The balance of the classes could be a factor in the plummeting of the sales, but I do not think you can blame those low figures in actual gameplay. To find that the classes are balanced or not, if the combat is repetitive, etc you have to actually play the game for some time. And for that, you have to buy it and it takes time. The sales were not good from the start, and there are games with far worse press that had better sales figures (the critics of the game weren't even that bad as games like ME: andromeda or Pathfinder and the "you cannot hit swarms with an axe, the game is bad" thing)
The fact that sales were bad right from the start would indicate that an awful lot of people were unhappy with PoE. Initial sales are very often an indication of how the previous thing went. Good initial sales dropping off quickly would have indicated unhappiness with Deadfire, but since the sales were poor right from the start, it's a case of people not wanting to continue with the franchise after being seriously disappointed with PoE.
This, to me, is by far the most likely scenario. Of course we cannot know the definitive answer, there's just no way.
I tend to think of Dark Souls' success as just incredibly unfair, because those games are just not very good, like I've played the first two anyway, I don't think they're good, I've heard every argument for them that there is to be made, I've made every argument against them that there is to be made, and its stubborn but I just feel that its evidence that a game becoming successful tend to mean it does one thing that makes a certain subset of players really happy, and it will do so even though the game has vast gaping flaws in it. The Divinity Original Sin games also suggest this because I did not see a good game in those either.
And it is often dirt simple like that, yeah the pirate theme probably put off a lot of people on PoE2 which is a shame, and the REALLY cynical part of me things that people found the first game and Obsidian's general approach to the world building and storytelling to be too complex (aka good) for them because most people, they want Star Wars, even though Star Wars is essentially a story for children, and Lord of the Rings, which well, I won't say in terms of language that was written for kids, but the plot is incredibly basic. But as I said, that's the REALLY cynical part of me. :P
Darksouls? that was a clever and very successful marketing operation. They make a difficult game and sold the idea of that. In an era of "story modes" "trainers and god modes" and "easy setting" they created a harsh and unforgiven game. They even sweep the floor with you in the tutorial.
And they sold the idea: Darksouls is the Everest, the Kobayashi Maru, the fact that you completed it makes you a pro, gives you a mark of "prestige", videos of gaming prowess with a Darksouls title is an automatic hit. They made memes and gifs. Whenever you think of a difficult fight, you think Demogorgon, Battletoads, and Darksouls; Any game with very difficult combat will be compared to Darksouls.
I just feel that its evidence that a game becoming successful tend to mean it does one thing that makes a certain subset of players really happy
This is well said. I can't say I agree with your sentiment about OS or DS. But I think this is what games should strive for. Generally speaking of course. And it's largely the problem with Deadfire versus these other titles. Deadfire bent over backwards to try and appeal to players with various tastes, and imo, undercut a bunch of its own elements in trying to balance these interests. These other games deliver singular, meticulously crafted player experiences.
The balance of the classes could be a factor in the plummeting of the sales, but I do not think you can blame those low figures in actual gameplay. To find that the classes are balanced or not, if the combat is repetitive, etc you have to actually play the game for some time. And for that, you have to buy it and it takes time. The sales were not good from the start, and there are games with far worse press that had better sales figures (the critics of the game weren't even that bad as games like ME: andromeda or Pathfinder and the "you cannot hit swarms with an axe, the game is bad" thing)
The fact that sales were bad right from the start would indicate that an awful lot of people were unhappy with PoE. Initial sales are very often an indication of how the previous thing went. Good initial sales dropping off quickly would have indicated unhappiness with Deadfire, but since the sales were poor right from the start, it's a case of people not wanting to continue with the franchise after being seriously disappointed with PoE.
This, to me, is by far the most likely scenario. Of course we cannot know the definitive answer, there's just no way.
Agreed, as I said before, that happened too to games like Legends of Grimrock. The second installment´s sales were very low too.
I tend to think of Dark Souls' success as just incredibly unfair, because those games are just not very good, like I've played the first two anyway, I don't think they're good, I've heard every argument for them that there is to be made, I've made every argument against them that there is to be made, and its stubborn but I just feel that its evidence that a game becoming successful tend to mean it does one thing that makes a certain subset of players really happy, and it will do so even though the game has vast gaping flaws in it. The Divinity Original Sin games also suggest this because I did not see a good game in those either.
And it is often dirt simple like that, yeah the pirate theme probably put off a lot of people on PoE2 which is a shame, and the REALLY cynical part of me things that people found the first game and Obsidian's general approach to the world building and storytelling to be too complex (aka good) for them because most people, they want Star Wars, even though Star Wars is essentially a story for children, and Lord of the Rings, which well, I won't say in terms of language that was written for kids, but the plot is incredibly basic. But as I said, that's the REALLY cynical part of me. :P
Darksouls? that was a clever and very successful marketing operation. They make a difficult game and sold the idea of that. In an era of "story modes" "trainers and god modes" and "easy setting" they created a harsh and unforgiven game. They even sweep the floor with you in the tutorial.
And they sold the idea: Darksouls is the Everest, the Kobayashi Maru, the fact that you completed it makes you a pro, gives you a mark of "prestige", videos of gaming prowess with a Darksouls title is an automatic hit. They made memes and gifs. Whenever you think of a difficult fight, you think Demogorgon, Battletoads, and Darksouls; Any game with very difficult combat will be compared to Darksouls.
They created a brand. I take my hat off.
This is true, but I think you could take a non-cynical look at it and see that the game design itself is what creates the hype and the community around the game. Not saying you're being super negative here. No doubt the game company did some clever marketing, but that doesn't work if the game doesnt match up. The fact that *every* player gets their face stomped by the Asylum Demon is something that players can then commiserate about. And it'll be the same experience for every player. That builds a community. (Tarnesh and BG is quite similar!)
It makes those videos compelling to watch. Because I know exactly what the experience of playing Dark Souls is like, I can grok precisely how impressive some no-death run is on youtube. Contrast this with Deadfire, which could have these moments with things like the Digsite drake or the flooded street fight. But because you can play the game on radically different settings, there's no shared experience of what those moments are.
This is true, but I think you could take a non-cynical look at it and see that the game design itself is what creates the hype and the community around the game. Not saying you're being super negative here. No doubt the game company did some clever marketing, but that doesn't work if the game doesnt match up. The fact that *every* player gets their face stomped by the Asylum Demon is something that players can then commiserate about. And it'll be the same experience for every player. That builds a community. (Tarnesh and BG is quite similar!)
Unfortunately it probably has the most arrogant, self assured, smug and obnoxious fanbase who think their achievements are more impressive than they are, are incapable of being self reflective, are unwilling to accept any and all criticism with the battle cry of "GIT GUD" and many game journalists who are terrible at their job anyway use it to make short hand comparisons that are annoying as well.
I've survived and conquered Ninja Gaiden Black, Kingdom Under Fire: The Crusaders, God Hand, Onimusha 2, Plutonia, Blood, among others, I ain't impressed. And man are those games just much better too.
I have definitely been singing PoE2's praises here but I've not been doing it without acknowledging it has a lot of room for improvement, and that its far from perfect. It is one of the more genuinely impressive achievements in world building in a videogame I've seen up till now, and thats worth something because most games don't even compete with Fallout 1 (granted Fallout 1 is amazing).
Sure, because Dark Souls has essentially a multiplayer deathmatch mode, it's going to attract the kind of FPS or other competitive game loons. I dunno, as someone who played a ton of Starcraft back in the day, I've grown a thick skin about any of that stuff. It's definitely unwarranted. And I think plenty of high level players concede that the game isn't actually about gamer skill, but can be won with some patient and careful play in the exploration/mob fight areas, and some consistent exploiting of the game's systems (iframe rolls for one) in the boss fights.
I actually found alot of the online play to be pretty good manner in the second game. There's lots of opportunities for co-op and lots of players willing to play in a helpful manner. And even the PvP was relatively quite honorable compared to past online experiences.
I tend to think of Dark Souls' success as just incredibly unfair, because those games are just not very good, like I've played the first two anyway, I don't think they're good, I've heard every argument for them that there is to be made, I've made every argument against them that there is to be made, and its stubborn but I just feel that its evidence that a game becoming successful tend to mean it does one thing that makes a certain subset of players really happy, and it will do so even though the game has vast gaping flaws in it. The Divinity Original Sin games also suggest this because I did not see a good game in those either.
And it is often dirt simple like that, yeah the pirate theme probably put off a lot of people on PoE2 which is a shame, and the REALLY cynical part of me things that people found the first game and Obsidian's general approach to the world building and storytelling to be too complex (aka good) for them because most people, they want Star Wars, even though Star Wars is essentially a story for children, and Lord of the Rings, which well, I won't say in terms of language that was written for kids, but the plot is incredibly basic. But as I said, that's the REALLY cynical part of me. :P
Darksouls? that was a clever and very successful marketing operation. They make a difficult game and sold the idea of that. In an era of "story modes" "trainers and god modes" and "easy setting" they created a harsh and unforgiven game. They even sweep the floor with you in the tutorial.
And they sold the idea: Darksouls is the Everest, the Kobayashi Maru, the fact that you completed it makes you a pro, gives you a mark of "prestige", videos of gaming prowess with a Darksouls title is an automatic hit. They made memes and gifs. Whenever you think of a difficult fight, you think Demogorgon, Battletoads, and Darksouls; Any game with very difficult combat will be compared to Darksouls.
They created a brand. I take my hat off.
This is true, but I think you could take a non-cynical look at it and see that the game design itself is what creates the hype and the community around the game. Not saying you're being super negative here. No doubt the game company did some clever marketing, but that doesn't work if the game doesnt match up. The fact that *every* player gets their face stomped by the Asylum Demon is something that players can then commiserate about. And it'll be the same experience for every player. That builds a community. (Tarnesh and BG is quite similar!)
It makes those videos compelling to watch. Because I know exactly what the experience of playing Dark Souls is like, I can grok precisely how impressive some no-death run is on youtube. Contrast this with Deadfire, which could have these moments with things like the Digsite drake or the flooded street fight. But because you can play the game on radically different settings, there's no shared experience of what those moments are.
Oh, no I was praising the marketing department, I´ve said nothing about the game.
ed->If you are stomped in the tutorial many many players quit the game and left a negative review, because of "bad game design" and BS like that. That could be a stain on the game´s sales (look at the indie games "Ronin" or pathfinder´s "why can't I hit the swarms with an axe").
but the PR of Darksouls turn it around and make it a "proud statement" "proof of concept" a "medal of honor" and they get away with it.
I´ve only played one of them. There are better game options in the market, but It's a decent game, and has mimics... what else you want?
Unfortunately some of the players you found online take away the fun of playing. I mean, you found plenty of boasting ratkids and trolls in multiplayer gaming, but when you found one playing Darksouls he is not only a troll: he´s always the Troll king and his court of ratkids minibosses; in unfair mode in a poor no-reload run with an SCS mod in an encounter designed by the devs of Battletoads.
Eh, mechanically speaking, PoE2 is probably the best rpg tp come out since BG2. Of course it has its flaws, but the groundwork here has tons of potential.
I don't think there's any evidence for that, personally. The mechanics of the OS games, frankly, blow away PoE2. The OS engine itself is far superior in terms of being able to represent things in a 3D environment. Which takes exploration to a new level, players can literally explore the game world in immersive fashion. It doesn't rely nearly as much on holding down some key and seeing flashing, un-immersive, click-here sign posts. And the fact of 3D allows for a richer opportunity in level design. Personally, I probably prefer the aesthetics of Obsidian's art team. But their 2D engine is far more limited.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
I don't think there's any evidence for that, personally. The mechanics of the OS games, frankly, blow away PoE2. The OS engine itself is far superior in terms of being able to represent things in a 3D environment. Which takes exploration to a new level, players can literally explore the game world in immersive fashion. It doesn't rely nearly as much on holding down some key and seeing flashing, un-immersive, click-here sign posts. And the fact of 3D allows for a richer opportunity in level design. Personally, I probably prefer the aesthetics of Obsidian's art team. But their 2D engine is far more limited.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
Sorry but this is just not credible. The D:OS games' mechanics are practically nonexistent. And their gameplay does not contribute a damn thing meaningful to the genre. In fact, the D:OS games don't even qualify as RPGs. They are glorified action games pretending to be RPGs. And legacy-wise, twenty years from now, people will be talking about the PoE games whereas the D:OS games will be forgotten.
I don't think there's any evidence for that, personally. The mechanics of the OS games, frankly, blow away PoE2. The OS engine itself is far superior in terms of being able to represent things in a 3D environment. Which takes exploration to a new level, players can literally explore the game world in immersive fashion. It doesn't rely nearly as much on holding down some key and seeing flashing, un-immersive, click-here sign posts. And the fact of 3D allows for a richer opportunity in level design. Personally, I probably prefer the aesthetics of Obsidian's art team. But their 2D engine is far more limited.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
Sorry but this is just not credible. The D:OS games' mechanics are practically nonexistent. And their gameplay does not contribute a damn thing meaningful to the genre. In fact, the D:OS games don't even qualify as RPGs. They are glorified action games pretending to be RPGs. And legacy-wise, twenty years from now, people will be talking about the PoE games whereas the D:OS games will be forgotten.
@kanisatha This is your opinion. @DinoDin above stated theirs. Just agree to disagree - there's no need to post every single time someone says good words about the D:OS games. And let me forward you to what the PC Gamer team thinks about D:OS II - https://www.pcgamer.com/the-pc-gamer-top-100-now/12/
I don't think there's any evidence for that, personally. The mechanics of the OS games, frankly, blow away PoE2. The OS engine itself is far superior in terms of being able to represent things in a 3D environment. Which takes exploration to a new level, players can literally explore the game world in immersive fashion. It doesn't rely nearly as much on holding down some key and seeing flashing, un-immersive, click-here sign posts. And the fact of 3D allows for a richer opportunity in level design. Personally, I probably prefer the aesthetics of Obsidian's art team. But their 2D engine is far more limited.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
Sorry but this is just not credible. The D:OS games' mechanics are practically nonexistent. And their gameplay does not contribute a damn thing meaningful to the genre. In fact, the D:OS games don't even qualify as RPGs. They are glorified action games pretending to be RPGs. And legacy-wise, twenty years from now, people will be talking about the PoE games whereas the D:OS games will be forgotten.
@kanisatha This is your opinion. @DinoDin above stated theirs. Just agree to disagree - there's no need to post every single time someone says good words about the D:OS games. And let me forward you to what the PC Gamer team thinks about D:OS II - https://www.pcgamer.com/the-pc-gamer-top-100-now/12/
Oh I see. But it's ok for people to post every single time someone says something good about PoE or P:K or just about any game that is *not* D:OS, apparently.
And I really don't give a damn about the personal opinions of someone working for a gaming website. Don't at all see how their personal opinions are any more relevant than mine or anyone else's. As far as I am concerned, critics/reviewers are among the most pointless and useless people in society, and I am proud to be able to say I have never bought anything in my life, not even a toaster, based on some idiot's "review."
I don't think there's any evidence for that, personally. The mechanics of the OS games, frankly, blow away PoE2. The OS engine itself is far superior in terms of being able to represent things in a 3D environment. Which takes exploration to a new level, players can literally explore the game world in immersive fashion. It doesn't rely nearly as much on holding down some key and seeing flashing, un-immersive, click-here sign posts. And the fact of 3D allows for a richer opportunity in level design. Personally, I probably prefer the aesthetics of Obsidian's art team. But their 2D engine is far more limited.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
Sorry but this is just not credible. The D:OS games' mechanics are practically nonexistent. And their gameplay does not contribute a damn thing meaningful to the genre. In fact, the D:OS games don't even qualify as RPGs. They are glorified action games pretending to be RPGs. And legacy-wise, twenty years from now, people will be talking about the PoE games whereas the D:OS games will be forgotten.
Just started a new playthrough of PoE2. Every time I fire up this game anew my awe and love for it only grow even more. It is fantastic in every way, with the ship combat mini-game being the only exception. I happily spend hours just on creating my new character!
I don't think there's any evidence for that, personally. The mechanics of the OS games, frankly, blow away PoE2. The OS engine itself is far superior in terms of being able to represent things in a 3D environment. Which takes exploration to a new level, players can literally explore the game world in immersive fashion. It doesn't rely nearly as much on holding down some key and seeing flashing, un-immersive, click-here sign posts. And the fact of 3D allows for a richer opportunity in level design. Personally, I probably prefer the aesthetics of Obsidian's art team. But their 2D engine is far more limited.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
Sorry but this is just not credible. The D:OS games' mechanics are practically nonexistent. And their gameplay does not contribute a damn thing meaningful to the genre. In fact, the D:OS games don't even qualify as RPGs. They are glorified action games pretending to be RPGs. And legacy-wise, twenty years from now, people will be talking about the PoE games whereas the D:OS games will be forgotten.
Pillars of Eternity games are great. And D:OS games are great. There's no point in kicking those of them you personally didn't like and call them trash that will be forgotten. Also, as I have said, the games ' developers are not enemies to each other.
The opinions you decided not to read explain why D:OS 2 is an exceptional RPG and why it belongs to the very top of video games along with the Witcher 3 (another game PC Gamer recommends).
And here is a part about inventing something new (D:OS) and staying conservative(PoE):
- It is apparent that Divinity has tried, quite bravely, to go its own way, whereas Pillars seems to keep to a more conservative execution.
- Oh I would say, definitely, that Pillars is much more conservative—I fully admit [laughing]! Pillars is made to be more conservative in general.
- https://talkingames.com/josh-sawyer-chapter-iii/
DOS2 is greater in some aspects(polishment, environmental interactions)
PoE 2 is greater in some aspects(exploration)
PF:KM is greater in some aspects(player freedom)
I don't like dos 2 but don't think that is a bad game. Unfortunately it created some "standards" from the industry that will really hurt small studios like fully 3D maps and fully voice acting... Prefer one over another, love or hate one is a matter of TASTE, not objective quality I honestly love the 2D maps with 3D models like ToEE, but is just my preference. ToEE is much better with Co8 mod who removes the level cap(an big problem of the game imo)
But i disagree that PoE 2 is that conservative, the pirate/colonial theme is not something very "old schoolish", and tweeks that they made on combat like greases, changes on attribute system, to allow low int wizards, etc; made the game very different than an old school RPG.
Pillars of Eternity games are great. And D:OS games are great. There's no point in kicking those of them you personally didn't like and call them trash that will be forgotten.
Really? Does this apply to the Pillars games as well? Because I see lots of posts here trashing the Pillars games.
Hm, you may not like the OS games. But calling the "action games" is just a false characterization. They're turn-based combat! Even when it takes place in real time, it's not reliant on fast reflexes or fast thinking. Even when you can move the mouse fast enough, you literally cannot cast spells or abilities faster than the turn timer. It's a criticism of someone who either hasn't played the game in awhile and forgotten it, or hasn't played it. No serious analysis of OS would call it an action-y game.
Saying the game hasn't contributed a thing to the genre just isn't true. Game developers are already admitting that they feel obliged or inspired to make their games more in line with what Larian delivered in these titles.
I've been pretty harsh on Deadfire, and you may disagree with my critique. Understandable. But I'm not saying things that are fundamentally untrue about the game, such as calling it an action game. Nor am I brushing aside the good things that it did, I've given a balanced critique. And I just find it weird that you cannot accept any other perspective on these games, rejecting popular opinion, professional criticism, other games developers' own words, and the opinions of other gamers. Everybody but you is wrong about OS?
Of course these things are subjective, but that's just not a useful perspective to adopt if you want to discuss games.
I must say I wasn't a big fan of PoE1. I tried the game twice and I wasn't able to finish. There are couple of major things that threw me off:
- game mechanicy or should I say descriptive aspect of game mechanice. I really didn't understand how specific spell work, what specific item do etc. The game mechanicy it's not well explained in this game.
- yellow NPC's that represent the backers. They are so annoying and there are so many of them that it distracts me from immersing the game. I know there are mods to turn it off, but both of my attempts were on console.
- to much of an encyplopedic world. I felt almost like reading a geographic manual or something. The world seemed bland and uninteresting to me. I just couldn't feel I have any desired to continue progressing.
Now, PoE2 on the other hand is way better in every aspect and I must say I'm having a blast playing it. It's very polished at this point and I didn't encounter any bug after playing the game over 30h. Dead fire Archipelag is much more interesting setting, full of colorful NPC's and place. Just compared Neketaka with any other major city in PoE1. I feel like there are more Quests in Neketaka alone than it was in whole PoE1. Well done Obsidian, well done Josh.
H<...>
Saying the game hasn't contributed a thing to the genre just isn't true. Game developers are already admitting that they feel obliged or inspired to make their games more in line with what Larian delivered in these titles.
<...>
That is my fear. For those who doesn't like DOS2 mechanics and prefer more old school, i wounder if PoE3 will be more DOS2 like instead of PoE like... Same with Pathfinder Kingmaker 2 and other games. See pre wow mmos vs post wow mmos... From Larian games, i only liked Divine Divinity, because there are no cooldown, no only one summon limitation, no retarded itemization, no gimmicky battles...
Anyway, Dark Souls 2 Sotfs who is considered an "black sheep" in the series(i disagree, DkS 2 is an amazing game IMO) has an seeling range of 2,000,000 .. 5,000,000, the same range of DOS 2 https://steamspy.com/app/335300 and https://steamspy.com/app/435150
But outside of sales, despite being much older DkS 2 has much more YT videos/comments according to steamspy than dos2.
The strange thing is that when I started PoE with RTwP I felt the battle is a bit meh for me. I was tempted to start over using TB mode. It almost seems that RTwP works only for IE games for me. Any other game with RTwP I have played I always wished battle was TB. It's really great they implemented both systems in PoE2. But I have to admit AI works really well and I basically don't need to micromanage and can focus on the story.
Hm, you may not like the OS games. But calling the "action games" is just a false characterization. They're turn-based combat! Even when it takes place in real time, it's not reliant on fast reflexes or fast thinking. Even when you can move the mouse fast enough, you literally cannot cast spells or abilities faster than the turn timer. It's a criticism of someone who either hasn't played the game in awhile and forgotten it, or hasn't played it. No serious analysis of OS would call it an action-y game.
Saying the game hasn't contributed a thing to the genre just isn't true. Game developers are already admitting that they feel obliged or inspired to make their games more in line with what Larian delivered in these titles.
I've been pretty harsh on Deadfire, and you may disagree with my critique. Understandable. But I'm not saying things that are fundamentally untrue about the game, such as calling it an action game. Nor am I brushing aside the good things that it did, I've given a balanced critique. And I just find it weird that you cannot accept any other perspective on these games, rejecting popular opinion, professional criticism, other games developers' own words, and the opinions of other gamers. Everybody but you is wrong about OS?
Of course these things are subjective, but that's just not a useful perspective to adopt if you want to discuss games.
And here I was thinking that we were all going to not insult or attack each other anymore.
There was nothing insulting or attacking in that comment, though.
Not to me. Accusing me of lying? Then condescendingly saying everything they say is true/fact and everything I say is false? But then again, it's par for the course in this forum.
He did none of those things. There is something wrong with your reading comprehension.
Whether his claims are correct or not is a different matter that I will not get into, but his comment was not insulting, nor did it attack you. It was a perfectly reasonable piece of debate.
Again, that is not an insult. You actually are reading him wrong. Ask anybody who is well-versed in argumentation. Anybody.
Let's get more precise now: where do you think he accused you of lying? He did no such thing. But please, show me.
I really don't have any interest in pursuing this any further, with you or anyone else. Despite some people's attempts to shut down any perspective that goes against their own view through insults and incivility, I'll keep posting my views until I am told I can't.
Comments
The fact that sales were bad right from the start would indicate that an awful lot of people were unhappy with PoE. Initial sales are very often an indication of how the previous thing went. Good initial sales dropping off quickly would have indicated unhappiness with Deadfire, but since the sales were poor right from the start, it's a case of people not wanting to continue with the franchise after being seriously disappointed with PoE.
This, to me, is by far the most likely scenario. Of course we cannot know the definitive answer, there's just no way.
Darksouls? that was a clever and very successful marketing operation. They make a difficult game and sold the idea of that. In an era of "story modes" "trainers and god modes" and "easy setting" they created a harsh and unforgiven game. They even sweep the floor with you in the tutorial.
And they sold the idea: Darksouls is the Everest, the Kobayashi Maru, the fact that you completed it makes you a pro, gives you a mark of "prestige", videos of gaming prowess with a Darksouls title is an automatic hit. They made memes and gifs. Whenever you think of a difficult fight, you think Demogorgon, Battletoads, and Darksouls; Any game with very difficult combat will be compared to Darksouls.
They created a brand. I take my hat off.
This is well said. I can't say I agree with your sentiment about OS or DS. But I think this is what games should strive for. Generally speaking of course. And it's largely the problem with Deadfire versus these other titles. Deadfire bent over backwards to try and appeal to players with various tastes, and imo, undercut a bunch of its own elements in trying to balance these interests. These other games deliver singular, meticulously crafted player experiences.
Agreed, as I said before, that happened too to games like Legends of Grimrock. The second installment´s sales were very low too.
This is true, but I think you could take a non-cynical look at it and see that the game design itself is what creates the hype and the community around the game. Not saying you're being super negative here. No doubt the game company did some clever marketing, but that doesn't work if the game doesnt match up. The fact that *every* player gets their face stomped by the Asylum Demon is something that players can then commiserate about. And it'll be the same experience for every player. That builds a community. (Tarnesh and BG is quite similar!)
It makes those videos compelling to watch. Because I know exactly what the experience of playing Dark Souls is like, I can grok precisely how impressive some no-death run is on youtube. Contrast this with Deadfire, which could have these moments with things like the Digsite drake or the flooded street fight. But because you can play the game on radically different settings, there's no shared experience of what those moments are.
Unfortunately it probably has the most arrogant, self assured, smug and obnoxious fanbase who think their achievements are more impressive than they are, are incapable of being self reflective, are unwilling to accept any and all criticism with the battle cry of "GIT GUD" and many game journalists who are terrible at their job anyway use it to make short hand comparisons that are annoying as well.
I've survived and conquered Ninja Gaiden Black, Kingdom Under Fire: The Crusaders, God Hand, Onimusha 2, Plutonia, Blood, among others, I ain't impressed. And man are those games just much better too.
I have definitely been singing PoE2's praises here but I've not been doing it without acknowledging it has a lot of room for improvement, and that its far from perfect. It is one of the more genuinely impressive achievements in world building in a videogame I've seen up till now, and thats worth something because most games don't even compete with Fallout 1 (granted Fallout 1 is amazing).
I actually found alot of the online play to be pretty good manner in the second game. There's lots of opportunities for co-op and lots of players willing to play in a helpful manner. And even the PvP was relatively quite honorable compared to past online experiences.
Oh, no I was praising the marketing department, I´ve said nothing about the game.
ed->If you are stomped in the tutorial many many players quit the game and left a negative review, because of "bad game design" and BS like that. That could be a stain on the game´s sales (look at the indie games "Ronin" or pathfinder´s "why can't I hit the swarms with an axe").
but the PR of Darksouls turn it around and make it a "proud statement" "proof of concept" a "medal of honor" and they get away with it.
I´ve only played one of them. There are better game options in the market, but It's a decent game, and has mimics... what else you want?
Unfortunately some of the players you found online take away the fun of playing. I mean, you found plenty of boasting ratkids and trolls in multiplayer gaming, but when you found one playing Darksouls he is not only a troll: he´s always the Troll king and his court of ratkids minibosses; in unfair mode in a poor no-reload run with an SCS mod in an encounter designed by the devs of Battletoads.
OS grants you the freedom to use any skill or spell at any time, which is also a much stronger base for RP potential than Pillars, where pretty much all your characters' skills are limited to combat. OS is actually progressing the genre. Deadfire isn't going to have a legacy.
I also hope a PoE3 comes out, and I would buy it. But it's the OS games that have had greater commercial success, reviewer praise, and industry praise and copying. I mean Obsidian made design decisions for Deadfire based on OS, not the other way around.
Sorry but this is just not credible. The D:OS games' mechanics are practically nonexistent. And their gameplay does not contribute a damn thing meaningful to the genre. In fact, the D:OS games don't even qualify as RPGs. They are glorified action games pretending to be RPGs. And legacy-wise, twenty years from now, people will be talking about the PoE games whereas the D:OS games will be forgotten.
@kanisatha This is your opinion. @DinoDin above stated theirs. Just agree to disagree - there's no need to post every single time someone says good words about the D:OS games. And let me forward you to what the PC Gamer team thinks about D:OS II - https://www.pcgamer.com/the-pc-gamer-top-100-now/12/
And I really don't give a damn about the personal opinions of someone working for a gaming website. Don't at all see how their personal opinions are any more relevant than mine or anyone else's. As far as I am concerned, critics/reviewers are among the most pointless and useless people in society, and I am proud to be able to say I have never bought anything in my life, not even a toaster, based on some idiot's "review."
Not credible?
?????? All he's talking about is 2D v. 3D rendering.
The opinions you decided not to read explain why D:OS 2 is an exceptional RPG and why it belongs to the very top of video games along with the Witcher 3 (another game PC Gamer recommends).
And here is a part about inventing something new (D:OS) and staying conservative(PoE):
- It is apparent that Divinity has tried, quite bravely, to go its own way, whereas Pillars seems to keep to a more conservative execution.
- Oh I would say, definitely, that Pillars is much more conservative—I fully admit [laughing]! Pillars is made to be more conservative in general.
-
https://talkingames.com/josh-sawyer-chapter-iii/
PoE 2 is greater in some aspects(exploration)
PF:KM is greater in some aspects(player freedom)
I don't like dos 2 but don't think that is a bad game. Unfortunately it created some "standards" from the industry that will really hurt small studios like fully 3D maps and fully voice acting... Prefer one over another, love or hate one is a matter of TASTE, not objective quality I honestly love the 2D maps with 3D models like ToEE, but is just my preference. ToEE is much better with Co8 mod who removes the level cap(an big problem of the game imo)
But i disagree that PoE 2 is that conservative, the pirate/colonial theme is not something very "old schoolish", and tweeks that they made on combat like greases, changes on attribute system, to allow low int wizards, etc; made the game very different than an old school RPG.
Saying the game hasn't contributed a thing to the genre just isn't true. Game developers are already admitting that they feel obliged or inspired to make their games more in line with what Larian delivered in these titles.
I've been pretty harsh on Deadfire, and you may disagree with my critique. Understandable. But I'm not saying things that are fundamentally untrue about the game, such as calling it an action game. Nor am I brushing aside the good things that it did, I've given a balanced critique. And I just find it weird that you cannot accept any other perspective on these games, rejecting popular opinion, professional criticism, other games developers' own words, and the opinions of other gamers. Everybody but you is wrong about OS?
Of course these things are subjective, but that's just not a useful perspective to adopt if you want to discuss games.
- game mechanicy or should I say descriptive aspect of game mechanice. I really didn't understand how specific spell work, what specific item do etc. The game mechanicy it's not well explained in this game.
- yellow NPC's that represent the backers. They are so annoying and there are so many of them that it distracts me from immersing the game. I know there are mods to turn it off, but both of my attempts were on console.
- to much of an encyplopedic world. I felt almost like reading a geographic manual or something. The world seemed bland and uninteresting to me. I just couldn't feel I have any desired to continue progressing.
Now, PoE2 on the other hand is way better in every aspect and I must say I'm having a blast playing it. It's very polished at this point and I didn't encounter any bug after playing the game over 30h. Dead fire Archipelag is much more interesting setting, full of colorful NPC's and place. Just compared Neketaka with any other major city in PoE1. I feel like there are more Quests in Neketaka alone than it was in whole PoE1. Well done Obsidian, well done Josh.
That is my fear. For those who doesn't like DOS2 mechanics and prefer more old school, i wounder if PoE3 will be more DOS2 like instead of PoE like... Same with Pathfinder Kingmaker 2 and other games. See pre wow mmos vs post wow mmos... From Larian games, i only liked Divine Divinity, because there are no cooldown, no only one summon limitation, no retarded itemization, no gimmicky battles...
Anyway, Dark Souls 2 Sotfs who is considered an "black sheep" in the series(i disagree, DkS 2 is an amazing game IMO) has an seeling range of 2,000,000 .. 5,000,000, the same range of DOS 2 https://steamspy.com/app/335300 and https://steamspy.com/app/435150
But outside of sales, despite being much older DkS 2 has much more YT videos/comments according to steamspy than dos2.
Whether his claims are correct or not is a different matter that I will not get into, but his comment was not insulting, nor did it attack you. It was a perfectly reasonable piece of debate.
Let's get more precise now: where do you think he accused you of lying? He did no such thing. But please, show me.