Game News Bloodlines Developer Diary #7

[Sol Invictus]

Tags: Troika Games; Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines

<A href="http://www.gamespot.com">GameSpot</a> has on their website the latest <a href="http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/vtmb/preview_6100691.html">Bloodlines Developer Diary</a> with Troika programmer, Dennis Taylor and a bunch of new screenshots to accompany it. Dennis Taylor discusses the AI and their impressive use of it in their upcoming game. Here's a snippet:<blockquote>
<br>
You will also meet a lot of thug guards. Much of the game is set up to allow for stealthy characters to find noncombat solutions to finishing the levels. So you can expect to see a fair share of guys on patrols or performing some interesting activities. It can be great fun to listen in on the conversations that the NPCs are having or sneaking up and catching them off guard playing a game of cards.
<br>
<br>
So long as the player successfully sneaks around, most levels will be much easier. But NPCs can be alerted by many different things. The player could alert them by walking too close and making audible footsteps, firing weapons, walking in lighted areas, knocking over physical objects, and so on. Then the NPCs will come and check out what's going on. Of course, this can be to the player's advantage, as you can use it to lead them away from key places. </blockquote>
<br>
I'm liking the sound of that already. The game will allow a multitude of playing styles from the looks of it.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I don't think so. The main playing styles i can see are combat, diplomacy and stealth. Sure, we'll likely have the ability to do the usual mix'n'combine scheme, but that's pretty much a given. I'd hardly call that a multitude of playing styles, but we'll see how different each style will be. I don't have much faith in it, however, since Troika stated that however you solve a situation, your rewards will always be the same (unless that situation has been altered), so interest and overal diversity in play styles seem more like a facade.

 

[Country_Gravy]

How many more ways do you want? Other than combat, diplomacy, and stealth, are there other things you would like to see in the game?

 

[Major_Blackhart]

I think it looks pretty good. Dont be such a downer RP.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I'm not being a downer.

Ok, i am, but i'm trying not be such a big downer

My point wasn't to criticize what they're doing, and with what they're consequently giving us; i was only pointing out that i find the standard three types of advancement trough the game (and the jack-of-all-trades type of advancement), to be anything but a multitude. Unless they present an overwhelming variety of possibilities, that is. I don't need the dozens of possibilities of Arcanum, but i hope it won't become too limited.

 

[Kamaz]

I am from those that have no illusions about games. IO know one thing for certain - what they promise and what they deliver are really different things. And Troika is the first one to doubt for - I waited for Arcanum really long and was really pissed off when I got my hands on it. It was not "fallout". Crappy RPG system, crappy combat, crappy storyline [well, the world was great, at least, and NPC's and quests were OK too]. Next game I just did not wait so hardly and did not play later, because ToEE was crappy in many aspects [while it was good in others - like, dialogue system with different char types, graphics which were awsome in my humble opinion, atmosphere]. I guess Bloodlines will suffer the same fate. Although I am thinking now that DeusEx type of game for Troika would be better, therefor Bloodlines would breake my attitude against them.

But speaking of different game paths - it is good, but not the best solution. I think that in good RPG should not be fixed three paths for any quest to encounter. I think developers should just use their immagination and mix up RPG and quest games so any quest is something original. For example, we need to get out of a burning town while the main gates are closed.

Traditional solutions [by low-quality cRPG's]
We take our sword [axe/spear - here comes the diversity in accomplishing the quest] and go fight for those evil bastards that guard the gate.

Traditional solution[by normal cRPG's, like upcomming Bloodlines might]
We can a)go and fight those goddamned basterds, that keep the gate closed;b)we can sneak by them and capture their captain with our little knife on his throat; c)we could negotiate with their captain forcing their leave.

Mixed way:
We can a)go and try to kill those evil bastards [but then we quickly find out that they are many and they all are well equipped and well trained so its really hard for us to take them all down]
b)organize town's militia force to breake through the gates; [needed some speech skills and also some warrior abilities or at least biiger than average fame/popularity]
c)search all around [or go and visit some old freak that knows everything because his blind, crazy and cannot walk] and find secret passage that leads out of the town;
d)set town's gate on fire;
e)organize townspeople to extinguish the fire by bucckets of water and sand;
f)unleash all townspeople animals towards the gates
g)...[I can continue more and more]

The point is to avoid strict structure - like - there are those three ways and none more or none less. In my opinion, the number of ways is not so important as logic of it. It should not be obligatory for all three character types to have the same possibility of accomplishing any quest met in game. I guess there should be quests that are meant only for warrior type and other types are less favoured, that 'd made game more flexible and natural.

 

[Anonymous]

What was so bad about Arcanum's storyline? The whole reason I like Arcanum is because of the roleplaying, history, NPCs, setting and storyline. As it's heavy on Roleplaying and it's a Roleplaying game, it worked out nice for me.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I'm not being a downer.

Ok, i am, but i'm trying not be such a big downer

My point wasn't to criticize what they're doing, and with what they're consequently giving us; i was only pointing out that i find the standard three types of advancement trough the game (and the jack-of-all-trades type of advancement), to be anything but a multitude. Unless they present an overwhelming variety of possibilities, that is. I don't need the dozens of possibilities of Arcanum, but i hope it won't become too limited.

Nonsense. There's lots of talkie options. You can, for example, talk to someone and discuss his problems psychoanalytically and befriend him if you choose to do so, or you can seduce him into supporting your agenda. You can also mind control him into doing your bidding, or put the fear of God into him by showing him how deadly serious you are.

There are going to be a lot of ways to kill things, too, besides the usual 'stab you in the face' or 'rip a hole in your stomach' methods usually employed by street thugs. You can do it the old fashioned way, or you can have some servile do it for you. You can even transform yourself into a monster and rip the shit out of him, or stab him in the back when he isn't looking.

That's choice, baby. It might seem insignficant, but they are choices nonetheless! You're making it sound as if they're only going to be one dialogue choice, one method of killing and one stealth method. That's silliness.

 

[Transcendent One]

Arcanum's storyline was a bit shallow in the start where it's basically "go to bmc... oops dwarves not there? np go to wc... oh wait, first you have to go to that island... good, now go to wheel clan... ooh a letter eh? okay, go find tsen ang blablabla". Okay, that's actually most of the game. Oh well.

That said, the gameworld really was impressive due to the sheer amount of detail, very nice history, nice beliefs of the inhabitants. Now make some areas feel populated. Tulla, perfect example.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Kamaz's analogy was the best, IMO. I'd love to see that implemented in a game. Hopefully bloodlines will have some degree of that freedom.

 

[Anonymous]

Arcanum's storyline was a bit shallow in the start where it's basically "go to bmc... oops dwarves not there? np go to wc... oh wait, first you have to go to that island... good, now go to wheel clan... ooh a letter eh? okay, go find tsen ang blablabla". Okay, that's actually most of the game. Oh well.

I dunno, I didnt mind that much because at first it seems simple like that, but once you get into the writing and reading of it, it's alot cooler. Lots of plot twists and stuff.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

That's why i said that i didn't considered the presented options to be in a number high enough to warrant it being called a multitude of options. unless they present an overwhelming variety of possibilities. Which apparently they do, as you say.

 

[Volourn]

I think if it wasn't for the FPS aspect of Bloodlines; I'd be really looking forward to the game...

 

[plin]

I would much rather have the FPS aspect then a shitty point and click real-time battle system where you have no control (like most CRPGS have today).

I think the FP view is great, and is another good way for the game to be that much more immersive.

 

[Volourn]

Immersive? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[Kamaz]

Arcanum's storyline sucked the big one because one simple reason - this kind of storytelling is allready seen so much times, played through till vomiting in basket and it offers nothing but players curiosity "say, how different they will prepare the same food[read: story] this time". Potatos first and then sauce or the other way round - thats the originality we got today.

When I finished the game [Arcanum, I mean] I could hardly stick together all story pieces. OK, the story I was told was OK,allthough some points did not make much of a sense. The main problem was that I was not immersed in it. The positive example, of course, is Fallouts. In first game we had to find the w-chip and it was clear, nice aim of our existance. Very good solution. Destroy the Master/bad guys, OK, that was kinda not so original, but, hey, it was logical because in your trace after w-chip you saw their viciousness and possible consequences if you do not destroy the base and master. So it was logically well made stroyline and I enjoyed it a lot. The second game featured little different task - find the G.E.C.K. Again, like in the previous game, we had just one goal to head for no intrigues, no old bastards telling the story, just intro and task. The Enclave stuff was allready not so original, because it all resembled a lot previous game. The same stuff just in other colors. Tolerable,though.

Arcanum, however, tried to raise movie like story. ANd here it blowed the big one. Having so open-ended world and structure the linearity of storyline itself was like poison to any plaisure game could bring. I was bored of having to go to the island because "Storyline says I must". With Fallouts this moment was clear - I have to get the G.E.C.K. and its really whatever how I get it. I could even find one in Enclave if I had found one on my ventures allready. Arcanum, however, implied me to go and seek for key-NPC's, key-locations, key-quests and so on. And it killed it. RIP.

 

[Kamaz]

Volurn, stop loughing, FP view actually does add immersivity [do we say so?] to whatever game. Bloodlines has something common with DeusEx the FIrst, I think, so I can mention this game as an example. I remeber hiding behind the back of giant metal-robot, that could kill me in no time just noticed. And I was really scared and immagined I hold my EMP granade ready to blow it up any time...And that was good, because I really felt the atmosphere and felt like being there. DeusEx is very good example of first person view though it is not clear RPG as Morrowind or Wizardry8 are. But in these games, however, I wished for isometric view because their world/storyline and setting did not offer such enviroment I would feel I live in it. (Morrownid was rather close, actually. The strange architecture and mist..the water..)

 

[Volourn]

I have played my share of FP games 9or at least try to); and I never feel more immersed than in 3rd person. Inf act, i feel less immersed. The view seems even more fake then over the top view. Why? for starters, you can only see in front of you. You can't see to the side of you or back of you as easy as you can in RL. being chewed on by rat just because it takes time to pan the camera and then atack is always an immersion killer. At least for me it is. But, hey, to each their own.

 

[plin]

Immersive? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

AHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHAHA Yes.

For me at least. I can't really get immersed when I'm some being way up in the air looking down and clicking on things, as compared to, actually being the character and controlling and seeing from his point of view, whether the width of eye-sight is realistic or not doesn't matter to me..

 

[Sol Invictus]

Volurn, stop loughing, FP view actually does add immersivity [do we say so?] )

The word is immersion

Not immersiveness. Not immersivity; and definitely not immersivitude.

 

[Kamaz]

Kewl, I allways have wondered about the greatynessity of language.

 

[Voss]

Kamaz-
you need to understand a simple thing. It adds immersion for you. You are not the universal consciousness of humanity.

For myself, the fact that its on a ~18" monitor about a foot in front of my face means thats it is about as immersive as this forum.

 

[Dhruin]

Vampire: Bloodlines sounds pretty good to me. Just because the devs give examples of three approaches doesn't mean it won't vary quest to quest or have other twists thrown in to make it interesting. Time will tell.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

The original Geneforge was one of the most immersive games I've ever played, and it was top down, had shitty graphics, and you had to read large bodies of text based on most special things that occured during the game. To say that first person is what makes things immersive indicates a rather large lack of perception and imagination.