DeepOcean
Arcane
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2012
- Messages
- 7,405
I haven't played any Larian game yet. Will buy Original Sin once it is on sale because i'm a bum. However, best i can tell it seems people liked the original Divinities not because they were particularly good, but because they seemed to be made by people who cared or had good intentions, but simply didn't have the talent or means necessary to make a great game. Apparently, now they do, so those good intentions eventually paid off, and everybody is congratulating Larian for their commitment through out the years, even after so many mediocre efforts.
Would this be correct?
I dunno if I agree with you. After I played the original Divinities, I searched on the internet who were those Larian guys that make so great but unpolished games. I didn't even know who the hell were them, it was the qualities in the games that called my attention. I really don't care if developers are well intentioned, if they produce crap, they still made crap and no amount of good will will change that. The original Divinities had big flaws but big qualities as well, they were far from being mediocre, they were ambitious games. One thing is to make the conscious decision to make mediocre games and release polished turds that don't inspire or offend (go for Bioware, Blizzard and Bethesda for true mediocrity.), another thing, is to try to make ambitious games and kinda fail at it (The Divinites games even having serious flaws, are still really enjoyable games).
The key difference always had been:
While I played Skyrim I always tought "This could be so much better." , while I played a Larian game it was always "This could be so much more polished." I think people are more tolerant with developers that try to achieve even if they not always manage to do so than with developers that cynically call their mediocrity "streamlining", "modern gamming design", "acessibility" to sound as something positive.