Eternity Josh Sawyer reflects on his failures with Pillars of Eternity

[Atchodas]

eh its okay I guess

sounds like shit to me

 

[vortex]

Game is fine but it hit the unknowable, bad luck impossible to tell what went wrong invisible wall. Just wrong place wrong time, no one will ever decode the mystery.

Sawyer's quest is to decode that mystery and plan forward.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

The game reviewed extremely well, so why would word of mouth be only 'eh it's okay'?

 

[user]

Game is fine but it hit the unknowable, bad luck impossible to tell what went wrong invisible wall. Just wrong place wrong time, no one will ever decode the mystery.

I don't think it's impossible at all. Some shortcomings are glaring even. I think that blaming the wrong time and place is placing one's head in the sand.

a lot of players like:

* characters that are more exaggerated/over-the-top/campy/silly.

* weapon/armor/character design that is more exaggerated/fantastic.

* plots that pit good against evil (in one form or another).

* progression systems that are fundamentally easy to break.

Still didn't break him enough, still blames dumb shit on players.
Kingdom Come has no first three points and is loved by players.

Well if he really thinks that, he deserves no sympathy :/

The game reviewed extremely well, so why would word of mouth be only 'eh it's okay'?

On the press? Most of these "journalists" are simple and just copy/paste what they think is the popular view, and they never go against it.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

I don't think it's impossible at all. Some shortcomings are glaring even. I think that blaming the wrong time and place is placing one's head in the sand./

Like what shortcomings that would exactly have drastically affected sales? The game reviewed extremely well at 88% on metacritic. Even Josh can't figure out why, how would a few over ambitious Codexers know?

 

[I ASK INANE QUESTIONS]

* characters that are more exaggerated/over-the-top/campy/silly.

* weapon/armor/character design that is more exaggerated/fantastic.

* plots that pit good against evil (in one form or another).

I've heard that one before.
"traditional RPGs don't sell well bad so I need to copy WoW"
Why all that love for thinking with decade-old trends? And why is he going backwards with them? First he was cowtowing to the ideas popular around 2008 with all his talk about balance and FIXING D&D, now we're back in 2006 with chasing WoW.
What's next? Is he gonna latch onto the forward thinking from the finest minds of 2003 if his next project fails? That'd be a massive incline tbh.

* progression systems that are fundamentally easy to break

here's the thing though, players treat the progression system like another puzzle, so when they break it, they feel pretty good about themselves. It's a part of the game for them.
This is a problem in tabletop, where you have an autist trying to shoehorn his op build into a normal party, but it's a fucking singleplayer rpg Josh. A party-based singleplayer rpg. Why are you trying to balance it like it's a fucking MOBA? Let the player break it. Just ensure the martials can break it too if you want to be extra fair.

weird fucking nibba holding an online funeral for his designer career because he stepped on a rake once lmao

 

[S.torch]

Why you guys don't just link this thread to Sawyer in twitter?

I'm serious. He maybe need to listen to the grognards.

 

[Prime Junta]

Why you guys don't just link this thread to Sawyer in twitter?

I'm serious. He maybe need to listen to the grognards.

Don't do it. He drinks too much as it is.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Why you guys don't just link this thread to Sawyer in twitter?

I'm serious. He maybe need to listen to the grognards.

Because no one has explained why any of these minor nitpick issues affected the game to cause hundreds of thousands less sales. The thread is just about useless.

 

[Lacrymas]

Even if they were minor nitpicks (they aren't), they'd still add up.

 

[Jezal_k23]

It doesn't look like Obsidian itself has any idea about why Deadfire failed. So this thread is probably as good as the information that they have there.

 

[S.torch]

Why you guys don't just link this thread to Sawyer in twitter?

I'm serious. He maybe need to listen to the grognards.

Don't do it. He drinks too much as it is.

You could argue that what drived him to drink in the first place was not listening to the grognards. I mean, he is saying that is strange that Deadfire did well on critics but not in sales. But in the Codex people were already telling that the first game had a lot of problems (see: Darth Roxor's review).

has explained why any of these minor nitpick issues affected the game to cause hundreds of thousands less sales.

But they did? I think the Pillars of Eternity series is one of the most discussed games here. People write walls of text about it every time.

 

[user]

I don't think it's impossible at all. Some shortcomings are glaring even. I think that blaming the wrong time and place is placing one's head in the sand./

Like what shortcomings that would exactly have drastically affected sales? The game reviewed extremely well at 88% on metacritic. Even Josh can't figure out why, how would a few over ambitious Codexers know?

Ok, don't blame me for the wall of text and that won't be nearly enough.

This is a huge topic. It's not about what anyone says. Yes, tastes, trends etc also play a role but if you deconstruct anything enough, you can also make logical/factual observations. For example, when people talk about C&C. What is the number of skill checks or decisions in the game? How many of them affect something that actually changes gameplay to a meaningfully deterministic point, for the player's experience? Now check that again comparing it to P:K. How important is C&C even, in crpgs? Who knows, right. Or story - what makes good literature? Succint but elegantly descriptive storytelling or painfully descriptive storytelling using a ton of fancy thesaurus adjectives at every other sentence?


The above is hardly considered deconstruction ofc - it is a huge topic after all - and you can call it biased because it's more about general impressions, but let's take a simpler example that none may care about, but it does indicates some interesting things about the rest of the game - the ship "mini-game", excluding any interface issues:

-How is the mini-game's "gameplay loop" affecting the main game? Meaning: How are ship upgrades or crew actually affecting the main game? Does the game make you care enough about aqcuiring them? Do you actually need to, given that the only area you can't traverse is the last and even there it's scripted that you get a ship? Are a couple of captain bounties enough of an incentive?
-How is the main game's loop affecting the mini-game? Is the game's economy such, that ship upgrades are something you don't "just click", but rather care about, or struggle to get? Is special crew recruiting something engaging, or again, something you "just click a few times"?

And it's not only about gameplay, because engaging gameplay also supports RP and immersion. Do the above have anything to do with tastes? Doesn't matter if anyone likes the mini-game or not or whether it should have been in the game. It's irrelevant. The fact is they threw a bunch of assets in a place and don't use them properly. What does this have to do with the actual game? I think they do exactly the same in many occasions. Another simple isolated example of an occasion like that is "empty islands". Islands, e.g. with a single area and a bounty boss. Barely any RP, any skill checks, any C&C. Do you really think that's "nitpicking"? And then you see P:K sprinkling them almost everywhere.


Whatever one may be creating, creator's prejudice is a bitch. When you pour your soul into something having a specific mindset, it's hard to change that mindset when criticizing it. Plus the game wasn't a disaster or anything so that you can pinpoint something that "drastically" affected sales - it was a pretty decent game, so that makes it much harder to pinpoint what went wrong with it.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Even if they were minor nitpicks (they aren't), they'd still add up.

Not really. I highly doubt casual Pillars fans were completely turned off by the hundreds of thousands over some minor mechanics or writing issues. It just seems like a perfect storm that hit and can't be analyzed well because it's unknown variables that led to the lesser sales.

But they did? I think the Pillars of Eternity series is one of the most discussed games here. People write walls of text about it every time.

It is but what is really learned from its threads? We learn that everyone basically has a unique niggle or two with the game and that doesn't add up to people abandoning the series by hundreds of thousands. It just doesn't add up, and even if Josh took all these small niggles and worked on them for the next game, I highly doubt it's going to change much in terms of major sales. Josh is in a tough spot because even he doesn't understand what the heck happened.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Obsidian's problems started after I was deownered.

 

[Lacrymas]

Even if they were minor nitpicks (they aren't), they'd still add up.

Not really. I highly doubt casual Pillars fans were completely turned off by the hundreds of thousands over some minor mechanics or writing issues.

That doesn't mean there are no issues, it means the issues were either bigger or they did add up. You know, the logical conclusion?

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

That doesn't mean there are no issues, it means the issues were either bigger or they did add up.

So then what issues can we nail down that would have attributed to the game absolutely flopping? It would have to be a major issue because gamers don't just leave a series in such droves over minor stuff. I personally think it has to do with marketing, time of release maybe and other factors like possibly isometric old-school fatigue or something. But then Kingmaker sold well so it really is a mystery.

 

[Desiderius]

Jesus.

There are none so blind.

This is dev equivalent of “the RNG hates me.”

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Ok, don't blame me for the wall of text and that won't be nearly enough.

This is a huge topic. It's not about what anyone says. Yes, tastes, trends etc also play a role but if you deconstruct anything enough, you can also make logical/factual observations. For example, when people talk about C&C. What is the number of skill checks or decisions in the game? How many of them affect something that actually changes gameplay to a meaningfully deterministic point, for the player's experience? Now check that again comparing it to P:K. How important is C&C even, in crpgs? Who knows, right. Or story - what makes good literature? Succint but elegantly descriptive storytelling or painfully descriptive storytelling using a ton of fancy thesaurus adjectives at every other sentence?


The above is hardly considered deconstruction ofc - it is a huge topic after all - and you can call it biased because it's more about general impressions, but let's take a simpler example that none may care about, but it does indicates some interesting things about the rest of the game - the ship "mini-game", excluding any interface issues:

-How is the mini-game's "gameplay loop" affecting the main game? Meaning: How are ship upgrades or crew actually affecting the main game? Does the game make you care enough about aqcuiring them? Do you actually need to, given that the only area you can't traverse is the last and even there it's scripted that you get a ship? Are a couple of captain bounties enough of an incentive?
-How is the main game's loop affecting the mini-game? Is the game's economy such, that ship upgrades are something you don't "just click", but rather care about, or struggle to get? Is special crew recruiting something engaging, or again, something you "just click a few times"?

And it's not only about gameplay, because engaging gameplay also supports RP and immersion. Do the above have anything to do with tastes? Doesn't matter if anyone likes the mini-game or not or whether it should have been in the game. It's irrelevant. The fact is they threw a bunch of assets in a place and don't use them properly. What does this have to do with the actual game? I think they do exactly the same in many occasions. Another simple isolated example of an occasion like that is "empty islands". Islands, e.g. with a single area and a bounty boss. Barely any RP, any skill checks, any C&C. Do you really think that's "nitpicking"? And then you see P:K sprinkling them almost everywhere.


Whatever one may be creating, creator's prejudice is a bitch. When you pour your soul into something having a specific mindset, it's hard to change that mindset when criticizing it. Plus the game wasn't a disaster or anything so that you can pinpoint something that "drastically" affected sales - it was a pretty decent game, so that makes it much harder to pinpoint what went wrong with it.

So the game flopping is due to not having enough skill checks? I doubt it, only us grognards care about stuff like that and we're a small minority.

 

[user]

This is dev equivalent of “the RNG hates me.”

Best analogy yet

 

[Lacrymas]

That doesn't mean there are no issues, it means the issues were either bigger or they did add up.

So then what issues can we nail down that would have attributed to the game absolutely flopping? It would have to be a major issue because gamers don't just leave a series in such droves over minor stuff. I personally think it has to do with marketing, time of release maybe and other factors like possibly isometric old-school fatigue or something. But then Kingmaker sold well so it really is a mystery.

Read this thread maybe?

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Jesus.

There are none so blind.

This is dev equivalent of “the RNG hates me.”

In my estimation that sentiment is correct. The RPG/RNG Gods hit his dice with a critical failure.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Read this thread maybe?

It's all microissues that most gamers don't care about. I'm like Josh, I'm just not seeing the big red flags that would have caused a massive flop. But then again, was it even a massive flop if it sold better than Tyranny?

 

[Desiderius]

a lot of players like:

* characters that are more exaggerated/over-the-top/campy/silly.

* weapon/armor/character design that is more exaggerated/fantastic.

* plots that pit good against evil (in one form or another).

* progression systems that are fundamentally easy to break.

Still didn't break him enough, still blames dumb shit on players.
Kingdom Come has no first three points and is loved by players.

At this point Josh is the player who keeps trying the same shit and losing the battle over and over.

 

[user]

So the game flopping is due to not having enough skill checks? I doubt it, only us grognards care about stuff like that and we're a small minority.

First of all, the game didn't exactly "flop", but it's obvious it wasn't worth its budget according to Sawyer. And that is certainly not what I said - I only made some examples and backed them up. Doubting that because of a general impression you have, of either the codex, the playerbase, or the game, doesn't make for a good argument.