Tyranny Pre-Release Thread

[Theldaran]

Yes, I'm sure an Obsidian game released in 2016 is going to have a dead end for players who didn't build their character correctly.

It's not build issues, it's C&C man! :D

 

[Trashos]

Is this game level scaled? If it is then learn by doing system makes no fucking sense whatsoever, just like in TES games.

I completely miss the point of LBD, level scaling or not. I have no idea why some people like it and it doesn't make sense to me from a gameplay perspective at all (other than railroad the player to a "correct" build). LBD proves to me that there are things in this world I am not meant to understand.

 

[Rivmusique]

Update says:

This change could have made conversations less rewarding, as players would need to fight in order to level up their characters. To resolve this, we added functionality to allow players to level up their skills in conversations. Player choices that are gated by skill requirements will add experience to those skills when they are used. Additionally, if you use a skill to intimidate an encounter into fleeing, we grant skill experience to the party equivalent to what you would gain if you fought them. It can’t be exact, as there are too many decisions that players can make during combat to replicate it exactly.

Sound like your "one-handed" (or whatever) skill will be increased when dodging fights through dialogue, so when the inevitable mandatory fight rolls around, you'll be fine.

 

[Infinitron]

The premise of this argument is flawed. Who says the only mandatory fights will be tough ones? Historically, in RPGs that offer non-violent solutions, it's been the opposite - the elaborate boss fights are usually the ones that have an intelligent adversary who can be convinced to back down, or be disposed of in some other scripted non-violent fashion. It's all of the mindless beasts and fanatical followers in the middle who you always have to fight.

And besides, he specifically mentions the ability to make tough encounters easier via persuasion.

 

[Prime Junta]

As I said, it's all in the implementation (and content). It's still systemically out of whack though, and they will need to do a lot of work in the content and scripting to avoid some very obvious pitfalls.

 

[Roguey]

Then there's PS:T where you can run away from everything except Ravel, Trias, and Ignus/Vhailor.

 

[Prime Junta]

Then there's PS:T where you can run away from everything except Ravel, Trias, and Ignus/Vhailor.

PS:T is not a paragon of good systems design. More like the opposite. Its strengths lie elsewhere.

 

[Roguey]

I don't see a problem with "you can avoid combat, but some are mandatory" in party-based and action-oriented RPGs.

 

[Prime Junta]

I don't see a problem with "you can avoid combat, but some are mandatory" in party-based and action-oriented RPGs.

Combine that with learn-by-doing and you have a problem.

 

[Roguey]

Combine that with learn-by-doing and you have a problem.

They literally described their solution to how you don't gimp yourself through combat avoidance.

It's an Obsidian game so obviously the critical path will be completable by someone who avoids as much combat and optional content as possible.

 

[Infinitron]

Then there's PS:T where you can run away from everything except Ravel, Trias, and Ignus/Vhailor.

Oh, you might not know this. The PoE engine doesn't allow you to leave areas during combat.

 

[Roguey]

Oh, you might not know this. The PoE engine doesn't allow you to leave areas during combat.

I remember http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-expansion-thread.100006/page-31#post-4082753

I imagine it's a problem that could eventually be resolved through programming or adding an "enemies give up on chasing you after a certain point" behavior.

 

[Infinitron]

Oh, you might not know this. The PoE engine doesn't allow you to leave areas during combat.

I remember http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-expansion-thread.100006/page-31#post-4082753

I imagine it's a problem that could eventually be resolved through programming or adding an "enemies give up on chasing you after a certain point" behavior.

There is such a behavior in PoE, but they're harder to shake off than in the IE games.

 

[Prime Junta]

Combine that with learn-by-doing and you have a problem.

They literally described their solution to how you don't gimp yourself through combat avoidance.

It's an Obsidian game so obviously the critical path will be completable by someone who avoids as much combat and optional content as possible.

I'm not worried about it not being completable, that can obviously be addressed even just by tuning difficulty down to the lowest common denominator.

I am wondering if it's going to be much fun. I don't like what I'm hearing about the systems.

 

[LizardWizard]

Yuck, that talent tree looks very FTP MMOish.

 

[Rivmusique]

I hope it's never encouraged/rewarding to get an enemy pack to the point where they've lost (1 or 2 enemies in a 6 enemy group left alive, for example), and then grind out skill training with 1 party member by auto-attacking with it, while you command the other 3 party members to stop. This is what I did in a fair few cases in TWM, in order unlock the soulbound upgrades through those dumb achievement requirements, and it is fucking dull.

 

[Prime Junta]

Yeah the soulbound requirements were dull. Fortunately they weren't too onerous though. An entire game with incentives like that would be... ugh.

 

[Bubbles]

Yuck, that talent tree looks very FTP MMOish.

That's what I thought as well. Ten years ago people here would flipped their shit at seeing a progression scheme like that. This basically looks like a simplified version of the Sword Coast Legends trees; even Dragon Age 2 had more complexity than these.

 

[Infinitron]

Yuck, that talent tree looks very FTP MMOish.

That's what I thought as well. Ten years ago people here would flipped their shit at seeing a progression scheme like that. This basically looks like a simplified version of the Sword Coast Legends trees; even Dragon Age 2 had more complexity than these.

What, these?

I guess you could they're topologically more complex, but I'd rather just have more talents to pick than have a bunch of weird little trees.

 

[Lacrymas]

They never said anywhere what kind of xp you are going to get when you get out of combat. Besides, if you get xp towards your current weapon then it's ALWAYS more beneficial to get out of fights because you get xp for the social skill you used and your combat skills. Besides, like I said, this is a compromise, they could've easily made it more logical by not adhering to modern AAA designs. And again, this devalues your choices. You are always going to get the same outcome no matter what you do.

 

[Theldaran]

Also itemization poses a problem, already in the IE games you could find awesome weapons not exploitable (or even usable) by your party, if you had the wrong proficiencies [easy to work around in 6-peep parties, that had a great variety of proficiencies].

This is stated to be a short game, so you're probably stuck with the brand of weapon you have used most, unless you find something legally awesome. Or maybe the weapons are crap (Bronze Age and all) and magic is what's all about.

This problem could happen too with magic; if, say, you have used mostly fire-based magic, you're encouraged to get more powerful spells of that subtype.

 

[Lacrymas]

It's a snowball effect where what you are using the most is the thing you are going to get better at so you are going to keep using it and you get stuck in a loop. This also means social skills are even more fucked.

 

[Theldaran]

On the bright side, it also means that the game will be replayable as fuck, since you can play it in a variety of ways, favoring during one playthrough the ability you dropped before. I think that's what they're going for there.

 

[Lacrymas]

They should probably think more about making the first playthrough not suck.

 

[Infinitron]

On the bright side, it also means that the game will be replayable as fuck, since you can play it in a variety of ways, favoring during one playthrough the ability you dropped before. I think that's what they're going for there.

Brilliant. Yes, that's a stated design goal of the game: http://www.rpgcodex.net/article.php?id=10248