Kordanor
Wastelander
- Joined
- June 2, 2012
- Messages
- 4,699
The player numbers for this one still look dismal, and are trending down. I don't know what can necessarily be concluded from these, but they are about 12% (at their peak) of what Pathfinder is getting, and about 2% of the D:OS2 numbers near launch. I suspect that's not good news for a moderately-sized production.
Imho it' partially their own fault, and partially something unavoidable.
Their own fault:
-Released was rushed, tons of technical issues, bugs (mostly minor) and horrible imbalances
-They advertised the game in a sub-optimal way in terms of content and audience. I am pretty sure that the immense amount of puzzles is pissing lots of players off
-featuring the humor in the game was a bad idea. Not because the humor is so bad in the game, but because for lots of people this apparently moves the game closer to the previous Bards Tale action Adventure
Something which was somewhat unavoidable:
-They have a very "weird" hardcore player base, which is extremely against any modern game design. They dislike that you cannot create a full group of random characters right away, they think that grind is great, they are missing unlimited respawn and random encounters, dislike that you don't get HP on level ups, they dislike that you can save that freely and so on.
If you make a game catering towards this audience alone, then the game would probably not have any significant audience. However this audience has been quite vocal.
So no matter what they did, they either would have catered towards a tiny audience to begin with, or, and this is what they decided to do, go a bit more modern, and cause this group to write hateful reviews instead.
No other game I can think of had a problem in this clarity so far, as most of them had some kind of more modern members of the series.
Pillars for example is based on Baldurs Gate, and Baldurs Gate was already a very modern game to begin with. Actually Baldurs Gate is basically the game brought more modern game design into the public, like pre designed group members and so on.
Might and Magic on the other hand already had more modern games.
Wasteland 2 had Fallout to bridge the gap.
Wizardry 8 is also based on Wizardry 7, which was already somewhat of a progression compared to Wizardry 6. And Wizardry 6 is from 1990.
Ultima had Ultima 7,8,9 and Online. If they made a new non-online game it would probably be "easier" as well.
But creating a Bards Tale 4 is like creating, creating a Wizardry 5 after Wizardry 4 was released in '87, doing a Ultima 5 after Ultima 4 was released in '85, or creating a Might and Magic 2 after M&M 1 was released in '86.
Do you really want to go that far back just to say that you stay true to the roots? I don't think so.
So now they created an technically bad game with bad balancing, with rather unexpected features (massive amount of riddles), and they have some people in their hardcore audience who strongly dislike any new game design elements.
They get tons of shitty reviews, which again means that less people will buy it to begin with, and therefore it's rather clear that the userbase isn't really growing much and the number of active players is imploding.
And just for the record: I still like the game nevertheless. But it's obvious that it has significant flaws, which might or might not affect you.
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2012
- Messages
- 4,699