Aztaka - Indie RPG Platforming

[Jason]

More details would be appreciated. No doubt it looks great, but how about the gameplay? What action RPGs or platformers would you compare it to? How demanding is it in the twitch sense?

 

[Castanova]

I bought this game yesterday and have been glued to it ever since. Great artwork and music.

Plant.

 

[Zyrxil]

Bought the game yesterday - terrible combat. It's like the designers were simply ignorant of the last twenty years of 2d platforming so they took gameplay from Altered Beast and paired it with modern artwork. Actually, that's probably too generous, Altered Beast has a lot more depth and more animations.

My fault though. Was expecting/hoping for another Aquaria, bought it gameplay trailer unseen from some random guys without 1/5 the Indie design experience of Derek Yu.

 

[poocolator]

I can't even think of a cool myth from the americas. They're almost always about how some bird spirit stole everyone's corn or something equally retarded. Unless you know of some awesome story where an Aztec warrior beats the shit out of 50 panthers and then uses their blood to quench a weapon forged in a volcano? (Oh wait, they used ROCKS for their weapons.)

Well... this is the sort of ignorance that sets most people off from further studying the mesoamerican civilizations. They had cities, states, practiced law, pursued government and much, much more. These were not nomadic peoples like the northern tribes, by any sense. Tenochtitlan was a city built in the middle of a lake by a tribe of displaced peoples (Mexica), refused settlement everywhere else in the region by the established powers. They eventually rose to pacify their neighbors and headed an Alliance of states comprising their former abusers. Even at that point, the once-great Maya civilization was already heavily in decline, with their fabulous cities all but reclaimed by the ravenous jungle they once towered above, being a much older civilization. I mean, these were a people who left behind a treasure of knowledge to be studied. Historians use every bit they can find (those not destroyed by the Spaniards in the name of Christ), like transcripts of judicial proceedings describing a conflict between two landowners, over encroachment of property; the intrigue is limitless!

 

[Melcar]

I can't even think of a cool myth from the americas. They're almost always about how some bird spirit stole everyone's corn or something equally retarded. Unless you know of some awesome story where an Aztec warrior beats the shit out of 50 panthers and then uses their blood to quench a weapon forged in a volcano? (Oh wait, they used ROCKS for their weapons.)

Well... this is the sort of ignorance that sets most people off from further studying the mesoamerican civilizations. They had cities, states, practiced law, pursued government and much, much more. These were not nomadic peoples like the northern tribes, by any sense. Tenochtitlan was a city built in the middle of a lake by a tribe of displaced peoples (Mexica), refused settlement everywhere else in the region by the established powers. They eventually rose to pacify their neighbors and headed an Alliance of states comprising their former abusers. Even at that point, the once-great Maya civilization was already heavily in decline, with their fabulous cities all but reclaimed by the ravenous jungle they once towered above, being a much older civilization. I mean, these were a people who left behind a treasure of knowledge to be studied. Historians use every bit they can find (those not destroyed by the Spaniards in the name of Christ), like transcripts of judicial proceedings describing a conflict between two landowners, over encroachment of property; the intrigue is limitless!

A post apocalyptic RPG based on the Mayan decline would be awesome.

 

[poocolator]

Yeah, the game story could be written to appear as if a global apocalypse were occuring-- like the verge of a nuclear war. That would definitely make for some interesting NPCs and scenarios. I'm not sure why it happened, but experts quote famine and overpopulation. It would be interesting to design the game to revolve around the causes, and put the player through a sort of discovery adventure.

 

[WanderingThrough2]

They had cities, states, practiced law, pursued government and much, much more.

How amazing that by the 15th C A.D. they had managed to achieve all these things.

Still didn't have the number zero, a functional wheel, or domesticated animals but hey, in another two millennia they would've gotten there but for the Spaniards.

 

[Melcar]

The Maya had the zero, and I think the Inca as well. Not sure about the Aztecs, but I'm pretty sure they had a working concept; Maya and Aztec astronomy was unmatched by Western science; Mesoamerican and South American architectural designs rivaled those of Europe; and agricultural techniques in the Americas (specially that of the Inca) were far more advanced than anything Europe had at the time.
They had no wheel, which was a big setback. The reason they had no domesticated animals of burden was because there were none to domesticate.
By the time Europeans started to arrive in the Americas, most civilizations were still in the Stone Age (remember that cultural development in the Americas started much latter than in Europe). They knew for the most part how to carve precious stones and produce intricate jewelry, but their tools and weapons largely remained of stone construction. However, a few cultures were already experimenting with iron (the Tarascans for example, and the Inca), so it wouldn't be far fetched to stipulate that in a few extra centuries they would have been closer in terms of technology to the Europeans.

 

[WanderingThrough2]

The Maya had the zero, and I think the Inca as well. Not sure about the Aztecs, but I'm pretty sure they had a working concept; Maya and Aztec astronomy was unmatched by Western science;

Mesoamerican and South American architectural designs rivaled those of Europe;

So I'm genuinely curious: do you actually buy this? I always wonder when I hear cultural relativists make these kinds of assertions. I've been to the ruins of Machu Picchu, Tenochtitlan, and Monte Alban. I've also been to Rome, Ephesus, Istanbul, as well as the major cities of Europe, and lesser cities like Granada with European pre-Colombian remains. The notion that even at their prime, the pre-Colombian American structures were comparable architecturally is just goofy. They aren't even comparable to Roman architecture the second century, like the Pantheon or the aqueducts. They were massive and by their sheer size quite impressive (in the same way the Pyramids are), but they lacked (at a very minimum) domes and buttresses.

agricultural techniques in the Americas (specially that of the Inca) were far more advanced than anything Europe had at the time.

Unlike architecture, I don't know anything about this, so I won't join the point, but suffice it to say, I'm quite skeptical. My understanding is that Incan farming was collective, rather than small plots, and so no doubt gained massive efficiencies from that (the same way huge corporate farms are more productive than small plots today). But I'm not going to argue where I can't.

They had no wheel, which was a big setback.

They did have a wheel, they just didn't realize it could be functional.

The reason they had no domesticated animals of burden was because there were none to domesticate.

The "none to domesticate" argument always struck me as a question begging red herring. If we had not domesticated cattle, but had instead killed them all off like we did the bison, we wouldn't think of cattle as domesticable. Also, a lot of animals that seem like "obvious" things to domesticate -- given the way they look and act today -- took centuries of domestication to transform into their current state. So the fact there weren't huge Arabian horses and fat Jersey heifers on the pampas doesn't excuse the locals.

Moreover, there are plenty of animals in South America that seem like promising options if one had the sophistication to domesticate. At the very least, you'd think they could've done something with the toxodon, a big hoofed creature that co-existed with humans in South America well after the time cattle had been domesticated in Europe.

Anyway, in this case the argument is clearly wrong, since the Incans had already domesticated the llama, and while I suppose llamas would've been somewhat less happy in the jungle climate than in the mountains, I'm sure they could've made do with them.

However, a few cultures were already experimenting with iron, so it wouldn't be far fetched to stipulate that in a few extra centuries they would have been closer in terms of technology to the Europeans.

Well, I don't know whether that's true or not (that they were experimenting with iron), but iron was used in Europe/Asia Minor in 1500 B.C. -- almost three thousand years before Columbus got to the New World. So "a few extra centuries" seems optimistic, to say the least.

I'm also note sure that the later migration of people to the Americas really is an excuse, either. I mean, they got there, what, 15,000 years ago? No real civilization started in Asia Minor until 14,000 years ago. Wikipedia tells me that the first South American civilization kicked off in 3,000 B.C., just about even with Egypt's civilization getting into overdrive.

Anyway, the fact is there's no good literature to come out of pre-Colombian America.

 

[Damned Registrations]

A setting based on the inca or maya having advanced a bit further might be somewhat interesting. Stone weapons and feather headdresses just scream useless tribal to me though. It'd be like having a setting focused on cave dwellers with only wooden clubs and sharpened sticks as weapons, wearing furs.

If you want a culture/mythology that is well removed from european stuff, I'd go for india WAY before aztec/incan/mayan.

 

[Melcar]

What could they domesticate? Aside from animals that could be used for food, they did not have much in a way of beasts of burden. A few in South America, but nothing like in Europe.
As for agriculture, guess what allowed the great population booms in Europe and what "fed" the raising armies of the time? A lot of agriculture techniques and crops from the Americas were brought over to Europe, and that allowed further growth and expansion of the population.
As for literature, most was destroyed and very few examples survive. Most are short legends compiled on surviving codices and book collections produced by the clergy.
In short, no, American civilizations were not Übermensch or anything of the sort. However, they counted with several achievements under their belt that made them much more than "savages". They were in, you could say, different timelines, and did not have the opportunity to get to the same level of sophistication and "cultural enlightenment" European and Asian cultures achieved.

 

[poocolator]

They had cities, states, practiced law, pursued government and much, much more.

How amazing that by the 15th C A.D. they had managed to achieve all these things.

Still didn't have the number zero, a functional wheel, or domesticated animals but hey, in another two millennia they would've gotten there but for the Spaniards.

This may be an alien concept to you: demand [and supply]. When there is a demand for something, solutions will arise to satisfy that demand. They had an abundance of manpower, so they specialised in it. Long merchant convoys of porters would carry goods all across the empire and beyond.

The wheel as used in transportation was useless to them because they had no horses, and the available animals (bred for any such use) would be cumbersome. This leads me to my last point:

They had domesticated animals, dipshit (look up the turkey). They had pigs and others too which I can't recall off the top of my head.

Honestly, I don't know where you angry little sods get your information.

 

[poocolator]

Long-winded stuff

Let me just add this:
You say you've been widely across Europe and shit, so I take it you're probably more impressed with ancient European cultures... but you have to keep in mind that Europeans easily shared culture, whereas the mesoamericans, completely insular, developed it spontaneously. To me, there isn't great difference (in architectural style, say) between Etruscans, Romans and the Greeks (to name a scant few).

Granted the initial settlers (of the Americas), tens of thousands of years ago, brought with them the foundational knowledge shared by all migrating humans originating from the common pool, but not of great enough consequence to refute my point.

A setting based on the inca or maya having advanced a bit further might be somewhat interesting. Stone weapons and feather headdresses just scream useless tribal to me though. It'd be like having a setting focused on cave dwellers with only wooden clubs and sharpened sticks as weapons, wearing furs.

They were hardly "tribal," FYI, and I don't see what's wrong with doing a game a tad differently from what we're used to (same European, high-fantasy bullshit). Also, I actually read about certain smaller tribes in the mesoamericas having developed copper weapons and used them to some degree... and that metallurgy was in fact fairly preponderant (for use in ornaments and relics, et. al), but the weapons stemming from this could not compete effectively with what already existed. Copper/Tin vs. Obsidian-- Obsidian wins :/

If you want a culture/mythology that is well removed from european stuff, I'd go for india WAY before aztec/incan/mayan.

I'm not surprised.

http://eatourbrains.com/EoB/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/azteccalendar.jpg

 

[Damned Registrations]

See, that pretty much makes my point. Humans were turned into fish and monkeys and birds to protect them from a bunch of storms? Very stupid myth.

And as far as being interesting in a fantasy setting, aztecs are pretty much tribal. They have no variety in armaments and no interesting mythical monsters or gods. Advanced agriculture and pottery doesn't make for an enthralling story. Dozens of gods (or aspects thereof, demigods, whatever) do. Demons and monsters held at bay by mortals do.

Besides, Angkor Wat kicks the crap out of pretty much any other religious site in the world.

 

[Jason]

There's a release candidate demo available, but only for a day as they haven't finished with the "real" demo.

 

[WanderingThrough2]

You say you've been widely across Europe and shit, so I take it you're probably more impressed with ancient European cultures...

Well, yes. And you should be, too. But that's not why I've traveled more in Europe. It's because modern European cultures tend to offer more things that make traveling pleasant. And I actually find much greater homogeneity in the ancient ruins in America than you see in Europe.

Again, bear in mind that Tenochtitlan corresponds not with, say, the Pyramids or even the Parthenon in age, but with with Notre Dame Cathedral (which is itself a bit older than Tenochtitlan). By the time you've reached Notre Dame, or the Hagia Sofia, or Red Square, or the Alhambra, or whatever, you've got such a variety both across cultures and across time in Europe and Asia Minor. Whereas in the Americas there's a bunch of big piles of rock that fit together seamlessly because they didn't use mortar. It's pretty cool to see one or two such things. But that's about it.

My point isn't that there is moral superiority that arises out of superior cultural artifacts. But to deny that the cultural artifacts are superior in order to defend a position of moral equivalence or savage superiority (which is, I think, the main project of relativists like Jared Diamond) is silly.

-EDIT-

Also, I've never really understood the whole environmental determinism claim (although I realize that a major flaw people have is wanting to believe in more agency than actually exists in the world, so I may be unreasonable here). I mean, it's certainly true that environment must play a role in development. But even within the same environment, you see radically different developments -- whether it's the huge variety of appearances and behaviors of Birds of Paradise or the enormous differences between Athens and Sparta. To try to explain the difference between Athens and Sparta in terms of soil nutrients and mineral content of nearby rocks and growing seasons seems ridiculous. So, while it might be true that the differences between Aztec and Christian Iberian culture is explicable primarily due to environment, that still doesn't explain why the Aztecs were so undeveloped.

 

[Melcar]

List of Aztec Gods:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_mythology

All other civilizations had similarly large list of Gods. Legends and poems regarding them exists, but not many survive and most are only excerpts from larger works.
There are actually some surviving records of the different armaments they used. Mostly Aztec and Inca. I'm sure you can find some references just by googling. An example:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aztec_warfare
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire#Weapons.2C_armor.2C_and_warfare

 

[poocolator]

And as far as being interesting in a fantasy setting, aztecs are pretty much tribal.

What exactly do you mean by this? Aztecs were about as tribal as say.... ancient Greeks

 

[Melcar]

And as far as being interesting in a fantasy setting, aztecs are pretty much tribal.

What exactly do you mean by this? Aztecs were about as tribal as say.... ancient Greeks

They lack bloom and shit. They are not as XTREME.

 

[Damned Registrations]

They were on par with greeks for some things. But as I've said, not for things that make them interesting. I don't really care about whether or not my fantasy setting has farms or astronomy. I'd prefer they have advanced metal smithing and engineering. Being able to melt gold doesn't count. Being able to make elaborate scale armor, mirrors, and coliseums does. Playing through the entire game with colourful quilted cotton armor and feathered headdresses doesn't appeal to me. Nor does wielding several varieties of wooden sticks with stones glued in. Or fighting animals as the only type of enemy other than other humans just like me.

 

[Annie Mitsoda]

...Or fighting animals as the only type of enemy other than other humans just like me.

Guess you missed this shot. And come on - what's not to like about a mythology that has a fuck-off huge featured serpent?

Also, it seems to come down to preference here. OK, you like more technological stuff. But what IS it about steel and such that makes this so compelling to you? Steel was so rare in Japan, for example, that their best armor was made of woven strips of it, and you didn't have great bigass claymores but slender katanas. Different circumstances beget different cultures. But again - what is it about STEEL in particular to you? The Romans and Greeks didn't have it. If it's tech you're all about, wouldn't you dig MODERN-DAY stuff? Or space marines! Don't everybody love 'em? (ack)

...in all seriousness, even if this setting doesn't suit everyone's tastes, I'm just going to say how fucking AMAZINGLY GLAD I am to see something set in a non-medieval-Europe-esque environment. I'd completely love to see something set in India (a playable version on the Ramayana? YEZ PLZ), Sumeria or Babylonia, about Inuit myth, Zulu culture (or oooo, the reinterpretation and changing of the myths, as in places like Haiti and the Americas), and a Chinese one that isn't Jade Empire. There's SO MUCH REFERENCE for good RPG settings in real world cultures that's not been touched on - so to me, even if this gets people to try something new, I see it as a win.

...just don't suck, ok, Aztaka? Don't be the failure that dickholes point to and go "SEE IT DIDN'T SELL WELL THAT MUST MEAN THE SETTING CANNOT BE ANYTHING BUT ORCS AND ELVES IN MEDIEVAL ENGLAND FROM NOW ON!" You laugh, but it happens!

 

[Melcar]

I just finished getting it. Can't get it to work on Wine and I can't be bothered to boot into my WinXP drive for any longer than 20min., so I won't be playing it adequately until the weekend... or something.
From the little I played so far it seems good. Graphics and animations are nice and fluid. The music is "meh", but I only heard like 2 tracks so far (I hope there are more otherwise it would be very boring). The game plays and feels like a platformer, so I guess you could classify it as a "platform/adventure with RPG elements". Did not get to the serious puzzles (supposedly it's a big part of the gameplay) so I can't comment on that. Combat so far is repetitive and unimaginative.

 

[poocolator]

Annie's right. This is starting to boil down to a shit-throwing contest about preferences. On that note, I do think that if done properly, DamnedRegistrations, the game could be very interesting and engaging. The opposite certainly is true: Fallout 3 is set in a very portentous world, but is boring as fuck because the design was not executed well or though-out.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

(Oh wait, they used ROCKS for their weapons.)

Stupidly overkill SHARP rock weapons, according to Age of Empires II . IIRC, "almost like iron".

 

[Damned Registrations]

Well yeah. Obsidian is basically like glass. Great for killing animals. Shit for cutting through armor tougher than cloth.

Also, why the fuck is a centaur in the game? :shock: