Torment: Tides of Numenera?

[LadyCrimson]

Can anyone else not see the total amount pledged on the KS page, at the moment? No biggie, just curious.

[alanschu]

 

$1,854,372

 

[Keyrock]

 

Just spotted this during my routine browsing at Formspring.

Q:  if fans rallied for your participation, would you be able to handle being involved in both project eternity and tides of numenera?

 

Ziets:  I couldn’t work full-time on both PE and Torment, but one option is doing some area design on Torment, much as Avellone did on Wasteland 2.

[LadyCrimson]

$1,854,372

Thanks. Think I figured it out tho...they seem to have changed the page scripting or something so I have to allow more scripts before I can see the number. Strange.

[Malcador]

 

 

If by "adversarial marketing" you mean the snot-nosed punk "CEO" at the beginning, yeah, that was trite.

 

Haha that part was a bit worthy of an eye roll, but I unfortunately found myself having to stop following Fargo on Twitter.

 

Much like how I don't care for political smear campaigns (promote yourself, don't attempt to drag the other guy through mud), Fargo had a tweet that just rubbed me the wrong way.

 

I'm fundamentally indifferent towards microtransactions, have liked all the DLC I have ever purchased (Especially Fallout: New Vegas' - I should probably also note that I don't buy many DLC), and like strong single player stories.  So Torment isn't for me?  I can understand calling out that it's difficult to get funding for the game you want to make, and that kickstarter is an exciting way of doing so.  I'd prefer he focus more on that rather than fostering an "us vs. them" environment which is not healthy for the gaming community in general.  There's already enough petty hate because people like and prefer different things, and I'd rather (admittedly naively) not solicit additional hostility in a community that is already infamous for being quite hostile.

 

 

Fargo's actions actually have me reconsidering supporting inXile.

 

 

A tad dramatic. Just a silly tongue in cheek tweet. Edited March 7, 2013 by Malcador

[Lord of Lost Socks]

Well, if what he says is true, then I'm all for him calling the publishers out on it.

[Drowsy Emperor]

I just had to log on and post regarding this.

 

Its beyond shameful. A bunch of dudes that worked on PST are making a new game that has absolutely nothing to do with any PST character, setting or story but they're using the name and reputation of a fourteen year old game to sell their product, because they didn't have the balls (or the faith in their project?) to sell it as something completely distinct.

 

I won't be buying it and I sincerely hope it fails.

[Keyrock]

I don't follow twitter or social media or any of that fancy fangled new stuff.

 

/chases youngsters away with cane

//grumbles

 

I guess there's some benefit to being oblivious.  Even if I did follow Brian Fargo, as long as he delivers to me a great game, he can make disparaging comments about Mother Teresa for all I care.

 

Apathy, get the sensation.

 

[Oerwinde]

I just had to log on and post regarding this.

 

Its beyond shameful. A bunch of dudes that worked on PST are making a new game that has absolutely nothing to do with any PST character, setting or story but they're using the name and reputation of a fourteen year old game to sell their product, because they didn't have the balls (or the faith in their project?) to sell it as something completely distinct.

 

I won't be buying it and I sincerely hope it fails.

I hope you fail.

[Lord of Lost Socks]

How dare they attempt to create a franchise in the style of PS:T. HOW DARE THEY?!?

 

No one wants this.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Lord of Lost Socks

[alanschu]

A tad dramatic. Just a silly tongue in cheek tweet.

 

As someone following him on Twitter since Wasteland 2's kickstarter, I find the "us vs them" is a rather frequently occurring perspective that comes up from his twitter feed.

 

I also don't consider it simply tongue in cheek.  It's a specific tweet done to rally those that (for whatever reason) are hostile towards DLC and microtransactions, and presents it in a way that such things must be mutually exclusive to a strong single player narrative.

 

We both know it'd be an epic field day if a Frank Gibeau made a silly tongue in cheek tweet that in some way could be perceived as a slight against Kickstarter or one of the projects that used it.

 

 

 

Well, if what he says is true, then I'm all for him calling the publishers out on it.

 

What if it isn't true?

[Nordicus]

How dare they attempt to create a franchise in the style of PS:T. HOW DARE THEY?!?

 

No one wants this.

They are using nigh identical design philosophy!

 

THEY MAKE ME PHYSICALLY ILL! Screw you inXile, you made me vomit all over my keyboard! This happened last time when Creative Assembly made Empire: Total War after Shogun: Total War!

 

*HURGH*

[Drowsy Emperor]

 

I just had to log on and post regarding this.

 

Its beyond shameful. A bunch of dudes that worked on PST are making a new game that has absolutely nothing to do with any PST character, setting or story but they're using the name and reputation of a fourteen year old game to sell their product, because they didn't have the balls (or the faith in their project?) to sell it as something completely distinct.

 

I won't be buying it and I sincerely hope it fails.

I hope you fail.

 

 

I hope you turn 18 someday and realize how stupid that comment was.

 

How dare they attempt to create a franchise in the style of PS:T. HOW DARE THEY?!?

 

No one wants this.

 

Yours too. The only style that can be attributed to PST is part of a setting that won't be featured in this game.

 

As for making a "philosophical" game in the vein of PST, I can only laugh at that. PST's philosophical bent isn't something that can be imitated deliberately. 

 

Besides that wasn't the point. Anyone can claim to make a game inspired by PST. There's nothing wrong with that.

 

But to call the game TORMENT and to write 10 pages stressing how similar the game is going to be to something that's totally unrelated to it is just pathetic.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Malekith]

I just had to log on and post regarding this.

 

Its beyond shameful. A bunch of dudes that worked on PST are making a new game that has absolutely nothing to do with any PST character, setting or story but they're using the name and reputation of a fourteen year old game to sell their product, because they didn't have the balls (or the faith in their project?) to sell it as something completely distinct.

 

I won't be buying it and I sincerely hope it fails.

By the same critiria P:E should also fail.

[Keyrock]

I just had to log on and post regarding this.

 

Its beyond shameful. A bunch of dudes that worked on PST are making a new game that has absolutely nothing to do with any PST character, setting or story but they're using the name and reputation of a fourteen year old game to sell their product, because they didn't have the balls (or the faith in their project?) to sell it as something completely distinct.

 

I won't be buying it and I sincerely hope it fails.

 

On a serious note, I don't understand that kind of attitude.  Okay, even if you do strongly object to the Torment name being used for this, why wouldn't you want a great game to hit the market?  I mean, I understand not supporting the project, but what harm would there be in this game being good?

Edited March 7, 2013 by Keyrock

[Lord of Lost Socks]

 

Well, if what he says is true, then I'm all for him calling the publishers out on it.

 

What if it isn't true?

 

Then he's lying? In which case it's obvious bad form. What's your point?

 

But you know, based on his speech in Unity, and based on other developer's(like Obsidians) comments about publishers, I wouldn't be surprised if it were true.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Lord of Lost Socks

[Malekith]

 

A tad dramatic. Just a silly tongue in cheek tweet.

 

As someone following him on Twitter since Wasteland 2's kickstarter, I find the "us vs them" is a rather frequently occurring perspective that comes up from his twitter feed.

 

I also don't consider it simply tongue in cheek.  It's a specific tweet done to rally those that (for whatever reason) are hostile towards DLC and microtransactions, and presents it in a way that such things must be mutually exclusive to a strong single player narrative.

 

We both know it'd be an epic field day if a Frank Gibeau made a silly tongue in cheek tweet that in some way could be perceived as a slight against Kickstarter or one of the projects that used it.

 

 

 

>Well, if what he says is true, then I'm all for him calling the publishers out on it.

 

What if it isn't true?

 

Can't argue with what you say. But you mentioned having liked New Vegas DLCs. Wouldn't you prefer an expansion with all the content at half the price? DLCs are a form of microtransaction in bigger scale. Having said that i too find Fargo a little too antagonistic against the "others", but it is a good marketing strategy with all the hate against the publisers nowdays. Fargo bets that a significant part of his audience considers modern games inferior and hate publisers, and that the part who likes them wouldn't be interested in his games anyway.

[TSBasilisk]

I think the basic assumption with the "Torment is a crutch" posters is that they're assuming the game won't be good; it'll spend too much time trying to show how it's just like Torment that it'll completely fail to actually stand on its own or live up to the name.

 

In other words, they expect the game to fail from the moment they use the name "Torment", and would rather the name not be sullied by a failure.

[Malcador]

I just had to log on and post regarding this.

 

Its beyond shameful. A bunch of dudes that worked on PST are making a new game that has absolutely nothing to do with any PST character, setting or story but they're using the name and reputation of a fourteen year old game to sell their product, because they didn't have the balls (or the faith in their project?) to sell it as something completely distinct.

 

I won't be buying it and I sincerely hope it fails.

Well, I think people have already went over this. Wonder what is the criteria for a KS to fail, the funding donated by fans was used to make it, so that lessens poor sales' impact, or am I mistaken.

[Keyrock]

I think the basic assumption with the "Torment is a crutch" posters is that they're assuming the game won't be good; it'll spend too much time trying to show how it's just like Torment that it'll completely fail to actually stand on its own or live up to the name.

 

In other words, they expect the game to fail from the moment they use the name "Torment", and would rather the name not be sullied by a failure.

I never subscribed to the "taint the legacy" theory.  For me, games stand on their own.  Master of Orion 3 sucked, I still consider Master of Orion 2 to be an awesome game.  Even if Torment: Tides of Numenera turns out to be garbage, that won't change my views of Planescape: Torment one bit.

[TSBasilisk]

Two ways a successful Kickstarter could fail for inXile:

 

1.) Financial difficulties drive the company under before the game is complete.

2.) The game doesn't sell enough to cover any out-of-pocket expenses the company incurs.

[Drowsy Emperor]

The irritating marketing behind the name is one thing but the point is that PST isn't a generic game that can be easily imitated with newer graphics. It has the stamp of its creator,  the particular time it came out, its engine, the storytelling innovations and the well made setting. None of these things can be repeated either because they're too personal, unavailable or simply not "innovative" (or new) anymore.

 

There literally is nothing to substantiate the "it'll be like torment" at all besides promises and the tenuous connections to the real PST.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Drowsy Emperor

[Lord of Lost Socks]

Yeah, but you're point is that you wish this game to fail, because it uses the Torment name and wants to be similar.

 

I want it to succeed at what it strives to do. Especially now that it's already funded. Don't you want a game similar to Torment that's good?

 

And if by tenuous connections, you mean practically everyone except Avellone(who strongly supports it) working on it...

Edited March 7, 2013 by Lord of Lost Socks

[maggotheart]

I love how it's not enough that someone not back the project, they have to hope it fails. That is such a petty and narrow minded view - If you like SP RPGs, you should be hoping this is successful, whether you hate the idea or not. We need all of these projects to succeed if we want to see more of them. So what if they are using the names of the old games to generate interest? The negativity is pointless, counter-productive and self-defeating.

 

 

In other words, they expect the game to fail from the moment they use the name "Torment", and would rather the name not be sullied by a failure.

 

If the people who made the game aren't worried about sullying the name, then those so called fans shouldnt have any leg to stand on getting upset about it either.

Edited March 7, 2013 by maggotheart

[Malcador]

As someone following him on Twitter since Wasteland 2's kickstarter, I find the "us vs them" is a rather frequently occurring perspective that comes up from his twitter feed.

 

I also don't consider it simply tongue in cheek.  It's a specific tweet done to rally those that (for whatever reason) are hostile towards DLC and microtransactions, and presents it in a way that such things must be mutually exclusive to a strong single player narrative.

 

We both know it'd be an epic field day if a Frank Gibeau made a silly tongue in cheek tweet that in some way could be perceived as a slight against Kickstarter or one of the projects that used it.

Well getting all huffy over the hypothetical tweet would be overly dramatic as well.

 

I just took it as claiming that if you dislike DLC, micro-transactions and all the other oft-complained about aspects of 'corporate' gaming then Torment is the game for you. Which is pretty lazy-ish marketing I suppose, but nothing more than that, certainly not that a good story is opposed to those.

 

But then I might be not paying all that close attention.