Please make your expansion's story fit within the main one

[Hormalakh]

So after playing pretty miuch all the IE games (just finishing up IWD1, haven't done IWD2) the one thing that really irks me when it comes to the expansions is that they are jarringly out of place with the orignial game.

 

1- The expansions usually don't fit within the main story AT ALL and are rather just an additional story. When it comes to telling an interesting story for myself, I find that I'd rather just not play the expansion at all so that I can have a better story. This is true with BG1 and IWD1. BG2:TOB does a much better job of keeping wihtin the story.

 

2- I find that it's really tough to stick with the expansion and the game's balance goes all wonky after this. You're either too overleveled for the final fights of the main story when you get back to it, or you're too underleveled for the expansion. Again BG2:TOB avoids this (for the most part) by coming at the end of BG2. However, the other games have this issue and even BG2's Watcher's Keep does the same thing. IF you start WK too early, the rest of BGII's main story line become a joke and not at all challenging. But if you try to finish WK after killing irenicus, you can't.

 

So how do you guys avoid this?

 

1- Fit the expansion within the story. Make you main story have a section where you expect a good time for the expansion to occur, then when you make the expansion, place it there so that it fits the story.

 

2- Make the expansion come directly after the story. But make the expansion unrelated to the main story, or at least make the expansion a "tying up loose strings" a la an epilogue.

 

3- If you are gong to make portions of your expansion fit within your main story, rebalance your entire main questline, keeping in mind that the balance is going to be completely out of whack with a person who is trying to play a completionist game. Or alternatively, make it an epilogue so that you don't have to worry about the balance of the main story.

 

4- Don't pull a watcher's keep, Durlog's Tower, etc for an otherwise good expansion. If you want to open up new locations, unlock them afte rthe main story is finished. Or if you are going to make them appear in the main story line, spend the extra week or two to rebalance the main story as well. Add a few monsters here and there and especially at the end game to account for the extra levels, experience, loot, spells. Maybe even give the final boss some of those spells that come in the expansion. For example, I'm pretty sure you guys are considering adding levels to the endless dungeon for the expansion. If you are going to do this, please lock that content out until the player finishes the main quest line. Maybe the party can find the key on one of the final bosses of the game in the main story that will unlock those levels in the endless dungeon.

 

Please make considerations for your expansion now, when you still can make changes to the main game. Set up a spot in your story that doesn't jar with the main quest, and set up in-engine modification capabilities so that you can keep balance for expansions in mind.

Edited March 30, 2014 by Hormalakh

[Hassat Hunter]

I rather have to object, "rip out stuff for DLC style"... I much rather have a full story in the main game, then "to be continued in the x-pack" pre-buildin.

[Hormalakh]

I rather have to object, "rip out stuff for DLC style"... I much rather have a full story in the main game, then "to be continued in the x-pack" pre-buildin.

 

that's not what i said at all. did you even read it? I'm saying that if they are going to do "DLC-type" expansions, to make sure that it works with the story and with main plot game balance. I would they rather avoid the whole mid-game additions and put everything as an epilogue to the initial game, but they have to keep these things in mind when making the original game.

 

every other previous IE game had what you call "DLC style stuff". I'm advocating that at the very least it should fit a complete playthrough.

Edited March 30, 2014 by Hormalakh

[Bryy]

Yeah, in today's gaming atmosphere, it makes no sense for expansion packs not to be continuations of the story.

 

Dragon Age: Awakenings executed this brilliantly, I thought. It was fully connected to the main game, but was separate enough that it acted as its own campaign.

[Hassat Hunter]

I did read it, including stuff like "the expansion could answer plotholes left in the maingame" or "tying up the loose ends"...

 

I also have no objections for the expansion adding to the main game. What's bad about more worth to your re-play with an expansion. Isn't there only good to that?

[Bryy]

Borderlands also does expansions extremely well.

 

Whenever I get stuck or fed up with the main campaign, I can just pop into one of the expack areas and screw around in that story.

Edited March 30, 2014 by Bryy

[Caerdon]

I think it'd be great if the expansion had a relatively self-contained story set after the story of the main game that would also set up and foreshadow the sequel - although it shouldn't give away too much.

 

 

IF you start WK too early, the rest of BGII's main story line become a joke and not at all challenging. But if you try to finish WK after killing irenicus, you can't.

Uh... what?

[Infinitron]

I don't think there was anything about Durlag's Tower that really unbalanced BG1 any more than exploring the entire overworld and hitting the level cap instead of focusing on the main quest unbalanced it. Ditto for BG2 and its "Chapter 2 of everything". You may have a point with regard to the more linear IWD, though.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Infinitron

[Frenzy-kun]

I disagree. I hate unfinished stories. I want the main game to be solid and complete, with no holes to be filled by expansions. In fact, I also dislike that the new areas are totally separated like in an extra episode.

 

 

What I really think an expansion should be is a game expansion, not a game completion or adition. expansion should give new areas that fits the game world, should have new characters, new missions, new objects, new classes, new races and new quests. Expansions should add new features on top of the original game to make the replay a totally new experience. But in no case the expansion should be filling gaps. Expansions should be an extra ingredient for the pizza so it tastes different, not adding a new ingredient because before it was tasteless.

 

If the expansion brings 5 new characters, with their own quests, their own items, their own dialogs in the main story, new romances, interjections with older party members and all this stuff, then it's good. I'd play again with a new party made of those new members. Even more if this is complemented with new areas, new quest, new items and new customization parameters. Having a continuation like ToB won't make me play the game again. Having two separated areas like TotSC, will make me load an old game.

 

One of the things I most hated of ToB is that the "Equipment" was in watcher's keep. Everything else in the game was pointless except for one or two things. One visit to Watcher's keep and you could scrap almost any non consumable item in the game. An expansion should add this equipment all around the game world so when you play again you find new stuff.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Frenzy-kun

[Hassat Hunter]

I can't agree more with Frenzy (bar the romance stuff then).

 

I would like, a rarity in modern days, for the game to be full, a story that makes sense and is complete without the need for DLC (or x-pack) to fill out the blanks. I don't even want a subplot like that, with 'to be continued'... even if I already own said expansion.

 

If they want to add hints in the main game to the expansion... (here it comes) ADD IT WITH THE EXPANSION.

Which means adding more stuff to the main game. Which means seeing new stuff in a replay. It's win-win in my eyes.

[Hormalakh]

I disagree. I hate unfinished stories. I want the main game to be solid and complete, with no holes to be filled by expansions. In fact, I also dislike that the new areas are totally separated like in an extra episode.

 

 

What I really think an expansion should be is a game expansion, not a game completion or adition. expansion should give new areas that fits the game world, should have new characters, new missions, new objects, new classes, new races and new quests. Expansions should add new features on top of the original game to make the replay a totally new experience. But in no case the expansion should be filling gaps. Expansions should be an extra ingredient for the pizza so it tastes different, not adding a new ingredient because before it was tasteless.

 

I now know how the devs feel when their words are misunderstood. You are the second person to misunderstand my point so perhaps this is a failure of communication on my part.

 

I'm not advocating that Obsidian remove any of its current story to stick into the expansion. As far as I can tell, their story was finalized many months ago. However, my point is that there should be considerations made in the current game for a future expansion that has already been promised. As such, they should consider avenues to make sure that the story in the expansion isn't jarringly out of place from the main story they are telling from the main game. Many times, in storytelling, spin-off stories occur when the creators find a topic that they would have liked to explore further in the original - I would rather they make considerations for that NOW rather than later when the main game is already finalized.

 

Again, I'm not advocating DLC-style expansions, taking bits out of the original game, or any other crazy notions. I'm advocating planning for the future expansion now to keep balance and story-telling in mind.

[Hormalakh]

I don't think there was anything about Durlag's Tower that really unbalanced BG1 any more than exploring the entire overworld and hitting the level cap instead of focusing on the main quest unbalanced it. Ditto for BG2 and its "Chapter 2 of everything". You may have a point with regard to the more linear IWD, though.

 

The equipment given to you in these expansions sometimes broke game mechanics that the developers intended - you have to rebalance the whole game for this, because you're unsure when players will tackle the expansion material. Secondly, it's not just the level cap that matters but WHEN you reach the level cap that matters. Putting in XP areas which can be tackled at any time, again, makes this difficult for developers to adjust the difficulty of the game.

 

 

IF you start WK too early, the rest of BGII's main story line become a joke and not at all challenging. But if you try to finish WK after killing irenicus, you can't.

Uh... what?

 

My mistake, I thought WK was not accessible from the TOB campaign, apparently it is. However, it is also accessible from the original campaign. Which brings me back to balancing the original game (as well as a story that doesn't really fit into the first one - The hero is killing demogorgon when he still doesn't have his soul yet? Shouldn't he be worrying about more important things?).

Edited March 31, 2014 by Hormalakh

[Infinitron]

Like I said, I don't think those games were very balanced in the first place so adding one more area wasn't really a big deal. I don't think Durlag's Tower had any "game-breaking" items either (BG1 as a whole was very conservative about items). Watcher's Keep might have been a different story with regard to items - I don't really remember.

 

Generally speaking character power in D&D is determined primarily by level - an item has to be crazy powerful to have a serious effect on game balance.

 

As far as rebalancing goes, though, the final boss battle of BG1 was actually upgraded for the expansion. If you can get a copy of BG1 without the expansion, you'll see that it's easier there.

Edited March 31, 2014 by Infinitron

[Sabotin]

Isn't that an issue with the hero then, that he went to WK without a soul?

 

I think the key thing is to have the direct connections not be plot holes or unanswered questions. They should have a closed function in the main game itself, with the expansion then only building upon them. I as a player should not recognize them for what they are until they are used.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

IMO, a seperate campaign is optimal because they wouldn't have to worry about narrative conflicts or balancing new items and higher levels in the OC.

[Hassat Hunter]

I'll point to the following topic;

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/65874-has-any-work-started-on-the-expansion-yet/

[Quadrone]

Hm, interestingly I find myself between Hormalakhs and Frenzy-Kuns opinion, though I disagree more strongly with Frenzy.

To be honest the way ToB handled it is more or less the perfect way to do an expansion in my opinion, regardless of how "good" ToB itself was in the end.

 

On one hand the expansion should be a continuation of the main story or at least hook into some plot detail and branch of from there so it can continue the story of my character.

Just adding additional map locations with extra sidequests/companions/items into PoE makes it feel like DLC and is only really interesting if I start a new game from the beginning but doesn't fire me up to go back, when I already completed the game with my favorite character, just so I get 100% completion .

 

On the other hand I DO like it when the AddOn also gives me something extra when I start a fresh game. Just like ToB did with Watchers Keep and some added Prestige Classes.

Though I would prefer it if this added content was actually not an extra dungeoncrawl akin to WK but a more open area, something like Trademeet in BG2, with a handfull of self contained quests.

[Jarrakul]

I don't like inserting content into the middle of the game. You want to add new NPCs and new classes? Fine. But adding content creates all sorts of balance issues. As the OP points out, Watcher's Keep is kind of the poster child for this if you play it in BG2 proper. You can get so many levels and so much incredibly powerful equipment that the rest of the game becomes utterly trivial (at least until ToB proper, where it becomes... mildly harder).

 

I do like new content in general, though, and I think the ToB (minus Watcher's Keep) and DA: Awakening approach works quite well. In both cases, the expansions came after the main game. The story was finished. And then the expansions were like "okay, but because of all that, this new stuff happens." It was a natural continuation to a story that didn't require one. Kind of like a mini-sequel. I like that, because it lets the expansion add new content without disrupting the balance of the main game. I also like that because I'm gonna finish the game before the expansion comes out, and I'd really like to be able to play through the expansion with the same character.

[ReyVagabond]

I backed a Full game, and thats wat i want, once the game lunches, ill talk about expancions and stuff.

 

But in general Rule, yes for expantions i want to keep going with the story of my usualy many PCs.

[rjshae]

Our opportunity for an expansion within the main game got killed by those among us who didn't like them running a second Kickstarter without finishing the first. Now the expansion will be wherever the developers want to take the story. I don't see a need to attempt to constrain their imagination at this point.

[ReyVagabond]

Our opportunity for an expansion within the main game got killed by those among us who didn't like them running a second Kickstarter without finishing the first. Now the expansion will be wherever the developers want to take the story. I don't see a need to attempt to constrain their imagination at this point.

They can still Do a Kick start once the game Lunches.

 

You know the riot they could get if we backed an Expantion, Second game, or what ever, and Some/every one Hates the game? or something.

 

A kickstart is a Gamble, Right now we Gamble on realy Good Horse (Obsidian), If the game does well, they can lunch A second Kickstart.

And if they way things went well i could pay again, to suport in a game i know i will like , insted a game i belive it might recapture old classics.

 

And now with the expirience they have from this game they could be even more Specific, with tresholds and what not. because they live it once.

 

Again, just me i love the mass effect / Witcher, BG1-BG2, Where you keep going witht those characters you love.

[rjshae]

 

Our opportunity for an expansion within the main game got killed by those among us who didn't like them running a second Kickstarter without finishing the first. Now the expansion will be wherever the developers want to take the story. I don't see a need to attempt to constrain their imagination at this point.

They can still Do a Kick start once the game Lunches.

 

You know the riot they could get if we backed an Expantion, Second game, or what ever, and Some/every one Hates the game? or something.

 

A kickstart is a Gamble, Right now we Gamble on realy Good Horse (Obsidian), If the game does well, they can lunch A second Kickstart.

And if they way things went well i could pay again, to suport in a game i know i will like , insted a game i belive it might recapture old classics.

 

And now with the expirience they have from this game they could be even more Specific, with tresholds and what not. because they live it once.

 

They could do another Kickstarter for PoE after this expansion is released, but I suspect by then the key people will likely be committed to other projects. It will likely result in a significant delay. Which may be okay.

[Sarex]

Why would they do a kickstarter at all? Either the game is good and it sells and from the profits they make exp/sequel, or it bombs and that is it from our brief nostalgia trip. 

[rjshae]

Why would they do a kickstarter at all? Either the game is good and it sells and from the profits they make exp/sequel, or it bombs and that is it from our brief nostalgia trip. 

 

There are other scenarios. Consider the funding for the current release: roughly $4M. If it sells an additional 20,000 copies at $25: that is $500,000 total, then subtract taxes and fees. Is that enough of a success? What if it sells 500,000 copies, but over the course of a decade and most of it at a significantly reduced cost. Will that fund the expansion? As a game it doesn't have to 'bomb' as you put it; it just has to fail to find an expanded market in the short term. The game then remains a niche product that may have a devoted fan following. At that point a Kickstarter may be appropriate, assuming Obsidian is still interested.

[Sarex]

There are other scenarios. Consider the funding for the current release: roughly $4M. If it sells an additional 20,000 copies at $25: that is $500,000 total, then subtract taxes and fees. Is that enough of a success? What if it sells 500,000 copies, but over the course of a decade and most of it at a significantly reduced cost. Will that fund the expansion? As a game it doesn't have to 'bomb' as you put it; it just has to fail to find an expanded market in the short term. The game then remains a niche product that may have a devoted fan following. At that point a Kickstarter may be appropriate, assuming Obsidian is still interested.

 

Point taken, but the last sentence is what worries me. What I gathered from the Obsidian interviews is that they want to make this in to a successful franchise. Now did they mean that they want it to find a healthy market(beyond kickstarter), or simply satisfying the people who kickstarted it so they can go another round (sequel/exp). I guess it's a question of if they have ambition to make a big studio out of Obsidian or if they are fine with getting paychecks for making games they love(?).