As I'm sure most or some of you know, Obsidian now has the rights to make Pathfinder video games, starting with an adaptation of the Pathfinder card game for tablets.
But I got to thinking about what other games they could make. My ideas are as follows, but I would like to know everyone else's thoughts on what future Pathfinder games you would like to see.
1.A Dragon Age or Skyrim-style RPG based in the Worldwound
2. A turn-based strategy RPG using the Pathfinder rules and using Rise of the Runelords as its story.
2. A turn-based strategy RPG using the Pathfinder rules and using Rise of the Runelords as its story.That one sounds interesting, though I feel we're probably in the minority for thinking so.
Why do you say that?
Not sure which I'd like better, a Dragon Age style game, or Skyrim one.
Would not be at all interested in an RTS Pathfinder game though. Especially not with Runelords as the story. Would have to be one of the more sandbox-y APs, like Kingmaker or Skull and Shackles.
Would not be at all interested in an RTS Pathfinder game though. Especially not with Runelords as the story. Would have to be one of the more sandbox-y APs, like Kingmaker or Skull and Shackles.
I didn't mean RTS I meant more like Disgaea or Final Fantasy Tactics with Pathfinder rules. Although an RTS would be sweet. Have Cheliax,Absalom,Andoran,etc. be factions and command their armies.
I think any Pathfinder game is going to have its own story, not draw from the APs (though some I'd love to play as a video game, like Carrion Crown).
I think a Dragon Age style game could work really well though. Dragon Age play similarly to KoTOR, which is very D&D/Pathfinder-y in play (from what I know of 3.5, many of the rules for progression, like when you get Feats are identical).
It allows for tactical, party based combat, without the (IMO) tedious micromanagement required for things like the Baldur's Gate games.
I think any Pathfinder game is going to have its own story, not draw from the APs (though some I'd love to play as a video game, like Carrion Crown).
I think a Dragon Age style game could work really well though. Dragon Age play similarly to KoTOR, which is very D&D/Pathfinder-y in play (from what I know of 3.5, many of the rules for progression, like when you get Feats are identical).
It allows for tactical, party based combat, without the (IMO) tedious micromanagement required for things like the Baldur's Gate games.
Yea I was thinking that DA style would be more drama, but the Skyrim style could have some visceral combat and some possible horror, cause you know, Babaus and Balors in your face.
I'd like it because I've DM'd it twice, though it died both times around book three. I just want to see it end, for nostalgia's sake. I think most people wouldn't like playing through it as a jrpg like Final Fantasy (if I'm understanding what you mean) because without a DM, you're not really interacting with the story. You're having the story happen to you, which gets rid of a lot of the fun of the AP. Like Rynjin said earlier, Kingmaker would probably be a better bet for the vast majority of people, and I think that's because with Kingmaker you'd actually get to make decisions that effect the game, even in computer format.2. A turn-based strategy RPG using the Pathfinder rules and using Rise of the Runelords as its story.That one sounds interesting, though I feel we're probably in the minority for thinking so.Why do you say that?
Like I meant like the gameplay of say Disgaea with Pathfinder rules and the interaction of some other RPGs.
I'd prefer the gameplay of Temple of Elemental Evil. All of the rules. But I think that is impossible because wizards hold the copyright to the 3.5 SRD.
The ToEE engine updated with the Pathfinder ruleset (and an actual plot) would be sweet.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
While I would ideally want turn based RPGs using the tabletop ruleset, I'd also be interested in a Kingmaker style turn based strategy along the lines of Civilization, but which also integrated heroes and turn based dungeon exploration. The kingdom building and mass combat rules should be more developed than what's been done for Pathfinder, hopefully.
Instead of setting it in the River Kingdoms, which would be too reminiscent of Kingmaker, setting it somewhere new would be fun, perhaps colonization of Arcadia.
Honestly I'd reskin Dynasty Warriors and start off there. Maybe try to bring in a little more customization but that's about it.
Obsidian? That's too bad.
I haven't been very impressed with their support for their games.
Obsidian? That's too bad.
I haven't been very impressed with their support for their games.
There are perhaps five houses in the country capable of doing a Pathfinder CRPG justice.
Obsidian is one of them.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Also, if a game is put out for a publisher, rather than directly by the developers, then the support for the game is often determined by the publisher - if they won't pay for it, they don't get it. Often the developer wants to support a game and their publisher won't let them.
Also, if a game is put out for a publisher, rather than directly by the developers, then the support for the game is often determined by the publisher - if they won't pay for it, they don't get it. Often the developer wants to support a game and their publisher won't let them.
This is why Obsidian has recently been going the Kickstarter route - they've been burned (rather infamously) by publisher demands and support in the past few years. I don't blame them for wanting to kick that model to the curb.
Anyone remember Eye of the Beholder? Imagine something similar but set on Golarion. Add some stuff to add roleplay elements and it could work as a jump off point. DLC to add more classes and races to shake things up.
Obsidian? That's too bad.
I haven't been very impressed with their support for their games.
There are perhaps five houses in the country capable of doing a Pathfinder CRPG justice.
Obsidian is one of them.
Oh? What five are those?
And you seem confused, this is a tablet card game not a CRPG.
It's something :D
No one can argue with that. That's for sure.
:)
Obsidian? That's too bad.
I haven't been very impressed with their support for their games.
There are perhaps five houses in the country capable of doing a Pathfinder CRPG justice.
Obsidian is one of them.
Oh? What five are those?
And you seem confused, this is a tablet card game not a CRPG.
The card game is just the first game they're making.
Obsidian? That's too bad.
I haven't been very impressed with their support for their games.
There are perhaps five houses in the country capable of doing a Pathfinder CRPG justice.
Obsidian is one of them.
Oh? What five are those?
And you seem confused, this is a tablet card game not a CRPG.
I'm not confused. A tablet CCG is their first Pathfinder project, but not their only Pathfinder project. Given Obsidian's history, it would be silly to think they're not giving serious treatment to a Pathfinder CRPG title. In fact, I'm kind of counting on it.
Other houses that I wager could produce a respectable Pathfinder CRPG: Bioware, inXile, CD Projekt, maaaaaybe Larian. I may be forgetting one or two.
First off Scott, Rynjin, and Kthulhu they are probably going to be busy doing their MMO, this card game, and that kickstarter game for a few years and then it will take time after that to make a CRPG... a lot can change in that amount of time.
Secondly Scott I hope you are right and that they have left behind the business model where they failed to give support for games (whoever is at fault); but they haven't yet been able to demonstrate that. Remember this isn't a huge software house and they are now working on at least three games, will they be willing to support titles after release even with limited manpower?
As for a CRPG:
So far Obsidian is known best for doing installments of other peoples games; it remains to be seen if they can handle one as complicated as a CRPG all on their own from scratch. I will give them credit for having some solid experience in the field but I still worry about support.
Bioware would have been the best choice for a Pathfinder CRPG, they are proven leaders in CRPGs.
InXile I am unfamiliar with their work. And they seem rather busy with Kickstarter stuff themselves.
CD Projekt basically did Witcher... You are right they could probably handle a Pathfinder CRPG well.
You don't sound very sure of Larian yourself. They did Divinity which I haven't played.
First off Scott, Rynjin, and Kthulhu they are probably going to be busy doing their MMO, this card game, and that kickstarter game for a few years and then it will take time after that to make a CRPG... a lot can change in that amount of time.
But Obsidian has nothing to do with the MMO or "that Kickstarter game".
Edit: It occurs to me you probably didn't mean the Pathfinder MMO. D'oh.
"That Kickstarter game" is kinda vague though. Is that Pillars of Eternity?
Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if they were done with all three projects by the end of next year.
Yeah Obsidian is starting their own MMO something with tanks and warfare I think, and yes Pillars of Eternity was their kickstarter.
Edit: And you are never really 'done' with an MMO unless you expect it to fail.
First off Scott, Rynjin, and Kthulhu they are probably going to be busy doing their MMO, this card game, and that kickstarter game for a few years and then it will take time after that to make a CRPG... a lot can change in that amount of time.
Their MMO is quite far along, and Pillars of Eternity ("that kicktarter game") is slated for release in a few months. Their team is more than capable of handling more than one project at a time.
Secondly Scott I hope you are right and that they have left behind the business model where they failed to give support for games (whoever is at fault); but they haven't yet been able to demonstrate that.
Woah, hold on. You can level plenty of criticism at Obsidian, but failing to give support? NWN2 and FO:NV both received huge amounts of post-release support, and those are probably their most significant titles to date.
Remember this isn't a huge software house and they are now working on at least three games, will they be willing to support titles after release even with limited manpower?
Obsidian is big enough to have multiple teams, I believe. Yes, they are working on three games. That's very manageable. Games require different levels of attention from different groups at different stages of the development process.
As for a CRPG:
So far Obsidian is known best for doing installments of other peoples games; it remains to be seen if they can handle one as complicated as a CRPG all on their own from scratch. I will give them credit for having some solid experience in the field but I still worry about support.
I'm not sure what you mean by "other peoples games". Obsidian is responsible for KotOR 2, NWN 2, FO:NV, South Park: Stick of Truth, and Alpha Protocol. This is a spectrum of RPGs with different levels of creative input (NWN 2 was an existing franchise with a new engine, FO:NV was an existing franchise with an existing engine, South Park was the first translation of the franchise into RPG form, and Alpha Protocol was an entirely original game).
Bioware would have been the best choice for a Pathfinder CRPG, they are proven leaders in CRPGs.
InXile I am unfamiliar with their work. And they seem rather busy with Kickstarter stuff themselves.
CD Projekt basically did Witcher... You are right they could probably handle a Pathfinder CRPG well.
You don't sound very sure of Larian yourself. They did Divinity which I haven't played.
I haven't played Divinity either, but I've heard very positive things about it from people who are picky about their CRPGs.
Bioware is obviously the strongest choice, but it simply isn't a good deal from Bioware's end - they own multiple juggernaut RPG franchises, and have no real reason to shackle themselves to someone else's world (Pathfinder) when they could simply be trading on the wild popularity of their own settings (the exception, of course, being when the other guys' world is even more wildly popular, like Star Wars).
I also should have noted originally that CD Projekt doesn't really qualify as one of my five, since they're not based in the States.
|
Why are you arbitrarily limiting your picks to American software companies. There's plenty of software companies in other countries that could make great Golarion's games (a more accurate description, given that they can't really make games using the Pathfinder system).
For example, the developers of all the games I listed above as possible inspirations for a Golarion action/adventure game. (Although obviously, a Nintendo-developed game would be for a Nintendo platform instead of PC.)
Also, it should be noted that Obsidian is made up of a bunch of black isle guys. They worked on Planescape: Torment, Fallout (Which means working on New Vegas was making a game in their series), Icewind Dale, and some others. They know what they are doing. They have some fantastic veteran designers.
And even with absurd deadlines and shady support from publishers, they make great games. New Vegas was great. KotOR II was (mostly) great. Neverwinter Nights 2 was great. I fully support Obsidian. You should to.
Why are you arbitrarily limiting your picks to American software companies.
CD Projekt is Polish and Larian is Belgian so I'm not sure why you're asking this question.
Why are you arbitrarily limiting your picks to American software companies. There's plenty of software companies in other countries that could make great Golarion's games (a more accurate description, given that they can't really make games using the Pathfinder system).
I was naming companies that I felt could do a proper Pathfinder traditional-ish CRPG treatment. If we're discussing a different sort of game entirely, the picture changes.
Here's another way of looking at this: Paizo has a licensing arrangement with Obsidian. The question to ask is "Why Obsidian?" If you (general "you", not you specifically, Kthulhu) think the answer is, "Because they wanted to make a tablet CCG with existing art assets and mechanics that have already been built and balanced," you probably need to reexamine things.
I won't lie, that sounds terrible.
Let us look at NWN2 if you want a perfect example of my concern. I had my copy on the first day of it's release and still play it today. When I bought the game it was so badly made that it was literally unplayable on a system well above the minimum requirements. They showered us with daily patches it seems until they got it semi-playable and then revised upwards the minimum requirements to basically throw the lower end users under the buss. Fortunately for me my system still met the minimum requirements. BUT let me make this perfectly clear the game has ALWAYS been buggy and remains so today for the Original Campaign and Storm of Zehir. After a certain point they just said screw it we aren't going to keep trying to fix it and stopped all efforts to fix things. Can you play through? Sure but in the OC you need to get lucky when you get to one of the buggy spots and if your game locks up you need to go back a couple saves and play through again hoping to get lucky... rinse and repeat till you make it past one of the buggy spots. In SOZ there are just a couple side quests that can't be completed since they are broken and one part of the main quest that has a buggy spot that makes that mission go poorly. But it can be played all the way through without layered saves.
AND NWN2 was built on Bioware's engine with a few tweaks to mostly enhance the graphics. This is true of their earlier games I think; they use the existing engine and add stuff to it to "make it better". Their story work is excellent but until recently they haven't had to make their own engine for a game. Although there are team members in Obsidian that came from Black Isle they clearly have a different standard of development and support. I don't recall having ANY issues with my old Black Isle purchase. But maybe that is because I bought that title well past their release date? I was just picking up an old classic that people recommended I buy. Correct me if I am wrong but Dungeon Siege 3 was their first attempt at their own engine. And that received mixed critic reviews and poor user reviews. I did own that as well and I can understand a lot of the anger, it's game play simply didn't live up to the quality of Gas Powered Games original efforts. Though to be fair it wasn't buggy.
I won't lie, that sounds terrible.Why, exactly?
It would certainly have a far greater chance of having less bugs.
I hate how Dark Souls plays. Not the difficulty, just how it FEELS, and I believe they've made that their style at this point (since Bloodborne looks like it will play exactly the same way).
I can handle some bugs, even find enjoyment in many of them, but if the whole gameplay style is something I don't enjoy? I'll pass on it, obviously.
|
I hate how Dark Souls plays. Completely. One of the main reasons I didn't finish either installment.
Obsidian makes awesome games. The reasons they are buggy is because they are forced to publish them prematurely because the publisher rushes them.
Look at Alpha Protocol or Binary Domain. Awesome games. Purely awesome.
There is always a Pathfinder version of Never Winter Nights. The good thing about this is that players could go online and play their favorite AP or Module.
The same thing that is keeping NWN alive could be used to create custom Pathfinder modules.
Edit: didn't read Aranna's post:
FYI comparing NWN1 to NWN2, NWN1 is better and NWN2 has issues. It is harder to make modules with it than it is with NWN1