Gromnir

I haven't played ME2, but isn't that a problem Bioware has had since forever? The only game I don't remember having this problem was Baldur's Gate, but the companions were practically mooks at your orders. bg2, kotor, and me1 jnpcs (with some notable exceptions such as carth) is models o' well-adjusted mental health compared to the broken dolls who comprise the me2 crew, and as you already noted, the bg1 npcs were developed little beyond their character record sheet and a catchphrase. HA! Good Fun!

the thing that bothers us the most is that biowarian storytelling errors is typical very obvious and fixable. the villain for da were terrible. a crpg protagonist is necessarily ill-defined. so, bioware decides to has an ill-defined protagonist AND a villain devoid o' personality? how on earth did the biowarians allow such stoopidity to go beyond the earliest planning stages? also, more than one da joinable npc had a wtf moment, and wtf moments is the result o' poor development more than anything else. how 'bout me2? the me2 Big Revelations were pretty anti-climactic when one considers how me1 concluded... and the biowarians went serious overboard with their infusion o' Drama into the crew o' the normandy. given all the me2 characters who got abandonment/daddy issues, one might suspect that the biowarian writers is a collection o' teenage girls. maybe for their next game bio should do a kissy-vampire story... a twilight saga crpg seems suited for their current writing talents more than does epic sci-fi or traditional fantasy. ... am honest curious what the biowarians thought process were regarding some o' the me2 and da story aspects... perhaps the kanadians is too polite to provide each other with useful feedback and criticism. maybe hire some American or Irish writers/editors would help. HA! Good Fun!

*groan* am not needing more of that wretched sleight-o'-hand nonsense. is a cheap way for bio to create an illusion o' multiple dialogue responses; it is a resource saving device that the biowarians somehow bamboozeled folks into seeing as a feature. HA! Good Fun!

nevertheless, it sold very well. so what is biowarian motivation to make wholesale changes? conventional wisdom suggests that with a sequel it is far lass risky to give people more o' what they want rather than trying to come up with a new approach, no? HA! Good Fun!

there is no evidence to suggest that the da2 protagonist is any more pre-determined than the grey warden o' the genesis game... at least as far as we has seen. is possibly little different than the nwn2 'hero'... with a gender neutral given name. every protagonist in a story driven crpg is predetermined, whether you realize it or not, but am getting what mc means. however, from the info released so far we cannot tell the degree to which player freedom is being handicapped. that being said, Gromnir were very much unimpressed by the da origins which resulted in largely undifferentiated gameplay regardless o' the origin chosen. perhaps the biowarians also realized that origins approach were a waste o' resources and has chosen to abandon such nonsense. as such, we is not as discouraged as is mc... although to maximize player freedom and increase potential for story building, we would prefer to see less of a focus on the protagonist, but clearly that ain't the direction bio has chosen for their development scheme. HA! Good Fun!

am gonna disagree with the "curiosities" being equivalent to the gateway impetus... and also with hurlshots observations 'bout the social acceptance o' weed. as for gateway, weed IS having a low physical addiction rate, but it also is less effective in producing a high as dosages and frequency of use is increased. nimh (national institute of mental health... the guys from the rat books) has actually done some very interesting studies on mj... worth reading. so, what do you think happens to the typical stoner as he smokes more and more pot and it becomes less and less efficacious? as weed is not particularly addictive, it is easy for the user to trade-up, no? what makes weed such a gateway candidate is its rather peculiar coupling o' low addiction with decreasing efficacy. if you wanna keep getting high, you gotta either use ridiculous amounts, or... the "or" is why weed is so often labeled as gateway. as for social acceptance... how on earth hurl equates cheech & chong movies with acceptance is beyond our ken. movies and television does not makes weed use seem particularly glamorous. weed use and weed users is, understandably, the but o' jokes in media. see a $800 an hour attorney with a glass o' single malt scotch in his hand is shocking? hell no. legal or not, picture the same attorney with weed. even so, we thinks that legalizing would go a long way towards making weed acceptable as more than punchline fodder. enough hollywood types and athletes use pot regular enough even now, but using openly would helps make it kewl for the same generation that likes twilight films and speed-texting. regardless, the notion that weed is currently having a level o' social acceptance beyond berkeley or heyward is perhaps myopic. hurl is in the bay area, so am thinking he might have a slight odd pov regarding the acceptance aspect. the biggest problem for the weed crowd is the folks advocating. most o' us who graduated university can recall being accosted at least a few times by some clown with a flier advocating the legalization o' pot. ever seen the folks who speak on behalf o' weed legalization on college campuses? is kinda like the folks who claims to have seen ufos and bigfoot... a more sorry and pathetic collection o' human detritus is difficult to imagine. if the most vocal proponents o' weed legalization were not hippie-wannabees with questionable hygiene and damaged reasoning skills, the Movement woulda' made considerably more progress over the past few decades. HA! Good Fun!

"Prove, prove how? I'm only relying on those same references. I think it's plausible considering the rampart drug experimenting going on in the scientific community back then. " ... how to prove? admissions is nice. eye witness accounts from credible resources might help. medical records or police reports has been used to "out" other drug users. can you find such for Einstein? Einstein's brain was removed shortly after his death, cut into little pieces, and studied... lots. is funny that such studies o' his brain never mentions drug use, eh? do you have Any credible source linking Einstein to cocaine usage... other than your belief that drug use were rampant in the science community during Einstein's lifetime? is not like we asked for irrefutable proof, but you ain't offered any credible proof. why would you do such a thing? there is more than a few world-changers whose drug use is well-documented, so why throw Einstein's name into the mix? am not even gonna bother shredding your religion and drug influence points... HA! Good Fun! ps you should remove the word "most" from your vocabulary until you learn how to use it properly. am gonna recommend "some" as an alternative, and perhaps "many" if you is feeling particularly bold. avoid "most."

first, list some folks who used drugs not come anywhere close to an offer of proof regarding Most. second, you stated that "There'd be no art without drugs, no psychology, no religion." clearly you claimed a causal link. however, if you is willing to back off from that pov, we is gracious enough to pretend you never made such a statement. no link 'tween brilliance and drugs. no proof of most. so, what were your point? also, please prove einstein drug use. we has heard some infrequent references to Possible opiod use late in life, but nothing quote worthy. HA! Good Fun!

your reasoning is suspect. 1) am suspecting that you would need to define "users/abusers of drugs" before we could take your notion serious. if every shlub who ever had a glass o' wine with his pot roast gets counted as a drug user in your book, then yeah, we suspect that you could say that "most" brilliant peoples has been drug users. 2) prove "most". using an acceptable definition o' drug use, you is gonna have a hard time proving that Most brilliant persons has been drug users. 3) prove that the drug use were a causal link between the brilliant persons and their brilliant discoveries. is just as likely that these brilliant folks you allude to made their discoveries in spite of their drug use, rather than because of it. HA! Good Fun!

if stranded on a desert island and an adequate fresh water water supply were available, Gromnir would want booze and broad-spectrum antibiotics... and we don't even drink alcohol. distilled spirits is less likely to perish and is more loaded with carbs than virtual any other alternative. die from infection is probable near as likely as starvation in a primitive and hostile environment, therefore we would be wanting those antibiotics. 'course am doubting we would has the luxury o' being able to plan for being marooned. we also uses various alcoholic beverages as ingredients when cooking. as such, we always has bottles o' pinot noir, pinot grigio, and sherry on hand. however, other than for cooking and our How-To-Survive-On-A-Deserted Island-Plan, booze has almost 0 influence on our daily life. nevertheless, 'cause wasteoid krez missed the point, using alcohol/alcoholism as the benchmark for healthy living alternatives is foolish and... stoopid. we can easily name dozens o' activities that ain't near as self-destructive as habitual alcohol consumption, but to suggest that all o' those activities is benign would be ludicrous. alcohol is legal IN SPITE of the human cost. duh. whatever arguments krez and others may find for legalizing mj use, compare to alcohol is ironic obvious and dumb. in any event, we again encourage widespread weed usage as it cannot help but benefit non-users such as Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

I love this post for multiple reasons: it perpetuates myths about marijuana, it does so whilst highlighting gromnir's ignorance of the topic at hand, and it's a classic example of gromnir using arrogance to sate his inferiority complex. And besides, where else am I going to find a post claiming that I'm some kind of hectic stoner? Oh gromnir you rascal! clearly krez is too stoned to notice that we didn't perpetuate any myths 'bout mj... 'less he is arguing that weed Does make folks smarter. HA! Good Fun!

am always seeing arguments that mary jane is less harmful than alcohol. *chuckle* one thing is for damned sure... weed ain't never made anybody smarter. yeah, is a selfish motive, but add a few more krez clones to the workforce can only help to make Gromnir look more smarty and dependable by comparison. therefore, we is in favor o' enabling the pot heads... 'cause why should the alcoholics have all the fun, eh? HA! Good Fun!

Because it was greenlit for production and has financial backing? as distinguishable from any other obsidian project? HA! Good Fun! It is distinguishable from any other hypothetical, not actually existing project. You're assuming that Square-Enix, or another publisher, would not only green light the project if it was identical but not DS, but also the recipient of equivalent funding. Why ds? Why not? eh? we already identified multiple reasons for why not. *shrug* again, am not questioning why some folks is happy 'bout an obsidian project. you got faith in obsidian, warranted or not. great. but the thing is, this is a ds project as well as an obsidian project. Your reasoning works just as well if obsidian were doing bayonetta 2 or ephemeral phantasia 2. specious. HA! Good Fun!

the name is precisely the price for obsidian to be working on this project. perhaps square enix and gas powered is benevolent masters and will allow obsidian considerable freedom, but without the ds name (followed by a # and a ":",) the game loses identity with the franchise. while ds may not seem to have the same fan base as typical o' the majority o' obsidian fans, ds were popular; some people will buy simply 'cause "Dungeon Siege" is emblazoned on the box and advertisements. obsidian gets to use ds name. in return, they gotta wear a leash and collar... with gas powered and enix both tugging on the other end o' the leash. hopefully the deal obsidian has struck affords them a chance to create a sequel "in name only," 'cause otherwise we envision many unhappy obsidian loyalists. regardless o' how much some folks 'round these parts enjoyed diablo, we doubt that such people is genuinely looking forward to obsidian developing a diablo clone... which is what ds were. worried 'bout the name? the last thing you should worry 'bout is the name, and hopefully little more than the name remains once ds 3 is complete. HA! Good Fun!

you think such is genuine analogous? how often do you see fans o' literature clamoring for proper grammar in novelist X's next work? am thinking that folks who demand proper implementation o' mechanics or crpg necessities is hardly doing so with same notions in mind as nathaniel and his rules o' grammar. a set o' general guiding principles that may be abandoned if need be? clearly that is what fans is demanding when they complain 'bout lack o' propriety... or not. *shrug* am all in favor of generalized crpg principles that is abandoned as frequently as joyce or twain abandoned the rules o' grammar. am doubting anybody would disagree with nathaniel. nevertheless, if propriety meant what nathaniel means, then we would rarely see such complaints 'bout the propriety, eh? HA! Good Fun!

even without the rest o' the "cheers" stuff, the above statement makes soooooo obvious that mc is english.... not that there is anything wrong with being a pasty-faced englishman (unless you are a bp exec.) ... am knowing that mc is both serious AND tongue-in-cheek with his request, but if there is one thing that sends a chill down our spine when reading game development message boards, it is the oft repeated notion that there is "proper" values or mechanics. am not wanting a developer to have some hard and fast notion o' proper. is certain elements o' the rpg and crpg community that embrace gaming dogma with a disturbing 'mount of zealotry. make the game fun, and let "proper" burn in the deepest and most godforsaken corner o' hell. so says Gromnir. HA! Good Fun! Obviously all entertainment media have an inherently subjective quality, and I don't necessarily think that there can be an absolute definition of the "proper" or correct course in any creative endeavor. However, I do think that well thought-out mechanics have (at the very least) an advantage over haphazard mechanics. Not that bad mechanics in games are always the result of insufficient consideration in their design - obviously compromise always occurs due to schedule, implementation difficulties, or other unforseen (or poorly planned for) circumstances. But, I think that the ability to maintain a clear and consistent set of principles that inform the large and small mechanical decisions you make in light of those difficulties really is what makes a good designer. The reason I bring this up is that "fun" is completely enigmatic and difficult to pin down. No game designer can really tell you what makes a game fun - they can explain what makes it interesting, how the gameplay presents interesting strategic and tactical choices, etc. I do think that trying to nail down what makes mechanics work in those ways tends towards a certain style of design, which is maybe why things start appearing dogmatic. am all in favor of having coherent and well-designed mechanics, but the notion o' there being "proper" mechanics offends our delicate sensibilities. as far as we is concerned, there is not some kinda universal Proper Mechanics that is appropriate for all games... or even all crpgs. for example, some folks who use the "proper" descriptor while posting at rpgcodex has argued, quite forcefully, that crpg combat shoulds necessarily be turn-based. perhaps nathaniel would care to comment? as for "fun," we were not attempting to define, or even to use as a useful guideline. such nebulous descriptors is hardly useful. you will, for example, never hear Gromnir deriding a game's immersion as such an observation is far to vague as to be having any value whatsoever. 'course as we has objected to the notion o' propriety o' mechanics, we can hardly offer more specific guidelines, can we? w/o an actual game, or aspect o' game being referenced, "fun" will necessarily needs suffice as a simple recognition that there is greater concerns in game development beyond propriety o' mechanics. HA! Good Fun!

Because it was greenlit for production and has financial backing? as distinguishable from any other obsidian project? HA! Good Fun!

People are talking as if the game was just started, but it has been in development even before New Vegas was announced, right? Rumors of a fantasy project on which Feargus was personally working were about for a long time, I would say at least a year! your point? you ain't suggesting that fergie woke up last tuesday and sudden discovered that aliens were cancelled while he were napping and ap were facing problems, are you? give the guy a little credit. we knew of delays regarding ap for 'bout a year, and if fergie were complete surprised that sega killed aliens only after it happened, then he probable ain't doing a very good job as obsidian ceo. your 1-year guesstimate would seem to bolster our remark rather than diminishing. HA! Good Fun!

I'm a little excited. I might be an outlier though and my excitement/non-excitement levels may wax/wane as information is revealed about the game. are you excited 'cause it is a ds game or because it is an obsidian game? our query were: why ds? HA! Good Fun!

fantasy movies of the 80s include: dragonslayer conan the barbarian ladyhawke princess bride dark crystal the star wars films is arguably fantasy, so you might throw a couple of 'em into the mix as well. HA! Good Fun! ps we forgot time bandits... and if you wanna get technical, throw in witches of eastwick and raiders of the lost ark

gonna ignore the obvious retort regarding the incompatibility o' propriety and principles so expansive. that being said, the standard oil building has been the second tallest in the chicago skyline for many years... though it got renamed at the end o' the last century. the chicago river can gets kinda oily too. HA! Good Fun!

I see it this way : GPG was searching for someone to do a sequel while they do another project. Squenix was already decided as a publisher. Obsidian saw the possibility of having a strong franchise (but with a decent amount of freedom), and at the same time open some doors at Square Enix (who showed interest in the western rpg market), so they went for it. Also, an original IP may or may not find a publisher that gives it a decent budget, as far as I understand (very little actually). I said again and again and again that, if Obsidian doesn't change the game formula, here we have a recipe for disaster, so don't take it for me being super positive for the game, but I can understand Obsidian's point of view. Now, if they had a stronger track record (meaning a better reputation when it comes to management) and were in a better financial position, they'd have probably gone with a totally original IP, or at least, so I guess. had not considered square enix angle. am not certain how substantial a factor that is. *shrug* in any event, it seems we is in agreement that the appeal o' this project is all 'bout "risk management," which is good for fergie, but is hardly the kinda thing for fans to get excited. "their bottom line is safe. huzzah." HA! Good Fun!

even without the rest o' the "cheers" stuff, the above statement makes soooooo obvious that mc is english.... not that there is anything wrong with being a pasty-faced englishman (unless you are a bp exec.) ... am knowing that mc is both serious AND tongue-in-cheek with his request, but if there is one thing that sends a chill down our spine when reading game development message boards, it is the oft repeated notion that there is "proper" values or mechanics. am not wanting a developer to have some hard and fast notion o' proper. is certain elements o' the rpg and crpg community that embrace gaming dogma with a disturbing 'mount of zealotry. make the game fun, and let "proper" burn in the deepest and most godforsaken corner o' hell. so says Gromnir. HA! Good Fun!

oh, so obsidian cannot change balance? bio created the infinity engine, but when black isle got their hands on the engine they made loads o' changes. for example, ranged weapons were considered overpowered in bg, so the iwd developers made adjustments to ranged weapons. force lighting and force wave were bio creations... at least as far as their in-game numbers were concerned. is not lucas who determined damages and costs and mechanics of kotor powers, so am not seeing why obsidian couldn't have played with the balance if they saw a balance problem. pass the buck to bio is myopic at best. now something like the d&d weapon master is actually a bit different as the prestige class itself is busted (as so many d&d prestige classes were.) you don't gotta be some kinda d&d super nerd to see that a weapon master with high crit range/damage weapons is gonna be more effective than a character who specializes in clubs. 'course obsidian didn't have a great track record getting wotc to make adjustments to their RULEZ. am finding it difficult to imagine that wotc would allow obsidian to rewrite their work... particularly in light o' the monte cook ranger snaffu. here is the real question: why? too general? ok then, why ds? what is it 'bout ds that a developer would genuine wanna build 'pon? is it the ds setting and ds lore that makes for a great foundation? fo had an intriguing setting, and forgotten realms games gots instant fan recognition and appeal. am understanding why a developer/publisher would find fr and fo settings to be attractive. is the ds game mechanics timeless or groundbreaking? how so? when discussing an obsidian game in development has anybody evar said, "you should implement that feature that gas powered utilized in Dungeon Siege." has anybody evar pointed to ds magic system or combat mechanics as a benchmark? so, why? why ds? am seeing why fergie, particularly in light of economic realities and the recent issues regarding aliens and ap, might choose low risk projects, and titles with numbers after names typically is lower risk. sadly, other than the obvious risk management concerns, we cannot see a reason for wanting to be a part o' a ds project. after fo2 were released, many black isle developers were chomping at the bit to make a fo3. sadly, interplay financial problems led to the failure o' a black isle fo3. by the time fergie eventually got around to starting fo3, it were already too late for black isle. so, am understanding why obsidian would wanna be involved in a fo project. but ds? why ds? other than name recognition (double-edged sword,) how does ds benefit obsidian... as 'posed to an original IP? HA! Good Fun!

am thinking that your observation is part o' the reason some folks got a problem with this game. a developer brought up fo3 as an explanation as to why ds3 would be a good idea, but am thinking that most folks who read these boards would agree that one of the real strengths o' fallout is the setting. bethesda, for all the complaints we seen directed at them, managed to capture the "feel" of fallout; the Best character in fo3 were the setting itself. a post apocalyptic world as imagined by 1950's era expectations and heavily influenced by road warrior? the setting were kewl. the ds setting, on the other hand, is meh at best... so what is the point? why constrain self with the limitations o' someone's setting if it ain't particularly intriguing? why ds? compare fo and ds fails, 'cause ds setting is... lame. ds were popular for what reasons? surely not story and setting. addictive, diabloesque game play? sure. mule loads o' phat 10075? yeah. original and intriguing setting? not hardly. HA! God Fun!