Development Info Greedfall II: The Dying World coming to Early Access on September 24th

[thesheeep]

You're not playing as the same character, so I don't see the issue if the story of the prequel's protagonist doesn't end up retroactively impacting that of the original game's PC. Not every story has to be world changing after all. A story about personal triumph can be satisfactory from both the protagonist's and the player's perspective even if it ultimately doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things. It's a self-defeating outlook to find value solely in a world changing narrative (not that such a plot can't be enjoyable, mind you) since time ultimately serves as the great equalizer of all personal stories in that regard. Time invalidates all personal achievements, only difference being on how long it takes in a given case. Doesn't mean that we should adopt a nihilistic attitude and say that nothing matters if it doesn't have world historic significance tho, it matters to us in the moment.

It's quite simple:
I have no interest in historical re-enactment.

The current point of time of a story is the latest that the story has reached - that happened in Greedfall 1, in this case.
I am curious about how that story continues and what choices I'm given to influence that.
What happened before is of no consequence to me, barely of interest.

PLAYING what happened before won't get me any closer to knowing how the story continues, either.
This isn't just a gaming thing, mind you, I have never cared in the slightest about prequels in any medium, and never will.
There is nothing in prequels of value to me. It could be the best prequel ever, I still wouldn't care - at least not about the story.

Which makes this entire thing just a huge wasted opportunity to me, and clearly I'm not the only one.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

It's quite simple:
I have no interest in historical re-enactment.

The current point of time of a story is the latest that the story has reached - that happened in Greedfall 1, in this case.
I am curious about how that story continues.

What happened before is of no consequence to me, barely of interest.
PLAYING what happened before won't get me any closer to knowing how the story continues, either.
There is nothing in prequels of value to me.
This isn't just a gaming thing, mind you, I have never cared in the slightest about prequels in any medium, and never will.

But is it the same story though or just a different story (with some common narrative threads admittedly) within the same universe? And even if you only care about the original story, a prequel could still add to that insofar as it expands upon the lore.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Which makes this entire thing just a huge wasted opportunity to me, and clearly I'm not the only one.

That I can understand and I'd probably feel the same if the original's story was the main appeal of the game for me. In my case, I just like the setting hence I'll just treat the prequel as its own thing.

 

[thesheeep]

But is it the same story though or just a different story (with some common narrative threads admittedly) within the same universe?

In this case? Clearly the same story, surrounding the same major events and even the very same location (which is only a small part of a much bigger world).
It really is just a "how it all started" AFTER you already had the "how it all ended".

And even if you only care about the original story, a prequel could still add to that insofar as it expands upon the lore.

It could, but again, not here.
I honestly do not believe this prequel will add anything even of interest to that particular series' storyline that the first game didn't already touch on sufficiently.
But even if it did, why make that the premise of the sequel? Instead of via a DLC or a prequel-sequel (starts before the first game, but actually advances past it, usually done with some time jump) or just... not at all.

Sequels are generally for people who enjoyed the previous entry. All of those would likely want to know how the story and the universe itself continues. Only a part would care enough to want to know about something that happened beforehand.
It seems such a bizarre idea to me from a business perspective as well.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

But is it the same story though or just a different story (with some common narrative threads admittedly) within the same universe?

In this case? Clearly the same story, surrounding the same major events and even the very same location (which is only a small part of a much bigger world).
It really is just a "how it all started" AFTER you already had the "how it all ended".

I mean, that's more of the metaplot of the setting within a limited timeframe. Story itself is about the protagonist and it can either emphasize the metaplot by putting the protagonist at the front and center of it or not. Unsurprisingly, most games tend to go that route since high stake plots are both easier to market and to write compared to a more limited and personal story.

It could, but again, not here.
I honestly do not believe this prequel will add anything even of interest to that particular series' storyline that the first game didn't already touch on sufficiently.
But even if it did, why make that the premise of the sequel? Instead of via a DLC or a prequel-sequel (starts before the first game, but actually advances past it, usually done with some time jump) or just... not at all.

Sequels are generally for people who enjoyed the previous entry. All of those would likely want to know how the story and the universe itself continues. Only a part would care enough to want to know about something that happened beforehand.
It seems such a bizarre idea to me from a business perspective as well.

I don't necessarily disagree with you. I just think that a prequel is as legitimate of an endeavor as any other for the devs, not that I would have minded if we had gotten a direct sequel instead. Since we've gotten a prequel instead though, I just think that you're robbing yourself of the potential of fully enjoying it for what it is (assuming that it will turn out to be a good story, naturally) when you frame it as 'something that happened beforehand' rather than as its own thing set within its own timeframe that just happens to be not that long before the timeframe of the previous entry in the series. Sure, the issue of the plague can't be resolved prior to the events of the first game, but it's not like the circumstances of that (which have already been revealed in the original game) are the only possible narrative hooks for a story set in Greedfall's world during that period. And since this prequel takes place in the old world, there's plenty of stuff that it can do in terms of story and branching without contradicting the world state that we've already been presented in the first game.

 

[thesheeep]

I just think that you're robbing yourself of the potential of fully enjoying it for what it is (assuming that it will turn out to be a good story, naturally) when you frame it as 'something that happened beforehand'

My man, I have 180 titles on my wishlist and a good dozen or so bought that I haven't even played yet (I tend to bulk buy during sales).
I am not robbing myself, I am glad for any filter I can apply to reduce the number of games that I actually want to play