Gromnir

if john dee had been open and notorious about his magical studies, he would never have survived his star chamber experiences or his investigation by the catholic church... and Magic Ain't Real, 'least not poe style magic. sheesh. is no contemporary oh john dee that were turning people into ghouls or binding their souls to inanimate objects. if there had been, do you honest believe your doctor example woulda gotten any kinda o' benefit o' the doubt from those who suspected him o' sinister purposes? as to the "what is real" stuff, you surely don't expect us to go down that road, do you? HA! Good Fun!

yes. josh expresses that the common folks is suspicious. how can the rest o' folks not be? we noted many times that we expect that in a game such as poe there would be examples o' those would test any law o' man, Gods or nature. you don't put something like animancy in a game and then complete ignore the possibility for drama. single and solitary examples o' such is expected. perhaps even a cabal? any kinda widespread acceptance o' animancy, even within an "enlightened" nation, strikes us a s wholly unreasonable. "As for the more educated experimenting in more questionable areas, wasn't that somewhat common in our own world. Alchemists who were suspected of dealing with the devil, entertained or were even retained by Kings, Queens and Emperor's. The educated middle and upper classes watching experimentation upon corpses with electricity, that promised revivification and sparked Mrs Shelley's most famous creation according to some. The fascination with the macabre and spiritualism that was catered to by ingenious frauds, and lapped up by the great and the good?" and who are these brave heroes who would come forth and open and notorious defend such practices even though the fears o' all were borne o' nothing save imagination. if the fears were real, how much less likely would be folks to admit trafficking with animancers/alchemist or whatnot... particularly in a world where Gods and souls is also real? am still not sure why that point don't get through. is not hypothetical. is not possible imagined. is not faith. is incontrovertibly real. HA! Good Fun!

much overstatement here unless you can back up further. translations were discouraged by the church, but as far as we know, there were never any threat o' excommunication or other such ultimate punishments. translations o' various forms were obvious necessary early in the church as most o' the original book weren't written in latin. around 1200 or so there were a formal prohibition on unauthorized bibles as a reaction to some s'posed heresies, but such weren't specific a translation issue, and there is at least evidence o' later french translations that didn't actual get suppressed, yes? technically, such ownership were not classified as a sin, so no, were not a damnation o' soul issue. would ownership o' a heretical bible tend to lead one to sin? yes, thus the prohibition. that being said, where excommunication and eternal damnation were at issue with religious issues, then we do have valid analogies. got any you wanna share? am betting we can show that there were serious resistance from all classes and social strata to folks engaging in damnation worthy offenses. rise o' protestantism? well, that is an interesting issue as is particularly plausible in a world without omnipresent and objectively real gods. is not an early renaissance and late feudal period kinda thing, but is noteworthy. without any kinda absolute truth, how does one know if their soul is in danger or not in our real world. got faith? maybe you is having absolute faith in a god or a church, but is faith nonetheless. again, poe world don't rely on faith... don't need it. is objective observable what animancers can and do do to the soul. is Not the same. serious. am not seeing how this is so difficult to grasp for folks. as real as soul is to folks in real world, it is real based on faith. knowing what damages the soul is also a matter o' faith... but not in poe. kepler actual got protection from jesuits to stave off harassment from protestants, but am knowing galileo is the typical example o' church resistance to Renaissance enlightenment, yes? is our understanding that galileo actual used scripture to defend himself. he were pleading and trying to convince that he were in line with the church rather than fighting the Church or outward denying. and for his trouble, galileo gets house arrest for the rest of his life. perhaps animancers would be expecting similar? perhaps not in more enlightened locales? but then again, galileo were not accused o' using magic that could alter the soul or raise dead. you gotta see the difference. or maybe not. btw, we know for a fact that there is corporeal undead in the poe world. is not some kind remote far-in-past bedtime story. the poe world view on animancy we has seen so far has... holes. is lacking an internal coherence unless one has a much diminished notion o' the value o' the soul. "Thus, I still fail to see your qualm with this. What is it exactly you're expecting? For animancy to be infeasible to even practice anywhere? That if a bunch of people think negatively about something, the world is rid of it?" never said that. is very difficult to communicate with you if you is gonna make stuff up and contradict yourself at every turn. you identify real world bigotry and suspicion that doctors faced, but you cannot cognizance increased suspicion o' animancers who actually can do the evils suspected 'o real world late feudal doctors? okie dokie. regardless, layoff the absurdism. we never suggested that animancy would be "infeasible" o' practice anywhere. we did say that animancers would face extreme suspicion everywhere. the uninformed is suspicious according to josh 'cause all they got is fear. well guess what, the informed know that the fears is not complete unjustified. animancers really does manipulate souls and they can create undead. you wanna analogize to the real world? fine. real world setting is late feudal and early renaissance and a new science evolves. the new science produces a cure for schizophrenia. unfortunately, some o' the scientists created genuine undead by binding souls to corpses... and some animancers is still doing so. what is the reaction o' pretty much freaking everybody to such a science and the people who practice? now, unlike lephys, Gromnir is not complete obtuse on this issue. we got a world o' magic when dealing with poe, so am suspecting the tolerance for the bizarre is a bit higher in the poe setting. is not direct analogous. however, at the same time you got the animancers exercising their craft through somewhat suspect and arguable immoral manipulation o' souls. in real world late feudal, we suspect that open practice o' animancy would not only be "infeasible" but animancers would be hunted down and burned at the stake. good riddance too. seriously? create undead and bind souls? but the nice animancer gave us an ointment for our boil. HA! Good Fun! ps serious odd post issue... half our text were mixed into quoted material. am thinking we fixed... kinda.

You will be able to go through character creation for your main character and any character you choose to make through the adventurer creator. They will all act as adventurers, not companions (meaning they don't have story content). Makes sense in that you don't have to take additional resources to create even more extra content for the demo. Really looking forward to this. is not an intuitive approach, but we think it is a good alternative to the games that allow you to play starting areas up to level X. play start/tutorial results in spoilage, and given the peculiarity o' relative impotence in a level-based system, the initial levels tend to be o' disproportionate insignificant importance. start us off at some mid-level range give us much better idea o' how game actual works. got a better idea o' synergy between abilities. will necessarily have more customization options. we will have a better idea o' how combat will work as 'posed to pretending as if killing rats or wolves is a useful example o' game combat. we will see at least some depth o' the magic system. etc. am pleased. HA! Good Fun!

*rolls eyes* souls is an abstraction in the real world. they ain't in poe. you don't need faith in poe. nevertheless, one wonders how one who has read any fiction that deals with souls, or any historical accounts o' martyrs could possibly come away with a pov such as you have. is genuine beyond our capacity to understand. hell, play motb or ps:t and see how obsidian has already handled issues o' the importance o' the soul in previous games. "I'm not denying that a world filled with magical horrors is more horrific than only reality's horrors. What you're failing to actually present, here, is the reason why anyone would be any more knowledgeable about any of this in one world than in the other." we don't have to. josh already did. the ignorant folks in poe is the ones who fear animancers will bring about apocalypse. perhaps ironically, the folks who know the dangers o' animancy is the ones who seem more accepting. more accepting than Apocalypse? not much o' a threshold. nevertheless, we didn't present a reason 'cause josh supplied as a given. our assumption would be that in the absence o' real knowledge, people will, as a whole, fear the worst, but we don't need to concern ourselves as josh already explained. common folks don't know and they fear apocalypse. you seem to believe that knowledge o' the real dangers would justify real fear. great. you and Gromnir is on the same page. animancy got real horrific dangers that go far beyond the dangers that inspired bigotry and suspicion o' real world dark age and early Renaissance scientists. therefore, real knowledge o' real dangers should result in a real freaking p00p stain in one's huggies when they is dealing with animancers. josh tells us that the knowledgeable folks is accepting. thus the disconnect. HA! Good Fun!

you is seriously comparing the resistance o' folks translation o' the bible into languages other than latin to poe animancy? ... am understanding why people keep using real world examples, but the examples you come up with baffle us. is gonna be very difficult to analogize to real world given we got actual souls being potentially harmed by animancers, but even so, to use bible translation strikes us as a very odd choice. and yes, we agree that it would be natural for some animancers to push boundaries, and they is perhaps a kinda evolution, much as chemistry were a kinda evolution from alchemy. but again, the imagined horrors that were resulting in antagonism and bigotry being directed at real world sciences is gonna be laughable when compared to poe animancy that does in fact create nightmarish monsters through perversions o' soul related magic. frankenstein is the frequent used real world cautionary tale 'bout science run amok yes? that were fiction. there never were no frankenstein monster. in point o' fact, ms. shelley's monster were benign for most o' the novel. dr. frankenstein creates and is horrified by the creatures ugliness and crudity. the monster is cast out and wanders alone til it decides to observe and aid a family kinda in secret. monster eventually learns french and befriends some old blind guy. happy days. everything is ok til family returns and sees the hideous monster and the beast is again driven away. our misbegotten protagonist returns to dr. frankenstein and observes that he will never gain acceptance from people, and so he asks his maker to craft for him a companion. dr. frankenstein initially agrees, but then he starts to worry about the implications o' a race o' monsters, and so he destroys his female creation. the monster finally snaps and swears he will get revenge on frankenstein. if frankenstein's monster has gained a foothold in the collective consciousness as representing the dangers o' science run amok, what then o' the Real Monsters produced by animancy? how much more terrible and vivid is gonna be the nightmares attributed to animancy given that the poe science does require trafficking in human souls and may result in undying monsters? and lephys don't even realizing that he is hurting his own cause? doctors were, in some cultures, viewed with suspicion borne outta fears given birth in the imaginations o' the ignorant. animancy dangers, on the other hand is real. am not understanding why this don't get through. mistaken belief that doctors and midwifes can hurt souls and create undead results in persecution, so imagine what kinda difficulties animancers, who actual does manipulate souls and create undead is gonna be facing. HA! Good Fun! ps we would ask once more that people quit using real world examples without recognizing that souls make different. either distinguish poe souls or try and find a parallel that would be equivalent to the possible destruction o' one's soul, but compare to real world examples such as we see above strikes us as intellectual dishonest.

every time the mods close a romance thread, a new one opens almost immediately. given the impotence o' their efforts to stop romance threads all together, perhaps they came up with a new plan: leave a single thread open to collect all the waste in one place... like a latrine. HA! Good Fun!

your point one were never genuine disputed though, were it? am expecting you may always find some rare case, particularly in fantasy stories, o' the fool who would choose immortality even at the cost o' his soul, sanity and 401(k), etc. the individual who laughs at God (or the Gods) and spits in the face o' infinity is kinda cliché, but is not gonna shock the player o' poe or the reader o' fantasy. and keep in mind that Dead Money is fallout universe. is no Real Gods and undeniable souls in fallout, but even so, is the immortals depicted as the lucky ones? ps:t explored such notions to some degree. is surprising that obsidian writers would recycle concepts? how did chrisA reveal to us tno's bid for immortality? including the damned quest o' would-be immortal in yet another obsidian game is not gonna shock us. in point o' fact, in such cases the costs to our token fool need necessarily be extreme to give scope to the crime 'gainst nature and/or gods. nope, we ain't talking 'bout individuals. the "common folk" is a broad category for which josh were able to make generalizations. am doubting common folks is the only class that is subject to his braodstroke approach. as to your point two, we expect that the obsidians will stress the value o' everyday and mundane animancy and possibly the monetary benefits o' the animancer's art as well. we made this observation in the other animancy threads. am not certain how far it takes us. we gave example o' seeming minor 20% increase in crop yield for farmers in another thread. farmer might not know much 'bout animancy, but if he were told that he would needs give up that 20% 'cause o' protests 'gainst animancy, the farmer might balk. 20% is significant to the farmer. 'course this ignores how the animancer got the farmer his 20%. if you thinks real world folks is kinda over-the-top about animal testing, imagine the reaction o' folks in a world with Real souls discovering that Mega Corn® were made possible thanks to testing 'pon a thousand discarded children. what if only requires testing on the SOULS o' five people (an extreme small group for any scientific study) would that make it ok? as to how much flesh is needed... huh? no doubt the victims will be feeling much better knowing that they is kinda like the goat the anaconda steals from some Guatemalan farmer. yeah, the goat is dead, but the anaconda will be able to go without eating for a whole month. call it a win for the goat? no doubt other farmers is not fearing anacondas much 'cause is only one goat per month? will the view o' the aforementioned classes and groups such as commons and nobles be more dismissive o' the evil o' undead creation once they realize that the anaconda in question need only feed rarely? *shrug* dunno if we are on same page. given the descriptions o' animancy, and the recognition that this is a fantasy game, we would be surprised if obsidian didn't include at least one individual who would be challenging fate. is kinda an obsidian thing, no? even so, that don't strike us as particularly relevant when considering how social/cultural groups in poe view animancy. if value o' soul in a world with Real souls is similar to how true believers view soul in our world, then am not getting animancy as described. something is clear missing. if souls is viewed as inconsequential, then am surprised by common folks reaction. parts just don't fit together quite right, do they? HA! Good Fun!

if she had said, "there was an npc in NWN that you could romance: the black guy," do you think anybody woulda' cared? puhlease. "that movie was ok, the one with the black guy. no, Not after earth. it won all the awards last year. not __________ either. are you high? what awards did fast and furious 6 win? no, the movie, with the guy from that horrible movie where angelina jolie played a russian sleeper-spy?" "what is the American president's name? which president? the current president, the black guy." see, simple say "black guy" doesn't get anybody roasted. the last one looks a bit ignorant, but not 'cause 'o "black guy" so much as 'cause who doesn't know who the US president is? suggest that people get attacked just 'cause they say, "black guy." yeah, that deserves a slap with a moldering trout. HA! Good Fun!

am suspecting that hilly in a rv can be a bit disconcerting. everybody knows that san francisco is making considerable use of the z axis, but is easy to forget that there is many other towns and cities in the US that is just as vertical. morgantown wv is unlikely to be on hurls list o' future tourist stops, but you mentioned going into pennsylvania in a couple years. you could not pay us enough money to drive an rv through pittsburgh. parts o' cincinnati, oh is equal disconcerting. boston is not too hilly, but the streets is labyrinthine. HA! Good Fun!

I see what you are saying, but there is the intellectual, philosophical knowledge that your soul is immortal, and perhaps there is even widespread empirical knowledge to the effect (although I am not sure this would be the most likely case as knowledge dissemination may not be as wide spread as even our Renaissance analogue, as it appears we have no printing press yet), and then there is the physical, visceral knowledge of your impending demise. I am sure there is a PoE Plato of some sort who nattered on about caves and such, but there is the possibility that if all we know are shadows, and we have only heard about the other things, we are going to cling to those shadows with every bit of crazy delusional self destructive strength we can. am not thinking actual knowledge o' immortality o' the soul is necessary to be making experimentation with souls unpalatable. josh mentioned earlier that there is varying notions 'bout what happens to souls after death. there also seems to be some empirical evidence regarding reincarnation. regardless, the soul is real. is not a hypothetical. the folks who have knowledge o' animancy is also aware that animancers can anchor your soul to your corpse, and that your corpse persists indefinitely. immortal? don't know, but regardless, the soul is real and one is knowing that it can exist beyond death. question: in a world where gods and souls is incontrovertibly real, do you honest see persons being more dismissive o' the soul than in real world? as we said before, we is gonna need more info. yeah, is possible to makes some explanation as to why poe peoples is indifferent to souls, but based on how the common folks react and given how josh otherwise describes souls and animancy, we cannot reconcile what we is being told. HA! Good Fun!

the fact that this doesn't shock us is indicative o' how little we expect from so-called journalists who cover games. nobody asked? terrible. HA! Good Fun!

post script please don't bring real world examples into this. a man dying o' a pancreatic cancer will consider most any possible medical solution. if ridiculous and expensive dolphin urine and coffee grounds cure don't work, what is the worst possible result? death? the guy is dying for chrissakes. dying by inches and not least bit dignified. a quick and painful death is not something to be greatly feared by the man who has pancreatic cancer. souls make different. in a world where souls is real, death is not the worst outcome for a dying man. risk your eternal soul to be guinea pig in a schizophrenia treatment study? hmmm. yeah, what is option B again? HA! Good Fun! edit: typically we would not be curious 'bout the religious backgrounds o' game developers, but it occurs to us that this might be a factor. the moderate well educated person in their 20s and 30s is tending to be the least religious 'mongst the American demographic. if obsidian guys is all atheist or somesuch, am guessing it is possible that they could be dismissive o' the importance o' the soul. maybe obsidian folks, in spite o' creating a world with objective real souls, simply don't get how vital the soul is to people who have faith. in poe you don't need faith. maybe gotta talk to some True Believers to get a sense o' importance o' the soul? had never occured to us before now, but if literal everybody at obsidian don't actual have any kinda faith that hinges on the notion o' an immortal soul, then perhaps they simple don't understand. dunno... is a complete left field guess. to tajerio: we seen your response as we edited, so this may be confusing as we seeming reply before your post. apologies in advance. we did observe that poe souls could be viewed different, and if that is the case such that souls is rather like an appendix, then we can be understanding the pov presented by the developers. given the horror o' corporeal undead, am wondering if such a perspective is plausible. your soul gets anchored to your corpse and it is you who goes cannibal and insane, not just some fuzzy and indistinct notion o' otherness. nevertheless, if souls is like hair or fingernails or appendix, am gonna need reevaluate. we mentioned in another animancy thread that philip pullman books (golden compass/northern lights) actual deal with separate soul concept. is a worthwhile read. am not suggesting pullman is only way to do such, but his perspective seemed internal coherent.

the reaction o' the common folks strikes us as entire plausible. view animancers with extreme suspicion? that makes perfect sense. correct info about animancy is, as josh observed, not wide-spread. mostest folks is gonna necessarily be ‘mongst the uniformed. most will be suspicious. the informed, on the other hand, is gonna be aware that animancers is capable o’ such “evils” as binding a soul to a corpse, such that unless the animated corpse eats his fellow men, he goes inextricably insane? going insane in such circumstances strikes us as something o’ a blessing. we is talking ‘bout a world where souls is not mere an abstraction neither, yes? is poe souls viewed so complete different from real world? maybe souls is more akin to a human appendix… or at least a kidney? sure, a kidney is extreme important, but you gotta spare, yes? we would let somebody experiment on our kidney if we were extreme desperate, had all kinda safety protocols in place, and were knowing that outcome would not potential damn us to an eternal torment. … yeah. am still clear missing something. we get that there is benign applications o’ animancy. am gonna assume there is potential lucrative opportunities to be making money from such benign applications. nevertheless, you has created a “science” that births the stuff outta nightmares AND is a direct manipulation o’ souls. the absence o’ extreme suspicion from the uniformed and Many of the informed is odd. poe has some strongholds o' enlightened acceptance? ok. sure. is a game too, so why not? that being said, am hopeful game does better job o' making animancy seem more palatable. HA! Good Fun!

truth. am nevertheless concerned. it is possible that the soul stuff simple weren't thought out very well. in a world where Gods is unequivocal real, and the existence o' the soul is not in question, we would expect greater resistance to animancy, particular when the real dangers o' that "science" is stuff outta nightmares. stem cell research? really? that is a good analogy? clearly Gromnir is missing something. am hoping that something is actual in the game. HA! Good Fun!

Because there is no question. Please return there and keep asking it forever. Be kind, I believe its our duty to rehabilitate those that have lurked on the BioBoards. Have you no pity? pity? no. that being said, we will observe that if gaider has ignored qistina, then we will metaphorical tip our hat to the biowarian for his unexpected good sense in this matter. HA! Good Fun!

no doubt josh is trying to be careful to not give anything away that is best left for the game. am understanding. nevertheless, we didn't actual learn much that you didn't already say previous, and we is still mighty confused. not wanna address stem cell analogy? okie dokie. how 'bout,"common folk have a lot of ideas and opinions about what animancy is, but it's not well-informed." see, am not certain what to make o' this. use real world ignorance o' the unwashed masses don't seem to help neither. think new sciences will possibly rob you o' your soul is the kinda silliness we would expect from a story set in similar time/place as The Name of the Rose, or even in early Renaissance.​ the difference here being that the real dangers o' animancy include the horrors one would expect uneducated to imagine in the absence o' knowledge. animancers is messing with your soul and creating undead. if the realities o' animancy include the horrific, then is the "common folk" actual imagining worse? may take us a bit to try and come up with a possible worse. am seeing we will need wait to get clarification... or perhaps we won't. hopefully the in-game explanations satisfy where current developer explanations leave more questions. HA! Good Fun!

"However, there are almost always side effects assuming the process works at all. Both the general public and many powerful people view animancy as reckless and likely to invoke the displeasure of the gods. It's seen as tampering with a natural or divine cycle." animancy sounds like scary stuff, particular in a magical world. magic necessarily is playing fast and loose with the natural order, which no doubt makes application o' the scientific method problematic, even if the scientific method is in widespread use by the "educated men" you describe above. tampering with souls strikes us as a potentially extreme divisive use o' magic-- will no doubt be some who think any benefits o' animancy is outweighed by the obvious seeming costs. one difficulty we has is in an obsidian response that analogized resistance to animancy and real world concerns regarding stem cell research. would you say that fears and concerns regarding animancy in poe is approaching stem cell research levels? greater? is the dangers o' animancy (e.g. link 'tween corporeal undead creation and animancy) well known? am suspecting that different cultures will have differing levels 'o resistance to animancy. got any such examples? there any cultures or locales wherein the dangers o' animancy is largely ignored? if so, how is such tolerance explained? no doubt many o' these questions need be answered in the game. even so, descriptions o' animancy in previous info drops don't necessarily seem to align with your contributions in this thread. care to enlighten, or should we expect clarification in the game? wait for game explanation is fine with Gromnir, just so long as we is knowing such explanations is actual forthcoming. HA! Good Fun!

"We didn't show character creation for two reasons: time and polish. Our demo slots were only 30 minutes long, 20 minutes of which were taken up by the demo itself, leaving 10 minutes for questions and general coming/going. I think Gromnir is right that character creation is very important in a game like this. At the time of E3, character creation was functional but it had a lot of bugs and the interface was really rough. Most of Roby's time recently has been spent polishing CC. It tends to be one of the most complicated and easily-busted interfaces in the RPGs I've worked on." a simple if somewhat disappointing response, although any response is appreciated given the inexplicable dearth o' info on some matters. if character creation weren't polished enough to be showing to the public, then we can see not wanting to show it at e3. is getting kinda late though, yes? a summer beta is still scheduled, correct? as we noted above, we suspected that character creation weren't ready for public display. regardless, is still mind boggling to us that given the relative significance o' character creation, no stories from e3 offer josh's explanation. did no journalist ask the question? HA! Good Fun!

Using increased emphasis on romances as a sign if their "decline" is a but curcukar, IMO, since that emphasis is placed there mostly by media/snarky gamers. For example, I don't think a romance has been morecore to a Bioware story than Bastila was in Kotor... Me2 has a wrong type of emphasis on romance in the npc stories due to locking out character interaction and progression outside romances, but it's something they did pick up on and fix for me3. Truly, the whole "BioWare focuses too much on romances" is more than a bit of hyperbole. Romances are still a tiny, optional part of every game, and arguably their presence isn't any larger than it used to. Hell, some people who work at BioWare have expressed frustration that their fans won't shut up about it and bring it up in every situation, instead of, you know, focusing on other parts of the game. There is much legitimate criticism to throw at BioWare. Their romances being cliche, cheesy and fan service is one of them. Their romances being the focus of the game, not so much. the irony being that the biowarians created the situation they now find distasteful. as bruce has identified, the biowarians made a safe haven for fans o' the companion seximification mini-game and alternative lifestyle advocates. bio writers were frequently active participants in the the romance love fests. yeah, we can sympathize with bioware to some small degree as we watched the evolution. as we has observed previous, is not as if bg2 romances resulted in some kinda dramatic overnight change. even the inclusion o' non-traditional romances in kotor and jade empire did not result in immediate and noteworthy alterations to the board dialectic. nevertheless, with each new game bioware pushed the envelope a bit further, and the writers and developers only complained rare about fan excess. so, now they wanna complain that all fans wanna do is talk romance? they coulda' stopped the crazy train if they had wished to do so, but they didn't. biowarians were laughing like pre-teens with their bare arses hanging out the windows as their silly locomotive o' love roared ever forward. complain now? *snort* bioware got what it wanted, but like in all the fairy-tales, it were too late when they came to realization that what they wanted weren't exact how they imagined. HA! Good Fun!

we dated an actress... once. HA! Good Fun!

kinda a sidenote: some o' the most bizarre feuds we can recall is literary feuds. writers can be... odd. is worth a google if you is looking for some particularly colorful insults. "literary feuds" will produce more than a few zingers. additionally, am not much o' a comic book fan, but am understanding that comic writers has been known to get surly. our experience is more with writers than other artists, but our limited experience is telling us that the insecure artsy types tends to be more prone to such stuff rather than less. 'least we ain't dealing with actors and directors, yes? some amusing examples: faulkner speaking of hemingway “he has never been known to use a word that might send a reader to the dictionary.” hemingway on faulkner “poor faulkner. does he really think big emotions come from big words?” capote on kerouac “that’s not writing, that’s typing.” byron v. keats is probable too easy... am not certain what keats ever did to byron, but there is multiple sources o' byron verbally eviscerating keats, and byron didn't even have the decency to cease his assaults after keats untimely death. is as if keats' death only angered byron more as it forever removed the young man from lord fussy-britches reach. but again, am not suggesting a feud 'tween obsidain and bioware. HA! Good Fun!

ps keep in mind that we ain't suggesting that obsidian developers is dismissive o' bioware-- said so above. is also not 'bout burning bridges and open feuds. nevertheless, just as boardies here and at codex come up with reasons and rationales as to why bioware games sell better, so will the obsidian developers. am having no idea what conclusions they arrive at, but am suspecting the obsidian guys take pride in their work and is competitive 'mongst themselves and others in their field... am betting that they don't resign themselves to the fact that bioware is simply a better developer o' crpgs. and again, just in case is being missed, we don't know what any particular obsidian is thinking 'bout bioware. "Many writers, who work alone, in fact eschew competition..." am not doubting this is true o' some obsidians or even most, but that in itself is also telling, no? mini-game romances is biowarian. avoid competition is just as telling. but regardless, we don't know obsidian mind on this. that being said, we suspect it is a question worth considering. HA! Good Fun!

our sister were smart, athletic and made friends easily. as an out-o'-state student she were accepted to uc berkeley as a molecular and cell biology major. in high school she played soccer and were the team mvp. she were also on the student council... secretary or somesuch. we bring up 'cause our sister eventually confided that she sorta hated being our sister during high school. she went to berkeley mainly 'cause that is where Gromnir went, and 'cause she didn't get into stanford. in spite o' being a soccer star, she were constantly being compared to her brother who were all-state in multiple sports. she did student council partially 'cause we had no interest in such stuff-- it were the "one thing" she had that were different and better than us. Gromnir never felt the least bit competitive towards her, which only made things worse for her. weren't til years later that she were able to get over the competitiveness. now the thing is, most every place we has worked, or any teams we has been part o', competitiveness and envy were always a factor... and sometimes encouraged. got forty and fifty year old men women working for a prestigious firm and their "office politics" is just a sad way to make immature rivalries sound better. there ain't no way bob deserved that promotion. mary is such a freaking brown-noser. blah, blah, blah. hell, as a coach or boss we has purposeful singled-out a person for praise or perks simply to get a reaction from the rest o' the "team." even if the guys at bioware and obsidian were absolute bestest buddies, we wouldn't be quick to dismiss their competitive nature. HA! Good Fun!

no matter how clever your sophistry or enlightened your ideals, you will never convince a tiger to become a vegetarian. am gonna leave for you all to decide if the promancers is the sophist or tiger. "2: Keep in mind that Bg1 had no romances, but Bg2 did. This suggest it is entirely possible for romances to be in PoE2." the quoted material does raise an interesting question. obsidian is not bioware. that observation is beyond contention, but in and of itself it means nothing. ask the hardcore fans here or at rpgcodex what is defining qualities that distinguish the two developers, and some folks new to these boards might be surprised. is would be hard to argue that obsidian has been more successful at selling games, so the folks who prefer kotor 2 to kotor or motb to nwn is forced to find differences other than raw sales data. "obsidian makes smarter games that don't pander to the prurient interests o' the bsn crowd." such debates will often include phrases such as "lowest common denominator" to be identifying the fans o' bioware games. the "console crowd" is another dismissive label. is a somewhat silly debate, nevertheless, one is wondering how obsidian sees itself as different from bioware. am doubting the obsidian v. bioware bit is something the developers discuss... much. additionally, it is worth noting that obsidian is not a single entity save as a legal fiction that is having benefits for taxation and investment-- different peoples at obsidan is likely having different perspectives. still, we cannot help but wonder how obsidian sees self, and if that identity might not have impact on future romance. romances is a biowarian staple. what Gromnir considers romance is not actual what bioware includes in their games, but we do recognize that bioware has been able to alter the very definition o' crpg game romance in the relative short period o' time they has been making games. when folks here and elsewhere discuss, debate and/or dismiss the merits o' crpg romance, they is arguing 'bout the companion mini-game that bioware has made integral in their releases. have romance 'tween two characters and both o' them is not the player character? before the turn o' the century such a romance woulda' been as likely, if not more likely, to be at the heart o' a discussion o' crpg romance. when Gromnir suggests that the bestest crpg romance we has ever encountered in a game is ravel puzzelwell's love for the nameless one, we is typical fighting an uphill battle, and we is needing necessarily start by proving that ravel's love for tno should be counted as a crpg romance. the very scope o' the question has been redefined by bioware. yeah, obsidian no doubt recognizes the popularity o' romances, but how does obsidian sees self in the present context? from a cynical perspective, would obsidian wanna deal with comparisons to bioware insofar as what has become a distinctly biowarian feature? is our understanding that obsidian included some limited version o' romance in AP and that the romance itself were, to put the best spin possible 'pon it, having very mixed reviews. if obsidian embraces some kinda us v. them mentality as does the relative fan-bases, it is possible that obsidian might wish to avoid comparisons related to romance. obsidian don't have biowarian experience with the romance mini-game. also, and while am certain obsidian could never admit, what if obsidian has a distinctly codexian perspective and is seeing bioware as a developer that is catering to the console crowd and the least common denominator? turned into a pillar o' salt might be just punishment for looking back towards sodom, yes? romances is one o' those distinctly biowarian features, and if one embraces the belief that such romances is an exercise in developer decadence and excess, then obsidian needs necessarily bring themselves down to biowarian level to craft such features. again, am not actual saying that obsidian is afraid o' competing with bioware or that obsidians is dismissive o' bioware and/or bioware style romance, so those o' you who has used reply/quote to refute should now be feeling a bit silly for indulging your reflexive urges. Gromnir is simply posing a question: how does obsidian see itself? perhaps you don't think the question is relevant. is a fair pov, but we cannot help but wonder at how constant being compared to bioware might influence obsidian. HA! Good Fun!