JFSOCC

I'm perfectly cool with being near the start of a renaissance. And the future, well, who knows what it looks like, we won't play it.

Looks good, I'm not going to nitpick, very nice!

yes, I was referring to "set pieces" though I didn't realise it was one word. Parts which you cannot avoid no matter how different your choices are. You'll always come across these. Sometimes it feels pointless to try something different as, while the story might be different, you'll still come across the same situations. Alpha Protocol is a fantastic example of this. Sure you could go for suave, professional or aggressive, For a game which advertised with "Choice is your weapon" I was quite disappointed that my second play-through found my way to the same scenes as before. And that's fine, to a degree. But you want at least SOME content which is exclusive, based on how you play. that's my point. And yes, that's why I said "Off topic"

or choosing one skill may exclude learning another one. Either way I think this discussion is moot.

Suppose there was a metric that kept track of lying and reputation as a liar. Also suppose you had a quest that was to retrieve an ancient artifact. Suppose you have multiple ways of retrieving this artifact and you do retrieve it. And suppose that during your course of finding the artifact you lie (via dialogue options; something you have done a lot in the past) to a very powerful person in order to get it, . Again, suppose you bring this artifact to the person who desires it. Now suppose they say "yeah, whatever, don't waste my time" because they are convinced that what you have brought them is counterfeit. In fact, because you are *such a dirty liar* they won't even consider having it appraised. You are forced to bring it to the black market where liars are run of the mill. There are nuances that would have to be worked out in this example, but I think it is pointed. it's a very good argument it's just not in response to anything I said.

wrong forum

quest for glory had cat and dog people. Still, so far Chris's involvement has given me the biggest confidence this game is coming together.

I wouldn't make the "legit" option invasive at all. That's just a sure way to create animosity. Just a "Support the artists! Buy a legit key" in the start menu, which is greyed out if you have a legit key. You're never going to force any pirate to do what he or she doesn't want to do, so instead try to make them want to do it. It might not get you every pirate, but you'll get some, which is more than you had.

Slightly of topic, but if I get different quests which still involve the same set pieces all the time, it won't feel very different to me. Reactivity means having some wildly different experiences based on your choices, not seeing the same level from a different perspective. That's cool part of the time, but not constantly.

Offering a legit option for pirates is an effective way to convert some of the pirates to your "honest" userbase. I think it's an excellent idea which has been known to work. Now about turning your windows Genuine? If it's going to cost as much as that does, I doubt it would work. So it's essential that the pricing of the game stays decent. (which, I think it is)

what the decision will be could ultimately be something you decide. obviously Edit: 1000th post! I feel I should go out and buy you all drinks

I like it, it also makes it easier for packrats to not hold on to stuff they're never going to use anyway.

The Dutch have Boswachter (Forest watch) which is essentially a park ranger. They carry hunting equipment are are the ones who determine if a population is running out of control or needs support. And we have "Jagers" which mean hunters. These are people who like to hunt, and can do so when a Boswachter gives the OK.

Haha, sorry about that. I got caught up in Lephys' post and added to it rather than yours because I don't see them as mutually exclusive. It just depends on where this 'council decision' is in the storyline. I think that when quests MUST be finished, like you pointed out (I think) then there should be genuine options with lasting repercussions. The idea of fleshed out factions is a fantastic idea. But in the case where the council decision could be bypassed, well, see above. Does that make it seem a little less like your idea was hijacked and adulterated? That was not my intention. PS JFSOCC: I'm interested in your factions thread. Is there some recommended reading about what has already been determined for PE before contributing a faction idea? Recommended reading? well, if you want to think outside of the box, perhaps it's best if you don't. But, if you don't already, try to read the developer updates. Not only do they tell you about the world but they might serve as inspiration. It did for me when writing the customs cartel for instance, as I heard they were going to run multiple currencies. Many of the factions (and some of the gods) I've written are affected by this new-world/old world split, which was also mentioned. Apparently the game takes place in the equivalent of the "new world". For as far as I know the thread is not even read by the devs. Nevertheless I enjoy the exercise, and I hope maybe sometime it inspires a dev should he come across it. I Also greatly enjoy seeing others post there, their ideas are so different from mine, and that's very refreshing. Nah man don't change. It's cool you can build on the idea. Just don't ignore the point I was trying to make: There are several roads to Rome, pick the ones you like best.

Challenge Ratings.

in his zombie slave army

Right run away with my example, add your own ideas and make it complete opposite my point. You spend more time arguing than listening. I'm sorry I couldn't be clearer.

I have seen enough plate for a lifetime

I look at it as "all ways lead to Rome" The Game might require you to become a powerful figure, someone of significant influence. If there are some 30 factions and you need to become a major player/leader in 3 of those, and you can have membership in say 5, (all arbitrary chosen numbers) then you can choose how you get there. That part will be the role playing. whether you're going to buy a vote from a councilman as a powerful merchant, crook, or business partner; coerce that council member as a powerful crime lord, spymaster, whoremonger, investigative reporter/policeman; become a council member yourself as leader of a crafting guild, as someone raised into nobility with title, or by popular support; provide a service to society which makes councilmen listen to you as someone renown for his/her wisdom, like becoming a religious leader, head of the city watch, leader of a militia, spokesman of the farmers. Or you could remove the council's decision making ability by taking over as tyrant, wise ruler, by killing them all(or most) And whether you lobby, coerce, buy, infiltrate, instigate, set example, convince or conquer, the way you eventually get to the end goal of "Move world policy to do what I need done/believe needs to be done" is entirely up to you. The bottleneck is the council decision which you need to influence. the freedom is in which factions you choose to ally yourself with to get to that point. And those factions would each have unique quest-lines. And because you have access to 30 factions, it's OK to fail them. when has that ever been the case? here, you can try your luck elsewhere. How about that, quests you can fail without needing to reload.

This new screenshot is so much more my kind of jive. I'm feeling it. I'm glad my concerns were addressed.

Maybe the reason for that is that there usually isn't very much interesting to do other than a few exactly opposing choices, making the experience largely the same on any playthrough.

Not necessarily If you have factions for which you can work, like I believe we'll have, then you can limit a player to working for just a section of these factions on any playthrough. If you base joining these factions on choice, rather than prerequisites, you'll have a significantly different experience each time you play, provided you choose different factions in different playthroughs.

The early medieval period was like the Cambrian explosion. The fall of Rome and the interesting period we known very little about known as the Migration Period basically left fertile soil for new ideas and social constructs. I see it as a new evolution of society. Historians don't like the term Dark Ages any more. Because it implies that it was somehow less advanced than the late ancient period, which it wasn't.

Neither do you, and all your reasons for your faith can very well be just that. Eh, why not be skeptical, they are trying to sell you a product, after all. Not true, I'm witholding judgement as well, I'm not taking anything on faith. I just think the negative rhetoric in this thread is baseless.

maybe you should withhold judgement till release, since you have no idea whether it was lip service or not.