.

[sigard]

.

 

[BING XI LAO]

Me after 30 mins looking at AoD's camera:

 

[Falksi]

Both had potential. Both missed the mark. Both need a proper sequel.

 

[PorkaMorka]

Which is worse, intentionally making your graphics look pixelated for no apparent reason, or using generic looking low poly 3d with an annoying camera?

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

I detect bait.

 

[Darth Roxor]

should have called it 'age in decadence' to keep the title consistent

 

[Atlet]

Serpent in Slavlands is a rpg

Age of Decadence is a visual novel

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

ELEX!

Spoiler

Am I doing it right?

 

[V_K]

AoD has better combat and dialogs, SitS has more creative non-combat mechanics (but not much use for them). Exploration and level design is pretty terrible in both. AoD bores you to death by constantly killing you with dialog checks, forcing you to reload and metagame. SitS bores you to death by forcing you to kite enemies to take them out one by one.
Overall, as games both were a disappointment, but AoD was at least fun to read after using CheatEngine in character creation.

 

[wishbonetail]

Which is worse, intentionally making your graphics look pixelated for no apparent reason, or using generic looking low poly 3d with an annoying camera?

Couldn't help the feeling it would be much better for AoD to have pretty background pictures with text instead of its unwieldy 3d. It wouldn's have lost anything in terms of game mechanics.
Guess, pixelation in indies serves the purpose of creating immersion. The same why big games use blur, chromatic aberration, film noise effect, whatnot. With time our brain just fills the gaps to formulate realistic visuals. Or, maybe, it's just senseless oldfaggotry.

 

[vazha]

One is a pixelturd and the other is not. With everything else being equal (not the case, AoD has more things going for it), that alone would be enough to decide against it.

 

[Lord_Potato]

The worldbuiding in both games is very interesting.

The presentation - limited by their indie nature. I think SitS made better choices in terms of art design, considering limited funds and manpower.

Exploration - very limited in AoD, much better in SitS, although numerous locations are much less interesting than they seem at first.

Combat - AoD system is better, with many builds and options, though it works best in party-based model, as proven by Dungeon Rats. Combat in SitS is functional - it's there, not great, not terrible.

Storyline - AoD had a good one, with lots or variety and interesting choices. Story is where SitS shat the bed. It simply does not make sense. The whole intrigue with trapping a god and influencing movement of the moon - only to flood an old, established port and create a new trading hub? That's as fascinating as trade negotiations in the Phantom Menace.

I like both games but playing AoD made a greater impression on me. It felt like interacting with a flawed masterpiece, while SitS seemed just like an commendable effort from a two people studio.

 

[Parabalus]

SitS is unplayable due to unreadable font and graphics.

 

[Grunker]

I love VD but AoD is not my cup of tea, to put it (very) mildly. I don't particularly enjoy SitS, but I did enjoy it more than AoD.

 

[The Wall]

SitS is made by Jews. AoD wins

 

[Alphons]

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

Will there be Mechajammer vs Colony Ship poll?

 

[JarlFrank]

Will there be Mechajammer vs Colony Ship poll?

Nah. You can just make a Mechajammer vs Copper Dreams poll

 

[Comte]

Blobbers

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Blobbers

Drpg

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Dungeon Rats is a better game than AoD especially as it actually focuses on the gameplay and its tactical combat.