Game News The Age of Decadence Released

[Goral]

If there will be one AoD2, it won't be a sequel, but a prequel.

No, it will take place almost at the same time as AoD but on a different continent.

 

[Darth Roxor]

It didn't bother you in Shadowrun games. Double standards.

a u was murzynów biją

 

[Excidium II]

Give an example of a game with better C&C than in AoD. Also, I don't remember "growing up dreaming" with any promises about AoD or any promises being made. People just noticed that AoD has the best C&C in any cRPG and the word spread. Also, the logic "since Shadowrun is a tablet game much can be forgiven" is very flawed.

But "Since AoD has more C&C than most games, shitty C&C can be forgiven" is ok.

 

[Vault Dweller]

aka do nothing

Just because it means nothing to you doesn't mean it does nothing.

There are different types of consequences:

- instant reward (you saved someone, sided with a faction, did a quest a certain way, betrayed, etc)
- doors opened/closed (something you did in point A affected your options in point C)
- long term consequences that affect the state of the world

MG questline in particular and the entire game in general has all three types. You don't care about the long term consequences that can't be shown in any game because they take years to materialize, so you dismiss all these consequences as false even though they mean something to people who care about the effect of your actions on the state of the world.

 

[Irenaeus II]

Lame trolls

 

[Cazzeris]

Just because it means nothing to you doesn't mean it does nothing.

There are different types of consequences:

- long term consequences that affect the state of the world

MG questline in particular and the entire game in general has all three types. You don't care about the long term consequences that can't be shown in any game because they take years to materialize, so you dismiss all these consequences as false even though they mean something to people who care about the effect of your actions on the state of the world.

But if a consequence doesn't have a real impact on the gameplay, it's just important on a flavor level, since it only affects graphics and text.

 

[Excidium II]

If it doesn't have an impact on how player experiences encounters then it's just flavour reactivity. It's not necessarily bad but you can't get butthurt if people say it doesn't matter.

 

[Johannes]

If you don't like flavor shit aka storyfaggotry, AoD is a p. terrible game. Some people like it others don't, game is good for what it is.

 

[AbounI]

No, it will take place almost at the same time as AoD but on a different continent.

Ok, so I misunderstood this:

You'd join an expedition sent by House Aurelian shortly before the events of the first game

 

[Irenaeus II]

Yes, if you don't like story, you should be playing something like a racing game or Fifa, not AoD. At least we can agree on that.

To enjoy RPGs you have to enjoy stories. Those are the rules.

 

[Darth Roxor]

Okay then, allow me to elaborate.

If you go around doing lets say 3 things and at the end all the stuff you did in them condenses into an ending slide that says how the 3 things you did carry on as history unfolds, that's okay.

But, if you just keep following the rails all the time and then ONLY AT THE END someone tells you 'go make the choice, my chosen one!', and the only consequence for FINALLY HAVING A CHOICE here is a goddamn ending slide, that is bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. And only leads to:

Spare the remaining IG or enroll them into Antidas's troops? No difference. Give the power in Maadoran to Strabos or Lorenza? No difference. Side with Athanasius or Strabos in Zanzibar? No difference. Persuade Paullus to nuke Al-Akia or not? N o d i f f e r e n c e. It doesn't even matter in the least if you screw Paullus and get Antidas to break the siege, FFS!

Do you have any idea how very offended I felt when all (ALL) the things I could do at the Zanzibar siege turned out to end up the same?

- Ask the Teron folks to break the siege
- Tell Paullus to side with Meru
- Tell Paullus to side with the Aurelians
- Convince Paullus to spare Al-Akia
- Paullus blows up Al-Akia

These are 5 different things available to the playa at the end, and all of them are the same. Siege is broken in a cutscene, dudeguy in the throne room says 'good job son' and lets me into the library, and then I leave for the ziggurat. Such deep C&C! Very different from Bioware! Much unique! I particularly like how the Teron scenario is there as a 'failure' option if you don't manage to convince Paullus to pick any side. And it also ends up the same, in a revolutionary display of deep C&C never seen before in a vidya gaem.

 

[Vault Dweller]

But if a consequence doesn't have a real impact on the gameplay, it's just important on a flavor level, since it only affects graphics and text.

My point was that an RPG with C&C needs all three. Basically, you affect your character, in-game options, and the state of the world. Personally, I'd consider it a flaw if a game offered only the first two but maybe that's just me. To affect the state of the world you need to set up proper quests and choices that would explain the future changes, so it's not all flavor.

 

[Irenaeus II]

Seems like this siege thing needs clearing up of bugs and issues. I haven't reached that far with a merchant, but I will.

 

[IHaveHugeNick]

Seems like this siege thing needs clearing up of bugs and issues.

It would if it were true.

 

[Cazzeris]

My point was that an RPG with C&C needs all three. Basically, you affect your character, in-game options, and the state of the world. Personally, I'd consider it a flaw if a game offered only the first two but maybe that's just me. To affect the state of the world you need to set up proper quests and choices that would explain the future changes, so it's not all flavor.

I don't think the game's C&C is underwhelming at all, but the examples Roxor's posted don't have real consequences attached to them. Those are the questionable examples, but I wouldn't say they are representative of the whole game.

If a consequence to an action can only be experimented through changes in the graphics (i.e. changing IG's banners with Daratan's) or text, then there are no real consequences. It's obvious that not all the choices in AoD have only this kind of superficial reactivity, but there's nothing wrong in criticising the examples that are lacking in this regard. The MG's questline has (arguably) too many of them.

 

[Irenaeus II]

They should have been posted on the official merchant thread.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Do you have any idea how very offended I felt when all (ALL) the things I could do at the Zanzibar siege turned out to end up the same?

- Ask the Teron folks to break the siege
- Tell Paullus to side with Meru
- Tell Paullus to side with the Aurelians
- Convince Paullus to spare Al-Akia
- Paullus blows up Al-Akia

These are 5 different things available to the playa at the end, and all of them are the same. Siege is broken in a cutscene, dudeguy in the throne room says 'good job son' and lets me into the library, and then I leave for the ziggurat.

I'm tempted to believe you and blame it for some kind of scripting bug, but you do like making edgy statements and you're the only one who's reporting these issues.

Still, for the record: There are two main outcomes: the siege is broken or the city is taken. There are different ways to do both. There are different slides explaining the effects of your choices, including the possible destruction of Al-Akia.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I don't think the game's C&C is underwhelming at all, but the examples Roxor's posted don't have real consequences attached to them. Those are the questionable examples, but I wouldn't say they are representative of the whole game.

If a consequence to an action can only be experimented through changes in the graphics (i.e. changing IG's banners with Daratan's) or text, then there are no real consequences. It's obvious that not all the choices in AoD have only this kind of superficial reactivity, but there's nothing wrong in criticising the examples that are lacking in this regard. The MG's questline has (arguably) too many of them.

You keep missing the point.

Not all consequences can be shown in-game. It's a question of scope. So the solution is, either do only the local, small-time consequences that the player can actually see and touch, which is very limiting, or allow a wider range but move some of the consequences into the ending slide. It's not a flaw, it's the only way to present them.

Since the MG questline is revolving around scheming and plotting, it does make sense that many consequences are of the 'down the road' variety.

 

[Aenra]

Death of the author.

New publication, with an editorial by Darth Roxor: 'On reciprocity and unequivocalness'

edit:
I respect VD's need to defend his baby, but the truth is somewhere in the middle. While the scope is to be commended, fact is they should have focused in fewer but more detailed story branchings; One does occasionally come across way too much flavour and too little substance. Personally, i am fine with that, but that is an opinion which as such does not invalidate the fact.
As for Darth, while he does have a point as i just mentioned above, i honestly can't get his fixation. I like your posts man, they denote a mentality not quite on a par with what you display here. Which tells me it's personal. No one should give a fuck about that. There is a lot of love in this game, shown tangibly, by a group of people that have clearly fucking read a book or two in their lives. In this day and age, that alone is commendable. More so when, flavour notwithstanding, precious few outcomes lack in the quality of their writing (mind you, quality and its degrees thereof in relation to other game titles' quality. I will not treat a gaem as i do a literary piece).

 

[Cazzeris]

You keep missing the point.

Not all consequences can be shown in-game. It's a question of scope. So the solution is, either do only the local, small-time consequences that the player can actually see and touch, which is very limiting, or allow a wider range but move some of the consequences into the ending slide. It's not a flaw, it's the only way to present them.

Since the MG questline is revolving around scheming and plotting, it does make sense that many consequences are of the 'down the road' variety.

I understand that the kind of content you designed for the MG's questline has many opportunities to add consequences that are only relevant narrative-wise and that it's simply not possible to implement content where the gameplay is actually affected by such long-term consequences, but it's a fact that, in these cases, there is only superficial, non-game changing consequences for some actions. Roxor is saying that the MG's questline has not enough situations where tangible future content is altered by your actions, and since he's mentioned a decent number of examples that follow this hypothesis, he might be right.

Personally, I was satisfied with the questline on many levels and always appreciate the addition of flavor consequences (Arcanum and Fallout frequently relied on them), but the nature of this kind of C&C being questionable is something that can't be refuted.

 

[Elhoim]

How?

$pref::AoD::hideDlgTags = true;

 

[Darth Roxor]

There are two main outcomes: the siege is broken or the city is taken. There are different ways to do both. There are different slides explaining the effects of your choices, including the possible destruction of Al-Akia.

I don't think you quite understand what I mean.

The only actual difference between all of these is the colour of the clothing of the guy that lets you into Meru's library afterwards - I remember when people kept criticising Alpha Protocol for doing the exact same thing, yet here somehow it becomes Deep C&C (tm).

As for the ending slides, I quite honestly give zero shits about them and find them massively overrated, particularly when they are used as a 'your choices have consequences you see!!!' kind of cover-up that has become so very popular in recent times.

 

[Haba]

Not all consequences can be shown in-game. It's a question of scope. So the solution is, either do only the local, small-time consequences that the player can actually see and touch, which is very limiting, or allow a wider range but move some of the consequences into the ending slide. It's not a flaw, it's the only way to present them.

What are your thoughts on significant time skips to facilitate better C&C? That's the way I found personally most feasible to show radical changes based on the player choices.

 

[Infinitron]

If you go around doing lets say 3 things and at the end all the stuff you did in them condenses into an ending slide that says how the 3 things you did carry on as history unfolds, that's okay.

But, if you just keep following the rails all the time and then ONLY AT THE END someone tells you 'go make the choice, my chosen one!', and the only consequence for FINALLY HAVING A CHOICE here is a goddamn ending slide, that is bad. Bad. Bad. Bad. And only leads to:

Hmmm. I don't really want to get involved in this duscission, but you say "doing let's say 3 things". Couldn't making that choice be considered "doing a thing"? Ie this is a kind of presentation issue.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The only actual difference between all of these is the colour of the clothing of the guy that lets you into Meru's library afterwards - I remember when people kept criticising Alpha Protocol for doing the exact same thing, yet here somehow it becomes Deep C&C (tm).

In AP it affected the shirt color of your allies, which didn't mean much. Here we're talking about the fate of an entire city, its Noble House, its religion, etc.

As for the ending slides, I quite honestly give zero shits about them and find them massively overrated...

Which is no different than saying that you don't give a shit about dialogues because they are massively overrated and RPGs should only be about combat. We all have personal preferences and there are things that I care about a lot (like setting in RPGs, for example) and things that I don't care about it like Bioware's personality dialogue options, which I fucking hated in Shadowrun, btw. Still, it's nothing but a personal preference, not a design flaw.