Share this project

Done

Share this project

Done
A story-driven CRPG set in the world of Monte Cook's Numenera.  We are deeply appreciative to all of you who made this possible.
A story-driven CRPG set in the world of Monte Cook's Numenera.  We are deeply appreciative to all of you who made this possible.
You can continue to support Torment by visiting our web site.
A story-driven CRPG set in the world of Monte Cook's Numenera. We are deeply appreciative to all of you who made this possible. You can continue to support Torment by visiting our web site.
74,405 backers pledged $4,188,927 to help bring this project to life.

Updated our Journal (25): Combat Vote!

75 likes

TL;DR: Weigh in on Turn-Based vs. Real-Time with Pause (or declare your indifference). Voting will close in December.

Over the last couple weeks, we’ve been reading all of your commentary and ideas regarding combat. Many good points and suggestions, and mostly civil discourse. Thanks to all who have engaged in the discussion so far!

And now... It is time! Only backers can place a vote. (If you haven’t already and you’d like your voice heard, please register with us to gain access to the backer-only UserVoice forum.) Feel free to also continue to submit comments and ideas to the combat discussion forum. Please remember that this vote is advisory only. Above all, please remember that our goal is to provide the best possible experience for the game, and if the final decision is not your preferred choice, we ask you trust our ability to deliver a solid game.

For more context about what this is about, please see Update 24, where we describe what Turn-Based and Real-Time with Pause might each mean for Torment. We’ll close the voting in December.

The Mandate, Deathfire

Two other Kickstarters you may be interested in checking out.

The Mandate is a sci-fi RPG that includes exploration, ship-ship combat, boarding operations, and political intrigue. You role-play a ship’s captain, commanding a hierarchy of officers aboard the ship you can design. You can try out their interactive ship design system and interactive character creator to get a sense of what they have planned.

Deathfire: Ruins of Nethermore is a first-person party-based RPG. Led by Guido Henkel, who co-created the Realms of Arkania series and was part of the Planescape: Torment team, Deathfire brings a new level of character interaction and storytelling to this style of RPG. It’s over 20% funded, but needs more support to reach its $390K goal by December 7th.

Wasteland 1 & Italian Torment tumblr interview

If you're a Torment: Tides of Numenera backer and your tier contains Wasteland 2 goodies, or you added on Wasteland 2 goodies, then you are eligible for a free copy of Wasteland 1 for GOG.com or Steam. Go to the Donations tab in your account to get your key. If you run into any problems or have any questions, please contact us. If you need a refresher on what tiers contain Wasteland 2, this page is the place to go.

Finally, we did an interview with the fan-run Italian Torment tumblr with some pretty good questions about crises, Numenera rules, narrative and more.

Kevin Saunders,
Project Lead

Seto Konowa, Ian Boyte, and 73 more people like this update.

Comments

    1. Creator Can Karadayı on December 7, 2013

      Can someone post how to get a refund?

    2. Creator Luke on December 6, 2013

      Is there any way to receive a refund?

    3. Creator Anon Nymous on December 4, 2013

      The only thing that really matters here is that the combat mechanics are 1. fun 2.quality over quanity (this was pr set from the start of the project) and 3. tie up to the storyline in a meaningful manner. That is why @Corey, I don't believe that the IE combat is a NECESSITY. Sometimes, it's better to let go of unsuitable ideas when it doesn't fit the final goal.

      Judging by Update 24, the Inxile guys have more experience and feel that the Turn-Based seems more logical choice for the game. That probably means they could improve on what they learned from Wasteland as well (drool on that idea).

      Plus, I think IE games depency on speed of enemy/AI scripting (how quickly the player click/commence actions and react to events) is degrading to intelligent combat/AI design and is especially volatile in games like Planecape where it's always quality over quanity combat. Even as a young boy, I learnt to bend the BG system relatively quickly from the start but no amount of meticulous reactions and pausing-ordering can help you in turn-based system (Fallout). I don't mean that making a fluid real-time-with-pause is impossible but I think this in terms of funds you want to spend on X that is taken from everything else.

    4. Creator Brandon on December 2, 2013

      @Cory, this game isn't a spiritual successor to Infinity Engine games, that would be Project Eternity. This is a spiritual successor to Planescape: Torment specifically and considering the fact that combat was just about the least important part of that game (Not to mention the combat in the game was god awful and terribly balanced)? Changing from real time with pause to turn based wouldn't change the fact that this game is a spiritual successor to it.

      When people think back to their time playing Planescape: Torment I feel pretty confident they are not reminiscing on any combat scenes at all. Rather they're focused on the world, the story and the games themes.

    5. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on December 1, 2013

      @Corey It's only a spiritual successor in theme.

    6. Creator Corey Butler on December 1, 2013

      I'll be super disappointed if RTWP doesn't make it- what's the point of making a spiritual successor to the Infinity Engine games if it's not RTWP?

    7. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 30, 2013

      @Yaniv - I think we will have to agree to disagree. You do not seem to be fully comprehending my points and we are going around in circles now.

    8. Creator AuronStarglider778 on November 30, 2013

      While I've played more games that utilized Real-Time vs. Turn-based, I've seen some pretty decent games that utilized the Turn-based system to great effect. Either will work as long as they pull it off. Though as a matter of my ten cents, add both, and let the players chose which one they want - this way, everyone can be happy.

    9. Creator Yaniv on November 30, 2013

      @Gavin
      -
      "Yes, the vote of us weighing in with our choice. That was quite clear. If you continue to attempt to translate American English by dissecting each sentence by itself, as if they are not connected in thought or intent in any way, I fear you will never fully understand it."
      -
      I think that it is you that do not understand or like to understand. The important part is "We are making the combat system you want" and "you get to tell us". What is the system that we want? It is pretty simple, the system that we want is the system that we want.
      -
      "Considering how many people have been saying "spiritual successor = RTwP", I have difficulty believing the sway theory."
      -
      -
      This is a bad argument. The fact that part of the community was not influenced by inXile does not say that there is no other group of people that was influenced by inXile. I think it is naive (or maybe idolizing inxile) to read the pro/cons description and continuing thinking its an objective description. It is a well known fact that the entity that conduct a poll gets advantage by the fact that it write the questions, this case is not different. inXile has a lot of force in that respect and they are using it in a dishonest way. If you talk about comments on the forum, quite a lot of backers say that they voted for TB because this is what the developers wants, it prove that inXile has the power to influence and that they use it to sway the vote.
      -
      One thing that I learned from this project is that "respected" and known figures from the gaming industry don't ensure honesty. Anyway we can agree to disagree.

    10. Creator Wojciech Wu Em on November 30, 2013

      Indifferent.

      Both are good. Both have pros and cons and quite honestly both will be good if executed right.

    11. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 30, 2013

      @mrwakka - "If you say your doing a spiritual successor, it is implied the game will be like its predecessor"
      It would appear that not everyone agrees with you. I'm actually fine with either one because I enjoy both, but I do understand your frustration. Had I a preference, I would be far more emotional about this whole ordeal.

      "and if they intended to break with a major component of how that predecessor worked, they should have been more up front with it."
      It is listed on the main page, and I remember always having the impression that the combat system was up in the air, but when I went back to re-read everything after this vote was announced, I actually only found one sentence about the combat system amidst everything that was posted to KS before the campaign ended (I could be wrong about that but I don't think so). It's easy now to go back and say "read the fine print", but I'm starting to doubt that argument because only one sentence out of pages and pages of written content actually said it. I have backed other projects without reading every single word of the campaign and never encountered such a huge issue. I'm starting to think they could have made that more clear. Perhaps even they did not know at that time what would eventually happen.

    12. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 30, 2013

      @Yaniv - "I did not thought for a second that "you" is me, "you" is us as a collective and you actually confirm my claim that they did say that we'll decide."
      Yes, the vote of us weighing in with our choice. That was quite clear. If you continue to attempt to translate American English by dissecting each sentence by itself, as if they are not connected in thought or intent in any way, I fear you will never fully understand it.

      "It is because inXile swayed ( at least I learned a new word from this debate :) ) the vote."
      Considering how many people have been saying "spiritual successor = RTwP", I have difficulty believing the sway theory. If RTwP had been a foregone conclusion for everyone upon reading the words "spiritual successor", then statistically speaking RTwP would have the majority vote. I seriously doubt that over 7,000 backers of a new Torment game are so droolingly dumb that inXile's preference for TB has spontaneously transformed them into TB fanatics. More likely many of them would have been fine with RTwP but are choosing TB now that they have been given the chance. I suppose then that it is also surprising that so many RTwP fans are angry that other backers would dare choose TB over RTwP, which is "obviously" the best combat system for this game.

      In reading some of the comments on the forum, however, I do find one particular point noteworthy: Many RTwP fans knew that the combat system was up in the air during the campaign, but were not expecting inXile to allow backers to vote on the system. In other words, they were expecting inXile to solely make that decision quietly in their offices and not allow other influences. It is a fair point, I think. One that probably would have led directly to TB, but at least it would not have dragged out into a near 50/50 split among the backers.

      I am morbidly curious to see the final result of this. It has been a bloody road...

    13. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on November 29, 2013

      Combat is only one part of this game. So if its TB or RTwP it does not immediately make the entire game bad.

      This is going to rock. To be honest I'm more concerned with how much real use they make of the Numenera license. At this point the entire setting is taking place outside of any Numenera source which is disappointing.

    14. Creator mrwakka on November 29, 2013

      This is the first kickstarter I've started to regret backing, I have seen others turn out badly, or fail to deliver, but those were the risks and I accepted them as such because at least the attempt was made to stay true to what was promised. I backed it on the premise it was a spiritual successor to Planescape: Torment, an infinity engine game the use RTwP. Now since it cannot use the story or setting of Planescape, I expected something billed as a spiritual successor then would build on the mechanics and themes, and perhaps I should have read more into the fact they didn't detail the combat system on the main page, or maybe not. If you say your doing a spiritual successor, it is implied the game will be like its predecessor, and if they intended to break with a major component of how that predecessor worked, they should have been more up front with it.

      I probably would have still backed it, but with the knowledge of what it was, now I just feel somewhat lied to with the game leaning towards TB. The vote itself surprised me when they first mentioned, it seemed like a no-brainer it was going to be RTwP up until then. That is the risk of kickstarter I guess.

    15. Creator Goblin Honey on November 29, 2013

      Real time with pause -- is this even a question??

    16. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on November 28, 2013

      I'm like this right now after reading the comments:

      http://i.imgur.com/Y5AGd.gif

    17. Creator Yaniv on November 28, 2013

      @Gavin

      ""We are making the combat system you want" refers to the voting. It does not mean what you, Yaniv, wants, but rather which system wins the vote."

      I did not thought for a second that "you" is me, "you" is us as a collective and you actually confirm my claim that they did say that we'll decide.

      "I am actually quite surprised that the split is so close. Never would have expected it."

      It is because inXile swayed ( at least I learned a new word from this debate :) ) the vote.

    18. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 28, 2013

      @Yaniv - "We are making the combat system you want" refers to the voting. It does not mean what you, Yaniv, wants, but rather which system wins the vote. I have a feeling (but no explicit proof) that they left the final decision in their own hands specifically in case this situation of 50/50 ended up happening. I am actually quite surprised that the split is so close. Never would have expected it.

      "the combat system ought to be RTwP because it is the implicit combat system, the expected is that spiritual successor does not change main characteristic of its predecessor."
      I have been seeing this a lot. To me personally, it was absolutely NOT the expected combat system. Partly because of inXile stating that the combat system was up in the air, and partly because I do not equate a combat system to a game. I think that last part might be due to the fact that I enjoy both TB and RTwP, so ultimately the decision will not affect me. Many seem to have a great deal of preference, though! ;) It looks like at least a thousand backers will have "wasted" their pledge money on this game no matter which combat system is chosen! Very surprising to me.

    19. Creator Kelvin Baillie on November 28, 2013

      @Cristian - Nope it is not. If it was superior in every aspect then it would be winning with 90%+ votes.

      I will be sad if TB wins, I just do not find it as an engaging combat system as RTwP. Yes its a personal preference, but RTwP looks a lot better and feels smoother to me.

      I am also a bit dissapointed in how obviously biased InXile have been with this poll. They clearly favour TB and while it won't influence everyone, I am sure there are plenty out there who were on the fence who voted TB because of the developers favour towards that system and so will have skewed the results in its favour than if they had been more neutral (By how much no one can really tell, but it will influence it in a meaningful way).

      Though to be honest I just feel like this whole poll is pointless, with their favouritism towards TB I doubt even if RTwP won they would go with it. It would have had to have won by an overwhelming margin I think for them to have gone with it.

      I just hope they can make a good TB system. Most leave me bored not long into them, but there is the odd one or two done very well that hold my attention for longer.

    20. Creator Yaniv on November 28, 2013

      @Gavin - And what about "We are making the combat system you want"? Is it, we are making the combat system you want but we'll tell you what you really want?

      This video clip, as far as I can recall, is the only detailed information regarding combat that was provided during the campaign. It state that the devs does not care what system it will be because what important is the details and not the combat system. They also said that they will make the system that we want. If you like to strike it out (i.e. no details regarding the combat system were provided) then the combat system ought to be RTwP because it is the implicit combat system, the expected is that spiritual successor does not change main characteristic of its predecessor.

    21. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 28, 2013

      @Yaniv - "weigh in" does not imply a discussion. It means to present your thoughts and preferences and have them considered. It is a one-way method of communication. Come to think of it, "weigh in" does not even imply that the reasoning behind the final decision is communicated to anyone. Huh... interesting to try to define phrases...

      The sentence "Well, you get to tell us" is the misworded sentence to which I was referring. I do agree that it was technically incorrect to say this. What I was also saying is that this is the ONLY incorrect sentence out of all the communication that inXile has given us. Latching on to that one sentence amidst everything else was the mistake that I think you made in forming your opinion that the backers would be the one and only source of input for this decision.

      Again, American English is one of the most difficult languages in the world to understand. We have exceptions to every rule!

      @Christian Alfredo Damer - Such as the fact that TB is superior in its ability to allow all combatants to act simultaneously? Are you just trying to make a joke here?

    22. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on November 26, 2013

      @kristoff turn off ghostery. the site uses third party scripts.

    23. Creator Cristian Alfredo Damer on November 26, 2013

      Turn based is winnin because its superior in every aspect

    24. Creator Kristoff Brunet de Courssou on November 26, 2013

      Can't vote nor post any comments on the forum. I'm logged in, and use Chrome. I wonder how many others are not able to cast their vote. I suspect this is why turn-based is winning so far! :P

    25. Creator Yaniv on November 26, 2013

      @Gavin - I don't see the conflict between "weigh in" (having a discussion) and "We are making the combat system you want. What system is that? Well, you get to tell us" (taking the decision).

      BTW, English is not my first language.

    26. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 25, 2013

      @Yaniv
      If American English is not your first language, I can see how you would have misinterpreted the specific words being used. I also think you should have questioned your understanding upon hearing phrases such as "weigh in" and "advisory". I have heard from a number of non-native speakers that American English is "F'ed up" because of the fact that two words strung together make a phrase with an entirely new meaning. However, your misunderstanding of the issue does not make inXile "wrong" in any way. One misworded sentence out of all the communication that has happened since this KS campaign started is hardly a basis for misrepresentation of any facts. inXile is not lying to you; you simply misunderstood. A very easy mistake to make if American English is not your first language, but inXile is using American English.

      @Torment Superfan - "Oh man, if things get this heated over a vote on the combat system, I doubt Inxile will run another vote in the future."
      No kidding! ;) What really surprised me was the whole "my opinion is fact!" comments running wild. People saying things like "TB is obviously better! why are we even voting?" right alongside "RTwP is obviously better! why are we even voting?". :P

      @armored_mammal - "Do you think it insults autistic people every time someone in Ghost in the Shell says they're switching over to autistic mode?"
      I actually would find that to be offensive. Maybe I am being overly sensitive in your eyes, but there you have it. Just because everyone is doing it does not make it morally right. I thank you for bringing this to my attention because now I know to avoid Ghost in the Shell. I think we would all prefer to avoid things that would offend us! ;)

    27. Creator Brandon on November 25, 2013

      @armored_mammal, no, you need to better phrase your points to not come off ridiculously insulting. As Emeraude posted before I could, there wasn't a misunderstanding on our side. If anything you wrote your thoughts poorly. Either way, multiple people took offense and I can't help but think even though you claim it's not meant in the way people took it? That it really was.

    28. Creator Emeraude on November 25, 2013

      Somewhat tangentially related: was amusing to stumble again on that interview today in light of the current debate... Gotta give that to Mr. Vince, he's one opinionated fellow.

      http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2008/02/01/against-design-decadence-vince-d-weller/

      "Let me ask you one of them rhetorical questions. Is turn-based for everyone? No. Will chess appeal to anyone? No. Casual players prefer to load a game, hit a few buttons and watch their characters kick some ass. They don’t want to play games like XCOM where a single mission can easily take a few hours. Yes, a few hours to kill 20 aliens. Should we be really surprised that in an age of weapons with DPS stats – that’s damage per SECOND – and avg expected kills of 10-15 monsters per minute, spending 2 hours to kill twenty aliens doesn’t sound like fun to some people?"

      Don't really agree with the way he frames that debate (asking why chess survived when rithmomachy died would make for an interesting sub-discussion on the artificial casual/hardcore divide if anything), but the reading is interesting to see where the hardcore TB supporters are coming from.

    29. Creator Emeraude on November 25, 2013

      "Do you think it insults autistic people every time someone in Ghost in the Shell says they're switching over to autistic mode? "

      The problem being that your use of autistic here would be described in Ghost in the Shell as "Closed Shell Syndrome'' - which is where/why people take issue (I know *I* do). Autistic mode, the shutting down of a cyberbrain's networkings functions means something else altogether and is understood as such in the context it is being used.

      Quoting you yet again: "anything but an essentially autistic/Asperger's way of decontextualizing from the human experience in order to immerse in mechanics" that's how you describe TB supporters. Unwilling/unable to connect and empathize. Emotionally crippled.
      Which *is* quite insulting.

      So, yeah, it's not just the words you use, it's the sense you ascribe to them. Or at the very least the way you're being understood.

    30. Creator armored_mammal on November 25, 2013

      @ Brandon: You're distorting what I wrote. Do you think it insults autistic people every time someone in Ghost in the Shell says they're switching over to autistic mode?

      The adjectivization of those conditions (the same way people refer to stuff as being 'ADD,' etc.) is pretty well established. The point's valid and the words well within the range of modern casual vernacular.

      And that's not even going into their usage in fields outside the medical.

      Let's stick to valid points and skip the linguistic coddling.

    31. Creator Brandon on November 25, 2013

      @Yaniv you SAY it's not a guilt trip but that's exactly what you're attempting. Bad form man, bad form. If somebody prefers turn-based then they should vote turn-based.

      Personally I sincerely hope turn-based wins if only to spite armored_mammal due to his inferring that people who prefer turn-based are autistic or have aspergers.

    32. Creator Yaniv on November 25, 2013

      @Skirge01

      1. You don't need good reflexes for RTwP (assuming it can be configure to pause on every round).

      2. I did not made a statement it is an assumption "I think". Maybe my assumption is wrong but
      I believe that most of the TB supporters enjoyed playing BG and I don't believe it work the
      other way around (at least for me it does not).

      3. Its not a ridiculous, "guilt trip" nor it is bull****, it is about compromising and knowing
      to look above your self desires. What you are saying is actually, "screw you"
      I don't care if you'll be able to use the game or not as long as I'm getting my full desires.

      4. inXile can (and they won't) conduct a survey to verify my assumption.

    33. Creator Yaniv on November 25, 2013

      @Thomas Beekers - "What system is that? well You get to tell us" in my English is you decide.

      And yes it make plenty of sense that the one that oppose an ide will write its pro/cons point. Very fair indeed.

    34. Creator Brandon on November 25, 2013

      @Yaniv, Thomas is correct. Seems you've misinterpreted what was said.

    35. Creator Thomas Beekers on November 25, 2013

      @Yaniv All he says is you get to tell us which one you want, literally he says "you'll weigh in". Weighing in is not deciding.

      From the same update, the vision doc says: Our plan is to come up with two or three high level designs, describe how we’d implement them to achieve the above goals, explain what we see as the advantages of each, and then let you, the backers, offer your input and insight.

      "Offer your input and insight", "weigh in", not "decide".

      The pros and cons were stated in the update that led up to the vote. not made up on the fly after. If you disagree with them, that's fine, but I don't see how you can claim this vote should have happened without the devs offering their opinion, that doesn't really make sense.

    36. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on November 25, 2013

      Yaniv, they mentioned in a previous update team members were leaning toward TB and the vote is advisory.

      BTW, I'm in the RTwP camp myself but hey I'm not the designer. I also am not a fan of the Numenera combat rules and "effort" mechanics. But hey, if that's how ultimately Colin, Adam and Kevin decide to do it who am I to argue?

    37. Creator Yaniv on November 25, 2013

      @Brandon - here

      www.youtube.com/watch… @ 6:12

    38. Creator Brandon on November 25, 2013

      Yaniv, perhaps the full URL would be helpful rather than just linking us to our youtube home page?

    39. Creator Yaniv on November 25, 2013

      @Thomas Beekers - really?! In my English the following is an explicit commit

      www.youtube.com/watch… starting @ 6:12 and in addition there is a statement that say that you don't care what combat system will be implemented.

      Influencing the vote proves how honest you are. Funnily, after the vote begun to favor RTwP you remember to add your "objective" pro and cons. Yes, yes you are very honest.

    40. Creator Torment- The Enduring Exile on November 25, 2013

      Oh man, if things get this heated over a vote on the combat system, I doubt Inxile will run another vote in the future.

      Gentlemen, please get a grip. Either system works really.

    41. Creator Thomas Beekers on November 25, 2013

      @Yaniv We have never explicitly committed to "handing over" the decision to backers, we have been clear throughout this poll is advisory, and have talked about engaging backers, not about letter backers decide.

      Nor is there anything wrong with us indicating our own opinion and preference. Without that the vote would be less honest, as backers would not understand why we're looking at these two systems, and why both work with our requirements for combat. There's nothing unfair about it, and it would be dishonest of us not to speak to this point, because it's a conversation, it's not just an opinion poll. You want our opinion, we want yours, not a one-way street.

    42. Creator Brandon on November 25, 2013

      Did I seriously see somebody for Real Time with Pause say turn based is for people with autism/aspergers?

      Just pathetic. If you cannot support your choice of battle mechanics without resorting to crap like that you have no business partaking in discussion at all.

      Also to those who are crying that Planescape: Torment wasn't turn based? The combat in that game was garbage, when you get all nostalgic for the game I HIGHLY doubt it was over the battle mechanics. Not to mention, the devs have been quite forthright from early on in the kickstarter that real time with pause or turn based had not yet been decided on, so don't pull this crap like "I pledged expecting real time with pause!" because no, you pledged because you wanted a spiritual successor to Planescape: Torment, a successor that had the developers admitting that the choice in battle system had not yet been decided.

      Anyways, long live Turn Based. Seems like such a much better fit for a game Torment. A game where you need to take your time and evaluate what's going on, to make important choices. Turn based just seems like a no brainer as it fits in with the rest of the game better than any real time system ever could.

    43. Creator Skirge01 on November 25, 2013

      "But the most important point is that (I think) almost all backers will enjoy RTwP but in contrary to that a lot of backers will not enjoy TB because it will be to tedious for them. For that reason I ask TB supporters, in act of solidarity, to consider their fellow backers before considering inXile profit."

      @Yaniv: In my best (admittedly horrible) Gordon Mah Ung voice:

      That's about the most ridiculous thing I've seen someone assert in order to justify their choice. It's a "screw you" tactic to someone who wants TB. It's a guilt trip. It's a "Think of the starving children!" argument. You're attempting to speak for all the TB voters and you're not even one of them. You don't like TB, but you're saying that TB players should be fine with RTwP. TB will be too tedious for RTwP players and they simply can't handle that (bull****!), but RTwP won't be less tactical, less enjoyable, overtly button-mashing click-fests for TB players? What about the older backers who don't have the same reflexes they had in their teens, their 20s or 30s (I'm actually *not* one of them, BTW)? Pausing doesn't improve their reflexes. Screw them, right? Why can't RTwP players just learn to be a little more patient? I know... they don't have time for that, do they?
      /rant

      My point is simply that there are perfectly valid reasons from both sides for each type of play. You cannot make a blanket statement that RTwP works for everyone while TB does not. It's simply not true; each side would need to adapt.

    44. Creator Yaniv on November 25, 2013

      @Gavin - Thank you for your vote :)

      You can watch www.youtube.com/watch… starting @ 6:12 and hear the explicit commit.

    45. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 24, 2013

      @Yaniv
      1) I disagree here. By funding the game's development, we as backers are essentially shareholders in the game. We put up our own money and so are financially and creatively involved. You can not care about the cost all you want, but you still paid real world money for this like the rest of us. Like it or not, inXile is discussing cold hard cash with us. Those of us familiar with game development not only enjoy this level of transparency, but it was one of the reasons we backed the game on Kickstarter while it was still in pre-production.

      However, I accept your point that such things were listed as TB pros while not also being listed as RTwP pros (in the reverse sense). They should definitely have been TB pros, but in thinking about your point I also think they should have been RTwP pros. The decision to go ahead and spend the money on RTwP is just as valid as the decision to save the money on TB.

      2) Not that I do not believe you here, but I must have missed this promise to the backers. I was under the impression (largely influenced by how inXile has been handling the WL2 campaign/development) that final decisions rested in the hands of inXile, but that they would take backer input into account. I watched a video interview with Brian Fargo himself that stated he would NOT go against a majority opinion among the backers even if he/inXile thought it was the right decision.

      3) Pursuant to number 2.

      4) Pursuant to number 1, I agree with you on this one.

      "But the most important point is that (I think) almost all backers will enjoy RTwP but in contrary to that a lot of backers will not enjoy TB because it will be to tedious for them. For that reason I ask TB supporters, in act of solidarity, to consider their fellow backers before considering inXile profit."
      Ok, you have convinced me. I will vote RTwP.

    46. Creator Yaniv on November 24, 2013

      Gavin - OK I will try.

      1. I don't care about the cost. It is inXile business it's not like we
      are shareholders. So AI should be RTwP pro and not in RT "pro".
      Continuing the same line of thinking, combat system reuse is not TB pro.
      2. inXile committed explicitly to hand over the decision regarding
      TB vs RTwP to the backers.
      3. inXile violated the "contract" (paragraph 2) by declaring that the
      vote is advisory.
      4. inXile openly support TB and presented the pro/cons in an uneven way.
      By doing so they are unfairly influencing the vote outcome.

      But the most important point is that (I think) almost all backers will enjoy RTwP but in contrary to that a lot of backers will not enjoy TB because it will be to tedious for them. For that reason I ask TB supporters, in act of solidarity, to consider their fellow backers before considering inXile profit.

    47. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 24, 2013

      @Yaniv - Ok, completely confused here. I was using the quotes to provide you with proof of my argument (a few comments ago) that "the avoidance to developing a real-time AI is listed as a "pro" because it avoids development cost and time, not because inXile is trying to shirk any duties or responsibilities to the backers." The specific quotes I used back this up, although you may need to read them in context from the original source to understand the meaning (thus why I provided references). You told me to provide you with proof, so I did.

      As for the "groupies" comment, perhaps I misunderstood you. That is entirely possible. However, I am still misunderstanding you because I still am not getting your point. Can you elaborate? Or perhaps just put it in different words?

    48. Creator Yaniv on November 24, 2013

      @Gavin - You can quote what you like and inXile can use what they like to use from WL2 as long as it is not in conflict with the explicit commit regarding TB vs RTwP. And please do not twist my words, I did not said that majority of backers are "groupies". I did say that inXile influencing a group of backers that can be categorize as groupies/flock. And what is the meaning of a quote from update 24?! is it a joke?

    49. Creator Gavin Reading Rainbow KS backer! on November 24, 2013

      @Yaniv - From the main page: "Furthermore, various systems and tools developed for Wasteland 2 will be used or adapted for Torment, saving development time and budget." From update 15: "Note that wherever it makes sense, we’ll be adapting the Wasteland 2 systems for use in Torment, so in polishing Wasteland 2, we’re also building a stronger foundation for torment." From update 24: "We can adapt Wasteland 2’s combat system, modified to work best for Torment."

      I accept your new point that they are taking a stand for TB and thus influencing the poll. I completely disagree with your previous point that the majority of backers are "groupies" that are easily influenced and that the entire practice is dishonest. Millions of BF4 console players are "groupies", not a mere 74,000 backers for a PS:T spiritual successor KS campaign. Even among PC gamers worldwide, 74,000 is a small niche. The very fact that the debate about TB vs RTwP is taken seriously is proof enough that we are not "groupies"!