illathid

Sure, but those are aimed at the very specific crowd only. I doubt they reach a wider audience than those really interested in Obsidian or PoE. Speculation time - publisher might provide various ads on websites, making deals with outlets to get a word out, reaching to audiences of their other titles. Who knows how much paperwork is needed to publish game globally. I imagine that if the work of a publisher wasn't significant devs wouldn't cooperate with them willingly. That's exactly what I meant. Obsidian did lots of updates, presentations, etc. but there wasn't any wider marketing to the wider audience *outside* of that core RPG crowd. That's the part I would've expected the publisher to do, and they didn't really. Tyranny was even worse; there was *NOTHING* to push that game. I'm hoping that Versus Evil will make a bigger ruckus--paying for web ads is a good start for something I'd expect the publisher to handle. I saw a bunch of web ads for both PoE and Tyrrany, it could be though that both were narrowly targeted (as I'm pretty squarely in the target market).

Yes, there were too many American voices in Pillars. I think maybe every voice was American? It's kind of off putting in this kind of setting. I know it's a bit of a cliché now having everyone sound English but it suits it. Nah, this something the game did right. English accents in a colonial setting would be weird.

The dragon Fafnir in norse mythology was a dwarf who became a dragon. yeah, it's reversed, but not unheard of in western tradition.

Nah, it's best DLC policy I've ever seen from a company. Fite me IRL if you think different. Five bucks for a portrait pack, 7 bucks to unlock features present but not completed in the base game! IT STINKS! $5 to keep artists employed even when a new game isn't in development. $7 for additional features that required additional work to complete. You may not think those are worth the prices to you, but that doesn't mean the policy itself is bad. Oh, puh-leeze. If it was any other company for any other game than an Obsidian RPG--it fit was EA for a BIOWARE game, for example!--that was charging money for a DLC to unlock already-in-the-game stuff, this board would be *ripping it apart*. It's cosmetic microtransactions and *allowing* you access to stuff that's already there. That's all it is. It's the same stuff companies have been crucified by gamers for doing for years. Paradox is no better than EA on their DLC policy. Might be easier to work with, might be more hands-off for the company, etc. but their DLC policy is the exact same ****tiness. Has been for a while now. If it was any other company doing the same thing, any criticism would be just as wrong.

Nah, it's best DLC policy I've ever seen from a company. Fite me IRL if you think different. Five bucks for a portrait pack, 7 bucks to unlock features present but not completed in the base game! IT STINKS! $5 to keep artists employed even when a new game isn't in development. $7 for additional features that required additional work to complete. You may not think those are worth the prices to you, but that doesn't mean the policy itself is bad.

Nah, it's best DLC policy I've ever seen from a company. Fite me IRL if you think different.

Doesn't that increase the complexity, though? Well it'd depend on a couple of different factors I think.

Could be a situation where both are possible. You can select a multi-class at character creation like in BG or decide on a second class at some later point like in NWN. Having one doesn't necessarily mean you can't have the other.

I'd rather Paradox published it. They're my favorite publisher out there, bar none. Obsidian getting into publishing isn't something I'd relish myself. It takes a lot of time, a lot of capital, and would take focus away from making the best RPGs in the industry.

You're on the wrong board lad. Easy mistake to make, as this OBSIDAIN company has a name very similar to Obsidian. You should direct your questions there.

That's just outright false. Their DLC practices are the best in the industry. They were... It's gone downhill. They used to sell all sorts of little cosmetic stuff piece by piece for super cheap so you could pick and choose, and their big DLC packs were like 10-15 bucks. Now they charge 15-20 for packs not nearly as big or good, and bundle all the little stuff into 5-8 dollar packs. I'd argue that pricing and value of content can't be a deciding factor in whether a DLC policy is good or bad as every individual will have their own determination of whether the price is worth it or not. What makes Paradoc's DLC policy good is that none of it required to play, and it comes with free patches that add content as well as bug fixes for those that decide not to purchase the DLC. That is correct, but it aint perfect. In the past when Paradox released an expansion, they abandoned their base game. So you were more or less forced to buy the expansions if you wanted an updated and patched game. Now as you correctly state, the DLCs are voluntary, and the community still profit from new features and patching. HOWEVER.... many Paradox games are now caught in a vicious patch cycle. A new DLC is released, which naturally introduced new bugs and balancing issues. However, instead of fixing these issues before they move on, they have started to implement these bug fixes in the next DLC. Which in turn introduce new bugs and balancing issues... Crusader Kings II is a good example of this... So either they need to start properly patching the games between each DLC, or they need to spend more time on QA. Regardless, the current DLC scheme is better than the old one. Hearts of Iron 3 without all the expansions is pretty much unplayable... I'm very familiar with the CK2 patching process (i'm the team lead for the geheimnisnacht mod). They usually release between 2 to 3 patches to fix bugs between every major content patch. You can see that here: http://www.ckiiwiki.com/Patches

Well, even if it's not mechanically a bastard sword, we could still call it as such.

Yeah, I prefer an obsidian bastard sword to something like the Macuahuitl.

I think so. I know I'll be contributing more when I get paid on the seventh.

Huh? How is what I said in anyway a personal attack?

Not sure why you'd think that... Probably because of the St. Ydwen's Redeemer, she was a woman: http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/St._Ydwen%27s_Redeemer Ah, I figured it was fairly typical spelling deviation for the same name. Like Erik and Eric, Ann and Anne, John and Jon, Katherine and Catherine, etc.

From most of your posts it's pretty clear you are not the target audience for these games.

Not sure why you'd think that...

In one of the twitch streams they've confirmed that priest deity selection will change your available spells.

I think having the hypertext entries used to help delineate between player and character knowledge is a great idea. I'm not sure about making a whole language system around it though.

Yeah, I don't know. I'll see what other people think before weighing in again I think.

You clearly haven't read the books and know nothing about the character, or the universe. His physical prowess aside, he was after all created for that particular purpose, Geralt is an extremely flawed character. And a tragic one at that. Both the books and the games explore deep phylosophical and psychological themes that are hardly relevant to an "adolescent boy", as you put it. In fact, the main theme of them both i would argue is Geralt's love for his adopted daughter Ciri. Is that an adolescent fantasy to you? Maybe if you missed all of that, the issue is with you, and not the games? Nah, the books are just as awful as the games, perhaps even worse. Also, a virginal maiden character that needs your protection is indeed an adolescent fantasy.

That sounds good to me. Although could you explain the character limit a bit more? So the two categories obsidian picks can't exceed 80 characters including spaces, but we won't know which categories will be picked? If that's the case, maybe it would make more sense that each category has a limit of 40 characters?

It also doesn't seem like a realistic budget for designing and testing both the arena and a matchmaking system for players. Yeah, budgeting for MP requires you to get into the funny money range.

nothankyou.gif