Interview Age of Decadence - Big in France

[Crichton]

As much as I like the bi-monthy TB v RTwP shitfest, I really don't see its application here. In AoD, you command one peon, that's it. It really doesn't matter what the combat system looks like, there's no such thing as a tactical game with one maneuver unit.

The best example of this is the KotOR games. They went to a great deal of trouble to add lots of different damage types, weapons, jedi fighting stances, jedi super powers, active feats and whatnot, but since you can't move your characters around independently of each other, you don't really have any control over anything anyway, all that's left is some targeting logic.

I presume the only reason VD is going ahead with the game in this crippled and sad form is that he's desperately trying to imitate Fallout 1+2. They're fine games, but their combat system makes KotOR look like ToEE.

Fallout "Tactical routine"

far away/ low accuracy: Non-Aimed shot
med accuracy: Aim for head
very close/ high accuracy Aim for eyes

You'll need to interrupt this occasionally to reload your rifle or use 150 stimpacks, unless you get crit'ed then you'll just need to reload the game. (KotOR version is to have two characters using area effect magic while the third one heals)

As for why the best skirmish tactics games have been turn based, my guess is that a) on such a small scale, it's easy to separate time into discrete pieces without the artifacts causing too much havoc and b) it's just much easier to design a good human/computer interface if the game's turn based (as opposed to fooling around with all the auto-pause options). For everyone who's convinced of TB's natural superiority, I might point out that the best battlefield tactics games are RTwP (TW series).

VD, IT ISN'T TOO LATE. ADD A PARTY TO YOUR GAME SO IT ISN'T SHIT. EVEN IF THEY'RE PURE MERCENARIES WITH NO MOTIVATIONS OF THEIR OWN THAT ARE SOLELY THERE TO MAKE THE COMBAT INTERESTING, GIVE YOUR "GAME" SOME GAMEPLAY OR EVEN YOU WILL HATE IT.

 

[Crichton]

I get your complaint, but this is a bad example. BG was a shit adaption of a turn based ruleset over a shit RT engine. It was a design decision to not let you precisely use a fireball spell ( i.e. pause when spell is ready and position template ). Probably to balance shit AI, or keep the things moving.

It's both a rule fidelity issue (in 2nd Edition AD&D, you chose your actions before you roll initiative, so you don't know where everyone will be by the time your fireball goes off) and a balance issue, fireballs that can be precisely targeted are almost as good as fireballs that simply pass through your party without harming them. As you might imagine, area effect weapons that do huge damage and can be used on people in melee with your own troops are a bit of balance problem.

 

[Dark Matter]

I've played many a SC match on bnet in my teens. Try to talk to some of the guys at the top of the ladder. Or better yet, check out some clan fora. It will give you the exact idea how stupid you can be and still be fucking awesome at starcraft.
Yes, it takes time and experience to be good at it. But so does running or jumping, or playing football. And you won't tell me that these activities require intellect.
And yes, someone can devote time to master fe. JA2. But a dumb person will need much more effort to be good at it than someone intelligent.

Chess is the mother of all TB games. Show me an average Joe that has exactly the same amount of experience as I have (about 40-50 played games) and will be able to beat me in it. A chess scrap anytime you want.

For the last time, I never said starcraft is intellectually demanding. I said it's a challenging and difficult game to master online. And sure, intelligence plays some role in JA2. Just as it does with any other game. A mentally handicapped person won't be able to beat JA2, nor will they be able to beat Starcraft. But when it comes to mastering a TB game, it's all about understanding the game and the mechanics. And that simply comes down to how much effort and time you're willing to put into it. Having an IQ of 160 doesn't mean shit.

Now I'm pretty sure you're just trolling. Or you're stupid.

I'm not.

 

[spacemoose]

VD, IT ISN'T TOO LATE. ADD A PARTY TO YOUR GAME SO IT ISN'T SHIT. EVEN IF THEY'RE PURE MERCENARIES WITH NO MOTIVATIONS OF THEIR OWN THAT ARE SOLELY THERE TO MAKE THE COMBAT INTERESTING, GIVE YOUR "GAME" SOME GAMEPLAY OR EVEN YOU WILL HATE IT.

its time to get in touch with someone, and forgive.

VD, you're among friends

 

[Gnidrologist]

TB vs RTwP thread detected. :nostalgia:
Face it, every notion of anything in any of the posts in this thread is a fucking joke.

 

[Kos_Koa]

Face it, every notion of anything in any of the threads on RPG Codex is a fucking joke.

 

[Dionysus]

You said challenge and claimed that even a 10 year can old be good at RT games unlike with TB games.

http://wire.ggl.com/2007/12/06/youngest ... ts-in-osl/

"First-person views of [13-year old] Tae Yong’s screen show remarkable speed... "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Karjakin

Chess is actually renowned for its child prodigies. Exceptional kids are pretty good at beating the adults. You are way off on this one.

As much as I like the bi-monthy TB v RTwP shitfest, I really don't see its application here. In AoD, you command one peon, that's it. It really doesn't matter what the combat system looks like, there's no such thing as a tactical game with one maneuver unit.

That is the real problem. With multiple pieces, you can argue that TB (or at least RTwP) is necessary to control everything. With a multiplayer game, you can argue that TB is good because it allows a true match of wits. But it all seems to fall short in the case of a single-player RPG. In AoD, I'll only have one character to track, and I doubt that I will be going up against deep blue. I have no problem keeping up with Virtua Fighter 5 or Ninja Gaiden in RT. I doubt that AoD's combat will match their complexity.

 

[Forest Dweller]

We are talking about an RPG on RPG Codex. Not CS Codex.

Cocksucking?

You keep bring up JA2; but JA2 is basically the peak

And? That doesn't impose any limits. FO1 and 2 and Arcanum are also the peaks when it comes to C&C, but that hasn't kept VD from trying to match (or surpass) them.

Don't flip flop, punk.

For some reason that word is immensely funny.

You said challenge and claimed that even a 10 year can old be good at RT games unlike with TB games. Challenge is challenge. There's no reason to exclude factors like precision and quick thinking and reflexes.

There is if you want something to be intellectually challenging rather than dexterously. And the intellectual challenge is what VD is going for in AOD. That means TB combat. He may not have explicitly stated it that way in the interview, but it's definitely there, it really is, if you just read between the lines a little. Hmm, perhaps you are more of a speed reader?

 

[DarkUnderlord]

For the people who use Starcraft as an example, I'd go back to VD's example.

Five orcs? Hah! They’ve gotta be kidding me. Must be a tutorial. I have six capable party members. We should be able to stop at least two orcish armies and maybe even invade a small country. I join the battle feeling bad about ganging up on poor orcs like that. Five minutes later my party is dead. Dead. Orcs 6, me 0.

The point I take from that is the X-Com example. I have 12 Marines. There are only 4 weak Aquaturds. 2 turns later all my guys are dead and there's sweet fuck all I could do about it. Turn-based enemies hit harder and kill you in a single blow (critical hits in Fallout anyone?). Real-time enemies never do. A critical hit in real-time is like "+10 damage", not the "+500 damage, hitting you in the kidneys and knocking you down causing instant death. Goodnight gracie".

Chess being the ultimate example. The most powerful piece on the board (the Queen) can be taken by the weakest piece on the board (a Pawn). In real-time, the Queen would have like 500 HP and a Pawn would do like 3 damage and the Queen would kick its ass - ala Starcraft. Starcraft isn't easy but is all about speed and multiple enemies attacking multiple enemies, attacking him with shit that'll outlast or survive his attacks (through sheer numbers or better units). There is no case of a Marine taking down a Battlecruiser.

If a real-time enemy in X-Com took you down in one hit, there'd be no countering it. There'd be no strategy other than "Damn, I wasn't FAST enough!" when I tried to run away. Turn-based gives you the option. "More that piece there exposes that piece and makes him vulnerable to attack but if I move him over there..."

What the hell is with you people?

That's what happens when I try to connect to Steam when I'm disconnected.
http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4351/sto.jpg

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/4600/sto2.jpg
I can play all games that don't require connection to play, including the ones like Empire: Total War which has to be activated on Steam.

I hate you. I have only heard tell of such possibilities. Instead I must be annoyed by Steam's constant refusal to understand that I'm offline.

Maybe something to do with the router? I have heard people had to "disable LAN Network" to make Steam realise it's offline. Never be assed to try it though as usually, turning the modem on and waiting for it to boot up is quicker than fucking around.

 

[ushdugery]

Turn-based gives you the option. "More that piece there exposes that piece and makes him vulnerable to attack but if I move him over there..."

I don't know positioning and waiting for the right time or a teammate not standing in the right area or one of the oppositions team mates being unaccounted for in a game of DotA can completely swing a large combat encounter and even a game it's pretty tactical and even squad based but you only control one of the squad members...

 

[Wyrmlord]

Age Of Decadence has only one controllable character?

This is a bad bad bad move.

It is a really bad move.

A single character represents a single set of skills and a single variable in combat.

Combat comes down to choosing from among those options and it all comes to what one person can or can not do.

Party-based RPGs are about a mix of skills spread between different people, and coordinating between them. It is not one decision but several decisions that count. You have to find the best combination of them.

Like having a spellcaster use Acid Splash on the creature that resists physical attacks, while the fighter attacks the ninja who can stealth attack the mage, and using the priest to cast Sleep on the remaining ones, so that the others don't have their hands more full than they already are.

Surely, the makers have good reason for doing this? People who have played games for years should know what works and what does not, at least by a rule of thumb.

 

[Dark Matter]

Nice job, dumbfucks. Now AoD will be delayed by another 5 years so VD can make it into a party-based game.

 

[Fat Dragon]

Surely, the makers have good reason for doing this?

Yes. It's not a party RPG.

 

[Gragt]

That Sailor Moon snes jrpg let control up to 5 characters in turn-based combat, you can even chose the formation and link attacks! Truly, it's heavan like any party turned-based combat is!

 

[Wyrmlord]

Crichton knows his RPGs.

He knows them very well. He has played the stuff from back as the 80s. And a good range of them.

And I know not seen good things from games where you play with a single character in tactical combat. When you start off Dragon Quest IV, it is nothing more than pressing the Attack button, and using heal when you have to. That's what single characters amount to.

When you start off KotOR 2, you just move around the Peragus station, either using three forms of attacks or a few spells. For each situation, you decide on one thing that works well, and you keep doing it.

This is a chore. When you are fighting as a party, you may get the guy with a Repeating Blaster to use Rapid Shot, the guy with the dual blaster to use Power Blast, and the guy with rifle to use Critical Strike. Each type of attack is a contingent against another, working well in different situations. The Rapid Shot is used on the high HP enemies, the Critical Strike on dangerous but low HP enemies, and the Power Blast on low AC high HP enemies. Each doesn't become singularly better for the situation as it would for a single character party.

 

[Wyrmlord]

Surely, the makers have good reason for doing this?

Yes. It's not a party RPG.

Nononononono, I meant, there could at least be joinables?

Like in Bioware games?

Have more than one person in a fight? Hell, have even just two people?

As far as I see, there are good reasons for these conventions.

If there isn't, tell me. Seriously.

 

[Davaris]

Age Of Decadence has only one controllable character?

...
A single character represents a single set of skills and a single variable in combat.

Why is it all about the combat? I thought this game was supposed to be about Choices and Consequences (TM)? Surely with one specialist character, there is more opportunity for multiple replays with different characters, than a game where all skills can be covered by a party of characters.

Surely, the makers have good reason for doing this?

It was good enough for Fallout and AoD is a Fallout influenced game isn't it?

 

[Wyrmlord]

Fair enough, if that's all there is to it.

I figured that with all the serious talks on having a good turn-based combat system, there would be some high ambitions there as well.

 

[Melcar]

I thought AoD was to be heavy on the "story" and "C&C" aspects? In that regard having a single character at your disposition is not that bad. Party based gameplay really only shines in combat heavy games. Now, if combat is to be a big deal in AoD, then yeah, this news is horrible and has probably killed a few kittens by now.

 

[Wyrmlord]

One of VD's common talks is on how turn-based combat is superior to pausable real-time.

I figured he took combat very seriously.

Actually, hasn't AoD been marketed as a game that will emphasise "choices and turn-based combat"? Atleast on its website?

I don't follow it as strongly as the rest do, so I am curious.

 

[Fat Dragon]

@wyrmlord
Have you watched any of AOD's combat videos yet? They'll give you a good idea of what combat will feel like. And the combat demo will hopefully be here soon so we can try it out for ourselves.

 

[Claw]

Troll Codex.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gU8fbVxrof4

• You know, everybody keeps talking about how this is going to be the next Fallout, but I'm not so sure I agree. One thing that Fallout had going for it was how visceral the combat was and this video shows nothing like that. I see a bunch of blocky lego men standing around waving swords at one another with all the vigor and agility of a pregnant cow, dodging blows after they have landed. I can't believe NMA praises this and then has the audacity to make fun of Fallout 3's animations.

That's AOD's combat in a nutshell LAWL.

 

[Shannow]

I get your complaint, but this is a bad example. BG was a shit adaption of a turn based ruleset over a shit RT engine. It was a design decision to not let you precisely use a fireball spell ( i.e. pause when spell is ready and position template ). Probably to balance shit AI, or keep the things moving.

It's both a rule fidelity issue (in 2nd Edition AD&D, you chose your actions before you roll initiative, so you don't know where everyone will be by the time your fireball goes off) and a balance issue, fireballs that can be precisely targeted are almost as good as fireballs that simply pass through your party without harming them. As you might imagine, area effect weapons that do huge damage and can be used on people in melee with your own troops are a bit of balance problem.

Hmm, makes me dislike D&D for cRPGs even more in general and appreciate the improvement of 3rd ed even more.
Obediah, any example of an RPG that used a good RTwP engine? (I couldn't think of one that was better than in IE games, so that was not a rhetorical device to make my opinion look better, or anything.)

What other challenge could there possibly be? How fast can you click? We are talking about an RPG on RPG Codex. Not CS Codex.

Judging from a lot of whining G1/2+NotR were difficult (read: challenging). They are action adventures and thus close enough to RPGs that the borders get blurry. For single-character games it's really a matter of preference and whether one likes twitchy combat or not. But you just go on letting the ADD kiddies whine. It has a certain entertainment value.

 

[WhiskeyWolf]

Tension, I feel in this thread.