Upcoming DLC - expansion or redo?

[Philomorph]

Have the devs given any hints about the upcoming DLC for Deadfire - whether it will be integrated into the main game, ala "White March"?

 

I'm considering getting the DLC add-on, but I didn't really like the way White March was set up, being integrated into the original campaign. I'd already finished the game by time it came out, so I would have had to go back and replay at least some of it, which I don't have the time or inclination to do.

 

I'd much prefer a true "expansion" that's sequel-like - a continuation of the story (or even a new story).

 

Does that make sense?

[Wormerine]

Nothing is known, except that there are three pieces of DLC planned for Deadfire, together worth $30. 

 

Also while you are entitled to your own opinions, you are wrong ;-)

[AndreaColombo]

^ what he said

[Daled]

You could have loaded the "no_return" save before going into breith eiman, without replaying any of the content you already played.

 

Personally I'm neutral in respect to expanding the main campaign or following it, I think it depends on a lot of different factors. The original campaign had a good pacing? Was strong enough on his own? Do they have a good idea for a "short story" after the epilogue? That makes sense? There are mechanical limits with progression?

 

When we think about after campaign expansions most of us think about ToB, I haven't played it in a while so I might be disremembering,  but in my opinion is not really easy to cram an expansion with so much content with a level cap almost twice as the one of the base game.

 

Plus don't forget that D&D martial classes don't have much going on for them, for PoE is much much harder doubling the level cap having all class equally interesting and active.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Daled

[Philomorph]

Yeah, I could have loaded the no_return save, assuming I still had one available, but it's still "going back", which I just don't like as an option. I definitely didn't have a save from before Burial Isle, so I guess scaling up monsters wouldn't have been an option anyway. It just felt like you couldn't really get the full benefit of the DLC unless you started over.

 

I'm not saying no one else should like it - it's just not what I want to do. I very rarely re-watch movies, reread books, or re-play games with a story line. I already have more available content than time, and I love playing through to the end of something and moving forward. 

 

Of course for the price, I don't expect DLC to double the level cap, or even any higher levels! I'd be just as happy with DLC that started a related (or completely new) story in the same universe. It could be the same settings a hundred years later, with the descendants of my heroes. It could be a concurrent story line where I play characters that were NPCs in the original. There are many ways to introduce new content without making a whole new game, but without repeating steps. 

 

But if I have to read a bunch of the same quest prompts again, and run the same boss fights again, I start losing interest. Just my personal druthers.

 

I suppose the saving grace here is that the DLC discount as an add-on is only $10 total, so I can wait until it comes out and not feel bad for missing out on some great savings.

[Achilles]

The general tone from Obsidian seems to be that they acknowledge that they got a lot of things wrong with WM and will make better decisions going forward. Some may find that more reassuring than others

[fgalkin]

Yeah, I could have loaded the no_return save, assuming I still had one available, but it's still "going back", which I just don't like as an option. I definitely didn't have a save from before Burial Isle, so I guess scaling up monsters wouldn't have been an option anyway. It just felt like you couldn't really get the full benefit of the DLC unless you started over.

 

 

But if you didn't have a save, then a post-story DLC wouldn't have changed things for you anyway? You'd still need to start over 

[PneumaticFire]

The primary motivation for me with games, movies and media in general is narrative and conclusion/resolution of the stories and messages being conveyed.  That's why generally speaking I don't tend to re-watch/re-read/re-play media and games where I know what the ultimate conclusion is, and will go to something new, only if   there's an alternate ending or it's been years and I've forgotten or want to reminisce.

 

I'm someone who likes novelty and 'the bigger picture' more than re-treading in familiarity (both are good but one outweighs the other).

 

Of course a mid-narrative DLC can still achieve this with a branching story arc, but it still doesn't have the appeal of knowing when you replay, there's more at the 'final destination'.

 

That's why I'm hoping the biggest of the intended DLCs is post main game.

Edited April 12, 2018 by PneumaticFire

[Achilles]

Of course a mid-narrative DLC can still achieve this with a branching story arc, but it still doesn't have the appeal of knowing when you replay, there's more at the 'final destination’

To be honest, I think I share several of your prejudices. As such, after spending a few hundred hours figuring out *precisely* when it made the most sense, narratively, to pick up WM, then a couple hundred more replaying it just to make sure that I understood what it was “doing”, I uninstalled it and decided that non-WM Pillars was going to be canon for me.

 

But then Deadfire got announced and after a couple of interviews, I became fairly convinced that WM contains quite a bit of setup for the sequel.

 

So now it’s back in.

 

For whatever that’s worth.

[ToolofIsis]

Hopefully they add on. If they do a "separate" release it would need to be one huge expansion.

[eRe4s3r]

I share your hope. To me White March was never even relevant because I backed a complete game and got that and was happy with that. I wanted nothing more inside of that experience (maybe beyond it, post-game). Others may see that different of course, but you gotta remember Witcher 3: Blood and Wine came out around that time, and sorry but.. that was so utterly superior experience to anything in Pillars that I couldn't go back.

 

When I heard it was gonna be mid-game DLC for Pillars 1 I was bummed and ignored it, but I would instantly support Deadfire if Obsidian came out publicly and made clear what they mean with 3 content DLC's for Dead Fire. Mid-game or Post-game, that is a pretty important factor to me.

[Philomorph]

 

Yeah, I could have loaded the no_return save, assuming I still had one available, but it's still "going back", which I just don't like as an option. I definitely didn't have a save from before Burial Isle, so I guess scaling up monsters wouldn't have been an option anyway. It just felt like you couldn't really get the full benefit of the DLC unless you started over.

 

 

But if you didn't have a save, then a post-story DLC wouldn't have changed things for you anyway? You'd still need to start over 

 

No no, I meant if I still had a save from before the point of no return. I'm a fastidious save deleter. I try to keep no more than 4-5 save files. It keeps me moving forward and reduces my baser instinct for save scumming.

[keriana]

I agree! I much prefer postgame dlc. I don't like having to go back and redo things in order to play the dlc.

 

During the Fig campaign, they said they were going to look at postgame dlc (https://www.twitch.tv/videos/124414169 @ 7:40:00). However, that was a while ago, so you might want to wait until they confirm if that is still the case or not before getting it.

Edited April 13, 2018 by keriana

[Celeras]

 you are wrong ;-)

[Wormerine]

I get all those reasons. I have a good friend, who shares the same attitude - he doesn’t like rereading books, replaying games or rewatching movies. For that reason he also dislikes games which cut of content from you based on your decisions (like RPGs). He also hates spoilers. We headbutt a lot. I personally, if I don’t feel like rewatching or replaying or rereading a work, than it means it’s not very good. I find story more engaging when I know where it is going as I can watch it develop. I often find my second playthrough/rewatch/reread more enjoyable because of that. Why would I even want an expansion to a game, which I am not compelled to revisit?

[Hybridsalmon]

Prefer postgame DLC too, but I replay/reread/rewatch if I really like it. It really depends a lot on the DLC itself though. In the case of WM I didn't actually mind it because it was enough content to offset the fact that I 'needed'(I didn't replay PoE since an expansion was soon coming out, so I was happy to replay it) to play PoE again.

But content like a new character class, an added questline, or more items isn't a reason for me to replay a game.

[Philomorph]

So they announced the three planned DLC and gave some details, but I still can't tell whether they will be "mid-campaign" or "post-campaign". I guess with the schedule so short (2 months post release!) I'll just wait before I start playing to see what the DLC looks like on release.

 

I have started waiting a couple months after KS games come out anyway, since they always need patching and re-balancing, and I prefer to play the more polished product.

[Achilles]

I get all those reasons. I have a good friend, who shares the same attitude - he doesn’t like rereading books, replaying games or rewatching movies. For that reason he also dislikes games which cut of content from you based on your decisions (like RPGs). He also hates spoilers. We headbutt a lot. I personally, if I don’t feel like rewatching or replaying or rereading a work, than it means it’s not very good. I find story more engaging when I know where it is going as I can watch it develop. I often find my second playthrough/rewatch/reread more enjoyable because of that. Why would I even want an expansion to a game, which I am not compelled to revisit?

Seconded

[KaiG]

I feel like with the separation of the islands in the Archipelago, it's more believable to have separate plots contained within single islands which could theoretically be undertaken at any point in the story. Unless the plots of the DLCs are heavily connected to the main plot of the game, I'm expecting them to make sense no matter what point in the game you're at.

[CottonWolf]

The general tone from Obsidian seems to be that they acknowledge that they got a lot of things wrong with WM and will make better decisions going forward. Some may find that more reassuring than others

 

That's both good and bad. Because there was a lot wrong and right with WM, but it's not clear whether they know which bits were which. And some things that were good about it, i.e. the scale, apparently sounded like they were just an objective error financially, so I guess we'll know what this is going to be like when it comes out.

[Philomorph]

I feel like with the separation of the islands in the Archipelago, it's more believable to have separate plots contained within single islands which could theoretically be undertaken at any point in the story. Unless the plots of the DLCs are heavily connected to the main plot of the game, I'm expecting them to make sense no matter what point in the game you're at.

 

This would be good - assuming they don't have a level dependence. If my party is near max level and I buy DLC of a whole new subplot where all the monsters are mid-level, it's not much use I'm not starting the game over with a fresh party and leveling them up halfway just to play a new island.

[Wormerine]

 

I feel like with the separation of the islands in the Archipelago, it's more believable to have separate plots contained within single islands which could theoretically be undertaken at any point in the story. Unless the plots of the DLCs are heavily connected to the main plot of the game, I'm expecting them to make sense no matter what point in the game you're at.

 

 

This would be good - assuming they don't have a level dependence. If my party is near max level and I buy DLC of a whole new subplot where all the monsters are mid-level, it's not much use I'm not starting the game over with a fresh party and leveling them up halfway just to play a new island.

Deadfire has a more robust level scaling so jumping into expansion with higher level party shouldn’t be an issue.

[Jonathan_Crow]

The game may be designed in a way, that after completing the main story you still could be staying in archipelago to do some unfinished business (some high-level side-quests for example), and here comes the expansions with additional stories. But in this case some epic-endings, such as the watcher becomes a sort of demi-god, are hard to implement.

[BijaT]

They say one of the DLC will be combat focus & suppose to be a challenge. I guess for it to be a proper challenge it gotta be balanced for max level character.