karelia

I hope that the game is sufficiently streamlined so that we do not have to deal with superfluous factors such as customisation, optional quests or exploration - ideally we should be aiming for Modern Warfare 2 in isometric form.

I'm planning on replaying Dragon Age 1 and 2. I always like to have a good 3 month lag(at least) before I try any new release, so all the critical bugs are patched and major DLCs are released. I tend to play the original immediately and enjoy the excitement of discovering everything with friends/online people, then leave a big gap until all the dlc has been released and play through again. This is useful to me because often the DLC is different in quality to the original - either slightly better or worse - or might change the balance/experience of the original. Both policies are good! ^__^

I agree with Elrond, that releasing it very quickly after the Christmas spending-spree would be a bad idea. A few months into 2015 would feel reasonable to me, and ensure they have a long scope for developing and implementing the improvements that they are delaying for. If it dropped before Feb I would be a little worried for its sales potential. Not to mention that people will still be playing Dragon Age 3 right after Christmas, and perhaps still WL2 - it's a big game. Witcher 3 may also compete with it for media and buyer attention.

I'm so relieved that Obsidian chose to do this. It allows for the game to be improved based on the beta feedback for the backers, but also importantly, allows the game a higher level of polish which will give it better review scores and consequent sales on release. Hopefully this investment of time will allow the game to become the franchise that most of us wish it to be.

I suppose my preference fits the escapism option to a tee. The main thing I enjoy about genre fiction is agency - it is much easier to 'do' things, whether they are grand story arcs or something as mundane as looting a person's house without fear of meaningful consequences. I'm not sure that this is entirely a power-fantasy, as the things I enjoy doing are often ridiculously mundane or even undesirable to do in real life (for example, sneaking around sewers). I feel that this type of activity simply cannot work as well within a non-fantasy (or sci-fi/what-have-you) setting, as essentially this is either unrealistic behaviour - achieving things at a superhero-style rate that is jarring compared to our own experiences of reality; or sufficiently psychopathic enough for the game to require systems to discourage you from doing certain things - something which in a low-technology or dystopian setting, there is less dissonance with allowing people to do.

Thanks - the elemental lore is interesting, though as another mentioned, the rain one is a bit hard to visually recognise as such without already knowing. Nice to see even the common Kobold-like creatures are going to have in-depth lore - I hope that there will be books scattered around the game documenting creature behaviour, maybe even anthropological style documents in diary format? The common "encyclopedia" style way of documenting creatures in games like Baldur's Gate with their myth-like tone always stuck me as a little disconnected from the creatures actually existing on the doorstep of human settlements.

*refreshes furiously*

While I find some of BG1's music to be unparalleled in character (for example the vibrant temple music), I do agree that if it were to be used in a modern game it would require modification to avoid repeating too much. I feel that the simplest way would be simply to spread out the loops more, and add some more ambient music in between, perhaps based on the melodic material of the music it interleaves - maybe for smaller instrumental forces, for example a solo woodwind in dialogue with the ambient nature sounds. I also feel that half of the reason it loops so often is because the developers knew it would be constantly interrupted by out of place battle music. Insensitive/inflexible battle music is something that even modern RPGs suffer greatly from (and indeed battle sounds such as yelling being uncomfortably loud in contrast to the pleasant sounds you may have been enjoying at fairly loud volume during exploration).

Great update, thanks. I like how you were able to talk about the music in as detailed a way as the other updates, and while I understand that people who just view music as a functional backing may not enjoy this update, many others are interested. I agree with your mentioning of the problems of transitioning tracks. Even Tchaikovsky had problems with sectional transitions. Like many of the other respondents, I like the dynamic range and tone of the music, but had reservations about the lack of a clear thread through it. This is not neccessarily a complaint about it shifting in mood or being sectional, but more related to the "big tune" factor that others have raised (and imo has become a bit confused with the word "epic" when I feel that some just mean up-front and melodic rather than reticent). As one person mentioned, the BG1 soundtrack managed to solve this identity problem by having a strong theme that was then punctuated throughout many of the overworld tracks to tie the game's musical profile together. I also feel that the warmth of the BG soundtracks was strongly related to it being quite perky in general. Even bucolic 'backdrop' tracks like Exploring the Plains were strongly hummable, and not neccessarily in an in-your-face way. The Candlekeep/City track also had light and shade parts while remaining very tied together. I suppose if I were to suggest anything, it would to not be shy about putting solo instruments (oboe, bassoon, cor anglais) to the forefront, and also about using them to foreshadow development of melodic material for larger forces later on, perhaps in the form of a coda. To the positive, I feel that the sectional element of the Dyrford track could help mitigate listener fatigue. By being sectional it also helps meld the subjective experience of exploration and moving around the environment with a soundtrack that seems more readily to 'respond' to this. The opening I found impressive, and the brass-tinged part effective, and it did convey the feeling of an isolated town surrounded by something large - simultaneously civilised but also with a mysterious element. I also have no reason to believe that the music for the game will all be identical to this, or lack variety, but I do understand peoples worries about the music perhaps being a little too much of a 'wash' of sounds. However, even if that were to be the case, I feel it would be an effective method for writing for a game of this type, as there is no single 'right' way. As long as it has some grabby tunes and an atmosphere of intrigue (whether in civilised or wild areas) I'll be more than satisfied.

Very happy to see that so many things are now in place in early form.

This is a good point - if the road post-dates the scary dragon bones, the bend makes sense, if it pre-dates it, then perhaps traces of the former straight road, which people now take a wider arc around, could be there. I feel really dumb even quibbling over such small things, but this is the natural reaction to any area I see - wanting it to be 'perfect'.

Mazhlekov's mock-up was really impressive to me - I get that the final paint-over is yet to be done on the original image, but hopefully one of the artists might see his suggestion and be surprised at how such a simple change of colours and attention to detail made the scene immediately much more reminiscent of Baldur's Gate 1. IMO this is a vindication of the idea of Kickstarter levels of transparency with sharing work in progress material, and makes me grateful to Obsidian for sharing them - hopefully - before they are finalised, so to be able to potentially take in any feedback that might be useful. I would never pretend that the majority of our suggestions are practical or desirable to the developers, but some may hopefully help in a small way, especially when presented as clearly as Mazhlekov did.

(Sorry if double post - other is waiting approval) I have a question about the "green" environment issue one or two have raised. I don't personally have a problem with many wilderness/semi-forested areas, because I loved the original Baldur's Gate, but I am curious - the world of Eternity seems fairly well developed in places, and even as far back as the middle ages in Europe, most of a country's land - for example in England or France - had been been converted to farm land in some form or other. Will we see areas a bit like WoW's Westfall (agricultural prairie land)? Incorporating human terraforming in a big way into areas (paddy fields and the like) offer many opportunities for distinctive and characterful decoration? All too often the IE engine games had a town or village with an unrealistically small amount of fields scattered around it, and it was surrounded by seemingly fertile grassland that for some reason nobody has seen fit to exploit commercially.

Great so far, and I'll be especially interested to see how you make the dragon bones less gently "placed" down - a bit more overgrowth/dirt with the art pass, but also potentially the bones should be more seperated. Looking forward to more.

This is how I see this issue. Eternity is not hack'n'slash, mate. The defeated foes, opened containers etc. will not throw up with whatever gold or gems or other treasures they have stored. Gold will not be laying around on the ground like sand on the beach. You want to loot something, then you just gotta do it the cklick-on-it-and-check-what-is-inside way. As a character, you will decide if you take all the content, or just pick some that you like and leave the unwanted trash. This is how it worked in all the games that devs are taking inspiration from (BG, IwD, P:T). So, even if there is a pile of gold on the floor left for a reason, it will not magically appear in your bag because of your immense force of magnetism or gravity or some other mojo. (note to self: magnetism spell, that would be interesting) Am I right, or am I right? That reminds me, I hope there's a "take all" option in addition to individually clicking items. I plan on vacuuming every item from every foe/container/laying around. Also, Id be thrilled for a console command list. A console would be amazing, but I fear that this is seen as a relic by developers, and the absolute mania modern devs have against cheating, which used to be commonplace and used for fun, could perhaps influence even Obsidian into not including such options :\

I forget who suggested it, but I also really like the idea of donating grey items to the stronghold's blacksmith to either melt down for resources, or to equip your soldiers with, or perhaps even to give to villagers who would otherwise be unarmed - and this mechanic could delay any incoming attacks and sieges as an enemy will be unusually delayed by better armed than usual peasants. Naturally this situation won't play out in front of your eyes, it will be "behind the scenes", and act as a variable to how advanced an assault will be before you can intervene.

I've been reading every update since the beginning, but finally there is one that made myself completely unable not to sign up and talk about. I was a big doubter of the stronghold idea at first - I didn't think it would spoil the game, but I just felt it was a fairly needless request by people who don't really like adventuring and want to play the Sims/romance, etc. However, in making the stronghold into a much more fully-realised system than in BG2, you have converted me into a believer. I feel that differenciation is important. Unlike BG2 with different class-specific strongholds, it would make sense in terms of resource allocation to only offer one given how much customisability it has. However, please make sure that it can be wildly different each time - make sure we cannot build a Mary Sue fantasy castle with absolutely everything. This will allow for two benefits: 1. each playthrough will result in an opportunity to specialise in a different style of stronghold, and have a different play experience 2. it allows for players to customise a stronghold to best suit their class of choice. So rather than a special "mage stronghold", they will customise the stronghold to have more mage-oriented additional structures, such as libraries, and lore-bestowing things. A druid or ranger type class will focus on gardens, and animal care. A warrior will be best suited to fortification, rendering the stronghold more defensible and safe, and yet they get less benefits from non-military structures, as they can afford to build less. Make sure that the player can nowhere near afford to upgrade everything to max, or make it so that you only have space to build a certain amount of buildings. Also consider allowing upgrades of each building type, which have superficial visible differences (not too strong) such as a couple of additional turrets/gargoyles. I also feel that it is *very* important to allow for not only an "evil" running of the stronghold, so to not force players out of character in the way they manage it, but also to allow for a grey-area middle-ground way. Sometimes you torture/send heavies to get tax if you need it, maybe you won't - you probably won't, but having the option is important. Re. being informed of a stronghold attack, I like Osvir's ideas, and would also suggest that the complaints about telepathy won't be an issue if only a mage could receive such notifications. This would naturally slightly punish parties without a mage, but asymmetrical gameplay is important for a mature experience. Druid-types can sense a disturbance as enemies enter their domain, etc. Messengers will be fine for everybody else, you just might get there a little later. Perhaps an upgrade to the stronghold can be a reflecting beacon to better amplify warning signals to magically-attuned characters. Or you can upgrade a tower for carrier pidgeons, which are faster than foot or horse messengers, for people without mages, who want to get faster warnings.