Game News Underrail Dev Log #64: Version 1.1.1.0 - Core City Factions Update

[ciox]

And the engine needs plenty of work still, there's long standing bugs that are hard to fix because of the old codebase.

Like?

The biggest one is the bug where you can't fire back at enemies that can fire at you, while rooted. For more, ask Epeli I guess.

Welp. As far as bugs go there are few edge cases in transitioning from real-time to turn-based mode. Actions in progress get cut off, even if they have both real-time and turn-based modes. For example fire a burst from real-time mode. As soon as the first bullet connects, the game engages turn-based mode and the attack stops.

Not bugs per se, but the old codebase sure is limiting here and there. Biggest one I can think of right now--as far as player satisfaction goes--is the faction relations code. Everyone hates loves how friendly NPCs turn hostile from almost anything. Then there's the AI model, which is used to good effect but is still too limiting for Styg. The zone file format isn't the best for loading times nor save file size, probably partially because originally the game was planned to have some procedurally generated areas. The entire game is structured downright painfully when it comes to things like localization (which they'd like to eventually do) or modding. They've had their share of issues with XNA asset pipeline too, but those are years past by now. And surely there's other stuff that isn't visible to players, but hinders development. Underrail 2 is probably going to be on a new engine.

Sprite engine talk: I don't think they're going to implement D2 style sprite compositing nor add significantly more animation sets, but IIRC they had other plans to (eventually) get more ouf of the sprite engine. For now their character artist has good workflow for creating new spritesheets for the current animations and there are no technical reasons to change the system yet. But the engine might be getting other visual/usability upgrades Soon™.

Yeah, I just remembered you can do weird things with the realtime like get a free attack, if your melee swipe that's initiated in realtime hits in turnbased (because combat started from the enemy noticing you) that swipe can still hit but not cost you action points. Because the action point expenditure for things done in realtime is fairly hacky and exception-based.
Obviously everyone kinda hates the zone code, large areas load pretty slowly and it's probably a factor in why some transition areas around towns are very small.
I thought they were going to very lightly experimeting with compositing, since they're adding stuff like muzzleflashes, for those to be unique based on weapon (think pistol vs energy pistol) there would have to be some element of sprite compositing otherwise there's a ton of re-rendering old sprite sheets all over again. Might be wrong on this though.

 

[Diggfinger]

People wishing for sequels....better to be happy with 'expansions'. I would have preferred 'expansions' to FO1-2 till the end of time than having the 'joys' of FO3.

At least with an expansion, the dev is constrained for better or worse by what is already available rather than letting more retarded delusions run rampart in a 'bigger, better' sequel.


Be careful what you wish for....

what's the link?

Fallout was a franchise which ultimately got bought by a much larger conglomeration who developed the IP further, whereas Underrail is a indie-game staying in teh hands of the original designers.

 

[Black Angel]

People wishing for sequels....better to be happy with 'expansions'. I would have preferred 'expansions' to FO1-2 till the end of time than having the 'joys' of FO3.

At least with an expansion, the dev is constrained for better or worse by what is already available rather than letting more retarded delusions run rampart in a 'bigger, better' sequel.


Be careful what you wish for....

what's the link?

Fallout was a franchise which ultimately got bought by a much larger conglomeration who developed the IP further, whereas Underrail is a indie-game staying in teh hands of the original designers.

While commie's concern isn't really a reality that can be linked to Underrail in particular, there's another side to sequels that's more concerning to the game and indies in general. Vault Dweller talked about this before:

Pleasant surprise it might have been but it suffered from the 'more of the same' curse all the same. Back when SteamSpy data was still available:

http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,7530.0.html

As you probably noticed a number of indie and not so indie sequels have done very poorly lately, selling a lot less than the original, according to SteamSpy:

• Legend of Grimrock: 1,037,095 vs 421,351
• Blackguards: 598,208 vs 248,752 (and that’s heavily discounted)
• The Banner Saga: 804,625 vs 328,163 (it would be interesting to see how well the third game does)
• Shadowrun: 1,161,596 vs 829,676 vs 587,436

Keep in mind that copies sold ! = revenue as ‘bundles’ can easily inflate the number of copies sold without boosting neither the revenues nor the number of active players. If we look at the players rather than owners, we’ll see a very different picture (% represents players vs owners)

• Legend of Grimrock: 616,936 (64%) vs 226,741 (57%)
• Blackguards: 261,263 (45%) vs 85,257 (32%)
• The Banner Saga: 601,244 (78%) vs 116,640 (39%)
• Shadowrun: 817,525 (74%) vs 434,653 (54%) vs 220,465 (38%)

It seems that success of the first game often fools developers into thinking that they can do even better or at least as good with a second 'bigger and better' game, but as you can see it's not always the case. The obvious conclusion is that unless you have a AAA blockbuster with massive sex appeal, don’t go for a sequel because it will be seen as more of the same and sell less.

Bonus content:

1. What's your take on sequels and expansions? Obviously, Pillars of Eternity 2 and three planned DLCs suggest you're a strong believer. At the same time, its new 'nautical-leaning setting' and ship combat offer something very different to entice players to come back and try something new. Is this the best way to go then?

Feargus: I’m a big believer in sequels, but I’m both a maker and player of RPGs. I think RPGs are great to sequelize due to their focus on story, characters, and growth. When I finish a RPG, I usually want to play with that character again, or play in that world again. Now, not everyone is like me, but I think there are quite a few of us. For all games, but particularly, for RPGs, we create these complex engines and design methods, and we can give players an even grander experience when we can use as much of that as possible from game to game. Of course, we can’t just make the same game again, and sequels need to be more than a big expansion pack. But, so much of our time goes into what players play (quests, areas, companions, dialogs), and when we create all of those again for a sequel with a different, or continuing, story - that’s a new game.

The challenge sequels are fighting with non-sequels is for attention. It is easier to get someone’s attention with things that feel new, so a sequel does need something new and interesting. This could be a big feature like the world map and ship combat in Pillars 2, but it could also be an incredible story; the core of which grabs your attention, and anyone else’s when they hear about it. I don’t know where the line is, but I think we all get a feeling for it. One of the things we did on Icewind Dale 2 at Black Isle Studios was to re-do the HUD. It looks and feels entirely different than all the other Infinity Engine games, and allowed us to also add in some tweaks, but it was not an entire re-write. One could argue that what we did was “skin” the UI, which isn’t really a benefit to players. I think it gave the game a fresh look, gave players more of the world to see, and created an easier way to interact with the characters and game controls at the same time. Either way IWD2 felt new and different because of it.

Personally, I think indies are better off making new projects instead of making sequels. Indies doesn't have the same selling power as AAA or even AA titles that are often backed by a sizeable following that makes it worth making sequels. And with Underrail, since they already have what they need in place, adding just what's still missing and improving what's need improving, making sequels would be far more costly and making a standalone expansion is actually a wise business decision.

 

[Major_Blackhart]

Great, now I gotta play this game again after I finish up Arcanum. It NEVER ends!