Amentep

Well I don't think anyone is going for THE SIMILARION - THE MOVIE, so I guess after December. Which IIRC frees him up for the Tintin sequel.

It is really good, been getting it in trade.

My suggestion... .... .... .... ....wait for it... .... .... .... "END OF LINE"

Weirdly - to me at least - the "loot everything in sight" mentality is driven by the economy of the game. Very early on you need every copper piece you can scrape up so you'll take everything that might possibly be sold so that you can buy necessary equipment. The deep stash really doesn't solve the problem, it just manages it differently.

Well its not "bonus experience", its just experience in the context of PE. But the argument appears to be its okay to award kill xp for every Xvart you find, but to earn stealth XP you have to stealth past every Xvart. Seems inconsistant to me. Ideally if you're not wanting to create accidental incentives for people to play a particular way than the general expectations of outcomes should be similar, I'd think. Inaccessible would be awkward if you stealthed past something you were supposed to steal on your way out to progress through Map 2, but can't go back to Map 1. Units removed wouldn't make logical sense and people seem to dislike that sort of thing in games. And you can leave it like the IE games which meant stealthing was only good for finding traps and scouting too. Its not invalid. That said, I'm not sure how it would effect the "games pacing". I can't say that when I saw a Xvart in BG1 I was pondering over carefully about how much XP I got from it (but perhaps that's just me). Learning from killing is very gamey anyhow, to be fair. Generally people would spend years training and then expand how to apply that training "live" but that's not really the way games work. That said, I readily admit that I probably side more on a gameist side than a simulationist side. YMMV. Which isn't bad, IMO, just different. The ultimate proof is in tasting the pudding, IMO.

IIRC BG1 & 2 had random monster spawns (the skeletons over by that wizard hut in BG1 kept respawning, IIRC, and in BG2 you had the random traveling encounters). RE: Flagging something as unkillible - I'm under the impression this would cause all of Europe to go into outrage, like they did when kids weren't killable in Fallout. Or so I hear. I'd also imagine - but could be wrong - that setting quest XP is an easier solution than trying to toggle a on/off boolean for a lot of individual creatures during each instance. Also I suppose it raises the question of what to do if you stealth past Group 1 but fail to steatlh past group 2 and the two groups are in close proximity. Should only Group 2 attack (which is unrealistic) or should Group 1 & 2 attack (which is realistic, but causes the player to expend resources on killing creatures they can't benefit from by killing).

Scorpion King 3 was kind of boring. I like bad films, but don't be boring, that's the worst thing you can do.

Well if it was Fallout it'd be because you couldn't leave the ****ing turn-based combat, hitting "end combat" just opened the damn ****ing combat **** up again. If it was the IE games, I really dunno.

It doesn't mean that the game doesn't exist, though. You can still play KotOR I and II; the words are not, to use your example, removed from the pages. They're there for you to read and re-read. It just means it doesn't connect to the larger architechture of the "universe". As a long time comic book fan, this is almost de rigueur for the handling of those shared universes. And yeah sometimes I wish they hadn't rebooted that particular character, or this comic line or what have you. But at the end of the day whether it matters to the continuity is less important IMO than whether or not it was enjoyable to me. Continuity be hanged, I played KotOR I and II and enjoyed them and can do so again, regardless of Lucasarts/Disney.

I remember you getting some flak about the Light Saber Nunchuck idea in 2004 but don't remember the "real world Light Sabers" discussion. Must have blinked.

Would love a "Weird Western" setting but that's probably darn unlikely. Would also like a "Pulp Adventure" set in the 30s. Doublely unlikely unless "Pulp Adventure" is defined as "Action + Lovecraft Mythos" in which case it goes back to just unlikely. But, ultimately, I want Obsidian to do a kickstarter about a game setting they're passionate about. That'll probably work out for the best. Isn't the rights to that with Activision-Blizzard? (Sierra was bought by Vivendi who was sold to Activision). Unless you mean "Arcanum 2 in spirit and not in actual IP" in which case, carry on.

That's cool as long as it doesn't handle like a methodone addict going through the shakes again. Hope they licence the "Moon Patrol" theme for when you're in the Mako...

Lucy - Thought it was a fun film - its like Luc Besson decided to meld a 70s sci-fi movie with his own earlier action films. Enjoyment may be muted if you can't get past some of the initial wonky science.

Maybe its just me, but "my opinion as fact" rants don't amuse me.

Well if it is a horror RPG, I'm hoping you can create your character. Whether that is choosing how smokey your head is or what color your hoodie is, I don't know.

Even knowing all of that about real-trials vs TV-trials, I still watch re-runs of Perry Mason.

Yeah asking Sargy to give up his posting style is like asking Gromnir to give up his. Who'd want either to do that?

I liked it.

Wait is that perhaps horror? From Bioware? The horror of it all.

I've been busy myself lately...

And that should be fine, IMO, as long as it makes sense with the NPC and the PC's choices. I think that's the key to understanding how the NPC and PC will interact. Mind you I also think if the game allows the player to visit bars (or prostitutes) regularly the others should start recognizing you too (Norm!). But I admit that's a lot of consideration for minor parts of the game.

I think it depends on the game, the setting and such. But yeah, sometimes I see puzzles in games and think "What was that ancient civilization supposed to be thinking when they decided to trap every path to the holy relic...they worshiped every day."

I think its important - if you were to include a romance - to make each as unique as the NPC. Maybe you can flirt with the person but if goes nowhere. Maybe you build a relationship but s/he leaves you because you keep letting him/her get defeated on the battlefield. Maybe they do flirt with you to steal your stuff. Maybe it'll only really just be getting started by the end of the game with the idea the characters have a future together in the post-game. So far the examples we've had tend to follow the same rhythms and beats and tend to be "get a sex scene before the final fight" other than BG2 which is more like "get a 'fade to black' sex scene, randomly and sometimes in ways and places that don't make sense" as I recall.

I'm not sure Eternity could take an Aerie anyhow. Something about jamming the eventual baby-as-inventory-item into the deep stash just seems morally wrong.

Interesting post, but I'm not sure I understand you correctly Are you saying in DA2 that the flirtatious comments from party members towards Hawke basically only accentuated the Romance relationship at the expense of other emotions and experiences you may have had towards a particular NPC? No, what I'm saying is that the player's ability to control their PC was challenged by the game having the NPC flirt with the player - sometimes even past being turned down. The NPCs didn't give the player an ability to navigate the relationship before being hit on, thus a negative reception.