candidate for an "Intelligence" attribute, I do not think it is a "traditional" Intelligence attribute as seen in many other RPG's (Intelligence in many RPG's is usually tied with in Magic some way). Furthermore, Morrigan got 12 Cunning and she seems to be a Cunning personality (Specially how she tells you how she sneaked into villages as a child and a bit when you're talking to her about her shapeshifting abilities and the history she's had with it). Curiosity: What kind of attributes do you expect to see some from Dragon Age: Inquisition? Like I said above, DA:O (and DA2) have a kind of vague attribute reflection to the characters. They are kind of user-friendly, to say the least. Diablo-esque in a way. For instance, the stats of the IE games feel like they are a "part" of the character, but in DA:O they feel as if they are more or less "Proficiency" points being spent with leisure. I expect DA:I to have a similar thread like it's predecessors, but I kinda secretly wish it takes some "innovative" steps towards being less about "point distribution" and more towards "character development = stronger character" as you progress the game (achieving milestones) and or by doing quests.

Not really? I want to write up a short story of my reasoning but I fear too much come to mind that indicates that Morrigan is very intelligent as seen in the lore but I am too lazy to write it out But some things, in a non-chronological order: - As a child she snuck into villages without being seen - Is a Mage (implying she controls magical arts, which usually indicates a sort of "higher enlightenment" in fantasy stories) - A known shapeshifter - Tricked many men - Has the Book of the... the... sod it I don't remember the name but Flemeths dark magic book (regardless, she knows how to read and write) - Manipulates the Player to take out Flemeth in DA:O - Has a greater agenda that seems to be shrouded in lots of mystery - Upbringing by an ancient being (Flemeth) who knows many things and probably colored her way of thinking and provided her with lots of knowledge Just some of what I can think of. She has had many tools at her disposal in terms of learning and to become an intelligent person in contrast to other characters in the Dragon Age universe and timeline. Comparatively to other characters in the Dragon Age universe I'd say she seems pretty intelligent. EDIT: My friend got a pretty neat little quote: "You're as old as your experience" and looking at Morrigan's experience within the universe of Dragon Age/Ferelden and within the Fade. So, my reasoning "more experience = more age = more knowledge = more intellect". And Volourn also said, tearing open the Veil (if she's the one to do it) seems to require quite a lot of effort seeing as she didn't appear in DA2. Which is also something to consider, Morrigan didn't make an appearance in DA2 which would allow her to grow further as a power being.

Frankly, after the DA2 trainwreck I'll happily take a tired and true "save the world" story. Although doing something akin to MotB would be fantastic. Seeing the interview gives me reason to think that you can possibly choose to destroy the world as well. Specially the part where they went on and talked about losing content. "Save the Keep" or "Save the Village" dilemma. If you save the village, well your keep got attacked. If you save the keep, the people got hurt instead. They even brought up an example where you can, again, choose to engage in a random battle occurring whilst you are exploring the world. The way he said it in the interview as well almost felt as if that was a choice too. Maybe you are running on the clock, and choosing to engage in the random battle might itself make you "lose" the content you were heading for (I.E. You are running to join an expedition, but because you engage in the battle that you came across, you'll miss the expedition. Or you ignore the battle and run straight for the expedition). So if Bioware is going with lots of these potential instances where you get to choose A or B, who is to say that "Destroy the World" is not an option... depending on how you roleplay your character or how you play the game or how you decide and choose progression? And on that matter... isn't Morrigan a very intelligent woman and very powerful Mage that considers all options? If she is the one who tore the Veil open to unleash horrors on the world and for whatever reason she did that ambitious task, would she simply fall by the blade in the end or... would she potentially use her charm to either remove or crown her most potential threat of closing the Veil? Namely you, the Player. Or you as the Player might be on roleplaying a powermad tyrant who wants to control the world, so you destroy Morrigan and crown yourself "leader" and win the game by becoming a Dark Overlord or whatnot. *shrug* we'll see. I don't mind the "Save the World"-idea (I like to roleplay the noble good guy & naive hero most of the time in RPG's ), it feels like every game does that in it's own way, but it is the journey there that makes it most interesting (Mass Effect 3 is a 94.87% great game in my opinion but yeah, the ending feels bland. Something I believe might or might not be extended into a way more colorful deal in future Mass Effect titles). Slightly off-topic, rhetoric question: Did Bioware ever say that Mass Effect 3 ending (specifically) would answer all questions or was that simply a projection to the audience of what is to come in future installments over the course of, possibly, several installments?

Not yet, but I like how you're thinking How does one project "eternity"? I bring up the Akilles example again, talking about the idea of how to become "immortal" (like Akilles) is one way to project an idea of how to become eternal... but it's still not quite "projecting" eternity physically, it's just a "how to" idea... but to project "Eternity" or "Immortality" in it's pure essence of meaning, physically? I'm having trouble theorizing how one would be able to do such a thing in a fantastical and imaginative sense. But... maybe... if a God could grant someone else immortality or Godhood somehow... that would be kind of like "projecting" Eternity onto someone else? That's in a "in-game" sense. For an out-of-game sense. This forum. We are projecting our ideas for what we'd like to see and what we envision PE, as a game, both could become and what we want it to become. "Project Eternity" could be seen as "Talk about this game we want to name Eternity. What do you envision it could be? What do you want it to be? What kinds of ideas do you have to bring to the table?" etc. etc. If "Project" is a verb, then Eternity is (I believe) no doubt the title of the game. A.k.a. in short "Envision Eternity" and the longer version "Envision what the game 'Eternity' could be like". But I stand my ground, PE is a great "Acronym" or "Signature Initials". Simply having it as E sounds almost too short. Though, they could always go with "EY" (Ey, sup yo got flo' bro?) or "ET" (but I guess that one is kind of copyrighted)

Wow... think about custom portraits; that would be a chore A chore that I would personally very much adore, without a single drop of bore, and play with Portraits in Photoshop a little bit more ;D

This made it for me!! Very excited now the tactical perspective of Dragon Age: Origins is really what made me enjoy it the most and one of the reasons I played it several times. When I began playing Dragon Age 2 and I couldn't zoom out as far as DA:O it felt as if I was being "suffocated" (figure of speech) from the freedom* I felt I had in DA:O. Great stuff thank you for this Maria Caliban. I really like the camera work they've done for casting spells in 3rd Person as well, the camera kind of "zooms" out a little bit as seen here, when targeting the meteor spell. Suddenly DA:I became "I'm skeptical" to a "must buy" for me. Woop woop! Hyped :D Not as much as for Project Eternity of course but Bioware won my heart (again) <3 everything I've seen on DA:I seems to be improvements and it looks like they've taken a lot of feedback to heart. * Keyword

3:24... 3:24!!!!!! :D :D :D :D <3 <3 <3 <3 <3 Yes!!! EDIT: Btw, it's about Bioware including the Tactical map *nod nod* great stuff

@Gromnir: Oh? Since I got this reply I was kind of curious and googled around but could never really find anything "substantial" to explain this. Please elaborate. Is it possible to mod & change the different states of the Portraits in PS:T? Additionally @everyone: I also wish to bring up "Emotional Expressions" into the fray. Will the Character Portraits of PE have "Emotional Expressions"? And if not, could it be possible to insert that in the same manner as what I posted previously? Psuedo-code! IF [Choice] = Intimidate DO [Portrait#1JAH] This could also be "modded" by opening the original JAH (Jaheira) portrait, modifiy it in photoshop and replace it as seen below: IF [Choice] = Intimidate DO [Portrait#1JAHANGRYFACE] ^This, I admittedly believe, would be a little bit more "complex" than simply tying up the Health bar with the Portraits. In theory this Dialogue+Portrait Expression might be simple, but in practice I believe it would require Obsidian to include "Portrait Folders" and tie them correctly in Dialogue (or else there would be a lot of confusion): 1. Main Folder [Jaheira] - ProfilePicture.jpg 2. Sub-Folder One [Health] -- 1.00% Health -- 0.75% Health -- 0.50% Health -- 0.25% Health 3. Sub-Folder Two [Expressions] -- Angry.jpg -- Happy.jpg -- Surprised.jpg -- Confused.jpg -- Charming.jpg -- Laughing.jpg -- etc. etc. In some ways it'd be a [Portrait Set] akin to how the [sound Sets] were handled. If you make a Sound Set for BG or IWD, you don't need to make all the 20-30 Sound Set files, you can make only 1 .wav if you want to and go with that. So, the suggestion is in essence, "It would be cool if there are 20-30 portrait 'placeholders' for various Health & Expressions purposes, but Obsidian only needs to make 1 Portrait in the vanilla experience". The simplest way for Players or Modders to play around with it would be to be able to directly influence in a Toolset/Game Editor, and tie specific "Portraits" and or "Pictures" to Dialogue choices and replies.

I've looked at "Project Eternity" with several perspectives: Out-of-Game perspective: - Project Eternity the Kickstarter Project/Campaign - Project Eternity, the Out of Game Quest (Obsidian Company Quest), Man wanting to achieve everlasting life. Fame, glory, legend. Project Eternity (the Game) might be a mark in video game history, a cult classic. Who over at Obsidian doesn't want to leave a nice footprint in the Earth? - Project Eternity, the tribute to the Infinity Engine Quest Related, in-game: - Project Eternity, a God Story/Quest, God's who work towards a greater goal, "Fate" or something other superstitious to achieve a platonic "Eternity". Or an Evil God that knows that everything that has a Beginning also has an End and it's own End is coming and thus creates "Project Eternity". - Project Eternity, the In-Game Quest/Story, man wanting to achieve everlasting life. Akilles chose (according to the mythology) to stay in Troy, even though he knew it would be death of him. But hey, everyone knows who Akilles is right? - Animat Factories, devices to prolong the life of a Soul (in a sense), someone had to start building the machines (the ancient civilization of the World?). What would they call their project, and for what reason would they build these machines? Eternity? With all the above said by me, I agree with what many others say in this thread. Project Eternity is thus far a "Placeholder". But I still think that "PE" has a really nice ring to it, in the same vein as the classical shorts BG, IWD, PST. Thus, I really think that Obsidian "should" work with "PE" as a title, something that starts with a "P" for a first word and "E" for a second word. Title-Help (Obsidian might have their own tools/ideas for how to get titles and stuff but I thought of just to share this for inspiration/influence or whatever~ also because I think it's a lil bit fun ): Something I myself think is pretty fun to do when I try to write titles, character names and events for my own story is to go on pages like this and see if there are "synonyms" that pretty much say the same thing but with a cooler sounding word that rolls on the tongue. Thesaurus and Merriam-Webster: 1. http://thesaurus.com/browse/project 2. http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/project[noun] 3. http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/project[verb] 4. http://thesaurus.com/browse/eternity 5. http://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/eternity Acronym sites are fun too http://acronymcreator.net/ace.py roPEY - Project EternitY Who goes by Rope Kid on Something Awful? Finally, anagrams: http://www.anagrammer.com/anagrammer/ Did you know that "Eternity" is an anagram of "Tiny Tree" for instance!?!? Like I said, brilliant stuff ;D

Just popping in and doing my "raise-awareness-duty": BioWare, if you're reading this thread from time to time just checking up on this: - Insert Top-Down Camera (with screen panning). Why? Because it's smoothly smexy. Come on. I know you want it (well I do and I believe many others want it too). Why? Because having a Top-Down Camera (with screen panning) makes it feel like I am controlling a Special Medieval Ops Unit of Great Warriors and Wizards to deal with my enemies during my adventures in your world. 3rd Person Locked Camera = Feels like I am controlling a single Special Ops Character with some side-kick heroes that are insignificant in combat (Mass Effect-mentality). Top-Down Camera (w/ Screen Panning) also makes the game get this RTS (Real-Time Strategy) perspective to it. Whilst 3rd Person Locked Camera gives more of a RTA (Real-Time Action) perspective to it. See the difference? If not, one says Strategy, the other says Action. Strategy is what made me love Dragon Age: Origins and finish it and even buy it several times (Once on PC and once on PS3). I've also started new games and played Dragon Age: Origins several times and made several different characters. Dragon Age 2? Bah! I've started ONE serious run but I stopped playing just as I finished Act 1 (to be honest, I got bored, but I was very engaged up until Act 2 started). I'm hardly a big demographic, I'm a vocal minority I am sure. But I still believe that you would make more money if you allow the Player to zoom out more than you can in Dragon Age 2. /"Raise-Awareness-Duty" End P.S. I'll be back to fight the good fight later in this thread or next section. I'll keep advocating for this because I see no "cons" with having this Option for the Player to choose their preferred perspective in the game.

It's not that crouching is bad per say, but Obsidian has stated (I'm too lazy to find it) that crouching is not feasible. I would personally love to get crouching, but I'm just following the official word (improper sourcing for the laziness! ) It's the Tim Cain QA video I believe, update... #16 or something like that.. early early stuff. EDIT: As for your climb idea, sounds great! Some Tree props could possibly have some sort of utility like that. No "climb animation" but more like "You will now climb this tree" *pop* "You have climbed this tree"~ imaginative climbing. Perhaps doesn't even need an archer artwork if climbing a tree either. Oooh I like this... The tree prop could get the "selection circle" and visually it could be a tree shooting arrows. If an enemy would hit the Archer/Ranger/Bow-User in the tree (practically & visually an enemy shoots the Tree) you could "fall down" (visually spawn at the bottom of tree with knockback-effect) from the tree (high-risk/high-chance of doing so) and take extra damage. [Clean up list]: - *pop* Climb tree: "Thou hast become a tree" = The character model disappears - Tree gets selection circle and gets "locked" range modifiers (A tree can not move)* - Enemy shoots at tree - Character "falls" out of tree = Character model spawns beside tree and falls to the ground a la "Knockdown" - Fin It also gets you on that "1 more door" boat. 1 House, 1 tree next to house, *pop* climb tree and *pop* jump into window. EDIT EDIT: More stealth stuff~ Faction Clothing (Fallout: New Vegas inspired). Take down a Guard, take his clothes and/or armor/banner stuff and get through the gate and similar shtuff. EDIT EDIT EDIT: Added [Clean-up list] * Can a tree move if a Druid makes it so?? :D

I am not asking for this or requesting it but it would be freaking awesome: I would love it if, not this detailed as above, if Obsidian could at least allow for 3-4 "states" of portraits depending on how much Health you have. In essence: If they write the code for "4 portrait states", modding it would be so much easier. But in the vanilla experience it would suffice still if it is just 1 Picture in all 4 states, less resources to be spent on the artistic work by Obsidian (unless they themselves think it's an interesting idea and want to do some artistic wolfenstein-esque health-damage work). 1. 100% Health 2. Same thing, 80% Health 3. Same thing, 50% Health 4. Same thing, 20% Health What it allows for is me, as the Player, to customize 2, 3, 4~ 1. ^Picture above (Full Health) 2. I go into Photoshop and add some amateur detail signifying that the character has taken damage. 3. See 2. 4. See 2. But as I first said, it's not anything I'm requesting, but simply throwing it out there because I personally think it would be awesome, effective and semi-"innovative". Obsidian wouldn't need to make the "damaged states" portraits themselves, but simply having the "4 states" in the code would open so many doors for Portrait enthusiasts and "modders" and "amateur" artists to fill in the gaps. EDIT: Switched the IWD portrait to something smaller. EDIT EDIT: In practice~ Concept, what Obsidian only needs to do (but with proper coding ofc): 1. IF 1.00% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH] 2. IF 0.75% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH] 3. IF 0.50% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH] 4. IF 0.25% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH] Because with this, I could easily just open [Portrait#1JAH] in Photoshop or whatever, modify it a little bit and rename it to [Portrait#1JAHMOD2] (or whatever I wish to name it) and then add it into the states as such: Concept, what I could then do with it: 1. IF 1.00% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAH] 2. IF 0.75% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD2] 3. IF 0.50% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD3] 4. IF 0.25% Health = Show [Portrait#1JAHMOD4] I'm not too savvy with programming, but it looks logically like something that could be fairly simple to implement.

No crouching. As for cover and such. I believe PE will have props (bushes and such), perhaps making bushes and other "cover" be "transparent" or passable whilst in Prone-Mode and give them parameters and triggers/scripts/code that they "aid" stealth (whilst in Prone-Mode). IF [Character Prone] = [bush#1] can be moved through & [stealth] (or something) It's not entirely "low profile" either. But it's also ideas for allowing the Player to enter 1 room from several different "entrances". The existence of having a [Prone] stance allows more "doors" (figure of speech) to be "opened" and "entered" through. Potential entrances to 1 room. Standing+1 Room/House: - 1 Room/House - 1 Door entrance (1 Door) - Window Entrance? (1 Door) - Climb roof+Chimney Entrance? (1 Door) - Backdoor? (1 door) - Total of 4 "doors" +Prone - Cellar entrance? (1 door) - Enter house from a nearby Cave->Tunnel (1 door) - River+Watermill Entrance (swimming, 1 door) - Total of 7 "Doors" suddenly Prone = Allows more entrances.

EDIT: Just throwing out some ideas, thoughts and stuff I Think should be considered /EDIT Don't forget Prone Stance and the possibilities it gives (If it is in the game, it was advertised by Tim Cain pretty early in the Kickstarter Campaign) 1. Crawl under a house to access it from below (if a house is slightly elevated and/or has a hatch door under the house somehow) 2. Crawl into a crack in a wall to get into the fort grounds (Friendly Arms Inn for instance, could it be possible to crawl into the area and pass by the guards at the gate?) 3. Crawl into a Cave tunnel. 4. Prone = Swim = Same-same animation possibilities (but would require some extra Resources to be spent on water coding and scripting and "swim paths"/water pathfinding etc. etc.) 5. River/Lake swimming to get past encounters. 6. General Secret finding (Dead-ends but might found some lost dead skeleton adventurer holding some semi-useful loot). Also secret paths. 7. Crawl in bush, hide from patrols. 8a. Prone specific take-downs? 8b. Must be in Prone Stance: - No animation abilities, but hiding behind an enemy/character/unit in Prone Stance and using a "Prone Take Down" could be an equivalent of a "Stealth Take Down" in many "Stealth Games" (Deus Ex HR, Dishonored etc. etc.). - No animation, as said above, but could give status effects such as "Sleep", "Stun" or whatnot. Can you move objects and possibly bodies in PE? (Divine Divinity-esque, you can move objects by clicking and dragging them). Does patrols, guards, factions notice bodies laying around? Can you pick up bodies? Does patrols, guards, factions notice dropped weapons and items? (Often times they do not, they get alarmed and hostile if they see a body, but they don't give a damn if you move the body but the weapon the knocked out guy was holding is in plain open field). ^I have more to say, but this will do for now I suppose. All things, in my opinion, to consider for a stealthy approach and how AI reacts to a stealthy-esque-ish approach.

Josh has said there's going to be visual aids for spell placements (so a circle showing the range of your fireball - a bit like TOEE I think). Personally, I prefer it without - makes spell-casting more challenging - but I can see the frustration of letting rip with a fireball and missing the enemy entirely. That's something a little bit save+loading could fix though (for research, "How big AoE does the Fireball exactly have??". I remember doing this in the Shattered Hand for this specific reason). I learned exactly how far the Fireball was going to go, so I could even hit enemies that were fighting close-range with my Fighter and Paladin without hitting my units. I quickly learned that most (if not all) big AoE spells had pretty much the same range as well. Getting visual aid sounds great, but I do like challenge and your post sprung an idea to mind... how about some "risk factor" of the Fireball (concept) being bigger or smaller than the visual aid? Maybe the fire jets out an extra layer to one side of the "visual aid circle"/GUI. Makes it more risky, which isn't necessarily "challenging" per say but isn't challenge/risk the same thing in some of these occasions? In the IE games = "I could hit that big ball of enemies if I throw a Fireball here but... I could also hit some of my own units" What I'm suggesting = "I'll hit everything in this circle of this Fireball but... there is a risk that it extends and hits some of my units, alternatively there's a chance that it extends and hits more enemy units. Hm decisions decisions.." Don't know how "easily" implementable that is, but felt like putting it on the table: TL;DR: Suggestion: - Abilities that may or may not become more powerful when cast~ A risk factor as well as a "Buffed Spellpower!" factor. Spells that may be a curse to the battle, or a gift. Not 50/50 chance, something marginal... like... 10% chance of either being an advantage or a disadvantage. Perhaps a Player picked Perk? "Wild Soul - This perk allows the Wizard to cast some spells with a chance to erupt greater power!! Disclaimer: However, the nature of gaining a Wild Soul also gives an element of 'Chaos'. The spells cast can tend to go off uncontrollably in a way not favored by the rest of the group" (insert picture of Powermad PipBoy Wizard with 5 scorch black units with fumes standing around (Party of 6)) or something.

Some wishes of what I'd like to see ranged weaponry do (Long-range weaponry): - 1. Friendly Fire (On Harder Difficulties) & Misfire As noted ^only on harder difficulties but I want to take Spell's into consideration here. 5 Magic Missiles gets fired off, who is to say that one or two aren't misfired at an ally close to the target or backfires back to the Wizard? As for Friendly Fire, also on harder difficulties, but then positioning becomes way more important and clutch moments where your Archer just narrowly fires between two of your "tanks" and hits the target just when you need it becomes more frequent and possible. - 2. Environmental Penalty Is it raining? Snowing? A big forest? An overly humid swamp? What can affect the efficiency of the Archer's mind and eyes? A close-ranged warrior can swing his sword around and clash in close quarters even though they might get slightly "worn down", but an archer and/or long-ranged fighter should get more penalized. Basically, anything that affects a close-ranged quarters (in combat) for anything that has anything to do with Sight/Reaction/Weight etc. etc. should double for Archers/Bow-users (Concept: Blindness makes your Fighters see worse = Blindness makes Archers/Bow-users see x2 worse than Fighters). A simple trigger/script such as "Is the Unit holding a Bow? If yes, x2 Sword sight penalty" should suffice (but with prettier words and less concept-like ofc). - 3. Aimed Shots/GUI Shots The Player could get some sort of GUI for the Archer, get a popular "Throw grenade" (seen in many FPS games but also some in League of Legends) transparent blue line from the Archer to the enemy and be able to manipulate it somewhat and the Archer will always fire with that angle in mind. Making the angle go over your allies so that 1. (Friendly Fire) does not occur could penalize the attack speed, whilst having a straight line could fire arrows faster but at the risk of damaging your allies (Friendly Fire). - 4. Archer Stance/"No Auto-Aim"/Turn Animation Can't shoot and walk at the same time e.g: 1. Move/Position your unit 2. Short down-time 3. Shoot 4. Short down-time 5. Shoot 6. Now, I want to move the unit so I click somewhere and [short down-time] occurs. 7. Unit moves. 8. Short down-time. 9. Shoot. etc. etc. In BG and IWD we have an "auto-aim" animation. Even if I have my back towards the opponent, the unit/character instantly turns around and shoots an arrow. The title of this section was partially "Turn Animation". Have the unit turn towards the target before shooting instead of doing some sort of Legolas "hax" turn and shoot instantly, though that could be something that scales with Leveling up of course (a.k.a. "Turn faster" or "Shoot faster after turning").

So it doesn't bother you that the overuse of astericks could be taken out of the game? Okay. Why not just say that? It's like some big thing that people don't want to admit that it was unecessary, as per the screen shot I posted. Oh no, we can't agree with Hiro even though the screen shot would be just as good without the astericks around the words. It's better to disagree with Hiro. Seriously. The asterisks didn't bother me was what I was saying. I also don't think it is, was or even would be unnecessary. This is my opinion, your opinion is further down in this post. I think the general dialogue doesn't feel the same in the examples where you've removed the asterisks around the words, Oswald doesn't convey the spoken lines in the same way when they are there. However, that doesn't mean that asterisks is the only method to convey spoken lines. Italics does the same trick. ^I put some emphasis on some words I thought were important. Btw, ^your opinion.

Agreed. Although, to be fair, sizes above 24-or-so might start causing problems with screen real estate, between dialogue boxes filling the entire screen and/or the player being inable to read more than about a short sentence at any given time without having to scroll. Who knows, though... Maybe there's some far-reaching voice that comes from inside the heads of those hearing it, for miles and miles, and to convey the sheer magnitude of its source, Obsidian uses Size 48 font for a brief moment, as it beckons thousands of people at once to succumb to some command or something. *shrug* Like you said... if they find a valid use for it, I say go for it. True. But who is to say that Obsidian can't *gasp* animate some of the text size for a brief moment? (I know that some jRPG's do this fairly well where the text can get bigger than the screen box a la "SAY WHAAAT!?" and then shrink back to normal size for emphasis of, in this case, the excessively surprised emotion) And there is also the example which you bring up Lephys. I get an image of some "Leader" or some "Tyrant" on top of a stage and he looks down on his underlings and uses some sort of Magical "Command Word" and just roars: "OBEY!" And everyone around just falls to their knees, succumbing to the sheer amount of raw power the words hold.

http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/884980 How about no PS4 Controller and just plug in your regular USB/Bluetooth KB & Mouse into the PS4?

It comes down to the heart of the matter and my original post on this. Do you like the overuse of asterisks? I don't. Here's part of my original quote. And then we have three pages of people disagreeing with me and yourself chiming in after I posted a screen shot to highlight my point. And yet there are posters who are still disagreeing with me. I would have used a better screen shot to show how bad the conversations can get with astericks everywhere but I was at work when I posted the one I did. There is a definite overuse of the astericks in IWD 2. It never bothered me, to be honest. I don't mind if Obsidian would write the story however they wish and use whatever tools to, quote dukeofwhales, "convey additional information about how the lines are spoken". Bold, Underline, Italic, *Asterisk*, Strike Through, CAPITAL ONLY LETTERS, or whatever really. Size 8 Size 10 Size 12 Size 14 Size 18 Size 24 Size 36 Size 48 Several different fonts, colors, wherever and IF Obsidian feels it is applicable to a given in-game situation/environment/character. It all depends on how Obsidian wants to write for PE.

I'm not trying to be king of the hill or anthing. I showed an example of IWD 2 with a screen shot where it's totally unnecessary. You're now saying the screen shot in question did have to have the *I* and *you* with asterisks around them? Did I ever state anything on this matter previously?

Only if you can show me a screenshot of a game in which two people engaged in a dispute got a room and it was necessary. I suddenly find myself worrying about the necessity of anything Obsidian is doing in this game that they cannot show screenshot evidence of from existing games. Explanations have apparently become useless, and innovation no longer exists. O_O For whatever it's worth, I think you are proving a pretty strong point in your posts Lephys. I don't know if Hiro is reading the same thing as me or if he simply wants to be "King of the Hill" of your... forum bout? Regardless, I personally like the italic method, it's on point. I wouldn't even mind bold and underline if applicable in the writing, and, depending on the situation in-game (if what happens on the game screen reflects well with the dialogue screen then *shrug* why not?).

(Speaking only about single player) I believe that is the only interesting example there is. Apart from that construed situation I don't think it likely that charm-, persuasion- or intimidation-experts would be reluctant to use their skills to help their party of adventurers. But then it simply becomes a routine non-decision to always use charming Boo in charming situations and you would ask yourself why the silly program can't simply and automatically use the person with the best skill? That entirely depends on your main characters relationship with the party of companions. It also depends on the party's agenda, I remember reading or hearing about the companions of PE having their own "goals" and "agendas". That implies many things, even things such as that they only want to stay with you for a couple of rounds until they achieve their own goals. Then they might hang around if they find you intriguing and/or have built a bond with your character. Maybe something you want to do goes against their wishes entirely.

I thought I replied to this hm... Do you know if you will be able to up your pledge to a Beta Access/Early Access Tier when the fulfillment site or would Obsidian simply release it an Early Access on Steam? PE's lowest Beta price was $110 (Planetary Annihilation was at $90 and released it as such on Steam as well, met with lots of complaints but was still on the top selling list on Steam). I'd probably up my pledge to $110 if I could join on the Beta for the sole purpose of bug testing.

I didn't think you were talking about PE, but to mix that system into the franchise later doesn't seem like a good idea either (unless, like all the previous commentaries about it, MP was tacked on and crappy as it was in BG2). Mass Effect, Dragon Age, so on. Maybe you didn't pay attention to all the initial discussion started in 2012, but trying to make "decent" MP content is another issue besides the technical complexities of MP; first we have the technical side of making different platforms work together in MP and all the related networking bugs, and then if going for "decent" MP, the content somehow has to reflect the MP context, so then what? Something has to give for a development firm without multi-million publisher backing. And you're probably smart enough to guess the price. Although the answer was actually given back in 2012. Adding later would introduce quality inconsistency into the PE franchise when we're hoping for a unified trilogy or whatever. Quality intellectual SP games are extremely rare right now, and the proposed caliber of combined IE games is completely nonexistent, so most of us who don't want anything to do with MP are purist because we've already seen how MP strips and dumbs down SP content for AAA titles with multi-million backing. Reusing SP infrastructure isn't going to make much of a difference because you still have to develop new content and MP still has its own infrastructure complexities, but if you want "decent" MP, I'll bet the SP infrastructure will need to be reworked around it as well. But again, I wouldn't mind if it was completely crappy tacked-on MP where only the lead character can affect dialogue choices and such, and SP content development was never affected. As I and others have said many times whenever the MP/co-op/console thing comes up, just have another Kickstarter for those items and make a different game. It can be set in the same universe, but a different kind of game altogether (because you can't have the same PE-type game with PS:T-like content in a console or proper MP environment--it just ain't happening). For once, leave the games-for-dumb-masses to Bioware and the like and hopefully Obsidian will give us a solid, proper old-school-like SP game. That's what they promised, anyway. As I have said before as well, I think it would be fun to have MP without touching the Singleplayer core experience. I've said it before, how the IE games handled it in the very first place. I personally enjoyed that sort of MP. From BG/IWD perspective (you already know but I am "painting" a picture for everyone): Singleplayer, 1 Player with 5 NPC's. Multiplayer, 2-6 Players who control all NPC's or their premade ones. You can even, if you want a "canon" experience, create a "filler" MP character and then remove that one and play Imoen, Khalid, Kivan, Montaron etc. etc. whoever you wish to play. It's still the core experience. That's what I'd like to see in PE. It doesn't interfere with the core Singleplayer experience. It simply allows your friends to tag along. As for the Multi-Party Dialogue+Multiplayer suggestion/question. Let's look at a concept from a Singleplayer perspective with a big "IF": - 1 Player, 5 NPC companions. - A conversation that requires an intimidating character, but my character isn't. - Luckily, Forton does have "Intimidating" traits in his pre-built character so asking him to help out doesn't seem too far fetched. Now, Multiplayer: - 2 Players, 4 NPC companions. - A conversation that requires an intimidating character, but my character isn't. - Luckily, my friend has built a character for this purpose with "Intimidating" traits in his built character, so asking his character for help (Without any "Do you want to help?" prompts) doesn't seem too far fetched. That is what I was trying to get at. But before you get on a high horse and look down on the MP or even me for suggesting it, I do want to emphasize that of course I prioritize an SP experience first and foremost. I don't think the Multi-Party idea is out of the picture of the SP experience though, because in so many ways it makes sense. If you've got a charmer in your group when you're out, maybe he or she can get you in on a club that you wouldn't be able to "charm" your way into. Asking your companions in social situations where you lack the social skill isn't a bad thing, the question is: Are they willing to come through with that help? Would your friend charm the bouncer and leave you hanging? Maybe your friend would be able to get himself in, but the bouncer isn't willing to the total of 6 of you get inside (which unlocks "Split Party mechanics" thoughts but I won't get into that too much here~ basically being able to control a character away from the party). I bring up the same example again: Maybe Edair has great "Intimidating" or "Threatening" traits, but would he be willing (as a character) to threaten the Innkeeper? So asking Edair in that situation might be a bad thing for your relationship with him. But! If you've swayed him down a dark path previously, he might instead be possibly happy to do it. Buuut that's another previous suggestion (being able to "turn" companions~ make a good hearted companion into a stone cold killer). But alas, I don't know what kind of depth the game will have in terms of Companion interaction/meddling/mechanics/writing. I do think it would be cool