cornishr

Sweet Jesus, 2 more girls as a fighter and a barbarian. How sh!t.

Is that fact, or speculation? If it's a fact, it's disappointing. Not what i'd classify as really huge, simply a big village or small town.

Over reaction perhaps?

Do they realise it's already 23.44 in Thailand where i live? Given the fact they're Americans, probably not.

No offense, but some of you are frighteningly un-funny. And people still push like!

I don't particularly care if it innovates or not.

I don't have any interest at all in computer game music. When are you going to tell me about the bloody Aumaua? Annoying.

It means they had a larger budget to spend making the game better. Are they really expected to account for whether it was the last half a million or the first half a million went towards adding some extra spells or improving the Trolls? Does it matter? Ps I hope they do improve the Trolls. Divinity Original Sin had quite a cool looking Troll i thought. I like the Games Workshop Trolls best of all. Project Eternity Troll looks like a spindly Zombie if i'm honest, i wasn't pleased with him. I've always had a soft spot for Trolls, and there is no way one of these ones could throw a Goblin for a touchdown.

Dear God make it finish...

1. Nude mod 2. Romance mod 3. Healing potion mod 4. Rest anywhere 5. Inventory anywhere Ive got my fingers crossed that one of the people that ponied up for Beta access is also a modder. Maybe a rest anywhere fix can be made before the game is released to the public. I'm trying to work out if you are being serious or joking?? A rest anywhere mod would immediately devalue any sense of challenge or achievement. I'd have zero interest in this game if you could rest anywhere anytime. I wouldn't even bother to download it for free if that was the case. I presume you are being sarcastic and laughing at people who'd need a silly feature like that? If not...words fail me.

Good old bag of holding - probably the most useful magical item of them all. Although flying carpets are pretty good i suppose.

This thread has literally made me feel ill. If i had a finger of death, i'd use it now.

I am desperately hoping for the option to be able to override the companions' portraits should i choose to. I am very fussy with portraits; it is a snapshot of who the character is, so for me it's arguably the single most important thing of all. The in-game portraits might be just what i want to see, but if i don't happen to like a given npc's picture, i am unable to include them in my party. Absolutely invaluable, obvious feature to include for a (presumably) small cost as far as i'm concerned.

Every time i've read an interview/preview whatever, the questioner seems to be harping on about how/why will this game be any different, same old quests etc., as if everybody is bored sick of games like this and Obsidian are forced to defend themselves. It's bloody annoying me. I'm sure there are plenty of people who don't like this stuff, but they won't buy it. I'm blissfully happy for this game to be very similar in nature. I haven't encountered hardly any games of this kind over the years; just crap first person shooters and rts nonsense everywhere. I'm sure Obsidian will make as many new interesting angles as they can, but a fantasy themed game is a fantasy themed game afterall. It's exactly what i'm after. In fact the last game like Baldur's gate i played was Baldur's gate. I want elves, i want Dwarves, preferably with big beards, and i want trolls. If anybody needs their daughter rescuing, i'm the man for the job (although i can't guarantee her virtue). Likewise, i'm happy to retrieve any lost tomes, clear out any abandoned temples, or stomp the living daylights out of any bandits. Haunted forest is my middle name, and God help any Dragons who don't tow the line. No need to keep apologising for making a game like this, tell the interviewer it's exactly what we want.

I quite agree with you! I've always loved the stereotypical warhammer dwarf with his big beard. Those dwarves in the update look like they're wearing fake stuck on beards to be honest.

Agreed. One area which I would really like to see change revert to the "old school", would be smaller scale Gold Box scenarios. I'm so tired of LoTR derivatives where ONLY YOU--THE CHOSEN ONE, can save ALL OF EXISTENCE from the HORDE OF BAD GUYS. *Sigh* What happened to haunted keeps and swamps? When the scope is too large, both the stories and the characters get lost--player controlled or otherwise. Just take things down a notch and focus on the quest your on. Make each quest have character and meaning rather than being a speed-bump to aggrandizing your messiah complex. I would have been much happier with the NWN official Campaign if they had just focused all of their energy and equivalent resources into Chapter 1 and the city itself. There was so much room for intrigue and drama, but it just got lost in the yawn-worthy epic scope they pushed. I believe it to be the main reason why the expansions were so much better than the original OC. I feel this can be said just about every c"RPG" ever made since. Absolutely completely agreed. I hate the way the whole fate of existence for a whole world rests on every game. I'd much rather be just a discreet adventurer looking for treasure in a haunted swamp or whatever. I find a huge desert one level in size, a world traversing mountain range two levels in size, a civil war of 10 people and a giant capital city of eight houses faintly silly. Much better to have a little country town, a few villages, a smaller scale map and goals. That way they could easily keep churning out more realistic expansions and things instead of having to invent the mother of the god of death's long lost brother who's brought their Dragon king back to eat the whole universe again. cheesy.

I don't mean balance isn't important; it obviously is very important. But only up to a point. A fighter has always been tougher than a bard, but so what? It would never stop me having/being a bard if i wanted to. If i want a warhammer, i'll use it, don't care if it doesnt damage as much as a sword. I just feel sometimes the reactions are a touch over the top for pretty minor issues and it feels like some people are literally straining every sinew to try and pick holes where everything seems great to me. Better than great, we have real experts working on it who are typically one step ahead so far. And if there are oversights/**** ups, they can be rectified after the event no doubt.

I'd say to come up with a full party of six characters whereby you literally couldn't overcome a fight would be pretty rare. You'd have to go out of your way to create crap characters on purpose. Do we really want them spending most of their time going over every single last percentage point again and again (when it's clear they are already incredibly diligent and thoughtful) just to make 100% certain that one person can't get stuck on one fight once on extra hard level? If that happens the difficulty could be turned down for that one fight. Or go get some magical help. They can't be expected to legislate for quite literally everything and some people seem staggeringly pedantic at times and on occasion it appears as though they seem desperate to pick holes and find fault. It must be disheartening at times, they must feel like they just can't win. Luckily it seems a small minority; i think most of us absolutely love the look of it. If the game is released and there are a couple of dodgy mechanisms or whatever, i'm sure it will be easy for them to correct, nothing to panic so much over beforehand. Ps Yes, absolutely gutted there isn't more wilderness. That was unbelievably cruel of Obsidian. I wasn't angry with Obsidian, though; i was and am angry with the folk who actually voted for a smaller game. Talk about a negative, pessimistic, unambitious outlook in life to assume it'll be worse if they make a bigger game with more area. I still can't fathom that one. I'd have assumed it'd be more of the glorious same. More levels, more companions. Everyone's a winner. Feature creep? Good grief. And that (levels/companions) really is a critical area of the game imo; much more so than whether or not chainmail deflects arrows better than it deflects bullets.

Not really, no. To me, the classes are still similar to the roles they had before, unless you choose to alter them to suit your own preference/style. There are now just a few more classes to choose from and a few more cool things for each, as opposed for almost nothing for some of them. To my mind, it's still possible to have all the old classes but it's now also possible to create literally any combination of characters i could think of. I've always played and a wizard and been gutted to not be able to carry a sword. Now i'm free at last! There used to be basically mage and priest spells, fighters and thieves, now there is all manner of lovely classes. I think it's a vast improvement. I have to choose between a priest or a druid, a chanter or a cipher; cool.

And another thing i don't understand is why some people are so obsessed with 'balance' in everything. Great when possible, but who cares? It's a one player game where you have a party under your command. I couldn't really care less if one of my party is weaker or stronger than another party member. Will the world really come to an end if a Druid is slightly stronger than a wizard? Ps Or a fighter; Aumaua fighter would be equally acceptable to me.

No, that's very much what Cornwall is like )

What stands out to me, is that you can tell these guys (Obsidian) have been playing all of these games (D&D etc.) for years and they are bonafide (and passionate) experts in the field. Every time i read of their reasoning behind a change (example being the new health plus stamina double tier thing and the per rest/per encounter abilities), i can immediately see what a good idea it is and exactly where it's come from and why it's been brought in. Several times so far i've thought 'why on earth would they do that" then i've read their thought process and it's miles ahead of mine. They really are getting nearly everything spot on imo. Keeping all of the good stuff, altering/fixing/improving everything which can be made better. Sometimes they are picking out fundamental issues which i hadn't even realised needed changing until they pointed out the inherent faults. Reading the forums, it strikes me that there are a lot of people scared and resistant to any change, but if something can be improved, surely go for it? Pen & paper and video games are, after all, completely different; why restrict a video to pen and paper drawbacks? Nostalgia is all well and good, but there have always been numerous fundamental flaws in any D&D edition, so for me one of the best things about this game will probably be the fact it isn't limited to replicating a flawed system. And if some mechanic does turnout to be dodgy, it can be altered later, so it isn't the end of the world. You'll never be able to please everybody everytime, but it's clear they are doing their best and i think we should trust their experience and judgment in this stuff instead of questioning every single decision they make. Until now it looks damned near perfect if you ask me. The fuss some people have made about the publishers; bloody hell. It's like reading little children sometimes! Obsidian great work so far, i trust you are aware most of us think it looks awesome and the other minority would never, ever be happy whatever you do, so don't worry too much about dissenting voices. Now all you need are more wilderness levels and a kickass male (no offende anybody) Aumaua barbarian and we're sorted... Ps I've just read that the Glanfathan language has been influenced by the Cornish language; this pleases me greatly! I'm impressed, most people in Britain don't even realise Cornwall has it's own language. Kernow bys vyken!!! (Cornwall forever)

Threatened by women playing video games? Good lord what an odd idea. Why would anybody be threatened by women playing videi games? I shouldn't think too many do mind you percentagewise. Buddy i think you take everything way too seriously, have absolutely no sense of humour, have all sorts of weird internal issues and you add two and two and come up with about 75. I'd simply like a big tough male fighter in my party. And i couldn't care less whether i get called a male, a bloke, a fella, a geezer and i couldn't care less about referring to a women as a girl or a lady or a chick. I have no interest in such trivialities.

As said before, pretty sure you can make one in the Adventurer's Hall. Oh, and nice restraint not calling everyone on the forums stupider than dirt this time. I'll make one if i must, just hoping they do one for us. Having never existed until this game, i can't believe there won't be an Aumaua available, that'd be just weird. If she's a chick (or female/whatever term i'm supposed to be using nowadays), i'll take her anyway, but i still feel we are missing a seriously badass fighter. You know secretly you want one too ). I'm just hoping they don't throw a curve ball and have an Aumaua Chanter or something. You surely must have at least one big bar steward in a party, it's a prerequisite in my eyes. And i was absolutely furious at that time after finding out we've lost out on more wilderness because some people on here don't want more levels. I still can't get my head around that and i never will. Vote for a bigger game or smaller game, and some people voted for a smaller! I wasn't myself that morning and i was throwing a tantrum. I'm not proud of it but i'm claiming severe provocation. Anyway, i still don't think there is anything wrong with a male preferring to use predominantly male characters just like i wouldn't be offended by a girl wanting to play with mostly female characters. I think that is perfectly normal human behaviour, whatever the Californian media like to say about it. It doesn't mean i hate women because i want a big tough male fighter to lead my line. I have a beautiful daughter; i'd be happy for her to be in my party as a druid or a mage, but i'm sorry, i just don't see her as a barbarian with a two handed axe. Mind you, my friend's wife could do a convincing job with a battleaxe...

Strip away all the press-conference spin and one is left with a single question, which was neither asked nor answered. Ok, we've been assured that Paradox will be handling all the distribution and marketing In the meantime: 1)all game design decisions remain with Obsidian 2)all backer funding remains allotted to the game's development So.... what's in it for Paradox? They're certainly not going to be handling all the marketing and distribution for free. All those media guys in the audience and not a single one of them bothered to ask for any meaningful details. Typical. So, we're back to square one: where gamers are stuck having to speculate. *I'm* guessing Paradox is going to get a share of the profits. How big of a percentage though? I always think it's weird the way some people seem to begrudge Obsidian ever making any money. I'll pay whatever the game costs if it's reasonable, and good luck to Obsidian if they manage to make a few bucks at the end of it. I'm over the moon Obsidian are making this game, i hope they make tonnes of money so they can make the next one bigger and better still. If it's even half as good as i hope i'll be delighted. I really couldn't give a monkey's who publishes the game. Of course i'd like a nice booklet and map, but i'd actually rather pay extra so Obsidian can make more and become more successful. I certainly don't want to screw them for every bit of blood i can. I'll spend hours and hours playing this; it'll only cost me the price of a few beers. Bargain. Bloody scrooge, some of you. Besides, i have faith that Obsidian have a measure of integrity about them, and if it is financially possible to release a beauitful map and nice book, i'm sure they will. And if i have to pay a little more, i don't bloody well care, i'll pay. Ps Although there should still be more wilderness levels!!! Let me pay extra for more wilderness you complete bar stewards! Pps Male Aumaua?