xzar_monty

Also, related to this topic: immediately after Deadfire came out, plenty of customers on this very forum were very unhappy about the fact that they couldn't make the narrator shut up.

Judging by this thread, @uuuhhii might. So apparently there could be one. But yes, I believe your claim is correct.

Your original claim was "Most customers expect it though", which is not something that can be claimed upon the basis of Sawyer's post-mortem, unless he is referring to an exhaustive survey done on this topic. I have watched parts of that post-mortem (not all of it, mind you), and I'm fairly sure that bit at least contained no such reference to any surveys. So, you see individual posts, according to which non-full VO is "unprofessional for some". I have no problem with that, apparently it is. But this "some" can be a very small percentage, and we certainly cannot claim, on that basis, that "Most customers expect it". This is just not how logic or rational thinking works.

I am not sure at all whether you can back up this claim. P:K did not have full VO and it did quite well, thank you very much. So what, exactly, would your evidence be? Also, you should keep in mind that this question is genre-specific, and when I'm questioning your claim, I am explicitly questioning it within the genre of cRPGs. Full VO is NOT necessary. Anecdotally speaking, I can say that I have never known, met or heard of anyone who thinks that full VO is necessary. I have only seen that claim made on the forums, and even on the forums by just one single person, whose comment you can see above.

I am not sure if this is true. It certainly isn't true in comparison to PoE1. There is an awful lot of filler combat in PoE1, most of which was -- thankfully -- removed for PoE2. I agree there's plenty of combat, but "heavy combat focus", in this genre? I am not so certain.

Oh, lovely. Very happy to hear it didn't make a loss. Excellent.

How about elves, dwarves or halflings? Point being, we're just so used to some fantasy races but not others. Myself included, mind you. So I understand what you mean.

I found the world uninteresting, the dialogue remarkably poor and the turn-based combat extremely off-putting. Also, the lizard (?) as a playable race felt simply stupid, a very bad idea. So I also stopped playing very quickly. A shame. I would have liked to like the games.

There are three, so what did you mean by both? I suppose that's BoW and Forgotten Sanctum, because the third, SSS, is mainly combat. Forgotten Sanctum was good but did not rise above the general storytelling level, in my view. But BoW certainly did.

In my view, Beast of Winter is the best-told story in the whole of Deadfire, by some distance. So yes, there is.

In my view, only Minsc would count, as he has no quest. The only thing that happens with Minsc is that he can start protecting Aerie. I agree that romanceable NPCs have more content than the others, but I don't see how that would make them lesser, as nearly all of them have a fair amount of content anyway. If memory serves, Jaheira probably has the most content. (It would actually be quite interesting to see the numbers.)

But there aren't any, at least in my view. Which would you argue have less content?

Fair enough. But it was not the structure of what you describe, rather the content (or something else like that). Again, I agree that sometimes it is difficult to pinpoint why something doesn't "click", so to speak. As I've said, I enjoyed Deadfire a great deal, although the main setting was problematic: on the one hand, the main story implied urgency because Eothas was clearly up to something drastic, but on the other hand, you actually didn't have to hurry at all, you could spend as much time as you wanted doing other stuff, and in the end you didn't even affect the main story in any way whatsoever (although I have subsequently learned that there IS a way to affect it). So the whole concept is all over the place, narratively speaking. But I enjoyed it nevertheless.

Hmm. I don't see any difference between this and most cRPGs. Many locations in all cRPGs I only ever visit once, and they only carry the story forward a little bit, and I don't see any problem with that at all.

I did get an engaging experience. It would be easier to discuss this if you were able to specify why you did not, although I understand that it's sometimes difficult to put one's finger on what is wrong, even if something definitely is wrong.

I agree it would be disheartening. The people who play games like these give the impression of being a fairly conservative bunch, and this strongly conservative nature of the gaming community may indeed be one reason why Deadfire didn't succeed -- it was too different. But we don't know. And we don't even know whether the gaming community as a whole is conservative; what we can say is that an awful lot of people who contribute to cRPG forums appear very conservative. Dungeon crawling is fine, but not necessary, and we've certainly seen enough of it. The Endless Paths were quite poor in PoE, and I was happy that there was no such thing in Deadfire.

Oh yes. There is almost nothing interesting about any of the companions in BG. In my view, BG is merely a template -- the game itself is not good at all, but it established a foundation upon which many better things could be and were built. BG2 is a totally different thing.

Surely there are no lesser companions in BG2. What do you mean by this?

But again, getting to know this takes time playing the game, and that requires purchasing it. Deadfire's sales were poor right from the start, so what you describe is probably not the reason.

Btw, I know this is off-topic but in my view, a stronger criticism (than classes and characters) that can be leveled at Obsidian is the company's fixation with factions. Due to the corona, I decided to give Tyranny a try, and the bloody factions are there, too. In PoE, you must support one of the factions, at least to a certain extent. And then, towards the end, you are strongly suggested to "join" one of the gods, although you don't have to. In Deadfire, the factions vie for your attention and co-operation. And now, in Tyranny, I notice right at the start that factions are just about the most important thing. I don't like this. Surely there are plenty of other ways to further a narrative.

My understanding is that the PoE system was designed as a deliberate step away from the DD model, which it clearly is. I think it works, although your criticism is justified and to an extent I agree with it. However, I also think that criticism of similar severity can be aimed at the DD system, which has its own flaws. In the end I'm happy with both.

Precisely. Given the inherent limitations in all cRPGs, teleportation is fairly likely to ruin a game or, at the very least, lead to some nasty and unintended consequences. You do have teleport in P:K, but its use is strictly limited, i.e. you can create teleportation hubs and move between them. Teleport at will and anywhere you like is not possible. I think this is a good thing. As you say, teleportation sounds great, but it's almost certainly not worth it, and it can end up being just terrible.

Yes, this is quite possible. I agree. Is there any game, in any genre, that attempts this?

At this juncture I would kindly point out that you are making rather heavy assumptions here, on this forum, and I am not at all sure whether they are well-founded. For instance, in another thread, just today, you said to @SchroedsCat that "And early thirties is still young and much more influenced by modern media than you might initially think", which is possibly intended to sound like a piece of wisdom coming from an experienced person but which is actually unfounded, somewhat myopic and a gross generalization, to such an extent that it decreases the overall credibility of the person making it. Let's face it: you are not aware of the extent to which other people on this forum are influenced by -- or even exposed to -- modern media, and it is decidedly unhelpful to make comments about other people's worlds (or level of RPG game experience) when in fact you are only talking about your personal impression of it. Projection does not benefit discussion.

Personally, I quite like both, while being mindful of the weaknesses of both. Like, there are no boy-I've-got-to-get-this items in Deadfire, whereas there tend to be a few in all DD-related games. Both have strengths and weaknesses. DD classes are very different from each other -- but each of them is very limited in some particular ways. I don't see any reason to engage in the debate about which system is better, since I have been quite happy to play both. Given the inherent limitations of computer RPGs, I'm not sure if it's realistic to expect a system that could combine the strengths of both and avoid the weaknesses of both.