Cantousent

Time to go have dinner with the inlaws. Truth to tell, we've kind of gotten to be quite fond of each other over the past few years, which is remarkable in that we used to have a great deal of antipathy towards one another. Talk about something for which to be thankful. Take it easy guys and remember, after today, it's all about people trying to get you to spend money you don't have on stuff no one needs to give to people you only marginally like for reasons that everyone seems to have forgotten over the years. :D

I start a thread for every holiday if I'm around for it, and so I wanted to say happy Thanksgiving. Usually, I get a few friendly posts and some antagonistic posts from folks. Some folks talk about the history of relations between Europeans and the native Americans. Some folks talk about the foolishness of religeous conviction. Some folks just don't like holidays. That's all fair enough. ...But, if you can put all that aside, I hope you have a great day. I'm a Catholic, so I do thank God for the blessings in my life. On the other hand, I'm also thankful of wise people who have helped me, good fortune in my past, and even blind chance that has given me a life that I can enjoy and share with others. I don't know if you're an American or a Christian. I don't know anything about a lot of you, but I hope that you have a day worthy of thanksgiving, even if it isn't a holiday. VIsit with your family, have a hearty meal, and enjoy the life you have. Maybe God gave it to you. Maybe the Flying Spaghetti Monster gave it to you. Maybe it's just the product of nothing more than Blind Chance. Yeah yeah, I'm just one of those silly Christians. I believe that this is the day that the Lord has made and I intend to rejoice and be glad in it. ...But, whoever or whatever has created your day, I hope you also find joy in it and and share my desire to be glad in it.

I had this long diatribe written, but I think it's more prudent to wait until I'm in a less diminished state to comment. I will say that you've certainly become one of the staples of this forum, ya doofus, and I look forward to seeing whatever crazy assed topic you pull out next.

There are metagame reasons that Mr. House won't accept Yes Man, but the logical reasons suffice for me. I agree with Humanoid, if we look at it logically, Mr. House would be willing to pay much much more. I agree with AGX that sometimes players have to be willing to suspend disbelief in order to accomodate a workable game story. In this case, we don't need to overlook anything. There's really nothing Yes Man can do that Mr. House can't do just as well and probably better. Yes Man is a mobile Mr. House. Mr. House's enforcer created Yes Man in order to do the things that only Mr. House could do up to that point. Mr. House doesn't need a mobile self who could be caught and turned against him. He needs to replace his enforcer who actually did turn against him. The idea that Mr. House use Yes Man is probably the worst request of your original post, Kronos. I'm not trying to put you down, just saying that logically there would be no reason. However, I will own that I thought it was sad to make the choice about the Brotherhood of Steel. There could actually be reasons for Mr. House to make some overtures towards the BoS, although I frankly think there's a case to be made that he wouldn't bother because of their history, but he might try to find a way to use them. I still wouldn't want Obsidz to change how they designed it. There have to be tough decisions in order to make the choices mean anything in the game world.

That's all well and good, but a lot of folks will instinctively scratch they're heads and call foul. That they're wrong doesn't matter. That they will assume the game is completely idiotic does. So, there are two things to do, as I suggested above. Find a reasonable in-game way to educate the player or bow to overwhelming popular assumption. If the folks who come to these forums think they represent even the majority of just the backers, let alone the desired consumer population after shipping, they're crazy. There has to be a fine line, to be sure, if the mass of consumers are convinced of a fact, then you aren't very wise simply to ignore it. Just saying metalic armor is better against electricity will probably strike a sizeable number of players as stupid, so at least have some explanation in the game.

Thats interesting, where was it and did you go? BioWare does stuff like this. Though it's nothing formal or anything. If you're in Edmonton I could easily give you a tour though. alan, ya bastard, I'm going to keep this post handy and cash it in if I make it up to Edmonton. ...And I travel a lot. ...And I would be very grateful and probably grease the wheels with a bottle of scotch, soda, mountain spring water, or some other token of esteem.

Wow, pretty damned impressive. You actually answered everybody. That's just plain cool, although I don't know enough about programming really to contribute to the discussion. :Cant's sheepish grin icon: ...But I do approve of the whiskey. I once made a trip to Scotland for, among other things, enjoying a bit o' the whiskey from the headwaters themselves, so to speak. Come to think of it, we talk way too much about booze on the Obsidz boards.

Tough times, Raithe. Sorry to hear that, man. I enjoyed Skyfall quite a bit and I think Daniel Craig has finally proved to me that he can be James Bond. Sean Connery is still the *real* James Bond, but Daniel Craig did a good job on this one. Goose day. I'm going to roast a goose trying something new. I normally just take my chances and cook the whole bird, but today I'm going to excise the breats halfway through, put them aside, and then finish them by pan searing briefly. I cook a goose at least once a year, but the important thing isn't the bird per se as to render the goose fat. I enjoy the meat, but it is sometimes uneven between the breast and the legs. Maybe this way will cook up the other meat nicely while preserving the breasts. Anyway, I'll put it on some hours from now.

To be honest, Seeker, I feel a bit foolish for being rude to you about your first post, so I'm going to say that I think most of us here really do want the same thing. What we're really discussing is how to handle it around the edges. I guess my point is that there will be times that we see the biases of the writing team and we shouldn't be angry about it because, if they completely took out all bias, the game would probably be too sterile for most folks' taste. Of course, I'll use the words 'probably be too sterile for most folks' taste,' and someone usually comes around and asks essentially, "how do we quantify that?" I ask, in English, how else do I express the idea. I'm proposing my views. Some come from experience, some from study, and others from my own personal instincts. I present it for you to take or not as you wish. ...But I still believe, from experience and instinct, that we won't have a game that doesn't let some sort of value peak through on the part of the developers. I don't think we should ask for a game that doesn't. It's okay if they have a particular bent as long as it isn't didactic and doesn't prevent them from making compelling NPCs of various outlooks. In our world, there is a wide variety of views, and some of those views exist in essentially constant conflict. Take for example religion v. atheism. Now, if we put aside our own biases, it's easy to see that both sides present an appealing argument to people, and some of those people might at different times fall into either camp. Sure, if you're a snide overbearing Christian, you might depict every atheist as a wretched hater who doesn't value anyone but himself. Some Christians are snide in such a way, to be sure. Likewise, if you're a smug superior atheist, you might depict every Christian as an ignorant backward fool. In reality, some atheists act in such a way. ...But some Christians will have congenial conversations with atheists and some of these Christians will present compelling arguments on various grounds, from logical to emotional, that can sway the other side. Ditto for the atheists talking to Christians. Some people might appeal to prejudice or some other baser, lower instinct, which is fair. Heaven knows, sometimes prejudice can carry the day. ...But most lasting movements have proponents who can create a compelling argument to defend their base philosophy. Even if I disagree with the proponent, the argument, and the philosophy, I have to concede that it's viable if it exists with a significant number of followers. That's what I want in the game. I will take issue with a couple of things you said. First of all, while 'good' and 'bad' do tend to fluxuate around various issues, there's a lot more in common with what societies have sorted into either side than different. If you focus on the differences, those differences will seem greater, but the bulk of philosophies, especially philosophies that have existed for a substantial amount of time, have a great deal in common. ...And these philosophies sometimes even blend together. Take your egoist, who proposes self-interest is best because it leads to competition, but the same person is also a Christian and believes in helping the poor. That's just one example. How about folks who are socially 'liberal' while being fiscally 'conservative?' So, we can beat around the bush about what we call things, and I'm on board with not using terms like 'good' or 'evil,' but those ideas exist whether we use the terms or not and it just seems desperate not to use them. Which takes me to the second thing. The people in the world will undoubtedly believe in good and evil. Humanity, from anyone in the world in recorded history, has called some things good and some things evil. These concepts are by and large pretty damned similar by the mass, but even if we say they aren't it doesn't matter. If the design team wants to sort it all out based on relativism and say there is no good or evil, fair enough. ...But it's going to be odd if the NPCs of the world desperately try to avoid using the terms for what undoubtedly exists in their minds anyway. At any rate, I apologize for being snarky before. You've got great ideas and you present them well and I respect. Really. It's just that the story is the most important thing for me. I think the classes and races and spells and combat are all cool, but it's the story that matters, so I'm probably overstating my arguments for that reason. Like I said above, I think what a lot of us want is by and large the same.

That's true, but I sometimes miss those old games also. I especially remember enjoying the Eye of the Beholder. I should see if there's a GoG version I can play. I can see ranged/thrown in two different ways. I think Firearms maybe should be a category in its own right since, although it is piercing, it's effects are greater than a starndard piercing projectile like an arrow or spear and have effects different in kind.

I will say that the kickstarter made it because people like you guys who were really urging other folks (in a good way) to look at the kickstarter. I'm sure there were fans around the world telling their friends at home, at school, and on message boards all about the game how good it would be. A relatively small number of fans can make a big difference in this mean ol' world. Plus, it really shows that we're actually a little community here in our own little spot of the web. I might be the old curmudgeon who shakes his cane at you youngsters, but I still like you enough to toss a few farthings into the basket.

Okay, Hurlie, you convinced me. I only pledge for $35, but I did pledge. I figure I'll gift it to my wife. She likes adventure games and I think she might enjoy it. I'll cross my fingers it makes the last little bit.

I'm sitting down with an Australian cab. I'm at the end of my New Vegas run, and I think I have time to actually finish tonight.

Aw, well, I have to plead guilty on that one. I do sometimes find weird ways to word things. :Cant's sheepish grin icon:

Wait, you "disagree" that The Others is someone else's favorite show? That's like someone making a "what's your favorite food thread," someone says "pepperoni pizza" and you respond "I disagree, pepperoni is not your favorite pizza topping, it is overdone and childish." I guess that's one way to take my comments. Another, more rational way would be to understand that we're discussing television shows and I disagree with Amentep's view rather than saying I know his mind better than he does. ...And, yeah, if someone says he likes pepperoni on his pizza because it's a great meat, someone else might rationally say, "I disagree. Pepperoni is okay, but I think italian sausage is better." Frankly, and I'm not saying this to be snarky, but I honestly think your response to my comment is much more puzzling, especially since I think I was responding to what Amentep said anyway. He's usually pretty good about speaking up for himself. Not that I'm offended, just kind of bemused.

Good luck on your mom's surgery, bud. Having spent a lot of time waiting around in hospitals, I feel for ya. Also, good luck with the bird, by which I mean the turkey. Remember, I like the mashed potatoes lumpy and the stuffing savory and the eggnog spiked with brady and rum (and even a little bourbon won't kill me, for my sins). I forgot to take my medicines last night, which lead to a long night and a day in which I basically didn't do much but sit in my armchair. I can forget the morning stuff without too much trouble, but if I forget the nightly stuff, which I do rarely, then I'm pretty screwed the next day. Still, it wasn't too bad. This was the day that the Lord has made, and so I rejoiced and was glad in it.

I see this sort of attitude quite a bit, Seeker, and it provides a basis for real discussion, of course, but it ignores two things. We might, as we do, argue about whether we should have morally grey areas or simply boil it all down to 'no morals exist' or even that it's all about 'various viewpoints.' Personally, I think the comment that morals are 'one dimensional' is prejudicial in the first place. Multiple causality is common in even the most ancient of literature, so the idea that morality must be confined to one dimension is erroneous. Now, to be fair, morality within one belief system tends to be an 'either/or' proposition, but no single belief system has ever existed in isolation anywhere on the planet in recorded history. If it did, it would not be questioned at any point and yet morals have always fallen under question. I don't care if folks are dead-set about avoiding the use of the term 'moral.' Sure. I guess the common replacement term of 'ethics' has shown its shortcomings as well. Likewise, fair enough. We can dump both terms in order to use the next term, whichever one you want to use, that will, in turn, show its shortcomings because, when it comes down to brass tacks, there will always be a point at which the majority of people within a society will say "this choice is good" or "this choice is bad." Now, I'll admit that I've been httting the vino as I often do on Saturday nights, so I don't want to puff up like a message board cowboy. I'm not calling anyone out nor am I trying to outdraw anyone. I'm perfectly willing to use whatever terms on which folks agree. My real point is that there will be a perspective on the part of every person involved and it won't matter if we call it moral, ethical, relative, or self v. other, most folks will fall into common categories based on all sorts of factors. If I were a jaded hater of moralists, I would try to find a way of explaining things outside of morals, and that's fair enough. ...But what is, is. The truth is, no matter what we discuss here, the sides will remain largely the same, no matter what we call them. That being said, I want real dilemmas that entail multi-faceted approaches. So, in my wine soaked brain, while I might have taken a wee bit of offense at the other parts of your post, Seeker, I am nonetheless completely on board with providing as fully fleshed out approach as possible. Even a goody two shoes, golden haired savior wannabe like me can agree with that. After all, in real life, there're a lot more 'bad' answers than good ones. The worst thing in reality isn't that the bad guy sometime wins. That's been true forever. Worse than that is that sometimes you've made some ugly decisions trying to be the good guy only to find out that you were really the bad guy all along.

There must be consequence in choice, and there must be consistency in characterization. I don't disagree with the specifics. I think the design team could have found a way to work with your demands, but I don't think the demands, in a larger sense, would have improved the game. For the choices to be meaningful, there should not always exist a pleasant outcome for all or even both sides. Moreover, real life is far more harsh. Games manage to provide a lot of good endings for players in situations where, realistically, a person would just be screwed. I don't mind games giving players who work hard for good solutions a chance to achieve the best result possible, but I don't think games should get to the point where everyone ends up happy. Not in an RPG. Not in an Obsidz RPG.

Ah, the twinkie defense will live on! The pizzas I cooked today are almost done. Why do I do this to myself? I can't just cook a regular ol' pizza. I have to cook a regular pizza and a Mexican pizza. I can't just pop open a can of refried beans, I have to make them myself. I tell you, the kitchen looks like a bomb went off in it and I'm beat as hell. Still, I might regret my decision less after a few slices. Gettin' a bit hungry now.

Ah, excellent idea, Bruce. Let's see, last night I sorted out 2 cups of pinto beans. Have to get out the bad ones and small pebbles and the like. Even good beans from the grocer will have some less than desireable beans in them. Then I put in 8 cups of water and covered them to sit over night. This morning, I drained them and put in just enough water to cover them and I'm simmering them with a few bay leaves. They'll simmer for a few hours and then I'll remove the bay leaves, mash up the beans, and put in some butter, some finely chopped garlic, salt, cumin and maybe some cayenne or chili pepper. After it's cooked up, I'll probably take a few tomatoes and toss them in the blender and puree them and put them in the whole mix. Then I'll just cook it down until the beans are thickened. I would have used goose fat if I'd had any. I'm going to cook up a goose this week for the fat. Of course, we'll eat the bird also. I also sometimes use cooking oil for the refried beans, but I think butter or fat is better and I like the butter for Mexican pizzas. I tend to use my calibrated eye for measuring how much to use, and it seems to work pretty well. I'm too lazy to use measuring cups for simple stuff like refriend beans or pizza sauces. The ground beef is pretty much browned ground beef. You'll spread a thin layer of refried beans on the dough, a thin layer of ground beef over the beans, and then finely shredded cheese over the top. I'll be using cheddar, jack, and asiago. You can put black olives on top like pepperonis if you like. I'll probably sprinkle some coarsely chopped jalepenos over or under the cheese or I might put those in the refried beans. For the dough, I'll put one of the recipes I use: I disolve about a table spoon of brown sugar in 1&1/4 cup of hot water (maybe not quite as hot as normal hot water from the tap, but somewhere around there.) (I used dark brown sugar most of the time if I have a choice. I like the distinctive taste, although it won't be very strong in the finished crust.) Next I put a packet of rapid rise highly active yeast into the sugar water and wait a bit until it foams (maybe 5-10 minutes). While that's going on, I combine 3&1/2 cups of flour with a slightly rounded teaspoon of salt in a different bowl. Now that the yeast and sugar are all ready, I put 2&1/2 cups of the flour mix into the bowl and then roll it out onto my counter and kneed in the rest of the flour until it's a nice ball and it doesn't stick to the counter when I kneed it. Then I put a smidge of olive oil into a large bowl and put the ball of pizza dough in it and cover the whole thing. You have to leave the dough to rise for a bit. Warmer is supposed to be faster, but I always just leave it on the counter. Anyhow, it'll get to be considerably larger, about twice the size, and that should be about twenty to forty minutes or so. I'm usually cooking other stuff at the same time. You know, grating cheese or whatnot, so it's not like you're just sitting there watching the dough rise. Then I roll out the dough ball onto the counter and roll it into shape. I can usually make two pizza crusts with the dough, and the dough is probably the only thing I'll completely use for the pizzas. I'm going to make two kinds of pizza, regularish and Mexican. I'll have left over brown ground beef and refried beans for sure. Anyhow, I put the other stuff on the rolled out crust and bake at 425 for about a half hour or so. The cheese should be melted to a nice golden brown. I tend to use my pizza baking stone for one of the pizzas and I've done something some folks don't like but I'll just a tiny veneer of olive oil on it before the dough. I've never had the dough suffer for it. I've also tried something I heard about which is baking the crust for a few minutes before putting the toppings on, but I don't see any real difference personally. At any rate, the crust should come up from the baking stone no problem and the cheese should be melted to a nice golden brown and you're good to go. Oh, and the wife hates onion, but I would have used a bit of chopped onion in the beans and ground beef if that weren't the case. I think that's it.

One thing I would warn against is the idea of complete and utter moral ambiguity. First of all, on practical grounds, the people in the world will have ideas of morality and ethics. Those ideas might not be right from our standards, and might not be right from the perspective of the player, but those grounds will exist. The PC's actions within that world might be an exercise of surfing the waves of moral greyness, but not every, and probably not even most, of the NPCs will see that as a good thing. Some may be susceptible to what the PC may variably feel is reason or jadedly considers persuasion, but most will have different degrees of moral certainty, from absolute to change on a dime. That's where faction comes into play. Some people of a faction will have absolute moral certainty on an issue. Hell, maybe they're right. On maybe less practical grounds but still a necessary consideration, is that most players will have some idea of morality themselves. That is, most sane players will have some grounding in morals and ethics, even if they would rather not put those ideas in those terms. A charity will always stand on firmer moral ground than a group of brigands. Sure, introduce moral ambiguity by having some corrupt people in the charitable organization. Have some noble bastards in the band of brigands if it suits the story also. ...But the idea of charity is still, at its heart, better than the idea of stealing. So muck up the puddles of grey if you want, and I agree that it's good to do so, but you're going to end up just as cliched if every charity is a front for evil ends as if you'd made every charity squeaky clean and above reproach. These morally grey themes are generally (not always) played out in individuals rather than organizations. ...And, remember, sometimes a brigand is just a brigand, and his motive is to kill you, rape your wife, and take your belongings to sell for more rum. Finally, there is the ultimate of practical grounds. There *will* be some degree of 'good' and 'bad' morality and ethics in the game. It will not, as a practical matter, be entirely without some amount of societal assumed morality. That's because, while we might not always know it and we might not always care, often there really is a good decision (either wise, moral, or simply practical) and even more bad decisions. I'm not putting you down, Keyrock, or you, Ismael. I actually agree for the most part. I want there to be morally grey areas because otherwise good or evil (or ethical and unethical) (or decent human being or complete and utter despicable wretch) becomes completely meaningless. You're not really making any meaningful decision at all if the 'good' moral decision is readily apparent, just as lavishly rewarded in practical measures, and costs you absolutely nothing to make. The vast majority of players would probably go that route if so. I want those grey areas and I'm with you 100%. I just don't want them to dwell on the grey so much that we lose any of those finer shades of black and white. In particular, I agree with Isamael in an earlier post where he doesn't want the consequences of our actions to be known right away. You do some terrible thing because your only choices are terrible things and you commit the act because you think it's the best choice in a bunch of bad. As it turns out, you did that terrible thing for nothing, maybe even worse than that, more people suffered than if you'd done nothing. Don't do it too often or you're going to royally piss off most of the players, but every now and then and it really adds a little piquancy to the experience.

I'm going to make a homemade pizza tomorrow. I'm thinking of a Mexican pizza with home made refried beans, ground beef, Jack, Cheddar, and Asiago cheese, Jalepenos, and, after it's cooled, topped by sour cream and black olives all on an unbleached flour crust. I'll also make a more or less standard pizza with black olives, banana peppers, mushrooms, and maybe *maybe* some turkey pepperoni. Meanwhile, tonight we had fast food because I didn't have time to get anything ready to cook when I got home. Other pizzas I like to make: BBQ chicken or beef, bulgogi, and my famous lasagnizza (which is a single layer lasagna with pepperoni). Anyhow, I'm just checking out the boards tonight is all. Friday night, but too tired to go do anything, I think.

Yes and no. I don't think the updates are too frequent but I would like it as well if they could start telling us stuff. I know they've all their hands full and are still in early concept phase but... just something little? A smidgen of lore, some rough ideas about the Aumaua or an example of those "...various small ideas, big ideas, minor tweaks, radical overhauls, and brand new storylines." that were mentioned in this update. It's fine if it's short. I already said something like this in a previous thread and it didn't go over well, but these kind of updates are just too vague for me. Not to be a stick in the mud but I'd prefer to hear stuff about PE and not about Obsidians general design philosophy. The way I see it is that the haven't been able to get more into the nitty-gritty of PE yet. So, the result is that they're giving us what they can, which won't satisfy folks who want more detailed information that they cannot, as yet, give. Since that's the case, you're essentially asking that they cease the interaction they can provide because you only want interaction they cannot. ...But you have a choice about reading these updates and, even if it doesn't tell you anything, it doesn't take anything from you either. On the other hand, if they follow your advice, folks like me who genuinely enjoy these updates won't get anything. ...And neither will you. So, keep pestering for more detailed information. I'm with you one hundred percent. Just try not to begrudge me the updates I enjoy reading at the same time. Just because they can't provide what everyone wants doesn't mean they shouldn't provide stuff that some folks want. I'm not putting you guys down. It's more a matter of perspective. That, and I don't want them to get into spoilerish stuff. Backstory things are fair game and a certain level of story specificity are expected. I'm a grown up. I know I'm taking my chances coming here and I have to take my chances on getting something or another spoiled. I just want the to save a little something for the wedding night. So, at some point, I'm probably going to regret reading one or two updates and I can live with that. See, you're going to live with too much general info now and I'm going to live with getting some specifics I probably didn't want to know later but someone is going to get something out of each of these updates.

As Spiderman says, I spidey sense you, FP, but that's simply the problem. Some games do a great job. I think Mask of the Betrayer really managed to reward characters for various decisions, and I don't mean with game mechanic things like abilities and attributes or even items. Sure, there were specific things you received for some actions in the game, but the big payoff was in the reward. Devour a god, and you're showing your badass side. Is it kinda nice to get an ingame bennie for it? :Cant's shrugging icon: Sure. But the real reward was being *that* guy who devoured a god. Decided to lay all those scribes to their final repose after so much time spent suffering? Who cares that you didn't get some super power. You were *that* guy who laid the rest to death and ended their suffering. The trick to rewarding role playing is to offer a role-playing reward. It's always good to offer game mechanic rewards, but you can spread those out a little more sparingly if you're good at what Avellone less than artfully calls "ego stroking." I think Obsidz has shown they can do it, and now they need to step it up a notch. They can do it. Not only that, but they can do it in a very controled, linear game like PS:T and they can do it in about as open ended a sandbox game like New Vegas. There is no excuse. They can do, and we should expect it. It's not good enough provide as good as they've ever done. The stars are aligned, the butterfly has flapped its wings, the storm is perfect. Time to step up to the plate, Casey, and this time there's no striking out. Of course, this could all be the wine talking. *shrug*

I want folks who want to play the 'bad guy' to find something fulfilling in the game. I want folks who want to swim around in 'morally grey' areas to find something fulfilling in the game. I want folks who don't give a crap and just want to make it through the moral questions without losing sleep on any of the answers to find something fulfilling in the game. I want folks who will go out of their way and forgoe immediate benefits in order to be the good guy to find something fulfilling in the game. Folks who want to be the good, bad, grey, or don't give a crap guy don't always need immediate concrete fulfillment. I've seen Obsidz skill at giving rewards to players in terms of story and consequence that transcend game mechanic rewards and I expect they will manage it here. In fact, I will only be damanding about one thing from Obsidz, only one way I'll be a royal pain in the ass, and that's about the consequence of our roles. I won't speak for the "it's soooo new and novel to play a bad guy" folks. They can undoubtedly speak for themselves. Likewise for grey and don't give a crap folks. I want my good guy character to get rewarded in ways that don't end up feeling like 'lawful stupid' or conveniently compensated in like manner. Folks who are truly dedicated to being evil or good will follow those paths regardless of game mechanic rewards. Sure, maybe access to one or two traits, items, or skills constricted by making the hard good/bad choices, but, for the most part, the reward should be in staying on the path. Playing either truly good or bad should be your choice. ...And, this is the hard part, while there will be 'good' and 'bad' choices, I don't want them to be immediately or concretely apparent at every point. I want layers of consequences where the meaning and outcome of your actions become apparent over time so some goody two shoes, golden haired savior wannabe like me suddenly realizes that all those hard decisions, all those terrible things I've done, might not have been for the good I thought they would be. Maybe I'll have to live with the constant question of whether or not all those noble decisions actually made life better for anyone, even myself. Maybe I want that. ...Or maybe I'm convinced I was right despite the nagging doubts some other, less noble crusader would have had. See, I'm not asking for much, right? I'm not such a demanding son of a bitch. I just want a story that surpasses even PS:T or New Vegas. That's all.