TheOptimist

I do not seem to have mine yet, though it says in my profile I should. Edit: Wow, superfast! Thanks Mods.

More than anything else, I want an RPG with a victory condition, an ending where my character walks off into the sunset with his companions having made the world a better place. Not a scene where we get set up for a sequel, not some dark edgy melodrama, not some half-coherent cut-scene, and sure as hell no Red/Green/Blue pick your color cause your choices are irrelevant BS. I want to be able to sit back from the keyboard and feel like I won.

Gonna throw out a few names I haven't seen mentioned: David Weber Eric Flint David Drake and SM Stirling Dave Freer Hmm...that's alot of Dave's. But they're also all good reads.

No, no, 1000 times no. This is exactly what I do NOT want. I am sick to death of playing games in which the story mode concludes in a long, twisting trudge toward depression and melodrama. There was a topic a while ago that talked about this, but essentially I'm pretty sure the 'edgy, unexpected' thing at this point would be a happy ending. I can only think of a handful of games where such an ending was even possible. In most games you have at best a quick cliffhanger or downturn with an eye toward the inevitable sequel, even if no sequel is ever likely. At worst you get a long session of violin music while characters talk about how much life sucks. Now I'm not greedy, if people want a crap ending it should easily be a possibility to get that ending. But please, Oblivion, give us a victory condition, where if we get everything right, we can walk off into the sunset with the world having been made a better place. That's really all I'm looking for here.

And then if you're an evil character, you can get arrested and thrown in a dungeon for the rest of the series, while people in later games give passing mention to how wicked you are. /sarc Seriously, why do some of you want to see other people's characters and gameplay choices wrecked just so your playstyle and your particular take on good and evil can feel validated?

One, what's with the quotes around my forum tag? Seems kinda weird. Two, I've never really been clear on why being evil is supposed to get you more material rewards than being good. For instance, lets say as a good character I see a puppy with a collar wandering lost. An evil character has no reason to care, (and if they're particularly psychotic, might kill it for giggles) but maybe a good character will want to find the puppies' owner. After a search, you find the owner, who 'surprise!' rewards you 20 gold for finding the puppy. It's not a quest, it's simply a tangible benefit of having been benevolent. You might call this a fairy tale, but I have seen this happen more than once in real life. Kindness is, or can be, a gift that keeps giving, and doesn't necessarily lead to less material rewards than evil, you simply acquire those rewards in a different manner. As another example, maybe you do a kindness for a shopkeep and he gives you a discount, whereas a thief that steals from that shop might cause it to go out of business and be unable to obtain the better items offered at the store later in the game. Demanding that treachery be rewarded materially while being kind get you a pat on the head and nothing else seems both simplistic and rather silly.

Indulging the hypothetical here, for me it would come down to whether or not there was an agreement in place whereby Obsidian says to any publisher 'thank you for your investment, now we're going to make the sequel we wanted to make while you sit over there quietly.' Essentially, I have no problem with someone providing part of the funding as long as they understand that Obsidian will make this sequel their way on their timetable without interference. If a publisher won't agree to that, no deal, either self-publish or take your case back to the people. Because if P:E sells well, it will hopefully prove that in some cases publishers are simply unnecessary, and therefore can be relegated to either silent investors looking for return on a proven idea or middlemen that can be cuttout altogether.

I'm going to jump in as against this idea. I constantly hear from people who play as quote/unquote 'evil' how much they hate it when games incentivize the 'good' option and punish you if you play an evil character. I'm of the firm belief that all play styles should have paths to success. If you want to be an evil tyrant, be an evil tyrant that wins by coldly manipulating people or slaughtering those in your path. By the same token, good should have as many options to victory, and neither should be punished for their choices unless it's on an equal footing. Making players 'pay' for being good is just a way of encouraging people to play as evil/self-interested characters.

Story, hands down. If I like the story, I will stick with a game even if some parts of gameplay get repetitive or frustrating. By the same token, I couldn't count the number of games I've stopped in the middle of because the story either wasn't interesting or had grown irritating.

In contrast to some other folks, I want at least one ending where the hero walks off into the sunset with his companions. In my opinion, Fallout: NV accomplished this wonderfully, as long as you kept in mind what your character wanted, you could absolutely win that game and walk into the sunset knowing you were the baddest mofo that ever walked the wastelands. I do not care what other options exist, but I want atleast one where afterwards it feels like I won. And you know what? For RPGs, that's a ridiculous rarity. There's only a few where when the adventure is over and it's all said and done, you can actually feel like you accomplished something and walked away to tell the tale. DA:O kind of did this, as long as you were willing to make the head cannon that you and Morrigan had an understanding. FO:NV did a better job. Suikoden I, II and V had this, although you had to work your butt off to make it happen. Kingdom Hearts 2 did that, and so did Mass Effect 2 (as long as we pretend ME3 doesn't exist). Fallout 2 did that. FFVII sort of did that if you include Advent Children as an hour and a half long ending cutscene. Chrono Trigger did that. And...from my experience, that's the list. It also happens to include almost all of my favorite RPGs of all time, because as long as you were willing to work for it, there WAS a victory condition. As long as we're on the subject, I would also like a FO:NV type recap of how you affected all the factions and how things turned out/were changed due to your actions.

Mass Effect 2 with all DLC. And I would cheer, CHEER, that Mass Effect 3 was gone. Then I would cry because Suikoden 2 and 5 are gone too.

For my nostalgia purposes, I'm actually expecting/hoping for something like Pool of Radiance in terms of dungeon crawling, though the Megadungeon need not be quite THAT large...

I actually really liked this part of DA:O, but I can see with integrated multiracial nations that there would need to be adjustments. That said, I really am all for you being given choices and dialogue options that are specific to your race and class.

Mass Effect 2 (we'll pretend for this purpose 3 doesn't exist), FF7, and DA:O, and Fallout: New Vegas round out my list of games I'd like to see this game mimic in terms of plot and character interaction. In terms of gameplay, Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, hands down.

I'd actually prefer something a lot closer to the plot of FO:NV. World has issues-go fix them, or not, as you desire. And in between all the little things you can do you can advance into the realm of regional politics, become a large player, and eventually, through your actions, decide how things turn out. Granted, I knew going in to FO:NV who I was going to support, as I 'knew' who had created the NCR. But as the game advanced, I found myself tilting in that direction anyway. This game sounds similar, with several different factions you may be able to gain favor with. And while yes, FO:NV gives you hard choices, as long as you keep in mind what your character wants to see happen, you can pretty much make the game turn out exactly as you want, provided you're willing to put in the effort. Ever since certain other games that shall remain nameless (MASS EFFECT 3! *cough*) that's really what I've been looking for in an rpg. And it's harder to find than you'd think.

200,000 in 5 hours (this assumes paypal to be around 115k by the end, getting us up past 4m)? There's only one response. http://ragefac.es/127

Hmm, pencil me in as being a supporter of romances in RPGs as a general rule. Now, should you have to do them? Absolutely not. Still, you're playing a character in a specific situation, I don't see anything wrong with wanting to see that character enter a relationship with someone. This gets taken to unfortunate extremes by some people, but that's true of anything.

I'm kinda with the OP. When you step back and examine it, we kicked in another $8+ as a lark for a custom forum title and a show of support for Obsidian. They said they'd mention the order in the game, and I'm deeply grateful for that. But it's time to rein in expectations a little. We can have as much fun with the Order as we want on the forums, but I had thought the whole point was that we thought the project was worthwhile enough to throw in extra cash, not start asking the devs for special consideration. And I also agree that it's better to talk about this now than see the problem get worse.

I recall one of the obsidian team posted this humorous video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nEaY4JYooJk that sort of deals with the subject. Keep in mind Banner Saga only had 20,000 backers, with 70,000+ things should be lively at Obsidian after the kickstarter finishes.

I think it's helpful to take a step back and remember that you essentially contributed money in the belief that when developers and financial backers are taken out of the equation, Obsidian knows what it's doing. Just because a feature you don't care for is in the game (or one you wanted doesn't make the cut) doesn't mean the game as a whole is completely ruined. You make suggestions and give input, but at the end of the day, you've given money to a company and said 'go make the game you've always wanted to make'. It's going to be a year and a half or more before we find out if this really worked, so in the meantime I'd say it's best to take it easy. (For the record, I liked DA2 as well, although there were certainly aspects that could have been improved.)

Indeed, the march to 70k backers begins here.

And there it is, 3.5 million. Congrats on accomplishing every single mission they could put in front of us, folks.

Lots of Suikoden fans in here. That said, I'd love to see a Stronghold that gets acknowledged in the wider game world. If you build yourself an impregnable fortress and rule wisely, it would be interesting to say encounter people in the larger world (which as per usual, is going/has gone to hell) whom are packing up and leaving for your fortress, for the specific reason that it's one of the few places that has been able to hold out the madness. By the same token, if you rule like a blood-drunk serial killer people should whisper the name of the castle as a curse word and talk about staying away from the whole region your stronghold occupies. I also agree with folks here that I would like a populated stronghold. There should be people and soldiers there, and that number should grow as my stronghold becomes larger and stronger.

Except its about 6 in the morning for them, and a bunch of them were up late ustreaming a dnd session and drinking. Pah! Excuses and nothing else!

I'm always in favor of seeing more character impact on a game. As you slowly become a truly powerful player on the gameworld's stage, I love seeing the gameworld change to reflect that.