ideas for better sales of obsidian

[wih]

 

Honestly I'd take the text heavy PoE over the fully voiced and shallow dialogue trees of Deadfire. I am a big proponent of brevity (and love that quote) but Deadfire does too much of a 180 imho. A balance is prob best.

 

I'd like to note that the DLCs, esp Forgotten Sanctum, are major steps in the right direction however.

I played PoE and Deadfire back to back, both for the first time, and didn't notice any significant change in dialogue style.

 

Reading this thread makes me feel like I must be playing a different game to some of you. I mean - it didn't sell because there's too much philosophy? What?

 

The only person I know confirmed to have tried Pillars and then shortly abandoned it was because it was too hard. If there is anything making this game (or at least the first one - I've never tried Deadfire's lower difficulties) inaccessible it's because it was made for and by powergamers. People who just want to pick a character to RP and click things to death are intimidated by how punishing it is.

 

Not only because there was too much philosophy. My list contained three more reasons.

 

Also have in mind that we, people on this forum, are a self selected bunch. We are here because we like the game. So our opinions are biased. There are roughly one million people (correct me on the numbers if I'm wrong) who played PoE 1 and are not in hurry to buy PoE 2. There is something that at least some of them didn't like about the first game and they are not there to say what it was.

[Jayd]

 

 

Honestly I'd take the text heavy PoE over the fully voiced and shallow dialogue trees of Deadfire. I am a big proponent of brevity (and love that quote) but Deadfire does too much of a 180 imho. A balance is prob best.

 

I'd like to note that the DLCs, esp Forgotten Sanctum, are major steps in the right direction however.

I played PoE and Deadfire back to back, both for the first time, and didn't notice any significant change in dialogue style.

 

Reading this thread makes me feel like I must be playing a different game to some of you. I mean - it didn't sell because there's too much philosophy? What?

 

The only person I know confirmed to have tried Pillars and then shortly abandoned it was because it was too hard. If there is anything making this game (or at least the first one - I've never tried Deadfire's lower difficulties) inaccessible it's because it was made for and by powergamers. People who just want to pick a character to RP and click things to death are intimidated by how punishing it is.

 

Not only because there was too much philosophy. My list contained three more reasons.

 

Also have in mind that we, people on this forum, are a self selected bunch. We are here because we like the game. So our opinions are biased. There are roughly one million people (correct me on the numbers if I'm wrong) who played PoE 1 and are not in hurry to buy PoE 2. There is something that at least some of them didn't like about the first game and they are not there to say what it was.

 

I wasn't trying to pick on you in particular, it was just an example of a complaint I find purely speculative and probably impossible to justify (like much of what is said in this thread).

 

It's precisely because of your last point that I reported on someone I know personally who tried the game and didn't like it. It's nothing as far as data goes but it's better than guessing.

Edited March 4, 2019 by Jayd

[nouser]

"too much philosophy" is a good thing. makes the story intelligent. 

[xzar_monty]

 

Honestly I'd take the text heavy PoE over the fully voiced and shallow dialogue trees of Deadfire. I am a big proponent of brevity (and love that quote) but Deadfire does too much of a 180 imho. A balance is prob best.

 

I'd like to note that the DLCs, esp Forgotten Sanctum, are major steps in the right direction however.

The only person I know confirmed to have tried Pillars and then shortly abandoned it was because it was too hard. If there is anything making this game (or at least the first one - I've never tried Deadfire's lower difficulties) inaccessible it's because it was made for and by powergamers. People who just want to pick a character to RP and click things to death are intimidated by how punishing it is.

 

Wow. I cannot disqualify anyone's experience, but I cannot see how this could be true. I am not a powergamer, I have absolutely no interest in it and I frankly find it a bit strange that some people take powergaming so far. I just want to pick a character and see the story, and PoE definitely wasn't too hard. If anything, it was too easy.

 

Pathfinder: Kingmaker is way too hard for people like that. But not PoE.

[daven]

"too much philosophy" is a good thing. makes the story intelligent. 

 

Sounds a bit pretentious.

[Jayd]

 

 

Honestly I'd take the text heavy PoE over the fully voiced and shallow dialogue trees of Deadfire. I am a big proponent of brevity (and love that quote) but Deadfire does too much of a 180 imho. A balance is prob best.

 

I'd like to note that the DLCs, esp Forgotten Sanctum, are major steps in the right direction however.

The only person I know confirmed to have tried Pillars and then shortly abandoned it was because it was too hard. If there is anything making this game (or at least the first one - I've never tried Deadfire's lower difficulties) inaccessible it's because it was made for and by powergamers. People who just want to pick a character to RP and click things to death are intimidated by how punishing it is.

 

Wow. I cannot disqualify anyone's experience, but I cannot see how this could be true. I am not a powergamer, I have absolutely no interest in it and I frankly find it a bit strange that some people take powergaming so far. I just want to pick a character and see the story, and PoE definitely wasn't too hard. If anything, it was too easy.

 

Pathfinder: Kingmaker is way too hard for people like that. But not PoE.

 

As a teen, I found NWN1's DLC campaign impossible to finish without cheating due to its power spikes. When I played it again as an adult a couple years ago, I breezed through it without a full party. If I had never had that experience as a youngster, I wouldn't believe that some people might find that game too difficult to finish. This is why, with respect, pronouncements like yours are frankly useless. People are terrible at understanding their own skill level and the experiences of people at different skill levels. You are much better at games like this than you give yourself credit for, and for a game to have high sales all the people much worse than you need to at least have a decent time when they pick it up. People who wouldn't even dream of creating a profile on a board like this.

 

After having such an incredibly easy time with both Neverwinters, I tried out PoE 1 on normal difficulty and found it significantly more punishing than NWN. Imagine teenage me trying PoE 1! He would've dumped it in frustration. My friend who did quit is an adult but was probably closer to that level of proficiency in these kinds of games.

[xzar_monty]

I'm not sure whether it's fair to say that my comment was "frankly useless", unless we agree that it would be fair to claim that the people you refer to are just stupid. I don't think either of those things is productive.

 

However, you are absolutely right in pointing out that the cliche about stepping into other people's shoes is a particularly hard thing to do, so I take your point on that. You are also probably right in saying that games like this might require a certain "ease of play" in order to become massive successes. But then, BG2 was a big success, and it certainly wasn't easy. So it's not only about that, although I do agree that it is a factor.

 

Also, Pathfinder: Kingmaker appears to be doing well, and it's incredibly difficult. Perhaps it has found every potential buyer it can have, whereas Deadfire, for whatever reason, has failed rather miserably at that. I don't know.

 

Anyway, my takeaway from your comment would probably be this theory: plenty of players from the -- let's say -- "new generation" tried PoE, found it too hard, got frustrated and didn't come back for Deadfire, which shows rather dramatically in the sales. We can't prove it, but it's plausible, so thanks for that, it's appreciated.

[Verde]

 

 

Honestly I'd take the text heavy PoE over the fully voiced and shallow dialogue trees of Deadfire. I am a big proponent of brevity (and love that quote) but Deadfire does too much of a 180 imho. A balance is prob best.

 

I'd like to note that the DLCs, esp Forgotten Sanctum, are major steps in the right direction however.

The only person I know confirmed to have tried Pillars and then shortly abandoned it was because it was too hard. If there is anything making this game (or at least the first one - I've never tried Deadfire's lower difficulties) inaccessible it's because it was made for and by powergamers. People who just want to pick a character to RP and click things to death are intimidated by how punishing it is.

Wow. I cannot disqualify anyone's experience, but I cannot see how this could be true. I am not a powergamer, I have absolutely no interest in it and I frankly find it a bit strange that some people take powergaming so far. I just want to pick a character and see the story, and PoE definitely wasn't too hard. If anything, it was too easy.

 

Pathfinder: Kingmaker is way too hard for people like that. But not PoE.

Did you finish PoE1 on PotD? I found it nearly impossible without abusing kiting and stuff that I don't want to abuse. So I stuck w Veteran.

 

PoE2 is balanced very nicely, having fun kn Veteran and PoTD with challenges.

 

I would say both games allow both casuals and powergsmers to enjoy. To the poster whose friend who quit PoE1 - did he find it hard even on the lowest difficulties?

Edited March 5, 2019 by Verde

[xzar_monty]

No, I only went up to Veteran which I found quite nice -- I almost never had to reload but there were decent enough challenges on the way. I would be quite happy to agree that PotD is a proper challenge, so when I refer to "too easy" I mean that you have to crank up the difficult to get anything resembling a challenge, i.e. the game is definitely a breezy walkthrough on Normal mode.

 

As for your last question, I am also curious about this. Surely the lowest difficulties should allow starters/amateurs to survive?

[Jayd]

Sorry if the "frankly useless" comment came off as an insult. I had in mind just that such comments aren't helpful for understanding how a game will be received in general unless contextualized by actual data. Could have put more thought into phrasing it.

 

I don't think I asked my friend what difficulty he was playing on, but I assume it was normal. Based on my experience playing normal in PoE1 in the context of what I said about young me and NWN, I think they are plenty of people who would struggle deeply with PoE1 on normal. In fact, if I remember correctly, the tooltip for "normal" said that that difficulty was NOT recommended for players new to RPGs.

 

I also remember having to try pretty hard on normal with stuff like the Llengrath fight even after my party was high enough level that I was mostly on autopilot.

[xzar_monty]

Don't worry, no offense taken.

 

Hmm. You present an interesting thesis which may indeed explain some of the reasons why Deadfire was not a success. That's quite something.

 

Incidentally, I believe some fights are intended to be quite difficult no matter what your level. I think it is because winning them is intended to give you a sense of accomplishment in the end. Obviously, these fights only should and I think do appear towards the end of the game. (Like, Maerwald is supposed to be some great figure but is actually dead easy to beat, and I can perfectly well understand why -- that's a fight you're supposed to win, to give you a start.) In PoE, the only fight I seriously struggled with was the alpine dragon, and I was a bit disappointed by the fact that the game cheated so blatantly, i.e. there were these spirits beaming in that you absolutely couldn't prepare for.

[bringingyouthefuture]

 

How do you explain the sales sucess of Divinity Original Sin 2 ? have seen some screenshots and the graphic and gameplay seem worse than pillars.  dont know how the game sold more than pillars. can someone explain that ?  Anyway i think it is possible to produce something better than divinity original sin 2 . so there is still sales potential for possible future pillars games. 

 

That my friend, is the question of the century. I only played a little, but I hated Divinity Original Sin 2's cheesy humor. I'd love to see a long side-by-side comparison review by someone who has played both games to the end.

 

 

I actually think DOS2 is easier to pick and play - POE2 requires a lot of previous experience, and reading, and trial and error.   I think DOS2 you can pretty much play with a controller and the systems are simple (and complicated when you get further along, so I'm not just saying they are simple) but they are simple enough to start going.   Plus it has the old RPG aspects of being able to touch and move everything which is fun in itself, kill everything, etc. People mention the multi-player which is really popular too.  I just think the learning curve is steeper in POE2, but when you get into it, it is way more rewarding - but I think for most young gamers that isn't fun, or even first time RPG'ers.

 

Perfect example - Super Mario Brothers - maybe one of the most popular NES games ever.  Want to know what a way better game is whose story is amazing Faxanadu.  The only thing was Faxanadu took a lot more reading and the learning curve was steep, but still to this day I will never forget that game, it took me on a journey.  I can say the same thing about POE - intimidating as hell and seems impossible, but once you learn it one of the best games ever.

Edited March 5, 2019 by bringingyouthefuture

[bringingyouthefuture]

I'm not sure whether it's fair to say that my comment was "frankly useless", unless we agree that it would be fair to claim that the people you refer to are just stupid. I don't think either of those things is productive.

 

However, you are absolutely right in pointing out that the cliche about stepping into other people's shoes is a particularly hard thing to do, so I take your point on that. You are also probably right in saying that games like this might require a certain "ease of play" in order to become massive successes. But then, BG2 was a big success, and it certainly wasn't easy. So it's not only about that, although I do agree that it is a factor.

 

Also, Pathfinder: Kingmaker appears to be doing well, and it's incredibly difficult. Perhaps it has found every potential buyer it can have, whereas Deadfire, for whatever reason, has failed rather miserably at that. I don't know.

 

Anyway, my takeaway from your comment would probably be this theory: plenty of players from the -- let's say -- "new generation" tried PoE, found it too hard, got frustrated and didn't come back for Deadfire, which shows rather dramatically in the sales. We can't prove it, but it's plausible, so thanks for that, it's appreciated.

 

I disagree - BG2 was pretty easy ... it could be hard but in general the main game was a breeze.  Sorry late to the convo ...

[MortyTheGobbo]

If Deadfire's sales were indeed less than Obsidian wanted or hoped for, they've got actual marketing and PR professionals figuring out why. There's not much we can come up with that'd be remotely useful.

[thelee]

If Deadfire's sales were indeed less than Obsidian wanted or hoped for, they've got actual marketing and PR professionals figuring out why. There's not much we can come up with that'd be remotely useful.

 

I mean, their marketing guy didn't get his contract renewed (I think it was mentioned he failed to hit some sales targets or something), and they're sending out these surveys about whether turn-based mode would help us recommend pillars to a friend. They're professionals, sure, but that doesn't give them magical insight.

 

Don't get me wrong, I don't think they're going to wander into this thread, read someone's post and slap themselves on the head and be like "OH THAT'S WHY" but it's a curious puzzle to try to figure out nonetheless.

Edited March 5, 2019 by thelee

[xzar_monty]

If Deadfire's sales were indeed less than Obsidian wanted or hoped for, they've got actual marketing and PR professionals figuring out why. There's not much we can come up with that'd be remotely useful.

 

You've got to understand, though, that the marketing and PR professionals are only going to try to explain things after the fact. In other words, they can and will come up with some kind of a story, but whether it's true or not is a completely different thing.

 

I'm not saying they're not professionals, I'm only saying they're working in a field where true knowledge is essentially impossible. Marketing professionals and economists are both in the same positions: they are always good at coming up with stories after the fact, and that's it. Look at the history of their respective fields and see how many times and how often everybody has been completely stumped and surprised by how things went. That's how you know they're working with unknowables. It's not anybody's fault, it's just that the field is too complex.

Edited March 6, 2019 by xzar_monty

[asnjas]

This board has high hopes I tell you what. Took a lot of aplomb and erudition to finally hammer out that grimiore controversy and now this. Is there anything this board cant do.

Edited March 6, 2019 by asnjas

[daven]

 

I'm not sure whether it's fair to say that my comment was "frankly useless", unless we agree that it would be fair to claim that the people you refer to are just stupid. I don't think either of those things is productive.

 

However, you are absolutely right in pointing out that the cliche about stepping into other people's shoes is a particularly hard thing to do, so I take your point on that. You are also probably right in saying that games like this might require a certain "ease of play" in order to become massive successes. But then, BG2 was a big success, and it certainly wasn't easy. So it's not only about that, although I do agree that it is a factor.

 

Also, Pathfinder: Kingmaker appears to be doing well, and it's incredibly difficult. Perhaps it has found every potential buyer it can have, whereas Deadfire, for whatever reason, has failed rather miserably at that. I don't know.

 

Anyway, my takeaway from your comment would probably be this theory: plenty of players from the -- let's say -- "new generation" tried PoE, found it too hard, got frustrated and didn't come back for Deadfire, which shows rather dramatically in the sales. We can't prove it, but it's plausible, so thanks for that, it's appreciated.

 

I disagree - BG2 was pretty easy ... it could be hard but in general the main game was a breeze.  Sorry late to the convo ...

 

Yes, for you.

 

BG is easy IF you understand all the systems. When I first played it as a kid I didn't give anyone armour because I couldn't understand why it lowered my armour value. I played after playing NWN which does the exact opposite... does it explain in the game anywhere about THAC0 and Armour Class? I don't remember.

[xzar_monty]

Not in the game, but it (rather obviously) does in the manuals.

[wih]

 

If Deadfire's sales were indeed less than Obsidian wanted or hoped for, they've got actual marketing and PR professionals figuring out why. There's not much we can come up with that'd be remotely useful.

 

You've got to understand, though, that the marketing and PR professionals are only going to try to explain things after the fact. In other words, they can and will come up with some kind of a story, but whether it's true or not is a completely different thing.

 

I'm not saying they're not professionals, I'm only saying they're working in a field where true knowledge is essentially impossible. Marketing professionals and economists are both in the same positions: they are always good at coming up with stories after the fact, and that's it. Look at the history of their respective fields and see how many times and how often everybody has been completely stumped and surprised by how things went. That's how you know they're working with unknowables. It's not anybody's fault, it's just that the field is too complex.

 

You seem to assume that the field is so complex it is practically impossible to predict what will happen (and  I agree with that) and also that it is practically impossible to understand why something happened after the fact. But I don't think the latter is impossible, just difficult (of course, this also depends on the level of certainty you require - proving something will be absolutely and totally impossible).

 

If you are a game studio you should be able to form a reasonable confidence about why something happened and then apply the lessons in the next game you intend to make.

[xzar_monty]

Well, the number of titles that utterly bomb (and Deadfire certainly bombed to a certain extent) kinda shows that while lessons can be learned to an extent, the entire field is actually and inherently unpredictable. In other words: the amount of uncertainty is a lot bigger than anyone in the producing end would want.

 

To take a parallel from the movie industry which has been extensively studied: the fact remains that nobody knows anything. Neither well-known star actors, nor the budget, nor pre-release hype, nor advertising, nor timing can be regarded as reliable predictors of success. This has been studied by Arthur de Vany et al., and you look it up if you want. (http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.521.7885&rep=rep1&type=pdf)

[Manveru123]

The sales were lower than expected because the whole post-release development proccess tried to cater to a vocal hardcore minority, instead of a casual majority. By trying to fix the game for some players, they effed it up for everyone else. All I can hope for is that Microsoft holds their horses a bit next time, and we won't get a finished product (from the perspective of mechanics and gameplay) a year after the initial release

 

It's not just Obs fault though. Their publisher did a horrible job at marketing.

[xzar_monty]

And how do you know that? (The claim you make in your first sentence.)

[xzar_monty]

(See, what I think reasonably probably killed Deadfire was PoE1: a lot of people were initially enthusiastic about that but then for some reason got seriously disappointed and didn't come back for Deadfire. Deadfire, in itself, did nothing wrong. It was PoE1 that did. Generally, if a title is successful saleswise AND liked by its customers, the sequel will do well.)

[Boeroer]

My guess still is that a lot of people who like fantasy crpgs are not interested in a Pirates of the Caribbean themed game. That, plus it's a sequel. If you look at the numbers how many people bought PoE and how many actually finished it...

Manveru's first sentence is nonsense.

Edited March 7, 2019 by Boeroer