Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
Also the feel of the game changed. The first game had grimmer details in the world and the looks too. The story didn't really make much sense or was as engaging compared to Kingmaker.
Nah, it's not a wrong forum, there have been a lot of discussions about PoE vs PF:KM. Now it's obvious, that Kingmaker is more successful game, than Deadfire, even if review scores are higher for PoE2.
:CITATION NEEDED:
Deadfire: Very Positive (4,344 reviews)
Pathfinder: Kingmaker: Mostly Positive (8,680 reviews)
"(Yes, Deadfire has an 88 Metacritic and Pillars 1 has an 89 Metacritic, but IMO Pillars 1′s review scores benefited from a nostalgia bump.)
Players who hate RTwP combat will say that it’s because Deadfire continued using RTwP combat, in contrast to the phenomenally better-selling (and better-reviewed) turn-based Divinity: OS2. Even if that’s true, Pathfinder: Kingmaker, which generally had lower review scores than Deadfire, sold better than Deadfire and had RTwP combat."
That's from the link above.
And even for the last month: Deadfire 205 reviews 91%, PF: KM 437 reviews and 88%. So Deadfire still keeps getting better, but significantly fewer reviews, and this forum is way more active, than that. Which means this game is way more popular, than Deadfire.
I very much enjoyed deadfire. I really hope the lower sales doesn't mean that's the end of these kinds of games from them.
*sigh*
Well, to me it's because 1) PF ruleset >>>>> PoE ruleset and 2) mods.
hell I even MADE some of them for myself.
it was phenomenally easy to mod.
Yeah, but Josh doesn't understand, why...
In my case, there was a free weekend, demo, or something for Pathfinder that I tried and decided it looked good, so I bought it on the next sale. Then bought DLC at full price because I thought it so good that the developers could do with some support.
However, as I bought Deadfire, and Pathfinder, and Divinity Original Sin 2 I doubt my buying habits are significant.
Pillars is grim for sure, however that novelty starts to wear off over time. Some of the companions are better though, I liked Eder a lot, until they ruined him in Deadfire.
Obsidian's custom ruleset is just not interesting, nor does it provide the same replayability, mechanical depth, or complexity; as NWN 2, Baldur's Gate 1-2, and Pathfinder: Kingmaker. Established rule sets are far more engaging, period. I have yet to see any system that comes close to the mechanical depth and replayability as DnD or Pathfinder.
Deadfire was a dumpster fire. I bought it day one, and regretted it. I played it for ten minutes and just couldn't pull through. The loss of Chris Avellone really hurt them. As he wasn't around to help write some of the companions for the sequel.
I'm sure Josh Sawyer is a competent designer, the guy has a impressive resume. I'm also sure Josh and team worked real hard on the Pillars series. Guy ought to take a break from directing games for a while. I've heard he got burned out from directing Deadfire.
Aso:
>Divinity Original Sin 2
I forced myself to suffer for 30 hours in that game. Never again.
poe 1 wasnt a bad game in my opinion, but something about the story just didnt grab me and it took me 3 attempts to finish it... i always lost interest halfway through the game.
poe 2 on the other hand i finished in one go & enjoyed it, although the max difficulty was a disappointment at release.
but then again, just recently i wanted to do a 2nd playthrough with all the dcs and lost interest halfway through it ... and ended up playing pathfinder again instead ;D
so in my case i'd say the way the story is told is just not engaging enough to keep me playing.
its not the rule system, because i love d:os and its fairly simple, same goes for pathfinder which is pretty complex on the other hand.
The path to an answer is right there in is own post though. PFKM did better than Deadfire. This is right there with my own view of the two games, PFKM is a much better cRPG than Deadfire. The question is why, and this is what Josh avoids addressing, preferring to hide behind notions of review scores, publicity etc. He's looking at marketing/biz explanations rather than root causes.
The fundamental mistake Josh made with Deadfire IMO is listening to whining about PoE1 and "streamlining" Deadfire's ruleset and mechanics accordingly. There is a fundamental rule about this sort of game: if folk are not whining about it vociferously then the game is not doing it's job, it's not hitting the spot.
A good example of where a developer deals with whining correctly is XCOM. XCOM forums are chock full of whining, especially about RNG. Do Firaxis weaken and cave in? No sir, they do not. Is XCOM highly thought of? Is it sucessful? Do pomegranates have seeds?
But Josh made three fatal mistakes with Deadfire in response to PoE1 whining:
1. Removed meaningful rest mechanics
2. Reduced party size to five
3. Failed to include any decently long and dangerous dungeon crawls.
As PFKM has demonstrated, this is the opposite direction to where the classic cRPG zeitgeist actually lies.
One reason might be people that bought POE expecting it to be like Baldur's Gate, and were disappointed. PFKM they tried and also have the bonus of the players of Pathfinder and DnD tabletop.