Of Troika

[saintfrancisnudecenterfold]

What Troika brings to mind (and what they probably were not doing) is the old tactic of smithing a half of a horseshoe perfectly and nailing it on the path to the village, an old form of advertisement. Well, ok, so it was a form of warning, but it still could serve as an advertisement.

 

Now, we have several games by Troika, all of which seem half-perfect, or with partial goodness and quality, but all these games are also flawed in a certain respect. Each would make excellent licenses to buy because of the setting or the way of handling UI, or other reasons. Yet Troika no longer stands. Where is Troika? Who forged this half of a horseshoe? How might we obtain such a horseshoe but whole?

 

If a person does not have sufficient funds to sustain their own company (or who are not being well fed by their lord), they might form a game that is attractive yet somehow unfinished, to call notice to all who like that fashion of work, all who might have need of them. Eventually someone will notice and eventually someone will hire them. Also, to the one who owns the rest of the horseshoes (the licenses), they can stand to make a sum from licensing.

 

So here is a way of handling ones pathway through business: half-formed horsehoes that are perfect. The beautifully concieved worlds that everyone wishes had endless sequels. We follow the path, hoping the horseshoe wasn't truly indication of brigands.

 

(Another warning was a knife thrust pointfirst into the ground, handle snapped off, but this could also be seen as an advertisement. Honest.)

[Fairplay]

I don't know. I thought ToEE was pretty good once it was thouroughly patched. Bloodlines was pretty good too. I think the biggest problem was that they never focused on making sequels. Horseshoes one day, knives the next.

 

Once they figured out how to make a good horseshoe, they should have stuck to making horseshoes. At least for a while.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

They seemed to have an honest desire to develop the best roleplaying games that they could make, but I think it was noticeable that their games suffered from having too many concepts with not enough implementation. Arcanum is the primary example of a game that tried to do too many things at once and it's too bad that out of all those things we can only bring up a handful of good ones. Still, some good is better than none. Temple of Elemental Evil also had lofty goals behind it but while it remains a very good tactical combat game with one of the best Dungeons and Dragons rule implementations, it's little else than that.

 

I would enjoying seeing more Troika-styled games, in the sense of games which may be flawed but have enough redeeming qualities that just make me want to keep returning to them, than Bioware games which largely feel very polished but without a soul.

[Bokishi]

I admire originality.

[Gabrielle]

This is so deep.

[Enoch]

Meh.

 

Arcanum had an interesting world, but none of the characters in it were particularly compelling, and the character skill progression and combat systems were awful. ToEE was just awful. Boring story, boring combat, boring game. I didn't play V:TM (goth-y vampire stuff ain't my thing).

 

Yeah, Fallout was a great game (though it had flaws that we all tend to forget nowadays), but I wouldn't say that the Troikites have done much else to recommend themselves.

[Darque]

This is so deep.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Gabrielle]

Troika was getting better as evident by the release of Bloodlines. A shame the company is R.I.P.

[SteveThaiBinh]

Yet some of its employees have moved on to jobs in companies that will take advantage of their creative talents and yet stay solvent. A good outcome, no?

[Cantousent]

Troika doesn't get credit for Fallout. Interplay does. Bloodlines, on the other hand, is one of the best RPGs I've ever played. So far, that puts one excellent Troika game in the midst of a few mediocre games and one game for which they

[Gabrielle]

:Eldars menacing grin:

[Darque]

Troika was getting better as evident by the release of Bloodlines. A shame the company is R.I.P.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed, definately.

[saintfrancisnudecenterfold]

Meh.

 

Arcanum had an interesting world, but none of the characters in it were particularly compelling, and the character skill progression and combat systems were awful.  ToEE was just awful.  Boring story, boring combat, boring game.  I didn't play V:TM (goth-y vampire stuff ain't my thing).

 

Yeah, Fallout was a great game (though it had flaws that we all tend to forget nowadays), but I wouldn't say that the Troikites have done much else to recommend themselves.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Who can refuse to reply to Enoch, Uḥnukh, who later was Eroch, who later was Eraq? Ahem. Sorry about the Hussar, friend.

 

I remember having great hopes for Arcanum, but the problem was that the mid-level path was difficult to find. Dangers were plentiful without chance to actually find safety. The rings of the citadel were poorly formed in that game, it was almost as if someone had frozen a freeform game in action, a game that freely develops with NPC interacting and choosing goals from what appears available, and the present situation was dire for the law of cities and quite excellent for the forces of opposition.

 

The characters were designed to have depth but did not have any in execution, and the story appeared broken. As if an idiot were given characters with depth, a story plot, histories, texts, and quite a bit of information, but because they were typing verbotim from the equivalent of a GURPS supplement and novelization, they did not have much else besides loose bits of dialogue, an indepth map, scattered characters, and quests.

 

All very vulgar in execution because apparently none of it actually was meshed and knitted together in the way it should have been, with other options besides walking off the path or following a loose strand.

 

What could they have done? Planned the darn thing.

 

Now, as to VTMB, that game really showed the limitation of their method. No indepth preplanning. I remember Troika talking about their plans for their characters: pretty damn loose and without form, not in the taoist sense, but in the sense of sleeping through half of D Day. If I had only a short time with a graphical engine and it's not there, it's not there, it's coming but not there, I'd spend ALL MY DAMN TIME doing dialogue, plot, characters, and planning gameplay features that depend on dialogue, plot, and characters. Graphics can usually not mess with dialogue, and the sort of gameplay that focuses on what is possible to direct and change in the game is good. If it can be graphically represented, all the better. If not, compell the player's imagination.

 

What could they have done? Planned the darn thing.

 

What was Troika good at? Troika? The people involved are probably as good as anyone, any janitor or car salesman or pizza deliverer or astronaut or president. However, Troika as a company did not inspire confidence in me or many people. I know a few people who mock the RPG community and call it "smoking pot", and call themselves Christians. If Christians or anyone want a roleplaying game based in their culture, community, or faith, the best way of doing it is to learn the games, play them with their paradigmal redesign, and fashion a game with a friendly motif. An education helps in this, as does great familiarity with many aspects of roleplaying games and roleplaying game design (and war games and war game design).

 

And for Pete's sake, plan the darn thing before jumping into it!

Edited February 17, 2006 by saintfrancisnudecenterfold

[Dhruin]

I found that original post rather hard to navigate. For my personal tastes, each Troika game had something I enjoyed that is hard to find elsewhere (at least in full commercial products). Definitely a loss for me.

[Gromnir]

I found that original post rather hard to navigate.  For my personal tastes, each Troika game had something I enjoyed that is hard to find elsewhere (at least in full commercial products).  Definitely a loss for me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

what you mean? you can find bugs and bad dialogues in most games.

 

HA!

 

however, we understand what you is getting at. always seemed like troika's biggest obstacle were themselves. too much ego and not enough business accumen to be making commercial success games.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Darque]

however, we understand what you is getting at.  always seemed like troika's biggest obstacle were themselves.  too much ego and not enough business accumen to be making commercial success games. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Did they make any smart business moves at all?

[saintfrancisnudecenterfold]

Personally, I'm just wondering when companies will wise up to the grand scapes of campaign worlds that have already been fashioned, such as Glorantha, Oerth, Tekumel, Harn, and other wonderful creations. Hey, even City-State of the Mad Overlord would make a nice setting.

Edited February 17, 2006 by saintfrancisnudecenterfold

[Dhruin]

Troika would have "died" one way or the other, anyway. It's a sad (?) reality that the type of hardcore RPG Troika liked to make is going to find it difficult to sustain the sales required for modern AAA titled, particularly as time marches on. I often see comparisons between Troika and the success of BioWare - a quick look at BioWare's forums will reveal plenty of "BioWare isn't as good anymore" type threads as old hardcore PC fans become disgruntled with BioWare's movement into consoles and games with broader appeal. That's how BioWare sustains their growth and it will continue as they grow larger. BioWare has always had a better eye for a wider audience than Troika...which is one reason I always liked Troika's games.

 

The best business decision Troika could have made would be to make a different style of game...in which case many of us would be complaining they "sold out" or went all console. That doesn't mean they didn't make plenty of mistakes that made the situation worse, btw.

[Cantousent]

Come on. These guys had access to high profile licenses such as VtM and Dungeons and Dragons. They made a good business decision in signing on for ToEE. They just couldn't come through with the goods.

 

You know, I don't want to kick Troika. They had some great ideas. The problem is, they never managed to turn them into great games. The real problem is that Troika didn't do it and so a lot of folks think it can't be done. Troika didn't do a damned thing to help the CRPG industry.

[Jorian Drake]

R.I.P.

[Volourn]

Troika made hardcore games with a soul? HAHAHAHAH!

 

 

1. I liked Arcanum. A lot. But, this is one of very few games that actually tries to combine to different combat modes equally. Not exactly hardcore is it? And, dont' blame the publisher. Troika is the dveloper. They get blame for all aspects of the game that they agree to. Overall, though, Arcanum was a fun game for me in spite of its many faults.

 

2. TOEE. The game wa sboring. It did one thing right - the combat system. Pretty much everything sucked, blowed, or was good but buggy as heck (itemc reation here). This game had no *soul* though. Even the role-playing it had lacked purpose or menaing. The characters were a bore.

 

3. Now we get to V:BL. I like this game; but I really want to LOVE it. Sadly, Troika ruins this. This game had some of the best quests, characters, role-playing, music, sound,a nd yes SOUl I have ever seen... yet.. it doens't even make my top 10 (close; but no cigar)..

 

Why? 'Cause the game isn't made for hardcore role-players.. The combat is not just real time; it's absolutely horrid real time. This combat makes KOTOR combat seem challenging, and while KOTOR cdombat is lacking it can be fun... V:BL combat simply isn't fun. It's simply boring (except for a few well done combats). Garbage like that along with the bugs and slowdowns hurts this games epsicially the silly argument that Troika's true goal was to make hardcore RPGs.

 

And, it's not like they weren't given a chance. They had two licensed products including a D&D one (for their seocnd game just like BIO had with theirs) yet still their games didn't hit home espicially the D&D game.

 

 

It says a lot whenh someone like me who actually likes 2 of their 3 games cna say such evil stuff about them.

 

 

I like their games; but I don't mourn their passing... yet, I'd likely have bought their next game because even with its faults; BL was a worthy purchase for me.

 

The funny thing is unlike other people, I have nothing but good epxerience with the Troika folks on line. They're always curteous or at worst begign even when repsonding to Mean Things I Say tm.

 

Go figure.

[Dhruin]

Come on.  These guys had access to high profile licenses such as VtM and Dungeons and Dragons.  They made a good business decision in signing on for ToEE.  They just couldn't come through with the goods.

 

You know, I don't want to kick Troika.  They had some great ideas.  The problem is, they never managed to turn them into great games.  The real problem is that Troika didn't do it and so a lot of folks think it can't be done.  Troika didn't do a damned thing to help the CRPG industry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I wasn't talking about licenses or the industry but rather the gameplay style Troika wanted - but since you raise the point and ToEE, I'll run with. Troika made a bunch of decisions intended to appeal to "hardcore" fans - people like themselves - such as prioritising turn-based combat over virtually everything else, such as sticking with rules like 100gp to identify items every time etc etc. BioWare would never include such things because they know this restricts the audience.

 

I'm not trying to make a value judgement - that one is better than the other - but BioWare put effort (to some degree or another) into trying to accomodate a wider audience that Troika never seriously considered. BioWare's way is smarter from a business sense - Troika wanted to make games they liked. Those design decisions are completely separate to whether they were competent in trying to achieve those goals.

[Volourn]

"Troika wanted to make games they liked."

 

False.

 

BIO makes games they like.

 

Unless you are saying Troika LIKED the real time combat in Arcanum... which they claim was forced on them.... LOL

[Gromnir]

make so-called hard-core games ain't what killed troika. looks at initial sales for toee... started out pretty damned good. initial sales of arcanum weren't bad neither.

 

is some folks that wanna repaint troika stoopidity as some kinda noble integrity. rubish.

 

troika games were buggy messes that seemed half-baked. as crappy as were the writing in troika games, stability were even worse... and yet after each incomplete game were released, troika folks went public with their own publisher blame game. stoopid. were stoopid for not having better organizational skills to be choosing what they could accomplish with the resources they possesed. were stoopid for attacking the guys with the money. were stoopid to make those same mistakes over and over again.

 

btw, we don't have to yet again go over how troika messed up identify in toee does we?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Unless you are saying Troika LIKED the real time combat in Arcanum... which they claim was forced on them.... LOL

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Troika said this was entirely their decision. I think either Cain or Leonard did so in either the Codex forums or in some interview.