What do you think about AoD?

[MetalCraze]

No way, VD is perfect. If something is broken it means the player is dumb. Didn't you see that witty button in a new AoD demo

 

[l3loodAngel]

Replace YOU RETARDS with VD and congratulations, you just figured out what we were saying.

The Word of AoD reacts if you kill someone for no reason. Now if VD would remove C&C from dialogue and make combat obligatory, the result would be Majestic.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Meh, C&C is interesting when influences the gameplay... Combat is gameplay, solving puzzles is gameplay, finding secrets is gameplay... Picking dialogue options is not gameplay.

AoD's C&C is for storyfags.

If by "gameplay" you mean "stuff you do in the game" (as opposed to more passive activities like appreciating the visuals or listening to the music), then it totally is gameplay.
Also the codex has plenty of storyfags (judging from the top 10 lists), so the overall reception should be more .

P.S. I just realized you can accelerate the masturbation of that fella up there by writing some stuff after it and then hitting backspace repeatedly.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

If by "gameplay" you mean "stuff you do in the game" (as opposed to more passive activities like appreciating the visuals or listening to the music), then it totally is gameplay.

There is a big difference between a game and a CYOA book (with lots of dead ends). I'm talking about something that challenges the player in any way, not about picking a solution to a problem from a menu.

 

[MetalCraze]

When you are presented with options like "solve this in A way, solve this in B way" it's not C&C it's retarded. Especially when option A is always "teleport past the trouble" and option B is "teleport into the trouble". What am I going to pick here?! Them choicez!

Whole AoD design is like that - VD thinking that people want nothing but clicking on dialogues. That's why combat is so unbalanced and added as an afterthought.

But hey what do I know when even Harvey Smith appreciates VD's design. Dishonored is like a spiritual successor to Age of Decadence with teleporting past enemies and all.

 

[almondblight]

I've only played the combat demo so far, but from what I've seen of it, it looks like VD went the Planescape route for C&C. Correct?

 

[MetalCraze]

No. He teleported.

 

[hiver]

One thing that needs to be observed is the loss of objectivity each and every artist that ever set up to create something goes through.
The more complex the creation, the greater the self investment - the bigger is the loss of objectivity.

Thats why artists seek opinions and appraisement of others, first and foremost. (no, that one is actually a secondary reason)

So far IT and Vince have done an admirable job of taking opinions and suggestions, advice and knowledge from many people and improved their work for it.
This issue with fast traveling remaining mandatory (-edit- in some cases) and out of players choice is maybe one of those bigger objectivity blind spots still left.
If it changes into an option the game will end up being better for it.

 

[Silellak]

Oh hey, I should go visit the Codex. I wonder if anything's changed.

So...that's a no, then.

 

[Commissar Draco]

The Word of AoD reacts if you kill someone for no reason. Now if VD would remove C&C from dialogue and make combat obligatory, the result would be Majestic.

[Intelligence/perception] So the Aod is not ES enough? Gross of of the complains here aside from Skyway being Skyway are: combat is too hard, too much confusing dialogues, why I can't be Diplo-fighter-mage-theif give me more XP and I can't rob all the NPCs homes blind... in game which was never meant to be sand box. This site should be called Bethpizda Board.

 

[MetalCraze]

Yes man - selecting the "win" dialogue all the time that simply teleports the player to end credits is confusing as fuck. Fucking casuals who just want to go around, explore and find a solution on their own instead of being presented with it on a plate - like true hardcore RPG players prefer.

If you complain that the game has shit design where you never have to think - you are Bethesda fanboi - makes sense.

 

[l3loodAngel]

When you are presented with options like "solve this in A way, solve this in B way" it's not C&C it's retarded. Especially when option A is always "teleport past the trouble" and option B is "teleport into the trouble". What am I going to pick here?! Them choicez!
Whole AoD design is like that - VD thinking that people want nothing but clicking on dialogues. That's why combat is so unbalanced and added as an afterthought.
But hey what do I know when even Harvey Smith appreciates VD's design. Dishonored is like a spiritual successor to Age of Decadence with teleporting past enemies and all.

You fucking tard, you haven't even played the game have you?
Let's take the bandit ransom quest for e.g.
1. You can go and kill all of them.
2. You can kill just the leader and intimidate others and return with the hostage.
3. You can pay them 1k gold yourself if you lack the needed skills.
4. You can convince house Daratan to pay the gold.
5. You can pay 500 gold if you have high trading.
6. You can convince House Daratan to pay for bandits to attack the Aurelian outpost.
If 6. You can then pay the badly wounded leader and make him your friend or you can kill him and take the money. If you leave him alive later you can ask for a favor from him.
If 6. You can turn the machines if your lore is significantly high and Increase you reputation with Daratan significantly. If your crafting is enough you can find out other stuff to and etc.
And each of these outcomes has different increases in faction reputation and general reputation.

So don't pretend you are not a fucking overgrown rat with monocle, mad because VD took the lever away.

 

[villain of the story]

And so the Codex comes full circle and realizes it doesn't actually like CnC, but likes combat instead. FALLOUT IS VINDICATED! IT IS TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO AVOID COMBAT IS NOW IRRELEVANT!

OLD. It was proven that C&C -the only redeeming feature of the game- alone doesn't make a game when Alpha Popamole came out. And the gameplay itself was entirely made up of sucky combat.

I think the main shortcoming of AoD (as far as the demo goes) is that it has a heavy emphasis on skipping a lot of repetitive filler crap, thereby replacing game systems with text adventures whereas the way to go (ideally speaking) is integrated game systems with the option of skipping repetitive crap, not removing the choice towards either altogether.

I commend VD's design philosophy of doing away with hiking simulations but lament the fact that it cost a gamist approach. It is a game for storyfags and it plays more like a visual novel with the occasional combat. It's like the girlfriend who is perfect in a lot of ways but you still struggle to feel an emotional bond because she's way too asexually monocle. You still admire and appreciate her, though.

Alternatively, the demo feels like "An Applied Thesis on How To Improve Computer Role-Playing Games".

 

[villain of the story]

I'd say good but too close to meh in my opinion. I agree with most of everything good that's been said (likaq brings up a lot of the good points), except for the combat, which I think is a pretty big let down. There is simply too little player control. Having AI companions would have made use of the combat system to a much wider degree, and on top of this, there are too few actual tactical choices to make in combat. You might say "well, not fewer than other RPGs", but in a game as hard as AoD, where you only have control over a SINGLE character, there needs to a pretty big tactical depth to make up for the lack of tactical decisions (because of only controlling on character) and/or the difficulty (so the combat relies more on player decisions and less of hoping on catching a break).

I completely agree, Combat is challenging, fun and all that but honestly, it doesn't feel necessarily any different than any other because the only variation it introduces is a wider selection of attack types. That near every option you have is centered on dealing damage instantly. Nuances get lost.

Just to be clear, is it criticism of all single-character systems in general or our system in particular? I thought that the post-combat demo consensus was that the combat system is fairly tactical. If you disagree, what's missing, in your opinion?

Personally, I was hoping wishing for more than just attack options. It's nice that we have skills such as dodge, block, critical strike but what good is that when all of that is on auto-pilot with zero input from player? And also because all of that has been auto-pilot on every other game as well. Especially for anyone with familiarity with a few non-DnD PnP RPGs where you got awesome stuff like pools where you allocate points between offense and defense, get interrupt choices where you can actively opt to attack or evade in moments of opportunity and what not. Something with more player involvement. PnP RPGs are ripe with those kinds of choices. I like the combat as it is, it has depth but it's still conceptually primitive.

 

[Vault Dweller]

One thing that needs to be observed is the loss of objectivity each and every artist that ever set up to create something goes through.
The more complex the creation, the greater the self investment - the bigger is the loss of objectivity.

Certainly. It's practically impossible to stay objective after spending a few years with your project, so you do need constant feedback. However, when it comes to 'controversial' games like AoD, you get a very wide range of opinions, so finding the objective opinions isn't easy (and debating merits is the only way to find them).

Not every bit of criticism is objective and should be immediately taken under consideration. Different people like different things in games and the RPG genre is the most diverse one. On top of it, plenty of people simply wish the game was something else, which doesn't help at all but only muddies the waters.

As for teleporting, it has pros and cons. I knew that it would be the most controversial decision, but thought that it would benefit the game in the end. Of course, some people don't like it. The question is, would they have liked the game if it didn't have teleporting?

Teleporting was inspired by ToEE's Hommlet. The quests weren't that bad, but the running around between NPCs made replaying Hommlet unbearable. Running between NPCs in the Witcher or in Arcanum's Tarant or in Mysteries of Westgate wasn't a memorable experience either.

you're asking for feedback just to refute it? huh?

See above.

 

[Vault Dweller]

OLD. It was proven that C&C -the only redeeming feature of the game- alone doesn't make a game when Alpha Popamole came out. And the gameplay itself was entirely made up of sucky combat.

The problem with AP was that C&C weren't integrated into the game. They existed outside of your missions and choices you made affected very little beyond "red shirt, green shirt". It was a combat game with stealth elements and 'glorious' boss fights, and some choices during the cutscenes.

I think the main shortcoming of AoD (as far as the demo goes) is that it has a heavy emphasis on skipping a lot of repetitive filler crap, thereby replacing game systems with text adventures whereas the way to go (ideally speaking) is integrated game systems with the option of skipping repetitive crap, not removing the choice towards either altogether.

Why? Isn't repetitive crap, well, crap?

 

[hiver]

One thing that needs to be observed is the loss of objectivity each and every artist that ever set up to create something goes through.
The more complex the creation, the greater the self investment - the bigger is the loss of objectivity.

Certainly. It's practically impossible to stay objective after spending a few years with your project, so you do need constant feedback. However, when it comes to 'controversial' games like AoD, you get a very wide range of opinions, so finding the objective opinions isn't easy (and debating merits is the only way to find them).

Not every bit of criticism is objective and should be immediately taken under consideration. Different people like different things in games and the RPG genre is the most diverse one. On top of it, plenty of people simply wish the game was something else, which doesn't help at all but only muddies the waters.

As for teleporting, it has pros and cons. I knew that it would be the most controversial decision, but thought that it would benefit the game in the end. Of course, some people don't like it. The question is, would they have liked the game if it didn't have teleporting?

Teleporting was inspired by ToEE's Hommlet. The quests weren't that bad, but the running around between NPCs made replaying Hommlet unbearable. Running between NPCs in the Witcher or in Arcanum's Tarant or in Mysteries of Westgate wasn't a memorable experience either.

Oh of course... i didnt even think it is necessary to especially point out that this fact does not mean every suggestion has to be taken in account or implemented.
And i was speaking from personal experience too, although it was much, much simpler one then trying to create a game which by its very nature contains several artistic mediums that need to work together.

It seems that a lot of people think about the issue in extremes of either not taking any criticism at all or taking every one thrown in... which really, never actually happens...
(even AAA mass market design studios take some criticism into decision making, even if its just internal one, and even if they are run by PR marketing teams and other various bullshit)

But Iron Towers, as a whole, has always shown an ability to take a good middle stance and measure in this. Thats why in your case this ends up improving the game at all.
Thats why i use you guys as an example of this whole "way of doing things" that actually works. (which is really useful in Wasteland2 forums when some cowards start crying about design by committee)

As for the issue of fast traveling teleportation : It isnt the issue of having it or not - at all
Its just whether it should be under the players control - as an option to choose, or not.
It is the fact that it is not a choice that is actually most galling and irritating here. Set up like this it actually has an unintended effect of turning attention from the story and its quests and gameplay to frustration about design decisions that are not necessary - in this sense of it being mandatory and forced.

Youre already half way there since you made it optional in a lot of specific cases in R2.
I cant see how it would hurt anything by making it an option all the way in every occasion.

Its a funny thing but, you will see that once you make it into an option a player can choose - most of those complaining about it will end up using it and praising the game for having it


I also noticed a few other things that may fall under this category, smaller and bigger... but i need to play more and will post my thoughts and some suggestions (however crazy they might be) in AOD section of the codex.

 

[l3loodAngel]

OLD. It was proven that C&C -the only redeeming feature of the game- alone doesn't make a game when Alpha Popamole came out. And the gameplay itself was entirely made up of sucky combat.

The problem with AP was that C&C weren't integrated into the game. They existed outside of your missions and choices you made affected very little beyond "red shirt, green shirt". It was a combat game with stealth elements and 'glorious' boss fights, and some choices during the cutscenes.

I am not sure emoticons with a timer can considered as C&C. Your choices were: ,,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwyR0opiAas

 

[Infinitron]

OLD. It was proven that C&C -the only redeeming feature of the game- alone doesn't make a game when Alpha Popamole came out. And the gameplay itself was entirely made up of sucky combat.

The problem with AP was that C&C weren't integrated into the game. They existed outside of your missions and choices you made affected very little beyond "red shirt, green shirt". It was a combat game with stealth elements and 'glorious' boss fights, and some choices during the cutscenes.

I am not sure emoticons with a timer can considered as C&C. Your choices were: ,,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwyR0opiAas

1) That's not true.
2) Those are just choices. There were also consequences. Srsly, read the wiki or something.

 

[Vault Dweller]

As for the issue of fast traveling teleportation : It isnt the issue of having it or not - at all
Its just whether it should be under the players control - as an option to choose, or not.
It is the fact that it is not a choice that is actually most galling and irritating here. Set up like this it actually has an unintended effect of turning attention from the story and its quests and gameplay to frustration about design decisions that are not necessary - in this sense of it being mandatory and forced.

Help me understand it then.

If you're doing a city quest, then talking to NPCs is mandatory. You aren't forced to talk to all of them and are often given choices there, but you do have to talk to some of them. Since walking from A to B is uneventful in 99% of RPGs, why not skip it, thus letting you focus on interaction with NPCs (which is the focus of town quests), not walking between them? Sure, why could have made it completely optional, but why? What does the other option add?

You are teleported only within a quest. Between quests you can walk around all you want and explore. There is no teleporting in the ruins either, since the focus there is interaction with the environment not with NPCs. I do agree that the implementation is a bit jarring, which is probably the main issue here. I liked Castanova's suggestion and already asked Nick to see if you can do it.

 

[Infinitron]

If you're doing a city quest, then talking to NPCs is mandatory. You aren't forced to talk to all of them and are often given choices there, but you do have to talk to some of them. Since walking from A to B is uneventful in 99% of RPGs, why not skip it, thus letting you focus on interaction with NPCs (which is the focus of town quests), not walking between them? Sure, why could have made it completely optional, but why? What does the other option add?

It lets us see the reactions of NPCs towards our actions in the intermediate stages of quests. (assuming the designers had the time and resources to add those in, hint hint)

Verisimilitude. You don't teleport in real life, you can't skip over the uninteresting parts of your day.

Joy of exploration, seeing the sights, listening to the music. I love dawdling in areas with great music in games, finding excuses to visit them again and again.

Allowing you to "take a breather" between stages of quests, giving you time to think over things while you make your way to the next NPC.

Or maybe you just want to go off on a tangent and do some other quest entirely. Who says quests have to be undertaken serially one after the other? (oh wait that's right it requires more scripting to allow for more combinations of events, hmm)

 

[Vault Dweller]

It lets us see the reactions of NPCs towards our actions in the intermediate stages of quests. (assuming the designers had the time and resources to add those in, hint hint)

No reaction. Since we had teleporting from day one, there was no need to add it. Thus, the resources were spent on more quests.

Verisimilitude. You don't teleport in real life, you can't skip over the uninteresting parts of your day.

Well... there are a lot of things that you do or don't do in real life, so it's not a valid argument.

Joy of exploration, seeing the sights, listening to the music.

It's all there. You can explore the town as much as you want between quests.

Allowing you to "take a breather" between stages of quests, giving you time to think over things while you make your way to the next NPC.

You can think it over when you're presented with dialogue/text options.

Or maybe you just want to go off on a tangent and do some other quest entirely. Who says quests have to be undertaken serially one after the other? (oh wait that's right it requires more scripting to allow for more combinations of events, hmm)

It wouldn't require more scripting than what's already being used. More complex quests (the ones with most scripting) allow you to take breaks between phases.

 

[desocupado]

Verisimilitude. You don't teleport in real life, you can't skip over the uninteresting parts of your day.

What sort of flying cretin are you? Nobody plays videogames to have boring parts you idiotic fucker, they're supposed to be fun, you want a life simulator, GO OUT AND HAVE A LIFE.

Now, you can dislike the teleporting for an array of different reasons, but this here takes the cake as the most retarded shit I ever heard, I even expected it to be something said by DraQ.

It's shit like this that makes me want to get a cabin in the woods and never see another human being again.

 

[Infinitron]

It wouldn't require more scripting than what's already being used.

Wonderful, then you shouldn't have any problem adding the option to walk at each and every point.

Oh, and here's another reason to prefer walking over teleportation. Forced teleportation is a loss of control. Some players prefer to be in control of all things at all times. Or at least, as much as reasonably possible. The sense of being in control is its own reward, even if you don't need that control for anything useful.

 

[Raghar]

I don't even... You're not even trolling, are you?

There is no need for trolling, I can simply talk about a proper design, and about theory of computer games, and you are trolling yourself.

Yes, graphics really are superficial, you niggerfaggot. Combat, character system, lack of player agency... everything is more important than graphics (especially since AoD has decent graphics already). Now, stop muddying the water and STFU about Krater already.

Krater had a world that was accessible early, and you could go everywhere without level scaling. You would be ripped to pieces, but there is no level scaling.

It's "Dwarf Fortress" and you need to get some glasses.

It's fortress that has been made by Dwarves, thus it's Dwarven Fortress. It's not my problem when author used grammatically incorrect name.