So i just finished AoD

[Vault Dweller]

I like the fact that we have a game with a 'documentary' style (I'll just run with that classifier for now). I don't think VD would disagree that the choice of such a style has consequences and weaknesses.

No arguing here.

The issue usually is that when people frame the complaint in terms of "all the characters are too samey" or "too generic" or "too dickish", it sounds like a complaint of realism - i.e. this is so improbable that everybody's a dick to me. Which just doesn't hold water, and isn't particularly relevant.

Pretty much, especially in the context of the setting.

 

[Jason Liang]

i actually gave myself like 4 extra attribute points to have stats for future skillchecks and like 200 skillpoints to be good in civics to avoid missing a lot

You missed the game.

Naw, it basically came down to seeing the god ending and being able to do a few persuade/stealth/streetwise checks.

It sounds like you did the IG route which means you probably did cheat yourself out of the best moment of the entire game, defending The Pass. Murdering the swiss archery team and bola choking Hazma come close but it isn't on the same level as the pass.

Also the most satisfying way to beat the game isn't godhood. It's murdering all three asshole kings and all three asshole gods.

 

[Trashos]

The characters' plans (and their tone, of course) are what gives them the personality they need.

I do consider AoD to be one of the best written RPGs I have played. I am not saying that it shouldn't be criticized or debated (everything should), but I wanted to make clear that I found its this-is-serious-business attitude to be something different and a breath a fresh air. It is not something that is easily found in other RPGs. Also found it to be very realistic, if that's important.

I also enjoy RPGs with different writing style, eg I like the goofiness in the Fallouts. But I am glad Fallout is Fallout and AoD is AoD.

 

[Jrpgfan]

I find the characters are portrayed in a very realistic way given the setting and context(post-apocalyptic and dealing with people in positions of power). The latter especially is hardly different in real life.

 

[Drowed]

Subjective?

Well, yeah. Maybe as subjective as a debate between "I prefer romance" and "I prefer science fiction," I guess. It's a target-audience issue. You've created a game for a specific audience, and just as you seem to have a particular liking for documentaries and/or historical books, it's not unlikely that many of the people who end up playing your game will share that taste. Your results will naturally be filtered by the kind of person who have an interest in playing the game more than 20 minutes and still decide to say something about it in the end.

This type of question may sound like a minority response by the kind of audience you end up attracting to the game - it's the minority of your current audience but not the possible audience. Case in point, there are scientific studies that show a greater preference of the general public for stories that involve romances. (It seems that Bioware really read the same research years ago.) I'm not saying that you should put romances in your game, dear god no, and neither that you need to broaden your audience. I'm just saying that your view of the audience is tapered by the very product you made. We call this niche-funnel effect - at least in my language, I don't know if there are any researches with the same term in english.

But here I am the one who ended up talking about an irrelevant point.

The point is: addressing a little of other aspects of human nature is, by definition, what gives the characters depth. Human beings are not shallow precisely because their interests and their lives go beyond a single area. We aren't just our work, or our hobbies, or our relationships. We are all these things, and I think you approach these issues even if superficially it can add a lot to your narrative. The point isn't to fill the game (or book) with irrelevant details about the characters with several personal mini-quests where you collect objects to give to each one to fill an arbitrary bar of friendship/love. This is a scarecrow. The point is that it's not by chance that most books considered as the best works ever written have explored different aspects of human nature.

But hey, like I said, you do you. You certainly already have a very specific vision of how to write your stories and attracted an audience that is interested in them. The truth is that you have already decided what you will do regardless of any external comment, but since we are on a topic talking about AOD, it's interesting to talk about the construction of the narrative of the game and why it ends up being different from others.

 

[SausageInYourFace]

It's murdering all three asshole kings

You can do that?

and all three asshole gods.

There are three of them?

Wow.

 

[Vault Dweller]

This type of question may sound like a minority response by the kind of audience you end up attracting to the game - it's the minority of your current audience but not the possible audience. Case in point, there are scientific studies that show a greater preference of the general public for stories that involve romances. (It seems that Bioware really read the same research years ago.) I'm not saying that you should put romances in your game, dear god no, and neither that you need to broaden your audience. I'm just saying that your view of the audience is tapered by the very product you made. We call this niche-funnel effect - at least in my language, I don't know if there are any researches with the same term in english.

Sure, I get that. The product defines the audience; however, not every product manages to find its audience and in this day and age selling 125k copies is an achievement (for a crappy looking indie RPG). Based on the feedback, the storytelling and characters played a large role in expanding the audience (it's one of the things that people talk about on various forums which attracts more people) and ended up being one of the top 3 'features' that people really liked about the game. So naturally I don't want to change what worked so well.

The point is: addressing a little of other aspects of human nature is, by definition, what gives the characters depth. Human beings are not shallow precisely because their interests and their lives go beyond a single area. We aren't just our work, or our hobbies, or our relationships. We are all these things...

That goes without saying but in a strictly business relationship you don't really see this side of people. I've met hundreds of business owners, top managers, and local politicians (it was part of my job, to handle high profile clients and problems). I'm sure they were good friends, loving sons and fathers, but the conversations never touched these aspects. They wanted something, usually for nothing, they'd try to lie, outmaneuver you, and use every advantage, because that's how they got to the top, and if they had some leverage, then you were really screwed. I had a lot of interactions like this, nothing but business, so the conversations I wrote reflect my experience (i.e. you write what you know).

... and I think you approach these issues even if superficially it can add a lot to your narrative.

Approach how? Give me an example or two.

PST is probably the best example but the entire game was built around human nature, love, friendship, regret, etc. It's worth noting that the new Torment failed miserably in recreating this experience.

The point is that it's not by chance that most books considered as the best works ever written have explored different aspects of human nature.

Are we talking about mass appeal now? That's an entirely different 'genre'.

The truth is that you have already decided what you will do regardless of any external comment...

It's not how it works. So we made AoD and processed feedback to prepare for the next game. The highest priority was given to things that had to be added (like stealth and proper exploration) and things that had to be addressed (meta-gaming, focus on specialists, and numerous design mistakes). Things that worked well or received the least amount of complaints were left alone simply because we don't have time or manpower to go through everything with a comb.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

People like Lhynn or this Drowed person are finding the characters same-ish, the society bleak etc because... of the lack of babes. They might be grasping at straws babbling about muh aspects of human nature and similar hogwash but the truth is: with enough babes in the game they would be happy campers.

ps: I'm pro-babes as well of course

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

If a comparison between cRPGs and TV shows is allowed, “Age of Decadence” contrasts with the typical cRPG in the same way that “The Wire” contrasts with “The Sopranos” or “The Accursed Kings” contrasts with “Game of Thrones”. It is a much more grounded, bleak and adult cRPG. To insist in the comparison, it is as if Lynn and Drowed were criticising “The Wire” for not being like “The Sopranos” because they can't stand anything that deviates from a soap-opera formula. It is an egotistical and simple-minded way of looking at things. The cRPG genre, and especially the jRPG sub-genre, are dominated by an ungodly amount of ego-pandering heroic fantasies and romances, and yet this one single indie game shouldn't have the audacity to be any different. Now, think about how ridiculous would be to suggest that David Simon should write and direct like David Chase knowing that they had completely different backgrounds, formations, life experiences, etc. Any author worth his salt will write about what he knows best, be truthful to his own voice, have his own style, etc.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

PST is probably the best example but the entire game was built around human nature, love, friendship, regret, etc. It's worth noting that the new Torment failed miserably in recreating this experience.

The game failed because it was conceived as an attempt to emulate someone else's idea instead of doing its own thing.

 

[MRY]

If AOD had included a subset of "decent" people who weren't doomed to destruction by the less decent ones, it would've harmed the game because it would've provided a safe harbor for players. By having every faction more wicked than decent, the player is forced into some measure of moral compromise, something very unusual for RPGs and a core part of the game's appeal.

That said, like other players, I found it very exhausting to be tempest tossed all game long without that safe harbor. It's interesting to contrast AOD and Fallout. Fallout is basically an ludicrously optimistic game in which every third character has a heart of gold and the horrors of nuclear war can quickly be overcome by American true grit(tm) and overcoming our differences. AOD is basically a game where you get to watch a convocation of eagles with their talons sunk into each other, tearing each other apart while they crash to earth. It's really just a question of how far into the fall an eagle survives, how much eagle-flesh it gets to eat before smashing on the ground, but there's no prospect of anyone soaring off into the wild blue yonder. Ultimately, I can't see the latter every achieving the mass appeal of the former.

 

[Vault Dweller]

AOD is basically a game where you get to watch a convocation of eagles with their talons sunk into each other, tearing each other apart while they crash to earth. It's really just a question of how far into the fall an eagle survives, how much eagle-flesh it gets to eat before smashing on the ground, but there's no prospect of anyone soaring off into the wild blue yonder.

Pure poetry.

 

[Trashos]

That said, like other players, I found it very exhausting to be tempest tossed all game long without that safe harbor.

Didn't I read somewhere that you are in a law firm? It can't be much better where you work.

Great post, btw.

 

[MRY]

 

[Drowed]

Approach how? Give me an example or two.

It wouldn't be difficult. A possible example would be you take a mission where you should protect a caravan until it arrives in another city. During the events and attacks that the caravan suffers, you could have some dialogues with some of the characters you met in the quest. Depending on the dialogues choices (and the survival of these characters to the attacks), you could form a friendly relationship with one (or more) of the characters after some intense battles, which could affect a future quest.

When fulfilling one of the missions for a major politician, you may end up causing the wrath of one of his enemies. This enemy eventually killed your contractor's wife/son/whatever, and he is informed of this at a time when he is talking to you. Thus, you witness the scene and the way it deals with that loss (whatever the reaction, you'll see something about him). Depending on your reaction during the scene, you may end up being a scapegoat and be seen as seen as indirect responsible, or be expelled from the scene, or even get a new quest against that opponent.

But not everything needs to be part of a quest, of course. Gossip about people's personal life is commonplace everywhere, and you can put NPCs that comment on some loose details of characters' lives depending on the questions you ask. Or even in bar conversations, with characters debating "the regent's newest slut," who has now achieved the achievement of having his tenth bastard son. Information that may seem trivial, but at the same time speak more about character, personality, and character choices beyond what you can see in a direct working relationship.

The point is to introduce a bit of the other aspects of the human relations of the characters. It doesn't sound so hard, even if the focus of your story is different. It doesn't have to turn into a drama or romance story.

Are we talking about mass appeal now? That's an entirely different 'genre'.

Not really. My point isn't that the only stories that matter are those with a large audience, but that there is a reason why these stories resonate with so many people. But more importantly, that this reason is something that isn't so difficult to replicate, and can have a great effect on the end result.

 

[Vault Dweller]

It wouldn't be difficult. A possible example would be you take a mission where you should protect a caravan until it arrives in another city. During the events and attacks that the caravan suffers, you could have some dialogues with some of the characters you met in the quest. Depending on the dialogues choices (and the survival of these characters to the attacks), you could form a friendly relationship with one (or more) of the characters after some intense battles, which could affect a future quest.

Design-wise, it's a 'save NPC and be rewarded with a quest' setup. Miltiades' questline is a good example of that. The problem is that you're trying to tack on friendship there and I'm not sure how it's supposed to work. So you talk to a guard, then the caravan is attacked, you and your future buddy fight together, you keep him alive, then what? You visit him in some tavern every time you return from questing? He tells you his stories, you buy him drinks, after 3 visits you unlock "you made a friend" achievement? It sounds like all those Bioware romances. This isn't friendship, no more than Bioware crap is real romance.

Writing real friendship (a multitude of deep, branching out dialogue trees allowing you to discuss different topics with your new friend) will be an major project and the end result would qualify to make the feature list.

When fulfilling one of the missions for a major politician, you may end up causing the wrath of one of his enemies. This enemy eventually killed your contractor's wife/son/whatever, and he is informed of this at a time when he is talking to you. Thus, you witness the scene and the way it deals with that loss (whatever the reaction, you'll see something about him). Depending on your reaction during the scene, you may end up being a scapegoat and be seen as seen as indirect responsible, or be expelled from the scene, or even get a new quest against that opponent.

This I don't like at all. Watching a character react to the death of an imaginary loved one is as touching as losing a sibling you've just met in Dragon Age 2's intro.

But not everything needs to be part of a quest, of course. Gossip about people's personal life is commonplace everywhere, and you can put NPCs that comment on some loose details of characters' lives depending on the questions you ask. Or even in bar conversations, with characters debating "the regent's newest slut," who has now achieved the achievement of having his tenth bastard son. Information that may seem trivial, but at the same time speak more about character, personality, and character choices beyond what you can see in a direct working relationship.

I like it but it's a pretty big writing task. Not as big as writing friendship but pretty big nonetheless if the target is more than "I hear the fighting guild is recruiting" or "I saw a mudcrab the other day."

 

[Black Angel]

I would say all of what Drowed wanted to be in the game are actually already there in the game. The aforementioned Miltiades story arc, becomes 'save NPC and be rewarded with a quest' at one point (when you first arrived at Maadoran, specifically), but I'd argue the whole time you actually become his friend (kinda). Yeah, he's kind of an asshole for putting you in violent situation (of which you can still solve with diplomacy, mind you) but the way he dealt with it doesn't come off as a 'boss-employee' situation like it usually is with other characters. More like partner-in-crime, but even then if that's not enough to fulfill Drowed's friendship fantasy, then I don't know what is.

Also, 'not everything needs to be part of a quest' is also there in the game. Like I mentioned in the previous page, you get to interact with a farmer unloading his goods/produce (or whatever), and you get a chance to have a warm conversation with him. With sufficient skill (iirc Alchemy and/or Trading) you can tell him how to do his job better. There might be more of something like that in the game, can't remember much though since it's been awhile the last time I played the game. Hell, one can say that conversation you can have with that raider boss at the beginning of the game is pretty cool too, especially when he made that sign to ward off curses/bad omens upon hearing you mentioning Hellgate.

 

[Lhynn]

People like Lhynn or this Drowed person are finding the characters same-ish, the society bleak etc because... of the lack of babes. They might be grasping at straws babbling about muh aspects of human nature and similar hogwash but the truth is: with enough babes in the game they would be happy campers.

ps: I'm pro-babes as well of course

No, actually i liked the fact that there are almost no wymn, fits the setting well. There are 3 of note that i remember, the healer, the old crone at the cult/village and the commie scum.

My problem is that everyone is too business minded, theres no humanity, they are all assholes. I get Vault Dweller wanting to paint a bleak picture, he overdid it and as a result theres no reason to care. Its fine if they all die, fuck them.

 

[Drowed]

Design-wise, it's a 'save NPC and be rewarded with a quest' setup. Miltiades' questline is a good example of that. The problem is that you're trying to tack on friendship there and I'm not sure how it's supposed to work. So you talk to a guard, then the caravan is attacked, you and your future buddy fight together, you keep him alive, then what? You visit him in some tavern every time you return from questing?

It doesn't have to be anything so "elaborate". You simply have the choice to talk to him or not. Talking to him, and saving him during the fight, he simply thanks and you talk a little (if you decide to talk to him) after the event. You never made friends? How did you make friends in your life? I don't know about you, but there are no friendship-points-meter or levels-of-visits in real life. I talked to a person in a bar, the conversation was interesting and we had some affinity, and the second time we talked I already felt close to him. It's something simple, human, that most people have experienced, and I imagine you have, too.

You either talk to the character or you don't. If you act like an ass or ignore him, certainly you don't become friends. If you have a normal human conversation, you may become friends. You are the writer. Just as you can create a credible asshole character, you can create a credible conversation between two mercenaries who become friends after a tense situation. I don't understand what you're seeing as complex here.

This I don't like at all. Watching a character react to the death of an imaginary loved one is as touching as losing a sibling you've just met in Dragon Age 2's intro.

It's not supposed to be touching? Where did you get that from? You are thinking that this event is supposed to be an emotional moment? That's not the goal, you're missing the point completely here. The point is to expand the character. Focusing on the 'emotion' of it will completely ruin a scene that must have the focus on exploring the character's reaction and define his personality. You are taking the scene to the wrong side and trying to give it a framing that would ruin it.

Do not write this kind of scene as if writing a drama, write this kind of scene following the "documentary" style you already use. Describe the event as a narrative historian, not as the writer of Twilight. The same scene may have a completely different tone depending on the focus and how it is described.

I like it but it's a pretty big writing task. Not as big as writing friendship but pretty big nonetheless if the target is more than "I hear the fighting guild is recruiting" or "I saw a mudcrab the other day."

True, I think this ends up in one of those situations where "either you do it right or don't do it at all." It sounds like something that would require a relatively large effort for a small team, and in fact, I imagine that all this effort would be a bette directed at creating new quests or other more immediate issues.

 

[Goral]

Fallout is basically an ludicrously optimistic game in which every third character has a heart of gold

Can't agree with that at all, in Vault 13 there are no characters like that, in Junktown there's Killian only and maybe the hotel owner, the rest are either cannibals or gangsters or psychos (and there is grumpy bar owner + Tycho, either way it''s not even half), in the Hub it's even worse, in Boneyard too, etc. etc. Only Shady Sands could fit maybe fit that description. And calling a game where you end up as an exile and where there is no unity (unless you want to become super mutant) optimistic is just wrong IMO.

 

[Jason Liang]

Don't worry VD. When I was in 3rd grade a classmate also called me an emotionless Vulcan. I didn't know what a Vulcan was since I'd just started learning English in 1st grade, and didn't watch Star Trek.

I've been there.

 

[Tovias]

First of all it wasnt exactly a propa playthrough, i actually gave myself like 4 extra attribute points to have stats for future skillchecks and like 200 skillpoints to be good in civics to avoid missing a lot of shit in the game.

Stopped reading right there. End your life in whatever method you see fitting.

 

[Jason Liang]

First of all it wasnt exactly a propa playthrough, i actually gave myself like 4 extra attribute points to have stats for future skillchecks and like 200 skillpoints to be good in civics to avoid missing a lot of shit in the game.

Stopped reading right there. End your life in whatever method you see fitting.

Not everyone is a systemfag. And besides, giving your character 200 extra skill points makes it easier to see that AoD's skill check based non-combat gameplay is actually lazy shit.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

Not everyone is a systemfag.

No, dude. These are the rules of the game. Using cheat code to play AoD is like playing chess with four rocks. It ruins the experience of playing the game completely, because the game was not designed to be played that way.

 

[Jason Liang]

Not everyone is a systemfag.

No, dude. These are the rules of the game. Using cheat code to play AoD is like playing chess with four rocks. It ruins the experience of playing the game completely, because the game was not designed to be played that way.

... AoD's combat is a joke once you know how the game mechanics actually work, so the game is essentially just a (thoughtfully designed) CYOA/ teleport simulator. If removing the pretense of challenge turns the gameplay to shit, the gameplay was shit in the first place.