Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Grimoire Thread

gestalt11

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 4, 2015
Messages
629
Here's another bug/quirk I noticed in combat:
> If a character lands a killing blow on the final enemy in the front row group and gains extra bonus attacks - they lose all the bonus attacks when the second row of enemies move forward. The next character in the party takes his turn as normal.

I assumed this was intended. That essentially all targeting is only applicable to a group and not a row. In other words there is no overflow between groups and that melee extra attacks are essentially equivalent to row based AOE.
 

Tarrant

Educated
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
76
I therefore conclude the game is in an Open Beta state, which probably implies 2-3 iterations of tweaks

Yes, it very obviously should have been early access, and the rapid updates since release demonstrate this fact. I still don't understand why Cleve was so opposed to EA, other than ego. Surely it would be obvious that it needed more work when people got to play it.

I am not going to say it should be Early Access because that is completely vague term and people throw complete hissy fits because they expected it to mean Beta Test when the Dev meant Alpha Test or whatever.

Early Access is just a shit show unless the Developers are extremely clear about what the actual state of the game is in their eyes AND EVEN THEN most people won't listen or have no idea what the difference is between Beta and Alpha and just assign random ass expectations.

Personally I think the use of "Early Accees" just creates tons of problems. Doesn't mean I would not release a game on Steam under the Early Access label, but it does not solve problems (except possibly the need for money which might be enough of thing to make you do it), it creates more problems.

I disagree, and I think there's a pervasive misconception about what EA means to Steam users. As a consumer, I'd have very much preferred if the dev would have been up front about what I was purchasing, especially for $40, and especially with my being the only person on the internet who wasn't familiar with Cleve beforehand.

Case in point - I've been on Steam since early 2004, have 650 games, and this was my first refund in 13+ years. The lack of honesty up front is what prompted me to refund more than the state of the game itself.

And for the record, other games released as EA have done just fine -- Factorio being the biggest go-to example. In fact, releasing a game as EA tends to encourage fans to *want* to help improve the game. Certainly there would have been disgruntled customers -- there's no way around that. But I expect they'd have been the exception, not the rule. I myself would have been happy to play, knowing what I was buying, and to make suggestions to Cleve for improvement (that said, I doubt Cleve would have been entirely receptive, but that's a different problem altogether).
 

gestalt11

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 4, 2015
Messages
629
I therefore conclude the game is in an Open Beta state, which probably implies 2-3 iterations of tweaks

Yes, it very obviously should have been early access, and the rapid updates since release demonstrate this fact. I still don't understand why Cleve was so opposed to EA, other than ego. Surely it would be obvious that it needed more work when people got to play it.

I am not going to say it should be Early Access because that is completely vague term and people throw complete hissy fits because they expected it to mean Beta Test when the Dev meant Alpha Test or whatever.

Early Access is just a shit show unless the Developers are extremely clear about what the actual state of the game is in their eyes AND EVEN THEN most people won't listen or have no idea what the difference is between Beta and Alpha and just assign random ass expectations.

Personally I think the use of "Early Accees" just creates tons of problems. Doesn't mean I would not release a game on Steam under the Early Access label, but it does not solve problems (except possibly the need for money which might be enough of thing to make you do it), it creates more problems.

I disagree, and I think there's a pervasive misconception about what EA means to Steam users. As a consumer, I'd have very much preferred if the dev would have been up front about what I was purchasing, especially for $40, and especially with my being the only person on the internet who wasn't familiar with Cleve beforehand.

Case in point - I've been on Steam since early 2004, have 650 games, and this was my first refund in 13+ years. The lack of honesty up front is what prompted me to refund more than the state of the game itself.

And for the record, other games released as EA have done just fine -- Factorio being the biggest go-to example. In fact, releasing a game as EA tends to encourage fans to *want* to help improve the game. Certainly there would have been disgruntled customers -- there's no way around that. But I expect they'd have been the exception, not the rule. I myself would have been happy to play, knowing what I was buying, and to make suggestions to Cleve for improvement (that said, I doubt Cleve would have been entirely receptive, but that's a different problem altogether).

I don't want to imply EA can't work. This is provably wrong, not a matter of opinion. EA has worked well in certain cases. Logically we only need one exception to prove a universal statement wrong and we have more than one case.

However there are also many cases where EA went poorly or was a bit of a scam (this is usually on the developer not the users, but I have seen a couple cases where the users were flat dickheads).

My main point is that the term Early Access is useless for characterizing the game. Its just a Steam program. It doesn't mean shit really. It only means what the developers and their user community make it mean.

I would encourage all reviewers to NEVER use it for reviewing purposes except in relation to how a game is being sold. If you want to characterize its release state then use Alpha/Closed Beta/Open Beta. If you want to say this game is roughly in an Open Beta state and should therefore have release as EA, fine. But telling someonge a game is in Early Access state is like saying Wisconsin is somewhere on the planet Earth.

Edit: Also Cleve is probably somewhat, or extremely, paranoid. So he probably thinks EA is a scam and therefore would be likely to believe everyone would think he is scamming them if he released the game in EA. Even if that is not the case, psychological projection is incredibly powerful even for people who are aware of how powerful it is.
 
Last edited:
Weasel
Joined
Dec 14, 2012
Messages
1,865,661
Lots of us in the old Grimoire thread suggested he should go EA first (a one man operation making something like this was always going to result in a rocky ride for a few weeks) but that's in the past now and not going to change. And from what I recall in Steam's documentation they have some basic requirements of what Early Access should mean (whether this is enforced or not is obviously debatable) . So EA is not supposed to be used just for bugfixing or polish, but for collaborative development of features and content.

And while a team of Codex spergs could have really helped smooth out the combat, I think most here know Cleve well enough to guess whether he would ever have been interested in this sort of process. So here we are, with the game we've been calling on him to release for years, with him still patching it every day and making grand plans to improve it. And he's still Cleve, just with less sleep than usual, so he's falling out even with some of his supporters. And it was always likely to be this way if Grimoire ever came out.
 

mwnn85

Savant
Joined
Aug 14, 2017
Messages
210

TheGameSquid

Scholar
Joined
Aug 23, 2014
Messages
124
If I want to buy the game I want to know about the game - I don't care about any objectionable behaviour he might have been involved in.

I don't agree with this statement. My reasoning is very simple:

It's very clear that Grimoire still has plenty of polishing left to do, and I don't think anyone is contesting this (right?). We're talking about a game that broke its save game format several days after going live after being in development for an incredibly long time. People who are looking into buying the game right now are probably wondering if they can trust a man like Cleve with providing post-launch support. In felipepepe's case, his (minor) criticism was met with a straight ban. I'm not sure I would trust a developer to provide the solid post-launch support that I talked about when the sole man developing the game has a hard time facing the hard facts about the state of the game.

Personally, in this time of Steam cash grabs, Early Access shit, broken 1.0 games, etc., I think it's more important than ever to do a background check on the developer before purchasing a product. When I buy a new game from Illwinter Design, I know I will be getting long term support for my game. When wondered if I should buy Might & Magic X I decided to wait for a sale because I figured Ubi wasn't going to bother supporting the game for a long time and it was released in a less than stable state (and that's exactly what happened).

TL;DR Doing a background check on devs before buying games that still require some work sounds like a good idea. I do think felipepepe's information is useful.

P.S. Yes I'm aware of CMB and Felipe's history, but I choose to believe Felipe's above that and tried to give a fair assessment.
 

Lady_Error

█▓▒░ ░▒▓█
Patron
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,879,250
Still, changing his review on Steam to not recommended because he is butthurt at the developer shows that he cannot separate the game from his personal feelings towards the dev. People don't care how you feel about Cleve, felipepepe, they care about the actual game.
 

Tarrant

Educated
Joined
Dec 16, 2016
Messages
76
[QUOTE="Brancaleone,
inb4 Lady Error's retadred rating - is that you Cleve?

It's not Cleve.. technically. But he's got Cleve's cock so far down his throat that for all intents and purposes, it's a Cleve-LadyError chimera.

My working theory is all the retard and shit post ratings are the only buttons he can reach and are likely a cry for help, but I don't know what to do. They share an HP pool at this point. :(
 

Infinitron

I post news
Staff Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
97,236
Codex Year of the Donut Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
I've read felipe's review. It's fair, not Roxor-level negative.

Let me elaborate on this.

I think too much is being made of felipepepe's assertion that "The game should have been Early Access", and perhaps it was unwise of him to lead with that. It's not really the point.

The real point is that he found most of the latter half of the game significantly less fun due to various issues. And his review reflects that. It's what reviews are supposed to do.

Saying that those issues could have been fixed in Early Access is just an interpretation. Knowing Cleve, he likely wouldn't have changed a thing.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,659
In felipepepe's case, his (minor) criticism was met with a straight ban. I'm not sure I would trust a developer to provide the solid post-launch support that I talked about when the sole man developing the game has a hard time facing the hard facts about the state of the game.

Cleve is honest about the state of his game. Felipe was banned for putting words in his mouth and refusing to accept being corrected.
 

Bumvelcrow

Somewhat interesting
Patron
Dumbfuck
Joined
Nov 17, 2012
Messages
1,867,060
Location
Over the hills and far away
Codex 2013 Codex 2014 Make the Codex Great Again! Strap Yourselves In
Saying that those issues could have been fixed in Early Access is just an interpretation. Knowing Cleve, he likely wouldn't have changed a thing.

We've had a couple of dozen post-'release' patches, so he's certainly doing something. Perhaps the criticism of his precious game is providing some much-needed motivation.
 

DavidBVal

4 Dimension Games
Patron
Developer
Joined
Aug 27, 2015
Messages
2,994
Location
Madrid
PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy Insert Title Here RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Pathfinder: Wrath
Still, changing his review on Steam to not recommended because he is butthurt at the developer shows that he cannot separate the game from his personal feelings towards the dev. People don't care how you feel about Cleve, felipepepe, they care about the actual game.

So, would you recommend a restaurant that serves good food ever even if the chef insulted you and kicked you out for suggesting the steak was too salty? It is fair to assume that being on the receiving end of Cleve's wrath right now isn't very difficult. It is not a bad idea to warn people about such behavior; I for one am not a person affected by being called names and banned from a forum, but such thing can ruin a game for many people. I can see it being part of the review.

My review is still positive (despite being banned), but if in 30 days we have no manual and there are no substantial changes in balance, I might change it. I am honestly undecided, as the game merits are very strong.
 

Lady_Error

█▓▒░ ░▒▓█
Patron
Joined
Oct 14, 2012
Messages
1,879,250
inb4 Lady Error's retadred rating - is that you Cleve?

I rated you as retarded because you claim outright bullshit:

Why does the Sage get Lockpicking but the Thief gets even less and no Inspection. This is the greatest CRPG balance of all time?

Of course Thief has Inspection. If you cannot get even basic facts like this right, why should anyone take your words seriously?
 

mwnn85

Savant
Joined
Aug 14, 2017
Messages
210
They start the game with zero skill in Inspection - that should be obvious from the picture I uploaded.

Plus the Sage started with higher skill in Lock Picking.

I don't remember Wizards in D&D or Bishops in Wizardry typically doing the trap disarming.

I take the starter bonus of skill points on a Thief character to correct this.

The point is - the game is full of strange quirks like the above.
 
Last edited:
Self-Ejected

buru5

Very Grumpy Dragon
Patron
Joined
Apr 9, 2017
Messages
2,048
So, would you recommend a restaurant that serves good food ever even if the chef insulted you and kicked you out for suggesting the steak was too salty?

Shitty argument, not comparable at all. Blocking someone from the game's forum is not comparable to denying service to the product.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom