Tyranny + Bastard's Wound Expansion Thread

[Mozg]

Why don't more cooldown games do the Mass Effect 2 thing and put all their powers on a universal cooldown, so that the decision to use whateverball or cone of who cares isn't about unloading your cooldown rotation as fast as possible but about the spell you need to cast right now?

 

[Lhynn]

Why don't more cooldown games do the Mass Effect 2 thing and put all their powers on a universal cooldown, so that the decision to use whateverball or cone of who cares isn't about unloading your cooldown rotation as fast as possible but about the spell you need to cast right now?

Because at the end of the day you end up just staring at the screen until the cooldown is ready, you cant react to shit, you can only at when you are allowed. In ME2 worked because it could fall back on the shooting, which was decent.

 

[Commissar Draco]

Weirdly enough, I blame the Germanics.

Only Gothics (did not played shit RT combat) and River of Times (Fist game shit, second good the DLC being ) were made by Germans the rest of games were made by Slav Countries Companies. And Don't agree btw its good to play the game which doesn't insult the brain. Just stop watching the Joo controlled Medias and spend some time saved learning what is difference between long and bastard sword or why chain mail is such thing :patriot:.

 

[Fairfax]

It's their execution that needs work (encounter design).

You really think better encounter design would suddenly make Tyranny's combat good? And how could they even do that with so few enemy types and a combat system where positioning barely matters? Tyranny's problems go much deeper than encounter design.

Wouldn't that make sense as a fluid difficulty system? easy fights end up giving you less xp/progression while harder fights yield better returns, sure you can game the system but that is completely your choice and i feel its better that its up to player to decide.

Handicapping players because they're efficient is not good design. It's the dumbest, laziest and most insulting form of level scaling I've ever seen. It also beats the game's purpose, which is to entertain its players. Instead of rewarding players for learning the game's mechanics and making good decisions, it rewards players for dragging encounters as long as possible. The optimal way to play is to do bad enough that the damage output will only end the encounter moments before the party is at risk of being wiped. How's that good design?

 

[Lhynn]

Who is defending combat system? But PS:T's combat is not better.

Nonsense, we saw it better executed at other infinity games. Its definitely better, even if PS:T did it poorly.

It's their execution that needs work (encounter design).

Nope, theyve tried fixing this for over a year, its still the same piece of garbage as it was during PoEs beta.

Patches will prob address some short-comings here, and in skill/talent balance.

Cant be done, already said it back when PoE got released, the system is royally fucked and flawed at the core. 21 months of constant patches and its still the same crap. No system deserves that much time to turn into "good", and this one cant even be said to have improved any. Just to flush it and come up with something better.

Also, Cooldowns > rest-spam Vancian.

Nope, vancian at the very least provided you with options, in tranny you just wait on the cooldowns of the exact same skills you spam on every fight. Also you can rest spam on tranny if you so desire.

Vancian is superior with strict rest restrictions

Its superior even without it, theres no resource managment in tranny other than time. that is all you manage in a fight, everything else is p. much unlimited, just tied to a cooldown.

The IEs rely on the player self-imposing restrictions, which is weak.

Not really, IE games had a yuge skill ceiling, its just that most of us reached it and then kept playing, therefore restrictions became the norm because we got so good at it, and we got so good at it because its hella fun to play it and because it allows us to be that good.
In tranny theres no skill involved beyond the extremely weak character building. Ive yet to feel any satisfaction for beating anything.

 

[undecaf]

so... RtWP combat turns out to be shit. Big surprise that.

 

[Lilura]

So PS:T's combat is better than Tyranny's because BG2 showed what IE encounter design was capable of. Laughable, right thar.

Never say never. Tyranny hasn't received a system overhaul or DLC at this stage and plenty of ppl are still playing/replaying RELEASE version and enjoying the fuck out of it, despite its shortcomings and bugs. I think it's safe to say this game has passed its initial test, wouldn't you?

Vancian as ineptly employed in IE RPGs only provided the player with the option of facerolling. And self-imposed rest and itemization restrictions are not the norm, never have been. Fucking player doing the DM/designer job, what a joke.

Framework for high "skill" ceiling is offered in Tyranny, too. Give it time, stop being a negative nancy etc.

 

[Fairfax]

IE games had better combat because of how they rewarded players in different ways at once:

• XP. It allows you to improve your stats and abilities, which affect the players's tools in and out of combat. Since players should be expected gain knowledge and improve over time, they should be rewarded with better and/or improved tools.
• The combat mechanics and character building had a ton of customization and being "broken" in terms of balance was part of the charm. Crazy and overpowered builds were rewards for experimentation and a deeper knowledge of the game's mechanics. There's nothing bad about that, as long as it doesn't make combat pointless for the rest of the game.
• Countless enemy types, which added variety and challenge to encounter design and the game world.
• The best encounters were like puzzles. This makes success inherently rewarding, as the player's knowledge and intelligence are being put to the test, not the player's endurance. Encounter design is even important because it boosts the player's satisfaction with the rewards (XP, loot, reactivity, story progress, etc).
• Itemization. Equipments weren't just boring variations with -1.4597% recovery time. They could bring dramatic changes to combat, which added variety and more tools for the player to experiment with.
• Level design. The large areas filled with interesting loot and side-quests were also rewards.

This obviously doesn't apply to all IE games at all times, specially PS:T, but it definitely fits BG2, the best example of the bunch. Also, there are other things that can make combat more rewarding: systemic storytelling and more reactivity in quests add context and changes the world according to the outcome, and stat-based checks in dialogue make character building and leveling up matter even more. Non-Bethesda Fallout games would be good examples.

In my opinion, combat in Tyranny and PoE sucked because it felt like it was there just because it was expected, not because it was meant to be fun. Tyranny has no enemy variety, no challenge, one dungeon, less depth, smaller areas, enemy level scaling and player level scaling, which makes it the worse offender in theory, but at least it showed a lot more respect for my time.
Unlike Tyranny, PoE did provide real challenge on higher difficulty settings, but it's pointless to figure out the challenge with tedious mechanics, tons of trash mobs, boring sidequests, linear story, boring loot, bad level design, etc. It was more of an inconvenience, much like its insane loading screens.

 

[Haba]

It is simply baffling how after decades of experience, expert game designers can't create good hand crafted encounters. We are still stuck with literal MMO/H&S design with blobs of mobs with "auto aggro range". Kite enemies to a chokepoint and handle aggro!

GET FUCKING CANCER YOU RETARDED PIECES OF SHIT

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

 

[Zboj Lamignat]

Yeah, they either don't care or never could do that and just took credit for other people's jobs. Or, in some cases, think of themselves as some sort of geniuses when all they can come up with is bland, boring pos.

 

[Haplo]

oh wait yeah sun sets in the west, sun rises in the east. Yeah the sunset spire you get the third after going through the plotline for the village area, which comes later in the game, you don't get it as soon as you exit the starting area and doing the first edict thing. So it'll be awhile away unless you've got the journal entries involving visiting the chief forge master and the chief of the village.


The closed doors in the dungeon are not ones you open, they're the exit path shortcut from the end point of the quest from the entire region, the chief doesn't open them for you. Once you have a quest from your major faction NPC directing you to that area you'll go to the chief, and the chief sends you through a bunch of other areas doing a bunch of other questing shenanigans which eventually leads to you ending up on the other side of those doors. But technically you don't unlock that spire until much later in the game, unless you guess the pattern from 2/3 which is bloody hard.

It wasn't hard to guess the pattern from 2 pieces. One of the first things I did right after Act 1. Even before talking to my faction and triggering the Helm.
The hard part was actually understanding that only a part of the symbol you've freshly lit will get connected by lines and you have to keep re-lighting points which you continue to connect.
But the actual pattern I guessed on the first try.

 

[santino27]

4) If you go to Tunon first he teleports there, didn't know those two cancelled out.

Spoiler

Yep, if you go to the library first on Bleden's behalf, it auto-fails your quest to meet with Tuon.

 

[hell bovine]

Enemy types, absolutely. Encounter design? Ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Yes, bad encounter design. It really is just copy & paste. Also, someone at Obsidian loves to start combat with custscenes, which means you lose control over your characters as you watch them casually jog towards the enemy for a chat. (bonus points for ignoring stealth)

 

[Bubbles]

It wouldn't be so bad if you could still force attack non-hostile NPCs. But nooo, you gotta walk up to them and click the "attack" option in the dialogue, which is also your only option in dialogue.

 

[Lilura]

IE games had better combat because of how they rewarded players in different ways at once:

Aww, you don't wanna talk about how PS:T has better combat than Tyranny, anymore? Why is that, I wonder?

XP. It allows you to improve your stats and abilities, which affect the players's tools in and out of combat. Since players should be expected gain knowledge and improve over time, they should be rewarded with better and/or improved tools.

And Tyranny's don't? At lvlup BG2 Warriors gain a THAC0 reduction, a few HPs, +ApR once in a blue moon, and a wasteful amount of proficiency points. Thieves gain a few skill points to distribute on utility skills and an increased backstab modifier. Spellcasters gain a few spells slots and some lore. What can warrior, rogue and mage equivalent builds do when they lvlup in Tyranny? Btw, there is not a single Lore check in BG2 dialogue. There is not a single rogue skill check in BG2 dialogue. The checks on a chars physique and prowess (Str/Dex) are non-existent in BG2 dialogue. How many of these sorts of qualifiers show up in Tyranny?

The combat mechanics and character building had a ton of customization and being "broken" in terms of balance was part of the charm. Crazy and overpowered builds were rewards for experimentation and a deeper knowledge of the game's mechanics. There's nothing bad about that, as long as it doesn't make combat pointless for the rest of the game.

The Robe of Vecna allows you to get your spells off before any enemy in the game. It's available in the first area of chapter 1. Celestial Fury and Flail of Ages on-hit effects bypass STs and MR. So yeah, maybe don't put broken in inverted commas.

Countless enemy types, which added variety and challenge to encounter design and the game world.

And they all fall like leaves in autumn.

The best encounters were like puzzles. This makes success inherently rewarding, as the player's knowledge and intelligence are being put to the test, not the player's endurance. Encounter design is even important because it boosts the player's satisfaction with the rewards (XP, loot, reactivity, story progress, etc).

It's not about intelligence, it's about trial and error and foreknowledge to hit the I WIN button at key points. Also, tell me more about BG2's "reactivity".

Itemization. Equipments weren't just boring variations with -1.4597% recovery time. They could bring dramatic changes to combat, which added variety and more tools for the player to experiment with.

Tyranny has such items, too. They are just fewer in number and not as OP in their blanket immunities and cheater-properties.

Level design. The large areas filled with interesting loot and side-quests were also rewards.

Side quests don't reward the player in Tyranny?

This obviously doesn't apply to all IE games at all times, specially PS:T

Obviously not. But then, you did say PS:T had better combat than Tyranny...

Also, there are other things that can make combat more rewarding: systemic storytelling and more reactivity in quests add context and changes the world according to the outcome, and stat-based checks in dialogue make character building and leveling up matter even more. Non-Bethesda Fallout games would be good examples.

No shit, but where is that in BG2? The greatest game evah according to you and Lhynn.

 

[Bubbles]

XP. It allows you to improve your stats and abilities, which affect the players's tools in and out of combat. Since players should be expected gain knowledge and improve over time, they should be rewarded with better and/or improved tools.

And Tyranny's don't? BG2 Warriors gain a THAC0 reduction, a few HPs, +ApR once in a blue moon, and a wasteful amount of proficiency points. Thieves gain a few skill points to distribute on utility skills and an increased backstab modifier. Spellcasters gain a few spells slots and some lore. There is not a single Lore check in BG2 dialogue. There is not a single rogue skill check in BG2 dialogue. The checks on a chars physique and prowess (Str/Dex) are non-existent in BG2 dialogue. How many of these sorts of qualifiers show up in Tyranny?

I wouldn't cite Tyranny's skill checks as a positive example of rewarding character progression, since all the checks in the game are level scaled. Your primary reward for getting higher skills is getting tougher checks.

 

[RK47]

XP. It allows you to improve your stats and abilities, which affect the players's tools in and out of combat. Since players should be expected gain knowledge and improve over time, they should be rewarded with better and/or improved tools.

And Tyranny's don't? BG2 Warriors gain a THAC0 reduction, a few HPs, +ApR once in a blue moon, and a wasteful amount of proficiency points. Thieves gain a few skill points to distribute on utility skills and an increased backstab modifier. Spellcasters gain a few spells slots and some lore. There is not a single Lore check in BG2 dialogue. There is not a single rogue skill check in BG2 dialogue. The checks on a chars physique and prowess (Str/Dex) are non-existent in BG2 dialogue. How many of these sorts of qualifiers show up in Tyranny?

I wouldn't cite Tyranny's skill checks as a positive example of rewarding character progression, since all the checks in the game are level scaled. Your primary reward for getting higher skills is getting tougher checks.

Crazy if true.

 

[hell bovine]

So PS:T's combat is better than Tyranny's because BG2 showed what IE encounter design was capable of. Laughable, right thar.

Never say never. Tyranny hasn't received a system overhaul or DLC at this stage and plenty of ppl are still playing/replaying RELEASE version and enjoying the fuck out of it, despite its shortcomings and bugs. I think it's safe to say this game has passed its initial test, wouldn't you?

Vancian as ineptly employed in IE RPGs only provided the player with the option of facerolling. And self-imposed rest and itemization restrictions are not the norm, never have been. Fucking player doing the DM/designer job, what a joke.

Framework for high "skill" ceiling is offered in Tyranny, too. Give it time, stop being a negative nancy etc.

While I agree unmodded IE combat is boring (and to my extent of knowledge there are no mods for Torment), I am not sure if it even would be possible to create something similar to SCS for Tyranny. There are just too many design flaws that would need a complete overhaul. What could - and should - be fixed: improve encounter variety and design, companion AI (as it is you have the choice between the clusterfuck that are the default options and micromanaging everything yourself) and magic variety. This alone would go a long way, but I seriously doubt Obsidian is willing to put that much work into it. And that's the problem, unless modders do it, I doubt it's going to happen.

 

[Lilura]

And how long did it take SCS to come out for BG2?

I think there will be tactics mods for Tyranny that come out much earlier than they did for BG2. The game is gonna be popular enough for that, even if Obsidian don't do much more with it other than patches/DLC. It will be EZ to implement stricter rest restrictions and more emphasis on resource management, too.

 

[Obsequious Approbation]

The way you people describe the story, it sounds like a blatant Black Company homage/ripoff, with the Lady and Dominator rolled into one and the not-Taken (props for the Catcher of Souls) causing havoc. Sounds pretty sweet, actually.

 

[ilitarist]

Lilura has it right.

Defending IE combat on account of it being "charmingly broken" is laughable.

Tyranny solved many PoE combat problems. Like limiting crafting to creating new items - in PoE you fight with boring optimized equipment, in Tyranny you get some interesting equipment. As I see it, Tyranny combat is actually much closer to IE combat in bad ways. It requires you to understand some systems in the beginning otherwise you are easily killed. But later you just steamroll everything without much effort. IE game also throw puzzle-like fights on you, but those are mostly cheap bullshit requiring you to find a specific solution to a problem a la bad adventure game or bad wargame. It's not adjusting tactics, it's trying to see what specific thing designer wanted you to do. Apart from those puzzle fights IE combat is as repetitive as Tyranny, even more so with amount of thrash combat you get. But yes, IE games have many sprites for all those functionally identical monsters.

There's also much more cheese in IE, so in theory when you know the game well enough you can play it without effort, while Tyranny combat always requires busywork. Of those 2 bad solutions (cheap undeserved wins versus trivial micromanagement) there's no need to declare one of those good.

 

[hell bovine]

And how long did it take SCS to come out for BG2?

I think there will be tactics mods for Tyranny that come out much earlier than they did for BG2. The game is gonna be popular enough for that, even if Obsidian don't do much more with it other than patches/DLC. It will be EZ to implement stricter rest restrictions and more emphasis on resource management, too.

And how long did it take Ascension/Tactics/Anvil etc. to come out for BG2? It's not a simple question of game popularity, but rather of what needs to be done vs what can be done. Because SCS at its core doesn't change much about BG's original combat system in order to make battles challenging. Enforcing rest restrictions and resource management isn't going to cut it (for the same reasons it's not enough in Swordflight, to use your example).

But hey, maybe some genius modder can do it. I love the magic creation system and it would be great to have a combat system to match it. As it currently is, I just let the walking loo & Verse do whatever they want, because AI on or off, whatever orders I give them tend to get ignored once they get "engaged".

 

[Infinitron]

More reviews: http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/118150-tyranny-reviews-3.html

Eurogamer labels it as "Recommended":

In moments like these, the grim brilliance of Tyranny is revealed, and it's undoubtedly worth persisting through the game's weaker stages to experience them. The dark cousin of Pillars of Eternity may not be as polished or comprehensive as Obsidian's standout RPG. But I think, in the end, Tyranny has far more of import to say, and it'll make you listen whether you like it or not.

GameInformer gives it an 8.25/10:

Even within the limited constraint of mostly dark outcomes, Tyranny has an impressive array of potentialities to explore, and practically demands multiple playthroughs. Entirely new storylines, allies, and even visited areas might appear in a subsequent adventure, and it’s exciting to confront a new mix of betrayals and dangers. As evidenced by a gripping final act that cries out for a sequel, Tyranny puts enormous authority in the hands of its players to shape the destiny of an entire world, but also leaves those players with an unrepentantly sober warning about corruption and power.

WorthPlaying gives it a 9.0/10:

Although it's conventional in some ways, Tyranny feels fresh. The theme has been explored before in other games and genres, but not to this degree. The characters are extremely interesting, whether they're tragic or humorous. Dialogue choices are expansive, and the sheer number of permutations that can arise from your decisions give the game near-limitless replay value. Supported by solid RPG mechanics, Tyranny is a game for those who couldn't get enough of Pillars of Eternity and its ilk.

GameCrate gives it an 8.75/10:

With a rushed third act and a few frustrating quirks here and there, Tyranny falls just short of reaching the legendary heights of the games that inspired it. Obsidian has, however, once again delivered on their pedigree with an engrossing and inventive story of betrayal and tyrannical rule. This game is a must-play for fans of isometric narrative roleplaying games.

GamePressure gives it a 7.0/10:

After all is said and done Tyranny remains a proposal that will be controversial among fans of the genre. An ambitious, unique plot is being sold in a package with a lot of mediocre ideas. Delight born in the first hour is killed in the following acts, when the game begins to put too much emphasis on combat, which seems to be only a cheap filler in place of some truly interesting content. This lack of consistency is visible on many levels, which may worry when we are talking about a game coming from the veterans of the genre. Now the question remains, what lessons will Obsidian learn from this – we shall see after the release of Pillars of Eternity 2.

Made For Gaming gives it a 9/10:

I have been blown away by Tyranny, and as someone who loves Dungeons and Dragons and its various board games like Lords of Waterdeep, this game feels like it was made for someone who is into that kind of thing. I never played Baldurs Gate or Planescape Torment but I have now been convinced to go back and play them and also Obsidian’s Pillars of Eternity. This will be a game I come back to at least a few times to try out different characters and choices and see how my outcome differs from my last. Each time I revisit I know for sure that I will learn something new about the Lore and that is wonderful in a game this rich. Sure I had issues with the AI pathfinding and some of the music wasn’t as memorable as I would have liked, but that’s only because I truly adored everything else about this game. It allows you to play the character you want within the ranks of an evil empire and as someone who always found amusement and humor out of the Empire in Star Wars, this really clicked with me. I may have felt bad about some of my decisions and the game may have made me feel like a terrible person at times, but I think that was the intention.

The Digital Fix gives it an 8/10:

What remains is a game that will immediately appeal to anyone who is happy to completely immerse themselves in a world akin to Planescape: Torment and its ilk, with more prose than you’d find in a standard fantasy novel. From a gameplay perspective, if you were expecting something leaps and bounds beyond Pillars of Eternity, you’ll be disappointed. But if you enjoyed that game, it won’t matter anyway - we’d suggest that the story here is far more interesting, and the freedom to betray your masters at numerous stages of the campaign offers you the chance to forge your own destiny in a truly evil way, even if the end result may leave you feeling a little empty as the credits roll. It’s a lengthy and at times ponderous slog amounting to dozens of hours, especially if you’re a sucker for completing every area and side-quest you encounter, but Obsidian have created a world that encourages exploration and a tale worth investing in. As far as RPGs go, that’s most of the battle won.

Metro gives it a 7/10:

And although we don’t mind that the game is relatively short for a role-player, at less than 30 hours, the ending is so abrupt and unsatisfying that we can’t decide whether it counts as sequel begging or an indication that Obsidian ran out of time and money just before the end. Hopefully it’s not the latter because we do want to see a follow-up, something that can shave off the rough edges and become the best at being bad.

NZGamer gives it a 9.0/10:

Tyranny is a tale about evil, but not as you know it. It sidesteps the predictable tropes of grayscale morality by shifting the spectrum entirely. The first few hours of the game are spent in disgust, but by the end you’ll become numb to your actions; evil becomes banal, terror and violence normalized. You’re not a moustachioed villain, as you so often are in games with morality meters – you’re a bureaucrat. And it’s terrifying.

Press Play Media gives it an 8.4/10:

Tyranny is a great way to spend countless hours navigating the intricate political and social dynamics of the world Terratus, playing around with classic RPG elements within a new context. If you were a fan of Obsidian’s games already, then don’t hesitate. If you want an RPG that’s different from the norm, then by all means check out Tyranny. It may not blow anyone away visually – being on par with Pillars of Eternity which is now 18 months old – but its RPG foundations are more than solid and there’s a fresh layer of paint that allows us to look at the genre through different eyes once more.

And Killa Penguin doesn't score it:

When the game was first introduced and I was going through the screenshots, my first thought was “wow, this looks like Lionheart: Legacy of the Crusader.” I hadn’t played Lionheart back then, mind you, so the comparison was based solely on screenshots of the two, but I went in to this game expecting something bland-looking. Instead, I got something unexpectedly vibrant. The opening screens explaining the game’s lore are all incredibly colorful (and these types of screens pop up a few more times throughout the story as you make progress), and even the more brownish-gray areas are often contrasted by various splashes of color. The areas that are bland and underwhelming are actually in the minority here, and I was really impressed by the art as a whole. They even put in different stances for character portraits during conversations depending on what’s happening, which is kind of a pointless feature, but one of those pointless features that makes you appreciate how much effort went into parts of the game.

Metacritic: 82

 

[J_C]

More reviews: http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/118150-tyranny-reviews-3.html

Metacritic: 82

It seems it is a complete flop.

 

[ilitarist]

More reviews: http://www.gamebanshee.com/news/118150-tyranny-reviews-3.html

Metacritic: 82

It seems it is a complete flop.

It looks like a flop on sales, not with critics. But even with some critics I wonder why is the score so low. All the reviews praise it but it looks like they just can't give a high score to a semi-2D RPG without universal appeal.