PoE expansion: The White March part 1

[Fardragon]

 

A kobold (or in the case of Pillars, a Xaurip) wizard would actually be rather cool...

 

How about an Ogre Shaman?

 

I played a half-ogre as my main DnD character for a long time. There are technical issues around including larger sized party members, not to mention credibility issues when the party passes through low doors! In PnP it was quite fun to have to "enlarge" doorways, and deal with issues like having armour specially made, when all the peasants run away screaming.

 

For some, any monster race party member would be too gimmicky, and for others, any human, too boring.

Edited June 26, 2015 by Fardragon

[Nakia]

I am one of those who normally finds humans boring.  I never ever included a human in my IWD playthroughs.  This why I so heartily applause how well Eder is scripted.  He is so marvelously human.  Ogres are intelligent in PoE so an ogre shaman wouldn't surprise me at all.  In fact I would welcome one.

 

Is not fantasy the ability to give our imaginations free rein and dream the impossible dream? 

[MadDemiurg]

A sporeling companion. After leveling up a number of times he evolves into a dank spore and becomes completely stationary, so you have to say your farewells. A very heartbreaking moment.

[tinysalamander]

A sporeling companion. After leveling up a number of times he evolves into a dank spore and becomes completely stationary, so you have to say your farewells. A very heartbreaking moment.

 

Unless you teach him Dig beforehand.

[MalVeauX]

Hrm,

 

Seems everything is released in "threes" at least these days, from films to games. It's a winning (in terms of commerce) model in today's consumerism world.

 

That said, I just really hope that eventually the game will be opened up to community content, the way Neverwinter Nights is, so that completely new campaigns can be made by really dedicated and appreciated people who make really fun side quests, side campaigns, or simply expand on certain things. Would require the ability to save characters and not just save games though. Might not be possible in this particular interface if not implemented from early on. But I don't know.

 

Very best,

[Magnificate]

I cross my fingers for some nice quaterstaff suitable for fighters.

[vv221]

That makes me wonder : Wouldnt it be illegal to sell an unfinished product since each part is not the full product?

Looks like it’s common practice nowadays…

*cough*StarCraft 2*cough*

[Luckmann]

The question is; will Durance's staff become a soulbound weapon? Would be appropriate, I think.

[Nakia]

 

That makes me wonder : Wouldnt it be illegal to sell an unfinished product since each part is not the full product?

Looks like it’s common practice nowadays…

*cough*StarCraft 2*cough*

 

When is a game finished?  The IE games had expansions added to them.  Many games since then have had DLCs and expansions added.  Sequels continue the previous games or are at least theoretically built on the previous game.

[Luckmann]

 

 

That makes me wonder : Wouldnt it be illegal to sell an unfinished product since each part is not the full product?

Looks like it’s common practice nowadays…

*cough*StarCraft 2*cough*

 

When is a game finished?  The IE games had expansions added to them.  Many games since then have had DLCs and expansions added.  Sequels continue the previous games or are at least theoretically built on the previous game.

 

 

I think the difference is whether the game is planned to be sold and marketed as a finished product, or knowingly divided into pieces that are doled out at market-opportune times in the interest of profit maximization and franchise popularization (keeping the interest up by a trickle of content, etc).

Edited June 29, 2015 by Luckmann

[vv221]

 

 

(…) unfinished product (…)

(…)

*cough*StarCraft 2*cough*

 

When is a game finished?  The IE games had expansions added to them.  Many games since then have had DLCs and expansions added.  Sequels continue the previous games or are at least theoretically built on the previous game.

 

IE games were sold as full games, then expanded upon with expansions.

StarCraft 2 is sold from the beginning in three parts (each one coming with the campaign for one race only).

 

To have a comparison, it would be like BG2 was first published with the class-specific questline and stronghold for Fighter and Paladin only, then they would sell an "expansion" adding the same for Druid and Cleric, then another one for Mage and Bard, etc.

You see why I’m okay with one (expanding an already "complete" game) and not the other (selling a game in parts, you need all the parts to play the complete game)?

[Fardragon]

The single player campaigns in Starcraft 2 are more like separate novels in a trilogy. Each one can stand alone perfectly well, and you can play any race in the multiplayer game, which has always been the main thrust of Starcraft anyway.

[Sannom]

That makes me wonder : Wouldnt it be illegal to sell an unfinished product since each part is not the full product?

Nope. I mean, look at Konami and how they sold the demo to Metal Gear Solid 5 for 45 bucks!

 

 

To have a comparison, it would be like BG2 was first published with the class-specific questline and stronghold for Fighter and Paladin only, then they would sell an "expansion" adding the same for Druid and Cleric, then another one for Mage and Bard, etc.

That feels like an absurd comparison, and extremely unfair too. Starcraft 2 had a lot of content for a game with only one campaign, and it's not like the expansions after that lacked the usual multiplayer addons that Blizzard accustomed us to.

[vv221]

I love when I’m told that playing single-player only is the wrong way to enjoy my game…

Bah, I’ll do as if I read nothing about this here.

 

The original StarCraft campaigns were a pleasure to play through, playing as each race in turn, then the expansion added a new campaign allowing you once more to play with each race.

If I want to have the same experience with StarCraft 2, I need to buy *three* games. Of course you might be okay with this, depending on what you like in this game, but *I* feel like Blizzard is trying to rob me.

 

-----

 

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

Edited June 29, 2015 by vv221

[Marky]

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

 

I've seen similar remarks a few times and I don't understand it. Why not just wait until the second part is out? As far as I can tell, the only difference is that now you can play something a bit earlier if you want to.

[Night Stalker]

 

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

 

 

I've seen similar remarks a few times and I don't understand it. Why not just wait until the second part is out? As far as I can tell, the only difference is that now you can play something a bit earlier if you want to.

I think it has to, do with

 

a) Obsidian promised a meaty expansion, with none of the modern DLC shenanigans, and then decided to split it up (which feels a bit like modern DLC shenanigans). To hammer the point home, Obsidian hasn't even confirmed if non-backers will have to buy each part of the expansion separately, or they will have to pay once to get the entire expansions (which the old nickel-and-dime DLC strategy).

 

b) Sure, you can make yourself wait, but releasing the expansion in parts sends a signal that it should be played now. It's like exploits in computer games, yes you don't have to use them, but if using them is the optimal strategy, then you are more likely to use them, even if it diminishes the fun of the game.

 

c) Since the expansion has been cut in 2 means that the story and the content of the second part must be cleanly split from the first part, instead of organicly integrated. This could very well not be a problem, but the possibility exists, and that diminished the expansion as a whole.

 

We'll see when the expansion is released.

[vv221]

Night Stalker pretty much summed it up for me (points a. & c., I don’t really care about b.).

If you just need to buy the first part to get access to both when they release I have no problem with it. But if you need to buy the expansion "twice" to fully enjoy it, it’s no better than the way I view Blizzard choice for StarCraft 2 (see my previous posts for this).

Edited June 30, 2015 by vv221

[Gromnir]

 

 

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

 

I've seen similar remarks a few times and I don't understand it. Why not just wait until the second part is out? As far as I can tell, the only difference is that now you can play something a bit earlier if you want to.

I think it has to, do with

 

a) Obsidian promised a meaty expansion, with none of the modern DLC shenanigans, and then decided to split it up (which feels a bit like modern DLC shenanigans). To hammer the point home, Obsidian hasn't even confirmed if non-backers will have to buy each part of the expansion separately, or they will have to pay once to get the entire expansions (which the old nickel-and-dime DLC strategy).

 

b) Sure, you can make yourself wait, but releasing the expansion in parts sends a signal that it should be played now. It's like exploits in computer games, yes you don't have to use them, but if using them is the optimal strategy, then you are more likely to use them, even if it diminishes the fun of the game.

 

c) Since the expansion has been cut in 2 means that the story and the content of the second part must be cleanly split from the first part, instead of organicly integrated. This could very well not be a problem, but the possibility exists, and that diminished the expansion as a whole.

 

We'll see when the expansion is released.

 

pretty much disagree with everything.  splitting don't "feel" like some kinda dlc ploy at all.  feels like the developers want to get material out quick enough so that players still care.  am suspecting we miss your (b) critique complete, but we see © as nothing more than assumption... and is "organic" the new "proactive"?  regardless, even if there is a single over-reaching expansion story, we suspect it would hardly prove problematic to break the content in twain as there will be inevitable and natural breaks in both content and narrative. consider any ie game or ie game expansion (save the ultra-brief HoW or luremaster content) and we can see obvious places to halt content and story advancement... could even do it "organically."  

 

*snort*

 

as an aside, given the lack o' certainty regarding respec, Gromnir is hesitant to continue playing any o' our current saves.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Fardragon]

I love when I’m told that playing single-player only is the wrong way to enjoy my game…

Bah, I’ll do as if I read nothing about this here.

 

The original StarCraft campaigns were a pleasure to play through, playing as each race in turn, then the expansion added a new campaign allowing you once more to play with each race.

If I want to have the same experience with StarCraft 2, I need to buy *three* games. Of course you might be okay with this, depending on what you like in this game, but *I* feel like Blizzard is trying to rob me.

 

-----

 

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

The single player gameplay in Starcraft 2 is NOT the same as Starcraft, where you played each race in turn in missions you could create yourself in the editor, using the same reskinned interface for each race.

 

Each Starcraft 2 campaign has it's own unique "out of battle" interface and gameplay, nor are you necessarily tied to playing as only one race. Did you know "Wings of Victory" included half a dozen Protoss missions?

 

Considering Starcraft earns most of it's revenue through multiplayer, Blizzard put an awful lot of effort into their single player gameplay.

 

Sure, Blizzard games are expensive, in the same way that my Volkswagen was expensive. You pay extra for a quality product. An Obsidian product may be cheaper, but you accept that you will have to contend with the bugs. It's Bethesda that offers poor value, their games are expensive buggy messes.

[vv221]

Each Starcraft 2 campaign has it's own unique "out of battle" interface and gameplay

I don’t care for these "improved cuscenes", even if I understand some like them. I play StarCraft for strategic gameplay, not for some interactive movies.

 

nor are you necessarily tied to playing as only one race. Did you know "Wings of Victory" included half a dozen Protoss missions?

That’s news for me, and it’ll help me moderate my future critics.

I tried a couple missions (my brother buy any Blizzard game at launch), but didn’t want to invest myself too much in a game I have no incentive to buy.

Still, it’s far from the "one campaign for each race" of StarCraft & Brood War.

 

Sure, Blizzard games are expensive, in the same way that my Volkswagen was expensive. You pay extra for a quality product.

You agree that’s totally subjective?

In my opinion Blizzard games were of damn good quality for their cost until WarCraft 3 (Reign of Chaos & Fronzen Throne) (included), since then I wouldn’t buy any of their modern games, even at half their actual price. Not even speaking of the mandatory client they turned Battle.net into, which is just a "no way" from me.

[Fardragon]

It's not just a matter of "Improved Cutscenes", there is a lot more to it than that (although to me the story is as important as the strategy).

 

Compared to SC2, SC1 doesn't have  "one campaign for each race", it has a set of missions for each race that barely qualify as a campaign between them.

 

I was initially reluctant to buy SC2, because of the high price, but I bought "Wings of Victory" discounted and was impressed enough to preorder "Heart of the Swarm", and will preorder the third instalment.

Edited June 30, 2015 by Fardragon

[Noin]

 

I love when I’m told that playing single-player only is the wrong way to enjoy my game…

Bah, I’ll do as if I read nothing about this here.

 

The original StarCraft campaigns were a pleasure to play through, playing as each race in turn, then the expansion added a new campaign allowing you once more to play with each race.

If I want to have the same experience with StarCraft 2, I need to buy *three* games. Of course you might be okay with this, depending on what you like in this game, but *I* feel like Blizzard is trying to rob me.

 

-----

 

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

The single player gameplay in Starcraft 2 is NOT the same as Starcraft, where you played each race in turn in missions you could create yourself in the editor, using the same reskinned interface for each race.

 

Each Starcraft 2 campaign has it's own unique "out of battle" interface and gameplay, nor are you necessarily tied to playing as only one race. Did you know "Wings of Victory" included half a dozen Protoss missions?

 

Considering Starcraft earns most of it's revenue through multiplayer, Blizzard put an awful lot of effort into their single player gameplay.

 

Sure, Blizzard games are expensive, in the same way that my Volkswagen was expensive. You pay extra for a quality product. An Obsidian product may be cheaper, but you accept that you will have to contend with the bugs. It's Bethesda that offers poor value, their games are expensive buggy messes.

 

About the quality: the comparison is incorrect. I would rather compare Obsidian to Blizzard games as Dr. Beats to Sennheiser or AKG headphones. Former are more expensive even though the quality is actually lower, what the person buying these headphones pay more for is the "feeling cool" and "mode". 

 

Unfortunately, in the gaming world price =/= quality. Beyond Earth is more expensive than Age of Wonders 3, but actually nowhere near in quality OR amount of content. Dwarf Fortress is actually free of charge, and is one of the most complicated and thought-through games ever created. I can list thousand more examples.

[vv221]

It's not just a matter of "Improved Cutscenes", there is a lot more to it than that (although to me the story is as important as the strategy).

 

Compared to SC2, SC1 doesn't have  "one campaign for each race", it has a set of missions for each race that barely qualify as a campaign between them.

 

I was initially reluctant to buy SC2, because of the high price, but I bought "Wings of Victory" discounted and was impressed enough to preorder "Heart of the Swarm", and will preorder the third instalment.

Looks like we’re both firmly camped on our respective positions. Do we agree to disagree here and let the thread go back to The White March?

(yep, I know I’m the one who derailed this thread in first place)

[Fardragon]

I wouldn't really compare Obsidian to Blizzard games at all - they are making different types of games. I have been happy with the value of products I have bought from both companies.

 

In everything, price doesn't necessarily equate to quality, which is why further research is always required. However, if something is cheap, you do have to ask yourself how it is being paid for? At best, the creator has lousy business sense.

 

Trying to get back on topic, I doubt part 1 will end with a sealed door and a "to be continued" sign. I suspect it will be more like Raederic's Hold. You complete the part 1 sidequest, then in part 2 the consequences come back to haunt you. I can see exactly why they are doing it in two parts: they are afraid that if they leave it too long before releasing new content people will have forgotten about PoE and moved on to other games. But they don't want to do what certain other companies do and release DLC that is trivial in size and scope.

[Elerond]

 

 

By the way, I’m not really happy to see The White March coming in two parts either.

I could have waited longer for it if it meant it would be published as a full expansion.

 

I've seen similar remarks a few times and I don't understand it. Why not just wait until the second part is out? As far as I can tell, the only difference is that now you can play something a bit earlier if you want to.

I think it has to, do with

 

a) Obsidian promised a meaty expansion, with none of the modern DLC shenanigans, and then decided to split it up (which feels a bit like modern DLC shenanigans). To hammer the point home, Obsidian hasn't even confirmed if non-backers will have to buy each part of the expansion separately, or they will have to pay once to get the entire expansions (which the old nickel-and-dime DLC strategy).

 

b) Sure, you can make yourself wait, but releasing the expansion in parts sends a signal that it should be played now. It's like exploits in computer games, yes you don't have to use them, but if using them is the optimal strategy, then you are more likely to use them, even if it diminishes the fun of the game.

 

c) Since the expansion has been cut in 2 means that the story and the content of the second part must be cleanly split from the first part, instead of organicly integrated. This could very well not be a problem, but the possibility exists, and that diminished the expansion as a whole.

 

We'll see when the expansion is released.

 

 

a) For first it was PoE's backers that Obsidian promised meaty expansion, and as all backers that bought that expansion, soon 3 years ago, will get both parts one would need to count both parts when they judge if expansion is meaty enough. Obsidian/Paradox has not even yet started to take preorders for expansions from non-backers, meaning that there is no need yet announce how they can buy the expansion, but I would say it would be more customer friendly to give people ability to buy parts separately or together, but whatever they decide to do has nothing to do with their meaty expansion promise to the backers. 

 

b) Obsidian got great deal of complains because they didn't gave backers access to preview and even earlier builds of PoE, but instead made them to wait official release version. And now they get complains because they have  planed their expansion so that they can offer people earlier access to some of its content, people are hard to please I see.

 

c) PoE's story itself is divided to 4/5 parts (chapters), which would allow to split game in episodes that could be sold separately without causing any problems how player progress in the story.