Shadowrun Shadowrun Returns Pre-Release Thread

[Koschey]

They did negotiate for the DRM-free base game with Microsoft. They offered it during the campaign. So either they knew and didn't tell or made promises without knowing the particulars of their license agreement. Either way is at the very least foolish.

You know this as a fact? Do you work at HBS or M$? Could you share the exact specifics with us?

Reading the latest update sure helps when discussing the latest update

Ultimately, we were able to successfully negotiate an exception with Microsoft for us to provide our Backers with a DRM-free version of the Kickstarter rewards (specifically the game and the Berlin Campaign) but that exception does not extend to non-reward DLC.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1613260297/shadowrun-returns/posts/453037

 

[Stabwound]

One of the most promising projects goes down the tubes in an instant. No corpse looting? What kind of CRPG does that?

 

[Brayko]

The ones with tablets in mind and only ask for 400k on Kickstarter.

 

[Jaesun]

One of the most promising projects goes down the tubes in an instant. No corpse looting? What kind of CRPG does that?

In-setting it makes very little sense for a Shadowrunner to loot weapons, ammo etc. from their enemies. 2050 forensic science allows Lone Star/a megacorp to track the guns or even radioactive isotopes in the bullets back to whichever grunt they were issued to. If you use them on another run afterwards, you generate another paper trail that can be linked to you which will eventually come and bite you in the ass. Runners primarily get their gear through fixers, who can get stuff that exists without paperwork, licenses, serial numbers, registration and so forth. It's both a recommended practice for GMs (at least in the SR2, SR3 and SR4 core books) to only let players get gear from fixers and a frequent plot hook to tempt players to steal an extremely expensive bit of gear only to have it bite them in the ass later on. It's also a way to allow the GM to outfit enemies with equipment similar to the players without worrying about a geometric growth in the amount of valuables the players score every run. Ask any veteran shadowrun player what happens once a group starts harvesting cyberware from the cooling bodies of their adversaries and you'll be treated to a number of horrific player deaths shortly thereafter.

The primary loot players collect during a run in pen&paper comes in the form of data stolen from computers, certified credsticks, telesma (in monty haul campaigns) and the fee from their Johnson.

Is lootless a streamlining over "traditional" CRPGS? Unquestionably. But it is keeping in the conventions set forth by the setting.

 

[DwarvenFood]

I, for one, see it more as a turn based Syndicate, and can do without too much of looting or with saves only outside of runs / at checkpoints.

 

[dibens]

I actually like the lack of saves and loot. It makes the preparation for the run that much more important, plus the object of the mission is always priority, not the kill count. I only hope karma is not rewarded for kills as well.

 

[Excidium]

It does suck that you can't loot but they simply don't have the resources to implement looting with the proper consequences so they preferred not to do it at all. But I'm p. sure it has been confirmed that it can be done through the editor.

 

[gromit]

Does your DM allow you to save scum when doing a Shadowrun PnP session?

No, but he does let me end the game whenever the fuck I want and not every 15 minutes.

You can always quit ANY game when you want. But then:

"Hey, sorry I had to run out last week!"

"No worries. So where were we?"

"I'd almost made it back to Cityberg -- remember, last time I dug that chalice they asked for out of the swamp?"

"Oh, OK, yes. OK. So: after a long journey from Cityberg, you've arrived at the edge of the swamp."

The proper response in such a scenario is "fuck you, Carl; you're full of shit and I'm going home." It's even more proper in response to a pile of bytes, because you won't make Carl cry.

I agree save-scumming is ridiculous, and have always held that a lot of games are best (or at least suck less) when played in good faith -- don't train 15yo AI instead of engaging and overcoming the challenge as intended, etc. Yet I also agree with "Roguey knows who" that it's an artifact of developers somehow thinking random or arbitrary failure has any place in designs which don't have a corresponding fail state beyond forcing you to replay some or all of a sequence or task. (That doing so is an unrewarding pain, instead of a joyful task, is itself an artifact of games being not-so-slowly dominated by immutable sequences and reliance on set-pieces... but that's another discussion entirely.)

Fuck, even proper fail states won't stop it: gamers have been conditioned to do something the "right" way. Sometimes it's not even unreasonable -- while I can appreciate the "shit hits the fan" moments of stealth games, I can appreciate someone else reloading that very instant. There's enough action games to buy if they want one, so they roll the simulation back a few minutes rather than trade the "puzzle" of a well-crafted level for sub-par combat.

It's more unsavorily Codexian than an eight-dicked two-titted racist, to suggest a game should actively punish every player each time life goes as it sometimes does, especially in the name of making sure some players don't progress through a single-player game by (gasp!) dishonorable means.

So which is it: are you beset by temptation from all sides, so overwhelming and inescapable that you must crusade to wipe it from the face of the earth, HHR-style? Or just worried about the sanctity of your chievies and gamerscore? Not without good reason, of course: I mean, if any Joe Schmoe off the street could earn them, they'd be meaningless.


C'mon, Jaesun, you're smarter than this, and seem to have enough of a life. What gives?

 

[almondblight]

I would like to see more games with a save system only in towns, and a rogue-like save system (if you die the save is deleted) outside of them, Unlimited Saga style.

 

[Excidium]

I would like to see more games with a save system only in towns, and a rogue-like save system (if you die the save is deleted) outside of them, Unlimited Saga style.

That's retarded as fuck for RPGs. That sort of thing only works on games that are immediately replayable like roguelikes.

 

[Gelbvieh]

That kind of system can get frustrating if you also want to have large dungeons/out-of-city areas though. I don't think it's a no-no, but it has a drastic effect on gameplay (you would have to bill it as one of your main features, really) and might work better as an opt-in, with (sensible) checkpoints and save-on-quit as your default.

Edit: the slightly less angry reply.

 

[almondblight]

That's retarded as fuck for RPGs. That sort of thing only works on games that are immediately replayable like roguelikeshave good gameplay.

Fixed.

That kind of system can get frustrating if you also want to have large dungeons/out-of-city areas though. I don't think it's a no-no, but it has a drastic effect on gameplay (you would have to bill it as one of your main features, really) and might work better as an opt-in, with (sensible) checkpoints and save-on-quit as your default.

Yeah, you'd have to design the game with it in mind. It'd probably be more gamist, focused on survival and not so much on long dialogues. You'd probably want more randomness from enemies and traps. It'd be a different kind of RPG, but that's not a bad thing.

When things like regenerating health are brought up, people complain that it takes away from the attrition aspect of RPGs. But if the player never has to redo an area because of attrition, than it's pointless at best, and all the trash mobs before the boss are just things you eat for loot and XP. You can see from threads here that most people have a hard time naming challenging RPGs. It'd be nice to have people at least try something new.

 

[Excidium]

It'd probably be more gamist

You people need to stop using those GNS terms. First because you don't know what it means and second because GNS theory is retarded and barely justifies itself as a study on tabletop RPGs, let alone video games.

When things like regenerating health are brought up, people complain that it takes away from the attrition aspect of RPGs. But if the player never has to redo an area because of attrition, than it's pointless at best, and all the trash mobs before the boss are just things you eat for loot and XP. You can see from threads here that most people have a hard time naming challenging RPGs. It'd be nice to have people at least try something new.

Shit design will always be shit, doesn't really make any difference if you put some arbitrary save restrictions.

 

[Excidium]

You can see from threads here that most people have a hard time naming challenging RPGs.

That's because most people adjust perfect scores on all their characters and collect metagaming knowledge from threads about the games.

Average codexer creates a thread asking about a game he's about to play: GUYS WHICH CLASSES SUCK WHERE SHOULD I GO FIRST WHAT SHOULD I AVOID WHAT IS THE BEST PARTY COMPOSITION WHERE DO I GET THE BEST WEAPONS

 

[Jack Dandy]

I agree with you Almond.
I don't like games that go "here, you can quicksave\load whenever you want" and then never balance encounters to saving only in safe spots.

I love that feeling of tension you get, longing to find that save spot.

 

[Stokowski]

The debates about design vs save-scumming, etc, are bogus diversions.
This is a company that said implementing proper save games in this title was beyond it's ability.

 

[Jashiin]

What a rollercoaster, didnt trust them so didn't back, saw the gameplay vid, felt sad I didn't back, now liars so glad I didn't back.

That drm free version will do just fine from the bay

 

[imweasel]

So you can only save at checkpoints?

Most codexers have no life, so losing 15 to 20 minutes of it in a worst case scenario won't hurt.

 

[J_C]

What a rollercoaster, didnt trust them so didn't back, saw the gameplay vid, felt sad I didn't back, now liars so glad I didn't back.

That drm free version will do just fine from the bay

Same here.

 

[Western]

What a rollercoaster, didnt trust them so didn't back, saw the gameplay vid, felt sad I didn't back, now liars so glad I didn't back.

That drm free version will do just fine from the bay

Same here.

I made the mistake of giving them $15 after i saw the gameplay vid, would've picked up the game of the year edition off steam for $5 in a year (if I could still be fucked at that point) if I knew it was going to go down like this.

 

[Jack Dandy]

This is a company that said implementing proper save games in this title was beyond it's ability.

Yeah, I gotta admit that much is pretty fucking suspicious. But despite not backing, I still don't think people should get so angry at them.
All things considered, it still sounds like a pretty fun RPG. If it doesn't end up being criminally short or boring as hell, I'll buy it and urge other people to do the same.

 

[Jaesun]

Harebrained Schemes ‏@WeBeHarebrained35s
Still need account info from 2800 $100 and up KS backers so we can get your name in the credits of the Anthology. Tell all your friends!

 

[Xenich]

I would like to see more games with a save system only in towns, and a rogue-like save system (if you die the save is deleted) outside of them, Unlimited Saga style.

No thanks. I don't play MMO's with spastic retards who live in their mothers basements and live and breathe face rolling their keyboard. I should be able to save when I want to, where I want to.

If I wanted tardsole systems, I wouldn't have thrown away my Nintendo 8 bit so many years ago. When I play a game, I want the difficulty to be in the content itself and not some stupid fucking gimmick save routine.

These types of mechanics are for console games, by console games, for fucking retarded console game players. It is a mentality of such, nothing more. If I wanted to, I could fucking hack their stupid ass game and implement a save system as I like.

That is the stupidity of trying to put these gimmick systems in a PC game. So they should stop trying to play fucking Nazi game master, and let those who are too fucking idiotic to not save scum go back to their console games.

 

[almondblight]

That's because most people adjust perfect scores on all their characters and collect metagaming knowledge from threads about the games.

Average codexer creates a thread asking about a game he's about to play: GUYS WHICH CLASSES SUCK WHERE SHOULD I GO FIRST WHAT SHOULD I AVOID WHAT IS THE BEST PARTY COMPOSITION WHERE DO I GET THE BEST WEAPONS

It never occurred to you that if a game's difficulty can be negated by spending 3 minutes reading a forum post then the problem might not be with the player? That people might find the AWESOME combination on their own?

Shit design will always be shit, doesn't really make any difference if you put some arbitrary save restrictions.

The whole genre of rogue-likes shows that save restrictions do make a difference.

No thanks. I don't play MMO's with spastic retards who live in their mothers basements and live and breathe face rolling their keyboard. I should be able to save when I want to, where I want to.

You'd be able to save whenever you wanted to. You wouldn't be able to creep and save, which I know enrages people. I don't think it's unreasonable for some games to be designed with the expectation that the player will go a 1/2 hour without dying, or that death in every game has to be a consequence free event where you can just reload the save from a minute before and continue on your merry way.

 

[Xenich]

No thanks. I don't play MMO's with spastic retards who live in their mothers basements and live and breathe face rolling their keyboard. I should be able to save when I want to, where I want to.

You'd be able to save whenever you wanted to. You wouldn't be able to creep and save, which I know enrages people. I don't think it's unreasonable for some games to be designed with the expectation that the player will go a 1/2 hour without dying, or that death in every game has to be a consequence free event where you can just reload the save from a minute before and continue on your merry way.

Save when I want to? You mean save within 15 mins of when I want to correct? Which is not "when I want to", rather it is when I am told I can.

I understand the problem with some people essentially cheating in a game, making it too easy, etc... but here is the thing. Who cares? Like I said, putting these stupid mechanics in the game is pointless because the retards who are going to cheat, will be cheating anyway. That is fine though, they ruin their game, not mine. Like I said, this mentality is from "console" development thinking and the entire point of these "back to the roots" cRPGs is getting away from the ridiculous design methodologies that infested cRPG gaming.

Now if they want to provide such as a "feature", then... why not allow "save as you like" or "save when we tell you can" options in the games setup? That way, those of us who have to stop playing at a moments notice can simply hit save when we like and come back to the game when we can rather than being at the point where we just finished a difficult encounter, objective, etc... or at the very end of it and basically have to come back and do it all over again.

Like I said, I played the days of games where saves were non-existent and you had to repetitiously master the entire game through a play through. Those were arcade games though and I am not interested in playing games with "arcade" mechanics just because the developers are "afraid" someone is going to bypass their content through one hack method or another. People will do it anyway, there will be all kinds of cheating going on with the game and yet... are they also spending a lot of effort to fight that as well?

It is stupid mechanic. Let people play as they wish. Nobody should care how a person chooses to play the game, it is really their decision. These types of mechanics are pointless.