RPGWatch - GOTY Awards 2018 - Most Promising RPG

Originally Posted by joxer
#1 is no surprise. But I'm absolutely confused with #2 and #3.
Seriously?
And also Greedfall at #10 (note that I didn't vote for it as there weren't 4 choices to make).

Honestly if one of those two runner-ups was Anthem or Destiny 3 I could still somehow understand it, but these…

Keep in mind that apart from you no one actually thinks WL3 will be multiplayer focused. We expect a game that's at least as good ss WL2 was, that we can play without the interference of other people. I hate other people ruining my games…

Realms Beyond is hardly a surprise either? Turn based DnD, party based, massive? What's not to like?

List looks pretty good to me. I'd also put Encased in the top 5 and Disco Elysium in 5-10. Two worlds III that high is the biggest surprise to me.

I know it's a lame reason and even though I know it's lame I can't help myself. I'm less interested in Disco Elysium since the name change. No Truce With The Furies forever!

Originally Posted by xenocide
List looks pretty good to me. I'd also put Encased in the top 5 and Disco Elysium in 5-10. Two worlds III that high is the biggest surprise to me.

I know it's a lame reason and even though I know it's lame I can't help myself. I'm less interested in Disco Elysium since the name change. No Truce With The Furies forever!

Yeah, what was the reason for the name change? I have a much harder time being excited about a game with "Disco" in the title…

Originally Posted by Carnifex
I think for now, Wasteland three has earned its rather high position because of the success of the prior iteration, I can only hope that the multi-player additions don't take away too much from the solo playing experience.

My hope is W3 will build on what was good in W2 and knock it out of the park.

Originally Posted by xenocide
I know it's a lame reason and even though I know it's lame I can't help myself. I'm less interested in Disco Elysium since the name change. No Truce With The Furies forever!

No Truce with the Furies is a such a better title…by a long shot.

Originally Posted by Hastar
New Battle Brothers DLC announced today, Warriors of the North.

Thanks for the heads up. Guess I'm putting off my next game a bit longer.

Agreed, I'll hold off a while longer before considering another foray with my Battle Brothers. I'm going to let all the content land and settle first.

Originally Posted by purpleblob
Wasteland 3 ahead of Realms Beyond, that surprised me but I guess not everyone is fantasy party based RPG fan like me

Black Geyser ahead of Druidstone really surprised me considering there were hardly any news/updates from Geyser team whereas Druidstone is to be released early this year.

Wasteland 3 is party based!

I think I voted for Wasteland 3, Druidstone and Realms Beyond in that order.

Originally Posted by Carnifex
I think for now, Wasteland three has earned its rather high position because of the success of the prior iteration, I can only hope that the multi-player additions don't take away too much from the solo playing experience.

Name one time multiplayer additions took anything away from anything?

Infinity Engine games had multiplayer. I think not having multiplayer took a lot away from Pathfinder, POE1 and 2, etc.

Originally Posted by joxer
#1 is no surprise. But I'm absolutely confused with #2 and #3.
Seriously?
And also Greedfall at #10 (note that I didn't vote for it as there weren't 4 choices to make).

Honestly if one of those two runner-ups was Anthem or Destiny 3 I could still somehow understand it, but these…

Don't think about it too hard; you might hurt yourself!

Originally Posted by SirJames
Wasteland 3 is party based!

I think I voted for Wasteland 3, Druidstone and Realms Beyond in that order.

*Fantasy* party based..

I voted Realms Beyond, Druidstone then Black Geyser.

Infinity Engine games had multiplayer. I think not having multiplayer took a lot away from Pathfinder, POE1 and 2, etc.

I think Pathfinder is better as a single player. I hate playing tactical RTwP games with others, much prefer TB for multiplayer.

Originally Posted by Farflame
I agree. Two Worlds III is pure nonsense imho, that game is not even in production.
Black Geyser could also slip into 2020.


I would put it in TOP 5.

But guys…. where is Encased???

I cant believe its not in the list. If Black Geyser is there - which is nice, but also surprising because it was doubted and criticized by some fans - why not Encased? The game is criminally "underrated".

EDIT: I could also mention Disco Elysium…

Just a few simple replies.

1. Has it been verified that Two Worlds III is not in production? As I remember an article a few months back that claimed it was in development. Just asking for any links.

2. I also have a feeling Black Geyser could slip into 2020.Lack of updates don't help.

3. I'm looking forward to Encased and the developer gives constant updates on the kickstarter page. It just came down to this game of Greedfall. I chose the latter.

4. Same as above with Disco Elysium I think the game looks promising with it's take on stats and choice & consequences. Still I chose Greedfall as I love Spider's RPGs.

Originally Posted by purpleblob
*Fantasy* party based..

I voted Realms Beyond, Druidstone then Black Geyser.

Realms Beyond is also another game that I backed. I have some worries but it's nothing of importance just little things. Like no voice overs or main NPC's. Still looks promising.

As for Kingmaker I'm warming up to the game finally. Mostly due to faster load times and the various bug-fixes. So allow me to say sorry for the other threads.

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
As for Kingmaker I'm warming up to the game finally. Mostly due to faster load times and the various bug-fixes. So allow me to say sorry for the other threads.

Glad to hear you are enjoying it more Yes, I think most of the issues are patched out with 1.2, even the end game encounters are less frustrating (although still not perfect).

Originally Posted by SirJames
Name one time multiplayer additions took anything away from anything?

Everytime.
Ressources spent on multiplayer features could have been used for more or better singleplayer features.

(Of course it's a little bit more complicated because multiplayer features could cause more revenues than cost which in turn could be used for additional singleplayer features.)

Originally Posted by SirJames
Name one time multiplayer additions took anything away from anything?

Here's a more specific example also. Divinity original sin 1 for me was absolutely worse because of co-op features. Overall it was a great game that I really enjoyed. But the worst part of the game was the dumb interaction between the two main characters that I had to control both of myself in single player. Game world control of both was fine. But when they started taking to each other it was bad. Didn't ruin the game but definitely made it worse.

There are so many games coming out these days. That said, of the games on that list - I'm definitely most interested in CP2077.

But that's mostly about its potential, and not because I'm certain or particularly confident CDPR have learned much from TW3.

But it wouldn't take that much to implement actually interesting gameplay based on the footage I've seen - and I'm holding out hope that they've done that.

I mean, it's really about the finer points, like combat balance, gear, progression and stuff like that.

Technically and visually - the game is clearly going to be very appealing. It's only the long-term gameplay I'm worried about.

Originally Posted by purpleblob
I think Pathfinder is better as a single player. I hate playing tactical RTwP games with others, much prefer TB for multiplayer.

Is xp split between the party in such a way that if you play just a single character they get all the xp and level up faster?

Has anyone done a single character run?

Originally Posted by Morrandir
Everytime.
Ressources spent on multiplayer features could have been used for more or better singleplayer features.

(Of course it's a little bit more complicated because multiplayer features could cause more revenues than cost which in turn could be used for additional singleplayer features.)

Yeah, it really doesn't cost much to have a network code guy doing his job. Could easily be worth it. All the most popular games on Steam have multiplayer.

Originally Posted by xenocide
Here's a more specific example also. Divinity original sin 1 for me was absolutely worse because of co-op features. Overall it was a great game that I really enjoyed. But the worst part of the game was the dumb interaction between the two main characters that I had to control both of myself in single player. Game world control of both was fine. But when they started taking to each other it was bad. Didn't ruin the game but definitely made it worse.

Yeah, that was an interesting and ambitious feature that didn't work that well. Even for multiplayer. Especially with the paper, scissors, stone mini-game being the ultimate decider. I don't see it as a multiplayer feature, though; It was a dialogue feature.

Originally Posted by SirJames
Is xp split between the party in such a way that if you play just a single character they get all the xp and level up faster?

Has anyone done a single character run?

You can enable an option that distributes XP according to the amount of party members, yes.

I'm sure someone, somewhere, has done it with a single character.

Yeah, it really doesn't cost much to have a network code guy doing his job. Could easily be worth it. All the most popular games on Steam have multiplayer.

Sounds like you really know what you're talking about *cough*

That said, I agree. Almost all games are better with friends.

Originally Posted by Darth Tagnan
Sounds like you really know what you're talking about *cough*

I detect a hint of sarcasm. Care to elaborate?

Originally Posted by SirJames
I detect a hint of sarcasm. Care to elaborate?

Why don't you elaborate on how you calculate the cost of implementing multiplayer using a "network guy" doing his job?

I mean, if we pretend that the game design doesn't matter in that equation

I can't wait for your googled response.

Originally Posted by Darth Tagnan
But that's mostly about its potential, and not because I'm certain or particularly confident CDPR have learned much from TW3.

Yeah, I also wonder about what they learned from the feedback on TW3. Will there be some incentive to explore beyond the story /quests? Will there be more interesting customization and development of your characters skills or gear?
There's some promising hints at the latter, but I'm not sure whether they'll be able to improve on the exploration part…

Oh, and please no "reset game to pre-ending state" after finishing the game. That was lazy.

Originally Posted by Cacheperl
Yeah, I also wonder about what they learned from the feedback on TW3. Will there be some incentive to explore beyond the story /quests? Will there be more interesting customization and development of your characters skills or gear?
There's some promising hints at the latter, but I'm not sure whether they'll be able to improve on the exploration part…

My primary concern is that there wasn't too much feedback like that. I mean, it seems all the critics and vocal consumers were busy ignoring glaring flaws and awarding it 10/10 almost across the board.

It's not that I mind it being so overrated - but it's pissing me off in terms of their future designs, because I fear they don't understand how weak the W3 gameplay mechanics actually were.

Oh, and please no "reset game to pre-ending state" after finishing the game. That was lazy.

Do you mean in New Game+?