Layoff hits Obsidian?

[Spider]

Alpha protocol was more polarizing, that's for sure. If you liked what it had to offer, you really liked the game. If you didn't, then it's flaws were pretty huge.

 

DSIII wasmore solid, but not spectacular. Good combat mechanics (better on console than PC I imagine, but still good on PC), ok story and characters. It did what it set out to do well. So it selling 820k in it's first month is no surprise.

[C2B]

As I've mentioned in my praising of DSIII before. I firmly believe that DSIII actually has a better basic story and charachters than most Obsidian games (with the exception of KOTOR2 and MOTB)(Not to mention it actually avoided the problems that F:NV gets critized the most for regarding narrative)

 

I agree though that there wasn't anything spectacular in it (Not a Dead Money or a Vault 11). It was a good, solid game in almost every category except Online-Multiplayer, Loot (which is kinda important for the gerne and was probably its biggest problem) and Camera.

[Lexx]

With a better coop-mode, the game would have been a much better runner, imo. I would really love to play the dlc, but can't get me to play it again... alone.

[Flouride]

With a better coop-mode, the game would have been a much better runner, imo. I would really love to play the dlc, but can't get me to play it again... alone.

 

The co-op mode was pretty good with just 2 players. Yea, sometimes the camera would **** you over. But most of the time it didn't bother me at least. With 3 or 4 players it was more annoying, but then again I only played for about 1 or 2 hours with 3 or 4 players. Went through the main game and the DLC with Bendu.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Flouride

[Lexx]

I tried once to play- with 4 people and it was a mess. Someone always blocked everyone from moving forward, then everyone was running around like headless chickens, then the camera was zoomed in so much that you couldn't do any range combat, etc. Pretty sure the coop would have been better if everyone would have had their own camera view. It still would have been possible to limit the area to walk in, so the group cannot split up too much and the reason for why everyone shares one camera (I think it had something to do with loading the areas?) is workarounded... and the general gameplay is better.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Lexx

[Auxilius]

"Alpha Protocol became a Cult Classic "

 

By whose standards? You can't call something a 'cult classic' just because a handful of people like it or else EVERYTHING that wasn't mainstream would be a 'cult classic'.

 

I'll let tvtropes answer that question for me:

A work that may not be commercially popular, but manages to attract a perpetually small fanbase by its ambition, quirks, or the world it created.

Sounds accurate.

[Volourn]

"Yes Volourn. Every nonmainstream title with a niche but dedicated following is a cult classic. "

 

So.. every game/movie/tv show/etc. that wasn't am major hit is a cult classic then? Because, you do realzie, that EVERY THING EVER CREATED has at least a small hardcore fanbase right?

 

L A M E

• Like This
  
• Unlike
  

[Pop]

Kotaku idly speculates that Avellone's overtures toward a Kickstarter gave Microsoft cold feet. Edited March 18, 2012 by Pop

[pmp10]

Kotaku idly speculates that Avellone's overtures toward a Kickstarter gave Microsoft cold feet.

Dose that even make sense given that payments supposedly stopped months ago?

The project was being developed for not-yet-existent console.

It was always bound to be a risk - no need to look for a conspiracy behind it.

[Tigranes]

Kotaku is being stupid, as usual.

 

[Starwars]

It's an extremely dumb article that makes absolutely zero sense. The notion that a publisher would pull the plug on a project, which they have invested time and money into, *simply because of the fact that the developer is excited about the prospects of kickstarter* is... beyond ludicrous.

 

Seriously, where do people get these ideas? And do they even do research on how the game development works before posting junk like that?

 

Jesus christ.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Starwars

[Auxilius]

Kotaku is being stupid, as usual.

 

Indeed. During the party Double Fine made after their kickstarter ended successfully, Schafer talked online with some backers. One of them asked Tim if his relationships with publishers changed after that. Schafer then wrote than publishers couldn't care less about the matter. I don't remember the exact words but basically, it went along those lines:

"You got the money you wanted for your project, that's great. Now let's talk about our contract."

Double Fine is like Obsidian, trying to make AAA titles. It's not a 3 millions dollar project that will trouble people with the means and money to make them, especially when it is so niche. Besides, according to Fargo this time (you can find his message on the Wasteland 2 kickstarter page), 1 million dollars is like 7% of a normal budget.

...

I should become a video games journalist. My message is more sourced than this stupid kotaku article. Damn me if this industry isn't a complete joke.

[WorstUsernameEver]

Kotaku idly speculates that Avellone's overtures toward a Kickstarter gave Microsoft cold feet.

 

That's.. not a Kotaku editorial. Somehow everyone seems to be linking the repost on Kotaku though? It's from RipTen btw. (I know, it's nitpicky, but they even mention RipTen in the body of the text!)

[Nepenthe]

Kotaku is being stupid, as usual.

Funny how this past week has made me look at gaming "journalists" in an entirely new light. It's like they are terrified of the concept of the gamers having a direct input in games, as seen here and in the response of several major outlets towards the fan furore over the ME3 endings.

 

I'm wondering if they're afraid of losing their position or if whoever's footing the bills is driving this.

[Bos_hybrid]

Kotaku is being stupid, as usual.

Funny how this past week has made me look at gaming "journalists" in an entirely new light. It's like they are terrified of the concept of the gamers having a direct input in games, as seen here and in the response of several major outlets towards the fan furore over the ME3 endings.

 

I'm wondering if they're afraid of losing their position or if whoever's footing the bills is driving this.

 

Unfortunately gamers have always had an input into games development. It's why adventure games and space simulators(personal favorite) have basically gone the way of the dodo. It's why every year we get a new CoD yet we will never see another big budget Freespace/Wing commander/Myst.

 

Kickstarter is an avenue for those that want niche games. It will never disrupt the balance of power. Even if projects start getting 5mil in funding that's still nothing to a EA or Activision. What it could do is show publishers that there is still a market for these games. However small, revenue is revenue.

[Nepenthe]

Kotaku is being stupid, as usual.

Funny how this past week has made me look at gaming "journalists" in an entirely new light. It's like they are terrified of the concept of the gamers having a direct input in games, as seen here and in the response of several major outlets towards the fan furore over the ME3 endings.

 

I'm wondering if they're afraid of losing their position or if whoever's footing the bills is driving this.

 

Unfortunately gamers have always had an input into games development. It's why adventure games and space simulators(personal favorite) have basically gone the way of the dodo. It's why every year we get a new CoD yet we will never see another big budget Freespace/Wing commander/Myst.

I think that's proof of the opposite, where a publisher will only cater to the mass market instead of aiming for a niche. The beauty of the kickstarters has been that the same guys who bitch about day one dlc, online passes and whatnot will happily lay down $ 100-200 for a kickstarter. Clearly there's some untapped potential outside the CoD crowd.

[Bos_hybrid]

I think that's proof of the opposite, where a publisher will only cater to the mass market instead of aiming for a niche. The beauty of the kickstarters has been that the same guys who bitch about day one dlc, online passes and whatnot will happily lay down $ 100-200 for a kickstarter. Clearly there's some untapped potential outside the CoD crowd.

 

Big publishers know there is a market there for niche games, they just don't think it worth their time/money/investment. Why would EA put millions of dollars into a new Wing Commander game when that money could go into making BF20192812 and sell 10 times as many copies?

 

Kickstarter can prove them wrong, or it can prove them right. Double Fine and Wasteland aren't great examples due to the fact they are known by the 'hardcore' or the 'older' gamers. If unknown developers start getting funding for their turn based RPG/ adventure games, then publishers might take the niche market more seriously.

[Nepenthe]

I agree with that part, but it's the problem big publishers face, they can't rise the price (ok, they can, see From Ashes, but...). With Kickstarter, people will voluntarily pay more.

 

Too tired to really make a good point, I admit.

[funcroc]

OT: South Park project director Zane Lyon's LI profile (he recommended Casey Kwock and Nicole Evanich)

Edited March 19, 2012 by funcroc

[Volourn]

. "What it could do is show publishers that there is still a market for these games. However small, revenue is revenue."

 

Publishers don't want to make a small profit. They want huge profits. One of the big reasons for this is so if they do have a bomb, they can suffer the losses and not die. Problem with having small profits is if you one game that tanks, youa re screwed.

• Like This
  
• Unlike
  

[Amentep]

The same trend is showing in movies (and to be honest probably any entertainment field with high production cost). As an example last years Green Hornet film (no comment pro or con on quality of same film) made a small profit for the studio that put it out - but not a big enough profit to warrant making a sequel. One of the producers said, essentially, that the studio wanted to spend $120 million dollar to make a film that would return a $300 million profit, not $50 million.

[funcroc]

Paul Fish

Obsidian Entertainment, Irvine, CA

February 2007 - March 2012

Environment Artist

 

Edited March 21, 2012 by funcroc

[funcroc]

Megan Parks' portfolio website

Experience:

2009

[Pop]

So the UE3 game, whatever it is, bore a tech demo, which means... it's not the downloadable title (presumably because Obsidz was aiming for a publisher-free route that wouldn't require a tech demonstration)? Did we ever figure out if that was Project Virginia or something yet to be killed? Is it something they've still got in the cards?

Edited March 21, 2012 by Pop

[C2B]

So the UE3 game, whatever it is, bore a tech demo, which means... it's not the downloadable title (presumably because Obsidz was aiming for a publisher-free route that wouldn't require a tech demonstration)? Did we ever figure out if that was Project Virginia or something yet to be killed? Is it something they've still got in the cards?

 

Most likely that was Virginia. (Called "Vermont" by Fader. Which is weird considering Vermont is two states after NC).

 

On that note we never had any evidence that Viriginia was publisher-free if I recall correctly, Just assumed it.

Edited March 21, 2012 by C2B