It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
The writing on display in the "Clan Reveal" videos has me a bit worried.

"Beauty can be lethal." "This city is rotten." "Knowledge is power." This is hackneyed writing. Perhaps I'm being overly harsh on an attempt to reduce the vampire clans to a two-minute elevator pitch, but it does make me wonder about the writing in the rest of the game. The White Wolf games have always tried to sell themselves on a sense of immersion and the importance of characters and their motivations, and I'm sure a game seeking the kind of scope "Bloodlines 2" aspires to has to be the work of a significant number of writers in order to fill out a game of some length with divergent player character options and plot opportunities.

...But it doesn't take all that much eye-rolling dialogue to dispel that immersion. One might get away with it for a side-quest or two, but if it's buried in the roots of the thing, people will notice. Almost better to have flaws in the powers or bugs in the battle system than significantly sub-par writing.

...Are there reasons for optimism that I'm missing? Because, frankly, I'm not finding the pedigree of someone like Mitsoda sufficient. The Internet is full of stories of people once-revered in the industry who crowdfunded games that were absolutely terrible.
Post edited December 21, 2019 by WarlockOne
avatar
WarlockOne: The writing on display in the "Clan Reveal" videos has me a bit worried.

"Beauty can be lethal." "This city is rotten." "Knowledge is power." This is hackneyed writing. Perhaps I'm being overly harsh on an attempt to reduce the vampire clans to a two-minute elevator pitch, but it does make me wonder about the writing in the rest of the game. The White Wolf games have always tried to sell themselves on a sense of immersion and the importance of characters and their motivations, and I'm sure a game seeking the kind of scope "Bloodlines 2" aspires two has to be the work of a significant number of writers in order to fill out a game of some length with divergent player character options and plot opportunities.

...But it doesn't take all that much eye-rolling dialogue to dispel that immersion. One might get away with it for a side-quest or two, but if it's buried in the roots of the thing, people will notice. Almost better to have flaws in the powers or bugs in the battle system than significantly sub-par writing.

...Are there reasons for optimism that I'm missing? Because, frankly, I'm not finding the pedigree of someone like Mitsoda sufficient. The Internet is full of stories of people once-revered in the industry who crowdfunded games that were absolutely terrible.
I really, truly hope your pessimism is misplaced; however I cannot argue that we have indeed witnessed quite a number of once-great studios and/or individuals churn out something far less than expected. Wasteland 2, Numenuma, The Outer Worlds (which I haven't played but by all accounts is a bizarre combination of boring gameplay, bland missions and scenarios, and terrible writing).

I really hope this one breaks the recent trend, but I'm not counting on it. Since Paradox is the publisher we know the primary driver will be revenue, which will likely mean a lowest-common denominator pitch/story, and most likely a cut back story which will be fleshed out with vast amounts of DLC over time.
Let us not hang them before the game has been released.
avatar
Themken: Let us not hang them before the game has been released.
Yes, cover your eyes and ears to what you are experiencing, pretend it's not happening and buy the game, regardless of perceived quality.

/s
avatar
Tenbeat:
Better read some reviews and such before buying. Do not buy before release of course, especially not if you suspect it might turn out not to be to your liking.


I also have been disappointed when I have bought too hastily.
Post edited December 18, 2019 by Themken
avatar
Tenbeat:
avatar
Themken: Better read some reviews and such before buying. Do not buy before release of course, especially not if you suspect it might turn out not to be to your liking.

I also have been disappointed when I have bought too hastily.
Me too, but ---- I've also liked many a game that critics and fans did not like and visa-versa. It's like asking someone if some food is good. If they like it, it's good. If they don't, it isn't. It has no bearing on whether or not you will like it.
Post edited December 18, 2019 by lordhoff
I always use the trailers and ad campaigns to decide if I want to pay real money and I completely agree with the OP's sentiments.
I also always wait for the beta testers to preorder the game for full price and fix it for me to pick it up when it's done at a significantly reduced price.
avatar
bluewillow: I always use the trailers and ad campaigns to decide if I want to pay real money and I completely agree with the OP's sentiments.
I also always wait for the beta testers to preorder the game for full price and fix it for me to pick it up when it's done at a significantly reduced price.
This is definitely what I've done for quite some time now. It's been many years since games were released in a proper stable condition (apparently The Outer Worlds was surprisingly bug-free, which is an outlier - it's apparently also soul-less and incredibly boring).

My theory is that anything with any kind of artistic merit won't have enough management to enforce proper quality controls, and anything with proper quality controls will have so much management that all creativity will be stifled. Which category will this game fall under I wonder?
avatar
bluewillow: I always use the trailers and ad campaigns to decide if I want to pay real money and I completely agree with the OP's sentiments.
I also always wait for the beta testers to preorder the game for full price and fix it for me to pick it up when it's done at a significantly reduced price.
avatar
squid830: This is definitely what I've done for quite some time now. It's been many years since games were released in a proper stable condition (apparently The Outer Worlds was surprisingly bug-free, which is an outlier - it's apparently also soul-less and incredibly boring).

My theory is that anything with any kind of artistic merit won't have enough management to enforce proper quality controls, and anything with proper quality controls will have so much management that all creativity will be stifled. Which category will this game fall under I wonder?
Monetary: why pay for extensive bug checking when the buyers will do it for you then be placeted by a fix?
avatar
squid830: This is definitely what I've done for quite some time now. It's been many years since games were released in a proper stable condition (apparently The Outer Worlds was surprisingly bug-free, which is an outlier - it's apparently also soul-less and incredibly boring).

My theory is that anything with any kind of artistic merit won't have enough management to enforce proper quality controls, and anything with proper quality controls will have so much management that all creativity will be stifled. Which category will this game fall under I wonder?
avatar
lordhoff: Monetary: why pay for extensive bug checking when the buyers will do it for you then be placeted by a fix?
True. Us gamers have only ourselves to blame for allowing companies to get away with this kind of shit.
This would not really be surprising.

Over the last decade or so, we have seen plenty of reboots, late sequels, and spiritual successors.

More often than not, they don't quite reach the same level of quality. Actually, my personal observation is that the ones made by the most prominent, big-name game makers of yesteryear are almost always a let-down.

The rendering engine will be much better, for what it's worth.
Post edited January 28, 2020 by Audiocide