The Outer Worlds 2 developer Obsidian is a studio built on a long history of rich role-playing, and apparently, the studio's very keen to reiterate that fact with its spacefaring sequel.
The Outer Worlds (the first one) certainly isn't a bad RPG, but it is perhaps guilty of watering down important choices with regards to character building and the like. This is where the follow-up hopes to improve, pushing players towards more specialised playstyles that help better define your own personalised adventure.
Speaking to IGN, Obsidian basically says that the whole process of developing your hero (or villain) is going to be much more in-depth than it was previously.
"We really wanted to lean into synergies, looking at how player Skills, Traits, and Perks can all infuse into interesting builds that play off of other systems," design director Matt Singh explains.
"We would often see characters good at everything, which by the end of the game, minimized your personal experience with your character," adds lead systems designer Kyle Koenig.
Indeed, this is a potential issue with many modern role-playing titles; developers can often see choice and consequence as a burden on players, rather than a way to keep those same players engaged.
Koenig continues: "We wanted to focus on making each individual level-up and investment really important."
But it's not just about picking a clearly-defined lane and sticking to it. Singh gives an example: "There's more than just a traditional stealth-focused build, combat-focused build, or speech-focused build. There's a lot of blending of concepts, playing with other systems and incorporating those into a pretty broad, but unique range of different player profiles."
So, essentially, it sounds like you'll be rewarded for committing to a specific role, but at the same time, you need to be aware that doing so may lock you out of other opportunities — and many would argue that's really what good role-playing is all about.
The developers go on to confirm a number of interesting details, like there being over 90 unique perks to unlock, while also teasing a character build that's all about murdering poor NPCs in exchange for permanent stat boosts.
Koenig then reveals that The Outer Worlds 2 will take inspiration from the Fallout franchise — originally linked with Obsidian before it was acquired by Bethesda — by incorporating both positive and negative 'Traits'. By taking on a negative Trait — 'Dumb' limits your skill investment and 'Sickly' reduces your max health, for instance — you gain access to additional perk points. So again, it's a case of choice and consequence.
Overall, The Outer Worlds 2 is starting to sound like a pretty ambitious sequel — at least from a mechanical perspective. The game's still on track to release for PS5 at some point this year.
Are you looking forward to The Outer Worlds 2? Do these enhanced RPG elements sound good? Start planning out your own character build in the comments section below.
[source ign.com]
Comments 21
N.i.c.e. I enjoy the outer worlds a lot it's a amazing game.so I'm liking what I saw in the outer worlds 2 gameplay.word up son
This design ethos is the exact reason I am never able to fully love any RPGs. It kind of locks you into a single play style. I would prefer to have all options available and use my agency to decide which I am going to use in the moment rather than using my player agency to decide on a build that forces me to use the same tactics in every scenario.
I enjoyed the first game, so I am very interested in the sequel. My personal hang-ups about not experiencing everything in the game will have to step aside by the sounds of it.
While I enjoyed my time with the first, I hope they tone down the overly satirized tone in this one. It became cringey after the 10th time in as many minutes that I was reminded “Corporations are bad”. I certainly agree with the sentiment, but I don’t need to be reminded every 30 seconds.
Also that gameplay snippet from ign didn’t really do much for me. I feel like they need to show more overworld exploration stuff to see how/if they improve on that.
loved the first game I liked the choices and outcomes i could make
Obsidian make some quality games
Well Obsidian didn't own or make Fallout (well funnily enough until Bethesda owned it, with New Vegas). Black Isle was the developer and Interplay published it. Some people from Black Isle made Obsidian not long before Black Isle was shut down, having cancelled the original Fallout 3. Unfortunately Chris Avellone, who wrote a lot of Fallout 2 and had the idea of the vaults being used for experiments on the population, and Tim Cain, the creator of the series, don't work for Obsidian anymore (Cain wasn't a founding member but did join in about 2010 or 2011 but left a few years ago).
I liked the first game's combat but ultimately didnt like the game as a whole because it felt like the combat was almost an afterthought compared to the conversations and lore; the balance was really off despite trailers being filled with cool sci fi weapons shooting enemies. Tried to do a science build and just when id get going with all the blasting, itd be over and id be right back in all the convos. Just might be that it's not the game series for me, but hoping the adjustments theyre proposing addresses that.
@TBubs311 Yeah, it was pretty ham-fisted. It gave the game what I assume was an unintentional Young Adult kind of feel, like basic satire aimed at younger teens. It's also not a particularly interesting thing to satirise - most agree with the sentiment. And doing it in such a cartoony way makes the satire feel toothless and ineffective.
Odd. I thought it was all the stuff around the RPG elements that needed improving. If you wanted to be a gunslinger type character it was dulled by the lack of weapon and enemy variety
I enjoyed the DLC and thought it was quite well written, but the base game was a snooze, design by committee or something. Whether this one is any good will not come down to the progression system, but, as with every RPG, to the writing.
@LoneWolfMcBrod79 This, tried doing the science build and my recollection is the amount of options were underwhelming. What they DID have was really cool and fun, but it wasnt much
@RBRTMNZ I can see that being for choices and consequences. I feel that there should certainly be more flexibility in the way you can convince someone instead of "Oh you have 1 point less in perception or intellect" meaning that you aren't allowed to use that choice. Ik that there are rpgs that use an rng system.
Hope so ...I like to talk and lock pick my way through stuff..do enough shooting on every other game
@Brydontk I said this in another thread recently, the combat balance was off but I otherwise enjoyed the game.
I loved the first one. I remember playing on the hardest difficulty where companions could die permanently and was gutted when Parvati was killed a couple of hours in.
@StylesT same, I always like high charisma builds but I've learned my lesson not to do that, as most games are so badly balanced.
Same with games that let you go stealth or mayhem (I think one of the Deus Ex's did this) and yet put you in a toe-to-toe boss battle at the end where your stealth and hacking skills are useless.
If they want to make choices meaningful, where choices have a penalty as well as a strong benefit, it takes a huge leap of faith from the player to invest heavily in non-combat/power talents.
Because most games are going to cheese out at the end and throw loads of enemies and a big meaty boss in your face and you ain't talking or sneaking around it.
I'm very excited for this. I wish they would take more time and blow it up into a true open world or system. Nothing has ever approached that feeling of isolation I got from New Vegas. That beautiful, wonderful feeling where all other people stopped like, existing at me.
I tried so hard to like the first one but I couldn't. I struggled to play 10 hours and everytime I started it up I just quit within minutes. I honestly don't consider them a AAA developer. Mostly mediocre games that have some bright spots. Their crpgs were good but they abandoned that so not much for me anymore.
I played a fair bit of the first game and then just ran out of steam/interest. Shame really, because it was fun till it wasn't
Never understood why people were down on the first game as i thought it was excellent.
Just finished avowed 82 hours! Short game my ass! really enjoyed it looking forward to this
Leave A Comment
Hold on there, you need to login to post a comment...