Ganrich

In the IE games I felt it was fine. Mostly because Melee was auto-attack. So you could set them and forget them for the most part. In PoE it did feel hectic. However, I think more customization for the classes to allow some to be much more auto-attack driven like the IE games would help. I still think PoE2 should be 6 person parties. I always felt 4 was too little in Dragon Age. However, that was because it (combined with the limited classes and customization) stifled group composition. However, in an open class system I don't see an issue with the smaller group size. This is because by removing class limitations you can have a great amount of variety. I just think group size and class systems need to compliment each other in a cRPG. The more rigid your classes the more bigger group sizes feel good. The more open the smaller you can go. I like the number 5 too, though.

If it's on GoG... That is where I will buy it. If it isn't then I can deal with Steam. I just hope for Linux support.

Yeah, I think an Arcanum spiritual successor would be fine here. All it needs (IMHO) is: 1) Tim Cain 2) Steam Punk 3) A setting where technology comes about in a fantasy world and doesn't agree with magic at all. However, I would be fine if they took a Shadowrun approach and had magic show up in our world around the late 1800s to early 1900s. 4) Somber score with all string instruments, or at least a heavy amount of string instruments. 5) Open class system that is as versatile as Arcanum, but make technology skills more viable. There are probably a few I am missing. I would retain the fantasy races, personally. But I could live with a change here. I would also make all skills require 10 points to max instead of some requiring 10 and others 5. The amount doesn't matter but conformity should be there. Everything should cost the same to max out. Also, I would separate attribute points from skill points. I would retain the 8 attributes, but wouldn't cry if Body was sacrificed to only have 7 attributes. I would be fine with adding feats to allow more versatility. Some feats may require maxing one skill (like fire magic) and nearly maxed second skill (say Melee). The feat you would gain allows all melee damage to have added fire damage. They just need to ensure each possible skill combo has a feat with the exception of tech skills and magic skills mixing. Eh, small post got big fast. Anyway that is what I would want, but the premise of Arcanum spiritual successor is enough.

I asked the same, and request it have Tim Cain at the helm.

I definitely agree. I hope this game has conversations that are the deciding factor on how combat heavy it is. However, on the world map section of the game's webpage it is showing a "Monster" population. That could mean combat, but it could mean your character can influence the area to create a militia to combat the monster population. This decision may have negative effects such as the cities life expectancy being much lower, literacy decreases because of focusing on the militia, increased chances of the city population starting uprising, etc. There is definitely some different things that could happen that could be very interesting.

The trailer shows combat (even if only 3 seconds of it). So, I doubt that will be the case, Humanoid. However, I like your idea, and would definitely play a game along those lines, but I don't see it happening.

I think my one question is: Is this another RTwP game or is it TB? I think most would assumed RTwP since it obviously is using PoE tech. However, I know Obsidian has expressed interest in TB, and there is a fairly large group of Obsidian's forum members that like TB. I like both, but I would like a few more details on the gameplay. Admittedly, I could have missed this tidbit. I have watched the stream, read the website, etc and I am still unsure.

I am excited. I enjoyed Pillars, and I have zero issues with them reusing the engine. The art for it (backgrounds in particular) is great. I want to Obsidian flex their muscles more to use it creatively. We will see how this pans out.

I always expect cancellation after an IP changes studios, and if it doesn't get cancelled I expect Duke Nukem. I really enjoyed EQ1 many years ago, but I expect little from the franchise these days. It looked interesting, and i always hate seeing innovation die before it is realized, but I am not surprised. As an MMO player the only game I have any real interest in is Camelot Unchained, but I was always a PvP player. Seeing that 99.9% of MMOs are PvE games with PvP strapped on... I haven't enjoyed many games in the genre. UO, DAoC, Shadowbane (was revlutionary, but combat was dated even for its time), etc. I like PvP with meaning, but without penalizing newer players with gear gaps, item looting, etc. I am tired of it being relegated to instanced matches with a huge gear tread mill like it is PvE content. MMOs need some innovation. This game getting cancelled will inhibit that, for sure. Even if it was trying to innovate PvE content the building/destruction could have benefited PvP too... I am sad to see it die before it had time to shine.

A couple things: 1) If AMD is to believed (I understand hesitation), then their Polaris cards should see more power in a lower price bracket. I think their aim is to have cards that compete with Nvidia's 970 to be around $200-250. While cards on the level of the 980 will be $400-500. They said their aim is for Polaris to make graphics capable of VR more affordable. This means cards capable of 4K will come down in price. This will force Nvidia's prices down, and that is a win/win for us consumers. 2) I was under the impression that 4K monitors could upconvert 1080p, or maybe it is the GPU settings. if you are in the 27ish inch range the difference between a 1080p monitor and a 4K where your game is running 1080p but upscaling to 4K would be negligible unless you are right on top of your monitor. The bigger the monitor the worse upscaling will look for sure, and native will always be better.

Well, the monitor I listed may be worth a look. Gsync is a hardware addon to monitors. That monitor doesn't have it (you can buy the Gsync module down the line and mod it in, but that is too much of a hassle for me), and from what I've seen Gsync will add $100+ to a monitor it is included in. So, you may want to forgo it. However, look at that Asus. I also am fine with 1080p at present, and only wanted a monitor with solid response time and 120-144hz. It has been a great monitor, and I have had it for nearly 2 years with zero complaints. I would look into its color capability because that wasn't much of a factor for me. That monitor hits every beat you are asking for except color. Color is a weak point for me as I don't care much since I am purely a gamer on my PC with the exception of music recording/mixing as a hobby. Just an FYI, AMDs Freesync is a software standard that's been added to monitors via Display port and HDMI (I can't remember which versions). I am unsure about DVI. Anyway, both AMD and Intel support it, and it will likely be supported by Nvidia since Gsync adds to the price. Monitor companies are adding more Freesync than Gsync this year it seems. Time will tell which wins.

I have an Asus VG248qe. It's 24 inch, 1080p at 144hz. It is a nice monitor. However, it is a TN panel, and thus it may not meet your color needs. It is mountable for sure. I have an Obutto Revolution (I play Elite dangerous and a few other sims), and have the monitor mounted to that. So, the monitor has VESA mounting for sure. I did zero modding aside from removing the base to gain access to the mounting holes. I guess I would ask a few questions not covered in your OP. Is 1080p enough, or are you aiming for 2k or 4k? Do you want Freesync or Gsync? Are you looking at IPS monitors to get better colors? If yes (to IPS monitor), are you ok with the loss of response? Edit: autospell.

I will agree with Fighter that the show definitely doesn't single out women. They were much more apparent about "Little Theon's" fate in the show than the books were. That is someone equally grotesque, IMHO.

If you are changing the story to make it better, and that is including something like torture, rape, etc. I have no issue with it. However, the majority of the GoT changes are shock value changes that actually water down the story. I will critique the show makers for going for the easy shock than making a better TV show. I won't go as far as labeling it misogyny, though. So, I sit in the middle of this debate, and can easily see both sides. I am a fan of the books. I think Martin succeeded in creating an un-filmable series, and the end result is that I can see that fact become very apparent in the show. It becomes more apparent every season. So, much is lost in translation, and to fill the void I feel HBO fills the holes with shock. The butterfly effect is about to rear its head in this next season. A character killed early on that must be replaced to continue on. While through out the series characters don't appear, are not mentioned, and whole sections of story are completely twisted. Some characters are more interesting on the page than the screen as well. One example is that Stannis is much more enjoyable to read about, but not to watch IMHO. That isn't a fault of the actor, but the writing/directing. That is completely my opinion though. I am still watching because I enjoy the world, the actors, and so on. However, the show is a shadow of the books at this point. Season 1 was incredibly well done though and had minimal changes. Some changes are well done in the show. I really liked the Aria and Tywin story arch from the show, and it was an example of a great change that minimized the changing of who was in control of Harenhall through out the books. Which may have been more confusing in the TV show if copied verbatim. My critiques of the show are more about story changes that come from being a fan of the books, but I always went in with an expectations of change. I won't bash the show as I knew I wouldn't like it as much. It is a fair attempt at the translation. We will see how season 6 pans out, and more importantly if we will get to read Winds of Winter before season 7 or before Martin dies.

Listen, when I said I enjoyed the combat in kotor.. I meant just that. I definitely think it could be better, I put it between the IE titles and NWN, though. I agree that kotor 2's streamlining of the combat was better, and it added Weapon Finesse which was my big WTF moment in the first game when I realized it was absent. I hate NWN1 combat with a fury. It was clunky, and obnoxious. I am not saying kotor was the end all be all. I've never been that high in my life. I would argue that this isn't a rose tinted glasses issue. This isn't a new title under the same name, a sequel, or a spiritual successor. This is taking a title, and remaking it. You are keeping the story and scrapping everything else. It's the equivalent of remaking a movie, keeping the actors, camera angles, sound effects, etc. However, you are recording everything again and adding a bunch of special effects. It feels like the Star Wars Ep 4, 5, and 6 theatrical rerelases of the 90s to an extent (although Lucas didn't record everything again), and I somewhat feel that the end result will be Greedo shoots first, the sarlacc will be inspired by Little shop of horrors, and they replace Ghost Anakin's actor at the end. It's fair that Kotor is a mod, but it still feels weird. Skywind makes sense. You are just facelifting the older better setting in the same engine. Any title I were to ask for a remake I would expect it to play the same with just have a graphic overaul, but not overhaul any aspect of the story or the game itself. You could add to it, but don't edit what is already there. Otherwise you are making a new game, and keeping a story. At which point you may as well write your own story with a new setting and be able to sell your game. Im quite surprised FF fans didn't riot with the FF7 announcement. That's my 2 cents, I guess.

I have a question. Let me preface it with something. I love storytelling, and find its potential (although squandered a lot) in video games interesting. However, many people don't care about it, but many here do for obvious reasons (Obsidian's stock and trade). However, we have 2 RPGs being remade at present (This and FF7), and they are being made from the ground up. They are getting new engines, new combat, etc. Why completely change the combat? These two games were halmarked for their story, for sure. However, FF had solid combat as it was, and I enjoyed the Kotor games combat, personally. These two titles are going to have a pretty large audience based on the players of the original titles, but I don't see either completely blowing the doors off local game stops or shutting down steam. So changing their combat really is just going to ostracize the people who may buy the product for sentimental reasons while incredibly risky because they aren't too likely to pull in new players. Maybe I am wrong, but I just don't understand it. I mean Kotor may sell because it's Star Wars, and FF because it's FF. I just don't understand not having similar combat to the original titles. Maybe it's just me, and I'm old. It isn't unlike a movie reboot that treats an older IP unkindly. It just seems a strange trend as of late. I am not saying I won't play this, or knocking it for what it is. I am genuinely curious as to other people's opinion on why the need to change the combat completely.

Wow, this is sad. Well, Fable was the only one remotely interesting to me. I would give Halo a try if it came to PC. I wonder if MS will try to reinstate the Xbox Live fee from GfWL with the online side of these games? I can't help but wonder what is going on though. My guess is that these ports plus the UWP API are a contingency for DirectX 12 losing to Vulkan as another way of keeping gamers on Windows. Still doesn't explain Lionhead though. I expect the Xbox will live on, and they may leverage the ease of porting via UWP to shore up their exclusive games on Xbox as well. So, the Xbox won't have exclusives anymore, but Windows will.

Indeed. I am reading the AMD AMA that was done a few days ago. One dev posted his personal opinion on VR technology scaling by saying that they are aiming for 16k at 240FPS. That is when they believe the tech will simulate reality. So, the game devs will need to pick up their facial animation game. https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/48e8rl/radeon_technologies_group_qa_is_happening_here_on/

@Elerond - I don't disagree with what your saying. I am only saying the slow phasing out of Win32 could be like DOS. That's it. They make a new API, make it more potent then Win32, lock it to their store, let Win32 atrophy with Time, when adoption of new API is high enough then stop supporting Win32. Microsoft could argue that with the onset of the mobile market and Apple and Google's dominance there that they aren't a monopoly like the old Netscape days. They have a decent argument as well. So, I wouldn't be so sure they wouldn't risk billions to potentially turn their store into the "only" store, or even the only full featured store by limiting their competitors applications. Since if they won they would probably make much more money than they stand to lose. It isn't like a loss here would bankrupt the company. They have some money lying around. I am always hesitant when big companies make big moves that look even a little shady. IMHO, it is better to be a little paranoid than to trust these big companies to do what is best for their consumers vs what is best for the bottom line. I don't want the PC game industry to be sideswiped. To each their own though.

I mean similar to DOS in execution more than the details of the situation. They let it survive side by side with Windows for many years, and one day it was gone. UWP and Win32 can survive side by side for now. Maybe permanently, but it is more likely that it will be phased out like DOS. I am not too sure Apple will ever be in the position to steal certain parts of the PC community. Gaming being one of them. They are expensive with limited hardware options. They have crappy hardware, and their OpenGL support is usually years behind, and Vulkan (if supported) will likely lag as well. Google is mostly ARM focused, and I don't know if they care much about x86 much past ensuring Chrome is competitive. Valve's Linux push could swoop in of course. I am not saying you are wrong and that this fear is silly, but MS has an anticompetitive streak. MS aslo has a history of BEing less than honest to the PC gaming market. So the lack of trust in this community particularly is understandable. From GfWL to statements along the lines of "We have some interesting stuff for our PC gamers in the near future" that lead to nothing. PC gamers have had little to thank MS for in the past 20 years with the exception of DirectX, and DX benefits MS more than gamers in the end.

Not saying this game is AAA, but Elite: Dangerous is pretty amazing on the Rift DK2. It is a great experience. I will personally attest to it. If space Sims are your cup of tea I would recommend giving it a try if you can. Star Citizen is also supposed to support VR, but they have some animations/features that will be problematic. We will see how that is handled in the end. I think most AAA games will take more time since the FPS genre is a bulk of it and typical fps run speed, head bobble, camera jerk on death, etc are VR sickness inducing. These companies will wait for a population to appear on VR before attempting a game, IMHO. Edit: also, mkreku is correct. The Vive "supports" moving around the room, but also allows sitting down. It is more versatile than the Rift in the end. The only thing you lose are built in headphones.

The fear is that MS will cease support of Win32 over time, and this will enforce their store as the only option on Windows. This isn't unlikely how they removed DOS from their platform in the early Windows days. I don't think Valve or Tim Sweeney care if the Windows store is required on tablets or Xbox, but only if it is required on PC because it goes against everything that built MS's empire to begin with. It also allows anti-competitive power against other Windows stores: Steam, GoG, Origin, Uplay, Battle.net, etc. It can also inhibit personal sales of any dev's product. It is a slippery slope. Let's not forget that this API likely requires DX12 as well, and that will inhibit competition from Vulkan. In the end I don't the it is so much what are the benefits vs what kind of power it gives MS to leverage a war with a portion of its Windows reliant 3rd party developers in order to siphon their business. It is a scary proposition.

Polygon did an interview with Time Sweeney on their Newsworthy podcast if anyone is interested. It is a bit more detailed than his Op-Ed. http://www.polygon.com/2016/3/4/11158992/tim-sweeney-and-windows-10-as-game-blocking-monopoly-newsworthy

Yup, the complexity ( <- see wut I did there) of dota is why I am adverse to trying. I don't have the time to get competent at it, but it looks fun. I already have a few games I play that have a learning curve (Tekken is one of them), and I don't need another game where you need to know nearly everything to excel when there is sooo much.

I will trust the gaming devs over a MS rep. Tim Sweeney saying what Valve has been saying is pretty big. All it would take is Blizzard joining the fray and I think PC gamers will get shaken and start thinking. Heck, I can only imagine what would happen if the big publishers start speaking out (I doubt they will), but EA and Ubisoft could given Origin and Uplay. CDPR may as well. If more devs start speaking out then we may see more devs support Vulkan in the upcoming API war vs DX12. That, in an of itself, will get MS back pedaling, and if not... Then we say bye Windows being the gaming OS. I'm glad I have a Steam machine ready to go. I'll be extra glad when my desktop PC doesn't require Windows. I'm being hopeful, though.