Torment Torment: Tides of Numenera Beta Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Junmarko]

Also, I bet he didn't fight anything, but now since it's cool and progressive to be against this stuff and to be alone against everybody it's no big deal if you rewrite your story a little bit, am I right?

I don't believe him either. His own Planescape modules had plenty of that stuff:

 

[ga♥]

Also, I bet he didn't fight anything, but now since it's cool and progressive to be against this stuff and to be alone against everybody it's no big deal if you rewrite your story a little bit, am I right?

I don't believe him either. His own Planescape modules had plenty of that stuff:

Why noone wants to pay the fee to license planescape, how much could it cost

Instead we get idiotic aumanas and guys with fire skulls and other edgy sheet

 

[Infinitron]

Achievements are up: http://steamcommunity.com/stats/272270/achievements (spoiler warning)

 

[FeelTheRads]

What's old about that, inshillitron? That Planescape is superior to Numenera which itself is superior to boring retarded crap like PoE?

 

[Infinitron]

What's old about that, inshillitron? That Planescape is superior to Numenera which itself is superior to boring retarded crap like PoE?

No, that the Planescape setting doesn't exist anymore. It's gone, old man

 

[FeelTheRads]

Hurr durr. I believe it was at about the time the Kickstarter for this was going that Wizards said that they can still license it.

 

[Stainless Veteran]

Hurr durr. I believe it was at about the time the Kickstarter for this was going that Wizards said that they can still license it.

Yep.

Planescape license up for grabs, says Wizards of the Coast

Monday, 11 February 2013 22:57 GMT By Brenna Hillier

Wizards of the Coast has said it would “absolutely consider” licensing its Planescape Dungeons & Dragons setting, despite suggestions from InXile that the publisher had shut down negotiations.

“We would absolutely consider licensing out Planescape, or any of our other great D&D IPs, if we were approached with a proposal. We often get proposals and are actively pursuing opportunities to make great digital D&D experiences,” Wizards of the Coast told Eurogamer.

“Brian [Fargo] suggested Baldur’s Gate 3 had proven difficult in the past before we regained our digital rights, so, that probably didn’t help the situation,” the unnamed representative added, somewhat mysteriously.

InXile’s Colin McComb, one of the lead designers of Planescape: Torment and an important part of the Torment: Tides of Numenera team, seemed a bit surprised by this version of the story.

“I’m certain that there was discussion on the subject directly but it sounds like there is some internal miscommunication there,” he said.

Torment: Tides of Numenera is a spiritual successor to Planescape: Torment, which was put together by Black Isle Studios. Many of its developers are now at InXile, and according to comments made both before and at the reveal of Torment: Tides of Numenera, the developer had attempted to secure the Planescape license and been turned away.

Sticking with the Torment part of the title, InXile settled on a new role-playing setting, Numenera, which was designed by one of the Planescape setting’s core designers, who will be working with InXile on the new game.

InXile doesn’t seem too worried about it; both McComb and original designer Chris Avellone had said in the past that they wanted to bring forth the spirirt of Planescape: Torment, but not necessarily make a direct sequel or even keep the same mechanics.

“Since we were already looking at Numenera as a potential setting, this made our decision easy,” McComb said of the apparent rejection from Wizards of the Coast.

“We’re genuinely excited about Numenera anyway – it’s a setting as different as Planescape was, one that breaks the mould of computer role-playing settings, and it’s got mechanics that are intuitive, easy, and deep. We’ve got a very cool story coming along as well.”

[src]

 

[Infinitron]

Not buying it. License to make Enhanced Edition DLC, Sword Coast Legends and games not actually set in oldschool Planescape but whatever it is they've done with the planes cosmology in D&D 5E.

 

[Turjan]

To shed some light on it, there was a point at which WotC (or whoever is calling the shots) switched gears with regard to former D&D versions. There was a period during 4e where they didn't want to have any products for older D&D versions on the market, as they perceived this as competition for the current line. This backfired, because it gave Pathfinder its breathing room. This policy changed at some recent point. Nowadays, they are even reprinting AD&D core books.

 

[Stainless Veteran]

Not buying it. License to make Enhanced Edition DLC, Sword Coast Legends and games not actually set in oldschool Planescape but whatever it is they've done with the planes cosmology in D&D 5E.

Yeah, because inExile and McComb showed themselves to be so trustworthy.
Regardless of the fact that WotC had or hadn't considered agreeing to licensing AD&D 2ed Planescape, I'd wager that somebody pitched Monte Cuck's Numanuma to inExile hard. It was probably either free to use (due to mutually beneficial publicity) or maybe had some other beneficial terms. So inExile could've very well never even approached WotC with a request for the license.

Oh, and 5th ed was released in 2014, IIRC, and the news article is from 2013.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Not buying it. License to make Enhanced Edition DLC, Sword Coast Legends and games not actually set in oldschool Planescape but whatever it is they've done with the planes cosmology in D&D 5E.

lol

Fuck off.
I'd trust more Obsiditard or inXile to ruin Planescape.

I'd wager that somebody pitched Monte Cuck's Numanuma to inExile hard.

I believe Colin said in his recent Twitch stream (while playing Torment) that he was the one?
But anyway, no matter what their current status is, both McComb and especially Monte Cook still have my respect for their work on Planescape. I masturbated several times reading the Guide To The Astral Plane, for example.

 

[Roguey]

McComb asked Wizards if they could license Planescape, they refused to talk to him.

 

[vortex]

McComb asked Wizards if they could license Planescape, they refused to talk to him.

Why, are they waiting for Bethesda, EA or some higher bidder ?

 

[Roguey]

Why, are they waiting for Bethesda, EA or some higher bidder ?

Maybe they didn't think they'd get enough money from it http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-discussion-thread.84849/page-97#post-4123606

 

[ga♥]

Achievements are up: http://steamcommunity.com/stats/272270/achievements (spoiler warning)

I'd wager that somebody pitched Monte Cuck's Numanuma to inExile hard.

I believe Colin said in his recent Twitch stream (while playing Torment) that he was the one?
But anyway, no matter what they're current status is, both McComb and especially Monte Cook still have my respect for their work on Planescape. I masturbated several times reading the Guide To The Astral Plane, for example.

Yes, he said he was playtesting the setting already, so personal relation surely did play a role in the choice.
I still imagine though that they tried to approach WotC first and then simply declined the idea from a financial point of view (much like Obsiddian with POE IIRC).

Anyway, this doesn't mean there couldn't be another game developer interested in the setting, I wasn't refering to TTON, actually, since I have 0 (zero) knowledge of the setting my naivety brings some optimism with it, mostly because it really can't be as bad as POE and "m'lady gods don't exist" *tips fedora* am I right?

On a side note all the planescape setting books were marvellous and I think it is a shame that such good material is left unused to make things like POE "godlike" which resemble something a teenager would think of.

 

[vortex]

If Planescape is open to licence from 11/02/2013 (date of that article), why hasn't anyone pick it up ? It's 2017.

 

[ga♥]

Why, are they waiting for Bethesda, EA or some higher bidder ?

Maybe they didn't think they'd get enough money from it http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-discussion-thread.84849/page-97#post-4123606

Interesting. I can't imagine the business reasonings behind this.
Maybe they don't want to help a possible competitor? Pretty much like Blizzard doesn't want to give Obsiddian rights for an Arcanum sequel?

 

[Stainless Veteran]

If Planescape is open to licence from 11/02/2013 (date of that article), why hasn't anyone pick it up ? It's 2017.

It's popular by itself, but in a very small niche. A larger niche of vaguely oldschool-like RPG "just like PST!" is potentially filled with T:ToN. So anyone who'd wanted to make their own project in PST would've been either competing with it - and the market isn't that big. Or needed to make a different type of game, something more popamolish, but still interesting for hardcore RPG enthusiasts and general population alike, something like Bloodlines or maybe Witcher. But making decent popamole costs even more money, and the setting, sadly, doesn't add to any appeal for the general population.

 

[Stainless Veteran]

Why, are they waiting for Bethesda, EA or some higher bidder ?

Maybe they didn't think they'd get enough money from it http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-discussion-thread.84849/page-97#post-4123606

You say it like it's some hard proof, with while it's just Fargo's words.
If it's beneficial for him to lie, I don't think Fargo has any problems with that. And it was beneficial, because why they haven't used Planescape setting and used Numanuma instead was one of the most common questions of TToN's kickstarter period.

 

[Roguey]

You say it like it's some hard proof, with while it's just Fargo's words.
If it's beneficial for him to lie, I don't think Fargo has any problems with that. And it was beneficial, because why they haven't used Planescape setting and used Numanuma instead was one of the most common questions of TToN's kickstarter period.

I don't see how that gains them anything more than using Planescape.

Activision refuses to sell/license Arcanum to Obsidian. They just want to own it and not do anything with it. Big companies are dumb.

 

[Infinitron]

Not sure if you trust him any more than Fargo, but Feargus Urquhart also wrote about how the D&D license had become inaccessible: http://www.polygon.com/2015/2/9/800...video-game-devs-thinks-that-tabletop-game-has

This article was published just days before Sword Coast Legends was announced, which made me think he was trying to tell us something.

 

[Roguey]

He also likens it to similar challenges in the video game space.

"Take Activision, they make games like Call of Duty and Destiny," he said. "They have these big tentpole things, it is very hard to then have another thing that is one one-hundredth of the magnitude of those."

What did he mean by this?

 

[Infinitron]

He also likens it to similar challenges in the video game space.

"Take Activision, they make games like Call of Duty and Destiny," he said. "They have these big tentpole things, it is very hard to then have another thing that is one one-hundredth of the magnitude of those."

What did he mean by this?

Magic: The Gathering

 

[Stainless Veteran]

You say it like it's some hard proof, with while it's just Fargo's words.
If it's beneficial for him to lie, I don't think Fargo has any problems with that. And it was beneficial, because why they haven't used Planescape setting and used Numanuma instead was one of the most common questions of TToN's kickstarter period.

I don't see how that gains them anything more than using Planescape.

Activision refuses to sell/license Arcanum to Obsidian. They just want to own it and not do anything with it. Big companies are dumb.

Yeah, Activision sure is dumb, no arguement here.

RPS: But to go back to my second question, what do those stories gain from being told on a computer rather than in a social group? Bloodlines is still such a beloved RPG, but does that fit with the ideas you’re talking about now? Can we expect more of the same?

Ericsson: On the subject of Bloodlines, one of the first things that happened when the news hit was that Activision called us and said, “can you tell us why this game is selling so well on Steam still?” And we say because it’s awesome, and because you’re the only modern day, proper, adult, gritty vampire game. Go figure.

But while WotC is dumb too, and God knows they've made their share of idiotic decisions, I just want to point out that Fargo wanted to show both himself and inExile as some kind of RPG underdogs, and shifting blame on publishers and big companies was his modus operandi. And as for "gains them more than using Planescape" - probably more money for them, I don't see how Monte Cook could've charged them much or demanded a big percentage from sales for using his untested and unproved setting.

 

[Fairfax]

Why, are they waiting for Bethesda, EA or some higher bidder ?

Maybe they didn't think they'd get enough money from it http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-discussion-thread.84849/page-97#post-4123606

I think it's more likely that they didn't want to license it to the guy who didn't pay their royalties the first time it was licensed. Colin must've mentioned the studio, so it probably applies to his inquiry as well.

Why, are they waiting for Bethesda, EA or some higher bidder ?

Maybe they didn't think they'd get enough money from it http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-discussion-thread.84849/page-97#post-4123606

You say it like it's some hard proof, with while it's just Fargo's words.
If it's beneficial for him to lie, I don't think Fargo has any problems with that. And it was beneficial, because why they haven't used Planescape setting and used Numanuma instead was one of the most common questions of TToN's kickstarter period.

Yeah, it was never popular even among D&D buffs. The sales were low enough that WOTC dropped it entirely right after buying TSR.