Hormalakh

You know what, this game is supposed to have field of vision right? Could you imagine how awesome it be if they could effectively utilize Fog of War to make a truly terrifying experience? Imagine you're in a dungeon and the torches only give you a limited field of vision (less than you'd find in the sun. Then you have things that show up in the shadows and you can barely make them out. Is that a chest or a pack of vampires? Perhaps you can only see the reflection from their eyes. Have any of you played the old XCOM? Try doing a mission at night. That WAS SCARY! This was an isometric game that did justice to light. Look I want a good reason for not going out at night. Lack of vision is a good reason. In BG it didn't much matter if you went out at night or not: you could still see everything. In XCOM, I would be terrified of going out at night, because I never could be sure what would jump out at me at night. Throw in a few ranged enemies with amazing (or at least better than your party's) low-light vision and you've got yourself a horrific experience. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=czVlgeOAJWg Compare to day. This was a great idea Osvir, can't believe nobody else talked about it. Obsidian READ THIS THREAD.

yeah i mean Casey Hudson was right. It wasn't A B or C. It was A A or A. I don't think that it's bad that A was the only ending. But it wasn't executed at all effectively.

Not too much VA. It's too expensive. Will have some though.

i didn't say i LOVED the ending. Merely that I thought it was fine and liked what they might have been trying to do with it. If they were trying to do with it what I think they were, I thought that it was well-done. To me, it seemed that there are things in life that are inevitable and Bioware was trying to show that through the ending. Sooner or later Shepard's gonna die. What happens next is probably more important than him. Yes, I agree that they were sloppy by reusing exactly the same cinematics for all three endings, but ultimately, perhaps the point was that somethings are worth the sacrifice. I like games that make you feel an emotion, no matter how crappy that emotion can be (in ME3's case, the emotion is loss) as it makes for a better interactive medium. And I think that ME3 was trying to do this because they had intended other parts of the game to be thought-provoking as well. But yeah, I didn't LOVE the ending. I just appreciated it for what it was. Now PE on the other-hand, I know they're going to do a btter job than Bioware. Right?

You know who else is good? I love me some Franz Kafka.

I'm thinking this is coming about because of the whole BG1 Imoen thing, but I could be wrong. My thinking is that the whole purpose is that if you want to pick up a character because you like their personality, you don't want to drop them because you already have enough of that class in your party. One way of dealing with this "holy trinity" issue (i.e. every party needs variable skills to survive) is to make classes less rigid in skill specialization. Another way is to allow companions to differ in class assignment, so that if you really like Forton as a character (scoff) and you are already a monk, you can choose for him to be a thief instead, so you still have him and he still plays a worthwhile role in your party.

This might actually work. It might be difficult to write for though. But, in general, I don't see why any certain personality predisposes to any certain class. Unless their experiences as that class have played a part in forming their personality. As an example, I still don't really know what class Minsc was from BG2. All I know is, he could rage and was a pretty good fighter. He could've been a barbarian, a ranger, or a fighter or even a really dumb paladin (which I guess makes him Lawful Good).

Is it like a Fight Club? First rule of JFSOCC's club is that there is no JFSOCC's club.

Finally read this thread. It was tough. But I did it. I hope you're happy OP. As for anything that I'd like to add. I think a souls perspective would be needed to your stats. Everything else seems pretty D&D standard. Also "Brevity is the soul of wit."

I'm not really sure what any of this has to do with what I said, but I'll take a stab. If they pay taxes and are upright, moral citizens, why do they fail to pay people for their hardwork when it comes to media? The girl (a lame attempt at empathy on your part) next door probably watches them on Hulu with ads. Hulu pays royalties to the companies who made Lost and thus are allowed to publish that. But still, this has nothing to do with games or Obsidian, specifically. So let me get this straight. They can afford the $ to buy a PC rig that allows them to play games. But they don't have the $20 to support the kickstarter? They still have time. If they can't afford the game, they should talk to the developers (email). Maybe they'll get a discounted price. This whole money argument doesn't hold much water. Entertainment is entertainment. In third-world countries, there is no concept of IP and rights for the creator of IP as entertainment because ultimately their governments have not allowed their people to reach a certain wealth to be able to create such entertainment. When these countries and their citizens start becoming producers of cultural entertainment for business, you'll start noticing that these same people will ask to be paid for their work. Source: I have seen this exact thing happen in countries. See Iran and its current IP issues with its citizenry.

Stop trolling... Falout did have a bad ending, though. Bad for the Vault Dweller. Besides the endings for PE are going to be more Fallout, FONV, Arcanum like, I believe. I, on the other hand liked, ME3's original ending, whichever one you picked.

Yeah I do think that the scroll button shouldn't be a "required" button. A lot of really old mice don't have it and it's tough to do with trackpads, etc. But for those who do have it, it'd be nice.

They call me Heisenmalakh.

I'd probably be a svef-trafficker.

Lewis Carol. No just kidding. Mark Twain. Confederate in King Arthur's Court.

I dunno about being able to identify everything with a "id spell." It's just so...."grindy". There really is no fun-factor behind that kind of thing. Just make everything ID'd if that's what we want. It's just easier and we can spend our time on other, more fun aspects. Like deciding between the Longsword+1+poison or the Longsword+3.

Anti-piracy advocates do all sorts of things that I don't agree with. But Obsidian is a mid-sized company. This is why I wanted to stick with PE. I don't really much care about how other companies do it: I care about the here and now. Unless Obsidian has screwed you over in some way, I don't see how this is relevant. Also, I generally find the excuse that "two wrongs do make a right" doesn't hold much water. Either you stop supporting a company/corporation altogether (by not even getting near or talking about their products) or just stop trying to take the higher road. For many, taking the higher road is tough, especially (when it comes to video game corporations) their games are too good to make a stand. This is the reason why I don't debate numbers of anything like that. Look any example that I give is debatable until the end of time. Either you accept that any amount of piracy hurts (to any extent - even a single firing or a cent worth of lower wages) or not. No example that I or anyone else gives you will change your mind. Saying that piracy is the only factor in the ending of a company is fairly simple-minded. There are many factors involved, such as management, the economy, etc. But the fact of the matter remains, many company spokespersons have come out and said that piracy affects their business. Both legitimate companies that are well-liked and companies who probably wanted to blame anything but themselves. And when it comes to businesses and the economy, the perception of an idea matters. If game development companies think that piracy hurts their businesses (and many do), that affects us the gamers. That's all that's required to show that piracy does hurt. It's the last line of your quote that hurts me the most though. Pirates are not Robin Hoods, that's a lie. They are only redistributing the so-called "wealth" to themselves. I don't think DRM is the right answer in every case. Unfortunately it seems that DRM is a horse beaten to death (many times over) by everyone. I do think that DRM works in some cases, but I don't think that it will in P:E's case. Not even for the later buyers of the games. I still do think it is a discussion worth having and there is obviously a lot of misinformed hate whenever DRM is mentioned. Hopefully, this new funding mechanism (kickstarter et al) will completely change the way game making as a business is thought of. As I said in my post, this too is piracy. You own the rights to it, for yourself or argumentally someone in your property (not including gifts). By loaning it to someone you break copyright laws. (as I said in my post country of residence dependant) Look both you and I know this isn't the type of piracy we're talking about. There might be "piracy" as a legal definition which will obviously be different from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Then there is the common idea of piracy that I'm talking about when discussing this. It has to do with a person using a software that he/she has never paid (how much and all that should be up to the seller) for. Ever. Now this isn't a legal definition, but it's one of those "I know it when I see it" type of things. Everyone knows "piracy" when they see it. I mostly agree with what you say. However in regards to point 1, I think Obsidian has to decide that, not us. In regards to point 2, I would have to say that that was my whole intent from the beginning. However it seems that people have taken my OP as a little too "heavy handed." Advertisements. "Free hot naked chicks! Just click on this ad!"

Wanted to necro this thread, because I wanted to know what people's thoughts were on the topic. I actually want to know if the devs have actually made a decision on this, but while we wait for that, if any new ideas have come up I'd like to hear them. I personally like the whole idea of having an ability to "quickly" (not by having to spend money or anything, just a quick party-lore check) identify lower-level items (regular +1's), but the only way you could identify higher-tier items would be to use the item over a period (short or long, depending on item, perhaps?). This allows all items to come into play instead of making any item that is automatically lower than your avenger+5, merchant trash. The risk/reward structure is a little better. You risk wielding a weaker weapon/cursed item for a while until you have enough experience to "know" what it does. Your reward is that you can sell it at a higher merchant price. Or if you don't like risking the time period, you can't sell the item at such a high price. Cursed items might be sold at a higher price too to "cursed-item merchants" who love to cheat adventurers (like you). Perhaps there are other ways of identifying an item too. For example, unidentified epic items always come with a basic description of that item and players who read the tomes in the story (adding to specific lore) will more quickly identify a specific item. If read somewhere that there exists a red sword with a purple gem that is the flaming sword +3 and you find a red sword with a purple gem, you more quickly realize this is (or isn't) the famed flaming sword +3. Or you could "metagame" that. By that I mean, the PC doesn't really identify items with in-game lore any faster than other items. However, you the player, who have read that book about the flaming sword, and who find a weapon fitting that description will think you "know." Therefore you let your PC use that item. Over time you find out if your meta-lore was right or not. Perhaps as you increase in levels, even lower tier weapons become easier to identify (shorter or even immediate identification). Like now you can know generic +2 weapons. This would mean that identify scrolls don't exist (for things above generic +1) and lore-masters wouldn't really know either. They could perhaps give you clues (i.e. I once heard that the flaming sword+5 is a red sword with purple gems, but there are quite a few cursed and non-cursed items with a similar description. I can't rightly know until I use the sword for some time.) So, Obsidian. Any news on this behalf? Have you made a decision about this?

Just once I'd like to see that the mose powerful god is the least worshipped. He is known for his mercy and patience. He doesn't smite the unbelievers immediately but gives them a lifetime and plenty of chances to be worshipped. his "followers" (who don't really worship him anyway) are just sometimes so crazy - killing people and just causing mayhem- that people don't really know much about this god. edit: oh wait i think arcanum did this. that was cool. except for the followers. something happened to them... i saw someone write "an atheist god". that made me think of a god who doesn't believe that s/he's a god. that'd be interesting. or a god - heh perhaps an omniscient one - that has forgotten that he is a god.

With bated breath, I await your next refreshing and undoubtedly illuminating response to my post. It's important to note that many of the options that they talk about in the post you linked refer to options/variability within the game. The ability to customize your character and choose different paths through the game are what they are talking about. Optional/variable content is typically considered interesting, but depending on the scope of "optional" the concerns people list in this thread are valid. Even with content, excessive optional content can make the game more breadth based instead of depth based. This isn't necessarily bad (Bethesda's games do this), but it will disappoint those that would like a stronger main story of the game. In this sense, with finite resources options are often mutually exclusive. You cannot give the option of the longest, deepest story possible while also providing the option of not requiring the player to play the crit path and instead playing optional side content. One comes at the expense of the other. I haven't really been following this thread but in regards to my post, I was referring to the point that options would not be limited only to character customizations and game narration/story but would also include mechanics. I thought that the previous poster was speakign about gameplay mechanics and the lack of options that would be provided. The post states that gameplay mechanics can also be changed (other than difficulty and iromman mode). Being able to modify gameplay mechanics options doesn't always have to take away from the story. Yes, cost and time influences aside, if adding a quick and painless change to a game mechanic isn't too tough, I figured they would do it. But hey you're the game dev, you know better than I how "easy" these things are.

Pirates haven't made a better product. That's bull**** and I'm going to call you out on it. Pirates duplicate a game and release that duplicate for free because they haven't invested in time and money to make the game in the first place. Competition would be for a developer to make a similar game to PE and sell it at a cheaper price point. If you want to argue that pirates give better service, then you should also realize that their competition would be places like gog.com or a brick and mortar. Those companies still pay the developers/publisher for the product that they are selling.

Bro, what? What did I type? Why was I typing at 5AM. I think what I was trying to say was that Ironman is likely to not work the way it's intended to and thus it's a waste of time. I've also been trying to be a little more honest with myself since that first post. I've always said that I can continue to "self-restrict" but that's never really happened. But haha wow. good catch. Edit: Now that I have re-read the first post I don't think continues woulfd be a bad idea as long as it's easy to implement. I just worry about too much time being spent on these extra-features and not on the game.

What I was trying to say was that we shouldn't actively be helping pirates. I will admit that was a little overblown. But no, I don't want to encourage inflammatory comments or active hate. I do like to encourage discussion and debate about this topic as it relates to P:E.

I feel like this has been done so many times. Zelda (deku tree), Avatar (tree of life), Mana (mana tree), Warcraft 3 (ancestral spirits).

Even Shakespeare made his plays fit for both nobility and the common rabble. He was the teacher when it came to drama: always bring your audience back down after a highly dramatic scene.