Sheikh

There never will be a physical version of it.

Are you joking? Out of the question. I must be the leader for my group and I cant allow myself that weakness. Also, if there was romance between me and another of the group, it would break the group apart. Not good. Integrity of the group is going to translate to better chances of surviving, which is important as you mentioned, and far more important in a situation like that than a little love.

It's nice to see shots from the game, however I almost think too much was shown. Either way, there was nothing spectacular about this trailer. Paradox better do better. If they don't do something as good as their Crusader Kings 2 promotions, which are really the only good promotions I've ever seen them do, I'm going to say that Obsidian never should have partnered with them. Eh...you seem to have a codependant attitude towards obsidian.

I dont think it would be personally. Turn based combat would always be far more immersion breaking than real time of any kind, whether with pause or not, and especially if you dont absolutely have to pause.

Looks great, looking forward to see if it plays great too

So what good emotions are involved in video game romance? Same ones as in real life romance?

Negative. Some things people say are subjective. Some things are not. 2+2=4 isn't subjective. It's factual information. Doesn't matter that it's your perception of math. You're perceiving something static and truthful. Some things are objective, everything anyone says is technically subjective, even when it just happens to be 100% true in reality. Our perception works very well, but technically what our perception yields is our perception, not the essence of truth. Lets assume 2+2=4 is true (because I really think it is). However the only way me, you or any human could ever know this goes through perception, so we can never be 100% sure that it really is true because our thought that it is is based on our perception. So the only way we can know anything is through a thought and the only way we can think anything is through perception. So from a practical viewpoint, we are capable of thinking of things that are true, but not thinking things that are true. Our perception of truth is always flawed, even if it happens to work out in the end.

Sure. Also, basically, your previous point of "romance is bad because you can easily recreate it" was actually just "I don't like romance, but others do." There's either something objective to be said about the implementation of such things into video game design, or it's all pure subjectivity. In which case, I'm not sure what discussion there is to be had about it, except "I like this!" versus "Oh, I don't." Everything everyone says is subjective at all times, including of course, what I say. If I say 2+2=4 thats my opinion that its 4 no less. The only way humans are capable of knowing anything starts with perception, which is always an indirect and approximate way of gauging information and therefore no human knows anything for 100% sure as no human is technically capable of that. Therefore there really is no such thing as full objectivity among human thought. For example if I think media source of info #1 is more objective than media source of info #2, then thats also my opinion. And yes the point of all of this is to understand why do some people like romance in video games as I happen to understand it.

Okay so basically since its not suitable from my viewpoint to go out and shoot someone, then its not suitable from someone elses viewpoint to go out and find romance so we enjoy different things in a video game. Okay. I like medieval times though yes. Cupcakes are not healthy though, I dont recommend them. Fair enough but whats good about romance in a video game? Why is it enjoyable? What good feelings does it evoke? I honestly dont understand. Because I personally feel like I 100% need a real person to ever experience romance. What I can say is that war is thrilling. Adventure is exotic. Medieval age is melancholic and romantic (pun not intended, but had anyway), in a way.

No its not supposed to be anything. At the very least the devs decide what is it "supposed" to be not you. At the most, using the word supposed to makes your whole sentence invalid.

German laws are good, I can tell from this example.

I just reported the item as counterfeit. I will check in a few days to see if it is removed. If it isn't, I will try to elevate it. Thanks for bringing it to our attention. But may be he was saying, You buy it now from me, when it comes out I will buy it and then send it to you.

I personally feel recreating romance in video games is boring. Recreating adventures and war is interesting because you cant do that really in real life unless you for example went to the iraq war or something along those lines, but that is dangerous and requires enormous dedication. On the other hand I can go outside and approach any girl I want to if I wanted to start a new romance so why would I do it in a video game instead? That is my perspective and probably my masculinity talking. I know this is all part of a duality so I would be interested in hearing the other side of the story - why is romance in a video game interesting? I know that women arent good at approaching the opposite sex, so it doesnt work as easily for them. So from the perspective of femininity, it would be different, but how exactly I dont know I do not personally feel like romance is an extension of roleplay. Romance is just romance the same way my romantic partner is not an extension of my character in any way, just a complementing part of my life. For roleplay purposes a romantic relationship is no different from any relationship. Roleplaying is not about relationships at all, its about individuals, their personas and characters. Relationships aka interacting are useful to bring that character inside the person through social interaction. But really from the perspective of roleplay, I feel relationship = social interaction. Relationship (whether it be master-tutor relationship, romantic or friend or enemy relationsip) is just a special type and/or form of social interaction and romantic relationships do not deserve special attention from my perspective.

Have you considered Obsidian may be trying to motivate Brazil to learn english?

You can begin collecting taxes from your populace as soon as you gain the stronghold. Special offers – Sometimes visitors to your stronghold will have rare items for sale, or perhaps they will offer you items in return for something else(ransom prisoner). This did not answer my question. This answered the question what does it mean for me to own a stronghold. What I want to know is, what does it mean for everyone else living in Pillars of Eternitys gameworld that I own a stronghold? Obviously since you are just 1 person in that world, what it means to everyone else is far more significant.

My question is what sense does it make that you can own a stronghold. Whats the political and legal framework in the game behind that and how much does the stronghold cost compared to a longsword and can you sell it and invest the money elsewhere?

How exactly are you coming to this conclusion? By using my mind.

Thats because there isnt any proof nor is there ever going to be. You cant prove inspiration.

I think for alot of immersion creating environment, you need to do a ton of extra work and perhaps the developers feel its not worth a slice of the pie of their budget and time? well, their budget is *not* small. they've had much more than planned. and they have more control than others, no publisher at their heels that has funded them, considering the success of kickstarter. Numenera is being delayed by 6 months minumum, and it's going to be amazing. Wait makes it all the sweeter. Heck, if they were to do this, I'd love them to re-open paypal and extend the beta for those that REALLY want to participate in it. not to mention, waiting could lead to newer engine, which will be amazing in terms not only of performance, but also of capabilities. it will be able to do several things the current version cannot do. Yeah I wouldnt mind waiting either, but perhaps not everyone is okay with it. The devs have to account for alot of stuff including time and money and 4m$ is not all that much to develop a game.

Yes. I have myself not made any such generalizations in this thread that I am aware of and I havent seen anyone else make them either. I have definitely seen the bad games back then. I have seen the good games now - world of tanks and pillars. But the "industry" that rides the "old" single player derived style of games train is not producing anything worthwhile, I dont know of a single such game within the last 8 years or so perhaps that could even be started to be considered good. Pillars is of this style, but it is not part of that outdated (and socialist, compared to kickstarter) developer-publisher-distributor model "industry". Tanks is not that style of game and perhaps not even apart of that industry either. Thats kind of the retracing I mentioned in my OP from my viewpoint. First we go back, find out what we lost along the way, take it back and go on on a new path from there, combining this "reacquired" knowledge with what we actually already have gained from going forward on a somewhat mistaken path - which is technology in making games most of all, I think. Theres tons of indie games available on places like steam and other places these days as well that dont even use the technology much at all. This is all part of it as well, as we are testing whether this technology we have developed while moving on this mistaken path is even worthwhile, though I believe for the most part we will find it is.

I think for alot of immersion creating environment, you need to do a ton of extra work and perhaps the developers feel its not worth a slice of the pie of their budget and time?

No, not really. Stealth and archery gameplay was improved. The rest was largely dumbed down, streamlined out of the game, subject to broken character progression, turned into annoying minigames or lacking the same sense of exploration/freedom. The gameplay was alot more functional though I think. The NPCs were all alot more lively and natural. Yes you are right it was dumbed down some, personally I most missed some stats for example and other such variety.

You need to be able to seperate all that is there and all that is good in elder scrolls from that which is not there and that which you would need to imagine, perhaps (to get an even better experience). I mean the music in Morrowind was really good, so I can just listen to that and ignore the lack of a decent NPC environment and instead focus my mind on what my character is up to at that particular time. It may or may not be enjoyable depending on what you are presently looking for in a game. In a way that is true. Oblivions gameplay was in most ways much better than Morrowinds for sure, on the other hand Oblivion was a totally uninspired and fairly generic fantasy grind, fundamentally like playing counter strike. Interesting perspective on fallout, not a fan of those games, but good to know, thanks.

Thats perhaps the best defintition, though its extremely abstract. I did not personally find those other definitions useful from the dictionary. Was skyrim a good idea, did it contain good ideas? Not really. It was a pretty horrible game and making it was a huge waste of effort, money and time for the people involved in my opinion. If I had to define inspiration it would be: Creative talent unlocked by experiencing of something already created. I think its fascinating that you are so interested in inspiration and want to find out what it is. I dont think anyone has accused you of anything.

I cant actually edit anything in "bbcode mode" thats the button on the upper left corner. Thats the core of my gripe in the first place.