Valsuelm

I've backed them both, and I very much look forward to both. However, I would like the art to be unique to each game and for them to go in their own natural directions and not be constrained in any way by the other. That said, I certainly wouldn't begrudge the devs shared resources if that makes sense to them. Art though, is something that can be at the core and feel of a game, so shared art doesn't sound like a good idea to me, anymore than shared music would.

This subject is like except less catchy.

There can always be what ifs. This is probably the best video on what ifs you'll ever see: Note that Suzanne obviously made no impression upon Chuck Shumer, as he's still leading the charge to take your rights away today. He is not naive though, he is an evil mofo. On the subject of Adam Lanza. Two things. 1. Most any resourceful teenager is going to be able to get their hands on the weapons he used, locked up or not. Where there is a will there is a way. 2. If the school where Adam allegedly murdered all of the folks he did wasn't a 'gun free' zone then perhaps at least one of the teachers would have had a weapon to stop Adam and prevent at least some of the carnage that occurred there that day. The fact is that most 'mass shootings' in recent times occur in 'gun free' zones. 'Gun free' zones are possibly the most asinine 'regulation of public safety' there is, and have no doubt caused far more harm than good.

How so ? I mean if everyone had guns, at least they would have been able to shoot back, but that presumes everyone being armed all the time. Doesn't seem very plausible. I went to visit a a buddy of mine who happens to be an attorney in Tennessee recently. As I'm interested in legal things we often talk about what cases he's working on and so it happened that while I was there I watched a surveillance video recording of an armed man attempting to rob a convenience store late at night at gun point. There were three other patrons in the store when this occurred. You can see the would be robber wave his gun and tell people to get down. As he turned his attention to the cashier after issuing his warning two of the three patrons pulled legally owned guns out (one a man and one a woman), aimed them at the would be robber and over the course of about 5 seconds convinced him to lay his weapon down. Police came, the man was arrested, and no one was hurt. While it definitely depends on where you live, in many places in the U.S. at least you would be surprised how many people are carrying a gun on them at any given time.

Here we go again... I'll sum it up quicklike. The truth is, anyone who is for gun control is either naive or downright evil. Most fall into the former category, and just really haven't thought things through all that well. In this particular situation, how great would it have been if out of the hundreds there at least a few citizens had been carrying a gun? Of course China can't have that, as an armed populace would mean revolt in many a Chinese place. And that is why nations are disarmed, and that is the true purpose of 'gun control', to prevent and/or minimize the effectiveness of citizen uprisings. And Woldan, some places have already outlawed pointy sharp things. Australia and the U.K. comes to mind. With most things, where there's a will there is a way, and this is something the naive just don't want to come to terms with. What's interesting about this case is that apparently ~10 armed men attacked joe average, so this was definitely well thought out in advance. I would like to know what their motive was.

http://www.azleg.gov/legtext/51leg/2r/bills/sb1062p.pdf and a mission statement by an organization that supported the bill: http://www.azpolicy.org/bill-tracker/religious-freedom-restoration-act-sb-1062 Note that at the federal level a law already exists that does what sb1062 wanted to do and it has already passed Supreme Court scrutiny. However the same Supreme Court ruled that this law was not enforceable at the state level, hence Arizona and other states making state laws to such affect. Discrimination in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. We all discriminate all the time, every day with near every decision we make. However, I'm fairly sure you meant that sb1062 was somehow discriminatory in an evil way, (as 'discriminate' has become a negatively loaded word in the modern politically correct lexicon whose primary purpose is to quash people's ability to think) and that is just not the case, contrary to what many a talking head on TV and in the press would have you believe.

You don't get anything for just existing, other than the right to die. Inalienable rights sir. It's concept that's been around for millennia. Thinking whatever you wish happens to be such a thing, and it's a fool's supposition to conjecture otherwise; evil to try and enforce otherwise.

You mean kinda like how in my nation, yours, and many of those reading this thread how an internal issue of a nation that most couldn't point out on a map is making international news and trumping local issues in our respective nations that are much more important and relevant to the folks living in those nations? Red herrings indeed.

The eating the poopoo videos were comical if anything, they certainly didn't galvanize hate. You're grasping at straws with that one.

Obama wants you to have the right to eat poo poo. That sounds about right.

Wow that's a clever post, okay lets be pedantic and not understand my original point. Yes you right its a basic human right to hate and this is something that countries allow. Is that better? It is a basic right to think whatever you wish no matter how right or wrong it may be. Wrong of course often being a subjective thing. You don't get basic rights from a constitution, you get them from just existing. Your Constitution happens to be one of the more @#$*(@#ed up ones in the western world by the way. Outlawing certain types of thought is arguably more evil than the whatever it is you're attempting to outlaw.

Press oppression doesn't just come in the form of dead bodies, though Gary Webb was likely suicided, but not before he was definitely put under extreme pressure. Michael Rupert has spoken of the pressure he was put under and he backed far away of some of the things he had been reporting on as a result as he's aware of folks who get suicided like Webb (likely), Colonel Sabow (definitely), and others. Another somewhat mainstream example would be to look up and watch the documentary 'The Corporation', which is a good documentary for a variety of reasons, but it does give other examples of press oppression in the U.S.. Keep in mind that if the oppression is successful, you likely either don't know anything about it and/or what you know is misinformation.

Actually... there are dead reporters in America. A recent one is Michael Hastings.

It takes a great deal of self-righteousness and/or hubris to call for sanctions on any nation over anything. 'Aid' from the west is generally really just bribes and funding of the west's agenda's and interests. Uganda would do well if it could to not accept any outside 'aid', just about any nation would. Of course leaders of such nations would likely find themselves facing opposition funded by the west if such opposition could be found, which it usually can. Africa fails to achieve it's true potential because outside interests keep it in the dark ages to further their own interests, in particular European interests, though Asia and the U.S. also have their hands dirty there. Hubris. Self-righteousness. Wow those are big words to describe something that is regularly implemented against countries when they make decisions that are unacceptable to many countries in the world. Uganda already gets aid, 20 % of its budget is outside aid, and Uganda as every country does is reliant on international investment in order to grow there economy. And when you say "because outside interests keep it in the dark ages to further their own interests" you sound like Robert Mugabe trying to justify why his economic polices have destroyed the Zimbabwean economy. You don't know much about how certain countries in Africa operate or how there governments manage there economies do you? Hardly big words. Regularly implemented yes. It's the norm for sure. It's one of the prime tools of the neo-colonialists of the last half+ century. That does not make it right or any less self righteous or audacious, or at the higher echelons of the decision making often downright evil. As far as Mugabe and Zimbabwe, while I certainly don't agree with Mugabe on many things, he's right if he's ever said something along the lines of what I did. His nation's economy is in shambles largely due to U.S., U.K., et al intervention in the form of sanctions and other punishments, which is downright disgusting at best. How dare Mugabe leave the Commonwealth! I know African geopolitics pretty well, and how the strings are pulled there and elsewhere subtly and overtly quite well as well. You certainly have no monopoly on knowledge of Africa just because you happen to live in South Africa, while most of the rest of us on this board do not. For better or worse Uganda should be left alone to make it's own laws. Rather than get bent out of shape about their violations of real or perceived rights, look in your own backyard. Many folks in many nations (including my own) would do better to do so than worry about internal laws of Uganda which are by and large benign on the world stage. There are worse and more oppressive laws of a variety of different types on the books in both the U.S., South Africa, and most if not all other 'western' nations than what folks are decrying currently in Uganda. And it's possibly the very efforts of some of the organizations that are leading the charge in decrying Uganda's policy that influenced it's implementing. There certainly has been some backlash in places other than Uganda to the global steamrolled agenda known as LGBT rights.

It takes a great deal of self-righteousness and/or hubris to call for sanctions on any nation over anything. 'Aid' from the west is generally really just bribes and funding of the west's agenda's and interests. Uganda would do well if it could to not accept any outside 'aid', just about any nation would. Of course leaders of such nations would likely find themselves facing opposition funded by the west if such opposition could be found, which it usually can. Africa fails to achieve it's true potential because outside interests keep it in the dark ages to further their own interests, in particular European interests, though Asia and the U.S. also have their hands dirty there.

Buy/build a desktop. Laptops are inferior to desktops for gaming in many ways, not the least of which is the inability to upgrade your graphics card. Really, unless you travel often and/or have a legitimate need to bring your computer places with you a desktop would serve you better. And if you have legitimate need and can afford it, a desktop and a laptop would serve you better than just a laptop. Desktops are superior to laptops in pretty much every way except portability.

I confess, this may be the first time I've seen "good graphics" and "Morrowind" used in the same sentence... At the time it was released it was considered to have very good graphics, and indeed for it's time it did.

Baldur's Gate 1 is better than Baldur's Gate 2 (2 is still great though) Bethesda games are horribly overrated and other than the good graphics frankly just bad, very bad (and good graphics are not a reason to play a game). I'm talking about Morrowwind, Oblivion, and especially Skyrim and Fallout 3. Monsters that scale with your level is one of the worst ideas to ever be realized in a RPG (see above) The 2nd edition AD&D ruleset as was realized in the infinity engine games is so far the pinnacle of in game combat design for a turn based RPG. Everything else has been a step down in quality and complexity in regards to gameplay. With a notable exception for 'tactics' type games which are really a different genre, ie: Final Fantasy Tactics. Bioware is no longer a good game studio, they sold out and gave into greed many years ago. Icewind Dale combat is often horribly overrated on these forums. It is no better in any way than either BG 1 or 2's combat.

You do realize that human eyes and the brain that processes the info from them isn't getting anything good out of frame rates as high as you're talking right?

Ya know... Having played all of the above games, IWD really didn't have better or more challenging combat than BG/BG2. At no point in IWD did I find myself up against an encounter that wiped me and I had to reload more than once or twice, and reloading at all was rare. There were points in both BG and BG2 I had to do this. (I always play on 'hardcore AD&D rules difficulty setting). IWD lacked the story and depth of BG and PST, and retroactively it's said that it focused on combat. I do not think having played them all, that IWD had the best combat by any means. In fact IWD2 had the worst combat AI out of all of them in my opinion. Baldur's Gate 1 beats Baldur's Gate 2 hands down in the exploration department. No good RPG game before or since has done exploration as well as BG did it in my opinion. That was one of the few things BG2 did the opposite of improve upon over BG1. PST of course has the best story I've ever come across in a video game of any genre. I'd compare it to some of the best books I've read. It's really in a video game class by itself insofar as story goes. That said, the one thing BG1&2 did that I liked that PST didn't do insofar as story didn't do, is that BG2 was a true sequel, picking up where BG1 left off and continuing the story. PST of course never had a sequel (nor should it have one, that story ended (and ended well)), but PoE is supposed to have a sequel someday, and when it does, I want a true sequel in the same manner as BG2 was a true sequel. So my opinion has been let's take all the best aspects from BG/BG2/PST, and that's about it. The IWD franchise, while better than many other franchises out there, were by far the weaker of the infinity engine games, and really are not in the same class as BG 1/2 and PST. But on topic. Let the storytellers tell their story. Romance isn't in every story, it need not be in this one.

Definitely good news in my opinion. To those who want their in game romance I'll say this: Keep in mind that Baldur's Gate didn't have romances, and Baldur's Gate 2 did. PoE will likely have a sequel. Perhaps romances might work better there. That said. One of the few things I didn't like about BG2 was the romances. The only game that comes to mind where I didn't mind or actually liked the romance was Final Fantasy VII. In Dragon Age, Witcher, and others, romances were yuck. If it adds to the main story like it did in FFVII, great, if it doesn't, keep it out of my RPG please.

Indeed. The backer portal was originally promised to us around holiday time last year. It's no small mistake on the part of Obsidian that it was not done back then I think. Largely due to the additional funding a good backer site could have garnered this last year.

Where? The linked interview certainly doesn't confirm it.

While I can see this happening to a new player to the genre or to AD&D, it's possible to go a long way before dying in BG1 if you play it well and safe.... past level 3 even. Party formation and how you move them around has a lot to do with it in that game. Granted, most games are easy mode compared to BG1, so most would not expect the unforgivable aspects of the combat. Save scumming certainly was not an issue, excepting for the most difficult of battles. But that's the norm in any good game. Mechanics that avoid save scumming likely are dumbing down the experience.

Heya!! Hi, I'm Noober. Nice place, huh? So, killed any monsters yet? Ever been to Baldur's Gate? I've been to Baldur's Gate. Ugh, I think i stepped in something. Everyone in town used to throw rocks at me and tell me I was annoying. What time is it? I haven't had a conversation this long, well...ever! What's that big weapon for? Those colours look pretty stoopid on you... I once knew this guy called Dilby. He threw rocks at me too. Are you gonna throw rocks at me? What about now? What about now? What about now? What about now? What about now? ... BZZZT!! ... ... What about now? What about now? What about now? What about now? What about now? Gee, you sure are patient. I've run out of things to say.