JFSOCC

Netherlands, checking in.

Well part of the save scumming thread discussion went into this, so I'll give my more general attitude: I believe that while a game shouldn't be forceful in what experience you have, it is allowed to encourage behaviour, under the condition that it is a game-design choice that improves gameplay. lots of caveats. but it bears repeating also, that this is phenomenally hard to do in a subtle and non-coercive way.

truth that's what I am saying Quite the contrary, I'm a big fan of Ethics, and if you think Nietzsche was about absolute values then you fail to understand him. many people do, unfortunately. (the Nazis first and foremost) I don't think the ends justify the means, but consequentialist reasoning will go further than a mere "the greater good"(oh how I hate that sentence. it reminds me of that scene in hot fuzz...Consequentialism is the idea that the world that results is better off than before. I don;t believe that harming children and raping them will bring a better world.

Absolutely. Ideally, failure should not mean less story but a different story. why is that quote attributed to me?

only because of people who shrug their shoulders and go "that's the way of the world"

I would say you skipped school the day when they taught you the difference between fact and opinion.

Where does the information come from? I didn't think there would be just 8 companions to choose from...

My comments in red.And yes, I see your point. in this sense I agree with you. but I don't need pointed out to me that they are bad. I can use my own ethics to decide what I find good or bad. My fear is an infantile version of good vs evil. (well not really, I doubt Obsidian would do that) There is no universal classification of what is good and evil, that's the point.

I trust enough in Obsidian that I'm not afraid that will happen. However if you disagree with something, arguing why you disagree is much better than saying "OmG NO this is DUMB" I know we all fall to that temptation sometimes, but it should be avoided.

@norolim I think the issue is that not all cirticism is constructive, and sometimes ideas are shot down when they are just that, ideas. More than just discussion, I also think we can be as a source of inspiration. The Devs might not copy our ideas directly, but it might spark something in their minds that they can work with. also, no opinion is wrong, but often, they are poorly expressed. Not everyone knows exactly what they want to communicate or how to communicate it. If you start negative feedback because someone puts something down you disagree with, I think you're missing the point. Someone might say he wants xp for kills (or not) to use a recent discussion. personally I think what that person might really want to convey is a fear that combat becomes irrelevant to progression. In this sense, I think discussion should include alternatives or constructive critisism, possibly compromise. Saying "Your idea is wrong and you suck" doesn't help anyone. because majority held positions don't have to be right (or wrong), I feel it is more useful to discuss ideas posited, than tallying those who are for or against an idea.

Unique abilities, weapons, single use items that have unusual and interesting function. Something more than the simple Damage, heal, buff, debuff. but rather functional features which can be used creatively and tactically.

Creative use of potions so they are more tactical in use? A potion that marks the spot you drink it, and another that teleports you back? Invisibility potions. Potions that can make you forget. (thrown as weapon can reset an encounter if npc's fail a will save, since they forgot you were fighting them, or convince someone to drink it. drinking it yourself allows you to reset some level up?) potions that let you see through obstacles (great for checking out traps, or the next room) A potion that allows you to see hidden messages in certain books or your surroundings (maybe a lot of work to fill the game with uses for that one) or see cloaked characters (imagine that there's a questline from people that you just happened to see because you were using this potion in a city. would be a cool hidden thing you could come across) I suppose quite a few of these have to do with getting you information you wouldn't otherwise have, so sort of scrying. A potion which allows you to pass through some solid object (also difficult to implement without breaking the game, or making it extremely situational) Etherealness is used in DnD, and only specific weapons can then hurt you, so I suppose it would be useful in combat as well. just spitballing some ideas here.

As far as I'm concerned, if you can't fail, there is no challenge. So quest failure (particularly of sidequests) should be possible. many people will reload anyway.

"they do it because they enjoy it." is a motivation other than "because it is bad haha" Serial rapists, might be sick rather than deliberately harming others, or they may enjoy the feeling of power over others (which most of us will view as evil) but a rhetorician who can sway masses might also do so for enjoying power over others. Joseph Kony wanted to create his own state, and thought creating a child-army would be the way to do it. Did the pope who called for the children's crusade to the holy land think himself evil? There was a great deal of orphans and poor that got to attempt something for the benefit of all Christianity there. even with them sold to slavers (as historians believe is the most likely end to that particular episode) might have been an income for the church, and a way to get rid of unwanted people. You and I might find that evil, because we judge based on our morals and ethics: I believe that if an action harms others strictly for my benefit, that is evil. But that is just not the only way to look at things. The pope got his money, the slavers theirs too, distant lands got a larger labourer force (and those exotic white slaves) and Medieval Europe got rid of people it could not support. I can see how some wouldn't even consider it evil. As long as these views are subjective you cannot accept the absolute. Maybe it's because I am a fan of Nietzsche (most misunderstood philosopher of all time) But I am no fan of absolutism. it's 1-track thinking. Me, I prefer consequentialist thinking over categorical thinking.

agreed, the render was pretty nice. but that's just the one image.

yet another poll that presents a false choice or a loaded question (or even answer) but I'll bite. I would enjoy the feel of a Baldurs Gate game, that said I prefer it if Project Eternity doesn't use the other games as a crutch and finds it's own style. As for my favourite game, I don't think I have a single favourite. Yes, Baldurs Gate II, but as much as I love RPG's I also play other games. Personally I really enjoyed Beyond Good and Evil, Riven and the other Myst games (save for Revelation), Bastion and Team Fortress 2, as well as the Thief Games. Knights of the Old republic II holds a special place in my heart. (liked it better than the first) I've been addicted to the first guild wars, not because it was a particularly good MMO, but because I enjoyed playing it with a group of friends. I've also spent a lot of time playing Warcraft II and III, and the first Commandos games. I just play a lot of computer games. I do terribly miss the good old RPGs though.

it would be cool if the lower levels of the dungeon appear to be in a different world. (seeing an alien landscape far below)

Quality Assurance is absolutely essential. It makes the difference between "could have been" and "is"

I think your problem is not so much that you know the statistics of a weapon, as it is that you can directly compare it to any other item and determine whether it is better or not (and indeed who should use it) I think that can be solved by giving unique weapons unique features that have strange effects other than slightly better stats, and thus play uniquely. this makes those weapons more interesting and tactical to use as well. For instance a sword that teleports the target 5 spaces away on hit (x% chance)(keep sending that Melee fighter out of combat) Or a ranged weapon that actually pulls an enemy in (chain!) (why position yourself when you can position your enemies?) A weak weapon that gets better with every kill (temporary) (better for large mobs) stuff like that. If each special weapon has unique gameplay, they'll feel much cooler, despite you knowing their stats. would that work?

Like many others, the announcement of Project Eternity made me go back down nostalgia avenue, and I decided maybe I should play some of the games that I hadn't played yet. There was immediately something that stood out to me. Some of these games are very dark. And I mean that in a strictly aesthetic way. Now maybe it's just me, I suffer from seasonal depression and I don't like darkness so much because of it. (despite my love for the thief games and the first few splinter cell games) So I was wondering if I was the only one who desired that while bleak and dark places certainly should make up part of the game, at least a significant part is brighter and colourful. (I'm not suggesting it should all be sparkly and wonderful, or that it shouldn't fit the art style of the game) After a few hours in a dungeon, I get sick and tired off it (one of the reasons why long dungeons fail to attract me. it is such a commitment to stay in there so long) Especially games with a birds-eye view of the world, where you can't see the sky can quickly feel constraining to me. Anyone else have this?

There is no good or evil because they are man-made concepts. There are motivations, no-one will do what they consider to be evil, for evils sake alone. (not in real life anyway) When people do things we consider to be bad, or evil, it's often for motivations that while we disagree with those, we can understand.

R.A. Salvatore is literally the worst ****ing author in the history of fantasy. Cliché ridden plot driven drivel. NO ****ing NO.No Salvatore, No Grubb, NO Donaldson, No Feist, No Goodkind and No Martin. Good fantasy artists include Brent Weeks, Patrick Rothfuss, Trudi Cannavan, Robin Hobb. I've read from all of these including those I don't like, and I think I can tell the difference between good and bad quality fantasy, you honestly can't bring up Salvatore as a postive.

Let's say an ancient Egyptian man made it to India, where he comes across the Indian burial ritual of building a pyre and burning a recently deceased. He is horrified. they just denied someone access to the afterlife! how dare they! Let's say an ancient Indian made it to Egypt, wherehe comes across the Egyptian burial ritual of mummification for the recently deceased. He is horrified. They are denying someone access to the cycle of rebirth! how dare they! This has been my argument against alignments. Good and evil are highly subjective. even things that we consider basic, like holding life sacred, has opposite viewpoints within our own world. Death worship like in feudal Japan. Where a good death was the best you could wish for. the Dharmic religions which believe that ending the cycle of rebirth and achieving oblivion is the ultimate goal. If we cannot agree about the most fundamental things, then you can't say one is good and the other evil. However, I'm sure that gleeful misanthropy is very cathartic, and I'm all for it being possible in the game. I just hope (and feel confident) that it is done more nuanced dialogue, and not good or evil dialogue.

you could blow up megaton and still talk to the npc's there, as ghosts.

and yet, that didn't come across during the entire game. I was off doing something else and the darkspawn were nothing but an annoying inconvenience as a random encounter during map travel. I had all these anti-darkspawn runes at the end of the game, that I hadn't used because I didn't even come across them that often. they completely failed as antagonist. I didn't care. we weren't removing them, we were stemming the flow, at best (in what I assume was a half-hearted attempt at grimdark) so the whole heroic notion fell flat as well.