For those who don't know, Josh Sawyer is the Game Direct at Obsidian Entertainment. He's responsible for the Pillars of Eternity series along with Fallout: New Vegas and Pentiment. Sorry I didn't mention that because I felt like he's basically a household name in gaming. LOL
He also was the Designer for Icewind Dale 2 and wrote the entire story over a weekend -- because that how much time he was given. While it's not a perfect story, it's pretty darn good for having been written so quickly. He tends to give games a very "grounded" feeling.
Thanks for this context, folks. I wouldn't know, despite having played a number of games he's apparently been involved in. Not necessarily enjoyed all them, but reasonably high profile RPG stuff.
Maybe, but blaming the audience for failing to show up usually isn't a winning strategy (hint, hint: Lucasfilm, Marvel (She Hulk, The Marvels); Amazon (Rings of Power), to name a few.
@@SlanderedGaming It really was an interesting video, especially his earlier Q&A too. I think I agree with your comment in the video that going forward mainstream RPGs will need to include romances, but I am afraid that puts people like Josh in weird place that I think someone like him could make a pivot. I wonder him someone like him could deliver instead are friendships. When I think about it a great example is Cypberpunk2077 where the game had okay romances, but ultimately what really makes the game(for me and my friends) is the relationship between V and Johnny and that growing over time. I also think Josh doesn't really speak about how well BG3 is just executed well in many facets and you can boil some of it down to time and money. It is easy to say that you know Larian had x dollars and self published so they can do this and that, but he doesn't really talk about making games with depth and how modern games feel like shallow puddles.
I appreciate him being able to be so honest, openly. Someone who is open with what he considers his weak sides should have no trouble delegating parts he feels he is weak at to people who aren't.
I was going to write the same thing. But delegating in this case would mean including things in the game that does not sit well with him, if I understood him correctly. So hiring and delegating good romance writers might compromise his vision for a game for the sake of sales.
I don't think he'd want to delegate those parts though. Most likely he'd just rather not do it. And I get the impression that Obsidian as a whole is pretty much on a similar page as him. He's always been vocal about this sort of stuff. His design philosophy is basically on the polar opposite end of Larian's. The difference is Larian puts the player's whims over their own vision for the game. Obsidian games have a set vision and they don't like the player meddling with that too much. This affects the whole game, but it's more visible on things like romance, because romance is basically the most overt form of "pandering". Sawyer pretty much has an intestinal aversion to any form of pandering to the player, but the reality is that a lot of people simply enjoy that.
@@rb98769 Sawyer has said in another one his videos that the big reason PoE1-2 were Real-Time-with-Pause is that those titles were pitched as successors to the Infinity Engine games and they didn't want to make a game radically different from what their core audience wanted. So they absolutely do take feedback into account, even for the biggest systems in their games. It's just on this particular issue that Sawyer seems to have drawn a line (and, hey, no judgement). And honestly, I'm not sure how much of the BG3 romance content is from audience feedback. The patch to add more kissing animations a little while back definitely seems like it was. But I'm guessing there weren't a bunch of requests during EA for bear and mindflayer scenes. Larian just has hornier/goofier sensibilities than Obsidian.
I'll be blunt; sure romances were key but that is because the people obsessed with them want a dating sim, not an RPG, which is fair but apparently it is the only way to draw people in who would otherwise have no interest in RPGs.
I don’t agree a lot of people like myself love romance in rpg games, but find pure dating sims boring. I love romancing Astarion but I also love the combat system in bg3.
As we have learned, mainstreaming your product can be good for business but Josh seems more interested in creating games that he would enjoy. That is a great divide.
I actually think it's the opposite. Josh seems too worried about "ifs and buts" regarding BG3 that it might be affecting what he actually wants to make. He said it more than once that "if they give me tons of money I'll make the game", problem is, people gave him money twice and they made the game twice. All of a sudden after BG3 he seems to only be willing to take the same money if it's BG3 levels of money. In other terms, he wants to create games he enjoy... but only if he has AAA budget.
BG3 is undoubtedly “more mainstream” than Pillars but I don’t think that is necessarily due to a conscious effort from Larian to make it so. They took 5es very easy to understand rules, a huge production budget and applied the same principles that made DOS2 successful and it turned out that way. I think if they tried to hard to appeal to the mainstream it would have failed.
@@ducky36F Believe it or not, I think that what makes BG3 be so successful is pretty much just the "directed" camera angle for dialogs and cutscenes. Divinity Original Sin 2 isn't that far behind BG3 but it's much more "oldschool" when it comes to dialog and cutscenes. Every dialog happens from the isometric view with pretty much no cutscenes at all. Which coincides with the success of other CRPGs that went the "cinematic" route like Knights of the Old Republic, Dragon Age and Mass Effect. I think the mainstream audience just prefers a more mainstream way of storytelling. Closer to movies and tv shows rather than books.
@@Ocean5ixit certainly helps people care about the characters when you can see them and their reactions and emotions. I certainly felt much more invested from the beginning in BG3 than in the DOS games, although I think writing and mission design also helped.
Interesting, but also completely fine regarding "the pulse/or I dont dig it". I take this as Baldurs Gate 3 is more about relationship/characters goals and ambitions during the journey, where Josh might be more mission driven. For example, he's more about the challenges of throwing the One Ring into Mount Doom rather than Frodos personal struggles about it all.
@@lilith1902 Yeah exactly. That's really the main problem. I don't mind romance in games but when all my companions immediately want to eff me after going back to camp it's very off-putting and immersion breaking.
I think that is much more important than romance. On my gnome playthrough, my gnome found all the companions too big to even think about sex. The character's growth was still there, and friendships still developed.
I watched Josh play BG3 on a short stream after it released, and he clearly was not enjoying it. He was more interested in talking about questions in the chat about food and biking, and just didn't seem into the game. Josh has done some great games, but he's always sort of had this "anti-grognard" spirit that I think is in contrast to a large number of cRPG gamers who love to min/max their builds. Josh's heart is in a different place. He seems like a great guy. I even got to chat with him for a bit at the Pillars of Eternity launch party, which Kickstarter backers were invited to. Good dude.
@@SlanderedGaming Considering how pillars 2 seems very inspired by 3.5 d&d and pathfinder with the subclasses, I am not very surprised that mechanically such a person wouldn't be too much into bg3 (especially beginning levels). Pretty much all customizability in bg3 isn't really about levelling at all, but finding items that Larian put in the game to abuse. Itemization really is more about what a build is rather than the character class and choices when levelling itself (which is in contrast to what I think a person who is really into character building would expect). The fact that all these items only really show up later into the game doesn't help either. Ofc all this is much more of a commentary on 5e vs 3.5e rather than the games themselves.
Pillars of Eternity 2 Deadfire not getting the level of commercial success they expected is disheartening and i don’t understand it either quite frankly. Feels like the audience dropped the ball.
@@SlanderedGaming Not sure if I'm allowed to post a link, but trying again as my previous post seems to have disappeared. Showing the link to stream that I reference. Josh started relatively motivated the game, but after around 30 minutes mostly just discussed BG3 adjacent topics and became more and more distracted from actually playing the game: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pD0WOIn4sQ4.html
@@Suikojunkie The problem with poe2 is simple : Poe1 was built with Baldur's gate 1&2 nostalgia and AD&D2 ruleset in mind. It got an interesting story setup but poorly paced. With poe2, they ditched the baldur's gate & ad&d2 feeling. Poe2 is not inspired by d&d3.5 like studentt6064 said, but d&d4e, one of the least liked edition. 4e has interesting concepts, but it's really the opposite of Ad&d2. Casters & melees strealined. Items power really low. It was obvious the game would displease fan of the first one. And the story is really bad. I found the game really boring. poe2 was a bad move. They put years to balance the first game... to ditch most of the system with 2. And the game was in a really bad shape at release. Don't do that with a sequel. It's great when a dev try to inovate, but not with a sequel. Fallout2, BG2, pathfinder wrath built on their first game & dev experience so they could focus to make a better game/story/experience. You don't have to reinvent the wheel for each game.
I fully understand. I am more an Obsidian/Troika/Black Isle type of writing person myself, and I am aware that it is a little more niche than Larian's BG3 style. And I agree that a Pilllars of Eternity part three would require a much better advertisement and marketing campaign than the first two received.
Funny thing you mention that since both Troika and Obsidian rose from Black Isle and later after Troika close they got to work together again. But most probably you know that.
Something Josh misses is the fact that the succes from BG3 is also attributed to an amazing ad campaign, something POE1 and especially POE2 missed sorely, that game was like barely advertised. Everybody knew BG3 existed even those who'd never play it. And do that on an already great game and it's basicly an unstoppable juggernaught, the player numbers to this day are just insane. Obisidian has always had difficulty making their games known enough, it's what let down Tyranny and Pillars 2. So I'm hoping for a robust Avowed ad campaign cause more people who play it, more chance we get another story/ game in that universe.
@@aintnomeaning I'd disagree big time. POE2 has absolutely beautiful scenery and locations, great looking monsters, much better visuals than POE1, also funny banter, and more, plenty of stuff to put in marketing, marketing was nigh non existent from my POV, it was just bad it was just barely there.
@@tobiasL1991 I agree @tobiasL1991. I didn't follow the marketing for POE, just saw some a review on a random game site. POE2 is a beautiful game that doesn't need AAA graphics to appeal to a consumer. Hell, the fact that just about every line is voiced still blows my mind. I remember seeing a commercial for Star Ocean the second story 2 and the biggest selling point was hundreds of endings. I hope we do see a POE 3 in my lifetime.
@@tobiasL1991I enjoy both PoE games but as a woman who’s fairly good judge of what other women like in games… it’s not possible to make an ad campaign for those last PoE games that would be as successful as BG3 (unless you hire an illustrator to create marketing assets vs using game assets). BG3 has more mainstream appeal, romance, & “charm” in the character designs. PoE3’s easiest way to increase sales is selling to women, since they’re currently far behind other RPG franchises on that demographic. The best way to understand “charm” that appeals to all audiences is the art direction & designs in Blizzard’s games WoW & Hearthstone, which have the highest % of women players among all PC games (outside traditionally female genres like Sims/ dollhouse). PoE3 could hire some of those Blizzard designers since many are currently out of work & have them illustrate marketing materials, & could hire a romance writer as well.
Sawyers' answers pretty much allign with how I feel to be honest. Not every game needs to be BG3, or even a Bioware style kind of game to be honest. Then of course if what Sawyer (but in general any dev team) really wants is "just" a financial success on par with BG3, they should aim in that direction, but do they need to? I'm now strictly speaking from a gamer perspective, I don't need another BG3 to be honest, because when the dust settled, despite considering it an amazing game it still doesn't appeal to me as much as other "less successful" ones, I prefer the original BG1/2 (and Torment of course), I prefer Owlcat's games and yes I even prefer Tyranny.
completely agree about every other thing you said except thinking bg3 was amazing, gave it a 6/10 due to several issues. I truly wish I liked it more. I'd love a Tyranny 2 tbh, or Road to Tyranny prequel or anything in Tyranny.
I feel like most old gamers that grew up with the genre are not as amazed by BG3 as other people but it manages to walk the fine line of appealing to both.
@@Kross415 MIght be the case yes (I do fall in that category of older gamers), but I believe it's down to something else. We can use as an example also the movie industry, that's been around longer so has even more age demographics included, the difference is between making something that's focused on a specific market/demographic, vs making something that needs to appeal to everyone (or at the very least the vats majority), in a way it's also what Sawyer pretty much says, you need to know who your movie/game is made for. Is Avengers: Endgame (or Avatar) the best movie ever? If one judges its financial success they might be inclined to say so, but is it the best movie for everyone who watched it? Absolutely not, personally it's not even in my top 50 movies, whereas for example Satantango is, but who wants to watch an Hungarian black & white movie that lasts 7 hours? I end up always with the same personal conclusion, I think books, movies (and TV series) and games should be considered art (an art form not dissimlar from painting or music), a piece of art appeals differently to different people, but in the effort of making it a successfull product it tends to lose part of its "magic".
@@demonbox7780 I agree, both industries right now suffer from trying way too hard to target the widest audience possible leading to a diluted, souless and low quality product that nobody enjoys. And that's just one of the several issues those industries face today 🤣
His writing aside the main issue is presentation. Both Pillars one and two hit you with so much exposition and world building right from the start and it never ever lets up, it's also never organically delivered. The best Obsidian games never had this problem, both SWOTOR 2 and Fallout New Vegas had a lot of story but it was paced more moment to moment like Baldurs Gate 3 is. I feel like Obsidian in a sense relied too much on his writing with the Pillars series.
It doesn't help that the writing in Pillars 1 and 2 is some of the most purple prose-y stuff in a CRPG. It's not terrible per se, but it's overwrought as all hell.
Yes I remember seeing a reviewer say they were going to review Pillars of Eternity but they were bored in 0.5 seconds. Exposition dumps are an all to common weakness in the writing of cRPGs
@@ducky36F I think the Codex in Mass Effect was a good idea. The story could just stay on track without awkward exposition (though it did have some of it). If you wanted to get into the lore and what not you could just read the Codex.
I loved NWN2 too, it's the closest Obsidian made to Baldur's Gate 3 and MOTB expansion absolutely felt like Act 2 (the best part) of BG3. They absolutely can make 3D games with voice acting, it doesn't need to have AAA budget, look at Spiders, they make solid 3D modern-ish RPGs without EA sized budgets. Obsidian is doing either isometric or first person games now. If I wanted something that looks like a Bethesda game I wouldn't be monitoring Black Isle and Bioware related devs.
I think Josh could do it but Obsidian would need to be given a HUGE budget. If you want a crpg type game to reach the masses, it has to be visually appealing. The complexity of this genre needs to be presented in a fun way otherwise it's a huge turn off to the masses (ie. endless text walls). BG3 is the first crpg to fully attempt to do this & it worked which was cool to see. I personally feel like romance is a bit overblown on social media (kinda like social media leading us to believe that Astarion would be the most popular companion to have in your party), but then again social media = marketing. So perhaps Slandered is right when he says that he feels it is important to a game's success these days. With that said I am biased as Shadowheart turned me down for 2 1/2 years in early access. I could care a less about romance in BG3 😂. {Edit in} I also think Josh & Obsidian would need to be given great freedom in the development of their game. Larian being independent was huge for their vision. Microsoft would have to truly believe & trust in Obsidian, which let's be real, that probably wont ever happen lol Would love nothing more than for it to happen though. POE2 is one of my all time favs.
I think Josh Sawyer needs to be daring enough to produce his own vision of what he wants a cRPG to be like. Throughout the pillars series, it felt like he was stifled between trying to cater to cRPG veterans on one hand and evolve the genre on the other hand (he mentions this in some interviews, for example). I really don't think that cinematics or romances is the lesson I would want Josh to take away from BG3 (i.e. DOS 2 didn't really have these, and was still a massive success). I'd instead love it if he focused on improved world interactivity to allow for more sandbox-like play, meaningful encounter design, open-ended problem solving (I.e. make skills useful outside of combat in flexible ways, instead of something that is only used for combat), co-operative play, and so on.
There's an old saying, "fiction is folks," and this really comes to mind. Characters are what really draw people into stories and romance is a key part of character. Baldur's Gate 3 succeeded because people became incredibly invested in the characters and the game's romance mechanic was the way the game rewarded that investment. I'm not downplaying the other features, but what drew the mass in was wanting to know characters who felt like real people, and you can't get real people if you cut off such a big part of them. Going back to Obsidian, it's no surprise that many people consider Parvati to be the best character in that game--she has a romance arc and its associated character development. Sure, it's not with the player, but she has that dimension and the other characters don't.
@@SlanderedGaming as a matter of fact I'm replaying Fallout New Vegas at the moment using mods to allow for a true party with interactions and even romance.
I consider vicar max also up there (well mostly because his battle quotes are pretty good), he's probably got the biggest (possible) arc out of all characters in the outer worlds.
@@Lemurion287 no party is reason I never got into 3D Fallouts. New Vegas was brilliant but it's such a solo game, where is my Sulik & Cassidy standing nearby on alert?
Well the fix is simple. If you dont know how to do something you can hire a person who does. Tbh you can make compelling RPG without a romance but such option is always a plus.
Yeah it's weird to me that Obsidian cannot just invest in someone who can help them write romances. A bunch of Bioware folks just got laid off, pick them up. LOL
You can make a compelling story without romance BUT: 1. Romance is easy to market. 2. People are becoming more shut in, which means the audience for it is growing. 3. If fantasy is about living in an alternate world, then sex and romance should naturally be a part of that.
@@SlanderedGaming He doesnt like romances that really stroke the players ego, or make the female characters appear desperate for them, and I think he feels that fundamentally what the romance desiring audience wants, so its not so much a "knows how" or even "willing to" its a "keep it out of stuff i work on." He doesn't want it in his games.
I’ve never been a huge gamer but I’ve been a devoted dnd player since I was 16, I enjoyed it mainly cause it felt like playing with my friends and getting sidetracked by random characters on our way to the goblin kings castle again. I won’t lie, the romance aspect is enjoyable, I can really develop my character based on who they choose to pursue, what appeals to them about them, how they react to their quest line, etc., but the friendships you cultivate regardless are really special
Sawyer seems to be one of the most insightful developers I've seen interact with the public, and his self-reflection is admirable. I love a lot of the Obsidian games and would love for them to be more mainstream, but they tend to be a bit more niche and lower budget.
As the saying always goes "If you can't do it yourself hire someone who can" he just needs a romance writer who knows how to connect romance to the story in little ways here and there and have an overarching romance, Bg3 has an amazing Romance team maybe console them literally for help or pay them for ideas something.
It's an interesting conversation for sure. Sawyer has had some great development concepts over the years and I absolutely love the two Pillars of Eternity games, but this also speaks to the broader discussion of how many companies are looking at Balder's Gate 3 and saying can we achieve that, and many of them thankfully realizing that you don't necessarily need to but at the same time being aware of what sort of a mountain you have to climb to achieve that same level of success, is really important for helping guide your design philosophies even if you're using BG3 an inspiration source. It's the difference between creating a 10 or 15 million game and a 250 million game at the end of the day and you really can't compare those when it comes to the Cinematic storytelling that can take place on the screen
Baldur's Gate 3 had 0 mainstream hype for all the years it was in early access. It wasn't until right before release it started to blow up. Larian came out claiming the game had 17,000 endings and a bunch of other wild claims, like evil playthroughs would be insanely deep. Most of those promises weren't quite kept, but people got attached to the quirky characters and dove head first into a pretty good game.
I don't particulary enjoy BG3 romances or even companions but what BG3 did exceedingly well is appeal to everyone in one way or another, starting with the EA, the Panels From Hell, the DnD setting, being the 3rd installment of a beloved franchise, making a CRPG with an unprecedented budget leading to the best graphics, animations and cinematics in the history of the genre, I can keep going but the point is, they did so many things right that they managed to gather customers from every demographic, wich is what every big company tries and fails to do. I'm curious if they'll manage to do the same with their own IP's wether it is DOS3 or a new one. I'm not sure if Obsidan would be able to make a game as successful as BG3 given the budget to do so, 1st because they have bosses and guidelines at Microsoft unlike Larian and 2nd because I think they've lost part of their talent and passion over the years and PoE2:DF underperforming just made it worse. Owlcat on the other hand has proved that CRPG's can still sell well enough to grow your studio from 30 people to 500 even on a crumbling industry and without a hit like BG3. I would also like to know the budget for DA4 and the return on investment once the game launches as it has very strong ties to this whole topic, chasing a new audience instead of serving their fans.
I totally agree and just because your game have high budget, does mean it'll come out good. Look at how many failed AAA games, although giving the investors/publishes pressure, some make sense that it failed but what I am saying that you don't only need a budget but you also have to know how to make a great game and it's clear Larian knows it. not just bg3 but DoS series itself are great. They utilize that early access is actually for not just to presale unfinished game
I think the one thing Larian did that people overlook is the easiest..they gave the best customer service. The craziest weirdest stuff...like, keeping the brain-puppy, the buff druid being a real character etc. were not only thought about and given lip service, but made reality. That kind of stuff goes a long way
Totally agree. I can go with or without romance. Companionship and being part of a group working together to accomplish quests is core I believe. I do think the feel of BG3(and DOS 1&2) also has a more broad appeal because it is more colorful fantasy whereas older crpgs tend to be more gritty and dark aesthetically and story wise which I get into more personally.
The romances are surely part of it; especially for the ad campaign, but.. I don't know whether that's the core of it? As someone who loves both BG3 and Deadfire about equally, I think it might be more down to the.. Vibes? of the player party. Obsidian games are great for letting you mould both companions and the world to suit your character, but BG3 feels more like you're stuck with actual people, in a world that's out to get you, and you have to make do. Pillars feels more like.. The world is your oyster, make of it what you will.. By the end of BG3 I cared more for my companions motivations and journeys than my own, and judging by the friendly love for the characters I've seen online, I think that's the core. In a lonely world, BG3 lets you make friends that actually warms your heart, and gives you strength. As much as I love Edér for instance, he's flat as a board in terms of actually feeling like a person compared to Shadowheart Another example: lots of people were awfully lustful for Astarion around launch, afterwards I've seen much more mention of how both the character and the acting moves people to their core. These characters makes people feel seen, and not alone. And that's quite beautiful. Josh seems more like he craves tactically challenging fights, and ethically difficult conundrums. I crave that too, but the world at large seems to long for warmth, comfort, and hope.. Not more cold logic.
Some parts are very minor but very vocal audiences. Official numbers from Larian show it. Despite the bear memes, Shadowheart is the most popular romance at 51.3% followed by Karlach and Laezel. The furries are a very very vocal minority that do not represent players as a whole. So while romance in game is good, I hopebthey do not take the wrong lessons from the internet.
I do think that Josh Sawyer could potentially make a game that is very successful. He is credited as one of the ones that contributed to the revival of CRPGs. Do I think that it would exactly mirror BG3's success? No, because I don't think that would be reasonable. Everything just fell in place for BG3 to be successful: the increased popularity of DnD (especially because of Critical Role and the pandemic), the name recognition, a very good early access, Larian being so likeable, a big budget, easy combat, the game being very cinematic, a good story that leaves an impact, and very good romances. All of these things helped Larian capture an audience that might not have played CRPGs before and an audience that was familiar with CRPGs/DoS2. On the topic of romances, I tend to enjoy more RPGs that have them vs ones that don't. This is because I often find that they add more depth to the characters (i.e. Cassandra, Wenduag, Miranda, and Lae'zel) and they add more replayability to the game. Call me basic but I also just like the ability to progress a relationship from friends to something more serious with a companion or character that I liked/I found meshes well with my player character. That said, it also depends on how the game handles romance. If it doesn't add much to the game and it's just surface level stuff, I'd rather it not be included in the game and they just include opportunities to make ride or die friends.
To me one of the most important things an rpg should have is options and choice. For that reason I believe that romances are a good thing to have in your game. Its not like you have to pursue the romances, you can choose to be platonic, but the option should be there.
I just want an ending to the Pillars story. Of course, I'd like it to have the budget of BG3, but I don't expect or need it. Romances aren't a dealbreaker for me either. Unfortunately I feel if Avowed doesn't sell well, they'll abandon the IP entirely and we'll never get a conclusion to a great story.
I really want a finale that is worthy of the series as well. I worry that making another direct sequel would hurt sales though. I feel like the only way to do it is to make POE3 a finale to the series, but not a direct sequel. Like it concludes the story, but not with all of the same characters and the PC from the first 2 games.
Sawyer doesn't like romance/horny in his RPGs. Alot of his older comments and interviews make me feel like he only added them into POE2 because he felt like there was a proverbial gun to his head. Ironically I think the BG3 Devs took it WAY too far in the other extreme. BG3 made me yell the following phrase at my TV screen four times: "Oh for Eff's Sake, Gale! NO MEANS NO!!!! I just wanne be bros dude!"
Quality romance can be done without horny romance. Edit: I don't think bioware romances are horny at all. They might mostly end in intercourse but its not like sex city. If you are gonna tell me that scene were jack is giving Shepard a tattoo is wanna the most impactful romance scenes in gaming, then i cant trust you
They need a Dragon Age 2/Inquisition/Andromeda style wheel where romance options are clearly marked with a heart. BUT Bioware holds patent to dialogue wheels, so maybe just mark a text box with hostile, sarcastic, romantic etc. options on the side would fix the problem. But this is not unique to BG3, too many people got stuck into romance unwittingly in other games, infamously Liara, and good luck stopping Anomen, Carth or Bastila from being annoying... hey never got Disciple and Atton fight for your heart in Ebon Hawk? That's Obsidian game.
@@KasumiRINA I don't think I ever had to shut down a romance more than twice in any game and I played all those. BG3 dudes will not effing take No for an answer. And it's just the dudes. Lae'zel took No for an answer without missing a beat. Wyll needed three shutdowns and I was about to file a goddamned restraining order against Gale.
Can I say it is nice to finally have a youtuber actually acknowledge the importance of romances. Every other youtuber dismisses them. It s funny how often people are like "I don't mind roamnces if they are done well." they act like if the romance isn't some massive part of the game they shouldn't be done at all. But romances don't actually need to be huge or complex. Honestly the most important thing is just having it feel like it exists throughout the game. That can mean just little scenes of romantic dialogue or the love interest referring to the main character with an affectionate nickname. They don't have to be massive dates or sex scenes just have the love interest check in with the main character after a massive revelation. Again just a bit of dialogue not some huge scene. The romances are important for me since often they are the only time the main character feels selfish (Not necessarily in a bad way) and like a real person not just someone whose whole existence is defined by side quests and main quests
Romance was definitely a huge part of the success of BG 3. The marketing as you say in particular. One thing that Larian did particularly well was marketing and spreading word of mouth and making the most out of the long Early Access. They definitely knew what they were doing with the Minthara scene in Early Access and leaning into the Halsin memes/fanclub was particularly crafty. Whatever you think about the Bear scene, it got *everyone* talking about the game at a critical point before release. Voice acting, you also mentioned is also very critical here I think. The mocap and Voice acting in BG 3 is spectacular and makes the dialogue particularly intimate in a way that is very engaging to the player-BG 3 is a very *emotional* game in a particular way that is difficult for more traditional isometric crpgs to capture and Larian really leaned into that strength. Now personally I don't think BG 3's story writing is particularly good (rather poor, actually), but you often see it praised for its writing and I think that there certainly is something to that. I think a large part of that is how adept it is at creating an emotional connection through the character relationships and cinematic dialogues. Obsidian not doing romances much is something I hadn't considered until now, but that is rather noticeable now that you bring it up.
BG3's writing is very good at exploring its specific main theme, ie. autonomy vs authority. Every character's arc shines a light upon that dichotomy, and even a generic Tav is forced to develop an opinion about it because of interactions with the tadpoles/dream guardian. This is where BG3's writing is at its strongest.
I think what made BG3 so successful is that a lot of its companions people find relatable, while they all have fantastical elements to the character and backstory almost all of them are rooted in relatable human experiences, betrayal, abuse, failure, revenge, sacrifice etc. that paired with excellent VA and mocap make for much more compelling characters than the typical isometric RPG put together
Good character writing beats out good plot writing every time. I like both Pillars and I’ll throw in Pathfinder too, but the characters in both games are simply much harder to feel close to than ones in BG3.
Pillars 2 was a good game. Though I would say the biggest problem for them would be party interaction and investment. They don't do a good job making you care about the party members. Party member quests feel more like check the box than BG3 or even DOS2. I really wanted to save Karlach in BG3 ai wanted to help Loeshe in DOS2. Pillars is missing that.
My biggest issue with Pillars was always building my character. I felt like in a lot of ways stats make no sense. Such as Might clearly being a physical attribute in the narrative sections, but then being a top stat for Wizards. Every time I tried to build a character I just never felt satisfied with the stat distribution, and even when I tried following guides, it just still felt unsatisfactory to me. And I hated the recovery speed mechanic with armor. HATED.
It’s interesting what you say, how they feel about Deadfire. I didn’t much like Deadfire. I felt it was asking a lot of me, but without a proportionate return. A whole world to learn about, a whole cast of characters to meet, a whole combat and class system to wrap my head around… it’s a lot to commit to without any guarantee that it’s going to be worth it. I eventually decided that it wasn’t and stopped playing around the 25 hour mark. If Josh is still wondering why Deadfire didn’t succeed, I’d say it’s because (a) it was too derivative with respect to the great CRPGs of the past and (b) because the payoff in fun seemed too distant and too uncertain in relation to the clear and present slog of getting to know the game’s systems, lore, topography and cast of characters.
I am with Josh on not understanding it or it agreeing with me but I also realized that the romances are the thing most fans seem to talk the most about.
Pillars of Eternity was my first video game. I loved a lot of Pillars of Eternity 2 (the multiclassing system was amazing) but the characters and main plotline was alot weaker than the first. The ship battle mechanics were also not fun. Pillars of Eternity 2 was also a direct sequel which hurt it's success. Romances creates more investment with the characters which is essential for a story driven game. Ultimately, characters are more important than gameplay.
I do think I sortof disagree with the romance part of your statement. Especially for BG3 I think it actually wierdly makes the game somewhat weaker, because you don't get scenes to replace the "romance" scenes a lot of the time, which means it's harder to "get" what a character is about (as you get less scenes with them). Party based games should always be about figuring out companions but it's a bit of a shame that to really get it you'd have to look up some romance scenes instead of some platonic friendship. Like lots of people in bg3 fandom care about Astarion pretty vocally, but if you don't romance the dude there's barely any story for the entirety of act 1 and 2 besides him admitting that he sucks blood lol.
Maybe you should read a book then if you value characters more than gameplay. Strange wish you have for games. The core of a game is still the gameplay. The reason why BG3 is so successful is because gaming has been invaded with people who don't really like games for gameplay but just as a medium to get friendships, romances and stories in the medium. In other words, the genre has been fucked.
@michaelpieters1844 Not sure where you have been, but the CRPG genre has always had a massive focus on characters and story. Whining that your niche genre is now mainstream just makes you look like a silly manchild.
This makes me really curious about what his idea of romance is. He said he didn't believe it would work with BG3 players, but didn't say what it would look like.
I enjoyed Baldur's gate 3 very much but the romance part of the game just annoyed me, it did not feel organic and too much of it which I thought personally took away from the game in a way. They could have refocused much of that energy into the story more and cut content I felt but that is just me.
I have jumped into the WotR space a little and one on the list to sit down and fully go through. Bg3 romance needs an achievement where you get it by dodging all the horny advances in act 1...good marketing no doubt but I think the show stranger things and Larians great marketing pushing BG3 to the top and the romance was half backed and not organic, if it was organic, would rise higher on my list and I loved the game.
Once again, Josh Sawyer proves himself to be one of the best "named" (meaning, someone who people recognize by name when attached to a project) devs working right now. For someone known for RPG's, outright saying "hey maybe I just don't know what the audience wants in a modern cRPG" is extremely refreshing to hear, especially as someone who's a massive fan of him and who agrees with him on a *lot* of RPG design choices.
I would be lying if I said that romance did not draw me to BG3 in the first place as someone who is cRPG noob and has never played bg1 or bg2. It's what attracts a wider audience and it worked wonders for bg3. the bear scene is the best marketing the game could ask for. Also, some people would be surprised how a lot of people have even deep connection with the game NPCs more than just "I want to f*ck them". I have seen some vid of companions being psychologically disected and it's quite fascinating
@@SlanderedGaming also to me while Romance was what drawing me to the game, pretty much everything else are the one making me play bg3. I have finished 8 playthroughs at this point with 1k+ hours. I don't need every playthrough to be completely different. just playing different class is sometimes enough for me to start the new playthrough hell, I never play or want to play evil playthough. And, the most important part for me is the combat. while is is not as complex as some other cRPG game, with how good it feels, it makes me somewhat despise how combat in cRPG feels and that's the main reason I could barely bring myself to finish act1 of WoTRC as someone who finished kingmaker while I am starting new playthrough of BG3 with classes mods
Hey Slandered thank you for an amazing video! Yeah I agree with you, romance in video games are amazing! I remember most of my female romances in RPGs like Bastila in KOTOR, LT. Commander Ashley Williams from Mass Effect, Morrigan Dragon Age/Cassandra Dragon Age Inquisition. Cyberpunk I romance Judy because I was playing as a female V. I want to romance the Queen in Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous however it takes to long and you have to wait until Act 5. In Balder Gate 3 I’m definitely romancing Lae’zel. I think if Obsidian wanted to they should experiment with romance in their games to take it to the next level. Replayability is definitely tied to romancing of characters for me. I loved playing Mass Effect over multiple playthroughs and flirting with Ashley, Liara, Talia, Jack and Miranda. Also Microsoft owns Obsidian and they have to make it work for gamepass . Baldur Gate 3 was multiplatform with PC 1st, then PlayStation and Xbox gamers had to wait because we had Starfield released around the same time. I agree with Josh that budgets will be high and I know Obsidian wants to work on multiple projects at the same time. If Xbox could have its choice they would rather them work on Fallout New Vegas 2 over Pillars 3 and give them a huge budget. I am definitely becoming a cRPG fan because the team up in those games are incredible and wonderful and I love the banter.
Yes, something I don’t like about the way people critique romances with a heavy sex aspect is it almost always comes across as this snooty “it’s only about sex” complaint. When it really, really is not.
BG3 acting quality sets such a highstandard for the people who come later. Their mo-cap stuff really takes it a step beyond what we've seen before, just more personality than could be shown in the past. There are great animators but working with great actors gives these animations such life on top of the quality voice work
While I certainly can't argue with the objective reality of the Pillars of Eternity series not meeting the sales expectations of the developers, especially in comparison to BG3, I do have to point out that Josh Sawyer's involvement in Pathfinder Kingmaker and Wrath of the Righteous are proof enough that his creative visions are clearly still marketable in the current CRPG landscape, just not in the same mass market appeal way that BG3 was. With Microsoft's backing, it could be possible for Obsidian to do something similar, but when you have a team with a very specific set of skills, it's best to use those to the best of their ability rather than try to copy a success story that even Larian couldn't have imagined. There's no saying whether there will ever be a Pillars of Eternity 3, but Josh Sawyer has proven himself a commodity to the people in our community, so if he ever gets the opportunity to captain another project in that style, we'll be there to receive it, even if the BG3 community is not.
I don't question at all that Sawyers way of making games is marketable and frankly I've loved all his games. The question is if he could create a game that has an equal amount of success compared to BG3.
idk how we act like BG3 was the first big CRPG success of larian. Larians previous game already had around 9+ million sales. Just look at DOS2, add cinematics to it and make it a lot bigger and you have baldurs gate 3. It's not realy just the romance, it's just a part of it (obviously easy for marketing)
It really isn't. In Swen's interview with Gamespot, he mentioned that BG3 had sold close to double (i.e. 2x) the copies of DOS 2 (so ~15 million, but presumably passed that now). DOS 2 was even PC Gamer's GOTY and top 5 in Gamespot's GOTY. BG3 **IS** the better game and has been critically received as such, but DOS 2 achieved a whole lot more than people are willing to give it credit for. Edited to include video reference: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-egQgPD1wd7A.htmlsi=FYy3L1qeRWhCwqv8
I love BG3, but a lot of the fandom/memes do show that a lot of the fans enjoy it as a dating simulator. Let's be honest. 🤣 I say this as someone guilty of it, no shade. I do think it's a crime we couldn't romance Grieving Mother or have a multiple-game romance with Pallegina, but I appreciate PoE's world building and writing overall more than any other franchise.
😂 I am confused by Josh’s comments. What sort of romance does he like that he thinks the audience would dislike so much?? 🤢 It’s true to get broad audience you must include lots of fun & creative romance options. It doesn’t necessarily need to be a bear druid but it’s fantasy so it can’t be 100% vanilla & boring either since that doesn’t fit the setting lol
This is a based perspective to have. You can acknowledge that something is important for financial success while also maintaining that you don't care about it. LOL
I kinda agree with Josh Sawyer on comparison of BG3 and PoE2. BG3 is great but so was PoE2. Yes, unfortunately there were no romance options but i did liked combat systems much more since there was a real time with pause option. As for romances both Josh Sawyer and Tim Cain were saying that they do not like how it is done now and that they see romance in a very different way. I wish they would talk more about what they mean by that. Because all Obsidian modern games are suffering a lot from not having romance options.
Most gamers aren’t going to buy a game because it has romance. Romance in a game is hard to do though and it often shows good writing and character development when it is pulled off. What Josh doesn’t get is the power fantasy dynamic. People want choices in their games even if they never plan to make those choices. Many want the power fantasy of winning against the odds. This includes beating the boss and winning the affections of the woman/man.
Not only does Obsidian not do the romances well; Alloth in particular was annoying in PoE2 in direct contradiction to his development in PoE1 to the point someone had to make the "Agreeable Alloth Mod" even to romance him properly. He got extremely uptight for no reason. You can't romance Eder even if you like him the best. But Romances aren't the end all be all of games, sometimes I just want the story. The thing about PoE franchise in general though, is that it has an EXTREMELY depressing factor in its worldbuilding. And, well PoE is rather depressing in general. They were excellent games, and when PoE1 came out I felt it was at least as popular as Wrath of the Righteous was, but there was a lot of gray and not very much color in PoE1; as in there was all drama and depression and not much humor aside from Alloth's moments and that's still undercut by the soundtrack. If you go that hard in a drama/tragedy with a melancholy soundtrack, you NEED to have those spots of lightness in the story, close relationships between the characters that's not all trauma bonding. You need to have something in the game, the world, the characters to fight for and with the mood of PoE1 I was surprised the endings did NOT result in a Final Fantasy Tactics style depressing "The End." Even the characters were like "well it's better than staying here so I guess I'll fight and save the world because it's the less suck of multiple sucky, depressing choices." PoE doesn't even give you comfort when the characters die because of that worldbuilding, in fact I would call the games somewhat nihilistic and jaded. PoE2 was better about unrelenting tragedy, and had a lighter atmosphere, somewhat. I say this as both a writer in my own right and a gamer who's been playing RPGs since 1989. Don't get me wrong; I love PoE and good tragic stories, it's a very unique world, the writing is phenomenal, but it took me a very long time to get through it because it was rather unrelenting and there were multiple bugs that, while not game breaking like OTHER studios I could name that never fixed them, made some parts of the game particularly frustrating, especially when you imported saves into PoE2. The best games are games that break your heart AND make you laugh and in stories like that the small, bits of comfort, fun, and humor are ALL the more important.
Great summary and discussion of this, thanks! I don't require romances, but I do appreciate them being present if they can be present without compromising mechanics, plot, and interactions I care about. I usually attempt them when present though, at least at some level. I failed in BG3, got friendzoned somehow, although I did like how my char and the friend concluded anyway. I greatly preferred CP2077 romance outcome which persisted through most of my play and felt like there was a significant other [ok, my CP2077 is mod'd]. I like the idea of proper sxscenes in adult games--like violence, gore, adult themes--although in practice, I find the scenes pretty cringy to actually watch; mostly take it as a positive sign for the game. But also not required. POE1 was the main reason I avoided POE2.
Refreshingly candid take from Josh, whom I already had a great deal of respect for but this no-bullshit sort of openness just makes me like him even more.
I remember when The Outer Worlds was doing a lot of press before it came out and the devs looking annoyed when asked about romance after a while. The question seemed to get asked every interview and that was the first time I found out people REALLY want romance in their rpgs. I'm OK with rpgs having no romance but if it's there that's cool too. I personally think romance in BG3 is terrible, your companions just throw themselves at you willy-nilly even if you never journey with them at all. I also like Obsidians writing more than Larian, so if Josh wanted to do romance in his style i'd be interested to see what that looks like.
They don't all throw themselves at you. Shadow heart who is romanced ove half the time according to the stats is rather middle ground. Gale is rather pushy boarding harassment, i wasn't even sure if wyll was romanceable at first, karlach will straight up reject you if she dosent like you Laz'el can be fairly easy. Starion is easy, Minny is easy to smash hard to convince. Heck for like the first 5 patches her romance was broke, did i forget anyone?
He is making a drastic miscalculation in the audiences of RPGs or any videogame. His audience is right there, but the story must adhere to whatever choices are made. He doesn't have to pull the Baldur's Gate 3 crowd, his own crowd is probably waiting for him to arrive.
I think the best Obsidian 'romance' was the Parvati / Junlei quest line. I enjoyed setting up my companion and helping them out. Regarding Sawyers opinion, i think he's correct, his games have a small but dedicated fan base, but from a market perspective they aren't likely to get the mass appeal needed to make big money.
Imo, I feel Josh is taking the wrong lessons from the commercial failure of poe2, as that game deviated hard from the familiar tried and true territory of the first. It also didn't help that the main storyline was, to put it politely, not very good, and was basically just a glorified scooby doo chase sequence around the globe. Don't get me wrong, the individually contained bottle stories and character interactions were still great, but they felt incredibly disjointed from the overrall narrative, and even to all the lore they've been building in poe 1. Add on the badly implemented choose your own adventure book format for unnecessary ship battles and events (literally would skip everything until an option to board would show up) low level random items that don't really do much to make combat more interesting, redone combat that tried to appease both rtwp and turn based yet winding up being mediocre at both, and half assed implemented features he clearly didn't have the heart to implement well, and deadfire wound up looking like a product that had spent too much time in the cobbling and mixing process from a chef with faning passion, and not enough in the oven to cook. And with pressures from above from folk like microsoft breathing down his neck, alongside a side glance at a fellow peers in the market somehow making a bombastic success off ideas he has no interest to comprehend, and i can't help but feel bad for him. Because even if say, Avowed is every bit as good as new Vegas was, the poe ip doesn't exactly have the legs for Avowed to carry the ip forward to even come close to microsoft's expectations (especially after fumbling that gamepass deal with bg3). And with Josh's lack of foundational curiosity for player engagement and driven investment systems, I doubt many will be willing to latch on fod long.
I will undoubtedly buy Avowed, as Pillars remains one of my favorite cRPGs - if not my most beloved. It isn't the game I wanted however, but I put a lot of effort into learning about their world building, and appreciating its depth. I recall Obsidian lamenting about cRPG fans not allowing them to expand the genre in meaningful ways - feeling trapped in the legacy of BG1 & 2 (and now BG3?). I gotta confess that I do admire Josh's ability to be in touch with his own creative feelings, and express them - but I can't help but feel a little sad about it. Deadfire deserved better reception than it received. (on a different note, I'm also kinda bummed about Owlcat stepping away from Pathfinder for four games...)
I'll accept romance scenes if they have mini games or unique loot. That's replay value, getting different loot depending on mutually exclusive romances. Other than that, romance in video games is usually hitting action figures together.
It's so sad that Deadfire didn't sell well. I love that game, It's one of my favorite rpgs. The world building is so well done and I'm a sucker for some Welsh inspired language.
Personally I don't care much about romancing in RPGs, so I didn't miss that in Pillars of Eternity and Tyranny - especially as the storylines themselves were very good. I think BG3 had the help of the early access sponsoring way of making the game, whereby Larian got early feedback from the community. Making BG3 on D&D 5th edition also helped, as that's a well known system. And lastly the BG franchise name was a lot of free marketing for the game. A game can market itself to a larger audience. However what Larian managed to do was much more than that. Especially getting early feedback and actually doing something with that is - unfortunately - a shocking innovative way of game development.
I think BG3's success is quite easy to understand tbh, it is just... at the right time and at the right place. DnD was gettin more popular with the movie and generally Larian is a household name (not even generally tbh it is a FACT after DOS2) so a very popular IP combined with a famous studio equals overwhelming success. Oh and I guess there is also the good gameplay which has been steadily improved over decades, and the graphics and the insane marketing the game got... I think BG 3 is very similar to the Witcher 3 back in the days, just an amazing game coming out at the perfect time. BG3 managed to capitalized on the lack of competition (cRPG isn't a particularly competitive genre) and the free marketing from the DnD movie, combined that with AAA production, decent pricing and already being really popular due to the decades long EA... All of this results in one of the best game of modern gaming, and tbh BG3 is better than Skyrim imho and that should tell you everything really.
I don't agree because BG3 launched right when DnD took a MASSIVE hit to their reputation. Across social media people were swearing never to buy anything from WotC again.
I think it indeed is mostly timing, there's been a bit of a slowdown in classic fantasy titles (dragon age/witcher 3 I guess being the latest AAA titles that were widely known, with witcher being arguably a bit less rpg as you play as a specific character). I think bg3 sortof just was able to slip in at a time that was very opportune.
@@SlanderedGaming I think a lot of people aren't really on the up and up on the licensing changes, in fact I doubt the average BG3 player has ever been involved in d&d ever beforehand anyways. Perhaps some players who were actually playing the tabletop might have said so, but I doubt most of the playerbase the game attracted would ever have even read an article about it.
I believe that even if you don't care much for romance. You will always want to endorse things that will grow sale of a game. More sales equals to continuation of that series of games.
It's tough comparing Deadfire to the financial success of BG3 just because BG3 had better marketing going for it. For one thing, BG3 had the more advanced graphics and that's always going to be a big marketing hook. Larian also was genuinely great at marketing their game. EA is a much better tool for marketing than a Kickstarter page and Larian was really aggressive with getting BG3 in the hands of streamers as well as making popular streams themselves. But as much as I would like a real PoE3, I respect not wanting to gamble on a BG3-sized project. If Obsidian missed, they'd probably be shut down or restructured.
While the romamces help soread the word via memes and tiktoks, what really helped imo was that the gameplay was also very good. One of my biggest complaints about most other crpgs, like WotR, is that there are so many trash mob fights where i dont even need to bother to pause and use any actual tactics. The ai will kill them all in a few seconds and it just slows me down to getting to the real fun fights. But with Larian, every fight feels boutique. You can come at them so many different ways an have their own twists and use of the battlefield and terrain to overcome or use to your advantage.
Romance in (c)RPGs are just a nice side distraction for myself, although I will say in my first playthrough of BG3 at launch, Gale was kinda bugged and flat out would not take no for an answer lol. POE was the game that truly got me into the genre, and I loved POE2. I am very unlikely to buy Avowed as I would rather play a CRPG than an Elder Scrolls 1st/3rd person game, and I feel kinda bad as I do want POE3. I do think if they ever do decide to make another CRPG, they should seriously look at making it turn based. BG3 being turn based helped it quite a bit, as A LOT of people really hate RTWP. Owlcat went from only RTWP (Kingmaker), to adding it later on, including it with WOTR to Rogue Trader only being TB.
to be completly fair , bg3's audience , is not neceasrily an crpg audience. I've had plenty of discusions with people going from bg3 into wotr , or even the original baldurs gate games , and being disapointed that they aren't more like bg3. Bg3 is a rather liniar , cinematic experience - in a way being like a combination between an movie and a game , rather then being an crpg. It IS pretty to look at , and maybe play through once or twice , but that's kinda it. In a way , it's similar to mass effect : a very linear and cinematic experience that most gamers can apreciate and enjoy , with a very low bar of entry , but not much replay value or substance. And don't get me wrong : i LOVE mass effect. And i've finished the entire original trilogy on insanity , but my god , i can't play it back to back again as i can play something like...baldurs gate or the pathfinder games , or most other crpgs in the market - old or new. I maybe do a full trilogy run once every couple years , but i can't just replay it over and over again. The same is true for baldurs gate 3. It's a game that i'd have to wait to forget the story for a while , before i can decide to play it again.....because sadly , if you've played it once.....you've seen like 70-80% of the story already. Sure , finding new interesting bits and pieces might be fun for some people....but it's not for me. I need my games to played quite differently , if i am to replay them over and over again , and bg3 does a very poor job at being replayable. So from that standpoint , i can see it : bg3 is made with mass apeal in mind. It's not made for a traditional crpg fanbase.
There was a similar discussion regarding DOS 2. I think it's fair to say Larian makes a lot of new players fans of Larian's games but not necessarily fans of cRPG's overall.
I dunno man I wouldn’t call bg3 linear. It just makes its 3 act structure more blatant than most rpgs. But within the acts you can do quite alot and get an insane amount of reactivity. The systematic design is as much of a draw as the romance.
@@Nastara it's textbook liniar gamplay. Filling an act with sidequests doesn't really change that. The story goes from A to B to C in succesion , allowing you to stop a bit in each chapter to sidequest , but none of the sidequest alters your game experience in any unique way , or changes the experience. As for reactivity.....i'm guessing you're talking about dialogue reactivity - people acknowledging that you're this race or this character class or whatever.....sure....that is nice to see , but it's also fluff for the most part. True reactivity would be the game allowing you to take a certain path to achieve a goal , and respond to that in terms of gameplay - changing your experience depending on your choices - rather then just the characters talking. From that standpoing , even the og baldur's gate 2 had more reactivity. If you were a good person , and had high rep , the merchants would treat you differently. If you accepted evil people in your party , you would lose reputation. If you were a specific class , you would get an specific stronghold that no other class could get. If you were a specific race , you couldn't romance all the characters. And so on , so on. All those might seem restrictive (and to some degree , they are) , but at the same time , they help help shape the world depending on your choices , and i consider that to be good world building. By comparison , in bg3 , it feels like the devs wanted to player to experience everything in one go. I can understand being proud of your work , since the cinematic aspect of the game is trully impressive in bg3 , but i fundamentally disagree with their way of storytelling. It feels like almost regardless of what you do , how you play , or who you play as.....you're still going to end up doing what the devs wanted you to do , rather then feeling like you own the story. And that makes for terrible replayability in an crpg in my opinion.
@@mihai000000 You cannot experience everything in one go. It is impossible. There are way too many options on how to beat quests, how to unlock quests. Characters react to this person being dead or getting information by another source. You can lock out so many options by doing certain things. You can also find novel solutions by combining gameplay mechanics together because the systems are programed to work beyond simple lock and key design. Thus the game is filled with open ended puzzles with multiple solutions. Some that are legit but developers did not account for. Almost every nonlinear game works like BG3. Here’s an example of Fallout 1, 2, and New Vegas: Intro Free exploration (ends when find water chip/find geck) Act 2 forced event Free exploration (ends when defeat the mutants and master/defeat enclave) Ending or we have the KotoR bioware model Linear Multi Hour Section Collect the McGuffins! Linear Plot Twist Segment Collect the McGuffins! Final Dungeon Now you can see BG3 is the same Intro Free Exploration Act 2 forced event Free Exploration Act 3 forced event Free Exploration Ending Almost every western rpg uses this closed-open-closed-open design. Your logic means almost every western rpg is linear and that is not true. This is going to sound offensive: it sounds like you didn’t play Baldurs Gate 3 at all. Or you are way to focused on aesthetics instead of how the game actually plays
@@Nastara i've played through bg3 start to finish twice , and started a 3rd playthough that i've abandoned after like 10 hours of gameplay , because everything was so fucking repetitive , clocking at around 260 hours of gametime. I've played as a good tav once , and an evil durge 2nd time. I don't find digging for obscure dialogue options for random sidequests , as having replay value , or "reactivity". And yes, i'd argue that most games (not only western ones) are actually quite linear. That's not even up for debate. There are very few games that trully allow the player to play its own story , in the way he wants to , and have the game or the story actually change to adapt to that. But just because most other games aren't doing it either, it doesn't mean that automatically excuses bg3. In the end , we're talking about what bg3 does well/wrong , not about what other games do wrong. Oh , and lastly : here's a print screen from my steam , just so you know that i'm not talking "without having played bg3" ibb.co/p2HfYK3
100% agree with what Josh said about not reaching an audience he doesn't understand, BG3 tapped into a new generation of RPG fans, I saw teens playing BG3 on a steamdeck longhaul flight. Pretty crazy, probably due to tiktok popularity.
I'd like to play a crpg that features more interesting romances. Where just building a genuine connection with a companion that feels natural and earned is it's own reward. I don't need the promise of an eventual sex scene to keep me invested.
I think Josh Sawyer doesn't understand, because most of the games that he has worked on hasn't had well developed romances and the characters in Pillars, for example, although well written, didn't bring people the same emotions that BG3 did. They are also in different categories of budget, of course, where Larian has invested a lot of their money on the motion capture and voice acting and closeup dialogue. I think THAT's the key to success of BG3...it's not the combat or story, but the party members and characters you encounter that made everyone fell in love with them and why it appealed to a wider audience (to the gamers that never played a CRPG / turn based RPG before). This is the reason why Dragon Age Origins + Awakening, Mass Effect and majority of Bioware's games have been reliant on good characters that you could get to meet and form a relationship with them. I don't think Obsidian has managed to do something similar with Pillars 1&2. I would argue that they managed to do so with Neverwinter Nights 2 + Mask of the Betrayer, but something was missing (for me) in Pillars. I love the lore of Pillars and the gameplay aspect of it, but on the dialogue and companionship there are very few of them that I care about (Eder being the only one that I actually cared about keeping him alive and in my party). These are my 2 cents on the matter.
Look... the problem isn't romance per se, but in just crafting complete, relatable characters. Obsidian characters tend to be vehicles for ideologies and so social dynamics are battles of ideologies. While I appreciate that, to a degree, it leaves the games feeling like cold exercises, rather than full-blooded stories. That was the biggest problem with PoE 1&2. They just don't connect on a human level.
If he wants to learn about what makes romances work he should be playing stuff like Wrath of the Rightious and 40k and honestly any of Owlcat's stuff. They do a super job of appealing to a number of different types of romances. I know for me, My partner LOVES spider girl. She LOVES the redemption arc, the way her character thinks and looks. Though honestly, I'd like to see some more Polyamory included in games. I know we're still a ways from it becoming mainstream, but if you look at ANY dating app there's tons of people out there looking for thirds or more than one partner. It's absolutely not for everyone, despite the desire being there, but I think it's something long neglected in the romance stories of games in general.
I'm just grateful that BG3 gave the modern CRPG genre mainstream exposure. Hopefully, it will inspire the evolution of CRPGs to come. And no, im not saying that anything is wrong with modern CRPGs. Dark Envoy, Colony Ship, Rogue Trader, etc ...are all fantastic modern CRPGs. It would be nice to see different twists on the genre is what im trying to say.
Outer Worlds, I just played it, you can actually attempt a romance with the engineer lady and she will shoot you down. Pretty funny. What I liked about that game was shooting people in the head at great ranges. I wanted to fly a space ship tho, and the "everyone shows up to help at the end" didn't really come together
I think these comments by Josh are something Owlcat needs to look at. Sure, everyone wants success like BG3. But do they have the understanding of the wider audience that enjoy BG3? It's not just about voice acting or 3D graphics, they'll need to pivot the entire emphasis of the game. That means they'll need (new?) people on the team who can deliver that product which is different from their usual games.
Romance doesn't necessarily need to be in an rpg but it's definitely a plus. I've played a lot of jrpgs and crpgs to know that I prefere games with even a small amount of romance. It's probably the reason why Persona 4 is still the number 1 in my heart.
so I played quite a bit of both Pillars games back when they released. my prior experience with crpgs was largely Dragon Age and Kotor, fun but _definitely_ on the lighter end of the spectrum. so Pillars was a pretty big jump for me at the time, and while I don't think either game was perfect, I enjoyed them quite a bit then. Replaying Pillars 2 last year, in a post Pathfinder and BG3 climate, there were definitely aspects that felt a little rough to me. I generally liked the writing, but mechanically, they felt a bit messy compared to games in the DnD lineage. all abilities being per-combat meant that even the "big" spells and abilities had to be tuned down to be a little underwhelming, and it relied on the player basically spamming as many abilities as possible in every encounter until they either ran out or the enemies died. the effect for me was that by about 2/3rds of the way through the game, the combat just turned into a complete slog. fights were either very easy or extremely difficult with little in between, and but were mostly very repetitive. I'm not saying they were bad games, and given the relative crpg drought when they released, I think they deserved more positive attention than they received. designing and tuning a new rpg system from the ground up can't be easy, and unfortunately I think they stumbled a bit with that. the math felt a little off, and different feats and abilities usually either felt like they were specifically intended to work together (so a bit on rails) or had no meaningful interaction at all (which felt incohesive). All that said, I'd absolutely check out a Pillars 3 game, and if they make it I definitely wish them success.
Romances existing or not is not a dealbreaker for me but it adds flavor to characters and storyline. But what is even more important to me in a crpg than anything else is how we as players interact and affect the world we are playing in. Til this day I still hold baldur's Gate 2 in high regards. Even so after BG3. Because it had so many interesting character you could meet and add to your companions. But also your chooises affected the world. Maybe not directly all the time but it was often mentioned in endings. Another series I hold in high regards is fallout series there your actions also affects the world and how it responds to your action. That is a major factor for me atleast. Linear storyline can be good and all but I for one want to see my chooises has an affect on the world.
Microsoft did not buy Obsidian to make CRPGs. Microsoft bought Obsidian to make Bethesda games, and then they bought Bethesda to make Bethesda games which made Obsidian irrelevant. Be prepared to say goodbye to Obsidian when (not if, when) Avowed doesn't sell enough.
I think this is a very interesting of "What my vision is" and "What fans want/like" and it seems that he thinks about this sort of thing a lot! He wants to make the sorts of games he thinks are fun but at the same time he also wants to make things Obsidian fans want so where does one draw the line? Or what other things that fans want that he doesn't get at all but he knows people want. It's like the Gunslinger class in WotR. Owlcat thinks it's a lot of work to do the class, but they know that people think that being a gunslinger is awsome, so what should they do? What is the best answer? What would make everyone happy?(can that happen?) I love this sort of things.
On the point of romance I don’t fully disagree, but I do feel that romance is not always necessary. The problem is choice, and having the CHOICE to indulge in something and having that option be of quality is what matters-which does tend to mean romance cause people be horny. Part of what I enjoyed the most about pathfinder for example is that the romances felt like things that I either stumbled into or very directly pursued. It didn’t feel like the romance fell into my lap like in Baldur’s gate most of the time. That said, sex absolutely sells and on that point I agree that to take in non CRPG players, that kind of appeal might be necessary. At the same time though, I feel like trying to appeal to people that aren’t already invested in buying your product instead of becoming more valued with the audience you cater to is usually a dumb move. If the audience enjoys it enough they will pull others into trying your product for you-like with BG3, ME, etc.
I'll say this, we are never getting a POE 3, I just do not see it happen, and I don't mind either, I just hope Avowed has a great story, a bit of a wrap up to the 'trilogy' since avowed is not set before POE1 and 2 anymore but after. Which to me is really the biggest reason to want a 3rd one, seeing how the story and world have evolved. It's why us likely never getting a Tyranny 2 is so heartwrenching because that world and perspective was so unique!
Yeah, I don't think it's happening. I don't think Sawyer wants to make it, and Obsidian seems to be moving on from cRPGs. Plus Microsoft calls the shots now, they'll just look at how Deadfire fared and say no.
@@rb98769 i hope they just do a step up and go for a CRPG but with a good multiplayer experience with a depth customisation, they want succes? that s it
Kudo's to Josh Sawyer for being so honest and self aware. A smart firm would have Josh handle some parts of the game and hire someone else to handle the romance. Personally, I could care less about romance options. I would agree that it broadens the potential audience. I don't think romance was what made BG3 great though. Icing on the cake for sure.
I feel like Pentiment does demonstrate that Josh's team knows how to deliver a compelling RPG narrative with memorable visuals. They just need a way to combine all that with a vision that speaks to a wider audience, and they have struggled with that in the past. However, not every game *needs* to break through to the mainstream - there is a space for niche titles too
Just started playing this game a year later after all the hype. I admit that the production value is what drove me to it, since I'm not a huge fan of turn based crpgs. I'm enjoying it so far, but I still struggle with the limited combat. As for romance, I'm not opposed to it, but it's not my focus. No character has caught my eye at all, so I'll probably romance no one.
Damn you beat me to it, was going to talk about this too; I share his views on romance, overrated and unnecessary but unfortunately the primary reason for BG3's popularity.
I always felt Pillars biggest roadblock for casual players is just how much it does exposition and lore drops in npc conversations. Lore and stuff is all good but I feel like they def need to try cliff notes, with the rest in a codex entry.
What I didn't like about the bg3 romances is the fact that preferences basically didn't exist. Apart from that they were done very well. Romances with preferences and race locks for me promotes more replayability like in dragon age inquisition. And i really liked solas romance because it makes sense. A female elf is his preference and it is respected
I loved Deadfire and would like to see them continue that world in that format. I loved the ship aspect of the game but as you said, the romance was very poor. I think POE 3 needs to be more like WOTR at least. Based on his comments, I think it would be best for them to take the next step and try to be better then WOTR then BG3. I am not sure another company is going to succeed in BG3's success until Larian makes another Divinity perhaps.
I enjoyed the heck out of BG3 and other Larian games, but not everygame needs to be BG3, i hope the lesson they take away here is that if you create a game that caters to your audience first and not to the stockholders, it has a much better chance of being successful.
Somebody needs to update Josh tha Larian Studios was so poor at one point that the founder, Swen Swenke, didn't have gas money for his car and had to call his girlfriend (now wife) to bail him out.
