Game News Tyranny Released

[Infinitron]

the only relatively recent attempt I could think of was The Witcher 2, and that only had two story branches in the middle chapter.

I feel like if you're going to go back as far as Witcher 2, you might as well mention Alpha Protocol too, but maybe that doesn't come to mind because it's non-fantasy.

 

[Vault Dweller]

And how can he make that assessment over a game he hasn't played?

You only need to play a game to judge its gameplay, not necessarily other elements.

Maybe C&C is to a large extent the gameplay in AoD (or "gameplay" if you hate CYOA), as opposed to an element of worldbuilding in Tyranny. Wouldn't know myself cause I haven't played Tyranny, but I'm fairly sure the argument can be made that AoD's approach to C&C is qualitatively different from that of other cRPG's as opposed to quantitatively different. PJ implicitly argues for the latter by saying that it's simply a question of added attention paid to fleshing out the C&C portion of the game.

Wonder what Vault Dweller thinks about all this

I didn't play Tyranny so I wouldn't know.

 

[Shadenuat]

Examples:

M-hm. So you if you play Chorus, I think Edict of Stone is first you have to end. You go to purple mages, they do ritual, you fight there, break staves, get +3 stat item from Cairn, get a slide in the end, it doesn't affect story or gameplay in any way later.
If you play Disfavored, I think it's last of edicts. But game is very kind to level scale all content, so whatever. You fight red chorus guys, save staves, get +3 stat.
If you go rebel, you can kill Disfavored, break staves, get +3 stat. Or don't break. You don't get +3 stat!

Prime Junta, that's *exactly* smoke and mirrors and flavor. It's the *same* location and *same* quest, you just visit it in a different order.

I didn't play Tyranny so I wouldn't know.

You can always read in wikipedia about it.

 

[Prime Junta]

Prime Junta, that's *exactly* smoke and mirrors and flavor. It's the *same* location and *same* quest, you just visit it in a different order.

As stated, the gameplay is same-y and boring whichever way you go. Hell even your party composition and build won't make more than a trivial difference.

But the quests aren't. Different objectives, different writing, different questgivers, fighting on different sides, different outcomes, and on occasion, different locations. That is not smoke-and-mirrors: it represents a major design and development effort.

(Or, okay, if you're 100% grog who feels that all content/story/setting/writing/quests is smoke-and-mirrors, then yeah sure it's smoke-and-mirrors. I find that position autistic but whatever.)

 

[Roguey]

You can't say the same about world building, choice and consequence and story branching, can you?
You actually need to play the game to experience them.

All those things can be verified through reading/watching LPs. They're not gameplay.

 

[Harold]

As stated, the gameplay is same-y and boring whichever way you go. Hell even your party composition and build won't make more than a trivial difference.

But the quests aren't. Different objectives, different writing, different questgivers, fighting on different sides, different outcomes, and on occasion, different locations. That is not smoke-and-mirrors: it represents a major design and development effort.

In Fallout 4, regardless of which of the 4 main factions you choose to go with, the gameplay is same-y and boring whichever way you go. Hell even your party composition follower mule and build won't make more than a trivial difference.

But the quests aren't. Different objectives, different writing, different questgivers, fighting on different sides, different outcomes, and on occasion, different locations. That is not smoke-and-mirrors: it represents a major design and development effort.

Also, given that I am a professional who takes great pride in his writing, I feel I must disclose that I have not played a single second of Fallout 4, having gathered the above factual statements merely by glancing at the game's wikipedia. Thus, while some of you fine gentlemen may find this implied comparison I'm making between F4 and Tranny uncalled for - indeed, some of you may even go so far as to think that such a comparison paints one of the games in a more (dis)favorable light, thus furthering my lazy-shill agenda - I personally find such concerns completely autistic and will nevertheless publish this post, thus demonstrating once again my refined taste and superior intellect.

 

[Prime Junta]

The Fallouts are a poor point of comparison as they're sandboxes rather than CYOAs. They're not even all that strong in exclusive quests tied to factions, by far the majority of quests are accessible whoever you end up allying with.

If you wanted to pick a better example from that genre, there's Gothic 2; that does have you pick a faction early on and gives you a different story depending on that. But man that's oooold.

 

[Kem0sabe]

Wasnt Prime Junta ejecting? or is this some fake eject thing all over again?

 

[Roguey]

In Fallout 4, regardless of which of the 4 main factions you choose to go with, the gameplay is same-y and boring whichever way you go. Hell even your party composition follower mule and build won't make more than a trivial difference.

But the quests aren't. Different objectives, different writing, different questgivers, fighting on different sides, different outcomes, and on occasion, different locations. That is not smoke-and-mirrors: it represents a major design and development effort.

That's actually pretty impressive for Bethesda.

 

[Prime Junta]

That's actually pretty impressive for Bethesda.

Is it true though? I've honestly no idea, I haven't followed the FO4 talk at all; I just completely lost interest in what they're doing after the double let-down of Oblivion and FO3. If it is I'll have to give it a spin after all.

(They did have exclusive faction quests in Morrowind so it wouldn't be a first for them.)

 

[Roguey]

Is it true though? I've honestly no idea, I haven't followed the FO4 talk at all; I just completely lost interest in what they're doing after the double let-down of Oblivion and FO3. If it is I'll have to give it a spin after all.

(They did have exclusive faction quests in Morrowind so it wouldn't be a first for them.)

Yep http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Fallout_4_quests

 

[Harold]

That's actually pretty impressive for Bethesda.

Is it true though? I've honestly no idea

Well, if the game's wiki isn't enough for you to make an informed opinion, I guess you'd have to...






















... actually play the game

 

[Infinitron]

FO4 was transparently going for a "New Vegas for babbies" kind of thing. Look ma, I can do C&C too!

But to get back on topic, the thing about Tyranny is that it was marketed as a "C&C game". So of course there's a natural tendency to compare it to other games that did the same thing, even though there are other RPGs that also have good C&C but didn't put it front and center.

When Tyranny came out, there was a certain poster (whose posts on the topic have since been deleted ) who claimed that the game's purported C&C focus was a sham and that it didn't have good C&C at all. Most people don't seem to have gotten that impression, however. At least, if they're complaining about the game then it seems they've found better things to complain about. But it's certainly something worth examining.

 

[Harold]

RPG Codex: Age of Disfavored Reviews: The Tyranny of comparing games you have not played: A Prime Junta Story: leaked by Bubbles: who was just emulating his favorite staff member: Infinitron: let's get back on track goyim

 

[Bohrain]

In case any of the drama leads to a codexian civil war I'll be on the side that has power armors and Trumpeter.

 

[Kev Inkline]

Wait, let me get this straight - something was leaked prematurely and Infinitron and Bubbles were involved?

If so, alarming, but fortunately this is just the first time, so there's hope it will not become a habit.

 

[felipepepe]

Here's a question for Prime Junta : What would make a better Tyranny 2 - better gameplay or less gameplay?

As in, does a C&C-oriented game like this really need you to go around fighting trash mobs and doing banal shit boring FEDEX quests for the two incompetent drama queens?

Because, personally, I always thought dumb as hell to make a LONG C&C focused game. These games should strive for replayability, not wasting your time with filler. Vide Way of the Samurai, which I finished like 20 times because a playthrough can last anything from 5 minutes to 5 hours depending on your choices, and the game push you towards exploring all possible paths.

 

[an Administrator]

Vide Way of the Samurai, which I finished like 20 times because a playthrough can last anything from 5 minutes to 5 hours depending on your choice

Is this really a good example of C&C?

 

[Fairfax]

DarkUnderlord, please eject me. I'm done with this site.

 

[Prime Junta]

felipepepe C&C-oriented games generally, I think the answer would be "less gameplay," but in this case, it's definitely "better gameplay."

Tyranny doesn't have all that much trash mob combat: most fights make sense for what you're doing. You are in the middle of a war, attempting to achieve objectives some other party wants to stop you from achieving. Some of the set pieces are even set up rather nicely, such as when you're storming a fortress or occupying a village. The problem is that whatever you do, you'll end up with a roughly even mix of weaksauce attack, healing, and escape abilities, and you'll be facing enemies with the same. So gameplay is just a grind of chipping away at their hit points while keeping yours topped up.

As it is the gameplay is a knock-off DA:O by someone who doesn't understand what made DA:O tick. While DA:O is still cooldown-based awesome-button derp, the abilities have obvious impact, marked differences, and you're facing enemies which shake things up. Fighting a revenant is not like fighting a dragon, which is not like fighting a mob of genlocks, hurlocks, and emissaries, and each of these will play differently if you're rocking two tanks, an archer and a healer than if you're rocking one tank, an archer, and two casters (times any of the other party combos that you might want to think up). If Tyranny 2 had abilities that were up to DA:O standards and different mobs had different mixes of them, there could be a quite a lot of fun to be had despite the cooldowns and skill trees.

Or, counterfactually: if Tyranny had DA:O's core gameplay and abilities, and the exact same encounters that are in it now had the enemies using different and thematically-appropriate mixes of them, it would be a fine game. Like having Disfavored bum-rush and shield-bash with their mages lobbing Earthquakes and Stone Strikes, while Scarlet Chorus featured javelin-lobbing, fast-moving skirmishers and their mages using Nightmare, Drain, and what have you. You wouldn't just be fighting on different sides, you'd be facing a fight that also felt different.

 

[Shadenuat]

Vide Way of the Samurai, which I finished like 20 times because a playthrough can last anything from 5 minutes to 5 hours depending on your choice

Is this really a good example of C&C?

In comparison to Tyranny, or even AoD, Alpha Protocol or Witcher, Way of the Samurai actually has, for real, a branching storyline. Which means that:
- There are different events happening depending on your choice
- Events can happen out of order, or not happen at all
- As Felipepepe said, game can end at completely random places

Tyranny, AoD and Witcher on the other hand all are structured in Acts - large strokes of plot, where some events will happen regardless of what you do.

Tyranny doesn't have all that much trash mob combat

 

[Prime Junta]

Not sure what you understand by "trash mob." What I mean by it is (1) a generic group of enemies (2) that's there only as filler, with no real plot-related reason to fight you. If it doesn't fulfil both criteria, it's not a trash mob.

This is different from "trash combat" which just means "bad combat," and Tyranny certainly had that a-plenty.

 

[Irenaeus]

Vide Way of the Samurai, which I finished like 20 times because a playthrough can last anything from 5 minutes to 5 hours depending on your choice

Is this really a good example of C&C?

In comparison to Tyranny, or even AoD, Alpha Protocol or Witcher, Way of the Samurai actually has, for real, a branching storyline. Which means that:
- There are different events happening depending on your choice
- Events can happen out of order, or not happen at all
- As Felipepepe said, game can end at completely random places

Tyranny, AoD and Witcher on the other hand all are structured in Acts - large strokes of plot, where some events will happen regardless of what you do.

Tyranny doesn't have all that much trash mob combat

The events in AoD depend on the path you take.

 

[Neanderthal]

Do you get to fight in a Phalanx at any point?

 

[Prime Junta]

Do you get to fight in a Phalanx at any point?

No. Nor do you get to fight in a big pitched battle in an open field where you'd find one.

They do rhapsodise about them though so it's clearly a major thing in the world.

Edit: fighting in a phalanx would probably not work all that well as there's pretty much zero agency in it. Fighting against a phalanx would be cool though. Shame they didn't manage to put that in, would prob have required some fairly freaky AI scripting.