My fwiw kickstarter economic analysis regarding the rift between the traditionalists and evolutionists

[Blarghagh]

Wow. Either / Or generalisations. Strawmen. Smug superiority. Wilful misrepresentation.

 

I take my hat off to you, but would ask what about the 95% of people here who fall inbetween your two not-very-accurate extremes?

 

What about them? The people here are like 0.5% of the kickstarter backers. They are inconsequential.

[Sensuki]

I didn't think the post was that bad, but I think it has a lot more to do with the amount of disposable income people have. The people who dropped $10K are probably millionaires or they earn over $100K a year at least, and/or are developers themselves.

 

However I am surprised at the whiplash the OP got, the last time I remember getting agitated at people was when I was expressing my utter disappointment about Game of Thrones Season 2 on winteriscoming haha, that wasn't very well received.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Sensuki

[Shades]

I have to say I find this huge anti-romance thing ridiculous (and yes, I'm going to diverge from the topic for a moment because the OP did mention this subject.

 

The IE games seem to be put up on some sort of pedestal as the most amazing things ever (and yes they are awesome games, but they still have flaws like anything else). But guess what? Those same wonderful, brilliant IE games? They had romances (excluding the IWD series). How many people liked Annah and/or Fall from Grace in PS:T? Those were romances. How many people liked Jaheria, Viconia or Aerie in Baldur's Gate 2? Those were romances! And how many people didn't like any of those? Okay those weren't romances.

 

So your old beloved IE games did in fact have those dreaded things called romances in them. And you know what? For the most part they were better in the IE games (unsurprisingly). They weren't all about wham bam thank you ma'am, just look at the numbers of talks they had specific to the romances and most will have more talks than any newer game examples. They didn't have to spell things our for you with little heart icons and terrible flirt lines either. And was there an option to turn romances off in the IE games? Oh wow, I don't think there was. You just, you know, talked to your companions. Half the time you couldn't really tell for sure if you were actually in or starting a romance or not. Unless they were a bit more blatant. In which case you told Anomen to shove off and take a hike over to the nearest garbage can. Either way somehow you'd eventually twig that you were romancing this or that character. And if you didn't want to? You stopped it. Simple as that. Why don't I hear people complaining all the time about those (mostly female) characters from the IE games romancing your character?

 

I can only assume that when one utters the word 'romance' all that springs to mind for those opposed to it these days are examples from the latest (mostly Bioware) games. But that's a bit like me going 'I hate combat or choices in Dragon Age 2, they were done horribly so I don't want to see them in this new game at all (and I'll conveniently ignore the fact that combat and choices were in the IE games). It would just be a waste of resources that could be better used on something like the story and world development.' Remember, all of you who are nuts about combat may be unhappy about the way it has changed in games these days, but some people are equally unhappy with the way romances have been shortened and focused on less choices and content, and instead more on eyecandy over the years. Thankfully this is an Obsidian game, and Obsidian have written decent romances before (hello MotB and Kotor2), so I have faith that they will deliver something great to us with PE. I don't expect or want a romance sim, and I'm not even sure that there will be any romances in PE, but I hope that it will be a great game that I'll love playing anyway. Also, I'm not going to demand that Obsidian take something out simply because I don't happen to use whatever it is much.

 

Anyway, about the two 'factions'... I don't think it's quite that easy to classify people. You'll get people who love the older games for different reasons, people who love games that are older than the IE games, people who love new games, people who are just willing to try any quality game made by a decent company, etc. I mean I could assume that those who are fans of the IE games are probably older, and therefore more likely to have stable jobs and money than younger people who may still be in college. But you'll also get younger gamers who have been introduced to the IE games earlier or recently that really like the way they work too.

 

I'm just happy that so many of us are able and willing to support PE no matter what games they grew up with or what particular function they cannot do without in a game.

[ravenshrike]

Wow. Either / Or generalisations. Strawmen. Smug superiority. Wilful misrepresentation.

 

I take my hat off to you, but would ask what about the 95% of people here who fall inbetween your two not-very-accurate extremes?

He's a particular breed of Codexian which is obnoxiously distasteful. But then, that was blindingly obvious from his previous posts and threads. Not to mention he doesn't even calculate age range in his blather, which tends to have a very large amount to do with the amount of money that can be donated. His subsequent whining about percentages is only true if you assume the majority of people are from Codex or BSN or particularly pro Codex or BSN. Which is almost certainly untrue. None of the people I've gotten to donate go to any either of those sites.

[zlarm]

Haha! Well I guess since my monthly income is a grand total of $0 (or well negative) and I pledged more than a dollar my pledge/income quotient is greater than everyone else. Which means my input is more important?!? I declare that PE should be a carbon copy of DA2. Shed me those warm salty tears 'codexians'.

[FlintlockJazz]

Yeah, sorry metiman, I loved your post in one of the romance threads with the 'alternative' romance approach utilizing the subdue mechanics, but I disagree with your post here. I understand your concern and agree with you on many points but the division between 'Codexians' and 'Biowarians' is not representative of most people I feel and are too extreme, but we are both entitled to our opinons unfortunately as I haven't finished the construction of 'The Device'...

 

Haha! Well I guess since my monthly income is a grand total of $0 (or well negative) and I pledged more than a dollar my pledge/income quotient is greater than everyone else. Which means my input is more important?!? I declare that PE should be a carbon copy of DA2. Shed me those warm salty tears 'codexians'.

 

I am not a Codexian but if PE ends up like either of the Dragon Age games then I will cut your balls off! Yes, yours, I am making you personally responsible now, just you!

[Uomoz]

It's just Codex vs. The Rest of The World as always. Seriously snap out o it. PST and BG1 are my favorite games ever but I don't despise things happened after. Jeez.

[metiman]

I have to say I find this huge anti-romance thing ridiculous (and yes, I'm going to diverge from the topic for a moment because the OP did mention this subject.

 

The IE games seem to be put up on some sort of pedestal as the most amazing things ever (and yes they are awesome games, but they still have flaws like anything else). But guess what? Those same wonderful, brilliant IE games? They had romances (excluding the IWD series). How many people liked Annah and/or Fall from Grace in PS:T? Those were romances. How many people liked Jaheria, Viconia or Aerie in Baldur's Gate 2? Those were romances! And how many people didn't like any of those? Okay those weren't romances.

 

So your old beloved IE games did in fact have those dreaded things called romances in them. And you know what? For the most part they were better in the IE games (unsurprisingly). They weren't all about wham bam thank you ma'am, just look at the numbers of talks they had specific to the romances and most will have more talks than any newer game examples. They didn't have to spell things our for you with little heart icons and terrible flirt lines either. And was there an option to turn romances off in the IE games? Oh wow, I don't think there was. You just, you know, talked to your companions. Half the time you couldn't really tell for sure if you were actually in or starting a romance or not. Unless they were a bit more blatant. In which case you told Anomen to shove off and take a hike over to the nearest garbage can. Either way somehow you'd eventually twig that you were romancing this or that character. And if you didn't want to? You stopped it. Simple as that. Why don't I hear people complaining all the time about those (mostly female) characters from the IE games romancing your character?

 

I can only assume that when one utters the word 'romance' all that springs to mind for those opposed to it these days are examples from the latest (mostly Bioware) games. But that's a bit like me going 'I hate combat or choices in Dragon Age 2, they were done horribly so I don't want to see them in this new game at all (and I'll conveniently ignore the fact that combat and choices were in the IE games). It would just be a waste of resources that could be better used on something like the story and world development.' Remember, all of you who are nuts about combat may be unhappy about the way it has changed in games these days, but some people are equally unhappy with the way romances have been shortened and focused on less choices and content, and instead more on eyecandy over the years. Thankfully this is an Obsidian game, and Obsidian have written decent romances before (hello MotB and Kotor2), so I have faith that they will deliver something great to us with PE. I don't expect or want a romance sim, and I'm not even sure that there will be any romances in PE, but I hope that it will be a great game that I'll love playing anyway. Also, I'm not going to demand that Obsidian take something out simply because I don't happen to use whatever it is much.

 

Anyway, about the two 'factions'... I don't think it's quite that easy to classify people. You'll get people who love the older games for different reasons, people who love games that are older than the IE games, people who love new games, people who are just willing to try any quality game made by a decent company, etc. I mean I could assume that those who are fans of the IE games are probably older, and therefore more likely to have stable jobs and money than younger people who may still be in college. But you'll also get younger gamers who have been introduced to the IE games earlier or recently that really like the way they work too.

 

I'm just happy that so many of us are able and willing to support PE no matter what games they grew up with or what particular function they cannot do without in a game.

 

Well how about we make a deal? You can have your romances if I can have my BG2 style combat without any NextGen elements. What do you say? I don't think romances are the end of the world or anything. Actually I don't have a problem with romances that are actually part of the plot at all. I liked the whole Deionarra thing in PS:T very much. I just think romances as minigames are wasteful. But if they are optional and don't use up 90% of the game budget to write all that lovey dovey dialogue for them fine.

Edited October 5, 2012 by metiman

[norolim]

Don't forget metiman, that there is a third faction. One that won't be backing the project and probably won't be playing the game. I remember you decisevly stated that you belong to this third one, didn't you now.

[Grone]

[Lord of Lost Socks]

Eh. I'm donating 50 dollars before the kickstarter ends. This essentially halves my food budget. Will be eating noodles this month

 

Also, I'm not old-school. Nor am i particrarly Biowarian. I enjoy D&D 4th edition. Really dislike the direction Bioware went with Mass Effect and Dragon Age. I also really enjoyed some of the old school RPGs, though they had some niggling issues I really disliked.

 

So... Wat.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Lord of Lost Socks

[BSoda]

I loved the part where you equated the "starved out" traditionalists (who apparently are only distinguishable to the rest of all backers -aka "Biowarians"- by their strong preferences for turn-based combat mechanics) to johns willing to pay top dollars for prostitutes and than, at the same time, belittled the "Biowarians" (love the term btw) for wanting romance in PE (of course the backhanded insult that what they really want is just virtual sex was a nice ironic touch as well).

Edited October 5, 2012 by BSoda

[Rink]

I disagree partly. This is not the US with just democrats and repulicans. It just isn’t that simple.

Today you sell games by targeting teens, make good graphics, simple hack and slay and collect items mechanic, same style game as most others with some small things changed to make your game stick out. Like preferably targeting the themes that are active in the same year (few years ago vampires, now zombies) or in the scenario (with RPGs you just feature dragons - personal note to that : ok, I don't mind, but still does it have to be on the cover every ******* single time?).

If you are innovative and use a completely new scenario, then you will have a problem finding enough people that want to buy it. Why? Probably because it is harder to tell people what you are selling if you cannot say « it is like … Skyrim but with less arrows to the knee ».

So your game always needs BOTH, traditional elements (so people find immersion and you don’t replace things that work perfectly just to be innovative) and new elements (to distict your product from other products and so people cannot say „buy diablo, it is the same but the original“.

And that is what the developers did here with the classes, some are known, others are innovative.

 

I think where your idea about two groups and their wishes really stops working is with the story. I doubt that even one player here wants to see exactly the same storyline as he has seen before/another amnesia story etc. Innovation with the story and characters is a must and I think if we have that and tactical combat, then we all will be happy holding hands singing praises to the devs in the end. I don’t think our wishes are that far apart that we need several groups.

But of course I would like romances too.

[metiman]

Well it's actually not a third faction per se. It's the same faction but just with a different estimate of how the project is likely to end up. I suppose you could divide the faction into the Pessimists and the Optimists. At that time I was with the Pessimists due to what both Feargus and Sawyer said about cooldowns. It sounded an awful lot like DA:O style cooldowns were probably in the game. Then Sawyer comes here and posts that that was not what he meant by cooldowns. He was just looking for some mechanic to avoid the tedium of walking back and forth between dungeon and camp. He also seemed to be leaning in favor of a slightly modified Vancian system. Which is too my liking. [edit] There was also the quote from Sawyer that was so important to me I decided to use it as my sig. I think it is by far the most important thing I have heard from Obsidian this whole time. It's another thing that has reassured me.

 

So now I am planning to back the project probably at the preorder $25-$65 level. If we get some more specific promises from Obsidian with respect to the whole insta-rest mechanic Sawyer is thinking about and if it sounds like it will either be optional and fully avoidable or it will not be in at all then I'd start looking at greater than pre-order level tiers. More specifically the $140 - $500 range. I really do want to vote with my dollars very badly and I also want the game to have as much development money as possible if it is going to be what was initially promised. If it isn't going to be what was promised initially then I don't particularly care about the project. But at this point I think the game has an excellent chance of being decent. So I am prepared at least for the preorder level.

Edited October 5, 2012 by metiman

[ddillon]

@OP:

 

I'm curious about your rejection of DA:O.

 

Despite some gripes, I enjoyed the IE games. I have mixed feelings about PC-NPC romances (and could do without them). I have several gripes about DA:O pertaining to both story and mechanics. BUT I like and enjoy DA:O (and KotOR, too). Threat-based combat behavior is a marked improvement. I love the rotatable camera. I don't miss spell memorization, clerics, etc. The game isn't perfect, but I accept it as a spiritual successor to BG.*

 

So... What's so bad about DA:O? (Aside from obvious gripes such as smaller party size, etc).

 

*Two disclaimers: First, I *hate* DA2. Second, while I don't miss D&D clerics, I do like the concept of priests as presented in PE Update 15 ("...there are ranks of dedicated adventuring or mercenary priests who have turned the flame of their faith into a spark to ignite the power of their souls. Such men and women have found a divine link to their chosen deity, but their abilities stem solely from within.")

[metiman]

I think where your idea about two groups and their wishes really stops working is with the story. I doubt that even one player here wants to see exactly the same storyline as he has seen before/another amnesia story etc. Innovation with the story and characters is a must and I think if we have that and tactical combat, then we all will be happy holding hands singing praises to the devs in the end. I don’t think our wishes are that far apart that we need several groups.

But of course I would like romances too.

 

DId I mention the story in my rant? I hope not. I suppose the story is the one area where we are all pretty much united. Neither faction wants a bad story. We all want a good compelling story. But for some of us the wrong combat mechanics could ruin the story. I never got to experience the story in Alpha Protocol for instance because I didn't care for the combat mechanics. I could say the same for Dungeon Seige 3. I don't want that to happen to this project.

[norolim]

So now I am planning to back the project[...]

That is until someone spreads rumors about, hmm... streamlined equipment management in PE, at which point you'll write another goodbye letter? Sorry, mate. I just can't treat you seriously after that "integrity" post. And the OP doesn't help with that either.

Edited October 5, 2012 by norolim

[Piccolo]

I think where your idea about two groups and their wishes really stops working is with the story. I doubt that even one player here wants to see exactly the same storyline as he has seen before/another amnesia story etc. Innovation with the story and characters is a must and I think if we have that and tactical combat, then we all will be happy holding hands singing praises to the devs in the end. I don’t think our wishes are that far apart that we need several groups.

But of course I would like romances too.

 

DId I mention the story in my rant? I hope not. I suppose the story is the one area where we are all pretty much united. Neither faction wants a bad story. We all want a good compelling story. But for some of us the wrong combat mechanics could ruin the story. I never got to experience the story in Alpha Protocol for instance because I didn't care for the combat mechanics. I could say the same for Dungeon Seige 3. I don't want that to happen to this project.

Nobody wants a bad story, but I think a lot of younger RPG fans would unwittingly ruin the storyline with their cries for voiced dialogue.

[Sensuki]

So... What's so bad about DA:O? (Aside from obvious gripes such as smaller party size, etc).

 

 

The controls are terrible (one player at a time in isometric mode, oh yay)

The story is crap

The combat is boring

The game changed soooo far from it's original concept in 2003 it's not funny

and it was in no way at all the 'spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate 2'

 

I thought Sten was a cool NPC though.

Edited October 5, 2012 by Sensuki

[metiman]

No. Until the developers themselves spread such rumors. I wasn't responding to user rumors. I was responding to comments from the CEO and the Lead Designer. But if the developers again imply things which seem to indicate that the combat will be awful then, yes, I would again withdraw my support. Why should I support a game that is not only not the kind of game I want, but isn't even the game they promised? The only reason I was interested in the project in the first place is because of the radical promises that were made about the type of game it was going to be.

[Wintersong]

I'm not Traditionalist/Conservative/Codexian. I'm not a New-Is-Better/Biowarian. I feel excluded.

[metiman]

Eh. I'm donating 50 dollars before the kickstarter ends. This essentially halves my food budget. Will be eating noodles this month

 

Also, I'm not old-school. Nor am i particrarly Biowarian. I enjoy D&D 4th edition. Really dislike the direction Bioware went with Mass Effect and Dragon Age. I also really enjoyed some of the old school RPGs, though they had some niggling issues I really disliked.

 

So... Wat.

 

Hmm Fourth Edition. That's a tough one. You don't like ME or DA. You liked some (unspecified) old RPGs. The problem with 4th Edition, what little I know about it is that it's mechanics are not all that much better than Dragon Age. It is still oriented around action gaming. Keeping the battle moving quickly. And convenience. Maybe you represent another faction, but those sorts of game mechanics are getting a bit close to those of Dragon Age or Obliviion. Very NextGen. All about making things easy. Now, everything I've heard about the 4th edition is based on what I have heard about it on the internet. So it may not be quite as bad as I am thinking. Did you dislike 2nd and 3rd Edition?

[metiman]

I'm not Traditionalist/Conservative/Codexian. I'm not a New-Is-Better/Biowarian. I feel excluded.

 

Perhaps you need to start your own faction then. It's strange though. I could have sworn you were on our side.

[Rink]

Yea, I just wanted to say: you didn't say that if they make a good story and companions and tactical combat like we know it from bg2, then I guess everyone would be happy. They don't really need to make romances to please one group or special enhanced combat systems just because some groups maybe pledged more. In my opinion they cannot make a mistake if they focus on story and characters (but that is just my opinion).

[metiman]

I never said that everyone would be happy. I don't think the anti-Traditionalist or Biowarian or whatever you want to call it faction would be at all happy with combat mechanics that are uncomfortably close to those of BG2. They will complain about it loudly and frequently. I just dont' think it is important enough to them to withdraw their pledges. I think some may reduce their pledges if the announcment were made that the combat is going to be more or less exactly like the IE games without any nextgen stuff, but not anywhere near the level they would after an announcement that they just don't have the budget to fit in romances. Haha. I'd break out the popcorn for that. The fallout would be fun to watch.

 

I guess I think that an announcement that PE combat will basically equal BG2 would result in a net increase in funding as the Traditionalist faction's donation amounts jumped by orders of magnitude and the Biowarians' donations dropped slightly. I also think that there would be a net increse upon an announcement that at least some romances will be in as the Non-Traditionalists / Biowarians' donations jumped up, perhaps signfiicantly in the hopes of a true dating simulator, while the Traditionalists' donations dropped but only slightly.