Divinity: Original Sin Casts First Trailer

By Nathan Grayson on May 30th, 2012 at 12:00 pm.

Man, that's always what happens when I go camping too. I can so identify.

It is the year 2012. We have magic rectangles that contain our entire lives and an invisible web that connects all of humankind. And while I can’t claim to own a hoverboard, I’m still pretty OK with a future in which Divinity: Original Sin defies both Father Time and the shareholder mothership to exist. I mean, it’s an Ultima-inspired, turn-based RPG that’s doing its damndest to conjure fond memories of Cheeto-stained tabletop role-playing campaigns, and it looks damn impressive. I’m afraid that I’ll wake up any moment now, and it’ll actually be a modern FPS reboot set in a future where magic was given a swirly by Totally Rad Soldier Men – a swirly that killed it forever. Somehow, though, it is a thing with its very own trailer, and the elemental magic system paired with turn-based combat looks like it could actually make for some tantalizingly tactical co-op. Marvel at its implausibility after the break.

Promising, right? Granted, the combat scenario more or less amounted to Bioshocking a baddie with water and lightning – aka, the oldest trick in the book. Larian’s shown quite the aptitude for massive, branch-twisting skill trees in the past, though, so I seriously can’t wait to see how this system evolves. I’m also definitely on board with smaller touches, like dice-roll-based co-op conversation options. Yeah, that one in particular is basically torn straight from a book titled “SWTOR’s Better Ideas,” but I’m glad Larian’s making sure Original Sin is a co-op experience - and not simply a regular swords ‘n’ sorcery to-do with co-op combat tacked on.

Granted, the potentially worrisome flipside is that Original Sin’s single-player could turn out to be a hollow shell missing the sturdy, ever-reliable turtle that is companionship. Unfortunately, there’s really no way to tell at this point. But, on a more positive note, Original Sin’s shipping with a hyper robust map editor, so even if single-player’s not up to par, I imagine the community will design at least a few worthy campaigns.

I’m a lot more excited about this one than I expected to be – especially since I sort of despised Divinity II: Ego Draconis. Now then, the waiting. Original Sin is – like all of the things - set to come out in 2013. Remember when we thought there’d be games this year? Oh what naive fools we were.

, .

43 Comments »

  1. HexagonalBolts says:

    Not to be Mr. Grumpy-Internet but: I’m not sure why they even bothered with the concept art when it looks practically identical to every other RPG’s concept art… I think (hope) now that we have Diablo III people will have a stronger desire for innovation in RPGs. Partly because they will have had their fill of conservative game models and partly because some people found that to be Diablo’s major problem.

    • Ringwraith says:

      Divinity’s always been that way, but to an extent. The game’s certainly got its moments, usually when it start sending up typical situations and generally being silly.
      Although Beyond Divinity definitely showed a more imaginative setting, seeing as none of it takes place on the rather standard high-fantasy plane of Rivellon.

    • Tyrone Slothrop. says:

      I think (hope) now that we have Diablo III people will have a stronger desire for innovation in RPGs. Partly because they will have had their fill of conservative game models and partly because some people found that to be Diablo’s major problem.

      Oh my, surely you jest? How on earth do you think anything you’ve just said is remotely the case? I’m not a fan of the genre, so I have no stake in the matter either way but Diablo 3 just sold well over seven million copies on one platform. Yet you ludicrously suggest ‘some [nebulous] people’ found a ‘major problem’ with the game (when isn’t this universally the case, granted it’s to a greater than usual degree… which still means shit all). Which are publishers going to listen to, those breathtakingly impressive sales figures or modest internet complaining?

      As for this game; a decent looking top-down fantasy RPG with a largely cartoonish art design and reams of forgettable lore? How am I supposed to muster enthusiasm for this?

      • Zeewolf says:

        Erm, it’s what you’re saying that’s not making any sense. Sales numbers has little to do with customer satisfaction, and it’s pretty well known that a lot of the people who bought the game are finding it somewhat disappointing. And not just because of the DRM.

        I’m pretty sure that there are a lot of Diablo III-players who are on the lookout for something a little deeper now, and who might like the sound of this game a lot.

        • misterT0AST says:

          I’m sorry to break it to you, but companies don’t care for your complaints if you keep throwing money at them.

        • Tyrone Slothrop. says:

          The proposition that businesses care more about profits and sales inspite of consumer asspain, real or perceived is something that doesn’t make sense? The contrary definitely doesn’t make sense.

          ‘Sorry shareholders, we were going to make another game that people are buying by the UNESCO relief plane-ful but Vegetable_99 disagrees with a design decision!’

          I don’t like it any more than you do, but it’s stunningly naive and arrogant to think otherwise.

          Let’s take a more consequential case where actual peoples’ well-being and lives are jeopardised, not merely someone’s belief in software accessibility; Apple utilises some truly horrific work practises in it’s manufacturing that shouldn’t be countenanced by any consumer who possesses both the information of said practises and anything resembling a conscience. The aforementioned abuses are documented, disseminated and publicised while their market worth has nevertheless skyrocketed to 500 billion dollars in recent years on the back of seemingly exponential sales.

          • HexagonalBolts says:

            I don’t think that means you should just accept what’s going on around you and the evils that capitalism does, rather, as Rushdie suggested, in the time honoured tradition of babies emerging from a womb into the dangers of the real world, I think you should kick up as loud a fuss as is possible. Certainly, those who exploit often win, but protest does make change.

            This has become a bit grand and abstract now from the issue of game design, but it still holds true, and I think a prime example is kickstarter. The more we reward innovation the more it will happen.

          • Tyrone Slothrop. says:

            I don’t think that means you should just accept what’s going on around you.”

            You’re talking to an anarcho-syndicalist here, I probably would be safe in hazarding I’m ultimately more anti-capitalist than your fine self and I certainly didn’t wish to convey the message in the above quote. Just because I recognise a reality doesn’t mean it’s not hideous or shouldn’t be countered or improved even in small ways and I couldn’t agree with your last comment’s sentiment any more. It’s manifestly intolerable, well, serious corporate abuse and human rights violations are… the design decisions of games I don’t have an affinity for in the first place however? {Shrugs} Especially when, on the whole, It seemed to make many people very happy, at least according to my friends and brother who purchased the game and millions upon millions of other paying customers, in spite of clear issues.

            And it’s due to those things that your line ‘because some people found that to be Diablo’s major problem’ struck as particularly hollow, especially in your initial suggestion and hope it would lead to games adopting contrary design decisions, especially that yours was a specifically subjective one.

            But please, don’t take anything I’ve said as being dismissive of your sentiment or your person, just your initial argument, I think you should definitely do anything in your power to steer a medium, genre or individual work in a direction you desire as a patron of said things. But you must also realise there’s a countervailing force; a lot of people, really, really love Diablo 3.

      • killias2 says:

        “As for this game; a decent looking top-down fantasy RPG with a largely cartoonish art design and reams of forgettable lore? How am I supposed to muster enthusiasm for this?”

        I agree that the art style is rather generic for the present, but.. really? Western-style turn-based, party-based RPG? From a company with a decent-to-good track record (DD is rather fun, and D2: DKS is better than it has any right to be)? The setting may be generic, but the mechanics are relatively rare. Kickstarter may have brought turn-based/party-based Western-style RPGs from “non-existent” to “incredibly rare,” but I still don’t think we’re at the point where an established, well-reviewed, mid-sized studio jumping into the genre can be dismissed as yawn-worthy.

        • HexagonalBolts says:

          For me it’s primarily the setting – the ‘faux-medieval elves etc.’ setting has been done to death a thousand times over and the lore is always pretty pathetic (e.g. a brief description of a critter that makes little or no crossover into the actual gameplay).

          • Ringwraith says:

            Divinity games look like that, then things start getting weird or just plain silly. Snarky remarks about conventional tropes abound.

            Unless you’re playing Beyond Divinity, then it just starts off a bit weird and gets weirder. Like being a paladin of the Divine One and being soulbound to a demonic deathknight with a sarky attitude as you search for a way to be rid of each other.

            Then you meet a talking skull.

            The first game has one of the best quick examples of its silliness.

      • HexagonalBolts says:

        Tyrone I think *because* it sold so well many people will be sated with the traditional RPG experience for quite a while and will be looking out for something that puts a twist on the old formula.

        Of course publishers are going to listen to sales figures, but I sincerely hope that people choose to not reward conservative design choices with sales figures.

        As for people who are dissapointed by Diablo 3 being too conservative? All you have to do is look at the recent DIablo 3 review on this website.

        • killias2 says:

          “Tyrone I think *because* it sold so well many people will be sated with the traditional RPG experience for quite a while and will be looking out for something that puts a twist on the old formula.”

          But.. Diablo 3 isn’t a traditional RPG. It’s a hack’n'slash, which, as a genre, tends to have more in common with roguelikes than proper RPGs.

          D:OS, on the other hand, promises to be a proper traditional RPG, with parties, turn-based combat, and an emphasis on actual role-playing.

          I guess I just don’t get where you’re coming from.

  2. MuscleHorse says:

    ‘Cheetos’? Shurely our colonial chum means Wotsits.

  3. Beef says:

    Veggies after the pringles binge?

  4. Jimbo says:

    Looks great. I hope it’s a little more involved than elemental rock, paper, scissors though.

  5. mr-wolfe says:

    So we’re pouring skepticism onto THIS, but Diablo III is getting away unscathed. Did you see the part with the editor?

    • Premium User Badge

      Lars Westergren says:

      And just a few minutes ago I saw someone on Reddit declared that he would never read a RPS article about Diablo 3 again because “RPS have obvously made up their mind to hate on D3 no matter what”.

      The problem with trying to be nuanced on the internet, eh? ;)

      • Premium User Badge

        jrodman says:

        Everyone else’s opinion is so valueless, that I must make mine as strident and loud as possible to stand out and compensate!

        (not commenting on anyone present.)

      • Nick says:

        its reddit.

        • Premium User Badge

          Lars Westergren says:

          Right you are. Also, it’s “it’s” not “its”. ;)

    • sneetch says:

      “Pouring skepticism” on this? Really? Where?

      Also, I don’t know what alternate-universe version of RPS you’ve been reading if you think Diablo III is getting away unscathed. It’s been scathed. A lot.

  6. Avish says:

    Hope it’s better than the Angelina jolie movie. It was not very good.

    I also hope it’s better than Divinity 2. I did not despise the game, but I never manage to play more than 20 Hours of it. Started good, but turned into a confused grinding mess as the game went on…

  7. MistyMike says:

    “… the first being a woman that’s been recently ressurected. The second one is a condemned warrior, who’s been suffering years of agony and torture.”

    Oh my, I can’t wait.

  8. Cinnamon says:

    Does this game track hunger and thirst and make you consume food? My only complaint about Divinity 2 was that it had so many food items but they were all basically useless versions of health potions.

    But yeah, turn based Neverwinter Nights sort of game. Sounds pretty good to me.

    • reggiep says:

      Tracking hunger is retarded. It’s just not fun. What’ll you want next? An mini game focused around pooping and wiping your ass? “Sorry, I can’t enter this battle. My shit meter is full.”

  9. Runs With Foxes says:

    “like dice-roll-based co-op conversation options. Yeah, that one in particular is basically torn straight from a book titled “SWTOR’s Better Ideas,””

    SWTOR doesn’t have stat rolls, just random rolls because they had no better option when they stuck their trademark dialogue-heavy crap in a WoW-style MMO. It has nothing to do with how you build your character, so it’s meaningless. In Divinity your choices should actually make a difference.

  10. Haborym says:

    Awesome, a turn based rpg. How come no one ever makes any of these anymore?

    Also coop? I’m really interested to see how that works out. Who gets to decide where you go and what you do and stuff?

  11. Minsc_N_Boo says:

    I really like the look of this! I have not really seen any single player CRPG’s that tickle my fancy. Thank goodness someone out there is still making this kind of game.

    I do enjoy ARPG’s, but they are not enough traditional RPG’s for my liking.

  12. pakoito says:

    Oh god oh god oh god oh god oh god. Its ToEE+Magicka with story editor. Make it netbook friendly and I will be theirs forever.

    • squareking says:

      ToEE + Magicka’s elemental system and co-op is basically a dream come true. I should have enough pennies for this if I start saving them today!

  13. Kleppy says:

    Turn based, hell yeah. Maybe it’ll be a bit smarter than Diablo 3 then.

  14. Didero says:

    I couldn’t decide whether their accents were Dutch or Scandinavian.
    Turns out the devs are from Belgium, so mostly Dutch then, with maybe a hint of French.
    Bad accent or worst accent? (In general, I mean. You hardly notice with these guys)

    Oh, right, game. Looks decent I guess?

  15. wodin says:

    Love it when developers give the player map editors etc so we can make our own adventures or play other peoples. Makes a change as normally you’d only get an extra adventure these days through expansions or DLC. Remember Neverwinter Nights editor…you just don’t get that sort of things very often these days.

    Looks like turn based combat is coming back in force aswell which is cool.

  16. Nick says:

    You wait ages for a turn based RPG, then shitloads are being made at once. So happy.

  17. cosmicolor says:

    I would be throwing money at my screen right now, but I have hardly any to throw, so I’ll have to content myself with thinking about it really hard.

  18. Urthman says:

    I can’t hear what you guys are blah blah blah-ing about over the sound of me giggling as I watch the guy slip on the ice at 2:43 over and over and over.

    “As you can see, that can can cause some pain.”

  19. JackDandy says:

    Looks excellent. Can’t wait to see more.

  20. Premium User Badge

    ffordesoon says:

    The “lightning + water = dead baddies” trick is indeed an old chestnut. What’s cool about this demonstration is that the other player turned the ice into water using fire, thus allowing for the lightning trick, meaning (assuming this is consistent across the board) elements can be turned into other elements through common-sense methods. That excites me.

    • pakoito says:

      The thing is, we need more interactions. They want the P&P feel, but they can even improve D&D3E ruleset if they start thinking big. In D&D almost no interactions were covered, and a lot of them were very broad, so the master had to use their own ruleset for them.

  21. MythArcana says:

    And the very first comment would have to mention the “D” word. *smirk*

    This game I will be checking out, Big D is out on his ass.

  22. The_Grand_User says:

    “Original Sin is – like all of the things – set to come out in 2013. Remember when we thought there’d be games this year? Oh what naive fools we were.”

    Hey! Not true! Because X-Com, a game you’ve been going on and on about (as you justly should) is coming out this year.

    Anyway, Original Sin also looks quite interesting and I shall have to keep my eye on it. I liked Divinity 2: Ego Draconis, because it was one of the finger countable games where you could (sorta) play as a dragon.