-
Posts
25 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Everything posted by Sarevok
-
Let's name this game.
Sarevok replied to Monte Carlo's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Preferably nothing with the world 'soul'. Seems way overused. -
I want a Colosseum I want to hire a doctore to train gladiators for me. I will pit them against one another, placing wagers on their survival. My gladiators will rise in power and my house will become the premiere gladiatorial host in the realm. Basically, this: What does that have to do with Project Eternity? Nothing. But, it's cool, right?
-
Neat idea. This wouldn't really make for a good stretch goal, in my humble opinion. This seems like a spin-off that they might do were the game to be a smashing success (which we can only hope for, at this stage). The resources need to be spent on the game itself, and in the marketing for the game, and the administration for the studio. It does sound cool though.
-
Dynamic Events?
Sarevok replied to firek's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Dynamic events are great in concept. I think they would play out very well in a single-player experience. I recently had a sub-par experience with "dynamic" events with Guild Wars 2. These events had no impact, as they needed to be redone again, and again, and again, due to the online nature of it. But here, in an entirely controlled environment, sure. I think they would be stellar. There needs to be lasting and obvious impact of the events. This will make the world feel vibrant and lived in, and that the player's choices really matter. -
I agree - totally like hot women to look hot. I think they want to give the game a more serious tone but hopefully we get some mages in slinky dresses or something So, I went through my Baldur's Gate portraits folder and pulled out some examples of "boob armor." Don't see anything wrong with any of these.
-
How old is everyone?
Sarevok replied to qstoffe's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Baldur's Gate I-II, Neverwinter Nights (on fan made content, largely), Icewind Dale I-II, Diablo I-II (ARPG, but I loved it), and though not in the same class, Skyrim has been a lot of fun. Age: 24 -
50,000 Backers. Wow!
Sarevok replied to Ink Blot's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Nice! -
Rideable mounts?
Sarevok replied to rjshae's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Mounts are cool in a game like Skyrim where you've only got your one character to worry about. With a group of up to six people, having that many horses (or whatever else) would just be a bit much to handle. Plus, you've got to consider how much it really adds to the game play and weigh that against the cost to implement it. It just doesn't seem like a priority. It would be neat if a fan could mod it in though. -
NPC Character Development
Sarevok replied to Monte Carlo's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
It's got to be complete control. There really is no other way for a game like this. -
I don't think that really has anything to do with the KS. Obsidian wanted to make an isometric rpg in the same vein as the Infinity games, they needed the money, they went with kickstarter, they got the money. I don't think they really need to provide Stretch goals that blow peoples minds, they are not like Indie developers who have no history of quality games and need to wow you into giving them money. They know what they want to do and what they need to do it. I think people looking for stretch goals similar to other games on KS are taking things down the wrong track. We don't need J.E. offering up weekends at his house on Maui or whatever as a stretch goal, the fact they have the pledges, the experience and quality to actually make the game should be enough. The KS was a huge success for what Obsidian wanted to do, going overboard for the sake of being like every other KS is just a waste. The money is meant to go into creating content or adding features, more money doesn't necessarily translate to a better game or even a more profitable game. The way some people are going on it seems more important to them that the KS is a success rather than that the game is actually going to be made. I'd be quite happy for them to stop providing stretch goals past what they currently have and just providing more info into the KS until it ends. Any more pledges that come in can go into increasing the quality of what they have already promised rather than adding yet another thing to the game, more VO maybe, music, certain artists etc. They don't need to provide a stretch goal to do all of that. I'm not really sure why you quoted me here. I am agreeing with you. I wasn't even talking about stretch goals, in fact. I do not think they needed to "blow people away." That is why I said I think it was smart for them to leave some unknown in their game. They could have rolled out every detail, but then some might be turned off by minor nuances. Better to throw out the goal of the project and leave it at that. Perhaps I am misunderstanding your argument here.
-
Where is everyone from
Sarevok replied to Sales101's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
I was expecting more from North America. I am from Tampa, FL, USA. -
Achievements
Sarevok replied to buggeer's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
I do not think overarching achievements are needed, from multiple playthroughs, accessed from the main menu. That seems unnecessary and is more of a console gimmick. But – they could have a place as an added roleplaying element in the game. I am imagining a sort of title system. After killing 100 Hobgoblins, a certain character might earn the title under their name in the character screen of Terror of Hobgoblins. Or, if the party knocks off an elite dragon, the party might collectively earn the title of: Slayers of X-named Dragon. I think this would be fun. My examples aren't very creative, but I am positive that people more thoughtful than I could come up with creative titles to give individual adventurers or a party. -
Temporary Party Members (6+1)
Sarevok replied to Sarevok's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
That's great. I haven't played either of those games (though I did just buy ToEE on a GOG.com deal, so I need to try it). How does the system work in those games? Is it similar to what I described? Is there a quote from one of the Obsidian guys confirming this? -
Temporary Party Members (6+1)
Sarevok replied to Sarevok's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Yes, that would be perfect. That was definitely not an option in the Baldur's Gate series and I would really appreciate seeing it in Project Eternity. -
Temporary Party Members (6+1)
Sarevok replied to Sarevok's topic in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
This would also allow the game to provide you with temporary characters designed to be just that, temporary. Let's say you are working with a thieves guild on a job. The leader of the thieves guild is showing you the way to a location. The +1 system allows the game to let him join your party for that quest. This lets Obsidian throw a lot more characters at us without having to flesh them out like you would with a traditional, full-game NPC. You could even use some of the Kickstarter designed NPCs in this way. -
Hello Project Eternity, As this game is being designed to echo classics like Baldur's Gate, it should be safe to speculate about ways to make those games better - thereby making Project Eternity better, should these improvements be realized in game. Something that always bothered me in the Baldur's Gate series was the highly restrictive party size. But, not in the way you may be thinking. Six adventurers (five companions and the protagonist) is perfect for your standard party. Six gives room for ample banter, mixing and matching of abilities, and tactical combat. But, how about when you and your five friends come upon one additional person in the depths of a dungeon. This person cannot escape without you. In Baldur's Gate, you had to say, "sorry, I just can't take you along right now," or "Sure, but current companion, please stay here." I hated this. A few examples of this include Xan, in the Nashkell Mines, and Yeslick in the Cloakwood Mines. Xan is left to be eaten by Kobolds and Yeslick will undoubtedly be drowned, if you do not take them along. I would actually leave one of my companions outside of the mines, pick up Xan or Yeslick, drop them off somewhere, and then retrieve my initially dropped companion. Yikes, way too much work. Here is what I propose: Make the six party limitation a soft cap, as opposed to a hard one. In the case of Xan or Yeslick, allow the party size to expand to 6+1 for the duration of that quest. Upon escaping from the mines, just to continue with those examples, have dialogue initiate forcing you to make a decision regarding who you will keep. If there is no specific quest related to the NPC, incorporate a +1 that is time based. Maybe, one 30 minutes, real life time – before a triggered dialogue begins. This would give players a chance to see the new person’s skills, learn a bit more about them, and then decide if they would fit into the party. As it stands, one would need to have played through the game beforehand or have read an NPC summary to know if the character would be a good fit. To prevent system abuse, I might have the soft cap restricted to +1 (so no parties of +2, +3, +4, if coordinated to take on a challenging boss, for example). The flexibility to temporarily take on an additional companion would provide more realistic resolutions for scenarios like I outlined above (with Xan and Yeslick) and would give players the chance to test drive a new companion prior to having them join up. Please let me know if you agree or disagree! I would love to hear some feedback on this idea.
-
There was a certain degree of ambiguity to be sure, but I don't know if that is a bad thing. While we are backing the project, we are not "investors" in the traditional sense. There is no profit sharing. We are stakeholders, not shareholders. Project Eternity still needs to market their product, and some of this comes from building hype through a slow release of information nuggets. This builds drama and excitement. Plus, if they rolled out everything they had in mind, some who might have otherwise been interested in backing the project might be turned off by a minor detail or two. Leaving the possibilities up to the collective imaginations of a ravenous fan base is more lucrative early on. Obsidian knows what they are doing here.