Cyberarmy
Love fool
I vote for better itemization and less HP bloat too. Last part battles against demons were boring like hell.
Linear or Open Worlds
Hi!
Some more words about CRPG elements and the sequel.
Linear or Open Worlds
In Lord of Xulima, the world was open in essence. From the beginning, you could go wherever you wished. Of course, you could die very easily, adventuring yourself into too dangerous regions. However, we set some few specific barriers in several places mostly in the first part of the game.
There were two types of barriers, ones that were only powerful guardians like the army of the impious princes that protected certain regions. Those barriers weren't impossible to beat without triggering the events that removed them (killing the corresponding prince) if you had a very powerful party. The other barriers were fixed and impossible to beat until you got special items or did specific things. For example, the Ulnalum Guardian that prevented to enter in Varaskel or the Yul statue in Rasmura that protected the bridge access with a halo of darkness.
We set those barriers for two reasons. First the story, the story was more coherent if the main story dialog was played in its natural order. Second, it was to avoid the player from getting lost too soon. In LoX’s earliest version, we first tested with no barriers at all. The testers wasted a lot of time trying to figure out where to go, what areas they could explore or were too dangerous. Ultimately, they became frustrated very quickly. In contrast, with those few barriers the world continues to be very open with lots of things to do, the story flows better, and the player is not overwhelmed by so many options at the very beginning.
As with any design decision, this one was sometimes criticized by the most hardcore players and at the same time, the game was too obscure for other players that got lost as soon as they reached Velegarn (indeed, most of them died on the road to Sorrentia; do you remember that lovely ogre?).
As always, it is impossible to please all players, so we will be loyal to the essence of Lords of Xulima and its old-school spirit. For the sequel, we will continue with this philosophy but improve the world openness as much as the story allows us to. The world will again be vast and dangerous. We want the player to explore and experiment without adding artificial barriers. You will be free to roam wherever you wish or your survival sense allows you.
Random Encounters
One very important mechanism of CRPGs are the random encounters. For LoX, we wanted to evolve it and make it more natural and realistic as we commented in this old post.
Generally, in most games, encounters are infinite and will periodically trigger. In LoX the encounters are finite in every region, so you can even clear full areas and wander freely without worries (except by the Cursed Hounds...). Also, the fewer encounters remaining the more time they need to trigger. Additionally, encounters did not trigger near the places where you defeated one of them recently. That’s the reason why you cannot cheat the system by walking in circles just in the zone entrance until you clear it and then explore it safely.We tried to make this mechanism natural and balanced and not so annoying as in many other games.
But we did not count on the many people who were willing to clear all the encounters to receive the reward for clearing every zone. So instead of avoiding the random encounter issues, we were encouraging players to wander desperately trying to trigger the encounters. Players asked the developers to have skills to trigger them, increase the frequency, or even that monsters respawn so you cannot run out of experience!!
So, yes, this is something we want to address for the sequel. Random encounters should be to keep the tension and sense of danger. We will remove the reward for clearing it unless it is because it is the goal of a mission. The encounters will be finite or not depending on what makes sense in the area. For example, you can clear a castle of soldiers, but perhaps from time to time some thieves or animals appear in the desolated castle, while in the wild you can diminish the encounters frequency but there will be always some of them wandering. So, we will mix different behaviors for the random encounters to adapt them for the zones and add variety, suspense, and surprise to the player. Also, encounters won't always be enemies to combat, but some special ones depending on the zones.
And of course, there will be much more dynamic and special elements. Do you remember the Cursed Hounds? Wait to see the Holy Servants of Alnaet in the sequel, you will miss your old friends...
Next post we will continue talking about CRPGs elements and the sequel. As always you are invited to leave comments here or give us you game feedback in the forum about the sequel.
Have a nice week!
And of course, there will be much more dynamic and special elements. Do you remember the Cursed Hounds? Wait to see the Holy Servants of Alnaet in the sequel, you will miss your old friends...
THE SEQUEL: MORE CASUAL OR MORE HARDCORE?
Greetings!
Recently, there have been some hot discussions in the forum about if the sequel of Lords of Xulima would be more casual to attract more potential buyers or more hardcore to please the old-school fans. So we would like to talk about this topic and clarify this aspect before the rivers of blood flood the forum.
First, don’t confuse Accessible with Casual
A game can be more casual or more hardcore independently of their accessibility level. Lords of Xulima is big, challenging and deep, with lots of mechanisms and possibilities but, it is very accessible. It is very easy and simple to play (move the avatar, talk with NPCs, disarm traps, level up, combat…). We dedicated a lot of work to achieve that level of simplicity of playing. On contrast, old-school games seemed much more hardcore than they actually were because of their obscure and awkward interfaces.
We will always try to make the games as accessible as possible so any player can play it, but with the same level of challenge and depth as they were originally designed.
Was Lords of Xulima casual or hardcore?
Of course, we would never say it is a casual game but it was also not designed as a hardcore one. We wanted to align it to the feel of the old-school games like Wizardy 7, Might and Magic, Ultima… Were those hardcore games? We wouldn’t say that. They were challenging. There was no hand holding, no tutorial, not linear, and they were complex and deep, but they were not hardcore at all. For us, a hardcore game is one that is mainly designed to challenge the player and always try to make him fail so only players with a lot of experience and a lot of understanding of the game mechanics can advance and overcome those challenges. That is what happens in most roguelikes or others like Dark Souls.
Lords of Xulima was designed and balanced to make the best experience possible for the Old-School difficulty mode. Then, we created two more modes as variations of the main mode:
– Normal: It represent a much lower challenge. It is perfect for people that prefer a much straightforward adventure and enjoys the game without needing to worry too much about game mechanisms.
– Hardcore: Just the opposite. The game parameters are modified to be much more difficult. Players should have a stronger understanding of the game, optimizing their party and way of playing to advance in the game. This is especially true if they active the Ironman Mode where they cannot save outside the towns.
We think it worked very well for most players. And for those that choose the hardest settings, the game rewards them with a better score (and also achievements and leaderboard position) that is impossible to achieve in lower difficulty modes.
So how will the sequel be?
Let’s just say that in Numantian Games, we will always focus on creating deep and challenging games. It is our seal and always will be. So, of course, it won’t be a casual game and it won’t have casual options to disable mechanisms of the game. We will use the same method for casual players: a low difficulty mode, but they will have to play the same game with the same mechanisms (food, traps, encounters…) as any other player.
Indeed, the game will be even more challenging, more open, with more depth, more options to evolve the party, and many more secrets. There will be a special ending that will be a truly hardcore experience and more special rewards for the higher difficulties.
Also, we are thinking of making the Ironman mode setting as mandatory or at least implement new features to prevent save-scumming as much as possible. But don’t worry!, it will always be implemented in a fair way.
What do you think? As always, you are invited to leave your feedback here.
See you soon!
We wanted to align it to the feel of the old-school games like Wizardy 7, Might and Magic, Ultima…
Interesting that Numantian addresses my idea I posted on their forums to be able to disable (or enable) various aspects of the game, making a more modular experience. I feel honored in a way that they decided to answer that, and although I disagree with their response that's not my choice to make. I'm sure the game will be great and I look forward to it.
I don't want to see this developer small compromising their way to the casual market.Interesting that Numantian addresses my idea I posted on their forums to be able to disable (or enable) various aspects of the game, making a more modular experience. I feel honored in a way that they decided to answer that, and although I disagree with their response that's not my choice to make. I'm sure the game will be great and I look forward to it.
http://www.lordsofxulima.com/2017/03/24/the-sequel-more-casual-or-more-hardcore/
THE SEQUEL: MORE CASUAL OR MORE HARDCORE?
Greetings!
Recently, there have been some hot discussions in the forum about if the sequel of Lords of Xulima would be more casual to attract more potential buyers or more hardcore to please the old-school fans. So we would like to talk about this topic and clarify this aspect before the rivers of blood flood the forum.
At the very least, there should be a way to force trigger those. Running around like an idiot hoping for an encounter is ridiculous.- After clearing an area, I stay around and tediously trigger the remaining encounters, in order to get the XP bonus.
At the very least, there should be a way to force trigger those. Running around like an idiot hoping for an encounter is ridiculous.- After clearing an area, I stay around and tediously trigger the remaining encounters, in order to get the XP bonus.
So, yes, this is something we want to address for the sequel. Random encounters should be to keep the tension and sense of danger. We will remove the reward for clearing it unless it is because it is the goal of a mission. The encounters will be finite or not depending on what makes sense in the area. For example, you can clear a castle of soldiers, but perhaps from time to time some thieves or animals appear in the desolated castle, while in the wild you can diminish the encounters frequency but there will be always some of them wandering. So, we will mix different behaviors for the random encounters to adapt them for the zones and add variety, suspense, and surprise to the player. Also, encounters won't always be enemies to combat, but some special ones depending on the zones.
That is awesome. I just love how some people are fully incapable of understanding the concept of an optionOh wow, that forum discussion is a massive Celerity flamewar. http://steamcommunity.com/app/296570/discussions/0/392184342866591870/?ctp=14#c135510393202155807
fluent is there too, and there's even a guest appearance by Codex nemesis Carl Batchelor from Nichegamer ("RPGEndBoss"). Lolcow central!
Also, fluent I have to congratulate you. You write pretty well for a 12 year old
I don't want to see this developer small compromising their way to the casual market.Interesting that Numantian addresses my idea I posted on their forums to be able to disable (or enable) various aspects of the game, making a more modular experience. I feel honored in a way that they decided to answer that, and although I disagree with their response that's not my choice to make. I'm sure the game will be great and I look forward to it.
How the fuck is adding an option making compromises?
You do know the meaning of the word "option", right?
Let me explain: You do not have to en-/disable an option. You can tune the experience to your liking.
If you want to tweak it a little to play like a filthy casual, you can do that.
If you want to tweak it a little to become an even more hardcore son of a bitch, you can do that, too!
Especially if adding an option is little work for the developer (in some cases, it is, in some, it is not), I don't understand why it is not done.
More people could enjoy the game, more sales, better ratings, and not a single downside.
Having more options concerning gameplay mechanics is one thing missing from many, many games.
At the same time, sports games went that way because the games themselves are short and have to play in the same manner as they do in the real world. It's all about replayability and small variations to the same formula.Options are missing from RPGs. The sports gaming industry went that way a decade ago and it was a hugely positive move for them. Just take a peek at the depth of the NBA 2K sliders sometime, what the community does with them and the rosters, etc., and also the options the game includes. And the thing is, options are in no way designed just for casuals who want to make the game easier - they also exist to make the game harder or more hardcore for those who want that. Best of both worlds.
I could insert this comment of yours into any conversation about quest compasses and it would be rightfully laughed at.
Why don't you think about that?
You're operating on the level of a gamefaqs commenter, with no knowledge of gaming history or the negative influence brought upon by allowing people to purposefully simplify your game.
At the same time, sports games went that way because the games themselves are short and have to play in the same manner as they do in the real world. It's all about replayability and small variations to the same formula.
Roguelikes can afford to do this but full-fledged RPGs can't, due to the implications of a small difficulty bump or gap at any point in the journey. Adjust the cost of something major like food during the midgame, and the entire difficulty curve goes out the window... not to mention that the value of all those food-related skills you learned will change.
I'm all for Numantian giving us the ability to adjust these settings initially, before the game starts, but we all know that endless bitching will ensue until those options are available in the middle of the game. Since this would be something that would take five minutes at most to implement, we would be back to having the same argument of Developer Vision VS Player Preference. The thing is, the vast majority of players simply want to get to the credit screen with 100% chievos unlocked with as little effort as possible, to the point where the only difference between Game A and Game B IS the developer's vision.
Ugh... Why do I even bother? Oh, well...Having more options concerning gameplay mechanics is one thing missing from many, many games.
I could insert this comment of yours into any conversation about quest compasses and it would be rightfully laughed at.
Why don't you think about that?