I'm going to tune the higher levels of difficulty to be like the hardest IWD2/BG2 fights all the time. Standard difficulty will be less difficult, but still challenging.
It was actually a demo for some team members who were less familiar with IE games and needed some pointers on how to play.
An animator had set up the pig with the melee weapons from a much more powerful creature and... welp.
Changing the level of difficulty generally means changing what creatures (and how many) are present in encounters. Outside of Path of the Damned, we don't have any plans to scale health, level, accuracy, defenses, etc.
Changing the level of difficulty generally means changing what creatures (and how many) are present in encounters. Outside of Path of the Damned, we don't have any plans to scale health, level, accuracy, defenses, etc.
Thank God. I hate the bullet sponge model of difficulty adjustment.
Right, that's what I'm interested in. Does difficulty affect THA LEWTS or not?
It depends on the creatures. On average, you will probably get a small increase in loot, but it's possible to get less in certain circumstances. Level of difficulty both activates and deactivates creatures, effectively replacing weaker enemies with more powerful ones. Sometimes the total number of creatures remains the same (rarely, goes down) while the challenge goes up. E.g. if there's a fight that involves wurms (baby dragons) on the sidelines, the fight could go from having 3 wurms to 5 wurms to replacing all of those wurms with a single drake (adolescent dragon).
Can you tell us at what a point a game is typically considered to be in beta? Is it always as simple as "'feature complete' = beta"?
Well obviously the joke answers have already been covered... which actually aren't that jokey because they do seem to be true in many cases.
The definitions may change from company to company, but I don't think they would change by much. Also, most of these deadlines are scheduled out far before they are reached. Their actual timeline can be adjust as scope shrinks and grows.
Alpha is usually when the major feature work is done. Production is not done yet, in other words, there are probably still levels to create, items to create, and minor features to implement. Typically this is also where the last major cuts should happen. Major cuts SHOULD have happened to scope back down before Alpha hits, but sometimes it happens.
Beta is when production and feature work is done. The only thing that should be done in this phase is polish and bug fixing. That's it.
Remember, there can be bugs in art, design and programming. A HUGE misconception is that all bugs are programming bugs.
If an artist makes a 6000 poly crate, and then a level designer stacks 50 of them in a level where you are already pushing hard to deliver your framerate, guess what, that's a bug that gets written up as a bad framerate (or a crash if it floors the console) and it goes to a programmer. A programmer might spend an entire day trying to figure out what the problem is before handing it off to a a designer to delete some crates.
If a designer creates content for a random loot generator that will cause 15,000 items to be put into a pool to be selected for drop, that's enough to hammer a console or a PC too. In this example, it was both a programming bug and a designer bug. The programmer in this case should not have used a grow array to store the possible loot drops, or should have set a hard limit, and the designer should have selected better keywords for the drop.
I'm not trying to pass the blame, there are more than enough programming bugs too.
We want to support custom portraits and make it very easy for players to drop in whatever they want. We're still playing around with portrait sizes but right now they're around 660x850 on the character/inventory screen and get downsampled for use on other parts of the GUI.
I think classes can be easier for players to "get" than a sea of potential skills/abilities/etc. With a lot of classless systems (especially really rules-intensive ones like GURPS), you may have to hunt around to figure out if you can build a certain character concept. Classes present you with rough character archetypes up front so it's easier to just drop in for newer players (IMO).
When I play, I prefer to use classless systems. However, in my experience with classless systems, I've still found that if tactical combat is "a thing" of the game, it needs to receive a lot of design attention so players can make use of it. GURPS pays a lot of attention to combat mechanics and leans more heavily on simulationism (albeit, sometimes in odd ways) so building a combat monster is not too difficult. However, a lot of the tactics for those combat monsters wind up looking pretty similar, so it doesn't necessarily encourage particularly diverse gameplay (again, IME, and GURPS is very large). In a game like Vampire, tactical combat really isn't "a thing" so having light rules doesn't matter that often IME.
The three pillars are environment exploration, interactive story/dialogue, and tactical combat.
No, I don't mean that you cannot make a good tactical combat game with a skill-based system. As I wrote, if you have a classless system and you want a tactical focus, you really have to give a lot of attention to the combat mechanics/skills. JA2 clearly had a heavy focus on it and it worked very well. Of course, JA2's combat also had a pretty narrow focus. That's not a bad thing, but it's something to consider when things like magic, melee, and ranged combat are present.
Obsidian has now ~130 employees, reaching their highest point since ~early 2009 (And may even surpass if all the current open positions get filled)
Also I just found a new production intern one week before said employee even begins working at Obsidian. Even though that is thanks to the magic of twitter I think there might be a chance I'm getting creepy.
Update by Kazunori Aruga, Concept Artist, and Brandon Adler, you-know-what-I-do
Hello, backers. This week we are profiling another talented Concept Artist on Eternity, Kaz Aruga. While Kaz wears many artist hats his largest contributions are area and UI concepts. Enjoy.
Q: Hello, Kaz. What is your job on the Project Eternity team?
Before I start I want to quickly thank all you awesome peeps who backed our game. I wouldn't be here working on my dream project if it weren't for you all, so thank you for making this a reality!
I have two responsibilities on Project Eternity. The first is supplying the asset and environment teams with concept art. The second is producing art for the game's UI. I'm occasionally tasked with scripted interaction art and will start producing character portraits further down the road.
Q: What are you working on this week?
I've been tasked with inventory and character creation UI. *leaps away as a massive fireball of community UI rage engulfs the land*
But seriously, I appreciated the feedback you all gave us for the action bar and conversation UI. I've taken notes and been implementing ideas that are in alignment with our design goals. As a side note, being a fan of the IE games and having a lot of experience playing them has proven very useful as it helps me identify what worked and what didn’t. I'm sure we all have fond memories of shuffling piles of arrows between characters.
Q: What is your typical work day like on Project Eternity?
My day usually starts by fighting off Robs and Polinas to get to the Keurig coffee machine in our room. Consuming the glorious bean drink allows me access to all two neurons in my head, which I then rub together as hard as I can to start making artwork. My day varies a lot from this point based on the task I'm on. For character and environment work a good chunk of time will be devoted to gathering reference and inspiration, or doing homework on a specific subject. I'll then do a rough sketch pass which gets reviewed by the leads and other artists. When I'm on scripted interaction art I work closely with our designers Bobby and Jorge, and for UI I interface with our project lead Josh and Brian who is our programming intern.
Q: What are you most looking forward to on Project Eternity?
Just the fact that we can put an IE inspired game on the market is enough to get me excited. It's been long overdue. I'm looking forward to seeing all the hard work we are putting in coming together as one complete package, and seeing reactions of people playing the game!
Q: Which concept that you have done has been your favorite?
Artists are typically never happy with their own work. Next question!
I've enjoyed working on art for scripted interactions, and been pretty happy with the results. I've also been putting a lot of work into inventory UI recently and am happy with the results coming out of that.
Q: What other projects have you worked on?
Before this job I was up in San Francisco working as a texture artist on a television series called Star Wars: The Clone Wars. I've also done some matte painting work in the film industry.
Q: What do you like to do when you aren't chained to your desk by your producer?
My off time often includes episodes of Breaking Bad, Game of Thrones, a cold beer, and dual wielding our two resident cats Puddy Tat and Lil'Babs. They are the best. I also have an unhealthy and destructive relationship with Ramen. (No, not the vile instant noodles. How dare you call that Ramen!) Thankfully LA has an abundance of good shops to satisfying my craving.
Q: Do you have a favorite concept artist?
Here's a few that popped into my head. I'll link to their site and save you all a google search.
Q: And where do you draw your inspiration from?
Nature is a big one of course. I also think back on how blessed we are with powerful tools like Google image search. We don’t neglect traditional resources, but I honestly can't imagine working at our current pace without it.
Q: What's your favorite Infinity Engine game? Why?
BG1 for exploring the vast wilderness. I can still recall the music and hear the birds chirping in the distance. BG2 is a close 2nd for its story and companions. The only title I haven't finished is IWD2 which I am playing through currently, and I will say I'm enjoying the combat.
Q: Existential question of the day: Who are we and why are we?
We're just here, man. There's no why, everything just IS. You feel me?
Q: Anything else you would like to share?
Long live the glorious PC gaming master race. *lets out a nerdy war cry and bangs mouse and keyboard together*
That's it for this week. Hope you guys enjoyed getting closer look into what Kaz does for us. See you guys in a couple weeks.
Classes don't currently share any Abilities at all. If you're not a fighter, you're never going to be able to take Defender. If you're not a monk, you're never going to be able to take Transcendent Suffering. Some Talents can be taken by any class (e.g. the weapon style Talents), but many of them are class-specific (e.g. Grimoire Slam).
I disagree with your description of what we've said about the classes. We've repeatedly stated that fighters are extremely durable, reliable, and excel at holding positions, that rogues are the best single-target, single-hit damage dealers of any class (yes, significantly better than fighters), that monks are high-mobility melee status-infliction machines that use Wounds as an expendable resource, that wizards have high flexibility and, in addition to their traditional area-nuking abilities, have a variety of personal and single-target buffs.
We've also said that if you try to play a class completely against role, you can run into trouble. There's an important distinction between what you can build and how you play. We don't allow characters to take Talents that are effectively dead-ends for their class. You also gain Talents at about 1/3 the rate that you gain Abilities, so they comprise much less of your character's makeup. In 3E/3.5, a fighter is practically made of feats and you can really botch a character even playing in the pool of combat feats.
For comparison, in PE you can buy light magic Talents for your fighter that give the character some neat flexibility, but you can't completely redefine what the fighter fundamentally is. And if you buy a set of Talents, we aren't setting up long Talent chains like the feat chains that exist in 3/3.5 -- e.g. taking Whirwind Attack requires Combat Mobility, Dodge, Spring Attack, Dex 13, Int 13, and a +4 BAB. Our Talents have a flat layout with simple prereqs and are designed to be valuable on their own for any class that is allowed to take them. In 3E/3.5, it's really easy to build a low-efficiency fighter who isn't good at, well, fighting. A PE fighter can diversify a bit, but at his or her heart, he or she will still be great at doing the job that all fighters' Abilities prepare them to do: absorbing damage, hitting reliably, and holding ground.
Similarly, if you want to gish it up with a wizard, there are spells and Talents that can lean you in that direction, but you can't outlast a fighter or hold ground like they can and you can't reliably spike damage in melee round after round like a rogue can. Now, there are things that you, the melee wizard, can do in melee that the fighter and rogue can't. You can surround yourself with a big fiery shield and make illusory duplicates of yourself. Those differences are cool and why you would want to play a gish wizard over a fighter or rogue even though you ultimately can't do their "jobs". But because grimoires are designed for flexibility (because wizards are designed for flexibility), if you get tired of being the glowing Daffy Duck gish hopping all over the place or if you're in a situation where you can't even stand next to the melee big kids, you can switch to an AoE damage grimoire and be a "traditional" wizard. There's no dead end in playing as a gish (even though you will be challenged in other ways) and more importantly, your gish-emphasizing build options don't dramatically impact your ability to do regular wizardly things. You shouldn't reach a point in the game where you go, "Wow, I regret taking these Talents because this character can't do anything well."
In 3E/3.5, class roles are less well-defined and it's easy to build a character that is bad at any job -- whether it's their class' job or otherwise. In 4E, class roles are very well-defined almost to the point of being straight-jacketed. In building PE's classes, I found that trying to draw strictly within the lines of a class' role was limiting in a way that wasn't enjoyable -- and I didn't believe that players would find it enjoyable either. That's why I've tried to use the approach of making classes "role-ready" instead of "role-constrained". PE's characters of any class are always ready to fill their class role regardless of the Talents you've taken because their per-level class Abilities have a much more dominant influence on their overall capabilities. There are always efficiency gains to be made in how you build, but compared to 3E/3.5, the number of viable builds should be much higher.
Play-wise, if you want to put a monk in a tanking position or run a wizard around in melee, the rules aren't structured around building restrictions to discourage you from doing that. In many fights, it will be totally viable even if it's inefficient. In some circumstances or at higher difficulty levels, it will be more difficult to play in this way, but if you find that you need to "fall back" to standard roles, you should be able to do so because your character can't be fundamentally built contrary to his or her class.
Abilities are always granted by gaining levels in a class. I.e., they are ALWAYS class-specific and they are gained per-level.
Talents are a more general pool of optional goodies (some of which are still class-restricted) that you gain (currently) every three levels.
Edit: To use a D&D example, Wild Shape would be an Ability, Dodge would be a Talent. Only druids* gain Wild Shape, but any character class can take Dodge.
* I'm sure there's some other class in a splat book that will prove this wrong.
RE: Skills: PE's skill caps are more like Pathfinder's than 3E/3.5's. Regardless of how many skill points an individual rogue puts into Stealth or Mechanics, he or she will always have a bonus in those skills that other classes don't have (Pathfinder requires a rank in each class skill for the bonus, but it's similar otherwise). A rogue who neglects those skills may be running on par (or below, if neglected enough) with a fighter who specifically maxes them out, but a character who focuses on the skills their class gains bonuses to will always be ahead of a character of the same level from a class that does not gain bonuses in that skill.
Probably an easier way to explain it: all characters have the same number of skill points per level and the same access to skills. However, every class has a few skills in which they receive a constant bonus -- always and forever.
0
Options
FandaHang a shining starupon the highest boughRegistered Userregular
Q: Anything else you would like to share?
Long live the glorious PC gaming master race. *lets out a nerdy war cry and bangs mouse and keyboard together*
Kaz is working on the inventory UI. The icons below the portrait are "mine" (i.e. just placeholders) and represent (top) Stamina, Health, Main Hand Accuracy, Off-Hand Accuracy and (bottom) the four defenses: Deflection, Fortitude, Reflexes, and Psyche. Of course, it's still a work in progress.
In terms of layout, the closest comparison is probably Athkatla. Our cities have a number of distinct (large) districts with their own thematic style, sets of interiors, and unique quests/content. They are set up to be easy to navigate, both physically (pathing) and visually. Generally there's an exit from each district along each side of the map, so backtracking isn't necessary if you just want to move to another district. There are exceptions -- e.g. Ondra's Gift, which contains the docks, can't be exited via hopping over the levee and into the ocean -- but we try to make navigation and exploration enjoyable. In terms of layout, the closest comparison is probably Athkatla. Our cities have a number of distinct (large) districts with their own thematic style, sets of interiors, and unique quests/content. They are set up to be easy to navigate, both physically (pathing) and visually. Generally there's an exit from each district along each side of the map, so backtracking isn't necessary if you just want to move to another district. There are exceptions -- e.g. Ondra's Gift, which contains the docks, can't be exited via hopping over the levee and into the ocean -- but we try to make navigation and exploration enjoyable.
Some of the classic auto-pause settings got new sub-options. E.g. "Enemy Spotted" now has a sub-option to halt the party when the pause is triggered. We also put in a few new ones like Extraordinary Defense which will come up when a PC's attack's pre-roll Accuracy is 50+ points below the enemy's corresponding defense. So if you take a bunch of 2nd level scrubs and start hurling standard melee attacks at a 7th level fighter with a large shield (i.e., super-high Deflection), it's probably going to pause right after your first attack and give you feedback indicating your chances of hitting the guy are really, really bad.
As an anecdote, I was recently doing tuning in a dungeon area where there were relatively narrow halls (not too bad, but not wide-open) with high-level fighters + large shields and casters behind them. I dogpiled the entire party with standard attacks on the enemy fighters and the dudes would not die. Even if I grazed them, their Constant Recovery would wipe out most of the pitiful damage pretty quickly. If I tried to walk away from them, they would stave my head in with a Disengagement Attack (fighters' DAs tend to be extraordinarily accurate/bad news). The caster behind them was chucking out a slow-moving line spell that fries enemies and heals allies, so that was sweet. I had no rogue (so no Escape), no monk (so no Rooting Pain), no barbarian (so no Wild Sprint), no flails to offset the shield's Deflection bonus. My wizard had Deflection-based spells or Reflex-based AoEs that would blast half the party. I had to use the cleric to light them up with a single-target Reflex-based spell that lowered their Deflection, then keep hammering them with the cipher's Psyche-based attacks.
We're still doing a looooooooooooooot of tuning (and will be for the rest of the project), but it's good to see the classes presenting these challenges and it's fun to use the given party's composition to come up with a solution using what we have.
The basic concepts/arcs for the companions are defined but we will be doing their writing later in the development cycle because it gives us more flexibility to respond to game content that already exists.
Hey Ropekid, I'm curious as to how you're thinking about handling equipment with the classes. What I mean is, for instance, will PE Rogues be assumed to be dual-wielding Daggers (classic Rogue) or could you equip a Greatsword and pump Str to dish out some sick sneak attacks? (a neat Pathfinder build).
Similarly with Fighters, say: are they optimized for sword and board or is two-handed/two-weapon/one-weapon Dualist-style viable?
I understand that not all equipment is equal and that, for running up and tanking the BBEG a sword and board is the best option, just wondering how much leeway there is.
BONUS QUESTION: What class would make the best Dualist/Swashbuckler and how viable would a lower damage, dodgy Dex melee fighter be?
Loving this game already.
PE rogues work best when they are using melee or missile weapons at close range, but they can use any "style". No matter what weapons they use, they do a lot of damage, crit more than other characters given the same Accuracy, and have Abilities to immediately spike damage if the circumstances are right. If you really want to do a ton of damage in one hit, a two-handed weapon like a pollaxe, estoc, or morning star is the way to go. If you want to do a bit more damage over time and have a more regular damage output, dual-wielding is the way to do it. If you find yourself in a situation where you're getting subjected to a lot of melee attacks, by all means, equip a shield.
Yes, for a fighter to be extra-fightery, a shield is great and can put his or her Deflection into the stratosphere. However, you may be in a situation where a) enemies aren't attacking your Deflection, but some other defense (e.g. druids can cast Flaming Brand and make melee attacks against Reflex) b) skyrocketing your Deflection isn't as important as doing more damage or c) enemies have shield-defeating attacks like flails. In the case of a) your shield gets you nothing and in the case of b) or c) it may make sense to equip a two-handed weapon or to dual-wield.
Specific weapon choice can also matter. E.g. if your enemies have shields, you might want to use a flail (or flails -- dual-wielding flails is one of my favorite things). If your rogue is getting squished in direct melee, use a pike (you can attack from farther away). If your enemies have annoying armor, use stilettos or an estoc (they negate a flat value of DT).
RE: Monks and fists: it's not really a matter of realism; I just don't want to make another class of weapons just to support what is ultimately a niche weapon type for one class. The idea behind monks is that they are the bare-fisted brawlers, so that's their "deal". Other characters can fight with fists, but they don't gain bonuses with them and they have a pretty huge array of other weapons to choose from.
Our flails are one-handed handle + ball and chain weapons. Our morning stars are two-handed long-shafted weapons with a fixed, spiked head.
We're probably going to give you increased Accuracy if you fight with a single one-handed weapon sans shield.
Heavier armors do come with their own drawbacks (currently, attack/action speed). We're not being simulationist about armor/weapon statistics. Also, armor absorbs damage and that function is separate from the four defenses (Deflection, Fortitude, Reflexes, Psyche) which are the targets to hit.
The technology of the Dyrwood (and nearby Vailian Republics) is 16th century, with a few exceptions. Glanfathans are at Early Middle Ages tech but have no problem using the more advanced technology of their neighbors. Though really, our own history is really "mix and match". People continued using outclassed/old-fashioned weapons and armor long after new tech had been invented (though often, they got their asses kicked).
Escape is an active-use ability, not something that's reflexively triggered by someone attacking. It also can only be used once per-encounter, so that limits how easily a rogue can shake a persistent attacker. The ideal use of Escape is against a fighter as long as the rogue has somewhere to go. A barbarian could (if he or she hasn't already used it) Wild Sprint to catch back up to the rogue, but that is a dangerous game to play for a barbarian. They have a lot of Stamina, but their Deflection is low and rogues crit easily. Barbarians also don't excel at single-target damage, so once the barbarian is on the rogue, math is often not in the barbarian's favor. Trying to Escape from a monk may be the most futile effort. Monks are inherently faster, their Deflection is average, they turn damage into Wounds to power active-use abilities, and many of those active-use abilities inflict status effects that target Fortitude or Psyche (rogues' worst defenses).
Some people aren't fans of our overall Attribute design, which I've focused on always providing benefits to characters of any class even if that means the Attributes aren't very realistic. If you want to make a Strength-based rogue, that's viable. So is a Strength-based wizard, an Intellect-based barbarian, etc. As with taking Talents, you may be de-emphasizing some core aspect of your character by using a non-traditional Attribute array, but there aren't class/attribute combos that are fundamentally bad.
The game will end if the protagonist actually capital-d Dies, but otherwise he or she can go down and get back up like other party members.
Wizards, druids, priests, ciphers, and even chanters all have levels of spells/prayers/powers/phrases/etc.
Also portraits will be head and shoulders BG style. Reason
Yeah, we're doing head and shoulders portraits because it will allow us to do many more of them. Also, it's generally easier for players to match a portrait to a variety of character concepts if the body/equipment isn't visible. The IWD/2 "knees-up" portraits were cool but very time-consuming. On IWD, it took almost all of Jason Manley's time on the project just to generate the portraits.
I can't go into too much detail about specific districts. The top right image shows a district that is fairly preserved since colonial times, making it one of the older parts of the city. It boarders a river and is actually built below the water level, with a large levee protecting the district. The last description was added after the sketch, which is why you see the streets above water level in the picture.
Furism and Scorchy from SA made a nice dev tracker, it doesn't stalk yet on the same level of quality as me, but it's a nice thing to have for a fast look at info
We're still developing magic. I can say that wizard spells are the most expansive of any class' Abilities. Wizards currently have a 4th level spell called Minor Arcane Reflection that is effectively Spell Turning. They also have a 4th level spell called Minor Grimoire Imprint that allows them to temporarily "steal" spells from an enemy's grimoire and cast them for free. We'll probably be implementing more wacky wizard spells as time goes by. We started with the classics like Spell (Magic) Missile, Fireball, Crackling (Lightning) Bolt, etc.
and other stuff (Chanters are pretty cool)
I realized a while ago we have a fairly eclectic group of artists and animators. Polina (Bulgaria), Dimitri (Siberia), Antonio (Mexico), Kaz (Japan). It's starting to look like an XCOM squad.
Chanters can absolutely do other things while chanting. They have good Stamina/Health, balanced defenses, and balanced melee/ranged Accuracy. Also, as their phrases tick over, they generate the ability to unleash Roars, which are powerful active-use (often offensive) abilities. Chanters are meant to mix it up in standard weapon combat and periodically unleash super slams.
If they were like bards in 2nd Ed. AD&D, they would wind up the same way: unplayed. Chanters don't play instruments. All of their power comes from using ancient literary phrases or idioms to awaken the memories of lost soul fragments around them. I'm trying to make them beefy enough to contribute to front-line combat even if they aren't doing anything dazzling outside of their Roars.
Yeah, you can make "adventurers" and keep them hanging around or in your party just like companions. The only things player-made adventurers lack are story integration/reaction dialogue.
Posts
Also, I doubt they are involved in the Mistborn RPG. I was expecting some information of it by now.
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
I would love a Deadlands RPG, especially if Obsidian made it.
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
If there's glob trotting involved, Western and Victorian are not mutually exclusive.
Hell, you could throw in samurai, Thuggee and kung fu masters, and it would still be period accurate.
Eternity Project
I REGRET KICKSTARTING THIS PRODUCT
VERY MAD RIGHT NOW
I WANTED LACQUER INLAY
:P
(If anyone wonders. Grimoires DO differ in appearance compared to each other. Just like other weapons)
Let's see KaliYama's grimoire. Look at that subtle off-white coloring. The tasteful thickness of it. Oh my god. It even has a watermark.
Is something wrong, @Surrealitycheck? You're sweating.
Also, Big Head Mode is in...
Obsidian has now ~130 employees, reaching their highest point since ~early 2009 (And may even surpass if all the current open positions get filled)
Also I just found a new production intern one week before said employee even begins working at Obsidian. Even though that is thanks to the magic of twitter I think there might be a chance I'm getting creepy.
Just a little one though.
Anyway, have her portfolio
http://whoiskatrina.com/
I don't think Monks have the ability to be as sticky to the badguys as a Fighter tank will be, since they'll lack the melee engagement-type powers.
Steam: Elvenshae // PSN: Elvenshae // WotC: Elvenshae
Wilds of Aladrion: [https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/comment/43159014/#Comment_43159014]Ellandryn[/url]
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA
Also portraits will be head and shoulders BG style. Reason
http://pedevtracker.azurewebsites.net/
and other stuff (Chanters are pretty cool)
Also this
Good thing we can abbreviate. :P
The only thing missing at the end is "WE DID THIS KICKSTARTER THANKS TO AN 84 IN METACRITIC".
Too much?
"We have years of struggle ahead, mostly within ourselves." - Made in USA