A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

For discussing Torment's story, setting, and characters. Ninth World discussions encouraged. Spoilers allowed.

Moderator: Memovira Goons

kilobug
Adventurer
Posts: 922
Joined: September 21st, 2014, 1:07 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by kilobug » March 2nd, 2016, 1:27 pm

Firkraag wrote:I've heard opinion, that Planescape itself, would've been a better on a different game system, rather than AD&D, though, probably, in wouldn't have been possible to implement at the time.
It probably would have from a pure "mechanics" pov, yes, but as you said it would have been hard to sell.

But another huge "gain" of Planescape being within AD&D is that it enabled you to easily re-use all the existing AD&D materials, you could have your Planescape players visit Athas (Dark Sun) if you want some post-apocalyptic settings, them visit Ravenloft if you want a gothic horror scenario, them visit Feerune or Greyhawk if you want a classical high fantasy settings, ... I did use many elements from other campaign settings to make the world richer and more varied - I even did a Spelljammer adventure in one of my campaigns, for some complicated reasons the PCs had to use an experimental Spelljammer ship, pursued by the Illithid fleet, to enter a world closed by other means of transport...

But then, rules are only a real problem if you stick to them too strictly - I never was a very strict DM rule-wise, my PCs have a good idea that isn't allowed by the rules, we find together some ways to allow it, and my NPCs can easily break the rules if the story requires it.

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 2nd, 2016, 1:28 pm

Firkraag wrote:
anonymous6059 wrote:Plus, I really don't know how many people have actually played PST.
Many people have actually re-played it many many times, some - recently and some people played it recently for the first time, when they heard about it. As for me, after re-playing it for the fourth time, I've decided to not delete it, it doesn't seem to be much of a waste.

I keep telling, that if you think, combat mechanics sucks in narratively driven video game, just max out combat stats with and enjoy your plot all you want, but people don't listen, as if I'm some sort of heathen, that suggests to detract all fun from a game. But after turning enemies' HP sponge into paper thin wall, you can enjoy many games, that are generally considered to be bad at delivery. Or may it just sits well with me, because I prefer power play to hard core challenge, so it's win-win, I get faster to good parts and slash through enemies, as a badass, my character seen as -often, from perspective of NPCs and due to unrealistic death toll combat involves, it is justified.
That's funny that's exactly what I ended up doing with PST, maxing out the stats. I honestly hate PST combat, but love POE, BG1&2 oddly enough. So maxing out the Stats really made the game much more enjoyable for me too.

kilobug
Adventurer
Posts: 922
Joined: September 21st, 2014, 1:07 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by kilobug » March 2nd, 2016, 1:34 pm

anonymous6059 wrote:Torment Tides of Numenera is more of a adventure game then a real RPG.
Well, I totally disagree with that appreciation, but I already voiced it and explained why before so...
anonymous6059 wrote:I mean to me just the fact that its not the same combat mechanics pretty much by itself rules out being a "spiritual successor".
That's only true if you consider combat mechanics something important and defining of PsT which most fans of PsT (and most backers of TTON) don't do.

User avatar
Firkraag
Adventurer
Posts: 671
Joined: October 28th, 2014, 8:49 am
Location: Ukraine, Kharkiv
Contact:

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Firkraag » March 2nd, 2016, 1:40 pm

It may seem, as highly controversial statement, but I think, what is making role playing game "real" is role playing.

If your game does not involve role playing, it's not an RPG. Like, decision making and interactive dialogue, where you are getting into a shoes of some character is a core of the gameplay.

RPG may still be an RPG without combat mechanics, but it can't possibly without roleplaying. Though, many people prefer to narrow down RPG to a few particular gameplay families, while in reality, there are RPG elements, that did spread and effectively crossed with other genres.

Some attribute games to RPG genre, just because those had character stats and some sort of levelling system. While other games, that could be perfectly into RPG genre are not there, just because people think of it, as FPS or "narrative experience", whatever that means.

Like, there's no way, I'd call Tales from a Borderlands "an adventure" game. Nope, good sirs, never. ;)
Last edited by Firkraag on March 2nd, 2016, 1:58 pm, edited 6 times in total.
"I am a warhead of weaponized Truth." The Last Castoff (non-canon).

"Colin's period as Jesus was an interesting time." © Brother_None

User avatar
Firkraag
Adventurer
Posts: 671
Joined: October 28th, 2014, 8:49 am
Location: Ukraine, Kharkiv
Contact:

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Firkraag » March 2nd, 2016, 1:48 pm

anonymous6059 wrote:That's funny that's exactly what I ended up doing with PST, maxing out the stats. I honestly hate PST combat, but love POE, BG1&2 oddly enough. So maxing out the Stats really made the game much more enjoyable for me too.
Have you notived, I said specoifically combat stats. Having maxed everything can be tempting, but you'd rather not doing it, unless game implemented those rather poorly (like it happened in Age of Decadence, when you can literally to miss awesome parts of the game, because you don't have some skill at really high level, you thought would be useless).
When you max out social stats it turns RPG into find all the content game. Which is fine, I guess, if you're content with that being your core gameplay.

I doubt, I will find myself cheating and save-scumming in TToN. ;)
Last edited by Firkraag on March 2nd, 2016, 1:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"I am a warhead of weaponized Truth." The Last Castoff (non-canon).

"Colin's period as Jesus was an interesting time." © Brother_None

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 2nd, 2016, 1:56 pm

kilobug wrote:
anonymous6059 wrote:Torment Tides of Numenera is more of a adventure game then a real RPG.
Well, I totally disagree with that appreciation, but I already voiced it and explained why before so...
anonymous6059 wrote:I mean to me just the fact that its not the same combat mechanics pretty much by itself rules out being a "spiritual successor".
That's only true if you consider combat mechanics something important and defining of PsT which most fans of PsT (and most backers of TTON) don't do.
Well I don't mean it as any kind of insult to the game. Here, I'd consider TToN the "re-envisioning" of everything cherished from Planescape Torment. Its hard to explain but its really meant as a complement. They took something and made it more then just a successor.

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 2nd, 2016, 2:02 pm

Firkraag wrote:It may seem, as highly controversial statement, but I think, what is making role playing game "real" is role playing.

If your game does not involve role playing, it's not an RPG. Like, decision making and interactive dialogue, where you are getting into a shoes of some character is a core of the gameplay.

RPG may still be an RPG without combat mechanics, but it can't possibly without roleplaying. Though, many people prefer to narrow down RPG to a few particular gameplay families, while in reality, there are RPG elements, that did spread and effectively crossed with other genres.

Some attribute games to RPG genre, just because those had character stats and some sort of levelling system. While other games, that could be perfectly into RPG genre are not there, just because people think of it, as FPS or "narrative experience", whatever that means.

Like, there's no way, I'd call Tales from a Borderlands "an adventure" game. Nope, good sir, never.
Well so far TToN isn't coming off as much of a RPG for me. I can't even walk up on the dais in the minor circus and try to save the fellow who has an umbilical cord coming out his mouth. In a RPG I'd have the choice to run up kill the guards and free him. I'm actually constrained by a invisible wall from even getting close to him. I'm still really hoping that they will make this into a RPG of course. The finished game could have more combat, more choices, the ability to actually do more then just talk. To me an RPG is a game where you can complete task in a variety of ways.
Wasteland 2 was a perfect RPG minus the amazing dialogue and story that this game will have. For TToN to be a RPG i'd have to take Wastelands 2 and add all the dialogue from TToN to it. Then I'd really have the perfect game.

User avatar
Firkraag
Adventurer
Posts: 671
Joined: October 28th, 2014, 8:49 am
Location: Ukraine, Kharkiv
Contact:

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Firkraag » March 2nd, 2016, 2:18 pm

anonymous6059 wrote:In a RPG I'd have the choice to run up kill the guards and free him.
Now what you really mean in ideal RPG, that is full on simulation. Even most interactive RPGs ever made can't react to your every decision and usually have some severe detalization drops.

In many RPGs you have a situation, where you can kill guards, but saved man doesn't have a line to say to you.

Even most sandboxiest tabletop RPGs discourage some behaviors and rely on players not taking certain actions.

That case you mentioned - as much as I gather - happend to be ablind spot for developers or under construction. You can try to report it is as a missed opportunity and maybe they'd fix that, so we'll have an option to save poor guy one way or another. Maybe not.

But my point is - no RPG is ever ideal in terms of scale "do what you want < - > world gives a damn about your actions".
"I am a warhead of weaponized Truth." The Last Castoff (non-canon).

"Colin's period as Jesus was an interesting time." © Brother_None

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 3rd, 2016, 5:27 am

Firkraag wrote:
anonymous6059 wrote:In a RPG I'd have the choice to run up kill the guards and free him.
Now what you really mean in ideal RPG, that is full on simulation. Even most interactive RPGs ever made can't react to your every decision and usually have some severe detalization drops.

In many RPGs you have a situation, where you can kill guards, but saved man doesn't have a line to say to you.

Even most sandboxiest tabletop RPGs discourage some behaviors and rely on players not taking certain actions.

That case you mentioned - as much as I gather - happend to be ablind spot for developers or under construction. You can try to report it is as a missed opportunity and maybe they'd fix that, so we'll have an option to save poor guy one way or another. Maybe not.

But my point is - no RPG is ever ideal in terms of scale "do what you want < - > world gives a damn about your actions".
The way it looks to me they just have large parts of the game cut off from use. The ultimate goal, least I hope it will be, is to allow you to go up on the stage. Someone warns you not to go up on the stage because your not allowed to do it. I'm assuming that the Levies will attack you as soon as you try and reach the victim. Its like I've been saying over and over. Another example is when you walk into the underbelly. You can literally badger the "Thugs" all day long and they will never attack you. That makes no sense whatsoever. In the end I'm almost certain you will be able to provoke them into attacking you. It would be a mistake not to have "thugs" attack you. This game has the ability to be a perfect RPG video game, but I'm just worried they won't add it.

Anyway, I never suggested that any video game has to allow me to have a infinite number of choices. I've already gone over that over and over. I'm just saying that you should have a few ways of settling most task. Just take Wastelands 2 as an example. If you want to get through a door you have several options: 1. force it with might, 2. unlock it with speed 3. convince someone to open it with intelligence 4. kill someone and take the key. This kind of stuff is abundant in Wastelands 2. Does that mean that I expect to be able to use magical teleporting mind rays to melt the floor and tunnel my way to the other side? No. I don't expect to be able to do whatever I want and I don't really care for Table top games where a DM lets people do whatever they want.

Think of it like this: Game has decided to make cliff. PC decides to step over cliff. 1. You can have PC hit wall. 2. you can have PC fall to his death. Both options 1&2 are equally dead ends. However, the PC feels like they have more control if you allow them to fall over the side of game. Making them hit a invisible wall is too restrictive. All I've been asking for from the beginning is basically option 2. Let me walk onto the dais and be "almost" instantly killed by the levies. (it would be nice to get in a hit or two before dying though. This way I could speculate that perhaps later in the game I could come back and kill them. Set the victim free and save the day.) IT all really comes down to giving the player an Illusion of choice that's what matters.

I originally threw in on this game because of how good a job they did with Wastelands 2. I noticed that they had spent 3 years on this game too. Wastelands 2 is a great RPG, but the story isn't and it has a little to much combat. I thought that this game would basically be built using the mechanics of Wastelands 2, but with a focus on story.

Eventually after many discussions in this very thread I came to see that this was in fact an adventure game or that's what everyone seems to think. That it isn't going to be a real rpg after all. I'm fine with that seriously. The game's looking pretty good. I'm just saying that its a bit of a disappointment to not be able to do standard stuff you could do in Planescape Torment.

I just am a bit confused that they can't figure out how to do stuff they knew how to do 17 years ago all of a sudden. Especially since they seem to of made it work so well in the last game they made. Just makes it hard to believe that they intentionally plan on adding pacifist thugs to the game. I just don't buy it.

kilobug
Adventurer
Posts: 922
Joined: September 21st, 2014, 1:07 am
Location: Paris, France

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by kilobug » March 3rd, 2016, 6:03 am

anonymous6059 wrote:I'm assuming that the Levies will attack you as soon as you try and reach the victim.
I didn't play the beta, so perhaps the objection doesn't hold, but if you suddenly break the law and start fighting law enforcers, there should be consequences. That's what I stated above - it should turn a whole part of the city hostile, or at least greatly alter the way most NPCs of that city react to you. That's why there are often things you can't do in a CRPG, because allowing it in a meaningful way requires lot of work, and better not allow it than allow it in a very shallow/suspension of disbelief-breaking way.
anonymous6059 wrote:You can literally badger the "Thugs" all day long and they will never attack you. That makes no sense whatsoever.
That does sound reasonable - feel free to signal to inXile such things, that's part of what a beta is about.
anonymous6059 wrote:I'm just saying that you should have a few ways of settling most task.
That's definitively a good thing, but not absolutely required for every task (BG and PsT both had many tasks for which there was only possible way to complete it, for example). WL2 did tend to have usually more ways of doing things, and it was good. But from I've seen from TTON (feedback, comments and AST) it seems that you often enough have several ways of dealing with things.

anonymous6059 wrote:Eventually after many discussions in this very thread I came to see that this was in fact an adventure game or that's what everyone seems to think. That it isn't going to be a real rpg after all.
Well, no, everyone doesn't think it'll be an "adventure game", most people do believe it is a "real RPG", and that it'll be a great one (disclaimer : it's always hard to say what "everyone" or "most people" think, but at least it's my opinion, and it seems to be shared by the reviews and comments I've seen). But we seem to different opinion of what a "RPG" is.
anonymous6059 wrote:I just am a bit confused that they can't figure out how to do stuff they knew how to do 17 years ago all of a sudden.
It's not that they can't figure out how to do it - it's that they explicitely don't want to do it, because the constant mindless combat was (for most people) a drag and not a feature of PsT. Now if you actually meet thugs, harass them, and they don't attack (and there is no reason for them not attacking, like if they know you're much more powerful than them, it's perfectly logical they don't attack but I can't judge on that specific point not having played the beta) then yes it's a flaw and should signal it to inXile - but that's a specific case, not a general "we need more combat" thing.

User avatar
Firkraag
Adventurer
Posts: 671
Joined: October 28th, 2014, 8:49 am
Location: Ukraine, Kharkiv
Contact:

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Firkraag » March 4th, 2016, 10:11 am

anonymous6059 wrote:This game has the ability to be a perfect RPG video game
[passive aggressive mode on]
If you start killing guards in Amn, they'll start attacking you and all other NPCs will be hostile to you and it makes game literally unplayable.You have no numerous ways to solve problems, not a lot of a meaningful choices. Therefore, Baldur's Gate 2 is not RPG. It's adventure game. Torment: Tides of Numenera is also not a 'true' RPG, but adventure game.

In fact, you know what? There are no RPGs at all, it's just an adventure games with or without combat mechanics. And there will be none ever. RPG - it's ideal, we can merely dream of and aspire to, as gamers and developers.

Done. I'm out of this topic. Bye.[/passive aggressive mode off]
"I am a warhead of weaponized Truth." The Last Castoff (non-canon).

"Colin's period as Jesus was an interesting time." © Brother_None

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 4th, 2016, 1:06 pm

kilobug wrote:
anonymous6059 wrote:Eventually after many discussions in this very thread I came to see that this was in fact an adventure game or that's what everyone seems to think. That it isn't going to be a real rpg after all.
Well, no, everyone doesn't think it'll be an "adventure game", most people do believe it is a "real RPG", and that it'll be a great one (disclaimer : it's always hard to say what "everyone" or "most people" think, but at least it's my opinion, and it seems to be shared by the reviews and comments I've seen). But we seem to different opinion of what a "RPG" is.
anonymous6059 wrote:I just am a bit confused that they can't figure out how to do stuff they knew how to do 17 years ago all of a sudden.
It's not that they can't figure out how to do it - it's that they explicitly don't want to do it, because the constant mindless combat was (for most people) a drag and not a feature of PsT. Now if you actually meet thugs, harass them, and they don't attack (and there is no reason for them not attacking, like if they know you're much more powerful than them, it's perfectly logical they don't attack but I can't judge on that specific point not having played the beta) then yes it's a flaw and should signal it to inXile - but that's a specific case, not a general "we need more combat" thing.
(@Kilobug, none of this is meant for you alone. You were just the last person to really address some of the points I was discussing. Most of your replies are valid and understandable. I appreciated your comments very much, thank you.)
One thing that's starting to drive me nuts is how much people focus on semantics on forums. I agree that it isn't an "adventure game" exactly. I was merely suggesting that some people seem to think this game will not have any combat outside of the 12 crisis. That you won't be able to attack anyone in the game outside of those 12 crisis. That the game won't be concerned with inventory management. That all solutions will be made through dialogue almost exclusively. At some point I came to see that a game like that would fall more or less under "adventure" instead of Role-Playing. I honestly don't want to focus on words. My point has always been that I just don't agree with the points stated above. I had come to accept that this game most likely wouldn't have those features and I can live with that. However, I started playing the beta and now once again I can't believe that they really intend to make the game that way.

I don't think Inxile explicitly wants to exclude combat outside of these crisis situations. I don't think that Inxile has any plan to not have an decent amount of items for the player to manage. These are core aspects of an RPG for me, maybe not as far as semantics are concerned. When I go into the Underbelly and see a thug my first thought is, " I'll most likely be able to attack this thug when the game is released!" Why? Because the word "Thug" implies the person is a bully and aggressive. Having Thugs that don't fight makes no sense unless its because they are scared of you or something like that. Even then they would need to be called "frighted thugs" or have them start dialogue aggressively only to get scared and flee.

I just don't see why so many people are so opposed to having thugs in the game as long as they aren't trash mobs. Just think of the Dustman in PST what was so terrible about them? It was pretty easy to figure out what to say in order to avoid a fight. Similarly, in TToN when you run into a thug it will come up and start a dialogue with you. It will ask you a few questions which you will have to answer. Your answer will decide if the Thug attacks. I don't see how that can ruin immersion for anyone. It seems like a legit and good way to add more combat to the game.

As far as I can tell the fact that Thugs exist in the beta verifies that in fact you will be able to attack people outside of specific crisis. The thugs are not the only example either. I've noticed several opportunities like those bug people in the underbelly ( can't think of the name) and the levies in the city will most likely be able to fight. The thugs are just the most obvious example because the word thug implies violent tendencies. HAHAHA... I just realized how much I'm pointing out the meaning of the word "thug" after discrediting people who focus on the meanings of words... :D

I'm assuming though that this will still be a pretty low level of combat compared with most other RPGs and I'm okay with that. I just think some people will be surprised when the game arrives. Some seem to be under the impression that this is a point and click game where you simply read and solve a few puzzles. Inxiles last game was Wastelands 2 and I don't see why in the world they wouldn't add some of the very fun and enjoyable mechanics that game had. I am not advocating adding tons of random fights to the game. I just want to be able to Role-Play in the same kinds of ways that you could in Planescape Torment.

Example how to handle a Dustman: Do I quickly snap its neck? Do I try and deceive them? Will I simply run? How about stealthily sneaking past them altogether or disguising myself as a zombie? Do I run through killing everything that moves? That's half of what makes Planescape Torment so much fun. You can Role-Play and play it how you want. The more options you have the better. Limiting the number of ways people can react to a situation makes little sense to me.

Anyway, I'm going to do my best to just leave this topic alone myself. I feel like I'm just repeating the same stuff over and over like a broken record. I haven't really heard a decent reason *why* what I've been suggesting so terrible but I am tired to arguing over what this word means or that word. If someone can say why the above things would make the game worse I'll most likely read them at some point, promise. I'm just not feeling like this is getting anywhere right now, just starting to become a flame war.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9402
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Drool » March 4th, 2016, 1:41 pm

anonymous6059 wrote:One thing that's starting to drive me nuts is how much people focus on semantics on forums.
True, but semantics can be important, especially when it comes to forming perceptions of the game. And also, people use semantics as a weapon to insult games as well. Like when people call Skyrim a "walking simulator"; that's clearly intended to denigrate the game as being not a "true" RPG or even a true game. Likewise, calling this game an "adventure game" strikes many as an insult.

Especially after people have explained their objections and you've agreed with their points. It starts to look antagonistic, which is why people keep fighting you on it. Which leads to armchair philosophers like me...
At some point I came to see that a game like that would fall more or less under "adventure" instead of Role-Playing.
I've been playing pen-and-paper RPGs for thirty some years now. I never, ever, not even once, had to worry about my inventory or the management thereof. Claiming this is some critical component to an RPG is more than a little odd to me. Furthermore, some of the most engrossing games I've played have been when we were playing Amber, which didn't really involve combat at all.

Yes, there's serious differences between PnP gaming and computer gaming, but these are all secondary attributes to the genre being oddly elevated to core components. Does Fallout morph into a point-and-click adventure game if you do a pacifist run? Is it adventure-curious?
Some seem to be under the impression that this is a point and click game where you simply read and solve a few puzzles.
The only people I've seen who seem think it's going to be like that are people complaining that any game that doesn't have a fight every 10 or 15 minutes isn't a real RPG.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 4th, 2016, 6:20 pm

Drool wrote:
anonymous6059 wrote:One thing that's starting to drive me nuts is how much people focus on semantics on forums.
True, but semantics can be important, especially when it comes to forming perceptions of the game. And also, people use semantics as a weapon to insult games as well. Like when people call Skyrim a "walking simulator"; that's clearly intended to denigrate the game as being not a "true" RPG or even a true game. Likewise, calling this game an "adventure game" strikes many as an insult.

Especially after people have explained their objections and you've agreed with their points. It starts to look antagonistic, which is why people keep fighting you on it. Which leads to armchair philosophers like me...
At some point I came to see that a game like that would fall more or less under "adventure" instead of Role-Playing.
I've been playing pen-and-paper RPGs for thirty some years now. I never, ever, not even once, had to worry about my inventory or the management thereof. Claiming this is some critical component to an RPG is more than a little odd to me. Furthermore, some of the most engrossing games I've played have been when we were playing Amber, which didn't really involve combat at all.

Yes, there's serious differences between PnP gaming and computer gaming, but these are all secondary attributes to the genre being oddly elevated to core components. Does Fallout morph into a point-and-click adventure game if you do a pacifist run? Is it adventure-curious?
Some seem to be under the impression that this is a point and click game where you simply read and solve a few puzzles.
The only people I've seen who seem think it's going to be like that are people complaining that any game that doesn't have a fight every 10 or 15 minutes isn't a real RPG.
Drool your making my life hard man. You just pretty much did exactly what I asked you not to do. I just want to discuss why it is or isn't a good idea to have the potential for a certain type of combat. Instead you just man the assault on what "words" mean. Its like a endless tug of war over nothing. I didn't come away from reading what you posted having any better understanding of the subject whatsoever. Instead you just dip in to pick on what this or that word means. I understand that a difference exist between crpgs and rpgs. I understand that not everyone has used the word "adventure" game to describe the game minus the suggested components. I understand that it might be in some way be merely a jab by me calling it a "adventure" game. I swear to study grammar and logic in greater detail. Still, you haven't actually said anything useful at all. Your just picking things apart. It's almost like your a Intellectual troll or vulture. ::Joking:: :D Please don't ban hammer me. I like it here. ;) I even broke my vow against this thread just to say your way of a thousand cuts is too much.

Honestly, I'm not hating or trying to be mean. I just don't see how pointing those things out helps solve anything. It just starts a fuss over nothing. I understand that your most likely sharpening those word daggers of yours but Its just making me feel like I'm wasting my time. Which I most likely am since I highly doubt Inxile cares greatly for my opinion. Still, if you have something constructive to add please do, but your exhausting me with this semantics stuff. I give you win. Forums are evil. lesson learned.

I was interested in the fact that you've played that dice-less RPG set in Amber. I'm actually reading The Guns of Avalon right now. So I'd love to hear about that RPG even though its extremely off-topic. Been really wondering if it was any good.

I also didn't know you could play through fallout 1 as a pacifist.... If you could though I wouldn't think that would make it a point and click game. You'd just be playing a CRPG without fighting. The fact that you've just chosen not fight at all stands to the truth that it is indeed a CRPG in my opinion. The strength would be in the fact that you can "choose" to fight or not to fight....so help you God? I guess that would make it a adventure-curious run through but now we are just inventing words.

This is my attempt at the word dissection game:
To me an adventure game is a interactive story with puzzle-solving. It is a more bare bones idea, but not meant in a negative way. A adventure game can be just as good as any other game. From what I've seen of the Beta I'd say its main category is under "adventure" followed by "RPG". The word "CRPG" (when I say "RPG" I mean "CRPG" since we are discussing video games, specifically TToN) to me is a loaded word that is in fact much harder to define. It has a story, inventory management, quest, leveling, combat, and lastly but most importantly Choice and consequences. An RPG can be a Adventure game and a Adventure game can be a RPG I guess. The word Adventure game as used above is meant to say that TToN according to some members want to focus almost exclusively on the adventure aspects, not that the game isn't a RPG at all. Just that they see it as more or solely as a interactive story with puzzle-solving. I can't say that they are wrong. The only combat that I've experienced in the beta could be seen as simply a puzzle more or less. I didn't actually combat the enemy at all just solved the puzzle in the area.

Okay. I've taken the time to try and explain the meaning of those two words and now my head hurts. If we disagree on the what a RPG is that's fine. You just asked so I thought I'd answer to be polite, but I'm not feeling like its getting us anywhere.

So I think I am saying that by adding more of the suggested (combat via-dialogue being the most specific) ideas it would be more of a RPG and less of a Adventure game. Which in my opinion will most likely happen and should happen. Since those kinds of things existed in Planescape Torment and because they did such a good job at it in Wastelands 2. I simply don't see how this could be a bad idea or how it could make the game worse. If anything it seems only to be a good idea. Still, I'd love to hear why this won't happen or why it would be bad if it did.

User avatar
Drool
Forum Moderator
Posts: 9402
Joined: March 17th, 2012, 9:58 pm
Location: Under Tenebrosia, doing shots with Sceadu.

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Drool » March 5th, 2016, 12:17 pm

anonymous6059 wrote:Drool your making my life hard man. You just pretty much did exactly what I asked you not to do.
It's a rock fight and we're both chucking rocks while requesting the other stop.
I was interested in the fact that you've played that dice-less RPG set in Amber. I'm actually reading The Guns of Avalon right now. So I'd love to hear about that RPG even though its extremely off-topic. Been really wondering if it was any good.
Briefly, since it is off topic, Amber diceless, more than any other RPG I've played, is deeply reliant on the imagination and the skill of both the GM and the players. In some ways, it's less an RPG and more a collaborative novel. It's a strange experience, but when done right, it's pretty damn amazing. With an unskilled or uncreative GM, it would likely be an absolute trainwreck.
I also didn't know you could play through fallout 1 as a pacifist.... If you could though I wouldn't think that would make it a point and click game. You'd just be playing a CRPG without fighting.
One of the core design philosophies of Fallout was that for every problem, you could Fight, Stealth, or Talk, which is probably why you can talk the Master into suicide.
Okay. I've taken the time to try and explain the meaning of those two words and now my head hurts. If we disagree on the what a RPG is that's fine. You just asked so I thought I'd answer to be polite, but I'm not feeling like its getting us anywhere.
Your definitions are reasonable. I disagree on some of the particulars, but that's to be expected. The problem was people using different core axioms and trying to talk like those were in line, which leads to confusion.

That said.

Your definition of "adventure game" is likely as good as any out there. However, there's more than just definitions going on here (hence the semantic debates). There's also the connotations of the phrase "adventure game". Those connotations are why people get up in arms when you (and others) say that Torment without combat is just going to be an adventure game. You mean your neutral definition; people hear the loaded implication.

For example: Sherlock Holmes was a brilliant detective, and a comparison of one's reasoning skills to him is going to viewed as praise. Except, when someone says something obvious and you reply with, "no shit, Sherlock," you're using Sherlock as an insult, even though he was a brilliant character. Likewise, even if you think King's Quest is the best game ever created, calling an intended RPG and adventure game is seen as an insult.
I simply don't see how this could be a bad idea or how it could make the game worse. If anything it seems only to be a good idea. Still, I'd love to hear why this won't happen or why it would be bad if it did.
Well, it looks like you can pick some fights if you want, but those are likely to have consequences. That said, I'm personally looking at this game as a bit of an experiment; to see if a (nearly) combat-free cRPG can actually work. I'm rather curious to see if it will, and burning resources finding extra ways to shovel in meaningless combat seems counterproductive to me.
Alwa nasci korliri das.

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 5th, 2016, 4:37 pm

Drool wrote:
anonymous6059 wrote:
I simply don't see how this could be a bad idea or how it could make the game worse. If anything it seems only to be a good idea. Still, I'd love to hear why this won't happen or why it would be bad if it did.
Well, it looks like you can pick some fights if you want, but those are likely to have consequences. That said, I'm personally looking at this game as a bit of an experiment; to see if a (nearly) combat-free cRPG can actually work. I'm rather curious to see if it will, and burning resources finding extra ways to shovel in meaningless combat seems counterproductive to me.
I think you mentioned that point before and I totally think that's the most valid reason I've heard. If we are going to make art then I guess its annoying when people ask what use the art serves. Its just I don't think of video games as only art. Its a game and it should entertain first and foremost. If we were talking about a sculpture or a painting I'd be more inclined to jump on board with you. Now the big issue for me in saying that is that this game isn't meant to entertain everyone. Its meant to entertain a very specific group of fans. So if in fact the backers honestly wished for the game to not have any additional "meaningless" combat, even when its done in a way that wouldn't ruin immersion or be just trash mobs, then that's what should happen. I just didn't remember seeing that the majority wanted it to be that way. I know that Inxile said they'd cut the trash mobs out and focus on making the game as meaningful as possible.

I just feel like I'm losing out in the range of possible ways I could enjoy the game. However, I've been playing through the Beta and I've been mostly pleased with what I've seen. Sure some stuff is buggy, a few typos, and a few graphics have bothered me. I have been reporting it all of course. Still, I feel like somethings missing as I make my way through the game. I come into an area and find "Thugs" who I can't attack. I ran across a sticha bug man that I actually could fight but instead of fighting him he just fell over dead. I go into another area and see "Goons" that won't even try to start anything no matter what I do. Things start to feel black and white. All that Meaningfulness is very superficial when in a RPG your so limited in ways of behaving that you can't even kill thugs. Mostly though its just going against the grain of what I'm used to seeing in a similar video game. I was under the impression that this was to follow in the same foot steps of black isles games. Its mostly just thrown me off more then anything else.

On another level though I have felt like this game will deliver on in a very interesting way. For instance it seems like at some point you can decide to save one of two groups of people and the results will be very unique and meaningful. Leading to major changes in the scenery and outcome of the game as a whole. Massive ramifications are always super cool. The game will deliver on that I think. I guess its the trivial "meaningless" stuff that seems so easy to add that is disappointing.

Its like the game has no barriers. Nothing is really time consuming but the dialogue. It just feels wrong somehow. Good combat regardless makes for good filler. It also mixes things up and gets other parts of your brain working. The only solution that I can come up with to supplement the lack of combat with an increase in puzzles. If the game had more puzzles then what I've come across so far then at least all those cyphers and numenera would be useful. I'd also make most of the crisis situations really difficult to beat fist to fist. You should be able to handle crisis in a variety of non-combative ways too. What's the point of even trying to upgrade armor or weapons though if you never really need them?

No matter what the game is looking pretty good. I'm enjoying it a lot. I'm sure Inxile will deliver. I've just confused why they would plan to take something useful out of the game. For me it's like purchasing a car and being told that the trunk, something that's always been useful and common in cars, might not be available and something experimental could be replacing it.

**I'd love to sit in on a Amber gaming session. If you still DM one on something like Roll20.net I'd love to just watch one time. Love to play too but would be happy to just see how it works.

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 6th, 2016, 3:35 am

I decided to go in and do some digging through the actual *Canon* to see what Inxile had or hadn't said regarding everything we have been discussing. I was very happy to see that in fact everything I've mentioned is plainly verified as being exactly what i'd wanted it to be from the very beginning.

"But wait," you say. "What if I want to fight? A dozen Crises doesn't sound like a good deal to me." Rest assured that if fighting is your preferred way to handle situations, then you will still have ample opportunity to do so. Our dozen (or so) Crises are handcrafted, it's true, and we won't ever require you to fight outside of a Crisis (or even inside most of them). But there will be a number of places where you can pick a fight, if you want to.
https://torment.inxile-entertainment.co ... t/gameplay

So all this has really been somewhat pointless because it plainly states that Inxile does plan to deliver on making sure that lots of "meaningless" combat will be available throughout the game. **hint: all the goons and thugs hanging out in most areas** The only question that really exist is in how they will deliver on this promise.

I've already gone to great lengths to try and explain how I feel this should be done. Still I'll quickly summarize: All the Goons, Thugs, Sticha, and many more should act in a similar way as the Dustman from PST. Sometimes they should approach you in a aggressive way, possibly depending on past actions. If you answer a variety of questions in a *pacifist* manner they won't attack. You might also should be able to deceive or bribe them into leaving you alone. Sometimes violence should only arise because of specific dialogue choices you make. Ones which pretty obviously show that your picking a fight.

Anyway, its plain that Inxile has always intended to have plenty of combat and so I don't really see anything left to discuss but how best to implement it. The idea that this game will not have "meaningless" combat seems to be a misconception luckily.
Last edited by anonymous6059 on March 6th, 2016, 3:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Lord of Riva
Adventurer
Posts: 963
Joined: October 14th, 2014, 10:18 am

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Lord of Riva » March 6th, 2016, 3:44 am

ahhh, that is kinda misleading.
But there will be a number of places where you can pick a fight, if you want to.
you do realise that this can mean 5-1000 encounters. Im still thinking you will not get what you wish for is what im saying

User avatar
anonymous6059
Adventurer
Posts: 786
Joined: January 5th, 2016, 6:45 pm

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by anonymous6059 » March 6th, 2016, 3:47 am

Lord of Riva wrote:ahhh, that is kinda misleading.
But there will be a number of places where you can pick a fight, if you want to.
you do realise that this can mean 5-1000 encounters. Im still thinking you will not get what you wish for is what im saying
Well it does say "ample opportunity". If that means a modron's cube or what I've been saying we have yet to see. Eitherway, why have all the goons and thugs in so many areas if they won't be fightable. It'd be like adding clay pots to zelda and saying you might not be able to break them.

User avatar
Lord of Riva
Adventurer
Posts: 963
Joined: October 14th, 2014, 10:18 am

Re: A look on writing, gameplay and some lore questions

Post by Lord of Riva » March 6th, 2016, 4:33 am

anonymous6059 wrote:
Lord of Riva wrote:ahhh, that is kinda misleading.
But there will be a number of places where you can pick a fight, if you want to.
you do realise that this can mean 5-1000 encounters. Im still thinking you will not get what you wish for is what im saying
Well it does say "ample opportunity". If that means a modron's cube or what I've been saying we have yet to see. Eitherway, why have all the goons and thugs in so many areas if they won't be fightable. It'd be like adding clay pots to zelda and saying you might not be able to break them.
Because if you meet your blinged Gangsta wherever you live, basically the cool kids and delinquents, no person in their right mind would just slaughter them on the open streets. Or do you go around killing all marijuana dealers because what they do is clearly illegal?

that said, a arena like the modron cube wouldnt be wrong however remember that encounters dont necessary bring XP also the level progression is rather limited with "only" 6 Tiers

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest