World of Darkness Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines 2 from Hardsuit Labs

[Fedora Master]

"The game is filthy" because that's the about the intellectual reach the average woman has. Muh vagina!

 

[Storyfag]

Cara and Brian want to have Native American main characters in the dlc but want approval from the Duwamish that live in Seattle first. Some of the main story revolves around indigenous stuff in some way or Seattle's history with indigenous stuff!​

They have not asked us Slavs for permission to culturally appropriate the vampires of our folklore.

 

[Cael]

That's a class action suit waiting to happen right there, fren...

 

[jackofshadows]

The game is really lgbtq+ because Seattle is really lgbtq+

Fascinating. And here I thought alphabet-people is kinda recent thing about which vampires doesn't give a slightest fuck.

 

[Roguey]

There's twice or three times as many characters in this game as Bloodlines 1 and they kind of think the amount of character's will be way impressive for an rpg

Brian made this mistake with Dead State; too many characters and his writing becomes really bland and terrible. I recall Avellone saying that one of the things Alpha Protocol did right was keep the cast of characters small.

Edit: here we go

Chris Avellone: Class, my lecture and/or discussion is entitled the "kitchen sink theory of game design and gamer perception," and what I learned way back when at Black Isle (groans from class, followed by "not BIS again").

The lesson is this: you can achieve an equally compelling and I'd argue, more compelling story with fewer, deeper characters than a thousand shallow ones.

That, however, is only one of the points I learned and applied concerning a title I worked on back at Obsidian Entertainment before they rose to power and took control of the Western Seaboard (hushed fear from class).

The first point is making fewer characters that are deeper and more reactive creates a more quality experience. We didn't have 40 companions in Torment, we had less than expected for similar titles, and I worried about that decision at the time. In the end, the choice was the right one. It's not just that, though.

Way back in 2010, once upon a time at an IGDA forum panel on story, I was asked what makes a good game story. I argued that a good game story can be achieved with a lot of reactivity, however you choose to implement it. If the story has the player's actions in the game at the forefront, the positive feedback loop is much stronger than a passive story the player is subjected to. I firmly believe that. That was the goal in Alpha Protocol 1, and it delivered, as evidenced by the recent releases of Alpha Protocol 12, Alpha Protocol: Hidden Agenda: International Politics Simulator, and Alpha Protocol: Global Thermonuclear War.

The second point I want to make is something that's largely either given the finger ("what's that," someone whispers, "is that an old symbol of disrespect in the 21st century?"), viewed negatively, or else given a dismissive shrug by the gaming community when you explain why you haven't included a feature in the game.

For example, you may be tempted to ask why don't you include a thousand deep interactive characters? We're paying for this shit, after all, it's the least you can do.

So right you are, you are paying for a quality experience... you in the back, shut up for a second or I'll activate the educational restraint collar... in a blue sky world (back when the skies were blue), having thousands of characters in a game with thousands of ways to interact seems ideal. Great.

The realities of game production, however, give you bookends and force yourself to ask how can you develop the same emotional reward without a ten year development cycle and a two year testing cycle? The unfortunate reality is you have X years, X languages, X amount for voice acting, and X people to make it happen. Your goal is to create a compelling story. Again, my answer is to add reactivity.

So in Alpha Protocol we achieved this by reducing the cast, not only because it complimented the genre (the central cast list in a Bond, Bourne, or Bauer production isn't large - although in 24, the emotional switchbacks among the cast are very high) but because it would create a better story.

Class dismissed.

The game is really lgbtq+ because Seattle is really lgbtq+

Fascinating. And here I thought alphabet-people is kinda recent thing about which vampires doesn't give a slightest fuck.

All the elders are getting slaughtered in the middle east, nothing but relatively young vampires around.

 

[Storyfag]

The game is really lgbtq+ because Seattle is really lgbtq+

Fascinating. And here I thought alphabet-people is kinda recent thing about which vampires doesn't give a slightest fuck.

All the elders are getting slaughtered in the middle east, nothing but relatively young vampires around.

"Relatively young" in this case would mean individuals who remember a world without electricity. Case in point Lou Graham/Grand who is very much around.

As a sidenote, this whole plot point resulting in the removal of so many interesting characters from the setting is not the best thought out move, I think. But oh well, yahr null everywhere I guess.

 

[Sailor Woedica]

The game is really lgbtq+ because Seattle is really lgbtq+

Fascinating. And here I thought alphabet-people is kinda recent thing about which vampires doesn't give a slightest fuck.

It’s way more fascinating how you jump to conclusions just to be upset. If you actually listened to the interview you would know that Cara and Brian already say that most old vampires don’t care about sexuality stuff because they’re way more interested in blood and power.

 

[Sardine Dev Poster]

There's twice or three times as many characters in this game as Bloodlines 1 and they kind of think the amount of character's will be way impressive for an rpg

Brian made this mistake with Dead State; too many characters and his writing becomes really bland and terrible. I recall Avellone saying that one of the things Alpha Protocol did right was keep the cast of characters small.

Edit: here we go

Chris Avellone: Class, my lecture and/or discussion is entitled the "kitchen sink theory of game design and gamer perception," and what I learned way back when at Black Isle (groans from class, followed by "not BIS again").

The lesson is this: you can achieve an equally compelling and I'd argue, more compelling story with fewer, deeper characters than a thousand shallow ones.

That, however, is only one of the points I learned and applied concerning a title I worked on back at Obsidian Entertainment before they rose to power and took control of the Western Seaboard (hushed fear from class).

The first point is making fewer characters that are deeper and more reactive creates a more quality experience. We didn't have 40 companions in Torment, we had less than expected for similar titles, and I worried about that decision at the time. In the end, the choice was the right one. It's not just that, though.

Way back in 2010, once upon a time at an IGDA forum panel on story, I was asked what makes a good game story. I argued that a good game story can be achieved with a lot of reactivity, however you choose to implement it. If the story has the player's actions in the game at the forefront, the positive feedback loop is much stronger than a passive story the player is subjected to. I firmly believe that. That was the goal in Alpha Protocol 1, and it delivered, as evidenced by the recent releases of Alpha Protocol 12, Alpha Protocol: Hidden Agenda: International Politics Simulator, and Alpha Protocol: Global Thermonuclear War.

The second point I want to make is something that's largely either given the finger ("what's that," someone whispers, "is that an old symbol of disrespect in the 21st century?"), viewed negatively, or else given a dismissive shrug by the gaming community when you explain why you haven't included a feature in the game.

For example, you may be tempted to ask why don't you include a thousand deep interactive characters? We're paying for this shit, after all, it's the least you can do.

So right you are, you are paying for a quality experience... you in the back, shut up for a second or I'll activate the educational restraint collar... in a blue sky world (back when the skies were blue), having thousands of characters in a game with thousands of ways to interact seems ideal. Great.

The realities of game production, however, give you bookends and force yourself to ask how can you develop the same emotional reward without a ten year development cycle and a two year testing cycle? The unfortunate reality is you have X years, X languages, X amount for voice acting, and X people to make it happen. Your goal is to create a compelling story. Again, my answer is to add reactivity.

So in Alpha Protocol we achieved this by reducing the cast, not only because it complimented the genre (the central cast list in a Bond, Bourne, or Bauer production isn't large - although in 24, the emotional switchbacks among the cast are very high) but because it would create a better story.

Class dismissed.

The game is really lgbtq+ because Seattle is really lgbtq+

Fascinating. And here I thought alphabet-people is kinda recent thing about which vampires doesn't give a slightest fuck.

All the elders are getting slaughtered in the middle east, nothing but relatively young vampires around.

Dead State's problem was never that it had too many characters, man. Dead State's problem was that the gameplay never evolved beyond scavenging in post apocalyptic Texas with a slow ass combat system that took ages to reach your turn, the Torque engine literally made in some guy's garage, the bugs that made events repeat, the repetitive music that never changes regardless of what your current game state is, the general un-fun nature of upgrading facilities in home base, and the overall lack of things to do in the game that just resulted in a purgotory-like state of never ending repetition that caused most people to call the game done midway.

The writing was fantastic, and I highly doubt Annie wrote for more than any of the characters who were just female wish-fulfillment sex fantasies, so my hat goes off to Mitsoda for surprising me.

The problem with these seemingly decent to good-tier old-school narrative designers, i.e. Mitsoda, Avellone, is that they're intensely autistic sperglords or beta males that #standwithwomen.

Avellone might be a legendary writer, but you can't trust him to keep his fucking mouth shut to the twitter mob, nor generally be a likable person on the dev team that anybody wants to "agree to disagree" with, so to speak. Mitsoda's like the Bernie Sanders of the industry. He just has to keep letting other people go first with their contributions, especially da poz.

 

[HansDampf]

Then why bring it up?

 

[Sailor Woedica]

Because the young vampires and humans in the game still care about this stuff. And being inclusive is cool

 

[Roguey]

Dead State's problem was never that it had too many characters, man. Dead State's problem was that the gameplay never evolved beyond scavenging in post apocalyptic Texas with a slow ass combat system that took ages to reach your turn, the Torque engine literally made in some guy's garage, the bugs that made events repeat, the repetitive music that never changes regardless of what your current game state is, the general un-fun nature of upgrading facilities in home base, and the overall lack of things to do in the game that just resulted in a purgotory-like state of never ending repetition that caused most people to call the game done midway.

The writing was fantastic, and I highly doubt Annie wrote for more than any of the characters who were just female wish-fulfillment sex fantasies, so my hat goes off to Mitsoda for surprising me.

When I stopped playing Dead State, I had found 13 allies and the only one I can remember is Dwight Schrute. It's pretty bad when the only memorable dialogue from the entire game is from a rip-off of a sitcom character.

 

[Semiurge]

"The game is filthy" because that's the about the intellectual reach the average woman has. Muh vagina!

That comment could well be marketing lingo, but I know what you mean. People who's reactions to fangless (which this game will be) artistic expression is "It's filthy" or "It's disgusting" have no business being in the entertainment business, or dealing with matters of adult nature. Their purpose is different, they need only gawk at the creations of better men, and market those with their indignation. Their deeper involvement is a disservice.

 

[santino27]

"The game is filthy" because that's the about the intellectual reach the average woman has. Muh vagina!

That comment could well be marketing lingo, but I know what you mean. People who's reactions to fangless (which this game will be) artistic expression is "It's filthy" or "It's disgusting" have no business being in the entertainment business, or dealing with matters of adult nature. Their purpose is different, they need only gawk at the creations of better men, and market those with their indignation. Their deeper involvement is a disservice.

It was said as marketing. Based on her old column on RPS, Cara's a big fan of filthy, as long as it's her kind of filth.

 

[compvet24]

Because the young vampires and humans in the game still care about this stuff. And being inclusive is cool

Ah yes, when I get turned into a vampire faced with the eternal concepts of immortality, ground-breaking supernatural abilities and other-worldly beings that revolutionize my world view and my entire understanding of what the world is, I will definitely still be worried about whether a man can stick his benis into another mans bunghole.

 

[Nano]

Because the young vampires and humans in the game still care about this stuff. And being inclusive is cool

Ah yes, when I get turned into a vampire faced with the eternal concepts of immortality, ground-breaking supernatural abilities and other-worldly beings that revolutionize my world view and my entire understanding of what the world is, I will definitely still be worried about whether a man can stick his benis into another mans bunghole.

Being a vampire in the WoD isn't all fun and games where you're joyriding through unlife, eating people because you can. Politics are still a thing for them. Or did you not notice all the faction drama in Bloodlines 1?

 

[HansDampf]

Iirc, politics and faction drama in Bloodlines 1 were about power, the masquerade, and how to govern vampire society, not what kind of fetishes are acceptable.

 

[Crispy]

I got that beat:

Spoiler

 

[fantadomat]

I got that beat:

Spoiler

 

[Harthwain]

Because the young vampires and humans in the game still care about this stuff. And being inclusive is cool

Bullshit. I am not interested in people's sexuality whatsoever. Not unless I want to have sex with someone. Outside of that you can identify yourself however you see fit, even as a Borg, because that's how much I care "about this stuff". People who "care about this stuff" are just as suspicious as people who concern themselves with who goes to bed with whom or what kind of sex they like when they're together.

Ah yes, when I get turned into a vampire faced with the eternal concepts of immortality, ground-breaking supernatural abilities and other-worldly beings that revolutionize my world view and my entire understanding of what the world is, I will definitely still be worried about whether a man can stick his benis into another mans bunghole.

You hit nail on the head there. This is exactly why I liked Redemption so much. Bloodlines 2 seems to try so hard to "be inclusive, because it's cool" that it misses the stuff that makes the whole vampire theme actually interesting in the first place. Or for some reason they aren't talking about it as much, but I am not an optimist here.

 

[Saerain]

Because the young vampires and humans in the game still care about this stuff. And being inclusive is cool

Ah yes, when I get turned into a vampire faced with the eternal concepts of immortality, ground-breaking supernatural abilities and other-worldly beings that revolutionize my world view and my entire understanding of what the world is, I will definitely still be worried about whether a man can stick his benis into another mans bunghole.

Being a vampire in the WoD isn't all fun and games where you're joyriding through unlife, eating people because you can. Politics are still a thing for them. Or did you not notice all the faction drama in Bloodlines 1?

This... this doesn't seem like a disagreement, yet it's framed like one.

 

[Nano]

This might not be blindingly obvious to some of you because of your straightness, but sexuality is a political matter.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

This might not be blindingly obvious to some of you because of your straightness, but sexuality is a political matter.

I do not wish to scare you, chaver, yet it seems that you are coming down with a case of philosophical idealism.

 

[compvet24]

I feel like the point is not coming across at all. Kine politics are not relevant to a vampiric being that has ascended humanity. You have much much more pressing issues than what the kine are doing, why would you care at all. It is explicitly mentioned in Bloodlines 1 that sexuality is not a concern of a vampire ('don't imagine Vesuvius would get a rise out of you, considering what you are').
Anyway why would it be a concern? Why would you still be tied to such worthless things, when you are dealing and processing this whole new world that has come before you. There are vampire power struggles, factions you must align with and attempting to avoid being killed while masquerading from the mass populace. Where on that ladder of priorities would human sexuality come into play? I can only imagine kine politics or the progressive flavor of the month would only be relevant to the kindred society if it indicated the possibility of the masquerade being breached.

But it will be all in Bloodlines 2 because the game is a sock-puppet, and its puppeteers are the ones who want to inject modern-day issues into a world where none of that would be relevant.

 

[Ol' Willy]

Iirc, politics and faction drama in Bloodlines 1 were about power, the masquerade, and how to govern vampire society, not what kind of fetishes are acceptable.

To be honest, *political* side of Bloodlines is kinda goofy.

Camarilla: we are the guardians of order! Thus, clown who want to diablerize the antediluvian is promoted to Prince of entire LA.
Anarchs: fuck Camarilla! We will fight for our freedom! Thus, those guys keep sitting at their shitty bar and whining.
Sabbat: we want to stop the tyranny of Elder ones! Thus, they enlist the most despicable thugs and employ Tzimisce with their unsound methods.
Chinks: we want to take hold in LA. Thus, they buy in all the hoax with the sarcophagus.

The game is basically about Jack swinging all the factions around his rod all laughing while at it.

 

[Silverfish]

This might not be blindingly obvious to some of you because of your straightness, but sexuality is a political matter.

I'm sorry you were molested.