Age of Decadence

[Slowtrain]

2by3 Games is a small time developer that makes war games and sells them through Matrix Games. Their games are actually usually sold for HIGHER than mainstream games. Their most recent Admiral Edition of War in the Pacific is $100 IIRC. ($20 discount if you own War in the Pacific). I picked that game up, even though it cost a lot relative to other games, even though it's a hex based war game with mediocre graphics and "meh" production values. I bought it because I loved WitP and this was a huge improvement in it, and so far I've not been disappointed in my purchase. Like CrashGirl said, we buy our games because we expect some sort of enjoyment out of them, and in spite of the high price, I know that WitP will give me lots of enjoyment, for a long period of time to boot!

 

Exactly. We are always constant adjusting our expectations based on our perceptions of a product.

 

I adjust my expectations on graphics between a fps and a crpg even if they are both from major studios. I adjust my expectations based on whether a game is made in the US or in eastern europe.

 

I don't think its possible to go through life with one fixed set of unyeliding expectations. AT least not for me.

[Wrath of Dagon]

If you actually have a small and dedicated audience who primarily buys your games, it's a totally viable strategy. I was under the impression that they wanted this to be a somewhat mainstream indie game ala Mount & Blade.

 

The best idea is probably a cheap download version and a more expensive boxed collector's edition with lots of goodies you have to order from them.(no retail)

I'm sure they'd love if it was that successful, they expect it to be a niche hardcore game though.

[alanschu]

If you actually have a small and dedicated audience who primarily buys your games, it's a totally viable strategy. I was under the impression that they wanted this to be a somewhat mainstream indie game ala Mount & Blade.

 

I definitely agree. I certainly can't fault them because I bought the game hahaha. People would occasionally go onto the forums and complain about the high price, but would usually just get responses (from the fans) defending the price as being inelastic and not resulting in improved revenues if the price was dropped. I wouldn't be surprised if it is true.

 

 

A cheap standard and more expensive collector's edition will probably work well.

Edited August 15, 2009 by alanschu

[Purkake]

How many of you would actually pay $80 for it? I certainly wouldn't.

[alanschu]

At this point I doubt I'll buy the game unless it's quite cheap and I somehow come into some extra money randomly haha. The game just hasn't captured my interest.

[alanschu]

Exactly. We are always constant adjusting our expectations based on our perceptions of a product.

 

I adjust my expectations on graphics between a fps and a crpg even if they are both from major studios. I adjust my expectations based on whether a game is made in the US or in eastern europe.

 

I don't think its possible to go through life with one fixed set of unyeliding expectations. AT least not for me.

 

 

Sorry, you're wrong j/k

 

 

As boring as it sounds, I typically look at a game, assess it in its entirety, and decide if it is worth my money based on what I feel about the game. I wouldn't go and pay $50 for AoD over DA simply because AoD is an indie project. I'd buy AoD only if I felt I'd get more for my money than had I bought DA.

Edited August 15, 2009 by alanschu

[Gromnir]

"Of course not. Because you failed to understand what I was demonstrating with it. "

 

fact that we disagree hardly equals lack of understanding... and am gonna point out that even crashgirl altered her position. analogize to gamer expectations never did work. refusal to give you some common ground to explain why your analogy works? yeah, Gromnir were uncompromising... but your analogy... sucked.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[alanschu]

fact that we disagree hardly equals lack of understanding...

 

It wasn't the fact that you disagreed that it was a good analogy. It's where you went with it and the blatant disregard of further attempts to clarify, coupled with the assertion that other people were wrong in their interpretation like you somehow knew what I meant, but I didn't. You were still stuck on the charity thing, because it's the only thing you had to try to save face, even when I started explicitly referring to BioWare and IST. I can understand if you didn't get the analogy the way that I intended, because sometimes that happens. It's that you just became obtuse about it when you had nothing to go on.

 

 

If you can't understand why people would hold works done by different development studios to different standards, then that's your own failing. Seems no one else here has a problem with it.

Edited August 15, 2009 by alanschu

[Hell Kitty]

If it was Peter Molyneux making the same claims as Vincent Dweller, people would assume they were bull****. It's just odd when you get folks like the codex crowd who are known for being so angry and cynical but can turn around and seem so naive and trusting. Personally it doesn't really fill me with confidence when the creator isn't even willing to attach his real name to the product he is making.

[alanschu]

Interesting observation.

 

Yeah, if Molyneux had said it there'd be no confidence at all in the potential buyers

[Aristes]

Let's just say that if Peter Molyneux were making it, a lot of the same people touting it as great would be slamming it.

 

I'm just saying that the game should be assessed in its own right, without any regard for his indie status. See, if you want indie games to capture more of the market, then they'll undoubtedly have to offer something more than some of the contenders in the market. Maybe the graphics won't be A+, but the story and overall design should be then. How about bugs? How about gameplay mechancis? How about dialogue?

 

The thing is, I'm rooting for this game to do well, but it still has to do well. I don't buy many indie games. I could probably count them on one hand over decades of video and computer gaming. If you want to capture folks like me, then you have to offer something I want. I won't just buy an indie game in order to support the underdog in the same way I wouldn't buy an indie car to support a visionary indie car company. When I put gas in the tank, I expect it to drive. If the door panels are faux wood, that's fine, but does it handle well? It has to have something that differentiates it from my other options. At the very least, it should put me in a position where I think all things come up equal and therefore I'm happy going with the indie option.

[Gromnir]

"You were still stuck on the charity thing, because it's the only thing you had to try to save face, even when I started explicitly referring to BioWare and IST"

 

a blatant misrepresentation coupled with a somewhat pointless observation. first, the charity aspect were only 1/2 our argument... and is still valid. really. why you thought to analogize commercial product to charity still baffles us. regardless, whether is charity or not, expectations not in any way change character or quality o' the game in question. you can dance 'round that point all day long... make "human nature"claims or some other nonsense. if is unjust or irrational to judge different based on misplaced expectations, then explain with "human nature" is, at best, a cop out.

 

also, as we noted before, we didn't bother reading once you got repetitive, so references to ist(?) and bioware is lost on us in this context. you think we were joking when we said we ignored? HA! regardless, we got your point, but it were... pointless. is one reason why others has abandoned the position, including your oft used example of crashgirl. no longer insists that expectations is lowered 'cause o' developer limitations and handicaps. too bad you can't be equal self-honest.

 

"If it was Peter Molyneux making the same claims as Vincent Dweller, people would assume they were bull****. It's just odd when you get folks like the codex crowd who are known for being so angry and cynical but can turn around and seem so naive and trusting."

 

is exactly the kinda thing that Gromnir is referencing. is a double standard at work. the Worst justification we got for the double-standard is that iron tower has less resources. 'cause iron tower has less experience and less resources, they is held to a lower standard of review. crazy, no? as you note, given how the rabid codexian dogs lash out at the majority o' developers, it is sad to see 'em give vinnie the benefit of the doubt. take vinnie's word in spite of his lack of experience and the pedestrian screenies and writing examples provided thus far? why? some o' the folks who has high hopes for aod has been merciless regarding other smallish indie developers, so am thinking the "underdog defense" bit is unlikely. is possible that some o' the aod fans is suffering from a traditional appeal to arrogance/snobbery ploy... vinnie makes claims that he is gonna do it right, unlike everybody else, and some folks wanna believe. more arrogant and pretentious iron tower sounds, the more support they get from the "hard core"contingent. don't underestimate an appeal to snobbery. vinnie can talk 'bout choices and consequences til he is blue in face, but is mostly empty promises at this point. troika showed us similar stuff with toee. the thing is that the snob appeal also serves to insulate iron tower from criticisms of writing and graphics... 'cause only the mainstream hax0r pre-pubescent twitch gamers is genuine concerned 'bout the graphics o' a game, and as for writing, vinnie is choosing freedom over the tyranny of the writer's plot, so if writing seems bad, that is only 'cause you ain't hard core enough.

 

*shrug*

 

has been more than a few justifications supplied, but all seem to assume a sorta willful disregard of rationality... the Faith in aod seems odd given what has been provided so far.

 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Gromnir]

How about bugs?

 

am always concerned 'bout bugs with a small developer who gots no publisher relationship. am doubtful that iron tower gots a serious qa department established. lord knows they is unlikely to have resources to serious test their product on a bunch o' different computer hardware configurations pre-release. an open beta call will help, but will be enough? 'course, so much depends on how aod actual eventual gets published. qa is a tough racket for even a big publisher working with an experienced developer. am seeming to recall that one o' the most significant contributions fergie made to fledgling bioware were pretty much establishing their qa. does iron tower have a fergie helping 'em out? didn't aristes do some qa for obsidian? perhaps you can lend a hand.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Aristes]

Me do QA? Who would trust me for stuff like that?

 

If they have a beta, I'll be happy to find bugs. I have the sneaking suspicion that doing QA would ruin my experience with the end product. I mean, I don't want to have seen all of the endings and know all of the puzzles and scenarios out of order because:

 

1) it would mean I couldn't enjoy the product as shipped

 

and

 

2) it would be hard to fully assess it.

 

Yes, I think I could be fair in how I look at the product, but I'm afraid that it would still factor into my 'review.' That's a feeling I don't like because, on a message board, your reputation for fairness and integrity is all you have. That being said, I would certainly lend a hand. My guess is that if they don't have a full fledged QA team in place by now, they're basically going on a wing and a prayer anyhow. Doesn't mean the game won't be good. As I understand it, QA for these modern games can be grueling and I've heard that the QA team has the hardest time at the end of the project. ...But I'm a gamer, not a designer, bro. Far be it from me to tell anyone how to run a project like that.

[Tigranes]

If it was Peter Molyneux making the same claims as Vincent Dweller, people would assume they were bull****.

 

When you spend ten years talking bull**** about several games, you get what you deserve.

[Starwars]

A few things here.

 

I definetely don't see the whole "putting VD or Age of Decadence" on a pedestal thing here. You can go to Iron Tower forums and seeing heated (and good) discussions all over the place over how some things are handled. Same thing on the Codex.

 

What some people feel is that VD looks to be delivering a type of game that many of us have missed for years now. This design philosphy has been supported by numerous examples/screenshots/the "let's play AoD thread" etc. You can of course point out that hey, maybe he's lying or whatever. But from where I stand, I'd rather put my faith in someone who is completely new to the industry and looks to be excited by the same things in games that I am, than someone like Peter Molyneux who has a history of telling lies and delivering crappy games. Furthermore, he is clearly interested in involving the community to get feedback and ideas. I suspect many feel that he would actually post the feedback on the combat demo from Annie Carlson and Brian Mitsoda (both of which were harsh on many things) is quite clearly the fact that he wants to be open about his game. Because it's definetely not a "PR piece" that you get fed from most other developers (with a publisher attached at any rate).

 

The above examples doesn't tell whether it'll be a good or bad game in the end of course. But again, I'd rather put my faith in someone new who's trying to push the buttons I want pushed. The mainstream gaming industry have sure done a terrible job of supplying me with games I want to play, so it seems to me natural that I would turn to someone who is trying something different. If it turns out to be crap, then so be it. I'll be more reserved the next time they make a game, just as with any other developer.

[Aristes]

That's fair, Starwars, except for the fact that it assumes that Molyneux's games suck. He did Fable, right? I can't remember. My lack of memory tells me a couple of things. I couldn't have hated his games and they couldn't have impressed me that much. Sounds like Fable at least. I didn't think the first one was all that and so I didn't bother with the second one. Kind of boring.

 

Okay, as to the stuff about IC. I think it's perfectly legitimate to be excited about the project. I see flaws in every game I play also. On the other hand, I don't think that IC should get any more of a blank check than anyone else. I take your comments that there is heated discussion on the other boards and that IC is willing to be intellectually honest about where he is and what he's doing. For me, everything else follows honesty. We can't have a real discussion without it.

 

Now, I've been either participating or lurking in these forums for... I dunno... has to be years by now. I saw this all go down. Gromnir made some not pleasant observations about what we've seen thus far. I think Gromnir can be a real jerk sometimes. I know I can be a real jeark a lot of the time. So, harshes everyone's buzz. Some folks take offense and then they lash back. I was out a bit and I haven't followed this alan/Gromnir tiff and, frankly, I don't want to. What I did see were folks jumping to the defense of the game with statements that, at least on their face, seemed contradictory. Now, Gromnir is a pit bull. So, he gloms onto these inconsistencies. That's it. So, Gromnir might be a big meanie, but the fact that folks originally had this all or nothin' approach didn't help.

 

Yeah, I know someone is going to accuse me of breaking the cardinal sin by brining up personalities, but that's my candid assessment. This thread is all about personality at this point because we don't really have that much information. There isn't a sufficient writing sample to judge. The graphics are somewhat lackluster. So, we have a small bit of information and folks reacting more to what the other has to say than they are to real information. Sounds kind of like a FO thread only less goofy.

 

Anyhow, we have this thing going on with personalities and then it comes down to some confusing arguments about how we judge games and who gets what slack. Yeah, some games seem to get a pass on some things and other don't. That's the way it works. However, it seems to me that who is giving the pass and who is getting it changes between titles, developers, and publishers. Me? I give everyone a pass. Really. Even Troika, whom I simply view with disappointment, got a pass from me for all sorts of design decisions. Hell, I played every game they made.

 

So, you want fairness? Fine. You make a compelling argument for IC. He should be glad you're pulling for him. Nevertheless, folks can't man the barricades every time Gromnir points out something as patently obvious as 'the graphics look dated.' ...And some of you did.

 

Now, I broke a cardinal rule, which is making this a post about message board personalities. One of the few ways to pull out my meaner side is to make the issue about me personally, so I can't fault folks for wanting to flame me. Go for it. One free flame Aristes card for anyone. I'll read every word and won't respond to a single one. Just having my say. Got to keep up the nice guy persona, after all. ...And I know how mean some of you can get when you feel slighted.

[Bos_hybrid]

What some people feel is that VD looks to be delivering a type of game that many of us have missed for years now. This design philosphy has been supported by numerous examples/screenshots/the "let's play AoD thread" etc. You can of course point out that hey, maybe he's lying or whatever. But from where I stand, I'd rather put my faith in someone who is completely new to the industry and looks to be excited by the same things in games that I am, than someone like Peter Molyneux who has a history of telling lies and delivering crappy games.

 

Hype is hype. VD is exactly the same as Molyneux, just someone trying to sell his game.

 

When you spend ten years talking bull**** about several games, you get what you deserve.

 

Well how long has VD been making/talking AoD, 5-6 years, so he is half way there.

 

$50+shipping for a box with a really nice colored manual.

 

 

So they are charging the same for AoD, as others games that actually have high production values.

 

$25 for the dl version is far more reasonable and quite frankly appropriate. Even then I only paid $19 AUD for Mount & Blade an indie title that AoD would hope to match, in both quality and success.

[Hell Kitty]

That's fair, Starwars, except for the fact that it assumes that Molyneux's games suck. He did Fable, right?

 

Molyneux found success with Populous, and his studio Bullfrog was behind classics like Syndicate and Dungeon Keeper, long before he became known for making promises he can't keep. Gamers have short memories. VD has been trash talking devs long before he became one himself, and I guess holding the same cynical views on the industry and modern games as so many others gives him a sort of internet tough guy "street cred" people are willing to trust over actual experience. Will his game be able to live up to his own hype? I hope so.

[Purkake]

He made Black and White 1 as well.

 

Now he's just Microsoft's crazy mouthpiece.

[Guest Slinky]

Molyneux found success with Populous, and his studio Bullfrog was behind classics like Syndicate and Dungeon Keeper, long before he became known for making promises he can't keep.

Actually, Molyneux was already all mouth during the development of Syndicate. I have some old magazines where he promises intelligent citizens in cities, who go to work and stuff like that.. In reality, only sign of intelligence was that people used crosswalks.

[Wrath of Dagon]

$50+shipping for a box with a really nice colored manual.

 

 

So they are charging the same for AoD, as others games that actually have high production values.

 

$25 for the dl version is far more reasonable and quite frankly appropriate. Even then I only paid $19 AUD for Mount & Blade an indie title that AoD would hope to match, in both quality and success.

As I've already explained, AoD is offering a lot more than just production values, things that mainstream games don't offer. If production values are the most important thing to you, buy any random EA/Activision game, don't bother with AoD. The reason the boxed version is $50 is because they want to have a really good color printed manual, which is quite expensive, especially in low volume, so they're just recovering cost.

[Purkake]

As I've already explained, AoD is offering a lot more than just production values, things that mainstream games don't offer. If production values are the most important thing to you, buy any random EA/Activision game, don't bother with AoD. The reason the boxed version is $50 is because they want to have a really good color printed manual, which is quite expensive, especially in low volume, so they're just recovering cost.

 

Everyone keeps saying that AoD offers this and that. What exactly does it offer that's different from mainstream games? Really long descriptions and lots of dialog and a somewhat hardcore combat system, is that all?

Edited August 15, 2009 by Purkake

[213374U]

What exactly does it offer that's different from mainstream games?

Salvation.

[Starwars]

This is just grabbed from the homepage, but these are the basics for me:

 

7 distinctive gameplay styles: from knight, serving a Noble House, to grifter, preying on greed and gullibility.

 

Non-combat quest resolutions and a well-developed diplomatic path ( "The best weapon against an enemy is another enemy."

 

Each situation has multiple ways of handling it, based on your skills, reputation, and connections. Each way has consequences that will affect someone or something.

 

An interesting world with rich history and unclear future that your actions can shape into seven very different game endings.

 

Q: What's the theme of the story?

A: There are several themes. One is exploration of a post-apocalyptic world: crumbling towns, devastated areas, abandoned facilities, lost knowledge and purpose, powerful relics of another age, and a new society, no longer bound by the artificial rules of civilized worlds.

 

Another theme is exploration of the past. We've taken an important event in the past related to the present, and run it through a game of Broken Telephone, where details are changed and added as the story passes through many storytellers and generations. Now the player is given a chance - it's optional - to piece the original story together, by comparing different accounts and looking for earlier records, trying to separate the truth from the myth.

 

For those who have read The Black Company series, you may remember how the legend and the origins of The Black Company and Kina change throughout the books, as the mystery is slowly unravelled. We are offering you a similar experience.

 

The last aspect of the story is the politics of the factions. All factions are tied together by their own agendas and goals. What affects one faction, affects all of them in different, positive and negative ways. These factions are paying close attention to your progress, as that too affects them all, and the fact that nobody knows what exactly is there, adds another level of complexity and more role-playing opportunities. You can make and honour alliances, eliminating enemies of your faction, or double- and triple-cross, playing one faction against another, weakening them all, or you can leave them alone, pursuing your own goals.

 

Q: Am I the chosen one? Do I have special powers?

A: No. The opportunities to do amazing things are there, but the game will never dictate your fate for you.