Kamos

I'm not in Europe (I'm in South America), but since there is no appropriate topic... The package rushed to my city, it has been here for a week now, but cannot be delivered because the address was truncated (the house number is missing). They will send a replacement package. Frustrating. Anyone else had this problem?

An interesting thing is that at least part of that 75% are people who voted for option #1 "to help protect Obsidian against piracy", demonstrating that they weren't even fully aware what they were voting on.

So the majority voted to get their stuff ASAP, despite the absurd waste of resources, despite the concerns for customs taxes, despite the fact that a game box without a game will be delivered. I am not even surprised.

My Wasteland 2 CE didn't get here yet. Living on the moon sucks.

Thank-you. Since my two posts before were in review for a while before accepted, when they were approved (cheers, by the way!) they were 'posted' in-place at the time they were made. Meaning, a lot of people didn't get to see my point.PLEASE address this issue, Obsidian. Marking it as a gift doesn't always work and is technically a false declaration. Customs (in the UK at least) can ignore it if they wish, I would not worry. With Paradox doing the fulfillment, they will likely dispatch from a warehouse inside the EU. Therefore no customs check or duty fees for that matter. That only solves the problem for european backers. Read carefully option #2: "Alternatively, we delay shipping everything out to you once we have the final 1.0 version ready. For some parts of the world, this could mean a delay of some real significance. Not just a week or two, but multiple weeks after it’s released." A lot of people seem to be voting on #1 on grounds that #2 would lead to piracy. I have counted four people who have mentioned it, so far. Edit: and I just saw someone answered the same. Still, other people have been saying the same (#2 = more piracy), so I suppose it's valid saying it again.

You want to receive the box without the discs for the novelty of not having discs in the box? Or did you pick the wrong option? Note that #1 is the option to have physical rewards ahead of the game disc - just letting you know, in case you voted by mistake... In any case, judging by the number of votes I'd say it is clear that #1 is preferred. I am hoping they will allow the opt-out.

It's worse where I live. If something marked as "gift" arrives at customs, they assume you're trying to deceive and just use any value they want for taxes. What some kickstarters have done, in the past, is consider the pledge a "donation", and then declaring the base production price of the items being shipped, instead of the store price. That would help backers in Europe. And a lot of backers must be from Europe, so I hope it gets sorted out that way for those there.

I am an international backer. Please DO NOT send the items in two separate shipments. Whatever value you declare for the package, I will pay close to 100% taxes upon. If you send it in two parts, I get to pay taxes twice. So please, just don't. Both items will take at least a month to get here, and then be held in a customs facility, so in my case all these ideas about sending stuff early are irrelevant (I appreciate the thought, and I can see how it can be cool for others - but PLEASE do not send me two packages). I would also be interested in knowing what value would be declared for the packages. I am hoping it is the actual "product value", not the value spent on Kickstarter. This is very important for me to know, since the difference could be several hundred dollars in taxes.

Now I want an A.R.M. code wheel... I'd even accept having to use it to launch the game.

I tend toward saying yes, but before I commit, I need to read a very good explanation of what you are planning, and how it affects what you have already planned. I understand that, perhaps, you're looking for ways to secure additional funding, while offering to expand on areas that would be cheap to develop (I'm assuming that adding a new feature is more costly than adding new content, especially so something like a wilderness area, which can theoretically be outsourced). If this is the case, I'd also be more inclined to help if you were straightforward about it. I do not think feature / content creep at this stage is a good idea, or a good sign (though I'd otherwise be the "simulate everything!" / "moar features!" guy). At this point, my preference would be for a small number of meaningful additions, or improvements to what is already there. So, a new companion, and expanded reactivity are welcome; a new hack-n-slash wilderness area, not so much. A new meaningful wilderness area, perhaps. Again, I need to read a good explanation of what you plan.

Combat was real time, and spellcasting could be initiated while paused. Also the chaotic nature of combat would practically force you to go into pause every now and then. I may be wrong, but I believe only Exult has a pause function.

Here is the poll you've asked for: http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/64050-item-durability/ As for "we saw some negative posts, let's scrap it"; it is actually more a case of "we weren't so sure about durability to begin with so thank you for giving us a reason to remove it". Perhaps you should go back a few pages and read some posts? I like the idea of durability, but only if the devs are willing to get it right. "Money sink" isn't getting it right.

Well, I think it is better for this feature to be gone than to have it standing by itself in the middle of the room without anything to support it.

I agree that what you're describing is bad gameplay (and design). However, the problem isn't durability itself, but the fact that the player can just stroll through a dungeon as if it were a theme park ride and go back to civilization whenever he wants. If you can restock / repair at any time you want, repairing and restocking becomes busywork. And if you can carry 50 weapons, breaking one means nothing. My thought too. The problem is not with the durability system, the problem is that other systems that would make durability make sense aren't there to support it.

Hello, Obsidian forum lurkers & staff. I have been following the KS updates but I seldom feel the need to discuss anything I read. I just think "awesome!" and move on. I realize that, as someone that isn't normally around here, it is not nice of me to just suddenly appear out of nowhere to give opinions. That being said, you did bring this upon yourselves by asking for feedback. A disclaimer: I play retro D&D dungeon crawls. I keep track of how many torches my players have and how many turns have passed since they lit the last one. Yeah, I'm one of those people. About the proposed crafting system: it seems pretty vanilla to me. If I understand correctly, your run around grabbing everything that isn't nailed down in the off-chance that you need it for something. You don't even know what you need it for, but you feel compelled to pick it up. It is there, so you need to pick it up. This is contrary to what I believe to be good dungeon crawling. Please, if I did not understand your proposal correctly, then disregard everything I'm saying from here onward. Let me tell you how I run my PnP game. First, adventurers are adventurers. They are not crap haulers or blacksmiths. They pay other people to do that. They have better things to do with their time. Second, they spend money to be able to go on adventures. This is their main "money sink", because adventuring costs a ****load of money. The feeling I shoot for in my dungeon crawl campaign is that of a horror movie. Imagine you're embarking on an adventure. You've found out about an ancient temple in a strange land far away. You'll need to hire a boat to go across the sea, and you're leaving civilization behind, so you need to bring everything you need with you. What do you bring with you, and who do you bring with you? You might want to bring mercenaries to keep the expedition safe. Or hire a physician. When you finally reach your destination, you'll need a local guide, and probably some workers to haul supplies and dig up the temple's entrance. Then, when you finally get inside, there will be deadly traps and maybe even a monster. You might get trapped in there with limited supplies of food and water. You might run out of torches. This is what inventory is all about. In my PnP game, inventory is not a "chore" or "busywork"; it is a trade-off. Yes, you could use a platemail, and you could carry a 60 feet rope + a 10 feet pole + 10 torches + 50 rations. The question is: are you sure you want to do that? Because if you do, you might not be able to run away when you stumble upon the monster. You'll not be able to run as fast as the next guy, who is just carrying a light backpack. You might even find yourself in the dark when the only person with a torch decides to run for his life in the opposite direction. Of course, if the player is *expected* to succeed at every turn (as he is in D&D 3rd Edition), then it doesn't really matter how he approaches this. If you can just fall back to civilization for "more of everything" (more rations, more lamp oil, more!), then yeah, inventory becomes busywork. In the same sense, if you can just bring with you 50 daggers, then getting one damaged doesn't matter, and keeping track of each one's condition makes no sense. So, in short: I don't like the crafting system, it looks like an incentive to pick everything up and it cheapens the value of "adventuring". EDIT: I've read on this thread about how people feel like swords breaking is busywork, and how "simulation" is "tedious" and "a chore". I agree in general, but I think those people are missing the point. These things are tedious because computer games do it wrong. If you can bring 5 swords with you, or just immediately "auto-travel" back to a city and repair your sword, then yes, it is tedious. If however, you can only bring one sword with you; if a sword is an expensive item; if you can use it to parry against a mace, knowing that it will break but save your life, and you won't have a sword anymore, you'll have to somehow stab that guy with your dagger (basically you're ****ed); then it is no longer tedious, it is part of the whole adventuring thing.

It seems that requiring food, water and sleep for your characters isn't considered good design nowadays. These things are mostly seen as annoyances, things that take the player "away from the fun". Alas, people don't really like this simulationist approach anymore. It may just be that the people backing Project Eternity are "hardcore" enough to want this kind of stuff in the game. But I wouldn't count on it. I'd settle for a weight-limited & slot-limited inventory, to be honest.

Haha, thank you. There is an "old school renaissance" PnP game called Lamentations of the Flame Princess, in which the XP you get is 99.9% related to the "treasure" you find and manage to haul back to civilization. It is pretty crazy, in a way, but it really gets across the point that you're an adventurer. Of course, the game has a chapter on what you do with your money (there is only so much you can expend on yourself, and you can't really be a gold wagon, right?). As you can imagine, it involves buying properties and ships, and hiring retainers so that you can shoot for even more outrageous adventuring expeditions. Not sure how related this is to your idea, but it is an example of in-game mechanics that lead players to really see money as something that gives them options.

I think money should be less useful. No, seriously. I think there should be completely viable ways to get gear without relying on going into an "adventurer's mart" and spending money. Perhaps once you get your stronghold you also get a blacksmith to outfit you. Perhaps you can become allied with a faction, and they outfit you. Or maybe you can craft your own stuff. I get it that in the Forgotten Realms setting (which is high fantasy) you can just go inside a magic store and buy yourself a +3 longsword. But not every setting needs to be like that. I think it would be funny if you went into a store, ordered 10.000 GP in Fireball scrolls and then got stopped by the city guard for "carrying dangerous, unlicensed equipment". That said, I think I agree with OP. Money should be more useful in the sense that money should be used for more interesting stuff. I think that what you can do / need to do with money in a setting really helps set its tone. OP's example from BG2 is a great one.

Certainly by small country you were talking of Liechtenstein, and not the seventh economy in the world? Yeah, but I agree 100% with you. Trying to maximize the amount of money you can get by hauling every single item you find is just the sign of a dysfunctional element in the game elsewhere. Removing inventory limits is like cutting your leg off because your toe hurts.

Aaahh, no, no, no. Considering every single RPG I've ever played has this, I don't get why you're complaining. Even the pen'n'paper games have a weight system for encumbrance. I don't know about PnP, but if every single cRPG you played has a weight system, then you played too few. Which either way, is not the point. BG, BG2, IWD, PS:T, NWN, NWN2, Fallout, Fallout 2, Fallout: BOS, Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas, Mass Effect Series (though this didn't have weight, it had limited slots), Dragon Age... Also played KotoR and KotoR2, but don't remember if they have the weight system or not. Ok, slightly wrong on every RPG having the weight system, but 90% of them do. Even Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim has the weight system. Those are just the ones I've played. You count the IE games' system as equal to bethesdas'? Which is the one I'm worrying about..... DA had slots as well, not lbs. The KotORs and ME1 had no limit at all. My problem is not with the limit. The first fallouts(from which I played only the first) are the only ones with some logical weight system. Read the OP. Oh, I thought this had been written by someone else. Yeah, personally I feel that, if you're going to have a limit, it should also make sense. Actually, if the inventory is supposed to serve some purpose (other than being a big list of stuff), then it probably needs to make sense.

I'd like to thank everyone for their answers. What is the point? I understand that, when done wrong, inventories become busywork or tetris, and I don't think they should have weight/slots/realism "just because". Most games don't take the tactical side of inventories into consideration, and in this case it *is* an annoyance. However, inventories can be a cool part of the game. You can have a character activate a pressure plate trap because he is carrying the 50kg idol he just looted. You can have characters that can't flee from fights because they decided to bring a little of everything. And so on. I hope such signs are going to be very subtle, and not always present. Certainly nothing that detracts from the believablity of the gameworld or holds the player's hand too much. I actually like it in RPGs when I can occasionally encounter enemies far beyond my character's own abilities by chance - not necessarily because i've deliberately ignored warnings and ran off into a dangerous area. That might seem punitive or harsh by modern game standards, but I really don't feel as though I need to win every single encounter. Sometimes, running away should be the best option, especially at lower levels. Of course, escape shouldn't always be possible and a character's movement and evasive skills should be a factor, not just how quickly the player can react. That's one of reasons why I prefer turn-based combat to real-time. Fleeing feels like a more natural and viable option with less interference from player skill/reactions and lock-on AI. I like your idea of fleeing. It does feel more natural than coming across a subtle sign subtly saying "you're not supposed to be here! - yet". There is no place you're supposed to be; and if the game is fair, then it doesn't treat you like a special person, or like you're supposed to win. Dying horribly is the "show, rather than tell" way of teaching about a game world. It also makes the opposition more believable. But then again, I suppose it does become an annoyance if done wrong. As do so many things. But I think that Torment shows us that dying can be fun.

Honestly, I think giving mages a "basic magic attack" turns magic into fireworks. I rather enjoy the idea that fighters fight, and that magic is spectacular, but not constant. I also think magic needs to have risks, or some kind of trade off. In the "vancian" style of magic, this trade off is that you need to rest. Resting is dangerous, you can't just take a nap in dungeons. In old school RPGs you also have to consider limited supplies of food and lamp oil, you can't just rest every single time you cast a fireball to take out some kobolds. Of course, many cRPGs never got this right, and in the end the whole thing got streamlined. It was probably perceived to be busywork. So, anyway. I think they should first decide how magic works, and then try to represent it through the gameplay mechanic. Not the other way around.. There are many interesting styles of magic, and honestly, I'd like to see PE tackle one. Maybe plants die when you cast magic, and you need to find the right spot to be able to use it. Maybe you age if you exert yourself too much. Maybe you need rare spell components that you have to hunt down, travelling far and wide. Maybe you need to negotiate with higher beings, like Elric of Melnibolné did. Maybe magic causes "corruption" and you grow an extra finger if things go awry. Maybe weird things happen around you if you break the fabric of reality too much (lovecraftian tentacles!).

Hello, everyone. After watching the Kickstarter video, I was literally one click away from backing this project for all I could afford. However, after reading more about it and watching some interviews with the Obsidian team, I am now leaning towards not backing. Please note that I'm not trying to troll Obsidian or the project. I want to want to back this project! But I am undecided, and looking for some answers. It may well be that my concerns are unfounded. So, without further ado, here are the things that have raised "attention" flags in my mind: 1) I watched an interview with Josh Sawyer where he mentions that some people expected Project Eternity to have crafting (without it even being a stretch goal), since it is something that cRPGs are "supposed to have" nowadays. I am very concerned that Obsidian might be adding this as an afterthought, as something that a game is "supposed to have" rather than a legitimate game element that is part of their vision. Let me explain what I mean. In pretty much every cRPG that comes to my mind, crafting is "a way to get cool gear" (that is actually how devs describe it). Which is to say, it adds absolutely nothing to the gameplay. Rather, I'd argue that, since it is often so poorly implemented mechanically, it detracts from the game by removing verisimilitude. Further, crafting creates the need to "gather" from every bush, node and corpse you come across. That, in turn, results in characters lugging around every single thing they find. Because hey, it might be useful for... something. Now, I can understand crafting in a game when it feels like it is part of the game world. Making bread in "Ultima 7" is one example. Making the bamboo flintlock in "Savage Empire" is another example. Arcanum also had something along that line, with "inventions" being integral to a technologist's development. Has there been any word about which way crafting is going in Project Eternity? 2) Some of my fondest memories with ye olde cRPGs is dying horribly to completely unbalanced battles / traps / challenges. Walking into the wasteland and getting owned by a patrol of super mutants immediately comes to my mind. I can't stand games that auto-balance everything around you (from D&D 3rd edition to Oblivion). You may find it silly, but this is really a dealbreaker for me because it says volumes about the mindset in which the game was made. I know Fallout: New Vegas was a bit more unforgiving than FO3, so I guess my question is: can I expect PE to take off the kiddy gloves? 3) Modern cRPGs have streamlined inventories to the point where they don't exist. Often, the inventory is a list of items, plus a weight limit just so that your inventory isn't absolutely everything you come across in the game. Seriously, this is poor design. But I suppose it was to be expected, since games have always encouraged players to do busywork by going back and forth hauling short bows and leather armors looted from kobolds. However, I'd ask this: why were they hauling so much trash in the first place? Why is "adventuring" so disfunctional in cRPGs? You don't go adventuring for trash, you go adventuring for treasure! In old school pen 'n paper RPGs, choosing what to bring with you was a big decision. Too little equipment and you'd be unprepared; too much and you wouldn't be able to run if things turned sour. Deciding how much food and lamp oil was a huge decision to make in dungeon crawls. Getting trapped by a sliding wall in a dungeon with no food is no laughing matter. Actually, any adventuring expedition worth its salt would hire NPCs for that single purpose: carrying things. So, my third and final question is this: what kind of inventory will we see in PE? Will we at least have backpacks, as in Torment and BG, or are we going to have a list of stuff that enables hoarders to carry every single thing they come across? Thank you for reading. I wasn't planning to write a wall of text, but it happened. Sorry. Edit: trying to fix my wonky english.