Why has PoE2 been sold so badly?

[Boeroer]

3 hours ago, Theonlygarby said:

I'm just starting deadfire(for the 3rd time) after playing pillars of eternity again.  The tone of POE was very grim darkish  Walking into the guilded vale and seeing the bodies hanging from the tree.  Then you find out about the hollowborn crisis after the bell tolls.  It really sets up what is a dark and tragic world where everyone is struggling.

In Deadfire you wake up on a boat and are attacked by pirates. Then you go to a town where people are complaining about... something.  They will help you if you help them.  Then you're off into an open world.  The world is vibrant and beautiful(the art really is beautiful in Deadfire).  The factions are all surviving and don't really care about Eothas.  There is no real tone to the game.  Some are struggling of course, but it's not a universal suffering.  I found the Factions well done, but by the end of it, they all just seem like dinks. 

edit: that's actually quite realstic come to think of it.... because in real life all the factions seem like dinks.

The biggest problem with Deadfire is that it is an open world.  Open worlds are fun, but it is hard to pace a story when you can go anywhere.  I really wish there was an option (maybe new game plus)  where you had the dialog option to just say "We can't stop him, don't bother." because that pretty much cures the feeling of "why am i doing these quests?"

The thing about Deadfire, is that if its the end of the series... it is not a good game story wise.  Though if there is a third game that wraps up the watchers story, then i think the story in Deadfire is great.  It's a real middle episode of a trilogy type of game.  It's setting up a world going through change, where people will have to adapt.

I do love Deadfire but those are 2 things that i think POE did better.

Criticism, wrote down decently. But you are wrong: open world is no fun.

3 hours ago, Theonlygarby said:

i have no friends 

That is unfortunate and also unusual to admit. How come?

[Theonlygarby]

3 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Criticism, wrote down decently. But you are wrong: open world is no fun.

That is unfortunate and also unusual to admit. How come?

Nah i have friends just no nerd friends.  I try to talk to them about this stuff and I can feel the apathy.

 

Honestly... I'm pretty over open worlds.  New Vegas is one of my favorite games... Also i loved kingdom come deliverance.  but the percentage of open world games i've played, compared to how many i've enjoyed is low.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Theonlygarby

[Sven_]

4 hours ago, Boeroer said:

Wow - I had no idea they were involved. I will aks Josh when he streams next time (if I don't miss it).

I've yet to finish this interesting series, but I found the answer. And yeah, I was surprised too. In particular as there was virtually zero German press regarding this, and you'd expect there to if a German artist would be involved in an international production. No matter how big or small.
 

Quote

Bobby Null came to Bell with a suggestion. He had been playing Mount & Blade, a fantasy-themed RPG featuring music played by a German orchestra called Frölich Geschray, and mentioned to Bell that they might be a good fit for Deadfire.

https://www.shacknews.com/article/103473/beneath-a-starless-sky-pillars-of-eternity-and-the-infinity-engine-era-of-rpgs?page=26

What I did find though -- probably because of the lack of press -- was a German forum where somebody was wondering whether Bell had ripped them off.   The guy had also wondered whether he had ripped off another German Artist, as Aim Spirente sounded so familiar to his (they're just both based on an existing sea Shanty).  

 

The Shacknews piece is also interesting because it hints at how much the full VO must have upped Deadfire's budget. 

Edited May 21, 2020 by Sven_

[kanisatha]

On 5/20/2020 at 2:06 AM, SubRosa said:

That may well be. But it only took me about two days to figure it out. I talk to other people about my experiences. After the first day some were excited about what I told them. One was pretty much on the verge of buying it. But after the second day I told them about the lack of big dungeons,  or large clearable outdoor areas, and they weren't so enthused.

Yes I think the issue of people having to buy and play a game to know exactly what's in it and how it plays is overblown imo. In today's world, one can use gameplay videos and streams from other people, including pro reviewers who get their copy of the game in advance, to get a pretty good sense of whether they will like a game. And this can happen fairly soon after a game is released.

[kanisatha]

On 5/20/2020 at 10:14 AM, AeonsLegend said:

But there is a difference, because I enjoyed the worlds in the games mentioned by Gel214th. But I did not enjoy the world in Deadfire. At all. I thought it was boring and the story flimsy.

I agree very much that whether one likes the setting of a game is not just a critical factor but even a foundational factor in whether one will end up liking a game in that setting. The setting is the starting point for whether you like a game. I love the Eora setting. But I can appreciate others may not. That I absolutely hate the Rivellon setting is a big part of why I found D:OS to be a horrible game.

[Sven_]

The change in setting actually reminded me of another series which sequel was perceived to have underperformed, sales-wise.

Dishonored.

The first Dishonored was set in a gritty Steampunk Version of London ca. 1850ish. The second took place further south and replaced that with vistas that reminded you of going on holiday in Southern Europe-- in a good way. Man, that's one game that really hurt bad to see flopping. Such all around fantastic level design. Such amazing world building. And now there probably will be no more of that.

Edited May 21, 2020 by Sven_

[Theonlygarby]

7 hours ago, kanisatha said:

I agree very much that whether one likes the setting of a game is not just a critical factor but even a foundational factor in whether one will end up liking a game in that setting. The setting is the starting point for whether you like a game. I love the Eora setting. But I can appreciate others may not. That I absolutely hate the Rivellon setting is a big part of why I found D:OS to be a horrible game.

I'm not the only one!  I have tried to play both Divinities multiple times and something just completely takes me out of those games.

[Rooksx]

It's not hard to identify why the D:OS setting didn't click for me. The bright campiness of everything was a complete turn-off and made it impossible to get absorbed in the game. That's not to say that the grimdark ambience of PoE1 is so much better.  It was overly dreary; a bit of humour would have beneficially lightened the mood. 

The problem with both PoE game's settings and stories for me is that they're too wrapped up in weird metaphysical concepts and are not personal enough. The population of Eora love to babble on about the gods, souls and the Wheel, but that's not much of a personal motivation to go adventuring. You spend all of PoE1 chasing Thaos without really knowing why. One of the central conflicts in the story is the debate around the use of animancy. It's a little hard though to care about the ethics of an entirely fictional concept which lacks a real-world parallel and has little to do with my PC.

PoE2 improved on this in some ways. I really liked the depiction of the caste system in Neketaka. That's a relatable real-world issue, not a load of metaphysical babble. It was particularly good how quests flowed from the caste structure; that's a nice example of linking setting, story and gameplay. Unfortunately there is, as many have noted, a disconnect between Eothas rampaging around and everything else that's happening. It's particularly problematic because the player's apparent motivation is to reclaim their soul from Eothas, which mostly involves more long-winded discussions about fictional concepts. I found it difficult to give a damn about what Eothas was doing. 

[Boeroer]

17 hours ago, Theonlygarby said:

I'm not the only one!  I have tried to play both Divinities multiple times and something just completely takes me out of those games.

Same

[xzar_monty]

I found the world uninteresting, the dialogue remarkably poor and the turn-based combat extremely off-putting. Also, the lizard (?) as a playable race felt simply stupid, a very bad idea. So I also stopped playing very quickly. A shame. I would have liked to like the games.

[Theonlygarby]

1 hour ago, xzar_monty said:

I found the world uninteresting, the dialogue remarkably poor and the turn-based combat extremely off-putting. Also, the lizard (?) as a playable race felt simply stupid, a very bad idea. So I also stopped playing very quickly. A shame. I would have liked to like the games.

Definitely agree for the most part.  The combat was really the only thing I liked from it.  In general i'm hesitant with Fantasy races, they often come off as cheesy.  The cat people in Elder Scrolls definitely fit into that category.  Cats are so damn tempermental I would actually probably be racist if cat people existed.

[Sven_]

Doesn't surprise me that there's a significant amount of actual dislike for the DOS games. (I've only played the first but the 2nd is said to be similar in structure). Apart of the narrative stuff: Their entire world design is essentially one tactical combat puzzle (where do I go next, and how do I deal with the foes there?). With areas being strictly level gated in an extremely linear fashion (due to how hugely damage scales with levels/items). Also google "Level Maps original sin" if you want to see what I mean in a Picture. The Pillars game, whilst they have lots of combat, are nothing like that. Sure, you can meet opposition yet too strong, but there's usually a) several places to go next and come back later (not all with a heavy focus on combat) and b) progress isn't always halted by opposition deliberately placed straight into your pathway. Additionally, you can actually beat opposition above your tier every once in a while, whilst on DOS, it's oft a straight party wipe.

I've pointed this out probably before, but Larian Marketing found more of an overlap with the audience of tactical game's such as X-Com than with Pillars.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Sven_

[xzar_monty]

40 minutes ago, Theonlygarby said:

In general i'm hesitant with Fantasy races, they often come off as cheesy.

How about elves, dwarves or halflings?

Point being, we're just so used to some fantasy races but not others. Myself included, mind you. So I understand what you mean.

[Rooksx]

What was particularly annoying about the gating in D:OS was that the game initially gave you the illusion of being a lot more open. It seems at first as if you're free too wander wherever you like, only to encounter enemies that you can't possibly beat blocking a path. It would have been preferable for the game to be more honest about its linearity instead of pretending otherwise.

[Theonlygarby]

34 minutes ago, xzar_monty said:

How about elves, dwarves or halflings?

Point being, we're just so used to some fantasy races but not others. Myself included, mind you. So I understand what you mean.

I don't mind dwarves, but i wouldn't play as one.  Elves I would play as.  Halflings... do you mean half elf because thats fine.  I think i've also seen halflings almost gnomeish and i wouldnt make my character a gnome.  Surprisingly I like Orlans even though it kind of goes against everything i've said... I think its because they are cute and angry....  Reminds me of my ex girlfriend.

41 minutes ago, Sven_ said:

Doesn't surprise me that there's a significant amount of actual dislike for the DOS games. (I've only played the first but the 2nd is said to be similar in structure). Apart of the narrative stuff: Their entire world design is essentially one tactical combat puzzle (where do I go next, and how do I deal with the foes there?). With areas being strictly level gated in an extremely linear fashion (due to how hugely damage scales with levels/items). Also google "Level Maps original sin" if you want to see what I mean in a Picture. The Pillars game, whilst they have lots of combat, are nothing like that. Sure, you can meet opposition yet too strong, but there's usually a) several places to go next and come back later (not all with a heavy focus on combat) and b) progress isn't always halted by opposition deliberately placed straight into your pathway. Additionally, you can actually beat opposition above your tier every once in a while, whilst on DOS, it's oft a straight party wipe.

I've pointed this out probably before, but Larian Marketing found more of an overlap with the audience of tactical game's such as X-Com than with Pillars.

That's true... in pillars you generally get to an area and struggle hard on that first map battle, even though you win, you realize you probably need to level up before you continue.  I do remember in DOS2 often going to an area and getting wiped out before i got a shot off... then going somewhere else and the same thing happening. Rinse and repeat until you can find something doable.

 

I think in the end i'm a story first person, and the story does nothing for me.  Also in DOS2 you wear a source disabling neck brace... yet you can use all your magic...  I guess i just dont understand the lore of what exactly source is... I thought it was magic, but nope... you can still use magic.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Theonlygarby

[kanisatha]

On 5/22/2020 at 4:05 AM, Rooksx said:

It's not hard to identify why the D:OS setting didn't click for me. The bright campiness of everything was a complete turn-off and made it impossible to get absorbed in the game.

Agreed. The final straw was areas where you had burning lava fire and then literally right next to it a bunch of cheery flowers and birds and bunnies hopping about. WTF.

On 5/22/2020 at 11:42 AM, xzar_monty said:

I found the world uninteresting, the dialogue remarkably poor and the turn-based combat extremely off-putting. Also, the lizard (?) as a playable race felt simply stupid, a very bad idea.

Yeah, it has to be human-like races for me to be able to play them (as the PC). Even orcs are perfectly fine. But lizards? Just no.

[juanval]

On twitter Sawyer said the game reached the break even point. That's not bad news. And the game slowly continues increasing the sales.

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/1263677679527620609

Edited May 25, 2020 by juanval

[SchroedsCat]

1 hour ago, juanval said:

On twitter Sawyer said the game reached the break even point. That's not bad news. And the game slowly continues increasing the sales.

https://twitter.com/jesawyer/status/1263677679527620609

I saw that too. Would speak for the marketing and maybe time of release just being kind of bad. 

[xzar_monty]

Oh, lovely. Very happy to hear it didn't make a loss. Excellent.

[bugarup]

19 hours ago, kanisatha said:

Yeah, it has to be human-like races for me to be able to play them (as the PC). Even orcs are perfectly fine. But lizards? Just no.

And here I am lamenting the fact that no Star Wars game would allow me to play as a Hutt. 

[Elric Galad]

1 hour ago, SchroedsCat said:

I saw that too. Would speak for the marketing and maybe time of release just being kind of bad. 

And not finished.

Bad difficulty scaling plagued the initial release gameplay more than anything else. More than bugs. More than missing features.

PoE2 is heavy combat focus, at least in terms of spent time, so what to do with an excellent class system if you meet no challenge ?

The game is deep. So it's nice if it finally meets some success. Even only half success.

I wish the game a Marsupilami tail !

Edited May 25, 2020 by Elric Galad

[SchroedsCat]

On 5/22/2020 at 7:09 PM, Theonlygarby said:

Definitely agree for the most part.  The combat was really the only thing I liked from it.  In general i'm hesitant with Fantasy races, they often come off as cheesy.  The cat people in Elder Scrolls definitely fit into that category.  Cats are so damn tempermental I would actually probably be racist if cat people existed.

This one is most sad that you are so underappreciative of the ja'khajiit. Ah, it is a sadness. 

1 hour ago, Elric Galad said:

And not finished.

I regularly play Bethesda games, it needs more than some bugs to scare me off. 

[Elric Galad]

1 minute ago, SchroedsCat said:

I regularly play Bethesda games, it needs more than some bugs to scare me off. 

I didn't speak about the bugs. I was specifically referring to difficulty scaling.

Granted that difficulty scaling isn't exactly Bethesda specialty.

But probably matters less in Skyrim, for example, when the endgame is more about building your house anyway.

[kanisatha]

2 hours ago, bugarup said:

And here I am lamenting the fact that no Star Wars game would allow me to play as a Hutt. 

He. I was only commenting wrt high fantasy games. A sci-fi game ...? I may be more open to playing weird races.

[xzar_monty]

2 hours ago, Elric Galad said:

PoE2 is heavy combat focus, at least in terms of spent time, so what to do with an excellent class system if you meet no challenge ?

I am not sure if this is true. It certainly isn't true in comparison to PoE1. There is an awful lot of filler combat in PoE1, most of which was -- thankfully -- removed for PoE2. I agree there's plenty of combat, but "heavy combat focus", in this genre? I am not so certain.