More character options is pretty much always a good thing. Even if I don't use many of them it is cool to have stuff there for people that want them and it doesn't hurt my game play in any way to have them there and not use them.

Politics in a game like this is fine. I just hope they treat it in a complex way with many different view points represented and some player agency in how they react to it and make choices.

That would be nice but, I'm not holding my breathe. Political input in BL1 was pretty one sided and simplistic. From the statements I heard, that will continue. However, as was said, we'll just have to wait (more then a year! :) ).

At this stage I'm more concerned with the fact that the only trailer we have so far doesn't even have gameplay footage. Sure it's more than a year away (the teasing bastards!), but games such as this take a lot of effort, and I would have expected some gameplay by now...

BL1 "politics" was simplistic, but the player did have the option of "joining" the Anarchs or not - which didn't change much except for some minor dialogues, sure, and it was only near the end we make an actual "choice" (not including minor choices during quests, which allowed one to be more or less good/evil in a way).

It sounds like there will be separate quest paths for each clan this time around, which is promising. Unfortunately that will likely tie in with the Paradox way of releasing "games" as a bare-bones core game followed by 100s of DLC packs.

I do not agree. My main problem with Witcher 2 & Witcher 3 is not having an option to see all content in 1 playthru. I replay BL1 once 1-2 years and I'm very glad that all clans can get all the quests in any playthru. This whole idea with limiting some quests to specific clans are bullshit in my book. Give different clan different means to resolve a quest - now that's great.

We had a miscommunication. I wasn't referring to the game mechanics politics but rather the side comments coming from the radio and individual comments by various NPCs which are basically socialist/anti-capitalist in nature.
Yeah, Paradox does like to milk one for extra content that should have been in a completed game at a single cost. For me, it likely means waiting years until there are package deals.
Certain quests are limited in BL1 by clan. I too like the idea of different quests per clan as that gives a real reason for playing each clan rather then one over and over like so many do in BL1. They can still do that but the curiosity aspect makes playing other clans more intriguing and keeps the game fresh.

That was indeed only changed by the plus UP, as I see this the same way as you do :)!

Good to hear it! :)
And thank you very much for UP patches! It's great to see good game staying alive.
Oh, and btw - what was the last UP version when any clan had all the quests? Because I replay BL not very often I got confused .

To each his own (if I spelled it right :) ) But I stand by my choice - it's far better to have an option to replay a familiar big adventure, than to play a short unfamiliar one.
I played BL1 many times and it's no longer holds any freshness for me, but I will replay it many times more because it has a long atmospheric story.

In the latest plus versions of the patch, 10.3, all clans can do all the quests. It pretty much were only two quests anyway: Nosferatu couldn't do the Lily quest and thus had their own CD quest. Which annoyed me a lot when I found the CD with my Toreador and didn't know what it was for! So I changed that and to balance I added the option to send Patty to Vandal, as she knows about Nosferatu anyway.

Ah, so that's the way things are now. Execellent! Time for new install is now :)

"It" is not the right pronoun to use. There is a long-established one, however, that is appropriate: "they".

Yeah I know, I was mainly being an asshole.

Seriously though, I heard that although "they" does exist and has been used in this context previously, I was under the impression it was still being debated and hadn't been settled as the "correct" pronoun either? I've heard talk of strange made-up words being put forward (but also not agreed on), such as "xer" or something...

To clarify: the usage you indicated (confirmed by the link) is in common use where the gender isn't known (most often where the identity of the person isn't known, as it's neater to say/write than he/she, for example). This is distinct from someone self-identifying as gender neutral (although it has been used in that context, it's not "settled" as far as I'm aware).

"Debated" for around 70 years, give or take a few: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/singular-nonbinary-they
Overall it's more "correct" in the linguistic sense than defining strange new pronouns that in practice nobody but the interested party will know or use correctly in the first place

For Bloodlines, I fully agree with your reasoning.

And in general, I guess I do too - especially for longer games, since the longer a game is, the less often I'll replay it. Especially if most of the content is pretty much the same, with only a handful of quests added/removed - even more so if it means some clans get additional quests while others just miss out (which is how Bloodlines was originally if I'm not mistaken).

However, for Bloodlines 2 my impression is you'll be able to "choose" your clan affiliation as you play. If each clan then has separate quest lines, this would make some kind of sense. This kind of thing worked really well in Age of Decadence, where you could generally only join one faction at a time, leading to significant differences in quests as well as locations in some cases. AoD was also a relatively short game (for a single playthrough), so it was designed to be replayed multiple times from that start - so that helped. All play throughs could technically do all of the additional side content every time, but that made up < 50% of the game (give or take)...
I wasn't aware of the 70-year history around this though, thanks for the info.

I fully agree that it makes the most sense in this context too - it's already used in a very similar context without issue (and has been for some time), so this would be the least disruptive to both grammar and people's sensibilities. Which is of course why hard-core SJWs will insist on making up something new just for themselves, then carry on as if this is what the entire LGBT community really wants.

Some interesting background info on this, when I restored the CD quest that was Nosferatu only in the original game, I noticed that the Malkavian answers were already there so at one point this quest had been available to all clans! I would guess that rather by accident Troika became aware that Nosferatu can't do some quest due to their looks, so they took this quest to balance that out. As I found another way for Nosferatu to do the Vandal quest by sending Patty instead of Danielle, restoring this seemed only logical...