In Defense of the Story

[Guest]

 

Due to over zealous editing of dialogue, Eothas' motives and plans don't make much logical sense (https://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/174058952291/so-is-the-idea-that-before-the-wheel). That's primarily why I'm disappointed. Logic is the minimum requirement of a story, yes?

 

The second reason I'm disappointed is perhaps that the Watcher is ultimately ineffective. All he does at the end of the game is give his 2 cents to Eothas about what direction he wants the world to go in.

 

Sure, lots of the secondary content is awesome, but the ending plays a big role in what taste the game leaves in your mouth afterwards.

I'd argue that no, logic is in no way a minimum requirement of storytelling, at least not on this planet. See: Romeo and Juliet's motives for marriage/suicide, Iago's motives for jealousy, or Achilles' motives for staying out of battle with the Trojans.

Except that Eothas’ motivations are logical and we don’t need Shakespeare to save us.

The Engwithans create a god to love the kith, and the god that loves the kith believes the kith don’t need gods.

One of the main themes of the game is unintended consequences and this is just a further play on that.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Achilles

[Gregorovitch]

Seeing a bit of (admittedly shallow) criticism of the story here and elsewhere which suprised me. I think Obsidian have been innovative and many people are missing the point.

 

The Eothas story is simply a framing device for the adventures of the Watcher. If you are beelining the crit path and feel like the story is shallow or rushed, well, you're missing 80% of the narrative. This might be compared to Breath of the Wild or more accurately, New Vegas, where the goal is extremely simple because it makes room for the player to make their own narrative journey. Might I also add that this is exactly the type of thing PoE1 copped criticism for neglecting?

 

Instead, the faction politics, exploration and side quests, completed at the leisure of the player, and the Watcher's choices form the narrative, which is far more satisfying than anything on rails.

I haven't finished the game yet (still levle 14) but so I know enough to that I agree wih every word of you post. I think you are exactly correct and that many people are either missing the point (or deliberately missing the point).

[jones092201@gmail.com]

Seeing a bit of (admittedly shallow) criticism of the story here and elsewhere which suprised me. I think Obsidian have been innovative and many people are missing the point.

 

The Eothas story is simply a framing device for the adventures of the Watcher. If you are beelining the crit path and feel like the story is shallow or rushed, well, you're missing 80% of the narrative. This might be compared to Breath of the Wild or more accurately, New Vegas, where the goal is extremely simple because it makes room for the player to make their own narrative journey. Might I also add that this is exactly the type of thing PoE1 copped criticism for neglecting?

 

Instead, the faction politics, exploration and side quests, completed at the leisure of the player, and the Watcher's choices form the narrative, which is far more satisfying than anything on rails.

respectfully disagree here--

 

a frame narrative is Chaucer's storytellers gathered at the tavern.

 

Eothas is a god who has walked from the Dyrwood to Deadfire to literally destroy the underlying metaphysical foundations of Eora. In a situation like that, all factions squabbles and exploitation and side quests are rendered meaningless because, again, a god is going to forever alter kith existence.

 

however--

I do agree that the faction content is where the bulk of narrative focus is placed ( and consequently where the story is strongest).

[Guest]

Times of crisis exacerbate in-group vs out-group biases, not tamp them.

[Opheleus]

I judge games based on how entertaining/engaging they are, and how well they compare to other, similar games in their genre. I wouldn't pit this game up against Skyrim, no sooner than I would against The Witcher 3; too many variables that don't match up. That's why, when it comes to CRPGs, I compare them with one of my all-time favorites: Dragon Age: Origins. Since we're just talking about the main story here (and by extent, the side quests) I won't mention the companions and combat - both of which are important but not as relevant here. 

 

In DA:O your character has great incentive to pursue the main quest line: not only is your life and the lives of everyone in Ferelden on the line, but your character is one of the few who can actually stop the Archdemon. PoE1 also has good incentive, as your character is directly tied with the antagonist and is running out of time. Deadfire forces you to follow Eothas for no real reason, since your actions and desires have little effect in the end. The whole "get your soul back" is a really lazy way of turning you into a bloodhound, and I'm still unsure as to why Eothas even cares as much as he does about the Watcher and their opinions. Surely there were greater Watchers before ours, and it's just weird that a deity of that magnitude (he's clearly superior to the other gods) puts so much stock in a single mortal. 

 

In regards to the side-stuff, DA:O's side-quests fit perfectly into the main plot; you're basically recruiting different factions to help you in the final fight, while solving their particular issues in the process. There's visible change in the factions, and your actions not only shape their future but also change how they aid you. PoE1 worked here as well. Most of the (major) side-quests revolve around animancy, and since animancy is at the root of all issues - especially in the main plot - it makes sense that your actions shift different people's/factions' opinions on it, one way or the other. More importantly, since one of the Watcher's main goals is to stop their descent into madness while learning about themselves and their situation, interacting with and aiding these other factions gives the Watcher a chance at gaining more information. Obviously this changes on a second playthrough - as dealing with Thaos would solve everything right off the bat, but there's no way of knowing that at the start, and the Watcher's actions are logical.

 

Deadfire's factions are great; they're full of interesting NPCs and each faction feels uniquely different from the rest - even their goals don't fully overlap. The problem stems from the fact that, despite the Watcher's best efforts, every faction ends on exactly the same note as it began. Sure, you might be able to pick from 2 different leaders for a few of the factions, but you never get to install any real changes. You're just another tool in their grand plans, and the worst part is - you don't even really need their help. Since you can get to Ukaizo alone, helping out the different factions serves only to hasten your monetary gain. If you make a character that has a background with one of the factions - or really agrees with their goals and ideals - then sure, you might feel more loyalty to 'em. For every other kind of Watcher - there's no reason to go against your morals and side with any of the unwavering powers. 

 

The ending also felt rushed and unfulfilling. Origins ends with the death of the Archdemon, the halt of the Blight, and the Warden a hero - whether alive or dead. PoE1 concludes with a huge revelation, the permanent end to a once-immortal and powerful foe (unless you send him back to the Wheel, I guess), and the improvement or demise of many lives in Dyrwood and the surrounding area - dependent on the Watcher's choices. Deadfire ends with the death of some ancient robot that likes to talk, a chat with a god that lets you slightly alter his original plan (for some reason), and largely unchanged factions - aside from some becoming stronger while others take a back seat or retreat. Oh, and for some reason, the leader of the most powerful faction meets you on Ukaizo, and despite being on relatively good terms with them throughout the game, having vital information about what happened with Eothas and what's to come, and posing no real threat to them (assuming you simply sailed off alone) - they resort to suicide; 'cause, let's be honest, after surviving a god and an ancient robo-dragon, instigating a fight against the Watcher is the most blatanty suicidal and nonsensical decision one could make - especially when it's done by a formely competant and intelligent leader. 

 

That being said, I enjoyed Deadfire, and because of that I can overlook some of its glaring issues and shortcomings when compared to other games in its playground. It's the same reason I enjoyed Skyrim, despite the fact that it was Oblivion's lesser in many regards - main story included. However, none of that excludes the game from criticism. Plus, I haven't even seen any extreme cases of people bashing the game or its main plot. You don't have to agree with someone's opinions to understand 'em, just like you don't have to read and engage with posts that claim PoE is sexist; chuckle, and move on. 

Edited May 30, 2018 by Opheleus

[Fluffle]

Plus, I haven't even seen any extreme cases of people bashing the game or its main plot.

 

 

[Wormerine]

All of this makes me want to ask you: Is Deadfire really THAT bad?

 

Deadfire ain’t bad. It’s pretty good. However, coming from PoE1 I had my expectations and in some aspects I am disappointed. I found quests engaging and Deadfire really fun to explore but the conclusion of the main “plot” of the game left me likewarm. I enjoyed while it lasted, probably more than PoE1 - I found nothing nearly as dull as mid point of PoE1. But When credit rolled PoE1 left me happy and satisfied, and Deadfire left me conflicted. I enjoyed it a lot, and it has tons of good content, but it feels like a lot of set up, with little payoff. That s sort of the problem. The chase after Eothas is good enough, but then doesn’t lead to anything I would call worthwhile. Factions are really good, with tons of great content, but the way the conflict gets resolved feels fairly inconsequential, sudden and forced. Companions feel less “personal” then they did in PoE. And the biggest crime of al - too few new books to read.

[M4xw0lf]

 

Plus, I haven't even seen any extreme cases of people bashing the game or its main plot.

 

 

 

We don't mention metacritic

[Fluffle]

We don't mention metacritic

 

My apologies, I didn't know that. Consider my post retracted.

[Lord_Mord]

@ Khagmas: This is the ****ing non spoiler section. You spoiled the end for me. Thanks!

[Fluffle]

Maybe the thread should be moved to the spoiler section of the forum?

I mean, how is anyone going to defend the story without talking about the story?

[Mari]

Seeing a bit of (admittedly shallow) criticism of the story here and elsewhere which surprised me. I think Obsidian have been innovative and many people are missing the point.

 

The Eothas story is simply a framing device for the adventures of the Watcher. If you are beelining the crit path and feel like the story is shallow or rushed, well, you're missing 80% of the narrative. This might be compared to Breath of the Wild or more accurately, New Vegas, where the goal is extremely simple because it makes room for the player to make their own narrative journey. Might I also add that this is exactly the type of thing PoE1 copped criticism for neglecting?

 

Instead, the faction politics, exploration and side quests, completed at the leisure of the player, and the Watcher's choices form the narrative, which is far more satisfying than anything on rails.

I dont think anyone is "missing the point". The story is shallow and rushed because the game put ZERO effort into combining the main quest with the bulk of the game.

 

The main quest is about a freaking God that has literally risen out of the ground, is sucking souls and crushing villages, is off to do who knows what, and this is ignored and has no impact on the majority of the game?? Last time the Gods were involved there was a huge war and a huge bomb, and I'm supposed to believe that everyone in Deadfire is too busy snorting crushed adra or polishing their cannons to notice? Sorry, but that's just sloppy writing.

 

Like, at least in PoE1 you didn't know where Thanos was. You were following leads and you had to do certain quests to advance. It made it easier to get sidetracked with sidequests (using whatever reason worked for your character) because the story led you there.

 

In PoE2, you (and everyone else) have to duck your head and actively ignore Eothas, who is waving his arms and shouting your name, in order to access 80% of the game. To me, this is very immersion breaking.    

Edited May 31, 2018 by Mari

[Murp]

 

 

 

Why can't people like you just admit that the main plot sucks and that Obsidian need to do better in the future? Is it really so hard?

 

There were a million different ways they could have made the Eothas plot and factions/side content coexist with each other. If they wanted the Eothas plot to be a "framing device" and to focus the main plot around the factions (e.g. New Vegas), they could have easily done so. That's not what happened. What we got instead was railroaded garbage that took up far too many conversations and robbed the game of a more interesting ending.

 

Why can't people like you just get over yourself and accept that a person can have their own perspective?

 

Why do people like you have to be so antagonistic all the time?

 

 

I'm not the one who started this smug ass thread claiming that people who dislike the story are "shallow" and "missing the point". Obsidian fans have got to be some of the most obnoxious I've come across.

 

 

and you've been nothing but an obnoxious troll since I've seen you on this forum.

 

What, me?

[Climhazzard]

My problem with the story is that it doesn't make sense.  Clearly the Engwithans did fine without the wheel, so why would it's destruction lead to the consequences that it supposedly leads to...

Edited May 30, 2018 by Climhazzard

[Karkarov]

My problem with the story is that it doesn't make sense.  Clearly the Engwithans did fine without the wheel, so why would it's destruction lead to the consequences that it supposedly leads to...

See you just applied logic, something most people don't do these days.  How dare you.

 

@fluffle, the game is fine.  User reviews have been, and always will be, 99% complete crap.  You shouldn't even read them, much less consider their views.  Also no, it is a much better game than Eternity 1, the main plot may be shakier, but every other aspect is better.  Considering how short the main plot of the game is, I don't really consider that one thing being weaker when everything else is better a big problem.

[Casper]

My problem with the story is that it doesn't make sense.  Clearly the Engwithans did fine without the wheel, so why would it's destruction lead to the consequences that it supposedly leads to...

as far i understand it...

there was a naturally occurring system in place, not entirely sure if it involved a less organized reincarnation system, or if new souls were created, born into bodies, lived life, died, passed on to some afterlife never to return. etc.

 

when the engwithans placed their new system on top of it, nature adapted to the new system, and perhaps the new engwithan cycle even involved elements of the natural one... well, whatever the case, the old natural one is apparently no longer capable of functioning on its own. for whatever reason, thanks to the egnwithan's interference.

 

or that's about my take on it.

[Mikeymoonshine]

 

My problem with the story is that it doesn't make sense.  Clearly the Engwithans did fine without the wheel, so why would it's destruction lead to the consequences that it supposedly leads to...

as far i understand it...

there was a naturally occurring system in place, not entirely sure if it involved a less organized reincarnation system, or if new souls were created, born into bodies, lived life, died, passed on to some afterlife never to return. etc.

 

when the engwithans placed their new system on top of it, nature adapted to the new system, and perhaps the new engwithan cycle even involved elements of the natural one... well, whatever the case, the old natural one is apparently no longer capable of functioning on its own. for whatever reason, thanks to the egnwithan's interference.

 

or that's about my take on it.

 

 

 

Yeah that's the impression I got. It seems like they broke the natural Wheel in order to create this new one, which basically exists to sustain the gods by siphoning soul essence. Eothas seems to believe that kith will rise to the challenge he has created and restore the natural wheel somehow and that the gods will die or find a way to exist as what they actually are rather than as a lie.

 

[Nokturnal Lex]

Due to over zealous editing of dialogue, Eothas' motives and plans don't make much logical sense (https://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/174058952291/so-is-the-idea-that-before-the-wheel). That's primarily why I'm disappointed. Logic is the minimum requirement of a story, yes?

 

The second reason I'm disappointed is perhaps that the Watcher is ultimately ineffective. All he does at the end of the game is give his 2 cents to Eothas about what direction he wants the world to go in. 

 

Sure, lots of the secondary content is awesome, but the ending plays a big role in what taste the game leaves in your mouth afterwards.

First game had it's faults with logic too. Like the female who opposed Thaos asks why the Watcher did the things they did in their previous life. Blaming them for things that happened in a life they didn't live. Sure, there's some logic involved in a world where souls are passed onto others, but there's nothing logical about blaming someone for something their previous soul did. They're not reincarnated as the exact same person.

 

When an elder passes a soul onto a younger member of the family, it's not like an exact twin of that elder is born.

 

Then there's the whole game's logic that new souls can be created from 2 other souls (Population increase), but that must mean they are completely independent of the other 2 souls, so there's no reason to believe people are just reincarnations of others but instead unique.

 

Then there's the massive holes in Thaos's logic of creating the gods and keeping them secret. He even admitted societies created their own false gods prior to making the current false gods, they achieved nothing but perpetuate the belief in false gods, which did nothing to solve their own existential crisis. (The Engwithans) He admitted to mass murders solely for the purpose of perpetuating the lie, a lie that would've existed with or without his civilizations creation of false gods. It's completely illogical.

 

Not only were both the main stories incredibly pretentious, boring, lacking a sense of urgency and lacking player choice, but they were illogical as well. When you analyze them, it's fairly easy to understand why most people don't like the main story of these games.

 

(BTW this whole thread should be in spoilers)

Edited May 31, 2018 by Nokturnal Lex

[adreeasa]

 the game is fine.  User reviews have been, and always will be, 99% complete crap.  You shouldn't even read them, much less consider their views.  Also no, it is a much better game than Eternity 1, the main plot may be shakier, but every other aspect is better.  Considering how short the main plot of the game is, I don't really consider that one thing being weaker when everything else is better a big problem.

 

 

How is the game better ? The combat is boring as hell, the maps are small and really take away the concept of exploration, the world map is a text based "Press NEXT to continue and collect some random crap " , ship combat is not even worth mentioning, leveling up never felt less exciting, items are a big meh...

 

Sure you have voiced dialogue , and some interesting stories here and there but it all feels waaay too disconnected and i end up wondering " why am i going after that ship .... eh some bounty  given by whom ? oh well, lets play the same boarding ship combat the n-th time and move on "

[Stephen Unsworth-Mitchell]

Personally think story should been bit longer.

 

Think having watcher having an actual effect on the story would been good to, way it is currently we did whole main story had no affect on outcome what so ever which then makes you feel like didn't need do anything at all.  (Sitting facing god at start please just kill me now)

 

Factions I understand how life not black and white and is lot shades grey at time, sometimes we have choose lesser of multiple evils. That said I think fraction end missions where all mostly way to black. Obsidian should given us more range of end missions which had degrees of grey not all black as it more like life and make the choices harder. As is with black endings most don't do or help one pirate instead.

 

That all said want POE 3 hope they learn from both earlier games. Yeah might complain at times about bits of both games but love both games had great time so far.

[drael6464]

 

 the game is fine.  User reviews have been, and always will be, 99% complete crap.  You shouldn't even read them, much less consider their views.  Also no, it is a much better game than Eternity 1, the main plot may be shakier, but every other aspect is better.  Considering how short the main plot of the game is, I don't really consider that one thing being weaker when everything else is better a big problem.

 

 

How is the game better ? The combat is boring as hell, the maps are small and really take away the concept of exploration, the world map is a text based "Press NEXT to continue and collect some random crap " , ship combat is not even worth mentioning, leveling up never felt less exciting, items are a big meh...

 

Sure you have voiced dialogue , and some interesting stories here and there but it all feels waaay too disconnected and i end up wondering " why am i going after that ship .... eh some bounty  given by whom ? oh well, lets play the same boarding ship combat the n-th time and move on "

 

 

Pretty sure the overall size of actually isometric terrain is bigger. 

 

The issue for me, and here I can agree with you, is I really enjoyed the dungeon in poe1. Some people hate that style of play, but I prefer a single, complex area, to hundreds of small areas. There's more sense of challenge in getting to the lowest level of a deep dungeon. And probably more sense of discovery in exploring a single area IMO too. A lot of areas in this game I was like 'this is great. Oh is that it?'. Still loved the game but I feel you on the area size thing.

 

I'm hoping and I think this is realistic, that the DLC's will give us some single, detailed areas to explore. 

[Grimo88]

 

Seeing a bit of (admittedly shallow) criticism of the story here and elsewhere which suprised me. I think Obsidian have been innovative and many people are missing the point.

 

The Eothas story is simply a framing device for the adventures of the Watcher. If you are beelining the crit path and feel like the story is shallow or rushed, well, you're missing 80% of the narrative. This might be compared to Breath of the Wild or more accurately, New Vegas, where the goal is extremely simple because it makes room for the player to make their own narrative journey. Might I also add that this is exactly the type of thing PoE1 copped criticism for neglecting?

 

Instead, the faction politics, exploration and side quests, completed at the leisure of the player, and the Watcher's choices form the narrative, which is far more satisfying than anything on rails.

respectfully disagree here--

 

a frame narrative is Chaucer's storytellers gathered at the tavern.

 

Eothas is a god who has walked from the Dyrwood to Deadfire to literally destroy the underlying metaphysical foundations of Eora. In a situation like that, all factions squabbles and exploitation and side quests are rendered meaningless because, again, a god is going to forever alter kith existence.

 

however--

I do agree that the faction content is where the bulk of narrative focus is placed ( and consequently where the story is strongest).

Agreed - I don't think I used framing device correctly either.

[whiskiz]

 

 

 

Lol @ the assumption that a great story or themes and ideas should be exclusive to film and literature. Far as I'm concerned games of a narrative kind should most definitely aim for these goals just as much as they should good gameplay. Better yet, they ought to think more regularly about how to integrate the two and use the interactivity offered by the medium as a narrative tool and means of expression. That's what I seek in the videogames I play, at least, and why I value videogames as an artform independent of literature, cinema or any other. But hey, maybe I'm just a lazy casual.

I think what they meant was gamers want a cinematic or literary tale which also affords the conceits of gameplay, which, unless you make something like Uncharted or the Last of Us, is not possible in all formats, because player agency and experimentation and nonlinearity is involved. Something has to give. If , for example, the Witcher was really on a dire quest to save the one person in his life he truly unconditionally loved, he wouldn't stop every two seconds for every peasant who needed help.

It's not possible because of a number of factors:

 

Player agency/non linearity/lore as you said.

 

Funding - this is not a Triple-A company and if you ask some, they are barely holding on financially. It seems to be one of those smaller devs that are being supported by the crowd and able to keep going because of it, not some faceless money beast that is just cutting corners for the sake of it.

 

Time - they already had to sacrifice balancing the gameplay of the game and higher difficulties for bugfixing as they stated, having to do those post release instead. Level scaling straight up didn't work on release, there were plenty of bugs and performance issues on release still and a whole host of other problems. Where are they going to get the extra time and again funding, to increase the quality of the story in a game more than it already is - when there's so many other factors to consider? (that are arguably more important to the medium.)

 

The fact that it is a game after all, as touched on - You may want to have the best of everything, but it's just not realistic. Some things are more important and more central than others in every medium and arguably the systems, mechanics, performance, bugs, balance, depth, length are all more important and then there's things like variety, audio, visual and other things that all need to be considered and worked on to end up at an above average level. Wanting to push the one aspect you happen to value higher than others, personally, is again just not a realistic expectation to have. I personally prefer combat depth and challenge and would rather that be expanded upon, but i get there are other needs.

 

Etc.

 

With the above in mind, it's a careful balancing act - where you can't just pump one thing, one aspect to suit individual needs. But rather shoot for a product that is great in all areas, rather than multiple areas suffering to make one amazing. So we get a "good" story, with good combat, good graphics, good audio, good exploration, good sized world that is also open etc etc.

 

P.S I get it - the casual crowd just wants, again, an interactive novel. Well i'm sorry but there's more to a game than that, thank god. There are again other mediums that do specialize in that though. You can't have everything and if you ask me, the gaming industry and anything for-profit caters to you enough already.

This is some nonsense and then some. Firstly, they did not 'sacrifice' balancing the gameplay, as they are fully committed to doing it and are currently doing as much - they merely gave relevance to things that they considered either more priorital or more essential for the game's end ambition first, that would either provide a worse player experience or would require far deeper and more fundamental changes to the game instead - things like, for example, game-breaking bugs, overall aesthetic, narrative design and so on. The choice to leave balancing for after release was done understanding exactly what kind of game they're making and what the game needs.

 

Secondly, you assume "other factors are arguably more important for the medium". No. There are aspects that ought to be present, but whether one is more important to a game than another depends on each individual example. The Wolf Among Us isn't relying on the same qualities as League of Legends is, nor is it a worse game for it. With Deadfire and several other Obsidian games, the primary focus *is* a narrative one - they're making a spiritual successor to the Black Isle games, who all placed their narrative at the forefront and excelled at it. Story is of *utmost* importance, whether you look at the game as a product you're targetting to an audience or as an artistic endeavour. If Deadfire's story fails, then to the majority of its *core audience* the game will fail, and this is not something that can easily be corrected post-launch.

 

As for the "casual crowds just want an interactive novel", **** that ****. Do you also argue that people who listen to songs just want sung poetry? Do you assume people who are into films with dialogue just want recorded theatre? Bollocks. And this utterly asinine stance wouldn't bother me so much if I hadn't heard it so many times before in this medium - as if this game didn't employ its every other aspect around the dialogue to tell a story as well. When you entered Fort Deadlight did you have to pick the option of "sneak", "fight", "bluff", or did you not simply do it? You assume your choices of action in the world itself outside dialogue do not tell a story? Audiovisual narrative is also a thing, or do you assume a film's narrative is only told through dialogue? Just so you know, videogames are an audiovisual medium too and thus employ many of the same devices. Who would have thought?

 

If you feel a game with a narrative focus is too "casual" for you, maybe I can recommend trying another game? One like CS:GO or DotA perhaps, which actually focus around competitive play (and which I, filthy casual that I am, have also played at different stages in my life, but that's an aside)? You would do best there than to stick around a forum for a casual game full of filthy casuals.

 

 

"This is some nonsense and then some. Firstly, they did not 'sacrifice' balancing the gameplay, as they are fully committed to doing it and are currently doing as much"

 

I'm sorry but i had to stop reading your reply after the first sentence. You don't actually know what you're talking about.

 

They actually said - their words not mine - that they had to choose between either bugfixing or balancing the game, a bit before release and went with bugfixing.

 

So yes, yes they did sacrifice balancing actually (i did say it for a reason...) and i know they are fully committed to working on it but that's *post release* as i already said in that post.

 

The irony is someone calling facts "some nonsense and then some"

Edited May 31, 2018 by whiskiz

[Porcelyn]

I feel it's way too short and it was so confusing to me I didn't know what to do and

chose destroy the wheel. It was funny to hear Eder and Xoti whine

but it left me with so many questions. I didn't feel satisfied just bewildered and disappointed. Thanks Wael.

Edited June 1, 2018 by Porcelyn

[hadiqa4444]

Seeing a bit of (admittedly shallow) criticism of the story here and elsewhere which suprised me. I think Obsidian have been innovative and many people are missing the point.

 

The Eothas story is simply a framing device for the adventures of the Watcher. If you are beelining the crit path and feel like the story is shallow or rushed, well, you're missing 80% of the narrative. This might be compared to Breath of the Wild or more accurately, New Vegas, where the goal is extremely simple because it makes room for the player to make their own narrative journey. Might I also add that this is exactly the type of thing PoE1 copped criticism for neglecting?

 

Instead, the faction politics, exploration and side quests, completed at the leisure of the player, and the Watcher's choices form the narrative, which is far more satisfying than anything on rails.

The narrative and story is 100% the worst part of the game IMHO and what dragged it down. It is no where near immersive.

 

this is why deadfire has stopped selling and is looking like flopping