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.

Age of Decadence Reviews

Fenix

Arcane
Vatnik
Joined
Jul 18, 2015
Messages
6,458
Location
Russia atchoum!
Yeah, Inquisition is the only one which could be comparable somehow.
 

Momock

Augur
Joined
Sep 26, 2014
Messages
644
you have no idea which approach will result in a better outcome, you're just guessing.
Eeeeh.... thank God for that? What's the alternative? That they spoil the game for you in a pop-up when you put the cursor over each option?
 

Bester

⚰️☠️⚱️
Patron
Vatnik
Joined
Sep 28, 2014
Messages
11,003
Location
USSR
you have no idea which approach will result in a better outcome, you're just guessing.
Eeeeh.... thank God for that? What's the alternative? That they spoil the game for you in a pop-up when you put the cursor over each option?
You know how in level design you slightly highlight the area the player is supposed to go to? Put other various visual cues?

In a branching story, there should be cues as well, otherwise it's a story-maze and all decisions you make are as good as random, and therefore meaningless. Nobody enjoys that.
 

Verylittlefishes

Sacro Bosco
Patron
Joined
Sep 14, 2019
Messages
4,731
Location
Oneoropolis
you have no idea which approach will result in a better outcome, you're just guessing.
Eeeeh.... thank God for that? What's the alternative? That they spoil the game for you in a pop-up when you put the cursor over each option?
You know how in level design you slightly highlight the area the player is supposed to go to? Put other various visual cues?

In a branching story, there should be cues as well, otherwise it's a story-maze and all decisions you make are as good as random, and therefore meaningless. Nobody enjoys that.

Isnt it just like this real life thing?
 

Goral

Arcane
Patron
The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
3,552
Location
Poland
I haven't checked on AoD reviews but these two are gold:

smaurine82 said:
First, I love role-playing games, and the cons are just my personal cons. Maybe you like them. I wanted to like this game but I just couldn't get into it no matter how hard I tried.
Cons:
No voice-acting, ALL reading, and the dialog size was fixed to a certain size
Sims 1 quality of graphics
Role-play is political focused (boring) and less adventuring-focused
Difficult to learn/figure out controls
Combat system was epic lame
Extremely limited character customization
I just couldn't get into it or feel invested in my character

Pros:
I liked the freedom of choice in how I responded to people/dialog options
I like that it showed me that an extra dialog option was due to a certain skill (e.g., persuade)
What else... it's a role-playing game, so that is always a pro.
This one might be even better though:

Excogitator said:
There only needs to be one major flaw to completely ruin a game and make it unplayable. With this one, not a bad game overall, it's the simple fact that there's no directions or location markers or any information anywhere on the planet earth apparently about the locations of the NPC's. You will be constantly told after nearly every quest to return to another NPC. Unless you play the whole game through in one sitting, which you won't so...I return after a week or so and notice I have 2 quests complete already (I now know why I stopped playing) and all I need to do is return to a NPC (not necessarily the original quest giver).

OK, so after 3 hours of scouring the internet I managed to find one NPC where, after dealing with him, I was to return to "Quintus". This is where I entered the twilight zone. Quintus simply doesn't exist outside of my personal reality it seems. Nowhere have I been able to find a single shred of evidence of his digital existence. The games list of character NPC's don't show a Quintus, the official wiki AoD website has nothing other than the option to create a page on "Quintus". W T F is going on!?!? F U C K Y O U AoD. I give up.

There is also this "serious" one:
JeNoVaViRuS said:
I will try to explain the system of the game as clear as possible without spoiling.
The game is "supposed" to be a turn-based RPG. This only applies if you are actually building and skilling as a fighter or hybrid (half fighting, half talking). You don't have ONE SINGLE FIGHT in the game if you only skill as a talker. It turns into a click & point adventure game if you do so. Opposed to what the devs say a fighter is the hardest playthrough.
You start your character by investing in STAT points in 6 categories that CAN NOT BE CHANGED (or hardly) during the game. These STAT points determine the rest of your SKILL points. The SKILL points are then given after you are done with the STAT points right in the caracters creation screen and can be earned throughout the game. This means that once you have created your character, you are already limiting your whole game expierence. I have to say that I actually like this because it made me actually replay the game which I never do with games but what I don't like is that it isn't made clear right from the start and you can already f*ck up hard. In dialogues or interaction with the environment it does "checks" (visible AND hidden) which means it looks for the level of your STATS and or SKILLS and if they are high enough you can successfully do an interaction/dialogue. The levels needed are not shown but only the STATS and SKILLS if they are "visible". Some are hidden. Now my recommendation: Don't invest STAT points half way. They can be skilled from 4 to 10. Either go full or almost full in one stat but don't try to make all about 7 or so. Save ALL the SKILL points and start the game. Save all the time. If you need a higher skill level then reload and skill it. At the start you don't know what you need so e.g. if you want to skill "Impersonate" hard you will not be able to use it very much (maybe 2 times) in the first city and will fail everywhere.
My critique and why this game is unbalanced can be read here. This is why I have to give a negative review. Don't get me wrong, I had fun here and there but there was too much frustration. If you are new to the game and don't know about the system you will get f*cked. Even more if you are going for a fighter. A talker is ridiculously easy. With STAT points 8 in Charisma you can literally walk into the bandit camp and demand the boss to free the hostage just because you are so charming. Or you can talk to a Demon enemy who has the task to kill everyone entering the area but you are so intelligent (STAT) and convincing (persusasion skill) that he will listen to you and let you enter. Come on, atleast let it make sense.
Lore: Very deep and complex, you only learn parts and can only know all of it with different playthroughs. I like it.
Interface: Cool design but could be more neat. Better quest organisation like main and side quest separation and quest history as well as Inventory and Trading. Skills window is well done and clear.
Additional gameplay notice: the game is very unforgiving. Some actions can permanently decrease your STATS or HP. Some few actions can increase them.
Now my personal experience:
Fighter (Mercenary):
I am often rather a fighter than a mage (often overpowered) or a talker with social skills in games. I like challenge. The problem with this game is that it takes neither skill nor a great amount of tactics to fight. Even worse is that you have a hit chance for your attacks which makes the fights absolutely random. 3vs3 can end in 1vs3 or 3vs1. I had enemies that dodged my 99 and 97% hit chance. I had enemies that dodged 7 out of 8 attacks with 80% hit chance. I never hit an attack with up to 40%. Don't tell me about bad luck, this was too clear throughout the whole playthrough to be bad luck.
Now comes the worst: already at the starting town I had to invest the SKILL points into combat (Axe and Block). I took all fights multiple times and barely made it. Some heavy armored Guards? No problem. 3 hobos in a hut? Can't even kill one of them. I maxed out the skills and got the most out of the first city with all quests that I could do. The problem is that if you are a fighter you will miss A LOT of options in the game thus you will receive way less skill points cause you can't solve some things. It isn't dependent on how well you play but how you invested in the STAT points. Once you have started to invest SKILL points in fighting skills you are in a vicious cycle. You will now encounter fights that are too hard to win. To progress you now have to invest all your SKILL points that you might want to save up to invest in social SKILLS to skip fights but you can't because you have too few. You now have to invest in the combat SKILLS again to win a fight. After that you might get some points to win the next fight you were not able to win before by investing your newly gained SKILL points again into combat SKILLS. But even with ONLY combat SKILLS I couldn't even handle the "end" fight in the first city from the Assassin Guild with the Centurion. This forced me to chose another option to progress and I was not able to enter a guild and do a questline which made me miss out many SKILL points.
I finished the game with one of the easiest endings. I missed many locations because I couldn't get anywhere without social SKILLS to get information about more places. I missed much lore. I missed much fun. You will have a lot of money to buy good gear but it will only get you so far. My final SKILLS were:
Axe: 9
Block: 9
Crafting: 3
Alchemy: 2
I had others leveled up as well but I got them by finishing some quest and not by investing directly. Compare it with the talker and see what I mean.
Talker (Drifter):
Easy AF to get through the game as I said not one single fight needed. You already have a ton of SKILL points after the first town and you could go for a hybrid if you want to. You will be low on money but it is enough to get through the game. For special endings you need items OR/AND special STAT points. So if you created your character with the "wrong" STATS then you are f*cked. You can also only look up the requirements for the checks in the wiki. Weird.
My final SKILLS were:
Impersonate: 3
Etiquette: 5
Persusaion: 10
Streetwise: 9
Crafting: 8
Lore: 9
Trading: 5
See the difference?
Summary: The game CAN be fun if you know what you are doing. Try it as a talker first (4-4-4-9-10-9 STATS), save up SKILL points, invest only when needed. Get a feeling for the game and if you want you can then replay.
EDIT: Fixed some words because of steam censorship.
He gives some reasonable critique in some places but saying that "when you play as a talker there are just win buttons everywhere and they make no sense" isn't true. Contrary to almost any RPG with persuasion all silver tongue lines are silver tongue. In The Outer Worlds persuasion lines weren't persuasive, they were just win buttons. Similar with DE. But in AoD talking your way out from Antidas' palace or negotiating hostage release were very well written and convincing making me believe that a skilled, charismatic, silver tongued person could actually pull it off.
 

Blaine

Cis-Het Oppressor
Patron
Joined
Oct 6, 2012
Messages
1,874,662
Location
Roanoke, VA
Grab the Codex by the pussy
You know how in level design you slightly highlight the area the player is supposed to go to? Put other various visual cues?

In a branching story, there should be cues as well, otherwise it's a story-maze and all decisions you make are as good as random, and therefore meaningless. Nobody enjoys that.

DarkUnderlord

Requesting user name change from "Bester" to "Worster."
 
Joined
May 8, 2018
Messages
3,535
A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

Score: 4/10

Mediocrity Score: Mediocre at Best.

The Age of Decadence is a strangely unbalanced turn-based CRPG. It rather uniquely takes combat out from being the main focus and pits the player into a scenario where you can take different approaches. Touted for being a game where "choices matter", the game somehow feels so linear - locking the player into a path chosen early on. Choices in the game will keep you on your toes, that is until you realize the pattern of don't trust anyone, ever. My advice before buying is - play the demo first.

Tags: The few words that come to mind are: mediocre, unbalanced, dialogue-heavy, cheap.

Avg. Time to beat: 21 hours

Quickest Speedrun: 2 minutes, 57 seconds

Quick Take: Play the demo first. If there is anything you should do before buying, it is to play the demo. This game is both very difficult and very easy. Rather unique in its approach, within The Age of Decadence you can 100% avoid all combat in the game by taking a more charismatic-stacked approach in your character build. What they don't mention is how incredibly simple the game becomes when you go for this non-combat route. It turns into a dialogue-heavy, point-and-click game where if you make the wrong choice you likely will be thrown into a combat situation where you will surely, and cheaply, die. Go with the combat route, and you are faced with a stacked-against-you RNG-based combat which is difficult to the point of coming off as both brutal and cheap. The one thing both routes have in common is the smoke-and-mirrors masking the cheap game-ending situations it constantly throws your way. In complete fairness reading reviews, watching let's plays, playing the demo, or even the reading developer's own disclaimers - potential players have been warned that "there is a good chance that you won’t like it, precisely because we took too many liberties with the established design". I can't help but feel like this is akin to being told "Here's the really over-cooked steak you ordered. There is a good chance you won't like it, but since this is all intentional - we've taken an extra heavy-handed approach with its blackened design." Yet here I am, disappointed that I paid for a really over-cooked steak that has an impressive char-broiled aesthetic.

Pros:

  • Has an honest demo.

  • Multiple routes may be taken to beat the game.

  • Incredibly funny and useful skill/ability descriptions. More games should take inspiration from this.

  • Some hilarious ways to find yourself dying, made out as a fool, or being separated from your money.

  • Budget-friendly in cost and in required/recommended system specs.

  • NPCs are hilariously evil, greedy, untrustworthy, and always out to get you.

Cons:


  • A lot of cheap situations made to make you fail while masquerading as being a "choices matter" feature.

  • RNG in combat is grossly stacked against the player, and always in favor of the NPC combatants.

  • The non-combat path becomes a trivial point-and-click game that leads to instadeath anytime you find yourself having clicked the wrong dialogue choice and end-up in combat.

  • Boring story with a boring end-conclusion. Dialogue becomes a chore.

  • The most important choice you will pick are your attribute points at the start of the game. Once you set yourself on that path, there is no deviating from it. You are locked in and cannot improve your stats in the game.

  • Lacking equipment options to suit your character with. I felt it was far too shallow.

Concept:
Throwback to the days of the classic-RPG. A bit experimental in its choice to take the focus away from combat and places it on the decisions and paths you take within a brutally corrupt and greedy society. Strongly driven by narrative with a big emphasis on dialogue (over 600,000 words of dialogue alone). Name of the game is, survive or die. Expect the unexpected. Unless you're not expecting to die. You're gonna die.

Graphics: Nothing award-winning for sure. Still seems dated for 2015-standards, and even more so for 2020. Keep your expectations reasonable, and it will be fine. Good enough so as not to detract from the gameplay.

Sound: I'll hand it to the audio/sound team - they did a stellar job. Great music and sounds are very fitting. Unfortunately for the rest of the game, for me, this might be its strongest aspect. No voice-acting though.

Gameplay: Narrative-driven gameplay where your choice can either get you killed, your pockets emptied, or if you're lucky - you'll come out on top as champion. Classic, turn-based RPG elements push you to become a character of your own. The variety of skills and abilities adds to the enjoyment of seeing your character progress throughout the game. Become a master-manipulator or a bag-man for one of the many houses of power. Your choices will never be quite as black or white as you'd first think.

Entertainment: The best parts of the game for me was letting my guard down only to be tricked again by another shady commoner within one of the towns. The game did have many enjoyable moments, mostly in the form of laughs at the sticky situations I'd incidentally put my character into. The frustration of too much dialogue mixed, or on the other hand the frustration of one-sided combat, far too often soiled the good times that I found elsewhere in the game. I had a hard time finding a point where I felt the game was balanced. It was either too easy or too hard. Call me Goldilocks.

Replayability: At a minimum, this game has enough variety in your character-build options to have two playthroughs. One combat-oriented, and one non-combat oriented. There are some more granular choices or even skills that could push some of the bigger fans to further runs through the game.

Cheats??: Yup! To be honest, this is one of the few games where I did not find additional entertainment value in them. Feel free to try them out for yourself and be the judge.

  • Add skill points
    • dlgaddskillpoints(x)
  • Change stat points (Can place a - before x to lower the stat by that number. Replace y with one of the following: str dex con per int cha)
    • dlgChangeStat(y,x)
  • Change a specific skill (Can place a - before x to lower the skill by that number. Replace y with the skill name)
    • dlgChangeSkill(y,x)
  • Add Gold
    • dlgChangeMoney(x)
  • Set Full HP
    • CheatHP()
  • Add item via Item IDs
    • dlgAddItem(x,#)
      • Complete lists of IDs can be found via Google or DuckDuckGo
---Full Review Below---

I get concerned when a game is overall and recently rated as very positive, but the first several reviews in the "most helpful" category are overtly negative. To me, this immediately means it's a more divisive, polarizing game - typically on a "love or hate" scale.

I'll give big props to the devs for making a free demo, strongly recommending people trying before buying, as well as provide much insight and caution to the difficulty of combat. After-all, combat tends to be a major selling point for many games - RPGs included. With all of the existing warnings and disclaimers, no one should be surprised by the difficulty. You've been warned by practically everyone.

What they don't mention is how incredibly simple the game becomes when you go for the non-combat character build. It really becomes a point-and-click game with a really, really heavy amount of dialogue and lore. It's trivial. Which isn't a bad thing necessarily, it just gets a bit too drab for my liking. Becomes an interactive book - which again, isn't an insult just a distinction.

This game is highly acclaimed for its wide variety of choices and how they affect the game greatly. I disagree. If you choose a combat-based build, you can't deviate without near-guaranteed failure. Vice-versa with non-combat/civil builds, getting into combat is a sure way to die. This forces you to make far more linear choices and sets you on a path that will corner you into only being able to succeed in a few ways. It's certainly realistic, but not something I'd tout as being non-linear and that "choices matter". They only matter in the immediate sense of fail or succeed, die or survive. It would appear your choices made an impact, while somewhat true - most of this is decided at the very start of the game; attribute point distribution.

I finished the game in a single evening [8 hours with breaks, maybe??]. Which seems...very fast. So I looked into speed runs, and without gross exploits - it can be beaten in under 5 minutes. Technically - no combat is even required from what I can tell, which again is not an inherently bad thing, just an unusual one. I did find the game rather...boring overall. I found myself dragging my feet to continue playing through to the end.

$15 USD is a good, reasonable asking price for the game. If a sale put's it at 50-75% off, then all the better. Great budget recommended system specs and even better minimum. If you've got an older, or perhaps simply not as high-performance of a computer, this game would be a great fit and all the more worth the price. That being said, I don't know that I can put much more than maybe 10 hours into the game. Sure - there's some replay value but the same NPC conversations and quests get dull rather quickly. It's simply not something I'd generally recommend. Only with asterisks. Which brings me to my rating and recommendations:

I can't broadly recommend The Age of Decadence. Only for certain people.

For me, a 4/10. Strangely unbalanced. It does some things really right, and some things really wrong. I preferred the non-combat, more dialogue-driven paths - but that required a lot of reading of a rather...mediocre story. I did like how dishonest and untrustworthy almost the entire NPC base is. Kept me on my toes... until I realized the pattern of don't trust anyone.

I'd recommend the game to people who:
  • Loved the demo.

  • Love hardcore combat.

  • Love point-and-click games and are willing to stick to non-combat builds.

  • Have a budget or low-performance system, but are itching for a different RPG.

  • Getting it with a significant discount
Everyone else, probably don't bother. There are much better RPG titles out there more worthy of your time and money.

---------

Thanks for reading!
 

jackofshadows

Magister
Joined
Oct 21, 2019
Messages
4,491
A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

Score: 4/10

Mediocrity Score: Mediocre at Best.

The Age of Decadence is a strangely unbalanced turn-based CRPG. It rather uniquely takes combat out from being the main focus and pits the player into a scenario where you can take different approaches. Touted for being a game where "choices matter", the game somehow feels so linear - locking the player into a path chosen early on. Choices in the game will keep you on your toes, that is until you realize the pattern of don't trust anyone, ever. My advice before buying is - play the demo first.

Tags: The few words that come to mind are: mediocre, unbalanced, dialogue-heavy, cheap.

Avg. Time to beat: 21 hours

Quickest Speedrun: 2 minutes, 57 seconds

Quick Take: Play the demo first. If there is anything you should do before buying, it is to play the demo. This game is both very difficult and very easy. Rather unique in its approach, within The Age of Decadence you can 100% avoid all combat in the game by taking a more charismatic-stacked approach in your character build. What they don't mention is how incredibly simple the game becomes when you go for this non-combat route. It turns into a dialogue-heavy, point-and-click game where if you make the wrong choice you likely will be thrown into a combat situation where you will surely, and cheaply, die. Go with the combat route, and you are faced with a stacked-against-you RNG-based combat which is difficult to the point of coming off as both brutal and cheap. The one thing both routes have in common is the smoke-and-mirrors masking the cheap game-ending situations it constantly throws your way. In complete fairness reading reviews, watching let's plays, playing the demo, or even the reading developer's own disclaimers - potential players have been warned that "there is a good chance that you won’t like it, precisely because we took too many liberties with the established design". I can't help but feel like this is akin to being told "Here's the really over-cooked steak you ordered. There is a good chance you won't like it, but since this is all intentional - we've taken an extra heavy-handed approach with its blackened design." Yet here I am, disappointed that I paid for a really over-cooked steak that has an impressive char-broiled aesthetic.

Pros:

  • Has an honest demo.

  • Multiple routes may be taken to beat the game.

  • Incredibly funny and useful skill/ability descriptions. More games should take inspiration from this.

  • Some hilarious ways to find yourself dying, made out as a fool, or being separated from your money.

  • Budget-friendly in cost and in required/recommended system specs.

  • NPCs are hilariously evil, greedy, untrustworthy, and always out to get you.

Cons:


  • A lot of cheap situations made to make you fail while masquerading as being a "choices matter" feature.

  • RNG in combat is grossly stacked against the player, and always in favor of the NPC combatants.

  • The non-combat path becomes a trivial point-and-click game that leads to instadeath anytime you find yourself having clicked the wrong dialogue choice and end-up in combat.

  • Boring story with a boring end-conclusion. Dialogue becomes a chore.

  • The most important choice you will pick are your attribute points at the start of the game. Once you set yourself on that path, there is no deviating from it. You are locked in and cannot improve your stats in the game.

  • Lacking equipment options to suit your character with. I felt it was far too shallow.

Concept:
Throwback to the days of the classic-RPG. A bit experimental in its choice to take the focus away from combat and places it on the decisions and paths you take within a brutally corrupt and greedy society. Strongly driven by narrative with a big emphasis on dialogue (over 600,000 words of dialogue alone). Name of the game is, survive or die. Expect the unexpected. Unless you're not expecting to die. You're gonna die.

Graphics: Nothing award-winning for sure. Still seems dated for 2015-standards, and even more so for 2020. Keep your expectations reasonable, and it will be fine. Good enough so as not to detract from the gameplay.

Sound: I'll hand it to the audio/sound team - they did a stellar job. Great music and sounds are very fitting. Unfortunately for the rest of the game, for me, this might be its strongest aspect. No voice-acting though.

Gameplay: Narrative-driven gameplay where your choice can either get you killed, your pockets emptied, or if you're lucky - you'll come out on top as champion. Classic, turn-based RPG elements push you to become a character of your own. The variety of skills and abilities adds to the enjoyment of seeing your character progress throughout the game. Become a master-manipulator or a bag-man for one of the many houses of power. Your choices will never be quite as black or white as you'd first think.

Entertainment: The best parts of the game for me was letting my guard down only to be tricked again by another shady commoner within one of the towns. The game did have many enjoyable moments, mostly in the form of laughs at the sticky situations I'd incidentally put my character into. The frustration of too much dialogue mixed, or on the other hand the frustration of one-sided combat, far too often soiled the good times that I found elsewhere in the game. I had a hard time finding a point where I felt the game was balanced. It was either too easy or too hard. Call me Goldilocks.

Replayability: At a minimum, this game has enough variety in your character-build options to have two playthroughs. One combat-oriented, and one non-combat oriented. There are some more granular choices or even skills that could push some of the bigger fans to further runs through the game.

Cheats??: Yup! To be honest, this is one of the few games where I did not find additional entertainment value in them. Feel free to try them out for yourself and be the judge.

  • Add skill points
    • dlgaddskillpoints(x)
  • Change stat points (Can place a - before x to lower the stat by that number. Replace y with one of the following: str dex con per int cha)
    • dlgChangeStat(y,x)
  • Change a specific skill (Can place a - before x to lower the skill by that number. Replace y with the skill name)
    • dlgChangeSkill(y,x)
  • Add Gold
    • dlgChangeMoney(x)
  • Set Full HP
    • CheatHP()
  • Add item via Item IDs
    • dlgAddItem(x,#)
      • Complete lists of IDs can be found via Google or DuckDuckGo
---Full Review Below---

I get concerned when a game is overall and recently rated as very positive, but the first several reviews in the "most helpful" category are overtly negative. To me, this immediately means it's a more divisive, polarizing game - typically on a "love or hate" scale.

I'll give big props to the devs for making a free demo, strongly recommending people trying before buying, as well as provide much insight and caution to the difficulty of combat. After-all, combat tends to be a major selling point for many games - RPGs included. With all of the existing warnings and disclaimers, no one should be surprised by the difficulty. You've been warned by practically everyone.

What they don't mention is how incredibly simple the game becomes when you go for the non-combat character build. It really becomes a point-and-click game with a really, really heavy amount of dialogue and lore. It's trivial. Which isn't a bad thing necessarily, it just gets a bit too drab for my liking. Becomes an interactive book - which again, isn't an insult just a distinction.

This game is highly acclaimed for its wide variety of choices and how they affect the game greatly. I disagree. If you choose a combat-based build, you can't deviate without near-guaranteed failure. Vice-versa with non-combat/civil builds, getting into combat is a sure way to die. This forces you to make far more linear choices and sets you on a path that will corner you into only being able to succeed in a few ways. It's certainly realistic, but not something I'd tout as being non-linear and that "choices matter". They only matter in the immediate sense of fail or succeed, die or survive. It would appear your choices made an impact, while somewhat true - most of this is decided at the very start of the game; attribute point distribution.

I finished the game in a single evening [8 hours with breaks, maybe??]. Which seems...very fast. So I looked into speed runs, and without gross exploits - it can be beaten in under 5 minutes. Technically - no combat is even required from what I can tell, which again is not an inherently bad thing, just an unusual one. I did find the game rather...boring overall. I found myself dragging my feet to continue playing through to the end.

$15 USD is a good, reasonable asking price for the game. If a sale put's it at 50-75% off, then all the better. Great budget recommended system specs and even better minimum. If you've got an older, or perhaps simply not as high-performance of a computer, this game would be a great fit and all the more worth the price. That being said, I don't know that I can put much more than maybe 10 hours into the game. Sure - there's some replay value but the same NPC conversations and quests get dull rather quickly. It's simply not something I'd generally recommend. Only with asterisks. Which brings me to my rating and recommendations:

I can't broadly recommend The Age of Decadence. Only for certain people.

For me, a 4/10. Strangely unbalanced. It does some things really right, and some things really wrong. I preferred the non-combat, more dialogue-driven paths - but that required a lot of reading of a rather...mediocre story. I did like how dishonest and untrustworthy almost the entire NPC base is. Kept me on my toes... until I realized the pattern of don't trust anyone.

I'd recommend the game to people who:
  • Loved the demo.

  • Love hardcore combat.

  • Love point-and-click games and are willing to stick to non-combat builds.

  • Have a budget or low-performance system, but are itching for a different RPG.

  • Getting it with a significant discount
Everyone else, probably don't bother. There are much better RPG titles out there more worthy of your time and money.

---------

Thanks for reading!
What a weird guy wrote this. I mean, mostly avoid combat in order to make a conclusion that "game takes the focus away from combat"? :lol:

If you choose a combat-based build, you can't deviate without near-guaranteed failure. Vice-versa with non-combat/civil builds, getting into combat is a sure way to die.
- I guess that explains it.

RNG in combat is grossly stacked"- well, nothing new here, right?

Cheat section?! Honestly, this is the first time I see such a section inside the review, ever.

To sum up, I think it's slightly better approach than by professional game-journalists, who're often trying to hide their actual experience under shit tons of pointless expressions instead. Overall, very shallow, obviously.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
other than the score itself I see nothing wrong with his review from a quick glance.
It's not easy(and probably not fair) to score games that specifically target a very niche segment, because for most people it will be awful.
 

Deleted Member 22431

Guest
other than the score itself I see nothing wrong with his review from a quick glance.
It's not easy(and probably not fair) to score games that specifically target a very niche segment, because for most people it will be awful.
That's like saying that there is nothing wrong with a stupid reviewer shiting all over the Ninth Symphony because he prefers Justin Bieber. If you are not qualified to evaluate the product properly, you have no business expressing your opinion about it. Some laymen are egotistical, arrogant. They think they have what it takes to form an opinion about any given subject just because they have the power to verbalize their superficial ideas. if you are not knowledgeable about a medium, just shut it. There are enough problems in the world as it is. We don't need pretentious laymen saying stupid shit because they think every opinion is equally justified. That reminds me of a newfag here claiming that the condescending attitude towards Oblivion was not justified because he didn't saw any detailed argumentation against it. Imagine how arrogant and simplistic is the mindset of that dumbfuck.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
50,754
Codex Year of the Donut
other than the score itself I see nothing wrong with his review from a quick glance.
It's not easy(and probably not fair) to score games that specifically target a very niche segment, because for most people it will be awful.
That's like saying that there is nothing wrong with a stupid reviewer shiting all over the Ninth Symphony because he prefers Justin Bieber. If you are not qualified to evaluate the product properly, you have no business expressing your opinion about it. Some laymen are egotistical, arrogant. They think they have what it takes to form an opinion about any given subject just because they have the power to verbalize their superficial ideas. if you are not knowledgeable about a medium, just shut it. There are enough problems in the world as it is. We don't need pretentious laymen saying stupid shit because they think every opinion is equally justified. That reminds me of a newfag here claiming that the condescending attitude towards Oblivion was not justified because he didn't saw any detailed argumentation against it. Imagine how arrogant and simplistic is the mindset of that dumbfuck.
There's nothing in his review that was wrong though you fucking retard
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
other than the score itself I see nothing wrong with his review from a quick glance.
It's not easy(and probably not fair) to score games that specifically target a very niche segment, because for most people it will be awful.
That's like saying that there is nothing wrong with a stupid reviewer shiting all over the Ninth Symphony because he prefers Justin Bieber. If you are not qualified to evaluate the product properly, you have no business expressing your opinion about it. Some laymen are egotistical, arrogant. They think they have what it takes to form an opinion about any given subject just because they have the power to verbalize their superficial ideas. if you are not knowledgeable about a medium, just shut it. There are enough problems in the world as it is. We don't need pretentious laymen saying stupid shit because they think every opinion is equally justified. That reminds me of a newfag here claiming that the condescending attitude towards Oblivion was not justified because he didn't saw any detailed argumentation against it. Imagine how arrogant and simplistic is the mindset of that dumbfuck.
There's nothing in his review that was wrong though you fucking retard
Quite a few, actually. In his defence he wouldn't know he was wrong, since he only played the game for a single evening and assumed he'd seen everything.

Go with the combat route, and you are faced with a stacked-against-you RNG-based combat which is difficult to the point of coming off as both brutal and cheap.
See Eyestabber's ironman video with all optional fights or player-submitted builds with over 200 kills. It's not that difficult and an experienced player can easily fight his way through the game. The problem is that new players are often overwhelmed and think that combat must be unfair and rigged and the RNG too random.

A lot of cheap situations made to make you fail while masquerading as being a "choices matter" feature.
The situations aren't scaled to your level. Where one character fails, another will succeed. Just because you fail doesn't mean that everyone else will fail here too. For example, a combat specialist can beat all combat side quests and situations in and around Teron: the pickpocket gang, Miltiades, etc, whereas a non-combat character (who'd go to get his money back from the pickpockets or follow Miltiades into a 'dark alley') would rage about fake choices designed to make you fail.

The most important choice you will pick are your attribute points at the start of the game. Once you set yourself on that path, there is no deviating from it. You are locked in and cannot improve your stats in the game.
First, you can increase the stats. Second, you can deviate from your path. There are opportunities to double- and triple-cross your faction and there are different choices to be made within the faction quests. For example, you can kill Darista and Gaelius or stay loyal, which affects your options in Ganezzar. Or you can convince Antidas to wipe out the guards or convince Mercato to join Antidas, which might help you with the siege later on. Etc. Third, the hybrids who have the most options. Of course a new player who struggles with combat wouldn't even think that playing a hybrid is an option but it is. See those smart soldier and tough traders videos.

If you choose a combat-based build, you can't deviate without near-guaranteed failure.
I'll be happy to post player-submitted builds that prove this wrong if you want me to.

I can't help but feel like this is akin to being told "Here's the really over-cooked steak you ordered. There is a good chance you won't like it, but since this is all intentional - we've taken an extra heavy-handed approach with its blackened design." Yet here I am, disappointed that I paid for a really over-cooked steak that has an impressive char-broiled aesthetic.
"Since I don't like it, it must be shit".
 

thesecret1

Arcane
Joined
Jun 30, 2019
Messages
5,676
Of course a new player who struggles with combat wouldn't even think that playing a hybrid is an option but it is.
Yeah, making a viable hybrid in AoD is pretty tough and definitely not something one is likely to pull off on first playthrough. It's however what most people will attempt at first, since that's how most RPGs are played ("I will put these points in STR and VIT to handle combat, and dump rest into INT and CHAR to have all the talking options...) which is invariably gonna lead to a very quick game over in AoD. In fact, most of the review reads like he made one musclehead that could barely speak under all the muscle, and one feeble brainiac that knew everything about the universe but couldn't even lift a dagger to defend himself. Such playthroughs then do look pretty linear, since a shitton of choices is only available if you can both talk and fight, at least to some degree. It'd explain why he thinks the game offers little to no replayability.

Can't say it's a good review, since he seems to have missed the game's whole point. There is valid criticism to be levied against AoD, but this ain't it.
 

Ninjerk

Arcane
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
14,323
It's been some time since I've played AoD, but once I became more relaxed about my playthroughs ending early thanks to bad builds or choosing the wrong path for certain builds I realized it opened up a world of content. I suspect most players are not accustomed to the game having loads of endings that you don't have to play 60 hours to see many of and start flipping out when they die.
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459
A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

A 2020 Review - The Age of Decadence (PC, 2015)

Score: 4/10

Mediocrity Score: Mediocre at Best.

For those wanting the scent of blood.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AgeOfDecadence/comments/fekmv6/a_2020_review_the_age_of_decadence_pc_2015/

There is no hell deep enough for some.

3063317b627aa91bc5dbef6b83ed8e88.png


"I just wanted to start a discussion"

ba4b3be58b2697ecefe4cf795d24242c.png


What a sorry state of affairs. But then we the rot infects here too.
 

Verylittlefishes

Sacro Bosco
Patron
Joined
Sep 14, 2019
Messages
4,731
Location
Oneoropolis
Well, the man has reviewed a game which is obviously not his cup of tea. Big deal. I thought AoD is a solid cult classic by 2020 to be able to ignore the retarded reviews like this one.
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
The game isn't for everyone, that's for sure. I'm more concerned about players who want to play it but just can't handle combat:

i i cant win im a mercenary with 3 main skills like the tutorial said to do and u cant win every fight etc. but im tryin to progress the main story and they are asking me to kill 3 men or find another way in but becuz i have no skill but fighting and blocking and alchemy i cant do ♥♥♥♥ i even looked around town to see if i could find the man who supplies them for food only found the kebab guy who didnt wanna speak to me i tried climbing over the tower to meet the king got tortured instead and i put my stats in sword and blocking but i still cant win a fight and i get it ur supposed to be normal but jesus christ i cant even progress now
He posted the review after 2 hours, then played for 5 more hours but apparently didn't get anywhere. I wanted to help him but I'm not even sure what to tell him.
 

Butter

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 1, 2018
Messages
7,523
Hypothetically, if you wanted to go back and add easier difficulties like Dungeon Rats has, would that be a lot of work?
 

CappenVarra

phase-based phantasmist
Patron
Joined
Mar 14, 2011
Messages
2,912
Location
Ardamai
The game isn't for everyone, that's for sure. I'm more concerned about players who want to play it but just can't handle combat:

i i cant win im a mercenary with 3 main skills like the tutorial said to do and u cant win every fight etc. but im tryin to progress the main story and they are asking me to kill 3 men or find another way in but becuz i have no skill but fighting and blocking and alchemy i cant do ♥♥♥♥ i even looked around town to see if i could find the man who supplies them for food only found the kebab guy who didnt wanna speak to me i tried climbing over the tower to meet the king got tortured instead and i put my stats in sword and blocking but i still cant win a fight and i get it ur supposed to be normal but jesus christ i cant even progress now
He posted the review after 2 hours, then played for 5 more hours but apparently didn't get anywhere. I wanted to help him but I'm not even sure what to tell him.
i'm getting an epic deja vu just reading this
i wanted to be constructive, but i don't even
 

Eyestabber

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 15, 2015
Messages
4,733
Location
HUEland
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015
Hypothetically, if you wanted to go back and add easier difficulties like Dungeon Rats has, would that be a lot of work?

At some point the AoD community will have to accept there is no such thing as patching IQ points on fucktards. Morons gonna moron. I wrote my mechanics guide to help players understand the system and all that, but there's a limit to how much "help" is actually useful. Some people simply can't be helped and there's nothing we can do about that.

But hey, at least they write entertaining reviews. I'll never forget the guy who paraded his obviously botched build that had like 3 weapon skills as "proof" the combat was "broken" or something. I mean, COME ON! Putting points into ONE weapon and ONE defense isn't fucking rocket science! Failure in such a basic and intuitive thing can only be explained by severe stupidity.
 

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