Jump to content
Double Fine Action Forums

Lightknight77

DFA Backers
  • Content Count

    202
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lightknight77

  • Rank
    Unholy Action Forum Commander
  1. Is there any potential reason why they haven't responded to this? It kind of seems like important information for us bloodline backers to know. But maybe they haven't quite decided on those specifics yet or something?
  2. It's not that they wouldn't care that it's just a game. It's that these are families marrying eachother for the same reason royal families used to marry anyways. To acquire power. It isn't trying to breed out a trait or race. Even if it was I'm not sure people would particularly care unless it was telling us to apply those practices to real life (impacting people even more). Here's a question though, let's say two bards marry and their child is a much more powerful bard. Is the child more powerful because they were born with genetically advanced fingers or just because they learned from skilled family members? Anyways, the premise of your thread is that there is an inevitable backlash coming. I simply don't see why to expect that. Maybe if Brad actually has four real-life families trapped in his basement to test the game in real life. Then sure, there'd be a backlash.
  3. I don't think people could care less. At all. Besides, you could just choose to see the advantages of marrying two families as gaining access to more advanced training that is what makes them better rather than inherent ability. But frankly I just don't think people care about it. They aren't breeding out a race or murdering the handicapped for eugenics. They're just making good matches with families. Maybe if it's a really slow work day for a media center and perhaps if they've hired Jack Thompson as a writer. But then that'd just be one guy.
  4. The link does not properly save in IE 9 at least. Switched to firefox where it now successfully saves. Any update on how the names are going to be reflected in the original house in game? Are they going to be siblings/married and will there be any opporunities to name the offspring or is that purely random?
  5. I'd also like to know more about what to expect about the initial family setup. I don't want my wife and myself to show up as brother/sister and I'm wondering about the ability to name offspring, if that's even an option. As a bloodline backer, I'm really just waiting on this kind of information before hitting the submit button.
  6. So, I've got my bloodline designed and ready to go. I have a question that will impact the names of the founding members. Do I have the opportunity to name subsequent offspring of the founders? How is it going to work? Do we start with the two founding members mentioned and then subsequent names are randomized. Are they husband/wife or something else like one of the other threads indicated (siblings)?
  7. Afford? The coat of arms were simplistic and easy to reproduce over and over again. I mean, look it can even naturally fit the general design of some of the things already there: Their reason for not doing this is based on aesthetic design, not cost. Type in your last name into google and then add the words "coat of arms" at the end. Congratulations, you now have a family history and coat of arms with the site likely trying to sell you a print of it. There's actually a huge demand for coat of arms. Entire companies dedicated to creating them and otherwise describing personal history.The request was for the basic traditional profile of animals. Like lions in a rampart position which is the most common. A lion, gryphon, and maybe one or two others. There are countless of uncopywritten examples that can be gleaned for so it wouldn't have been difficult. The fact that I've run a basic google search and found my lineage shouldn't somehow diminish my vote for such a feature. However, let's face it, the editor is out and we're not going to get a chance to resubmit. So it's not going to happen.
  8. Right, and hopefully you can understand why those of us that paid for the bloodline backer level to "immortalize" our family line in a game by double fine would actually want the option to put in our actual coat of arms or something vaguely resembling it. It's disappointing but I do understand where you're coming from, I just wish there was a way your team could have included this option by designing the traditional animal profiles in a way that looks like the other game designs I'm already seeing. Even the main image chosen for the kickstarter of the game is two guy's profiles facing eachother.
  9. Here's an example of traditional coat of arms types that seem to follow more in-line with the art theme here. Though this one is definitely copywritten. (just the creatures inside, not the whole thing)
  10. Hmm, still wanting to see animal profiles available like with traditional coat of arms. That is what this is, after all, a family coat of arms. Most commonly lions, griffons, horses and such. These traditional images aren't even copy written so it shouldn't be hard to find. Lion (yes, I know the family name here is Griffith) Griffon I get that the goal here is a more simplified artistic style but hopefully something can be done.
  11. Any of the typical animal positions from traditional coat of arms. Like lions/griffons/etc facing each other or by themselves. Fortunately there's only like six positions that the animals would ever have been placed in so it could be a relatively quick addition.
  12. Great, I was really concerned I'd missed this.
  13. Hello, I'm a bloodline backer and I'm happy I saw this thread. I'd really like to see some coat of arms. For example, this is my family's coat of arms. If this could actually somehow make it into the game (perhaps without the name banner to make it universal) I would be amazed.
  14. BA had better be a commercial success. You do realize that DF has been pouring profit from other games into this every step of the way? If the project had been within budget (and I completely understand why it wasn't) then it wouldn't have been so important. But as is, it actually needs to at least help them break even with every additional dollar they spent. I don't know how it's performing right now sales-wise but hopefully that's not too far away. That being said, what constitutes a commercial success here? This was such a large scale project that the lessons learned alone would constitute a success at the break-even point. However, would a break-even discourage DF from ever trying this kind of project again? At this point, would it require it to be a financial success to match the funds they contributed? I don't know, only they know that. It looks like they're trying to get to a point where they can safely self-publish which would be wonderful. If BA were a huge commercial success, it would potentially make DF a self-publisher which means great things for us considering their love of making games. But I suppose getting them there right now isn't as important as making sure they survive well past this project. There's a lot more public scrutiny than any development company should have to deal with. Thousands of individuals, mostly well meaning, who claw at the development and their PR reps tirelessly for details. You just saw DF announce that they were simply releasing one half of the project early. The media almost imploded at that news and painted all kinds of nonsensical garbage across the web about misuse of funds and all other silly things when an early release of half to help fund the end doesn't mean the project is failed. Any single failure is a huge PR issue and every development cycle is going to have small problems that the media will latch onto as a failure even if it isn't. It can be bad from a PR perspective. This time it was a mixed bag because it also gave up front capital generated by PR and buzz over the success of the project and bad because of the scrutiny. The best case scenario for DF will be if they get to a point where they can fully self-publish their games. Then it's just a matter of them accurately gauging market interest in the game before beginning development to avoid losing their hats.
  15. You don't have to stack the deck with such questions. Of course anyone selecting no is a loser.
×
×
  • Create New...