Amentep

It is your concern because your posts seem to indicate you think that if they spent more time with the product that there would be less bugs. My argument is that they didn't find the bugs in 8 months of Beta Testing. Of however long of internal Q&A. Another month, another two months was not going to get them to find problems they hadn't already found. Sure its in a working state. I've been playing it for a week with no problem. Does it work *flawlessly*? Well for me it has so far. For other clearly not. But that's a different thing from not working entirely.

At this point, we'll have to agree to disagree. I don't see adding an extra month to the release would allow them to suddenly find bugs that weren't found in the backer beta or internal Q&A. YMMV.

Sure, there is - particularly if a bug happens to you. There's a difference between complaining and asserting that Obsidian was in some sort of conspiracy to bilk money out of people by releasing a "broken" product though. Remember the Unistall Bug on POOLS OF RADIANCE (2001). The one that unistalled everything on your hard drive including the operating system? That was a broken product. Remember the bug in ARCANUM: OF STEAMWORKS AND MAGICK OBSCURA (2001) that led to Quest Inventory items being permanently removed from your inventory so that you couldn't complete the critical path? I remember that one stopping me from playing the game. Given the CTD reports (some which may be legit bug related rather than running on below spec hardware related) and I think the Raderic Hold bug that actually stop the player from being able to continue, I'd argue PoE falls more on the Arcanum side than the PoR2001 side, IMO.

Let me clarify: virtually every player could reasonably be expected to potentially encounter the events which trigger these bugs. Double-clicking an item, equipping a particular item, or loading a saved game are not unusual fringe events in a computer game. Developers shipping a game with major bugs and then working furiously to patch them shouldn't be the default expectation. Would it be better to have the game released in a year completely bug free? Or wait another 6 months? I get it, bugs suck, but it came out, what, a week ago? Bugs happen - the fact they are already working on a patch shows they care (or at least they arent going to just leave the bugs alone). 6 months? A year? The handful of major bugs I'm talking about are apparently being fixed with a patch in under a week. So, do I think it would have been better to delay the game a few weeks or a month to get these fixed? Yes, absolutely. If I thought otherwise, I probably would have bought into the beta. Why do either of you think that a few more weeks would have led Obsidian to find those bugs that are now being found now after 8 months of Backer Beta and however much Q&A they did? I doubt they looked at the release date and said "Oh well, we were going to test double clicking items to equip, but I guess we'll skip it, the game has just GOT to get out the door."

Mobile was home to an old Southern Association League (1901-1961 not to be confused with the Southern League that was before it or the current one that came after it) team called the Bears. From what I've read, the new team (which originally began as the AA Charlotte Knights in 1976, but moved to Tennessee when the AAA Charlotte Knights were created) wanted to honor that history but also not just try to co-opt the past team and came up with BayBears because they're located in the area of Mobile Bay. I don't watch Baseball much anymore, but I find its history to be fascinatingly wonky.

Are you seriously arguing that something that can be expected to eventually happen during gameplay - is actually a rare exception, if one person on this forum say they did not see it? And that if someone on the forum insists it is an exception, then that it is an exception is also "clearly and objectively true"? Did you really say that? That's not how I'm reading it. To me, he's saying that many posters have not encountered them (based on posts) and that therefore the conclusion that they are encountered by virtually every player was untrue. If it was me, I'd argue that you should never use a self-selecting group of people who care enough to post on a message board to make statistical extrapolations to larger populations and/or draw definitive conclusions but that's possibly just me. Some people encountered the bugs, some people haven't; beyond that I'd be wary of quantifying a universal experience. I believe the post was actually cautioning about trying to bolster ones argument by using hyperbolic statements, more than anything else. YMMV.

Maybe: something like "Backer NPC discussions." But I still think these are two distinctly separate discussions. They probably should be - I'd argue backer items were distinct as well, but that doesn't seem to be the direction...

The one downside of this is that you may well end up finding yourself getting a quest involving someone with the same name. My character is named Aufra Should have used Sexburg.

Would it helped if a mod changed the title to be more general? Perhaps something along the lines of - "User Created Content - good/bad" since they wanted to lump all the discussions into one place. The "offended over the removal of jokes" side is the side that is offended at anything they think gives a hint of "Censorship". And there are those on that side who see the word censorship and kneejerk just as hard as every other offended group. IMO.

I'm offended you would think I'm offended. I didn't say you were offended. Obviously when I mention the people who are offended, I am only referring to those who are offended and not those who weren't offended, who I liked to refer to as "those who weren't offended". No offense intended.

The Wiki has some name suggestions http://pillarsofeternity.gamepedia.com/Personal_Names

The internet tells me the cheat code is AdvanceTimeByHours So AdvanceTimeByHours 2 would advance time by two hours You may need to do the iroll20s unlock, and it may affect achievements (if that's your thing). Does seem weird there isn't a wait button (hadn't noticed there wasn't one but so far hadn't encountered a need either...)

Why have I not tried to fix the problem? Because you have 5 posts and none of them seem to follow Obsidian's "How to Report an Issue" request. http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/72439-must-read-how-to-report-an-issue/ Well without knowing what the issue is (see above) its kind of hard to determine how to fix the issue. It is. The technical support forum is here: http://forums.obsidian.net/forum/104-pillars-of-eternity-technical-support-spoiler-warning/ Posting the thread here with none of the "How to Report an Issue" stuff makes it seem like you don't really want to solve an issue.

Probably true...but honestly there's perpetually offended on both side, whether it offense over jokes or offense over the removal of jokes that people found offense in. Like I said, there's no positive outcome for Obsidian here; whoever perceives they "lost" with respect to what Obsidian does is going to take it personally and be further offended.

To be fair, someone iss going to be butthurt regardless of what choice they make. Face it, Obsidian's choice is which downside they want, not what choice has an upside.

I'm not trying to be obtuse, so understand I value your attempt to explain the position to me. Perhaps I need to clarify my question? I know what I'm trying to ask but I seem to be failing to ask it properly. Lets say that a man and a woman were being married as Satanists. Wouldn't that be objectionable? Immoral, destructive, sinful? Would the Christian who balks at gay marriage also balk at providing a man and a woman a wedding cake with a pair of devils on it? Would they object to providing a cake with an upside down cross? Why is marriage in general seen as "good"? If acceptance of Christ is a key to heaven as described in the New Testament, wouldn't a marriage between non-believers who would potentially create and raise more non-believers mean that the support of any non-Christian wedding was supporting (or at least furthering) the eternal damnation of those people?

Weirdly I listen to the text, then read the description ignoring the spoken lines I've heard already. Works for me, so no problems with the dialogue system.

If killing mobs is so fun, why do you need an external motivator to encourage you to kill mobs?

If a mod could be created to remove it, then certainly a mod could be created to add it back. So if mods are a solution, why is either option bad (the "put out" party would just have to apply the mod if they felt that strongly about it).

I admit it took me 5 or 6 goes before I started getting the handle of how to do combat. Luckily I'm an inveterate re-starter and so was planning on playing the opening several times in order to test out various character classes and concepts. I think I've finally got the hang of it. Two important things I learned - one you really need to not worry about using up your resources or else you'll TPK and two adding adventurers when you get to town really makes a big difference.

Actually, an "other" option would be lovely and appropriate. It is 2015, and we should be better by now. I'm really disappointed that so many people in this community are so gung-ho to mock people who aren't cis-gendered. If you want another compelling reason to remove the "joke" epitaph, its **** like this. I'd rather just have gender be removed as an option. How many times does someone read a post from a new member and think "I'd press "like this" on this post if only I knew what gender this person is..." In fact does gender even display anywhere? I've got mine set to "Not Telling" so I can't tell. Well I can tell, but just not through the boards. Quiet you.

I have to agree with Bruce on this, while there are many residents of the US who are almost Canadian in their self-depreciation, there are a not unsignificant group of residents of the US who wouldn't recognize humor if it testified in a court of law.

AFAIK no one actually knows. There's loads of theories, but little proof. It seems it was a less-than-flattering term that got adopted and changed to a point of pride. It might be related to Cumbrian dialetical word "hoozer" or to a black Methodist minister Rev. Hosier or a Louisville contractor named Samuel Hoosier whose work gangs became known as "Hoosier's Men" - later settling in the area as hoosiers. The folk etymology says its a bastardization of "Who's here" a question asked by travelers to find out if they were approaching friend or foe (ran together to come out "whoshere" or "hoos 'ere". Although my favorite tale involves a barroom brawl and the question "Whose ear?" personally.

I know you said you didn't have time for this, but I'd be curious to know your thoughts on whether, conceptually, it would be different (and how) if scenario 1 read "If a Hindi couple go to a bakery and order an Hindu themed wedding cake and the owner of the bakery refuses to make them one on religious grounds" And whether that is still fine our not. The Hindu wedding is just as heretical to Christian belief as the gay one is, given that neither would be marriage in the "Eyes of God" from the Christian perspective. Christians generally don't have a problem with a man and woman of a non-Christian faith getting married. Of course they'd prefer to see them Christian as they think it's for their own good, but generally a Christian would celebrate a man and woman getting married no matter if they were Hindu, Atheist, Zoroastrian, Islamic, whatever. To put it simply, why Christians (and others) have a problem with participating in a marriage that is not between a man and a woman is that they see it as immoral and destructive. They want no part of a ceremony that is celebrating what they see as sinful. But if the particular sect of a Christian church doesn't recognize gay marriage, its not a marriage at all to them. So why is it important? And why is it sinful other over heretical marriages to the point that it is singled out as prohibited?

Yup there seems to be a problem with uploading a photo from desktop. I just lost mine trying it. EDIT: was able to upload a pic from a website, but couldn't from the desktop.