Quiconque

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but the author depicts Litalia as swinging wildly between extremes: her goals are completely different in each game, her alliances completely different, and her emotional presentation is totally different. (And of course, she spent more time with canisters than any other major human character in the series.) Whether or not the author's views changed, there can be zero question that Litalia was depicted as an unstable character. So, the suggestion isn't that she lied -- indeed I don't think she did. The suggestion is that her memories are not stable or reliable. She implies as much herself.

Yet another reason why it is ridiculous to take Litalia's ever-shifting accounts at face value. Yes, obviously we know their reaction will, for a while, be their usual exterminatory one. But fast forward to the state of the war in G4, where there have been real losses and Shaper society is totally deformed by the war effort. The Shapers had already been willing to violate core tenets of their strict regulations in order to have a better chance at defeating the Rebels, with their new creations, for example. In G4, they are happy to accept even a geneforged servile as their ally. If they are willing to that, I see no reason why they wouldn't be willing to call things off when faced with an enemy who doesn't want to fight them and for whom the historical record really backs that up. You may have a more sympathetic view towards some of the Drayks after you finish the series. I agree that letting the Barzites join is weird; maybe it's just some of the Barzites? Given the way things happened in G2, perhaps not all of their members have animus towards creations?

The endings all have the same blurb about the door, except the Taker ending which specifies it is "the final creation of Easss." Since you've played G3, you can probably figure out what this is: it's Ghaldring, or I guess, his egg or something.

So, what I was saying to Triumph before, when it was spoilersville for you, about an unusual and potential successful ending, was in reference to the Awakened. To wit:

Yeah, Lilith's advice is solid. There is little to be gained, and more to be lost, by splitting your points into 2 different attack stats.

I don't mean to derail the thread, but think there are some important distinctions here between 1) "pay once for more of the product" -- which is the core idea of shareware, or of demos, expansions, and DLC 2) "pay continuously for more functionality" -- which is the freemium model being discussed 3) "pay an unlimited amount for a competitive advantage" -- which is also freemium, I guess, but is more specifically free-to-play or pay-to-win While Discord's model is technically category B and technically a "premium", it is clearly designed to be unnecessary and not something anyone gets pushed into. You're paying for a few very specific, mostly visual features, like having an animated avatar. Also, and unrelated to Discord: just because you're paying for a service doesn't mean your data isn't being sold.

Well, that explains a few things, I suppose...

Potentially benign, anyway. I don't think that's a given.

Free services that the service provider is mining in some way are still free. I think there is room for a second chat option. All personal feelings aside, sy's sw-ish chatroom is not something that can be offered to the whole, broad, "family friendly" Spiderweb audience, simply due to language/topic norms. I don't think those norms are a bad thing, btw, I just think there is room for a more universal option.

Go for it.

Unfortunately, "fishing at the edges" is exactly what the pros do. This is one of a few interface issues that gets discussed with every new Spiderweb release, but that have persisted for years. I assume that Spiderweb knows about them and that there just isn't an easy answer given the way they have things set up. It really is too bad. On the plus side, you do get used to it, at least somewhat, after a while.

You're fine. You would know if this bug had struck you because every new container object you opened (in new zones) would have nothing in it.

Welcome to the Spiderweb forums! (I split this post off because the old topic was both very, very old, and had been a little contentious, so let's let that remain in the past.)

By "error message" Lilith means an error in the text console, by the way, not a dialogue box or anything. The cause is unknown. It definitely happened more in certain games (Avernum 4 especially) and Jeff said at one point he fixed it -- which seems to have made it much less likely to occur, though it still does, so presumably he fixed one possible origin. One thing we know can cause it (doesn't usually, but can) is use of certain shift-D codes that were intended for testing purposes only and may not load/save zones the same way regular code does. In particular, "backtostart" can cause this in certain games (like A4).

There is a limit to the number of items the game will save in each zone -- I think 255, but I don't remember precisely. This includes items that start out there as well as whatever you drop, enemies you kill drop on the floor, etc. So if you go past that, stuff may just disappear. You CAN safely drop a lot of stuff in the ground in one area for storage, just not everything.

Yes; you'll notice I suggested the southern road. And that's a good reason not to be telling other players they've "cleared up most of the game" when you don't really know that

Look up "Shaman Liese" here: http://spiderwebforums.ipbhost.com/index.php?/topic/22363-avadon-3-item-location-and-quest-list-massive-spoilers/ As you can see there are multiple parts to the quest. If you kill Shezass at the beginning, you'll miss out on the later parts of the quest. (Also, to correct what I said earlier, he doesn't actually give quests himself, but one of the quests for Liese requires completing a task for Shezass.)

Experimental Valley is definitely not in Taker lands; it sounds like the OP has half the game left to explore. Check out this map: http://murrp.myartsonline.com/geneforge/2gene_map.html You'll note there are a few different ways west. Did you try the route south of Experimental Valley? Keep in mind that the in-game map only displays zone exits that you have actually found in-game.

He also gives quests. I remember there being a material reason not to kill him immediately; I don't remember if it was because of the person who gave the quests, or because he gives some quest later in the game. Re scarabs: yes, that is unchanged.

And before you say that part was in response to my comment: the stuff I was talking about typically involves someone who's not being addressed at all (and is generally not even a participant in the thread) making the complaint.

Is there a difference between bad game design and game design that players do not like? Just degree of consensus? "Players" are not a monolithic entity with a single unitary opinion. A game that one player enjoys, may not be what another player enjoys. This, obviously, is why there are different types of games; different genres, different styles, different -- different everythings. If "good game design" is simply defined as "highest degree of positive consensus" on an elemental level, then "good game design" will gravitate, like a rudimentary neural net, towards meaninglessly common, inoffensive denominators. No, we have more analytical ability and more insight than that. We can talk about "good design" and "bad design" while acknowledging that no design (good or bad) will be liked by all players.

It's different in different scripts. It depends on a few different factors -- if it is set up to have the companions interact or not; and also how many paragraphs of text are in the text node to begin with.

Usually the game will only display dialogue for 2 companions no matter what. And no, it doesn't track who you take on missions at all.

Yeah, that makes sense. I will say, however, that the RPG label definitely applies to both categories. This isn't a case of mislabeled genres. That's just how "RPG" is used when it comes to computer and video games.

I want to highlight this point because it comes up on these forums all the freaking time. People talk about strategy or tactics -- perhaps making suggestions or talking about optimizing numbers -- and then somebody else complains about some variation of "you are telling us we're playing wrong." It's a straw man argument and I wish everyone would stop doing it.