Snoozer

Ehhh... first impressions, sure. Reviews? Not so much. The whole point of a review is to be objective. Which is why "*5 stars* I LOVE IT!" doesn't help anyone. Unless you just wanna be like people who like stuff for unknown reasons. "Well, 5 million people love it. Those could be 5 million people who also like to punt kittens in their spare time and love rubbing steel wool on their eyeballs... I really have no clue. But... Better be like them! Don't want to miss out on a complete question mark!" See, people don't necessarily like things because they're good. So, objectivity is the only thing useful in a review, really. So, if you just say "man, the graphics suck," that's useless subjectivity. If you say "The graphics aren't quite as on-par with several other games that have already released, so they aren't pushing the limits of the PS4 or anything," that's helpful. In fact, you can even follow that up with "On the plus side, that means that this game runs, on average, far better on not-top-of-the-line machines, 8D!". Pros and cons. You can't just make up subjective pros and cons. "Pro: this game has lots of blue in it. Con: I can't play this game in my kitchen because I don't have a TV in my kitchen." Subjectivity has its place, but that place is not to rule over objectivity. There's no point in measuring anything with subjectivity. Even if it's not an exact science, reviews measure the quality of games. I can't subjectively measure the length of my hand. "Meh, I think it's 58 feet long." Well, that's great, but that doesn't help anyone to know the length of my hand. And sure, objectivity in reviews doesn't cover everyone's subjective decision-making process of "should I get this game or not? Will I like it?", but that doesn't mean that going with subjectivity is going to do any better. Maybe I like blue in games, and maybe you don't. Telling you the game's good because it has lots of blue doesn't help you at all. Telling you it has lots of blue in it... that's at least a fact. You can use that information to better determine how you will feel about the game. "Blegh, I HATE blue, so I might not like this game." etc. Annnnnnywho... It's funny you say the point of the review is to be objective yet turn around the next sentence and say that a 5 star rating isn't helpful. That's a standard. Thumbs up or thumbs down. That's another standard. A rating of 83% is objectively better than 82%. These are parsed down from all subjectivity to create an objective score. But I hear you say the reviewer might have said some ridiculous or faulty statements. To which I reply, yes, because all reviews are subjective. Their opinion is molded and influenced from past experiences. This inherent bias gives the review it's "flavour", because there are many reviewers out there, which each their own tastes. The current rubric you seem to elaborate is one where you have clearly defined parameters of graphics/gameplay/control. But that might not be what your audience wants to read/see/hear. I remember hearing from a gaming podcast how there is a christian gaming website that reviews games based off its content only. And that's fine! Will I read it? Hell no. But there's an understanding between the reviewer and reader/listener/watcher that this is what they are looking for. If anything, what you are talking about is giving as much information to the consumer and letting them decide what to do with it. But to review a game, or any product, is to imbue it with your own opinion and share that opinion with someone else. Facts help relate that opinion, Let us take Order 1886. Graphically beautiful game! But working at a lower resolution due to the black bars. Aesthetically pleasing! But it looks drab and lifeless. Cinematic gameplay! But that's boring and hand holding. It has QTEs! But it has QTEs. An objective fact is stale food before subjective seasoning. Let's continue with the QTE analogy; how long is an acceptable QTE? Should I state the acceptable amount of button pushes required for completion of said QTEs? What frame of reference should I use to compare these QTEs with other QTEs from other works? Objectively speaking, what are QTEs?...this can go on forever. Or you can say the game has QTEs and you hate/love them. Are the QTEs obstructive to gameplay? To me they weren't. Maybe. They might be to someone else. And they might hate Galahad. Or they might not. They might enjoy the writing. Or not. To be objective can be as much as a hindrance as being overly subjective. However, the saving grace is the PLETHORA of reviews and opinions. That word is appropriate; there was print and television but now there's blogs, youtube, twitch, let's play, patreon reviewers, gaming websites, specific forums for every eclectic gaming taste. Not to mention the various types of reviews like feminist, christian, PC only, console only, technical specs aficionados, FOV slider quacks, arm chair gaming generals...who spurn the objective model because they have framed the review from a different angle. Is that wrong? Depends who you ask. But one thing I think we can both agree on; declare and state your bias before you begin the review. Let your audience know your perspective and your experience. If they find offense, there's always a dozen other reviewers willing to share their review with you. If you want a review completely devoid of subjectivity, read this objective review by Jim Sterling on FFXIII in 2010. He is hamming it up for laughs but it gets the point across. http://www.destructoid.com/100-objective-review-final-fantasy-xiii-179178.phtml We can aspire to be objective, we can work towards framing every debatable angle as objectively pristine as possible but reviews will not be devoid of all subjectivity.

I'm surprised most of you care whether he reviews it favourably or not, seeing as how most of you are Kickstarter backers and have already "purchased" the game. Unless you feel he might "review it wrong" or not score it properly...in which case whatever floats your boat. If Joe is a backer, he's nostalgic and eager for this type of game (as all of us are). Youtubers/Twitch streamers are the new reality of gaming marketing and press. With speedier and easier access internet services, anyone can upload/download video quickly, making it easier and faster to see unfiltered gameplay. I bought Binding of Isaac after watching a streamer; I would never have given that game a chance because I didn't like the art style but it grew on me and the gameplay hooked me in. Basically, let go of preconceptions about the form of review/impression. There are hundreds of reviewers, let's players, streamers, "game journalists", gaming blogs, etc. to filter your opinions through. Will I watch Joe's review? Nope. But I do hope he enjoys the game and has a good time.

The latest Jimquisition sums up my thoughts. Have a look on his website or on youtube.

CKII has sold over a million copies since September 2014 and considered a success. Resident Evil 6 sold 5 million plus copies and was considered a failure. You have to understand this as a matter of return on investment. Obsidian has a target number they want to hit; anything higher is gravy. Plenty of coverage on "mainstream" sites does not correlate to better sales. I have never said the game won't sell well, I just temper my expectations and don't buy into hype.

My apologies. I wasn't aware this was related to the early Kickstarter campaign.

Then, quite honestly, they should have waited and not committed to a date. This tells me you've never coded in your life and therefore don't understand complexity in fixing bugs. Fact of the matter is that on a PC platform, with its myriad of possible configurations compared to consoles, makes it insanely difficult to stamp out all bugs. There will always be bugs. Not all bugs are equal, and I kinda agree with Voss, but it's not about the bugs. I imagine it's more about running out of budget and having negotiated a release date with your publisher. IMO, many signs point to the release being a rough landing. I hope for the best though, and that the game gets as good reception as possible from the casual crowd (I hate that term but it's so convenient) everyone outside of our forums here. It's this that will make it a success, I think it should be a success for all its quality creative ideas and a setting which personally I already see becoming a classic. There are bugs which will irritate guys like us and then there are bugs which will turn away the general public, and I'd rather have the general public happy and us waiting for patches for the things which the general public wouldn't even notice, than us very happy at release and the general public indifferent to the game. Weigh those two outcomes and you'll see I'm right. This is a niche product, advertised as a niche product and satisfying a niche audience. Hence, the Kickstarter nostalgia campaign targeting isometric RPG buffs. To Obsidian's QA team, there is no difference between bugs that will piss off "gamers" and "casuals". People will complain regardless of issue. As I've stated before, there will always be bugs, always unsatisfied customers. Voss is right the game breaking bugs take precedence over others; however I don't believe any game is ever "ready" and bug free. I'll still play day one and I'll be expecting a day one patch too.

Molyneux is the reason why hype is godawful and important to the industry. He is a hype machine, a relentlessly broken promise spewing machine. He has been very influential with developing classics like Dungeon Keeper, Populous and Syndicate. When he set up Lionhead Studios, he relentlessly promoted Fable, The Movies and Black and White as the end all and be all of video games. Fable came out in 2004 for god's sake! And even then people were disappointed by his self indulging promises of next gen gaming. He sold those games based solely on his magnetism and allure. Anyone who kickstarted his Godus campaign was either deluded or naive, no ifs or buts. Kickstarter/Early Access video game campaigns are faltering because donors/backers are willing to toss money at nebulous concepts without an understanding of game development. Steam is replete with early access super sellers, only 25% of all early access games actually get finished...because of people who believe in people like Molyneux. If you want to waste money, I've got a lovely bridge to sell you.

Paradox, though, is a different matter... Let's just say, it's a good thing the kickstarter campaign compelled Obsidian to promise not to do it. Obsidian hired Paradox to manage production and distribution. Otherwise Paradox has no vote in any kind of matters, including production of DLCs and expansions. Also, Kickstarter did not make Obsidian "promise" anything about DLCs, except that an expansion will get made. If Obsidian suddenly decided to do 10 DLCs with one clothing item in each, nothing would stop them. But it's not Obsidian's style, so I'm not going to worry about that. You do realize they are "selling" 8$ forum tags, which are just cosmetic and essentially a vanity item like DLC horse armor and skins. I have no problem with it, everyone is free to spend their money however they choose. But I wouldn't rule it out as Obsidian's style.

The reviewer should have posted what build he was testing, among other nagging issues with the impression. He should have probably consulted with some colleagues to see if their experience was similar. Just a tip for everyone, don't bother reading first impressions or early build previews. They are hype pieces that don't give any indication of the final product. Two examples: Aliens Colonial Marines and Dragon Age Inquisition. The former for obvious reasons and the latter had so many design changes within a year that reviewers (I'm thinking of one on Kotaku at the moment) didn't recognize it.

Then, quite honestly, they should have waited and not committed to a date. This tells me you've never coded in your life and therefore don't understand complexity in fixing bugs. Fact of the matter is that on a PC platform, with its myriad of possible configurations compared to consoles, makes it insanely difficult to stamp out all bugs. There will always be bugs.

Can't wait to hear the whole soundtrack. On a side note, I thoroughly enjoyed PS:T soundtrack because the main theme was always somehow present in nearly every other song or tune in the game. Like an undercurrent that keeps rising. It's why I enjoy the Zelda games as well; a shared link or thread between each game.

true, the problem is: this is not the case in PoE - it might be, if there were new talents at every level up, then 12 levels might be enough to fully customize a character, but like this, i feel it is lacking! especially in such a loooooooooooooong game as this one, and level 12 is something you will only see if you complete all the content in the game i guess, so for most people lvl 10 or 11 should be the end anywaybut i will judge the final game Keep words "I feel". It's a design choice. Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 had similar level caps, people complained about it just as much and it didn't affect the quality of the games. If you derive more pleasure from seeing an arbitrary number tick up faster, I've got a great stopwatch for you.

GoG all the way. On the auto patching issue, you can turn off auto patching in Steam. Doesn't prevent one from playing the game. As GoG is mod friendly and DRM free, I think they'll be lenient with the auto patching options. Lets wait and see what they do.

They rather have to be since they've committed to a late march release date. Seems cutting it overly fine to me. Welcome to game development! Those day 1 patches you see is the constant QA testing at work. Regardless whether good or bad, that's the reality.

I can't imagine a game like Baldur's Gate being made in today's marketplace with Kickstarter and Early Access games. For every sensible backer in this thread, there's another clueless berk like the OP who doesn't know the difference between alpha, beta, demo, etc. My faith in humanity only keeps slipping each time I turn on the internet.

Sorry for the misinformation Luckmann.

Would you like my Kickstarter icon on the forums? Because with that you're missing out on the full Pillars of Eternity experience! Obsidian has been smart about their pre-order giveaways as there are no quests/characters blocked off behind a pay wall. Even high paying kickstarter backers (not me) receive the same electronic "boosts" as you and I do. Namely, if you pre-order (checking GOG) the champion pack, you get a pet and an item. Preordering the Hero edition, same thing. PoE on Steam? Ibid. Quick, call the internet pirates, unfair! Champion edition provides you with the soundtrack among other things; unless you are a fetishist for every scrap of promotional artwork and junk, you might have wanted to kickstart back in the day for 1k...or not. In conclusion, you are getting "the full experience". There is nothing within the game that has been parceled and distributed as pre order incentives (that I have seen). I, too, hate it when publishers divvy up content and sell it as DLC or pre-order incentive. There is none of that here.

Basically, wishful thinking.

Wow I'm honestly baffled. I'm sure you guys have the best intentions for Obsidian and their game but these ideas are just that, ideas. It is wishful thinking. Review copies get sent out to press and increasingly to youtuber/twitch personalities. You haven't invented the wheel by wanting TB to review it. Maybe he will do it on behalf of GOG or maybe he was already a backer (eg. Wasteland 2). Exuberance is one thing; suspension of disbelief another. Evidently none in this thread have ever undertaken a serious endeavor to run a contest. I love being devil's advocate but you guys make it too easy.

I concur with that sentiment. Many dev teams have done likewise with their player base and I wouldn't mind seeing Obsidian adding a named NPC or gravestone with that name.

Outsourcing a contest on DeviantArt is ripe with possible PR blunders. Running a contest also takes a large amount of time and resources; you don't see every dev house pull a contest. Final bit, why did you start a new thread rather than appending this post to that one? Same idea.

Fiction. Fantasy. Oh yes, Creative Writing. Leave your pedagogical meanderings in the Who Cares? forum.

I'm glad everyone is using this thread to up their post count. Not like there's anything worthwhile to read here...

If you are on Steam, go to the Steam community forums for those games and look up your issue. I've often found what caused my PC related problems. Second option, google it. Third, get in touch with the developers on their forums and ask for help on those community forums. Otherwise, there is nothing we can do for you. I can't troubleshoot your PC nor do I want to. Unlike consoles, every PC can be optimized and built differently, thus creating a multitude of errors or issues on the client end. Good luck but don't expect Obsidian to know the answer.

Value for price will differ from person to person so trying to find commonality in that respect is moot. Obsidian could charge 10, 50, 90 or whatever amount and some will still say it's too expensive (or not enough, weirdly). The price is whatever the buyer is paying for the product. Marketing can be whatever Paradox imagines as the game in all likelihood will end up on sale or discount within half a year to a year. They've got a sales target (e.g. 100k units sold in a week) for X price; they hit that, they are happy. Don't concern yourselves with price point or day to day minutia. They've got people for that.