Sarex

You say make money back, I'm not sure you understand what I mean. They will at the release of the game be in the black(unless they put some of their own money in the game), meaning that any copy of the game they sell will be profit. So 100k copies sold is pure profit. As for my definition, well for my expectations it's a major success. In my opinion the market for Isometric cRPGs right now is not that big, though I think there is room to grow.

Depends on what kind of deal they made with Paradox, as for steam and gog I think you are overestimating their cut.

If it sells 100k copies then it will be a major success. That means that they have a budget for the next game without a kickstarter and that it's a sustainable model. Anything above 100k is pure gravy.

This will show if the Iso-cRPG model is sustainable or if it will never be more then a kickstarter funded game.

I can't wait for the situations were you are almost at the end of the dungeon with low health searching for a rest spot and then bam the boss appears. Now that is a sucker punch.

Also how would they fund the prolonged development? Or are you saying that they are keeping some money back for whatever reason?

Meh, the closest thing to a space sim I enjoy are games like Homeworld and Sins of a Solar empire, but then again those are not space simulations. As for Star Citizen, well at least they showed something and we can now be reasonably sure it wasn't some form of a Pyramid scheme.

But then that isn't what he was saying was it.

Not to mention the people who claimed that the government is spying on it's own population were marred as crazy conspiracy theorist and were demeaned with caricatures of people with tinfoil hats. But hey, now it seems that everyone knew that the government was spying on them and no one is surprised... Generally people are idiots and aren't willing to put 2 and 2 thorougher for precisely the reasons Valsuelm's videos describe.

http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/04/10/transistor-release-date-announced-is-sooner-than-you-think/ Can't wait.

You think running a state is like playing a game? If they attack, well I'll just reload and prepare my border. Russia is preparing it's borders for any eventuality, it could be an attack force but more likely it's a defensive force. The government in Kiev is not, what you would call a beacon of stability and a lot of random **** could still happen. You would agree that common logic dictates that you shore up the borders with the country you are in conflict with.

http://www.channel4.com/news/russia-nato-ukraine-military-satellite-images-border?12

An interesting documentary that, amongst other things, deals with the modern world economy. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a36_CwzA0bk&t=76m0s I found the whole thing interesting but for the sake of being near the topic I have timestamped it to part 3.

I get it you are fascinated with the Airforce, but you can't win a war from air alone. Also that doesn't really mean anything, if an all out war broke out money wouldn't matter, what would matter are the resources and the factories that could be converted to military output in a short amount of time. Funny you should say that. Russia that bore the brunt of the German force, during WW2 boosted their military output (production) to stupendous heights and would have conquered all of Germany(including the territories they gained in WW2) on their counter offensive had America not intervened to stop them. Also while Russia couldn't have won the war on it's own, it played the largest part in it. You think GWB didn't score any points? Don't be naive. Just look at Agiel above if you have any doubts. Do you really think that Putin isn't playing the long game? If he let Ukraine go and let it eventually join the EU/NATO, he would have compromised the safety of Russia immensely. Ukraine is a buffer between the EU and Russia, without it Moscow is a stone throw away. You might think it paranoid, but you always plan for the worst case scenario, especially when the stakes are so high.

I don't mind that he disagrees, I mind that he dismisses other peoples opinions. It's very arrogant. It's very simple, those fights where harder(harder then any in the game, you could even say unfair) and unless you knew the hard counter(for some of which it didn't even resolve the fight on it's own) you had to figure out what combination of spells, positions and character you needed to beat the encounter. We can use Kangaxx as the poster boy fight. My first time against him, my knowledge of D&D was what the game it self provided, it took me an hour to beat him. During that hour I changed who tanked him, who was out of range of him when to cast spells what spell worked and most annoyingly of all Jaheria had to survive (the bugs on that NPC were unreal), that was the only encounter in the game where I had to work that hard and that is what made it memorable. Now all of a sudden I hear people moaning about it being a sucker punch and how they didn't like it. Well ok, you didn't like it then don't do it, it is purely optional and it doesn't affect the story at all. But alas it's seem that it's either or neither.

On what information do you base the size of their economy. I hope you don't think what you read on the internet can really show the intricacies of a countries structure and military might. Also military might doesn't only equal economic might. China is great power because it has it's massive population and also because of it's top down culture. People here seem to think that war has become cleaner then in the past, that technology has somehow fundamentally changed it, but that is only the construct of the media. What still counts the most in any war is how many boots you have on the ground. You are very misinformed if you think that America could wage a full out war with either Russia or China. If America ever attempted a land invasion of either Russia or China they would get eaten alive. The same would be true in reverse for Russia, for China I'm not so sure. World Power America may be, but it is not all powerful as can be seen in the Ukraine conflict, while it may be willing to strut and posture in the south the same cannot be said for regions near Russia or China. What I'm trying to say is that while it's power may be greater then that of Russia and China, it is still not great enough for direct conflict. Russia may not be able to project it's military might like America can(yet), but it sure as hell is boss of it's own back yard. As for Putin I don't know how you would think that Russia hasn't prospered under him in the years since the cold war. I don't think you are aware of just how far down the ****-hole Russia was after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Under Putin the Russian leadership was united and made to work. While Russia might not be the standard of economic prosperity (yet) it has certainly moved leaps and bounds in stability since the collapse. Putin wouldn't have been able to hold the rains of such a large country, if he didn't have something to show for the years he has ruled. That is very naive view you hold for the Russian governing body. I think that Putin is scoring big points back home right now and is showing the Russian people that Russia is still a force to be reckoned with. Anyone who thinks otherwise is naive to say the least.

I don't know what you know, but I do know that this isn't a big budget game that requires massive amounts of work(in the scale of game making).

Missed the point again, it's not easy, but it's not as hard as the work in large 3d games.

So what you are trying to say is that you know what people liked better then they them selves do. Ok, well I believe that what people liked in bg was not the gameplay and the iso view, but the hipster feel it made them experience. I think we are getting somewhere here. Soon we will create the game that everyone likes.

Then why not simply dial it back using difficulty settings. If you introduce permanent death in the upper difficulties of the game, then why not also scale those hard-counter spells with difficulty. I get that you don't like metagaming, but to be honest some(a lot?) of us do. As you may have read in this and other threads, some of those hard-counter/metagame fights were the most memorable and exiting for us. They were a challenge to beat and prove to yourself that you could beat the hardest thing the game throws at you. In fact the best fights were completely optional. I really think that there is room for both and that there is no reason to make metagaming a bad word.

Most recently? That explains a lot. If my family had a stake in Gazprom, I'd probably be raised as a Russian apologist too. It's funny how having a different opinion that isn't cynical gets you billed as a troll or a sheep. As for Russia, I guess I'm a little skeptical because it's the country responsible for keeping Poland under its boot for 154 out of the last 200 years, with a long track record of imperialism, warmongering, genocide and ethnic cleansing, atrocities, totalitarianism, and crappy cars. That's just the 20th century alone to boot. Plus, it's helmed by a former KGB officer and recently confirmed that it's a hostile foreign power, so it's not really arbitrary skepticism. As for "free gas", TANSTAAFL. I've worked as a small hotel receptionist for 3 years and had quite a few Russian guests. They were never the Oby's type, but nonetheless they all (literally) shared one common trait - they were kinda "patronizing" (for the lack of better word) and couldn't (or didn't wanted to) understand why Poles are so stubborn about being left alone and not willing to get back to "one big happy family". I want to stress out that they were never hostile or angry about that, neither did they felt offended by our denial of those sentiments. IMHO it was more similar to the confusion of a small child who's mommy and daddy hate each other. Child that's to small to understand why do they have to live separately and how could they claim it's "for the best". Coming from a broken family, I think it's the most suitable comparison I could make. Go back more if you want, plenty more.

But then isn't it like that for anything else in the game, you can reload if you fail or are caught unprepared. Where do you draw the line at what is annoying and what isn't, as this is a very subjective thing. If you step in to a deadly trap you simply reload and avoid it, if the enemy does a certain combo and gets you, you reload and plan for it. I am not sure I follow how that is different from anything else, is the problem that you can't outplay it or what?

I have seen bigotry posted by more users then Oby, what about them?