Ristora

Hi, I just wanted to say that I am very pleased with Pillars of Eternity thus far. I made my pledge to the project around April 6th 2 years ago? 3 years ago? It's been a while, but worth the wait. OBSIDIAN: Thank you for delivering what you said you would. I have only played the game for a few hours, but already I feel compelled to commend you on your work. Though it may not have been the intention, I feel like I am playing Baldur's Gate 3. Everything is perfect, from the dialogue to the mouse cursor icons the the wonderful audio. In a market saturated with appeals to the lowest common denominator, Pillars of Eternity is an absolute gem. I hope I'm not the only one who feels this way. I feel like I stole the game at $29. I will be buying copies for my friends at market cost. Thank you, Adam Mantha

They also have more hair and like live in forrest and set traps. And they have some feline blood in them. haha

Is there any word on how Orlans differ from halflings, other than pointy elf ears?

Frost: It is little things like this that set already fantastic games apart and makes them memorable. Fantastic idea!!!

Re-reading what I quoted and what you've said now, I see you may not have been talking about set items as in 'quest items' which is what I thought you were talking about, hence my attempt to show how there could be reactivity despite having the same 'set items' (quest items). Were you referring to quest lines with the same linear plot points (set items)?

Where is information on this slacker backer site? Will slacker backers have the option of purchasing things like a beta key or a hard copy of the game?

Oh...I guess I should have looked at the timestamps Thanks for the explanation--I think I did miss the original point/post as I came in mid argument.

Lephys, I think what we and others are getting at in this post and the dialogue post is that there has typically been a lack on the NPC side of cRPGs. Reputation and renown systems, accounting for combat telemetry as you put it and oneda brought up--these things make NPCs more reactive to the PC. It's as though there has typically been a lack of community and interactivity among NPCs, and I hope PE is groundbreaking in this respect.

Agreed. My hope for PE is that the story line paths, if mapped out, will resemble two trees joined at the trunk where the multiple branches at the one end of the tree represents early choices like class, the trunks the inevitable chokepoint in the story, and then the other branches of the tree representing where to go in a game world affected heavily by what was done at the chokepoint.

Wowzers. So, if I understand here, the debate originated over whether there should be healing stuffs that take time to work. I might get my head bitten off for trying to do this, but I'm going to try to defuse this situation while at the same time trying to inform myself of what is up for debate. It seems there are a few things to consider: OPTIONS I (OPTIONS 2 replace 'Healing' with 'Stamina') 1. a) Healing inside of combat b) Healing outside of combat 2. a) Healing with an item/spell b) Healing by regeneration c) Healing by rest 3. a) Instant effect b) Delayed effect If I'm not mistaken, one should be able to choose one dichotomous option from 1, 2, and 3, to frame what kind of scenario they are talking about. For example, OP I--1a + 2a + 3a <---I think that should be possible. Or something like this: For persistent wounds it should be 1b + 2a + 3a whereas for superficial wounds 1a or b + 2a or b + 3a. Does that make sense? Does it help at all? Of course, there is much more at stake in the debate now since there is the inevitable desire to save face, but maybe you guys will find this post so helpful that you will just be like "Let's let bygones be bygones and use this new wonderful way of talking about healing and stamina scenarios" hehe

I think your ideas are very relevant given that the PE devs are focusing heavily on combat. You may have implied this already with your comment, but just to be clear, when the main quest line is over, I think the PC should still be able to roam the world, and random encounters (even as simple as those found in Fallout 2 when fast traveling) in addition to what you explicitly mentioned, namely areas that refresh and react to your party, combined with a game that doesn't kick you out of it when you defeat it (which fallout 3 did well with) would certainly enhance replayability. What's more, when I finish a good game, like, something that I am intensely immersed in, I hate seeing an outro, credits, then main menu. The reward centers in my brain by this point are expecting a fix and cutting off the game abruptly is like getting someone addicted to heroin and then taking away their money and stash, (haha, maybe not completely analogous ) What I'm getting at is that the game should ease you out of it and having re-visitable areas like you mention oneda, allows for post-game withdrawl to be minimal and detox gradual.

Yeah, it said 8 or more than original donation. I thought maybe my original donation could be considered $0. hehehe

I would like a custom title! I just became a slacker backer. Does that qualify me?

Suppose there was a metric that kept track of lying and reputation as a liar. Also suppose you had a quest that was to retrieve an ancient artifact. Suppose you have multiple ways of retrieving this artifact and you do retrieve it. And suppose that during your course of finding the artifact you lie (via dialogue options; something you have done a lot in the past) to a very powerful person in order to get it, . Again, suppose you bring this artifact to the person who desires it. Now suppose they say "yeah, whatever, don't waste my time" because they are convinced that what you have brought them is counterfeit. In fact, because you are *such a dirty liar* they won't even consider having it appraised. You are forced to bring it to the black market where liars are run of the mill. There are nuances that would have to be worked out in this example, but I think it is pointed.

Astonishing indeed! I have high hopes. As for my disappointment with New Vegas, the game felt like it was rushed in development. The simplest answer I can give as to what New Vegas was lacking is to reiterate what I've already said I'd like to see in a game with respect to dialogue and then simply point out that it does not exist in New Vegas. I think the crux of it comes down to a need to elaborate on what I mean by course-of-the-game affecting. This may not have been the best mash up of words to describe my over all hope, because you are right, New Vegas did have course-of-the game-affecting dialogue. However, it was how those dialogue choices impacted the game world that was lacking, I think. The most striking example I can think of is Mr. House. Without getting into spoilers, I think its agreeable that nothing you said to Mr. House had any impact on the outcome of the game. His destiny was set in stone when the game began, as was the player character's destiny to be disappointed by a lackluster finish. Just my opinion. In New Vegas, important decisions like those regarding Mr. House came way too late in the game and were choked to death by the few planned endings the game devs had in mind. So, 'course-of-the-game-affecting' dialogue is not limited to the dialogue system in and of itself, but rather relies on a successful 'course of the game' to be...well, successful. New Vegas would have been better, in my view, if making it to reno was one of the first things you did in the game, the families were fleshed out more (and I'm talking a lot more, it was just bloody pathetic how easy it was to bypass them completely as though there were no powers in New Vegas proper whatsoever which did not do justice to the memory Fallout 2, assuming my memory isn't clouded by nostalgia), and the build up to the various endings started earlier. More fleshed out factions, a system of dialogue that takes into account renown and reputation of both PC and NPC, and choke points early on in the game rather than at the end would have made New Vegas a good game in my opinion.

If you really feel indebted, you should come by the #obsidianorderofeternity on quakenet and honour me with a real-time conversation!

I think your numbers are correct, but with what I'm proposing (also what Lephys is proposing) is not a plethora of unique textual dialogue options, but rather a myriad consequences throughout the game world based on what has been selected in dialogue. The difference is this: with 100% unique textual options you can get the appearance of consequences to come, but you may never be able to cash in on them. What I'm proposing is a system according to which the kinds of dialogue options selected are weighted on the basis of mood or attitude elicted, cached and manifest in some sort of gauge like a 'reputation' which impacts subsequent dialogue options with NPCs associated in some way with the original NPC (whether because they live in a small town and word travels fast, or because you verbally slighted a noble with global influence). Imagine fallout 2, or Baldurs gate 2 and ignore the plot linearity for a moment and focus on the dialogue options. What if the dialogue options, the story and such were all the same as they are now in those respective games, and each had a system behind them where, like I said, each option is weighted on the basis of mood or attitude elicited in the NPC (and to be clear, $null is a perfectly reasonable value for story line delivery etc, but when it comes to quests big or small, this system should register. And even in the case of storyline delivery, if an NPC shares the history of a relative who belonged to and served a faction and the PC poo-poo's the story, this could affect the PCs affiliation with the faction given time for word to spread). Based on the values cached from responses certain dialogue options that appear later in the game for a PC might not appear because of how they have responded to NPCs in the past. Why would an NPC tell a PC who has proven to be a smart-ass laissez-faire know-it-all that she is having genuine difficulties with such and such a problem? If this results in only getting 3 dialogue options from an NPC when there are 5 coded, I am completely happy with that. If this were a system in FO II or BG II there would appear to be more continuity in the game! Quality over quantity! Yes, there would be a lot of content that goes unexplored in an initial playthrough, but I see that as an incentive to make the game world richer, not make it simpler. I want to play a game, not click my way through an ebook with moving graphics. Also, I just started a new game of planescape torment because I never managed to get into it years ago. I'll check out this new planescape kickstarter too

I think it is a good idea, but I'm not sure that in practice it would affect the pirate community. If there were benefits, whether in game or just aesthetic, to having a legitimate copy of the game, the pirate community will find a way to tap into it regardless of whether something was purchased or not. As far as I can foresee, your solution would only benefit players who are already honest and are likely to buy the game if they find it worth while after pirating it anyway. One thing I could see working is a PE server that hosts lore, items, quests that vary on a regular basis each time the player logs in. Note I said 'hosts', kind of like how diablo 3 game content within the framework intended by the developers requires the information to be kept on the development side's server. However, I don't see this as a likely scenario. I really like your idea though CDX. If I'm missing something seem to have overlooked a point you made, let me know.

UGH. Exactly. These kinds of choke points drive me absolutely crazy. Of course, if the council decision outcome must be war, and there are 20 ways of getting it done, there should be genuine repercussions to the way in which you influence the council decision. If the war must happen, let me choose who I will fight for based on my deeds in game, and don't make my 20 options turn into the same consequence. I mentioned in another post about my dissatisfaction with New Vegas's main quest line where this kind of pivotal decision occurs late game. You get different endings, but there is no sense that your decision affected the game world in any meaningful way because the game is, well, over. Ideally, something like this council decision should occur mid game so the main quest line narrows early then flourishes again to allow for the big PC decision to genuinely affect the rest of the game, which should look notably different on subsequent playthroughs given different decisions.

I have to be honest, I only started looking at the announcements today, and I haven't encountered anything specific about dialogue. I played through FO New Vegas and was thoroughly disappointed in my interactions with Ceasar. Although it felt as though the factions in New Vegas were a real presence, by the time my character had a chance to influence them (this is just my opinion of course) it seemed like the game was over and there was no real difference in the game world at all. I do suspect that dialogue options with faction associates will be really fleshed out and consequnetial, but I'm worried about the dialogue with non-faction or 'main story line' NPCs being nothing more than a delivery system for a story with not real affect on the PC and therefore gameplay. This isn't to say they are going to botch it, but I am still concerned

That would be nice, so long as it is 'accessible'.

Thanks Malekith, I will check it out. Hopefully it's on GoG! I will report back within the next few days at most.

Choosing a sarcastic response when speaking with a faction leader or a king or some other such great figure, or someone in desperate need of help should have consequence, I'm arguing, on how others associated with those people see you. If you approached a faction leader who had a serious investment in a certain problem being solved and you belittle that investment, it should be reflected in how he/she and others associated with the faction treat you. When sarcasm equals disdain, it is an insult, and insults should be met with consequences, 'good' or 'bad'. Of course, what I'm talking about would require an overhaul of how dialogue has been handled in the background, for example, it would require the quantification and valuation of dialogue choices: a network that is a weighting system of dialogue choices to keep track of how the attitudes of the PC influences the game world, namely, the NPCs in it.

Not quite. While those are examples of branching storylines, I'm speaking directly to dialogue in a broad sense. I'm hoping for there to be some mechanic in play that makes almost all dialogue choices affect the game world vis a vis the dialogue options available or not available in the rest of the game. It would be nice if the role playing a person does via dialogue choices affected how all fleshed out NPCs perceive the PC. Does this make sense? I can try to be more elaborate if not.

I found that I was being herded through the storyline in New Vegas. The dialogue writing was excellent but the affect on the gameplay was glitchy (as in the brotherhood of steel) to the point that if felt like the dialogue options weren't genuine. In new Vegas it felt like the important dialogue decisions happened so late in the game that the effects again didn't seems genuine. I haven't tried alpha protocol, however.