Michael_Galt

I do not approve- this truly makes me a sad panda, if that is the case. I don't care if they don't want to put in romances- fine. I understand their reasons for that, though I personally like romances (though, not stupid and shallow ones, but those are part of life as well, so really don't mind them either). I don't feel any of the romances in BG 2 were bad- to the contrary, to me, they were very well thought out and made lots of sense. But, I do not understand why it is that they would "nerf" an incredibly important skill of a thief. I see literally no good reason for that. Especially as they had that mechanic in F: NV, and it worked quite well- meaning, they know how to do it. I have loved pretty much everything I have seen about the game so far, but if pick-pocketing is practically useless, I will be pretty disappointed. I've always had it as part of my gameplay in Arcanum, BG 2, the Fallouts, etc. Almost all the games I have not liked, have had weak pick-pocketing mechanics, which contributed to me feeling unsatisfied with the game in general (because it seems like a relatively simple thing to do). I'm not saying, "OMG, I'm going to hate the game!", just that it would significantly damper my enthusiasm for it.

So, I was recently thinking about this, and it is probably much too late for them to change anything significant in terms of the story and written dialogue, but, I am really hoping that this isn't going to be a "gloomy", super "gritty" game. I know that is all the rage now, because of stinking RR Martin, but I enjoy my fantasy books and games to not make me happy that I live in this world, not theirs. Give me some Jordan or Sanderson, please. Both could write some fantasy settings full of conflict, yet still make characters that are interesting, and put moments of light-heartedness and goodness into their works. I sincerely doubt that RR Martin even laughs, in real life- the only thing I recalled from his books was dark humor, which is only partially funny (because it is messed up). I don't mind some warfare, threat of great evil, and stuff like that, but I don't want to play some sort of dystopian fantasy, where everyone is miserable and fearing for their lives, and there is nowhere you can go in the world that is untouched by "evil" or strife. I really like it when there are a variety of environments/areas where I can go, which have different ambiances. Like, certain areas are rife with warfare and or corruption, and the general feel of those areas is less positive, or downright negative, in comparison to other areas. But, I also like to be able to go to places where, by and large, everyone is happy, and prosperous, and has an entirely different attitude. I really hope that PoE has a broad spectrum of environments and locations, so it doesn't feel oppressive and smothering. To make some examples, it is a big part of the reason I can't replay ME, Torment, Kotor 2, the Fallouts, The Witcher, IWD, Skyrim nearly as much as I can Morrowind, BG 1 & 2, and Arcanum. In those games, I just don't really want to be there a whole lot. In the BG games, there was a huge variety of environs and types of locations- I loved some of the stupid banter between the party members. I still remember someone stealing someone's special pet, and the very ridiculous accusations and threats made against that person. I remember the jokes made about someone else's absolute cold-heartedness, that made me think, "Yes, that actually makes me enjoy having this __ in my party, because I get to hear someone say things which make it entertaining, and are even moderately psychologically deep." Same in Arcanum. Morrowind had an immensely different variety of settings, all with their own unique "feels"I know that they have said they want a more nuanced universe for PoE, but, I really hope it isn't going to be one of those games I play once, twice, maybe three times and then call it quits because I just don't want to experience it anymore. I don't necessarily have to be the "chosen one", and recognized savior of the land, but, I really don't want to say at the end of it, "Hmm, did lots of stuff. It was challenging. But, it wasn't pleasant."

I'm sorry, I don't understand what that means. Does that mean that I will only be able to pickpocket someone if I initiate conversation with them?

Well, good to see that I ended up in the same place as lots of other people. I mean, I am purely a cRPG gamer, for computers. I've played pretty much everything that has come out since 2000 which has come from Black Isle, Troika, Obsidian, or Bethesda. Just can't get into IWD 2. I would rather play BG or Arcanum again, and I have played either one of those, I don't even know how many times (both being from now non-existent companies). I've managed the Kotors and Fallouts numerous times as well, though fewer times. If Pillars of Eternity can be BG 3, with the art of IWD 2, and the interesting universe and moral decisions of Torment/Kotor 2, I will be quite happy. I know, the bar isn't set nearly high enough

No, I'm aware of the fact that it is a bit more open- similar to ID 2 and Kotor, in that sense. I mean, you have to select a class, but you then get to focus them how you want, and even learn things which are not strictly speaking related to that class. But, as there will doubtlessly be factions and guilds, and religious orders, I would like the possibility of being affiliated with them, or to actually belong to them- that would make it more "immersive". I like having a protagonist- don't get me wrong. I just don't like that the protagonist instantly becomes the most important character in the party for all things by default. As to the linearity thing, I know they have spoken about it sparingly. I am fully confident we won't be railroaded. I just really hope that it won't be a matter of "unlocking" what should be normal locations. As in, I can join a merchant caravan to go to the other large city. Or I can hire a boat to take me up the river. Or... etc, etc. I really don't like being stuck in a little playground, having to play with the same children and toys, when I know that there are other playgrounds with other children and toys...

I really wish that there was the option to "order" things. As in, "Hello, I need a bastard sword +1, please." "Sure, we will have that in 3-5 days, and it will cost this much __. Would that be acceptable to you?" It has always irritated me when I have needed a specific weapon for a party member, and have lots of gold, but no one is selling it. They could even make it more expensive, as it is a "specialty item" (like, if you are in an area where everyone likes fencing sabers, and you want a battle-axe, so it is more difficult for them to get).

Have there been any updates on the pickpocketing mechanic? I am highly interested in this, and do not recall having read anything about it recently.

Okay, so, I am well aware of the fact that they are pretty far into the development at this point, and probably very little will change. Also, this will not be D&D. And, I've been reading all the updates and generally staying on top of the interviews and all that. I would just like to say that I am finally (was finally?) playing Icewind Dale 2, since I have heard lots of references by various developers about how it was an inspiration. So, that being said, I want to just say what I did and did not like in ID 2 (I will preface this with the fact that I am only in the 2nd chapter, which is why I am writing this, actually). What I like: - Lots of sub-classes available (Priest of Tempus, Lathander, Helm, Mystra, etc). This might not dramatically alter the game play, or even the selected class, but it is nice to be able to think, "Yes, I am a priest of __, therefore, this is why I am doing/not doing this." I don't believe that prestige classes are available, but that would only make it better. I like to be able to hypothetically play a particular class multiple times, and in the end, have a character that plays totally differently and has different and distinct strengths and weaknesses. I believe they said something about this, in reference to paladins and maybe monks, but don't recall for the other classes. I would love if they incorporated sub-classes. - You don't have a protagonist that is the only one that people address. I don't feel that you should have to be the "super special person that will __ from the __." What would be even better, though maybe borderline impossible (though, I don't think so), is if people actually only addressed party members based on relevant information available. For instance, let's say you encounter a mage which is looking for someone to do something for him. Would he talk to your ale swigging barbarian about this (supposing this is your protagonist, or even not assuming that), or would he look for the closest thing to a mage (ie. cipher, chanter, etc)? Obviously, if there was literally no one in your party with no apparent magical ability or knowledge, sure, he might talk to your barbarian, for lack of options. I liked how you could chose to have your ultra-high charisma sorceror go talk to them, because they are extremely charismatic, while maybe you send your tank to go intimidate the band of mercenaries. I have never liked when I have had someone in my party that would be better suited to doing a certain task, but not having the game give me a method to incorporate this into the gameplay. So, maybe idiot man is responsible for talking to the important diplomat, even though I have someone in the party that should be extremely competent at something like that. Maybe it could be something like in Mass Effect. If it is your protagonist doing the talking, just like in most cRPGs, you could select exactly what he/she will say. But, maybe you get the option, "Let NPC __ do the talking for you", in which case, they will say whatever they have been scripted to say, and you don't get to control that, maybe only reply after that (or, maybe not- maybe it becomes a form of Russian Roulette or the lottery, where you either like what they say and it really helps, or, it ends up being a disaster, but there isn't much you can do to fix it (since you made the decision to let them talk or to do the task). This should perhaps be a separate thread... - Lots of feats. I like that you could make a sneaky mage. I know that they will be doing something similar. This makes me happy. What I didn't like: - So LINEAR. I like a good story. I like to feel like there is some sort of sense of gravity to certain things. At times, I like to feel pressured. I do not like being stuck in a specific area that I can not leave until I have completed every mission/quest/objective there. I do not like the fact that I have played the game for hours, and have literally only seen one little town/village. I do not like having to be in constant battle. I know that some of these things won't apply to Pillars of Eternity. I just really don't want to be spending the majority of the game without being able to go to other cities, and feeling compelled to only concentrate on __ until it is done, always. That is why I probably am not going to continue playing ID 2. I don't feel like slogging through even more of the temple where I am, because I went online, and saw that I have 2 levels left, and they are just chock full of tough fights. I don't want to spend another who knows how many hours fighting in essentially the same place, so that at the end I can say I cleared out a massive temple complex of every monster in it. - Scripted events. These really bugged me in Dragon Age, and BG 1. I am highly unappreciative of when you force my entire party into an ambush and/or dialogue, when I had my non-detection rogue/ranger scouting the area so that I could plan how I was going to approach it. I do not like that ONE BIT. Scripted events should only be non-combat related, or perhaps based on internal timelines, like the dreams with Irenicus in BG 2, or perhaps encounters that will naturally happen in certain areas at certain times. But, I don't like magic, "let's see if they can survive THIS" events, which make no logical sense. Offhand, I think that is it. What do you guys think? Similar gripes, or totally different things?

I really like the fireball effects, as well as the web ones- look cool. But yes, understand that the animations aren't even close to done, but they shouldn't be running with their attention focused 2 feet in front of them, it makes them look stupid. Also, they shouldn't looked hunched over. I'm sure that will be fixed, but it would be really unfortunate if it wasn't because, while I'm not one overly concerned about aesthetics, I would be constantly distracted by that in-game. Other than that, I really liked it! I loved the new screenshots, they look amazing (besides the Turdhenge formation... something needs to be done about that. There are legitimate, real rock formations that look really awesome that could be used as inspiration.)

I thought of something after reading this update: If all the other classes of people (paladins, wizards, etc) manipulate only THEIR souls, is there therefore a strong cultural adversion to the Ciphers, since they manipulate the souls of others? It seems to be hinted at, in that many people don't trust the Ciphers. Additionally, given their inception, they were literally "boogey men". Regardless of later political settlement between the 2 cultural groups, it seems unlikely that their general reputation would be likewise repaired. And given that there are groups that interpret the meaning and proper use of souls differently, it seems very likely that there would be large groups of people (organized and otherwise) which would be religiously/philosophically/ethically opposed to people "tapping into"/"manipulating" the souls of others... So perhaps having a Cipher in your party (or being one yourself), will result in hostility from various/many NPCs in game...

Chris: There’s a few: The Wire, Archer, Ultima, Chronotrigger, Deus Ex, Arcanum, Star Wars, Firefly, and Doctor Who, to name a few. I think Star Wars is pretty high on people’s lists here at the studio. Personally, I’d love to do an Eberron D&D game as well, I love that universe. I like 3 of those: Deux Ex, Arcanum, and Star Wars. I couldn't enjoy any of the actual Deus Ex games, as hard as I tried, because of the mechanics. I'm just not a first-person shooter kind of guy. I managed to play ME, but that was in spite of the shooting stuff, not because of it. I feel Obsidian would make an already great setting and concept even better, and hopefully reduce the "fighting" to something that a non-first person shooter could handle. I mean, I loved FO: NV. If it was pretty much set up like that, I wouldn't have a problem. Arcanum. I would buy the $200-$300 tier in the Kickstarter for this. This has been the game I have been hoping for for a very long time, though P:E is also one I was hoping would happen- I do love my BG style games. That being said, while I am sure that P:E will be great, and I will highly enjoy it, I would LOVE a version of Arcanum. I love steampunk. I love steampunk + magic even more. I love steampunk + magic + political/religious subject matter even more. I loved how many different themes you could explore in Arcanum, and how many options you had for building your character. But, I do feel it would be better with a perspective similar to FO: NV, not "top down isometric". Star Wars. I have murdered and buried my dreams of KotOR 3 ever happening, sadly. But, I have high hopes, sometime in the hopefully not to distant future, there will be... Star Wars: Imperial Knights! http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Imperial_Knight I am not a huge Star Wars fanatic, but, besides the Old Republic, this sounds like the absolutely most interesting Star Wars setting I can think of. But, since Lucas Arts owns SW, it will probably never happen.

Ah. Because I would very much like to see what he would end up voting for. Or to hear what he really liked/disliked. That would be epic.

Speaking of which, are we not overdue for another of Avellone's updates? I feel like it has been nearly a month now... And I just pray that it has a text component.

So then, just to confirm, I take it that this HASN'T been answered in any capacity through interviews? I get all the updates, and am pretty much positive they have never talked about time limits in them...

Yes, that is pretty much exactly what I was thinking. Similar to in many RPGs, where some smiths have some really good equipment [ie. the capability to acquire/make really good stuff], while others don't and never will, because they don't have the suppliers or ability. I can remember how long I had to look for a greatsword +2 in BG1, for instance, while I found tons of people making daggers +1, longswords +1, etc. Am I to believe that they can't just make me a greatsword +1?

That makes me very happy.

Well, I don't think you should be able to buy "epic" equipment almost at all- if it is one of a kind, there should only be one place you can find it, and if it is "in a store" (buyable), then it should be exceedingly expensive. The idea should be that you CAN buy some epic equipment, but if you do, it will cost you a "King's ransom", so it would still be more "economical" to find similar things through regular questing or dungeon-crawling. I am talking everything short of that. So, not "Crom Faeyrs" (not sure of spelling), but swords of fire +2, regular equipment, various common gems, shovels, things like that.

I love that idea. It would also remove some of the necesity of actually having a pack animal in your party and having to "worry" about it getting killed. Personally, I still don't understand why that is so complex, when you essentially had that in Fallout with the car, and in many games there are "NPCs" which are effectively nothing more than glorified pack animals. But I would love to have a pack animal "war rhinoceros" (which would obviously be VERY expensive to acquire, and difficult to find- probably a quest in and of itself). Functional AND dangerous. Damn, I really want pack animals. Hopefully someone can mod it into the game...

Another shameless bump. Perhaps new blood can be injected into the thread. I really feel lots of constructive ground was covered here.

Shameless bump. Also, has there been any word on this? I don't recall seeing any confirming or denying...

Out of curiosity, has this question been answered in any way by the devs? Haven't been paying close attention on the forums...

What I would give for a game, where you can actually say, "I want a _" to a shopkeeper, and you could get it. Whether it is common, rare, or original. As in, I want another set of full mail armor, as I bought your last set, but have another member of my group that doesn't want to wear splint mail anymore. Or, could I get another Crossbow +1? Or, "I would like a sword that does fire damage and is at the minimum, +2." And then, the price would be calculated, perhaps you would have to wait for a period, but you could get it. That would be grand. Maps!!! Yes, I would also LOVE these... So, maybe you could find a really famous adventurer, or traveling scholar, and they could mark locations of potentially lucrative ruins on your map for a price. Or, maybe you could go to a cartographer, that would provide you a detailed map showing all sorts of things the normal one doesn't. Maybe having this resource would decrease your travel time and or chances of being ambushed... Or even increase how much rest you could get in the wilderness, as you could use a good map to find good places to camp during your travels... Maybe you could hire local guides that would show you to possible ruins, or teach you shortcuts to get around the region surrounding their village/town/city.

Without reading through the previous 15 pages, I must say I was pleasantly surprised by this update. I really wasn't remotely interested in the stronghold to begin with, because I didn't want to have to play the Sims or Age of Empires. But given how this is stated to play out, now I am sure that my first character WILL be a "paladin", who as soon as he hears about this place, will immediately see it as integral to gaining prestige for his order and for it's strategic purposes, and will begin investing heavily in it. Or maybe I will actually try a sort of mercenary fighter character, which sees it as a way to start carving out his piece of the pie, and building a huge mercenary group that he can base out of it.... Or a wizard that wants to have a place where he can practice all manner of soul magic and not be molested... So many options...

Well, on that note, I also liked how some stores had guards that stayed on duty during the night, some shopkeepers had traps on their chests, and in general, you couldn't just follow one strategy to be successful at that. Also, something I think that no one has mentioned is that you could legitimately use gambling in the game to become rich. That was one of my first characters, actually. You could do it in FO:NV to some extent, but were essentially limited to using your skill in Vegas itself. Additionally, you were limited by how much you could win, so it was not something you could use infinitely.

No, I get it, I just fail to see how that is really SOOO bad. If Troika had also put a -1 penalty on male characters' intelligence, beauty, wisdom, dexterity, whatever, I wouldn't have cared. Even if I had cared, that certainly would not have been a sufficient reason for me not to play the game. Now, if they had made it so that if you created a female character, that you would constantly have to fight to avoid being raped by NPCs, or made it so the majority of the male NPCs wouldn't talk to you because you were a female, and they considered it beneath them, then I could understand some real level of outrage/anger. Fantasy games aren't a promise that you can do whatever you want with character development, though the "better" ones tend to give you more latitude than others. In that regard, Arcanum is much better than most, because you can fine tune your character in a huge variety of ways that you can't in most other CRPGs (races, backgrounds, attributes, skills, training, schools of technology/magic, and blessings). And, I admittedly don't know many female gamers, but of the few that I do know, they don't play RPGs. So, I sincerely doubt that there were that many women which were "turned off" to the game, back when it was released. I also find it difficult to believe that someone would fail to play a game for as petty of a reason as what you stated, though I suppose there are people which fit that category.