Torment Torment: Tides of Numenera Pre-Release Thread [ALPHA RELEASED, GO TO NEW THREAD]

[Lord Andre]

Torment would be better with both less and better combat.

This. Exactly this.

And if the posers above would have played more than a few hours before rage quiting, they would know that cutting combat from PST completely is not such a good idea.

 

[Moribund]

to Grunker, Andre, tuluse.

At least there's some people on this site I [/s]don't need to track down and strangle unconscious for dire idiocy[/s] can agree with.

 

[Excidium]

The amount of people using the false argument that Torment would be better without combat because the combat wasn't very good baffles me. It is such an evident misnomer.

Hell, the fact that removing shit because it isn't perfect is considered decline is one of the central reasons this site exists. Don't remove central game elements because they didn't work to perfection; improve them. Torment would have been a much better game with combat more like the other IE-games; not by removing its combat entirely.

Well, no shit. But that's quite the beautiful CRPG dream, where every system is better designed and improved from the previous iteration. I want to live there.

You're gonna have to forgive people for being realistic and not expecting much from kickstarter projects that mainly cater to nostalgic people. I'm p. sure most people who pledged to this would be more than ok with it if the combat was awful shit because THE STORY IS WHAT MATTERS IN TORMENT MANG, so I don't really know how the hell I'm supposed to be optimistic about it.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Also not every element should stay just because it has been there in the previous game. They added guns to a Sonic game. Instead of making the gunplay better for the next title, everyone agreed it was a terrible idea and should never be spoken of again.

 

[Lord Andre]

I don't really know how the hell I'm supposed to be optimistic about it.

Your optimism is not required.



Only your

 

[Excidium]

They don't go anywhere until I know exactly where they're headed.

 

[Grunker]

 

[mondblut]

Mondblut and his ilk define PS:T that way because they like to watch the fanbois of America's best JRPG NERDRAEG

 

[Gozma]

A PS:T sequel should have something like a "violence system" rather trying to get a lot of gameplay out of combat. PS:T is an adventure game with mediocre IE combat interwoven, sometimes egregious amounts of combat that is badly designed even for IE games in the second half, but you really do need to be able to resolve things by killing/beating people and you should be driven by the normal RPG "I need to be ready to kill bigger things" lootgrubbing and exploration cycle. But sometimes kicking around or murdering a poor bastard will not and should not be game driven; I don't expect that fight to be "combat". It's actually a case where I'd prefer not to have the gameness of TB but rather a sim-heavy Rtw/P like 7.62mm or something, even though that wouldn't happen in a million years. A system that could handle all those things like dexterity checks in dialog to choke a guy to death in the violence engine would be cool.

Fallout had a kind of very shallow but somewhat effective "violence system" where at least half of the combat in the game isn't close to gameplay with TB I guess. Mostly with comedy gore animations and text descriptions.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

No, really. You say that "removing shit because it isn't perfect, instead of perfecting it" is a bad idea, but what if that smelly shit had no business being there to begin with? For example, Bethesda does this with level scaling - Fallout 3's level scaling was better than Oblivion's, which fixed the most glaring problems but still suffers from the bad points associated with it (mostly meaningless exploration, getting stronger punishes you with stronger enemies, etc). In turn, Skyrim's level scaling is a little better than FO3's, but again it's not quite enough. Wouldn't it be better if they just flushed the turd instead of polishing it over and over?

 

[Moribund]

I'd rather they take out combat than make shit combat that's just filler. But then it really would be an adventure game, and that's a lot harder to do right than an RPG in many ways.

 

[Moribund]

And it's not like there isn't a down dumbing of adventure games, too. Some people really just want no challenge, a passive entertainment where you don't really do anything, even if they are too dumb to see it. Why don't you just watch the youtubes of the game and leave us alone? Here's why I'd like to see all cinematics die, it just attracts a retard element that can't be reconciled to real RPG fans.

 

[roshan]

I'm against the idea of torment 2 don't having combat , because it is a little tiring to read walls of text, after walls of text without something to change the flow of the game from time to time, the main flaw of torment was that sometimes you feel that the game is too much of an interactive book ( I know it is a storyfag game, but i don't see why the storyfaggnes will be ruined by an improvement to combat) . RTwP give a feeling of lack of control, the feeling of every fight becoming a clusterfuck with no much regard for formation, position, movement, allowing kiting abuse (all of those could be more of a problem of the Infinity engine games than from RTwP). Turn based could make the fights take more time but if there isn't trash mobs it is doable without the game turning it into a JA 2/Torment hybrid.

How in the world did you kite in PST? I don't even remember the game having any projectile weapons, unless you managed to get Nordom.

 

[hiver]

No, really. You say that "removing shit because it isn't perfect, instead of perfecting it" is a bad idea, but what if that smelly shit had no business being there to begin with? For example, Bethesda does this with level scaling - Fallout 3's level scaling was better than Oblivion's, which fixed the most glaring problems but still suffers from the bad points associated with it (mostly meaningless exploration, getting stronger punishes you with stronger enemies, etc). In turn, Skyrim's level scaling is a little better than FO3's, but again it's not quite enough. Wouldn't it be better if they just flushed the turd instead of polishing it over and over?

Whose side are you on again?

/

Look, you morons, there is going to be combat in the game, just as there was in the original and nobody really gives a shit that you would prefer some other game instead.
Combat was a part of the content of the original game, beautiful weird items and crazy magic spells included and so it will be in the new one.
Shut the fuck up. Youre stupid, ignorant and blinded by sense of self importance fueled by your stupidity.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Whose side are you on again?

I wrote two posts, and the second was just to clarify the first. I suggest you lay off the booze.

 

[hiver]

look...hahaha buster...hehehe.... you just wrote that even a shitty system like level scaling of bethesda got improved by iteration. While at the same time you are trying to argue it is better to remove a feature then to improve it.

I mean... you just craketh me up...

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Yeah, I said it is being improved with each game, but it's still shit because the idea of level scaling an open world based on exploration is shit to begin with. I suggest you lay off the alcohol enemas.

 

[buzz]

The amount of people using the false argument that Torment would be better without combat because the combat wasn't very good baffles me. It is such an evident misnomer.

It wasn't just the fact that the combat wasn't good. Combat just didn't matter, it wasn't central to what made the game interesting.
If there was a game that really needed better combat and better enemy encounters, it was Arcanum.
Again, this is just personal opinion and everything but the final fight with The transcendent One is not supposed to be EPIC 4 TEH WIN, like the Irenicus fight in hell for example or the one with Gothmenes in PoD.
And it's the same with pretty much all of the game. It's a much more atypical form of adventure. Best way to put it, would you be able to correctly recreate the experience from PT in simple AD&D2e sessions?

Hell, the fact that removing shit because it isn't perfect is considered decline is one of the central reasons this site exists. Don't remove central game elements because they didn't work to perfection; improve them. Torment would have been a much better game with combat more like the other IE-games; not by removing its combat entirely.

Yeah bro but that's a pipedream right there. I know most of us imagined a game with PT's story and visual design, ToEE's combat (with good enemy encounters nonetheless) and say ... Daggerfall's amount of content (without the blandness). And yeah, that sounds like a great game.
But that's not how games are made. If InXile had the budget of an AAA game, maybe they could do something like that.

 

[Gozma]

Combat was still central to Torment even though it sucked because it made you behave like it was an RPG so you gave a shit about loot and XP and getting +1 CON or whatever. That tidal force is part of RPGness, seeking all those permanent power-ups. Go play Quest for Glory with all the shitty combat removed and you play it like a normal adventure game - it will be completely gutted because you won't give a damn about raising your vitality and melee skill or finding the golden shitfucks to buy the armor.

 

[suejak]

Torment would be better with both less and better combat.

YES.

All the IE games had completely different strengths. Really, who the hell wants PST to be more like the other IE games?

Torment would have been a much better game with combat more like the other IE-games; not by removing its combat entirely.

Except for this guy, but who knows what he's trying to say.

Torment ought to have just a handful of really good, well-designed, well-thought-out, and largely optional combat encounters. Like in the original and in Fallout, you should be able to charm/reason/argue your way out of most every combat situation. Maybe a couple of fights in there like the gang wars and slipped-Curst in the original. Some random thugs in the street, whatever. But definitely not nonstop BG2 wizard warz shit. That is not the only way nor the correct way to make a crpg.

 

[Grunker]

Charmed/reasoned/argued your way out of many radscorpion encounters in Fallout, didya?

 

[Grunker]

No, really. You say that "removing shit because it isn't perfect, instead of perfecting it" is a bad idea, but what if that smelly shit had no business being there to begin with? For example, Bethesda does this with level scaling - Fallout 3's level scaling was better than Oblivion's, which fixed the most glaring problems but still suffers from the bad points associated with it (mostly meaningless exploration, getting stronger punishes you with stronger enemies, etc). In turn, Skyrim's level scaling is a little better than FO3's, but again it's not quite enough. Wouldn't it be better if they just flushed the turd instead of polishing it over and over?

You seem to forget the fact that Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale already had IE-combat in a much, much better place than Torment. What's wrong with using the functionality in Torment just with less encounters (and thus less combat)?

Torment is IE-combat (which is why I can only roll my eyes a suejak's meaningless attempt to come off as someone who knows anything), it's just a horribly warped version of it. Most people here like IE-combat but detest Torment's - not because Torment wasn't supposed to have combat, but because the IE-combat in Torment is fucked by UI-problems, JRPG spell animations that take forever, and a bunch of other crap that muddle it.

(would I rather have a turn-based Numenera? Yes. But that's beside the point, which is that the original Torment had no reason to fuck up the basic functionalities of IE-combat the way it did.)

 

[suejak]

Charmed/reasoned/argued your way out of many radscorpion encounters in Fallout, didya?

Random encounters or the ones you can block off with an implosion of the cave / hire Ian to kill?

If random encounters, you can up your Outdoorsman or run (or hire Ian). Anyway, I'm not opposed to all combat, but there's famously no absolutely unavoidable combat in Fallout.

 

[Grunker]

there's famously no absolutely unavoidable combat in Fallout.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...otally-avoid-combat-in-fallout-1-and-2.22371/

Spoiler

 

[Irenaeus]

there's famously no absolutely unavoidable combat in Fallout.

I can't believe that in this day and age people still make such statements.