Is Avowed just Pillars 3 by another name?

[slopesandsam]

So, I know there's no information out there on this game beyond what's in the trailer, but...is this PoE 3 in all but name?

What I mean is, this wouldn't be the first franchise to drastically alter its presentation in its third installment.  GTA 1 and 2 were these tiny little top-down driving games before suddenly becoming giant, 3D worlds with GTA3.  And, of course, Fallout 3 drastically changed the presentation of that franchise (for better and/or worse).  So I'm wondering if Avowed is doing the same thing for the PoE franchise, and if so, is it only called Avowed for marketing reasons?

Or is it its own thing that just happens to be set in the PoE universe?

[algroth]

I reckon it'd be its own thing. It's be odd for Pillars III to be branded and marketed as something so completely aside from what the franchise has been so far, and I reckon that having direct narrative ties with the Pillars franchise would only hurt Avowed's accessibility with Eora newcomers as well as leave Pillars fans disappointed, being a pivot not many would likely be wanting to see.

[Ormag]

24 minutes ago, slopesandsam said:

Or is it its own thing that just happens to be set in the PoE universe?

Yes. Hopefully it's story won't involve watchers and metaphysics 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Ormag

[algroth]

Hopefully it *will* involve both things, but from a new perspective.

[Wormerine]

I am curious to see. To me, personally, lack of PoE anywhere in the title suggests a very standalone experience - I don't expect story, systems, themes or tones to be tied in anyway to PoE1&2 (they could be, but could not be).

However, it is also possible that Avowed is PoE3, and change of IP name is used to 1) not scare off new audience 2) not annoy old audience. A lot of conversation around Baldur's Gate3 revolves around "but is it really Baldur's Gate?" Possibly, with the state of the world at the end of PoE2 it would be possible to introduce new protagonist, new story thread and still reveal to the new audience all they need to know (from the point of witness to the Eothas aftermath, rather then with inside knowledge of the Watcher). 

What I find odd is the title - it seems very specific to built a lengthy franchise on... Avowed2? Avowed again? Avowed for life? Everyones Avowed MMO? 

Edited July 30, 2020 by Wormerine

[slopesandsam]

26 minutes ago, algroth said:

I reckon it'd be its own thing. It's be odd for Pillars III to be branded and marketed as something so completely aside from what the franchise has been so far, and I reckon that having direct narrative ties with the Pillars franchise would only hurt Avowed's accessibility with Eora newcomers as well as leave Pillars fans disappointed, being a pivot not many would likely be wanting to see.

So, the thing I think here is: if they're making a AAA game, and assuming it is intended to be a competitor for the Elder Scrolls games (and therefore, likely a very big, open-world game), why use the PoE universe if this isn't intended to be the flagship title going forward?  Because any future isometric PoE games would be overshadowed by this one.

Unless that is, this is PoE 3, and they're trying to brand it like an Elder Scrolls game (which are all better known by their subtitles) and at some point down the line Avowed quietly gets a small-print "Pillars of Eternity" prefix.  Or they're retiring the PoE name, and Avowed is the successor title.

Like I said, I don't know much about marketing, but it makes logical sense that they don't want to scare off potential new customers by calling it PoE 3, and also don't want to piss off existing fans by altering the franchise's format so drastically, so they give it a new name.

OR, they're also working on a AAA PoE 3 that's a Dragon Age competitor, I guess.   Just seems kind of unlikely, though.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Wormerine said:

What I find odd is the title - it seems very specific to built a lengthy franchise on... Avowed2? Avowed again? Avowed for life? Everyones Avowed MMO? 

"Oblivion" had no immediate relation to either Cyrodiil or "Elder Scrolls IV", yet people still bought it. I imagine Elder Scrolls V could have been titled "Dragonborn" and people still would have bought it.

All this to say,  I don't know that there's too much to be gained by reading a lot into the title or worrying about how future installments will be referred to.

[GinaC]

You've got it backwards.  It's Pillars 3 in name only.

It's being advertised as a first person shooter.  Pillars 1 and 2 were isometric "spiritual successors to Baldur's Gate".

In my opinion, this is a money grab that is just trying to cash in on the Pillars name.

[Ormag]

Using the pillars name would be opposite of "cash grab" since deadfire unfortunately didn't sell.

Dropping the name completely might even be a financial decision, so that the new AAA project is not associated with a relatively obscure series which didn't  really cater to the casual masses.

And old fans who have played the Pillars games already know what "eora" is

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, GinaC said:

In my opinion, this is a money grab that is just trying to cash in on the Pillars name.

Feargus has been saying for years that his dream game is "Skyrim in Eora".

I loved Pillars 1. I really liked Pillars 2. Neither sold anywhere close to enough units for there to be a name to "cash in" on.

[algroth]

3 hours ago, slopesandsam said:

So, the thing I think here is: if they're making a AAA game, and assuming it is intended to be a competitor for the Elder Scrolls games (and therefore, likely a very big, open-world game), why use the PoE universe if this isn't intended to be the flagship title going forward?  Because any future isometric PoE games would be overshadowed by this one.

Unless that is, this is PoE 3, and they're trying to brand it like an Elder Scrolls game (which are all better known by their subtitles) and at some point down the line Avowed quietly gets a small-print "Pillars of Eternity" prefix.  Or they're retiring the PoE name, and Avowed is the successor title.

Like I said, I don't know much about marketing, but it makes logical sense that they don't want to scare off potential new customers by calling it PoE 3, and also don't want to piss off existing fans by altering the franchise's format so drastically, so they give it a new name.

OR, they're also working on a AAA PoE 3 that's a Dragon Age competitor, I guess.   Just seems kind of unlikely, though.

I actually think it would be good to develop Pillars as the more niche side-venture to the Avowed flagship, actually. I think in this day and age isometric games will be largely a niche interest and if anything it takes pressure off the franchise to overperform whilst also potentially having a better gateway into the series for newcomers. My one issue about that would be if Pillars suffers as a consequence in the way of either feeling the need for Avowed tie-ins or seeing resources syphoned away, causing a drastic impact in scale, ambition and whatnot, or even leading to the cancellation of Pillars as a franchise in favour of more Avowed games - but if Avowed also renews interest for Pillars and the Eora setting, and we can see a Pillars 3 off of it, that'd be an absolute win.

[kanisatha]

3 minutes ago, algroth said:

I actually think it would be good to develop Pillars as the more niche side-venture to the Avowed flagship, actually. I think in this day and age isometric games will be largely a niche interest and if anything it takes pressure off the franchise to overperform whilst also potentially having a better gateway into the series for newcomers. My one issue about that would be if Pillars suffers as a consequence in the way of either feeling the need for Avowed tie-ins or seeing resources syphoned away, causing a drastic impact in scale, ambition and whatnot, or even leading to the cancellation of Pillars as a franchise in favour of more Avowed games - but if Avowed also renews interest for Pillars and the Eora setting, and we can see a Pillars 3 off of it, that'd be an absolute win.

This is how I see it as well. Avowed will become the "flagship" franchise within the Eora setting because it is in a genre of RPGs where sales expectations can be minimum 10 million (DA:I sales), and perhaps a whole lot more (42 million for Skyrim sales). But then, if Obsidian can use the popularity of Avowed to get at least 10% of Avowed fans to give a PoE game a try, that's all they'll need (alongside the core PoE fans) to make a PoE game financially viable.

[algroth]

6 minutes ago, kanisatha said:

This is how I see it as well. Avowed will become the "flagship" franchise within the Eora setting because it is in a genre of RPGs where sales expectations can be minimum 10 million (DA:I sales), and perhaps a whole lot more (42 million for Skyrim sales). But then, if Obsidian can use the popularity of Avowed to get at least 10% of Avowed fans to give a PoE game a try, that's all they'll need (alongside the core PoE fans) to make a PoE game financially viable.

I think it has an opportunity of being a big hit, but I wouldn't elevate the bar to 10 million units. It's an original series and I don't think Dragon Age or Elder Scrolls are the standard performers in the scene. Fallout didn't perform to that level, or Horizon Zero Dawn for that matter, or the Witcher games prior to the third. But even if it sells around 3-4 million units, I reckon it could mean good things for the franchise moving forward, and again, certainly attract some more attention to the Pillars games potentially.

Edited July 30, 2020 by algroth

[kanisatha]

1 minute ago, algroth said:

I think it has an opportunity of being a big hit, but I wouldn't elevate the bar to 10 million units. It's an original series and I don't think Dragon Age or Elder Scrolls are the standard performers in the scene. Fallout didn't perform to that level, or Horizon Zero Dawn for that matter. But even if it sells around 3-4 million units, I reckon it could mean good things for the franchise moving forward, and again, certainly attract some more attention to the Pillars games potentially.

Fair enough. That number was just meant to be a discussion point and not truly literal.

[Theonlygarby]

I really really hope this is it's own thing.  I like crpg and first person....  But I'd hate to lose POE

[Wormerine]

2 hours ago, algroth said:

I actually think it would be good to develop Pillars as the more niche side-venture to the Avowed flagship, actually.

I don't think Avowed being success makes PoE3 impossible, and I agree there would be a benefit to having a more niche games within the IP.

My bigger worry would be, if Obsidian is genuinely interesting in making it. Sure, it saved a company and, at least initially proved profitable.... but is someone at Obsidian interested in making it? Josh was rather vocal about disliking some things (like classes and RTwP combat), and iI remember him saying that if he were to make another onr he would need to find a way to make a game he would enjoy making, and players would like to play (citation needed). Now, when Obsidian isn't desperate for cash influx... is there someone really passionate about the project to invest years of their life into it? And if so, how far would it depart from original "IE spiritual successor"?

[kanisatha]

6 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

I don't think Avowed being success makes PoE3 impossible, and I agree there would be a benefit to having a more niche games within the IP.

My bigger worry would be, if Obsidian is genuinely interesting in making it. Sure, it saved a company and, at least initially proved profitable.... but is someone at Obsidian interested in making it? Josh was rather vocal about disliking some things (like classes and RTwP combat), and iI remember him saying that if he were to make another onr he would need to find a way to make a game he would enjoy making, and players would like to play (citation needed). Now, when Obsidian isn't desperate for cash influx... is there someone really passionate about the project to invest years of their life into it? And if so, how far would it depart from original "IE spiritual successor"?

I think the likes of Brandon Adler and Adam Brennecke and others who worked on the DLCs for both PoEs may be interested. I feel their visions for the game were better (my subjective view) than Sawyer's.

[algroth]

I think all of them would be interested, they're just also apprehensive about pouring millions into a project that isn't going to interest an audience most likely. But I also don't think you cannot feel some connection or passion for the saga after having lived with it this long and leaving a clear hook for a third installment on top.

[Guest]

I think if they put one person in charge of the narrative and then get the entire team behind that vision, there's a good chance to re-engage the audience.

[Wormerine]

6 minutes ago, Achilles said:

I think if they put one person in charge of the narrative and then get the entire team behind that vision, there's a good chance to re-engage the audience.

I personally thought Fenstermaker/Sawyer made a good combo. All PoE1 needed was more polish, revision, iteration, and it could have been one of the greats.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Wormerine said:

I personally thought Fenstermaker/Sawyer made a good combo. All PoE1 needed was more polish, revision, iteration, and it could have been one of the greats.

Agreed, though I would argue that PoE1 already is one of the greats

 

[ComradeYellow]

6 hours ago, GinaC said:

You've got it backwards.  It's Pillars 3 in name only.

It's being advertised as a first person shooter.  Pillars 1 and 2 were isometric "spiritual successors to Baldur's Gate".

In my opinion, this is a money grab that is just trying to cash in on the Pillars name.

Pillars 1 and 2 were cash grabs trying to cash in the on the Baldur's Gate name.

Pillars has about as big a name as Elder Scrolls did before Morrowind/Oblivion

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, ComradeMaster said:

Pillars 1 and 2 were cash grabs trying to cash in the on the Baldur's Gate name.

I have to respectfully disagree on this one. I think if that were true they would have made more of an effort to march in lock-step with Infinity Engine games, especially once the grognards got a hold of the beta and started complaining about how different it was.

I think this even more evident by how much of a departure the second game was from the first.

Lastly, I don't think "small budget, niche game" and "cash grab" go in the same sentence

[the_dog_days]

9 hours ago, slopesandsam said:

So, the thing I think here is: if they're making a AAA game, and assuming it is intended to be a competitor for the Elder Scrolls games (and therefore, likely a very big, open-world game), why use the PoE universe if this isn't intended to be the flagship title going forward?

I bet if we had the numbers we'd see a sells spike for POE 1 and Deadfire since the announcement. So why use Eora as the setting? Because they already had two games in the setting and they're probably already financially benefiting from the games taking place in the same world.

9 hours ago, slopesandsam said:

Because any future isometric PoE games would be overshadowed by this one.

From what I've heard, it sounds like they won't be making any more isometric games. 

9 hours ago, slopesandsam said:

OR, they're also working on a AAA PoE 3 that's a Dragon Age competitor, I guess.

Whether or not they're working on such a project I don't know, however, if POE3 does happen I imagine that it would in fact look like Dragon Age rather than Elder scrolls.

[ComradeYellow]

52 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Lastly, I don't think "small budget, niche game" and "cash grab" go in the same sentence

A completely risk free crowd funded project paid for by fans who received zero of the post-release profits could very well be considered a cash grab if you want to get down to it.

Which is why so many studios found Kickstarter absolutely seductive and started using it, no risk attached whatsoever.