Concerns regarding the game setting

[searinox]

I was a bit unsettled by something Feargus mentioned in the Gamebanshee interview, namely "Ultimately, we really feel that what an RPG is about is the characters and the story

Edited September 15, 2012 by searinox

[Oerwinde]

I think what he means is that good characters and a good story can make pretty much any setting good. So focusing on those over the setting will elevate the setting anyway.

[WorstUsernameEver]

I don't agree with Feargus there, some RPGs *are* about the setting (Fallout series for example, or Arcanum). That said, J.E. Sawyer already wrote a bunch of blog posts that should hint at the direction they're going for, and I'm not particularly worried:

 

http://forums.obsidi...-better-worlds/

 

http://twofoldsilenc...s-deal-was.html

 

Relevant quote (IMO):

 

I've been rambling here a bit but let me get back to the main point: The Black Hound wasn't really *~ sUbVeRsIvE ~* "this ain't your daddy's RPG!" fantasy. It had elven ruins and fire genasi and Ilmaterian paladins and Maztican sorcerers and crypts full of undead -- all the stuff that made the Forgotten Realms the crazy blend of hardass adventurer-heavy, gods-mess-with-things, cults-and-dracoliches-under-this-rock D&D fantasy it always has been. I, and I think we all, just tried to approach the world with open eyes, asking, "Okay, so let's suppose all of this stuff about the Realms is true. What does that mean for how the people in it live their lives?" It made the world more dark and grim, and sometimes that consideration wound up bucking convention, but we didn't set out to invert fantasy conventions just for the sake of doing it.

[ Edited September 15, 2012 by WorstUsernameEver

[C2B]

First, that interview was about a specific Torment Spiritual Successor. Not this projet.

 

Secondly, Sawyer talked about "designing a world" a lot this past week so I doubt they didn't spend much attention to it. And the world design seemed to be a collarbation between all of them.

[Monte Carlo]

I'm cool with a fairly vanilla setting TBH. It's easier to sell, and this project is selling well so far. I agree that the content within that world is what a game stands or falls on, the crunchy stuff. I find the Forgotten Realms, for example, to be pretty meh. But I loved the IE games. So what Sawyer says in his quote is on the money as far as I'm concerned.

 

I'm pretty confident that they will pull the old classic-with-a-twist trick, and do it well.

[Undecaf]

oops wrong thread...

Edited September 15, 2012 by Undecaf

[Wombat]

Feargus is not the project leader, Sawyer is. It's an established fact that Feargus is just responsible for serving coffee in Obsidian.

[Monte Carlo]

I know, for a fact, that Ferg sits in his underground cave, stroking his cat with his foot on the shark-tank trap door pedal.

[Wombat]

Feargus related jokes - oh, my memories.

[Darth Trethon]

I would say he's got the right idea. The greatest game ever made imo was KotOR(back when BioWare still knew how to make good games) but what made the game so great were the characters and their conflicts a lot more than the setting. You could argue that the Star Wars universe was the setting but that doesn't really fly I think since we all saw how merely being in that universe is not even remotely close to enough to make something half decent. No, the locations were many and you were never in one place for too long....hell the locations weren't even connected beyond the goals and conflicts that the characters were facing. The game's only true focus were the characters and it delivered one of the most memorable stories ever made.

 

So yes, I'm all for focusing on one truly epic story driven by characters. I absolutely do not care for pointless NPCs that do nothing other than reinforce what we know about the world if this focus and development detracts from creating an amazing story with choices and consequences.