Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


591 Excellent

About Taevyr

  • Rank
    (4) Theurgist
    (4) Theurgist

Profile Information

  • Location
    Right behind you
  • Interests
    Don't quote me on this, but i think i may be interested in RPG and strategy games.


  • Deadfire Backer Badge

Recent Profile Visitors

1,030 profile views
  1. Ignoring that they're quite unlikely to rely on funding campaigns post-aqcuisition, Kickstarter did an excellent job for PoE. Deadfire, meanwhile, got stuck with Fig, which in my opinion severely hurt its visibility as no-one even knew that platform existed.
  2. I hope they go for an open system: something like Tyranny, such as previously mentioned, would go nicely. 'Twould be nice to have Josh's classless system, but with him not being part of the project I don't think we will.
  3. Honestly, if it's going to be Skyrim-like, I wouldn't mind if companions weren't all that important. Obsidian generally does'em exceedingly well, but out of all open-world CRPG's without companion control I've played, only Dragon's Dogma had companions whose combat AI didn't want to make me sacrifice them to an elder god. The idea of plot-bound companions sounds decent however: more easy to incorporate, and less burden on the player to pick the right ones or build a balanced party. Since this is Obsidian, and with the experience from Outer Worlds and New Vegas in there, I don't think we have much to worry about.
  4. While I always enjoy having some options such as unique player homes, specific class-tailored quests and abilities, and extensive crafting mechanics, I really hope they leave those for updates and DLC. Or as is most likely with such content, they put them in after some miraculous event causes them to have fully developed, implemented and succesfully tested every other game aspect four months before launch as Jeff Bezos walks in to give them a few millions in development dollars. On a more serious note: about half of these options read like you want it to be like a tabletop game without taking into account both the actual cost and the opportunity cost: implementing niche features such as class-specific quests, or money sinkholes such as player housing, doesn't just cost way more than you're likely to receive for it, it also takes away from developing the main part of the game. As for your rather.... extensive desires for unique housing and crafting: a bonus minecraft with your RPG isn't the most reasonable of expectations, I'm afraid. Would I enjoy those things? Of course I would. But I'd rather they focus on building a good basegame with some simple crafting mechanics like in deadfire and perhaps some basic player housing if they still have the time/money, than end up sinking too much money in minor game aspects that are unlikely to return revenue while the main RPG aspects are left wanting. e.g. Deadfire's ship combat mini-game are fun additions, but hardly worth the money sink it reportedly was. I agree concerning the visuals and sound: If this is going to be Skyrim-like, an attractive, immersive world with music and visuals that make you enjoy just wandering around for a few hours are THE key aspects. Add in an actually decent combat system, some simple modding/"crafting", quests that go beyond "stab *insert person/group*" or "grab *insert item(s)*", and some obsidian-quality writing (deadfire main quest excluded), and I think most of us'll be hooked. After that, you can look at adding companions with or without reactivity, and things like housing and a more developed crafting system. But those are the base elements you need in an immersive, sandboxy CRPG. Though I hope they don't make it too sandboxy: It'd reduce plot/general writing options quite a bit. As for Romance, it's never good in games like Skyrim, though I actually respect Skyrim's simple, bare-boned implementation: "here's some romance for your sandbox, now we'll let you do what you want with it while we work on the actual sandbox". Bioware does them decently, but it's a key part of their brand and they're aided by the cinematic nature of their games; a 1st-person rpg doesn't require it, and is unlikely to do it well in the first place. If I want to get an alright romance I'll go play a visual novel, and even then I'll have to be rather discerning. I'll be annoyed if they give me infinite storage space though. I'm probably in the minority, but I always like having to deal with weight limitations in games like Dragon's Dogma and such, and usually find myself RP'ing it in games that lack it. Especially when said game is without a ship or castle I could conceivably store my personal zoo or 500 cheese wheels in.
  5. Yeah, Living Lands seems... unlikely to me, though the other information seems believable enough. I guess we'll have to see what other information trickles out. And I agree that it could only be made with Microsoft's support; the question is whether it was meant as a first "big project" to pitch to MS, as both a passion project and a way to properly start the union, or whether they started working on it fully the moment they knew the MS takeover would happen in a form of pre-production. Not that it matters much to me: release date speculation is fun, but I'd rather they take all the time they need over trying to make a set date. Elder Scrolls games take ages to make for a reason, and they always work out excellently. Let's hope Obsidian follows that example for their own version of 'em.
  6. But...but some of us like metaphysics. And there are dozens of us. Dozens! On a more serious note: Deadfire's plot could've used a bit less metaphysics, or at the very least clearer metaphysics. A look at the amount of threads trying to figure out what exactly happened in the end, dissatisfaction over the main story, and the writers having to add an explanation to the finished game in the form of Woedica's book, all point at that. I had a lot of fun thinking about the impact on Eora's metaphysics in Poko Kohara, the Wheel, and everything else, but even I have to agree that it was a bit much, and could at the very least have been handled a bit better. For the trilogy though, I at least want to see them finish the story they started. It'd be a shame not to at least tie off the existing meta(physics)plot, but perhaps tie it in with the general world/factions a bit more; Deadfire often felt like the main quest just hung in the background, leaving the factions to do their unconnected thing as the meat of the game. But Deadfire, to me at least, is a clear "mid-story" game, mostly setting up for the last part; it'd be a shame not to do something with that, and the characters who've been part of it from the start. I always felt Deadfire handled it pretty well with the "lose your soul" thing, considering it lines up perfectly with the metaphysical "all power comes from developing your soul" idea, though they could have made "reclaiming" it a bit more meaningful. That aside, is it really that hard to start again with a 1st level character, especially when a reason is given? I've had plenty of tabletop characters whose backstories implicated that they ought to be less or more capable than their mechanical level, and it's not like the levels of companions tend to differ depending on their life experience in most RPG's. Not to mention that mechanically, it'd be boring as hell to play through a game that doesn't have you properly growing in power.
  7. Eastern reach would be an odd choice: too much of it's history is already known - and thus set in stone - leaving fewer options for C&C, and it doesn't quite fit with all the Woedica imagery. Not to mention that the technology seems to point at a prequel, which'd fit better with "Skyrim in Eora" and doesn't necessitate creating first-person arquebusier animations. The mentions of empire and "always known war" point strongly towards the 3 Empires, particularly Old Vailia, but the Woedica imagery, mentions of queens and kings, and importance of oaths - to the point of being in the game's title - make Aedyr the obvious choice. And Aedyr was built on the wars and eventual unification between the human & wood elf races, so it fits as well. As for the vessels; I have no idea.
  8. According to his website, Paul Kirsch is one of the Narrative Designers on Avowed. Which makes me cautiously optimistic, considering his work on Deadfire and Tyranny that we know of.
  9. I checked Paul Kirsch's website, and it has him as a Narrative designer on Avowed, which is a good sign in my book. He did a lot of work on Tyranny and various characters and side quests in Deadfire, notably the Waidwen sequence in BoW, so with him on the team I'm cautiously optimistic concerning narrative.
  10. Eora, but "standard high/dark fantasy". I wonder how they'll manage it, as even with rediscovery of animancy and such out, there're still quite a few special aspects to play around with. To me, much depends on how Skyrim they go with the combat and attribute system: If they don't go beyond morrowind in simplification, I'll be.... content, at least. Some variety in weapons with actual differences between'em, some spellcrafting, proper perception of "being a living character" in first person rather than a camera with floating hands & weightless weapons.... oh, and actual attributes. For the love of Engwith, give us actual, meaningful attributes to develop. I've been missing those in first-person RPG's for way too long. Something else I noticed: the teaser magic, specifically drawing that symbol to create a specific effect, seemed reminiscent of Tyranny's magic system to me. If they find a way to adapt that system in a first-person RPG, I'll be hooked before I know it. EDIT: as for setting, considering Aedyr's supposed to be a Feudal/Byzantine rainforest, it should be both familiar and exotic enough to provide plenty of interest.
  11. If MS is generous with funding, I imagine third-person'll likely be in, if only to make certain they don't lose a chunk of potential customers. For now, all we have is confirmation that it's primarily first-person, though it could be I've missed any announcements about it.
  12. It does look like we'll be going back in time, which is probably to keep the game high fantasy: "oblivion with flintlocks" would be entertaining, but I can see why they'd want to stick to something more traditional; just too bad for my own preferences. And if it is set around Woedica's fall, which fits with a weakened Aedyr, seemingly lower tech advancement and the various oathy references, it makes for a good, viable spinoff from Early-Modern Eora: Far enough back that knowledge of PoE 1&2 isn't necessary for new players, while still a period that players of the previous games have just enough information on to pique our interest. Not to mention furthering the metaplot of "god shenanigans screwed things up, and now we have to find a way to solve it ourselves". I also doubt they'll risk losing a large chunk of customers by not implementing a third-person mode: it's a no-brainer if you have the funding for it, which MS'll probably provide.
  13. Well, I'm excited to see what Obs'll be able to do with a first-person rpg, though it'll likely be more open world exploration over RP if they're truly going by the skyrim formula. Still, the teaser looks great, they're going forward with Eora, likely either Aedyr or Old Vailia specifically, and I wouldn't mind exploring that world in the most immersive way possible. I'll be keeping an eye on this one.
  14. Staying OT, but I like talking about my field, so please forgive me: as an archaeologist who specialized in the roman mediterranean, you could write a doctorate on the subject and still not be able to pinpoint the main factor. Long story short, it started in the 3rd century with the combination of a terrible economy, a great plague and massive civil wars leading to the loss of control over the outlying provinces, each with their underlying reasons and further developments, for starters. Reliance on local powers after that century can be seen as a form of proto-feudalism: Rome collected taxes and enforced the imperial cult, local powers could rule their lands in peace, and the empire "remained whole". 476 merely cut the last piece of rope keeping largely independent parts together. Straw-man arguments like "Rome was perfect until X" are ridiculous, both because you can't pin it on a single thing, and because Rome wasn't all that awesome in the first place. Especially when it concerns "Immigration bad" and "christianity bad", since both also became important factors helping stability.
  • Create New...