JFSOCC

Nvidia geforce 710m 2gb ddr3... should be able to run most everything. and it does, just a lot less efficiently. It had real trouble with framerates with Xcom-Enemy within on higher graphic settings.

As a laptop owner, I always resent seeing the sentence: "laptop versions of these cards may work but are not supported" My graphics card on my laptop is pretty powerful, yet I find myself unable to play many games I should easily be able to play at top graphics, not because I don't have the power, but because the drivers are simply unsupported. I despise large developers like Ubisoft which make it a matter of course not to support laptop video cards, especially when the evidence points to a growing market for laptops (and tablets) and a dying market for the desktop. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laptop#Sales http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2013/03/06/apple-google-microsoft-hewlett-packard-dell-ipad-iphone-android-ios-samsung-galaxy/1946325/ It's absurd, the effort to support laptops is minimal (it's not larger than supporting desktops) and you reach a larger market. I'm tired of being treated like a second rate PC owner, especially when my laptops have always been desktop replacements when it comes to power.

I think any literature professor will vehemently disagree with this.

Sawyer, god of history, balance and games. a direct competitor of Ladamo His titles are "He who explains things to fans", "developer", (a title with an arcane meaning lost to time) and "the assessor" Sawyer was a mortal whose exclusive duty it was to make sure that every game he made was well balanced and enjoyable. He spent his life travelling the world looking for games, any game that was well balanced and enjoyable would be brought back home to be analysed and recorded. After Sawyer Ascended, he continued on his quest, offering those who invent games but have creative issues advice from unexpected perspectives. If you encounter Sawyer, something that only happens if you make games, he will reward you with a gold piece for each well balanced game you've made. (Whether that is chess, checkers, or hide and seek is really irrelevant) These gold pieces are enchanted with various wards and benefits, and no good comes of getting rid of the coins, which is a considered a great insult. Priests of Sawyer are mandated to play many games, find the weaknesses in every game they find, exploit them, and then make a version which is better balanced. Most temples offer advice on history, game theory, a place to play games, and have cats roaming the halls. Because cats are a sacred animal to the Sawyerists. The Attribute of Sawyer is a cat, symbolising serendipity, chaos theory, and curiosity. During the festival of cattus interruptus, people celebrate with traditional sesame seed-based snacks, Honey-sesame-seed candy bars, sesame cakes, hamburgers with sesame seeds on the bun. It is common practice on this day to play your favourite games, and attempt to improve them in some way.

In PoE there's an infinite stash - so you'll be able to put all that junk into it on your first run. No need to go back to scavenge. My only concern with this is that now I'll have unlimited junk to sort through when at campsites/towns and then selling 100 longswords for 1gp each. so a good sort function would be a great feature, especially for barter windows. It'd also be nice to have an option to mark any equipment you like to keep with a "Don't show this in sell window" option, so you don;t accidentally sell something you intended to keep. It's happened to me before, very frustrating. (but can also be solved with instant buyback, one of the few features of DA:O that I liked)

if they don;t change then they are a type, not a character. It makes them one-dimensional. That's bad writing no matter where it is done.

Link? For science, of course....

and an arc. A character has to have a journey during which something is lost and something is gained.

I wonder what beautiful bows exist.

associating identities with uniforms could work if quests were designed that way, I suppose. but they'd be one offs, not a (semi-)permanent alias of which you could have an alternate character, infiltrating other organisations. So for purposes of fooling guards on patrol duty, you could have an officers uniform, if you wear it, they might think you are an officer from another unit and ignore you as you go about your business. with potential for interaction and stat-based bluff checks. Or if you wear the cooks uniform, you can move safely in the kitchen, but not elsewhere in the fort. A prostitute outfit, well, let's not tackle that one. Would be an alternative approach to stealth.

I liked the mass effect response wheel, and it always said something along the lines of what I intended it. I didn't get everyone's whining about it.

Hell.

I like and support the idea of aliases

What is it about my face that attracts street peddlers, beggars and charities to approach me and not someone else in crowds?

I hope that despite the level cap being put at 12(ish) that class progression is already designed beyond that. Otherwise you might get weird progression jumps in the sequel.

I agree with everything nonek said.

-I believe many crpgs have too much text. Good narrative design would allow for a lot of subtext and lore to be delivered visually or audibly. -don't (necessarily) need a story with a villain, beginning middle and end, instead I would load the world to the brim with organisations and let you pick a few to join and lead. -skilltags have ruined dialogue design. -most CRPG's aren't intelligent or mature, but are trope and cliché laden. -the pasty bland look of the IE games was terrible. A little vibrancy goes a long way. -Paladins are dumb zealots, all of them. I judge everyone who picks a paladin or blackguard as their forum avatar. -willpower comes with intelligence, not convictions, rogues would have greater willpower than paladins. -Wizards are lame skeleton key characters for munchkins. -Monks are cool, eastern kung-fu monks are cooler. -no crpg I've ever played was daring enough in its subject matter. -I'm fine with romance porn.

I can't speak specifically as to why Obsidian has no plans to create an end user toolset (my personal opinion is simply that the time investment would probably be better spent on the game, and that user friendly end user tools are not trivial things to do). Unity does have some licensing quirks, however, which I know burned a professor of mine that experimented with it for some game development classes. http://unity3d.com/company/legal/eula "Legal Entities May Not Use Unity Free with Pro Add-ons for the Same Platform" They ran into issue such that students were not allowed to use Unity Free at home, and the Unity Pro provided at school, and as such students had to choose to work on place or another. As such, it's possible that this may compromise things for Obsidian as the tools and game are likely developed to work with Unity Pro, and providing support for Unity Free may run into annoying legalese. Thanks for this explanation. I didn't realise it was this convoluted. Do you think this holds up despite that any mod made would have to be released for free? There's some chicken and egg problems here, however. Both the latest fallout games were immensely more successful than any of the IE games. As such you simply have a larger pool of potential modders to make content (as well as a larger market to consume the mods). I'd be more inclined to believe that FO3 and FONV would have been very successful games without modding tools, as opposed to modding tools being significant contributors to the games being successful. That's a fair argument, but it can't be denied that there is a significant amount of mods for FO3 and FO:NV in a fairly short period of time. I believe that is mostly due to the contribution of good modding tools Unfortunately, while it may seem this way, this is rarely the case. Especially if there is anything third party associated (or stuff that they feel is proprietary and a competitive advantage, like perhaps their conversation editor). Especially if you're hoping for things such as the following: It's providing opportunities for others to learn and grow as artists. A potential source of future employees or indeed competitors. By sharing their tools, they help build a legacy of encouraging new artists. Depending on the discipline, there are a lot of fields that don't have a shortage of applicants. I could also argue that someone that can create mods without end user mod toolsets could possibly come out as an even stronger applicant. Your point gives the impression that without doing this, Obsidian will be compromising the growth of game developers in any significant way. Even though earlier in the thread you concede that without a good game an end user toolset is irrelevant. Yes, I am saying it would compromise the growth of artists. Sure, those who could do the same without released modding tools might be strong and more capable. But there is a significant advantage to getting novices their first leg-up. It's about getting new people curious and interested, and then giving them the tools to grow from. Games as a medium are in their early adolescence and this medium is going to be much larger and significant still. It doesn't matter that there is no shortage of applicants now (to my mind there is a shortage of game studios) Nor does my concession that without a good game the end user toolset being irrelevant have any bearing on this argument. I have an expectation that releasing the tools used to develop PoE won't result in a lower quality game. Actually, I'm curious to see if the disappointment that Shadowrun Returns seems to be for many might be compensated in some way in the (near) future due to their policy of releasing good modding tools. Time will tell.

This. When a game developer "gives you" their tools, they still have them. A tradesman cannot do this, as his tools are not digital. False logic and the same principle applies. You can't ask for something to be given to you, that wasn't promised to you, that wasn't part of the job, and the original agreement excluded those tools and it's what you agreed to originally. Even if the tradesperson created special tools for that specific job with the money you gave to them, they're under no obligation to give them away. They may create copies of those tools, they may lease those copies to another tradesperson, they're not obliged to give a copy of those tools to you because you now want them. You are right, Obsidian isn't obliged to give us anything but the game we backed. That said, I still believe it mighty stupid if they don't release modding tools. Obliged or not, it's the right thing to do. It's more than fanservice, it's community building. It's providing opportunities for others to learn and grow as artists. A potential source of future employees or indeed competitors. By sharing their tools, they help build a legacy of encouraging new artists. It costs them nothing extra to release what they've already made. It increases the potential of their work far beyond what they will deliver in these two years of working on it. It won't cost them one sale, and potentially delivers them a bigger market further down the line. It's all pros and no cons. it's a no-brainer. To me at least, I find it very hard to understand anyone could be opposed.

If I pay a tradesperson, a plumber or electrician to do a job and with the money they receive from me decides to buy some tools, do I get to keep the tools too? Even though all I asked for was something that excluded those tools? If you asked them "Hey I like DIY-ing a little, could you tell me what kind of hammer you use" or, could you tell me where to buy your hammer? do you expect a "NO! THIS IS MY HAMMER!"?

a magocracy is rulership by teachers. Which btw, I am entirely for.

Not Chaos either, Chaos was first.

The same can be said for those who want something that wasn't promised or part of the stretch goals and want the game delayed further when others don't want it. How very selfish that line of thinking to delay a game for something that wasn't promised nor part of the stretch goals and to inconvenience other backers who don't want it, just because some people want mod tools. And paladins were part of a stretch goal. They promised they would be in the game. Obsidian can't cut paladins. It seems odd that you would compare something Obsidian promised us, something that was part of a stretch goal to something that wasn't. Obsidian didn't promise mod tools. And did you miss the part where if Obsidian did release mod tools further down the track, I would be okay with that? Seems you did. They promised us a game, not a game with mod tools. So you use mod tools? Plenty of us wouldn't. And we shouldn't be inconvenienced with a game delayed any further because of it. crafting was a stretch goal too, didn't that get neutered?

Considering I'm a backer, I wouldn't want Obsidian to spend time on making mod tools, spending time on QA, spending time on adding instructions of the mod tools to the manual and anything else that involves in time and money, if it's going to take time away from the games release. Mainly because I don't use mod tools, I don't create mods and very rarely use mods. So it really doesn't affect this backer. So it's not a question of rights for me. And as Gizmo said, It wasn't part of a stretch goal. If Obsidian decides to release mod tools down the track, I'm also fine with that. How very selfish that line of thinking is. I don't care for romances, but I certainly empathise with those who were looking forward to it. I despise paladins, I would never play them, but if they were cut I wouldn't stay silent because it didn't affect me. So you don't use mod tools? Plenty of us who would.

The study didn't follow the self-professed trolls behaviour outside their behaviour on the internet, making it a very flawed study. While this behaviour maybe considered "dark tetrad" it could be anything like an outlet for real life frustration, or selective bad behaviour. To remark on behaviour and attribute it to character on so little evidence is downright bad. I'd would be good if the study had followed the trolls (and everyone else who participated) for a while longer before coming with such bold claims. Calling trolls psychopaths is just too easy, as tempting as that can be.