New stretch goals for companions and wilderness areas?

[Sensuki]

No DLC. Ever.

 

Full Expansion or bust.

[Cubiq]

How many companions are there planned at the moment? 

8

and 11 if they reach stretch goals (11 classes in total)

[Stephen]

Adding stretch goals sounds like a good idea, at first, but I'd rather see extra attention to detail on the core game.

 

I'm certain that a financial success of this magnitude will yield expansions and DLC in the future - possibly crowd funded - and I don't feel that good ideas will be lost to eternity (ahem) because they weren't included in the original game.

 

I do think the poll options are poorly worded - the second option should have been "No, I'd rather Obsidian concentrate on quality. I'd consider funding future expansions or episodes once PoE is released." and a third option could have been "No, the promised game is enough forever."

[Ieldra]

 

How many companions are there planned at the moment? 

8

and 11 if they reach stretch goals (11 classes in total)

 

8 is already pretty good. I wouldn't mind more companions for an expansion, but I think making the game world bigger is more desirable at the moment. Nonetheless, I would help fund new stretch goals as long as new areas are in the mix.

[anameforobsidian]

It's worth noting that these new companions would be current classes that don't have a companion.  I think it's a pretty fair goal since the lack of a written companion in those three classes actively discourages the player from seeing those classes in action / wastes a lot of the effort they spend balancing that class.

[rjshae]

A larger side plot to link the new wilds together might help to sell it. A mysterious darkness is stirring in the wilds... something with a heart of purest cold and utter evil... rumours are spreading in the border villages; a hamlet is suddenly deserted; strangely mutilated beasts have been found...

[Bubu91]

why are ppl still comparing this to BG2 in terms of size? this is a kickstarter project. Even with Unity and 2D painted backrounds 4M$ isn't that much. They need to deliver on the stretch goals that they promised first. All these extra stretch goals can be incorporated in the add on. 

 

Obsidian rly needs to stop trying to reach BG2 in scope and size. They just don't have the budget AND IT'S OK!

[ImRhoven]

I'm a bit in two minds about this. While extra stretch goals would be a fun thing for the community and might be a driving force behind extra funds, I'm thinking that it might wiser to spend any extra funds on improving and expanding what's already there.

 

That said, I'm always in favor of extra companions.

[Quadrone]

Eh, don't really want to argue but I'll retort at least once...

 

By that same token, a bunch of the stuff that's already on the "to be included/finished before release" isn't "critical" to the game itself, and therefore is simply delaying the game past some prior release date.
 
I mean, it's completely understandable to not want further delay. Don't get me wrong. I just don't see adhering so strictly to a "well, let's just say if it's not really critical, it's probably unnecessary and shouldn't be added to the game" condition and calling it a day as being a very good idea.

Not really, Obsidian created a chart in which they wrote down what assets they had to create, how many workhours that would take them, at what cost ,etc... ending in an approximate date for the games release. I'm fine with that target date. But now they want to add to that list, which in turn will affect said date. I don't want the game out as soon as humanly possible, I just don't want it delayed (or rather not delayed beyond a certain point).
 

It's about cost-benefit. If they were to do stretch goals for this stuff, that implies that there would be certain additional-funding conditions that would need to be met for them to even BEGIN shooting for the extra content. Thus, most of the extra time of extra content could be mitigated by the use of that funding to procure extra manpower. I mean, if you suddenly have 2 environment artists instead of 1 (for example... I'm well aware they have more than 1 environment artist), then you're going to get 16 man-hours of environment art out of an 8-hour work day, instead of 8.

 
Is that so? I said in one of my earlier post that I'd be fine with more Stretchgoals if they manage to produce this new content alongside normal production, which could be the case with increased teams-size/man-hours, but so far I've not seen a clear indication it will happen like that. (Increasing their team size permanently, I mean.)
Outsourcing the new wilderness area(s) doesn't really increase their manpower, to my understanding it just means that the initial art is done by someone else and then it returns to the same team to be worked over and get filled with quest and stuff. This takes time.
 

So, like Josh said, adding stuff would require a little extra design time. But it's not like all the grunt work would just be tacked onto the end of the current production timeline. "Okay, once we've gotten the game to where it WOULD'VE been finished for release, let's start working on additional environments and companions! 8D!"

Well that entirely irrelevant isn't it? Adding additional workhours required in the middle or at the end of production still makes for the same outcome.
If this was meant humorously I'm sorry, but to my excuse I'm German.
  

Beyond that, there's nought left but preference. If you just plain don't want the game to be delayed any longer than it has to be, regardless of reasons or benefit (doesn't matter if the game were 1000% better, even), then that's a perfectly understandable desire. The line has to be drawn SOMEwhere, and maybe some people just want it to remain drawn where it is, on principle. That's fine. But, as far as all the worries over their delaying the game for minimal additions that won't really benefit the game much, I just don't think that's the case. It might've been in the Update 69 thread, but I think Brandon (or Adam?) already stated, in reference to this "Do you want more Stretch Goals?" question, that, if it was going to significantly delay the game's release (beyond just a wee, tiny extra bit of design ironing out...ing...?), they wouldn't even be considering it as an option.

I'm not against stretchgoals on principle, I just don't have that initiate deep trust that you seem to have and rather think that BAdler's OP is laking in critical information like: when was the game intended to be released and by how much would what stretchgoal delay the release date.
What if the Stretchgoals are too successfull? I don't want to see a miniature Star Citizen going on with ever new goals and an ever more distant release date. After all why would Obsidian turn down free funding if the demand is there?

Though, if Obsidian can assure me that a 2014 release date is not in danger at any point I'll shut up and sit down right now.

[Ovidius]

I voted yes.

 

I'm greedy, I admit it.  I want everything in this game.

 

I'm also willing to wait until 2016 if that is what it takes.  Maybe I'm more patient than some.  I've never had a problem with games being released later than expected if the creators deem it appropriate.  I'd much rather have a game as prepared as possible than deal with all kinds of lackluster content and bugs and if that means delaying the release for added areas and companions so be it.

 

There are plenty of other games I can play while I wait.  Hell, I still play Baldur's Gate regularly and still discover new stuff in that game that I had never seen before. 

[Llew Llaw Gyffes]

I voted yes too.

 

More content, a better game.

[greenmonster]

I'd want to see details about exactly what the goals are and how much. From what I have read,  I would have rather have had more wilderness offered earlier instead of going deeper in the  mega dungeon. Perhapos a trade oof could be arranged?

[rjshae]

I'd want to see details about exactly what the goals are and how much. From what I have read,  I would have rather have had more wilderness offered earlier instead of going deeper in the  mega dungeon. Perhapos a trade oof could be arranged?

 

This has been discussed...

[Eyeshield1625]

I voted yes was going to upgrade my pledge anyway ,but this was nice motivation on their part. When are they you going to announce the results and the stretch goals?

[Webslinger]

I have difficulty objecting to additional content.

[Elithranduil]

Voted yes because more content is always welcome.

 

This begs the question: how do Obsidian intend to raise funds to hit these new wilderness and companion stretch goals?

 

If you look at other extremely well-funded kickstarter campaigns (a certain space sim comes to mind...) the reason they attracted so many pledges was through a heavily incentivised reward system (i.e. pay more money to get a better starting ship).

 

So conceivably Obsidian could increase pledges by offering further exclusive in-game items or bonuses along the lines of Neverwinter Nights 2 pre-order bonuses.

 

e.g.

• A feat like "Blessed of Waukeen" which generates +1 bonus to all saving throws
• Some sort of cosmetic effect that applies to a single weapon or piece of armor.

If not, I don't see how we will hit new targets considering everyone has already backed the game at the lowest price point.

[Lephys]

Not really, Obsidian created a chart in which they wrote down what assets they had to create, how many workhours that would take them, at what cost ,etc... ending in an approximate date for the games release. I'm fine with that target date. But now they want to add to that list, which in turn will affect said date. I don't want the game out as soon as humanly possible, I just don't want it delayed (or rather not delayed beyond a certain point).

It seems pretty useless to point out their resource-efficiency chart as a reason why adding things to their taskload wouldn't be a good idea, considering that the very fact that the additional tasks would ONLY stem from the attainment of additional resources via stretch goals. *chin rub* 

 

 

Is that so? I said in one of my earlier post that I'd be fine with more Stretchgoals if they manage to produce this new content alongside normal production, which could be the case with increased teams-size/man-hours, but so far I've not seen a clear indication it will happen like that. (Increasing their team size permanently, I mean.)

Outsourcing the new wilderness area(s) doesn't really increase their manpower, to my understanding it just means that the initial art is done by someone else and then it returns to the same team to be worked over and get filled with quest and stuff. This takes time.

 

Fair enough on the lack of a clear indication, but you've also not seen a clear indication that it WON'T be done in the manner proposed as possible.

 

For what it's worth:

 

Crosspostin' from SA:

Probably a bit, mostly for companions rather than wilderness environments.  Additional content does take additional time to make, but not dramatically, not at the scale we're thinking about.

 

E: Personally, I think more wilderness areas would feel really cool and I believe players would enjoy them.  I also would like for players to have every character class represented by a companion.  Right now we're 3 short.  We don't want to go buckwild on this stuff, but we do think it would feel better with those additions.  If we thought it would fundamentally make the game worse, we wouldn't even be asking.

 

"Rope Kid" is Josh, by the way. At least I'm pretty sure. While he doesn't provide details, he claims that the amount of additional content they're even considering possibly adding in would not increase the overall development timeline by much at all. Now, if I knew absolutely nothing else about Josh, and this were the first statement of his I'd ever read, I'd say "Hey, how long is 'not dramatically'?!!!" But, since I've read pages and pages of word-for-word interviews and seen lots of talks hes given regarding various aspects of design, I know that his idea of "not much" isn't 7 months. Basically, I trust his reasonability, so while I realize that additional content is going to add SOME amount of time onto the timeline, hardly anyone here is thinking of any scenario other than "do the 200 (made up number) days' worth of work to finish the game, THEN do like 50 more days' worth of work?! That's ridiculous!"

 

People are looking at this like a gauge. As if:

 

A) Every single member of the team is working 12-hour days, every single day until the second the game comes out, and

B) More funding (which is, again, a given from the sheer mention of stretch goals) would allow them to hire more manpower.

 

I realize ALL the work isn't just grunt work. But, there's almost no process that can't be helped by addiitonal manpower/additional overtime, etc., either of which costs the same thing: Funds. Therefore, more funds would allow them to do significantly more in significantly less time, as opposed to simply having the additional time be directly proportionate to the additional amount of work.

 

It is folly to judge the timeframe of such added content by their current set of resources/budget, since they would have additional resources. I can't tell you exactly what that will mean, detail for detail, for the expedience of the additional content (were it to be stretch-goaled into existence and implemented), but I CAN tell you, with certainty, that it would allow more to be done in less time than if they simply tried to do more with the exact same amount of resources they have now.

 

 

Well that entirely irrelevant isn't it? Adding additional workhours required in the middle or at the end of production still makes for the same outcome.

If this was meant humorously I'm sorry, but to my excuse I'm German.

 

No no, my apologies. The quoted part was, indeed, laced with humor. I can see how it would be easily misunderstood. Sorry about that. All I was trying to say was, basically, that it's not just going to be simple addition. They're not just taking their existing resource set, and adding some more things to the work queue. And, as I mentioned, even if they're partially doing that, there are people in various positions who have varying workloads as the development process progresses. There are people who would be free to work on new stuff before the existing stuff even gets the finishing touches put on it. The biggest things that would cause delay would be polishing and QA testing. And, even those things would have an efficiency boost from going through the entire rest of the game's assets/components already.

 

 

I'm not against stretchgoals on principle, I just don't have that initiate deep trust that you seem to have and rather think that BAdler's OP is laking in critical information like: when was the game intended to be released and by how much would what stretchgoal delay the release date.

What if the Stretchgoals are too successfull? I don't want to see a miniature Star Citizen going on with ever new goals and an ever more distant release date. After all why would Obsidian turn down free funding if the demand is there?

 

That's understandable. But, I think the reason his OP didn't provide such details is that they simply wanted to find out if anyone was even the least bit interested in such a thing. If 90% of the people, even without any details, just said "NO!", and not "Hmmm... could I have some more details?", then they'd know not to waste any more time with it. Instead of wasting days preparing this big, elaborate detailed plan in update form, only to have everyone say "That's great, but we just want the game to finish, at this point, and aren't even remotely worried about adding anything else to it right now, especially if we've got to fund it via stretchgoals."

 

As for the latter part of that... why wouldn't Obsidian do anything that you see as terrible? You really have no way of knowing. You've got to trust something at some point. I trust that they're either competent and honest, or are a giant organization of con men. And I very much doubt it's the latter. So, I can either trust their word and their judgment, or just second guess every single thing they ever say until some kind of future predicting machine can prove to me with visions of the future that their claims are true. And I don't see that as a very feasible or constructive approach to the situation. So, yes, I choose to trust.

 

 

Though, if Obsidian can assure me that a 2014 release date is not in danger at any point I'll shut up and sit down right now.

 

Also understandable. On a purely subjective note, I personally wouldn't mind a delay of approximately 1 month. The closer that gets to 2 months, the more wary I am. And beyond that, it's a flat-out "Nah... not even interested." And I understand that that's just my preference, and that other people have their own, some of which are "I don't even want it delayed another HOUR if I can help it!". And that's fine.

 

But, either you feel the delay is worth consideration, or you don't, in that regard. Second-guessing everything doesn't serve a purpose. Asking for details is understandable, also, but having developers say "No, we don't want the game to be super delayed either. The delay would be minimal.", I don't see much point in wondering if "minimal" actually means a really long time, or if they're just flat-out lying, etc. But, you know, we've got to be realistic, too. Like with the whole "they keep lying about the big update!" shenanigans... the development team is not omniscient. They can only estimate things. With a lot of first-hand knowledge, granted. But, still. They can't even tell us right now that the game WILL release in winter of 2014. They're going to work on it until it's done, or until they absolutely cannot work on it anymore if it isn't quite done (if they were to run out of funding, for example). But, they don't know exactly what bugs and problems they're going to face in completing it, etc. They don't know exactly how many days it's going to take to get it to the point it should be for delivery. All they can do is be as accurate as possible.

 

Just... if you don't like the amount of unknowns/risk with this idea (stretchgoals for more content), then don't like it. That's totally fine. No one's gonna attack you. But, 1,000 people in this thread all nitpicking and being like "Well, I'm interested, but is it going to take an extra week, or maybe an extra 2 weeks? I mean, if it's going to take an extra 2 weeks, then I'm totally against it. How much content are we talking, exactly? If you can't tell me exactly every detail of what's going to occur should this plan go into action, then I'm against it. But I'm actually kind of for it, so I kinda really want to know all the details, because if it turns out it was something I DO want, then I'll be mad if I just was against it because I didn't have precise knowledge of the plan."... It's a little much, really.

 

Did people scrutinize the project this much when it was initially funded? They didn't even know HALF the stuff they were dealing with. Hell, this is their first time to use Unity (I think?) on a project, and they didn't even know many specifics on ANYthing, and yet we all gave them about 4 million dollars? And now, armed with even more accurate knowledge of what they can and cannot do in a given amount of time, with their own, hand-forged product, everyone's being awful demanding and particular about a simple "Hey, would you be interested in maybe providing more money for a little bundle of extra game we think would really top off this game?". We're all "WHOAH, how do you know that's a good amount? Are you adding 7 years worth of stuff? I need to know how much it is, and then judge, because I don't trust your judgment regarding your own handiwork, u_u..."

 

I mean, is that not mildly silly? Is it really that strange for me to trust their assessment of "this would be good stuff to put in the game, and this wouldn't delay it much" over my own?

 

Info would be welcome, as always. But I'm hardly going to demand to know how many brush strokes they're going to make, and exactly how many people they're going to need to pay to do all this, then determine myself whether or not they can do it in a feasible amount of time to produce minimal delay. I believe they're quite capable of determining such things in an intelligent fashion, then telling me what they've determined.

Edited December 14, 2013 by Lephys

[Abel]

Great post Lephys, very long for a foreigner, but great

 

For my part, while a have a huge respect for every opinion in the world, i don't understand them all. My guess may be simplistic but here it is...

 

One of the major thing a like very much about kickstarter is the idea that the game will be released "when it's done". So, the only thing that preocupied me at first sight was "what is needed to make the better game possible with the funds they have?". And about the new stretch goals, the only question is "Does this new stuff usefull in order to make this great game?". My answer is yes, so, i said yes to stretch goals. Simple.

 

Some people spoke about saving the add in for a future add on... I don't understand this guess as well. I mean, all add on of all RPG i ever seen was about NEW places and NEW characters in NEW places. BAdler explained us in a previous update how it coud be time consuming to change stuff already done. So! I think that adding companions and areas that blends well into the core game is very difficult if not developped alongside the rest of the game. I feel it's a very bad idea for the team to come, modify and patch existing areas/quests/NPCs/dialogues in the core game to help new companions/quests/areas of an add on to blend with the already published game. We don't want companions' existence to be noticed only in 3 maps of the game. We want them to blend with the entire adventure, like all other companions. I don't want 5 wilderness areas in an add on, separated of the main storyline, where i can find a new guy for my party while my game is already at its end. i want these areas to be part of the main plot, not like "well, we added some wilderness areas, but it's not needed to visit them unless you want to start a brand new adventure". It would be painfull...

 

Does anybody reminds where you find Skye in BG1? Rather too late for her to be usefull. and TotSC was cool,  but didn't blend better in the core game than mods like Secret of Bonehill. I just don't want stuff like DLC that does not blend well with the base game. And like someone said here, i waited for such a RPG since i finished "Lionheart, Legacy of a crusader". It was in 2003... 3 months, or even 6 or 10 isn't a big deal for me. Nowadays, people are all in a hurry, they all want things to be done before even asked. I can't help but think this is somewhat linked to the "crunch" problem in game industry... I really like to "laisser le temps au temps" like you say here...

Edited December 14, 2013 by Abel

[Cubiq]

If not, I don't see how we will hit new targets considering everyone has already backed the game at the lowest price point.

Indeed, if everyone who voted yes donated 50$ you would still only end up with only 50% of only 1 stretch goal

(if we consider it will be 100,000 and not 200,000 like it was at the start of the campaign)

 

Problem is, a lot of people have forgotten they even backed this on kickstarter and are nowhere to be seen.

If obsidian wants to have a go at it it they are going to have to get some publicity first.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Voted yes because more content is always welcome.

 

This begs the question: how do Obsidian intend to raise funds to hit these new wilderness and companion stretch goals?

 

If you look at other extremely well-funded kickstarter campaigns (a certain space sim comes to mind...) the reason they attracted so many pledges was through a heavily incentivised reward system (i.e. pay more money to get a better starting ship).

 

So conceivably Obsidian could increase pledges by offering further exclusive in-game items or bonuses along the lines of Neverwinter Nights 2 pre-order bonuses.

 

e.g.

• A feat like "Blessed of Waukeen" which generates +1 bonus to all saving throws
• Some sort of cosmetic effect that applies to a single weapon or piece of armor.

If not, I don't see how we will hit new targets considering everyone has already backed the game at the lowest price point.

 

I've been wondering about this too. How do you get people who have already pledged money to pledge even more money? Perhaps rewards as you've said. There's got to be an incentive for backers to pledge more money otherwise everybody will just sit back and hope someone else donates the money.

[Elithranduil]

 

Voted yes because more content is always welcome.

 

This begs the question: how do Obsidian intend to raise funds to hit these new wilderness and companion stretch goals?

 

If you look at other extremely well-funded kickstarter campaigns (a certain space sim comes to mind...) the reason they attracted so many pledges was through a heavily incentivised reward system (i.e. pay more money to get a better starting ship).

 

So conceivably Obsidian could increase pledges by offering further exclusive in-game items or bonuses along the lines of Neverwinter Nights 2 pre-order bonuses.

 

e.g.

• A feat like "Blessed of Waukeen" which generates +1 bonus to all saving throws
• Some sort of cosmetic effect that applies to a single weapon or piece of armor.

If not, I don't see how we will hit new targets considering everyone has already backed the game at the lowest price point.

 

I've been wondering about this too. How do you get people who have already pledged money to pledge even more money? Perhaps rewards as you've said. There's got to be an incentive for backers to pledge more money otherwise everybody will just sit back and hope someone else donates the money.

 

 

Hi Hiro

 

Perhaps Obsidian can offer something that doesn't really upset the balance in the form of "bonus merchants".

 

I'm unsure if you are familiar with Baldur's Gate 2 - but if you are - you'll recall Bioware provided two bonus NPCs (Deidre and Joluv) with some flavour items for sale (e.g. Dak'kon's Zerth Blade, Sling of Everard) in the Adventurer's Mart & Copper Coronet.

 

If they offered a couple of bonus merchants who would appear in your Stronghold (not connected to plot or anything) for $10, I think that would make people feel a bit better pouring additional money into the project.

 

Let's see what happens. I do believe the key to hitting the stretch goals is to offer pledge incentives that don't impact on the plot - and minor Stronghold perks seems like the ideal way to handle this without breaking the game. Just my $0.02

[Darth Trethon]

I understand that people want the game, hell I can't wait to play the game, but can we please stop talking about longer work hours for the developers? They're human too and working 12+ hours a day every day takes A LOT out of people, I've been there. If we have to wait an extra month or two for the game it'll be worth it. These stretch goals wouldn't be likely to add more than a month or two to development anyway since all the tools are already in place. But for now it's Christmas time and the new year so I certainly hope the team can take some well deserved time off to celebrate with their families and rest.

[forgottenlor]

I would prefer a polished game to more companions, and more companions to more wilderness, but I'd be happy with anything if the quality of the game remains the same or improves.

[Rabain]

The problem with a more polished game is for most people they just read that as a delay that should never have happened. If Obsidian say they really need an extra month or two to polish the game even without added content how many people will riot on the forums?

 

Personally I wouldn't mind if the game was delayed 3-6 months extra content or not, so long as work continues on it.  Part of the reason so many of the kickstarter projects are being funded is because publishers won't fund that type of game yet there is a relatively large (small in a publishers eyes) audience who want them, yet most players are just acting like publishers crying about release dates and even update release dates.  We want information, of course but really can people not appreciate what they are getting and just let it happen?  I'm pretty sure Obsidian could have picked up another game from a publisher instead of doing PE, it might not have been what they wanted to do, it might have restrictions and deadlines they just have to live with but it would probably be as profitable as PE, if not more.

 

I want PE, but I want the best version of it I can get on release day.  I can only play this game once for the first time, I want that BG experience back, I can wait for it.

[Elithranduil]

On the subject of encouraging higher pledges if these stretch goals do in fact go ahead, would anyone be opposed to the following hypothetical 'reward'? Just throwing out ideas here.
 

Reward: Animat Guardian - Animats are animated by the souls of ancient warriors that are extracted, purified, and bound into armor. This construct occupied the ruins of your stronghold before you took possession, and still remains to ward off those it perceives as a threat to its home. [increases Stronghold Security, Lowers Stronghold Prestige]

 

Requirement: Have a total combined pledge of $75 or more.

 

Too much?