I wish to address this, as it's a good question.
It's true that not everything that someone propose is feasible, but if it is done else where, why would it be so hard to do here? It's not that we have to do it exactly how they did, but if the idea is good, and obviously there is something over there that must be good.
There are many answers to such a question: If it works there, why not here? There can be many answers to such a question, but the question itself can be seen as an over-simplification. I'll elaborate if someone wishes, but for now it would detract from this response.
While we cannot discount the effort to develop and balance such a system, which make no mistake is fairly far-reaching in scope, there is actually a more limiting factor at work here. And I am speaking generically, not just about this idea in particular.
We've stated before that our palette is rather full, and our modules have bounced off of some rather annoying hard limits in the NWN system now more than once. Adding new systems, complete with all the new scripts, NPCs, tokens, items dialogs and whatever else takes up valuable space. It is somewhat impossible to determine the exact impact on resources until something like this is fully implemented. At that point, it can come down to a choice: Do we sacrifice something old, tried and tested for something new and speculative? I don't have an answer for that question. It's not something that is necessarily an easy yes/no sort of answer.
If it came to it, what would we be willing to give up? Shall we trim down the crafting system and what can be made? Shall we thin out the diversity of the unique and interesting items in our drop lists?
Does this mean there will be nothing new? No, it doesn't. However, we have to weigh more factors than just "is it a good idea?" and "will people like this?" and "will the world benefit from it?"
Well why can't we try to implement it and see if it brings in more people? If not, well we added somethings to the existing player, if a vast majority think they don't like it after trying it, then yank it out. You don't gain anything, if you don't try.
Agreed in concept, but when we're resource-strained (and I'm including the human resource in that as well) it's a gamble, and for larger systems, just "yanking it out" is kind of a real demoralizer for anyone who poured their time and effort into such a thing.
So, as Acacea suggested, there are considerations beyond the status quo. Maybe the better question is not should we implement something new but can we adapt or work within what we already have?
Anyway, I see no reason why the discussion has to stop. Work through the ideas in the back-and-forth.
