Survey for the Future Part 2

[Sking]

Hey you (bunch of forgiving gamers),

 

Our partners had a few issues in their last survey and have made corrections. We'd really appreciate you have another go at it. Thanks for all your past surveying and we hope we haven't burnt you out. New (Survey Link).

 

Use that voice

- Sking

 

 

[algroth]

Done! I'm not sure what the rules are with regards to this, but I'm going to copy what I replied to in the thread about the earlier survey because I feel it still applies for this one:

 

So... I just finished this survey. I have to say, I'm very wary of the information and ideas the company gets out of these results, I for one found many of the responses and questions a little too vague to really be in agreement or disagreement of. Meanwhile, the slides and questions regarding tone just made my heart sink. What if I don't want fantasy to be thought of in terms of "light" or "dark"? To my mind, one of the great successes about the likes of Planescape: Torment (to my mind the best game I've ever played) is that it didn't need to assume itself as being dark, it simply was thanks to the thematic content. It is a much more affecting and disturbing game than the likes of Dark Souls or Dragon Age: Origins, which on the other hand do try so hard to dress their rather standard fantasy tropes in a dark and cynical outfit, and pretend they're so much more serious for doing so. The matter of tone is complicated, because you can ONLY pick your tone in accordance to the content you have before you: if we don't know what this hypothetical upcoming RPG is about, how are we supposed to know which style works best for it? It is best to let the tone develop naturally from the content and the story opposed to reinforcing it just because it's what the playerbase wants to see.

 

My two cents, anyhow.

[Karkarov]

Basically the same survey, I suspect they changed it because before you could not move sliders if you didn't want to.  I bet if you didn't move them they came up as negative results or n/a's previously didn't they?  Hohohohohohohoho

Either way gave pretty close to the same answers I imagine.  Still not particularly excited about a Pathfinder game because it is just more generic D&D world, but Pathfinder as a isometric RPG is certainly a better use of the license than a card game.

[Urthor]

Pathfinder needs Obsidian way more than Obsidian needs Pathfinder.  No reason to go for an inferior IP just because it's tied in with Pathfinder when you can make awesome original ones like Tyranny or follow through with Pillars of Eternity 

Edited October 29, 2016 by Urthor

[Dainalt]

I want to point out that the card game doesn't pit you against other players. It works remarkably well as a single player platform. There's no AI or other non-sense. No snickering pre-teen who happened to get lucky on the other end. Well... I don't mind the snickering youngsters, but I know some people do. I've enjoyed MtG. I've even won a sanctioned tournament (many years ago), but Pathfinder the card game warrants a second look if you erroneously think of it as a MtG sort of experience.

 

Nevertheless, I'm also jonesin' for a good RPG proper. The setting is fairly meaningless to me. I don't hate it. I guess, more than that, I can dig it. It'll be fun. I'm still on the lookout for a CoC or perhaps something more mystery/spy related, but it's like a certain baseball field. If you build it, I will come.

[nikolokolus]

The art questions about "early pathfinder" and "later pathfinder" are baffling to me. They're both completely "ugh"

 

With respect to Pathfinder, I don't completely hate the mechanics of D&D 3.x (which I hear some people describe PF as 3.75) but the baked-in setting that comes with D&D just doesn't do a thing for me anymore - Grumpy dwarves, haughty elves, fat hobbits, and kitchen-sink, high fantasy worlds where there is is zero sense of wonder or mystery or weirdness.

 

Not to say Obsidian can't make a good game based on the Pathfinder ruleset, but man what I wouldn't give for an Obsidian RuneQuest game, or an Obsidian Zothique game, or anything that isn't bog-standard, D&D-derivative.

[ManifestedISO]

Wait, hold the comm link ... Cryptic Studios was listed in the list of developers related to which company would arouse or snuff interest in an isometric Pathfinder RPG ... Cryptic developed Star Trek Online in 2010 ... STAR TREK D20 RPG CONFIRMED

[evilcat]

The early/late PF is tricky, both look the same. And probably neither is good for games. (cool artwork for book or some static graphic)

The answear is: for isometric good is "not too many lines" since you will never see them anyway. It is up to preferences if you go for "natural" look (more like poe) or more stylish like Torchlight or D:OS.

 

It would be fun to see something which is different. ;-) We have constant supply of classic fantasy. (Path of Exile, Divinity, Witcher, Skyrim, PoE, Tyranny fair enought).

Cyberpunk is ok i suppose (shadowrun, Deus Ex) SciFi is maybe (SWTOR is not really it, and Andromeda is nobody knows). Apocalypse is fair (Wasteland, Fallout)

 

It would be cool to have not yoru standard fantasy setting rpg. SteamPunk. Horror. Oriental. World Of Darkness. Weird.

Tides of Numerea is honorable mention in originality.

Tyranny has fair gimmick of being evil, and having multipath plotl.

Witcher, ME, Jade Empire, Deus Ex are special since have challenging action component.

There is potencial in pirate setting.

There is Alchemic Fantasy like Eberon setting.

SciFi Fantasy, where Magic is technology fallen from stars.

Edited October 29, 2016 by evilcat

[aluminiumtrioxid]

the baked-in setting that comes with D&D just doesn't do a thing for me anymore - Grumpy dwarves, haughty elves, fat hobbits, and kitchen-sink, high fantasy worlds where there is is zero sense of wonder or mystery or weirdness.

 

I feel like I must politely but strenuously object. D&D isn't limited to Forgotten Realms, and Pathfinder has some really, really cool sub-settings with nary a grumpy dwarf or fat hobbit in sight - check out the Strange Aeons or the Iron Gods APs for example.

[LLaney]

I was confused by the art question as well. I've looked at a LOT of PF art, and I don't think there's a huge shift in style over time -- just shifts in style between artists. I figured they were trying to dance around saying "by Wayne Reynolds" and "not by Wayne Reynolds". PF online seemed to be shooting for a 3D interpretation of his work. Maybe thinking about it like that will help you answer the question?

 

(I didn't complete the survey nor was I involved in creating it. I'm just full of opinions )

[nikolokolus]

 

the baked-in setting that comes with D&D just doesn't do a thing for me anymore - Grumpy dwarves, haughty elves, fat hobbits, and kitchen-sink, high fantasy worlds where there is is zero sense of wonder or mystery or weirdness.

 

I feel like I must politely but strenuously object. D&D isn't limited to Forgotten Realms, and Pathfinder has some really, really cool sub-settings with nary a grumpy dwarf or fat hobbit in sight - check out the Strange Aeons or the Iron Gods APs for example.

 

Perhaps, but a licensed game using a non-standard setting? Seems unlikely.

[ruzen]

That took very long. Hope It will help you.

[kanisatha]

 

the baked-in setting that comes with D&D just doesn't do a thing for me anymore - Grumpy dwarves, haughty elves, fat hobbits, and kitchen-sink, high fantasy worlds where there is is zero sense of wonder or mystery or weirdness.

 

I feel like I must politely but strenuously object. D&D isn't limited to Forgotten Realms, and Pathfinder has some really, really cool sub-settings with nary a grumpy dwarf or fat hobbit in sight - check out the Strange Aeons or the Iron Gods APs for example.

 

^This. Pathfinder is not a singular setting but actually a collection of very varied settings. And they are mostly very well developed.

 

Also, I can appreciate the sentiments of those who're tired of games in high fantasy settings. But at the same time for others like myself, sword and magic is all we really care for as a setting for an RPG. I simply cannot get into guns or lasers so I'm never going to play a Fallout or Star Wars game no matter how good it may be.

 

Obsidian already has the license for Pathfinder; the setting and the game mechanics are thoroughly developed so very little resources need be expended on those major aspects of any new game; and, the setting comes with a reasonably large existing fanbase. So a Pathfinder CRPG would be a relatively low cost and low risk but high return game for Obsidian. Thus from a business standpoint, it makes perfect sense to do it. And best of all, Pathfinder is perfectly suited for a Neverwinter Nights style game, meaning you build a moddable base game, and then you release a series of new modules for the game for years thereafter. As was evident from the survey, Pathfinder already comes with a very long list of mostly-popular game modules to work with.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

 

the baked-in setting that comes with D&D just doesn't do a thing for me anymore - Grumpy dwarves, haughty elves, fat hobbits, and kitchen-sink, high fantasy worlds where there is is zero sense of wonder or mystery or weirdness.

 

I feel like I must politely but strenuously object. D&D isn't limited to Forgotten Realms, and Pathfinder has some really, really cool sub-settings with nary a grumpy dwarf or fat hobbit in sight - check out the Strange Aeons or the Iron Gods APs for example.

 

Perhaps, but a licensed game using a non-standard setting? Seems unlikely.

 

 

Why? The two biggest isometric RPGs based on tabletop RPG licenses lately have been Shadowrun (Returns, Dragonfall, Hong Kong) and Tides of Numenera, neither of which is your usual high fantasy fare.

Edited October 29, 2016 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Nonek]

The survey is much better now, with explanations spaces granted for when you choose other.

 

Still forced to choose between two Pathfinder art styles that are horrendous however, there really ought to be a choice of artists to draw upon there such as Clyde Caldwell and Jeff Easley AD&D styles, Frazetta as represented in paperback Conans, or something far more historically grounded such as Mr Karranthian provided in his delightful thread where many historical illustrations were used. I'd far prefer to thunder into battle sabre slashing as a Winged Hussar. Lower my spear, heft my shield and dig in my heels as a Hoplite of the Ancient Greek phalanx, trusting to layered linen and bronze. Or sweat under heavy gambeson, mail and Sutton Hoo helm as I swing a Dane Axe.

 

Being a half naked breechclout clad brute such as in Torment has its own charm however, just not the modern semi stylised art please.

[nikolokolus]

The survey is much better now, with explanations spaces granted for when you choose other.

 

Still forced to choose between two Pathfinder art styles that are horrendous however, there really ought to be a choice of artists to draw upon there such as Clyde Caldwell and Jeff Easley AD&D styles, Frazetta as represented in paperback Conans, or something far more historically grounded such as Mr Karranthian provided in his delightful thread where many historical illustrations were used. I'd far prefer to thunder into battle sabre slashing as a Winged Hussar. Lower my spear, heft my shield and dig in my heels as a Hoplite of the Ancient Greek phalanx, trusting to layered linen and bronze. Or sweat under heavy gambeson, mail and Sutton Hoo helm as I swing a Dane Axe.

 

Being a half naked breechclout clad brute such as in Torment has its own charm however, just not the modern semi stylised art please.

Who wouldn't want to wander around in a Paul Bonner inspired setting, or a DiTerlizzi world? Any of Adrian Smith, Arthur Rackham, Russ Nicholson, Vance Kovacs works, as a style to aspire to would be amazing.

 

Then again, I suspect the industry has moved well past my tastes at this point (if it ever matched at all?)

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Not that I'm a fan of Reynolds' work, but I'm not entirely sure how reasonable is it to ask for a game based on a licensed IP to look nothing like the IP in question.

Edited October 30, 2016 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Nonek]

Hardly a problem, presumably it'll still have Pathfinder emblazoned upon it prominently. Besides alternate art styles have been abandoned or embraced before, look at BG2 using the horrible 3rd ed art style, while still utilising 2nd ed rules, though that was such a downgrade from BG it was not even funny.

[IndiraLightfoot]

 

 

 Pathfinder is not a singular setting but actually a collection of very varied settings. And they are mostly very well developed.

 

Also, I can appreciate the sentiments of those who're tired of games in high fantasy settings. But at the same time for others like myself, sword and magic is all we really care for as a setting for an RPG. I simply cannot get into guns or lasers so I'm never going to play a Fallout or Star Wars game no matter how good it may be.

 

Obsidian already has the license for Pathfinder; the setting and the game mechanics are thoroughly developed so very little resources need be expended on those major aspects of any new game; and, the setting comes with a reasonably large existing fanbase. So a Pathfinder CRPG would be a relatively low cost and low risk but high return game for Obsidian. Thus from a business standpoint, it makes perfect sense to do it. And best of all, Pathfinder is perfectly suited for a Neverwinter Nights style game, meaning you build a moddable base game, and then you release a series of new modules for the game for years thereafter. As was evident from the survey, Pathfinder already comes with a very long list of mostly-popular game modules to work with.

 

 I feel you!

I've given so many CRPGs a chance, where they involve post-apocalyptic landscapes, lasers and a wide array of hand guns, but those still don't fly too well with me. I'm not engrossed in the same way as I for some nostalgic reason get to be in the admittedly worn out genre of LotR/Rune Quest/D&D-kind of Medieval-ish high fantasy. The reason's on my end, in my twisted head, but I just love that kind of setting.

 

And imagine if you're right about a moddable base Pathfinder CRPG that beats the hell out of the rather big disasters of Daggerdale and Sword Coast Legends, I'd be so happy about such a product, and imagine the longevity. Wow... 

Finally, I trust that Obsidian would make one helluva of an interesting game, using the Pathfinder setting, which is both unique and mature enough to be to my liking. 

Edited October 31, 2016 by IndiraLightfoot

[Chilloutman]

Not that I'm a fan of Reynolds' work, but I'm not entirely sure how reasonable is it to ask for a game based on a licensed IP to look nothing like the IP in question.

I thought that Pathfinder is rulebook, It doens't have to have certain art style associated with it?

[nakedmolerat]

There was a question in there that irked me more than usual. (Usual survey questions urk me because choosing the best possible fit of an answer still feels like I'm choosing pants a size too big.)

 

Towards the end with all the pathfinder stuff there was a question about looking forward to a game and the answers for part of it focused on liking or not liking DND.

I personally answered it in terms of dnd system, since setting is varied in DND (hell, varied setting is half the point, you can even homebrew your own campaign).

Then it dawned on me afterword, are they asking about setting?

 

And if I was wrong, and it was about setting, how can you answer that since, as above posters and I have said, the setting is variable.

If I was initially right, and it was about system the answer still comes out wonky.

 

I have fond memories of some of the rules of second ed ADND, but disliked the whole THACO thing, and how some rolls you wanted high, some you wanted low.

 

I liked 3rd mostly, especially since it fixed rolls and now everything was basically "beat this number". However they way they did skills never felt right to me. If it was a class skill or a cross class sill would eventually lead to a large difference in abilities. If i wanted to be a guy that dabbled in lock picking, but there was a dedicated lock picker in the party, I may as well have wasted my points (outside of possible split party scenarios, which my DMs never liked because it led to more work for them, and for half the party sitting there waiting while the active half did its thing)

And multi-classing was a whole freaking can of worms with all the min/maxing insanity it could lead to.

 

Fourth Ed seemed ok, but our campaign was based on people with different schedules playing via the net, and things fell apart so I can't make a completely informed comment about how good or bad it ultimately was.

 

Never Played fifth, Never played 1st (though my first DM did home brew in a few things from first back in the day).

 

With that much variation in what is "dnd", how am I supposed to just say that I liked or disliked it?

 

Even if we keep it to more recent DND, am I supposed to answer based off of 5th ed, which I never played? Am I supposed to answer based on 3.5, which is what I think I heard pathfinder was basically a continuation of?

 

Am I supposed to answer based off of Greyhawk or Forgotten realms, which are pretty generic fantasy type stuff? Or maybe that Spelljammer (?) I heard about once with all its airships, or Dark Sun, or that setting I can't remember the name of where you play a person with a bit of the power of a god and try to build up a kingdom as much as you are building a character?

 

Ok, venting over, I feel better now.

Answer everything as best I could, hope it helps.

 

One more thing (Inner Columbo time). The questions where you were to chose word to fit an art style seemed a bit rubbish to me, but that's probably just me since I don't attributing vague words like "epic" and "cool" to things when I'm trying to give concise and clear answers, like I would be in answering a survey.

And both the pathfinder art styles look weird to me, and the only reason I could pick is because one of the faces looked a bit off and wonky to me, like it was an example of how not to draw anatomy of a face or something. So I just picked the set that didn't include that face.

[aluminiumtrioxid]

 

Not that I'm a fan of Reynolds' work, but I'm not entirely sure how reasonable is it to ask for a game based on a licensed IP to look nothing like the IP in question.

I thought that Pathfinder is rulebook, It doens't have to have certain art style associated with it?

 

 

In the same sense as Warhammer is a set of rules and theoretically doesn't have to have a certain art style associated with them, but nonetheless there are very strict art guidelines licensees are expected to adhere to. At least that would be my guess.

Edited October 31, 2016 by aluminiumtrioxid

[Chilloutman]

 

 

Not that I'm a fan of Reynolds' work, but I'm not entirely sure how reasonable is it to ask for a game based on a licensed IP to look nothing like the IP in question.

I thought that Pathfinder is rulebook, It doens't have to have certain art style associated with it?

 

 

In the same sense as Warhammer is a set of rules and theoretically doesn't have to have a certain art style associated with them, but nonetheless there are very strict art guidelines licensees are expected to adhere to. At least that would be my guess.

 

Good point, Its probably me not being too versed with Pathfinder, but in terms of WH I think aesthetics are more ingrained in it as they were selling figurines and such? I don't think its true for Pathfinder, but again, I might be wrong

[Nonek]

 or that setting I can't remember the name of where you play a person with a bit of the power of a god and try to build up a kingdom as much as you are building a character?

 

Birthright.

[Sedrefilos]

Apart from just being rule books, all settings have a tone and aesthetic/art style that heir creators imagine when they write about those worlds that makes them distinguishable. I doubt we'll ever see an offcial Warhammer or D&D product (made by Games Workshop or Wizards) that has, say, a manga aesthetic/art style. I know people like to imagine things in their imaginary fan art style, but, personally, I like that companies decide and keep their art style in their official products. Third companies that made side products can or maybe must respect that.

 

PS. I mostly dislike fan art