Legends of Amberland II: The Song of Trees

[Chris Koźmik]

Platforms and date decided: https://www.silverlemurgames.com/2022/11/14/legends-of-amberland-ii-platforms-and-date-decided/

Legends of Amberland II platforms and date decided​

The next instalment of the Amberland series comes to Steam, GOG and Nintendo Switch in 2023!

In the last month I was signing papers, negotiating, discussing schedules and planning stuff. So, here it is, the release plan of Legends of Amberland II: The Song of Trees.

– The game comes to Steam (PC). Store link: https://store.steampowered.com/app/2110840/Legends_of_Amberland_II_The_Song_of_Trees/
– The game comes to GOG (PC). Store link: https://af.gog.com/game/legends_of_amberland_ii_the_song_of_trees?as=1649904300
– The game is basically guaranteed to come to Nintendo Switch (console). I have signed the letter of intent with Pineapple Works, the guys behind the excellent port of the predecessor, to port and publish the game on Nintendo Switch. So, based on my prior experience with them, I would say there will be no problems.
– The game might be ported to other consoles as well. It’s being examined if it’s feasible technically and financially, so maybe. In case the game were to be ported to additional consoles it would be done after the release.

The planned date of the release is 2023. It’s not decided yet if this will be a simultaneous launch on all platforms or maybe PC version would be done first. Not sure yet. Similarly, it’s not decided yet to which languages the game will be localized yet (but English, German and French localizations are guaranteed) and if the localization will be ready upon release or as a patch later. Still, all of those (Steam, GOG, Nintendo Switch in at least 3 languages) are planned to be concluded by the end of 2023.

If you want to know more, here is the presskit.

The short version: comes to Steam, GOG and Nintendo Switch in 2023.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

A quick survey: "if you had to choose 3 features/changes you would like to see in LoA II, what those would be?" Order of those matters (list the most important one first).

Also, if you already replied to the survey elsewhere (like on Discord), please mention it so I don't count it twice (but feel free to repost your vote, it's still handy since I'm curious if RPGCodex has some specific preferences set).

 

[Dorateen]

1. More complex Dungeon design
2. Thief class (with locked doors and chests to be picked)
3. Ranged combat

 

[Acrux]

1. More complex Dungeon design
2. Thief class (with locked doors and chests to be picked)
3. Ranged combat

Same

 

[Moaning_Clock]

1. A few secrets
2. More complex Dungeon design
3. A few more side quests

 

[Chris Koźmik]

I have some design questions and could use some input Feel free to rant or go off-topic.


1) I'm thinking about monsters respawn, yes or no?
If you are for, then I'm especially interested in arena vs regular monsters respawn. Like should it go more into the direction of "there is one special place where monsters infinitely respawn" vs "monster respawn should be a standard/common thing" (like overworld and/or dungeons). Note that common respawn would imply a way to stop it if desired (by destroying local monsters spawning grounds).

2) Doors locked by keys in dungeons. Should those keys be limited to the same location (you always find required keys in the same dungeon where the keys are needed) or found anywhere (keys can be found in other locations or given by NPCs in towns, etc)?

3) I'm thinking about redesigning griffins. To something along the lines of "there are griffin stations in cities and the overworld and you can travel only between those (each station unlocked when visited). Or at the very least, introduce travel time (like 8 hours per griffin use). Is it worth it?

4) Source of infinite money (note than monster respawn listed above implies it since you always get gold from combat). Possibly with additions like "work" mechanic (limited to small income and possibly other limiters). Yes or no?

5) If you have ideas for interesting dungeon features, I'm all ears. But please note it's not a Dungeon Master and not real-time, so many traditional dungeon features might not fit with the rest of the game and mechanics.

 

[Jermu]

1. no respawn, arena is fine
2. anywhere 100%
3. no strong opinion on this
4. probably not worth it. doing all the quests + killing monsters should provide enough money for most of expenses
5. secrets / hidden walls, maybe puzzles

 

[Kliwer]

1) I'm thinking about monsters respawn, yes or no?
If you are for, then I'm especially interested in arena vs regular monsters respawn. Like should it go more into the direction of "there is one special place where monsters infinitely respawn" vs "monster respawn should be a standard/common thing" (like overworld and/or dungeons). Note that common respawn would imply a way to stop it if desired (by destroying local monsters spawning grounds).

I would advise against "automatic" respawn anywhere. Instead, in areas that the player visits repeatedly, manually design successive "waves" of monsters (maybe with some random element?). We killed the goblins on the road - after some time a group of trolls appears in their place. We killed the bandits near the cemetery - after the next full moon we will meet zombie bandits here... Something like that. The world will seem more "alive", visiting the searched locations will be more interesting.

2) Doors locked by keys in dungeons. Should those keys be limited to the same location (you always find required keys in the same dungeon where the keys are needed) or found anywhere (keys can be found in other locations or given by NPCs in towns, etc)?

Anywhere, all over the world. But with some clues (in the form of notes, tablets, dialogues, even a suggestive fresco on the wall). Let there be some logic behind it: in the tower of the archmage we find the key to his secret laboratory in the nearby forest.

 

[Kliwer]

4) Source of infinite money (note than monster respawn listed above implies it since you always get gold from combat). Possibly with additions like "work" mechanic (limited to small income and possibly other limiters). Yes or no?

First of all, let the economy be "tight". Let the player who beats most of the game/loot most of the treasures still be too poor to buy all the spells/items available in the shops. Making extra money on some "daily jobs" is a good idea, as long as there is some mechanics behind it.

5) If you have ideas for interesting dungeon features, I'm all ears. But please note it's not a Dungeon Master and not real-time, so many traditional dungeon features might not fit with the rest of the game and mechanics.

Definitely a dungeon puzzle. Different types. Preferably in such a way that the player has to collect clues to solve them himself. Distinguish an "irrelevant" book from one that contains important information. Read the clue from the mosaic pattern. Gain information about the relationship between two forgotten gods to organize the symbols on the altar.

Let some of the puzzles have more than one solution. i.e. solving the puzzle is one way, but you can sometimes get around it with some character skill. Only a dwarf with a pickaxe (or a high-level wizard with disintegration) can remove a weakened wall. Only a skillful rogue (or someone with magic rope) will climb a steep wall, etc.

A commonly unused mechanic is "environmental" spellcasting. To open a magic lock, you need to cast three appropriate spells on it in order (which can be learned from various clues - and even better if it can be deduced from the entire philosophy of magic in your world; make playing a mage more than just mechanical learning spells, but also studying the principles of magic...).

 

[Moaning_Clock]

1. no respawn, arena is fine
2. anywhere 100%
3. no strong opinion on this
4. probably not worth it. doing all the quests + killing monsters should provide enough money for most of expenses
5. secrets / hidden walls, maybe puzzles

Agree 100%. I would also introduce at least travel time but that's about it.

 

[Dorateen]

Something else to consider for locked doors in dungeons. They need not all be literal keys. There could be an idol the party has to find and place in a niche to access an area. Or to open a door blocking a passageway requires a certain word or phrase, which the party will have to discover through their explorations.

 

[Antigoon]

5. secrets / hidden walls, maybe puzzles

This, but please no pixel hunting or Google-Riddles

 

[Fedora Master]

This is a propos of nothing but I'd like to see map annotations and more character portraits that...uh...don't all look to the right for some reason.

 

[Darth Canoli]

1) I'm thinking about monsters respawn, yes or no?
If you are for, then I'm especially interested in arena vs regular monsters respawn. Like should it go more into the direction of "there is one special place where monsters infinitely respawn" vs "monster respawn should be a standard/common thing" (like overworld and/or dungeons). Note that common respawn would imply a way to stop it if desired (by destroying local monsters spawning grounds).

2) Doors locked by keys in dungeons. Should those keys be limited to the same location (you always find required keys in the same dungeon where the keys are needed) or found anywhere (keys can be found in other locations or given by NPCs in towns, etc)?

3) I'm thinking about redesigning griffins. To something along the lines of "there are griffin stations in cities and the overworld and you can travel only between those (each station unlocked when visited). Or at the very least, introduce travel time (like 8 hours per griffin use). Is it worth it?

4) Source of infinite money (note than monster respawn listed above implies it since you always get gold from combat). Possibly with additions like "work" mechanic (limited to small income and possibly other limiters). Yes or no?

5) If you have ideas for interesting dungeon features, I'm all ears. But please note it's not a Dungeon Master and not real-time, so many traditional dungeon features might not fit with the rest of the game and mechanics.

1/ Like Kilwer said, pre-designed waves of enemies looks pretty good.

2/

3/ "Griffin stations", why not? But only if it makes the exploration better and goes along with your worldmap design, otherwise, don't bother.
Travel time, what for exactly? If it's just to delay the party until the bonus wear off, it's not very useful.

4/Please don't introduce work. Besides, I don't think you're got the right customer base for that.
As for the economy, I like it lenient, tight for the first half of the game and then more generous and very generous in the last quarter of the game but best items have to come from exploring dungeons and beating foes to a pulp.

5/ Visible traps like in Might & Magic III, illusion walls, trapped chests but not just with explosions.
Summon traps, prison traps where the short exit is cut and an alarm summons a shitload of guards, teleport trapped chest sending you in a dangerous cave to die (but it's possible to survive), etc.

The trick is to not trap every single chest and use each kind of trap with parcimony.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Will this be playable on the Nintendo switch?

 

[Chris Koźmik]

Will this be playable on the Nintendo switch?

Yes.

 

[Chris Koźmik]

Source: https://www.silverlemurgames.com/2023/02/03/the-design-philosophy-of-sequel-to-legends-of-amberland/

The design philosophy of sequel to Legends of Amberland

This is an overview of the design direction for Legends of Amberland II. It does not list exact features, but more like design principles on a more abstract level. Probably this would be most interesting to game designers and developers than regular players, but who knows.

Overall, it's a direct sequel, like 90% code will be reused. If you liked the first game there are extremely high odds you will like that one too, if you hated the predecessor you will hate that one as well. But if you liked the first one but found it lacking there are decent odds the parts you did not like would be improved. As a principle, it's an evolution, not a revolution. It will be basically a very similar game with various improvements, adjustments, slight changes in the design principles and other changes, but the nature and premise will stay the same.


Lessons learned from the first Legends of Amberland

While I was reading various articles, reviews and forum posts about Amberland I noticed an interesting thing. The things I had fun to make were valued very high by the players, while things that I did not enjoyed making were valued as poor or mediocre. Take as an example the overworld map (which I had blast making) vs underground levels (which I did not enjoy making that much). Overworld was evaluated as super fun to travel while dungeons were frequently evaluated as merely passable. It applies to other aspects of the game as well. Which lead me to a decision to alter the development process by adding an additional criteria, which is "do I have fun making it?". Of course this would not apply to to UI, bug fixing, technical stuff, which obviously has to be done and it's always tiresome and boring. But for the gameplay related things I would add such step and I feel it should result in a better game.

Another observation, all design goals I wanted to achieve were actually achieved, but... Sometimes, the cure was worse than the disease. For example "make shop items useful and make them decently priced so there is a decision to be made what should be bought" was achieved, everyone wants to buy the additional Girdle of Carrying and its price is far from trivial even in the late game. So, yes, I was able to "fix" the long lasting problems of basically any other RPG... but it resulted in side effects that negated the whole gain. Basically, a non trivial amount of players was simply sad they can not afford everything (which was the goal mind you, perfectly executed). Therefore, I decided to more carefully examine my design goals, especially if those were contrary to classic RPG design choices in other games. It made me realize that many, very stupid at a glance, limitations and cliches of RPGs are there for a reason, usually an important one and not visible at the surface. Definitely more care needs to be taken when it comes to innovation and wild ideas on this field.

Story of the first Amberland had two strong pillars (world lore and characters) and one weak pillar (plot). Lore was evaluated as super consistent, logical and with an excellent mood, not a single complain, a lot of praise, no alteration here needed at all. Characters (NPCs) were frequently valued highly for their lines and personality, no complains, can carry on with the same style. Plot was the part that many people evaluated as mediocre, some even as poor. While there were no terrible ratings of the plot there definitely is a problem with that aspect of the story. I was thinking about the reasons for a longer while, so I could made whole separate post about it, but the short analysis is this. The plot was too complex and too subtle (most people did not understood it, especially the relation between the spell of forgetfulness and the crown) and therefore it was classified as cliche (yes, not something one could guess is even possible). Next problem was related to lack of the final boss, which was confusing (yep, there was no final boss in first Amberland, the one you meet at the end is not the final boss), also environmental storytelling was lacking. The interesting thing is that when I inquired players and asked "what you think was the real story behind all those events" they did guess it right, despite at first claiming something else, so it's not that it was too subtle or confusing... Anyway, definitely a different approach to plot is needed.

Many other small things. The list could go on much longer, there are other smaller observations like the Great Desert perceived unbalance, lack of magical staves, etc. These all were taken into consideration and many (maybe most?) of those are planned to be addressed in some form or another.


Design choices for Legends of Amberland II

I decided to alter my approach to the sequel design based on the analysis above. Note it will not list any exact features, it's more like a general direction or a mindset I'm using for the sequel.

1. Respect the players' time but do not obsess over it.

To my surprise I got zero, null, not a single one complain that the game was too long. I strived hard to compress the experience and remove every single boring part or potentially boring part. It proved too be too excessive, a more lenient approach would be better. Especially since all my games are anty micro-management in principle, so actually there is no real danger of me ever making a game that is heavy on the grind side, even if I tried and was paid a lot of money. My default game designer's mindset prevent me from it. So, a more lenient approach, where I merely respect the player's time but not obsess over it should result in a better game.

2. More RPG and less roguelike.

My background is from the roguelikes community, I do love resources management. I feel I might have leaned slightly too much towards a roguelike in the first Amberland (for example I knew during the development how much gold total is in the game and how many shop items the player can afford, a bit too excessive). So I decided to go more in the RPG direction. With a more lenient economy and less control over experience/gold, especially since the core balance turned out to be better than I expected. Also, the pillar of the game is "exploration" not resources management, so I will align other features to support it.

3. Observe the classic RPG design principles.

While innovation is nice I will now double check the validity of each decision especially if such decision is contrary to the classic RPG design. For example the damage/HP ratio problem, which was intended as an innovation and later had to be patched. Now each such decision will be accompanied with "why they did it that way" question before being implemented.

4. Advanced mechanics.

The encumbrance system was very, very well received. Such modern systems, easy to explain and deep in concept are good to be integrated with the game and those do not hinder the nostalgia feel of the game at all. While there is not much space to include many more such mechanics, the overall direction is good and more such mechanics can be considered for addition. Overall, examining the feedback, I feel the players would be willing to process a few more such intuitive yet deep mechanics so I feel I can afford to grab deeper into my designer's chest and grab a few slightly heavier parts without making the game too complex if needed.


Summary

There will be changes in some mechanics, but not to the extend of changing the nature of the game but rather for the purpose of replacing the parts that were not that great in hindsight (for example items will be a mixture of semi randomly generated regular items and a bunch of handcrafted unique items). Definitely I want to avoid "hey, let's making something new here for the sake of being new" and only incorporate stuff that truly enrich the gameplay. In addition, the approach to several design philosophies will be changed to better suit the strong points of the game and the genre. Overall, the goal is to make the same kind of game as the first one, but even better and even more fun.

 

[Infinitron]

https://www.silverlemurgames.com/2023/03/27/progress-report-legends-of-amberland-ii-2023-q1/

Progress report – Legends of Amberland II – 2023, Q1​

Overview

This is a very unusual project for me. It’s not the first sequel I made but the first sequel to an RPG. Which makes a tons of difference. Typically (read always) the bottleneck is coding. You track bugs, implement features, etc. But with a sequel to an RPG it is a totally different story. RPGs are content driven, so, once you have a solid code base not that much changes actually in the programming department. In short, this project is made quite differently to all my previous projects.

To take this specific situation into account, development was divided into two projects. Project “A” which is about technical improvements (coding) and project “B” which is about making the actual game (content). The first is made using a mix between evolutionary prototyping and a research project methodology, the second using the old classic waterfall model.

What is done

Again, the unusual thing is that a lot was done before the project officially started. I ordered art assets and music from contractors, so they were experimenting and producing some content without my direct involvement. So, quite a lot was ready before it even started. Which is super nice.

The other nice thing is the source code, which is like 95% (probably) identical to the first Amberland. I was polishing the original source code for a few years, in extend beyond the simple support of an existing game, in order to keep the code as similar as possible for as long as possible. So, actually, art of the coding for the sequel was done before the project officially started. Note that 5% difference might sound like not a lot but it’s actually quite significant (to put it into a perspective bananas share 44.1% of genome with humans, yup). Basically, the game was extended and polished before it started (note for example the full gamepad support, dozens of tiny fixes, save system redesign, etc) and part of it was done in order to speed up future porting to other platforms.

So, what actually was done after the project was officially announced? Well, first all experimental assets were evaluated and it was decided what will be put into the game, analysis of the first game was made (part of it was listed in other posts https://www.silverlemurgames.com/2023/02/03/the-design-philosophy-of-sequel-to-legends-of-amberland/) and the coding started. The aim, and the top priority, was to produce better tools for me, to speed up development. A big part of it was reimplementation of the map structure to abstract entities (now you don’t put “tile with a tree” but abstract “tree” shape of variant #3). Which might sound boring and unimportant but is a huge help, since it allows a lot flexibility and convenience for me as a designer. The second priority was the editor. It was redesigned and simplified (and even there was a budget to add some frills), now I have even a cutting edge feature called “Undo” which is super fun since it’s the first time even any of my editor has it!

All right, lets talk a bit about features that are visible to you as a player. The code of map navigation was extended and now it allows things like “alternative entries to locations”, “mixed indoor/outdoor locations”, “portals leading inside other locations”. Which allows some interesting topography and connections between locations to be made. New tile types were introduced (like farmlands), stationary NPCs, more huts and more other things. Some extra dungeon features like doors locked by keys, illusionary walls, etc.

The big thing which was redesigned was resistances system and items. Now resistances have values (for example: Ring of Fire Resistance +10, Ring of Fire Resistance +20) and items can have suffixes “Helmet {of something}”. In the first game all items were hand crafted, which was a noble effort which proven not so great. Now I switched to predefined hand crafted unique items and semi-randomised regular items. Basically it means higher variation of items you find. As a bonus, because now I had more time freed up I could spend it implementing extra item properties (like “Invisibility” or “Heroism”) which were put as item suffixes. The random loot table was redesigned as well to provide a fixed chance for a certain item type (for example now 30% of loot will be weapons, regardless of how many items were “defined”) which means now various item types will have more or less equal chance of dropping so there should not be overabundance of certain items. And yes, because some people will ask, this also means extra staves for mages, actually there are now three basic types of staves so you even will have a choice what kind of magical staff to equip.

In addition to all those features I half made the first (starting) continent to see and test all those new features, I have a rough shape of the overworld map and the core storyline was told to my son before going to bed several times (several variants and iterations). Oh yes, also a small alpha test is in progress, so I can get early feedback and reevaluate what works and what not.

And some other things which are not listed here.

Summary

The project “A” is coming to an end soon, I think. Editor is almost done (just a few features I wish to have before I start to churn regular content). All critical/major systems which were to be redesigned are implemented or almost implemented. So soon I should be ready to start project “B”, and in the meantime or afterwards I will probably spend some time to implement some extra stuff.

Overall, the progress is good. Actually, when the core development is not about coding it’s almost boring, because nothing breaks… Before this project I never realized how expensive and troublesome the coding part is. It turns out that if you have a solid code base and no major features to code it is actually kind of like a walk in the part… at last that’s how it feels right now (or maybe that’s just my impression because my previous project was super feature heavy Stellar Monarch 2, so it’s a striking contrast), we will see. So far, everything is going fine and I see no danger of exceeding the 2023 deadline (actually I would unofficially speculate it should be ready somewhere this summer).

 

[Dorateen]

map navigation was extended and now it allows things like “alternative entries to locations”, “mixed indoor/outdoor locations”, “portals leading inside other locations”. Which allows some interesting topography and connections between locations to be made. New tile types were introduced (like farmlands), stationary NPCs, more huts and more other things. Some extra dungeon features like doors locked by keys, illusionary walls, etc.

This part sounds good. Bodes well for exploration, which was the strongest element of the game.

 

[Jermu]

can't wait to pump every tile with wall just in case there is a illusionary wall

don't really care about randomized items but its not a big deal looks promising

 

[Infinitron]

Trailer time!

 

[Dorateen]

The Song of Trees. Bloody hell, this is going to be about elves, isn't it.

 

[Contagium]

Looks identical to LOA 1, but I'm ok with that because the first was really good. Keep this up for the next 30 years and you could be the next Jeff Vogel!

 

[Eisen]

Looks identical to LOA 1, but I'm ok with that because the first was really good. Keep this up for the next 30 years and you could be the next Jeff Vogel!

Wish they added more animations to the enemies

 

[Butter]

Yeah, I have no problem with it looking the same as the first one. I wish more devs had the "if it's not broke, don't fix it" mentality.