Preview Tyranny GDC 2016 Previews

[MRY]

Cazzeris To be clear, I don't know enough of their team structures to argue about the facts here. So you may be right. It would strike me as unusual, and unfortunate, if your description is correct and his name were nevertheless put first in the credits on each of those categories. But perhaps Wikipedia does not reflect the actual ordering of credits. There's no sense in my arguing about it further because I don't know the facts as well as you do.

 

[Telengard]

Shadowrun was done by a very small team, they managed to cram a party into it, lots of text, turned based combat and great visuals, while selling almost a million copies on steam alone. True that the sequels didnt sell as well, but still on the budget they had, and it being their first rpg, i very much consider it a greater success story than a a developer who costs 1 million a month to run churning out a mediocre baldurs gate re-imagining.

I couldn’t possibly think in a worst example to bring in this discussion. Shadowrun games suffer from the very same problems of PoE. They satisfy some design bullet points (isometric, turn-based, etc.), but are shallow and super easy. They have no cRPG “meat” in them. I want more games like AoD, Underrail and Serpent in the Staglands. Harebrained Schemes is a shovelware factory designed to suck money from deluded grognards desperate for cRPGs.

You forgot you're on Storyfadexia. The fact that the Shadowrun series uses a 2AP system where all the guns are balanced, but even then the enemy can't be allowed to have 2AP - that matters not. The fact that they had the Biowarian epic super-chosen-one hero writing, that is what matters. That is all that matters.

And therein lies Obsidian's true failure in their copy-blending of Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale Planescape. They forgot what truly matters to the core RPG audience. Drow, Drizzt, D&D, and drippy dialogue. And in that order.

 

[Roguey]

I made the point about shadowrun because it was party based and done by a small team, on a very small budget for what they managed to actually release.

Roughly half the Codex refers to HBS's Shadowrun as shitty mobile games. Other than personal preference, that's hardly better than Obsidian and inXile.

 

[Lurker King]

I couldn’t possibly think in a worst example to bring in this discussion. Shadowrun games suffer from the very same problems of PoE. They satisfy some design bullet points (isometric, turn-based, etc.), but are shallow and super easy. They have no cRPG “meat” in them. I want more games like AoD, Underrail and Serpent in the Staglands. Harebrained Schemes is a shovelware factory designed to suck money from deluded grognards desperate for cRPGs.

I made the point about shadowrun because it was party based and done by a small team, on a very small budget for what they managed to actually release.

Ok, but we want smaller teams to design better cRPGs and be successful at it, while Harebrained made good money in part because they made causal-friendly cRPGs. It is a bad example.

 

[Lurker King]

I made the point about shadowrun because it was party based and done by a small team, on a very small budget for what they managed to actually release.

Roughly half the Codex refers to HBS's Shadowrun as shitty mobile games. Other than personal preference, that's hardly better than Obsidian and inXile.

Yet, they still give large amounts of money in fundraiser for each new Shadowshit.

 

[Roguey]

Yet, they still give large amounts of money in fundraiser for each new Shadowshit.

That would be the other half.

 

[Kalin]

It's gonna be shit.

 

[orcinator]

The fact that they had the Biowarian epic super-chosen-one hero writing

What? It's more like it's the opposite, the PC is barely a character in the SR games. I don't like the writing and do think it's Biowarian in some aspects but it's not Biowarian in a way where you're playing anyone of importance.

 

[Volrath]

Imagine PoE with its production values but founded as well on solid and fun core mechanics.

But that's the entire root of the problem right there. They are fun and solid core mechanics according to Sawyer himself.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Imagine PoE with its production values but founded as well on solid and fun core mechanics.

But that's the entire root of the problem right there...Sawyer himself.

 

[Roguey]

I don't like the writing and do think it's Biowarian in some aspects but it's not Biowarian in a way where you're playing anyone of importance.

Chosen one is a stretch but you are saving the city/world in all the main campaigns, which is not very Shadowrun-like.

Shadows of Hong Kong is the only one that feels like a proper Shadowrun conflict.

 

[ArchAngel]

I don't like the writing and do think it's Biowarian in some aspects but it's not Biowarian in a way where you're playing anyone of importance.

Chosen one is a stretch but you are saving the city/world in all the main campaigns, which is not very Shadowrun-like.

Shadows of Hong Kong is the only one that feels like a proper Shadowrun conflict.

That is very different than being destined to do it like in Bioware games. In SRR it feels like you stumble on that big problem and seeing how nobody else will do anything about it, you decide to do something about it.

That is a good and acceptable way to do "save the world" story

 

[Doktor Best]

I don't like the writing and do think it's Biowarian in some aspects but it's not Biowarian in a way where you're playing anyone of importance.

Chosen one is a stretch but you are saving the city/world in all the main campaigns, which is not very Shadowrun-like.

Shadows of Hong Kong is the only one that feels like a proper Shadowrun conflict.

That is very different than being destined to do it like in Bioware games. In SRR it feels like you stumble on that big problem and seeing how nobody else will do anything about it, you decide to do something about it.

That is a good and acceptable way to do "save the world" story

Agreed.

A "save the world" story does not automatically have a "chosen one" as protagonist. In most cases they do but not always. Its the "there is an old old prophecy that tells you that you are super important and super super mighty, now go and kill this evil dude who keeps telling everybody that hes been waiting for you" shit that triggers me. I dont mind saving the world if the game gives me plausible reason why people are helping me and why i am helping those people and doesnt pull of this super lazy prophecy shit.

 

[Irenaeus III]

"there is an old old prophecy that tells you that you are super important and super super mighty, now go and kill this evil dude who keeps telling everybody that hes been waiting for you"

It is written: Only Link can defeat Ganon

 

[Excidium II]

I don't like the writing and do think it's Biowarian in some aspects but it's not Biowarian in a way where you're playing anyone of importance.

Chosen one is a stretch but you are saving the city/world in all the main campaigns, which is not very Shadowrun-like.

Shadows of Hong Kong is the only one that feels like a proper Shadowrun conflict.

That is very different than being destined to do it like in Bioware games. In SRR it feels like you stumble on that big problem and seeing how nobody else will do anything about it, you decide to do something about it.

That is a good and acceptable way to do "save the world" story

Agreed.

A "save the world" story does not automatically have a "chosen one" as protagonist. In most cases they do but not always. Its the "there is an old old prophecy that tells you that you are super important and super super mighty, now go and kill this evil dude who keeps telling everybody that hes been waiting for you" shit that triggers me. I dont mind saving the world if the game gives me plausible reason why people are helping me and why i am helping those people and doesnt pull of this super lazy prophecy shit.

It doesn't matter if there's a prophecy or not, if you are forced to do it anyway for no other reason besides the plot demanding it.

SRHK escapes somewhat because you can at least do it all for personal gain.

 

[prodigydancer]

The fact that the Shadowrun series uses a 2AP system where all the guns are balanced...

...but ARs are slightly more balanced than everything else.

but even then the enemy can't be allowed to have 2AP - that matters not.

If enemies used all their AP for shooting Dragonfall would be unplayable on highest difficulty because cover doesn't do shit against their huge accuracy bonuses. So they'd probably have to reduce the amount of enemies and then people would complain that there are no big fights.

 

[Prime Junta]

but even then the enemy can't be allowed to have 2AP - that matters not.

If enemies used all their AP for shooting Dragonfall would be unplayable on highest difficulty because cover doesn't do shit against their huge accuracy bonuses. So they'd probably have to reduce the amount of enemies and then people would complain that there are no big fights.

If they made a change like this, then of course other numbers and encounters would have to be rebalanced as well. That can be tuned to any desired level of difficulty, as can the current setup with the only-one-attack limitation. Duh.

Obviously different rules for players than for enemies (different number of attacks) just feels wrong -- artificial, contrived. Many of us would prefer that the balancing is hidden in the less obvious numbers -- accuracy, damage, defences.

 

[Lurker King]

Imagine PoE with its production values but founded as well on solid and fun core mechanics.

But that's the entire root of the problem right there. They are fun and solid core mechanics according to Sawyer himself.

They are fun and solid core mechanics according to popamoles and fanatics.

 

[Excidium II]

SRR games would have good mechanics if XCOM was never made.

 

[Tigranes]

but even then the enemy can't be allowed to have 2AP - that matters not.

If enemies used all their AP for shooting Dragonfall would be unplayable on highest difficulty because cover doesn't do shit against their huge accuracy bonuses. So they'd probably have to reduce the amount of enemies and then people would complain that there are no big fights.

If they made a change like this, then of course other numbers and encounters would have to be rebalanced as well. That can be tuned to any desired level of difficulty, as can the current setup with the only-one-attack limitation. Duh.

Obviously different rules for players than for enemies (different number of attacks) just feels wrong -- artificial, contrived. Many of us would prefer that the balancing is hidden in the less obvious numbers -- accuracy, damage, defences.

In any case, difficulty was a joke in SR and still a cakewalk in Dragonfall in large parts because your guys are all Neo.

 

[prodigydancer]

If they made a change like this, then of course other numbers and encounters would have to be rebalanced as well.

Most probably they vastly overestimated what they could achieve with their initial budget. SRR was, I imagine, not exactly what they envisioned during pre-production. Backers were a bit underwhelmed as well, so they had to make Dragonfall to appease their fans and secure funding for SR:HK. And they mostly did what people were asking them to do. Do you remember all those posts like "why don't hirelings in SRR have any personality?" Writers and programmers may be different people but they're paid out of the same money pool, and that's why better AI scripts and "biowarian" companions are in direct competiton. We all know what usually wins in the end.

This being said, I hear you and of course I agree. Still, nobody cares about mechanics because mechanics don't sell. Or at least the consensus within the industry is that they don't sell.

 

[Excidium II]

If they made a change like this, then of course other numbers and encounters would have to be rebalanced as well.

Most probably they vastly overestimated what they could achieve with their initial budget. SRR was, I imagine, not exactly what they envisioned during pre-production. Backers were a bit underwhelmed as well, so they had to make Dragonfall to appease their fans and secure funding for SR:HK. And they mostly did what people were asking them to do. Do you remember all those posts like "why don't hirelings in SRR have any personality?" Writers and programmers may be different people but they're paid out of the same money pool, and that's why better AI scripts and "biowarian" companions are in direct competitor. We all know what usually wins in the end.

This being said, I hear you and of course I agree. Still, nobody cares about mechanics because mechanics don't sell. Or at least the consensus within the industry is that they don't sell.

SRR suffered from a lot of the diminutive budget going towards noob-friendly campaign editor.

 

[Lurker King]

Yet, they still give large amounts of money in fundraiser for each new Shadowshit.

That would be the other half.

You know, I can’t shake the impression that these people are promoting the game due to some sort of bizarre cRPG activism. They seem to believe that Harebrained Schemes must be promoted and backed because they are willing to develop isometric turn-based cRPGs, and this is a noble goal. What they don’t understand is that instead of promoting a noble goal they are promoting popamole turn based cRPGs, and that is a big difference.

 

[prodigydancer]

a cakewalk in Dragonfall

Yeah, especially mid-game in DFDC: 4v10, enemies spam grenades and there isn't enough cover to keep everyone spread out.

 

[Prime Junta]

but even then the enemy can't be allowed to have 2AP - that matters not.

If enemies used all their AP for shooting Dragonfall would be unplayable on highest difficulty because cover doesn't do shit against their huge accuracy bonuses. So they'd probably have to reduce the amount of enemies and then people would complain that there are no big fights.

If they made a change like this, then of course other numbers and encounters would have to be rebalanced as well. That can be tuned to any desired level of difficulty, as can the current setup with the only-one-attack limitation. Duh.

Obviously different rules for players than for enemies (different number of attacks) just feels wrong -- artificial, contrived. Many of us would prefer that the balancing is hidden in the less obvious numbers -- accuracy, damage, defences.

In any case, difficulty was a joke in SR and still a cakewalk in Dragonfall in large parts because your guys are all Neo.

It wouldn't have been if they had doubled enemy damage per attack.

I don't understand their decisions either: the combat would've been more intense with the "only one attack" limitation removed, and the numbers tuned to wherever they need to be.

The difficulty however is the way it is because that's the way they wanted to tune it; they could've made it however hard or easy they want by adjusting enemy accuracy, damage, armour, and dodge without touching number of attacks. The same would still be true if they had the same number of attacks on both sides.