New PA CRPG

[root]

While this is my first post at NMA, I'm a very long term reader and hopefully, deserving of the title "Honorary Glittering Gem Of Hatred".

I would like to use NMA to officially announce a new Fallout like CRPG with the working title "Untitled PA CRPG".

We've been developing the title for almost a decade (full time jobs make things take much longer) - indeed, work began on the same day I completed Fallout 2 for the first time - and we're already at an advanced stage of development. A website and screenshots will be available in around a month. We hope to have a demo available in around six months (actually, we already have a demo ready, we're just reserving it for would-be publishers for the time being) and hope to release at the end of the year. Just bear in mind that we're geeks, not publishers, so this is from a programming point of view. Whatever happens in publishing is a complete unknown, so the schedule could change.

All that remains are three steps:

1. Polish (ie, correcting typos, fixing graphics, detailing maps)
2. Implementation of user submitted suggestions (which is where you lot come in)
3. Play-testing (when there's 27 different ways to complete a single side quest, this might well take longer than planned).

It is, of course, number two I come to this forum to discuss.

I really don't want to give much away while we haven't discussed what we're willing to disclose between us and while we're still trying to get a publisher interested (incidentally, many thanks to Briosafreak who provided me with a link elsewhere. It might have only been a link that my googling failed to throw up, but it was one hell of a link that pretty much guarantees we'll release even if we can't find a big name publisher), but I'll give you as much as I can for now.

A brief run down of our creation, without giving too much away. The setting is PA, though not post-nuclear-apocalypse. Civilisation has fallen and it's your job to, well, live in the post apocalyptic world. To quote Selena in 28 days later "Do you want us to find a cure and save the world or just fall in love and fuck? Plans are pointless. Staying alive's as good as it gets". And there it is - find a cure, save the world, or fall in love and fuck. The path you choose depends on the role you choose to play, as it should (and there's a feasible path with proper multiple endings for every and all character types we could think of, not just your combat, stealth, diplomatic, stupid builds). We have, of course, tried to keep everything that made Fallout Fallout where possible.

Like the rest of you, I've been longing for Fallout 3 for years. While we can never replace Fallout, rather than simply name drop it as many do, we've actually tried to recreate the elements that made it work. Cause and consequence, top down isometric view, moral ambiguity, kicking a rat in the groin, turn based combat, etc (and before you pounce on me for this gross simplification, I am being brief - we all know what makes Fallout Fallout, I've read all of your comments on the matter and there's no need to readdress that here).

Here is where you lot come in. We've had to drop some elements, and I want your opinions on how damaging this is:

SPECIAL - we're looking for a commercial release. We've therefore had to drop SPECIAL and replace it with our own system, though we can trace it's roots clearly.

Setting - We've kept the PA, but lost the 50's. Arcanum dropped both and did okay. Does it have to be 50's PA to satisfy Fallout fans, or is it suffice that the setting is strong?

Turn based combat - We've tried to keep this intact, but we're not out and out turn based. Remembering some of the big fights in both Fallouts demonstrated the problem with turn based so we've gone for a hybrid in the style of FO:T. The difference is, we intend for our game to be played in turn based. Real time may or may not be properly balanced. Frankly, I don't care if it is, it's sole purpose is to speed up fights that are dragged out. Good enough compromise or does anyone have a better suggestion?

I have, obviously, kept up to date with suggestions made in the Fallout 3 section - even if Bethesda doesn't listen, we do - and tried to incorporate those that have been generally agreed on and fit our scenario (sadly, Ron Perlman saying "War never changes" is not one of them). This isn't Fallout 3 though, which gives us a bit more leniency. What great ideas did you have for Fallout that didn't work because they weren't, well, Fallout?

I understand how limiting the lack of information given here is, but hopefully there's enough for you to give "in theory" suggestions at least, and there's room to comment on the things we've had to leave out without many more details. I'd love to give you more details and will do as soon as I can (two to three weeks). Before I can do that though, we need to get together and have a discussion about exactly what we will and will not announce so far in advance. Hope you understand, and hope I at least managed to whet your appetites.


ETA - the schedule offered is for the Linux version. We will port to Windows as soon as development is completed, but this will come later than the Linux version for obvious reasons.

 

[alec]

Remembering some of the big fights in both Fallouts demonstrated the problem with turn based so we've gone for a hybrid in the style of FO:T. The difference is, we intend for our game to be played in turn based. Real time may or may not be properly balanced. Frankly, I don't care if it is

This doesn't sound good at all, especially the "Frankly, I don't care if it is" part.

Also: you say you've been working on this game for a decade now (which is 10 friggin' years) and all you've got to show is this post of yours? Why all the secrecy? Afraid we're going to steal your ideas? Sheesh. After 10 friggin' years you guys only seem to have a working title ("Untitled PA CRPG") and a couple of things that you 'frankly don't care" about. That does not bode well. At all.

I understand how limiting the lack of information given here is, but hopefully there's enough for you to give "in theory" suggestions at least

No. Sorry. I already think your game sucks and, hey, I haven't seen anything of it yet. After a decade of developing it. A decade, for crying out loud.

 

[root]

This doesn't sound good at all, especially the "Frankly, I don't care if it is" part.

Perhaps the description was not clear. It's purpose is not to be a self-contained combat system. It is a complimentary feature to the turn based system whose sole purpose is to speed up the proceedings.

Hold down your real time key (or switch to it in settings) while the annoyances occur, let go again to resume turn based. The inverse of real-time-with-pause.

If you try to balance two differing combat systems, one has to suffer. I'd rather pay little attention to a complimentary feature that *could* be used as default if you really, really wanted to, than allow turn based, the intended system, to suffer.

Also: you say you've been working on this game for a decade now (which is 10 friggin' years)

Ten friggin' years of spare time work between full time jobs, universities, families. Compare the hours of 5 men in their spare time over 10 years to a full sized crew working full time over a year, and I reckon you've got a close call.

and all you've got to show is this post of yours? Why all the secrecy?

No secrecy - disagreement over what to reveal. Where, for example, does plot overview end and spoilers begin?

The idea of this thread was that as a side effect, as well as general mechanics feedback, through questions asked and points made, we'd get a feel for what exactly we'd need to do to reveal enough without revealing too much. You're only asked to wait a few weeks for a full spec while we make that judgment based on your contributions.

Like I said, we're geeks, coder, not marketers, publishers or anything else. The coding is what we're good at. PR is nobodies strong point, as is painfully obvious.

 

[mirdza]

You could at least show us some screenshots...

 

[Briosafreak]

Welcome root, you have a good basis to get some feedback here, I'm sure people will start helping out. Still it's hard for anyone here to be very open and talk a lot, because without a website and some screens most members here just wait, we had many vaporware games in the past being presented here.

So as long as you can show us something in the near future, and make a press release for our newsguys to publicize your project on the main page you'll be fine, best of luck.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

Perhaps the description was not clear. It's purpose is not to be a self-contained combat system. It is a complimentary feature to the turn based system whose sole purpose is to speed up the proceedings.

Hold down your real time key (or switch to it in settings) while the annoyances occur, let go again to resume turn based. The inverse of real-time-with-pause.

It still doesn't sound very good, in fact it sounds like something very exploitable.

If you try to balance two differing combat systems, one has to suffer. I'd rather pay little attention to a complimentary feature that *could* be used as default if you really, really wanted to, than allow turn based, the intended system, to suffer.

Surely it's still going to suffer, you've still got a hybrid there. Why didn't you just have a fast turn option? Though if anyone thinks the TB combat in Fallout was too long surely it's because they don't really like TB combat?

And the only true way to avoid dragged out fights is to keep the encounters small and managable.

 

[keyser Soeze]

Not to many CRPGs done nowadays, so i hope you guys have something here.

What engine are you using?

Does it have to be 50's PA to satisfy Fallout fans

For me, no.

 

[Briosafreak]

Fergus has some more advice for you




Edit: Hey Requiem that B5 on your avatar, isn't it?

 

[Sorrow]

Sounds promising but I can't say what I think about until I'll see some screenshots.

Setting - We've kept the PA, but lost the 50's. Arcanum dropped both and did okay. Does it have to be 50's PA to satisfy Fallout fans, or is it suffice that the setting is strong?

I think I could play a non 50's PA RPG, but he setting has to be strong, preferably stylised for a specific period of time (60s, 70s or 80s for example), because our times suck .

 

[2]

what are the graphics like?
modern or 10 years old?

atleast put up some screenshots of anything

 

[root]

I'm sure people will start helping out. Still it's hard for anyone here to be very open and talk a lot, because without a website and some screens most members here just wait, we had many vaporware games in the past being presented here.

The whole vaporware thing is exactly why we left it so long to say anything. Nobody wants to wait ten years for a game (especially, as it happens, our spouses). Then of course, we hit the problem of having *too* much and not knowing what to release.

Everyone wants screenshots. I was going to leave them till I did the website (it makes more sense to take screenshots of areas discussed in an announcement than screenshots that just look good), but if that's what you all need, I'll give you some later today or tomorrow. The site itself is awaiting DNS propogation and agreement of exactly what to put up there. There will be at least something, within the week.

It still doesn't sound very good, in fact it sounds like something very exploitable.

Why didn't you just have a fast turn option? Though if anyone thinks the TB combat in Fallout was too long surely it's because they don't really like TB combat?

Realtime was there rather than fast turn based initially as a dev aid. It just happened to do the same job as fast turn based but in a different way. It never occurred to anyone it was exploitable because it was never intended to be used as a primary combat system. Never looked at it from that point of view because that's not what it is for. It's a good point though.

Back to the drawing board on that one, I guess. Alternative suggestions anyone?

Also, you can like turn based and acknowledge its faults. Boneyard and New Reno spring to mind.

For sure, the only way to avoid dragged out fights is to keep the encounters small, you can limit it as much as possible but that's not always possible. The whole idea of a CRPG is to let the player do, as far as is possible, exactly what they want. Especially when playing an evil build, is easy to offer examples where there's not much you can do to avoid it. Assassinate a mayors wife, for example, and you've suddenly got every guard in the city after you. They'll attack whenever they see you, and when they do so, every other NPC in the area needs to move too - sometimes into the range of other NPCs and make them join the fray as well. You can limit the problem, but you can't solve it.

Incidentally, I never liked the idea of entire towns turning hostile, it just wouldn't happen. If you were a shop keeper outside the view of the guards, are you going to hit somebody who has just been on a rampage through your town with a frying pan if he comes into your shop? Unless you're of a particularly brave or stupid variety, you're more likely to be intimidated, serve him, and get him out as quickly as possible, right? Either way, the shopkeeper still needs to make his move along with everyone else.

What engine are you using?

It's a unique, in-house engine. It's very heavily based on Fallout though, to such a degree that we started out using SPECIAL (though we no longer do) and can even handle Fallout maps.

I took a look at FIFE a while ago when they were asking for contributers here. We might well have enough to make a major contribution there at a later date.

what are the graphics like?
modern or 10 years old?

Adequate, but no more. Some arsehole (me) decided to write the whole graphics engine in assembler, which turned out to be a not very smart thing to do. The whole graphics engine was then re-written a while ago and can now handle OpenGL, but we're still mostly using the original sprites. These will and are being remodelled, but we're certainly not looking at ultra-modern graphics.

As I said earlier, I'll give you some screenshots in the next day or so.

 

[10mmCurator]

'50 PA is old to me so be creative man. Just because the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Arms Race happened/started in the 1950's doesn't mean everything PA has to have their nuclear war in the 1950's

 

[Sorrow]

Adequate, but no more. Some arsehole (me) decided to write the whole graphics engine in assembler

Wow !

What will be system requirements?

 

[DirtyDreamDesigner]

Well, I'll tell you this much, I'm much more optimistic about your game than FO3.

Best of luck.

 

[requiem_for_a_starfury]

Back to the drawing board on that one, I guess. Alternative suggestions anyone?

Fast turn base, +/- keys to speed up animations during opponents turn? Move non-combatants en masse.

Also, you can like turn based and acknowledge its faults. Boneyard and New Reno spring to mind.

Putting it another way, TB players won't really care and those likely to complain will complain about it being in TB in the first place. Take a look at JA2 1.13 mod, there's a scripted attack that has you fighting approximately 120 opponents. Sure there are complaints about the difficulty but not about the time taken (usually 2-3 hrs).

Incidentally, I never liked the idea of entire towns turning hostile, it just wouldn't happen. If you were a shop keeper outside the view of the guards, are you going to hit somebody who has just been on a rampage through your town with a frying pan if he comes into your shop? Unless you're of a particularly brave or stupid variety, you're more likely to be intimidated, serve him, and get him out as quickly as possible, right? Either way, the shopkeeper still needs to make his move along with everyone else.

There's also the uncanny ability to tell that you are to blame even if you leave no surviving witnesses.

 

[Sorrow]

Back to the drawing board on that one, I guess. Alternative suggestions anyone?

Fast turn base, +/- keys to speed up animations during opponents turn? Move non-combatants en masse.

Also, you can like turn based and acknowledge its faults. Boneyard and New Reno spring to mind.

Putting it another way, TB players won't really care and those likely to complain will complain about it being in TB in the first place. Take a look at JA2 1.13 mod, there's a scripted attack that has you fighting approximately 120 opponents. Sure there are complaints about the difficulty but not about the time taken (usually 2-3 hrs).

I second that. I played both Fallouts and JA2 1.13 mod and I have no problems with mass combat in turns - partially, because I use fast combat speed in Fallout.

Incidentally, I never liked the idea of entire towns turning hostile, it just wouldn't happen. If you were a shop keeper outside the view of the guards, are you going to hit somebody who has just been on a rampage through your town with a frying pan if he comes into your shop? Unless you're of a particularly brave or stupid variety, you're more likely to be intimidated, serve him, and get him out as quickly as possible, right? Either way, the shopkeeper still needs to make his move along with everyone else.

There's also the uncanny ability to tell that you are to blame even if you leave no surviving witnesses.

I never liked that I could kill everyone in town and people would still know that my character is a childkiller...

 

[monsharen]

They'll attack whenever they see you, and when they do so, every other NPC in the area needs to move too - sometimes into the range of other NPCs and make them join the fray as well. You can limit the problem, but you can't solve it. [...]

Incidentally, I never liked the idea of entire towns turning hostile, it just wouldn't happen. [..] Either way, the shopkeeper still needs to make his move along with everyone else.

It can be solved. Just find another angle. Maybe Fallouts way of doing it was a little bit of a "cheat", code wise. Walk up to that white board of yours, think about the problem at hand and solve it. A simple, yet not a sufficient, solution would be to use some type of radius. You need more to it though, but surely it can be done (if deadlines are not an issue).

It's a unique, in-house engine. It's very heavily based on Fallout though, to such a degree that we started out using SPECIAL (though we no longer do) and can even handle Fallout maps.

Interesting! Do you handle dialogues the same too?

As I said earlier, I'll give you some screenshots in the next day or so.

Sounds awesome! Can't wait

Add: Oh, forgot. One thing I DID like with the "whole town attacking you" phenomena was that I couldn't go around wasting every dude I didn't like. Brought something to the overall feel. Reminded you of that your character was not invincible.

 

[mvBarracuda]

I took a look at FIFE a while ago when they were asking for contributers here. We might well have enough to make a major contribution there at a later date.

Ahh now it gets interesting for me

Do we talk about possible code contributions or does one of your programmers consider to jump on board for a limited time?

 

[Fyu-jon!!!]

While this is my first post at NMA, I'm a very long term reader and hopefully, deserving of the title "Honorary Glittering Gem Of Hatred".

...Just bear in mind that we're geeks, ...
...when there's 27 different ways to complete a single side quest,...
...The setting is PA, though not post-nuclear-apocalypse. Civilisation has fallen and it's your job to, well, live in the post apocalyptic world...
...just [...] fuck [...] the world...
...The path you choose depends on the role you choose to play
...feasible path with proper multiple endings for every and all character types we could think of, not just your combat, stealth, diplomatic, stupid builds...
...Cause and consequence, top down isometric view, moral ambiguity, kicking a rat in the groin, turn based combat...

Music to my ears Hope you can deliver.

Here is where you lot come in. We've had to drop some elements, and I want your opinions on how damaging this is:

SPECIAL - we're looking for a commercial release. We've therefore had to drop SPECIAL and replace it with our own system, though we can trace it's roots clearly.

Sure, as long as the character system is interesting. If it's not an actual Fallout title, SPECIAL is hardly a strict requirement.

Setting - We've kept the PA, but lost the 50's. Arcanum dropped both and did okay. Does it have to be 50's PA to satisfy Fallout fans, or is it suffice that the setting is strong?

Again, why should it be, if it isn't Fallout? In fact it'd feel like a rip-off if it were 50's PA (and once again, not a Fallout title). I would however like to see more than a generic PA world.

Turn based combat - We've tried to keep this intact, but we're not out and out turn based. Remembering some of the big fights in both Fallouts demonstrated the problem with turn based so we've gone for a hybrid in the style of FO:T. The difference is, we intend for our game to be played in turn based. Real time may or may not be properly balanced. Frankly, I don't care if it is, it's sole purpose is to speed up fights that are dragged out. Good enough compromise or does anyone have a better suggestion?

I haven't played Tactics, and I'm not sure. If real time is strictly optional, and not (effectively) required to beat some encounters, then I don't mind, because I probably won't use it (like Arcanum).
Have you considered/tried implementing that feature Troika had in ToEE, where several NPCs could move together? I think it'd be perfect for ones that are far away from the action, or cowering civilians and the like.


Anyway, looking forward to hearing more. In the meanwhile, can you tell us about yourself and the rest of your crew? Are they Fallout fanatics as well? What other games do you play, what games (or other media) inspire you? And are you also following AoD?

 

[keyser Soeze]

As I said earlier, I'll give you some screenshots in the next day or so.

I hate liers