168 réponses à ce sujet

[Savber100]

David Gaider wrote...

Some people are really concerned about RPG's needing to maintain a certain amount of "purity" and thus all occupy the same space. Personally, I'm happy that Obsidian is doing such a game. It's not really competition for DA3, as the two games aim for very different things, and I wish Obsidian all sorts of success and then some. It'd be nice to definitively prove that IE-style games are still viable.

Odd seeing that the same people will claim that Mass Effect 3 and Dragon Age 2 aren't RPGs either which makes you wonder why they would care if such games don't even belong in the "RPG genre". 

*sigh* The burdens of the RPG elitist...  


And I agree with the last sentiment as I love how Kickstarters and indie developers are just filling that niche of which I personally enjoy. 

Modifié par Savber100, 19 décembre 2012 - 11:20 .

[Cutlass Jack]

I'm a little confused as to why either would have to 'win' over the other. The real winners will be us for having both games to look forward to.


RPGs fall from the sky. Everyone dies of happiness.

[Direwolf0294]

I think they're completely different types of games and you can't really compare them. I mean you'll have people who prefer one over the other of course, but it's like trying to compare which is better between a shooter and an RTS, it's just not doable.

Personally, I have zero interest in Project Eternity. It's an "old school" isometric (the worst view for RPGs in my opinion) RPG, so DA3's already got it beat in my books, even if DA3 sucks, but I'm sure there's people who feel the opposite to me, as evidenced by this thread, who will absolutely love Project Eternity over DA3 no matter what.

I'm also a bit critical of Obsidian using Kickstarter to fund it. They're a successful, well known developer with a lot of popular titles behind them, do they really need to use crowd funding for their next game? Maybe, I don't know their financial situation, but it seems a bit suss to me. Kickstarter's supposed to be a place where people can get help starting up a business and funding their first projects, not where already established businesses can go when they don't want to risk their own money an certain endeavours.

[Boiny Bunny]

bombspy wrote...

Project Eternity compared to DAI?

You really want to compare a 2D retro RPG to a Skyrim-Dragon Age mix?


Project Eternity wants to appeal to nostalgic rpg fans beyond the age of 30. Of course there are plenty of people who will play it, but only because it's like in the good old times. It will never have the success of Skyrim or Fallout 3.


DAI has a lot of potential if made right. Mixing the freedom and exploration of a TES with the storytelling of Dragon Age (/ Mass Effect) could lead to the most awesome RPG of 2014.

I guess it's appropriate to ask yourself, what is the main reason that you play an RPG?  What do you get out of it?  Do you play it for the plot?  The characters?  The immersion of the world?  Do you just enjoy lots of diverse dialogue options?  What about having dozens of ways to build your character?

I think whatever things you might put on your list of 'most important features of an RPG' - surely an awesome graphics and physics engine wouldn't top the list (or for many, be anywhere near the top)?

You may well be missing the point of Project Eternity.

Graphics, voice acting, etc. has moved forward dramatically since the days of 2D 'retro RPGs' - however, in a lot of ways, other things have stepped backwards (again, depending on what you enjoy in a game).

Personally, I'm quite excited about the promise that both PE and DA:I hold.  I imagine that PE will have a vastly superior plot and characters, a much deeper and more complex character customisation system (build wise), amd probably also a vastly more complex combat system.  DA:I will naturally have beautiful graphics and landscapes to behold, will (obviously) give off a higher level of immersion by putting you in a fully rendered 3D world, and letting you see your character's face etc., will (possibly) offer more potential for open-world gameplay, will have a better character customisation system in terms of physical appearance, and will mark another entry into a world of lore that I'm already invested in (which is a big plus).

It's also worth noting that (this is really just a guess, but is based off past titles by the respective companies), I expect PE to be a significantly more mature and 'darker' themed game, with more complicated plots/characters.  Obsidian seem to be great at that kind of stuff.  They don't seem too fond of the 'prophesised hero saves the kingdom from the evil one-dimensional man and everybody is very happy' plots.  Whether that's a pro or a con however, depends entirely on the player!

Modifié par Boiny Bunny, 20 décembre 2012 - 12:09 .

[Firky]

David Gaider wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

Why can't we just say that the next few years will be good for RPGs and just leave it at that?

Are you guys really going to lose some sleep over which game will be better?

Some people are really concerned about RPG's needing to maintain a certain amount of "purity" and thus all occupy the same space. Personally, I'm happy that Obsidian is doing such a game. It's not really competition for DA3, as the two games aim for very different things, and I wish Obsidian all sorts of success and then some. It'd be nice to definitively prove that IE-style games are still viable.

I'm looking forward to everything.

I wonder how BG EE is going. I recall seeing a BGEE designer tweet that it is around the 100th best seller (within RPGs) on the iPad.

I bought a copy. It was a bit pricey, considering I own 3 copies of BG already. But, although I've played BG in probably the last 3 years, it doesn't really seem to have aged well, IMO. BG2, different story.

I backed Project Eternity. I hope it'll be fun to play and that lots of additional people buy it, after release. For me, the biggest difference between PE and DA3 will be price, oddly enough. I'm fairly sure I'll enjoy them both, for different reasons, but one will cost rather a lot more ...

[Cutlass Jack]

Firky wrote...

I backed Project Eternity. I hope it'll be fun to play and that lots of additional people buy it, after release. For me, the biggest difference between PE and DA3 will be price, oddly enough. I'm fairly sure I'll enjoy them both, for different reasons, but one will cost rather a lot more ...

...Especially if you kickstarted $5,000.

[HTTP 404]

I rather they are inspired by BG and KOTOR. there was some exploring there. I get the impression it will be more along those lines.

with that said. I have no problem with developers drawing inspiration as long as they are INSPIRED while making this game.  They can draw inspiration from a Sesame Street game for all I care.

Modifié par HTTP 404, 20 décembre 2012 - 01:48 .

[TheBlackAdder13]

David Gaider wrote...

Savber100 wrote...

Why can't we just say that the next few years will be good for RPGs and just leave it at that?

Are you guys really going to lose some sleep over which game will be better?

Some people are really concerned about RPG's needing to maintain a certain amount of "purity" and thus all occupy the same space. Personally, I'm happy that Obsidian is doing such a game. It's not really competition for DA3, as the two games aim for very different things, and I wish Obsidian all sorts of success and then some. It'd be nice to definitively prove that IE-style games are still viable.

I'm not trying to troll or make passive agressive challenges or anything but isn't it competition for you when it comes to casual gamers? Sure, to an expereinced gamer they're two hugely different types of RPGs but honestly the only games I currently play personally are Dragon Age and Crusader Kings 2, gaming is something I do pretty infrequently. If Project Eternity turns out to be all sorts of awesome, that may lure people with my mentatliy away from Dragon Age as they may see two fantasy RPGs and don't neccesarily see them as sub-genres (I'm personally unclear about the distiniction between a Dragon Age-style RPG and a Project Eterntiy one) and pick one over the other to invest their time and money in. The likelihood of me opting for Project Eterntiy of Dragon Age is low because I'm captivated by the story and lore but won't other casual gamers just see two different fantasy RPGs? But what if I hear that Project Eterntiy's plot and characters are absouultely phenomenal and I don't have enough to invest in both franchises? 

Modifié par TheBlackAdder13, 20 décembre 2012 - 01:59 .

[Firky]

Cutlass Jack wrote...
...Especially if you kickstarted $5,000.

(Well, yeah. But $20 vs - I paid $99 for DA2 off the shelf - with $9 being Sebastian and Aussie prices. )

[Iakus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Right, but all of those games are very different from what many people on the Obsidian forums feel should be in the game (in regards to the "make it more like Bioware games" comment earlier somewhere in this thread).

Eh, many people also stating that Vancian magic is a requirement, adding cooldowns to magic is an atrocity, the focus of the game should be a combat simulator, or that combat isn't as important as the characters or story, while some feel exploration should come back en force.

Lots of discussions had happened, but things have quieted down now.

Vancian magic might be a requirement for a 2E D&D system (which Baldur's Gae, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment are all set in) but I hardly think that it's a requirement for all IE games.  If I recall correctly, the first two Fallout games are also IE games, and they used a modified GURPS system and had no magic at all!

[Guilebrush]

While an interesting topic really it's kind of pointless to ask since as many have pointed out the two games will be wildly different. I think gven Obsidian's track record the more important question would actually be "how does PE hold up vs classic IE titles?" Aside from FE3:NV what recent-ish games have they released that were considered any good in practice?

I guess the core of this question is really an excercise of how people define RPGs and what their personal expectations are from them. It's strange too since no one has a solid, universally accepted list of criteria that define the genre Which is how we have everything from Diablo, Torchlight, Dragon Age, Dungeon Defenders, Final Fantasy, Mass Effect, Baldur's Gate, Skyrim, Dark Souls, Pokemon, Paper Mario, WoW, the Witcher, etc. etc... all classified as "RPGs" (of one "sub-set" or another) yet there is no one defining commnality between each of them that doesn't cross over into other game genres.

That aside, I personally hope that PE does well and turns out to be a great game, doesn't hurt to have another viable entertainment alternative out there for people that enjoy "RPGs." But even more so than Bioware's recent track record, Obsidian's is open to criticism, just not nearly as high profile. 

[Allan Schumacher]

isn't it competition for you when it comes to casual gamers?

Well, it's competition in the sense that all games are technically competition.

For myself, at least, I'm also a gamer. So ultimately I want more awesome games. And even if we lose some customers to Project Eternity (I'm sure we will, in the world of finite resources), it doesn't mean that we don't also have somewhat of a symbiotic relationship because we're of the same genre.

There will be lots of people that still play both simply because it's "more RPGs!" Heck, even yourself, you might not pick up Dragon Age 3 right off the bat for your own reasons, it doesn't mean you won't ever pick up DA3. Same goes for Project Eternity stuff.

I also greatly prefer being highly regarded because people prefer our product over others, rather than liking our product because there's nothing else out there. I think it's better for the genre as well.

Depending on how you classify "casual" gamer as well, there will also be advantages/disadvantages based on the level of exposure and so forth.

Vancian magic might be a requirement for a 2E D&D system (which Baldur's Gae, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment are all set in) but I hardly think that it's a requirement for all IE games. If I recall correctly, the first two Fallout games are also IE games, and they used a modified GURPS system and had no magic at all!

I agree. As a concept I actually dislike the Vancian magic system a lot. I understood it and understood what it delivered in the context of AD&D rules so I could work with it, but it is hardly a requirement for me. But there were some people on the Obsidian forums that were quite adamant that it was a requirement to satisfy the promises of the Kickstarter campaign.

Fallout was not made on the Infinity Engine, however (It was its own internal engine).

[Iakus]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Vancian magic might be a requirement for a 2E D&D system (which Baldur's Gae, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment are all set in) but I hardly think that it's a requirement for all IE games. If I recall correctly, the first two Fallout games are also IE games, and they used a modified GURPS system and had no magic at all!

I agree. As a concept I actually dislike the Vancian magic system a lot. I understood it and understood what it delivered in the context of AD&D rules so I could work with it, but it is hardly a requirement for me. But there were some people on the Obsidian forums that were quite adamant that it was a requirement to satisfy the promises of the Kickstarter campaign.

Fallout was not made on the Infinity Engine, however (It was its own internal engine).

Ah, well, I'd still classify them as an Infinity Engine-style game, personally.  And if folks disagree, well, Project Eternity is not going to be on the Infinity Engine, either.  It's going to be on Unity 

I mean, as long as teh combat system doesn't make me tear my hair out, the story's told well, and the rpg elements are immersive, it should be a good game.  And that goes for DA3 too.

[Allan Schumacher]

Sawyer is a rules/mechanics guru. I have a high degree of confidence the combat will be good. Probably better then the IE games actually. (I never played BioWare games for the combat)

[Sister Goldring]

I have room on my shelves for more than one great RPG. I hope they are equally successful and I really look forward to playing them both. The more RPGs there are to play the happier a gamer I am.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

[Leoroc]

One of the best parts about single player RPGs is that it is never armageddon vs deep impact or call of duty vs bf3. The releases are generally not in direct competition (probably not intentional, just related to the long development times). I love fallout 3/nv, I also love Dragon Age and Skyrim was awesome (Dawnguard has been boring as **** though, there is no exploration, just a linear quest). I want more RPGs and more RPG companies, was so sad when Troika sank.

[termokanden]

Good rules and mechanics make me giddy. Perhaps that makes me a sad person. But a happy sort of sad person.

I am interested in both projects and am not at all expecting them to be similar. I don't really want to speculate on which will be better either. I already paid for Eternity so I'll be getting that for sure. As for DA3, well, I'd say there's a high probility I will get it, but nothing is certain before I know more about it.

[Realmzmaster]

iakus wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Right, but all of those games are very different from what many people on the Obsidian forums feel should be in the game (in regards to the "make it more like Bioware games" comment earlier somewhere in this thread).

Eh, many people also stating that Vancian magic is a requirement, adding cooldowns to magic is an atrocity, the focus of the game should be a combat simulator, or that combat isn't as important as the characters or story, while some feel exploration should come back en force.

Lots of discussions had happened, but things have quieted down now.

Vancian magic might be a requirement for a 2E D&D system (which Baldur's Gae, Icewind Dale, and Planescape: Torment are all set in) but I hardly think that it's a requirement for all IE games.  If I recall correctly, the first two Fallout games are also IE games, and they used a modified GURPS system and had no magic at all!

Fallout 1 and 2 did not use a modified GURPS system. Steve Jackson games pulled out of the games due to the excessive violence and gore.  Fallout 1 and other Fallout games use the intenally developed S.P.E.C.I.A.L system. The first two Fallout games used the Fallout engine not IE.

[Iakus]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Fallout 1 and 2 did not use a modified GURPS system. Steve Jackson games pulled out of the games due to the excessive violence and gore.  Fallout 1 and other Fallout games use the intenally developed S.P.E.C.I.A.L system. The first two Fallout games used the Fallout engine not IE.

Really, really, really modified? 

[Gibb_Shepard]

Oh god the Vancian system needs to go jump in a pit and never resurface. I disliked the system so much that it genuinely made the IE games a much poorer experience for me. It may be no coincidence that my favourite IE game had the least amount of combat (Planescape Torment).

[PinkDiamondstl]

Fast Jimmy wrote...

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

PinkDiamondstl wrote...

No contest Da3 wins..This game looks cheap and boring . As did Fall out 1 and 2.

You are a bad, bad man. Who says bad, bad things!

Man?

Man! 

My lady parts mite dissagree...