Why Tyranny Failed
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 май 2020
- Tyranny the game developed by obsidian who have made many impressive rpg titles such as fallout new vegas, and even another isometric rpg pillars of eternity both were hits with pillars of eternity selling 1.25 million copies But even with all that experience and previous success’s Tyranny still didn't succeed why?? In this video I will discuss How a failure in marketing torpedoed this great game.
This is a more scripted video tell me what you think
![Kehlani - Next 2 U [Official Music Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MpI7ekFG8A0/mqdefault.jpg)
It's a great game for black palate rpg players. That's how I think. Obsidian may have not made a lot of money. But this game did a lot for Obsidian's already massive prestige.
I'm not sure if the launch date had as much of an impact as you seem to suggest. I doubt there's a lot of overlap between CoD players and CRPG players; the type of people who typically buy CoD games are not going to be interested in a mechanics-heavy CRPG. So Tyranny was never going to be a direct competitor to CoD.
Personally, I think Obsidian's main mistake was approaching Paradox to be their publisher in the first place. Paradox is not known for having experience with CRPGs; they are a company that focuses almost exclusively on strategy and simulation games, so Tyranny was never going to be a big priority for them. Moreover, they are a PC-centric, digital-sales-centric publisher, which was probably why Tyranny never got a console release, further limiting sales. Paradox's CEO whining that the market isn't there for CRPGs just sounds like he's trying to deflect blame, considering that marketing for the game would've been largely their responsibility.
It actually makes me incredibly angry that such a unique game had its chances for success stymied because the publisher was not up to the task.
I manage a very basic English, even so, being clear your voice I can understand well.
Good work, greetings from Argentina.
thxs google translate tho
Ey. Yo también soy de Argentina y también me parece un juegazo. Buscame en Facebook. Te Mando un abrazo.
como lo disfrute incluso mucho mas que POE se merece una segunda entrega :(
Creo que también es mejor que la serie POE. Encontré que el mundo es mucho más único e interesante, no es que POE sea malo, pero sentí que las opciones eran mucho mejores y de mayor alcance en la tiranía. Honestamente, pensé que había muchas potencial en el escenario ya que un final bueno/rebelde te abre el siguiente juego luchando contra Kyros o si haces el final malvado, pensé que tal vez Kyros podría morir o desaparecer y su imperio podría caer en una guerra civil y caos. Paradox ha dicho que la puerta no está completamente cerrada para la serie y que la serie podría continuar incluso en otros géneros, de forma muy similar a cómo su nuevo juego "Avowed" tiene lugar en el universo POE, pero no es un crpg. Lo siento si la traducción es aproximada, estoy usando Google Translate.
Story wise tyranny is quite good, but im not sure why it felt too short for me and somewhat too linear because lots of places are locked behind quest progress unlike new vegas where you can visit anywhere from the moment you enter. In my opinion they should have expanded the first arc more, make the ultimatum period at the very least as long as 30 days instead of 7 and make the condition more difficult to finish, im thinking of "fallout water chip" kind of gameplay. You would need to pull all kind of ways just to have the edict finished. Unfortunately in the limited knowledge i have for the game it seems the event it self is quite short just to make you feel like the "hero". I just feel like it lacks the time and challenge to make it a deserved event as your start as the "person of interest".
The game IS short. It almost has no side quests, heck before the DLC it had less skill checks as well(DLC adds random encounters which usually have skill checks etc while traveling which aren't too complex but adds a feel that the game is longer)
Feel like if atleast 2-3 cities had a decent amount of quest the game would've felt bigger.
It's an amazing game but kinda weird too. It's a linear game with a story that has a set goal. There are no surprises in terms of the end result, you constantly have this feeling of "I'm just doing my job" and then you can start plotting possible endings in your head and it's pretty much how it plays out.
It's hard to explain. It's as if they turned a Civilization campaign into a CRPG. There's no real sense of adventure. That said, for what it is and what it's going for, it executes pretty well. I just thought the game lacked a bit of exploration.
To some extent it makes sense since the publisher was Paradox who's main shtick is civ type games.
However, the Paradox is whooly to blame for it's failure since they refused to let this game sell on console which gutted it's sales potential
Marketing and Kickstarter is one thing; but I played the game and straight-up from it infuriating and unappealing.
Wow really I love the game what didn’t you like about it I think it’s one of the best isometric rpg’s ever
@@Conduit999 Mainly the combat.
But more overall; the whole universe as presented, was so over-the-top that all the seriousness was lost, like colors in the rainbow. I don't think the cartoon-like graphics helped either. The Archons looked like Cartoon Network villains.
Now, it's not that I didn't see any merits in the game - but I'm practically writing a review here, so I'll just say: I couldn't take it serious and lost patience with it.
I think it would've appealed more to me , if the setting were grounded more in realism. The magic/fantasy detracts from the theme.
Having spent almost as much time looking up queries to be able to effectively play this game, as I have actually playing I can effectively say it's not JUST the marketing. That really didn't help, but anyone that spends ten seconds playing the game will possibly opt out for an effective time limit that DOES NOT need to be there in the first place (yes you can circumvent it, but it is a pain and only serves to prove you shouldn't have to - and no, I don't care if it's a "generous" time limit. It's a no no to most players of this genre)
Next; there is not enough money to be able to be made. From any choice you make. You will scrounge for cash as best you can. As the evil overlord's middle management no less. I will not spoil further reasons this makes no sense. It is also a) too hard, and too easy to level up down paths you don't intend or in ones you do. The enemy scaling hurts, and at times a LOT. The spell system is a nice add, but it's a resource drain that every accent and expression you either have to find or buy AS WELL as the core of the sigil in order to cast anything. Mostly you will want them for buffs, but I do not understand why you couldn't just have already known the accents and expressions, and left the Cores to be the expensive part.
A means to mitigate the cost would have been to let ALL dead bodies have something on them you could gain and or sell. It would also perhaps have granted better chance to get rarer loot, since it is effectively randomized. I've had chests that had 39 subterfuge to open have only a 20 ring reagent item, in one game and an actually good/expensive item in another. That's needlessly punitive. The trap issue, and the puzzles are bad - though I admit I just hate traps in any game. Period. I had to look up how to get the correct sigil sign to activate the FIRST spire. Just the first one, never mind any others. That's an automatic roadblock in a game that is going to be a hard sell (since it bucks the established trend in gaming where you ARE playing the hero. Full stop)
You end up with an effective level so far as I have looked up - and it is BAD that there's no really definitive answer about level/talent caps for build theory-crafting by the way - of about 17-21 ish. Supposedly you stop gaining skills at 20 but I'll be danged if I ever get past Act 2 to see for myself. You get basically no real reward most of the time for killing anyone, but you are forced to fight. There should have been experience gained for surviving every battle, damn it. At least on the point of that, because it DOES fit with the brutal world. Gaining experience per kill would also have mitigated the very slow level gain and helped your character get to the point of feeling powerful faster. (Which could still be spun as a pit fall because of the level scaled enemies)
Overall, every choice you'll make is effectively wrong. There is no means to gain favor with one faction without losing it with another unless you are insanely careful. Even then the choices that do not muck something up, are few and farther between than one might think. Your companions are basically there to do nothing. There is no romance; the stories are not that deep, and most of them do not even fulfill their assigned party role all that well. If they could stand still, do nothing unless I told them explicitly to do something, then maybe they would be useful as meat shields. However that point is not limited to just this game. (Really wish Devs would stop trying to impress people with AI in general. Let the hero be powerful on their own and not NEED companions, or at least get the roles and the pathing correct. General rule: if they are more a hinderance than a help, you did something wrong)
Honestly, I think this game had some potential... if they'd actuall fleshed out a full Anarchy go your own route/create YOUR OWN faction route. They baked this one half way and rushed it out the door. Might doesn't work to make you stronger, Quickness doesn't actually reduce recovery (it just helps ability cooldown) and half the systems are counter intuitive. I like the concept, I like the moral question imposed - to set point, I get what they were going for but having every faction arguing like three year olds with no way to REALLY sort any of it out or say screw you all, wasn't the best showing. I like that they included Unarmed as a playstyle - except that it's bugged last I read about. (Can we please get one RPG where I get to be a tanky/regen Brawler, who isn't Swiss Cheese five seconds out the gate, and can do credible damage compared to the other weapon types... without having gauntlets ten times the size of my in RL body weight? Why is that so much to ask? o. O )
Most of the best spells in the game by their expense and hide and seek placement means you'll have to look them up to find them... and pray to a Frengi that you'll have saved enough coin to buy them. I'd give it a 3 - 4 out of 10, but I freely admit it could have been an 8 with a few more months to a year in the pot. Not that I think my opinion counts for much. I have played this game for 50 hours plus, and am still trying to get through a playthrough. I'm not disagreeing with you, I am simply stating that there were several reasons this game didn't go well. These are only some of them.
Personally I won't play a strategy game, it started as an RPG and should stay one. There's no point flipping genres if they're not going to actually show the battle with Kyros. I'd do the second one as means to give your MC a fighting chance to build his/her ability in the vein showcased (no spoilers) so that they CAN effectively challenge and defeat a supposed "God-King/Queen/???" to rule the world. Decide on that point, how you would be King/Queen and could you do it better than Kyros. Then in the Third game, start it with the fight and let the player choose how to whoop Kyros' over-extended arse to prove that YES; I can. Maybe mark that He/She/It? started from the point of wanting to protect their world from something worse... like I don't know, all the banes forming up to become some giant nigh unstoppable deific being. (which would lend credence to the Voices' of Nerat's power being, actually pretty danged powerful. Don't you think?) So it would become Kyros was the big bad evil overlord to prevent a bigger, badder evil overlord from breaking everything. Would you step into his shoes, and wear that crown, or try to find a better path - with the caveat that YES guys... there DOES have to actually BE a better and clearly good/peaceable end path if you go that route. Just my thoughts on expansion.
* Also, romance! If you guys don't want to write it fine, hire me. I'd be more than willing to help flesh characters out so that they're functional, pogniant/investable and able to start families should the player want. (One of the bigger problems for those who like romances in games is it IS side content, so usually they get written as 14 yr olds, by 14 yr olds I'd bet... if they even bother at all)
I don't doubt Tyranny flopped because of its marketing, but to me I can't play that game because I can't stomach the idea that I'm evil and in an evil world.
I think marketing played a big factor in its bad sales but there is a good option in game you can side with the rebels
@@Conduit999 I know, I tried to play that route and it was a bit too much for me. Good video BTW!
The game looked interesting but I couldn't stomach nor did I have the heart to be an agent of a great evil. I know you can be good in the game and side with the rebels but I've heard it was pretty half assed since the game is clearly not geared for that. The last thing our world needs is a game lacking any hope and is even worse than our own. Video games are supposed to be a form of escapism, so what good is it to escape to a world that is even worse than ours and where you're expected to contributed to how bad it is. Makes no sense to me.
Really bro I found the rebel path just as good as the evil storyline and not half assed at all, while kyros is evil you could argue it’s more of a lawful evil while it’s not a society I would want to live in people who are citizens are safe and fed it’s a lot like Caesar’s legion where you can understand while people might support it. And I find games that are darker than the real world can show how good our world is in comparison.