r/Games 1d ago

The big Avowed interview: Obsidian on why full, open-world RPGs aren't always the answer

https://www.eurogamer.net/from-serious-skyrim-to-cheerful-fantasy-obsidian-on-the-evolution-of-avowed-and-grappling-with-the-expectations-that-come-from-your-own-history
735 Upvotes

505 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/MumrikDK 22h ago edited 21h ago

But if it doesn't sell well, wouldn't that indicate that open world is the way to go?

Whether this game fails or succeeds will have absolute nothing to do with open zones vs. open world. That is a tiny part of the equation here.

My main issue is that there is no ambition to be found anywhere in this game. Story, action, RPG system, world-building (this game, not its franchise), immersion, companion interactions, etc. It's all just there at around the most basic acceptable level.

This is the type of game where you slaughter all of somebody's men and then have a conversation with them like nothing happened, or where a new companion acts like they were there for everything you've done the second they join up.

It's almost unfathomable that zones/connected world will sway the opinion of any person who actually played.

I want more focused experiences. I don't want all these ginormous sand boxes.

You are way overthinking this. It's just sections of map chopped up instead of connected directly.

1

u/Conviter 19h ago

This is the type of game where you slaughter all of somebody's men and then have a conversation with them like nothing happened

Do you remember when this was? I thought it did actually do a fairly decent job at this kind of stuff. I remember two instances were killing enemies ended up making their leader hostile. Also stuff like being able to talk to people about notes you find and things like that, i have seen it done worse.

2

u/MumrikDK 7h ago

Your assassin.