No, obviously the best solution is to wait and see the results then decide whether it's worth the money but going around and call people transphobes, racists etc which happens pretty regularily when political arguments happens here is actually doing exactly the same thing you are criticizing other people for only difference is that you arguing from the opposite standpoint, bit hypocritical.

I don't like one sided politication of games either and that's because i don't need other people trying to teach me my own values but yes i would wait until i was certain that it is included in the game before criticizing it.

Well, I didn't mean to side with that behavior just because I didn't single it out specifically and only addressed the article. I actually agree with you there.

Don't worry i understand that and i also expect the same from both sides, criticizing something you don't like is perfectly fine but it should be done with facts and objectivity.

Jesus Fucking Cthulhu!

I expected to find comments criticizing Paradox as a publisher, didn't expected to find comments criticizing modern identity politics on this thread. Thankfully, seems they are minority...

This is what White Wolf has been like even before the original company went bankrupt years ago. What's funny is they never got the message, so they're staying woke and getting worse by the day, so imagine how converged this game will be at release.

This Game Should Be Online Multi Player In Online World.

To me, done right = done in a way that makes the game more interesting. done wrong = done in a way that serves only to add extra busywork or make the game worse in some other way.

In particular, for weapon durability to make sense:
* It should actually be used as a limiting factor, and not just for "realism".
* Items that can break (or otherwise have limited uses) need to be significantly better than options that don't involve using such resources. (In particular, one needs to compare it to unarmed attacks and magic, two things which typically don't break in games (though magic often has a limit on its use).)

Good examples would be Fire Emblem (everything has limited uses) and SaGa 1/2 (again, everything is limited, and skills that recharge at the inn are weaker than those that don't). Bad examples would include SaGa Frontier 2 (there are plenty of infinite durability weapons, and they tend to be stronger than the finite durability weapons, defeating the point) and the Elder Scrolls series (more powerful items have so much durability that they're unlikely to break, making the mechanic meaningless). I can't think of any games that have the reverse issue, though perhaps SaGa 1/2 can come close with physical attacks being both limited and (usually) inferior to magic.

That link redirects to the homepage of the site, which makes it useless (and I actually consider this to be worse than a 404 error).

Agree on all of the above, except the escort missions - escorts in World of Darkness - well, I think their escorting will be of a different kind ;)

WOW! Talk about coming out of left field!

But those prices/editions... looks like I'll be waiting for a good long while until sales roll in, plus there's no upgrade paths just full-on $60-$90 editions, but still, it will eventually make it into my library!

Here's the link again then: https://kek.gg/u/Cksc.

Considering the revelations outlined in the article, I won't be buying this game, or renting it.

As technically flawed as Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines was, it was a masterpiece of writing, atmosphere, sound ambience, development, satyres, and it stayed truthful to the PnP RPG (with a few minor liberties). Once I saw that Bloodlines 2 was announced I almost had a heart attack of excitment; however, after seeing a few interviews I'm skeptical.

Having Brian Mitsoda as a writer and Chris Avellone working on some unannounced part of it is great news, however, they picked Cara Ellison as the lead writer from what it seems and it couldn't have been worse; your usual Kotaku outrage culture style journalist who cares more about virtue signalling than the quality in her work. That was a red flag on itself, but then they went ahead on the interview and spoke ill of the original Bloodlines just to score points with the woke brigade. It seems like Bloodlines 2 won't tackle on things like Malkavians exploiting people with disorders, or sex workers on the streets and a rampant urban sex culture, or even cracking jokes on the lifestyles and setting because that according to them was "untasteful" which is a shame; Vampire is not about safe spaces, it is about a pretty messed up satyrical reality.

To add to the insult, the game is being published by Paradox and already has a bunch of pre-order DLCs available. If that wasn't bad enough, it's being developed by a company with no track record regarding RPGs (Hardsuit Labs), and although I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt (because everyone starts somewhere), I'm not very optimistic about Bloodlines 2.

It is really a shame that after 15 years this may be just a identity politics filled game with very obvious "good and bad" propaganda instead of the moral grayness that should be present in the World of Darkness universe. It's also worrying that they picked Hardsuit to develop it. Vampire is dependent on world politics, I am aware of that, but the way they seem to be tackling it is more of a forced, pandering way that fits their narrative and limits the freedom that its world could have rather than a way that benefits the story and settings, and that is what worries me.

I gotta give it to them though, making it DRM-free, mod friendly (it'll have mod support and all), and not dealing with exclusivity bullcrap scores positive points in my book, so even though there are a few things I'm not very happy about, I'm definitely happy about a few othe things.

I will wait and see how it plays and what kind of content it has before deciding it isn't worth it, but I'm not as excited as I was initially; I do hope I'm proven wrong and that the game turns out to be great, I'd really love that.

Here's a less hostile article about the same topic (with other information) about the game:
https://www.vg247.com/2019/03/21/vampire-the-masquerade-bloodlines-2-political-character-creator/

In any case, how is giving the player more options a bad thing? (Assuming the options don't introduce bugs, of course, and that they don't unbalance gameplay, which the sort of options mentioned in these articles aren't expected to.)

84.99 AUD. Standard edition...Bit pricey for a digital copy...

Because you're thinking of these 'options' as though this is Obsidian or Troika we're talking about. Paradox is not that kind of developer; these kinds of 'options' are SJW wanking material and will prove to be nothing else come release.

Pretending otherwise is being too generous, and I'd advise you to look at the recent Vampire books and PDFs if you need proof that this is just virtue signaling and identity politics.

Late EDIT: I don't read VG247 articles. One Angry Gamer already covered what was in that interview, and what they spoke of was little more than ego stroking for an audience that doesn't play RPGs, just poison them.

I don't mind the politics being in a game...

If they write a good story.

I liken it to the difference between Firefly and (post-Trump) Supergirl.

Both have plenty of politics in them, but one is a great story with a moral to it while the other is third-rate Tumblr fan-fic that does its best to club people over the head with their politics.

The sad thing was I thought it had a lot of potential in the first season, and I was excited for CW to get it and roll the series into their DC lineup, but then the election happened and everyone seemed to lose their minds.

Even if I agree with what you're saying such a heavy-handed approach to moralizing through your medium drives me up the wall.