[deleted]

[Mustawd]

If the Codex can survive Fallout 3 being the shittiest of the shitty...yeah, we can survive a crappy retread of a JRPG.

 

[Severian Silk]

If ToN turns out to be shit, then my opinion of Kickstarter/crowdfunding will also take a huge hit. Any optimism I may have felt in the past will be gone, replaced by cynicism and the realization that crowdfunding is just another means of producing games, no better or worse than traditional publishers. It is true the devs may get more of the money with crowdfunding; but who cares when the games are just as shitty?

 

[Lacrymas]

replaced by cynicism and the realization that crowdfunding is just another means of producing games, no better or worse than traditional publishers.

Well, duuuh. The only thing different is the genres being produced. When they can't make a good game to save their lives all the money in the world won't help them.

 

[MLMarkland]

If ToN turns out to be shit, then my opinion of Kickstarter/crowdfunding will also take a huge hit. Any optimism I may have felt in the past will be gone, replaced by cynicism and the realization that crowdfunding is just another means of producing games, no better or worse than traditional publishers. It is true the devs may get more of the money with crowdfunding; but who cares when the games are just as shitty?

Regardless of the quality of individual games I think it's definitively obvious that more games that are desired to be made in the formats they are desired are being made through crowdfunding.

The method of finance isn't going to magically alter human foibles, production challenges, etc.

Having been on inside for both types of productions crowdfunding games have a much higher ship rate and a much higher average rating.

60~80% of old fashioned games get cancelled for example (perhaps many rightly so) -- that's not really something that happens to great degree among the serious crowdfunders.

 

[Severian Silk]

So far almost all the Kickstarters have been disappointing.

Wasteland 2, I haven't played, but it gets panned here
Shadowruns are okay, haven't played Hong Kong
D:OS, setting, ambience, writing, level design suck, combat is okay
PoE, feels watered down, combat sucks
Dead State, mostly broken
Paper Sorcerer, SitS, Legends of Eisenwald, others, are any of these classics?

On the other hand:

Underrail, Aod, Undertale, Witcher 3, good solid RPGs, not Kickstarters!

 

[vortex]

For me narrative is well done and written. I would like to see strong and fun combat gameplay as in D: OS.

 

[Morality Games]

When I was seven years old and finished reading The Hobbit for the first time (took me all night -- I was awake early in the morning), the first thing I did was stay up even later into the afternoon reading it again, from start to finish. It was good, really good, as were subsequent readings, but I was never quite able to capture that original feeling of awe the first reading inspired.

The thing you have to realize is that Planescape: Torment was for many Codexers what you call a formative experience -- a formative experience in C&C driven narrative-focused role playing games.

The thing about formative experiences is, you only get them once.

 

[Lurker King]

Regardless of the quality of individual games I think it's definitively obvious that more games that are desired to be made in the formats they are desired are being made through crowdfunding.

The best thing* about Kickstarter is that it boosted cRPG player’s self-esteem. For the first time in a long time, they could discuss new cRPGs instead of talking about cancelled projects, old games and bashing triple-A products. The bad thing about Kickstarter is that players got deluded with a cRPG renascence that doesn’t exist, which it is dumbing down even a niche medium. With few exceptions, Kickstarter isn’t rewarding talent and promoting old-school games, instead, it’s rewarding crooks to deliver more popamole games and making everyone believe that these popamole games are any better than triple-A bullshit. No one who is right in the head desires games such as PoE.

* Which wasn’t good for me because instead of playing decent classics, I got caught in this web of newly released shitty games.

 

[mastroego]

When I was seven years old and finished reading The Hobbit for the first time (took me all night -- I was awake early in the morning), the first thing I did was stay up even later into the afternoon reading it again, from start to finish. It was good, really good, as were subsequent readings, but I was never quite able to capture that original feeling of awe the first reading inspired.

The thing you have to realize is that Planescape: Torment was for many Codexers what you call a formative experience -- a formative experience in C&C driven narrative-focused role playing games.

The thing about formative experiences is, you only get them once.

Yeah I read the first half or so of LotR in one day. I was 11 or 12 at most.
You get that kind of experience only once, so true.

 

[Lurker King]

When I was seven years old and finished reading The Hobbit for the first time (took me all night -- I was awake early in the morning), the first thing I did was stay up even later into the afternoon reading it again, from start to finish. It was good, really good, as were subsequent readings, but I was never quite able to capture that original feeling of awe the first reading inspired.

The thing you have to realize is that Planescape: Torment was for many Codexers what you call a formative experience -- a formative experience in C&C driven narrative-focused role playing games.

The thing about formative experiences is, you only get them once.

That is not important. To insist on your analogy, the point is that T:ToN will only succeed if it is rich enough to provide a formative experience of its own. Playing Torment shouldn’t be like having the mesmerizing experience of playing Planescape for the first time, but it should provide another incredible experience of its own. That is reasonable to expect from a game inspired in PS:T, wich received ridiculous amount of funding and has a lot of talent involved. If they screw up, it's their fault, they have no one else to blame.

 

[Morality Games]

When I was seven years old and finished reading The Hobbit for the first time (took me all night -- I was awake early in the morning), the first thing I did was stay up even later into the afternoon reading it again, from start to finish. It was good, really good, as were subsequent readings, but I was never quite able to capture that original feeling of awe the first reading inspired.

The thing you have to realize is that Planescape: Torment was for many Codexers what you call a formative experience -- a formative experience in C&C driven narrative-focused role playing games.

The thing about formative experiences is, you only get them once.

That is not important. To insist on your analogy, the point is that T:ToN will only succeed if it is rich enough to provide a formative experience of its own. Playing Torment shouldn’t be like having the mesmerizing experience of playing Planescape for the first time, but it should provide another incredible experience of its own. That is reasonable to expect from a game inspired in PS:T, wich received ridiculous amount of funding and has a lot of talent involved. If they screw up, it's their fault, they have no one else to blame.

Formative experiences don't work like that

When you were a baby splashing your hands in a puddle was amazing, as was discovering the difference between "soft" and "hard" textures by rubbing your palms on them, and basically everything. In adulthood puddles are this annoying thing you don't want to step in and ruin your shoes.

Or to put it the way mr. Btongue might, Planescape: Torment is what you call a Jungian archetype. It occupies vital real estate in each player's identity, emotions, and memory, and to the extent that this isn't true that is the extent the player does not rave about how amazing it is -- those guys are the players who say Planescape: Torment is shit.

T:TON might be enjoyable for P:T fans, but it can't compare with a deeply rooted game play experience. There aren't any qualities a game designer can put into the game to inspire that devotion.

 

[Lurker King]

My point is that the question about whether T:ToN will be another landmark in the cRPGs history has nothing to do with whether they are inspired by PS:T or not. AoD was also influenced by PS:T and it blew me away. I also think it’s superior than PS:T. I’m not following T:ToN updates closely, but I’m curious to see the result. If it end up being a bad game, it will not be because of a lack of similarities with Planescape, for the same reason that FO is not a bad game because it’s different from Planescape. I’m also a Planescape fan and I couldn’t care less about its inspiration. Just give me engrossing cRPGs and I'm happy.

 

[Shadowfang]

How come its the first time i see this pool?
I am prepared for it to be shit. If it isn't they'll get my gold.
Nothing wrong with playing it safe after those franchise rapes and crowd funded disappointments.

 

[Starwars]

From playing the beta, I kind have a hard time seeing how anyone who enjoyed PS:T would find this to be a piece of shit (whether it will actually match Torment is another issue). But stranger things have happened on the Codex of course.

 

[Black Angel]

Hi y'all, newfag here. Also, since I'm not a backer of T:ToN, I rarely keep tabs on updates and development logs of the game. The recent Codex Gamescom interview with Fargo getting cancelled, however, brought to my attention a picture of how the game fare along since it gets funded back in 2013, and what it would turn out to be, which some would claim being shit. The recent interview debacle is obviously some shenanigan committed by inXile-Techland, most likely to completely avoid the Codex's questions after they announced a simultaneous PC-console release. So, could anyone give me some TL;DR if the game would turns out to be okay? If not, why exactly? Among some things mentioned that would turn the game into shit:

1. Simultaneous PC-console release. While most, if not all cases of simultaneous releases so far resulted in the PC version being gimped in favor of the console versions, ain't inXile managed consoles releases just fine for the Wasteland 2: Director's Cut? I've heard that the shop UI was worse, but is that it? Is there more to be afraid of based on WL2: DC PC version? What could possibly hinder the PC version of T:ToN, this time around?
2. 4-man party, instead of 6. I've heard that the Torment tradition suggest of 6-man party, care to elaborate more on that? I've also heard that 4-man party is in purpose of jumping the casual-pandering wagon for the likes of Dragon Age games. Why would 4-man party made (or contribute to) the game into shit?
3. Kevin Saunders, who was once the Project Director for the game, got fired halfway through the development. Some would attribute the game would turn into shit because of this. Would anybody kindly explain this?
4. Turn-Based combat instead of RTwP. All I know is that, in respecting the tradition and credibility of Infinity Engine game, the game was supposed to be RTwP (or something like that). Though, at the end of the day most of the Codex didn't really care if it's TB or RTwP, isn't TB would be better for the game since PS:T not exactly known or loved for its combat, so ain't this time around the combat would be... I don't know, better?
5. Numenera setting being too colorful, in comparison to the original setting of Sigil and the rest being bleak and mostly grey.
6. Pandering to SJWs crowd.

Point 5 & 6, I can't say more, but that's what I've heard. Anybody care to elaborate further on those points? What do people mean by that? Could anyone point me to the updates that leads to some Codexers here to accuse T:ToN pandering to SJWs crowd, and Numenera setting unfit to be a place where the sequel (or successor) to PS:T takes place?

Also, I know that the game's initial release had been pushed back few times. It was initially supposed to be delivered by December 2014, but was then pushed back to 2015 supposedly because of Wasteland 2's Early Access being a success, then pushed back to 2016, and finally pushed back to Q1 2017 (most likely to accommodate for the console version), yet some here would claim how the game was already developed with console version in mind. Why would this delay means that the game is being gimped to accommodate for console release? Ain't the EA version on Steam fares just fine?

So, could anybody explain to this newfag all above? Or at least, give a TL;DR?

Inb4, everything is shit.

 

[Infinitron]

The four person party is a very early design decision, made by Kevin Saunders. It may have been known already during the Kickstarter campaign, and definitely since 2013. Some people seem to have decided to get mad about it again now, because people (although actually back in 2013 almost nobody gave a fuck)

 

[Black Angel]

The four person party is a very early design decision, made by Kevin Saunders. It may have been known already during the Kickstarter campaign, and definitely since 2013. Some people seem to have decided to get mad about it again now, because people (although actually back in 2013 almost nobody gave a fuck)

Fair enough...I guess?

And holy shit, I forgot to also mention this: there was supposed to be a entirely different system related to health bars/health pool. I only vaguely remembered it, but now it has been changed, allegedly because newer players can't understand it. So, what's up with that? Why would it turn (or contribute to) the game into shit?

 

[Popiel]

Could anyone point me to the updates that leads to some Codexers here to accuse T:ToN pandering to SJWs crowd, and Numenera setting unfit to be a place where the sequel (or successor) to PS:T takes place?

Numenera is about nothing, therefore cannot be worthy successor to P:T, because said game was set in a setting that was about something.

 

[Sacred82]

1. 4-man party, instead of 6. I've heard that the Torment tradition suggest of 6-man party, care to elaborate more on that? I've also heard that 4-man party is in purpose of jumping the casual-pandering wagon for the likes of Dragon Age games. Why would 4-man party made (or contribute to) the game into shit?

Personally I prefer multi-class/ versatile characters over one-trick ponies, so I like 4 person parties (It's actually how I play PS:T).

I think this particular criticism is simply about it being 'not like PS:T'.

 

[Sannom]

The four person party is a very early design decision, made by Kevin Saunders. It may have been known already during the Kickstarter campaign, and definitely since 2013. Some people seem to have decided to get mad about it again now, because people (although actually back in 2013 almost nobody gave a fuck)

Maybe that Tyranny criticism is bleeding out somehow?

 

[Space Insect]

The four person party is a very early design decision, made by Kevin Saunders. It may have been known already during the Kickstarter campaign, and definitely since 2013. Some people seem to have decided to get mad about it again now, because people (although actually back in 2013 almost nobody gave a fuck)

Fair enough...I guess?

And holy shit, I forgot to also mention this: there was supposed to be a entirely different system related to health bars/health pool. I only vaguely remembered it, but now it has been changed, allegedly because newer players can't understand it. So, what's up with that? Why would it turn (or contribute to) the game into shit?

Paging The Game Analists for answer

 

[Excidium II]

ain't inXile managed consoles releases just fine for the Wasteland 2: Director's Cut?

Yeah, with the DC which came an year later. Different scenario.

Numenera setting being too colorful, in comparison to the original setting of Sigil and the rest being bleak and mostly grey.

That's a fairly minor point, the real setting problem is one best explained by Prime Junta in his review of the torment splatbook for the numenera pnp.

 

[Lurker King]

prodigydancer

 

[Fairfax]

Hi y'all, newfag here. Also, since I'm not a backer of T:ToN, I rarely keep tabs on updates and development logs of the game. The recent Codex Gamescom interview with Fargo getting cancelled, however, brought to my attention a picture of how the game fare along since it gets funded back in 2013, and what it would turn out to be, which some would claim being shit. The recent interview debacle is obviously some shenanigan committed by inXile-Techland, most likely to completely avoid the Codex's questions after they announced a simultaneous PC-console release. So, could anyone give me some TL;DR if the game would turns out to be okay? If not, why exactly? Among some things mentioned that would turn the game into shit:

1. Simultaneous PC-console release. While most, if not all cases of simultaneous releases so far resulted in the PC version being gimped in favor of the console versions, ain't inXile managed consoles releases just fine for the Wasteland 2: Director's Cut? I've heard that the shop UI was worse, but is that it? Is there more to be afraid of based on WL2: DC PC version? What could possibly hinder the PC version of T:ToN, this time around?
2. 4-man party, instead of 6. I've heard that the Torment tradition suggest of 6-man party, care to elaborate more on that? I've also heard that 4-man party is in purpose of jumping the casual-pandering wagon for the likes of Dragon Age games. Why would 4-man party made (or contribute to) the game into shit?
3. Kevin Saunders, who was once the Project Director for the game, got fired halfway through the development. Some would attribute the game would turn into shit because of this. Would anybody kindly explain this?
4. Turn-Based combat instead of RTwP. All I know is that, in respecting the tradition and credibility of Infinity Engine game, the game was supposed to be RTwP (or something like that). Though, at the end of the day most of the Codex didn't really care if it's TB or RTwP, isn't TB would be better for the game since PS:T not exactly known or loved for its combat, so ain't this time around the combat would be... I don't know, better?
5. Numenera setting being too colorful, in comparison to the original setting of Sigil and the rest being bleak and mostly grey.
6. Pandering to SJWs crowd.

Point 5 & 6, I can't say more, but that's what I've heard. Anybody care to elaborate further on those points? What do people mean by that? Could anyone point me to the updates that leads to some Codexers here to accuse T:ToN pandering to SJWs crowd, and Numenera setting unfit to be a place where the sequel (or successor) to PS:T takes place?

Also, I know that the game's initial release had been pushed back few times. It was initially supposed to be delivered by December 2014, but was then pushed back to 2015 supposedly because of Wasteland 2's Early Access being a success, then pushed back to 2016, and finally pushed back to Q1 2017 (most likely to accommodate for the console version), yet some here would claim how the game was already developed with console version in mind. Why would this delay means that the game is being gimped to accommodate for console release? Ain't the EA version on Steam fares just fine?

So, could anybody explain to this newfag all above? Or at least, give a TL;DR?

Inb4, everything is shit.

Note: I've listed these same concerns as potential red flags in a couple of posts, not things that would turn the game into shit.

1. I don't know much about WL2 on consoles besides the shitty UI they forced on PC as well. Besides the game's UI, I suspect the game could have more content changed because of performance issue, but we'll never know what and how much was changed because of consoles without a whistleblower or something. All we have is confirmation bias in case something smells consolized in the final game.

2. No idea. Makes no sense, if you ask me. Could be to avoid performance issues (first beta ran like shit, imagine how bad it was even earlier in development), or maybe because it makes combat much harder to balance. Both, perhaps.

3. Firing the Project Director is a pretty big deal, and AFAIK he was responsible for putting the KS together, including the people to work on it. We don't know what happened there, though.

4. I'm the only one bringing that up as a concern. The vast majority of the Codex favours TB and campaigned for it during the combat poll. My main complaint is that they rigged the vote to make it TB, and I also think a self-proclaimed successor should keep the same type of combat.
Anyway, if the game is shit, you can bet nobody here will mention TB as a reason.

5. Since this is something we've all seen beforehand, it won't be a disappointment. Although MCA also said recently that Numenera doesn't have as much freedom as Planescape.
I prefer Planescape by a mile, but I think in some aspects most people don't expect TTON to be as good or better than PST. This might be one of them.

6. Yeah, that stuff is shitty writing no matter the positions being promoted. This happens to be extremely heavy handed in Numenera, and most TTON devs are hardcore SJWs.

 

[Space Insect]

You're welcome, Black Angel.