Deadfire delayed to May 8th

[FlintlockJazz]

Hey, I just realised, my ankle operation might actually be done by the time Deadfire comes out! Meaning I may have recovery time to play it!

[Daled]

To the one thinking about hurting himself to play on release date, don't do it 

[JerekKruger]

To the one thinking about hurting himself to play on release date, don't do it 

 

Agreed. It's much less painful to pretend you've hurt yourself instead

[rheingold]

 

I am just mentioning that due to the amount of work required with the new mechanics, the ships and the massive map there is a chance the story is going to suffer. Which just happens to be a characteristic of open world games

Nope. Story is already set. I'm sure there's a lot of bugs, but that won't affect the story. The story is what it is at this point.

 

Um, I think you are missing the point - obviously at this stage the story should be locked. The issue is that in large, open world/sandbox type of games the story tends to suffer as a result of the compromises made. But I'm not going to derail this thread further. I'm just happy that they delayed the game.

[Mannock]

Um, I think you are missing the point - obviously at this stage the story should be locked. The issue is that in large, open world/sandbox type of games the story tends to suffer as a result of the compromises made. But I'm not going to derail this thread further. I'm just happy that they delayed the game.

If you're not going to derail, why do you keep bringing up that this game is a sandbox game?

 

Cause it's not. Not even in the slightest. If you're trolling, you're doing a great job, cause you're driving me nuts with these fantasies of yours.

[SonicMage117]

Open world will be fine as long as it's not like Tyranny (was Tyranny considered open-world? I believe that players considered it as so, even though Obsidian did not - if I remember correctly, I may be wrong). Cut off sections in an almost boardgame set-piece like structure in which it operates. That's really what Tyranny's world felt like to me and to be honest, I did not appreciate it.

 

If we can all agree on one thing, it would be that Deadfire's world deserves to be explored without cut-offs and check-points/pre-destination limitations (you cannot achieve going here without doing x)

 

I don't think it will be sandbox but sandbox is pretty loose term now days in gaming. Does open world go with sandbox? Maybe that means the same as "Can we keep living this lie in Deadfire? Will Obsidian encourage it? What types of things will we be able to do?"

 

I have no clue if we will be able to play around in the world after the campaign is done, I would assume so since there are alot of non-scripted random events and more likely some mini-games to partake in this time around. Maybe some "Outdrink the Ogre"? Hmmmph... we shall see soon enough.

[Wormerine]

Open world will be fine as long as it's not like Tyranny (was Tyranny considered open-world? I believe that players considered it as so, even though Obsidian did not - if I remember correctly, I may be wrong). Cut off sections in an almost boardgame set-piece like structure in which it operates. That's really what Tyranny's world felt like to me and to be honest, I did not appreciate it.

If we can all agree on one thing, it would be that Deadfire's world deserves to be explored without cut-offs and check-points/pre-destination limitations (you cannot achieve going here without doing x)

I don't think it will be sandbox but sandbox is pretty loose term now days in gaming. Does open world go with sandbox? Maybe that means the same as "Can we keep living this lie in Deadfire? Will Obsidian encourage it? What types of things will we be able to do?"

I have no clue if we will be able to play around in the world after the campaign is done, I would assume so since there are alot of non-scripted random events and more likely some mini-games to partake in this time around. Maybe some "Outdrink the Ogre"? Hmmmph... we shall see soon enough.

How was Tyranny “open world”? It’s a set of couple fairly linear locations and in many “storylines” you even don’t have direct control control over which ones you visit and when.

 

Open-world and sandbox a rather well defined. Open-world game is a game which design doesn’t create artificial boarders for exploring. There are no set levels, which you need to beat in certain order (I am talking location wise, not story instances). BG1 is sort of open world (except some locations are cut off) but I would say BG2 isn’t, although you get lots of choice in what to do.

 

Sandbox games, often use open world structure, are games which put little limitations on players - it is more of a playground than a structured game. Often sandbox games adapt a more traditional, limited gameplay for the “story instances”. Witcher, Gothic, Fallout: NV or Baldur’s Gate were not a sandbox games (even though Witcher3 has handful of mini games typical to sandbox games) there is nothing indicating that Deadfire will be. Systems added seem to be there to enhance main content, not distract players from it.

[SonicMage117]

Thank you for your answer, it helped clear things up for me. I never really understood what sandbox meant.

 

Glad to hear that Tyranny wasn't considered open world, I loved the game but just hated the way that Obsidian put locale progression in it. Just seemed unimmersive to me but that's just my preference. The timeline deal was unique but became more and more tedious for me as the player.

[Wormerine]

Thank you for your answer, it helped clear things up for me. I never really understood what sandbox meant.

Glad to hear that Tyranny wasn't considered open world, I loved the game but just hated the way that Obsidian put locale progression in it. Just seemed unimmersive to me but that's just my preference. The timeline deal was unique but became more and more tedious for me as the player.

I am not sure if that is what put you off, but for me what made Tyranny weaker wasn’t per say design of the locale (I did like the more focused approach) but that after act 1 for the most part you were watching you choices from intro and act 1 play out, rarely making new ones. It is as if after act one you were set on straight line till the end after rather brilliant opening. Beside Oldwalls Tyranny didn’t have an exploration, which fit the theme, though I can see how it could have been missed.

[Guest]

 

Thank you for your answer, it helped clear things up for me. I never really understood what sandbox meant.

Glad to hear that Tyranny wasn't considered open world, I loved the game but just hated the way that Obsidian put locale progression in it. Just seemed unimmersive to me but that's just my preference. The timeline deal was unique but became more and more tedious for me as the player.

I am not sure if that is what put you off, but for me what made Tyranny weaker wasn’t per say design of the locale (I did like the more focused approach) but that after act 1 for the most part you were watching you choices from intro and act 1 play out, rarely making new ones. It is as if after act one you were set on straight line till the end after rather brilliant opening. Beside Oldwalls Tyranny didn’t have an exploration, which fit the theme, though I can see how it could have been missed.

Hmm. Only one playthrough? There’s a ton of reactivity in Act II however I suspect that one would have to play at least twice to notice (obviously making different choices)

[Guest]

 

Thank you for your answer, it helped clear things up for me. I never really understood what sandbox meant.

Glad to hear that Tyranny wasn't considered open world, I loved the game but just hated the way that Obsidian put locale progression in it. Just seemed unimmersive to me but that's just my preference. The timeline deal was unique but became more and more tedious for me as the player.

I am not sure if that is what put you off, but for me what made Tyranny weaker wasn’t per say design of the locale (I did like the more focused approach) but that after act 1 for the most part you were watching you choices from intro and act 1 play out, rarely making new ones. It is as if after act one you were set on straight line till the end after rather brilliant opening. Beside Oldwalls Tyranny didn’t have an exploration, which fit the theme, though I can see how it could have been missed.

Hmm. Only one playthrough? There’s a ton of reactivity in Act II however I suspect that one would have to play at least twice to notice (obviously making different choices)

[Wormerine]

Hmm. Only one playthrough? There’s a ton of reactivity in Act II however I suspect that one would have to play at least twice to notice (obviously making different choices)

Two playthroughs. I am not saying that the later chapter are static, but that they are defined by decisions made in act1. I find making a decision to be much more appealing than watching it play out. While there are some cool dilemmas to solve after act 1 (like dealing with the child) overall it feels much more like watching a fallout of conquest and act1, and to me, is less involving.

[Guest]

 

Hmm. Only one playthrough? There’s a ton of reactivity in Act II however I suspect that one would have to play at least twice to notice (obviously making different choices)

I am not saying that the later chapter are static, but that they are defined by decisions made in act 1.

And I am saying this isn’t entirely accurate (though I understand why one might have this perception)