Jump to content
misterjimmy

Josh:"The Watcher don't have particular reason to fight Eothas."

Recommended Posts

Obsidian side stepped the most important question - What is a God?

I think the whole point of the first game was to throw out the question so that we could answer that for ourselves.

"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Pillars Of Eternity 2 you determine which faction gains control of Ukaizo, and hence the fate(short term at least) of the whole archipelago- and possibly the world, since if the Wheel is rebuilt it'll presumably be on that faction's terms. Your interactions with your party members can determine their fates, and even how they feel about each other. When you speak to Eothas you can convince him to follow up the destruction of the Wheel in multiple ways- empower Berath, empower mortals, provide a home for lost souls. The only thing you can't do is prevent the destruction of the Wheel.

 

I am disappointed myself in the final conversation (it actually feels contrived to give the player too much agency- why did Eothas wait for me to get there before breaking the Wheel, and why does my opinion matter so much to him?) and in the way the ending slides don't really give much of an impression of the Wheel being rebuilt, but these cries of "nothing I did made a difference, I was just a spectator in the narrative" are getting a bit silly.

 

I can't say I'm disappointed overall myself in the conclusion as such, only aspects of it, but to add to the above, which I'm generally in agree with, I also don't agree with the notion that the ending is meaningless or any such thing - yet, granted, it feels rather open and inconclusive, as if leading towards a final chapter to close out a 'trilogy' (doesn't necessarily mean that we'll only ever have three Pillars but I would suspect a third game would finally close up the Watcher's arc). One of the central themes of the first game is that of a cultural transition from a more theocentric worldview to a more anthropocentric one, to some extent capitalizing on a similar change of current that we went through during the Renaissance and so on - I think a similar arc seems to be at hand here, with the first game finishing with the reveal of the origin of the gods and their authenticity placed in question, yet their power and the structure that upholds them remaining intact, and with this game's plot being all about that structure being put in crisis as it is literally torn apart. I can see a third game being precisely about the repercussions of this system being put in check, and how one rebuilds it in light of everything that's happened and has been revealed and so on. Of course this is all really a big 'if' concerning what Obsidian eventually do with Pillars 3, but like many other great second parts in a trilogy I feel that it does tell of a particular shift and a particular arc within a greater narrative that, to my mind at least, is going somewhere, and towards a place that at this point in time feels rather exciting.

Edited by algroth
  • Like 4

My Twitch channel: https://www.twitch.tv/alephg

Currently playing: Pillars of Eternity II: Deadfire

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Obsidian side stepped the most important question - What is a God?

I think the whole point of the first game was to throw out the question so that we could answer that for ourselves.
How can it be the whole pt of the first game when their true origins were revealed at the end?

 

Do you prefer 2nd rate Greek Gods sitting around a table arguing? I sure don't.

Edited by Verde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Obsidian side stepped the most important question - What is a God?

I think the whole point of the first game was to throw out the question so that we could answer that for ourselves.
How can it be the whole pt of the first game when their true origins were revealed at the end?

 

Do you prefer 2nd rate Greek Gods sitting around a table arguing? I sure don't.

I hear you and I agree with you that it should have been the end of the discussion, but as one of Eder’s endings (and many people on this forum) will confirm, this isn’t the case.

 

Some people will argue that powerful toaster is still a toaster (i.e. the source of the power is what matters). Some people will argue that a powerful toaster is still powerful (i.e. the existence of the power is what matters).


"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would "what is a god" be an important question? Not gonna lie, I find "do the gods deserve to be gods" more interesting

Because the theme of pillars 1 was “what will you give up for your belief”. Hard to have that conversation without exploring what you believe and why. If you’re still willing to follow a god that isn’t divine, what is it about them that you feel makes them worthy of your devotion?

"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Obsidian side stepped the most important question - What is a God?

I think the whole point of the first game was to throw out the question so that we could answer that for ourselves.
How can it be the whole pt of the first game when their true origins were revealed at the end?

 

Do you prefer 2nd rate Greek Gods sitting around a table arguing? I sure don't.

I hear you and I agree with you that it should have been the end of the discussion, but as one of Eder’s endings (and many people on this forum) will confirm, this isn’t the case.

 

Some people will argue that powerful toaster is still a toaster (i.e. the source of the power is what matters). Some people will argue that a powerful toaster is still powerful (i.e. the existence of the power is what matters).

It's a shame because the first game really had me thinking. Not so much the second.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Obsidian side stepped the most important question - What is a God?

I think the whole point of the first game was to throw out the question so that we could answer that for ourselves.
How can it be the whole pt of the first game when their true origins were revealed at the end?

 

Do you prefer 2nd rate Greek Gods sitting around a table arguing? I sure don't.

I hear you and I agree with you that it should have been the end of the discussion, but as one of Eder’s endings (and many people on this forum) will confirm, this isn’t the case.

 

Some people will argue that powerful toaster is still a toaster (i.e. the source of the power is what matters). Some people will argue that a powerful toaster is still powerful (i.e. the existence of the power is what matters).

It's a shame because the first game really had me thinking. Not so much the second.
I was impressed by how much effort went into fleshing out the factions, but I miss the darker tone of the first game
  • Like 3

"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My only complaint with the main story line was that it was pretty short and the conversations with Eothas wasen't very fleshed out, in my opinion. I didn't mind not having to fight him.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not buying Josh's argument actually - at least not in full. He refuses to adhere to safe Campbellian fantasy tropes, he doesn't want to be subversive about it, he's not interested in "big confrontations" - fine, that's his story. What do you propose instead?

The problem is that "I'm not doing an obvious story trope" is only half of the solution. Where is he going with this? What does he want his story to be? Does he come up with some fresh and interesting ideas instead that neither conform to fantasy cliches nor subvert them? Beacuse otherwise we might be left with a whole bunch of "nothings" in place of the story IMO.

 

I think Josh Sawyer is an excellent creative lead but I agree with the above statement.

There are significant narrative issue plaguing Deadfire-- pacing and critical path urgency in particular--  and these mistakes don't stem from a choice to either adhere to or subvert the monomyth  they come from a larger failure at OBS  to craft a plot-centric narrative that kept focus on the critical path. Any discussion of Campbell-- which, to be clear, is mostly us doing-- is a distraction.

And Deadfire, like any modern rpg, is thoroughly rooted in the monomyth; in plot structure and character function, it is all pretty clear. 

Lastly- whether or not the pc fights the antagonist in the end doesn't alter whether a story fits the monomyth-- Frodo never stands down Sauron with sting. Luke skywalker doesn't the emperor. The monomyth is the journey-- i'm not sure an crpg could ever really exist outside of it.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any discussion of Campbell-- which, to be clear, is mostly us doing-- is a distraction.

 

*proceeds to end the post with another paragraph on Campbell*

 

;)

  • Like 1

"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Any discussion of Campbell-- which, to be clear, is mostly us doing-- is a distraction.

*proceeds to end the post with another paragraph on Campbell*

 

;)

 

haha-- true enough.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will there is being sick of anything to do with Eothas, especially the castle smashing and soul sucking. Plus there is never seeing his stupid face, or listening to his self-indulgent humdrum ever again. Those are particular reasons....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

If the Watcher ends up deciding their fate in 3, then the player has to establish some sort of relationship with them in 2. Otherwise players will bitch about “arbitrary” choices.
  • Like 3

"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

I like Berath though, other than the whole chime thing. lol

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

If the Watcher ends up deciding their fate in 3, then the player has to establish some sort of relationship with them in 2. Otherwise players will bitch about “arbitrary” choices.

 

Which doesn't mean that has to be done poorly, i.e. round table discussions, like some kind of celestial boardroom; Christ. :banghead:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

If the Watcher ends up deciding their fate in 3, then the player has to establish some sort of relationship with them in 2. Otherwise players will bitch about “arbitrary” choices.

 

Which doesn't mean that has to be done poorly, i.e. round table discussions, like some kind of celestial boardroom; Christ. :banghead:

 

Right. They totally should've had us speed dating them instead. Maybe you would've been into that. As for me, I appreciate that they didn't waste any more of my time then they had to.


"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

If the Watcher ends up deciding their fate in 3, then the player has to establish some sort of relationship with them in 2. Otherwise players will bitch about “arbitrary” choices.

 

Which doesn't mean that has to be done poorly, i.e. round table discussions, like some kind of celestial boardroom; Christ. :banghead:

 

Right. They totally should've had us speed dating them instead. Maybe you would've been into that. As for me, I appreciate that they didn't waste any more of my time then they had to.

 

You said dating, not me. The God's could have had their own quests, for items (like in Skyrim) thus letting us interact with them in more meaningful ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right. Skyrim. Meaningful.

  • Like 3

"Art and song are creations but so are weapons and lies"

"Our worst enemies are inventions of the mind. Pleasure. Fear. When we see them for what they are, we become unstoppable."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

If the Watcher ends up deciding their fate in 3, then the player has to establish some sort of relationship with them in 2. Otherwise players will bitch about “arbitrary” choices.

Which doesn't mean that has to be done poorly, i.e. round table discussions, like some kind of celestial boardroom; Christ. :banghead:

Right. They totally should've had us speed dating them instead. Maybe you would've been into that. As for me, I appreciate that they didn't waste any more of my time then they had to.

You said dating, not me. The God's could have had their own quests, for items (like in Skyrim) thus letting us interact with them in more meaningful ways.

Copying Skyrim is like copying the kid that only gets C's. The only thing the Elder Scrolls series is good at is mod support, and well see how well that is going forward.

 

I can't wait to see which features get removed entirely in the next game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still, you can't deny that in Skyrim the gods have quests for you, some personal time with each god would have been cool for Deadfire. Maybe different ending options depending on which gods you did quests for. It seems like they streamlined the main quest as much as possible and compensated with groovy visuals and setpieces to make it more exciting. Can't really blame them, but I wish the main quest had felt more substantial

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not sure if it was the wrong story to tell but it was certainly told poorly. The conversations with the gods are some of the worst scenes I've had to endure in a video game.

If the Watcher ends up deciding their fate in 3, then the player has to establish some sort of relationship with them in 2. Otherwise players will bitch about “arbitrary” choices.
Which doesn't mean that has to be done poorly, i.e. round table discussions, like some kind of celestial boardroom; Christ. :banghead:
Right. They totally should've had us speed dating them instead. Maybe you would've been into that. As for me, I appreciate that they didn't waste any more of my time then they had to.
You said dating, not me. The God's could have had their own quests, for items (like in Skyrim) thus letting us interact with them in more meaningful ways.

Copying Skyrim is like copying the kid that only gets C's. The only thing the Elder Scrolls series is good at is mod support, and well see how well that is going forward.

 

I can't wait to see which features get removed entirely in the next game.

 

That's a red herring argument if I ever did see one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...