Lephys

I think simply dividing the adventure up into segments of "we've un-donned all our clunky gear" is the best idea. "Oh, we've gotten to town, which is supposed to be relatively safe, and we're at our room in the inn, now. I'll just take all my plate off and go out in some lesser equipment." Basically, the game could allow you plenty of opportunities to see your character's head, without the need for an option that makes sure you can always see it. But, that's just me...

@PrimeJunta, And I accept that, but you also don't reply to everything I say despite not reading it, so I have absolutely no problem with that. @Immortalis, I don't always have the time to read every single post in a thread, or remember them all perfectly even if I did (when the thread is multiple pages in length). The easiest thing to do, if that is really the case, is to say "I already stated that," and/or optionally link to the post in which you already said that. All you told me was "I feel like you're not reading what I'm typing" and "I don't think you're addressing what I'm saying." So, my apologies if you already said that very thing, and in my human limitation, I missed that fact. Also, I'm not trying to win anything, so I have no premise for that.

Dude... wax seals are too legit to quit.

Not that you're not allowed to dislike it, but here's my question: If PoE's 3D models look like crap, then what have all the games from the past 20 years looked like this whole time? Is the dividing line between crap and splendor at a fixed point, or is it tethered to the maximum graphical capabilities of the year, always dragging behind it at a fixed distance? Once they perfect virtual reality games, and everything just looks real because the graphics are just signals sent through our neural network to our brain to be interpreted as images, will everything below Crysis 2 look like crap?

Is it, though?

Apologies, as I did not mean to suggest that there's no interaction whatsoever without a present spouse/apple-of-your-eye. What I mean is... there's a certain kind of interaction that's absent. It's the difference between just sitting at your stronghold and issuing orders to parties and forces you send out, then waiting for news of their return and their progress, and actually venturing out and participating in bouts of combat, yourself. It's the difference between sitting there with someone and playing a timed chess match, and mailing your moves to each other at a rate of one move per week. Also, I, too, prefer it over the teenage squeeing, but having a present interest does not automatically = teenage squeeing, for what it's worth. I don't want the person to be present so that I can have teenage squeeing. I want them to be present so that they can actually be a part of what ever else is going on in the world, and not some separate, disconnected thing. There's nothing wrong with their being separate via distance or memories, etc. That's perfectly fine and allowed, and does what it does very well. I just prefer that other things, that it does not do (and that are not teenage squee-worthy) to also be present, is all. Honestly, though, that particular example of letter-writing sounds like an overly convoluted typical romance dialogue. Again, not that letter-writing is inherently bad, but it does seem to be a bit more difficult to intertwine the whole romance/relationship thing and the lore/world/narrative when the only interactions you ever have with said person comes in the form of isolated letter-writing. Romance needs to get away from being an intermission amid the rest of the game.

Elerond, I believe Sarog's idea of orcs is more general than you think. Basically, you wouldn't have 16-foot tall, really thin, long-limbed creatures in your world and call them "dwarves," would you? Nor would you have hulking 10-foot-wide brick-wall-looking creatures with no grace whatsoever and call them "elves." You could, but you wouldn't. Same thing with Orcs. They don't have to be huge, and they don't have to be green, and they don't have to have tusks, but... they've got to maintain some kind of orcish design, or there's no reason to call them "orcs." I think that's all he's saying. The most notable traits of orcs, from precedent, are the large, physically-powerful humanoid form and green skin (most commonly, although there are plenty of other variants of skin color, and there could definitely be plenty of ethnicities of orcs, only one of which -- or maybe even none of which -- is green), etc.

Aww. Well, hope they will add variant of deathgod like's head growth thing that covers whole face kinda like mask or helmet. I don't really like the "Helmet that covers everything but mouth" look Seconded. I don't hate the current godlike heads, but I'd prefer some kind of asymmetrical design that at least shows one eye or something. When it just covers almost the whole head like that, it looks more like something they're wearing than something that's a part of them, is all. Plus... just options, really. It'd be kind of like having a race at character creation that HAD to be bald. I mean, in Guild Wars 2, the Sylvari (plant folk) don't really have hair, but they came up with some pretty interesting hair-like foliage patterns that fit really well with them. Instead of just giving them green hair or something, or preventing them from having hair. I dunno... I mean, we probably haven't seen all the godlike head variants. I'm just vying for some variety, especially in the death godlike (if they all just have giant, everything-but-mouth-concealing "something's wedged on my head and I can't get it off" growths, it would be disappointing, from a variety standpoint. I don't demand that we get to make a death godlike that looks just like anyone else or anything. I'd just like for there to be variety in the way their growths manifest.

I would agree with Bruce, only in that a lack of actual interactions would heavily dilute the existence of anything in the game, much less romance. Imagine if there was a reputation system, but you didn't get to do things and have it be actively effected, you just picked some background options and such at character creation, then went through the whole game having people respond to that, and nothing else. You just have a passively set reputation for the entire game, and that's that. I would at least want to see the effects of my actions and choices on my distant relationship partner, etc. BUT, I will also say that the only way for this whole romance thing to be done well is to, as Nonek said, utilize our imaginations to scour the possibilities. I really think the main reason most romances in games are so "meh" (at best) is that the box in which they're allowed to be conceptualized is so small. Reminds me of MMOs. People keep making 'em, and they keep being 85% identical.

Hear hear! *fist raise of cheer*

@BrokenMask, You're not alone. I kind of love the sheer gameplay of ME3. I even enjoyed all the continuity/carry-over stuff from the first two games (regardless of the fact that the content, itself, obviously could've been more interesting, etc.). I basically enjoyed the crap out of ME3 (including the multiplayer co-op mode) all the way up until about the last 5 minutes.

For what it's worth, Stun: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Isle_Studios#Published If you trust Wikipedia on this, then you should probably read that page, under the "Published:" heading.

^Maybe one that just negates it entirely? "Quick with a Blade" or something. 8P

Be that as it may, there's just only so much "more"ness we can add to the game. There's all kinds of stuff I think would be amazing, but I comprehend the amount of priority they placed on something like this within the context of the rest of the game's design. Sandbox pickpocketing, while really fun, isn't really enhancing what else is already in the game. Especially alongside hand-placed scripted-interaction/dialogue pickpocketing. Also, while it's pretty similar, in concept, to being able to kill whomever you wish, killing people in the game is already functionally implemented, thanks to combat. Whereas, with pickpocketing, the only thing in the game that would use that mechanic would be sandbox pickpocketing. I don't think it's bad, and I'm not telling you not to want it in general or anything. I love the whole "you can pretty much try to do anything" aspect of PnP D&D, for example. But, in that, you have a DM who can adapt to what you're deciding to do, with whatever consequences he wishes. If you got into a D&D session, and just tried to kill everyone in existence, and/or steal from all of them, what would be the point in playing D&D at all?

^ That, and I also think it works well when 2 items gives you (example effect) +10% Coolness, 3 items gives you +15% coolness, 4 gives you +25%, etc. Instead of "I'm wearing everything except the Sock of Coolness, but I'm still equally as lame as I was before. *puts sock on* Whoa!!! I just gained a ton of Coolness! 8D" I like to mix-and-match armor pieces... of various styles, that is. I'm not gonna wear a cloth bracer and a plate bracer, a leather boot and a bare foot, a plate helmet and a robe... etc.

I mean this very matter of factly, and not in some hostile fashion (pretend C3PO is saying it), but, I've exhausted the various manners in which to present my points, and someone isn't happy no matter what. If I'm concise, there's an outcry of "you're just making a claim and not proving anything with an explanation!" If I explain things, there's outcry "Oh man, you just type so much word on the screen that I can't handle the amount of word! But, I think I'll just not-read it all and still continue arguing with you! 8D!" So... my options are basically to never post, or to post and watch people complain about it. 8P Such is life. My brain apparently annoys people, and I hate that it does. But, I'm hardly going to refrain from being an active part of a discussion community just because some people are a little more argumentative than they are patient. That's one of the things I was trying to tell you. The current precedents for what's a quest and what isn't are not restrictions upon PoE's "objective" system. An objective could be anything. Or, to keep it in quest terminology, you could "get a quest" simply by stumbling upon a situation and/or there could be exploration-based quests. "Figure out what's up with these crazy ruins." Well, if they're surrounded by disgruntled wombat people, you can't really figure much out about them. Thus, you go slaughter them all, and figure out stuff. Boom. XP. Objectives could be anything at all, and I trust Obsidian not to make them stupid ("Travel 50 feet, 8D!", or "Find a random group of hostile things, and arbitrarily sneak past them instead of fighting them, accomplishing nothing by the stealth! 8D!", etc.)

^ NONSENSE! THEY ARE CODE-BOTS! The fact that they were defectively programmed with human needs and psyches is most unfortunate, but IRRELEVANT! GET BACK TO WORK! *cracks whip* Or, in the words of that kid from Wedding Crashers, "MAKE ME A BICYCLE, CLOWN!" Wait... did you just... did you just spend a dollar at the drink machine?! A dollar... from your PAYCHECK?! WRONGFULLY-ALLOCATED RESOURCES! *blows whistle*

Yeah, basically, AI should cover your peeps not-dying simply because they were standing around picking their noses. It shouldn't win any battles for you, but it might help you not stupidly lose some. 8P "That rabbit bit Steve to death, simply because he wasn't doing anything at all after he expertly executed that troll! >_<"

Look, Sensuki... it's completely organized and in no way problematic to anyone's understanding. It's just that it's a complete mess. That's all. *insert excessive laughter acronym here*

Doesn't seem like a good idea to me, either for the game balance (making negative modifier a positive thing isn't a good idea and can be abused) or for the meaning of CHA stat. CHA means force of personality, it is not beautiful/ugly axis. To substitute STR for CHA is a recommended way for such situation. Why is it not a good idea? You don't have to be ugly to be intimidating. Charisma is sort of a measure of the positive force of your personality. That's why people naturally are more accepting of, and react better to, people with high Charisma. Thus, low Charisma produces the opposite effect (people react worse to you, from the start). So, conceptually, it seems like, the lower your Charisma, the easier it'd be to intimidate people with your already-obviously-producing-negative-reactions presence. As for the balance thing, people with high Charisma might have trouble intimidating people. Problem solved. Understandable in most games, but that may not work so well in this one. Or, it'll yield some interesting results, to say the least.

Unless it's the god of explosions. "*BOOOM!*... Ahhh, I see you've come and paid great homage to our Lord of Explosions! He thanks you for leveling this temple and strengthening his hold on the world, ^_^"

I will just say, on the topic of Biowarian romances, that I can appreciate them for what they are, but do not consider them to be even close to the optimal design.

I'm almost certain I inadvertently started this conga-line of pun-ishment. Post #6 in this thread. One could say I was... spearheading this little operation? 6_u Seriously though, it's good to know someone's ensuring that I do my job, heh. In these dark, dark times of gamelessness while we wait, it's important to keep morale up.

Romantic attachments in complete isolation are always going to be just that -- sweet nothings -- and are always going to be worse than all the happenings you've described. Romantic attachments not in isolation, however... That's 99.9% of the problem with romances in games of late. They aren't part of the game. They're just an appendix. They're like... dying your equipment, or achievement hunting. "This really has nothing to do with anything, but we figured some people might enjoy it in complete isolation."

That's just a little more than ONE week! o_o Such closeness!