Josh Sawyer on dealing with grognards

[Bryy]

 

When DA2 came out, it got rave reviews from Journalists. It still has an 82 rating on metacritic.

 

When ME3 came out it got rave reviews by Journalists. It still has an 89 rating on metacritic.

 

What I get from that is that Journalists don't always have a good read on what gamers will like.

 

 

I couldn't agree more. 'Pillars of Eternity' is our chance to show the RPG gaming industry they are headed the wrong way, or at least that more games addressed to mature audiences are released. There should be more titles like Baldur's Gate I&II, Fallout I&II, Planescape: Torment and I really hope 'Pillars of Eternity' imminent huge success is going to send a loud message to producers.

 

I don't think Pillars will Save The Industry. I just want it to be a good game. And, honestly, that's all it should be. 

[Karkarov]

 

When DA2 came out, it got rave reviews from Journalists. It still has an 82 rating on metacritic.

 

When ME3 came out it got rave reviews by Journalists. It still has an 89 rating on metacritic.

 

What I get from that is that Journalists don't always have a good read on what gamers will like.

 

 

I couldn't agree more. 'Pillars of Eternity' is our chance to show the RPG gaming industry they are headed the wrong way, or at least that more games addressed to mature audiences are released. There should be more titles like Baldur's Gate I&II, Fallout I&II, Planescape: Torment and I really hope 'Pillars of Eternity' imminent huge success is going to send a loud message to producers.

 

What I get from that is that there is a reason you shouldn't trust user reviews on metacritic.

[Bryy]

Metacritic is bullcrud, plain and simple. 

Edited April 13, 2014 by Bryy

[AGX-17]

This will show if the Iso-cRPG model is sustainable or if it will never be more then a kickstarter funded game.

Isometric CRPGs are not a model of any economic system that has ever or will ever exist. I don't recall ever having the interest on a credit card determined by a saving throw.

 

If you need kickstarter to fund your product, then it's not a product that has great mainstream appeal.

[Sarex]

Isometric CRPGs are not a model of any economic system that has ever or will ever exist. I don't recall ever having the interest on a credit card determined by a saving throw.

 

lol

 

If you need kickstarter to fund your product, then it's not a product that has great mainstream appeal.

 

Or it's just a product that publishers weren't willing to invest in and we all know that publishers rarely get it right.

[Hassat Hunter]

Hey, AGX-17 is totally right... Obsidian should make a Call of Duty clone... after all, we only need products for the great mainstream right. There's no other way to make profit?

There are no successfull indies, Minecraft is a lie... Space people didn't cough up $35 million for a new game... all a lie.

 

What I still don't understand though, and please do explain me, is why so many iso-RPG's are funded lately (original sin, torment, pillars of eternity and wastelands 2) and how they *each* got around 3 million.

[Stun]

Metacritic is bullcrud, plain and simple.

I disagree.

 

It successfully does what it claims to do: Rank games based on popularity -and- To be an outlet where gamers and the media can come together and pool game critiques into one giant website for a consumer to read and draw conclusions for himself/herself.

 

You're totally free to argue that Popularity and user reviews are not valid measurements of how good a game is. And that's fine. But that, in itself is a subjective viewpoint and you're simply attacking the messenger by dismissing Metacritic as "bullcrud".

 

 

In my opinion though, Metacritic gets it right more often than not. If I go to metacritic and see that a game on there has a 3.5 user rating, chances are, that game IS garbage.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Stun

[Fluff]

 

If you need kickstarter to fund your product, then it's not a product that has great mainstream appeal.

 

Or it's just a product that publishers weren't willing to invest in and we all know that publishers rarely get it right.

 

 

Unfortunately, they do actually.

If you've got 12 minutes this video explains it a lot better in more depth.

 

But, long story short. Games like Battlefield and games with 5th and 6th installments are what sells the best. When risks are taken, they rarely pay off for the people putting money into them, and even when they do only marginally compared to these "blockbuster games". Only to become a cult classic 20 years later.

 

Even classic franchises like Mario aren't safe from this, Galaxy, Sunshine, and Yoshi's Island despite being regarded as practically masterpieces now are 3 of the worst selling Mario games in history, while  New Super Mario Bros.. an unoriginal rehash is one of the best selling ever.

 

Basically, taking outside of the box risks in the video game industry just isn't a smart idea unless you've got the money to back up that risk.. and RPGs (of any genre) are no exception to this. 

[constantine]

"I couldn't agree more. 'Pillars of Eternity' is our chance to show the RPG gaming industry they are headed the wrong way, or at least that more games addressed to mature audiences are released. There should be more titles like Baldur's Gate I&II, Fallout I&II, Planescape: Torment and I really hope 'Pillars of Eternity' imminent huge success is going to send a loud message to producers."

 

Except POE won't be as like those games as you hope. I mean you have Sawyer mocking old skool gamers for a reason. It'll have similarities but it will not be those games.  If that's what you want you will be dissapointed. POE will have more in common with modern RPGs whether you like it or nott han old skool games.

 

 

 

 

I've read project updates, developers interviews, so I am well familiar with the kind of game PoE is gonna be. In the parts where they disagree with old-school cRPGs, I agree to disagree with them.

 

No I will not be disappointed. PoE will most likely be for me the improved 'Baldur's Gate 3' that I've never got to have, albeit not Forgotten Realms Campaign World or AD&D rule-set (but I can live with that!)

[constantine]

 

This will show if the Iso-cRPG model is sustainable or if it will never be more then a kickstarter funded game.

Isometric CRPGs are not a model of any economic system that has ever or will ever exist. I don't recall ever having the interest on a credit card determined by a saving throw.

 

If you need kickstarter to fund your product, then it's not a product that has great mainstream appeal.

 

 

*Ahem*, I am surprised you backed this game. The 'Saving Throw' you so mock is a derivative of the large-scale successful 'Dungeons&Dragons' pen-and-paper game and cRPG's success was the effort to transfer the table-top game onto your PC's monitor. Even those games that did not have the 'Wizards of the Coast' license where very influenced by pen-and-paper games.

 

You are wrong, the consumer market is out there, the thing is, the good games to buy are not there.

[AGX-17]

Hey, AGX-17 is totally right... Obsidian should make a Call of Duty clone... after all, we only need products for the great mainstream right. There's no other way to make profit?

There are no successfull indies, Minecraft is a lie... Space people didn't cough up $35 million for a new game... all a lie.

 

What I still don't understand though, and please do explain me, is why so many iso-RPG's are funded lately (original sin, torment, pillars of eternity and wastelands 2) and how they *each* got around 3 million.

Did I say that? No. Your strawman arguments should at least resemble the the statement you're trying to fallaciously attack. Where, precisely, did I state that Obsidian should not aim to create games that they and their fans want?

 

I said that isometric CRPGs aren't products with mainstream appeal. It wasn't the masses of CoD and Madden players that ponied up their money for P:E's kickstarter. PC gaming is a dramatically smaller sector of the industry as a whole compared to consoles. Are the kickstarter badges in my profile invisible? Or are you just ignorant out of a fundamental misunderstanding of economics?

 

In a span of two years, CoD4 sold more copies than every BG game has in the 15 years since its release. Every subsequent cawwadoody game has moved a similar number of units. The reason why so many crpgs are funded lately is because of kickstarter. If these games had the same sales potential as AAA products, they would never have needed kickstarter to be made in the first place.

 

 

 

 

This will show if the Iso-cRPG model is sustainable or if it will never be more then a kickstarter funded game.

Isometric CRPGs are not a model of any economic system that has ever or will ever exist. I don't recall ever having the interest on a credit card determined by a saving throw.

 

If you need kickstarter to fund your product, then it's not a product that has great mainstream appeal.

 

 

*Ahem*, I am surprised you backed this game. The 'Saving Throw' you so mock is a derivative of the large-scale successful 'Dungeons&Dragons' pen-and-paper game and cRPG's success was the effort to transfer the table-top game onto your PC's monitor. Even those games that did not have the 'Wizards of the Coast' license where very influenced by pen-and-paper games.

 

You are wrong, the consumer market is out there, the thing is, the good games to buy are not there.

 

Stating reality is not the same as expressing an opinion. And I wasn't mocking saving throws, I was making a joke about the fact that someone would refer to isometric RPGs as an economic model. Please take an economics class someday so that you will understand what an economic model is, and why a video game genre is not a model of economic activity.

 

 

 

The genre is niche. Where did I say there was anything wrong with that? Oh, right, nowhere. The fact that I backed the kickstarter should make that obvious.

Edited April 13, 2014 by AGX-17

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

At best, the Kickstarter RPGs will encourage some publishers to put capital behind more niche products. We have seenthis to some degree with M&M X Legacy. I highly doubt it will cause publishers to abandon the CoD cash cows, because those games sell very well to a broad audience known as the "console peasants".

[Hassat Hunter]

They also need to sell a lot more since they take a LOT more money to make.

I look forward to the day people are fed up and the highly expensive game gets barely sold. That's going to sting.

 

The PC is more popular than ever?

[Fluff]

The PC is more popular than ever?

 

Very much so.

 

A lot of the credit can of course go to things like Steam.

But also the simple fact that certain genres just can't work on anything other than a PC.

 

A calculator can handle a platformer, but cRPGs are a good example.. I wouldn't envy console users at all if they got ports of them. Have fun playing something that complex with a controller.

[Volourn]

You cna it can do well. People are just too lazy. The FF series is no less complex than, say, FO. (that doesn't mean I think FF is a better rpg than FO) but facts are facts.

[Lephys]

Except POE won't be as like those games as you hope. I mean you have Sawyer mocking old skool gamers for a reason. It'll have similarities but it will not be those games.  If that's what you want you will be dissapointed. POE will have more in common with modern RPGs whether you like it or nott han old skool games.

On the other hand, it's not like he hasn't mocked plenty of modern games and their designs.

[Bryy]

we all know that publishers rarely get it right.

 

... then, uh, why do EA and Activision make so much darn money?

Edited April 13, 2014 by Bryy

[Stun]

 

Except POE won't be as like those games as you hope. I mean you have Sawyer mocking old skool gamers for a reason. It'll have similarities but it will not be those games.  If that's what you want you will be dissapointed. POE will have more in common with modern RPGs whether you like it or nott han old skool games.

On the other hand, it's not like he hasn't mocked plenty of modern games and their designs.

 

He has?

[Hassat Hunter]

... then, uh, why do EA and Activision make so much darn money?

Cause they rehash their games more than a cow their grass, and people still somehow buy each and every incarnation.

 

Yeah, I don't get it either.

[Lephys]

He has?

Yup. Off the top of my head... quest markers. I might could dig around to find some specific examples of particular titles he's criticized, but my claim -- to be clearer -- is that he's done plenty of mocking of the things modern games do that older games did not do.

 

The other thing is, just because you take issue with the way things were done 10-20 years ago doesn't mean you automatically favor all the stuff that's commonly done today. There's the third option of "not how old games did it, but also not how current games are doing it."

 

It seems like the majority of the problems people have with his changes to the old systems are simply intertia -- which is why he cites "grognards" in this example. Almost anything he's tried to change, sometimes even before he's actually said how it'll be different, he's been met with "What?! WHY?!". Doesn't mean everyone's got the same complaints, or if you like some old-style stuff you're just a grumpy old grognard.

 

I don't know why every word he says is held under an electron microscope, anyway. As if no one in the universe matches his example.

 

Anywho...

[Sarex]

... then, uh, why do EA and Activision make so much darn money?

 

Because when they do get it right they choke their games out of any profit they have. Not only that, but they don't take to many risks any more, they figured out that they can just buy successful franchises and run them dry.

Edited April 13, 2014 by Sarex

[Volourn]

"I don't know why every word he says is held under an electron microscope, anyway."
 

'Cause this is the internet, and when you post on it you open yourself to feedback and other people's opinions on your opinion. It's not like he's original in that.

[Stun]

It seems like the majority of the problems people have with his changes to the old systems are simply intertia -- which is why he cites "grognards" in this example. Almost anything he's tried to change, sometimes even before he's actually said how it'll be different, he's been met with "What?! WHY?!". Doesn't mean everyone's got the same complaints, or if you like some old-style stuff you're just a grumpy old grognard.

Right, Right. We cement heads are just disagreeing for the hell of it. We're not smart enough to actually have fundamental reasons, many of those reasons arising from 2 whole decades of playing both old and new games, for disagreeing. No, no, it's simply intertia. (inertia?)

 

But you're not totally wrong. In my Grognardish opinion, it's probably not a great idea to sales-pitch the infinity engine games, and falsely claim to LOVE MAKING THOSE GAMES, and then turn around and 1) Make something else, and 2) insult and stereotype us for refusing to embrace the wonderful, magical superiority of today's RPGs.

 

 

 

 

I don't know why every word he says is held under an electron microscope, anyway.

Yeah, A Great Mystery. It's almost as if he's the Project Director for a game we funded, or something important like that. Crazy. Edited April 14, 2014 by Stun

[Bryy]

 

... then, uh, why do EA and Activision make so much darn money?

Cause they rehash their games more than a cow their grass, and people still somehow buy each and every incarnation.

 

Yeah, I don't get it either.

 

Seems to me they are getting it very right.

[Lephys]

"I don't know why every word he says is held under an electron microscope, anyway."

 

'Cause this is the internet, and when you post on it you open yourself to feedback and other people's opinions on your opinion. It's not like he's original in that.

I was actually kind of expressing my failure to understand an actual reason for that level of scrutiny. What you provided was essentially "because people can."

 

Granted, I didn't really specify that I wasn't simply asking why it occurs, as opposed to not-occurring, so that's my fault.

 

Right, Right. We cement heads are just disagreeing for the hell of it. We're not smart enough to actually have fundamental reasons, many of those reasons arising from 2 whole decades of playing both old and new games, for disagreeing. No, no, it's simply intertia. (inertia?)

I don't understand why, if I point out some folly in some people and don't actually make any connection to you, whatsoever, you automatically affiliate yourself with that group. Why is that?

 

If you're not just averse to change for no other reason than that it's change, then you're obviously not in the group I'm talking bout. Not "No, you're definitely talking about me, but you're wrong, since that doesn't describe me."

 

Sheesh...

 

Yeah, A Great Mystery. It's almost as if he's the Project Director for a game we funded, or something important like that. Crazy.

Yeah. A game we funded despite the fact that Josh, and not we funders, is heading the project.

 

Also, funding someone's game automatically justifies excessively scrutinizing everything that person says or does. I mean, since we backed his game, there's no longer any such thing as irrational behavior! I'm going to go write a 7,000 word thesis, now, on why he decided to use the word "extreme." Brb.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Lephys