Search the Community

My list of bugs: Character gets stuck in a "falling" animation after battle if knocked unconscious, upon loading a game I get white boxes and green circles in the boxes above the portraits, I can't finish the ogre quest because the head (and blood) always disappears from my inventory (after loading), Ogre never has the club, missing equipment (after loading/ sometimes on stratup), quest disappearing after loading but coming back after quitting the game and restarting, attack animations are buggy; ranged weapons are used as melee weapons, character sounds missing, weapon sounds missing (guns), sometimes attack animations are looped over and over again after battle, loot dropped but not appearing in inventory, random crashes when loading etc. Some of these are already in the known issues but just dropping down the bugs I have encountered. However, really digging the feel of the game, the spell effects, the sounds/music, guns are so cool and the art in general is great. So much potential, can't wait for the release! Attachements: DxDiag and error.log (after a crash I got a message that encouraged me to send the error.log to the devs!), screenshot DxDiag.txt error.txt

TLDR: Scroll to bottom for main points. I've been playing through Fallout NV recently. It's excellent quest design has brought to my mind a few points I'd like to share about NPC agency. Let's talk about the oldest trope in fantasy RPGs - that of the "quest". Usually a PC is given quests that entails "solving" problems for NPCs. If the player accepts a quest, then directions to complete said quest and possible rewards for doing so are made clear. If the player chooses to ignore the quest, then not much of anything happens (more on this point later). This plays into the power-fantasy that these games have historically filled. The player is either a White Knight travelling from town to town solving problems or an Evil **** (my own label) who benefits from said problems. This has always struck me as shallow and ultimately conceited; the White Knight's motivation is seemingly helping others in need but in actuality, his/her true motivation is the feeling of power gained by doing so. And if the player chooses not to engange in a quest (for whatever reason) then nothing changes because the NPC is incapable of handling the problem without the player's intervention. In my opinion, Kreia (from KOTOR 2) is the best NPC character I have ever encountered in any game. Her interactions with the player shred all the preconceived notions about being both a White Knight or an Evil ****. The conversation where she tears the player a new one for the ostensibly "noble" act of charity toward the traveller trapped at the port in Nar Shadda is permanently etched into my mind. "Such kindnesses will mean nothing, his path is set. Giving him that which he has not earned is like pouring sand into his hands." The notion that simply doing good deeds for others is the end-all cure to their problems was in desperate need of being thrown out with the rest of the simplistic moralism espoused by a lot of fantasy games - and Kreia was the one that did it for me. Back to New Vegas - one aspect of the quest system that really stood out to me was it gave the player the choice of not only solving the problems of NPCs but empowering NPCs to actually solve their own problems. A great example is one of the first quests you receive: Ghost Town Gunfight. Instead of merely eliminating the Powder Gangers and "solving" the problem, the player is put in a postition to empower the people of Goodsprings to help themselves. Rally the troops and have them play to their strengths in order to fight off the invaders. There is certainly a sense of satisfaction to be had from helping people help themselves. Sadly, this was not done nearly enough (even in NV). By declining to do a quest, the NPC would usually see you off with a "I'll be here if you change your mind" and then simply wait around for you to return and help him/her out of the problem. The quest that comes to mind is the one where the Brotherhood of Steel initiate asks you to return the laser pistol he dropped in the wastes while running from Radscorpions. I wanted to tell him that if he snuck out of the bunker for target practice, he can certainly do it again to retrieve his pistol, and if he's too cowardly to do so, he can talk to the quartermaster, admit his mistake, and bear the consequences of his actions. In short, he should SOLVE HIS OWN DAMN PROBLEM. Sadly, this was not an option provided in the dialogue tree. I left that quest undone on moral grounds, even though to complete it would have probably netted me some free supplies from the quartermaster. For those of you who are still with me, here are my simple recommendations for dealing with NPC agency in quests: Ensure that there are noticeable outcomes (positive, negative or otherwise) for both choosing to accept a quest and NOT choosing to accept it. If possible (because it isn't always possible) enable player to help NPCs solve their own problems. Seeing as how both the games from where I have taken ideas are Obsidian games, this is probably already well understood by the devs. I'd simply like to see more of it.

Hello ! What type of quest whoud you like to see in PE ? What type of quest you like most ? What "quest" was your favorite. I personaly whoud like to see 2 types of quests: 1. (Mystery) Find out who is werewolf in port last (NWN1) my personaly favorite from that game. 2. (Mystery/ghost) A mansion with ghosts from Vampire Masquarade Bloodlines. The best known quest on the planet in my opinion. It whoud be awsome to see quests like that in PE. I also enjoyed "orzamar deep roads" from DAO (best quest from that game). Rakghouls and sewers from Kotor1 (also good). And allmost all quest from Witcher1, expecionally "Detectiv" part. What type of quests you like ?

First of all, Obsidian, thanks for everything you have done to the RPG world. I am 29 now and a lifetime fan of your works (back and then). Project Eternity is a dream for me, still i can't believe it's happening. We have waited for so long.Well, i'm very excited. Can't wait to play. This post may be unnecessary or useless, i don't know, i just wanted to write to you, so pardon me. Oh, and excuse me for my lacking english. Here we go. You will read a lot of "in Baldur's Gate this was bla bla bla". Don't get mad. Sorry for this but that game is my gold standard. (whole saga) I am a big fan of D&D and it's character kits/alignement system. I hope PE will have a similar system. Barbarians, fighters, humans, wizards, sorcerers, thiefs, dwarfs, orcs, elfs and sub-classes... It's a nice long list to read:) My biggest concern is the difficulty level. You know, in these days, games are easier to play, dumbed down for childrens; no dialogues, no choices, no stories to listen. Easy quests, lineer story-line etc. I hope there will be a lot of challenging battles, mind blowing puzzles, hard-to-see clues, a lot of stuff to dig in. If a gamer can solve the puzzle in 10 minutes it won't be an epic moment to remember. We wanna argue about it in forums, try theories:) And anyone remembering Kangaxx? Demilich with a creepy mausoleum? I remember, i tried a month just to find a way to awaken him an failed. An enemy (and a puzzle) like him will be epic too. Just a reminder; Baldur's Gate 2 had over 290 quests and we expect more:) This is a very important element. Replayability. Lots of quests, lots of sub-quests, tons of thing to do and freedom in accomplishing things. But not only quantity of course. In BG quests was interesting, some of them were mystical in some ways and connected. Fulfilling rewards are one thing but ancient myths, cults, hidden cities underground, secret passages, georgeous stage designings... Those are just a few of the things made quests replayable. Remarkable, colourful, one-of-a kind characters (NPCs). I missed them. It has been decades, we haven't seen any guy like Minsc or Edwin or Korgan. They had a unique biography, a history. I think i don't have to explain myself longer. This is crucial. Crucial in anyways. We need a lot of unique (NPCs). Not 6 or 7 of them but "lots" of them. I don't know about you guys but i still remember the stories behind the items in BG. For example; Moonblade, Lilarcor... And the artworks they had? I think that's a very important element too. When you put a story, a history behind a sword, when you give it a unique design and artwork, it becomes unforgettable. No matter it's useless or what, it becomes a part of the game that makes you satisfied. This is something i could never found from other RPGs. I think it's enough verbosity:) Only a few things left to say. Graphics are important but not that much. Replayability and unique characters are the keys to win the heart of an RPG fan. I am not expecting a high-end graphics engine, not expecting unbelievable effects. I will be satisfied if it works steady. Ok. Thanks for everything again. Hope you read this.

What type of quest you like the most ? What type of quest you whoud like to see in PE most ? My favorite quest is ocean house in Vampire Masquarade the bloodlines. I also liked playing Detective in wither 1

Could the Player take the "Quest" in a completely new direction by the actions he/she is taking? Say, there is a Side-Quest to banish a Demon, but instead you release him and becomes his master. Now this wasn't just some "Hey Demon become my summon!" but an actual "Doomsday Demon" making it even more threatening than the task previous task at hand, and he's on your leash Could the player produce some "doom events" themselves? Basically, instead of facing Sarevok, the Bhaalspawn goes off elsewhere on a "X" choice. Choosing to face other player triggered events that is way more a problem than Sarevok. Or stumbling into some dark deep place and accidentally summon Cthulhu (in a side-quest). Sarevok is just an ant in a much larger scheme after all... no? Basically, can the Player kind of become the "threat" narratively?

I've had some thoughts on experience (most of it gathered up in my wall of text in my signature though) and how I view experience. I am slightly concerned about P:E (as thus far revealed) being tied to Objective Based experience. I like it a lot, but I'm also scratching my head about it; "Are there more ways to improve it?". Now I don't realize to what extent this is going to be implemented and "How", merely just discussing and sharing some thoughts on what I see could be an issue.. to the point: Being rewarded after getting from point A to point G. I experience a lot during the journey between A and G (B, C, D, E, F), but I will only be rewarded at G, when I have fully completed the objective. Which to me feels more like a "temp-work" kind of dealio. I contracted this job and I will only be paid at the end of it. That is what concerns me. My character going through the dungeon, facing enemies, solving mysteries and riddles, finding books, items and equipment making my character slightly stronger, but won't level up until I have finished the dungeon and returned to the surface. I view the "Objective/Quest Experience" as "Character/Player Experience", or even "Spiritual Experience". Life Experience. Insight Experience and so on. I would like to see the Character Experience and the Combat Experience differ, being two different experience tables. What your character does in the world, in terms of quests and objectives, makes your character grow in knowledge, in reputation (how the world sees you), in insight, understanding of the world, exploration and so on. Your character becomes more devoted into their Class, their way of life, as they explore the world. All "Character Experience". It doesn't define any "Physical Aspects" but only the "Mental Aspects". Knowing in theory how to swing a sword will make it easier for you to understand how to swing a sword, but will you swing a sword better because of it if you've never swung a sword before? No. You're going to be a noob like everyone else, you might be a better noob or a worse noob, the point is that you are still going to be a noob with that sword. You might learn faster, or you might learn slower depending on pre-knowledge and research. The concern I have is exactly that, with a Quest based Experience system the issue could become that my character is suddenly a Master Swordsman, regardless of Class. "Poof" like a magical smoke out of nowhere. Drawing a parallel to Baldur's Gate: Baldur's Gate has both, that both defines Character Experience and Combat Experience. It is one pool. What I am suggesting is splitting up the character in 2, but keep the way experience is gained like the IE games. BG: Quest+Combat = Leveling up 1 Experience Pool. The proposal/Suggestion: Quest = Levels up the Character/Class Combat = Levels up Combat skills -------------- Conceptual (Numbers are conceptual as well): In the IE games you take down an enemy to get 15 Experience. Your character has now 15/1000 experience to level up. As proposed, you'd still be at 0/500 experience to level up your character, but have 15/500 on combat aspects. Experience Graph IE: 15/1000 Experience Proposal: 15/500 Combat Exp 0/500 Character Exp P:E (as far I know it): N/A Combat Exp -------------- Likewise, in the IE games, finishing a Quest in those games you get perhaps 450 Experience, adding up with the pool of defeating monsters you would be at 465/1000 Experience to level, whilst as proposed you would have 450/500 experience to level up your Class, and 15/500 experience to level up your weapon. Experience Graph IE: 465/1000 Experience Proposal: 15/500 Combat Exp 450/500 Character Exp P:E (as far as I know it) N/A Combat Exp 450/1000 -------------- Perhaps the level of the Character could decide (accordingly) how fast your Combat experience grows. If you have a Level 4 Sword Experience and a Level 8 Fighter, but you want to play with a Mace instead (and it's level 1), the Mace could grow at x2-x3 times experience up to a certain point (so that Bandit that gave 15 experience is instead giving 30-45 experience). Just to make you be able to catch up with another weapon and specialize in more than one combat aspect. How does this balance the game? More importantly, how does this balance the classes? Your Rogue can be a level 5 Rogue, with specialized Combat making your Rogue a more adept sneaky bastard or a straight out close-combat martial artist. It could even make your level 5 Rogue an Adept in Magic, a Rogzard (Rogue/Wizard). Your Fighter would become a level 5 Fighter, but not at all specialized in close combat, or just so. Perhaps being an excellent tank, or a weak magical buffer. Or heck, even your level 5 Fighter is a Fighter but roleplayingly he could be seen as a Level 5 Paladin Trainee (due to his combat prowess and direction you chose to upgrade/level him).

This is a legendary quest to conquer rats at a tavern, but how many rats can there be... A great part to this quest could be to add as many rats as there are backers and name each one a backer

It bothers me alot in roleplaying games that you see a bunch of npcs named for example citizen and one John. Well we know from the start that John has a quest for us or something. I would rather have a system were after a conversation mwhere the NPC introduce themselves ,the name appears above the npc. Also it is stupid that u walk to every npc and ask them if they need help. Quests should be done differently. 1. The NPC approaches you by himself 2. The NPC is in a situation which is visually presented 3. A information board,book,notice or a towncrier And many other possibilities which I cant recall right now. But yeah, it is a small Idea which can change our gameplay drastically in my opinion ( THe npcs will be more memorable ). What do you think ?

Do you know what makes great quests and decisions less great? Predictability. Peeking at the guide and doing a second playtrough and all the mistery is gone. What I propose is to have consequences be somewhat random (when appropriate of course). Let me give an example: REDCLIFFE from DA:O You got 3 choices of which one (getting help from mages) is superior because there is no danger in it. You KNOW nothing bad will happen when you leave. Something that is a risk, a chance, ceases to be. But what if you didn't know? What if - no matter how many guides you read, how many times you play - you can never be certain that everything will be OK once you get back? Basicly, when approprite - usually when events are outside of player character control - have the outcome randomized to a point. Now, if you had a great victory at Redcliffe and prepared everyone, chance of something bad happening is 33% If you had a good victory, chances are 50% If you did bad, chances are 77% If the bad consequence happens, even the extent can be randomized. If all knigts survived - high chances of Teagen being alive, but some knights died protecting him (for example) This makes unpredictable things unpredictable. Taking a risk is always a risk - you can increase your chances, you can take some precautions to reduce the fallout - but you will never KNOW. You will enver be sure. *** Now the question is - what is stopping the player from reloading? That depends on whow it's done. When is the roll determined? Once rolled, does it become static? So let's say the roll is made the second you head out towards the Circle Tower. Let's also say it's not static. You'll have to re-do the Broken Circle quest (unless you did that already) and travel there and back for a CHANCE to change the outcome. Let's say it is static. Roll sez Teagan dies. Too bad. No re-loading will help you now, Teagan dies. Unless maybe, you load an even older save and change some of the other variables (like how well the Redcliffe milita is equipped). In this case, a roll would be static UNLESS some variables change. In which case it would be rolled again an then become static again. Which would make it both fair and at the same time incredibly frustrating to save-scum.

Hey kid, we have different stories about it. What do you think about building storyline mechanics with respect to different difficulty options? I mean that gameplay would vary not only in difficulty, but in storyline or amount of quests that player receive. It may look like developer have to build handful unique stories and will demand double of money and HR. My idea is to build one complete main plot and set of side stories/quests, and until certain difficulty modes (suppose those 3 special most difficult goals) player wont get all side quests (developers may even randomize offered set) and may be restricted to go through some predefined shortcuts of main story. Another possibility (along with hiding some secondary quests) will just end main plot and propose to continue (or even restart) on full difficulty to see extension of story. P.S.: I know that this may require additional funds, however perhaps not as many compared to the interest shown by players. Many games struggle to attend audience more than once. Such feature may add motivation, and different gaming experience. Instead of single pass, players will become interested to go through the game again. And of course, adding more arbitrariness of gameplay will reduce significance of pass-through "manuals" which will inevitably rise over the internet with time.

Imagine, travelling through highland (possibly rocky montane area) around the rocky corner of the road you hear some not so distant sound of blast and rockfall on the way ahead (possibly down the pass or on the other side of linn/combe/ravine). Later you see that way (road) was blocked by rockfall you've heard and, when approached the site, you see dead bodies in white torn robes and body parts scattered among the rocks all around the place. Searching around you discover one laying male person that moving his limbs like still alive. Man, middle aged, wear white bloody robe above strange suit, with blood on his face flowing from empty orbits, presumably suffering from internal bleeding and damage or fractures, apparently in state of delirium with symptoms of terminal state. Man raving some words on unknown language and then losing his conscious. you and companions managed to heal him a bit and he's still alive; but not for long, and you need to decide: whether to take a stranger to nearby village by sending one of companions (who will try to keep man alive up to transferring this man to local medicaster) and possibly save man's life, or (considering weak chances for man's survival and assuming apparent uselessness of that man to campaign) to leave him and continue quest with so needed companion. All words you managed to catch, before man fall unconscious - "parallel dimension", "black hole", "collapse", "earth destroyed" - you failed to understand. Patch on man's robe pictured two circles and hieroglyphs formed "CERN" pattern.

Hello Obsidian, This is an open letter requesting Lichs be included in the game as either, a) A playable race. b) Ascension as a result of a wizard/cleric/cipher(?) only quest (allow melee classes a quest to become either vampires or fiends) c) A companion. Lichs are the best undead archetype and too long have RPGs mistreated, misrepresented, and mishandled their inclusion in their game world. Lich discrimination includes but is not limited to: Type casting as mid-boss level villains, untrustworthy quest givers who will betray you after completion of the quest, secret loot pinatas that dispense overpowered equipment, and vague and unseen threats sprinkled throughout a game world's lore. I believe the above usages are selling the potential of a Lich and the Lich's sacrifice of his humanity short. There are any number of interesting reasons to become a Lich, good, neutral, and evil, and exploring this multiplicity of motivations could make for very interesting story telling. Allowing the player to become a Lich will accomplish the following: A) An immense sense of progression as the player sheds his mortal body. B) A host of possibilities for world reactivity based on the cultural perceptions of Lichs across the game world. C) Interesting gameplay mechanics and added tactical choices gained through the many Lich abilities. Thank you for your consideration on this topic, the inclusion of Lichs would make many people very happy.

Kind of, Quest events. Imagine doing Kivan's quest, but from being a third-party. Where he leads and you follow (and would you walk back he would continue forward). During the time you follow on his quests you would pretty much be a 7 man party, with perhaps some basic shouts a la "Watch out!", "Get over here", "Follow me for a while". You wouldn't have any mechanical control but this could be a tactical aspect in itself in combat (Controlling an out of Party companion with limited tactical management, controlling several? Lead an army? xD). Of course, the companion should have some proper AI. I'm thinking Side-Kick Heroes, basically potential Companions or traveler's, that travels the world actively doing one Quest tree. Every NPC usually has their own in-built Quest tree that they have to follow right? That you have to do anyways? If Time is going to be a resource, would you miss certain Quests, companions?

Any RPG has its fair share of quests. Themes include: . Progresing the main story line; . Increasing your status in a guild; . Helping an NPC find something they've lost; . Killing on contract; . etc What sort of quests are you looking for in Project Eternity? Would you like to play soul quests, ones that take place in the ethereal realm with your soul and a projection of your physical self, or a projection of whatever was occupying your PC's mind? Personally I prefer quests that make me think. Ones that put my character in a position where the choice I make changes the evolution of the story. Soul quests also intrigue me because in the ethereal realm physical strength is less relevant. Soul quests may provide an opporunity to engage with the god-like (or gods even) in Project Eternity.