Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

AoD - Readme: the combat demo survival guide

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Ogre and Obediah are bitching again. Color me surprised.

@ Ogre: Go fuck yourself, you whiny piece of shit.

@ Obediah: Do you see many people bitching about it? Ask yourself why. We have a shitload of ammo types, not one. We have 3 basic types x 5 metal types x 4 different upgrades (poisoned, flaming, masterwork, hardened) = 60 possible combinations. Does multiplying it by two (arrows/bolts) sound like a really great idea to you?

There is dumbing down (one ammo type for everything) and there is eliminating unnecessary complexity (60 is better than 120).
 

Haba

Harbinger of Decline
Patron
Joined
Dec 24, 2008
Messages
1,871,728
Location
Land of Rape & Honey ❤️
Codex 2012 MCA Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2
O.K. VD, this is going a bit too far. The joke was funny when you started forging screenshots for the upcoming "game" of yours. I almost fell from my chair when I saw your imaginary game appear in the gaming press. That was brilliant.

But lately, with the fake gameplay video, portraits and now a fake readme... I think you're taking it too far.

If you continue down this road, you'll eventually have actually made the game.
 

Double Ogre

Scholar
Joined
Feb 4, 2009
Messages
765
HOW ABOUT YOU JUST RELEASE THE FUCKING DEMO???

I can't wait to play it and tell everyone how shitty it is.
 

Imbecile

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 15, 2005
Messages
1,267
Location
Bristol, England
Vault Dweller said:
There is dumbing down (one ammo type for everything) and there is eliminating unnecessary complexity (60 is better than 120).

As always there is a balancing act to pull off. For some, there is no such thing as unnecessary complexity. For others, no game can be dumbed down sufficiently.
Combining bolts and arrows seems reasonably sensible to me though.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Double Ogre said:
I can't wait to play it and tell everyone how shitty it is.
Goes without saying.

Imbecile said:
Vault Dweller said:
There is dumbing down (one ammo type for everything) and there is eliminating unnecessary complexity (60 is better than 120).

As always there is a balancing act to pull off. For some, there is no such thing as unnecessary complexity. For others, no game can be dumbed down sufficiently.
Combining bolts and arrows seems reasonably sensible to me though.
Imagine a long list of up to 120 arrows/bolts in your inventory. Imagine right-clicking on your bow/xbow to change ammo and getting a mile long list of possible options. Combing them was definitely the right decision.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Vault Dweller said:
@ Obediah: Do you see many people bitching about it? Ask yourself why.

Oh, let's listen to the masses! They are the ones that let us know Deus Ex 1 was too complicated, and that the critical flaws in Mass Effect were elevators and crap FPSing.

Valut Dweller said:
We have a shitload of ammo types, not one. We have 3 basic types x 5 metal types x 4 different upgrades (poisoned, flaming, masterwork, hardened) = 60 possible combinations. Does multiplying it by two (arrows/bolts) sound like a really great idea to you?

Good luck justifying a complexity scale where 60 is perfect, but 120 is just too damn confusing. And if you must do it anyway, get to 60 by adding incompatibilities between the basic type, metal, and upgrade that would actually add to realism and present interesting choices to the player, rather than just letting people shoot bolts out of a bow.

Yeah I know - the realism you embrace is absolutely necessary, and the realism you abstract is soul-crushing tedium. That's just the way it is - not at all subjective and absolutely no chance of triggering insights that force you to revise your criticisms of other developers.

There is dumbing down (one ammo type for everything) and there is eliminating unnecessary complexity (60 is better than 120).

Awesome! You're getting really good at the PR double speak. So your stance is that the blunt axes in Oblivion was eliminating unnecessary complexity because there were still more than one weapon type? No, of course that was dumbing down - let's get the definitons right:

Eliminating unnecessary complexity = "Iron Tower simplifying game mechanics"

Dumbing Down = "other developer simplifying game mechanics"
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
obediah said:
Vault Dweller said:
@ Obediah: Do you see many people bitching about it? Ask yourself why.

Oh, let's listen to the masses! They are the ones that let us know Deus Ex 1 was too complicated, and that the critical flaws in Mass Effect were elevators and crap FPSing.

Valut Dweller said:
We have a shitload of ammo types, not one. We have 3 basic types x 5 metal types x 4 different upgrades (poisoned, flaming, masterwork, hardened) = 60 possible combinations. Does multiplying it by two (arrows/bolts) sound like a really great idea to you?

Good luck justifying a complexity scale where 60 is perfect, but 120 is just too damn confusing. And if you must do it anyway, get to 60 by adding incompatibilities between the basic type, metal, and upgrade that would actually add to realism and present interesting choices to the player, rather than just letting people shoot bolts out of a bow.

Yeah I know - the realism you embrace is absolutely necessary, and the realism you abstract is soul-crushing tedium. That's just the way it is - not at all subjective and absolutely no chance of triggering insights that force you to revise your criticisms of other developers.

There is dumbing down (one ammo type for everything) and there is eliminating unnecessary complexity (60 is better than 120).

Awesome! You're getting really good at the PR double speak. So your stance is that the blunt axes in Oblivion was eliminating unnecessary complexity because there were still more than one weapon type? No, of course that was dumbing down - let's get the definitons right:

Eliminating unnecessary complexity = "Iron Tower simplifying game mechanics"

Dumbing Down = "other developer simplifying game mechanics"

And to save you the time - butthurt detected!
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
obediah said:
Vault Dweller said:
@ Obediah: Do you see many people bitching about it? Ask yourself why.

Oh, let's listen to the masses! They are the ones that let us know Deus Ex 1 was too complicated, and that the critical flaws in Mass Effect were elevators and crap FPSing.
Yeah, it's quite obvious that I was talking about these people and not about people who frequent the Codex or our forums. Good reach, Obediah.

Good luck justifying a complexity scale where 60 is perfect, but 120 is just too damn confusing.
Where did I say confusing?

And if you must do it anyway, get to 60 by adding incompatibilities between the basic type, metal, and upgrade that would actually add to realism and present interesting choices to the player, rather than just letting people shoot bolts out of a bow.
It's kinda hard to say that you can harden these bolts, but not these, or can apply poison only to these arrows because they are, like, absorb poison better. See what I mean?

Yeah I know - the realism you embrace is absolutely necessary, and the realism you abstract is soul-crushing tedium. That's just the way it is - not at all subjective and absolutely no chance of triggering insights that force you to revise your criticisms of other developers.
Where did I say realism? Can't you feel like you totally put me in my place without making shit up?

Awesome! You're getting really good at the PR double speak. So your stance is that the blunt axes in Oblivion was eliminating unnecessary complexity because there were still more than one weapon type? No, of course that was dumbing down - let's get the definitons right:

Eliminating unnecessary complexity = "Iron Tower simplifying game mechanics"

Dumbing Down = "other developer simplifying game mechanics"
Obediah, it's clear that finding flaws in everything we do is very important to you. I don't think that any attempts to explain the "universal ammo" decision will be heard, because it's not about the ammo. It's about you finding yourself a [rather pitiful] reason to bitch and type angry posts. I would feel bad if I take that away from you, so ... carry on.
 

Melcar

Arcane
Joined
Oct 20, 2008
Messages
35,205
Location
Merida, again
Was it easier to go the ammo variety/upgrade route instead of the different ammo kinds route? You have to admit that on the surface it looks like a lame attempt to add bling to the game. I think it would have been better to have the separate ammo types and have a few variations of each than the other way around. But whatever, we just want the damn game.
 

Serious_Business

Best Poster on the Codex
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
3,904
Location
Frown Town
Double Ogre said:
Vault Dweller said:
Somebody said:
Vault Dweller said:
Somebody said:
Hey, VD, I've noticed that your game has this flaw, how about...
NO U
But wouldn't it be reasonable to...
NO MY GAME IZ GRATE

Get the fuck out you stupid bastard, he's been changing shit because people have been 'offering critiscism' (read : whining) for years now, VD is practically designing this shit as a team effort it's ridiculous, I'm not even defending him, he basically has no confidence in himself as a developper, this game will be out in 2011 mark my words
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
Vault Dweller said:
Good luck justifying a complexity scale where 60 is perfect, but 120 is just too damn confusing.
Where did I say confusing?

Complex? Numerous? Tedious?

Whichever you pick, 60 is already a lot. Going to 120 wouldn't hurt the players head any further.

It's kinda hard to say that you can harden these bolts, but not these, or can apply poison only to these arrows because they are, like, absorb poison better. See what I mean?

It's a lot more palatable to the brain than shooting an arrow out of a crossbow. And of course, all of the possible restrictions must be crap because you thought of one that is crap?

* Limit bow and/or crossbow to two types of ammunition

* one or more metals do not hold the work of a master crafstman, or can not be hardened.

* certain metals are too heavy to construct a jagged head, or too soft to construct a piercing head.

* the design of a bolt/arrow to deliver fire or poison is such that piercing and/or jagged is impossible.

I don't think it would be hard to mix-n-match these to get a number of combinations that is under your limit and offers a richer difference between bows and crossbows while maintaining a satisfying customization system.

Yeah I know - the realism you embrace is absolutely necessary, and the realism you abstract is soul-crushing tedium. That's just the way it is - not at all subjective and absolutely no chance of triggering insights that force you to revise your criticisms of other developers.
Where did I say realism? Can't you feel like you totally put me in my place without making shit up?

Rather than getting bogged down in whether or not shooting a bolt out of a longbow has anything to do with realism - you can just skip to justifying how universal ammo in AoD is "removing unnecessary complexity", yet doing it in other games, or merging axes and hammers is "dumbing down". For the record, I'm going with they are the same thing and any difference is defined by the personal preferences of the observer.
 

Silellak

Cipher
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,198
Location
Tucson, AZ
Double Ogre said:
Vault Dweller said:
Somebody said:
Vault Dweller said:
Somebody said:
Hey, VD, I've noticed that your game has this flaw, how about...
NO U
But wouldn't it be reasonable to...
NO MY GAME IZ GRATE

You are right, they should totally divide bow and crossbow ammunition back into arrows and bolts, just because a couple of people bitched about it on RPG Codex (of all places!).
 

Darth Roxor

Royal Dongsmith
Staff Member
Joined
May 29, 2008
Messages
1,878,377
Location
Djibouti
Vault Dweller said:
@ Obediah: Do you see many people bitching about it? Ask yourself why. We have a shitload of ammo types, not one. We have 3 basic types x 5 metal types x 4 different upgrades (poisoned, flaming, masterwork, hardened) = 60 possible combinations. Does multiplying it by two (arrows/bolts) sound like a really great idea to you?

I doubt anyone would carry around all the 60 possible combinations for BOTH the bow and the crossbow.
 

Silellak

Cipher
Joined
Aug 19, 2008
Messages
3,198
Location
Tucson, AZ
Double Ogre said:
Silellak said:
on RPG Codex (of all places!)
This is pretty ironic, since the Codex crowd is actually the main (or even only) target audience of AoD.

A few whiny people that pop up in every AoD-related thread consistitutes the entire "Codex crowd"? Good to know.

Somehow I doubt Iron Tower has lost any customers because they decided to make bows and crossbows use the same ammunition.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
Melcar said:
Was it easier to go the ammo variety/upgrade route instead of the different ammo kinds route? You have to admit that on the surface it looks like a lame attempt to add bling to the game. I think it would have been better to have the separate ammo types and have a few variations of each than the other way around. But whatever, we just want the damn game.
Meaningful options are better than meaningless options, no?

Serious_Business said:
Get the fuck out you stupid bastard, he's been changing shit because people have been 'offering critiscism' (read : whining) for years now, VD is practically designing this shit as a team effort it's ridiculous, I'm not even defending him, he basically has no confidence in himself as a developper...
Proof? Links? Anything backing up the idiotic notion that AoD is designed by committee?

You are confusing seeking criticism and presenting ideas for discussions with changing the game because someone doesn't like something. If you're having troubles understanding it, click here:

Section8:

I really like VD's method of evolving his designs. Right from the beginning, before AoD even had a name, he was throwing fragments of his design onto the forums and letting us pick at them. I see it going like this:

* Designer develops strong vision internally.
* Designer then seeks criticism and suggestions around that vision.
* Designer and critics argue relative merits.
* Designer improves his vision accordingly.

From my own experiences, I think this is one of the most effective methods a game designer can use - if they're not willing to externalise their ideas, then they ought to be having similar discussions internally - though of course with indies, that becomes difficult since teams are small.
 

Black

Arcane
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
1,872,563
This thread is intense and makes my penis happy.
Don't stop, I enjoy the shitstorm which will be even greater when the game's out (LOL!!!)
 

Lonely Vazdru

Pimp my Title
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,656
Location
Agen
That combat demo is fascinating. I didn't know AoD allowed multiplayer. Keep it up boys !
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
obediah said:
Vault Dweller said:
Good luck justifying a complexity scale where 60 is perfect, but 120 is just too damn confusing.
Where did I say confusing?

Complex? Numerous? Tedious?
Numerous/tedious and confusing are the same thing now?

It's a lot more palatable to the brain than shooting an arrow out of a crossbow. And of course, all of the possible restrictions must be crap because you thought of one that is crap?
Everything you think is crap is crap? Is that the new definition?

Games have nothing to do with realism, so if your brain can handle the fact that you can survive after being cleaved with a 2H axe, that you can easily carry 200 pounds of armor and weapons in your invisible backpack, that you don't need to sleep or eat, that you can master electronics in less than a day, than I'm sure your brain won't fall apart when presented with the universal ammo for bows and crossbows concept.

* Limit bow and/or crossbow to two types of ammunition
Why and how is it a good thing again?

* one or more metals do not hold the work of a master crafstman, or can not be hardened.
Why? Since you like realism so much, I'm sure you're aware that are hardening techniques for bronze, iron, steel, and a lot of other metals.

* certain metals are too heavy to construct a jagged head, or too soft to construct a piercing head.
THAT makes sense?

Yeah I know - the realism you embrace is absolutely necessary, and the realism you abstract is soul-crushing tedium. That's just the way it is - not at all subjective and absolutely no chance of triggering insights that force you to revise your criticisms of other developers.
Where did I say realism? Can't you feel like you totally put me in my place without making shit up?

Rather than getting bogged down in whether or not shooting a bolt out of a longbow has anything to do with realism....
You didn't answer my question.

you can just skip to justifying how universal ammo in AoD is "removing unnecessary complexity", yet doing it in other games, or merging axes and hammers is "dumbing down". For the record, I'm going with they are the same thing and any difference is defined by the personal preferences of the observer.
Well, since you're having problems grasping obvious concepts:

Merging hammers and axes into one Blunt category in Oblivion serves one purpose - reduces the number of skills because having too many skill is confusing and we want little Johny to master all skills and guilds.

Merging ALL ammo into one universal ammo in Deus Ex 2 eliminates ammo management completely, replacing it with the ammo bar. It REMOVES a gameplay element to make the game easier.

Merging arrows and bolts into universal ammo in AoD does NOT reduce skills and does NOT remove a gameplay element. You still have a shitload of different ammo to use/manage. It removes an unnecessary duplication of all ranged ammo. Neither a crossbowman nor a bowman character will be affected by the universal ammo. Both characters will have all ammo options. That's the part and the key difference that you're so stubbornly refusing to grasp.

If you need my help with anything else, let me know.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom