Jump to content

Stretch Goals?  

2,052 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you like Obsidian to release new stretch goals to go along with the opening of the Backer Portal?

    • I would love new stretch goals.
      1591
    • No, I would prefer if Obsidian did not introduce new stretch goals.
      458


Recommended Posts

More stretch goals? Sure, why not - but only if they further the game worlds ambitions in the way of being sensible parts of a large, immersive and coherent world and just not "static" or forced content for sake of "moar moar". That's my five pfennings...

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds slightly better than what I was imagining, but I'm still against stretch goals introduced this late in development. Keep that stuff for eventual expansions/add-ons and focus on the core game you've planned now. God knows you'll probably have to cut some stuff anyway.

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, what I've seen to date is quality. They already said they would hit the current stretch goals in the op, the original game is not at risk as such. Its a simple question of more money for more content. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barring cosmetic stuff and general enhancements, I'd save content additions for expansion and such. I mean you have the game all planned and set in stone, wouldn't throwing more stuff at it derail the thing? I know a lot of people point at Star Citizen, but I think that's a bit different kind of game, where the expansiveness and complexity is what it's all about.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the stretch goals they have listed are actually well thought out ones.  The wilderness areas especially can be farmed out to some of those external people mentioned before, they would just make the world larger.  NPC's are more complicated as they require much more integration with the entire game.

 

Anyhow I think more cash to Obsidian should be a good thing, after all they probably didn't need to do a KS project, they could have just picked up some random game from a publisher.  If more money into PE means they really consider this as a good long term investment for the company, we all win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think most people want more NPCs. The selection right now is pretty small. Extra areas... that can wait.

  • Like 1

sonsofgygax.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do I want more?! The answer is an obvious no, because I'm a contrarian.

 

I kind of need to know the give/take on the choices to be honest. Without stretch goals, do you focus on shipping and polishing what's already planned? With stretch goals might the release get pushed back, but you expect funding to make another leap that wouldn't happen otherwise?

  • Like 2

"Show me a man who "plays fair" and I'll show you a very talented cheater."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with having more content if the quality remains the same? Give us more stretch goals and if people are willing to pay/wait, they will.

Edited by Goran
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if it means less incentive for people to put in additional pledges/pre-orders: Please do not add more stretch goals, but use additional funds to polish what you intend to include at present, instead of adding more things.

  • Like 3

Citizen of a country with a racist, hypocritical majority

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I voted more stuff

 

I'd rather have the game jam packed with stuff to do (class quests, more stronghold, more animations, more companions (and more fleshed out), more banter, more interactivity, etc) rather than have the game sooner

 

EDIt: I don't really want or care for new areas just for more to do in the areas we have

Edited by ShadySands

Free games updated 3/6/19

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would gladly take a slight delay in the development to get more companions (or maybe added as free DLC).  The number of companions we have right now is a little too small for my tastes, and I'm pretty sure many others agree.

 

But overall, I see nothing wrong with additional stretch goals, just as long as they don't slow down development heavily.  Perhaps any additional stretch goals that are met could be added to DLC or expansions?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While extra content is always awesome, I think it might be for the best to leave that for an expansion.

That being said, I wouldn't mind funding one even before the actual game is out, seeing how it's probably more effective to start creating it sooner than later.

 

But obviously the most important thing is to have the main game feel solid and rounded. If it needs more resources for that to happen, then so be it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only if there's a totally cool cycling cap addon.

 

 

Serious answer: If it's just more stuff related to combat and dungeons (that whole series of mini-goals for the megadungeon was, from my selfish perspective, a damp squib), no interest. If it's more talking and other noncombat interactions, then sure, why not.


L I E S T R O N G
L I V E W R O N G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually voted no, out of worry of what would happen to scheduling. But if it did happen, I'd only want more content if the money was found from somewhere else, pledge increases through the backer site or something, rather than getting less of what was already going to be there. As Sensuki points out, this stuff ain't free.  If they did find the money and thought they could do it practically, more wilderness content rather than more companions would probably be my choice. Presumably they've already written the story, no point writing new companions then struggling (and potentially failing) to tie them into the main plot somehow.

 

EDIT: Sawyer addressed the companion point on Something Awful, in short. It wouldn't be a problem. They've not written any of the companions yet beyond basic designs, to allow them to be more reactive. I'd still probably rather more wilderness content though.

Edited by CottonWolf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I thought no, but I probably would be interested in more wilderness if it meant an expansion in creature diversity, more environmental effects, and a dynamically explorable map.

  • Like 2

"It has just been discovered that research causes cancer in rats."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd like to have fewer and more tightly written companions, and the big wilderness areas with not much in them weren't exactly the best part of old IE games.

 

However, if you can manage to add more without sacrificing quality, eh, go nuts.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they asking for:

 

1) actual additional funding from backers + more time

2) just more time to stretch more/new things

 

?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it's #1, there. We're iffy on the "more time" part, though. I mean, if you spend money to hire twice as many artists, then you could feasibly produce twice* as much art in the same amount of time.

 

* for example's sake...

  • Like 1

Should we not start with some Ipelagos, or at least some Greater Ipelagos, before tackling a named Arch Ipelago? 6_u

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty sure it's #1, there. We're iffy on the "more time" part, though. I mean, if you spend money to hire twice as many artists, then you could feasibly produce twice* as much art in the same amount of time.

 

* for example's sake...

 

Thanks. I wouldn't mind... but. There is a but. I'd prefer the "more part" of the more content as released in the expansion, to not really stretch the general costs for the devs. A deeper and bigger rpg is always cool, even if too ambitious... but it's a goal that you must be sure you are reaching without losing anything on the road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crosspostin' from SA:

 

So will adding additional content make the game take longer to get released? 

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.
 
 

Would adding companions at this 'late stage' not limit the degree to which they'd be able to be tied into the story? There's no point doing it if they were going to be obviously subpar versus the initial envisaged ones.

No, actually.  While we do design our companions relatively early in development, we don't write them until we get closer to the end (e.g. I just started writing the first companion literally this morning).  We ignore them completely as far as the crit path design of the game is concerned because they are all optional.  Developing them later allows us to be much more reactive to the final designs of quests and areas.

 

 

 
Edited by coffeetable
  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Crosspostin' from SA: 

Based on those answers, I voted yes.

Edited by Boox
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...