Preview Age of Decadence R4 Preview at GameBanshee

[TwinkieGorilla]

Regardless of what happens with this game I think it's safe to say it will go down as the most "character-creation" save-scummed game of all time.

 

[MRY]

I've been waiting for this game forever, and I'll probably wait a while longer till some of the kinks get worked out. But it sounds like the issue here is really a result of the interaction of CYOA skill checks and a generally unforgiving design philosophy. I'm a big fan of CYOA checks, but I'm more used to seeing them coupled with game settings where you're a superhuman -- like Lone Wolf or whatever -- rather than ones that are trying to dramatize how weak your character is relative to the impersonal powers in the world. It sounds like AOD succeeds in conveying its theme through its gameplay, but perhaps that's not a totally delightful experience to be on the receiving end of.

My own preference would be to have binary or nearly binary skills coupled that operate essentially as "cool opportunities" to make the player feel empowered. It's not very RPG-ish, though, since it doesn't lend itself to character progression as easily. Still, while I'm sure there are tremendous problems I'm overlooking, it seems like some of these problems would be resolved or at least alleviated if you just had binary skills -- that way you know if you pick Streetwise or Disguise or whatever, you'll always have that avenue of gameplay open to you. The 3/4 vs. 4/3 scenario that crawlkill describes seems fairly frustrating. Or you could have two levels for each skill -- basic and master. But not a long ramp that leaves you uncertain how far up you have to go in order to achieve a certain play-style. Still, I've always been a pretty weak player. Vince would scoff at me!

 

[hiver]

Im sure someone will correct me but currently both skills would be counted so you couldnt fail that check just for having a point difference in one or the other.

When i played a grifter i didnt find a single situation like that. Even if there is one, you can report it and the devs will change it. Even if there is one, you usually have other ways of handling it. etc.

But it sounds like the issue here is really a result of the interaction of CYOA skill checks and a generally unforgiving design philosophy.

It sounds to me as if its the same old issue again. The issue of AoD not playing like another type of RPG, in this case W2, to be precise.

And i dont see anything else about it - again.

 

[Elhoim]

AoD vs Wasteland 2: Which one is better and why?

I have a slight agreement with sea. AoD could have been more involving with little effort (if identified as a design goal early on but not at this stage). His "prepare potions for side quests" example is spot-on.

We planned a long time ago using acid for melting locks, but we never had time to properly implement it... Working on two games at once with an almost non-existent budget is hard. As a matter of fact, we have plans for a slightly more complex lock picking system with a couple of lockpick types, oils and acids.

I'm not bothered by dialogue-hopping by itself to remove A-to-B and B-to-A bloat but the lack of a general sense of leaving the player alone and letting him or her do things as a bridge between A-to-B and B-to-A, which is rather rare in AoD.

We have planed removing restrictions on exploration on several places, like the mine, for example. Also, in the latest update, you can harvest alchemy ingredients using your alchemy skill. We still haven't placed all the items, just in Teron for now.

All that said, there doesn't seem to much to the Grifter class, unless I missed a lot when I played one. Other than the first quest and one reference to "Grifter" during a skill check with Feng, I didn't see any unique content for this class. Unless I missed a bunch of content, I would think this class could just be removed. A non-combat "Drifter" would be the same thing anyway.

You can con the noble woman in Teron, in the house near the palace, and the merchant outside the inn. Vince is writing lots of non-combat quests including making a partnership with another grifter doing some cons around the city.

This is what I found. I put all my points into social skills as a starting grifter and the first NPC I came across who had a social challenge I failed them on. Because I had Streetwise 3 and Persuasion 4, instead of Persuasion 3 and Streetwise 4, as I vaguely determined by recreating my character. I found myself just sitting on my skillpoints until a dialogue check came up that I failed, at which point I'd reload and dump one more point into the skill I thought was too low, which usually did it. And that was with ten Charisma and ten Intelligence, too.

Where was that? We are really interested in balancing and making skill checks more flexible where it makes sense.

 

[Infinitron]

We also had a turn-based top-down party-based cyberpunk CRPG earlier this year, and it was also mediocre. Just having all the right things in the back of the box doesn't mean anything

Shadowrun Returns most definitely did not have "all the right things".

I can't help but feel that Fallout itself would have been treated by you as "mediocre, uninspired" if it had been released today. "Rat cave with trash combat. And look at all these boring binary choices! Kill all the scorpions...or just blow up the cave! Kill all the raiders...or just convince them with a skill check. SO DEEP!!" Don't you see how any traditional CRPG, no matter how fun, can be reduced to looking "mediocre" this way?

A new Fallout-like post-apoc isometric RPG is the Codex's holy grail. You're on a forum with people who jizzed in their pants at the sight of Troika's 5 minute engine tech demo of such a game. I just don't understand what you want here, man.

 

[Invictus]

Sounds to me that the main issue most players are having is that their character end up playing as a sort of perfect stat balancing act where the game punishes you for choosing the "wrong" skills to raise. I know it must be quite a feat to have a game which throricaly can be finished by any class but it should work as a "hey I would like to try this" rather than restarting the game again to reblanace your skills because your prior choices made the game unbeatable
Now mind you this is exactly the kind of tough combat game I would enjoy but seems to me the tough combat is not the issue here but the way the non combat options seem too skill related rather than option related...perhaps if more of those options acted as hidden mechanics they would be more effective too

 

[crawlkill]

Where was that? We are really interested in balancing and making skill checks more flexible where it makes sense.

It was the rich woman in the first city you can take for her jewels by implying you might get her a marriage to your imaginary master. It's especially weird because the character who failed actually got -two- checks that were (if I'm remembering right) the same two traits (I don't remember if it was Persuasion and Etiquette or Persuasion and Streetwise or something both times). I passed the first one but failed the second one. It does make the conversation keep going longer, which is legitimate, but it felt strange mechanically.

 

[ZagorTeNej]

I can't help but feel that Fallout itself would have been treated by you as "mediocre, uninspired" if it had been released today. "Rat cave with trash combat. And look at all these boring binary choices! Kill all the scorpions...or just blow up the cave! SO DEEP!! Kill all the raiders...or just convince them with a skill check. SO DEEP!!" Don't you see how any traditional CRPG, no matter how fun, can be reduced to looking "mediocre" this way?

Or you can barter with Garl for Tandi, or challenge him to unarmed combat or convince him you're his returned father (need a lot of conditions for that though), it's not really a good example no matter with what attitude you approach the game with.

A new Fallout-like post-apoc isometric RPG is the Codex's fucking holy grail. You're on a forum with people who jizzed in their pants at the sight of Troika's 5 minute engine tech demo of such a game. I just don't understand what you want here, man.

What is Fallout like? If it's just isometric, turn based in a post apocalyptic environment then sure but I'd argue there's more to it than that (though it's still is an important part), that said who knows what the final product (Wasteland 2) will look like.

There's also the danger of being compared to its predecessors and coming up short (whether because of nostalgia, genuinely lesser quality in some areas or a mix of both), AOD tries something different (which you may or may not like) so there's nothing really to compare it with.

 

[Kz3r0]

Regardless of what happens with this game I think it's safe to say it will go down as the most "character-creation" save-scummed game of all time.

True old school then.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

Fargo promises too much and barely scrapes by in WL2 pre-alpha beta.
Vince delivers exactly what he promises, if not more, in AoD.
And sea you are way more optimistic about WL2 than AoD.

Exactly how much dew and doritos were involved here? Or are you still brain damaged from arguing with smudboy?

 

[Kz3r0]

Working on two games at once with an almost non-existent budget is hard.

Go to Kickstarter, ask for fifty thousand dollars, you will get one hundred thousand.

 

[Kz3r0]

We also had a turn-based top-down party-based cyberpunk CRPG earlier this year, and it was also mediocre. Just having all the right things in the back of the box doesn't mean anything

Shadowrun Returns most definitely did not have "all the right things".

Absolutely this, besides why people forget so easily Expedition:Conquistador?

 

[Infinitron]

Or you can barter with Garl for Tandi, or challenge him to unarmed combat or convince him you're his returned father (need a lot of conditions for that though), it's not really a good example no matter with what attitude you approach the game with.

Sure thing, but even those things (well, except the returned father solution) could be seen by a jaded RPG player as "tired tropes I've seen a million times before", etc.

Anyway, don't want to derail the thread further, but felipe's statement that "AoD will have more fans and more endorsement, while W2 will just be replaced by any other cRPG", when the Codex's biggest thread by far is about a spiritual successor to the ultimate "going through the motions" RPG is pretty silly.

People do fondly remember those games that checked all the boxes and did it competently, even if they weren't super-original.

 

[Chaotic_Heretic]

IWD2 was just going through the motions if you mean PE thread.

 

[felipepepe]

We also had a turn-based top-down party-based cyberpunk CRPG earlier this year, and it was also mediocre. Just having all the right things in the back of the box doesn't mean anything

Shadowrun Returns most definitely did not have "all the right things".

SR:R feature list sure had... isometric, turn-based, party-based, cyberpunk setting, based on the P&P... it even had things like deckers hacking the matrix and a editor. You're only saying it didn't had "all the right things" because you played it and saw it didn't do anything with all those features, implementing them in limited and boring way.

I can't help but feel that Fallout itself would have been treated by you as "mediocre, uninspired" if it had been released today. "Rat cave with trash combat. And look at all these boring binary choices! Kill all the scorpions...or just blow up the cave! Kill all the raiders...or just convince them with a skill check. SO DEEP!!" Don't you see how any traditional CRPG, no matter how fun, can be reduced to looking "mediocre" this way?

No, it can't. You just tried to do so and failed; the simplest examples you could think of, one is a trash combat area that can be fully avoid by clever use of skills, the other had various different outcomes and even a completely original one. That's why Fallout 1 is simply unrivaled.

Besides, various other RPGs impressed me; such as Underrail. While the writing is bland and forgettable, the combat and the the world are interesting enough to provide various great moments. And again, that's the problem with W2; it's uninspired, bland, forgettable. I've played 25 hours of it and the only thing I saw that was trully interesting or well done was that a frog ate my character's gun.

FFS, just look at the W2 thread. The game has been out for weeks and all you see are people talking about concepts & mechanics or bugs. Now go to other game threads, from Dark Souls and Wizardry 8 to D:OS or Underrail, and you'll see people talking about how they "did X and it was fun", tried Y and Z, was cool", etc... there's none of that in W2, you're just going through the motions, doing "RPG stuff".

A new Fallout-like post-apoc isometric RPG is the Codex's holy grail. You're on a forum with people who jizzed in their pants at the sight of Troika's 5 minute engine tech demo of such a game. I just don't understand what you want here, man.

The other thread, when we were talking about level design, C&C and dialog in W2, the whole defense was "this is not Fallout, different games, different goals, etc...", but now it's Fallout-like?

Anyway, don't want to derail the thread further, but felipe's statement that "AoD will have more fans and more endorsement, while W2 will just be replaced by any other cRPG", when the Codex's biggest thread by far is about a spiritual successor to the ultimate "going through the motions" RPG is pretty silly.

We haven't even seen a true gameplay video bro, just a short trailer. And the amount of discussion has nothing to do with how the game will play, the Fallout 4 thread has more pages than the Witcher 3 + Underrail thread, so is F4 a great RPG?

Besides, Sawyer is doing anything BUT going through the motions. All the butthurt and countless pages comes precisely from how he wants to do things differently, fix all the issues that he had with old games and all that.

 

[J_C]

FFS, just look at the W2 thread. The game has been out for weeks and all you see are people talking about concepts & mechanics or bugs. Now go to other game threads, from Dark Souls and Wizardry 8 to D:OS or Underrail, and you'll see people talking about how they "did X and it was fun", tried Y and Z, was cool", etc... there's none of that in W2, you're just going through the motions, doing "RPG stuff".

Jesus Christ, you are ripping the excitment out of me regarding W2. This is one of the Codex Kickstarter darling, is it possible that it will be a failure in terms of quality?

I've played 25 hours of it

So you are playing a boring, uninspired RPG for 25 hours? You sure like those it seems.

 

[CWagner]

SR:R feature list sure had... isometric, turn-based, party-based, cyberpunk setting, based on the P&P...

The world and story was P&P based, the actual mechanics had pretty much nothing to do with the P&P at all.

Oh and I like WL2 and think it'll be a really cool game and I like AoD and think it'll be really cool even if I'll take ages to finish it as I'll need to take longer breaks between dying for the xth time.

 

[felipepepe]

So you are playing a boring, uninspired RPG for 25 hours? You sure like those it seems.

Finishing the beta takes like 6 hours, there's two paths to take and my saves got corrupted, so I had to replay everything...

Besides, W2 isn't bad, just mediocre.

 

[Infinitron]

SR:R feature list sure had... isometric, turn-based, party-based, cyberpunk setting, based on the P&P... it even had things like deckers hacking the matrix and a editor.

...and also ultra-linearity, and no Fallout-style skill-based system, and no environmental interaction using that system (it was a lot like AoD in that respect!), and no full party creation, and it was too damn easy.

No, it didn't have all the right things.

doing "RPG stuff".

See, your problem is that you consider "doing RPG stuff" to be a bad/boring/mediocre thing. On the RPG Codex, I believe most people happen to like "doing RPG stuff".

The rest of your post is basically subjective hipsterism and there is no point replying to it.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I dunno. I didn't hate it, but it didn't feel very...vibrant, and certainly not a fluid way to play the game. If I'm playing a social character who has literally not put a single point anywhere but social skills, I feel like I should reliably be able to pass social checks.

Might as well have one social skill in the game then.

 

[felipepepe]

See, your problem is that you consider "doing RPG stuff" to be a bad/boring/mediocre thing. On the RPG Codex, I believe most people happen to like "doing RPG stuff".

Talk to NPC, get quest, go to area X, kill enemies, get back to NPC for rewards and next quest. That's "RPG stuff", so I guess that MMOs are the RPG Codex true love, since they are all about doing that for days straight.

But they aren't, are they? If the mechanics aren't implemented in a interesting way, you just have a boring game were you "do stuff". You don't have to reinvent the wheel, just do the basic right, with some flavor. Even MMOs have some quests that are amazing and interesting, that drag you in. W2 doesn't. It may be a innovative and hardcore RPG for those who grew up with Oblivion and Fallout 3, but in the goddamn RPG Codex it brings nothing new, nor does the old in a interesting way. The reason we spend so much time talking about it has more to do with Fargo, Kickstarter and the Wasteland 2 name than anything it does in-game.

BTW Infinitron, what are your impressions of W2? Is it a great and memorable game, that holds up to what was promised and will be the new Codex favorite "Fallout-like" RPG?

 

[Infinitron]

BTW Infinitron, what are your impressions of W2? Is it a great and memorable game, that holds up to what was promised and will be the new Codex favorite "Fallout-like" RPG?

Played it for about half an hour. Had a blast. Definitely more playable at this stage than D:OS, which is all sorts of clunky.

I think some of the people criticizing W2 for being "boring" are just now realizing that the standard-issue "post apocalypse in the desert" setting is kind of inherently drab? It's cynical and self-aware, visually very uncolorful, it doesn't grant your characters any awesome powers.

It is what it is. *shrug* I can see how you might find it not very captivating, especially without Fallout's Vault schtick which adds a little bit of "stranger in a strange land" tension to the narrative.

 

[Roguey]

no Fallout-style skill-based system,

Sure it did. It didn't have as much granularity (and had attribute caps like Arcanum), but Fallout's level of granularity is awful. Wasteland 2's not that granular, and even AoD eventually moved away from it.

Unless you're referring to how every skill except decking is a combat skill.

and no environmental interaction using that system (it was a lot like AoD in that respect!),

Decking was sometimes used as a lockpick and for hacking computers without entering the Matrix. You could also send drones into vents, and there was at least one non-combat situation where that was beneficial. During combat, you could summon monsters from objects in the environment and place your casters on marked squares to boost their abilities.

and no full party creation,

Not necessarily a "right" thing.

And yes, if someone's already played Fallout, a game with the same level of quality is no longer good enough.

 

[Longshanks]

SR:R feature list sure had... isometric, turn-based, party-based, cyberpunk setting, based on the P&P... it even had things like deckers hacking the matrix and a editor.

...and also ultra-linearity, and no Fallout-style skill-based system, and no environmental interaction using that system (it was a lot like AoD in that respect!), and no full party creation, and it was too damn easy.

No, it didn't have all the right things.

Full party creation is one of the "right things"? Most of the Codex's top RPGs don't feature it - FO, PST, Arcanum. My ideal RPG would not have full party creation, it works well for certain sub-categories but not the ones I'm most interested in.

I can recognise some of the "flaws" in AOD that sea identifies, but whether these are actual flaws or just a matter of different focus (as sea considers Wasteland 2's more limited dialogue) will come down to each individual player. Personally, I've always rated reactivity, especially to character build, well above anything else in an RPG, for me it's what they're for and everything else is just dressing. AOD is at times too utilitarian but it does quests and reactivity better than just about anything else I've played, which sea acknowledges. I've never been all that interested in environment exploration - I find the plot exploration from different angles with different builds much more interesting - and the only thing that AOD lacks for me is the option of more free skill use, though that's not to say there could not have been other improvements to existing content. My enjoyment of the game has nothing to do with it "mostly being combat" and I found this a strange suggestion, but its quality, possibly unmatched, concrete roleplaying.

I'm more with felipepepe, the "standard fare" just doesn't do it for me anymore. Give me some proper reactivity and actual variation between character builds (one reason full party creation is not my thing), or I'm just not that interested unless you're game is doing something else very well. Whether it's ISO, TB or whatever is largely irrelevant. I've not yet played Wasteland 2, but from what felipepepe says it doesn't sound too promising, as it seems to do what most RPGs do, hiding ordinary concrete roleplaying behind a bunch of flavour roleplaying and side elements. AOD makes little attempt at this, it's upfront about what it's doing and does it very well, if that's what you want out of a game it's going to be very satisfying.

 

[Vault Dweller]

^ Pretty much. Doing "RPG stuff", as felipe said, doesn't do it for anymore either, which is why we tried to do something different with AoD. Obviously, we could have done more and we could have done better, but our team is way too small and our focus has been on quest design, combat, and reactivity.