Josh Sawyer's tweets and teasers, part III

[rjshae]

I wonder though how well the aspect of Eothas at Caed Nua will sell the game to those who have not yet played PoE? I'm guessing they are more likely to buy it for the "pirate adventures in the Caribbean"-like aspects.

[injurai]

I wonder though how well the aspect of Eothas at Caed Nua will sell the game to those who have not yet played PoE? I'm guessing they are more likely to buy it for the "pirate adventures in the Caribbean"-like aspects.

 

Probably, but I can't complain about that. As long as Pillars is managing to draw in people, I benefit from that.

[Sedrefilos]

I wonder though how well the aspect of Eothas at Caed Nua will sell the game to those who have not yet played PoE? I'm guessing they are more likely to buy it for the "pirate adventures in the Caribbean"-like aspects.

 

I played Mass Effect 2 before 1. I didn't even know it was a direct sequel. I had no problem with the game whatsoever. 

 

Pillars 1 starts with devs presuming you know much about its world, lore etc. If you didn't follow the development or read the strategy guide you could feel this was a game amidst a series. Some had problems with it, others not.

 

I don't believe its a dealbreaker. If you see something you feel you're gonna like and, while playing, you like it indeed, you're gonna find your way.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Sedrefilos

[The Sharmat]

I'll never fathom people that start with a sequel but the one thing I do know about them is they clearly don't care that much about continuity, so why would it bother them?

[injurai]

I'll never fathom people that start with a sequel but the one thing I do know about them is they clearly don't care that much about continuity, so why would it bother them?

 

The Witcher 3 sales numbers are fascinating. Almost nobody who is a self-proclaimed fan has played the first game. Very few have played the second. The third is one of the more successful games of it's time.

 

At some point I think the experience is what people are after more, and Deadfire sells a unique experience.

[The Sharmat]

Yeah that always depresses me but I was one of the fools holding out hope that save import might actually mean something for the third game. Didn't even get so much as a cameo for Iorveth...

Can't blame them though I suppose. Marketing data shows they'd have been fools to sink resources into stuff 1% of their playerbase would have recognized. Shame about all the people willing to miss out on great games because the integer after their name is too low though.

[Alot]

 

I'll never fathom people that start with a sequel but the one thing I do know about them is they clearly don't care that much about continuity, so why would it bother them?

 

The Witcher 3 sales numbers are fascinating. Almost nobody who is a self-proclaimed fan has played the first game. Very few have played the second. The third is one of the more successful games of it's time.

 

At some point I think the experience is what people are after more, and Deadfire sells a unique experience.

True, but the Witcher 3 is very accessible to people who haven't played the first 2 games. I'm worried that Deadfire won't be nearly as accessible, and consequently less successful at attracting new players.

Edited April 14, 2018 by Alot

[injurai]

Is accessibility all that knowable in advance?

[Sedrefilos]

I'll never fathom people that start with a sequel but the one thing I do know about them is they clearly don't care that much about continuity, so why would it bother them?

 

It is the designers' job to make a sequel as easy for everyone to get into as it can possibly be. One might not know about your previous game for whatever reason. You should't force people buy your previous games in order to play your last. Each of your work should stand as its own even if it's a part of a series. 

[The Sharmat]

True, but the Witcher 3 is very accessible to people who haven't played the first 2 games. I'm worried that Deadfire won't be nearly as accessible, and consequently less successful at attracting new players.

From what I've seen that's only because the main plot not making much sense goes totally over their heads, presumably because they assume it would have made sense if they'd played the other games. Nevermind the books, most aren't aware they exist, and if they are they think they're based on the games instead of the other way around. People that start with sequels simply don't care that much about getting into the plot, and I can't see anything in Deadfire's premise that builds tremendously on the previous game's plot anyway. the Saint's War stuff was all backstory that's easy to relate.

[The Sharmat]

 

I'll never fathom people that start with a sequel but the one thing I do know about them is they clearly don't care that much about continuity, so why would it bother them?

 

It is the designers' job to make a sequel as easy for everyone to get into as it can possibly be. One might not know about your previous game for whatever reason. You should't force people buy your previous games in order to play your last. Each of your work should stand as its own even if it's a part of a series. 

 

No one says this about anything but videogames. If someone chose to read Lord of the Rings starting with the Two Towers, you'd think they were crazy. It's only video games that are expected to have either little to no continuity or tons of recap. I don't know how this happened but it's universal to the medium and will prevent meaningful continuations from ever occurring.

[injurai]

I think it's usually best to keep the plot related the what's been established. Because either people play the game for the story (obviously for other things as well) or they play it for the experience. If you make the story too self-contained you can lose some older fans. The other fans may drop in and out depending on if the gameplay looks fun enough.

 

MGS is a good series that kept people around based on the crazy stories, but also had a highly compelling experience for people looking to jump into the middle of a series.

 

TW1 just had small enough of a player base that it didn't make sense, but Pillars will probably retain a lot of it's older audience. In the later cases continuity is a supreme consideration for the designers.

[snphillips0@gmail.com]

The better metaphor is people reading Lord of the Rings before the Hobbit, which people do all the time. Same with any of the countless mystery and urban fantasy series out, or with movie series like the Fast and the Furious, Halloween, Mad Max, etc.

[The Sharmat]

Eh, I'm not convinced. People will buy it if it has little to nothing to do with the first game's story. And why not? The first game's story is pretty complete. Even if it wasn't, I doubt it would negatively impact the sales in a negative way to ignore it, judging by every single other game of this type. I advise you to keep your expectations about save importing and etc very low. It's basically never been more than cosmetic.

[The Sharmat]

The better metaphor is people reading Lord of the Rings before the Hobbit, which people do all the time. Same with any of the countless mystery and urban fantasy series out, or with movie series like the Fast and the Furious, Halloween, Mad Max, etc.

No, the better metaphor is the one I made. The Hobbit is a complete story. The Witcher 2 is not. It ends on at least one cliffhanger, maybe more depending on in-game outcomes. These are largely unaddressed in the sequel.

[Sedrefilos]

 

 

I'll never fathom people that start with a sequel but the one thing I do know about them is they clearly don't care that much about continuity, so why would it bother them?

 

It is the designers' job to make a sequel as easy for everyone to get into as it can possibly be. One might not know about your previous game for whatever reason. You should't force people buy your previous games in order to play your last. Each of your work should stand as its own even if it's a part of a series. 

 

No one says this about anything but videogames. If someone chose to read Lord of the Rings starting with the Two Towers, you'd think they were crazy. It's only video games that are expected to have either little to no continuity or tons of recap. I don't know how this happened but it's universal to the medium and will prevent meaningful continuations from ever occurring.

 

 

That is because book series are usually written with them being a single story in the writer's mind. Games usually are made, then a company decides to make a sequel and so on. Huge difference.

[Sedrefilos]

Eh, I'm not convinced. People will buy it if it has little to nothing to do with the first game's story. And why not? The first game's story is pretty complete.

 

Exactly. They made first Pillars without having in mind it'll ahve a sequel. And, tbh, Deadfire might be a continuation of the main character but not of the first game's story. It has nothing to do with Thaos and the LEaden Key or anything. It's about Eothas coming back and you chasing after him.

[The Sharmat]

Does it always have to be that way, though? Also to be fair, there's been at least one major public case of a company claiming they had a big overarching story in mind for a whole series and blatantly lying about it. It was a franchise that rhymes with Ass Effect.

[Sedrefilos]

So what is exactly you problem with Deadfire @The Sharmat? That people start series from the middle?

[The Sharmat]

I don't have a problem with Deadfire as far as I know. I do dislike that developers feel pressured to water down their sequels, but that doesn't really apply here since PoE1 never set up expectation for a continuing story in the first place. The conversation just kind of drifted in that direction.

[Sedrefilos]

When I heared that Deadfire's gonna be a direct sequel I was abit dissapointed tbh. I'd like to start anew with a different character in a new story. But as it turned out, Deadfire is something like that. Ok you play the Watcher but the story and place is totally different. Is exactly as Baldur's Gate 2 was to Baldur's Gate 1 (a series that I played 2 first, 1 second too :D ) which is good enough for me.

[The Sharmat]

Wait I do actually have a problem with Deadfire. Five character parties. I prefer six. But other than that it's all good so far.

[Blades of Vanatar]

 

No one says this about anything but videogames. If someone chose to read Lord of the Rings starting with the Two Towers, you'd think they were crazy. It's only video games that are expected to have either little to no continuity or tons of recap. I don't know how this happened but it's universal to the medium and will prevent meaningful continuations from ever occurring.

 

That assumption is untrue. Going back to early 80s (I’m old...) some video game trilogies required completion of game 1 in order to continue in game 2. Other trilogies did not. It all depends on the developer.

[injurai]

I think the most important thing when developing sequels is to maintain character continuity, and stay consistent with the established canon.

 

Otherwise games can be a single story arc in a series of relatively independent stories.

[Blades of Vanatar]

I think the most important thing when developing sequels is to maintain character continuity, and stay consistent with the established canon.

 

Otherwise games can be a single story arc in a series of relatively independent stories.

What’s wrong with single story arcs? As long as they are in the same system/game world they could easily be completely fulfilling.