Jump to content

Crucis

Members
  • Content Count

    1,592
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Crucis last won the day on May 5 2015

Crucis had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

533 Excellent

About Crucis

  • Rank
    (10) Necromancer
  1. I pretty much agree with what you've said here. Writing usually has low production costs, unless perhaps you're doing some sort of work where you need to do some research. For example, let's take Dan Brown of Da Vinci Code fame. His books tend to take place around old churches, museums, and so on. And I strongly suspect that Brown travels to these locations to get a look and feel for them before using them in his novels. That's understandable, I'd think. And it's really not all that expensive (compared to movie costs, at least), though it might be pricey if you were an brand new writer and couldn't afford a research trip to Rome or Paris or Venice, or wherever. But so many other novels don't really need this level of research, if any at all, and can be written entirely from the imagination. And then, of course, about the only costs you have are the cost of owning and operating a PC (or if you're really old school, a typewriter and plenty of paper, etc.). But it obviously costs money to make movies or music, etc. You have to pay everyone behind the cameras, as well as the actors, and then the SFX studios, if there are any. And the orchestra that does the background music. And so on and so on and so on. You also make a very fair point about performing orchestras. They may not have to completely earn their keeps (I assume that most are getting some degree of grant money to help them stay afloat), but they do have to pay their musicians and all the other support personnel on their payroll. And to do that, they have to get fannies in the seats. And you're almost certainly right that they can't do that by performing stuff by unknown composers. They're existing in a very niche marketplace, and their customers are probably much more interested in seeing them perform classic pieces by famous composers, not unknowns. They might … might … be able to slip in one modern piece per performance. But if they had a new stuff only night, it wouldn't shock me if it ended up being their worst attended night of the season. Taking a step back, they can get away with performing certain modern stuff, but it probably has to be exceptionally famous movie related stuff, like from Star Wars, or from famous movie musical composers like John Williams or Hans Zimmer … which in turn comes back to name recognition.
  2. Yep. This is the heart of the problem, and this is why Hollywood, for instance, has been creatively dead for, what, like, twenty years at least? Nothing has been created, in terms of innovation. (And of course now, with the global market, the main audience of mainstream American movies is no longer even in America, it's in China. Way more profitable.) I don't see this as a problem, xzar. Movie studios are in business to make money, not to be creative, innovative, or original for the sake of being creative, innovative, or original. What pays the bills and makes profits is producing movies that the paying customers want to see. Period. If you can produce a movie that both has a compelling story and good characters that people will want to pay to see, and also happens to be creative, innovative, and original, good for you. But that's easier said than done. And Hollywood's investors prefer to invest in things that are much more reliable. Hence the current trend of superhero movies. 10-25 years, it was movies based on old TV shows. Name recognition puts fannies in seats.
  3. Regarding Hollywood, it's not really so much about the producers as it is Hollywood's financiers/investors. They don't hand out hundreds of millions of dollars so that some director can pursue his dread movie. They do it because they want to make money, lots of it. So, they invest in movies that they think have a chance of doing exactly that. Do they always succeed? No, of course not. But that's why you see so many sequels and remakes. Or for that matter, movies that are based on some old TV show or a well known book. It's about name recognition. Investors were probably falling all over themselves a decade ago to fund The Da Vinci Code movie adaptation, given that it was one of the most best selling books of all time, meaning that it was going to have massive name recognition. And it's not just movies when you think about it. How many writers write series' of books? They do it because the characters become popular and readers want to follow those characters through many novels to see what happens. I'm sure that it's hard to come up with a popular character and setting for a series, but once the writer gets it going and it is popular, I can hardly blame them for wanting to milk that cash cow. They are writing for a living, after all. Coming up with something completely new and original with each and every book has got to be rather difficult, and then there's no guarantee that it clicks with your audience. Oh, there may be some rather artsey-fartsey writers who don't believe in series. But something tells me that either they're spectacularly good at producing stories that people will buy, perhaps trading on their personal reputation, or … I was about to say that perhaps they were happy to be less than popular writers. However, their publishers want to make money too, and would more than likely stop publishing unsuccessful writers at some point. After all, publishers are sort of like movie investors in that they want a return on their investment. They may not have to pay the writer to produce the books before hand (unless they have a contract that does just that), but I doubt that they'd want to keep paying unprofitable writers. They want writers who produce books that enough customers want to buy that the publisher can turn a profit.
  4. It's interesting that we have the opposite opinion on this. I do think the ship was lacklustre and a lot of the features were not very good. As for the endless paths that was a crowd funding bonus thing. Deadfire had Fulvano's voyage as it's bonus (Dunnage, The Drowned Barrows, Ori O Koiki, Crookspur and splintered reef) A lot of good content there though then again without that content the game would feel a tad empty and the same can't be said for the endless paths. As I and others have said I found the micromanaging of the keep to be incredibly annoying where as the ship it's only slightly annoying. I do think you have a good point about resting bonuses and there could have been more ship upgrades available that did stuff like that. The ship does have things like merchants, visitors, other ship encounters ect they just are dotted around the map because it's a ship. I do think that a lot of them are not that interesting but they are nowhere near as awful as the repetitive and pointless stuff that happened at the keep. It's a shame the sea monsters goal was never reached though, it really feels like there should be more sea monsters in deadfire. I'm with you that the PoE1 stronghold was rather annoying to micromanage. I didn't find the ship particularly annoying as a stronghold. Of course, it had its other annoyances. IMO, it would have been nice if behind the scenes, your party got a rest every 24 hours spent on the ship while on a long voyage. OTOH, maybe some people would dislike losing that costly bonus you might have "purchased" when staying at an inn, if an auto-rest on the ship negated it. I agree that the generic ship encounters can seem repetitive. In my last party, I was constantly beating up on slaver ships, since they were an easy way to make a little cash from their swag, as well as a good way to work on some soulbound requirements. And I got a bit annoyed at myself when I went to Crookspur and defeated the slavers, because it put a stop to the respawning slaver ships and their nice little stream of goodies. I didn't beat up on the generic ships of other factions, because I hadn't picked a faction and didn't want to annoy any of them and risk losing one of my companions. (Having a deep reserve certainly makes your ship/party incredibly difficult to defeat in boarding actions. Your active party may only be 5 people, but having another 9 or so reserves makes for quite a powerful force during those boarding actions.) Honestly, I really missed having a deep dungeon like the Endless paths, or at least a greater number of more involved locations, like the "city" under Nekataka or the 3 level Engwithan ruin on the east side of the map. There were too many overly "shallow" locations that were little more than one, maybe 2, small levels. And in this way, I found PoE2 rather disappointing. If there is a PoE3, I hope that they spend more of their effort on developing larger, more involved areas than were in PoE2. They don't have to be as truly immense as the Endless Paths. For what it's worth, perhaps my favorite dungeon in all of the BG/IWD/POE games was the one in the Tales of the Luremaster. I absolutely LOVED that dungeon, and was both happy to complete it and sad that it was all done. I know that I replayed IWD1 a number of times, just to get to play TOTLM once again.
  5. I'm holding out for blue cheese! Who knows? Maybe a little space alien named Boo will be hiding there.
  6. Yeah, I don't see any logical reason why it should matter if the game is crowd funded or not, with one possible exception. For starters, all games are going to require an infusion of cash up front or a very wealthy game company that has the cash on hand to finance the development right from the start. Otherwise, they'll need to get the money from an outside source. For example, crowd funding or perhaps a bank loan. Now, with a bank loan, they have an incentive to make the best game they can with the loaned money because they have to pay back that loan. And with the self-financing option, the company may not have a loan to pay off, but I'm sure that they want to make that money back and at least break even. With the crowdfunding option, there are some details that I freely admit I don't understand. For example, is there any legal requirement that the game company actually release a game or have to return the money to the investors? (with or without interest...) Or, if a game is released, what if the game is garbage that doesn't sell worth a damn? Where do the investors stand in that regard? In short, what are the legal responsibilities involved in a crowd funding set up? One thing does seem certain. With crowdfunding, the game company is really laying their reputation on the line with their investors, i.e. their fans and supporters. And if they really screwed their investors big time, the game company's reputation might be forever ruined. Now, that doesn't speak to the buginess of the final product, but it does seem like their reputation is on the line with a crowd funded game, so arguably, the company has a fair degree of incentive to try to do their damnedest to keep their investor-fans happy, so that they keep their reputation intact and perhaps keep those fans willing to invest the next time the company may attempt a crowd funded game.
  7. Let me put a different spin on this interesting question. Are single player games more buggy than online games that depend on a constant stream of revenue? Without any data, let me give my impression from a strictly logical perspective. I think that it's arguable that single player games would be more buggy than online games for this reason. At release, they might be equally buggy, but here's the difference. With single player games, you pay for the game up front, and the developing company may see no massive reason to continue investing in the game (i.e. squashing bugs) when they've made a good chunk of money and perhaps profit. OTOH, with online games, the economic model for the company depends on a constant and ongoing stream of revenue. And if the game is buggy, players may/will migrate away from it to other games if they see no commitment from the developer to fix those bugs. So, the developer has a vested interest in continually fixing bugs. Now, I don't know if the real life data backs this up, but my case seems logical enough. Thoughts?
  8. Because I think that the writers saw the character in the role of Maia as a Rauatian soldier, not a Rauatian intellectual. I don't think that Kana would have fit into that position at all.
  9. Nouser, honestly, *if* there's a PoE3, it seems to me like the devs were lining things up for it to happen in Yezuha, where Rekke is from. There seem to be plenty of hints in PoE2 pointing in that direction. And were that the case, I think that the point would be for the Watcher to take Rekke home. However, I doubt that that's set in stone. Heck, there are no guarantees that there'll be a PoE3 at all, though it'd be VERY sad if there wasn't a 3rd installment in this series. That Rekke story sounds like a really dumb idea. Especially since Rekke isn't a full fledged party member with no investment into the story whatsoever. No I stand by the fact that PoE should not continue with the Watcher and have a new type of protagonist emerge in the future. Some time needs to have passed since PoE2. A protagonist that can deal with the fallout of Eothas' actions. Have previous party members or characters just pop up as cameo's or maybe as part of a side quest or something. Or not at all. One of the main gripes I had with PoEII was how little impact your actions in PoE seemed to have on your party. Only Eder was agreeable. Everyone else was like: ah yea we travelled together for months, shared life, misery, dreams, happiness, hardship. Oh and we stopped one of the Gods from destroying us, killed dragons and ended the hollowborn crisis. But yea now you said you don't like cookies so now I hate your guts. The introduction of your old team came off really wrong. Especially Aloth and Pallegina. If it was reallity I would have told them to piss off. Ah yes this reminds me of the time I played BG2 and killed Anomen when he started his self righteous attitude towards Jan. I dispise people like him and Durance. With a vengeance. Somehow, Aloth also went that route. It wasn't enough for me to want to kill him and kick his body into a ditch, but he wasn't far off. Not far at all. 1. I don't think that a Rekke story for PoE3 is a dumb idea at all. I also don't give a flying (you know what) about "investment in the story". If anything, that's what makes it an even better idea, not a lesser idea. I *want* to see the story get away from most of the existing companions!!! 2. I'm also very much in favor of continuing with the Watcher, but just have that story move over to Yezuha. I'd like the story to be one where perhaps the Watcher is sent to Yezuha by the Gods to investigate some new rising power there. And of course, bringing Rekke along to help out. 3. Frankly, your gripes in the 3rd paragraph don't even show up on my "radar screen". 4. I didn't like Durance either. However, I suspect that he was included because the character devs didn't want to only have nicey-nice companions. They wanted at least one who was surly and not very likable. Honestly, I wouldn't have even included him in my part, except for the fact that he was the only priest and you encountered him early (usually the 3rd companion you meet), which at least for me, made it very difficult to not use him. Also consider that not everyone who plays PoE1/2 are going to always want to play perfectly nice Watchers. Heck, given the number of people who talk about playing Bleak Walkers, it sounds like there are plenty who play Watchers who are serious jerks, since to me, a "nice" Bleak Walker seems like a total oxymoron. I can't speak for Aloth in PoE2, as I've tended to leave him in my reserves and only using him for that late game Leaden Key related personal quest, and occasionally for battles that seem to require the services of a high level wizard. Thus, I haven't had many long discussions with Aloth, but those I have had didn't seem as bad as you're making them out to be. Maybe I'm missing a lot of his personal banter. Frankly, it seems to me like you're expecting every Companion to be paragons of virtue and to like every other companion. That hardly seems realistic to me. Heck, there can be people who seem normally very pleasant. But then they encounter someone who rubs them the wrong way and it brings out the worst in them. Hey, Pallegina doesn't like overly pious people, and Eder doesn't like people who are cruel to animals. Heck, some people don't like Xoti because her constant, over the top niceness annoys them. Anyways, I think that you have unrealistic expectations if you expect every companion (and perhaps sidekick) to be likeable and get along with every other companion, 24/7 (or whatever it is on Eora). That's just not the way that people are. Ok, so the devs will have to make up yet another reason for losing all your experience, money and equipment. It was one of the least appealing parts of PoEII. Your endeavours in PoE counted for absolutely nothing. It might have as well been a different character alltogether. It's cheap and unimaginative. And it prevents the game from growing into more. A lot of people do not like change. Because it's scary. Continuing the watcher story is a bad idea. It doesn't amount to anything. There's nothing left for the watcher to do other than going to a different land and do something else. Then why have the same character(s) participate and have it follow up on deadfire? No it's a truly unimaginitive idea. There's absolutely no point in doing so. I'd love to see a new protagonist with different powers that take the story to a deeper level. Sure have Rekke participate and go to his lands. But add 10-15 years and build a new story based on past events. It allows for so much more creativity. You confuse nice with likable. Viconia and Sarevok are not nice. But they are likable. What I like is something I enjoy. This has nothing to do with a persons herritage or "allignment". Anomen is a goody two shoe full of himself self righteous a-hole. He is not likable. Keldorn is a Paladin, but he's not a self righteous a-hole. So he IS likable. Durance is a self righteous smug know it all idiot with 0 intelligence. I don't find such a person appealing to have around just so he can spout his drivel at me on how well he knows everything and also about me. I found it hilarious that he found out he was wrong about everything. Made killing him so much sweeter. He was not a sad broken person. He was a dumbass and I knew that when I met him. Although now I just kill him as he utters the words "Saw you in the flame". Like a drive by killing, sell his loot and move on. Much better that way, because early game you really need the money. Better than having someone around that lowers the average IQ of the party. With Eder around that's saying something. 1. I'm not bothered by starting over again, XP-wise, in PoE2. And wouldn't be in a PoE3. Oh, I would probably wish that I could start at level 4-5, just because things are a little more fun when you have more than the barest minimum of abilities, but that's a very minor thing for me. 2. Regardless, we disagree on this profoundly. I'm perfectly happy to continue on with The Watcher, and head off to Yezuha with Rekke. Maybe on a mission from the gods to investigate some new and mysterious rising power, as well as explore a hitherto unknown part of Eora. And heck, unless you bring some companions with you, every potential companion or sidekick you'd meet in Yezuha would be completely new. (I'd be happy to just head off to Yezuha with only Rekke and Ydwin at my side.) 3. No, I didn't confuse nice with likable. "Nice" can be taken to mean different things, and often different to different people. But, yes, in the sense if "nice" that YOU mean, there is a difference. But I meant "nice" as likable.
  10. We had almost half of the old cast from PoE1 show up in PoE2. Some as Companions (Eder, Aloth, and Pallegina). Others making cameos (Kana, Mahena, Devil of Caroc (as enchanted armor), and Durance... sort of). And I think that Eder might have mentioned Hiravias at some point. I just don't remember for certain. 7 (or out of 11 is a pretty good representation. Heck, one might even make the case that Maia is a semi carry over from PoE1. Not that she was in PoE1. of course. Her brother Kana was. But she represents a familial carryover, since Kana really couldn't fill the role that Maia does in PoE2. In fact, I'm tempted to think that the writers might have wanted to have Kana carry over as a full companion, but couldn't find a way to do it, and settled for his sister as a Companion and Kana in a camo role.
  11. Nouser, honestly, *if* there's a PoE3, it seems to me like the devs were lining things up for it to happen in Yezuha, where Rekke is from. There seem to be plenty of hints in PoE2 pointing in that direction. And were that the case, I think that the point would be for the Watcher to take Rekke home. However, I doubt that that's set in stone. Heck, there are no guarantees that there'll be a PoE3 at all, though it'd be VERY sad if there wasn't a 3rd installment in this series. That Rekke story sounds like a really dumb idea. Especially since Rekke isn't a full fledged party member with no investment into the story whatsoever. No I stand by the fact that PoE should not continue with the Watcher and have a new type of protagonist emerge in the future. Some time needs to have passed since PoE2. A protagonist that can deal with the fallout of Eothas' actions. Have previous party members or characters just pop up as cameo's or maybe as part of a side quest or something. Or not at all. One of the main gripes I had with PoEII was how little impact your actions in PoE seemed to have on your party. Only Eder was agreeable. Everyone else was like: ah yea we travelled together for months, shared life, misery, dreams, happiness, hardship. Oh and we stopped one of the Gods from destroying us, killed dragons and ended the hollowborn crisis. But yea now you said you don't like cookies so now I hate your guts. The introduction of your old team came off really wrong. Especially Aloth and Pallegina. If it was reallity I would have told them to piss off. Ah yes this reminds me of the time I played BG2 and killed Anomen when he started his self righteous attitude towards Jan. I dispise people like him and Durance. With a vengeance. Somehow, Aloth also went that route. It wasn't enough for me to want to kill him and kick his body into a ditch, but he wasn't far off. Not far at all. 1. I don't think that a Rekke story for PoE3 is a dumb idea at all. I also don't give a flying (you know what) about "investment in the story". If anything, that's what makes it an even better idea, not a lesser idea. I *want* to see the story get away from most of the existing companions!!! 2. I'm also very much in favor of continuing with the Watcher, but just have that story move over to Yezuha. I'd like the story to be one where perhaps the Watcher is sent to Yezuha by the Gods to investigate some new rising power there. And of course, bringing Rekke along to help out. 3. Frankly, your gripes in the 3rd paragraph don't even show up on my "radar screen". 4. I didn't like Durance either. However, I suspect that he was included because the character devs didn't want to only have nicey-nice companions. They wanted at least one who was surly and not very likable. Honestly, I wouldn't have even included him in my part, except for the fact that he was the only priest and you encountered him early (usually the 3rd companion you meet), which at least for me, made it very difficult to not use him. Also consider that not everyone who plays PoE1/2 are going to always want to play perfectly nice Watchers. Heck, given the number of people who talk about playing Bleak Walkers, it sounds like there are plenty who play Watchers who are serious jerks, since to me, a "nice" Bleak Walker seems like a total oxymoron. I can't speak for Aloth in PoE2, as I've tended to leave him in my reserves and only using him for that late game Leaden Key related personal quest, and occasionally for battles that seem to require the services of a high level wizard. Thus, I haven't had many long discussions with Aloth, but those I have had didn't seem as bad as you're making them out to be. Maybe I'm missing a lot of his personal banter. Frankly, it seems to me like you're expecting every Companion to be paragons of virtue and to like every other companion. That hardly seems realistic to me. Heck, there can be people who seem normally very pleasant. But then they encounter someone who rubs them the wrong way and it brings out the worst in them. Hey, Pallegina doesn't like overly pious people, and Eder doesn't like people who are cruel to animals. Heck, some people don't like Xoti because her constant, over the top niceness annoys them. Anyways, I think that you have unrealistic expectations if you expect every companion (and perhaps sidekick) to be likeable and get along with every other companion, 24/7 (or whatever it is on Eora). That's just not the way that people are.
  12. There's also a little bit of Ydwin reactivity in SSS. Perhaps one of the funniest bits of in-party banter in the entire game, when Ydwin tells Xoti something like "Be quiet. The adults are talking." If I have a gripe about Vatnir, it would be that I wish that the devs had worked to find a way to place him, say, in the Wild Mare to try to develop a way to make him available to the party earlier. As it is, you don't (or probably shouldn't) meet him until your party is rather high level late in the game, and you might be fairly committed to your existing party. It would have been nice if he'd been available to use earlier in the overall story, because without him, there's only one priest option available, Xoti.
  13. She's the mirror of Maia. Pallegina is a Vaillian patriot. Maia is a Rautian patriot. And remember that both are representatives of their faction, so it shouldn't come as a shock that they're difficult if not impossible to sway away from their faction. Also, don't forget that Sarafen and Tekehu are also staunch defenders of their factions as well. So, it really comes down to the design of Deadfire's faction system and how 4 of the companions are very loyal to their factions. And it seems to me that it'd screw up the overall balance of these 4 companions if only one of them wasn't nearly as strong a defender of his/her faction as the others. I suppose that the devs could have designed things in such a way that none of the companions were strongly tied to a faction, but that might have seemed weird for Maia, Pallegina, Tekehu, or Sarafen. I tend to think that if they'd not wanted any faction-tied companions, the devs would have had to develop 4 very different companions who clearly had no love for any faction.
  14. I didn't bother trying to run Rust down. I just assumed that that was the game's way of giving the player a big bleep you. As for the crowd funding, that's just dumb. They shouldn't have allowed that outcome to even be possible. I don't care if there are exacctly the same number of unique weapons or armors of each type. But there should have been at least, say, 3-4 for each type, with any beyond that being gravy. This number probably shouldn't include pre-order items. And frankly, shouldn't include items on those "revenge ships", I think someone called them. I'm NOT fond of hiding items behind extreme corner case situations that players may never see. As for the final paragraph, honestly, I don't give a flying firetruck about weapon/armor/shield crafting systems. To me, they're a waste of time that would be far better spent on MORE of those items. Not following Rust was an incorrect assumption on your fault. It was more like the game telling you that you needed to work for the best stiletto and one of the best rogue weapons in the game. And in fact was an enjoyable sequence you missed out on. You can't blame the game for your decision. Sorry, but I will blame the game. I was willing to engage in a big nasty fight to get the dagger. But when I see a character run away like that, my automatic assumption is going to be that it's the devs flipping me off. Imagine how a one time only player is going to see it. It was a silly decision to do it this way.
  15. I didn't bother trying to run Rust down. I just assumed that that was the game's way of giving the player a big bleep you. As for the crowd funding, that's just dumb. They shouldn't have allowed that outcome to even be possible. I don't care if there are exacctly the same number of unique weapons or armors of each type. But there should have been at least, say, 3-4 for each type, with any beyond that being gravy. This number probably shouldn't include pre-order items. And frankly, shouldn't include items on those "revenge ships", I think someone called them. I'm NOT fond of hiding items behind extreme corner case situations that players may never see. As for the final paragraph, honestly, I don't give a flying firetruck about weapon/armor/shield crafting systems. To me, they're a waste of time that would be far better spent on MORE of those items.
×
×
  • Create New...