Originally Posted by greywolf00
Definitely truth to that. For every great indie game out there, there's several bad ones. I'm really looking forward to AoD, the group at least appears to have a ton of passion for what they're doing and that always shows up in the final product. Interviews with BioWare indicate they have far more freedom to try new things under EA, I'm really just not a fan of most of what they've tried.
For me, evolution is kind of a toss up. I'm a big fan of "If it's not broke don't fix it" but there does have to be some small degree of forward progress/polishing. BG 2 is great, but I would expect a bit more in a remake (BG EE's additions weren't enough to justify the price to me for example). A lot of RPGs seem to be moving more towards adding Action elements (Kingdoms of Amalur, DA 2, Witcher) over the iso RTwP/TB RPGs of old and it's not an evolution I personally enjoy. I think this is publisher influence, more people interested in action, which makes it easier to recoup the investment & make profit. IMO, as the Mass Effect series went on you could see a heavier influence of action/shooting and it sometimes felt like the RPG side took a back seat. Most of the systems I enjoy are on KS instead of coming from publishers these days.
Star Citizen is also a prime example of a project with a ton of financial backing compared to the normal KS game. When coupled with their obvious passion for the project, I think feature creep will be far less of an issue for them than other projects. With so much more money to work with than something like SR:R, I'd expect scope/evolution to be bigger/more ambitious.