Gumbercules

Heh, now I see why these attributes might be considered controversial. Reading Sensuki's guesses I was thinking "Hmm, all of this seems perfectly reasonable and inoffensive..." but the final result could definitely make simulationists pitch a fit. The attribute system looks like it could be very interesting and fun to play around with. Just looking at it on paper, without having played the game obviously, it looks like it could get an "A" for build variety and tough decision-making but an "F" for intuitiveness. The way the attributes contribute to defenses is intuitive and easy to remember, but you could probably randomly jumble the other attribute effects and they would make about as much sense. I'm excited to test out various attribute builds when the game is finally released, but please make it a top priority to figure out a way to make the attribute logic easy to justify and remember. I dunno, it might just be a matter of presenting the player with lore-based explanations of each attribute written in a persuasive enough way that they forget to think, "Wait, but couldn't Strength just as easily affect Damage?"

Wow, lots of interesting new information. Regarding where everyone is in the world: are the islands visible in the upper left corner of the PoE map the Aedyr Empire or is that further away? And is every location that you described still in the southern hemisphere?

I can't think of any isometric party-based sci-fi RPGs off the top of my head. If we expand it to include third person RPGs there's Mass Effect and KOTOR, and there's a bunch of sci-fi games in other gameplay genres like shooters or strategy games, but really there's no sci-fi equivalent of the Infinity Engine games. Plus there's tons of stuff you can do with sci-fi, especially if you move away from space opera. It should be at least theoretically much more open than traditional fantasy. You often see fantasy returning to elves, dwarves, orcs, etc., but sci-fi properties at least always have to invent new aliens even if they borrow ideas from other properties. All of the settings that you listed sound great and I would back any one of them. I do think however, that since Obsidian pretty much chose the safest possible genre for their first Kickstarter game, it might appeal to them to gradually Kickstart less safe choices until they have a few stable IPs. So a good progression might be trad. fantasy -> sci-fi -> something less traditional.

Here's what I said in the Rock Paper Shotgun interview thread: I actually don't care too much about the specifics of the setting, and whether it would be space opera or more of a hard sci-fi. I trust Obsidian's storytelling abilities either way. Phase-based wasn't an option in the poll, but I think it would be ideal for a game that focused more on guns and cover than close combat and magic. Frozen Synapse shows that you can do some really interesting, intense stuff with such a setup without it just devolving into a bunch of rooms with chest-high crates and walls scattered throughout. Plus, based on the arguments that both sides made in the Torment: Tides of Numenera combat poll, it seems like phase-based would satisfy many of the concerns that were brought up.

Dragon Age: Inquisition is supposed to be open world, perhaps as a response to Skyrim's popularity. And sure, there's still room for variation even within the confines of open world fantasy RPGs. But it is still a niche that is being served without anyone having to pledge money for it, which makes it a less certain Kickstarter idea. I think my isometric sci-fi suggestion is both safer from a fundraising and production standpoint (PoE will provide them with a tech base and show potential backers what can be accomplished for a few million dollars) yet bolder from a creative standpoint (a space opera type of sci-fi setting is hardly obscure, but how many party-based tactical RPGs of that type are we seeing?).

Well, The Witcher 3 and Dragon Age: Inquisition are the two upcoming ones off the top of my head, but http://lmgtfy.com/?q=open+world+rpgs+2014 Also please don't do that thing where you paint anyone who's remotely critical of something as spazzing, raving, frothing at the mouth, etc. This is just my early feedback. Their final pitch may look vastly better. If so, great! And if you like what we've heard so far, that's cool too. I merely disagree.

Exactly wasn't the whole point of kickstarting Eternity, Tides, and Wasteland 2 because it was something publishers had no interest in. I think a publisher may serve Obsidian better if they want to make a massive open world game. Not really, you're missing the point entirely, they get none of the profits if a publisher is involved and they don't own the IP. They only get paid their wages and costs to produce the game for the publisher and that's it....maybe a bonus but not always(they never got a bonus for new vegas). An idea that would appeal to a larger audience is important and no, they would sure as hell not go to a publisher if they can avoid it. I'm in complete support of them getting the profits for the games they make as well as them retaining ownership of the IPs. I have nothing against them owning the IP and the profits. My point is that "Hey, we're making the same thing as everyone else, except this way we get to keep more money!" is not a great Kickstarter pitch. The trends for what works on Kickstarter are very different from what works with the wider audience. That's why you don't see many FPSs or TPSs, MMOs, mobile games, etc. on there. They're already being made without consumers having to fork up money ahead of time. If Obsidian want a game that will be successful on Kickstarter and that they can own the IP and profits of, they should leave Skyrim-type games to the publishers.

What struck me most about this interview is how all or most of it seems like stuff suited to pitching to publishers. Everyone's eager to replicate the successes of Skyrim, so It seems like Obsidian should be able to find a publisher to fund such a game. Even if they get rejected by everybody, there's not much reason for us gamers to care since we'll have plenty of choice in this genre as everyone seeks to make a Skyrim killer. The Witcher 3 in particular will probably be better than anything Obsidian attempts with a Kickstarter budget. The same applies to a lesser extent for licensed titles and episodic gaming. If you're going to ask the crowd for money, give us something different from what publishers are expecting.

Bleh, barely any of that sounded appealing, beyond just the general idea of more Kickstarter games. I'm skeptical of an episodic open-world game. Doesn't it defeat the whole purpose of an open world if you break it up into small chunks? I suppose they could make it so that the episodes each just introduce new areas and factions that integrate seamlessly into a complete game. Don't like the idea of licensed stuff, or of doing too many spinoffs too soon within the Pillars of Eternity world either. More original properties please. Pillars of Eternity already looks better than Forgotten Realms, so I would prefer that they just make an original ripoff/homage of whatever they're thinking of licensing. My ideal idea of a second Obsidian Kickstarter project would be a phase-based isometric scifi game, with party-based fighting as well as FTL-like ship combat. Picture FTL meets Frozen Synapse meets Mass Effect. Barring that, just anything original or weird (I'm not saying the sci-fi idea is weird. It's a pretty obvious route to go).

Obsidian is developing a Linux version of Pillars of Eternity, which means it already should be able to run on Steamboxes. Additionally, Valve is designing the Steambox controller to work with mouse-and-keyboard-based games even if they don't support it natively. Therefore, there is no need for Obsidian to waste any of their limited time and resources to specifically design the game for controllers and couches, especially before anyone knows if that's even an important market segment.

Where is this idea that UIs should keep the bottom center free coming from? I've been looking at UIs for various recent RPGs and strategy games just now and virtually none of them follow this supposed rule. Not only are skeuomorphic UIs more common than I had remembered, even in recent games, but even those that aren't still usually plonk some key UI element on the bottom center of the screen.

I vote against having any small gaps in the UI. Gaps are only useful or relevant in games with a fluid, rotating camera. In those cases, the expectation is that you'll be moving the camera around and the little snippets of game world that you view through the gaps will add up in your mind and create a larger viewing area. For a stiffer camera that can only pan (and zoom somewhat I guess), gaps only serve to remind you that the UI is blocking part of the game world. Larger gaps, like in Karkarov's mockup are OK I guess. I'm not a fan but neither would I get angry if that ended up being the final result. But smaller gaps like the ones in Sensuki's scare mockups are terrible and pointless and should be filled in, even if it's just with filler art.

We've seen artwork for: Eder: rogue Feathered chick: paladin (by the look of her at least?) Cadegund: priest Forton: monk Sagani: ranger Aloth: wizard (by the looks of him) Orlan dude: cipher Green chick: druid (again, by the looks of her) which means that - if these are, in fact, are all companions - chanter/barbarian/fighter are without companions. I think I remember someone saying that not all the characters shown so far would necessarily be companions. Plus you listed eight potential companions without any of them being an aumaua, which seems unlikely.

I'm curious to know which companion classes we'll be missing if you stick to just the current 8 companions.

So are you confident that animations, effects, etc. will have enough time and money as is? Are companions and wilderness the only two stretch goal possibilities because you are satisfied with how everything else is shaping up? Additionally, the number of current companions vs proposed additions is pretty obvious, but what about wilderness areas? Is the current scope close to the in-between-BG1-and-BG2 goal that was originally considered? If so, how much additional wilderness would the stretch goal add?

Managing my pledge went smoothly, so good job there. The teaser trailer was nice, if short. There's plenty of stuff to nitpick, especially as far as animations, effects, and environmental details go, but it's pretty obvious that all those things will improve when the game enters the polishing phase. The Rock Paper Shotgun preview was a bit concerning in some regards. The author didn't seem too impressed with the originality or depth of options of what he saw. The quotes from Obsidian, both in that article and the various others, of course sound great, but hopefully the game content reflects them better as development continues. Good work overall.

Both of the stretch goal options sound good as long as they don't affect the release more than a few months maximum. If extra companions in particular would delay the game substantially, I'd rather they just be saved for the expansion instead.

Whenever an update is late, delayed, or off-schedule in some way, I do feel a brief twinge of impatience and annoyance, then I remember that we're merely talking about news about an unreleased video game and I go about my day. That said, I think Obsidian and the Project Eternity team do have some room for improvement as far as communication goes. You guys are probably amongst the most revealing, open, honest, and friendly of the Kickstarter game devs, but you sometimes fail at framing things in the right context or clarifying things without prodding from fans. For example, there's the first art update, which wasn't exactly received well in all corners of the web. I think part of the reason for that is because the writeup that accompanied it was more focused on making jokes than on explaining how the drawings and models fit in the context of game making. It's a small distinction, but saying, "We know this art looks ugly to outsiders but it's exactly what we need at this point for ___ reasons," is much better than saying, "WIP, so don't be all 'Argh!'" Similarly, feel free to take a month or two in between updates if the need should arise, but it's better if you give us a heads up and an explanation ahead of time instead of just popping in at the last minute on the expected day. This openness associated with Kickstarter games is very unusual and new so it's quite understandable that there may be hiccups from time to time, and like I said at the start of this post it's relatively trivial stuff anyway. Still, no harm in a little extra trust and goodwill from better communication.

I like the idea of different animal companions having vastly different advantages and foci. Could be a good way to make the class feel varied and versatile. I wonder if each ranger will have a whole menagerie of companions to swap between, or if you stick with one throughout the game? Maybe there could be Talents that let you choose if you want to focus on improving ranged attacks or focus on keeping multiple animal companions at the same time.

The concept art looks terrific! Once again, you're taking a well-worn concept (the hippie tree city) and updating it to feel fresher (vikings + weird mysterious black structures). I have some criticisms of the in-game stuff, however. The drake skeleton looks way too fresh and intact, as if it were a prop that was dropped in at the last minute. It's likely that this is just because it hasn't received the 2D paintover yet, but it needs to feel like it was there for a while as part of the landscape. The trolls are also really difficult to discern. Maybe it's just the way the screenshot came out, but they look like murky, shapeless masses. I thought the models from the GDC slides also appeared too drab and easy for the eye to slide off of, although not quite to this extent. It feels a bit patronizing to say this to experienced developers, but maybe incorporate more of Valve's advice for DOTA 2 character design in your creatures and NPCs and see if you can make them pop more without going too cartoonish: http://media.steampowered.com/apps/dota2/workshop/Dota2CharacterArtGuide.pdf Will the big update and backer site be up next week, or do we have to wait 2+ weeks?

I mostly agree with what seems to be the prevailing consensus in this thread that mechanics and common-knowledge lore should be revealed while plot and rare lore should be kept a secret. However, I think that to focus solely on the common stuff may make the game seem too bland or conventional, so I think they should also rarely reveal context-light snippets of weirder or more dangerous stuff.

Thanks for posting the link! It looks like the combat screenshot shows our first glimpse of the arcane veil. Looks more solid and tangible than I was expecting, but I like it. I'd like more context for the "Return of the Curse of Scooby-Doo" slide. Perhaps something about whether enemies always stay in the same place in a dungeon or move around? Is the red armor with the spiked helmet from a new culture, or is it just a variant for the existing cultures?

Interesting that he says the game is progressing ahead of where he thought it would be, considering that pre-production seems to have taken longer than what Obsidian originally gave out as estimates. Maybe they got some stuff done then that they had originally expected to tackle later, or maybe production is just going really well.

IWD definitely has the best intro of the IE games, and I wouldn't be opposed to something similar in P:E. It would also fit nicely with the illustrated "choose-your-own-adventure"-style screens that we already know P:E will have. I wouln't mind some other approach either, as long as it were at least as classy and future-proof. The intro cinematics of the other IE games are really cheesy and outdated these days, and I wouldn't want P:E to suffer the same problem.

There's a pretty big difference between not knowing how your character is going to speak or act, and not knowing how others will interpret that. It's the same as not knowing what an object is vs. not knowing whether or not the object in question is even real or a hallucination. Once you're sure of your own senses and intentions, you can use context and intuition to determine how others will react. Yes, there's still a chance you'll screw up, but it'll be in a much more fun and realistic way.