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

[tuluse]

Can someone just link him the quote by Tim Cain saying he wants to make turn based fun again (with regards to Fallout) so he is slightly less ignorant about history?

 

[mondblut]

But separating input from execution isn't merely some cosmetic difference; it has a profound impact on gameplay.

Indeed. Once the execution phase fires, you cannot intervene and have to live with the choices you've made before. What you see in execution phase is still 100% asynchronious and turn-based.

It is irrelevant because, at least if I understand you correctly, the execution phase is always going to be both simultaneous and consequential (did you mean sequential?); how could it be otherwise? IIRC In Bard's Tale the information of a given combat round is presented in the order of some spd value (attack priority?), with the planning phase obv. up to the player to decide by altering the configuration of the party.

However, if represented graphically it would still look like a ffa with everyone wailing at each other simultaneously, and even if you cut the actions up into turns and have everyone go one at a time it still wouldn't actually change the fact that the characters are acting simultaneously within that phase -- they're still synchronized.

How are they synchronized when guy A acts first in execution phase, guy B second, guy C next? If a mage happens to get his fireball off first, there will be no one alive to hit him back.

The order of acting might depend on stats like speed, or it may be fully random (Wizardry tends to lean to the latter), fact is, in their execution phase participants act one at a time.

 

[Zed]

when were they closing the polls on this?
I wish they would just make a decision already. anybody who matters or actually care have already had their say in the matter.

 

[tuluse]

when were they closing the polls on this?
I wish they would just make a decision already. anybody who matters or actually care have already had their say in the matter.

Dec 15 I think.

I can't be bothered to double check and make sure I'm right.

 

[catfood]

Guy makes a video in response to a forum post... what?

Assburgers is a bitch.

 

[undecaf]

Sunyavadin commented · December 6, 2013 9:33 am ·
I didn't pay for a crappy turn based game. I paid for Torment.
Giving a turn based snorefest would be false advertising. It'd be like id releasing a Doom remake as a point and click adventure.

*sigh*
...no, *yawn*

no comment

 

[FeelTheRads]

Ask him what he thinks about Fallout 3 vs Fallout 1 & 2. I'm sure he thinks the "false advertising" was just fine in that case.

Edit: nvm, he'll probably say VATS is the same as turn-based.

 

[Rake]

There was Fallout 1 and 2?

BUUUT...BUUUUT.. Bethesda didn't made gaems befor Oblivion. Does not compute...

 

[Athelas]

It'd be like id releasing a Doom remake as a point and click adventure.

Anybody else think this would make for an awesome game?

 

[Topher]

Just watched his first video and my only comment has to be this.

He cites the definition of a spiritual successor as a game that has the same theme, styles or elements (all narrative constructions as I interpret the definition he provided) then ignores all three terms and stresses that the word to note here is 'game'.

On it's own that point is already a confused mess since he somehow he interprets those three terms to mean gameplay... but seeing that bit after hearing his argument about how it's ok for sequels to change core system mechanics while spiritual successors can't. The guy is a fucking moron.

*Also, I've got to ask? Why does he keep saying metaphysics and constantly insisting that the metaphysics of the game world is broken. What does that even mean? The term doesn't make any sense in this context. Is he playing it off to say that since games have metagames their game worlds occupy metaphysics? ...and he constantly refers to games as a game first and foremost (i.e a set of mechanics, he seems very set on expressing this) but then constantly tries to abstract things as an aspect of narrative.

Absolute fucking mess, I'm sure he'll do exceedingly well in modern game development.

 

[Longshanks]

The only response needed for this idiocy is that InXile made it abundantly clear what they considered to be the "spirit" of Torment and what they were looking to bring over to their game. The fact that they did not even know what combat system they'd be implementing is the clearest possible message that, for them, this was not a key part of that spirit.

Anyone who backed the Kickstarter despite having an unbending preference for combat system is an idiot.

 

[FeelTheRads]

So, does he still think RTwP is part of D&D?

 

[Infinitron]

Brother None on Something Awful: http://forums.somethingawful.com/sh...=196995&perpage=40&pagenumber=3#post422230856

 

[janjetina]

Infinitron, stop linking to that shitty site.

 

[anus_pounder]

Need to buy an account to read the full topic btw, though I'm sure most codexers already have one.

Spoiler

 

[FeelTheRads]

So, Jewfinitron, you're paying for SA?

 

[Infinitron]

So, Jewfinitron, you're paying for SA?

It's a one time fee, not a subscription. Paid it about 4 or 5 years ago. Their front page has provided me with years of entertainment, so I figured they deserved the money. Up until recently, I rarely even read their forums, and I've never posted there.

 

[Zed]

Brother None makes a good point about feedback and discussion around the two types of systems. But I would say that's pretty much the one thing they really got out of this. "PR", ehhh... sure, exposure, but not exactly anything sales increasing.

I think they'll either end up with either a phase-ish compromise, or a less alienating type of Turn-Based: imagine ToEE without the shitty pop-up menus and faster movement/turns. In any case, I expect them to stress "combat is not really necessarily a super-duper big part of Torment" to calm some titties.

 

[evdk]

"Phase-ish compromise" would piss off everyone instead of working as a concillatory measure as you suggest.

 

[Zed]

"Phase-ish compromise" would piss off everyone instead of working as a concillatory measure as you suggest.

I suggested the conciliation would be in addition to either scenario. I believe a compromise would piss off many people too.

 

[tuluse]

They've been pretty adamant that they would pick one and go with it instead of going with some terrible compromise no one likes.

No compromise even in the face of armageddon smudboy

 

[Bilgefar]

Had this to say about his first video. Really, really disappointed with this guy because I liked listening to him tear Bioshock Infinite's narrative a new one. But it seams he's not nearly as well versed when it comes to gameplay. And from my experience and what some of you have to say, his strategy for when he's losing an argument is to stop responding and make a new video fellating his own arguments that have already been dismantled.

Wait...didn't this guy argue that Fallout 3 was a great game? So making a sequel to a TB isometric game and changing it to first person real time is awesome, but making a spiritual successor to an RTwP isometric game, keeping it isometric but changing the combat to TB is changing the game play too much from the original?

 

[Grunker]

BUT FALLOUT 3 ISN'T RELEVANT DON'T YOU SEE

 

[Ninjerk]

YOU SEE, SPIRITUAL SUCCESSOR MUST COPY THE PREVIOUS GAME EXACTLY, BUT A SEQUEL CAN BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AND UNRELATED MECHANICALLY

 

[cherry blossom]

I haven't been keeping up with this so, TB won, right?