Gromnir

it's a trailer. trailers typical tell us nothing useful 'bout the game. we liked the planescape trailer, but other than that it were using the ie engine, we could glean almost zero that were useful. we also liked the music, but the composer for the trailer was different than for most of the game, and some o' those cut-scenes is o' stuff we never saw in the game. it's a trailer. HA! Good Fun!

urban population density is, we s'pose, nice. am just not too worked up 'bout it. anytime we looks at a feature, we considers that poe has limited development resources. so what is we willing to give up to get ________ ? things such as random name generators and more urban density is the stuff we want in game after all the things we think is important is included and optimized. as between adding a couple extra npcs that is meaningful and having attached quest lines Vs taking same resources to make sure a city is populated with many moving bodies am not sure what is an equivalent development cost for urban population density, but am suspecting there is more than a few things we would rather have in the game than a few dozen chatable Wendy the Baker npcs who will ask us 'bout how keen it is to be an adventurer and how terrible the situation is in Hazbleakastan... or whatever. HA! Good Fun!

am not sure if we can express just how much we disagree. the more complex the game system, the more helpful is a respec. have absolutely no idea why you would think that adding character story elements decreases the benefit (and possibly the need) for respec. when bioware made dragon age they didn't skimp on story elements compared to most story-driven rpgs. unfortunately/fortunately dragon age did not arrive with a set o' three hardbound books o' a few hundred pages that would explain the actual way in which the rules worked. even after our first play through o' dragon age, we still had only the most limited notion o' the manner in which the character development choices translated into actual game efficacy. dragon age were a new system with relative complex rules mechanics and neverwiner nights 2 were also having complex character development options. combinations of abilities, feats, classes, and skills were making for a great deal of complexity. bg/bg2 were almost childish simple compared to nwn2 and motb. the thing is, for the serious rules junkie who weren't satisfied with choosing fighter or wizard and then just hoping for the best at level-up, there were literal dozens o' rules books that explained d&d. you didn't mistake your way into a viable fighter/bard/rdd/wm build. by the same token, you could mistake yourself into complete and utter uselessness by choosing feats and classes that looked like fun, but had poor synergy. nevertheless, for the folks that wanted to metagame the rules, there were all those d&d resources available to 'em. oh, and all the story in the world wouldn't makes a broken character more fun to play in nwn2. frustrating is Not fun. so, is poe gonna be more like bg/bg2 or closer to da or nwn2 insofar as complexity is concerned? am gonna bet it is closer to da. unlike nwn2 or even fo:nv, many/most players is gonna be coming to poe without any useful knowledge 'bout the rules or game mechanics. the more complex the rules is, the more likely it will be to makes possible the broken or useless character. similarly, the more complex the rules is, the more likely it will be to find specialty builds. respec is a natural and reasonable option for a game with complex rules and extreme limited meta-knowledge o' those rules. gots absolute nothing to do with story. HA! Good Fun!

the original funky drummer, clyde stubblefield were one o' those often unheralded studio musicians who knew how to play with the song. as an aside, we noted a few pages ago that we ain't a big jazz fan, but without Tony Williams, modern rock drumming wouldn't be the same. so, for enoch... HA! Good Fun!

for Gromnir, carl palmer is one o' those enigma drummers-- we know he is fantastic, but we rare like his music. what we mean is that there is some elp stuff we think is great, but most o' the asia catalog interests not at all. keep in mind that our first genuine exposure to palmer were late 70s and early 80s, and that were when there were some significant negative backlash lingering from elp's Love Beach release. regardless, palmer is what made the good elp stuff memorable for us. aside: our favorite drummer is a cliché choice HA! Good Fun!

Then why would you even make that connection, a more accurate statement would then be that I was replying to your strawman... ... what on earth are you talking about? publishing is HIGH risk. piracy HARMS publishers. there is your freaking connection. *shakes head sadly* HA! Good Fun!

Well we can agree to disagree on that point, it's pointless to discuss ideologies. The newest iteration of SimCity was not pirated for more then a year, because of it always online policy. It did way worse then it's predecessor, to the point where they even tried to move it to an offline platform, at which point, yes it was pirated. I think those two markets are separate. Those who want to pirate it will, those who don't won't. If we somehow magically removed piracy (SOPA?), how much would that change the standings. The biggest question there is how much of those pirated copies are lost sales. There is a reason why free to play games are so popular nowadays, but that is a tangent that would take it's own thread to discuss. You insinuated strongly that they were a big contributor, it was a direct reply to what you said, no strawman at all. Also when those experts are paid by the same companies that have a conflict of interest and use research done/payed for by the same companies, excuse me if I don't swallow what they have to say. That's in the same line of an oil company paying for research on global warming and then having their experts discuss it. is all kinda contributing factors. no doubt piracy is a contributing factor as we has now pointed out Many times... so yeah, still a strawman. we got no idea how big a factor is piracy to publisher fails, 'cause as noted above, is largely impossible to come up with numbers. and if you won't believe quarterly reports, or experts doing independent studies, or that those heartless corporations is spending millions trying to stop piracy, then our observations 'bout you just being plain obtuse 'bout this issue is seeming being reinforced. in any event, it doesn't really matter though how big or small is the problem o' piracy is, 'cause as 'tween the publishers, developers and/or artists versus the poor pirates... HA! Good Fun!

strawman alert. we didn't make claim that piracy were forcing publishers to shut down. "also, it is worth noting that we didn't blame the pirates for failure of interplay or others" *chuckle* is possible that sarex is gonna get us in trouble for spam if you force us to repeat that yet again. we said that publishing were high risk and that piracy were costing publishers money. is rare for there to be a single obvious event or cause for failure o' a major publisher. regardless, piracy is a problem for game software developers and publishers. is a Significant problem 'ccording to most experts. is a problem that those in a high-risk venture can ill afford. is a problem that makes quantification difficult or near impossible. is a problem that is global but is having vast differing impacts and rationales in developed v. developing world. is a problem that is differing if we is speaking of books or movies or music... and is differing even if we is talking platform v. pc and direct download. is a complex and multi-layered issue. experts such as Siwek likes to give numbers for billions o' dollars and jobs lost, but every expert has different numbers and every new bit o' info or change in tech alters the numbers anyway. piracy is a problem for game software publishers.... and that really is the end o' the line as far as silly justifications for piracy. HA! Good Fun!

sure it is lost money. difficulty is in coming up with an exact figure that everybody agrees 'pon for how much is lost to pirates. the experts in our second link seem to agree that coming up with exact numbers is if not impossible, then prohibitive difficult. there is vast differences 'tween piracy costs and countermeasures in developed nations v. developing. there is also differences in cost 'tween the types o' information being pirated. coming up with exact numbers is as silly as is suggesting that every pirated copy equals a loss at US market rates.... which is what some experts has done in the past. that being said, only the most obtuse observers is gonna pretend that 'cause o' the difficulty o' quantification that piracy does not result in loses to publishers. HA! Good Fun!

You do know that you're also spouting pure conjecture? also, it is worth noting that we didn't blame the pirates for failure of interplay or others. we noted that game publishing is risky, and publishers is frequent spending money they don't have, or squeezing every dollar they can out of the games they has made... and they still fail. from perspective of shareholders and board members, lost money to pirates when you is hemorrhaging is gonna be unacceptable. http://www.nam.org/Communications/Articles/2014/01/INTERNATIONAL-SOFTWARE-PIRACY-HAMPERING-MANUFACTURERS-IN-THE-US.aspx http://www.ssrc.org/workspace/images/crm/new_publication_3/%7Bc4a69b1c-8051-e011-9a1b-001cc477ec84%7D.pdf second link is excellent btw. HA! Good Fun!

Actually I misunderstood your post I asked my question on; re-reading and with this further discussion I see you're saying, regarding the big publishers - "they make enough money now to continue creating games, so the only loss is to their profit margin which doesn't (typically) get invested in game development but lines investors/owners pockets" whereas I read it as "they have enough money now to make games, it doesn't matter if they make any more money". So a total reading comprehension fail on my part. its still bs. most large publishers lose money on a majority o' their games-- is a handful of successful titles that keeps the light turned on. also, lining the pockets o' investors is what makes the whole system work. if a publisher makes investor no more money than the investor would see from an ordinary savings account or even mutual funds, what is the motivation to invest in riskier game publishing ventures? decrease money that would otherwise go to investors decreases investor motivation to be investing in games development and publishing. am sure you can see how that impacts future game development, yes? HA! Good Fun! Right, I don't disagree with you, but I did fail to understand what Sarex was getting at. In a very general sense, yes if a money making endeavor is making - generally speaking - the expectations for returns on investment such that future development isn't impeded the piracy is only impacting the company having higher that expected profits. The problems, however, come in when the company (for whatever reason - not just piracy) starts making less money in which case development of projects may be ended and the company may turn to chasing trends in an efforts to regain the former profitability. In general, one would think that piracy is probably less likely to effect the big companies because they have more opportunity to cover their losses with huge return profits, but I tend to think mitigating loss may actually change corporate thinking. with these long quotes it is easy to lose track. piracy weren't directly being addressed. "they make enough money now to continue creating games, so the only loss is to their profit margin which doesn't (typically) get invested in game development but lines investors/owners pockets" that were sarex's rather naive observation. what he simply don't understand is that the only way to "make enough money now to continue making games" is for the investors to to be having the pockets lined. in point o' fact, the investors need have their pockets lined very well indeed to make their investment profitable and reasonable. investors in games publishing is not buying games. investors is buying moneymaking opportunities. when you have money, the options for making money is quite diverse and very competitive. return on investment needs be very good to take the risk o' investing in game publishing. is even worse for publishers 'cause game publisher investment is rare viewed as a long-term investment. the publisher must produce quarterly returns, otherwise the investor will go elsewhere to make money. if investors go elsewhere, then there is no money with which to make future games. "In a very general sense, yes if a money making endeavor is making - generally speaking - the expectations for returns on investment such that future development isn't impeded..." unfortunately, the money making endeavour is not a game, or even bunch o' games. most games published is fails-- they either lose money or don't make enough to have been worth the investment. publishers has a handful o' successful games that needs must be profitable enough to cover the loses of their remaining catalogue and still provide a return for investors that makes it reasonable to embrace the relative high risk o' throwing money at game publishing. even if every game by a publisher made a profit, that would, in and of itself not be enough to keep a game publisher in the business o' making money. and as noted above, given the slavish devotion to quarterly report, even if profits would be better invested by a publisher into projects or infrastructure that would improve company long-term, the publisher needs must provide those investors with a snazzy quarterly report, or the investors will leave. as for relevance to piracy specific, am suspecting that when folks read stuff that says piracy possibly only hurts 1.8 -3% o' profits (have seen higher % as well) they thinks such numbers is if not justifying piracy, they is at least marginalizing. it ain't. yeah, is the profitable titles that gets pirated, but a game publisher needs that money. is no surprise that game publishers and developers die at an alarming rate. is no surprise that that interplay sat on fallout 3 for so many years and kept churning out iwd titles instead. is no surprise that in spite o' finally making a profit, ps:t didn't get a sequel, 'cause it were a failure for the publisher. is a rough business, and when only a few titles is making profits at all, even 1% is far more meaningful than we think some folks realize. is also no surprise that every publisher wants a successful mmo, but am gonna leave that alone for the moment. HA! Good Fun!

am not sure 'bout Gromnir as a mod, but your goal is worthy. one should choose goals that is exceeding difficult to achieve but that provide profound rewards even if you ultimately fail in your quest. you display uncommon and surprising wisdom. HA! Good Fun!

yes, and flemmeth IS andraste, and you are morrigan's hellspawn... hmmm. that would perhaps be too creepy even for a bio romance. HA! Good Fun!

the black city will be: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Edmonton_Common when those wizards saw the fugly, tacky and boorish monstrosity that were the Creator's "heaven," they were disappointed and mildly appalled. in a fit o' pique, the Creator cursed the mocking intruders-- turned 'em into the first darkspawn. what? you really think bioware will come up with something better? HA! Good Fun!

Seems like a problem with the receiving end then, to be honest. Not sure what the reason for the argument is anyway, not like any of you are actually going to change your stance at all so. Well other than just being **** as usual. we find the reasonings o' folks regarding piracy to be genuine fascinating. is many folks who engage in piracy who is knowing it is wrong. is folks who would never think o' stealing, but if they find a wallet on the ground with a couple hundred dollars in it, they might be tempted to keep the money rather than returning. piracy is similar in that it is so easy and most folks assume they won't ever be caught, but at least most folks recognize that piracy is wrong. the thing is, we is curious 'bout the folks who try to justify their piracy. am also curious 'bout the geographic rather than socioeconomic idiosyncrasies. this will be the last time we link http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66262-piracy-or-not/page-7?do=findComment&comment=1454894 piracy gots same excuses. the excuses with our voyeurs scenario seem silly, but for reasons we cannot understand, the excuses is convincing to folks when the info being pirated is a computer game, movie, or tv episode. yeah, is unlikely we glean any new insights, but the reasonings is curious, no? HA! Good Fun!

he already conceded that he pirates. am recalling a specific and somewhat amusing example of textbooks, yes? *shrug* we don't drink alcohol, so perhaps we is being naive when we observe that posting on message boards while inebriated is a recipe for disaster. HA! Good Fun!

as vol would says, "no." also, http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66262-piracy-or-not/?p=1454894 HA! Good Fun! Sorry, my math is not strongest, but if producer make 0 for not selling, or 0 for someone else pirate it, its still 0 in my book, am I missing something? actually already responded to this in a post to sarex, so... regardless, is a side issue. sarex were complaining 'bout excessive profits. Gromnir pointed out that is a big difference 'tween profits and profitability. simple profit cannot sustain a game publisher. the larger the investment, the greater the profit one needs to legitimize given alternative investment opportunities. whatever you genuine think is the impact o' piracy on profits, the fact o' the matter is that sarex notions o' ridiculous high numbers n' such is laughable. is also beside the point as, y'know, the holder o' the intellectual property rights is telling you not to pirate their stuff. "I have never once said that pirating is "Right". Twist and turn my words all you want, it just makes you look stupid." *chuckle* you has been trying to justify piracy for how many pages? we questioned you: in the absence o' a stance o' right, is your arguments stronger or weaker? if you is voluntarily conceding that you don't have right on your side, well... thanks? am not sure if you realize you is weakening your own position though. you don't seem clear on much at all in this thread. HA! Good Fun!

Again who said piracy is going to fix anything. My opinion is right there where you quoted me. They don't care about us I don't care about them... is even better. at least if you had some misguided notion that what you were doing is Right, you could at least argue that you have a reason to pirate. so, you don't care and you think that makes your position weaker or stronger? wacky stuff. "No Gromnir don't give up, it will be a first for you and your record for debating right to the end will be ruined. Be resolute !!!!" we give up all the time. sure, our stamina for such things is extreme, but am hardly indefatigable. HA! Good Fun!

where did we get it? what thread are you reading? "Coming from you that's rich. "You said the companies want something, I said the consumer wants something too. The companies aren't too broken up about what the consumer wants so why should the consumer care what the companies want? "My point exactly, why should we care that they didn't meet their ridiculously high numbers? That doesn't mean we should buy more or pay at a higher price, it means that those people need to reevaluate what kind of profit they can make from games." so, am gonna essentially repeat our self by responding to same nonsense again. as a corporate entity that sells shares, publishers rasion detre is to be making money. you don't like it? you says "most" companies is baddie no-goodnicks? HA! you is making your position less tenable and not more with your complaints 'bout Gromnir characterizations of your posting. piracy will not fix your imagined evils, regardless o' the strawman 'bout "ridiculous high numbers," whatever the hell that means. what the consumer wants is expressed by how they spend their dollars or euros or whatever. you don't like what a publisher is selling? Shocking Revelation: you don't have to buy what they is selling. ... this is getting ludicrous, even for Gromnir. "Sing me up for a NO on that "no" of yours. Not everyone that pirates would buy the game, in fact most people who pirate wouldn't buy the game. On the flip side of the coin arguments have been made that pirates are free marketing and bring in more sales." ​didn't even bother to reply to the weak-sauce. you is much attached to "most" silliness today. so, prove it. the act o' piracy is rather compelling initial evidence that an individual wanted the intellectual property in question. so, rebut that. HA! Good Fun!

as vol would says, "no." also, http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/66262-piracy-or-not/?p=1454894 HA! Good Fun!

I remember reading that they covered their production costs with the initial sales, but that the stock holders weren't satisfied with the numbers and thus considered it a failure. I could be wrong about that, I read it a while ago. Coming from you that's rich. You said the companies want something, I said the consumer wants something too. The companies aren't too broken up about what the consumer wants so why should the consumer care what the companies want? My point exactly, why should we care that they didn't meet their ridiculously high numbers? That doesn't mean we should buy more or pay at a higher price, it means that those people need to reevaluate what kind of profit they can make from games. your characterizations is amusing broad. you is quite terrible at being reasonable. elerond already pointed out the bad logic, so we won't retrace that point, but your notions o' what is acceptable profit is... cute. expecting investors to be reevaluating what is acceptable profit to meet your childish notions is narcissistic and fanciful. briareus, Gromnir and others is telling you the way things is, not the way things should be. after all, game publishers can't run their business on the sarex model of acceptable profits, and lord knows your piracy won't bring 'bout some kinda trotskyist epiphany on the part o' publishers and developers. seriously, how resilient to reason is you gonna be on this matter? is axiomatic that if investors can make more money investing in real estate, or even a savings account or mutual funds, then the shareholder/stockholders/investors who is currently putting their money into game development will find better investments. by definition, any business that sells public stock is in business to make money. your piracy won't change that. if you and every other disgruntled purchaser didn't buy games, that might help change things, but piracy sure won't be the thing to convince publishers that a reasonable rate of return for investors is teh evil. HA! Good Fun!

sure there would. 'pon reflection, is probable an excellent barometers o' mod success. Gromnir tends to be adversarial and uncompromising. if we were looking for mods, we would want ones who didn't becoming gibbering nutters in the face o' our colorful posting style. that being said, we wouldn't normal have brought the tn conflict up at all, 'cause as you note, we has conflicts with many boardies. however, as we said, the rant were complete unexpected. were notable 'cause it were unprovoked. as such, we didn't get into it with him at the time. it were strange. HA! Good Fun!

we didn't realize bruce was so passionate about the Jesuit order. in any event, am thinking a good rule-of-thumb is that anybody that wants to be a moderator is likely a poor choice... not that we believe that bruce were seriously nominating his self. HA! Good Fun!

... congrats? we don't have much dealing with tn, so am guessing that is a good thing for a moderator. on the bad side, only interplay we can recall with tn were a weird seeming rant by him a month or so ago... kinda out-of-left field. seemed to have personal issues with Gromnir. oh well. he wouldn't be the first moderator with... issues. HA! Good Fun!

you is being particularly carefree with the fallacies today. am suspecting it has something to do with your untenable position, but that is a guess. "And I want games to be cheaper, especially now that they are mostly digital, I also want dlc to be reasonably priced (compared to their size) but hey why should they care what I want." non-sequitur, or do you have a point? just posting random nonsense is hardly constructive, but it is becoming a trend. "The problem with that is that they have a funny way of gauging the point at which the game is profitable. A normal person would think that a game would be profitable if it covers it's production cost, but it seems it ain't so." actually, profit and profitable are two separate things. http://www.nma-fallout.com/showthread.php?152662-Briareus-speaks-out&p=3024645&viewfull=1#post3024645 is just one example. the publisher needs investors, and investors need a far better return than simple profit to make their high-risk investment profitable. is any of this getting through? HA! Good Fun! ps for folks that don't know, briareus were a black isle developer