KickStarter Underworld Ascendant Pre-Prototype Thread

[Zombra]

That all sounds great.

 

[Excidium II]

They're not sure yet if siding with a faction will be an exclusive choice or not.

Better be optional in any case.

 

[Infinitron]

Survival elements - there'll be some of that, similar to the original games. Paul says he doesn't like the idea of an FO:NV-style optional hardcore mode, it has to be integral to gameplay.

Tangible gameplay incentives for playing on higher difficulty levels - probably not.

 

[SausageInYourFace]

There's going to be some sort of "supplemental narrative", the notes of a previous explorer of the Abyss that you can find.

Is it going to be Toorum?

 

[Infinitron]

The game will have an end (not some kind of perpetual sandbox).

No good/evil meter.

No fast travel. There might be hazardous shortcuts between areas, though.

 

[Zep Zepo]

They want there to be dangerous high-level areas that the player can take a risk by going to early.

They're not sure yet if siding with a faction will be an exclusive choice or not.

The narrative won't be exposition-heavy. Find clues and notes in the environment, environmental storytelling, etc. There's going to be some sort of "supplemental narrative", the notes of a previous explorer of the Abyss that you can find.

"They Want..."

"They're not sure..."

"The narrative won't be..."

I mean, wow...do you ever listen to yourself?

Zep--

 

[Excidium II]

 

[Infinitron]

Paul says there'll be a video update like the recent one every 1-1.5 months. Playable prototype for backers in the "not too distant future", before the end of the year.

Pacifist playthroughs - Paul likes the idea of that, but they won't try to explicitly support it as a playstyle. He doesn't like the idea of designer-mandated distinct playstyles - "the stealth path", "the combat path" - which is something he felt Deus Ex did. Things should feel more organic than that.

Ooh, Tom Chick mentions Age of Decadence to them as an example of an RPG that supports non-combat playthroughs.

I mean, wow...do you ever listen to yourself?

Zep--

Are you daft? I'm transcribing notes from a podcast while listening to it. Feel free to summarize my words in elegant prose if you want.

 

[Metro]

I'm sure the game will turn out okay but Infi is like a Star Citizen backer with his level of fervor.

 

[Infinitron]

Paul hints that Lord Cabirus' failed colony will be an important plot point in the game.

That's it, I think. These guys have a good handle on what makes a good dungeon crawl. "The arc of coming to appreciate and making sense of a place that terrified you."

 

[k0syak]

Is it going to be Toorum?

I think (or hope) they mean Dark Souls rather then LoG.

 

[Mustawd]

Paul hints that Lord Cabirus' failed colony will be an important plot point in the game.

That's it, I think.

Almost. Right before the end Paul called out Zep, "There's this drunk bastard on RPGcodex named Zippy, Zorro, or something. Not sure what his problem is, but he's definitely annoying as hell. Just leave us alone already! Leave Looking Glass Otherside ALONE!".

Then the webcast faded out. The end.

 

[Metro]

I think (or hope) they mean Dark Souls rather then LoG.

I hope not. Dark Souls is overly pretentious.

 

[k0syak]

I hope not. Dark Souls is overly pretentious.

Overly pretentious like Ultima?

 

[Melan]

No fast travel. There might be hazardous shortcuts between areas, though.

Pacifist playthroughs - Paul likes the idea of that, but they won't try to explicitly support it as a playstyle. He doesn't like the idea of designer-mandated distinct playstyles - "the stealth path", "the combat path" - which is something he felt Deus Ex did. Things should feel more organic than that.

That shows a good understanding of level design and typical level design mistakes. Nice.

Overly pretentious like Ultima?

Shut thy whore mouth, Sire!

 

[Mustawd]

Overly pretentious like Ultima?

 

[Aenra]

there'll be no stats and no experience points instead there'll be some form of learn-by-use

Lacrymas

 

[Darkzone]

I still don't like the idea of having no stats and experience points. Also only learn-by-doing OR use has one big problem: it can force a certain path on the player and then it is difficult to change this path.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

I dunno, UW had tratitional RPG stats that were inconsequential and didn't impact my enjoyment of the game at all. What was important was visiting a shrine to train. I don't believe they are strictly necessary if you have other avenues to bolster your performance (like training).

 

[Aenra]

Said it elsewhere, this is the same issue with simulated dice we wish RNG, cirticals and how they fuck up any kind of versimilitude by the number crunching they can impose and so on.

No, they are not bad. Not per se (this is an important distinction, as implementation matters)

But that doesn't mean they are the only way to go about things. Whether it's clicking an agility box seven times or naturally "choosing" the way of the drifter/rogue, the choice/outcome is the same; or can be if creativity is involved. Whether you "tick" said agility box two more times down the row or improve "naturally" over fixed period of time, the choice/outcome is the same. I cannot see why we stick with the signifier, and not the signified. At least theoretically.

If they fuck it up? Different story. But on the level we are now, ie the hypothetical, i can enjoy a number crunching + systems heavy RPG as much as a more natural and statless one. Maybe more, since liking number crunching and power/meta-gaming is one thing, but being inserted into a world is something else altogether. And i cannot for the life of me see how each and every fucking world must have 'Agility', 'Strength' and 'Intelligence'. Even the arbitrariness of signifier names has remain unchanged become not only fixed, but ended up being perceived as logical. By the goddam fans themselves... Which is the ultimate paradox obviously ^^
Nice to have things we like. Even nicer to occasionally ascertain that by now, there is a certain level of "familiarisation/expectation" that has caused some severe tunnel vision. Never mind the conservativism related to it. Or what it has amounted to.

 

[Doctor Sbaitso]

Nice post. One thing LGS did and Paul and Tim both speak to is outcomes and player agency.

They question and analyze the itch and consider in depth how to satisfy it organically and plausibly within the simulation. Most just don't think on that level or in that way and that is the LGS secret sauce. It speaks to confidence and winning process. Tropes mean shit unless they pass the so-what test.

 

[Darkzone]

Aenra Doctor Sbaitso
For me the XPs and stats like "Strength, Agility and Intelligence" are place holders / abstraction of the played character's qualities, that are contained within the game. They can be used to optimise a character or they can show simply how a character develops over the time without a direct determination and influence by the player.
Strength is normally used, as a quality to determine the damage parameter that a character can deal with a certain weapon (which is by the way not quite accurate) and the amount of weight that the character can carry. And restrictions like strength for a carrying weight are also a part to make a game more exciting.
XPs determine the step and the distance between the levels. Naturally there are other solutions for an abstraction, like the skyrim solution, which btw did have still levels contained. But skyrim was just shit in this approach on all accounts.
The questions arise how XPs should be granted and should they be visible, and that also applies to the level of the played character. While i think that XPs and Level can be made invisible, like XPs for the level and skills, i dont necessary agree that stats should be that invisible. In times before the standartisation of weights and times, nobody exactly knew how strong or fast he/she is in comparison to others, before testing eachother in a competition. But this were times of the stone age, and every high culture invented in the bronze ages measurement for determining speed (distance / time), time and weight, naturally they did not done it for testing eachother, but this was a nice side effect that people discoved very fast.
Having no stats means normally that carrying weight is handled very bad, mana for magic or the spells amount per day is shit and etc.
"Can the stats be hold invisible?" is a very good question, and i think that they can be hidden under certain conditions, but then also the weight of items has to be also hidden and just indicated as light or heavy and etc.
So i think that they can utterly fail in making a stats less system, but they can hide the stats and even that can pull the game down. Stats are for me not necessary about number crunching, but also about changes for mundane things like pushing and pulling or carry things.

 

[Lacrymas]

Lacrymas

It kinda reminds me of TES and most Asian MMOs like Ragnarok Online, and even Ultima Online. So yeah, don't like it :p Yeah, it's weird that by chewing gum and kicking ass you get better at seduction for example, but that depends on balance rather than anything else. AoD doesn't have a problem with this :p

 

[Aenra]

Darkzone yes and no. In the sense that you appear (might be misapprehending) to use the norm to define a range of outcomes and simultaneously taking said range of outcomes to sit back and contemplate just how many "variables" of them can express the norm. Variables in the sense of agi, str, et al.

That's a catch 22
Either you go full versimilitude, and to go there you must first have a vision, a concept and a goal, or you start with the math and systems and do your best to 'expand' them as much as your budget and intelligence allows for.

Anyway, yes, whichever the approach, we agree that there is plenty of space for differentiation and experimentation.

Lacrymas i think someone clipped my last post. I also think i know who that someone was, but anyway..
Not surprised you don't appreciate, it's why i tagged you ^^

 

[Darkzone]

Darkzone yes and no. In the sense that you appear (might be misapprehending) to use the norm to define a range of outcomes and simultaneously taking said range of outcomes to sit back and contemplate just how many "variables" of them can express the norm. Variables in the sense of agi, str, et al.
That's a catch 22

It might seem to be paradox, but i call it a iterative approach from two directions.

Either you go full versimilitude, and to go there you must first have a vision, a concept and a goal, or you start with the math and systems and do your best to 'expand' them as much as your budget and intelligence allows for.
Anyway, yes, whichever the approach, we agree that there is plenty of space for differentiation and experimentation.

Here also applies this bi-directional approach / influence. You can have a vision that later gets changed by the system and other wise. And such approaches are necessary, because sometimes the vision, goal and concept are not realistic or cannot be accomplished in a certain computation space or even the math, so the system has to refine the goal, vision and concept. The system on the other hand should be designed to fit as much of the the vision, concept and goal as possible, or be open to changes from the goal, concept and vision.
And yes we both agree, that there is plenty of space for differentiation and experimentation.

But i assume due to the qualities of Tim Stelmach and LG previous references that the system will provide much room for Otherside vision, the question is only how. Otherside has made quite clear what are the outlines of the game system, like physic oriented engine, prey-predator relations, dynamic "A.I." and etc.
And especially the physics oriented "engine" normally demands certain stats, like mass and speed. And what does mean "without stats" in this context?