Community The Age of Incline: RPG Codex's 2012-2016 GOTY Results

[Vault Dweller]

Being able to go anywhere, battle random monsters and do random quests can hardly be called design as it's too broad and generic. There is a lot of demand for this type of games, provided you have top notch visuals, which keeps the entry barrier high enough and rewards investment. If one can produce such a game, which usually takes 5 years and a small fortune, the actual design (combat, quests, character system, etc) won't really matter because that high entry barrier keeps supply low.

Counterexample: Spiderweb iso rpgs look like shit, take only 1 year to make, and fit the description of "open world" in every way (for better or worse).

Highlighted the key factor.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Fixed!

Seems like the only immature butthurt autist who cannot deal with people having a different opinion here is you, what else if not extreme butthurt and insecurity drives you to hunt down (even retroactively!) and rate every post that dares criticize your favorite videogame as ''retarded'' and ''shit''? I would be really surprised if you are not on the spectrum.

Codex is full of such individuals. Rads, infucktron, cosmo, Eryvkad, volrath, janjetina, iraneus, kalarion, mustawd. And this list is far from exhaustive.

 

[Zeriel]

Negative brofists were the real mistake. Before, there was just two sorts of feedback for posts: ignoring them, or brofisting them. Now, you can go around passive aggressively telling everyone how much you hate them. People are far more likely to use the panoply of options to tell someone they're a faggot than agree with them. From a hard-knocks perspective this is all well and good, but from an open expression perspective it's kind of shit. I've been on internet since 90's so I don't care, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who just stop posting controversial things because their fee-fees get hurt. Peer pressure works. This is also why Reddit is so bad. At least here negative ratings don't hide your posts from everyone.

 

[laclongquan]

Being able to go anywhere, battle random monsters and do random quests can hardly be called design as it's too broad and generic. There is a lot of demand for this type of games, provided you have top notch visuals, which keeps the entry barrier high enough and rewards investment. If one can produce such a game, which usually takes 5 years and a small fortune, the actual design (combat, quests, character system, etc) won't really matter because that high entry barrier keeps supply low.

Counterexample: Spiderweb iso rpgs look like shit, take only 1 year to make, and fit the description of "open world" in every way (for better or worse).

Highlighted the key factor.

I will note that the ability to play some naked wimmin and being able to stare at a female ass for hours on end is a strong point.
No matter how you prefer, visual is one key factor. I dont like Final Fantasy 7 mostly because of that blocky graphic.

 

[Sizzle]

PS:T has the story tied to gameplay, but also has some cringe worthy writing, including romances with Annah.

Having an option to kiss Annah in one dialogue is now a full-blown romance? What?

Every classic game is a mixed bag in regard to writing.

PS:T, FO, Arcanum, Bloodlines, MoTB, KoTOR II - TSL, Betrayal at Krondor - all of those have writing that's mixed bag. Right.

Because - if AoD can't have perfect writing, no game can. Gotta love the way your addled little mind works.

 

[Mareus]

Being able to go anywhere, battle random monsters and do random quests can hardly be called design as it's too broad and generic. There is a lot of demand for this type of games, provided you have top notch visuals, which keeps the entry barrier high enough and rewards investment. If one can produce such a game, which usually takes 5 years and a small fortune, the actual design (combat, quests, character system, etc) won't really matter because that high entry barrier keeps supply low.

Now you are just playing word games. Sorry, but if you can't admit that sandbox is a design choice and are jumping through loops to argue against something so obvious,... well then what is the chance of convincing you of anything else? Besides, there are many ways you can simulate the feeling of open world without necessarily investing 50+ milion dollars on world building. Hell, some indie games do it for a fraction of a budget, so your argument is flawed.

In other words, your analogy was flawed.

It wasn't an analogy. It is a fact. Sandbox is a design choice. How much it costs, doesn't affect that fact.

Shooters have always been more popular than RPGs but in the RPG realm sandbox games rule supreme.

First of all, you are missing my point. The point was that the popularity is determined by more things than just choice of genre. Second of all, you are factually wrong. I could have just as well used Diablo 3 for example which sold 30 million copies. It outsold Skyrim by 7,5 million units.

Even the way you present it: fanatics vs 'us reasonable folk who appreciate flexibility' suggests strong bias.

The whole point of your game are choices and consequences. When you take away player's freedom to do something that even a half decent RPGs lets you do - like walking around after you accept a quest - you are objectively and factually reducing the player's choices. Now this is true regardless of any biases that might exist. Same thing when you force the player to wear centurion armor. Same thing with meta-knowledge save-scumming playstyle, since it is the only way to achieve anything, etc. Yes, there is a personal preference involved in the sense that some people don't like being ass-shafted on every turn, while others enjoy that type of activity. But that doesn't change the fact that ass-shafting is actually happening. Now, if you think that this is great RPG design, fine. But lets not pretend that ass-shafting is not happening.

You didn't get to do this one thing your way, so you dismiss both the explanation and the fact that the infiltration quest has tons of different options, more than any other quest I can think of. If you disagree, name a quest with more options.

This is clearly just a strawman of my position, so it doesn't deserve a reply.

Obviously the game is well received on the Codex (i.e. within the same RPG community). It has flaws (more than I like) but the overall consensus here is that it's a good RPG. Then we have some people like you, Lhynn, and Jazz who are convinced that it's actually a bad RPG. So either you're right and the rest of the Codex is wrong and AoD *is* a bad RPG or you simply prefer a very different design. Either way, there isn't much room for dialogue here.

Yeah, I see this isn't going anywhere. You are stubborn as a mule. The problem is that the whole point of your game are choices and consequences, and I am flabbergasted as to how many people are praising it for that aspect, while being completely ok with the fact that you can't chose to do some rudimentary things that should be there by default, so forgive me for taking the Codex' opinion - whose active member you were even before you delved into the dev waters - with a grain of salt. Especially with having to read lunatic ramblings of people like Lurker King.

Ignore? My entire point was that there are a lot of people who like this design. I know it's a niche design and we'll never sell hundreds of thousands of copies but we're fine with that and more than happy to serve that particular player base. We sold 85,000 copies, most of them on Steam where the game is also well received, so this particular design isn't something that appeals only to the Codex.

Nice spin In reality what you were doing was using extremely skewed statistics to argue how there were only 2 complaints about that 1 particular quest, trying to present the whole spectrum of issues as only 2 irrational people making a fuss about nothing. Like I said - a nice spin.

They must be new to the internet because everyone else complains non-stop about everything.

No matter how you count these complaints, even if you group them all together they are still a minority, even on the Codex

As were our complaints when it comes to Skyrim, Oblivion, etc. Doesn't mean that there aren't actual problems, nor does it mean that echochamber effect does not exist.

 

[makiavelli747]

Mareus you are fucking idiot, seriously

 

[l3loodAngel]

Negative brofists were the real mistake. Before, there was just two sorts of feedback for posts: ignoring them, or brofisting them. Now, you can go around passive aggressively telling everyone how much you hate them. People are far more likely to use the panoply of options to tell someone they're a faggot than agree with them. From a hard-knocks perspective this is all well and good, but from an open expression perspective it's kind of shit. I've been on internet since 90's so I don't care, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who just stop posting controversial things because their fee-fees get hurt. Peer pressure works.

Some of the people *cough* *mustawd* *cough* will even go to into verbal diarrhea how they rate posts, not because of QQ but because they don't care...

 

[Mareus]

Mareus you are fucking idiot, seriously

The feeling is mutual, you twat.

 

[Lurker King]

Seems like the only immature butthurt autist who cannot deal with people having a different opinion here is you, what else if not extreme butthurt and insecurity drives you to hunt down (even retroactively!) and rate every post that dares criticize your favorite videogame as ''retarded'' and ''shit''? I would be really surprised if you are not on the spectrum.

Dude, you just waste some minutes of your fucking life trying to accuse me of being immature for doing the same things everyone does in this forum. And I'm the one who is immature? Grow up, will you? If it was up to me, we would have no button ratings at all. I'm just playing by the rules of this circus.

Right on, bro. Too many RPGs use dialogue as a substitute for a quest system capable of recognizing the player's actions. The challenge is to write dialogue that doesn't assume prior events -- by omission, vagueness, and conditional coding when necessary. You sacrifice a lot of literary flourishes to fit the medium.

That's vague. Give examples.

 

[vdweller]

What the fuck is that Deus Vult button? Is there a new button added every hour?

 

[Roguey]

Having an option to kiss Annah in one dialogue is now a full-blown romance? What?

There's far more to it than that.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Being able to go anywhere, battle random monsters and do random quests can hardly be called design as it's too broad and generic. There is a lot of demand for this type of games, provided you have top notch visuals, which keeps the entry barrier high enough and rewards investment. If one can produce such a game, which usually takes 5 years and a small fortune, the actual design (combat, quests, character system, etc) won't really matter because that high entry barrier keeps supply low.

Now you are just playing word games. Sorry, but if you can't admit that sandbox is a design choice and are jumping through loops to argue against something so obvious,... well then what is the chance of convincing you of anything else? Besides, there are many ways you can simulate the feeling of open world without necessarily investing 50+ milion dollars on world building. Hell, some indie games do it for a fraction of a budget, so your argument is flawed.

Jesus fucking Christ. Design is a very specific thing, a blueprint, a detailed plan, etc. Sandbox is a genre. All it means is that you can roam free and do whatever you want. It can and does support endless actual designs as long as you can roam free and do whatever you want. That's why many people liked Oblivion - because they like free-roaming gameplay with great visuals (for its time) more than they care about some design particulars. It's not a difficult concept to grasp, is it?

Shooters have always been more popular than RPGs but in the RPG realm sandbox games rule supreme.

First of all, you are missing my point. The point was that the popularity is determined by more things than just choice of genre. Second of all, you are factually wrong. I could have just as well used Diablo 3 for example which sold 30 million copies. It outsold Skyrim by 7,5 million units.

Diablo is the only action RPG franchise that can pull this kind of numbers. Sandbox RPGs with great visuals do that all the time. Witcher 3 sold 20 mil copies as March 2016. I wouldn't be surprised if it already hit 30 mil. Skyrim sold 20 mil in the first 2 years. Fallout 3 sold 12 mil in the first day at full price.

The whole point of your game are choices and consequences. When you take away player's freedom to do something that even a half decent RPGs lets you do - like walking around after you accept a quest - you are objectively and factually reducing the player's choices.

Some quests have certain urgency to them (i.e. it's happening now, do you want in not?), but most quests allow you walking around after accepting them. Claiming that it's not the case suggests that you haven't played much.

Same thing with meta-knowledge save-scumming playstyle, since it is the only way to achieve anything, etc.

Bullshit. I understand that that's your experience but claiming that your experience is universal because there's no way someone could prevail where you failed is a very self-absorbed position.

Yeah, I see this isn't going anywhere. You are stubborn as a mule. The problem is that the whole point of your game are choices and consequences, and I am flabbergasted as to how many people are praising it for that aspect, while being completely ok with the fact that you can't chose to do some rudimentary things that should be there by default, so forgive me for taking the Codex' opinion - whose active member you were even before you delved into the dev waters - with a grain of salt.

What do they know, right? Blessed with True Sight, you alone see the game for what it is - a bad RPG. Clearly, I'm a stubborn old fool for listening to people who actually like the design instead of listening to you and changing the design to accommodate your preferences.

Ignore? My entire point was that there are a lot of people who like this design. I know it's a niche design and we'll never sell hundreds of thousands of copies but we're fine with that and more than happy to serve that particular player base. We sold 85,000 copies, most of them on Steam where the game is also well received, so this particular design isn't something that appeals only to the Codex.

Nice spin In reality what you were doing was using extremely skewed statistics to argue how there were only 2 complaints about that 1 particular quest, trying to present the whole spectrum of issues as only 2 irrational people making a fuss about nothing. Like I said - a nice spin.

In reality the game was very well received. That's a fact, not a matter of opinion. Only a handful of people are convinced that it's a bad RPG. I will let you draw your own conclusions.

No matter how you count these complaints, even if you group them all together they are still a minority, even on the Codex

As were our complaints when it comes to Skyrim, Oblivion, etc. Doesn't mean that there aren't actual problems, nor does it mean that echochamber effect does not exist.

There is a huge difference between two different groups of people who want very different things (the Codex vs Bethesda's new playerbase) having different opinions and a minority opinion within the same group of people who want the same things. I thought I've already explained it.

Anyway, I've already wasted enough time on this conversation already. Enjoy the rest of your day, maybe play an RPG you actually like.

 

[Sizzle]

Having an option to kiss Annah in one dialogue is now a full-blown romance? What?

There's far more to it than that.

Of course, but I still wouldn't call it a romance - at least in the sense we use that term today - rather, it's an integral part of her character and reason for traveling with you.

 

[l3loodAngel]

What the fuck is that Deus Vult button? Is there a new button added every hour?

It's the decline son. In the next version of codex buttons will add themselves to the posts.

 

[Zero Credibility]

AoD is simply the 2nd best liked cRPG from 2012-2016 at the Codex, after Twicther3.

Let that sink in.

Wait, I thought it was fourth? Witcher, Underrail, Dragonfall, then AoD?

Also, buttons are a cancer on the forum.

 

[Ludo Lense]

Negative brofists were the real mistake. Before, there was just two sorts of feedback for posts: ignoring them, or brofisting them. Now, you can go around passive aggressively telling everyone how much you hate them. People are far more likely to use the panoply of options to tell someone they're a faggot than agree with them. From a hard-knocks perspective this is all well and good, but from an open expression perspective it's kind of shit. I've been on internet since 90's so I don't care, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who just stop posting controversial things because their fee-fees get hurt. Peer pressure works. This is also why Reddit is so bad. At least here negative ratings don't hide your posts from everyone.

I am not sure about this. I am obviously not part of the old guard but reading the old threads made me see lots (relative to the user-base at the time) of short negative sentences that didn't contribute anything. I have a feeling the negative ratings removed a lot of "kys" comments and the like from a thread.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Negative brofists were the real mistake. Before, there was just two sorts of feedback for posts: ignoring them, or brofisting them. Now, you can go around passive aggressively telling everyone how much you hate them. People are far more likely to use the panoply of options to tell someone they're a faggot than agree with them. From a hard-knocks perspective this is all well and good, but from an open expression perspective it's kind of shit. I've been on internet since 90's so I don't care, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who just stop posting controversial things because their fee-fees get hurt. Peer pressure works. This is also why Reddit is so bad. At least here negative ratings don't hide your posts from everyone.

I am not sure about this. I am obviously not part of the old guard but reading the old threads made me see lots (relative to the user-base at the time) of short negative sentences that didn't contribute anything. I have a feeling the negative ratings removed a lot of "kys" comments and the like from a thread.

It sure as fuck didn't remove excidium 2 or whatever number he's using now. BTW nice button idea you have there.

 

[Goral]

On a different note, I've checked what percent of all players have reviewed the game they were playing and what I find strange is that UR, which has 89% positive reviews ratio has this number so low. I have my theories though.

Age of Decadence: Owners: 61,600 ± 7,250 (1,240 reviews = 2% of all players)

Witcher 3: Owners: 2,768,885 ± 48,434 (85,415 revies, 3.08%)

Neo Scavenger: Owners: 149,090 ± 11,278 (2,574 reviews, 1.7%)

Pillars of Eternity: Owners: 878,249 ± 27,347 (9,157 reviews, 1%)

Underrail: Owners: 67,626 ± 7,596 (1,080 reviews =1.6% of all players)

Undertale: Owners: 2,426,290 ± 45,359 (76,361 reviews, 3.1%)

Fallout 4: Owners: 4,097,084 ± 58,811 (90,041 reviews, 2.2%)

P.S.
Woah, I haven't seen Vault Dweller this upset in a long, long time. Achievement unlocked Mareus.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[l3loodAngel]

P.S.
Woah, I haven't seen Vault Dweller this upset in a long, long time. Achievement unlocked Mareus.

Everybody whos not a dumb fuck here is upset (not even mentioning that AOD is his creation). A game without any real RPG mechanics is the TOP RPG. We are slowly wandering into Dear Esther territory. It's a kick into teeth to any RPG fan, because there's not much room left to decline.

 

[Konjad]

EVERYBODY WHO DOESN'T AGREE WITH ME IS A DUMB FUCK! WAAAAAAAAAH WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH I'M SO ANGRY WAAAAAAAAAH WAAAAAAAAAAAAH

 

[Vault Dweller]

Woah, I haven't seen Vault Dweller this upset in a long, long time. Achievement unlocked Mareus.

Upset about what? Someone having a different opinion or thinking that AoD is shit? After years of processing feedback I'm indifferent at best. The only reason I got into this conversation is to tell Mareus that he can actually buy weapons before the starting quest and that he has more options in that infiltration quest.

 

[Zeriel]

Negative brofists were the real mistake. Before, there was just two sorts of feedback for posts: ignoring them, or brofisting them. Now, you can go around passive aggressively telling everyone how much you hate them. People are far more likely to use the panoply of options to tell someone they're a faggot than agree with them. From a hard-knocks perspective this is all well and good, but from an open expression perspective it's kind of shit. I've been on internet since 90's so I don't care, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who just stop posting controversial things because their fee-fees get hurt. Peer pressure works. This is also why Reddit is so bad. At least here negative ratings don't hide your posts from everyone.

I am not sure about this. I am obviously not part of the old guard but reading the old threads made me see lots (relative to the user-base at the time) of short negative sentences that didn't contribute anything. I have a feeling the negative ratings removed a lot of "kys" comments and the like from a thread.

That's better, though. If you want to slag someone off, that's fine. In fact, it's admirable. But you should have to actually put yourself out there, not just tag every single one of someone's posts with "HAHA WHAT A FAG, WRONG OPINION". Then again, maybe I'm just being an old man yelling at the kids from my porch, especially in light of the fact that once we didn't even have brofists.

 

[sstacks]

I'll be live with felipepepe and Matt Barton in just under an hour (1 PM Central) on the radio show talking about these poll results. 96.5 FM The Answer in Little Rock, online at http://965fmtheanswer.com (direct stream link: http://saleminteractivemedia.com/ListenLive/Player/KHTEFM).

 

[Ludo Lense]

Negative brofists were the real mistake. Before, there was just two sorts of feedback for posts: ignoring them, or brofisting them. Now, you can go around passive aggressively telling everyone how much you hate them. People are far more likely to use the panoply of options to tell someone they're a faggot than agree with them. From a hard-knocks perspective this is all well and good, but from an open expression perspective it's kind of shit. I've been on internet since 90's so I don't care, but I'm sure there's plenty of people who just stop posting controversial things because their fee-fees get hurt. Peer pressure works. This is also why Reddit is so bad. At least here negative ratings don't hide your posts from everyone.

I am not sure about this. I am obviously not part of the old guard but reading the old threads made me see lots (relative to the user-base at the time) of short negative sentences that didn't contribute anything. I have a feeling the negative ratings removed a lot of "kys" comments and the like from a thread.

That's better, though. If you want to slag someone off, that's fine. In fact, it's admirable. But you should have to actually put yourself out there, not just tag every single one of someone's posts with "HAHA WHAT A FAG, WRONG OPINION". Then again, maybe I'm just being an old man yelling at the kids from my porch, especially in light of the fact that once we didn't even have brofists.

kill yourself