Incline Colony Ship RELEASE THREAD

[Serus]

The learning by doing system was supposed to circumvent AoD's problem of saving up points, waiting until you know what you need to invest them in, and then ruthlessly minmax to get through the game.

Tbh I found this aspect to be part of the fun, especially on later playthroughs. It didn't need fixing.

Or you could just make so that you have to invest all points the moment you get them. You know like most(?) games do.

Terrible idea considering AoD doesn't really let you know which skills you need at which point, you have to enter the actual dialog windows to know what you need and then spec accordingly.

No you don't "need" it. That's nonsense. You only perceive it that way. If you invested "poorly" and can't pass a check then it means it works as it should be. That what the true C&C in roleplaying game is. It is normal. In the meantime, You invested in something else instead and it will pay off eventually if the skill you choose made sense. What's more, in a well designed game logical (and/or roleplay) choices will be awarded while stupid ones won't. Which means if you play well you will pass most tests that you should according to you rp choices. Those are the basics of rpg and I feel really silly to have to explain it to You of all people.

 

[JarlFrank]

You invested in something else instead and it will pay off eventually if the skill you choose made sense.

But there's the problem with AoD's rigid design: it often doesn't. Sometimes you think a skill might make sense for a certain profession but it never comes up, not even once (see: lockpicking for assassins because you might assume there'd be some assassination jobs where you have to infiltrate a place stealthily; never gets used). You either correctly predict the handful of options the devs give you, or you're screwed.

 

[Beans00]

No you don't "need" it. That's nonsense. You only perceive it that way. If you invested "poorly" and can't pass a check then it means it works as it should be. That what the true C&C in roleplaying game is. It is normal. In the meantime, You invested in something else instead and it will pay off eventually if the skill you choose made sense. What's more, in a well designed game logical (and/or roleplay) choices will be awarded while stupid ones won't. Which means if you play well you will pass most tests that you should according to you rp choices. Those are the basics of rpg and I feel really silly to have to explain it to You of all people.

Except the game railroads you down paths and 'missions' you can't get out escape. So the only option in some cases is either reload a much earlier save or start over because 'reasons'. Or of course have points hoarded and allocate them as needed(this is how I played the game being honest).


If this was good design the games would have sold better. Simple.

 

[SpaceWizardz]

You either correctly predict the handful of options the devs give you, or you're screwed.

AOD's character creation highlights relevant skills depending on your selected background, no guessing required.

 

[Alpharius]

Noooo, how come i cant pass a skill check? Never had this problem in pillars of mediocrity or baldurs gay 3. Colony ship bad.

 

[Nikanuur]

Except the game railroads you down paths and 'missions' you can't get out escape. So the only option in some cases is either reload a much earlier save or start over because 'reasons'. Or of course have points hoarded and allocate them as needed(this is how I played the game being honest).
If this was good design the games would have sold better. Simple.

Yeah, and it is of no consequence if one does what the game told him to do in the beginning. Or what one should be doing in any other RPG, for that matter. Specializing.
Many of us passed most or all the checks because of that. We play RPGs, we know we should be doing that.
So, back to the beginning.

 

[Beans00]

Except the game railroads you down paths and 'missions' you can't get out escape. So the only option in some cases is either reload a much earlier save or start over because 'reasons'. Or of course have points hoarded and allocate them as needed(this is how I played the game being honest).
If this was good design the games would have sold better. Simple.

Yeah, and it is of no consequence if one does what the game told him to do in the beginning. Or what one should be doing in any other RPG, for that matter. Specializing.
Many of us passed most or all the checks because of that. We play RPGs, we know we should be doing that.
So, back to the beginning.

I'm not sure if I would call being forced to do 4 fights in a row of increasing difficulty, with no warning this would be a point of no return with no way out 'specializing'.

I call it poor design.

 

[Nikanuur]

I'm not sure if I would call being forced to do 4 fights in a row of increasing difficulty, with no warning this would be a point of no return with no way out 'specializing'.
I call it poor design.

Well, I call you poor at RPGs then. And as such you judging them is of no consequence.
I love to use that word.
Anyway, this is all because no matter how much more you try to dodge the topic, there are many people who have no problem with what you are getting at. Just because they know what specializing is.
Go figure.

 

[Beans00]

I'm not sure if I would call being forced to do 4 fights in a row of increasing difficulty, with no warning this would be a point of no return with no way out 'specializing'.
I call it poor design.

Well, I call you poor at RPGs then. And as such you judging them is of no consequence.
I love to use that word.
Anyway, this is all because no matter how much more you try to dodge the topic, there are many people who have no problem with what you are getting at. Just because they know what specializing is.
Go figure.

Well I beat the game so clearly I didn't have that much trouble lol. Regardless of that I didn't appreciate getting stuck in railroaded quest trees and having to reload once or twice.

Also you and other ITS fans keep saying 'well I didn't have a problem with it so the design was perfect'. If you liked the game fair enough w/e to each their own. Again I didn't necessarily dislike AOD, but it could have been much better. People who like to play games like to have player agency. All the best RPG's or open world games give you a sense of player agency.

AOD will have a small following, but even on this site its fans are tiny in number compared to pretty much ever major rpg big budget or small budget.

 

[TheDarkUrge]

No you don't "need" it. That's nonsense. You only perceive it that way. If you invested "poorly" and can't pass a check then it means it works as it should be. That what the true C&C in roleplaying game is. It is normal. In the meantime, You invested in something else instead and it will pay off eventually if the skill you choose made sense. What's more, in a well designed game logical (and/or roleplay) choices will be awarded while stupid ones won't. Which means if you play well you will pass most tests that you should according to you rp choices. Those are the basics of rpg and I feel really silly to have to explain it to You of all people.

Except the game railroads you down paths and 'missions' you can't get out escape. So the only option in some cases is either reload a much earlier save or start over because 'reasons'. Or of course have points hoarded and allocate them as needed(this is how I played the game being honest).


If this was good design the games would have sold better. Simple.

There's console commands to add skill points

Anyway going to try the new patches and do a new playthrough of this game.

 

[TheDarkUrge]

I don't think that Patreon would work at all. As for KS, it gives you a bit of money and then you start looking for a publisher. It's not something we're interested in.

Well that's a shame. Not even for an age of decadence remaster?

I liked AoD and Colony Ship quite a bit so will be sad to not get any more CRPGs.
Good luck for whatever else you might do.

 

[Technomancer]

age of decadence remaster?

Remaster is out of the question. Working on Torque3D in 2024 is deranged. So it would have to be a remake, which means a costly undertaking because every asset needs to be remade from scratch.

 

[Yosharian]

Is this well-polished yet or does it need more time?

 

[Hellraiser]

Is this well-polished yet or does it need more time?

Depends, regarding UI and QoL stuff someone who had issues with that and played after the patches improving those areas would need to chime in.

As for bugs I had just 1 on release that I still remember, and this was during my second playthrough (both just after release), I managed to stealth kill an NPC in a quest and then be able to still talk to him and finish the same quest the talker way with also those exp/loot rewards from the second path. It was pretty stable on a technical level.

 

[thesecret1]

The most annoying bug I had was that when you drag&dropped a loaded gun from loot window to your inventory, it wouldn't stay where you put it, but instead autosort itself. Worse yet, it took a seemingly random item from your inventory and placed THAT wherever it was you wanted to move the original item to. Not sure how it wasn't caught by now, but not gamebreaking in any way

 

[CoronerZg]

Is this well-polished yet or does it need more time?

Well polished. I did 3 playthroughs, fairly recently. No bugs, glitches or anything.

 

[Lhynn]

Noooo, how come i cant pass a skill check? Never had this problem in pillars of mediocrity or baldurs gay 3. Colony ship bad.

BG3 does checks well, especially in the honor mode, where you have to live with failures and there are almost none that are game over, but most are meaningful.

 

[agris]

but most are meaningful

in what ways?

 

[Lhynn]

They can change how a quest progresses or ends, cost the life of npcs or make them leave, fail to keep party members around, get pets for the camp.

All failures mean something in the game changes. Like for example if you fail a persuasion check you may have to kill 2 tieflings holding a gith hostage, then you have to fight them to free her. If they survive the encounter you can find them again later at certain points in the story.

Some failures may cost you skills, like for instance, theres a book of necromancy that can grant you speak with the dead at will, and offers a quest later on to finish reading it, but if you fail you wont get the skills, or may even get cursed (Cant remember as I never got there in my honor run, where it was pretty much guaranteed I wasnt succeeding the hard checks.

You may get some npcs to help you, or to stand down, and a lot can come back later if they survived. Its absurd the lenght to which larian went to validate player choice and player fuck ups.

It really feels like people that dont like the game simply havent played it. Which, fair, theres shit I dont like in it too. But it is one of the best rpgs ever made, better than even fallout when it comes to the ability to interact with the world as if a DM was there and adapted to your choices.

 

[Lhynn]

Im probably not even doing the scope of choices and checks justice by the way, its late and im tired. But the sheer amount of potential for experimentation is staggering.

 

[TheDarkUrge]

They can change how a quest progresses or ends, cost the life of npcs or make them leave, fail to keep party members around, get pets for the camp.

All failures mean something in the game changes. Like for example if you fail a persuasion check you may have to kill 2 tieflings holding a gith hostage, then you have to fight them to free her. If they survive the encounter you can find them again later at certain points in the story.

Some failures may cost you skills, like for instance, theres a book of necromancy that can grant you speak with the dead at will, and offers a quest later on to finish reading it, but if you fail you wont get the skills, or may even get cursed (Cant remember as I never got there in my honor run, where it was pretty much guaranteed I wasnt succeeding the hard checks.

You may get some npcs to help you, or to stand down, and a lot can come back later if they survived. Its absurd the lenght to which larian went to validate player choice and player fuck ups.

It really feels like people that dont like the game simply havent played it. Which, fair, theres shit I dont like in it too. But it is one of the best rpgs ever made, better than even fallout when it comes to the ability to interact with the world as if a DM was there and adapted to your choices.

Yeah Larian did a good job in the first act which was a 10/10 in terms of choices and consequences. But the final act was at best a 6/10, and it was clear they didn't actually finish the main story. Upper baldurs gate was completely removed and the story narrative ended up being just a mess, just like DOS2's final act. Anyone with a brain can tell that the final boss area was quickly hobbled together with spammed enemies. It's a shame that they had to rewrite the plot, from what I've read about the previous version it was way more interesting and thought out.

 

[Hellraiser]

I personally blame early access on front-loaded content/quality in both cases. Wasteland 2 California is another example (although i think it had a backer beta rather than steam early acces, might be wrong here, only played it after release).

In the olden days QA played parts of the game outside of sequence and you didn't give a shit they had a disjointed experience. If you outsource QA to players and also rely on revenue from EA rather than other funding you will end up pleasing the EA players too much, otherwise they will bitch or you won't get money. This just funnels effort into the early parts of the game, regardless how optimal that is from dev resource allocation or technical risk management point of view. And at some point the revenue stream dries up and you need to finish the game.

EA just doesn't work as far as consistent quality goes for non-sandbox story-driven titles like RPGs. Your rimworlds, factorios, ONIs, KSPs etc. will not see this problem because you are not adding parts of the storyline in sequence but rather whole mechanics/systems in content updates, and you can introduce them in the optimal (from the development perspective) order without players bitching. Hell even something like Subnautica, which I enjoy greatly, has a rather underwhelming final area. And Subnautica: Below Zero, where I did play it through the whole EA period, was even worse with this as it was plainly visible only the starting area was done with effort, rest half-assed.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

I want the opinion of a legit AoD fan who thinks CS wasn't as good.

I disslike level-up-by-use, let me have my fun, that's pretty much it. Thanks AoD whiners; Next time just shut the fuck up and go play something else. Assholes.

 

[The Wall]

EA just doesn't work as far as consistent quality goes for non-sandbox story-driven titles like RPGs.

Noone stopped Larian from making rest of the game fleshed out except Larian. I finished law school, and know how much lawyers charge per hour. I refuse to be someone's free lawyer. Don't know why gamers love doing that

Plenty of games in EA didn't suffer from front-loaded problem. Like Age of Decadence, for small example. Lazy Devs are root cause, Early Access is simply an excuse

 

[*-*/\--/\~]

A true CRPG fan understands there are many types of arseholes. Miltiades is a different sort of arsehole than Feng, for example, but both are liars who want you to kill people for them. Although... is Miltiades a liar if he genuinely believes his insanity?


ITS produces the most diverse cast of arseholes you'll find in any game. We need ITS, Long live branching stories and multiple factions, Long live turn based combat, Long live arseholes!