kanisatha

What makes you think that? There's precisely zero reason for either to abandon single-player games. Except for the "not making enough money from it" reason. If you do a quick Google search you'll come across quite a number of articles from the past year or so with direct quotes from game developer company executives saying there's not enough money to be made from single player games anymore. inXile itself has said (in a recent Brian Fargo interview) that their next new game (after Wasteland 3) will be multiplayer (and consoles) focused.

It's very unfortunate that games with multiplayer significantly outsell single player only games. I can understand a little bit of a sales advantage for multiplayer, but these numbers seem to indicate a gigantic difference. I imagine this will mean that even small-to-medium sized RPG developers (Obsidian, inXile, etc.) will now move to multiplayer games and abandon creating single player only games. I know that many multiplayer games can be played as single player, but at least for me it feels very much that those games make it very clear in-game that you are supposed to play them multiplayer and that they're optimized for multiplayer at the expense of the single player experience (ex. the D:OS games). This tends to seriously dampen my interest in those games. Sorry for the tangent.

I'm a casual gamer. I backed the game (and was one of the first backers of PoE way before most others jumped on that bandwagon). I'm just as much the "main audience" as you.

Party-based RPGs with strong single-player Strategy games (especialy those based on good boardgames) Resource management games Empire/city builder games I strictly stay away from multiplayer. The whole point of gaming for me is to get away from other people.

At least when on our ship, I'd like the ability to simultaneously access the paperdolls and inventories of all of my companions and not just the ones in my party.

Well, there's also a third group, like me, who are more or less indifferent. For me the story, the companions and the side quests are always more interesting than combat itself. And since the different easy settings caters to people like me, we have little interest in PotD difficulty. This exactly. I've played PoE many times (though finished it only once). And every time I replay it I only play at the easy or story mode. The story, the side quests, the companions, and my own character's development are all that I care about, and I generally hate the combat situations.

This game definitely needed some rebalancing coming out of the gate. But it ought to have happened before the game's release because I agree it can be frustrating for players to have to restart their game with each new patch. However, the OP's point about "minority opinions" is absolutely true. Posters on these forums do tend to see themselves as representing the majority of the people playing these games even though the active posters on these forums in reality represent only a tiny fraction of the overall player base. This is why, in spite of all the whining about this, I am happy that Sawyer gets his feedback from a range of other places besides these forums.

This PC Gamer article has some interesting insights into where Sawyer (and other RPG devs) may want to go in the future. https://www.pcgamer.com/the-future-of-crpgs/

I highly doubt they will move to PoE3 that soon. Sawyer has stated he wants to do something not related to Pillars-style games before he would be ready to return to that type of game. So unless PoE3 happens without Sawyer, PoE3 will only happen after Sawyer has had his chance to do his TB historical RPG. The way I see the sequence: Indiana, ???, Sawyer's historical RPG, PoE3. So what ??? ends up being is the question. I suppose one possibility is a new something using their Pathfinder license.

This some new isometric RPG coming out (didn't watch the videos)? Yeah just completed a successful Kickstarter campaign: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/grapeocean/black-geyser-couriers-of-darkness?ref=d9g6qg

Well the project name is not my point. I'm speaking in the hypothetical here. According to what Feargus said in that interview, 4 1/2 projects, with the 1/2 project being something new they were just spinning up. The four projects were: Tyranny DLC (small team), Pathfinder Adventures (small team), Deadfire (Sawyer-led big team), and Indiana (Cainarsky-led big team). I would assume that Tyranny is now done and Deadfire is transitioning to a small team. So what's the next new "big team" project (which I have here dubbed Mississippi just as a shorthand)? They surely need to have already begun preliminary work on it because otherwise there'd be a gap in projects after Indiana which would be bad for the company. And, we know for a fact it is NOT a Sawyer-led project. So I'm curious as to whose project it might be (which in turn may give us clues about the nature of the project).

Ok, I'll throw some thoughts out for starters. With PoE2 released and that team shifting to patches and DLCs, the project will transition from big project to small project status. So what 's the next big project for Obsidian after Indiana? Under usual circumstances, this would be Sawyer's next big project. But Sawyer has made it clear he wants/needs a break, so his next big project will surely be two projects down from Indiana. So what is the next one in line (i.e. Mississippi. the next state after Indiana)? Even more specifically, whose project will it be? Brian Heins? Adam Brennecke? Do they try to hire a new big name project director?

But none of this gets to the real problem, which is simultaneous access to the inventories and paperdolls of all companions. This is currently not possible anywhere, even when on your ship. You have to keep swapping companions in and out of your party, which is extremely tedious and annoying. I'm not asking for this access everywhere. But when I'm on the ship, and every companion is physically right there, why can't I access everyone jointly?

Thoughts, anyone? Too soon?

It's not about stripping companions of their gear. Quite the opposite, it's about optimally distributing new-found gear across all companions and not just the ones in your current party.

Thanks, OP, for this thread. So great and so on point. I find myself in agreement with pretty much everything that's been brought up here. I was (and still am) one of those who was very disappointed with the decision to drop party size, and yet because pretty much every aspect of this game - large and small - is just so incredibly awesome and well done I find myself not caring that much about my party size issue. And that says a LOT!! This game truly is a gem.

Same here. For me PoE1 beats DOS1 by a wide mile. Really loved PoE1 even as I'm having to really push myself to finish DOS1. And it's not just one thing but many major issues I have with DOS1. So I can't even begin to understand how DOS2 could be better than PoE2. I highly doubt I'll even bother to buy DOS2. My personal take is that fans of TB combat are hyper-passionate with their preference whereas fans of RTwP combat are not. As such, TB fans go out of their way to hype the DOS games regardless of any shortcomings because ... TB!!

Yeah that last possibility is what's got me concerned.

It's interesting that Sawyer is stepping down as creative director of Deadfire so that he can pursue other projects. I wonder if he's been given the green light on his long-cherished idea of doing an historical RPG. And if so, I wonder what new directions he'll choose to take for the game given his recent comments on the state of RPG game development across the industry.

Yeah this was something I've brought up so many times. I even brought up the exact same suggestion of having access to the inventories of all companions to make it easier to manage everyone's equipment during the crowdfunding campaign, and Sawyer noted it and responded that it was a good idea worth considering. I mean it's not like it would be a difficult thing to implement at all given that Obsidian implemented a very similar party management system in NwN2!!

Chaos Chronicles died years ago, and I haven't seen any information about any revival of that project. Do you have some new information? Oh, you are in for a treat: https://www.realms-beyond.com/ This is the original CC developers, now able to develop and finish the game without interference from the morons who temporarily seized the unfinished assets and released it as shovelware to make a quick buck. This is the real deal. Thanks! That is awesome. I was so very disappointed when CC died, especially because of the utterly ridiculous reasons why it died. I checked out your link and it sure looks really nice, including that they're actually using the D&D 3.5e OGL. That way they don't have to waste resources on developing systems and can focus on the story and the world and the characters.

Chaos Chronicles died years ago, and I haven't seen any information about any revival of that project. Do you have some new information?

From the bottom of my heart, THANK YOU OBSIDIAN!! Don't ever stop making amazing RPGs like this. I will gladly pay multiple times retail value for games like Deadfire.

It's always a melee warrior class for me because I like my PC to be front and center in the action in combat. In the IE games I always go with some fighter-thief combo, but in PoE1 I liked the barbarian class a lot. Adding multiclassing is for me the awesomest improvement in PoE2 over 1. I really like what's been done in PoE2 to make the fighter class a truly interesting class to play, and I am really looking forward to playing fighter-barbarian/paladin/ranger combos. I know a fighter-ranger melee character will not be particularly optimal but I really don't care. Having a fuzzy furry pet to take along with me more than makes up for mechanical shortcomings. I'm like my bro Eder that way.

Or those for whom having companions to take along with you on your adventures is a huge part of their enjoyment of the game and now they have one less of those companions to take along. Enough with the straw man of people being unhappy over things being different.