The 'Sidian Tyranny thread

[Gromnir]

 

Isometric Elder Scrolls game?

The character system is classless with improve-by-use progression, although there are still experience points and levels.

There's going to be some sort of spellcrafting system, but Obsidian aren't ready to talk about it yet.

 

Okay, so after hearing "isometric Dragon Age 2", this is about the SECOND harshest way I think you could describe the game. However, just because Oblivion completely sucked at using this kind of system, doesn't mean it has to, too.

 

dunno.  in a perfect scenario, improve-by-use might not be complete dreck.  less crpg and more "linear" helps improve-by-use systems as the number o' possible uses o' _________ becomes more predictable and less subject to degenerative gameplay.  regardless, one needs do considerable mental and practical gymnastics to prevent improve-by-use from being anything other than moab.  come up with a good improve-by-use mechanic is a curious thought experiment, but poor game design even so. obvious solution is to avoid improve-by-use rather than expending considerable effort to keep such an easily broken approach from breaking.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

ps am not using "moab" to reference a place in utah.  pam from archer knows where Gromnir is coming from on this. apologies as is nsfw.

[Oerwinde]

It's some sort of variant of it is, yes. "Terra" is Latin for Earth.

 

(e): "tus" translates to Frankincense in Latin. Probably isn't what's meant, though,

Frankenearth?

[Elerond]

In Greek  Teratus (Τέρατος) = beast 

 

Maybe people fear their world 

[Quillon]

Looks like GDC embargo has been lifted.

 

Read some articles:

 

- Already "powerful" character.

- Choices during character creation changes the state of the gameworld; locations, which factions controlling them, quests etc.

- Bronze to iron age equivalent era.

- Classless system, skills are improved via actually using them. 

- Abilities acquired through quests/choices/reputation(maybe only some of them?).

- Companion combos via relationship with them/bad relations also rewards combos.

- Around 20 hours long.

- Alpha Protocol level of reactivity.

- Party size is 4...maybe. Player and 3 companions mentioned.

 

Well I'm not too excited about the game since it's "another fantasy rpg" but I'm also intrigued by the replayablity value of the game and the fact that we're the bad guy.

[HoonDing]

"Isometric Elder Scrolls game?"

 

Would be hilarious if they came up with a copypaste Dungeon Siege 1/2 class system after what Dungeon Siege 3 turned out to be.

[Sabotin]

The whole premise makes me kinda sceptical. Obiously it depends on how exactly the things are gonna work, but on paper it reminds me of a BioWare style binary reputation system. I also wonder how they will portrait people living under an opressive regime. It could be very complicated, but it could also be very romanticised. I'm hoping for lots of depth and exploration there.

[Flouride]

The whole premise makes me kinda sceptical. Obiously it depends on how exactly the things are gonna work, but on paper it reminds me of a BioWare style binary reputation system. I also wonder how they will portrait people living under an opressive regime. It could be very complicated, but it could also be very romanticised. I'm hoping for lots of depth and exploration there.

 

I wouldn't compare Bioware's and Obsidian's reputation systems. If you look at something like Dragon Age the whole reputation system is a cheap gimmick where you can just buy your companions with gifts where as in Obsidian's games it's mostly your actions and what you say that decide how your companions feel about you. Not sure if you played Alpha Protocol but that game did the whole reputation system pretty much perfectly. Everything you say and do in the game will matter when it comes to how others perceive you. If they can get Tyranny's reputation system close to what it was in Alpha Protocol or even in PoE it should be a lot better than the ones I've seen in Bioware's games (haven't played DA3).

Edited March 22, 2016 by Flouride

[Flouride]

I like the fact that the game is shorter and actually pushes for replayability. It's something that is often missing in cRPGS mostly due to the massive amount of time that it takes to fully play a 2nd and 3rd playthrough. While 80+ hours might work for people who play only 10 games a year and got plenty of time to spend just playing, it doesn't suit everyone.

I also like that they are trying differ from PoE, so the rule settings etc. won't be just copied from one game to another and the fact that we won't start as some weakling that could be killed by group of rats. If the reactivity is really at Alpha Protocol's level that is something that will make me play the game over and over again (granted that it doesn't suck otherwise) and gaining abilities through choices, quests etc. sounds neat as well.

[Elerond]

PoE doesn't have companion reputation system. System sound to be similar with Bioware's rivalry/friend system and what we saw in Alpha Protocol and because of this is Obsidian's game I would guess that implementation is closer to Alpha Protocol than those of Bioware

 

Faction system seems to be similar to one that you find in PoE, but maybe in bit wider scale (more factions more intersect quests and choices).

 

PoE's disposition system seems to be missing.

[Tigranes]

The whole premise makes me kinda sceptical. Obiously it depends on how exactly the things are gonna work, but on paper it reminds me of a BioWare style binary reputation system. I also wonder how they will portrait people living under an opressive regime. It could be very complicated, but it could also be very romanticised. I'm hoping for lots of depth and exploration there.

 

It'll be closer to Obsidian's own reputation systems. See: FNV.

[HoonDing]

*kills random Powder Ganger in the middle of the desert*

 

---You are now vilified by the community

[Gfted1]

I had to look up moab. Hilarious.

[Lychnidos]

Right, well this one called for a quick perusal of my reference literature: As far as I can tell the Latin suffix -tus mimics the English suffix -ed in most ways, so with that in mind Terra as Earth would with the -tus suffix become Earthed, an Earth that is current? For instance a common use that we all know would be Manus, hand, becoming having a hand when made into Manuatus.

 

Perfect Participles, verbs, nouns, and all of the boring stuff i've left out as they serve to confuse more than illuminate i've found, I often get lost myself when using them.

 

Edit: Romanes eunt domus.

 

Edit#2: I really should find something better to do with my time.

 

To bad terra is feminine. 

 

In Greek  Teratus (Τέρατος) = beast 

 

Maybe people fear their world 

 

Seeing it written as Terratus, with double r and -us ending, made my mind jump to Latin, maybe the guy transcribing it on the site I read it made an error. From my little familiarity with Modern Greek I remember that teras means monster, though I recall a different word for beast. Teratos could be a declension, or an Ancient/Medieval Greek variant. The Greek origin somewhat suits the Bronze-Iron Age transition period they say the world is in, though I don't see it much in the screenshots.

 

I had to look up moab. Hilarious.

Hilarious indeed.   

Edited March 22, 2016 by Lychnidos

[Nonek]

 

Right, well this one called for a quick perusal of my reference literature: As far as I can tell the Latin suffix -tus mimics the English suffix -ed in most ways, so with that in mind Terra as Earth would with the -tus suffix become Earthed, an Earth that is current? For instance a common use that we all know would be Manus, hand, becoming having a hand when made into Manuatus.

 

Perfect Participles, verbs, nouns, and all of the boring stuff i've left out as they serve to confuse more than illuminate i've found, I often get lost myself when using them.

 

Edit: Romanes eunt domus.

 

Edit#2: I really should find something better to do with my time.

 

Too bad terra is feminine. 

 

Do we know that the Earth is regarded as feminine in the world of Tyranny? If so then yes the designers have made a mistake and should have used Terrata, however i'm quite sure the designers are aware of the language they are aping, and have performed a modicum of basic research. If not then i'll be a little disappointed after the sterling work done in Poe on this front.

 

Edit: Extremely pleased to hear about the Bronze/Iron age setting, less pleased to hear about the anime nature of combat, though Homer ocassionally had his heroes performing ridiculous feats of martial aptitude. I'm not sure how these two things will mesh, if we have an extremely well grounded and internally consistent world, and then in combat are using idiotic movesets like in God of War, Devil May Cry and such, then there may arise a dissonance between the two. Poe suffers from this in my opinion, to its detriment.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Nonek

[Humanoid]

It's a slower process than I'd like to see happen, but any sort of weaning away from outdated Infinity Engine traditions is always going to be something I can support. Hopefully smaller parties are just the beginning.

[Bartimaeus]

Even as a huge fan of IE games, I've always felt like six is too many, personally. I like five. Five's a nice number. It's also the number of party members I generally use in IE games. Even four's O.K./better than six, though.

Edited March 23, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[Humanoid]

Party of one or three for me. Having just one companion feels weird, almost just like having a butler in tow instead of having two people travelling as equals (weird but honest I guess, since that's what companions in Bethesda games feel like). Two companions is like having two kids in the back of the car distracting each other so they won't bother you as much.

[Ganrich]

Even as a huge fan of IE games, I've always felt like six is too many, personally. I like five. Five's a nice number. It's also the number of party members I generally use in IE games. Even four's O.K./better than six, though.

In the IE games I felt it was fine. Mostly because Melee was auto-attack. So you could set them and forget them for the most part. In PoE it did feel hectic. However, I think more customization for the classes to allow some to be much more auto-attack driven like the IE games would help. I still think PoE2 should be 6 person parties.

 

I always felt 4 was too little in Dragon Age. However, that was because it (combined with the limited classes and customization) stifled group composition.

 

However, in an open class system I don't see an issue with the smaller group size. This is because by removing class limitations you can have a great amount of variety.

 

I just think group size and class systems need to compliment each other in a cRPG. The more rigid your classes the more bigger group sizes feel good. The more open the smaller you can go.

 

I like the number 5 too, though.

[ShadySands]

I don't care about the mechanics of it, I just like companions for some personality and banter

[Keyrock]

I generally prefer party-based RPGs to be turn-based.  I'm down with RtwP if I'm only playing one character, or two, three at the absolute most, but if I'm going to be controlling a party of four or more then the companion AI better be really good (95% of the time it isn't, in my experiences) or I'm going to wind up pausing every 2 seconds to issue commands, which nullifies the preeminent selling point of real-time, the speed of the game.  For whatever reason  managing a party of 4 or more in turn-based combat wears on my brain a lot less than managing a party of 4 or more in RtwP where I pause every 2 seconds.  I think the more organized structure of TB makes it easier for me keep track of things and plan things ahead.

[Bartimaeus]

Yeah...the "game speed" isn't really the "pre-eminent selling point of RtwP" for me: it's the fact that multiple things can actually transpire at once in real-time, which can help make combat actually somewhat interesting. Turn-based combat in RPGs is so single-focused, so two dimensional the vast majority of the time. I'm not a fan of turn-based.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

Even as a huge fan of IE games, I've always felt like six is too many, personally. I like five. Five's a nice number. It's also the number of party members I generally use in IE games. Even four's O.K./better than six, though.

I agree. For me though it's largely that 5 would in theory have more...tight formations while 6 always felt a little clunky to me. Of course class balance and variety also factors in, and I usually try to build a well-rounded party so I'd hope that 5 characters could be built to collectively handle most situations.

[FlintlockJazz]

 

The whole premise makes me kinda sceptical. Obiously it depends on how exactly the things are gonna work, but on paper it reminds me of a BioWare style binary reputation system. I also wonder how they will portrait people living under an opressive regime. It could be very complicated, but it could also be very romanticised. I'm hoping for lots of depth and exploration there.

 

I wouldn't compare Bioware's and Obsidian's reputation systems. If you look at something like Dragon Age the whole reputation system is a cheap gimmick where you can just buy your companions with gifts where as in Obsidian's games it's mostly your actions and what you say that decide how your companions feel about you. Not sure if you played Alpha Protocol but that game did the whole reputation system pretty much perfectly. Everything you say and do in the game will matter when it comes to how others perceive you. If they can get Tyranny's reputation system close to what it was in Alpha Protocol or even in PoE it should be a lot better than the ones I've seen in Bioware's games (haven't played DA3).

 

This.  In Alpha Protocol even the ways in which you accomplished missions (whether by stealth or mass murder) was added into how people viewed you, even those who weren't there to view it firsthand.  Bioware, on the other hand, pretty much had zero impact from the way you played, you could tell someone that you too love kittens to gain Love Points while wiping your blade clean of the blood from that litter of kittens you just been butchering (or, to use one of the more famous examples from their actual games, cast Blood Magic right in front of Templars and never even get called out on it).

[Nonek]

It's probably Alpha Protocol that allows me a fair degree of hope that the "evil" path may be well implemented, Michael Thorton Inc. is probably the most satisfying ending one can achieve. Though I think it's a pity that Mr Avellone is absent as his particular brand of twisted creativity always appeals, though I think Mr Travis Stout was equally far out, has that gentleman left as well? Still Mr Fenstermaker's Beyond the Beef and Vault 11 were both fantastically ambiguous.

[GhostofAnakin]

Party of one or three for me. Having just one companion feels weird, almost just like having a butler in tow instead of having two people travelling as equals (weird but honest I guess, since that's what companions in Bethesda games feel like). Two companions is like having two kids in the back of the car distracting each other so they won't bother you as much.

 

That's because typically in Bethesda games, your companion is nothing but a butler/pack mule.  They're generally awful in combat (best thing you can say about them is they act as bullet sponges to distract your enemy) and are good only for carrying the extra loot you can't carry.