Aventari

Great find. It is interesting to see that Jeff has been so consistent over the years in his enthusiasm for making games.

Hey Misc, you had better luck than me then. I cleaned out the underworld as much as I could, then it would cut out after leaving the fort.

Hey Ess-Eschas Thanks for the welcome, I'm not sure how much I'll have to contribute being so late to these forums but I'll probably wander through the Queen's Wish and Avadon forums for some tips at some stage. Avernum in its different forms I've played enough of to feel familiar with, Avadon and Queen's Wish I found harder to wrap my head around in terms of balancing the party. I'll probably email the developers at some point, but I'll need to take your articles into account. Jeff notes in there that Exile/Avernum 3 were the most popular of their iterations (which makes far more sense to me based off my own taste). It would seem unlikely that A3:RW didn't follow that trend. As to how I came across Exile 3, I think it was a PC Powerplay or PC Gamer CD. I remember exiting Fort Emergence and feeling thwarted when the Shareware ended there. I loved it because it reminded me of Ultima 4 & 5, I remember tracking down the series to download and, I will admit, I did crack it at first (but later bought it, and everything else that was on the catalogue). Finding out Exile was remade as Avernum was an excuse to dive in all over again. Then cue the latest remakes, sure enough dived in again. Discoverability is a factor, and while the Steam Store is big it does recommend games that fit your taste ('more like this', discovery queues, curators, etc). I've also found that whenever I come across another CRPG fan, I'll recommend Avernum and have found a few converts. I'd be curious about how much business for Spiderweb Games is generated from that factor, happy customers then referring others across. That was part of why I wondered about whether the data on the remakes was correct, whether word of mouth customers were buying A1:EftP were buying there but not going further because it didn't fit them. Hey Edgwyn To a point, though once already established in the market it seems that an Indie can still get attention and Jeff is definitely established: https://www.pcgamer.com/spiderweb-software-is-remastering-another-classic-rpg/ https://game-news24.com/2023/02/05/remastered-open-world-rpg-geneforge-2-infestation-kicks-off-kickstarter-campaign-on-feb-8th/ https://www.well-played.com.au/geneforge-2-infestation-remaster-coming-to-kickstarter-later-this-month/

Meta, a small correction there. I did not ask for their sales data: I later clarified with: I asked whether the data I saw correlated, that is a yes/no/sort of, not a request for Spiderweb Software's financial statements. Still a bit presumptuous to ask a question of the developer, but not to the degree that you have framed it. I also agree that ad hominem is a reductive fallacy, that would be why I took exception to your statement that you have since qualified as merely being an expression of confusion. Maybe it is something lost in translation, where I come from we express our confusion over a statement with a question about that statement rather than a negative observation about the person who made the statement. But since you've now asked the question, I'll run through my thoughts on each element with the caveat that I am primarily observing differences between the games, not making a comparison of them to the genre at large: Story - Avernum 1: The big challenges are decentralised from one another, in fact you only need to escape to actually 'finish'. You are a small fish in a big world with threats that have been looming for sometime. - Avernum 2: Your party exists in a time of war, when you get to Formello you are effectively railroaded into going to the Vahnatai due to the magical fields restricting your access to the rest of Avernum. At that point, you are on the story train of doing what you can to secure the alliance and end the war. Narratively, that is not nearly as free as the first game. - Avernum 3: You aren't even an independent party, you have been chosen to explore the surface. While you could pursue different objectives at your own pace, you effectively end up completing the provinces in order from the slimes to cockroaches to trogs/giants, golems and alien beasts partly due to difficulty and also due to the fact that you need to establish your reputation in easier provinces to get access to the harder ones with less hostility from the Empire. Three different premises from which you operate within as the player. From a little fish in a world to survive, to a little fish who can change the course of the war, to a little fish who must save those who were once the enemy from those who claim to be allies. I would say that is substantially different. Features This is a less salient point point, but elements such as the Vahnatai crystal to steal and replicate creatures, or the increased use of timers for events to shape the world over time are some examples of difference of features between the games. Pacing - Avernum 1: There are great challenges but there is very little push story wise to proceed quickly, they are all big threats that loom in the background in the world you have been thrown into. - Avernum 2: The start has a restricted access to most of Avernum based on the magical fields, you HAVE to progress by meeting the Vahnatai, you HAVE to complete all three challenges to end the war. - Avernum 3: You have to complete the initial challenges to get to the surface, you are incentivised to complete the challenges of the provinces quickly due to the threat of the provinces deteriorating. Particularly because the sooner you complete one province, the sooner you can get to the next before it deteriorates. Pacing, like story, does not seem to me to be the same or so similar as to be irrelevant. First-timers to CRPGs Here I am thinking of people that may have been recommended to Avernum by friends, they get the first game but because it isn't their cup of tea never end up buying and playing the others. Now these are all opinions that I've formed off my own experience, they aren't gospel, am more than happy to discuss them further. Hopefully this clarifies why I believe there are substantial differences between the games and the experience they offer.

Maybe it is just because it has been a long day, but you come off as a bit dismissive. The data is questionable, that is the whole reason I came to the forum to ask questions about it so, consequently, that data will form the foundation of my thoughts. While it is likely, it is not clear that the numbers are either absurd or clearly inaccurate and you are not in a position to definitively answer that question. That is why when I first posted I said this question was primarily aimed at the developers because they are in that position, if they don't find my questioning presumptuous to start with. As to an analysis, I don't have one. I have questions about what factors might have led to differences (if the data quoted does correlate to some degree), I'm hoping to learn from what analysis the developers may have if, once again, it isn't an imposition (which it may well be, I have no rapport with them and they have no need or obligation to answer my questions in the slightest). But to say there is no way to sort this out? Any developer gets feedback, whether wanted or unwanted, combined with sales data that can certainly inform them as to how well people engaged and what things they found particularly engaging, whether feedback was consistent on certain points, whether good feedback was matched with good sales, negative feedback with reduced sales. That in turn normally informs future product development, it most likely would have played a role in what design elements were added, removed or altered in the remakes of Avernum 1-3. This isn't a question of having absolute irrefutable data to form a judgement, it is what the developers' opinion is based on what data they have available and their years of experience that informs a judgement. So while I appreciate your attempt to answer the question, though not so much your snide comment about how much experience with the games I may have, this isn't something you can answer with authority. Debate, muse, wonder and reflect upon certainly and I'm happy to do those, but if you're going to state that something is beaten to death after six posts, maybe you need to consider whether your intention is to discuss or just assert your opinion.

Thank you for the welcome. Accuracy of the data is suspect, that is part of why I thought I'd come ask at the source if it was something that was a topic that would be open to conversation. I'm not really so concerned about how much money is made (though that data is weird), it is to try and understand level of uptake on the different games and why there may have been different levels of engagement with the revised versions of Avernum. I remember reading some years ago that part of the reason Jeff Vogel revises the games is like the Beatles, people at times want the big hits. To me the first three Avernum definitely qualify as that, but that data I saw shows widely divergent levels of engagement. So is it story? The features available? Pacing of the narrative and game? What is working for players and what isn't between the different games? Or is it a case of people are trying to enter Avernum with the first game, then a measure of those sales should be seen as first timers to CRPG that are entering the genre with Avernum but the genre isn't their cup of tea?

I'm not sure if this is the place to ask the question, but thought I'd run with it. It is really aimed at any member of the team that has been working with these games if they are willing to comment on it. When considering the measure of success of a game after it ships, one measure is by the number of units sold Now I bought originals by CD order but the remakes through Steam. So I thought I'd look at Steam statistics to see what it said about the games. Avernum: Escape from the Pit Avernum 2: Crystal Souls Avernum 3: Ruined World I can't say how accurate the statistics are, but Escape from the Pit does very well, it drops off for 2 then 3rd doesn't come close to 1. To me that is insane because I was originally drawn to Exile by Exile 3, and in each iteration the 3rd game has been my favourite (3, 1 then 2). Now those statistics (assuming they are accurate) are only of one store, but it leads me to what puzzles me. Do those statistics roughly correlate with how well they have sold overall? If so, what things may explain the disparity?