The 'Sidian Tyranny thread

[Sannom]

@https://twitter.com/PdxInteractive/status/772794639594168322is there going to be a livestream for this somewhere?

Yep, on Paradox's Twitch channel :

 

https://twitter.com/PdxInteractive/status/772794639594168322

Edited September 5, 2016 by Sannom

[mindswayer]

 

@https://twitter.com/PdxInteractive/status/772794639594168322is there going to be a livestream for this somewhere?

Yep, on Paradox's Twitch channel :

 

https://twitter.com/PdxInteractive/status/772794639594168322

 

Awesome, thanks. Always love to hear Sawyer talk.

[ManifestedISO]

Yeah thanks for the link. C'mon, release date, c'mon, no whammies!

[Infinitron]

http://forums.obsidian.net/topic/88946-obsidian-at-pax-west/

[Infinitron]

 

Dev Diary #9 – Beasts and Bane

7 SEPTEMBER, 2016AuthorBy Brian Heins.

In our last update we introduced you to another potential Companion, Sage Lantry. For this week’s update, we’re going to tell you about some of the creatures that inhabit Terratus: the Beasts and the Bane.

Beasts of Terratus

The Beasts of Terratus are a race of partially-humanoid creatures whose history is as disputed among humans as it is between the various Beasts’ tribes. A race of hulking, hairy monsters who value predatory strength and skill above all else, these territorial hunters once ranged the whole of Terratus, but due to Kyros’ encroaching conquest, now thrive primarily in the Tiers.

Though the truth of their legends cannot be confirmed, by and large the Beasts believe that rather than evolving from smaller, four-legged carnivores, they are a more developed version of the human race, shaped over thousands of years by the magic of the land, sea, and sky in order to become tougher, fiercer, and more deadly—in order to be better predators than their hairless, blunt-clawed ancestors.

Regardless of the veracity of who’s evolved from whom, there’s certainly little dispute regarding these creatures’ ties to the land, as seen by the varied adaptations distinctive to each tribe. Dark and sleek as a starless night, the Shadowhunters were clever, agile predators who killed from the shadows, whereas the Stonestalkers tend to larger builds and can be as dull-witted as boulders. The Mantaborn of Stalwart’s coast are a semi-aquatic tribe, rarely if ever seen outside their nests.

Beasts do not think the same as humans do. As wild, animalistic creatures, their experience of the world is extremely visceral and sensory-related. They consider themselves apex predators and take great pride and exhilaration in their ability to stalk and kill creatures of all types, humans sometimes included. However, they form strong emotional ties with their own kith, and will often express a range of complex, intense feelings within their speech, from thrill to fury to easy-going contentment.

The tribes themselves are split amongst fiercely-fought-for territories—a pride of relatives led by a single, strongest female called the Prima, her rank won through bloodshed and dominance and just as often lost the same way. While Beast tribes are often matriarchal due to the fact that females are typically larger and more aggressive than the males of their race, it’s not completely unheard of for a male to lead a smaller hunting pack within the larger tribe.

Humans often worry Beasts have a larger agenda—but their goals are as fragmented as their tribes. Survive. Thrive. Kill all humans. Become the dominant species.

Who knows what they’re really after?

~Megan Starks, Narrative Designer

The Magebane

Little is known about the Bane, as few are strong – or lucky – enough to survive an encounter with them. The Sages of the School of Ink and Quill know that these creatures are a mix of the arcane and the mundane – capable of both physical and magical attacks. Accounts from survivors of Bane attacks say that they first attack any mages or fighters wielding weapons and armor imbued with magic. The Sages speculate that the Bane somehow need magical energy to survive – feeding off of the life force of spellcasters. This belief has given these creatures their name – the Magebane, though it is often shortened to ‘Bane’.

Though Bane can be found throughout Terratus, they are most commonly located near the Oldwalls and Spires. Something about these ancient structures draws the Bane near. Many historians believe that, rather than any property inherent to their nature, it is the presence of the Bane that gave these structures their reputation for being unlucky. Regardless of the cause, Kyros’ law forbids any from entering the Oldwalls. Given what lurks inside, most believe this law entirely unnecessary for only the mad or suicidal would willingly enter.

In the second century of Kyros’ rule, Fatebinder Andros compiled stories from survivors of Bane attacks looking for clues that could aid the Overlord’s forces in surviving their encounters with these creatures. From these stories, he created broad classifications for the Bane. None know how complete or accurate this classification is:

Wisps: The weakest form of Bane, their form more diffuse than other types. Wisps are slow-moving, making them the easiest of the Bane to outrun. While a single Wisp can be defeated easily by a trained soldier, they are rarely found alone. Where a Wisp is found, the Scourge and Malice are not far behind.

Scourge: The most common – and aggressive – form of Bane is the Scourge. These vicious creatures travel in swarms, surrounding their prey with whirlwinds of tearing claws. Entire villages have been wiped out by a single pack of Scourge.

Malice: Rarely seen – at least, not by those who lived to tell of the encounter. A Malice’s touch can drain and corrupt the living, taking their strength to empower the Bane.

Havoc: Legends tell of an incredibly powerful form of Bane known only as the Havoc. There are no recorded sightings of a Havoc in recent centuries, so little is known of their abilities. Legends and campfire stories say that if a Havoc is seen, kill any other Bane present to deny the Havoc strength. No one knows why this advice has survived for centuries.

~Brian Heins, Game Director

 

 

[GhostofAnakin]

The one on the right needs a push-up bra.

[Nonek]

Visceral...

[kirottu]

Death by snu snu.

[mindswayer]

"by and large the Beasts believe that rather than evolving from smaller, four-legged carnivores, they are a more developed version of the human race, shaped over thousands of years by the magic of the land, sea, and sky in order to become tougher, fiercer, and more deadly—in order to be better predators than their hairless, blunt-clawed ancestors."

"Beasts do not think the same as humans do. As wild, animalistic creatures, their experience of the world is extremely visceral and sensory-related. "

Wait, what?

How do they perceive themselves as the next step in human evolution while being extremely visceral and sensory-driven?

Isn't that kind of contradictory? I'd imagine they'd need some sort of intellectual capabilities to think of themselves as such.

 

"Beasts do not think the same as humans do."

"However, they form strong emotional ties with their own kith, and will often express a range of complex, intense feelings within their speech, from thrill to fury to easy-going contentment."

Isn't that exactly what humans do?

Edited September 7, 2016 by mindswayer

[Nonek]

 

"by and large the Beasts believe that rather than evolving from smaller, four-legged carnivores, they are a more developed version of the human race, shaped over thousands of years by the magic of the land, sea, and sky in order to become tougher, fiercer, and more deadly—in order to be better predators than their hairless, blunt-clawed ancestors."

"Beasts do not think the same as humans do. As wild, animalistic creatures, their experience of the world is extremely visceral and sensory-related. "

Wait, what?

How do they perceive themselves as the next step in human evolution while being extremely visceral and sensory-driven?

Isn't that kind of contradictory? I'd imagine they'd need some sort of intellectual capabilities to think of themselves as such.

 

Come now they are obviously mentally superior to humans, after all they have developed a theory of evolution in a Bronze Age setting. Perhaps the Galapagos or Beagle tribe?

[HoonDing]

Exterminatus.

[Infinitron]

http://www.gamerevolution.com/features/interview-tyranny-lead-developers-are-annoyed-by-false-choices-in-rpgs-will-give-players-a-wealth-of-dialogue-options

 

Interview: Tyranny Lead Developers Are Annoyed by "False Choices" in RPGs, Will Give Players a Wealth of Dialogue Options

 

In the world of Tyranny, the development team at Obsidian Entertainment have asked, "What if evil won?" However, instead of the game revolving around trying to save the world and overthrow the tyrant, it asks what you, the player, would do for your own survival. In a Dungeons and Dragons sense, would you be neutral-neutral or chaotic-evil? You can try to be chaotic good or even neutral good, but you will not survive for very long. But the big question is, does it really matter how you choose to be? Does what you choose affect anything, especially the endgame?

 

The lead developers for Tyranny sat down with me a PAX West to talk about choice in RPGs, and how important these choices really are in Tyranny. After all, as Lead Narrative Designer Matt MacLean pointed out from their PAX West panel, an "RPG is a world that reacts to you." Without choices, how can a world react? Also, what should the world react to?

 

"You want a choice to be something you can actually pay off on, where you're able to see the consequences of that choice, and actually have interesting quests and dialogue play out from those choices. That is a good choice, one you want in an RPG," Tyranny Game Director Brian Hines said. "A bad choice is one that is purely for flavor, that has no impact on gameplay or story. It's a false choice, one that lets the player think they have a say in what's going on when they really don't."

 

And we've all played RPGs or games with "false choice" exactly like that, haven't we?

 

"We also tried to avoid another type of false choice where its only purpose is to screw you over," MacLean added. "The game that comes to mind is a really old one, Sierra Games' Adventure Quest, where you have a choice to push a button, and when you do, oh hey you're dead. Well, why did you give me that option? Oh, so I could see what happens. That's not a choice, that's just seeing something that can be done."

 

"There's also the problem of weeding out choices that break other choices," he went on. "For example, we're not going to give you an option to rob a bank, and then later down the line let you invest in and get a job at that bank."

 

"To elaborate on that point," Obsidian Design Director Josh Sawyer jumped in. "A lot of the times we think about choice and consequence we think what are a variety of players likely to want with that circumstance and what will they want to do to express the mechanics of their character or the personality of their character. As such, what would seem to be a 'false choice', if it provides entertainment or a reaction to the player, like making them laugh, then that's also a good choice to implement."

 

However, usually when we have choices in games such as this, the choice often lies on morality, whether we're being good or evil. But in Tyranny, you play as a hand of justice from the ruling tyrant. It's up to you to decide how that justice should and will be served. You won't survive by being that paragon of niceties. Those who enjoy finding ways to kill everyone in a game will have no problems jumping in with both feet, but what about those who have a hard time being mean? What choices will get them into the tyrannical spirit?

 

"Making people fear you will be as rewarded as getting people to like you," Sawyer admitted.

 

"But," Level Designer Denise McMurry cut in, "with this game sometimes the nice option isn't necessarily the nice option because the person you're talking to is not a nice person. It seems nice, but then you will discover that being nice and helping them caused a terrible, terrible thing."

 

"Also, you aren't playing as a big evil army going to conquer nice people," MacLean explained. "The people you are conquering have their own flaws that may make you think that. hey, perhaps the Overlord does have it right, because actually, these cultures are kind of awful too."

 

"They certainly provoke you too," Sawyer said. "You may show up and say, 'Hey, native people,' and they will respond, 'Hey, ****.' They will really test your patience sometimes, so it becomes easy to quickly decide you're done trying to be nice to people."

 

"Really, I'd tell people the best way to embrace Tyranny is to not do what you would normally do," Narrative Designer Megan Starks laughed. "You'll see how fun it is to play a character you typically do not choose to."

 

The entire team spoke at great length about how much fun it is to experiment with the choices and see the various rabbit holes you can go down with the terrible or not-as-terrible things you can do. I remembered my time with Pillars of Eternity, a game I still have not completed, so I had to ask, how long is Tyranny? If what makes the game so great is seeing all the variations, it can't be as long as Pillars.

 

"It's quite a bit shorter," Hines explained. "A typical playthrough runs about 20 to 25 hours. We wanted something that would be shorter than Pillars of Eternity and something that had a high focus on replayability. Those who want to see many of the effects of choices will get a lot out of the game, but we also know people want a game they can finish in just a couple of weekends."

 

That is how important choice is for this team; they want players to see just how much choice affects the world by creating a more densely compact experience instead of a massive, sprawling 100-plus hour game.

 

No release date yet for Tyranny, but the team did say it would release this year, 2016.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Infinitron

[mindswayer]

I'm not sure if I agree with their dislike for "false choices" where they lead to your death/negative consequences for the PC.

 

I was pleasantly surprised when in Pillars I jumped off that pit in Burial Isle, my character died impaled on some **** and the game gave me a game over screen. I thought "eh, that's pretty neat, wasn't expecting that" and reloaded the game. Wasn't particularly frustrated.

No idea why they hate it so much.

 

Seems to me like "oh you can do whatever, it doesn't matter because there's no consequences for you" is a falser choice than what they call "false choices". They're solving a problem that doesn't exist by ultimately restricting what the player can do.

Edited September 8, 2016 by mindswayer

[Infinitron]

Who said anything about no consequences

[mindswayer]

"We also tried to avoid another type of false choice where its only purpose is to screw you over," MacLean added. "The game that comes to mind is a really old one, Sierra Games' Adventure Quest, where you have a choice to push a button, and when you do, oh hey you're dead. Well, why did you give me that option?

Edited September 8, 2016 by mindswayer

[Infinitron]

 

"We also tried to avoid another type of false choice where its only purpose is to screw you over," MacLean added. "The game that comes to mind is a really old one, Sierra Games' Adventure Quest, where you have a choice to push a button, and when you do, oh hey you're dead. Well, why did you give me that option?

 

 

Getting a Game Over isn't the only consequence an RPG can impose on you.

 

Being able to jump into the pit in PoE was basically a one-off gimmick. Weird thing to get attached to, but I doubt it's what they have in mind here anyway.

Edited September 8, 2016 by Infinitron

[Sannom]

Being able to jump into the pit in PoE was basically a one-off gimmick. Weird thing to get attached to, but I doubt it's what they have in mind here anyway.

In the recent Obsidian PAX panel, they specifically mentioned putting in the option to start a fight against an enemy who was just too powerful to beat (I'm guessing one of the Archons), which had QA ask them why they put the option in. After that, they decided to remove the option or at least made taking the option not result into death.

[Nonek]

 

Being able to jump into the pit in PoE was basically a one-off gimmick. Weird thing to get attached to, but I doubt it's what they have in mind here anyway.

In the recent Obsidian PAX panel, they specifically mentioned putting in the option to start a fight against an enemy who was just too powerful to beat (I'm guessing one of the Archons), which had QA ask them why they put the option in. After that, they decided to remove the option or at least made taking the option not result into death.

 

 

I am Nonek's complete lack of surprise.

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah, I don't much like that. It doesn't really help build your world - actions have consequences, and sometimes doing dumb stuff leads to a dumb death. That's the nature of life. Remove stupid deaths/consequences that don't make any sense, by all means - such as trying to attack Irenicus in Spellhold without the help of your fellow madmen, and the game scripting your immediate death for no real good reason - but otherwise...

Edited September 10, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[Fenixp]

Not to mention developers never being able to fully predict what'll players come up with - that encounter which kills 99% of players might be cheesed by the remaining 1%. I'm pretty sure Obsidian has allowed these things in the past, and I'm also pretty sure games then reacted to such unlikely victories. Oh well.

[Madscientist]

 

Being able to jump into the pit in PoE was basically a one-off gimmick. Weird thing to get attached to, but I doubt it's what they have in mind here anyway.

In the recent Obsidian PAX panel, they specifically mentioned putting in the option to start a fight against an enemy who was just too powerful to beat (I'm guessing one of the Archons), which had QA ask them why they put the option in. After that, they decided to remove the option or at least made taking the option not result into death.

 

 

Sorry, but I do not like when devs remove options because players do not like the (plausible) result of their actions. The setting of Tyranny reminds me a lot of Age of Decadence. In AoD, if you act like an idiot you will be dead very soon. So if a fresh fatebinder attacks an archon, the archon will just kill him. You are not the only fatebinder and there are surely some people who want to have your job. If you intend to kill an archon, you should be very strong and have a plan to exploit his weaknesses. However, if the game gives you the option to attack somebody, then a fight should start and the game should react if you win, even if the enemy is very strong and it is very likely that you just get killed in seconds.

 

Combat in Tyranny will be much easier than AoD, unless you go for triple crown solo maybe. But in PoE some people managed to kill every enemy that way ( I did not. I did not even play PotD)

[Hurlshort]

Don't blame the developer, blame the players.  You don't stay in business by ignoring the people that buy your product.  

[mindswayer]

Don't blame the developer, blame the players.  You don't stay in business by ignoring the people that buy your product.  

"Hey, our company just got saved by people who love "hardcore" RPGs, what should our next project be?"

"We should go after those people that don't care about these types of games. You know, reduce number of party members, disable friendly fire, make it so that the player can't fail no matter how hard he tries"

Of course this is an hyperbole, but it doesn't really sound like the right way to go. I guess sales of Tyranny will determine if you're right or wrong.

Edited September 9, 2016 by mindswayer

[Gfted1]

Wasnt the "hardcore" solution PoE?

 

Everything must be "hardcore" because one game was crowdfunded?

[aluminiumtrioxid]

Yeah, I don't much like that. It doesn't really help build your world - actions have consequences, and sometimes doing dumb stuff leads to a dumb death. That's the nature of life.

 

I think "this action is considered to be so fundamentally dumb that it doesn't even occur to your character" is a perfectly valid way of worldbuilding by omission.