Game News Dead State Kickstarter Update #25: Combat Video Released

[BobtheTree]

I must say I'm a little bit surprised. It's no problem for me, for it can only mean the games will be finished soon-ish, but according to that kickstarters fall into into two different categories.

I think inXile and Fargo will deliver on, or very near, time. For one, Brian Fargo isan actual publisher of games, unlike a lot of these other Kickstarter which comes from developers who, if given the resources, would probably continue making the game forever. Fargo has the business background that most other Kickstarted projects don't have. Without the responsibility of a contract that says you must deliver by X date, there's very little from keeping these people from making their game provided they still have the funds from Kickstarter to work with (see Double Fine, which still doesn't seem to be anywhere close to delivering this mystical "old-school adventure game" I haven't heard anything new about since the actual Kickstarter ended).

 

[tuluse]

I'm curious, do inXile see themselves as building up a bigger running income by building up a stable of games that sell modestly well for long periods? (As opposed to the huge initial sales + steep dropoff method of the big publishers)

I think Fargo's plan is to keep going back to kickstarter.

I think inXile and Fargo will deliver on, or very near, time. For one, Brian Fargo isan actual publisher of games, unlike a lot of these other Kickstarter which comes from developers who, if given the resources, would probably continue making the game forever. Fargo has the business background that most other Kickstarted projects don't have. Without the responsibility of a contract that says you must deliver by X date, there's very little from keeping these people from making their game provided they still have the funds from Kickstarter to work with (see Double Fine, which still doesn't seem to be anywhere close to delivering this mystical "old-school adventure game" I haven't heard anything new about since the actual Kickstarter ended).

Have you been watching the documentary? They recently had their first playable build and starting doing in house testing.

 

[Kirtai]

I'm curious, do inXile see themselves as building up a bigger running income by building up a stable of games that sell modestly well for long periods? (As opposed to the huge initial sales + steep dropoff method of the big publishers)

I think Fargo's plan is to keep going back to kickstarter.

Well yes, for the main funding but I'm thinking more of a small amount of extra income to smooth out the "big income followed by nothing" cycle.

 

[Rake]

I'm curious, do inXile see themselves as building up a bigger running income by building up a stable of games that sell modestly well for long periods? (As opposed to the huge initial sales + steep dropoff method of the big publishers)

I think Fargo's plan is to keep going back to kickstarter.

Well yes, for the main funding but I'm thinking more of a small amount of extra income to smooth out the "big income followed by nothing" cycle.

No game has "big income followed by nothing". Even AAA games continiue to sell. Its just that the big publisers are conserned only with the initial sales to make back their investor's money, and to sale as many copies as they can in the initial 60$ price with the marketing hype. Sales 2 years latter on a sale is not their focus. Alpha Protocol's sales for example, after the disapointing start, continiued to sell and i read that it was profitable and Sega was surprised.
I find it quite telling that the publisers don't consider the quality of their own games to be good so the games can continiue to sell via word of mouth and player's love, and instead throw all their expectations to marketing hype and bought reviews to sell as many copies as they can on week one and then wash their hands in the whole affair.
Deep down they know they offer shit.

 

[Kirtai]

I find it quite telling that the publisers don't consider the quality of their own games to be good so the games can continiue to sell via word of mouth and player's love, and instead throw all their expectations to marketing hype and bought reviews to sell as many copies as they can on week one and then wash their hands in the whole affair.

The movie industry do the same, especially in order to try and drive as many sales of stinkers before the word spreads about how bad they are. Smartphones have put a crimp in that practice though. I expect that the game publishers think the same way.

 

[Tigranes]

It's clearly in the early stages and a lot of work needs to be done, and that's fine. What I would like to know (sorry, have only read a little bit of the thread) is some things which would be pretty bad if they were by design, but look like they were just not implemented yet:

• Mitsoda was describing some zombie appearances as zombies on the map lured by the sound, but in terms of watching the video, they sort of seemed to appear out of thin air, with no obvious route by which they entered - they were just hanging around in the middle of the house. I'd expect to see, say, the zombies huddling outside the restaurant/diner shuffle towards the mart.
• The zombies seemed to be really dumb and blind, i.e. the very first zombie just stands there and gets backstabbed, the second zombie only sees you when you run up to its face. They should be a bit more aware even in an 'early map', or it's going to be pretty easy, no?
• No hotkeys, or was Mitsoda labouriously going back and forth between weapon icon and the zombie just so it's easier to see what's happening on video?

If any of this has been covered, yeah, I'm an idiot. I'm sort of assuming they'll be addressed during development though.

Otherwise looks OK. I backed it but I never expected combat to be particularly complex, just a AOD/Fallout kind of deal with some interesting zombie-specific mechanics. I think the key factor will be how well and how deep they can implement the latter. I like the noise mechanic and the guns/melee tradeoff, I like the zombie/human difference even though that one human was beaten up so fast we didn't really see that bit yet, etc. I hope to see zombies do more than just throw Default Attacks as development progresses.

The look of it isn't great, and the interface still looks silly, but we already knew that. I hope they're able to redo the UI but if they can't that's not a huge deal. I think as long as the zombie mechanics are done right, and it looks like they're on their way, there will be sufficient atmosphere.

 

[HanoverF]

He said Zombies attracted by sound spawned at map exits and there was one right behind the hardware store.

 

[curry]

He said Zombies attracted by sound spawned at map exits and there was one right behind the hardware store.

No, he said noise attracts nearby zombies and too much noise makes even more zombies spawn at map exits.

 

[Mastermind]

Using a crowbar to bash a door open...

 

[Roguey]

Brian said a few things in the forum that sounded promising in regards to combat, but I still have my doubts. Might end up being a good example of the dangers of systems design from a narrative designer.

Yeah the market is just fucking FLOODED with turn-based, Stat and skill based Zombie survival games.

http://whalesdev.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page
http://roguesurvivor.blogspot.com/p/about.html
http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/563686

Yup.

But what do you guys expect? That you will be playing SR this June? Ha-ha-ha.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...an-direct-to-consumer-is-a-double-edged-sword

We've spent every penny and more that they gave us to make the game; we haven't made any money."

I don't think they can delay it much longer. At least not without hooking up with a publisher.

 

[winterraptor]

Yep. HBS have been very open about this. The first iteration of the game was a more casual Shadowrun Return game. And us backers were VERY vocal in that we just wanted a good old fashioned Shadowrun cRPG (kind of like the NES and Genesis ones). The scope completely changed of the game. Thankfully.

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...an-direct-to-consumer-is-a-double-edged-sword

We've spent every penny and more that they gave us to make the game; we haven't made any money."

Well spotted.

"Come hell or high water, we're shipping this thing, and it will be the best our blood, sweat and tears can make it"

 

[PorkaMorka]

This combat demo really highlights the limitations of Fallout style combat and the need for innovation in turn based gaming.

Combat worked alright in the Age of Decadence combat demo because every battle was carefully tuned for an enjoyable level of challenge. Despite the simple combat, there was a level of thinking and execution required, simply because the scenario was so carefully balanced. But bashing random zombies in that kind of combat system will be an exercise in tedium; the level of fine balance won't be there, it can't be there because more zombies can be generated out of nowhere. It will mostly be a rote exercise in repeated ultra-simple "tactics" and animation watching.

A more dynamic and innovative turn based combat system could make fighting random zombies interesting, but it looks dreadfully dull in this game. I question the decision to make a game with Fallout style combat and zombies.

Furthermore the stealth gameplay which he attempts to highlight looks... nonexistent.

 

[Davaris]

A more dynamic and innovative turn based combat system could make fighting random zombies interesting, but it looks dreadfully dull in this game. I question the decision to make a game with Fallout style combat and zombies.

What do you suggest as an alternative?

 

[Infinitron]

I think Dead State is not in fact a combat-centric game, so any expectations of immense combat depth may be misplaced.

 

[PorkaMorka]

A more dynamic and innovative turn based combat system could make fighting random zombies interesting, but it looks dreadfully dull in this game. I question the decision to make a game with Fallout style combat and zombies.

What do you suggest as an alternative?

Well, I could obviously suggest a lot of turn based combat systems that are better than the one used in Fallout. But that would be beside the point as the game was always marketed as a Fallout-like when it came to combat. I don't have a suggested solution for resolving the problem posed by a Fallout style combat system with zombie opponents who are not really hand placed.

 

[Excidium]

Combat systems employed receive criticism immunity due to the game's main focus not being putting little men to fight each other, despite the fact that combat will still happen with enough frequence to affect the overall enjoyment of the game.

 

[Humanity has risen!]

I wonder how good you can make a turn-based combat system set in the real world without it being crazily unrealistic.

 

[Excidium]

Well, I could obviously suggest a lot of turn based combat systems that are better than the one used in Fallout. But that would be beside the point as the game was always marketed as a Fallout-like when it came to combat. I don't have a suggested solution for resolving the problem posed by a Fallout style combat system with zombie opponents who are not really hand placed.

The animations also play a large part. It looks slower than AoD.

 

[Infinitron]

Combat systems employed receive criticism immunity due to the game's main focus not being putting little men to fight each other, despite the fact that combat will still happen with enough frequence to affect the overall enjoyment of the game.

Are you saying that the combat looks simplistic, or are you saying that it looks unfun?

My original statement was about depth, not about fun.

 

[Excidium]

I wonder how good you can make a turn-based combat system set in the real world without it being crazily unrealistic.

This misconception that TB is unrealistic needs to die. It's a design choice that people can be stabbed a dozen times to the face before dying in games like AoD.

Combat systems employed receive criticism immunity due to the game's main focus not being putting little men to fight each other, despite the fact that combat will still happen with enough frequence to affect the overall enjoyment of the game.

Are you saying that the combat looks simplistic, or are you saying that it looks unfun?

My original statement was about depth, not about fun.

PorkaMorka's complaint isn't about depth, it's that the combat system employed isn't very fit for the type of game they're making.

 

[Atomic]

​

​

​

The combat music is terrible. omg.​

 

[curry]

The combat music is terrible. omg.​

Better than the music in AoD, though.

 

[Gozma]

This combat demo really highlights the limitations of Fallout style combat and the need for innovation in turn based gaming.

Combat worked alright in the Age of Decadence combat demo because every battle was carefully tuned for an enjoyable level of challenge. Despite the simple combat, there was a level of thinking and execution required, simply because the scenario was so carefully balanced. But bashing random zombies in that kind of combat system will be an exercise in tedium; the level of fine balance won't be there, it can't be there because more zombies can be generated out of nowhere. It will mostly be a rote exercise in repeated ultra-simple "tactics" and animation watching.

A more dynamic and innovative turn based combat system could make fighting random zombies interesting, but it looks dreadfully dull in this game. I question the decision to make a game with Fallout style combat and zombies.

It will be extremely dependent on the tuning of the noise mechanic and the overgame to make little stuff interesting. If every combat has the real potential to snowball into a world of TPK shit and/or wasted resources via noise, that makes the risk/reward choices worth thinking about. If everything that happens in a combat has overgame/RPG consequences (e.g. infection mechanics) that makes r/r worth thinking about. That's basically how Roguelikes with absolutely mindless combat mechanics far more simple than Fallout can work.

I'm also hoping for flat-out horror mechanics that randomly fuck you over to force you to break out of any tactical ruts, but hey I like Roguelikes.

 

[Davaris]

This misconception that TB is unrealistic needs to die. It's a design choice that people can be stabbed a dozen times to the face before dying in games like AoD.

PorkaMorka's complaint isn't about depth, it's that the combat system employed isn't very fit for the type of game they're making.

On thinking about it, I would suggest the combat be more binary and over with in one, at most two moves.

I also suggest they not look at the game as a simulation, but as a fun game. Saying no you can't do X, because of [insert common sense reason], isn't going to make the game enjoyable. Instead give only one character the chance to do X, which is extraordinary, but he has big flaws to balance it out.