Author Topic: This game looks great! My thoughts...

daveyd

  • Citizen
  • Ogre Zombie
  • 4
  • Joined
    May 09, 2018
    Posts
    121
#1989 November 18, 2019, Monday, 07:06 pm
So I suppose I'd be OK with some "scaling" in limited situations when there is a good rationale for it; perhaps not even based on your level but consequences of the player's actions.  For ex: You chose to let a necromancer live and now there are more / stronger undead in the area. 

Or another thing I actually like the idea of is that another group of adventurers might deal with a quest, or it otherwise becomes unsolvable if you wait "too long" to complete it.  To me that would add to the sense that this a living breathing world, not a static one waiting for you to solve every problem at your leisure.   

It would definitely be great to see a game do these things, but as a developer I can tell you that this kind of algorithm is really complex. I think this is the real difference between playing with people and with a CRPG. There is nowhere a game that can react as you say and to develop it we would really need lots of people and lots of time. Maybe one day, when a decent AI is developed we could see more reactive games, but for now the developers should put themselves there and create every single possibility by hand and I don't see how enthusiasts like Ceres can cope with the scarce resources they have.


Oh yeah, I could definitely see how some of the features I'm talking about could become complicated very quickly.  Not really expecting Ceres to do that sort of thing for their first game.

I have not played Pathfinder: Kingmaker yet but I've heard it has attempted some of the sorts of reactivity I'd like to see in RPGs.  But they raised around 7 times what Realms Beyond did on Kickstarter and had a publisher. The game was also extremely buggy on release according to reviews. 

Really, I'll just be happy if RB quests often have multiple solution paths (stealth / stealing, diplomacy, etc.) rather than simply "go here and kill this guy" all the time.

Night

  • Town Guard
  • Marsh Goblin
  • 2
  • Joined
    Oct 12, 2019
    Posts
    22
#1990 November 19, 2019, Tuesday, 10:11 am
So I suppose I'd be OK with some "scaling" in limited situations when there is a good rationale for it; perhaps not even based on your level but consequences of the player's actions.  For ex: You chose to let a necromancer live and now there are more / stronger undead in the area. 

Or another thing I actually like the idea of is that another group of adventurers might deal with a quest, or it otherwise becomes unsolvable if you wait "too long" to complete it.  To me that would add to the sense that this a living breathing world, not a static one waiting for you to solve every problem at your leisure.   

It would definitely be great to see a game do these things, but as a developer I can tell you that this kind of algorithm is really complex. I think this is the real difference between playing with people and with a CRPG. There is nowhere a game that can react as you say and to develop it we would really need lots of people and lots of time. Maybe one day, when a decent AI is developed we could see more reactive games, but for now the developers should put themselves there and create every single possibility by hand and I don't see how enthusiasts like Ceres can cope with the scarce resources they have.


Oh yeah, I could definitely see how some of the features I'm talking about could become complicated very quickly.  Not really expecting Ceres to do that sort of thing for their first game.

I have not played Pathfinder: Kingmaker yet but I've heard it has attempted some of the sorts of reactivity I'd like to see in RPGs.  But they raised around 7 times what Realms Beyond did on Kickstarter and had a publisher. The game was also extremely buggy on release according to reviews. 

Really, I'll just be happy if RB quests often have multiple solution paths (stealth / stealing, diplomacy, etc.) rather than simply "go here and kill this guy" all the time.

Yes, I also hope for what you say. Being able to solve the quests differently through skills or through well-studied dialogues is already a good compromise. This solution makes the different classes of characters in the group count. Failing a quest, for example, by making local merchants angry or foreclosing non-fundamental side quests would be a wonderful solution and would increase replayability.
As for P: KM I finished it 3 times, I participated as a beta tester and I can tell you that there are some choices that matter and make the game world congruous with the choices made. As I said in the previous post they don't upset the game, but they characterize the game a lot. Don't spoil it too much  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

daveyd

  • Citizen
  • Ogre Zombie
  • 4
  • Joined
    May 09, 2018
    Posts
    121
#1991 November 20, 2019, Wednesday, 01:35 pm

Yes, I also hope for what you say. Being able to solve the quests differently through skills or through well-studied dialogues is already a good compromise. This solution makes the different classes of characters in the group count. Failing a quest, for example, by making local merchants angry or foreclosing non-fundamental side quests would be a wonderful solution and would increase replayability.
As for P: KM I finished it 3 times, I participated as a beta tester and I can tell you that there are some choices that matter and make the game world congruous with the choices made. As I said in the previous post they don't upset the game, but they characterize the game a lot. Don't spoil it too much  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm encouraged that the main writer for RB said in discord that one of the things he doesn't like about point & click adventure games is there is usually only one solution to a problem.  And during the Kickstarter they described their quests as "choice driven" like those in Arcanum and Fallout.  So there's reason to hope they're aspiring to have some interesting, multi-faceted quests. 

LadyBard

  • Town Guard
  • Gelatinous Cube
  • 3
  • Joined
    Nov 13, 2018
    Posts
    59
#1993 November 21, 2019, Thursday, 07:56 pm
We don't have level scaling or auto levelling for enemies.
Some areas are more dangerous than others, with more powerful encounters.

During overland encounters, you can actually flee but you need to match some criterias to do so. If one of your characters is already down, you'll lose him/her.


Thank you. Level scaling is fine, but lack of level scaling gives games more clearer path, which doesn't make it linerar, nor a chore. I hate what pillars did, where you had level scaling, but it was badly optimized and a chore.
I like it Pathfinder Kingmaker way...

Tharagavverug

  • Developer
  • Marsh Goblin
  • 2
  • Joined
    Jan 02, 2018
    Posts
    12
#1996 November 22, 2019, Friday, 02:04 pm

Yes, I also hope for what you say. Being able to solve the quests differently through skills or through well-studied dialogues is already a good compromise. This solution makes the different classes of characters in the group count. Failing a quest, for example, by making local merchants angry or foreclosing non-fundamental side quests would be a wonderful solution and would increase replayability.
As for P: KM I finished it 3 times, I participated as a beta tester and I can tell you that there are some choices that matter and make the game world congruous with the choices made. As I said in the previous post they don't upset the game, but they characterize the game a lot. Don't spoil it too much  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm encouraged that the main writer for RB said in discord that one of the things he doesn't like about point & click adventure games is there is usually only one solution to a problem.  And during the Kickstarter they described their quests as "choice driven" like those in Arcanum and Fallout.  So there's reason to hope they're aspiring to have some interesting, multi-faceted quests.

Ah yes, that conversation. :D

Yes, my approach to quest design - and one I encourage in the other writers, too - is to present the player with a situation and then allow him to approach it in whichever way he sees fit. A shady guy in a tavern just told you about a secret meeting place you should go to? You can go there, or you can tip off the guards about it if you feel like your character wouldn't get involved in shady dealings. Two lords are squabbling over a piece of land they both believe belongs to them? You can pick a side, or you can go to the Royal Archives to search for old records that might prove whose claim is right. Etc.

Rather than giving the player quests with detailed instructions of the "Do A, then do B, then do C" sort, the player can always come up with his own solution, ask other NPCs about their opinions, and make decisions on how the situation should be resolved. No railroading in Realms Beyond!
Then Leothric said: "What is Tharagavverug's food?"

And the magician of Allathurion said: "His food is men."

kanisatha

  • Town Guard
  • Marsh Goblin
  • 2
  • Joined
    Nov 16, 2018
    Posts
    44
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
#1998 November 23, 2019, Saturday, 06:31 pm
Ah yes, that conversation. :D

Yes, my approach to quest design - and one I encourage in the other writers, too - is to present the player with a situation and then allow him to approach it in whichever way he sees fit. A shady guy in a tavern just told you about a secret meeting place you should go to? You can go there, or you can tip off the guards about it if you feel like your character wouldn't get involved in shady dealings. Two lords are squabbling over a piece of land they both believe belongs to them? You can pick a side, or you can go to the Royal Archives to search for old records that might prove whose claim is right. Etc.

Rather than giving the player quests with detailed instructions of the "Do A, then do B, then do C" sort, the player can always come up with his own solution, ask other NPCs about their opinions, and make decisions on how the situation should be resolved. No railroading in Realms Beyond!
This sounds awesome. And thank you for posting here for the benefit of those of us who don't do Discord.

I also like that you guys are looking to a wide range of older games for your inspiration in doing this game. Games like BG and Ps:T are fine and all, but I get tired of hearing people hold those games up as some sort of pinnacle of good game design.