Release on 2015 if that will mean a better game

[Bill Gates' Son]

"No offense, but the devs will do whatever they think is best for the game. I trust them."

 

No offense,  but these are the same devs that made  DS3 and AP. trust in them is not advised.

 

AP is one of my favorite RPGs of all time (and according to RPG Codex's Top 50 cRPGs, other people think so too), so I would trust them for that game alone.  :D

 

Nevertheless, I seriously doubt they will be able to release the game within this year.  Inxile thought they were going to released WL2 earlier, but fan feedback convinced them to do that.

Even if they do run out of the initial kickstarter money, they are ways for them to get extra money.  Either by requesting more (like Star Citizen) or even getting help from Paradox (whom I hope Osidian works with more in the future; Paradox is an great company).

Edited April 12, 2014 by Bill Gates' Son

[Bryy]

"There are a lot of things in both DS3 and AP that a lot of people liked,"

 

Those people don't know  games then. *shrug*

... why are you even here if you dislike Obsidian to that degree?

[Volourn]

"why are you even here if you dislike Obsidian to that degree?"

 

L0L Who says I dislike them. Did you read original post that the post I was quoted quoted? Go back. Also, read my sig, and then try to lie and besmirch my name by accusing me of 'disliking Obsidian so much'. LMAO

 

I criticize because I care

[Mannock]

 

 

I understand the developers are commited to release the game on the estimated date stated on Kickstarter Campaign, but we all know game content we founded is much bigger than what was first planned.

 

All I am saying is if they need more time, that is OK with me and I hope the majority of the backers agrees with me. 'Pillars of Eternity' should not be hurried if this will compromise game quality. I am not the expert in saying this but I believe old Infinity Engine games had more than 2 years of development to be the masterpieces that they are.

 

Developers can post a poll concerning this matter to see what our opinion is on this matter.

 

 

How do they fund a delay?

 

And perhaps more importantly, how do you judge what is a "better game"?

 

A game in development for 10 years isn't necessarily objectively better than a game in development for 2 years.

[constantine]

 

 

 

I understand the developers are commited to release the game on the estimated date stated on Kickstarter Campaign, but we all know game content we founded is much bigger than what was first planned.

 

All I am saying is if they need more time, that is OK with me and I hope the majority of the backers agrees with me. 'Pillars of Eternity' should not be hurried if this will compromise game quality. I am not the expert in saying this but I believe old Infinity Engine games had more than 2 years of development to be the masterpieces that they are.

 

Developers can post a poll concerning this matter to see what our opinion is on this matter.

 

 

How do they fund a delay?

 

And perhaps more importantly, how do you judge what is a "better game"?

 

A game in development for 10 years isn't necessarily objectively better than a game in development for 2 years.

 

 

 

Development process has top-priority goals and those of secondary priority. Usually some of those end up being cut off from the final product due to lack of development time. They can very well be elements the developers think they can add that extra bit of flavor, but in the end they decide they have to release their product leaving them out, so not to disappoint us paying customers who are so hyped to get the game without further delays.

 

What I'm saying is that I want PoE to come out like it was envisioned, even if that means it will delayed another 2-4 or no matter how many months.

 

 

It is clear so far our friendly developers are perfectionists, PoE is their prodigy, they want it to be as good as it can be and they want the game to leave behind a legacy and the ground for following titles. Being a pen-and-paper GM myself, I understand how they see things and I will be patient for this game no matter when it is released.

[Lephys]

Those people don't know  games then. *shrug*

 

And,s top blaming publishers for Obsidian's failures. Obsidian is responsible for Obsidian for the bad and the good.

Even excrement holds the value of being excellent fertilizer. I dare say it's not them that don't know games very well, if you think games are somehow 100% bad or 100% good. And before you say "Who says I said that?", notice the "if" there. And, there are either good things and bad things in a game, or there are just all bad things, or all good things. So, yes, when you respond to the idea of some things in decidedly not-stupendous games actually being good with "Pssh, that's silly," I'm not sure what else to figure you mean.

 

And I'm not blaming publisher's for Obsidian's failures. I quite specifically said that I can't attribute those specific games' development choices to publisher interference, but I do know for a fact that it is a very precedented thing. When you can either do exactly what an oftentimes mostly-business-oriented entity tells you (for whatever reasons they want it done, that aren't necessarily "Because we totally creatively feel like it's best for this design, ^_^") and receive money and actually be allowed to continue developing the game, OR not do what they say and have all your funding cut and be fired while they find someone else to finish their game, you're not really responsible for the entirety of that game's design, as a development team.

 

It happens. Dunno if that was the case on those two games. If you do know, then, by all means, share. Either way, on this project, Team Eternity is in 100% control of the whole shebang. So, now, if the game is sub-par, we can say with certainty that none of it could be attributed to publisher interference.

 

That's a simple observation. I'm confused as to how or why it warranted a "it's not like they're perfect and publishers are all to blame" response. If I wanted to say "It was the publishers' fault," then the contents of those quotations marks, there, would've been my post.

[Volourn]

"When you can either do exactly what an oftentimes mostly-business-oriented entity tells you (for whatever reasons they want it done, that aren't necessarily "Because we totally creatively feel like it's best for this design, ^_^") and receive money and actually be allowed to continue developing the game, OR not do what they say and have all your funding cut and be fired while they find someone else to finish their game, you're not really responsible for the entirety of that game's design, as a development team."

 

Yes, yes you are. They signed the contract for x amount of dollars. Why should the people paying for it give you more money to screw up?

 

It's like a house developer. He tells you x amount of dollars is acceptable then he comes back and says, hey, we need more money because of y.. why should you give him it? He agreed to do the work for x amount of dollars. If he couldn't handle it he should have said so from the start. I'd fire his behind and get someone in there who can actually do the job. No mercy no second chances. And, no more stealing and bleeding my money.

 

Blaming the publisher is almost always a cop out used by cowards (and usually used by fanboys). Obsidian is responsible for both their good games and their bad games. That is undisputable FACT.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I've always wondered why when games are released and they're highly praised, there's very little to no mention of publisher interferences. eg. the IE games.

[Zeckul]

The game has already been delayed by 8 months, that should be enough for the team to realize its vision. I think the developers have set a realistic schedule and it'll be best for the game for them to stick with it.

 

In software you can always make a better product if you spend more time on it, but shipping is a feature, and real-world feedback is a indispensible tool for ironing out remaining issues and paving the way for future expansions and installements. It's not sane to keep a project in development for too long. PoE won't be the be-all and end-all of videogames; it'll be flawed in some ways, and future games set in this new universe will do better.

 

That, and it's been freakin 13 years since Baldur's Gate 2. 

Edited April 14, 2014 by Zeckul

[Bryy]

 

 

 

 

I understand the developers are commited to release the game on the estimated date stated on Kickstarter Campaign, but we all know game content we founded is much bigger than what was first planned.

 

All I am saying is if they need more time, that is OK with me and I hope the majority of the backers agrees with me. 'Pillars of Eternity' should not be hurried if this will compromise game quality. I am not the expert in saying this but I believe old Infinity Engine games had more than 2 years of development to be the masterpieces that they are.

 

Developers can post a poll concerning this matter to see what our opinion is on this matter.

 

 

How do they fund a delay?

 

And perhaps more importantly, how do you judge what is a "better game"?

 

A game in development for 10 years isn't necessarily objectively better than a game in development for 2 years.

 

 

 

Development process has top-priority goals and those of secondary priority. Usually some of those end up being cut off from the final product due to lack of development time. They can very well be elements the developers think they can add that extra bit of flavor, but in the end they decide they have to release their product leaving them out, so not to disappoint us paying customers who are so hyped to get the game without further delays.

 

What I'm saying is that I want PoE to come out like it was envisioned, even if that means it will delayed another 2-4 or no matter how many months.

 

 

It is clear so far our friendly developers are perfectionists, PoE is their prodigy, they want it to be as good as it can be and they want the game to leave behind a legacy and the ground for following titles. Being a pen-and-paper GM myself, I understand how they see things and I will be patient for this game no matter when it is released.

 

When they cut content, they don't get the money they made the content with back.

[Lephys]

Yes, yes you are. They signed the contract for x amount of dollars. Why should the people paying for it give you more money to screw up?

Sometimes, it's not your fault it gets screwed up. If the publisher insists that you spend 50 hours polishing up a character so they can show it off in a super-awesome gameplay clip of eye candy to some investors, THEN they insist that you need to change that character completely (and waste the majority of those resources you already spent) for some such reason, then still expect your game to be out in 1.3 years, whose fault is it that you wasted time you could've spent making the game better?

 

A publisher doesn't always just say "here's a whole game's budget worth of dollar bills. *pat on the back* make me proud. We'll check up with you in a year and a half! 8D!"

 

It's like a house developer. He tells you x amount of dollars is acceptable then he comes back and says, hey, we need more money because of y.. why should you give him it? He agreed to do the work for x amount of dollars. If he couldn't handle it he should have said so from the start. I'd fire his behind and get someone in there who can actually do the job. No mercy no second chances. And, no more stealing and bleeding my money.

Umm... that actually happens quite a lot. It's called factors. He's not a magical fairy. If he was told by a supplier that he could get such-and-such materials to do your kitchen floor, and then that supplier says "Whoops, just kidding. We don't have any of that," then, either he finds some different materials, probably at a different price, or you don't get a floor for a while.

 

He doesn't just put a Sorceror's hat on and Fantasia up all the building materials to make your house.

 

Blaming the publisher is almost always a cop out used by cowards (and usually used by fanboys). Obsidian is responsible for both their good games and their bad games. That is undisputable FACT.

Good thing I'm not doing it. I'm simply observing the publisher as a factor, alongside the development team.

 

1 partner in a partnership can only ever do 50% of the work. I'm saying that, even if the development team (ANY development team; this is nothing specific to Obsidian) performs flawlessly, they still have to work within the confines set forth by the publisher (in a publisher-actually-has-project-control scenario).

 

I've always wondered why when games are released and they're highly praised, there's very little to no mention of publisher interferences. eg. the IE games.

Dunno. Maybe there wasn't as much interference? Or maybe the development team simply overcame it. *shrug*

 

If I got stuck in traffic, but was able to take an alternate route and get to my destination on-time, why would I show up and tell everyone "Sorry I'm not late but almost was... there was really bad traffic"? Does the fact that I was on-time mean that the traffic couldn't have existed?

[Hiro Protagonist II]

Dunno. Maybe there wasn't as much interference? Or maybe the development team simply overcame it. *shrug*

 

If I got stuck in traffic, but was able to take an alternate route and get to my destination on-time, why would I show up and tell everyone "Sorry I'm not late but almost was... there was really bad traffic"? Does the fact that I was on-time mean that the traffic couldn't have existed?

 

 

Really? That must be it!!! There wasn't as much interference by the publishers with highly praised critically received games when they're released. So now we have it everyone. When a highly praised critically received game is released = less publisher interference and the team simply overcame it. But when a poorly received game is released = more publisher interference and the team didn't get over it.

 

And why wouldn't someone comment on the traffic on their way to work even if they get on time? In fact, some people do this very thing to let others know that route A is a bad way to go, so go route B instead.

[Lephys]

Really? That must be it!!! There wasn't as much interference by the publishers with highly praised critically received games when they're released. So now we have it everyone. When a highly praised critically received game is released = less publisher interference and the team simply overcame it. But when a poorly received game is released = more publisher interference and the team didn't get over it.

Excellent strawman!

 

Let me put it this way, and be done with you and your ignorance of other people's exact arguments:

 

You either believe that a publisher is capable of detrimenting a game's development timeline/progress (in which case you don't actually disagree with my point, because that's all it is), or you believe they are incapable of doing so. So, maybe figure out which you believe, and you'll be doing yourself a solid.

 

To you and to Volourn... "It could be poor handling on the publisher's part.[/i]" There. Prove that's impossible, and we'll talk more. Otherwise, we don't even have an argument, besides "Who knows best what Lephys is trying to say with his very own words? Lephys, or not-Lephys?". I'll leave the two of you to that one, if that's the one you want to go with.

[Hiro Protagonist II]

 

Really? That must be it!!! There wasn't as much interference by the publishers with highly praised critically received games when they're released. So now we have it everyone. When a highly praised critically received game is released = less publisher interference and the team simply overcame it. But when a poorly received game is released = more publisher interference and the team didn't get over it.

Excellent strawman!

 

Let me put it this way, and be done with you and your ignorance of other people's exact arguments:

 

You either believe that a publisher is capable of detrimenting a game's development timeline/progress (in which case you don't actually disagree with my point, because that's all it is), or you believe they are incapable of doing so. So, maybe figure out which you believe, and you'll be doing yourself a solid.

 

To you and to Volourn... "It could be poor handling on the publisher's part.[/i]" There. Prove that's impossible, and we'll talk more. Otherwise, we don't even have an argument, besides "Who knows best what Lephys is trying to say with his very own words? Lephys, or not-Lephys?". I'll leave the two of you to that one, if that's the one you want to go with.

 

 

No Lephys.

 

You can have two similar games with the same level of interference from their respective publishers and one can be a critical success while the other can be poorly received. It doesn't necessarily reside solely with the publisher. The general gaming public can also be fickle with what they like to play. Also, prove a negative? Not up to me to prove the impossible, Nice try though. You seem to ignore the fact that when games are received with critical acclaim that there may have been a lot of interference with the publishers.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Hiro Protagonist II

[Volourn]

Here's what I see. Obsidian releases a game and it's liked... all because of Obsidian awesomeness. Obsidian releases a game and it's disliked... all because of the publisher. LMAO

[Bryy]

Here's what I see. Obsidian releases a game and it's liked... all because of Obsidian awesomeness. Obsidian releases a game and it's disliked... all because of the publisher. LMAO

Kickstarter is not really helping the notion that money somehow magically corrupts you like it is Black Water.

[moridin84]

 

 

 

I understand the developers are commited to release the game on the estimated date stated on Kickstarter Campaign, but we all know game content we founded is much bigger than what was first planned.

 

All I am saying is if they need more time, that is OK with me and I hope the majority of the backers agrees with me. 'Pillars of Eternity' should not be hurried if this will compromise game quality. I am not the expert in saying this but I believe old Infinity Engine games had more than 2 years of development to be the masterpieces that they are.

 

Developers can post a poll concerning this matter to see what our opinion is on this matter.

 

 

How do they fund a delay?

 

And perhaps more importantly, how do you judge what is a "better game"?

 

A game in development for 10 years isn't necessarily objectively better than a game in development for 2 years.

 

More like, a game in development for 10 years will probably be worse than a game in development for 2 years. 

 

Taking too much time to release a game can be just as bad as taking too little. I think that if development goes on too long, developers can get sidetracked in regards to what game they are actually trying to make. For example Duke Nukem Forever or X: Rebirth. 

[Hassat Hunter]

Do you think that Obsidian gets treated differently? I think not. The publishers usually have some sort of policy of handling things and I doubt they do it differently for Obsidian just to screw them.

Let's see... LucasArts... Battlefront 3, KOTOR2... check!

Let's see... SEGA... Alpha Protocol, Alien RPG, produces horrible Alien game everyone hates... check?

 

Not to mention I like Alpha Protocol and KOTOR2.

So, indeed they don't get treated differently, but it doesn't quite seem like the publisher treated other developers nicer anyway. Or maybe that's completely my point of view?

[ravenshrike]

"No offense, but the devs will do whatever they think is best for the game. I trust them."

 

No offense,  but these are the same devs that made  DS3 and AP. trust in them is not advised.

 

On the other hand, these are the same devs that made MOTB and Fo;NV, so I can trust them..

 

 However, I made a $250 bet with my own money that  PE will be a great game. I hope I bet the right way....

Out of curiosity, what exactly was wrong with DS3 beyond it being a game with a playstyle you disliked? I ask this because they were almost certainly told to make a DS game that was playable on both the PCs and consoles from the start, and given those parameters it's pretty decent. Better in certain ways than BG:DAI&II.

[Hormalakh]

Don't push back the release date. Finish what you have when you said it. "Better quality" doesn't exist. If it's a good game, it'll be a good game and we'll fund a sequel or an expansion or whatever.

 

If it's late or sucks, we won't.

[Monte Carlo]

It's worse to release a buggy game on schedule than a stable game late.

 

Word.

[Endrosz]

There are two opposite schools of thought on this, and you hear both from developers on a regular basis.

 

-- Release as early as possible to judge reactions and gather ideas/feedback from players. If players generally don't like the basic concept and gameplay, why bother with bugfixing and polish which costs money? If you spend on development, spend it wisely. -> Minecraft, Early Access games, etc.

OR

-- Polish as much as you can to make the best possible first impression on players and the press. I think that narrative- and atmosphere-driven games suffer a lot if the bugs break the progress, pacing and immersion often, so polish is advised before release. -> Telltale story games, Bioshocks, Mass Effects, etc.

 

I think both have some merit, and choosing between the two depends on the circumstances. For example, if a game delivers fresh, interesting gameplay, and blows the players' minds with new, exciting experiences, then players are more willing to overlook its flaws and wait for patches. If it's an established, familiar concept, like "corridor shooter", then bugs will earn you a lot of complaints because you have less initial "goodwill".

 

RPGs have really long tails when it comes to sales, and have many interlocking systems which require a lot of iteration to get right, so I think the first stance fits RPGs better. Get fans with what you have, then continue to polish the game. You can look at BG1-2 fix packs and tweak packs to see how many issues were not fixed even in after-release patches -- the community took care of those. And the BGs are considered "gold standards" by many. And I remember quite clearly that Fallout 1 and 2, another pair of revered classics,  were buggy messes initially. Specifically, Fallout 2's savegame system was so broken (the file sizes were bloating and load times were increasing with each save and without limit, eating up your hard drive in a major way -- remember, it's the middle of the '90s, not today)  that they rewrote it completely 3-4 months after the release, which invalidated all savegames, including my game-in-progress. And who remembers those initial months now, really, besides old fossils like me? The people who played the first two Fallouts as retro RPGs after the 3rd came out certainly don't.

Edited April 14, 2014 by Endrosz

[Volourn]

"Out of curiosity, what exactly was wrong with DS3 beyond it being a game with a playstyle you disliked?"

 

How do you know I dislike the playstyle? Why are you lying about me? Don't make stuff up. DS3 is garbage and I expect a company like Obsiodian whose made awesome games like MOTB and FO:NV to do better than utter tripe. Period.

 

\As for topic, eh, they'll release the game when it's done.   Silly posters who think they can with any certainity tell the developers when the game is done 'enough' to be released early or late. As long as they don't take a ridiculous amount of time (common sense should determine this) no biggy.

[600lbpanther]

Sorry...I'm catching up here.

 

What was the fear that caused this initial post?

 

An update somewhere?  A video on the development of the game?

 

Did we just suggest this possible scenario and then start arguing for or against it?

 

If so, why did we suggest this possible scenario and then start arguing for or against it? 

 

Obsidian's track record?

 

So many questions....never mind...forget it...I withdraw all my questions...I'm going to the bar.

 

[Bryy]

And SEGA Aliens game is really a shot in the foot for your argument because the reason for Colonial Marines to be bad is actually LACK of SEGA control and overview of the developer 

This is the reason why we're not gtting a Borderlands 3 anytime soon. Instead, we're getting Borderlands 1.5, made by an entirely different studio.