kanisatha

That's the smart way to do it. You don't piss off the superfans of your game and you actually get them to buy the game when it's released. Rest of the crown will most likely gladly wait a year or two for sales anyways. Weird though, that even Ubisoft is turning to Epic Store, since they have their own store. Epic must be paying a lot to get someone like Ubisoft to ditch thier own store. Sorry but I don't see how this is any sort of compromise. You still don't get the game for a year. What meaningful difference does having it as a preorder make?

Can't find anywhere whether this is the new game (Project Gustav) they've been working on. Very likely not, and hope not, since this seems to be largely the work of another studio that Larian has contracted.

I gotta admit, I'm much more forgiving of these types of issues if the game has a great story and sidequest design. For instance, especially in RPGs, combat ranks way down on my list of me caring if it's good or not. It's probably why I'm so forgiving of the Witcher 3's faults. The things it did well are the things I look for most in RPGs. Couldn't agree more. So long as combat isn't frustrating to the point of pulling my hair out I don't really care about it one way or the other. Combat is my least liked part of an RPG too. Also, yes, filler combat is especially loathsome, not just in TW3 but RPGs generally. I don't understand why wild animals, even if they're wolves and bears, should automatically and aggressively attack you. Just plain silly and annoying.

Ok, fair enough. And yes, I also don't buy that Obsidian was entirely uninvolved in all of this.

source? https://twitter.com/VtM_Bloodlines/status/1108948381127204865 well that effing stupid, there was ton of melee combat, I can't imagine good melee in FP. WTF? Thanks, @ShadySands. Yeah I agree it really sucks. On the game's website they say "mostly" first person though the camera will pull back to third person for a few of the melee animations, which makes it all the more stupid that they didn't just include a full-on third person option. I guess in today's high end graphics games, it's just too much of an extra cost for devs to include multiple camera positions.

This actually looks really good. Too bad that it too, like TOW, is only in first-person so it's out for me.

Been binge-watching Miami Vice commercial-free on Starsz. As a product of the 80s I love that show, cheese and all.

Non Disclosure Agreement. They can't say **** publicly about this until the NDA runs out. Would Microsoft ever agree on such transfer of games? I seriously doubt that. Aside from just plain NDA considerations, it's bad business to publicly disparage your business partners. That's a quick way to turn needless drama into needless drama with a lawsuit attached. And as far as Microsoft goes, it does look like they already did throw their weight around. If they didn't intervene, TOW would likely be a true Epic exclusive, and not have a simultaneous PC release on the Microsoft Store. Well, they don't have to disparage anyone. Couldn't Obsidian just say something like: "This was entirely a Private Division decision as the publisher of the game, and we had nothing to do with it. Please refer all questions to Private Division."

I don't understand why I should give Obsidian's upper management the benefit of the doubt. Yes there's no evidence they supported this; but equally there's no evidence they didn't. So it's a matter of how each of us subjectively chooses to see things, isn't it? I love the Obsidian devs. But I do harbor concerns about Obsidian's upper management (and no, it isn't because of Avellone's crazy and silly rants).

Do you have an example of where that behavior actually ruined a crowdfunding game? Usually crowdfunded games fail because the developers get too ambitious or have poor business skills, and thus run out of funds. I agree with your point, actually, but don't necessarily get mad over a crowdfunded project gone south for this sort of reason because I accept that crowdfunding is, by definition, a gamble. As for examples, it's hard to say because what qualifies as "ruined" or a "failure" is inherently subjective, and my taste in games is extremely narrow and so I have not backed that many games. But, I would offer two recent inXile games as my main examples: the constant drumbeat of certain people demanding that T:ToN be TB; and similarly, that BT4 not provide save anywhere anytime (which thankfully inXile overturned after the game's release).

https://www.gameinformer.com/2019/02/03/rumor-is-a-sequel-to-jade-empire-in-the-works

Larian has "Project Gustav" in the works and, during a recent Internet spasm about a possible BG3, confirmed they're NOT working on a D&D game.

My main problem with crowdfunded games is on the backer side rather than the developer side. Though a minority, far too many backers have an entitled mentality and the view that only their preferences for the game must be taken into account and any deviation from 100% of their preferences means the developer is a liar and a cheat and evil ... or something. I'm really tired of these 'the universe revolves around me' backers and would rather have developers be truly independent, from both publishers and crowds. But I understand that that's a very difficult road to follow.

That's not how competition works. EGS wasn't making their platforms better, they are just throwing money away to get market share, and they will get these money back when they get enought market share, from the consumers. It's not competition they want, it's monoploly. Yep, it's the equivalent of dumping in international trade. You dump your (inferior) product on to the market at below market prices to drive your competiton out of business so you can then have a monopoly for yourself. For this to be a viable strategy you have to have very deep pockets or someone else bankrolling/subsidizing you so you can survive your own dumping - which Epic/Tencent has.

That's speculation. Yes Private Division has an exclusivity deal with Epic, but that does not mean Obs wasn't also ok, even enthusiastic, about going with Epic. Obs's tweet about the deal comes across rather glowingly.

A simple online search shows that Private Division has an exclusivity deal with Epic. But at the same time, the tweet from Obs clearly states they view Epic as their "partner" so Obs likely wanted this just as much as Private Division.

Kid? Rigggght. My dream? I'm a backer of both PoE games whereas you're not. Proof? You made the claim. I merely rejected it. Burden of proof's on you ... kid.

Apparently EGS has an exclusivity deal with Private Division for all their games. I was never going to be buying this game anyway on account of it being first person. But yeah, I also will NEVER use EGS, and am strongly put off by any developer or publisher who signs on to an exclusivity arrangement with anyone.

I am also sure that POE 3 will be the next big project from Obsidian No it won't. Sawyer has made it very clear he wants a nice long break from PoE They can make PoE3 without Sawyer. Sawyer wasn't even the director the PoE2 DLCs. They can, but they won't. But there's no harm in holding on to your dream.

I am also sure that POE 3 will be the next big project from Obsidian No it won't. Sawyer has made it very clear he wants a nice long break from PoE, and I don't blame him at all. He's also been pushing for years for Obsidian to allow him to make his historical RPG. So I am sure it will be, in order: New IP RPG (possibly Sawyer's historical game) TOW 2 PoE 3 (maybe)

Personally I think it is far too early for them to have launched a TOW2 project even if only in an exploratory form. So I'm convinced at least one of the two unannounced projects is a new IP game.

Gotta disagree with you there. Because mass effect and dragon age were sucessful , although i think the world setting of dragon age is inferior to pillars. rpgs focused in story are not dead. but as i said before. the poe gameplay will unfortunately have to be modernised even more. lets hope the old workers , writers and directors of obsidian manage to preserve aspects of crpg even with the selling to obsidian. ME and DA are AAA franchises, so apples and oranges.

D:OS2's tremendous sales success (yes, it is indisputably a huge sales success) is very easily explained: 1. Co-op play 2. DM mode These are very much the things a great many of today's young gamers really like to have in their games. The classic RPG in the tradition of the IE games is and has always been very much a niche genre, and the D:OS games do NOT fall into that genre. So if someone is going to make new RPGs in that genre, they're going to have to accept that sales will be in the ballpark of what they have been for the PoE games. I think OE was kinda' ok with that up to now, but from a Microsoft pov that's just not going to cut it. Which is why I have predicted that we have seen the last of PoE1/2-style games from OE. If there is ever another "PoE" game, it will be a third-person ARPG with co-op/multiplayer included and released for consoles right from the beginning.

I can see one of those two unannounced projects being a follow-on to TOW. I wish OE would start giving out some hints on the other of those projects, one that's been going on for some time now.

Yup. It's been sitting in my Steam wishlist for a while now. Looking forward to it.