Pipyui

I'm in the right-click move, left-click select camp too. You can right-click hold for formation rotation. Making the argument that we shouldn't use this scheme just because everyone else is is just about as pertinent as the argument that the control scheme shouldn't change because the old IE games were left-click move. I have not played the beta myself, and spend less time lurking the forums of late, but Rumsteak already addressed some issues (s)he had with the current control scheme, such as misclicking an ability in the UI to send his wizard wandering off into nowhere. I imagine it would be equaly as frustrating to try to move your character only to select another instead, and vice versa. This sounds like a problem to me, and one that can easily be remedied with a simple button swap. If this really is as it sounds, then nostaligia has nothing on ostensibly impractical controls in my opinion. In my experience (looking at you, Xbox360 Mass Effect 2 'A' button), having a single control do multiple things within overlapping contexts is a bad idea, and should be avoided when more practical alternatives present themselves.

I just checked their site, and Unity claims to be able to publish games in 64-bit Linux, so I don't see any reason why PoE won't be (and considering the map file sizes, it sounds like PoE would benefit well from 64-bit memory addressing). I have to admit though, I'm curious: what's wrong with keeping around the 32-bit libraries? It's not like modern hard drives are lacking in space, unless you've a small ssd.

I still want a little hawk that does nothing except flit between trees as it follows you, or accross rooftops, maybe on occasion darts off screen and returns with a fresh mouse!

Ah, my bad. I hadn't gotten down to the third video at that time. You're right about the sorting - I think the brain-bender there is that the brush has to simulate 3D sorting while it itself is a 2D image, and the depth comes out warped as consequent. Seeing it reminds me of those impossible images that hopefully explain my point better than I can: I wouldn't know a solution to that problem though.

I'm too very disappointed to see that foliage animation was taken from the game. Granted, in that original mockup video, the trees and brush looked pretty awkward, but the tall grass looked just fine. And if you mean the physical interaction with characters when you say grass "sorting," I don't think we even need that at all - just give it regular occlusion. The falling-leaves effect is nice too I suppose, but it'll be awkward to see stormwinds simulated in fog and such (as we've seen in the gameplay video, and as evidenced by that soul-sucking storm thingy) if the foliage just sits still as stone (extra bonus disappointment if the falling-leaves effect stays so leisurely too). Speaking of occulsion with brush, how's it look currently in the beta when walking through? I'm kinda curious if it's layered, or purely binary, or if brush can't be traversed directly through at all. It's an interesting problem having to simulate interaction between 2D and 3D game elements.

Hell, I'd be pleased with just an ordinary logo-ed d20. It would at least feel a bit more ... personable? Appropriate to the title? The memopad sounds like the freebie companies give away to bolster advertising at events at best, at worst like the consolation prize I'd get after a sour buisness interview. Off the top of my head: a logo-ed d20, a plush logo-ed d20, a plastic (PE-unique) (painted???) monster figurine (extra cool if each box had one random from a small set). That's all I've got from the top of my head, granted, but we can do better than office supplies! You should get locked in a pillory of eternity for that... I agree, that pun wasn't really up to fluff. I wrote this whole post just to make that pun.

Cat head mode.

I had left this page open on my computer, and when I returned to find my little sister sitting at it (not unprecedented), she says: "Are you guys really trying to fool yourselves with three forum pages about boobs, and how absolutely not infatuated you are with them?" Gave me a good chuckle, and I promised I'd share her sentiments. Please don't throw anything particularly heavy.

When we're criticising verisimilitude because of breast proportions under heavier material weights, I think we're taking criticism a little too extreme. Of all the little inconsistent bends in physics, we're really choosing to crusade against this one in particular? As for the exageration bit, I'd prefer to be able to distinguish my characters. We could exagerate hips instead, but to make that notable at distance they would need to be really exagerated. At what point is that any less objectivizing than showing boob contours?

I'll have you know I'm keeping this.

The beach and dungeon scenes both look fantastic. I have to wonder who builds a shack right on the very edge of the water (and how that shack remains perfectly dry. Maybe it hasn't been painted yet? I'd like to see some water stains), but stunning work nonetheless. My itch to go exploring these environs contrasts sharply with the reality that I'm sitting alone in an apartment in the city. You Obsidian guys keep doing your good work, and I'll keep reflecting on how illusory my escapism is. Gods, but I'm a downer. Can't wait to see these scenes in motion!

Why does the goal necessarily have to mean we've been cheated or otherwise directly lied to? I don't know, the way I see it, it's like we hired some dude to build us a fence. "I can build a fence with 5 dollars, but every dollar more means I can make the fence just a little better." So you give the man 5+ dollars. "At 10 dollars, we can paint your fence too!" So you give him 10+ dollars. "And at 15 dollars, we'll install a weapons array to deter children and invasive lawn gnomes!" He has 15+ dollars. "Finally, at 20 dollars, we can build you a better fence!" Hasn't it already been determined that all extra money went into making the fence better? It's not like the '+' in X+ went towards whiskey and hookers after all. Every dollar above a stretch goal was intended to build a better fence - the stretchgoal was redundant. Back to Pillars, I will concede that perhaps Obsidian had budgeted some particular (and that's the key word here) polish items in the $500,000 goal difference, but if so, I feel they would have mentioned in the goal. Saying "polish the game and make it better" sounds exactly like "every dollar more means we can make a better fence game," which had already been established from the getgo. My long-winded point is, that stretchgoal or not that money was supposed to go towards polishing the game. My sentiments are that Obsidian knew (or at least thought they knew ) how much they could chew, and elected to bite off just that. They couldn't confidently add significant promises past the $3.5 mil goal and maintain a deadline. But they couldn't just say "stretchgoals over" either, of course. And thus we got goal $4.0 mil. I'm not bitter about it - it was a good business decision - but they didn't - couldn't - promise more content, so they just reaffirmed what we already knew: more money = better game.

What? What? ... ... ... Happy belated 420 to you too, mates!

I laughed aloud to that, then clicked the link to discover you were serious. Good fun.

I think it'd also be neat if a merchant who holds you in good standing could commission you to collect some particular goods (s)he's like to sell - like some wine (if they're unscrupulous about source), or iron weapons (to smelt into raw material), or leathers, chemical reagents, souls (for ... certain patrons). I also like to see a customer barter with a merchant every once in a while. It's unnerving that they exist seemingly only to sate you. I always found rpg merchants a little disconcerting - their apparent self-interest contrasted with the total generosity to throw infinite volumes of money at you. Little automatons, they don't move except maybe to track you with their heads and those empty eyes. Sometimes I dream that behind those glass orbs screams the voice of a man watching his business crumble, too meek and servile to complain. Just pulled smiles and friendly nods or bits of banter. But maybe that's only what I like to believe. Maybe it's harder to accept that behind those windows to the soul their simply isn't anything there - just a hardened mirror shaped to reflect the world around it, with no identity of its own. (where's the drinking-alone-in-depression emoticon when you need it? ( ))

^ That doesn't necessarily have to be the case here though. We know that PoE has A, B, & C priority features and elements; and I imagine a manager usually lays down more Cs than may be reasonably met. It's possible those slacker funds are still going into polishing up the game, adding more quests, etc - and I'd like to imagine they are.

I don't know about things like thunder-stun, that sounds too ... simulationist isn't the right word. Particular, maybe? -- to my ears. They're only so many mechanics like that I could stomach before it would just begin to annoy me. Things I can get behind in terms of mechanics: fog reducing sight, heavy winds reducing ranged accuracy (this shouldn't be complicated, just a flat reduction will do). Keep it simple. Visual responses would be neat though. A party hunkering in wind, or bowed to the rain, flinches (purely visual) for heavy thunder outside of combat, a less confident, controlled stride in snow, sand, or difficult terrain maybe. Speaking of PC(s) completely unresponsive to hostile weather, it'd be neat (but maybe too expensive?) if my party's armor changed slightly with climate. In hot or temperate it could be light or cut at the arms, in frozen heavier and padded with fur or a cloak, in wet maybe augmented with a simple hood or light cloak. Conceptially, it wouldn't require different armor models, just generalized armor accessories. I don't know, it just sounds like a neat touch of verisimilitude.

It's my feeling that the narrator needs set the pace of their own work. There's only so much player agency to impart in game mechanics; at some point a game needs to define its own rules and enforce them upon the player in order to define itself at all. If you watch a movie at 3x speed, is it the same experience? You're watching the same film, unabridged, but does the narrative hold the same impact when dictated to your own pacing? And why not speed it up then? It's the same movie experience in 1/3 the time! Efficiency! But I would argue that it's not the same. It's just a shortcut where time is valued more than the experience, at cost of the latter. Travel and exploration are a part of the narrative of a game like this - even when it feels slow and tedious, and breaks up the action with drawn out interludes of solitude in the forest, or chaos in the market, or slogging through the dark corners of an "abandoned" mine. I don't need to be given the option to zip past these passages of inactivity, because like the drawn silence between music tracks to break the monotony, they serve a purpose in their own way; and the game is not the same without them, even if we like to believe it is. *stuborn face* Sorry to rant, I found my sentiments on this matter were considerably stronger than I would have thought. No hard feelings, anybody. I must go discipline myself for having the audacity to hold strong opinions towards anything. (that is not satire, I'm actually, unreasonably, kinda pissed at myself (unnecessary information! I'd best get to sleep...))

I personally don't see a need for variable walking speed outside of combat. I say just give the party a fixed travel pace, and factor speed differences in combat only. No boots of haste bull, no scale down to slowest party member (why would I keep an Orlan if (s)he dragged my whole party down to her pace?).

Oh no, I wasn't talking about you Lephys. We're actually on the same page, methinks. I just thought I'd help clarify Ink Blot's thoughts before they got misrepresented by someone (I'm being presumptuous, I know ).

^ To elaborate on what Ink Blot said, the controversy isn't that the car prevents you from doing anything particularly illegal, it just all too often prevents you from using it legally. "Alright! A new life at my new apartment! Let's take the old car out for a spin." Error! Unregistered geolocation detected. Locking down vehicle. The proper authorities have been notified. "Alright! Time to drive to work!" Error! Could not connect to manufacturer's server. Locking down vehicle. The proper authorities will be notified when we can connect with them. "It's unfortunate that my car's manufacturer went out of business. I'll have to be careful not to lose it." Error! Could not connect to manufacturer's server. Locking down vehicle. The proper authorities have been notified. "Hey honey? Could you get us some milk? Take my car." Error! User not licensed to operate this vehicle. Locking down vehicle. The proper authorities have been notified. I'm with ya there; my point wasn't that DRM is good for everybody - just that some instances of it (really just Steam) are good for a majority of users, plus developers, and thus it doesn't have to be a purely, irredeemably evil thing (pointing at crusaders, not you, mind). It just happens to be abused all too often.

As far as DRM goes (the code-shackling, not the EULA), I actually think Steam manages to strike a very healthy balance of supporting developers while remaining as unintrusive to the end-user as possible. Steam is more than just a shackle - it manages your library, it provides community features, it features achievements, and the sales are fantastic. Now it hosts user reviews, can provide a mod hub, can provide servers (you're much more likely to find online players on a Steam server than elsewhere). For developers, Steam provides anti-piracy, of course, but also visibility, (and the servers again). People like to forget that before Steam the indie game market was virtually nonexistent. That isn't to say that the whole indie market grew directly as a consequence of Steam, but it was absolutely a huge, very big factor. Fact is, Steam does promote the use of the evil of DRM, but it does it in perhaps the best possible manner. For the restrictions we suffer in usage rights, Steam does very well to provide convenience to both developers and consumers alike. I think the real trouble is in the misguided message other publishers seem to get from Steam's success (e.g. Origin, Gamestop App, Ubisoft App, Games for Windows, etc.) That being said, I still prefer my games DRM free from GOG. Just because I've determined that Steam and its DRM aren't evil, and actually provide back to the gaming community, doesn't mean I have to prefer it. I'm a control freak - it's inherent in being a programmer.

I don't mean to be that guy, but I don't think the $4 million stretchgoal really meant anything at all - only that Obsidian needed to put something out there to get more funding, when they weren't confident in putting more features in within a reasonable deadline. As far as we've been told, all funding from the Kickstarter goes towards production of Pillars of Eternity - is it fair to say that had Obsidian made $3.8 million, $300,000 would have been thrown out the window? I'm not bitter about it, but that last stretchgoal was just a marketing gimmick; all funding was to go into making Pillars of Eternity a (better) game anyway.

I'm still ambivalent on the whole issue. What Frenzy says is of course true, but having a bottomless inventory pit concerns me. I suppose it all depends to me on just how much garbage we're to find lying about. If a TES game had such an inventory, there wouldn't be a spoon left in a house, and I, the great savior of the lands, would have an inventory that looks like: 324 wooden bowls 113 pewter candlesticks 260 wooden spoons 75 feather quills Such banal items won't appear for collection in PoE, of course, but if every mook drops an iron shortsword or similar item, it's going to bother me that I can (and will) pick up every one of the blasted things for sale later, regardless of how menially they pay. And if there aren't so many banal items to collect in PoE? Then why do I need a bottomless inventory in the first place?