Why so much AoD butthurt?

[John Yossarian]

Thank you for your cooperation.

 

[Mangoose]

I think what VD is trying to say is that there is environment interaction, but it is done in a low budget text-based way because he wants to include many options instead of spending time on lesser amounts of graphical interactions.

 

[Stereotypical Villain]

Here's a question: How long would a speed run of AoD take? Will there be any obvious design "flaws" that one might abuse in order to win in 20 minutes or less (alá Fallout)?

 

[Radisshu]

Yeah just max out guns at character creation, then pickpocket the glock from the shady guy in the first city

 

[Morkar Left]

I was replying to Infinitron. You position has been very reasonable from day one.

I already thought so. Just wanted to be sure to avoid misunderstandings.

It is. The way I see it, environmental interaction is a very interesting and much needed feature, but it doesn't exist yet. We chose to focus on an equally interesting (imo) feature that barely exists - branching plot, choices & consequences, etc. There is only so much you can do in one game with limited resources, although it seems to apply to all games, regardless of resources.

Sounds like a mix of both. The decision is reasonable. But I still think some gameplay elements should have been put better directly into the engine, e.g. stealth mechanics, pickpocketing, friend or foe recognition etc. It would still allow you to use the textboxes (which was a very good idea in the first place) but provide you with more dynamic gameplay.

An ability to use the environment as you would in real life, or as close as possible. Ironically, that's the main reason we did text adventures. When I was re-playing Fallout 2 where you have to run around some fence to get to that car with a spare part, I thought how nice it would be to climb the face or cut a hole in it or even blast it with TNT. While doing animations and new assets would be expensive and time-consuming, throwing in a text box that would check your Agility and teleport you to the other side of the fence if you pass the check would be very easy. That's when the idea to do things the way we did was born.

According to this definition (or better level of detail) there is hardly a game regardless of genre that fullfills this promises. I'm more leaning toward games like Wasteland, Ultima 6/7, JA2, Fallout. For your example above you would have the already existing mechanics (e.g. stealth to circumvent the critters or open the lock) and could allow a dialogue box option to climb over the fence (RoA style).
With JA awesomeness you wouldn't even need a dialogue box and could do everything in the engine on every spot on the fence you would like. But I can totally see why you avoid the amount of extra animations for this; to much effort for a small scale studio with to little impact on the gameplay. Out of my mind a possible solution could be just using soundanimations intead with a fading in/out blackscreen and teleporting the char on the other side of the fence (I left out the obligatory teleport joke here, way to easy).

As for Gothic 2; wouldn't it be cool to have jump, climb, swim, levitate, etc. in AoD for example?

It's not the same in isometric games, imo.

I agree but possible, see JA2, some Fallout, Wasteland or Desperados. It's more about having the right idea on your own as a player and finding the right spot all alone instead of having some char jumping skills or player thumbpressing-agility.

I guess that's the main issue here. Not the actual interaction but the fact that we took too much control (or the illusion of it) from the player.

Yes. That nails it. But it's not just illusion. It forces and encourages the players to use their brain. To think about possibilities and solutions on their own. To encourage this you have to include tools of interaction (stealth, lockpicking, pickpocketing, use-command etc.) right into the engine to provide him with some reliable gamemechanics he can count on to form his own thoughts into the engine. I hope this makes sense, language barriers walling up right here. It's basically a very very limited micro-script-tool for the player to interact with the world if you want to see it from a technical point of view.

Maybe it's just me, but I didn't see it as figuring it out on my own. I used both the radio and the dynamite without thinking about what to do with these things. The radio was clearly an item to be used in a specific event. Sealing the cave was cool, but it was a single use scripted event (not that there is anything wrong with it). Sure, some people missed it, but I would tie it to your character's perception (like we did in the graveyard) and tell you that your character noticed a weak spot if you pass the check and give appropriate options.

When I got the walkietalkie it provided me with some info right away and I instantly thought; hey it will be useful later to circumvent enemy patrols or maybe using it to communicate with other people. Arriving at the base and overthinking my options luring away the guards was one of the things that came right into my mind. And oh the joy to realise it was possible by using it. A simple textbox with offering me this option right away wouldn't have felt that rewarding.
Bring in char skills should provide you with such information when they are good enough but low values shouldn't punish you when you have the right idea. That doesn't mean that the execution of the idea shouldn't be connceted to skills (make a bluff in the walkietalkie example to lure the guards away could be skill-based).

We can easily add chests and locked doors, since looting appears to be a beloved and dear feature. It's already there. A dead body is a container that looks differently. In Dead State you'll be able to loot proper containers and fiddle with doors all you want (and it's the same engine).

The joy of rewarding exploration is a gameplay element you should never underestimate. It crosses over to all genres (even strategy and jump&runs) and is especially a trademark for rpgs.
Adding chests and containers shouldn't be added randomly of course but in logical places with some difficulties to reach them (finding clues, circumvent guards, open the pick, find/steal the right key, avoid the trap, avoid the watchful owner or his dog, not summon the demon inside, kill the demon inside etc.)

 

[Marsal]

 

[Vault Dweller]

 

[Marsal]

It needs to be an animated gif, VD.

See? Much more emotionally engaging!

 

[kaizoku]

The joy of rewarding exploration is a gameplay element you should never underestimate. It crosses over to all genres (even strategy and jump&runs) and is especially a trademark for rpgs.
Adding chests and containers shouldn't be added randomly of course but in logical places with some difficulties to reach them (finding clues, circumvent guards, open the pick, find/steal the right key, avoid the trap, avoid the watchful owner or his dog, not summon the demon inside, kill the demon inside etc.)

I agree with this, but... basically what Mangoose said. Really, what he said.
A good example of what you mentioned is the breaking into Daratan's House, where you have a treasure room to loot. But it's just done in a different way. There isn't any mouse hovering for hotspots and instead you're immediately given your options.

If I were to add anything, regarding the lack of manual interactivity, particularly the ability to loot, it would be that at some instances the game cuts your legs at it. Examples: aurellian mine when you fail the lore check or the lockpick check, thus you return empty handed. When ambushing the merchants, after you kill them you're immediately forced to leave without putting your hands on those sexy corpses.

 

[Infinitron]

As for me, I'm neither holding AoD to the "highest standards" nor "imaginary ideals" which my various examples from other games should show you.

I was replying to Infinitron. You position has been very reasonable from day one.

For the record, there is no substantial difference between my position and Morkar's. I'm not holding AoD to the highest standards. I'm just decrying what seems to me the stubborn closed-mindedness of its creator. Or in other words, sometimes it seems like you don't even recognize that there are higher standards.

I guess it's a marketing guy thing.

 

[Marsal]

I guess it's a marketing guy thing.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I explained how I see it. You see things differently and insist that I drop my own position immediately and adopt yours, since clearly it's the right one. Because I'm not eager to do so, I'm stubborn, close-minded, and blind. Sounds about right?

 

[Infinitron]

I explained how I see it. You see things differently and insist that I drop my own position immediately and adopt yours, since clearly it's the right one. Because I'm not eager to do so, I'm stubborn, close-minded, and blind. Sounds about right?

Actually, by mentioning that there are "higher standards" that it's unreasonable to expect AoD to live up to, you've implicitly adopted my position already. So I guess we're cool.

 

[Vault Dweller]

You mean this post this post?

"Likewise, I find it extremely tiresome how people hold AoD to the highest standards imaginary ideals, forgetting, for a moment, that it's an indie game developed by 4 people without previous experience. Hell, if it's decent, it's already an achievement."

 

[Infinitron]

You mean this post this post?

"Likewise, I find it extremely tiresome how people hold AoD to the highest standards imaginary ideals, forgetting, for a moment, that it's an indie game developed by 4 people without previous experience. Hell, if it's decent, it's already an achievement."

What the hell is an "imaginary ideal"? On one hand, you say that people shouldn't expect so much from a po' little indie game, but on the other hand, you say that their expectations are "imaginary".

I can only conclude that "imaginary ideals" is hyperbole and that you do recognize that those "ideals" are not so imaginary.

 

[FeelTheRads]

There isn't any mouse hovering for hotspots and instead you're immediately given your options.

See, now this is what it's annoying about VD and his fanboys. It's Bethesda all over again. HURRR IT WAZ BAD SO WE REMOVED IT U WOULDNT WANT IT ANYWAY.
Automatically all exploration in all RPGs is "pixel hunting and barrel inspecting", all interactivity is "hovering for hotspots", all non-quest related combat is "filler" and thank god for AoD because it removes all that.

How about actually thinking about what you can do? There's this fence here and hmm... look I have these pliers. What if I cut the fence with them? Or, here's a broken elevator shaft and I have this rope. I wonder if I could use it to climb the shaft!

Now, I understand this is difficult to do for a small team, but the fact that you motivate it by basically saying that what you removed you did so because it was crap in all games ever... eh...

 

[Infinitron]

I see AoD as basically a huge homage to New Reno and other C&C-heavy segments of Fallout. New Reno: Ancient Rome Edition. It's not a Fallout clone, but it is a clone of portions of Fallout that the creator has a huge fetish for.

That's totally cool. The problem is when said creator goes around saying that everything else in the RPG genre (including, in effect, other parts of Fallout!) is fluff that should be disregarded, and that's why the game is the way it is.

I say you should define your game positively, not negatively. "I made AoD this way because I love New Reno." Not "I made AoD this way because everything except New Reno sucks!"

 

[Ion Prothon II]

Few months ago, when the beta came out, and I saw this teleporting thing ang dialog options interaction... I was sure it's just a shortcut for testers, to help focus on scenario branching, variables, accelerate going through the game, and so on.
Now it's just combined with . Not that I;m not interested in the game, though.

It's not like it's just codex being codex. The most of things mentioned here is what the entire world will be bitching about after the release. At least this little part of world interested or doing reviews. And yeah, this release next thursday.

 

[Vault Dweller]

On one hand, you say that people shouldn't expect so much from a po' little indie game, but on the other hand, you say that their expectations are "imaginary".

I'm saying that when people compare AoD to Fallout and Arcanum, they forget that it's an indie game. When people ask why there is no environmental interaction, unless they mean 'where are my chests with loot, bitch!', they expect way too much for such thing doesn't exist yet and we've never promised to do anything about it.

Of course, if all they are saying is 'but I wanted to click on that button!", it's a different issue that has nothing to do with environmental interaction.

 

[Infinitron]

such thing doesn't exist yet

Then at least aspire to (or at least recognize) what little of it does exist. Morkar has already said it:

An ability to use the environment as you would in real life, or as close as possible. Ironically, that's the main reason we did text adventures. When I was re-playing Fallout 2 where you have to run around some fence to get to that car with a spare part, I thought how nice it would be to climb the face or cut a hole in it or even blast it with TNT. While doing animations and new assets would be expensive and time-consuming, throwing in a text box that would check your Agility and teleport you to the other side of the fence if you pass the check would be very easy. That's when the idea to do things the way we did was born.

According to this definition (or better level of detail) there is hardly a game regardless of genre that fullfills this promises. I'm more leaning toward games like Wasteland, Ultima 6/7, JA2, Fallout. For your example above you would have the already existing mechanics (e.g. stealth to circumvent the critters or open the lock) and could allow a dialogue box option to climb over the fence (RoA style).
With JA awesomeness you wouldn't even need a dialogue box and could do everything in the engine on every spot on the fence you would like. But I can totally see why you avoid the amount of extra animations for this; to much effort for a small scale studio with to little impact on the gameplay. Out of my mind a possible solution could be just using soundanimations intead with a fading in/out blackscreen and teleporting the char on the other side of the fence (I left out the obligatory teleport joke here, way to easy).

 

[Vault Dweller]

See, now this is what it's annoying about VD and his fanboys. It's Bethesda all over again. HURRR IT WAZ BAD SO WE REMOVED IT U WOULDNT WANT IT ANYWAY.

Yep, same shit. Removing factions, weapon classes, skills, trademark features like levitation, wall climbing, etc is exactly the same as removing walking from A to B in an isometric game (15 inch avg travel distance) or telling the player that he sees an object he can interact with (in the best traditions of PnP games, mind you) instead of letting the player discover it all by himself (Achievement!). Exactly the same.

How about actually thinking about what you can do? There's this fence here and hmm... look I have these pliers. What if I cut the fence with them? Or, here's a broken elevator shaft and I have this rope. I wonder if I could use it to climb the shaft!

Yeah, words can't describe what I felt when I clicked on the rope and then on the elevator. ME! I DID IT! LOOK, MA! ALL BY MYSELF! TAKE THAT, YOU BROKEN ELEVATOR!

I don't see the difference between doing something that's painfully obvious (at least by the adventure games' standards) and being presented with a text option that sums up the obvious (for my character) things, but maybe that's me.

ITT we discover that different people like different things. News at 11.

 

[hiver]

I say you should define your game positively, not negatively. "I made AoD this way because I love New Reno." Not "I made AoD this way because everything except New Reno sucks!"

I say you should really shut the fuck up and stop inventing what someone else is actually thinking because it makes you look like complete internet moron.
Same goes for your inability to accept the game as it is and instead hate it because its not some other type of a game that you would like better.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Yeah, btw, Fallout didn't have any fence climbing. It does have an animation for climbing ladders, though, which wouldn't be that hard to do. Also, the same "use" animation where the character bends and wiggles his hands a bit is good enough to abstract most of the actions. So, climbing and using... two animations. Looks to me like the reason is that it's easier to script the actions in a CYOA way rather than on scenery objects.

 

[Vault Dweller]

such thing doesn't exist yet

Then at least aspire to (or at least recognize) what little of it does exist. Morkar has already said it:

An ability to use the environment as you would in real life, or as close as possible. Ironically, that's the main reason we did text adventures. When I was re-playing Fallout 2 where you have to run around some fence to get to that car with a spare part, I thought how nice it would be to climb the face or cut a hole in it or even blast it with TNT. While doing animations and new assets would be expensive and time-consuming, throwing in a text box that would check your Agility and teleport you to the other side of the fence if you pass the check would be very easy. That's when the idea to do things the way we did was born.

According to this definition (or better level of detail) there is hardly a game regardless of genre that fullfills this promises. I'm more leaning toward games like Wasteland, Ultima 6/7, JA2, Fallout. For your example above you would have the already existing mechanics (e.g. stealth to circumvent the critters or open the lock) and could allow a dialogue box option to climb over the fence (RoA style).
With JA awesomeness you wouldn't even need a dialogue box and could do everything in the engine on every spot on the fence you would like. But I can totally see why you avoid the amount of extra animations for this; to much effort for a small scale studio with to little impact on the gameplay. Out of my mind a possible solution could be just using soundanimations intead with a fading in/out blackscreen and teleporting the char on the other side of the fence (I left out the obligatory teleport joke here, way to easy).

I'm aware of what does exist in other genres (JA2) and sub-genres (first person games that can cheat and skip animations, like climbing air shafts and walls in Daggerfall). Fallout? I don't see any interaction there, unless you mean scripted events (which were superb).

 

[Infinitron]

I'm aware of what does exist in other genres (JA2) and sub-genres (first person games that can cheat and skip animations, like climbing air shafts and walls in Daggerfall). Fallout? I don't see any interaction there, unless you mean scripted events (which were superb).

And what's wrong with scripted events? They're part of the game, too. You don't need to have that many of them to change the feel of the game.

BTW, would you consider Ultima 6/7 another genre? You didn't mention them. Rather extensive unscripted environmental interaction in those games.