Torment Sequel Q&A with Brian Fargo

[Josan]

Planescape: Torment will always be my favourite game. The writing, the characters, the mood, the music, for me nothing will ever top it.

 

Calling this a sequel instead of a successor is a bit misleading but whatever. I'm naturally intrigued by what they're doing and will definitely check it out should it see the light of day. It won't be Planescape: Torment. Nothing ever will. But hopefully it will be a well written, immersive game.

 

I do wonder why WotC are such twits though. It's not like they're doing anything with the setting as far as I know.

[Dream]

And what exactly is wrong with that? I don't understand why you people in this topic are getting so bent out of shape about this. if it going to share some of the same ideas, some of the same theme, and maybe have some references from Torment, then I don't see any problem with the new game using the name. Planescape is word that is a trademark, not Torment.

 

Because saying something like "Torment is a thematic franchise" is retarded when there has been a grand total of one game in the "series." Literally no one thought that until he came a long and started claiming it for the sole purpose of being able to call this game the next Torment despite it having no link to the original game. Plenty of things in media "share some of the ideas," but by the definition of franchise that most normal people use one requires more than a few tenuous thematic links between installments to call them part of the same franchise (especially when they're released almost two decades apart).

 

It's obvious to anyone who read that interview that this game is definitely not Torment 2 by any stretch of the imagination and to claim it to be is simply PR bull**** to try and lure fans into shelling out money (not even Bioware had the audacity to try and pull that **** with Dragon Age). If it shares "thematic elements" then cool, call it a spiritual successor (that's why the god damn term was invented in the first place), but don't call it a sequel.

 

Look at it this way, you don't see Underworld being called Blade 3, Quake being called Doom 3 (or Doom being called Wolf 2), or Dragon Age being called Baldur's Gate 3, and if this was a major studio like Activision trying to revive some old ass franchise by saying the exact same **** ****ing EVERYONE would be flipping their **** over how much of a cash grab it was.

[Huinehtar]

Well if you think about the Twilight Zone series, each episode (and each season) is very different, but it is the same franchise. And TZ is considered as a classic.

 

So why not in a video game?

[Amentep]

So really what they're saying is, "We're going to try and make this game like Planescape: Torment" only "it won't be Planescape: Torment" at which point the only reasonable response, in my mind, is: "Then you should sever all ties, not tout it as a sequel or any of that other nonsense, and just make a game, with its own 'not a cash grab title' and say that it was simply inspired by Planescape: Torment." It's all in the wording. They could have presented it as something inspired, in the same vein, which is what you're hoping it is. That would be fine - but they didn't do that. They went the cash grab, name dropping, 'look at me look at me' route . . . and it's despicable.

 

Seems to me they're doing the same thing Obsidian did with Project: Eternity which heavily touted Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment, Icewind Dale and the Infinity Engine despite the fact that its not set in the Forgotten Realms or the Planes of the D&D game, nor using Bioware's engines.

 

Its a hook. They're saying. "We liked Torment. We're going to do a game that explores themes similar to PST. It'll have "torment" in the title. But it won't be set in the Planescape campaign setting because Hasbro wouldn't license it to us". But just as PE isn't going to be Baldur's Gate 3, Icewind Dale 3 or Planescape 2: Electric Boogaloo, neither is this game.

 

Don't really see what the big deal is, tbh.

 

Because saying something like "Torment is a thematic franchise" is retarded when there has been a grand total of one game in the "series." Literally no one thought that until he came a long and started claiming it for the sole purpose of being able to call this game the next Torment despite it having no link to the original game.

 

Really? Because I always figured if another Planescape game had been done at best its only connections to Torment would be references (like Dak'kon's blades or some other relic) because the story of those characters was - IMO - done and that really only leaves the abiltyi for the sequel to be thematic in nature.

 

Maybe it'd be less of an issue if Black Isle had done the PS1 Planescape game...?

 

EDIT: Clarity.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Amentep

[Malekith]

I don't get what the issue is. No one complains about Final Fantasy sequels.

 

You've never seen someone complain about FF sequels?

 

Every game has an entirely new setting with new game mechanics, characters, etc. but they had to make one an MMO before people complained that they weren't real sequels

 

Apples and oranges, very different thing here. If you can't see why on your own I don't know how to explain it to you. This is every bit as bad, in my eyes, as opening up Black Isle studious again . . . with none of the Black Isle people involved. This isn't a sequel or a 'Torment' like game or anything of the sort, it's just name dropping to get attention for a completely unrelated project.

 

You might want to say, "Well that's Final Fantasy" but you'd miss the point that, "Well that's Final Fantasy," Their games were never meant to be direct sequels (until they started doing that with X-2 and XIII-2). One of the first things pushed by this "Torment" game is that it "is" a sequel . . . part of the "torment franchise" despite not being a sequel, or even having access to any of the same resources. If I were looking for a Planescape: Torment game i'd sort of expect it to be set in Planescape, and have some actual links to the game. This game has no such links, they legally can't have such links.

 

So really what they're saying is, "We're going to try and make this game like Planescape: Torment" only "it won't be Planescape: Torment" at which point the only reasonable response, in my mind, is: "Then you should sever all ties, not tout it as a sequel or any of that other nonsense, and just make a game, with its own 'not a cash grab title' and say that it was simply inspired by Planescape: Torment." It's all in the wording. They could have presented it as something inspired, in the same vein, which is what you're hoping it is. That would be fine - but they didn't do that. They went the cash grab, name dropping, 'look at me look at me' route . . . and it's despicable.

Read this:http://kotaku.com/5935737/the-guy-who-made-planescape-torment-tells-us-what-a-spiritual-successor-would-look-like

from Avellone.

Torment in the title is for the most part a marketing ploy.But even Avellone said that Obsidian might be interested in making A P:T spiritual successor after P:E with Avellone as Lead.

All a P:T successor really neads is a fantastic, unconventional setting, emphasis on story over combat and to be very text heavy.If it matches that crittiria it is in the vein of Planescape:Torment.Will it be as good?Noone knows, but propably not.But its a direction in games that no other game followed,except maybe MotB, and its the direction i enjoy most. Will be a good game?I think so.Better than Torment?No.But it doesn't have to be.Its enough that they will try.DA:O was worse than BG2,but was still a good game.The same can happen here .And i'm happy that it has no conection to the first game.The story of the first is finished and anything they would do at this point would be pointless.Even in Black Isle days, Avellone had an idea of a sequel in the Planescape setting,but it would be a whole new story without the Nameless One.

http://www.rpgwatch....55&ref=0&id=208

and part 2

http://www.rpgwatch....56&ref=0&id=208

Edited January 10, 2013 by Malekith

[Dream]

Well if you think about the Twilight Zone series, each episode (and each season) is very different, but it is the same franchise. And TZ is considered as a classic.

 

So why not in a video game?

Because the Twilight Zone series (and Final Fantasy for that matter) has actually established itself to be a "thematic franchise." They didn't release just one and then wait until 15 years later to make another and be like "hey, this is Twilight Zone episode 2!"

Really? Because I always figured if another Planescape game had been done at best its only connections to Torment would be references (like Dak'kon's blades or some other relic) because the story of those characters was - IMO - done and then thematic.

 

Maybe it'd be less of an issue if Black Isle had done the PS1 Planescape game...?

That's pretty much how I see it too, and like I said in another thread if they said the exact same stuff in that interview but didn't try and pawn this off as a second Torment then I'd be excited as ****, but the way it is now the game just screams cash grab to me. I hope I'm wrong, but don't tell me if some PR guy from Activision tried to pull the "thematic franchise" bull**** on an IP from the last century you wouldn't be like "waaaaaaaaait a minute..."

Read this:http://kotaku.com/5935737/the-guy-who-made-planescape-torment-tells-us-what-a-spiritual-successor-would-look-like

from Avellone.

Torment in the title is for the most part a marketing ploy

Spiritual successor is the key phrase there. As for it being a marketing ploy; that's what scares those of us that are leery about this. If they have to resort to cheap marketing crap like that then maybe this game is going to be all hype.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Dream

[Amentep]

That's pretty much how I see it too, and like I said in another thread if they said the exact same stuff in that interview but didn't try and pawn this off as a second Torment then I'd be excited as ****, but the way it is now the game just screams cash grab to me. I hope I'm wrong, but don't tell me if some PR guy from Activision tried to pull the "thematic franchise" bull**** on an IP from the last century you wouldn't be like "waaaaaaaaait a minute..."

 

Actually I wouldn't care. Primarily I'm interested in who the game makers are and what they say what the game will be as opposed to how they sell it. Activision wants to do "Pitfall in Space, a thematic sequel to the classic Jungle adventure" my main interest is whether I think the game is going to be any good, not whether I feel its a sacrilege to the name of Pitfall Harry because of how Activision has chosen to package the title.

 

I've liked games Brian Fargo's been behind; I backed Wasteland because of that and because I thought that the game sounded good not because I liked the original game (I only played about 20 minutes of it, to be honest). If they kickstart this game - which I understand they are - I'll watch the pitch, read the information, weigh that with how I feel about Fargo's work and decide if I want to back it - regardless of any connections it may / may not have to Torment.

 

Again to me the Torment angle is a hook; its saying "here's a context for you as a gamer to understand what our vision is". However, I never expected a sequel to Planescape: Torment to be Planescape: The Further Adventures of the Nameless One - now even MORE Nameless!" so perhaps my mental framework is vastly different from others expectations.

Edited January 10, 2013 by Amentep

[Ganrich]

I think many of us are disenchanted by the industry. It's 90% marketing and 10% game development. At least from the outside looking in. The initial announcement has people spooked. In the end time will tell. I am excited, but that is because I have faith in many of the devs on these kickstarter projects. Where I am disenchanted with publishers spoon feeding me garbage. I think a few of these devs have been quoted as to saying that it only takes 1 major foul up for the kickstarter house of cards to come tumbling down. This could be it, but I haven't seen evidence of it yet.

[maggotheart]

Everyone always says that PST storyline was closed and finished, and that there was no opening for a sequel. The main character is immortal and was banished to the lower planes, and all of his companions (experienced planeswalkers) are also immortal and vowed to track him down at the end of the game no matter how long it took. That seems to leave the door open for a pretty awesome sequel in my mind.

 

Despite the fact that this Torment game will not be a sequel and there seems to be some pretty transparent marketing hype going on, (and they do deserve to be called on it) I don't see why it couldn't be a good game. If someone with some credibility says they want to make a cRPG with deep writing, I'm on board with that.

[Amentep]

Everyone always says that PST storyline was closed and finished, and that there was no opening for a sequel. The main character is immortal and was banished to the lower planes, and all of his companions (experienced planeswalkers) are also immortal and vowed to track him down at the end of the game no matter how long it took. That seems to leave the door open for a pretty awesome sequel in my mind.

 

Neither Dak'kon or Neeshka are immortal (or shouldn't be as both were regular members of their races unless I'm forgetting something). The other maybe, but I'm not sure I'd be jumping at "Morte, Ignus, Vhailor and FFG travel the planes looking for TNO in the Blood War" game either. What is the narrative hook outside of trying to tidy up the ending of the previous game and put a bow on it? Arguably I'd imagine a sequel like that - which exists solely on wrapping up dangling thread from the first game without a stronger narrative hook to give the new game its own identity - would lessen the impact of the first game, to be honest.

 

EDIT: Clarity again

Edited January 10, 2013 by Amentep

[maggotheart]

Everyone always says that PST storyline was closed and finished, and that there was no opening for a sequel. The main character is immortal and was banished to the lower planes, and all of his companions (experienced planeswalkers) are also immortal and vowed to track him down at the end of the game no matter how long it took. That seems to leave the door open for a pretty awesome sequel in my mind.

 

Neither Dak'kon or Neeshka are immortal (or shouldn't be as both were regular members of their races unless I'm forgetting something). The other maybe, but I'm not sure I'd be jumping at "Morte, Ignus, Vhailor and FFG travel the planes looking for TNO in the Blood War" game either. What is the narrative hook outside of trying to tidy up the ending of the previous game and put a bow on it? Arguably I'd imagine a sequel like that would lessen the impact of the first game, to be honest.

 

Hrm I had the impression that Dak'kon was immortal because of how much time it is implied he has spent with TNO, but in the lore Githzerai definitely have limited lifespans. Maybe had something to do with his vow. Anyway, those concerns could be solved with some good writing, I'm just saying it was not a completely closed storyline like many seem to claim, and personally I would enjoy a game focused on the Blood War and plane travel, which could include a quest for redemption by a petitioner (TNO).

Edited January 10, 2013 by maggotheart

[Dream]

Neither Dak'kon or Neeshka are immortal (or shouldn't be as both were regular members of their races unless I'm forgetting something). The other maybe, but I'm not sure I'd be jumping at "Morte, Ignus, Vhailor and FFG travel the planes looking for TNO in the Blood War" game either. What is the narrative hook outside of trying to tidy up the ending of the previous game and put a bow on it? Arguably I'd imagine a sequel like that - which exists solely on wrapping up dangling thread from the first game without a stronger narrative hook to give the new game its own identity - would lessen the impact of the first game, to be honest.

 

EDIT: Clarity again

 

Pretty much anyone in planescape can become ageless due to being badass or magical enough. Beside that the whole "fought your way out of hell" may be cliche but there's definitely a certain appeal to those type of stories

[Amentep]

Pretty much anyone in planescape can become ageless due to being badass or magical enough. Beside that the whole "fought your way out of hell" may be cliche but there's definitely a certain appeal to those type of stories

 

Right...but would the fans of Planescape Torment be pleased with a game that could be summed up as "TNO and crew fight their way out of the Blood War"? I'm under the impression that that kind of "actiony" concept actually isn't what fans of the game would want.

 

Again I'm not saying that a direct sequel is impossible, you can do a direct sequel to anything. But you need a bigger hook than tying up the loose ends from the previous story. The character arc for TNO is wrapped up so what new character story are you bringing to the table?

Edited January 10, 2013 by Amentep

[alanschu]

Well if you think about the Twilight Zone series, each episode (and each season) is very different, but it is the same franchise. And TZ is considered as a classic.

 

So why not in a video game?

 

 

For me, the real issue is "why call it Torment?"

 

The things he listed are things I want in pretty much all my RPGs.

 

 

The issues I have with calling it Torment is that it will immediately make it linked to PST and hold it to PST's standards, as well as place immediate comparisons during development. It's no longer standing alone.

 

I don't usually consider myself a cynic, but there's no reason, aside from tugging on nostalgia, to call this game Torment.

[Tigranes]

Yeah, I'm fine with that description. If the game is good, and does what they say, fine with me. It would be an issue if a more faithful Planescape setting Torment was possible, e.g. Bethesda outbidding Troika to the Fallout license; but in this case a Planescape: Torment is no longer possible.

[Amentep]

Well if you think about the Twilight Zone series, each episode (and each season) is very different, but it is the same franchise. And TZ is considered as a classic.

 

So why not in a video game?

 

 

For me, the real issue is "why call it Torment?"

 

The things he listed are things I want in pretty much all my RPGs.

 

But in calling it Torment, you still have a better hook for what their goal is than if they just stated the things he listed.

[sorophx]

I hope not.He should consatrate on P:E.I prefer for him to give his 100% in one game than have him do a half assed job in many

this *is* MCA we're talking about. even if he was working on 10 projects at one time, he would still be doing a great job on all of them

[Edmund84]

*sigh*

 

I must admit that this article does not actually fill me with joy, even despite my long-standing love affair with PS:T.

 

I can't say I'm excited or even hopeful in the least. It sounds like a cash grab off the title, until I see something that proves otherwise. I just hope it doesn't turn out to be as shameful as re-opening Black Isle studious with . . . no black isle people involved. Anyways, what little is there doesn't really sound like something that I'd associate with Planescape: Torment in the least. It's not even a Planscape setting, so, really, the 'name drop' of "Torment" and comparisons, insistence that it's another 'torment' game . . . comes off as even more of a soulless cash grab.

 

 

I immediately thought of Dragon Age: Origins, which wasn't even marketed as a sequel but as a "successor," one step removed. Yet it was not the successor to Baldur's Gate by a long shot, while all the marketing, interviews, and what-have-you always mentioned the tandem relation. Thus, all I see are red flags, which increases my suspicious tremendously. You know what they say: Fool me once...

 

These are extremely loaded terms and phrases to throw around willy-nilly, and with each placement I'm more convinced it's a mere marketing ploy and not an original development of merit:

• sequel
  
• make a new Torment game
  
• Torment sequel
  
• natural fit for a Torment game
  

What's interesting is that the wording in the interview appears to conceptually split the subtitle off the original setting Planescape: Torment. Sounds like Fargo wants to stress that the whole sphere around the game should be Torment: Planescape and the game they're working on now is a natural franchise "sequel." Well, that doesn't actually do PS:T justice because of the misuse of a literary/media definition, which I find patronising.

 

se·quel [see-kwuh l]

noun

1. a literary work, movie, etc., that is complete in itself but continues the narrative of a preceding work.

 

se·quel

1: consequence, result

2a : subsequent development

b : the next installment (as of a speech or story); especially : a literary, cinematic, or televised work continuing the course of a story begun in a preceding one

 

Yet we know the setting won't be the same (that part I don't fault them), the story certainly won't be the same, none of the characters would be there. Absolutely no link besides the word Torment! Even DA:O's marketing wasn't that bad.

 

This is not a damn sequel.

 

Here's the thing, Obsidian:

 

Wording matters. What words you choose and where you place them highlights your intent (whether accurate or not) and colors all the subsequent content in the article and beyond. By throwing around the heavily loaded and completely misused terminology, that tells me you are banking so heavily on PS:T nostalgia for salability that you place more emphasis on the nomenclature than the proposed game product and are hoping for blind fans. You know what? If DA:O was marketed without mentioning BG to which it had exceptionally little in common, I wouldn't have minded; probably even enjoyed it for what it was. If all your statements surrounding this new game were strictly about "capture the feeling" and "epic narrative" and whatever, I wouldn't mind; this is why I supported Project Eternity.

 

I'm not a mindless fan-drone zealot and find the approach in this particular article to be, well.... rather offensive.

 

Uhm, you've got the wrong guys here, Obsidian is making Project Eternity, the Torment game is being pitched by Brian Fargo, he's the head of inXile, different company, Obsidian have nothing to to with this, besides the blessing from MCA

[Dream]

Right...but would the fans of Planescape Torment be pleased with a game that could be summed up as "TNO and crew fight their way out of the Blood War"? I'm under the impression that that kind of "actiony" concept actually isn't what fans of the game would want.

 

Again I'm not saying that a direct sequel is impossible, you can do a direct sequel to anything. But you need a bigger hook than tying up the loose ends from the previous story. The character arc for TNO is wrapped up so what new character story are you bringing to the table?

 

At least it would be an actual sequel and not this "Hey guys, we're making another Torment (in name only); give us money!"

 

Like I said, what they've told us so far interests me greatly as a stand alone game, but the fact that they're resorting to this rather cheap appeal to nostalgia to market it is making me leery of whether or not there's any fire behind the flash.

[Bester]

All this fuss for a name.

[Amentep]

What's in a name? that which we call a rose

By any other name would smell as sweet;

[Tigranes]

Right...but would the fans of Planescape Torment be pleased with a game that could be summed up as "TNO and crew fight their way out of the Blood War"? I'm under the impression that that kind of "actiony" concept actually isn't what fans of the game would want.

 

Again I'm not saying that a direct sequel is impossible, you can do a direct sequel to anything. But you need a bigger hook than tying up the loose ends from the previous story. The character arc for TNO is wrapped up so what new character story are you bringing to the table?

 

At least it would be an actual sequel and not this "Hey guys, we're making another Torment (in name only); give us money!"

 

Like I said, what they've told us so far interests me greatly as a stand alone game, but the fact that they're resorting to this rather cheap appeal to nostalgia to market it is making me leery of whether or not there's any fire behind the flash.

 

In Torment's case, this is far better than a direct sequel/prequel/etc featuring TNO.

 

If the game sounds good in the details I'll back it. If not, then I'll start to get pissed about the marketing.

[alanschu]

Well if you think about the Twilight Zone series, each episode (and each season) is very different, but it is the same franchise. And TZ is considered as a classic.

 

So why not in a video game?

 

 

For me, the real issue is "why call it Torment?"

 

The things he listed are things I want in pretty much all my RPGs.

 

But in calling it Torment, you still have a better hook for what their goal is than if they just stated the things he listed.

 

 

It also sets expectations.

 

I agree that it's used as a hook. Fargo will be kickstarting this project, and tugging on the nostalgia of Torment will undoubtedly bring in more money. Still, even Obsidian only said "inspired by the Infinity Engine games" and that was certainly enough.

 

Based on Fargo's interview, I see him trying to shoe-horn in a definition of what makes Torment (which in many cases are nebulous terms that could apply to any project) in an attempt to franchise the term "Torment." He ends up painting himself into a corner by doing so, and removes the creative freedom for themes that Planescape: Torment was allowed to explore. There was nothing forcing PST to have the things that it had in it. Suddenly Fargo has said "A torment game means having these themes." Therefore, the game must have those themes. Themes that were discovered while playing PST are now prescribed because evidently it's what makes the game a "Torment" game. Part of what made PST so great was that I didn't really know what to expect.

 

I'd prefer something new and fresh, along the lines of what PE is doing (and in fact I wouldn't be surprised if PE does an excellent job of wowing me much the same way that Torment did), rather than latching on to an older IP and setting yourselves to the expectations that come along with it.

[Amentep]

It also sets expectations.

 

Of course it does. But so does saying a game is "inspired" by the Infinity Engine. The arguments down in PE's forums show that not everyone agrees as to what "inspired by the IE" should be. BG2 style romance arguments, anyone?

 

I agree that it's used as a hook. Fargo will be kickstarting this project, and tugging on the nostalgia of Torment will undoubtedly bring in more money. Still, even Obsidian only said "inspired by the Infinity Engine games" and that was certainly enough.

 

Based on Fargo's interview, I see him trying to shoe-horn in a definition of what makes Torment (which in many cases are nebulous terms that could apply to any project) in an attempt to franchise the term "Torment." He ends up painting himself into a corner by doing so, and removes the creative freedom for themes that Planescape: Torment was allowed to explore. There was nothing forcing PST to have the things that it had in it. Suddenly Fargo has said "A torment game means having these themes." Therefore, the game must have those themes. Themes that were discovered while playing PST are now prescribed because evidently it's what makes the game a "Torment" game. Part of what made PST so great was that I didn't really know what to expect.

 

I'd prefer something new and fresh, along the lines of what PE is doing (and in fact I wouldn't be surprised if PE does an excellent job of wowing me much the same way that Torment did), rather than latching on to an older IP and setting yourselves to the expectations that come along with it.

 

So your objection is less that this game has tenuous ties to the original game but that you'd like it to have less ties to anything and be more original? Because a lot of people in this thread are arguing the game can't be "good" unless it has more ties to PST (in fact many seeming to have wanted a direct sequel with the same characters).

 

Which kind of proves my point; everyone has a different perception of what "Torment" means - including Fargo. The game that (may) get made will be his (and his teams) perception. That's not limiting - but if you want to see it as such, any game they made would be limited by the creative group's perception of what the game "is".

Edited January 10, 2013 by Amentep

[alanschu]

So your objection is less that this game has tenuous ties to the original game but that you'd like it to have less ties to anything and be more original? Because a lot of people in this thread are arguing the game can't be "good" unless it has more ties to PST (in fact many seeming to have wanted a direct sequel with the same characters).

 

My objection is that (especially given the restraint), there's no point in naming the game Torment aside from tugging on the heart strings since people highly regard the game Torment. For the same reason I'm not a fan of Interplay reviving the old Black Isle Studios name. It's manipulative and not necessary.

 

Stating that they want to make a torment style game would be fine. But noooo, they are naming this game Torment straight up, and have said "Torment games have these themes." What made Torment amazing was that it was new, fresh, and unexpected.

 

He's already handicapped himself for what the game's themes can be (i.e. a rehash of the same themes explored in Torment, so what was surprising and unique in the original game is now being leveraged to acquire more money, all the while undermining the potential for being surprised and unique in the same way that the original game could be."

 

Yes, PE has expectations based on its comparison, but they have some wiggle room in still doing their own thing. Torment 2 has handicapped themselves to have the same things that Torment had. The irony of suggesting "breaking down RPG tropes" like the first game, all the while mandating that the game has to have the same RPG tropes established by the original game. Project Eternity has more freedom because they can take what they want from the "inspired by Infinity Engine games" comment. A lot of it mechanical (which is just a means of delivering an experience, with it's strengths and weaknesses).

 

 

My objection is that this seems like a pretty blatant attempt at grabbing more money for a Kickstarter by latching on to one of the greatest RPGs ever made and milking the title for additional funds. The idea they have is fine, but this isn't the same as "I've been wanting to make Wasteland 2 for decades now." This is "I want to make an RPG that has some of the gameplay elements that Torment established. I might as well name it Torment 2, and all the pitfalls it comes with doing so, because it will get me more money." This coming from Brian Fargo, who allegedly hates big name publishers and all they do, and their sequelitis because sequels are safer, known commodities. And yes, I understand that I work for a company (and on a project) that is a sequel as well. He's underutilizing the kickstarter angle which allows him the creative freedom to try new things, by latching on to such a powerful franchise because it will get him more money.

 

PST is pretty much sacred to me, and I suppose I'm a hypocrite because I was okay with things like Fallout 3 and so forth. But none of those games were developed under the guise of using a novel new funding mechanism that frees developers from their creative shackles and lets them try new and riskier methods.

 

As a developer that works for a big name publisher, what excites me about PE (and even WL2) is that it provides the avenue to make games that are considered "too risky" for big name publishers, and has the potential for them to be home run knockouts that force big name publishers to take notice. Project Eternity is taking general game concepts from a mechanical point of view to proof out that those mechanics are viable for a game dev to focus on. Torment 2 is saying "lets make a game and get more money by associating it as a sequel, while also increasing the intrinsic risk since the idea of satisfying the fans." Project Eternity isn't ACTUALLY an Infinity Engine game (and even then, it's just an engine). If Project Eternity had been "Baldur's Gate 3" then the expectations grow immensely.

 

At least Fallout 3 was pretty unabashedly being made for a different crowd. Torment 2 is being aimed specifically at the same fans of Planescape: Torment, with promises that it will deliver on the same themes and situations that Planescape: Torment did. In other words, this isn't just another isometric RPG... it's a game that is going to blow our minds like Planescape: Torment did. At least it better, since they've leveraged the title in order to solicit more support.

 

 

The game that (may) get made will be his (and his teams) perception. That's not limiting - but if you want to see it as such, any game they made would be limited by the creative group's perception of what the game "is".

 

It is limiting, because we as gamers already know what the game is going to be about - the new and fresh themes that were established in the original. Which is completely contrary to what PST delivered (since Torment 2 is bound to attempt to recreate what PST delivered, lest it be a failure). Might as well just say "we're going to wow you just the same as PST did!" and step on your landmine right from the get go.

 

 

 

It probably doesn't help that I have less confidence in Fargo and Co. delivering (in large part based on conversations/topics he posts on the forum for WL2. I have seen him consider very simple and obvious "third choice" outcomes as being examples of meaningful choices and consequences for WL2. The idea that the third choice actually turn out WORSE for him was something he found pretty surprising. Sure, he was receptive to feedback and admitted he'd need to go back and reexamine, the idea of Torment 2 being a "community developed project" in the same way that WL2 has been doesn't inspire much confidence either.

 

I dunno, I just see people like Avellone and Sawyer as being some of the strongest in their respective suits. I contributed to WL2 because Avellone was involved in some capacity.

Edited January 10, 2013 by alanschu