Diogo Ribeiro

Traps worked in many places, from the more obvious narrow corridor to wider spaces. Places I remember using them included the Black Mountain Clan mines, Tarant and Caladon sewers, the Dredge, the Vendigroth Ruins, and many of the gameworlds' dungeons. In the city, I used many traps in the Boil. Quite, hence why I didn't suggest otherwise. Why should the existence of crippling attacks, or critical hits and failures be disregarded because they aren't directly controlled by the character? It's a valid example of how physical attacks are different than magic. There were called shots and three distinct areas one could aim at: head, torso and legs. I think this was done by pressing Ctrl+the attack button. You'll know it's a targetted attack when you see a head, torso or leg icon next to the cursor. Critical hits could cause characters to become stunned, drop their weapons, damage their weapons or armor, and instead critically hit themselves for considerable damage. Playerwise, a scar derivative from a critical hit would temporarily have a negative impact on the Beauty attribute. Critical hits to the best of my knowledge weren't necessarily tied to a high melee skill but rather to a high To Hit chance, which in turn was based on skill modifiers (such as Perception determining your To Hit success with Firearms), item types (such as having a highly magical character use a technological weapon, or a character using a weapon which had a bonus to Critical Hit rates) and conditions (items which are broken have higher chances of critically failing), and on ocasion, visibility (such as light sources helping visibility, or their absence limiting it).

Entangle holds on position but the target is awake so if a PC was to approach them enemies would still be able to hit. The Tranquilizer Gun pretty much stuns them on their spot (which, unlike a Stun Grenade does not have kickback). The Acid Gun can tear apart enemy armor and weapons as it fires acid rounds. Not sure I'd call these debuffs, unless we're considering different meanings for the word. Not much advantage? Paralyzing opponents allows a PC to momentarily perform other actions with considerable safety; paralyzing opponents and throw a grenade which throws opponents into several directions allows the PC to use the gained distance between itself and the opponents to perform other actions with an even greater safety margin. During that time players can either heal or buff themselves and/or party members, keep attacking, take the chance to position themselves in more convenient locations, or even run away. Whereas stunning and closing in to stab may work great against one opponent but risks leaving the PC open to danger should the opponents wake up by the end of the turn. It's obvious none of this compares to any tactical options that great wars are made of, but it's not as utterly ineffective as you seem to suggest. Which doesn't make it any less valid of a combat option. Of course I have to keep attacking an enemy if it's not dead. You can replace "vapors, vapors, vapors" with any other desired attack option as long as it results in success, ie, replace an area of effect spell which causes damage every round with melee attacks, throwing grenades of various effects at them, attacking with firearms, summoning, or using direct damage spells on each target one by one. Hardened Hands also doesn't risk breaking nor can it be damaged by hitting elemental opponents. That's three differences already when compared to using a melee weapon. Congeal Time basically halves opponent's action points while more dexterity increases the PC's action points by every point invested. It's clearly not the same thing. In fact, as a combat option it's much more immediate than developing a character for a long time until it has a large amount of action points. That's fine. I'd just appreciate if you would notice that I'm not saying Arcanum's combat is good or that it wouldn't benefit from more options and enemy attack routines that required their use, but what little is there isn't completely devoid of options. You're free to remove "force, force, force" and sub in other methods.

Possibly, but the standard tends to be on conquering the world to rule over it; this wasn't Kerghan's case. It may be, but it's still assuming. In fact, the assumption harkens back to the original Baldur's Gate: it's always brought up, both in the character's background and in a handful of character interactions that Imoen was your childhood friend. This was done even with evil characters, which in a way suggests that evil characters would stand being around someone on the good spectrum such as Imoen or that she would stand being around someone on the evil spectrum such as the PC. It's suggested the character must have affection towards her but it's still an assumption that the character would have any noteworthy bonds; there was no means to connect with the character at all because when the game begins it's already happening way after any relationship ever happened. Worse, is that any character bonding that happens with Imoen at all in the series is after the PC rescues her from Spellhold, not before. A character doesn't have to follow those guidelines in order to be "my" character. By your own logic, and discarding the possibility of having the character talk as I want him to, then that would suggest a player-created Bhaalspawn, or Vault Dweller, aren't my characters because they also don't look the way I look, I can't dress them the way I want, and they have totally predefined backgrounds as well. Yet they very much are, and play as if they are my characters. Even then, I heavilly disagree with your notion that a character isn't a player's unless he looks like the player who creates it. JC Denton the character doesn't exist as long as his actions and decisions are the players' to make. Otherwise, the game is loosely going from allowing a measure of character control to the player and removing it the next instance; it's conveniently altering between roleplaying and adventure game mechanics. And if that is the case then what is the point in roleplaying the character if it's going to act on its own? I'd rather have no control over his dialogue or have no saying in the construction of his persona than have my input only matter as long as it serves the history but have it nullified when it doesn't. Strong narratives do not have to exclude character development. Planescape: Torment also has a strong narrative and allows me more chances to define my character than Deus Ex including, but not limited to, joining with different sects. The Nameless One was also very clearly a character who had been created by someone else, and who had an extensively developed background that had happened independantly of player input. I don't need to see myself as a character in order to roleplay it. Clearly if the developers wanted me to rescue Imoen they would have only included that option in the plot, but they didn't. Hence why they added revenge or some thirst for power as additional motivation. Again, if they want something to be forced on players then go ahead; don't give them a motivation which is either meaningless or that relies too much on assumption.

Blood Omen 2?

Baldur's Gate 2: Shadows of Amn comes to mind. Characters were expected to have some motivation to care for Imoen and to try to rescue her. They were also expected to have some motivation to even bother with Irenicus and to try to give chase. First time I played trough I couldn't believe I was nearly forced to care for Imoen but she wasn't even an important character after that, and that I would have had less problems if I hadn't chased Irenicus into Spellhold. Screwed if you do, screwed if you don't. Deus Ex is another example, as it also assumed too much that the main character would have a motivation to follow trough the predetermined path instead of choosing who to work for, or that he wanted to switch sides. Everything up to that point was pretty good but the ending sections were what threw me off. I disagree; as I've said, I find Arcanum's combat was unbalanced and ultimately poor. But it was also the player's decision to not use what was available to him. There were various combat options available which were simply not used in favor of quicker or stronger options, but deciding not to use them doesn't mean they weren't there. It certain wasn't as deep as I would have liked it to be, but there was some depth. No need for that last bit, really. I rarely, if ever, play mods. However, if you want to talk about solo builds, I can share some I've made for Arcanum. One involved a human with the Idiot Savant background who used only a knife as his primary weapon. Further down the road he also developed Molotovs, a Tranquilizer Gun, and an Acid Gun; after he'd paralyze and hallucinate enemies in combat then close in for the kill with Backstab or simple melee attacks. Another build was a Half-Ogre who was an adept at the Nature, Temporal, Air and Morph spell colleges, along with some Melee skill. Basically he'd cast Entangle, followed by Poisonous Vapors and wait out until enemies died from the poison. The ones that didn't would die at his hands after he cast Hardened Hands and Congeal Time. Another was more 'standard' but involved a Dwarf who was proficient at Melee and crafted himself a Flamethrower and Pyrotechnic Axe. I think he also used grenades of nearly all kinds. Damn runt was a skull splitting undead buster. I also created a gnome who invested into diplomacy, gambling, and the Phantasm and Conveyance spell colleges, and he survived up until the island of Thanatos. I say he survived until then not because he died but because I don't recall having finished the game with him because I quit. Nonetheless, he was working out fine especially considering he had no melee or ranged skills whatsoever. Finally, I remember having created an Elven character who focused on Thieving and Technological skills, and focused on ranged combat only. No melee backup weapons. There's likely more solo builds I did in my time but I think these are enough. There were some other combat options I'd use back in the day, such as sneaking around and placing traps, then getting the enemies attention; I'd then jump around with Spatial Distortion trough the mined area and watch enemies get torn apart with the traps. I also created Walls of Fire and throw enemies into it with Unseen Force. Not quite, physical attacks could not only be targetted but they could also cripple enemies, while spells couldn't. Sorry about that. Again, it's been a while since I've played so I can't precise just who cast magic and use ranged but I think I can find more on a replay, though. Or wait until the NPC went somewhere. I don't recall having been able to steal from shops with Unlocking Cantrip but recall some where lockpicking worked, though. Not really, but I think there's some other situations where it's actually much more noticeable such as technological characters being able to use magical potions with no problem but magical equipment lost some of its power on their hands (guess stomachs are insulated against harmful effects). On the other hand, the perceived lack of depth that would lead players to only focusing on one or two combat methods seems misleading.

I would have also enjoyed a less linear main path, no doubt, or one that had more multiple ways of going trough its choke points. Still, there were at least two ways of dealing with most of them which while not ideal seemed to work. They weren't accomplished writers by the time of Arcanum, at least; and they certainly didn't show any skill they might possess in Temple of Elemental Evil. Again, it was only with Bloodlines they showed a bit more of what they could do. In Arcanum it seemed they deliberately tried to come up with elements that would forcefully make their game unique or different in some way, as seen in the multiple story twists and setting. Some worked, some didn't. Storywise it wasn't as successful. I think most of them still gravitate around that particular plot, or some derivation thereof; though it's generally the methods to achieve it that change. Oh, I'm aware of the Dark Helm dealio. But I can guarantee you this wasn't the case. I don't remember if the prophecy expected the ressurection to entail all of Nasrudin's virtues or just his power (at which point it was debatable if Virgil was seeing trough the fullfilment of the prophecy considering that the PC should also be a force of virtue, or if he was just following me around to see me show any hint at anything else that might've suggested a telltrace of Nasrudin), but I agree that it wasn't, as I've said, well exposed.

Not sure if this is directed at me, but I wasn't refering to you on my previous post. The 'drooling fanboy' bit was directed more at people who review games and go "Wow, what can I say about gameplay? Just WOW!!1!1!"

While my reviews often get longwinded, I try my best to be as informative of the game as possible. I want to avoid falling into the drooling fanboy syndrome, and just blather on about how everything is awesome! or crap!

I apologize in advance to anyone who reads this and finds typos, omissions and other types of errors, but this was written today under feverish influence. If corrections are in order, let me know as I also plan to submit this review for some sites. As promised to metadigital, here is the review. Since I assume others might read this as well and some of them may not know the series I tried to give some background information on the series and general gameplay. A long time sucking Ever since the arrogant nobleman Kain took the chance to come back to life in the form of a bloodthirsty vampire to exact revenge against those who had murdered him in Silicon Knight

And how many publishers are willing to finance a game that would visually show disenbowelment, splitting skulls, pulling out eyes and some such? Any of those would make anti-Grand Theft Auto inquisitors to cream their pants at just how much censure they could apply, or suggest be applied. Also, text is many times downplayed in face of graphics but we're forgetting that text, including the one in Torment, is also used to describe things which we can't visually show such as the sense of smell. How would the particular smell of the Mortuary, for instance, be described visually to players?

If someone decides the story makes no sense simply because they couldn't be bothered to follow trough it because it did not conform to their idea of an interesting story, that's their prerogative. But it doesn't mean they are correct. Character incentive that draws the player into the game is hard to achieve, and I'm sure Troika could have done much better. Vampire: Bloodlines was already a step in the right direction. Still, I find character motivations in Arcanum are just as lacking as most other games out there. Wrong. And... (snip) Variety in combat does not mean it doesn't lend itself to allowing players to pursue one single, optimal method of dealing with it, and 3 or 4 examples don't really undermine my statement that "nearly all other games" encounter the same problem. Diablo 2 has many character development choices which allow to, as you say, integrate given combat options into the gameplay. But against enemies who don't need to be countered by those options the players will often use their best attack repeatedly to deal with them, because it doesn't merit using more complex options. Planescape: Torment? Same problem as Arcanum: most enemies were melee-based who just rushed the party; spellcasters were few and appeared very often. Doesn't mean it didn't have variety. Baldur's Gate 2 tactics? If the enemies were melee-based, then it was only a matter of having good equipment and rushing them. Spellcasters were also for the most part trivial: they'd raise spell defenses which were easilly countered, at which point melee characters or a party spellcaster could pummel them. Most of the tactics involved in it came from fighting enemies which were either special enemy groups (Cowled Wizards) or unique monsters (such as Dragons or Liches) which avoided a basic enemy mold. The remaining combat was actually as simple as possible - which doesn't mean it didn't had variety of course; it's just that many combat iterations simply didn't require that variety to come into play. If you want to argue that Arcanum's combat is poor, then you'll get no disagreement there. Enemies are very basic and often don't require much tacticts at all, and some character builds are clearly overpowered. Arguing that it uniquely 'suffers' from something which can be seen in many other games is however not something I can entirely agree with. Most of my characters in Arcanum had at least two attack methods and they weren't screwed. Several had melee as a secondary option, even, and weren't screwed. If all combat options had the same rate of progress and success what would be the point of giving multiple choices to players? All enemies, yes. Except those who were ranged or only used spells. You're not saying anything I don't agree with or haven't verified, so did I fail to be clear? Again, the ability to perform these depends on skill investment and ability to go unnoticed, either by resorting to a skill like Prowling or by resorting to environmental appraisal and approaching them in dimly lit areas (natural or caused by characters). Because of this, they sometimes work, sometimes don't, and sometimes one works better than the other.

You can pretty much tackle what you want, when you want in Arcanum as well. The main story arc only kicks in when you want it to; in fact, you can go off and do whatever you please while still being involved in the main story arc. The linearity of the story arc has no bearing on the possibility to explore the gameworld; in fact many times I left a main story arc quest behind me and went exploring the gameworld, only to resume it later. Many places in Arcanum could be found before they were deemed necessary to visit. First time I found Tarant, for instance, was not because I made inquiries in Shrouded Hills regarding its location but because I was simply exploring. Some cities do not appear until they're deemed necessary, true, but this didn't happen always or to such amounts that it felt terribly constrictive. His attitude towards death had already been considered warped by the members of the Elven Council, and his journal (which admitedly not everyone may have found in the game, as it was found in an optional location) briefly detailed his curiosity towards necromancy. When he was banished to the Void it was clear his long stay there deeply influenced his already warped notions of death, and as he exposes his motivations to players it seems ultimately the banishment by the Council to a place where not even they knew what it was was what likely caused him to further develop his simple necromantic curiosity with a nihilistic point of view. He wasn't a well developed villain by any means but I felt his motivations to be more acceptable than conquering a world. I may not agree with that perspective but I find it's easier to emphatize with. Well actually you were being taunted by the right guy; he was posing as the wrong one. This twist actually managed to surprise me as the build up actually made sense... Everyone had reason to suspect Arronax, and using the Dark Elves, who shared the same beliefs of elven supremacy as he did, to banish the Black Mountain Clan, which I've always thought were victims of Arronax's continuous assaults on technology, made sense. But that Kerghan, often considered of less importance by the Elven Council (at least when compared to Arronax and other creatures such as Kraka-Tur or the Bane of Kree) managed to conceal himself and used such a conveninet scapegoat as Arronax actually surprised me. I looked at it somewhat the opposite: since it was vague I assumed that there were considerably powerful forces not wanting them to be found. The Black Mountain Clan mines are an example of mystery: the entire clan disappeared and left no trace behind. It wasn't like there had been a great slaughter, or a formidable war, or as if they had suddenly developed claustrophobia with canibalism as its side effect; they were simply gone, without a trace. To me that succeed as a mysterious event which warrants some deeper investigation. I remember checking this and noticing once that my alignment meter and Virgil's were on the same level when he joined, which suggests (at least to me) that changes seemed closely tied to the point of conforming to the PC's actions because both of the markers started at the same point. I say this because other times my alignment was at something like -80 and his was way behind. He was seeing trough the whole Panarii deal, and he was told by Joaquin to follow me around. That seemed to be the reason, even if not entirely developed or exposed. No, players could influence Virgil negatively and alter his manner. Since I haven't played in ages I don't remember the specifics but I distinctly remember influencing him to become more aggressive and evil, to the point where Joaquin confronts me and Virgil (after an interjection between the three of us with a small Star Wars reference) in Caladon.

Kain feeds off a near death victim in Legacy of Kain: Defiance.

Then it's not really a remake is it? Besides, reworking portions of it so it becomes acceptable for today's market is likely going against what made it a critical success in the first place. It would sell without being Torment.

And components for crafting items, and ammunition for ranged weapons, and asking smiths to fix their weapons and armor. Players could also purchase Bates' mansion and a boat but these were unique, one time events.

Yes. I think it requires a charismatic and intelligent PC, though, as it will involve discussing a brief amount of dwarven lore and beliefs to show the PC understands and empathizes with Loghaire's plight.

The game does suffer with this, true. However, there's at least two locations where it is not necessary to go trough. The Dredge is entirely optional as Loghaire's son can be convinced to show his father's chamber; and going to the Vendigroth ruins is also somewhat optional as players can kill Nasrudin in order to be banished into the Void.

That isn't going to happen, because no publishers are going to fund games like that. If a game developer tells a publisher that they want to make a game based on a formula created by a game that was a financial disaster, their chances of getting funding are slim to none. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Knights of the Old Republic 2: The Sith Lords follows on the same particular formula of Planescape: Torment in regards to character development and party NPC interaction.

Khergan the Necromancer had been banished from the Elven council for his magical experiments with necromancy by order of its leader, Nasrudin. He was banished to the Void and believed to remain there forever, although the Elven Council wasn't entirely sure of what the Void was. Arronax, the son of Nasrudin, had also been banished to the Void for having single handedly destroyed the city of Vendigroth; he had perceived the rise of that technological marvel back in the day to be a great slight commited against Elves, whom he believed were the rightful rulers of Arcanum. After the battle with Arronax, Nasrudin was considerably weak and decided to confine himself in a protective magical shell which would remain until he had regained his power back. Meanwhile, Kerghan was plotting to return to the world of Arcanum. To do this he posed himself as Arronax and manifested himself before the Dark Elves, who much like Arronax, believed their kind to be the righteous rulers of Arcanum. Influenced by Arronax's visage they decided to set events in motion that Kerghan believed would release him from his interdimensional prison. Meanwhile, K'an Hua, an elf who had always met opposition from Nasrudin, influenced the Panarii religion to believe Nasrudin was dead and had been buried in Caladon. The Dark Elves posed themselves as the elves of Qintarra and had Loghaire Thunder Stone, the dwarven leader of the Wheel Clan, believe the dwarves had commited considerable atrocities against them, the exact details of which admitedly escape me at this point. However, for this transgression Loghaire Thunder Stone banished the Black Mountain Clain, who was then trasported to the Void - presumably by the Dark Elves - so they could become slaves and assist Kerghan in creating a large teleportation device that would generate a portal so he could escape the Void. During the construction of this device, one dwarf - Stenard Rockcutter - managed to escape trough the device's portal back into Arcanum. During this time, he tried to evade any pursuing forces by starving himself and losing much weight to the point where he could pass off as a gnome. He boarded the IFS Zephyr, presumably to contact someone, but the blimp was shot down by two half-orcs pilotting small planes. When he was about to die he asked a survivor to take a ring he carried to "the boy". The dying "gnome", you'll note, is the same on the game's introduction. Virgil claimed the PC was the reincarnation of Nasrudin who was prophesized to be 'reborn under wings of fire', and he took the PC surviving the burning wreckage of the blimp as a literal interpretation of this. At this point the PC had two elements which required to be investigated so they could provide answers. The ring, and the prophecy. The ring belonged to Gilbert Bates, reputed creator of the steam engine and one of the factors responsible for Arcanum to enter a Steam Age. In truth, Bates never created it. He had met the Black Mountain Clan when he was a young boy and was astonished by their technology, but the dwarves had nothing to do with him. He there met Stenard and became his friend. He said he was interested in the wonders of dwarven technology and said he wanted others to see them. He gave Stenard a ring his father had comissioned to P. Schuyler and Sons for him as a token of appreciation and friendship, soon going away. During this time, the Black Mountain Clan was punished by Loghaire under direct influence of the Dark Elves posing as the Elves of Qintarra and the Silver Lady. When Bates returned the dwarves were all gone. His only proof they had been there was the technology they left, and when others saw the steam engine plans he had with him they had assumed he had created them. Bates gained fame and money, and the reputation for having created the steam engine. When his fortune had allowed him to, he began hiring mercenaries to find out the whereabouts of the Black Mountain dwarves, but all mercenaries turned up empty handed or dead. One day he was approached by an assassin of the Molochean Head, who were in league with the Dark Elves, and was told to remain silent. The Molochean Hand are also the sect of assassins intent on killing the PC for his link to the whole deal with the dying "gnome", although eventually they prove to have been fooled by the Dark Elves as well. In regards to the prophecy, the PC would have to find out more the Panarii religion. In Caladon the PC met with acolyte Alexander, the son of Saint Mannox and was told more of the religion. Trough some investigation it was determined that K'an Hua had killed Mannox - by most likely burying him alive in a crypt below Caladon's church - and rewritten holy texts and conjuring prophecies to keep the secret. By analyzing some scriptures the PC eventually found out that the Nasrudin was actually resting in Thanatos, an island. In the island, it was revealed that Nasrudin was actually quite alive and that the Panarii religion was pretty much built on lies. Nasrudin exposed what had happened between him and Arronax, and when told of the apparent return of Arronax he told the PC the only way to stop him was to be banished to the Voi.d The PC would go to the Ring of Brogdar and meet with Nasrudin (or K'an Hua, if they had sided with him) and be teleported to the Void in order to banish (or restore) Arronax. It was there that it was revealed that Arronax had been imprisoned by Kerghan and was not intent on returning to destroy Arcanum. Not knowing of the PC's true nature or motivations, he had assumed the PC was trying to hinder his progress, likely based on Molochean Hand reports and knowledge of the (falsely built) Panarii prophecy. Yes, it is supposed to come together and make sense. And it does. Once you develop one particular method of fighting, that is it for the rest of nearly all other games in existence. Characters develop skills tailored to succeed at doing something in combat, and they do it; if it works why should they limit themselves? Then again, that they focus on one type of character doesn't prevent them from focusing on others. A character who invests in melee and ranged combat can be as good as a character who succeeds just in melee. Besides, "spamming" the same attacks doesn't always work as there are enemies which have attack patterns or resistances which can require other types of attacks. Beauty was criminally underused but its influence on character reaction was there. Aside the afforementioned character reaction in dialogue, some enemies would quickly attack PCs with a very low Beauty stat or would not immediatelly attack PCs with a very high Beauty stat. Both lockpicking and Unlocking Cantrip's success was determined by character skill and the ability to perform them unnoticed. Unlocking Cantrip was more tricky to perform as its sound seemed to alert nearby NPCs as well. In some locations it will work, in others it will clearly not. Which can be said of many other games once all their mysteries have been solved, all of the gameworld has been explored, and once nearly everything in it has been done. The villains' main motive is logical and felt more reasonable to me than standard world-conquering aspirations. Why should antagonists or their nature be outright revealed to players, or revealed before time? The revelation of the Master in Fallout, the revelation of the Dark Savant's true nature in Wizardry 8, and the real intent - and therefore clear indication of her status as an antagonist - of Amelissan the Black Hearted in Throne of Bhaal had no negative impact on the game, or the character's exposition. No character's "alignment" conformed to the PC's, it was affected by just what the PC was doing. All characters had their stances on good and evil reflect the PC's actions. Eventually should a PC's actions led NPCs to go too astray they would start to dislike the PC which would lead them to leave the party or outright attack the PC. Unless you're talking of how Virgil could ultimately have his entire persona be influenced by interjections with the PC and the PCs actions. He could be redeemed, or he could become evil, yes. How is this a negative for the NPC?

Extraneus

Bestiality is bad, mmmkay? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You stole my thunder.

Well to be honest after I left the reply I was wondering if it was their decision to include the realtime combat, or if it was their decision to include multiplayer. Unfortunately I was out for the day so I couldn't look up sources to clarify it; although I'm almost certain that it was their decision to include realtime combat and that it was Sierra who pushed for multiplayer. Will try to find some quotes to clarify this, however. I enjoyed it in the sense that it was playable and didn't really get in the way, although I always played Fast Turn Based. Still, it never seemed to even reach Fallout's combat.

Troika said this was entirely their decision. I think either Cain or Leonard did so in either the Codex forums or in some interview.

They seemed to have an honest desire to develop the best roleplaying games that they could make, but I think it was noticeable that their games suffered from having too many concepts with not enough implementation. Arcanum is the primary example of a game that tried to do too many things at once and it's too bad that out of all those things we can only bring up a handful of good ones. Still, some good is better than none. Temple of Elemental Evil also had lofty goals behind it but while it remains a very good tactical combat game with one of the best Dungeons and Dragons rule implementations, it's little else than that. I would enjoying seeing more Troika-styled games, in the sense of games which may be flawed but have enough redeeming qualities that just make me want to keep returning to them, than Bioware games which largely feel very polished but without a soul.

A possibility, but I hope they won't take Bioware's approach of not creating some models because they would have serious clipping (I think this was the excuse given in regards to cloaks) but then have nearly every other models clip.