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.

Underrail vs Age of Decadence

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
To make you read the lines instead of just scanning them?
is it possible to be any other point?
I mean - what difference does it make? The skillchecks won't become any less binary because of that, nor does it make them any more challenging.
 

makiavelli747

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Village Idiot Shitposter
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
402
I mean - what difference does it make?
it makes it more PnP-like, instead of min-maxing everything for specific check, it makes you stick to your char concept.
in other words, without tags its still easy to find correct answer, but its almost impossible to metagame
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
without tags its still easy to find correct answer, but its almost impossible to metagame
I find it hard to believe.
If the lines are written in such a way, that it's obvious what skill is checked - then from a metagaming perspective it makes no difference whether the tags are there or not. And if the skill in question isn't obvious, than it just adds another metagame on top - the "guess what the designer had in mind" one. Which makes it all even less exiting.
The problem with skillcheck-based progression isn't skill tags - it's the binary nature of skillchecks. You either pass or fail and there's no way you can assess the result in advance, nor influence it on the spot. This is what leads people to metagame, not the tags, and their removal doesn't do anything about it.
I guess it could be written off as the roleplaying (LARPing) vs. playing to win (min-maxing) mentality, but the thing is it's very easy to go from "Let's hide the skill tags, they break the immershun" to "Let's hide the weapon stats, it breaks the immershun" to "Let's get rid of to-hit rolls" to "Let's do away with the stats altogether". It's the path of decline basically.
 

MF

The Boar Studio
Patron
Developer
Joined
Dec 8, 2002
Messages
892
Location
Amsterdam
So it's a Mad Max setting in an ancient Rome environment. Not terribly innovative either.

Cute. As far as I know it's never been done before. Name me one similar setting and I'll concede your point.

By the way, AoD and Underrail are both great games. It's very interesting that they're so different.
 

Shadenuat

Arcane
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
11,955
Location
Russia
"guess what the designer had in mind" one.
All puzzles is guessing what designer had in mind. Just look at Deus Ex HR dialogue - in it's nature, it is a puzzle.

The problem with skillcheck-based progression isn't skill tags - it's the binary nature of skillchecks. You either pass or fail
Failure is also a consequence.
And actually, the problem probably lies more in the nature of player's relationships with NPCs - it's binary trust/distrust that can switch through 1 check. You'd have to adapt something like Morrowind's systemic approach where everything from your race to faction you are in and general reputation was calculated into opinion of every NPC in the gameworld, and then forge dialogue trees out of that. Imagine what a titanic job it would be even for a small cast of NPCs.

it's very easy to go from "Let's hide the skill tags, they break the immershun" to "Let's hide the weapon stats, it breaks the immershun"
Well you could say it's a tradition. In PnP you roleplay social play and use numbers to solve mechanical conflicts (things that can't be roleplayed, like whos guy is stronger or better with a sword). Most DMs probably prefer to avoid rolling Diplomacy checks and such, because if you do that there's just nothing to roleplay left at all.
It passes into CRPGs where writers want you to make choices based on what your character would do or what you know about NPCs, not just win everything with one click. It's to make player pay attention to the narrative and make him feel his own moral stand and decisions mean something. Sometimes it's varied and more elegant (in PST you could use CHA not just to make binary paragon diplomatic choices but also to lie through your teeth and make others suffer), but more often it's not.
 

makiavelli747

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck Village Idiot Shitposter
Joined
Dec 12, 2015
Messages
402
If the lines are written in such a way, that it's obvious what skill is checked - then from a metagaming perspective it makes no difference whether the tags are there or not.
to metagame you need to know exact values, because the strategy is to pass a skillcheck by having lowest possible stats. there is a big difference between guessing the right answer(even if its obvious) and to have it highlighted, because you know that you always can be wrong and you can't rely on your guess without checking all other options.
for example, I don't know is it a persuasion+charisma check or just persuasion, in some particular line, but when i'm not trying to metagame, my char will have it both, because otherwise he wouldn't make sense.
"guess what the designer had in mind" one.
its supposed to be like that, actually
with false lines its going to be the same thing - how you figure this line is wrong? why is it wrong? just because the devs said so?......
"Let's hide the skill tags, they break the immershun" to "Let's hide the weapon stats, it breaks the immershun"
tags are basically telling you the right answer, and that your particular skills are low, without 'em you can't even be sure that "partial success" is not the best possible result. I can't see how weapon stats are showing you what to do in combat.
I want skillchecks as much as possible, but i don't want the game to tell me what to do. The only bad thing about tags being off is that AoD is actually not designed for this in the current state.
Let's do away with the stats altogether
you can't make assumptions like that... even if people have similar playstyle, they usually have different reasons - some metagame to be able to do everything, while others just like the process of figuring out how to break a game.
to me, i can't make a character if i can't make him different from the other, thus i don't understand how you going to have immersion w/o stats being important
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
You'd have to adapt something like Morrowind's systemic approach where everything from your race to faction you are in and general reputation was calculated into opinion of every NPC in the gameworld, and then forge dialogue trees out of that. Imagine what a titanic job it would be even for a small cast of NPCs.
Not really, systemic approaches are always easier to do, in the long run at least, than trying to account for every possible stat combination in hand-written scripts because systemic means more abstraction. Basically, you'd just have to separate the dialog game in two: influencing NPC's opinion (which could be represented by several variables like trust, fear etc.) and then checking these variables when you attempt to convinve the NPC of anything. It would actually involve less checks than AoD's current approach.

with false lines its going to be the same thing - how you figure this line is wrong? why is it wrong? just because the devs said so?
All puzzles is guessing what designer had in mind. Just look at Deus Ex HR dialogue - in it's nature, it is a puzzle.
And you could say that all combat is hacking things with other things, but still there is difference between, say, Goldbox games and Progress Quest.
 
Last edited:

Shadenuat

Arcane
Joined
Dec 9, 2011
Messages
11,955
Location
Russia
Basically, you'd just have to separate the dialog game in two: influencing NPC's opinion (which could be represented by several variables like trust, fear etc.) and then checking these variables when you attempt to convinve the NPC of anything. It would actually involve less checks than AoD's current approach.
Yeah and how do you think you'd account for influencing NPCs opinion? You'd have to assign integers for actions that do influence his opinion, like quests for example. You can abstract it into things like reputation in faction NPC belongs to, but what if NPC doesn't belong to a faction, doesn't care about events around and is not afraid of your [bodycount]? What if setting doesn't feature races or guilds? You'd have to manually assign what things you have to do to make NPC like you or what makes him fear you. You'd basically have to make multiple likeness meters (like in KOTOR), and think what would fill them up for every particular NPC.
At least that's if you want NPC to have actual personality and react to things happening around and your actions in a different way than another NPC, not just live as an abstract faction member #46 from Elder Scrolls.

Compared to that, a skill check, maybe with a modifier or two for plot important NPCs is simplier and easier to assign and track.
 

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
If the lines are written in such a way, that it's obvious what skill is checked - then from a metagaming perspective it makes no difference whether the tags are there or not.
to metagame you need to know exact values, because the strategy is to pass a skillcheck by having lowest possible stats. there is a big difference between guessing the right answer(even if its obvious) and to have it highlighted, because you know that you always can be wrong and you can't rely on your guess without checking all other options.
for example, I don't know is it a persuasion+charisma check or just persuasion, in some particular line, but when i'm not trying to metagame, my char will have it both, because otherwise he wouldn't make sense.
You don't need to know the exact skill values to metagame, it's enough to know that there is a passed/failed check deciding the outcome of a quest. You can then use this knowledge to obtain the outcome you want; in the case of singular checks it's particularly easy, because it doesn't take long to figure our which skills you need to raise, and you can use this knowledge in all subsequent games, as those values don't change. If you want to do this by having lowest possible stats, then I'd say you're powergaming on top of it, as powergaming often involves using metagaming to create the most powerful character with minimal skill investment.
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
You'd have to assign integers for actions that do influence his opinion, like quests for example. You can abstract it into things like reputation in faction NPC belongs to, but what if NPC doesn't belong to a faction, doesn't care about events around and is not afraid of your [bodycount]?
Does AoD's current dialog account for that? No. So why should a systemic remaking of it do?

Yeah and how do you think you'd account for influencing NPCs opinion?
In the laziest way possible - through the very same dialog options and skill/reputation checks.

At least that's if you want NPC to have actual personality and react to things happening around and your actions in a different way than another NPC, not just live as an abstract faction member #46 from Elder Scrolls.
And how would you make each enemy have a personality and not just live die as an abstract goblin #46? Oh wait, you don't. Same applies here - a few plot-critica NPCs may have more nuanced options, while the majority do with a run-of-the-mill system. And you always have the writing of the actual responses to communicate personality.
 

Lord Andre

Arcane
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
3,716
Location
Gypsystan
I can sum up the difference between these 2 games with a dungeon master analogy:

In AoD the DM is a control freak, he only gives you enough information for the situation at hand and keeps things vague so that he can pull shit out of his ass whenever he wants to bludgeon you with some C&C. He's stingy with the exp and the skillpoints. This makes for a very tight and focused experience and the whole game is challenging as you are constantly in a war with the DM for control. You are never in control though and if you stop for a second to analyze your situation you will find that you are glued to the DM's rails. So positives and negatives.

In Underrail, the DM plays by the same rules as you, he lays everything on a map in advance and does not change things on the fly. This means that if you see a big wig NPC with 10 guards and you want to kill him then that is the situation you will have to deal with. No pulling shit out of DM's ass where anothere 20 guards respawn out of the ground 'cause he said so. There is room placement of guards, there is line of sight, noise system, stealth and vents etc. This leads to better emergent gameplay because what you see is what you get and you plan around it. The downside is that because the DM never cheats, never pulls shit out of his ass, the challenge may suffer as the player starts to understand the system and use it to his full advantage. Also the story is less interesting as the best way to deal with situations is to use violence and without heavy rails to take that option away from you there's never a reason to roleplay stuff. Twists are rare etc. So positives and negatives.

Now the 2 games are really good, "modern classics" really, but they are not perfect. The 2 DMs in my example could learn from each other, one should loosen up a bit and allow the player a bit more freedom and the other should tighten his grip a bit and abstract some content away for more focus.

Going into particular complaints now:

AoD: - the best and most interesting content is gated behind Lore+Crafting. Sorry but Darth Roxor was right. You can play and finish the game without spending a point in those 2 but the BEST content is gated behind those 2 skills. Without them there are entire locations where you can do 0 things. Just look at the pretty map and leave.
- the combat system breaks down the second enemies are allowed to use your "tricks". Give enemies bolas and you will go from killing 10 at a time to cheesing your way through 2 enemies. The same with nets, crossbows etc. You will always be at the DM's mercy and since new enemies can always spawn out of thin air at the DM's whim you can never plan ahead and strategise.

Underrail - quality of life tools are almost non-existant and while this might be cool for 30-40 hours the shit gets worse and worse as time goes by.
- at times the game throws its mechanics out the window and decides to spice things up with classics as "unending respawns", "invincible enemies/NPC", "un-hackable, not-pickable snowflake doors" and NPCs that refuse to do shit that is obviously in their own interest without being persuaded or intimadated.

Now, I've made it clear that to me both games are really, really good (despite some imperfections) but what if I had to pick the best out of the 2. Which one is better ? I would say it depends. It depends on what kind of game I want to play right now. Right now I feel like crafting an op sniper rifle and one shot some bitches. Next week I might feel like double-crossing and betraying my way up the social ladder and then AoD is the best. Next month I might feel like playing Gothic and I'll be bitching about modern Piranha Bytes sucking ass. Then nuTorment will come along and I'll feel like philosoraptoring my way through a story...

Anyway, my point is, no sane person likes the same thing all the fucking time, forever and ever. There are shades of quality a product can achieve and these 2 games have the same shade but they each do different things. It's normal. Only dumb cultists think "there can be only one". You're not dumb cultists, are you bros ?

/rant over
 

Goral

Arcane
Patron
The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
3,552
Location
Poland
Someone at NMA has posted one of the reasons why he considers Age of Decadence to be superior: http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/underrail-released-on-steam-and-gog.204706/page-2#post-4110220
At this point for me, if you're going to buy only one indie RPG this year, it ought to be Age of Decadence.
Fallout gives you a purpose & then kicks you off into the world. If you actually give a fuck about the purpose, is up to the player. In the first one, you're just a disposable asset and you're not the only one they send out. In the second one, you're the chose one because you come from a tribe of morons and have the same blood as the savior in the first game.

However, with Underrail, you've got no purpose. "Welcome to the SGS", now would you kindly run our insanely dangerous missions for no other reason than us asking nicely?
Your fellow inhabitants clearly do not get such over the top dangerous tasks and if they do, then there are a fuckton of them deployed with heavy guns and armor wherever they go. It's more or less made clear that you could stay even if you don't carry out the suicide missions, since you meet plenty of people who don't.
So what drives my character here? And what drives the SGS? "Oh, we've got a guy that did pretty OK on our tests, so let's see if we can get him killed by sending him off alone against threats that have absolutely murdered the shit out of dozens of others before him"?
Painted like that, I don't really feel like helping out the SGS much. The problem isn't the fetch quest, nor the danger. It's the writing. The feeling you're doing something good for the community you feel a part of (if your char is a good guy at least). SGS has no appeal. It's a good base to be in this world, but none of the writing give you a sufficient motivation to offset the dangers you encounter. You could live out a safe & happy life without risking your life for drilling parts.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
I would argue that AoD is better in combat department too because almost all fights are challenging and are interestingly set up.

I think that the problem with Underrail’s combat is the same problem we have with BG2. It’s great that you have all those spells, skills, classes, magical items, and combos but the fact that the game allows you to exploit the system and being completely overpowered, beating every fight as one trick pony, and providing stuff like a resting button, leaves you with a bad taste in the mouth.

It’s almost as if a flexible combat-hybridzation approach and the challenge aspects end up cancelling each other. The cooler you build is, the most overpowered it is. The guy who tries different builds is not worrying about whether the combat is challenging or not, he just wants to try different things to kill things in different ways. If you can pay more attention to this aspect and ignore the fact that you are practically playing as a Genghis Khan, you’re this guy, you will prefer the hybridization approach.

The other tension is between the exploration of sandbox games like Underrail and BG2 and the challenge part. Games with heavy exploration and tons of quests, end up being easy after the first half, if not earlier.

I think that the main reason combat system richness and sandbox aspects are in tension with the challenge aspect is that it’s too difficult to balance the game. And by balance I don’t mean “Sawyer’s balance”, which is the attempt to make everything bland and safe for causals, but the opposite, which is to make everything more tight and difficult. The developers usually don’t have the time or the patience to make every single encounter compelling after they wasted so many hours developing a ultra-rich combat system. Or maybe they don’t want to, because that it will make the nuances of the system more difficult to absorb, and will repel players. Vault Dweller is promising that his new game with be focused on exploration, with hybrids and feats, but I doubt that will be as challenging as AoD. I guess we will have to wait to see it for ourselves.
 

hell bovine

Arcane
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
2,711
Location
Secret Level
I would argue that AoD is better in combat department too because almost all fights are challenging and are interestingly set up.

I think that the problem with Underrail’s combat is the same problem we have with BG2. It’s great that you have all those spells, skills, classes, magical items, and combos but the fact that the game allows you to exploit the system and being completely overpowered, beating every fight as one trick pony, and providing stuff like a resting button, leaves you with a bad taste in the mouth.
The problem with BG2 was that arcane magic was ridiculously powerful compared to everything else, but the enemy AI - especially that of enemy mages - was plain bad and incapable of using that power. BG2 with SCS caster scripts set to full power turns BG2 into a different game. It still won't balance out the fact that wizards are better at everything, but at least it turns them into proper enemies. Ascension (with SCS-scripting) - even sorcerers can't one-trick pony through that final fight.

And that's the similarity with Underrail: the game under-utilizes its own combat system, because the AI is bad at making enemies work together. Humanoid groups could provide toughest encounters in the game, because every overpowered character build you can think of, humanoid enemies can have too, only they come in numbers. Except that they don't work well together.
 

Sykar

Arcane
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
11,297
Location
Turn right after Alpha Centauri
I would argue that AoD is better in combat department too because almost all fights are challenging and are interestingly set up.

I think that the problem with Underrail’s combat is the same problem we have with BG2. It’s great that you have all those spells, skills, classes, magical items, and combos but the fact that the game allows you to exploit the system and being completely overpowered, beating every fight as one trick pony, and providing stuff like a resting button, leaves you with a bad taste in the mouth.
The problem with BG2 was that arcane magic was ridiculously powerful compared to everything else, but the enemy AI - especially that of enemy mages - was plain bad and incapable of using that power. BG2 with SCS caster scripts set to full power turns BG2 into a different game. It still won't balance out the fact that wizards are better at everything, but at least it turns them into proper enemies. Ascension (with SCS-scripting) - even sorcerers can't one-trick pony through that final fight.

And that's the similarity with Underrail: the game under-utilizes its own combat system, because the AI is bad at making enemies work together. Humanoid groups could provide toughest encounters in the game, because every overpowered character build you can think of, humanoid enemies can have too, only they come in numbers. Except that they don't work well together.

Still the AI of Underrail is miles ahead of that of BG 2. Bg 2 AI was basically non existent, heck mages would hammer spells into you even if you had Protection from Magic up. Case in point: Kangaxx, I beat him once by giving Jaheira Staff of Rynn and 1 Scroll of Protection from Magic, buffed her to to heaven's kingdom come and tugged away the other characters safely. Was an easy fight that way since Kangaxx was wasting spell after spell into her.

I would argue that AoD is better in combat department too because almost all fights are challenging and are interestingly set up.

I think that the problem with Underrail’s combat is the same problem we have with BG2. It’s great that you have all those spells, skills, classes, magical items, and combos but the fact that the game allows you to exploit the system and being completely overpowered, beating every fight as one trick pony, and providing stuff like a resting button, leaves you with a bad taste in the mouth.

It’s almost as if a flexible combat-hybridzation approach and the challenge aspects end up cancelling each other. The cooler you build is, the most overpowered it is. The guy who tries different builds is not worrying about whether the combat is challenging or not, he just wants to try different things to kill things in different ways. If you can pay more attention to this aspect and ignore the fact that you are practically playing as a Genghis Khan, you’re this guy, you will prefer the hybridization approach.

The other tension is between the exploration of sandbox games like Underrail and BG2 and the challenge part. Games with heavy exploration and tons of quests, end up being easy after the first half, if not earlier.

I think that the main reason combat system richness and sandbox aspects are in tension with the challenge aspect is that it’s too difficult to balance the game. And by balance I don’t mean “Sawyer’s balance”, which is the attempt to make everything bland and safe for causals, but the opposite, which is to make everything more tight and difficult. The developers usually don’t have the time or the patience to make every single encounter compelling after they wasted so many hours developing a ultra-rich combat system. Or maybe they don’t want to, because that it will make the nuances of the system more difficult to absorb, and will repel players. Vault Dweller is promising that his new game with be focused on exploration, with hybrids and feats, but I doubt that will be as challenging as AoD. I guess we will have to wait to see it for ourselves.

Even later in the game there are enemies who can one round kill you if you are not careful, especially when you play a stealth character with low Con. This is especially painful in Arena when enemies win the initiative and you are not able to start in stealth.

Someone at NMA has posted one of the reasons why he considers Age of Decadence to be superior: http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/underrail-released-on-steam-and-gog.204706/page-2#post-4110220
At this point for me, if you're going to buy only one indie RPG this year, it ought to be Age of Decadence.
Fallout gives you a purpose & then kicks you off into the world. If you actually give a fuck about the purpose, is up to the player. In the first one, you're just a disposable asset and you're not the only one they send out. In the second one, you're the chose one because you come from a tribe of morons and have the same blood as the savior in the first game.

However, with Underrail, you've got no purpose. "Welcome to the SGS", now would you kindly run our insanely dangerous missions for no other reason than us asking nicely?
Your fellow inhabitants clearly do not get such over the top dangerous tasks and if they do, then there are a fuckton of them deployed with heavy guns and armor wherever they go. It's more or less made clear that you could stay even if you don't carry out the suicide missions, since you meet plenty of people who don't.
So what drives my character here? And what drives the SGS? "Oh, we've got a guy that did pretty OK on our tests, so let's see if we can get him killed by sending him off alone against threats that have absolutely murdered the shit out of dozens of others before him"?
Painted like that, I don't really feel like helping out the SGS much. The problem isn't the fetch quest, nor the danger. It's the writing. The feeling you're doing something good for the community you feel a part of (if your char is a good guy at least). SGS has no appeal. It's a good base to be in this world, but none of the writing give you a sufficient motivation to offset the dangers you encounter. You could live out a safe & happy life without risking your life for drilling parts.

What a bunch of crap. Guys not being able to follow a basic story just shows how degenerate NMA is nowadays.
 

ArchAngel

Arcane
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
19,889
Someone at NMA has posted one of the reasons why he considers Age of Decadence to be superior: http://www.nma-fallout.com/threads/underrail-released-on-steam-and-gog.204706/page-2#post-4110220
At this point for me, if you're going to buy only one indie RPG this year, it ought to be Age of Decadence.
Fallout gives you a purpose & then kicks you off into the world. If you actually give a fuck about the purpose, is up to the player. In the first one, you're just a disposable asset and you're not the only one they send out. In the second one, you're the chose one because you come from a tribe of morons and have the same blood as the savior in the first game.

However, with Underrail, you've got no purpose. "Welcome to the SGS", now would you kindly run our insanely dangerous missions for no other reason than us asking nicely?
Your fellow inhabitants clearly do not get such over the top dangerous tasks and if they do, then there are a fuckton of them deployed with heavy guns and armor wherever they go. It's more or less made clear that you could stay even if you don't carry out the suicide missions, since you meet plenty of people who don't.
So what drives my character here? And what drives the SGS? "Oh, we've got a guy that did pretty OK on our tests, so let's see if we can get him killed by sending him off alone against threats that have absolutely murdered the shit out of dozens of others before him"?
Painted like that, I don't really feel like helping out the SGS much. The problem isn't the fetch quest, nor the danger. It's the writing. The feeling you're doing something good for the community you feel a part of (if your char is a good guy at least). SGS has no appeal. It's a good base to be in this world, but none of the writing give you a sufficient motivation to offset the dangers you encounter. You could live out a safe & happy life without risking your life for drilling parts.
Except it is not like that. Tasks you are given are easy for anyone there and that is why you are doing them. Why waste time of well armored/well armed guard when he is needed to guard vs Lurkers/Lunatics/Ironguys/Protectorate/Faceless/anything stronger than few rathounds.
If your character cannot do that, why bother with anything else. Then when you get to GMS compound, you can ask Gorsky why is he sending your alone and he asks you if you are afraid of few rathounds? If you later tell him you saved some people from bandits he mocks you by asking you if you want a medal. So he obviously does not see you as someone that needs to be protected or only sent on easy mission, you are expendable asset to him that needs to prove himself (probably everyone is but you especially as a newbie).

The Junkyard mission, you are supposed to get a drill part not meddle in local affairs. They didn't send you there expecting you to fight mutants. But when you do and come out victorious you show to them you are not just a random mook that nobody cares about and you are after that given serious missions that are not given to their armored guards.
To make people like this guy happy I would add some more content here where you can go back to complain how the drill part is in Junkyard A and as a result they ask you if you are afraid to continue the mission and want them to handle it? If you say Yes they kick you out of SGS and game ends there with a slide that says you died alone in the Caves with nobody wanting to take you in after SGS put out a word about you.

The guy on the link just has reading comprehension problems, it is a common problem with AoD lovers, comes with min/maxing "talking" stats and doing the game having the correct ones.
 
Last edited:

NotAGolfer

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Dec 1, 2013
Messages
2,527
Location
Land of Bier and Bratwurst
Divinity: Original Sin 2
Still didn't play AoD since the combat demo so I can't really compare.
But if I ever pick it up again I certainly won't play a character relying on social skills since I really don't care for CYOAs.
I find the concept of such characters pretty dumb tbh. IRL there might be professions that work that way but they are boring as hell and I don't see the point of adding such tedium as main gameplay element of a game. I also don't see any reason why only those chartypes should get to see interesting stories unfold while the others just stumble over dead bodies and yawn. Why do you have to be punished by lazy writers just because you think smooth-talking your way out of every dangerous situation is gay as fuck?

Combat only focussed gameplay is a problem for CRPGs, I agree. They should definitely add more gameplay elements that don't just amount to attacking everything in your way til it stops moving and a little stealth on top. But binary diplomat - combat char approaches to game design are not the answer. In fact diplomat has to go away, it's a boring and dumb profession not suiting the smale scale adventures in most CRPGs where you don't juggle with relations between states/nations all day.
I'd rather like to see more CRPGs doing something in the fashion of the Quest for Glory series, adding adventure style puzzles involving the scenery and NPCs that also tie in your char's skill set.
Actually this is so obvious that I really don't get why this isn't already mandatory and every single CRPG does it.
And if there absolutely has to be a profession that can do nothing but smooth-talk then at least reintroduce parsers so it gets less brain-dead ffs.
 
Last edited:

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
Still didn't play AoD since the combat demo so I can't really compare.
But if I ever pick it up again I certainly won't play a character relying on social skills since I really don't care for CYOAs.
I find the concept of such characters pretty dumb tbh. IRL there might be professions that work that way but they are boring as hell and I don't see the point of adding such tedium as main gameplay element of a game. I also don't see any reason why only those chartypes should get to see interesting stories unfold while the others just stumble over dead bodies and yawn. Why do you have to be punished by lazy writers just because you think smooth-talking your way out of every dangerous situation is gay as fuck?

Combat only focussed gameplay is a problem for CRPGs, I agree. They should definitely add more gameplay elements that don't just amount to attacking everything in your way til it stops moving and a little stealth on top. But binary diplomat - combat char approaches to game design are not the answer. I fact diplomat has to go away, it's a boring and dumb profession not suiting the smale scale adventures in most CRPGs where you don't juggle with relations between states/nations all day.
I'd rather like to see more CRPGs doing something in the fashion of the Quest for Glory series, adding adventure style puzzles involving the scenery and NPCs that also tie in your char's skill set.
Actually this is so obvious that I really don't get why this isn't already mandatory and every single CRPG does it.
And if there absolutely has to be a profession that can do nothing but smooth-talk then at least reintroduce parsers so it gets less brain-dead ffs.
I actually did a loremaster playthrough, and it was extremely frustrating to see how easy it would be to remake those rote CYOA sequences into fairly good PnC puzzle sequences, especially if the game didn't insist on being so unforgiving.
 

oneself

Arcane
Shitposter
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
9,502
Location
A minority-white, multicultural hellscape
@Lore Andre

I liked the comparison of AoD and Underrail to two different DMs. Very apt.

AoD is overly on rails for me, and that is a fundamental design issue. Underrail gets easy later on for sure and it lacks the C&C that AoD has, but one of those problems can be easily fixed by simply improving its difficulty.
 

Elhoim

Iron Tower Studio
Developer
Joined
Oct 27, 2006
Messages
2,878
Location
San Isidro, Argentina
I actually did a loremaster playthrough, and it was extremely frustrating to see how easy it would be to remake those rote CYOA sequences into fairly good PnC puzzle sequences, especially if the game didn't insist on being so unforgiving.

PnC?

EDIT: I assume point and click. We are experimenting with that, the new thieving update is very "freeform" with lots of things to point and click at.
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
PnC?

EDIT: I assume point and click.
Yep, that. It's actually pretty amusing how the levels in the game are structured in a very Adventure-like fashion, i.e. as collections of separate scenes with space in-between serving little purpose. Explains all the teleporting that was in the early versions as it would be a very natural thing in an Adventure game.
 
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
8,820
Location
Italy
age of decadence.
even if only because its fonts aren't trying to kill me.
 

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