Eternity Avowed - Obsidian's first person action-RPG in the Pillars of Eternity setting

[Beastro]

Already posted?

Sir Golli of Wogg

 

[H. P. Lovecraft's Cat]

Friendly reminder that Monster Hunter Wilds is only 1 week away.

I think you know which game deserves your money more.

First we want to see what happens when you shoot arrows around and if you can kill NPCs.

I see what you're doin and you would have a point if Monster Hunter was trying to chase the same "market". But Monster Hunter created it's own market and it only needs to play by it's own rules. And even then they're clearly not being lazy. Wilds is pushing boundaries within it's own niche and that is epic af. These are the visionaries and projects we need to be celebrating, instead of the brokedick cocksuckers like modern day Obsidian who settle for mediocrity. Fuck that.

 

[processdaemon]

Of course the punchline is that GreedFall, despite being a middling game with a not-entirely-memorable plot, nonetheless completely blows Avowed out of the water in terms of writing.

I find Greedfall charming in its own way like most Spiders games but if its writing 'completely blows Avowed out of the water' that's probably the most damning criticism of this game in the whole thread and the only one that's made me think twice about trying it. Greedfall is basically my standard for an okay aRPG that ticks most of the boxes without exceeding expectations anywhere and if Avowed doesn't even reach those lofty heights that's pretty concerning.

 

[Konjad]

But Avowed is failing with normies too - having 10k concurrent player week after release in 2025 is not good enough for the game with billboards on the Times Square.

The gamepass effect is a big factor here.

Most single-player xbox games do similar numbers, Starfield being the big edge case because Bethesda had already built up a huge audience who wanted to own and not rent it. Who knows what MS's expectations are? We'll find out when Obsidian either gets layoffs or the announcement of Avowed 2.

Gee, I guess you're right. Soon we'll see announcements of sequels for these games, certainly including expansions to Avowed and then Avowed 2!

Thanks,
Sherry
This post is pending Infinitron's approval
Say

to Skinwalker's

 

[luj1]

Obsidian team assigned to make console slop sequel to game they don't care about.

It's not just that they don't care, they legit can't make a good game

 

[Quillon]

Obsidian team assigned to make console slop sequel to game they don't care about.

It's not just that they don't care, they legit can't make a good game

It's not that they can't, they won't even try. Fergie's saying "we are not good technically, we're good at making content"; latter isn't even true anymore but I just don't understand how can he/Obs settle for the former, just hire more & more talented programmers ffs. They have a carte blanche on ambition with MS on their backs, but they are saying "no thanks", which is why I won't look at their mediocre games "for what they are".

 

[Mauman]

Speaking of GreedFall, the comparisons with Avowed are so strong that I'm baffled Obsidian didn't change the plot just to distinguish themselves.

My knowledge of both games' plots is vague - I played GreedFall a while ago and forgot most of it, while I've started skipping dialogue in Avowed - but here's my understanding of plot points both games share:
- The player is the agent of a colonial empire who visits an exotic colonised realm for an important mission
- The player's overriding goal is to cure a plague, and the answer lies deep within the exotic land
- The player has an unusual appearance with distinct facial markings which other characters frequently comment on
- The player realises early on that they have a strange innate connection to the island, despite having never visited before
- The moral clarity of the player's mission is complicated the more they learn about the reality of colonialism (though GreedFall treats it with nuance while Avowed is much more of a boring unambiguous "we're the bad guys" deal)
- The player has run-ins with religious zealots (though again, they're a proper fleshed-out believable faction in GreedFall while they're one-dimensional villains in Avowed)

The similarities struck me about twenty minutes into Avowed and they only deepened from there. Of course the punchline is that GreedFall, despite being a middling game with a not-entirely-memorable plot, nonetheless completely blows Avowed out of the water in terms of writing. Obsidian must have realised they'd end up inviting comparisons, and that those comparisons would be unflattering for them given that they fucking suck at writing, so why did they go with this plot?

You know, Greedfall is a game that one could look at and describe as "woke" that didn't actually bother me too much and I even rather enjoyed it for what it was. Like you said though it gave the factions more nuance than a screeching blue haired land whale.

I think my only beef with it was that it put the natives as a faction as 100 percent in the right. Though it at least had the good grace to put plenty of the natives individually in the wrong.

 

[FreeKaner]

It's not that they can't, they won't even try. Fergie's saying "we are not good technically, we're good at making content"; latter isn't even true anymore but I just don't understand how can he/Obs settle for the former, just hire more & more talented programmers ffs. They have a carte blanche on ambition with MS on their backs, but they are saying "no thanks", which is why I won't look at their mediocre games for "what they are".

Except Avowed is great technically, it looks good and plays good. There is an issue of scope, in that zones aren't huge and there isn't a lot of enemy variety but even then the zones are packed to brim with content that it feels good to explore every nook and cranny.

 

[Inec0rn]

they should have released this earlier dialled back the visuals and game length, the people buying this slop wouldn't care.

 

[Quillon]

Except Avowed is great technically

They say Avoid is buggy this time around where as TOW was practically bug-free at launch but what I meant was making a bigger game involving more intricate mechanics, KCD1-2, Bethesda stuff. f.i. I'm sure Feargus is thinking CP77 is made by aliens and that its just not possible to achieve it if they tried for the next 20 years.

 

[FreeKaner]

Except Avowed is great technically

They say Avoid is buggy this time around where as TOW was practically bug-free at launch but what I meant was making a bigger game involving more intricate mechanics, KCD1-2, Bethesda stuff. f.i. I'm sure Feargus is thinking CP77 is made by aliens and that its just not possible to achieve it if they tried for the next 20 years.

Avowed has very few bugs and most minor. The only big bug I noticed is that sometimes NPCs don't load properly when entering a new zone for the first time but that's fixed on reload.

All the stuff like killing npcs and thievery are things that exist in Pillars and nobody cares. It's just bad faith nonsense arguments or an addiction to empty cynicism.

Not every game has to have high level of world simulation, see Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls. Actually in BG3 too most NPCs stay in place without moving and there isn't even a night time.

 

[H. P. Lovecraft's Cat]

Of course the punchline is that GreedFall, despite being a middling game with a not-entirely-memorable plot, nonetheless completely blows Avowed out of the water in terms of writing.

I find Greedfall charming in its own way like most Spiders games but if its writing 'completely blows Avowed out of the water' that's probably the most damning criticism of this game in the whole thread and the only one that's made me think twice about trying it. Greedfall is basically my standard for an okay aRPG that ticks most of the boxes without exceeding expectations anywhere and if Avowed doesn't even reach those lofty heights that's pretty concerning.

That's the thing ultimately. If Avowed got something importent right people would ignore the bad things and sing it praises. It would be like a CDPR game. All it took was nailing down one thing like a character or a quest. But instead nobody got anything right and it is AIDS. The greatest failure is succeeding at nothing which it did. A game made for no one including homeless people who get tortured by rats and cockroaches.

 

[processdaemon]

Frankly I am surprised just how much reactivity the game has in terms of narrative so far, it has a lot of choices you make just in act 1 some of which immediately have consequences in act 1 and others later.

When you say narrative reactivity is that shifts in the dialogue and NPC reactions to you or changes to the actual plot/ world and the quests (either what quests are available to you or what options you have in those quests?) What you're saying sounds good but others have the opposite take and I'm trying to work out whether that difference is because people are taking past each other in terms of what they're describing or if it's a genuine difference in opinion.

 

[Quillon]

All the stuff like killing npcs and thievery are things that exist in Pillars and nobody cares. It's just bad faith nonsense arguments or an addiction to empty cynicism.

Not every game has to have high level of world simulation, see Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls. Actually in BG3 too most NPCs stay in place without moving and there isn't even a night time.

Importance of such features aren't 1 to 1 for a first person rpg vs isometric one. I personally want simulation first and foremost from an ambitios RPG but ambition doesn't necessarily mean simulation; for example CP77 is very light on simulation mechanics but heavy on most other features. Games like TOW and Avowed just aren't ambitious projects, if this is what you were expecting from Obsidian with virtually limitless budget(at least much higher than what they were used to pre-MS) good for you.

 

[FreeKaner]

Frankly I am surprised just how much reactivity the game has in terms of narrative so far, it has a lot of choices you make just in act 1 some of which immediately have consequences in act 1 and others later.

When you say narrative reactivity is that shifts in the dialogue and NPC reactions to you or changes to the actual plot/ world and the quests (either what quests are available to you or what options you have in those quests?) What you're saying sounds good but others have the opposite take and I'm trying to work out whether that difference is because people are taking past each other in terms of what they're describing or if it's a genuine difference in opinion.

Both, to give some spoilers:

Spoiler

If you free the smuggler in the prologue, she will help you get a deal with smugglers without paying and make it easy to resolve that quest without fighting the smugglers. Similarly, if you let go of someone important in main quest in act 1 you get to have entirely different resolution to a side quest in act 2. There are also some choices that make another quest available that it isn't otherwise. There are a lot of minor reactions from dialogue to item placements, for example there is an unmarked scripted interaction where you can assist a guard searching a merchant's goods for anything smuggled and you can find grenades which you can let the guard know and which case you later find a note mentioning it even though it is such a minor thing

Mind you I haven't yet finished the game but overall I found that narrative is quite flexible in how you approach it and there are a lot of things that happen when you do.

 

[Falksi]

The state of these cope-filled cunts lol...

"Steam reviews say it's great...I don't care about anyone else's reviews..."

 

[FreeKaner]

All the stuff like killing npcs and thievery are things that exist in Pillars and nobody cares. It's just bad faith nonsense arguments or an addiction to empty cynicism.

Not every game has to have high level of world simulation, see Dragon's Dogma or Dark Souls. Actually in BG3 too most NPCs stay in place without moving and there isn't even a night time.

Importance of such features aren't 1 to 1 for a first person rpg vs isometric one. I personally want simulation first and foremost from an ambitios RPG but ambition doesn't necessarily mean simulation; for example CP77 is very light on simulation mechanics but heavy on most other features. Games like TOW and Avowed just aren't ambitious projects, if this is what you were expecting from Obsidian with virtually limitless budget(at least much higher than what they were used to pre-MS) good for you.

I don't get what is your point here, is ambitious just having high level of simulation detail in an open-world rpg? I went into this game expecting Dragon's Dogma, and I got something with way more narrative flexibility, much more fun exploration and just beautiful visuals. Maybe Bethesda will do all that stuff in Elder Scrolls 6 but it is definitely not what I am looking for here. I wasn't looking for GTA:Cyberpunk with Cyberpunk 2077 either by the way I didn't even play GTA5.

This game is safe in that its scope is small, which probably makes their break even much fewer sales since they already talked about making DLCs and even a sequel. It isn't safe because it isn't a game on Bethesda formula completely but rather it's safe because it's small. Could it be better game if they didn't limit the the scope so much and it was a 100-hour game instead of 40? Perhaps, especially because I would enjoy bigger hubs with more dialogue-centric quests and more enemy variety but certainly if it was 100 hours of the same thing the same criticisms would apply regarding simulationism and it wouldn't be less ambitious for it.

Honestly what's point of being disappointed in a game because it isn't another game? Should I talk about how BG3 is a bad game because it doesn't have NPC routines? It's not quite first person but frankly calling it isometric when most of the time you are playing the game 3rd person over the shoulder camera and interacting with the world from that point of view except in combat is frankly a stretch.

One thing that's a little disappointing to me is that they didn't try to do the same as PoE1/PoE2 and make it possible to kill NPCs and complete the critical path but again that won them no praises in PoE1/PoE2 anyway so I can also see why they might have though it is a lot of work for no gain when they are trying to limit costs to see how a first person action game in Pillars world would do. That also with caveat this game seems to have a lot of reactivity including ability to get bespoke endings for getting yourself killed.

 

[Quillon]

I don't get what is your point here, is ambitious just having high level of simulation detail in an open-world rpg?

Already explained it.

Honestly what's point of being disappointed in a game because it isn't another game?

I'm disappointed in Obsidian for making such a game when they had every means to attempt at a much bigger/better/cutting edge/ambitios etc one.

One thing that's a little disappointing to me is that they didn't try to do the same as PoE1/PoE2 and make it possible to kill NPCs and complete the critical path but again that won them no praises in PoE1/PoE2

But it did win them a lot of praises in NV(see: not 1 to 1). Sawya is very satisfied whenever he mentions that player who played NV like two-face, flipping a coin to decide any NPCs fate.

I personally always do a murder spree run at some point if the games allow it.

 

[luj1]

Obsidian team assigned to make console slop sequel to game they don't care about.

It's not just that they don't care, they legit can't make a good game

It's not that they can't, they won't even try. Fergie's saying "we are not good technically, we're good at making content"; latter isn't even true anymore but I just don't understand how can he/Obs settle for the former, just hire more & more talented programmers ffs.

I don't think programmers are the problem

 

[Sibelius]

A more professional review is online

Other than having no redeeming qualities, pretty good game overall!

watched this -recommended by YT- vid after that:



pretty much covers everything

I was going to post this video last night as well. This guy is as fair and balanced as they come and everything he says is true. The bit about Obsidian mandating slow and steady and actually encouraging avergae was really eye opening, hadn't heard that before. The point about the art style being completely at odds with the initial reveal trailer being one of the main reasons for the failure is absolutely spot on. The art direction is hideous, that combined with the DEI marketing fail killed this game more than the lack of reactivity or bad writing. Well that and this....

https://developer.microsoft.com/en-...nclusion-actions/design-for-global-customers/

Look at these Product Inclusion Action: Designing for the Global Customer guidelines. If you are forced make a game for everyone, it more often than not appeals to no one.

 

[FreeKaner]

I'm disappointed in Obsidian for making such a game when they had every means to attempt at a much bigger/better/cutting edge/ambitios etc one.

They apparently first pitched as a multi-player game that would be something akin to Destiny and Skyrim together. Now that's an ambitious project in scope but even if they somehow pulled it off perfectly that would not be a game I would play. I don't like Destiny, RDR2 or GTA so just having the Microsoft funds doesn't mean it is a good idea.

Now I hope this game is successful enough that they make another isometric RPG. Yet I won't decry this game for not being Skyrim when it has a lot more RPG elements and reactivity in narrative just because you can't get caught stealing (and NPCs do sometimes react to you taking their stuff with voice lines, like taking the dagger on floor from a murder scene, going to behind a shop's counter or looting a companion's bag before you recruit them. At that stage patching it so that guards turn hostile would not even be complicated but again they likely didn't want to do that without giving you ability to finish critical path.

 

[v1c70r14]

Except Avowed is great technically, it looks good

 

[DY050503]

The art direction of the finished game is far from its original trailer. And the new director seems not knowing how to make a world attractive though they have graphics improved by ue5 engine. Kind of waste the opportunity. At the moment the new non rpg games from this studio are better than their original rpg titles.

 

[Maldoror]

The game could be great and I would still have lost 90% of my interest in it the moment that I learned that it is essential that companions follow you.
That is essentially my litmus test for whether I will enjoy a WRPG or not. It's the reason I despise the Owlcat Pathfinder games - despite being able to eventually dismiss them, they made companions mandatory during the tutorials.

 

[Quillon]

The bit about Obsidian mandating slow and steady and actually encouraging avergae was really eye opening

Obsidian says it won't chase huge profits or grow aggressively, and that's how it's going to last 100 years in the RPG business: 'Are we serious? Yes'​

By Tyler Wilde
published 5 hours ago

The Avowed studio expects each game to be a "mild success" and budgets accordingly, say company leaders who want it to reach its 100th birthday.

In a talk at this week's D.I.C.E. Summit, an industry conference whose theme this year is sustainability, Obsidian Entertainment VP of operations Marcus Morgan and VP of development Justin Britch said they want the Fallout: New Vegas, Pillars of Eternity, and most recently Avowed studio to make it to its 100th birthday. Obsidian is 22 years old now, so that's 78 to go, and the VPs think it can get there by staying lean, holding onto talent, setting realistic sales expectations, and not going all-in on delivering huge profits.

Obsidian's 100-year plan isn't—and I hope this isn't too disappointing—a decade-by-decade breakdown of future projects that ends somewhere around Fallout: Old Vegas (I'm assuming that pre-apocalyptic settings are popular in 2103). It's more of a thought exercise, but Morgan and Britch said that they genuinely want Obsidian to continue beyond their lifespans. "Are we serious? … Yes," said Morgan. And why not? Nintendo was founded in 1889.

One of the pillars of the plan is staying "lean and invested," meaning small enough that none of Obsidian's employees feel like a cog in a machine. Morgan and Britch said that in recent years they'd been considering opening multiple international offices, but in the end decided to partner with existing studios rather than risk weakening Obsidian's culture by getting too big.

Leanness can also refer to Obsidian's games: It doesn't aim for unprecedented scale or the most advanced graphics, and before it greenlights a game, Britch says the studio spends a lot of time determining how much to invest in the project with the assumption that it will be a "mild success," not a smash hit.

They didn't call out any examples themselves, but the duo was clearly setting themselves apart from companies that pour enormous budgets into long and turbulent development cycles and then announce that the resulting game underperformed because it didn't immediately sell tens of millions of copies. Dragon Age: The Veilguard is the most recent high-profile example of an expensive RPG that didn't meet its owner's sales expectations, and EA cut jobs at BioWare after the miss.

(Big bets do sometimes pay off, though: Baldur's Gate 3 comes to mind as a recent example, though I can't say exactly how its scale and budget compares to Avowed's, and Cyberpunk 2077's launch troubles notwithstanding, CD Projekt continues to make a case for RPGs that take a long time and a lot of money to make.)

Obsidian has also laid off staff at times in the past, and has been in a precarious position at least once, but has appeared stable since Microsoft acquired it in 2018. That hasn't been the case for Microsoft's more recent acquisitions, which have been hammered with layoffs and studio closures from their new Xbox bosses.

The difference there can't be attributed to some secret sauce of Obsidian's—it's a much smaller company than Activision Blizzard or Bethesda, which Microsoft clearly had different plans for—but the studio's strong showing at a time when much of the industry seems to be reenacting Homer's jump over Springfield Gorge does lend credibility to the idea that Obsidian has sustainability ideas worth listening to.

Obsidian has released three games in the 2020s so far: survival game Grounded (we reviewed it positively), narrative adventure game Pentiment (we reviewed it positively), and now Avowed (another good one). Some studios don't even announce a new game in that amount of time.

Among other things not mentioned here, Morgan and Britch's plan includes building institutional knowledge by aiming for "the lowest turnover rate in the industry" and continuing to release the kinds of games they're known for (player freedom, worldbuilding, all of that) at a consistent pace, "not rushed, but often."

Britch described his vision for Obsidian as a 1973 VW bus with a trunk full of tools and a manual that's being continuously annotated, and summed up the plan by saying that Obsidian is more or less going to keep doing what it's been doing, "not trying to grow aggressively, expand our team size, or make super profitable games." It's aiming for somewhat profitable games, then, made well and at a consistent pace.

Prudent, but it didn't save Arkane Austin, also a mid-sized studio, from getting shuttered.