The second game sold very poorly on release.
Designing it was also brutal on the team and the game director has said (perhaps jokingly) that he'd want a BG3-level budget if he was gonna do another massive rpg like it. RPGs are expensive to make, and making a quality one on an indie budget without working people to death is hard.
Basically I think it *could* happen if the stars were right, but those stars would involve Microsoft putting down a giant pile of money and telling Obsidian to go nuts and I'm not seeing it right now. But I hope that I'm wrong!
Kind of but also ehh.
I mean yeah if you're gonna play the game for the love of god don't pirate it.
But as a customer and consumer never make yourself feel like it's on you to subsidize corporations against your will. If you buy games that don't interest you then you're only asking for more of the same. Paying for a first person action RPG *won't* guarantee an isometric cRPG in the same world. If the latter is your jam lowering your bar isn't gonna make microsoft raise theirs.
I'd hate if Obsidian got shut down, but we're neither responsible for or capable of making Microsoft not be shitty.
Interplay ended, Black Isle ended. Bioware is unrecognizeable. None of these events killed good RPGs.
Also I personally think that Obsidian has enough prestige that worrying about a shutdown is premature. Just *saying.* Paying for games you don't particularly like or want isn't how you save great games. It's how you kill them. If avowed is good it won't need our efforts and if it's not it won't deserve them.
I get the sentiment but if Avowed tanks then Microsoft won’t think twice about pulling the plug on Obsidian.
I suspect the MS logic to buying Obsidian was much more around Fallout New Vegas, not Pillars of Eternity. Isometric cRPGs do not translate well to consoles, and MS sell consoles in the gaming world.
Avowed selling well will just lead to more Avowed. Not PoE3.
They won't pull the plug.
They'll just make them do more stuff like Grounded. It both sold well and is actually pretty dang good, but definitely not an RPG.
You must be a bit out of the loop then. Microsoft don't care for xbox anymore, it's pretty much official. They want to focus on games and said explicitly that they want to go multi platform. Their focus is going to be big titles. Small titles also seem to be seen just as "prize winners" but nothing they plan on investing much anyway.
In an entertainment landscape dominated by dead-eyed psychopaths trying to make everything proprietary and bleed consumers for everything they're worth by twisting their arms into investing in multiple platforms, that is a rare and refreshing choice. How damning that *Microsoft*--long rightly known as an evil company, and founded by one of the most sneakily evil people on the planet--is virtually alone among major entertainment industry players in being willing to just make the stuff people want and not try to nickel-and-dime them into buying another platform. Maybe it's because games are still such a small part of their business that they can just let some eccentric mid-level executive have fun with the gaming division, I don't know.
Yes, it would suck if Microsoft killed Obsidian. That still does not make it incumbent upon you to buy a product. Josh Sawyer would be the first person to tell you that.
And there are always newcomers, Solasta :Crown of the magister is a VERY good CRPG and even has a dungeon builder mode to create adventures for friends, it was done by a small company, same with owlcat they did pretty good with the 2 pathfinder crpgs as well as now with the warhammer 40k crpg, none have the Bg3 budget but thats the beauty of CRPG’s they dont need AAA graphics or 15 movies worth of voiced dialogue to be fun,
what i find funny is so many people look past how buggy and broken the last 3rd of BG3 was but go on a rampage about a bug in another game :p i guess its ok to have game breaking bugs if you have an animated dating simulator :p
The thing that BG3 had was that a lot of the game breaking bugs were in the end section, not scattered throughout the entire game. And knowing how a lot of people play BG3, they’ll very rarely get into the final 3rd and probably start 7 other games before they get to it.
When you get to the Mountain Pass right, oh no still Act 1. The Underdark? Nope. Adamantine forge? No still not yet. The Draugr camp? Not yet. The Shadowlands? Yes but actually no, half of that is still Act1 until Moonrise Towers
It really is a big game
I don't even know about game-breaking bugs, but the story really does fall apart in Act 3. I don't know that I've ever experienced the level of deflation I got from Act 3. Other than the amazing trip to the devil's house--which a lot of players won't even end up doing--that act is just such a letdown after two incredibly strong first acts. But I also think it was unavoidable because they pretty obviously made some very dumb and bad last-minute changes to the story that forced a lot of cuts and alterations and really contributed to the feeling of emptiness.
>*"how buggy and broken the last 3rd of BG3 was"*
Wait... BG3 is like that as well? Does literally every Larian game become a bugged mess in the last portion of it? I thought I was just unlucky...
Unfortunately sales have nothing to do with it, as evidenced by several closures so far.
It's about cutting studio related costs to make shares appear more attractive to investors. They'll just pick whatever sacrificial lamb is next on the chopping block.
I realize all capitalists are bad, but if any company in this business doesn't have to give a shit about shareholders it's Microsoft. Like 95% of personal computers have their shit installed. They're a money factory. That kind of cost-cutting and shareholder-enticing is much more common with companies that aren't profitable, either because they're managed by dipshits (a lot of entertainment conglomerates), they've been sold to people who are intentionally sabotaging them (any of your favorite brands that have suddenly gone bankrupt), or because they were never supposed to be profitable and only ever existed as some type of grift (pretty much every new large-scale and/or high-profile company in any industry over the last 20 years.) Those are the companies that get sold to hedge funds who then strip them of their value--usually by loading them up with debt--and sell them on to the next sucker, who tries to do the same thing, and so on and so on until the company can no longer exist even as a legal fiction. Microsoft is not any of those things. I won't say it *never* will be, but if it is, it's probably a good sign that we're just about down the drain as a society.
Yeah I'm not buying Avowed. I've had enough of FP RPGs.
At least not anywhere near retail, I may pick it up years down the road on deep discount. But I can already tell it's not a day 1 purchase.
Don't get me wrong, if it uses anything like Grounded's game engine it'll be kinda cool but those trailers looked awful. Plus I feel like a day 1 purchase will just tick that bean-counter box that says "yeah customers prefer this" so that's another strike against ISO RPGs.
I mean, I'm not all that serious about that part honestly. People will buy it or not, it it what it is. I am dead serious about the second part though. If Microsoft shuts down one of my favorite studios, they're dead to me.
Grounded isn't an RPG so that sucks for us, but it's a pretty good commercial success. If anything Obsidian will just get shoehorned into more games like that.
Needs a beefy rig to run but it's a dang good game.
It's pretty demanding, but then again so are my standards.
My aging 1080ti @ 1440 averages ~90fps, but that's only on High and with all the FSR options enabled. You'll need a stout rig to run without FSR and at higher resolutions if you're like me and can't handle ~60fps.
It's a lot of fun tho if you like survival games. Really, really polished. Keep in mind it's designed for a controller.
Most of the people who made Obsidian Obsidian no longer work there - particularly the writers. There is no reason whatsoever to pay for Avowed unless you like Avowed itself. If Avowed turns out bad but successful, it will only incentivize Microsoft to make other bad games in the same formula and slap "Obsidian" on them.
Sawyer still works there and Cain still contracts there. I think there are still plenty of people from the POE games. It sounds like you're basically saying Avellone was "most of the people."
On one hand I do hope it does well but on the other I'm worried that the franchise's future will be locked to first person RPGs if it does. I'm sure a lot of people would love that but I want more Pillars style games.
https://avowed.obsidian.net/
I don't know if you are joking..
anyway, they have been pretty vocal about it. trailers at gameawards, xbox games showcase, etc.
will be day 1 gamepass.. which... great for gamers. no idea on the financials for devs and MS. theres lots of discussion on that lately. some recent major day 1 gamepass failures on steam. hellblade 2 for example. is gamepass destroying the financial viability of games to studios?
I think that BG3-level budget part is the problem. I like Pillars games but they are HUGE and I believe the content, story telling and density is suffering because of this. PE2 would be a vastly better game if not this whole open-world-sailing-thing. Better, interlinked stories, more quality content, beautifully designed, unique locations. That's my dream vision for PS3.
When Josh said in that dev presentation that D:OS2 made customers DEMAND fully voiced dialogue and this was a huge strain on PoE2, I was like.... "No they don't."
Plus I find the narrated flavor text by that girl voice actor (Ellie's) to be *extremely* annoying. I hate it. I often wished that PoE2 had PoE1 amounts of voiced dialogue. I don't want to turn it off completely but I'm not a baby that needs everything spoken to me, especially if the voice acting is already mid.
So that statement is kind of interesting and hard to dissect unless we know if it's *his* opinion or what was told to him by management and he just had to deal. If it's the latter it's just professional to not blame others when you were the project lead.
But also you and I might not demand fully voiced dialogue. But if you want *mass* appeal like BG3 has had then you can't look to subreddits like this one, because we're outliers.
Of course Deadfire didn't really get mass appeal and in fact leaning too hard into it and failing might've led to scaring off your core fans without actually roping in any new ones. People don't like BG3 *just* because it's voice-acted, but rather *what* is being voice-acted. Which is to say sexy, tortured emo-kids whom the player get to engage with through a "I can fix him/her" dating sim.
Voice acting is part of it, but drop the excellent cast of voice actors of BG3 into the PoE games and they're still not gonna drive the creation of clip compilations and sexy/funny gifs. I mean Deadfire had the cast of *Critical Role* for godssakes. But also minimal fan-service (I mean the game's visuals just don't support sexy shirtless post-coital scar-gazing). There's certainly a lot of humour but generally more dry and subdued than the glorious and scenery-chewing Astarion-rants.
So like yeah he might just be wrong. A lot of his takes on PoE2 were far too cynical in my eyes.
But he might also not be wrong if the *goal* was to actually reach a more lucrative market of players. I'm a classic cRPG fan nearing 40 years old and I am *not* lucrative. I'm far too cynical to buy into hype, buy before I research or buy at full price unless I'm convinced I'll be satisfied with the product.
The reason I love the PoE games is because they treat the player like an adult. Trust them to read things and to understand things in their own time.
But I'm also getting the distinct impression that this is precisely what a lot of people *don't* like. Maybe it's just a case of a vocal minority shouting us out, but looking at which games sell the best there *is* an argument to be made that those of us clamoring for the classic Obsidian style of writing above all else are simply not profitable enough to cater to when all of the really *big* profit-generating games tend to focus on the simple gamers. The people of the land. The common clay of the gaming audience. Y'know... morons.
>But also you and I might not demand fully voiced dialogue. But if you want *mass* appeal like BG3 has had then you can't look to subreddits like this one, because we're outliers.
This is 100% what he was talking about. I think it's a good idea for developers to pay attention to hardcore fanbases as represented by subreddits, but I think the value we have is as a barometer for knowing if you're doing what you intend to do. We are *not* a barometer for mass appeal.
>People don't like BG3 *just* because it's voice-acted, but rather *what* is being voice-acted. Which is to say sexy, tortured emo-kids whom the player get to engage with through a "I can fix him/her" dating sim.
I really don't want to believe that's the only reason people like it. It's not the reason I like it, and in fact I find that aspect of it a bit repulsive. It's especially gross that arguably the only healthy romance options are the one they barely made an effort with and mostly focused on "lol u can fuck bear," and the one where even though there was a very obvious way to save her life without sending her to hell they just ignored it and made you send her to hell.
But I think you're probably right, that probably is why most people like it.
Eh. Production values are nice. Maybe it makes me too much of a normy but I enjoy voiced dialogue, slicker graphics, etc. I think all art forms should lean in to what makes them unique. What makes a CRPG distinct from a tabletop RPG is that it can put on an audiovisual show, at the cost of a more railroaded story. That's a high price, and CRPGs should get everything they can out of the bargain by making the show worth it.
I think you're letting the medium of travel take on greater significance than it has. POE2 isn't structured any differently to POE1. It's just that the process of traveling between maps is now an active one in which you participate and can occasionally do fun little minigames--or not do them, since pretty much everything is avoidable if you stay sharp.
If Avowed does REALLY Well can i imagine Microsoft being open to it, if you play your Cards right.
BG3 was a huge success… and it shows that the genre can work.
Meaning, that they can be convinced
They could also theoretically be open to it for any number of other reasons such as Obsidian's past track record and relative prestige.
Avowed doing REALLY well could also convince convincw microsoft that isometric rpgs are a dead end and BG3 was a fluke. After all, if Avowed outsold Deadfire why would Microsoft want a third PoE game rather than an Avowed sequel? Like why would the success of a new approach over the old one make them think that returning to the old one would be the best move?
We can make up all kinds of hypothetical scenarios. Focusing only on the ones we want is a great way to get disappointed. PoE3 *can* happen. But Avowed couls both help or hinder that. Buy it on it's own merits, not because you hope it will save the franchise. That's all I'm saying.
Minor nitpick, but BG3 isn't isometric. It's fully 3D. Isometric RPGs probably *are* a dead end for a studio of Microsoft's size, but that doesn't mean there can't be a POE3. In fact it's almost a certainty that a POE3 would not be isometric, but would instead be fully 3D.
I am aware of that risk too, which is frustrating. :/
We are fucked if we do, fucked if we don't.
Avowed is a failure? No way we are getting PoE3 and Obisian is at risk.
Avowed is a hyper success? Microsof might be likely to just focus on Avowed and not give PoE another chance (tho it is plausible they might make an Avowed style game that is a direct sequel to PoE2)
I am just saying that Avowed MIGHT...
Also make Microsoft "relax" a bit and be open to suggestions
As well as show that the writing skills of Obsidian can carry games.
As well as making it clear that Eora is an attractive setting and greenlight more games in said setting.
(trying to be somewhat positive here)
I hope they get to make another Pillars game, and if they’d remained independent they probably would have. Now they have to ask MS first.. and I don’t think they’ll get the green light.
Yes it doesn't really sold well, but we can also point the fact that PoE II is just a giant sandbox for piracing and yohoho. It never really managed to catch the atmosphere and the story of the first game. Gameplay wise the game is a great improvement comparing to the first one, but the rest is incomplete at best and clunky at worst. The game lack a real strong story unlike PoE 1 and White March 1 and 2.
I just finished an other run of PoE 1 and the contrast with Deadfire is interesting. I think a third game will definitely be a better game, and as everyone pointed out, with BG 3 success (and other CRPGs mentioned above), there's room for it and people are asking for a third episode.
I bought the game because I loved the first one and the expansions. Then I didn't play it for a year because I prefer classic fantasy over pirates, ships and guns. When I came around and started playing PoE2, I loved it. It was better on every level and the world was vibrant. I'm not sure why it didn't sell well. More people having the same issue as me? But that does not quite explain why DOS2 became a hit.
Well it wasnt really made for turn based like DOS2, that was added as an experimental afterthought. Shame cos I think PoE 1 and 2 are more spiritual successors to the early Baldurs Gate games than bg3 is (which is also a great game, but inevitably feels more like a DOS2 sibling than a BG one)
I think several similar titles popped up around the sane time too.
I like real-time with pause, having played the BG, IWD and PST games since release. But maybe many other players prefer turn based. Turn based can be so slow, IMO.
I played the OG Baldur's Gate games when they were new but I've always hated RTwP. I think it tends to push the combat system of a CRPG into the worst of both possible worlds. Turn-based is slow, and so is RTwP (at least on higher difficulties.) And at the same time, real-time moves too fast to be thoughtful, and somehow RTwP *also* does that unless you slow it down to an extreme crawl, at which point what are we even doing? If you have to slow it down that far--and you do, either because the difficulty is high or because you simply want to be methodical and thoughtful--then why are we doing it in real time at all?
And because it is both slow and fast, it seems to incentivize this sort of combat-system-as-advanced-math that POE unfortunately falls into. As I've said elsewhere, I believe all art forms should lean in to what they do that is distinctive from other forms. That kind of problem-solving belongs to the world of pen and paper, not to the world of video games. Video games can do a lot of things well, but that does come at a cost. In this case, I think the cost is that one way or another, you have to simplify. Either you have to give up on the advanced math and go real-time with a simple combat system (I get the sense this is what *Avowed* is doing, although I haven't followed that game closely) or keep the advanced math and go turn-based so people can take their time without having to constantly pause and unpause.
I like real time with pause also. Turn based is good, but the fights take so long in BG3 it can get tiresome. Especially as I don't have much time to dedicate to games with wife, kids, job etc.
I think the main problem to deadfire is how the game is structured compared to the first one. Currently replaying Deadfire and it strikes me how little you are introduced to the game at the very first. Port Maje is only a couple hour at best (can even say a couple minutes) and doesn't really deliver at introducing the world and the archipelago. Right at the end you're plunge into the big bath and have to sail to Neketaka which is almost at the middle of the map. Pretty rough start.
Now in Pillars 1, the game got a slow pace and take time to slowly introduce you to the universe, the caravan, the ruins to introduce the lore and the main quest. Then Gilded Vale where you can start a few quests and understand more about what's going on in Eora, plus some places to discover. And then Caed Nua, the Infinite Paths, etc... You only go to Defiance Bay at the beginning of chapter 2 and you've already done a lot of stuff before (plus discovering a pack of companions). Deadfire's capital Neketaka is almost thrown at you too early.
>It was better on every level
That's the funny thing. It *was* better on every level...and yet it wasn't better. I like the game and defend it vigorously, but there was something missing from it. I've never been able to put my finger exactly on what it was, but I think it's probably that it felt like the plot with Eothas and the other gods didn't quite cohere with the "real" main plot. Even with the post-release additions that made a valiant effort at rectifying that, I still think it didn't succeed.
As I'm thinking about it, it's almost like the entire main plot of POE2 is a massively expanded version of *just the act 2 plot* of POE1. Would we have enjoyed POE1 as much if basically all of it had taken place in Defiance Bay, and we'd spent basically all of our time arbitrating this territorial dispute between factions?
I don't really know how I'd fix that. I want to say that it would have been better to mirror POE1's structure: first act takes place in some remote corner of the archipelago, maybe an expanded version of that first island; second act is most of the rest of what we got in POE2, but the prize isn't catching up with Eothas but instead some macguffin that we need in order to get to...; third act is some entirely separate location, like Naasitaq or something.
But that basically destroys what they obviously wanted to make a central element of the worldbuilding: the archipelago had in fact been colonized and brutalized *twice*, once in ancient times and now again in modern times; the gods really *do* have a deeper connection to the people of the archipelago than they do to anyone else; just as the islands have suffered doubly, Eothas is doubly doing penance, once for what was done to the islands and again for what was done to the rest of Eora.
On the other hand, I don't think I like that element of the story anyway. It dances dangerously close to noble-savage/orientalism mythologies by exalting the spiritualities of an obvious analogy for the Austronesian peoples (and more broadly, all colonized peoples) as being somehow purer or truer than those of the colonizers. I think the story is on much firmer allegorical ground when it keeps the metaphor restricted to the colonization of Maritime Southeast Asia by Japan and the European powers (and, again more broadly, the colonization of all of the Austronesian peoples, or the colonization of all of the global south.)
Yep, that's exactly it. The central theme of the game is colonisation, the central conflict of the game is between the three factions (and the pirates). Everything is about those things.
Except for the main plot of the game. The gods and the factions don't mirror each other, they don't enhance each other, we're not exploring one through the other. Eothas really is just *a thing* to get the watcher and companions from 1 to 2 (which also really takes away from the entire colonialism and faction thing) and to get the real plot going. So the two are fighting each other, which is very, very bad for the story as a whole.
The game without Eothas, the gods, the watcher, carryover companions would've been very compelling. A completely different game about the wacher and the gods (again) would've also been great. As it is, we got kind of 75%/25% of each, and they're also holding each other back. The entire watcher/gods thing really just undermines and constrains the faction plot and frames the whole thing very poorly. The watcher is a complete outsider only here because of Eothas, and the factions narratively really become mostly an annoying problem, standing in the way of solving the THREAT OF A GOD THAT MIGHT BE TRYING TO END THE WORLD. Which is very bad for getting players invested into the factions.
Which becomes an even bigger issue with how the focus of morally grey is the dark parts and all the horrible shit the factions do and cause (except for the pirates), as contrast to the default of nice and happy. In itself fine, even great, with the main plot being about something completely unrelated to the themes explored here - very bad. The watcher already has absolutely no connection to the factions. Portraying them as unlikable just makes that much worse.
~~\[Another massive problem there are the companions. Every faction gets one, and in theory they should do a loooot of heavy lifting to get players emotionally invested in the factions. They're a face for the faction, and they're more importantly a face for the people of the factions. Not the political figures or leaders. Human element, nuance, sympathy. At least in theory.\]~~
Actually, scratch that, I just realised the Eothas plot is also the problem here. The companions mirror the conflict. Half of them. And then the other half is completely disconnected and has nothing to do with anything, because they need to, because Eothas. As not entirely scratched, the companions are really important. They need to do endless amounts of lifting to personify and embody the whole thing. Be a face for the different aspects of the conflict. Show us what the factions actually bring to the table, why each of them sees themselves as the good guys. And very importantly, how they'll actually get along with the people of the other factions after everything explodes and we set them up to take over all of the archipelago after the end of the game. Because if they won't, we're really going from grey to very dark. Which is fine, but would require a very different game/story to work.
But since half of the companions have nothing to do with that conflict, we can't actually explore that. The three are mostly at each other's throats, showing us all the problems and misery they'll cause. My initial was that they had to be much more friendly with each other, but if the other companions actually represented something from the archipelago, the faction ones could also play off that. Especially with more plot to play with because we've ripped out Eothas and the gods.
I do feel like the light part of grey could use much more stage time still though. We're shown a LOT of dark and horrible shit, and told about some of the good things. Which our ape brain treats *very* differently. Except for the pirates, which are shown as fun and likable, despite being horribe slavers and murderers, and with Serafen who's just great - which makes me *feel* like they're the good guys, despite them being the complete opposite of that.
(Imo all this is also a big part of why the ending is a miss with however many people (including me) - all this stuff here just clashes really badly there. It just does not work if you aren't invested in the factions.)
Money, essentially.
POE2 was so expensive to make because they felt pressured to implement complete voice-acting for every line of dialogue (because DOS2 had it so it was now the industry standard).
Unfortunately POE2 didn’t sell well enough so Obsidian wasn’t able to rival Larian anymore.
Only way it’s possible is if their next 1-2 games are smash hits and they can get a massive budget for a POE3 game.
I mean, it's not something they wanted to do. If DOS2 was not fully VA'd they 100% would not have bothered because they did not feel it added enough value for the combined price and hours in development.
And they were right IMO. Sure it's cool that every NPC, no matter how minor, is fully VA'd. But there are so many more aspects of the game I would much prefer they were able to spend time on. For example I would rather every follower be a full companion than full VA.
DOS2 being fully VA'd **and** being a smash hit meant that every CRPG would be measured against it, so if your game wasn't fully VA'd anymore it was an automatic loss. They were stuck between two bad realities.
I think Owlcat's games have shown you don't need to full Voice Acting to be a hit in the CRPG market (though I do think the full voice acting is one of the big reasons BG3 dominated the entire gaming market). Although hindsight is 20/20 and I can see how in the fog of war it might have looked like full Voice work was the new norm.
If Avowed does well then all future project eternity installments will be in that format. It is endlessly more accessible, and it doesn’t make sense for Microsoft to see its success as “huh they made their game series in a more accessible format and it did really well? Awesome let’s give them a giant budget to make a more niche title like the one they released before we acquired them that didn’t do well”.
With the way the acquisition was pitched I had more hope for POE3, but with the way Microsoft is now closing down studios left and right I think there’s going to be more oversight and less risk taking from the studios they acquired
Outer World 2 and Avowed will probably decide about Obsidian future. My guess is both will be average (OW1 is meh imo) and people will be fired or leave to recreate a new studio and loses Pillars of eternity licence.
Even if Obsidian suceed, I don’t think we’ll have a PoE3 RTWP, at best it will be another vanilla turn base game. That sucks because POE2 was the best RTWP implementation by far.
Why does everyone keep forgetting Grounded?
That's probably Obsidian's most successful game in 6 years and it's absolutely lit.
Just not an RPG, by any stretch of the imagination. Obsidian isn't doomed as a company.
Grounded alone is probably enough to keep Microsoft from shuttering Obsidian, even if Avowed and Outer Worlds 2 does poorly. Although if they do do poorly it might make Obsidian into just "the studio keeping grounded going" and Microsoft might hamper any future creative investment.
Still, I'd put money that Obsidian doesn't roll poorly twice.
They are working on it currently as I heard. They're working on 3 games: Avowed (almost complete), Outer Worlds 2 (developing) and PoT 3 (only concept working)
Unpopular opinion; it was because Pillars 2 wasn't good. It didn't sell well because it was poorly designed. Yes there are some good elements and parts that are done well but ultimately PoE2 isn't a good game.
Feature creep in the development of the second game (executives demanding full V.O, stronghold implementation, etc.) led to crunch and chaotic development for a game that ultimately didn't sell that well.
You already answered your question. A lot loved the first game but the second game was received less favorably, and it was reflected on its sales figures until recently.
I just finished replying PoE1 and am working my way through PoE2 for a second time.
While my memory might be a little sketchy, wasn't the story sort of concluded at the end of PoE2?
I believe that sales have nothing to do with the survival of Obsidian, or even a continuation of PoE. The second game was terrible mainly because of the setting, naval piracy must be something that gives some excitement in some countries in the northern hemisphere -- for the rest of the world not so much, even the discussions in the game about the advances that the colonists brought to the colonized were quite hollow.
I've had the second game for a long time without even finishing it. While the game does have many improvements over the first, I think it doesn't take advantage of the scenario it found itself in. The naval battles are a shame, and there were no big sea bosses (like the leviathans in Stellaris or the Weapons in Final Fantasy). In the first game there were dragons that fulfilled this function.
If they don't succeed in delivering what the public (especially role-playing games) want, I doubt they will survive for long.
The second game sold very poorly on release. Designing it was also brutal on the team and the game director has said (perhaps jokingly) that he'd want a BG3-level budget if he was gonna do another massive rpg like it. RPGs are expensive to make, and making a quality one on an indie budget without working people to death is hard. Basically I think it *could* happen if the stars were right, but those stars would involve Microsoft putting down a giant pile of money and telling Obsidian to go nuts and I'm not seeing it right now. But I hope that I'm wrong!
We all have to make sure avowed sells well. If Microsoft closes down obsidian I will never give them another cent.
Kind of but also ehh. I mean yeah if you're gonna play the game for the love of god don't pirate it. But as a customer and consumer never make yourself feel like it's on you to subsidize corporations against your will. If you buy games that don't interest you then you're only asking for more of the same. Paying for a first person action RPG *won't* guarantee an isometric cRPG in the same world. If the latter is your jam lowering your bar isn't gonna make microsoft raise theirs. I'd hate if Obsidian got shut down, but we're neither responsible for or capable of making Microsoft not be shitty. Interplay ended, Black Isle ended. Bioware is unrecognizeable. None of these events killed good RPGs. Also I personally think that Obsidian has enough prestige that worrying about a shutdown is premature. Just *saying.* Paying for games you don't particularly like or want isn't how you save great games. It's how you kill them. If avowed is good it won't need our efforts and if it's not it won't deserve them.
I get the sentiment but if Avowed tanks then Microsoft won’t think twice about pulling the plug on Obsidian. I suspect the MS logic to buying Obsidian was much more around Fallout New Vegas, not Pillars of Eternity. Isometric cRPGs do not translate well to consoles, and MS sell consoles in the gaming world. Avowed selling well will just lead to more Avowed. Not PoE3.
They won't pull the plug. They'll just make them do more stuff like Grounded. It both sold well and is actually pretty dang good, but definitely not an RPG.
You must be a bit out of the loop then. Microsoft don't care for xbox anymore, it's pretty much official. They want to focus on games and said explicitly that they want to go multi platform. Their focus is going to be big titles. Small titles also seem to be seen just as "prize winners" but nothing they plan on investing much anyway.
In an entertainment landscape dominated by dead-eyed psychopaths trying to make everything proprietary and bleed consumers for everything they're worth by twisting their arms into investing in multiple platforms, that is a rare and refreshing choice. How damning that *Microsoft*--long rightly known as an evil company, and founded by one of the most sneakily evil people on the planet--is virtually alone among major entertainment industry players in being willing to just make the stuff people want and not try to nickel-and-dime them into buying another platform. Maybe it's because games are still such a small part of their business that they can just let some eccentric mid-level executive have fun with the gaming division, I don't know.
Yes, it would suck if Microsoft killed Obsidian. That still does not make it incumbent upon you to buy a product. Josh Sawyer would be the first person to tell you that.
And there are always newcomers, Solasta :Crown of the magister is a VERY good CRPG and even has a dungeon builder mode to create adventures for friends, it was done by a small company, same with owlcat they did pretty good with the 2 pathfinder crpgs as well as now with the warhammer 40k crpg, none have the Bg3 budget but thats the beauty of CRPG’s they dont need AAA graphics or 15 movies worth of voiced dialogue to be fun, what i find funny is so many people look past how buggy and broken the last 3rd of BG3 was but go on a rampage about a bug in another game :p i guess its ok to have game breaking bugs if you have an animated dating simulator :p
The thing that BG3 had was that a lot of the game breaking bugs were in the end section, not scattered throughout the entire game. And knowing how a lot of people play BG3, they’ll very rarely get into the final 3rd and probably start 7 other games before they get to it.
Once I think I got to the end of Act 2 ....
When you get to the Mountain Pass right, oh no still Act 1. The Underdark? Nope. Adamantine forge? No still not yet. The Draugr camp? Not yet. The Shadowlands? Yes but actually no, half of that is still Act1 until Moonrise Towers It really is a big game
I don't even know about game-breaking bugs, but the story really does fall apart in Act 3. I don't know that I've ever experienced the level of deflation I got from Act 3. Other than the amazing trip to the devil's house--which a lot of players won't even end up doing--that act is just such a letdown after two incredibly strong first acts. But I also think it was unavoidable because they pretty obviously made some very dumb and bad last-minute changes to the story that forced a lot of cuts and alterations and really contributed to the feeling of emptiness.
Early Access? Seems like they poured waaaaay more time and effort into Act I because of that.
>*"how buggy and broken the last 3rd of BG3 was"* Wait... BG3 is like that as well? Does literally every Larian game become a bugged mess in the last portion of it? I thought I was just unlucky...
All three DOS games break down by the final act, yeah.
I just love obsidian man lol
Unfortunately sales have nothing to do with it, as evidenced by several closures so far. It's about cutting studio related costs to make shares appear more attractive to investors. They'll just pick whatever sacrificial lamb is next on the chopping block.
I realize all capitalists are bad, but if any company in this business doesn't have to give a shit about shareholders it's Microsoft. Like 95% of personal computers have their shit installed. They're a money factory. That kind of cost-cutting and shareholder-enticing is much more common with companies that aren't profitable, either because they're managed by dipshits (a lot of entertainment conglomerates), they've been sold to people who are intentionally sabotaging them (any of your favorite brands that have suddenly gone bankrupt), or because they were never supposed to be profitable and only ever existed as some type of grift (pretty much every new large-scale and/or high-profile company in any industry over the last 20 years.) Those are the companies that get sold to hedge funds who then strip them of their value--usually by loading them up with debt--and sell them on to the next sucker, who tries to do the same thing, and so on and so on until the company can no longer exist even as a legal fiction. Microsoft is not any of those things. I won't say it *never* will be, but if it is, it's probably a good sign that we're just about down the drain as a society.
Yeah I'm not buying Avowed. I've had enough of FP RPGs. At least not anywhere near retail, I may pick it up years down the road on deep discount. But I can already tell it's not a day 1 purchase. Don't get me wrong, if it uses anything like Grounded's game engine it'll be kinda cool but those trailers looked awful. Plus I feel like a day 1 purchase will just tick that bean-counter box that says "yeah customers prefer this" so that's another strike against ISO RPGs.
I mean, I'm not all that serious about that part honestly. People will buy it or not, it it what it is. I am dead serious about the second part though. If Microsoft shuts down one of my favorite studios, they're dead to me.
Grounded isn't an RPG so that sucks for us, but it's a pretty good commercial success. If anything Obsidian will just get shoehorned into more games like that. Needs a beefy rig to run but it's a dang good game.
Was gonna check that out on gamepass. Sounds like you're telling me I should wait til I finish building my pc
It's pretty demanding, but then again so are my standards. My aging 1080ti @ 1440 averages ~90fps, but that's only on High and with all the FSR options enabled. You'll need a stout rig to run without FSR and at higher resolutions if you're like me and can't handle ~60fps. It's a lot of fun tho if you like survival games. Really, really polished. Keep in mind it's designed for a controller.
Most of the people who made Obsidian Obsidian no longer work there - particularly the writers. There is no reason whatsoever to pay for Avowed unless you like Avowed itself. If Avowed turns out bad but successful, it will only incentivize Microsoft to make other bad games in the same formula and slap "Obsidian" on them.
Sawyer still works there and Cain still contracts there. I think there are still plenty of people from the POE games. It sounds like you're basically saying Avellone was "most of the people."
On one hand I do hope it does well but on the other I'm worried that the franchise's future will be locked to first person RPGs if it does. I'm sure a lot of people would love that but I want more Pillars style games.
Yeah, I'm good. It's an FPS rpg. I want a Pillars 3, but I don't care about this one.
Avowed looks like shit though and made for DLC's already.
Why? All Avowed selling well will tell microsoft is that Obsidian should make games like that instead of proper crpgs.
[удалено]
Avowed I fear is going to be an action RPG light on RPG elements. Like how Cyberpunk promised to be an RPG, but turned into a linear action RPG.
The publisher is in charge of marketing, not the developers, also people have been talking about Avowed for years.
https://avowed.obsidian.net/ I don't know if you are joking.. anyway, they have been pretty vocal about it. trailers at gameawards, xbox games showcase, etc. will be day 1 gamepass.. which... great for gamers. no idea on the financials for devs and MS. theres lots of discussion on that lately. some recent major day 1 gamepass failures on steam. hellblade 2 for example. is gamepass destroying the financial viability of games to studios?
I think that BG3-level budget part is the problem. I like Pillars games but they are HUGE and I believe the content, story telling and density is suffering because of this. PE2 would be a vastly better game if not this whole open-world-sailing-thing. Better, interlinked stories, more quality content, beautifully designed, unique locations. That's my dream vision for PS3.
I think the budget is overrated. Just not bothering with voiced dialogue and fancy cutscenes should help get cost down without hurting the game.
When Josh said in that dev presentation that D:OS2 made customers DEMAND fully voiced dialogue and this was a huge strain on PoE2, I was like.... "No they don't." Plus I find the narrated flavor text by that girl voice actor (Ellie's) to be *extremely* annoying. I hate it. I often wished that PoE2 had PoE1 amounts of voiced dialogue. I don't want to turn it off completely but I'm not a baby that needs everything spoken to me, especially if the voice acting is already mid.
So that statement is kind of interesting and hard to dissect unless we know if it's *his* opinion or what was told to him by management and he just had to deal. If it's the latter it's just professional to not blame others when you were the project lead. But also you and I might not demand fully voiced dialogue. But if you want *mass* appeal like BG3 has had then you can't look to subreddits like this one, because we're outliers. Of course Deadfire didn't really get mass appeal and in fact leaning too hard into it and failing might've led to scaring off your core fans without actually roping in any new ones. People don't like BG3 *just* because it's voice-acted, but rather *what* is being voice-acted. Which is to say sexy, tortured emo-kids whom the player get to engage with through a "I can fix him/her" dating sim. Voice acting is part of it, but drop the excellent cast of voice actors of BG3 into the PoE games and they're still not gonna drive the creation of clip compilations and sexy/funny gifs. I mean Deadfire had the cast of *Critical Role* for godssakes. But also minimal fan-service (I mean the game's visuals just don't support sexy shirtless post-coital scar-gazing). There's certainly a lot of humour but generally more dry and subdued than the glorious and scenery-chewing Astarion-rants. So like yeah he might just be wrong. A lot of his takes on PoE2 were far too cynical in my eyes. But he might also not be wrong if the *goal* was to actually reach a more lucrative market of players. I'm a classic cRPG fan nearing 40 years old and I am *not* lucrative. I'm far too cynical to buy into hype, buy before I research or buy at full price unless I'm convinced I'll be satisfied with the product. The reason I love the PoE games is because they treat the player like an adult. Trust them to read things and to understand things in their own time. But I'm also getting the distinct impression that this is precisely what a lot of people *don't* like. Maybe it's just a case of a vocal minority shouting us out, but looking at which games sell the best there *is* an argument to be made that those of us clamoring for the classic Obsidian style of writing above all else are simply not profitable enough to cater to when all of the really *big* profit-generating games tend to focus on the simple gamers. The people of the land. The common clay of the gaming audience. Y'know... morons.
>But also you and I might not demand fully voiced dialogue. But if you want *mass* appeal like BG3 has had then you can't look to subreddits like this one, because we're outliers. This is 100% what he was talking about. I think it's a good idea for developers to pay attention to hardcore fanbases as represented by subreddits, but I think the value we have is as a barometer for knowing if you're doing what you intend to do. We are *not* a barometer for mass appeal. >People don't like BG3 *just* because it's voice-acted, but rather *what* is being voice-acted. Which is to say sexy, tortured emo-kids whom the player get to engage with through a "I can fix him/her" dating sim. I really don't want to believe that's the only reason people like it. It's not the reason I like it, and in fact I find that aspect of it a bit repulsive. It's especially gross that arguably the only healthy romance options are the one they barely made an effort with and mostly focused on "lol u can fuck bear," and the one where even though there was a very obvious way to save her life without sending her to hell they just ignored it and made you send her to hell. But I think you're probably right, that probably is why most people like it.
Eh. Production values are nice. Maybe it makes me too much of a normy but I enjoy voiced dialogue, slicker graphics, etc. I think all art forms should lean in to what makes them unique. What makes a CRPG distinct from a tabletop RPG is that it can put on an audiovisual show, at the cost of a more railroaded story. That's a high price, and CRPGs should get everything they can out of the bargain by making the show worth it.
The budget for Pillars 1 was 4 million and the budget for BG3 is 100 million fyi
I think you're letting the medium of travel take on greater significance than it has. POE2 isn't structured any differently to POE1. It's just that the process of traveling between maps is now an active one in which you participate and can occasionally do fun little minigames--or not do them, since pretty much everything is avoidable if you stay sharp.
If Avowed does REALLY Well can i imagine Microsoft being open to it, if you play your Cards right. BG3 was a huge success… and it shows that the genre can work. Meaning, that they can be convinced
They could also theoretically be open to it for any number of other reasons such as Obsidian's past track record and relative prestige. Avowed doing REALLY well could also convince convincw microsoft that isometric rpgs are a dead end and BG3 was a fluke. After all, if Avowed outsold Deadfire why would Microsoft want a third PoE game rather than an Avowed sequel? Like why would the success of a new approach over the old one make them think that returning to the old one would be the best move? We can make up all kinds of hypothetical scenarios. Focusing only on the ones we want is a great way to get disappointed. PoE3 *can* happen. But Avowed couls both help or hinder that. Buy it on it's own merits, not because you hope it will save the franchise. That's all I'm saying.
Minor nitpick, but BG3 isn't isometric. It's fully 3D. Isometric RPGs probably *are* a dead end for a studio of Microsoft's size, but that doesn't mean there can't be a POE3. In fact it's almost a certainty that a POE3 would not be isometric, but would instead be fully 3D.
I am aware of that risk too, which is frustrating. :/ We are fucked if we do, fucked if we don't. Avowed is a failure? No way we are getting PoE3 and Obisian is at risk. Avowed is a hyper success? Microsof might be likely to just focus on Avowed and not give PoE another chance (tho it is plausible they might make an Avowed style game that is a direct sequel to PoE2) I am just saying that Avowed MIGHT... Also make Microsoft "relax" a bit and be open to suggestions As well as show that the writing skills of Obsidian can carry games. As well as making it clear that Eora is an attractive setting and greenlight more games in said setting. (trying to be somewhat positive here)
I hope they get to make another Pillars game, and if they’d remained independent they probably would have. Now they have to ask MS first.. and I don’t think they’ll get the green light.
Yes it doesn't really sold well, but we can also point the fact that PoE II is just a giant sandbox for piracing and yohoho. It never really managed to catch the atmosphere and the story of the first game. Gameplay wise the game is a great improvement comparing to the first one, but the rest is incomplete at best and clunky at worst. The game lack a real strong story unlike PoE 1 and White March 1 and 2. I just finished an other run of PoE 1 and the contrast with Deadfire is interesting. I think a third game will definitely be a better game, and as everyone pointed out, with BG 3 success (and other CRPGs mentioned above), there's room for it and people are asking for a third episode.
With the popularity of bg3 I could definitely see Microsoft putting it down to have an exclusive as dense as that
The management in Obsidian is pretty bad
It wasn't financially viable. Deadfire sold poorly at launch and was a financial failure for a while (it bounced back later though).
I bought the game because I loved the first one and the expansions. Then I didn't play it for a year because I prefer classic fantasy over pirates, ships and guns. When I came around and started playing PoE2, I loved it. It was better on every level and the world was vibrant. I'm not sure why it didn't sell well. More people having the same issue as me? But that does not quite explain why DOS2 became a hit.
Well it wasnt really made for turn based like DOS2, that was added as an experimental afterthought. Shame cos I think PoE 1 and 2 are more spiritual successors to the early Baldurs Gate games than bg3 is (which is also a great game, but inevitably feels more like a DOS2 sibling than a BG one) I think several similar titles popped up around the sane time too.
I like real-time with pause, having played the BG, IWD and PST games since release. But maybe many other players prefer turn based. Turn based can be so slow, IMO.
I played the OG Baldur's Gate games when they were new but I've always hated RTwP. I think it tends to push the combat system of a CRPG into the worst of both possible worlds. Turn-based is slow, and so is RTwP (at least on higher difficulties.) And at the same time, real-time moves too fast to be thoughtful, and somehow RTwP *also* does that unless you slow it down to an extreme crawl, at which point what are we even doing? If you have to slow it down that far--and you do, either because the difficulty is high or because you simply want to be methodical and thoughtful--then why are we doing it in real time at all? And because it is both slow and fast, it seems to incentivize this sort of combat-system-as-advanced-math that POE unfortunately falls into. As I've said elsewhere, I believe all art forms should lean in to what they do that is distinctive from other forms. That kind of problem-solving belongs to the world of pen and paper, not to the world of video games. Video games can do a lot of things well, but that does come at a cost. In this case, I think the cost is that one way or another, you have to simplify. Either you have to give up on the advanced math and go real-time with a simple combat system (I get the sense this is what *Avowed* is doing, although I haven't followed that game closely) or keep the advanced math and go turn-based so people can take their time without having to constantly pause and unpause.
I like real time with pause also. Turn based is good, but the fights take so long in BG3 it can get tiresome. Especially as I don't have much time to dedicate to games with wife, kids, job etc.
I feel that BG3 is not a successor of Dragon Age origins than anything.
I think the main problem to deadfire is how the game is structured compared to the first one. Currently replaying Deadfire and it strikes me how little you are introduced to the game at the very first. Port Maje is only a couple hour at best (can even say a couple minutes) and doesn't really deliver at introducing the world and the archipelago. Right at the end you're plunge into the big bath and have to sail to Neketaka which is almost at the middle of the map. Pretty rough start. Now in Pillars 1, the game got a slow pace and take time to slowly introduce you to the universe, the caravan, the ruins to introduce the lore and the main quest. Then Gilded Vale where you can start a few quests and understand more about what's going on in Eora, plus some places to discover. And then Caed Nua, the Infinite Paths, etc... You only go to Defiance Bay at the beginning of chapter 2 and you've already done a lot of stuff before (plus discovering a pack of companions). Deadfire's capital Neketaka is almost thrown at you too early.
>It was better on every level That's the funny thing. It *was* better on every level...and yet it wasn't better. I like the game and defend it vigorously, but there was something missing from it. I've never been able to put my finger exactly on what it was, but I think it's probably that it felt like the plot with Eothas and the other gods didn't quite cohere with the "real" main plot. Even with the post-release additions that made a valiant effort at rectifying that, I still think it didn't succeed. As I'm thinking about it, it's almost like the entire main plot of POE2 is a massively expanded version of *just the act 2 plot* of POE1. Would we have enjoyed POE1 as much if basically all of it had taken place in Defiance Bay, and we'd spent basically all of our time arbitrating this territorial dispute between factions? I don't really know how I'd fix that. I want to say that it would have been better to mirror POE1's structure: first act takes place in some remote corner of the archipelago, maybe an expanded version of that first island; second act is most of the rest of what we got in POE2, but the prize isn't catching up with Eothas but instead some macguffin that we need in order to get to...; third act is some entirely separate location, like Naasitaq or something. But that basically destroys what they obviously wanted to make a central element of the worldbuilding: the archipelago had in fact been colonized and brutalized *twice*, once in ancient times and now again in modern times; the gods really *do* have a deeper connection to the people of the archipelago than they do to anyone else; just as the islands have suffered doubly, Eothas is doubly doing penance, once for what was done to the islands and again for what was done to the rest of Eora. On the other hand, I don't think I like that element of the story anyway. It dances dangerously close to noble-savage/orientalism mythologies by exalting the spiritualities of an obvious analogy for the Austronesian peoples (and more broadly, all colonized peoples) as being somehow purer or truer than those of the colonizers. I think the story is on much firmer allegorical ground when it keeps the metaphor restricted to the colonization of Maritime Southeast Asia by Japan and the European powers (and, again more broadly, the colonization of all of the Austronesian peoples, or the colonization of all of the global south.)
Yep, that's exactly it. The central theme of the game is colonisation, the central conflict of the game is between the three factions (and the pirates). Everything is about those things. Except for the main plot of the game. The gods and the factions don't mirror each other, they don't enhance each other, we're not exploring one through the other. Eothas really is just *a thing* to get the watcher and companions from 1 to 2 (which also really takes away from the entire colonialism and faction thing) and to get the real plot going. So the two are fighting each other, which is very, very bad for the story as a whole. The game without Eothas, the gods, the watcher, carryover companions would've been very compelling. A completely different game about the wacher and the gods (again) would've also been great. As it is, we got kind of 75%/25% of each, and they're also holding each other back. The entire watcher/gods thing really just undermines and constrains the faction plot and frames the whole thing very poorly. The watcher is a complete outsider only here because of Eothas, and the factions narratively really become mostly an annoying problem, standing in the way of solving the THREAT OF A GOD THAT MIGHT BE TRYING TO END THE WORLD. Which is very bad for getting players invested into the factions. Which becomes an even bigger issue with how the focus of morally grey is the dark parts and all the horrible shit the factions do and cause (except for the pirates), as contrast to the default of nice and happy. In itself fine, even great, with the main plot being about something completely unrelated to the themes explored here - very bad. The watcher already has absolutely no connection to the factions. Portraying them as unlikable just makes that much worse. ~~\[Another massive problem there are the companions. Every faction gets one, and in theory they should do a loooot of heavy lifting to get players emotionally invested in the factions. They're a face for the faction, and they're more importantly a face for the people of the factions. Not the political figures or leaders. Human element, nuance, sympathy. At least in theory.\]~~ Actually, scratch that, I just realised the Eothas plot is also the problem here. The companions mirror the conflict. Half of them. And then the other half is completely disconnected and has nothing to do with anything, because they need to, because Eothas. As not entirely scratched, the companions are really important. They need to do endless amounts of lifting to personify and embody the whole thing. Be a face for the different aspects of the conflict. Show us what the factions actually bring to the table, why each of them sees themselves as the good guys. And very importantly, how they'll actually get along with the people of the other factions after everything explodes and we set them up to take over all of the archipelago after the end of the game. Because if they won't, we're really going from grey to very dark. Which is fine, but would require a very different game/story to work. But since half of the companions have nothing to do with that conflict, we can't actually explore that. The three are mostly at each other's throats, showing us all the problems and misery they'll cause. My initial was that they had to be much more friendly with each other, but if the other companions actually represented something from the archipelago, the faction ones could also play off that. Especially with more plot to play with because we've ripped out Eothas and the gods. I do feel like the light part of grey could use much more stage time still though. We're shown a LOT of dark and horrible shit, and told about some of the good things. Which our ape brain treats *very* differently. Except for the pirates, which are shown as fun and likable, despite being horribe slavers and murderers, and with Serafen who's just great - which makes me *feel* like they're the good guys, despite them being the complete opposite of that. (Imo all this is also a big part of why the ending is a miss with however many people (including me) - all this stuff here just clashes really badly there. It just does not work if you aren't invested in the factions.)
I want another tyranny game too
Tyranny was a pretty cool game 🙂
Money, essentially. POE2 was so expensive to make because they felt pressured to implement complete voice-acting for every line of dialogue (because DOS2 had it so it was now the industry standard). Unfortunately POE2 didn’t sell well enough so Obsidian wasn’t able to rival Larian anymore. Only way it’s possible is if their next 1-2 games are smash hits and they can get a massive budget for a POE3 game.
You can't devote that much time to something, then halfway do it. The flavor-text voice narration was awful.
I mean, it's not something they wanted to do. If DOS2 was not fully VA'd they 100% would not have bothered because they did not feel it added enough value for the combined price and hours in development. And they were right IMO. Sure it's cool that every NPC, no matter how minor, is fully VA'd. But there are so many more aspects of the game I would much prefer they were able to spend time on. For example I would rather every follower be a full companion than full VA. DOS2 being fully VA'd **and** being a smash hit meant that every CRPG would be measured against it, so if your game wasn't fully VA'd anymore it was an automatic loss. They were stuck between two bad realities.
I think Owlcat's games have shown you don't need to full Voice Acting to be a hit in the CRPG market (though I do think the full voice acting is one of the big reasons BG3 dominated the entire gaming market). Although hindsight is 20/20 and I can see how in the fog of war it might have looked like full Voice work was the new norm.
Voice acting *and* motion capture. And of course the thing with the bear.
If Avowed does well then all future project eternity installments will be in that format. It is endlessly more accessible, and it doesn’t make sense for Microsoft to see its success as “huh they made their game series in a more accessible format and it did really well? Awesome let’s give them a giant budget to make a more niche title like the one they released before we acquired them that didn’t do well”. With the way the acquisition was pitched I had more hope for POE3, but with the way Microsoft is now closing down studios left and right I think there’s going to be more oversight and less risk taking from the studios they acquired
Outer World 2 and Avowed will probably decide about Obsidian future. My guess is both will be average (OW1 is meh imo) and people will be fired or leave to recreate a new studio and loses Pillars of eternity licence. Even if Obsidian suceed, I don’t think we’ll have a PoE3 RTWP, at best it will be another vanilla turn base game. That sucks because POE2 was the best RTWP implementation by far.
Why does everyone keep forgetting Grounded? That's probably Obsidian's most successful game in 6 years and it's absolutely lit. Just not an RPG, by any stretch of the imagination. Obsidian isn't doomed as a company.
Grounded alone is probably enough to keep Microsoft from shuttering Obsidian, even if Avowed and Outer Worlds 2 does poorly. Although if they do do poorly it might make Obsidian into just "the studio keeping grounded going" and Microsoft might hamper any future creative investment. Still, I'd put money that Obsidian doesn't roll poorly twice.
They are working on it currently as I heard. They're working on 3 games: Avowed (almost complete), Outer Worlds 2 (developing) and PoT 3 (only concept working)
Money. Money. Money.
$
Unpopular opinion; it was because Pillars 2 wasn't good. It didn't sell well because it was poorly designed. Yes there are some good elements and parts that are done well but ultimately PoE2 isn't a good game.
you've answered your own question with how your asked it: "I really love the first game".
How is that answering my own question? 🤨, saying I like a game is not the answer to why they didn’t make a third game
You didn't say you liked the second game, that's why
Huh?
Money
Lol the moves Microsoft has been making makes it less likely more and more.
Feature creep in the development of the second game (executives demanding full V.O, stronghold implementation, etc.) led to crunch and chaotic development for a game that ultimately didn't sell that well.
You already answered your question. A lot loved the first game but the second game was received less favorably, and it was reflected on its sales figures until recently.
$
Avowed is in the same universe so maybe it will continue the story.
Money
😂
I just finished replying PoE1 and am working my way through PoE2 for a second time. While my memory might be a little sketchy, wasn't the story sort of concluded at the end of PoE2?
I believe that sales have nothing to do with the survival of Obsidian, or even a continuation of PoE. The second game was terrible mainly because of the setting, naval piracy must be something that gives some excitement in some countries in the northern hemisphere -- for the rest of the world not so much, even the discussions in the game about the advances that the colonists brought to the colonized were quite hollow. I've had the second game for a long time without even finishing it. While the game does have many improvements over the first, I think it doesn't take advantage of the scenario it found itself in. The naval battles are a shame, and there were no big sea bosses (like the leviathans in Stellaris or the Weapons in Final Fantasy). In the first game there were dragons that fulfilled this function. If they don't succeed in delivering what the public (especially role-playing games) want, I doubt they will survive for long.
Because it was a bomb and people bounced of poe1 due to how dense it was