Obsidian's Pillars of Eternity [BETA RELEASED, GO TO THE NEW THREAD]

[Gozma]

That cover/advertisement art is actually the early '90s equivalent of mainstream pandering, considering that Darklands generally played fairly straight with late-medieval armor and weapons (and imagery in general) rather than Elmore-ing things up.

That kinda reminds me that every X-Com retrospective plays that awful X-Com intro video, which both looks terrible and is contrary to the game in about ten different ways

 

[Cursed Beaver]

That cover/advertisement art is actually the early '90s equivalent of mainstream pandering, considering that Darklands generally played fairly straight with late-medieval armor and weapons (and imagery in general) rather than Elmore-ing things up.

That kinda reminds me that every X-Com retrospective plays that awful X-Com intro video, which both looks terrible and is contrary to the game in about ten different ways

I'm not an expert in medieval fashion, but the woman could be accurate.
Not everybody could afford an armor back then. And if you're not gonna wear an armor, you should just go for light clothing, to maximize freedom of movement.
Now I'm not sure if this kind of clothing was around.
However I heard that the people back then were far less prude than we think (in fact they were actually less prude than us).

The man's armor is completely inaccurate thought.

 

[GarfunkeL]

While it's true that the Victorians tried to white-wash and censor all of European history, medieval people were not free-love hippies - not that you can really generalize simple statements to cover millions of people living on an entire continent for few centuries. And no, folks who couldn't afford clothing would not "maximize freedom of movement", which is nothing but a shitty excuse invented by RPG-nerds to justify ridiculous woman warrior garb. Can't afford chain mail? Wear padded or leather. Considering that even the smallest wounds were prone to infection, which could lead to gangrene or even death, no-one who expected to engage in melee would voluntarily dress down to reveal skin.

 

[Cursed Beaver]

While it's true that the Victorians tried to white-wash and censor all of European history, medieval people were not free-love hippies - not that you can really generalize simple statements to cover millions of people living on an entire continent for few centuries. And no, folks who couldn't afford clothing would not "maximize freedom of movement", which is nothing but a shitty excuse invented by RPG-nerds to justify ridiculous woman warrior garb. Can't afford chain mail? Wear padded or leather. Considering that even the smallest wounds were prone to infection, which could lead to gangrene or even death, no-one who expected to engage in melee would voluntarily dress down to reveal skin.

There was a lot of people/adventurer and soldiers (some peasant conscript) who could not afford any armor (or just didn't bother getting one).
In this case, more clothing won't protect you.

As for free-love hippies, of course not. But as far as I know, around france/england/germany/italy showing skin was not a big deal back then.

 

[GarfunkeL]

What do you think padded armour was? It was literally rough-hewn clothing padded together, perhaps mixed with some leather plates or strips, to cover and protect as much as possible. Not that it was very effective. The only parts that were regularly naked, were knees and elbows for obvious mobility reasons.

Not that there's any point in trying to justify the poster with historical authenticity or the possibility of such, because 99.999% of time, women who accompanied mercenary units did so solely as camp followers, not as warriors themselves.

 

[Cursed Beaver]

What do you think padded armour was? It was literally rough-hewn clothing padded together, perhaps mixed with some leather plates or strips, to cover and protect as much as possible. Not that it was very effective. The only parts that were regularly naked, were knees and elbows for obvious mobility reasons.

Not that there's any point in trying to justify the poster with historical authenticity or the possibility of such, because 99.999% of time, women who accompanied mercenary units did so solely as camp followers, not as warriors themselves.

I'm fairly sure many travellers/adventurers didn't even bother wearing minimal protection. But if we're talking about mercenaries, then yes, most if not all would wear some armor. And exposed legs like the guy in the picture would be completely absurd.

As for the women, yeah I pretty much agree.

 

[Hormalakh]

because 99.999% of time, women who accompanied mercenary units did so solely as camp followers, not as warriors themselves.

exactly this. If you want realism there were never as many women running around as "adventurers" as we have in these games. so the whole point is moot. and the few women that were around were probably trying their best to look like men anyway.

also re: the convo about "generic fantasy." Since we expect everyone to have the same definition for generic when it comes to these games, maybe we can all figure out a good definition for cRPG too.

 

[Cursed Beaver]

because 99.999% of time, women who accompanied mercenary units did so solely as camp followers, not as warriors themselves.

exactly this. If you want realism there were never as many women running around as "adventurers" as we have in these games. so the whole point is moot. and the few women that were around were probably trying their best to look like men anyway.

also re: the convo about "generic fantasy." Since we expect everyone to have the same definition for generic when it comes to these games, maybe we can all figure out a good definition for cRPG too.

Well there certainly wasn't a lot of women soldier. And they would indeed try to look like men.

However women going on ''adventure'' was fairly common. Just not the combat heavy kind of adventure.

 

[J_C]

Fucking simulationists, who don't want fantasy in my fantasy.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Only when someone is trying to, mistakenly, justify fantasy with reality. I'm all for skimpy female armour and hot adventuresses. Just, don't claim it has any basis on reality or history.

 

[Cursed Beaver]

because 99.999% of time, women who accompanied mercenary units did so solely as camp followers, not as warriors themselves.

exactly this. If you want realism there were never as many women running around as "adventurers" as we have in these games. so the whole point is moot. and the few women that were around were probably trying their best to look like men anyway.

also re: the convo about "generic fantasy." Since we expect everyone to have the same definition for generic when it comes to these games, maybe we can all figure out a good definition for cRPG too.

Well there certainly wasn't a lot of women soldier. And they would indeed try to look like men.

However women going on ''adventure'' was fairly common. Just not the combat heavy kind of adventure.

Eh?

There were no "adventurees" of RPG kind in real life. People were either Mercenaries or merchants. The only real life example of this stock character is rich/funded explorers who typically did not travel alone.

That's over simplifying things. There was a lot of different reasons to travel around, not just to kill stuff or sell stuff.




BTW, anybody knows at what time this update is supposed to come out? It's already 15h00 for them in california, soon work will be over.

 

[Hormalakh]

The problem is that most people could not afford it, let alone women would probably get robbed or worse doing it alone.

probably "or worse." That shit happens in wars all the time. I'll leave it at that.

I am of the camp that I don't want tits in my games. I just never really understood this: so Bioware is stupid because they have sex scenes in their games but at the same time we want TNA in our games? Isn't that just fighting over how much imagination you want to use when masturbating?

 

[imweasel]

Obsidian making Darklands 2, with J. E. Sawyer at the helm.

Obsidian is actually making a spiritual successor to Darklands. It is called Project Eternity.

 

[Cursed Beaver]

The problem is that most people could not afford it, let alone women would probably get robbed or worse doing it alone.

It depends on the context.
But unless there was some massive famine or conflict, people lived pretty well and could afford to travel : pilgrimage to distant monasteries being one good example.

As for women, obviously it wasn't advised to travel alone. Hence they would probably travel in group. But even there, in peaceful area, bandits weren't very abundant. And not every bandit was a sick rapist murderer scumbag either.

It's all nuanced.

Also bandits were mostly targeting strangers/people not from the area.

 

[Hormalakh]

The problem is that most people could not afford it, let alone women would probably get robbed or worse doing it alone.

probably "or worse." That shit happens in wars all the time. I'll leave it at that.

I am of the camp that I don't want tits in my games. I just never really understood this: so Bioware is stupid because they have sex scenes in their games but at the same time we want TNA in our games? Isn't that just fighting over how much imagination you want to use when masturbating?

Not really the same. Allow me to explain:

Bioware's attitude towards sex is "culturalized" and moralized, "anti-patriarchal" sexual freedom. It forces an ethical standard down your throat when actually computer games are only for fun and not some serious social medium. It manifests as ridiculous attempts at interpreting human relations and the resultant shallow interactions within the player's surroundings. They essentially are the worst perpetrators of the thing they pretend to fight: the objectification of the woman. They just extend it to objectification of MEN AND WOMEN.

So you don't like gay eroticism in your games. And how is TNA not objectification of women? Or do you mean that only objectifying women is OK, but no male objectifications?

Also re: computer games are only for fun and not some serious social medium. *GASP* I think PS:T and hopefully T:ToN will be more "serious" games. I disagree with this assumption.

 

[Hormalakh]

I guess you're right but I can't come up with a reasoned argument

OK

 

[Cursed Beaver]

herm so when does the video come out? Will I be able to go to bed early tonight? (it's 18h00 where I am)

 

[Hormalakh]

they ususally do updates 9 to 11 pm where you are. im in the same timezone. they've kept their updates (except for last week's) to that time period. they'll probably do it at 10 pm so that it's at the end of the work day for them.

 

[Cursed Beaver]

thanks.

By the way, does obsidian has a permanent funding campaign with a pledging portal?
Can they get more backers from this showcase?

 

[imweasel]

By the way, does obsidian has a permanent funding campaign with a pledging portal?

The crowdfunding phase is over. But you can still pre-order (slacker backer).

Can they get more backers from this showcase?

Sure. If it doesn't look like shit at least.

 

[Rake]

Obsidian making Darklands 2, with J. E. Sawyer at the helm.

Obsidian is actually making a spiritual successor to Darklands. It is called Project Eternity.

Put a few things Saywer liked about Darklands in Eternity != spiritual successor

 

[imweasel]

Obsidian making Darklands 2, with J. E. Sawyer at the helm.

Obsidian is actually making a spiritual successor to Darklands. It is called Project Eternity.

Put a few things Saywer liked about Darklands in Eternity != spiritual successor

More like a lot.

But maybe I missed the part during the Kickstarter campaign where Obsidian said that it will resemble Darklands more than the IE games in many circumstances. Would you be so kind and point out to me where?

 

[Gelbvieh]

So you don't like gay eroticism in your games. And how is TNA not objectification of women? Or do you mean that only objectifying women is OK, but no male objectifications?

Also re: computer games are only for fun and not some serious social medium. *GASP* I think PS:T and hopefully T:ToN will be more "serious" games. I disagree with this assumption.

I don't think having LBG(no T yet?) is what people are bothered by, it's that sex of any kind is handled so badly. Like how in Dragon Age: Origins romance operates on the level of prostitution - give your followers enough shinies and they'll invariably start coming on to you. The character system is broken as a whole - as long as you keep giving them shit, your NPCs don't care what you do to other people - but when that's the case, why would also shoehorn sex into a bad system? Iirc everyone except the dwarf has a threshold at which, if you have been friendly to them, they come on to you in a less-than-subtle fashion and require several rebuttals to leave you the f alone.
Of course you can also say yes and engage in the 'romance', in which case you have to endure cringeworthy soap-opera (dialogues before the inevitable softcore rumpy-pumpy (it's mostly shots of eyes). After which, more soap-opera. The only difference in Mass Effect is that there's also aliens (maybe they're supposed to make up for the lack of trannies) and you don't even have to give them stuff, they just beg you to bend them over the nearest futuristic chest-high wall at pre-determined story junctions.

You know why you can't romance the dwarf in DA: O, or Wrex in Mass Effect? Because they're ugly.

 

[Diablo169]

God damnit, I have to go to bed its now Wednesday and theres no update. :/

 

[Roguey]

Sooooooooo....
inb4 shitstorm?

Doubt it. Obsidian have seen the videos of previous Kickstarter projects and they know what quality level they need to achieve to impress people.

During our Prototype we try to make stuff look great, but it’s secondary to form and feel.

I'm sure it'll look better than the first animated video of Wasteland 2. And probably the vertical slice video as well though obviously it won't have as many working features or even a UI. I hope they reiterate the info from update 46 about the differences between a protoype and a vertical slice.