Codex Preview RPG Codex Preview: No Truce With The Furies

[Projas]

Marat Sar This game is going to lose sales because people assume police procedural = procedurally generated

All gonna be balanced out by furfags thinking this is a furry game, don't you worry.

 

[Prime Junta]

No Truce With The Hill Street Blues?

 

[SausageInYourFace]

Sometimes I wish the eugenics movement had succeeded in creating a more genre savvy audience.

:D Holy shit, bro..

Detective role playing game sounds pretty good by the way, better than police or cop RPG because it emphasizes the actual detective work element.

Cops or police you think of police academy or shit like that, buddy cop movie, you think of Lethal Weapon or some such..

Spoiler

 

[Zombra]

Marat Sar This game is going to lose sales because people assume police procedural = procedurally generated

I'd think that would increase sales. People who like police procedurals already know what the term means, so they will buy the game. And then people who want a procedurally generated game will buy it too because they are dumb. Anyone who complains about it on the internet will get bounced down hard by people saying "Look it up, stupid". Everybody wins.

 

[Infinitron]

Marat Sar This game is going to lose sales because people assume police procedural = procedurally generated

Actually, I think I agree. We're gonna have to change it to "cop show RPG" or something. "Buddy cop RPG"?, "Detective role playing game"? "Detective RPG"?

Such a pity. Police procedural role playing game sounds so much better. Sometimes I wish the eugenics movement had succeeded in creating a more genre savvy audience.

BTW fix your title! http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/index.php?account/personal-details

 

[AwesomeButton]

Pretty much all of the above.

1. The world is small. It doesn't feel like that, though -- not to me at least. We have the 4th dimension in there too, characters appear and things happen depending on what day it is. (We have a time of day system that didn't factor into Prime Junta's short play-through). So very concentrated. But also small, yes.
2. The reactivity will be less than people wish it would be. Always the case, I'm afraid. At least for me it is.
3. Almost none of us have families and about half (the leads especially) have also become teetotalers. I for one am barely a corporeal entity any more.

So, it will be a crime story with multiple possible endings and a main character who starts out at a pretty low point of his ilfe but has a chance to get better. Sounds like the noir detective RPG I've always wanted, with a characteristic visual style and in an unique setting. At least that's how I imagine the media would phrase it. Definetly use the word "noir" if it's applicable, I would say. It's an often used search term/tag.

I hope it turns a profit! One thing is for sure - with your graphics, you cover the segment of people who are ready to buy because "it's an isometric RPG and has pretty screenshots and trailer".

2. Only the beginnings of dialogues are voice acted so you'd get a feel for the characters voice. From there on it only makes reading slower, so no VO. An exception is our dream sequences which I want to be totally voiced because there's less picture and the text is... different let's say.

Excellent. Finally, someone who understands the purpose of voiced dialogue in isometric RPGs.


Also, kudos for the bravery to implement time as a factor in quests!

 

[Excidium II]

also i would just like to say that the codex really isnt a learning animal to fap over a no-gaemplay rpg like this right after the release of its cousin tworment

Just because the game doesn't emphasize combat, doesn’t mean that it has no gameplay. PS:T had nice gameplay mainly due to narrative reasons. This games has some interesting concepts that seem tied to the gameplay. The question is whether they are going to do this right or not. The emphasis on new mechanics in dialogues has nothing to do with it.

clicking on shit is not gameplay, it's interface. I haven't quite grasped how exactly this plays but if it's like tworment where there's no problem solving, no learning process idk where's the gameplay nigga. Exhausting dialogue options a puzzle makes not.

 

[Kasparov]

clicking on shit is not gameplay, it's interface. I haven't quite grasped how exactly this plays but if it's like tworment where there's no problem solving, no learning process idk where's the gameplay nigga. Exhausting dialogue options a puzzle makes not.

Then it is a good thing we have a good interface. The difficult bit is that people have subjective preferences when it comes to that, but you can please only so many people...

What's your favourite game, man?

 

[KILLER BEAR]

I'd think that would increase sales. People who like police procedurals already know what the term means, so they will buy the game. And then people who want a proceduraly generated game will buy it too because they are dumb. Anyone who complains about it on the internet will get bounced down hard by people saying "Look it up, stupid". Everybody wins.

Quite the opposite, really. Many people who are interested in a story-focused detective RPG (but they don't know the term "police procedural") may lost interest if they get the impression that the game is procedurally generated (unsuitable design for plot-heavy games). Just think of the Codex reaction if the game was going to be randomized.

 

[Fenix]

also i would just like to say that the codex really isnt a learning animal to fap over a no-gaemplay rpg like this right after the release of its cousin tworment

I thought long before TToN faoled that they are different.

Sometimes I wish the eugenics movement had succeeded in creating a more genre savvy audience.

We still have a chances, because it exist today - parents design their future child (which inevitable will be used as cornerstone for new feodal aristocracy of 21 century).

 

[Lurker King]

clicking on shit is not gameplay, it's interface. I haven't quite grasped how exactly this plays but if it's like tworment where there's no problem solving, no learning process idk where's the gameplay nigga. Exhausting dialogue options a puzzle makes not.

I think you are right, but it’s curious because in PS:T some bad choices could put you in some difficult situations, e.g., you can be cursed by Deionarra, or Reekwind, which makes you hiccup non-stop and unable to use any spells! You also have some puzzles, for instance, at the Brothel for Slating Intellectual Lusts, etc. So it is far from this linear boring click fest that is ToN. Another example is “King of Dragon Pass”. The game has pure text-adventure interface, but you need to think about your choices before you click, etc. So you are right, but nothing they said is inconsistent with this belief.

 

[Lurker King]

Neither this has changed. Your active checks still promote the mentality of "Winning is Fun".

Games are attempts to surpass unnecessary challenges. You won when you surpass a challenge. Winning is fun it’s the very bedrock of gaming, there is nothing wrong with that.

 

[Zombra]

Your active checks still promote the mentality of "Winning is Fun".

Uh, no they don't. When failure also has a fun outcome, the player has the opportunity to accept it that you don't see in most games. Most games, failure is all penalty, all denial; it gives you no reason not to reload and try again. Here, failure lets you see cool story branches unavailable through success. In short, there is an incentive to "fail". Sure, some people will save scum to make sure their character "succeeds" at everything he tries, but those people are assholes who missed the point.

Will you miss the point?

 

[Lurker King]

I think they should find a middle ground, because not allowing the player to fuck it up is an extreme and makes the game pointless. For instance, they could allow the player to make many mistakes, but the frustrations could add up to the point that the player could suffer mental diseases such as paranoia, depression, schizophrenia, etc., leading ultimately to death. This would fit nicely with the emphasis on the thoughts of your character. You can also create some scenarios resulting in the players’ death, for instance, you can be killed because people know you as a dirty copy or an easy mark, etc. In any case, they need to add venues for failure, otherwise it would be an interactive novel, not a game.

 

[Prime Junta]

Again: I failed two "red" skill checks during my brief foray into the game. I won't spoil them for you here, but... they were funny. Unexpectedly, delightfully funny. It was very simple too: the PC just had a Really Bad Idea and acted on it, with both the Really Bad Idea and the action as fully represented as consequences of a successful check would have been. I didn't get what I wanted, but they made me laugh out loud and like the PC more. No way I would've reloaded after them. If they're all that good -- big if, I know -- there isn't a problem here.

I can't think of any game that did it like this, or pulled it off as well.

 

[Lurker King]

Most games, failure is all penalty, all denial; it gives you no reason not to reload and try again. Here, failure lets you see cool story branches unavailable through success. In short, there is an incentive to "fail".

So in other words, tails I win, and heads I also win. Sounds like a shit game. It's important to remember some basic facts. Failures and reloading are fine, because we are talking about playing games after all, not an interactive novel. There are no challenges without failures.

 

[aweigh]

Kasparov

i'm way more excited in the prospect of kentucky route zero present in your game, than in aping PST.

KRZ is a masterpiece of indie fiction (in video games), and the best magical realism you'll find in a vidya game as well. i hope your signature lives up to KRZ.

 

[Prime Junta]

I think they should find a middle ground, because not allowing the player to fuck it up is an extreme and makes the game pointless. For instance, they could allow the player to make many mistakes, but the frustrations could add up to the point that the player could suffer mental diseases such as paranoia, depression, schizophrenia, etc., leading ultimately to death.

They were a bit cagey about it, but I got the impression that this is pretty much the approach they're taking. There are fail states: if you screw up too much, you will end up a hobo (and lose the game). They also hinted that you might not want to take advantage of the stat boosts given by substance abuse too much, being a late-stage alcoholic and all. However I only played so little of it that I didn't get to see any of this in practice; it is kind of crucial that they manage to pull this off too, otherwise it will stray too far into interactive-movie territory for my blood.

 

[Lurker King]

kentucky route zero is a masterpiece of interactive novel

Fixed.

 

[Lurker King]

They were a bit cagey about it, but I got the impression that this is pretty much the approach they're taking. There are fail states: if you screw up too much, you will end up a hobo (and lose the game). They also hinted that you might not want to take advantage of the stat boosts given by substance abuse too much, being a late-stage alcoholic and all. However I only played so little of it that I didn't get to see any of this in practice; it is kind of crucial that they manage to pull this off too, otherwise it will stray too far into interactive-movie territory for my blood.

They should really think about this. The types who enjoy this kind of heavy narrative game will enjoy it no matter what, but other players will require some sort of metric to measure their performance. Make no mistake, if you remove this completely, they will lose these costumers.

 

[Zombra]

I think they should find a middle ground, because not allowing the player to fuck it up is an extreme and makes the game pointless. For instance, they could allow the player to make many mistakes, but the frustrations could add up to the point that the player could suffer mental diseases such as paranoia, depression, schizophrenia, etc., leading ultimately to death. This would fit nicely with the emphasis on the thoughts of your character. You can also create some scenarios resulting in the players’ death, for instance, you can be killed because people know you as a dirty copy or an easy mark, etc. In any case, they need to add venues for failure, otherwise it would be an interactive novel, not a game.

Meh. A game, or whatever you want to call it, doesn't need to have a "you died" screen in order to be fun. I will be perfectly content if this is a brilliant, provocative artwork with many possible outcomes; I honestly don't care whether it has fail state roadblocks or not. I know some people are only content if they have to struggle to "beat" a game by "winning" instead of "losing" ... but again, I think that mentality is very much missing the point here.

So in other words, tails I win, and heads I also win. Sounds like a shit game. It's important to remember some basic facts. Failures and reloading are fine, because we are talking about playing games after all, not an interactive novel. There are no challenges without failures.

If you don't get the basic premise that failure can be fun ... you are lame and need to broaden your horizons.

Let me give you an example from a P&P campaign I'm in. We rarely roll dice unless the GM can make the stakes interesting. Say my character wants to sneak past some guards to talk to a prisoner, so I make a stealth roll. If I succeed, I get to the prisoner and find out plot information. If I fail, he doesn't just say, they kill you, game over. Instead I get captured and that leads to a whole jailbreak sequence. This is a million times better than "Well, roll the dice again until you succeed" (the equivalent of save scumming). Obviously, winning is fun and I want to succeed at the roll, but if I fail it's still a cool story. If you want to call that an "interactive novel", fine, but it's not, it's still a game. It just has Interesting Story 1 and Interesting Story 2 as possible results instead of Game Continues and Game Over.

 

[ArchAngel]

Most games, failure is all penalty, all denial; it gives you no reason not to reload and try again. Here, failure lets you see cool story branches unavailable through success. In short, there is an incentive to "fail".

So in other words, tails I win, and heads I also win. Sounds like a shit game. It's important to remember some basic facts. Failures and reloading are fine, because we are talking about playing games after all, not an interactive novel. There are no challenges without failures.

See there are different kind of failure.
#1 There is the kind jerk DMs and AoD use:
Player: I want to do X.
DM: Roll Y.
Player: Gets a low roll.
DM: Rocks fall and you die.
Player: ....fuck you DM!

#2 There is kind smart DMs and good games use:
Player: I want to do X.
DM: Roll Y.
Player: Gets a low roll.
DM: Doing X will be much harder now. You can continue doing X or you can try A or B.
Player: I still want to do X, I don't care how stupid or hard it is now.
DM: Roll Z.
Player: Gets a bad roll again.
DM: Because it was much harder now and you still insisted on following this path rocks fall and you die
Player: ...well I was warned.

No Truce with Furies sounds like #2. I prefer #2.

 

[KILLER BEAR]

Kentucky Route Zero is so abstract that makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[Lurker King]

Meh. A game, or whatever you want to call it, doesn't need to have a "you died" screen in order to be fun.

In other words, you should try to surpass challenges, but you can't fail. Sounds like a bad game to me.

I will be perfectly content if this is a brilliant, provocative artwork with many possible outcomes; I honestly don't care whether it has fail state roadblocks or not. I know some people are only content if they have to struggle to "beat" a game by "winning" instead of "losing" ... but again, I think that mentality is very much missing the point here.

You are confusing artistic pretensions and appreciation with games. You can't just make a game and say it doesn't have some core features because it's an interesting piece of art. That's idiocy.

If you don't get the basic premise that failure can be fun ... you are lame and need to broaden your horizons.

Nah, I think I will mantain my horizons reduced, thank you. I get that additional game content can be fun, sure. Even AoD, that is regarded as masochist hell by some players here, have many fail-and-go scenarios. That's not the point. The question is whether there is no challenge involved and nothing to lose considering the game as a whole.

 

[Pentagon]

No Truce With The Furies is more liberal than Bioware, more communist than Dzherzinski and more fascist than Geralt of Rivia's fashion sense.

Day-one purchase it is then.