redneckdevil

Depending on the type of "atmosphere" the game has im gonna say the type of romance in a game i would be ok with or like to see is the type of "trying to find but never getting". Ill explain. I would rather have one where through story, dialogue, or notes or etc etc we learn about or we learn more about someone. A lil breadcrumb trail in which we can learn more and even influencing said persons life for better or for worse. After we are engaged in the breadcrumb trail because we are facinated and have a desire to interact with or try to get, at the end of the breadcrumb trail we find that we cannot have said person. Either they be dead, happily marriaged, involved with something that so important they do not have the time nor pleasure to be involved with someone, we cannot have said person. Said person could even not want anything to do with us, or could wish they could be with us but due to circumstances it is just a dream that cant be optained. hell id even favor in the lil breadcrumb trail said person died by our actions even if we didnt know. Like someone whos a high class theif who made alot of enemies but we made a mistake somehwere or got swindled by someons that when we finally find said person, they died because we lead the enemies to them. I guess im ok with getting a chance to "chase" but not getting. That way we can imagine what coulda been and instead of getting disappointed in what is hardcoded.

I wonder if romance was put in the game, if people would find it ok if we the PC was the "damsel in distress" or the one getting the moves put on. What if it was portrayed as the characters being the "dominate" or the one who the relationship is centered around and not our PCs if people would be fine with that. Meaning the characters are the ones who push it along and not our PC. The PC would have a say in it to determine how far the relationship goes but is not the one who instigates it. The PC can move it along by selecting dialogue or doing actions to show interest but is portrayed and executed as the one being "wooed" and not the one doing the "wooeing". Would that be acceptable?

That is great and all, but if it releases for real (supposedly soon) at a 60 dollar price point they are going to find out no one will be buying their game. I have played it, it isn't worth 60 dollars. Honestly I would say it is a 20 dollar game at best. Its not gonna be released at a 60 dollar price, but if it is then yes i agree 60 dollars would be to expensive imo for just a base game.

you do realise they also put the game on discount during the most recent steam sale.....soooo AFTER the beta access was given to all its orginal backers ;-) so while people who buy it through steam at a discount, a good one there for a min, the orginal backers got a nice bonus of free beta access. so in my eyes it was still done in a good way )

Imho its because of new vegas that i KNOW obsidian can make deep relationships with other party members without going down the "romance" path. im for romance being in the future games as long as they dont shove it down our throats or only be able to get the best outcome because u romanced up a party member. Yes u can hide goodies behind romance paths and options but do not put no where near the best stuff or outcomes behind romances because then that passively pushes players into being romances. That i cannot stand. otherwise i have no sag in yay or nay in future games. Fonv showed u can have deep connections with party members without sexin or romancing it up with them, so as long as its not forced or passively pushed onto us, either way im fine.

Yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesssssssssdssssdsd!!!!!!!!!!!! When i found this and read it at work, i let out a nice loud !@#$ YEAH!! which is resulting in me getting coached because of a family basically a few feet away from. I dont care, im just sooooo excited! Wooott!! Edit-quick qiestion, since i put my steam info in backer site, will it automatically be gifted to me or will i need to go and manually download it to start testing?

Im gonna be an oddman out. Actually none of the crpgs brought me to PE because i could never get into crpgs as a teenager and early adulthood. I was more into final fantasys and dragon warriors and secret of mana growing up so i just couldnt get into them. the game hook that brought me in to support PE isnt even listed and i wont even say it actually is a game hoo and that game would be fonv. The writing and the flow and the interaction and roleplay oppertunities impressed me so much to support a type of game i grew up not liking or getting into. I not only wanted to show my gratitude for what they did with fonv and to be part of something that would keep them going, but also a game that had the quality i found in fonv. i have been huying the older games and been trying to get into them, while some had excellent stories, so far alot seems clunky now but thankfully i dunno ifbit counts but i have bee spending alot of hours in divinity original sins to get me this type of niche gaming and it boostes my confidence that i will enjoy not only the story and lore butbthe type of game it is as well.

Lol

I do share your point of view completely in the Skyrim issue. Then the both of you have missed Bethesda's point completely. Skyrim's marriages are not "romances", nor were they supposed to be, nor are they the result of trying to implement romances but failing to "flesh them out" or whatever. They were pure utility value as designed. They gave the player something he/she could call his own, like a house....or a horse. In Skyrim, a spouse is either the player's personal merchant, or his/her unconditional fighting companion. Or both. The fact that they come complete with a wedding ceremony, a wedding ring, and they live in the player character's house, Is Brilliant. It leaves completely open the option for Larpers to Larp, and the imaginers to fill in the story gaps in their heads. Which is what the elder scrolls games are all about. THAT is why they work in Skyrim, and why they're praised. But you guys aren't asking for that. Nope. You want Love-drama spoon-fed to you by Obsidian writers. And you want it even though Obsidian has a track record of sucking when it comes to writing romances. I did enjoy the house feature in building my own house...but really? This is what i am talking about, not that the marriage was there but the execution of it. buy a trinket, give a trinket, say ur vows, and then now u are married. Thats it, no winning over, shifting their stance towards u, nada. Buy a trinket and bam u are married ) Thats my issue with skyrim that i will admit thats purely my own beef and i have long gotten over if no one else shares it nor will i put them down for liking the things in skyrim. My main beef with said game is that a majority of the roleplaying is done strictly in ur head and with ur imagination. The gameworld barely reacts to any of ur decisions or roleplay antics with the exception of the guards. It is a very beautiful sandbox world that has very linear questlines. Its almost as if it the very sandbox world they let u run around in wherever u go will deceive u that u actually have any choices or roleplay optiins with the very stories within the game. it is a game for larpers and im glad tbey can enjoy it and more power to them, that is not the playstyle for me. Ill stick with morrowind that gives me freedom to use my imagination AND respond to my roleplay as wel ingame. Thankfully bethesda caters to different styles with their games and i have found my niche with tes in morrowind while others have found theirs with oblivion and skyrim. They have every right to enjoy those games just as i have a right to not enjoy because it doesnt suit my playstyle. imho i guess my main beef with skyrim is that fallout 3 offered more roleplay oppertunities that where reconized ingame than skyrim did. Im not to much on relying solely on my imagination to roleplay interacting with the game world. rant over, in the end i am merely critizing the execution, not the idea of what bethesda did in skyrim. yes i agree it was there for utility for larpers but the execution was imho horribly done. thats why i am saying if u do soemthing, do it right or dont do it at all. would i be pissed if obsidian did exactly what skyrim did with marriages and whatnot, no just like im not pissed at bethesda for doing it. i will cringe yes and not use it and i can even be happy for the people who would love it. it just wouldnt be for me. my whole stance in this thread is NOT against having romance in the game, but simply because its locked that we shouldnt worry or think that we are missing roleplay oppertunities when obsidian has a history of giving us plenty of roleplay oppertunities that the ingame will reconize.

I do share your point of view completely in the Skyrim issue. Then the both of you have missed Bethesda's point completely. Skyrim's marriages are not "romances", nor were they supposed to be, nor are they the result of trying to implement romances but failing to "flesh them out" or whatever. They were pure utility value as designed. They gave the player something he/she could call his own, like a house....or a horse. In Skyrim, a spouse is either the player's personal merchant, or his/her unconditional fighting companion. Or both. The fact that they come complete with a wedding ceremony, a wedding ring, and they live in the player character's house, Is Brilliant. It leaves completely open the option for Larpers to Larp, and the imaginers to fill in the story gaps in their heads. Which is what the elder scrolls games are all about. THAT is why they work in Skyrim, and why they're praised. But you guys aren't asking for that. Nope. You want Love-drama spoon-fed to you by Obsidian writers. And you want it even though Obsidian has a track record of sucking when it comes to writing romances. I did enjoy the house feature in building my own house...but really? This is what i am talking about, not that the marriage was there but the execution of it. buy a trinket, give a trinket, say ur vows, and then now u are married. Thats it, no winning over, shifting their stance towards u, nada. Buy a trinket and bam u are married ) Thats my issue with skyrim that i will admit thats purely my own beef and i have long gotten over if no one else shares it nor will i put them down for liking the things in skyrim. My main beef with said game is that a majority of the roleplaying is done strictly in ur head and with ur imagination. The gameworld barely reacts to any of ur decisions or roleplay antics with the exception of the guards. It is a very beautiful sandbox world that has very linear questlines. Its almost as if it the very sandbox world they let u run around in wherever u go will deceive u that u actually have any choices or roleplay optiins with the very stories within the game. it is a game for larpers and im glad tbey can enjoy it and more power to them, that is not the playstyle for me. Ill stick with morrowind that gives me freedom to use my imagination AND respond to my roleplay as wel ingame. Thankfully bethesda caters to different styles with their games and i have found my niche with tes in morrowind while others have found theirs with oblivion and skyrim. They have every right to enjoy those games just as i have a right to not enjoy because it doesnt suit my playstyle. imho i guess my main beef with skyrim is that fallout 3 offered more roleplay oppertunities that where reconized ingame than skyrim did. Im not to much on relying solely on my imagination to roleplay interacting with the game world. rant over, in the n

I personally would love a static atribute system. We already get to raise our skill points and we learn new spells and gain higher attack rating and gain feats as we level, that imho is enough to portray our characters getting "better" and advancing to me. Also yeah lets not bring up fallout 3 rpg qualifications, while its a fun game its not a great fallout rpg per se. We will start looking like NMA in this thread lol. But yeah we do need to stay away from fallout 3 way in that u can max out EVERYTHING and very easily as well by simpy playing the game as it is. I do not want to purposely continually "gimp" my character just because they keep throwing things in my face to level up an atribute or skill. Hell, character creation can be static and if anything needs to be raised, just have it done by enchants or magical gear or feats

**** ive spent 10 hour in the very first town alone and havent left yet and im not done lol

Romances don't have to be about ego stroking. So yes, there are romances out there that are about roleplaying (BG2&Torment only being some of the good examples). You should play those games. Try those romances. See for yourself. For the love of god, don't compare them with the EA/Bioware ego bull****. Whoring and flirting with Fisto are not romances though but options for the player to express their sexuality. New Vegas did good in this front, with plenty of lines of dialogue where your could imply your tastes and let's face it, which other game let's you have sex with a robot? And a Fisto robot for that matter. Crazy stuff. All those options are some of the reasons why New Vegas is so awesome. I've beaten the game 5 times so far and I discover new content in every playthrough. I agree the fisto and the hookers arent romance options but were as i said was some of the ways the game let u express ur sexuality. The romances i said were in the game but not our own was the tragic story of veronica and her lost love, the troubled couple who wanted to free of one of the casinos grasp, the history of boone and his wife, setting up the boomer with a love seen from far away, etc etc. They were other peoples romances that we got to interact with. Thats what i meant romance was in the game and im sure that romance in that form will be in this game. My point i was trying to make is that games can be incredible games with lots of roleplay oppertunities that dont need romance for our characters and still be a great game that doesnt need or be complete without the need for romance in it. Fonv didnt have any romances in it and it didnt suffer at all from a roleplays point of view from the lack of it. Just because PoE wont have romance options right now does not mean obsidian cant still craft a game that will give us plenty of roleplay options and deep character interaction between npcs and party members. it can be a great game without romance options and still not feel like somethings missing because of the lack of it AND the bioware examples was there to show what could happen as well or even skyrim with its marriage that feels so damn empty and halfass u wonder why it gets the praises it does in a game. seriously the marriage option in skyrim is very praised by plenty of people who wanted romance in their game (not counting u in this at all because i dont know ur stance on that which u problemly share my view on it) that i dont even understand how without headroleay outta game makes up for it for most people. there are plenty of examples of romance going wrong in a game with very few examples of it being done right. While that isnt a good example of not putting it in a game, it is when its a new ip that u are trying to make the best on all fronts and i rather they play on tbeir strengths which they have already shown they can give us deep and fulfilling roleay options without romance and the options to express our sexuality and motives.

Ill be honest, i havent really seen romance done well in games though i havent finished bg2 so im not sure about it. Planescape teh romance was ok but was overshadowed by the interactions with other companions. The latest games ive played that romance did it ehh how do i put it. DA:O was subpar but bearable, DA2 and ME was a huge ego stroking orgy fest. Tbh the reason why im glad romance is out because its mainly there to stroke the players ego. in fonv there wasnt any romaces besides a random hooker or a sexbot, but it did not deter my enjoyment nor the closeness i had with the companions. I actually cared what the companions would think or react to certain situations. From a strictly roleaying experience it helped shaped some dicisions and made some even more painful because how it interacted with them. In no way shape or form did i feel like an asexual but was freely able to express my sexuality if i cared in the game if i chose to. Hell its because of the game fonv being my first obsidian game and never being able to get into this type of game they are making the reason why i threw so much money at them. Fonv they proved they can deliver a very well done story with multiple c&c and very great and deep interaction between my companions. Everytime i did think to try to romance up a characterit was purely from a ego stroking frame of mind, not to expand on the story but mainly in the end to make me feel more important and more badass. And on top of that there was romance in the game, just not ours because in the end fonv wasnt about the courier but everyone elses stories and how we interacted with their stories and influenced their outcomes or endings. So no, romances not being in the game wont automatically mean ull lose rileplaying experiences, though it will mean less oppertunities for ego stroking.

Well Kickstarter is over and Obsidian has the money to make the game. If u are looking for a dev response, then Mr. Ferg should do since i believe he is the "boss" of the company and he has stated that all extra money will go into creating expansions. So by buying u are still helping out by contributing towards expansions which are expansions and not dlcs (yay!!!) So your money is still contributing towards the cause. Now when the game comes out, THOSE sales will go towards the next game. So by contributing now, u are still helping the game out by helpimg fund expansions which will when made further help fund the next game. Or u can contribute by buying the game coming out which will directly go towards the next game. So either way u chose, ur helping either directly or indirectly help fund the next game, but contributing now helps THIS game now while also indirectly helping the next game )

<wades through misguided selfentitlement outrage that people believe they have a right for> <grabs towel drys self off and wrings the tears of outrage off into a bottle to lap up later> Fantastic update! One thing i thought that is brilliant and was surprised to see in my home games was the barbarians health being disabled from seeing when in rage. That is gonna be awesome lol. I love seeing that both can fill the job of the "tank" of a party but will noticeable differences. One will be the "rock" thats dependable and likely to survive and one is a bonfire that is more likely to engulf and burn the enemies to a cinder before being snuffed out. Great tactics already in my head, if one encounter needs be ran like a marathon to finish u woukd go for the fighter. If an encounter is a burst damage before u are burst damaged down, u would go with the barbarian. Man cannot wait to play the game, i am feigning for this lol. Keep doing what ur doing and remember, we know these updates and whatnot are candy for us backers that u dont have to do or are under no moral oigation to do so. Most backers know when tbey gave u money the only thing u are required to give us is a great game. Everything else u have been doing is just sweets u didnt have to give us. Thank you for the updates and all the stuff u have shown so far.

Have we heard anything about if we are able to max out all the skill or not yet? Ill be honest, i really hope that at the end, we will not be all maxxed out in everything. Im really hoping we can create characters that start off strong in some areas and weak in others and at the end of the game be extradenary in the areas we started out strong in and be decent in the areas we was weak in. Or if we focused on all the skills, we would be good in all but master of none. i would really hate to when we near ingame that everything is maxxed out because we would lose the things that make our characters act diiferent outside of combat.

Also id like to point out that the extra money right now could go to working on the expansion as well.

Actually i guess im one of the few that thought the 60 dollar wasteland 2 price was very honorable. The only reason it was that price was so that it was just a lil higher than if someone backed it in kickstarter. They were not trying to disrespect those people who helped with their wallet when nothing was offered against someone who comes along who didnt back it and make it possible and charge them the same price or less. The 60 dollar pricetag wasnt there to slap in the face of the person who bought the early release, it was that price not to slap in the face the people who backed it in kickstarter. Be very very careful with early access though.

To be honest, the only game that comes to mind in how "best" to do it is TES:Morrowind. Been playing that game for over 2 years now and since i dont look up locations but i have looked up the gear, ive found maybe a 3rd of all the arifacts and unique items. it had a nice blend between gaining said artifacts from questing, coming across it somewhere out away from civilization, killing innocents, etc etc.

Ok just bought a new program off steam called fantasy grounds which let u play and run pnp games online. It doesnt have a sound output so people communicate through ingame text or through programs such as team speak. Now the question is ask is, can u have 2 different users on 1 pc and one user to talk in and the other user to play music with? Reason why i ask is because the games i run at my house, background music is very important and want to play background music through team speak as a seperate user. That way if people dont want to listen to the music they can simply mute the user the music is coming in and still be able to listen to me. Is this even possible and if so please tell me how its done.

No no no, they only bring out the huge filing cabinet when they are meditating. They select certain files and asked to be approved and then carry around a portfolio for the rest of the day silly ) ) Edit-by the gods i cannot get it to do a smiley face on my phone sigh (Btw that was me being humorous and not taking a stab at you )

Now after playing some older games conpared to newer games, i have noticed some newer games have a toggle button (aka on/off switch) for certain features. What would u like to see a toggle for? Ill go first, i want to be able to toggle npc/enemy health bars off that arent in the party. One of my favorite games is Morrowind and just recently found a mod that will disable health bars and that simple thing added alot to immersion. No longer did i have the knowledge of when an enemy was going down or if they werent going down quickly enough. Thats mine, what would yours be?

Loving the update! I do believe my character is gonna be a chanter ) Please, please, please keep the priest mechanoc ingame where if they stray to far from their path. To many games i have run with people playing as clerics and choosing a deity based on the weapon and special abilities they get and then decide to play totally opposite to that deities belief or tenets. people may think its stiffling roleplaying but instead opens up replayability due to the different options due to which belief u choose.

As far as level scaling i am ok with it if it is reined in. Like lets say an orge we would normally find at lvl 4, i am ok with him being scaled up to lvl 8 and thats it if we came back at lvl 12. Or if we didnt go to a place at the beginning and would normally find a kobold or 2, now after 12 lvls we go there and encounter packs of them like 6 or 8. To put it bluntly i am okay with level scaling as long as their is a cap that they scale to and not just to continue to scale indefinitly to our level.