Torment Torment: Tides of Numenera Beta Thread [GAME RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

Nice list, thanks man. :cheersmate:

 

support@inxile.net

Direct contact line with sea. Drop an "eat shit, corporate servant!" while you're at it.

 

How do they know what they might cut before they start making the game?

 

And Russian hackers obviously.

:russiastronk:

 

But that is precisely my point. Since kickstarter campaigns are inherently retarded, they may just as well cut content to improve the other parts and deliver something more interesting. No one will know better what needs to be cut than the developers themselves. Delivering subpar content is pratically the same thing of breaking your promises because it is barebones and unfinished. The stronghold in PoE seems like the basic foundations of the stronghold in alpha, not was promised. I think the only reason why they didn't cut it, is because it was tied to the dungeon.

 

There are many kickstarter campaings that delivered everything they promised, mostly boardgames and stuff like that. There's nothing wrong with Kickstarter, the problem lies with scummy developers. Even among vidya Kickstarters there are people having no problems with delivering what they've promised. Bonus campaign for Shovel Knight (promised in the Kickstarter) arrived years after the game release but was actually polished and on par with the original game. Most devs would charge at least $5 for it. 2 more free campaigns for Shovel Knight are still in production. Shadowrun Hong Kong devs also delivered what they've promised, probably because they actually knew what they were capable of.
Stop bashing Kickstarter, the founding project is fine as long as it's not abused by shitty people.

 

inXile is offering not just refunds but pledge credit to backers of the KS Collector's Edition:

https://forums.inxile-entertainment.com/viewtopic.php?p=179430#p179430

 

Exactly. The problem with PoE was that they didn't expect to reach funding that quickly, so they basically pulled the stretch goals out of their ass without considering how many of them are actually doable. Though at least they delivered on them, crappy Stronghold notwithstanding. And they publically admitted several times how they miscalculated and underdelivered with some stretch goals, so respect to them.

inXile, on the other hand, were willing to keep their fans in the dark about unfulfilled promises, and only admitted to it when they were caught with their pants down. Now, I doubt they got into the entire project with the premeditated intent to renege on their promises down the line - but it's obvious that, during production, they realized they couldn't achieve all they set out to do, and, instead of talking to their fans about it (damage control at that point would have been much less severe, and could have even generated some good will if handled the right way), decided to pretend nothing happened and hope everything turns out right.

Still, even though many companies and individuals outright abused the Kickstarter model, it did give us some good games we otherwise never would have got. People shouldn't expect KS to magically solve every problem the game industry has, and they should also be more cautious about what they pledge to - if something sounds too good and overambitious to be true, well, then maybe it is.

 

https://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35533

so, where's our interview?

 

Any motherfucker who mentions "Tier 1" is banned.

 

This is why stretch goals should be designed from the start, so you know very well what to aim for. It may be unnecessary work if you don't get enough funding, but it is one less major thing to worry about if the cash starts flowing.

I'm not saying Obsidian or inXile are incompetent, but in a rush everyone makes mistakes and promises they won't be able to keep. A good stretch goal strategy is needed so that people don't always aim for the current stretch goal, but not so far away that it becomes difficult to reach it and people give up entirely on it. They should follow a "cool" -> "AWESOME" -> "filler/not so important" pattern, with the money gap between them like so: "good" ---->"awesome"->"filler"-->"good"---->"awesome". Always keep the people's interest, expectations, and hype up. The moment they think a goal is unreachable, they give up on funding.

 

T:ToN wasn't inXile's first Kickstarter. They should have known better.

 

So a question to everybody who already played it (no spoilers please!) --->
Assuming that under certain circumstances I'm rather easy to please (f.e. I like PoE, Tyranny and Wasteland 2) as long as there's enough good c&c / reactivity, an at least okay story and a non-childish general tone: do y'all think I will like this one? Let's say on a scale from 1 ( "It's total shit, really disappointing c&c, retadred story" ) to 5 ( "You'll love it, it's really strong in those areas you mentioned!" ) ?!

There was a post in the inXile forums a couple of months ago that Brian Mitsoda "submitted his work", which quite sounds like he actually contributed something.

 

Lol, third reply:

How long before inXile blacklists RPGWatch too?

 

Doubletalk

The way it's worded implies that all CEs include Numenera books, printed novellas, large cloth maps and statues.

The thing is the best way to screw yourself on those CEs was to back at $95 $100 $125 and $135 levels which all have only the manual, map, art-book and soundtrack as physical rewards.
The 383 backers that pledged at $135 are especially shafted.


The best move is to include the Numenera books, printed novellas and large cloth maps also to these tiers and you can say things are even.

 

If those are your standards, yeah you'll like it. Reactivity + C&C is good; I was quite impressed at the different ways you can approach and solve problems, how the quests can play out, and how much skill/ability-gated content there is (hint: play a socially-adept nano).

I didn't care for the overall tone -- it's not Torment at all, it's a colorful mishmash of weird with no rhyme or reason to it --, Roxor has already dissected the problems with the prose, the latest UI iteration is annoying af, and the core gameplay is nothing to shout about. But if you can tolerate that, yeah you'll like it.

(I don't know if I'll like it though. Probably not: it took a seriously wrong turn since ksaun was kicked off, and that UI gives me a migraine.)

 

I think even this concept of game design comprising a list of features which you can add to or subtract from is weird to begin with.

https://www.rpgwatch.com/files/Files/00-0208/Torment_Vision_Statement_1997.pdf

You can't even begin to say what has been "cut" from the original conception of Torment: it's an entirely different game. The concept sounds like a fun enough (relatively-)action-oriented rpg with a focus on weird abilities and fun AI-behavior, but it's hard to imagine MCA working within that framework to his best abilities.

No idea what approach would've suited Saunders best, but giving him room to maneuver away from the KS pitch would've probably resulted in a more inspired end-result.

 

That's some grade-A PR there folks.

 

Torment 1999: two half-demon chicks, a rogue AI, a walking suit of armor, a floating skull, a living corpse on fire.
Torment 2017: a bunch of regular humans with weird hairstyles.

 

True. I stand corrected.

 

How has it changed between ksaun being in there and after he left?

 

New UI, new journal, new intro, console version, "Current Objective" popups and generally more handholding. All of it .

(TBF also much better performance.)