Thoughts on Arcanum in 3-D FPS/Hybrid?

[Continuum]

If that's you define FO by its gameplay mechanics only, then Tactics must have been a fabulous sequel for you, right?

Who said that? You? But sure, I'll gladly answer to your question. FOT failed as Fallout game. And do you know why? Because they only left this:

Turn-based strategy, now with height, utilizing SPECIAL and largely similar skillpoints.

Everything else was gone. See how this is working?

I think it's silly to dismiss the new game simply because it's not the same combat/viewpoint.

Nope. It's silly to claim that removing one of key design decision doesn't have impact on the "feel" of the game. This is silly. Worse: uber silly. And your personal preferences don't really matter here...

 

[Idiotfool]

If that's you define FO by its gameplay mechanics only, then Tactics must have been a fabulous sequel for you, right?

Who said that? You? But sure, I'll gladly answer to your question. FOT failed as Fallout game. And do you know why? Because they only left this:

Turn-based strategy, now with height, utilizing SPECIAL and largely similar skillpoints.

Everything else was gone. See how this is working?

No. Because you don't seem to like New Vegas because it's missing this aspect. It seems a major concern of yours, as evidenced by the below statement. Since it's so important to you, I don't quite understand how a game that focuses on it exclusively could be considered bad to you.

I think it's silly to dismiss the new game simply because it's not the same combat/viewpoint.

Nope. It's silly to claim that removing one of key design decision doesn't have impact on the "feel" of the game. This is silly. Worse: uber silly.

You seem to put more weight on the viewpoint and combat than I do. If I read a book and I develop my vision of the world and then I play a game based on the book, if the setting, characters and interactions are as I'd expect, then the game world "feels" the same as the novel's world, to me. I don't want to just Kindle the book on my computer; I enjoy seeing an artist's rendering of the world and its differences in aesthethics doesn't break things for me, so long as the world itself feels like I think it should.

I look at games like New Vegas and appreciate them for giving another viewpoint to the gameworld I enjoy. New Vegas works how I think it should, given the platform it is presented in. FO3 was a pile of horseshit, as was P.O.S. and, to a lesser extent, Tactics. They didn't feel like Fallout, to me, largely based on character interactions, storyline (or lack thereof), and even setting. As you say, Tactics completely sacrificed what is Fallout to just be its core mechanics. BOS and FO3 were just developers trying to make cool shit, but they failed, in my opinion.

But, now we've gotten away from the point of my original post. Would you approve of an Arcanum 2 that was in 3-D, but still top-down turn-based? Does it have to be isometric? Are there any concessions you'd make for it in terms of view and combat?

What about the rest of you?

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Regarding Arcanum, I loved the story and idea of the setting but the game was always a little too in-depth and I just couldn't get into it, despite numerous attempts. Given that, I think the game could benefit to a move toward FPS/RPG hybrid like FO:New Vegas. I'd just like to see the characters have exaggerated crosshairs or movemement depending on skill in guns, thus removing the player's skill and leaving things mostly character stat-dependent.

Too in-depth? Boy, I could just imagine what Planescape could do to ya.

For your question, let me get it off my chest, I freakin' hate RPG/FPS hybrids, I think it's a dumb idea in general, and the combination doesn't work well together. Didn't like it in FO3, couldn't get into Deus Ex because of it, and it was just barely OK in Borderlands - but because they left the "shooter" component largely intact. As for the last part, it'd be awkward and unworkable to make everything completely stat-dependent in first person. It just doesn't feel right to have crosshairs dead on target while the character is shooting in a different direction because of lack of skills. In short FPS/RPG hybrid is as nonsensical as a fighter/RPG hybrid would be. Imagine how much a 2D fighting game where hits and damage are determined by stats and rolls would suck. Any fighter-fan would want to kill it with fire.

I'm not sure on turn-based. Though I loved turn-based games back in the day and I don't think that it's a bad combat style, I've not encountered modern examples that impressed me.

Someone mentioned Frozen Synapse, it's a good example of non-traditional TB. Combat in HOMM series is still as good today as it was before. There's countless Japanese "tactical" games that are TB. TOEE is not that old, and remains one of the best examples of TB application. Age of Decadence if/when released, will have TB combat. So it works. It was just buggy as hell in Arcanum.

Anyway, what are other's thoughts? Would you play a magic steampunk game in 3-D FPS/RPG hybrid style or is it just "Oblivion with Guns" perhaps more literally than FO3 was?

Would probably play it for the story/setting if it were as good as Arcanum's, but pretend I don't notice how horrible the gameplay is.

The reason I couldn't get into Arcanum largely stems from the fact that I can't commit to a character.

Lol, how do you even play RPGs at all? Most of the time it's about creating your character/team and shaping them into something you'd like to see...

I have nothing against turn-based top-down isometric games, I just don't think they're very popular and I don't know of any good, recent examples of them.

Disgaea. HOMM. Valkyria Chronicles.

But, now we've gotten away from the point of my original post. Would you approve of an Arcanum 2 that was in 3-D, but still top-down turn-based? Does it have to be isometric? Are there any concessions you'd make for it in terms of view and combat?

Personally, I don't think Arcanum needs a sequel (I just don't see where it'd fit in the story), and as some have said, it's a bit too early for a reboot. Hypothetically, TB or RT would be fine (remember, Arcanum technically had both), though I do welcome it when devs think outside the box (which rarely ever happens with big game companies these days). To me any RPG means 3P or ISO view, cause that's the era I grew up it.

 

[Surf Solar]

What is Lexx 2.5D, apparently even Google doesn't "know".

You cannot possibly be this stupid.

http://www.moddb.com/engines/fonline-engine

And you cannot possibly be this illiterate? Cvet is the author of the engine. Lexx "only" works with the engine, so do hundreds of other people (me including). You should really settle down your temper, especially when you accuse others being stupid and you don't even have the right facts. Quite ironic, isn't it?

As for the OP - hell no. I am fucking sick of this "we must "modernize" game xy which was perfectly fine into some 3d bastard!"

 

[Idiotfool]

Too in-depth? Boy, I could just imagine what Planescape could do to ya.

What I mean is that so many character stats have far reaching nuances in how your character plays. It wasn't a lack of understanding the game mechanics or anything like that. I want to see all possible outcomes so, for instance, I may save and reload on a conversation with several dialog choices a handful of times to see what each choice brought. In games from Bioware, this isn't and issue since almost every choice gets you to the same place. In a game like Arcanum, though, there's long-term effects in every choice and, because of a character fault of my own, I must know every consequence. This isn't any reason that I think the game should be dumbed down or anything. I just would like to see another take at that universe and, given the popularity of FPS/RPG hybrids I wondered if there would be a resounding "Fuck, no" to an Arcanum game in that vein.

For your question, let me get it off my chest, I freakin' hate RPG/FPS hybrids, I think it's a dumb idea in general, and the combination doesn't work well together. Didn't like it in FO3, couldn't get into Deus Ex because of it, and it was just barely OK in Borderlands - but because they left the "shooter" component largely intact. As for the last part, it'd be awkward and unworkable to make everything completely stat-dependent in first person. It just doesn't feel right to have crosshairs dead on target while the character is shooting in a different direction because of lack of skills. In short FPS/RPG hybrid is as nonsensical as a fighter/RPG hybrid would be. Imagine how much a 2D fighting game where hits and damage are determined by stats and rolls would suck. Any fighter-fan would want to kill it with fire.

In most modern FPS games I've played (Borderlands, New Vegas and Mass Effect, I think), the target reticle bounces around unless you change positions. I don't understand why this idea couldn't be applied to stats. If someone says "I suck at shooting a rifle" I imagine it's because they can't hold the rifle steady or they pull the barrel to one side as they pull the trigger. Seeing this in FPS view isn't really any different, to me, than seeing your character shoot at an enemy and then reading the turn-based dialog that says "IdiotFool critically missed and lost his turn!"


I'll look into your TB examples (thank you for serious ones). I was at work so couldn't watch any gameplay for the one provided earlier. I came across a few others, but they were more TB-Strategy than TB-RPG.

Personally, I don't think Arcanum needs a sequel (I just don't see where it'd fit in the story), and as some have said, it's a bit too early for a reboot. Hypothetically, TB or RT would be fine (remember, Arcanum technically had both), though I do welcome it when devs think outside the box (which rarely ever happens with big game companies these days). To me any RPG means 3P or ISO view, cause that's the era I grew up it.

My first foray into RPGs (when I was 12 or so) was the SSI D&D Gold-box. I had top-down squad turn-based combat with Dark-Sun and pseudo 3D with Menzobarrenzean and the like. I hold no view to be inherently better than another.

 

[ramessesjones]

I can understand wanting to modernize games some, but even if you do I greatly prefer Bioware style 3rd person to first person. This can even work with games with shooting, just hit the aim button to bring up a first person iron sight view.

Being in first person all the the time is a headache and actually breaks immersion more than it helps, because the constant and claustrophobic tunnel vision.

Classic turn based probably won't appeal to that mainstream of an audience, but some sort fake turn based that looks like real time, but is actually turn based or at least real with pause, is still viable I think.

I think there is a potential market for turn based, 2-D games in some of the growing lower cost markets like downloadable games though.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

What I mean is that so many character stats have far reaching nuances in how your character plays. It wasn't a lack of understanding the game mechanics or anything like that. I want to see all possible outcomes so, for instance, I may save and reload on a conversation with several dialog choices a handful of times to see what each choice brought. In games from Bioware, this isn't and issue since almost every choice gets you to the same place. In a game like Arcanum, though, there's long-term effects in every choice and, because of a character fault of my own, I must know every consequence.

Except in Arcanum, or just about any well-made RPG (FO, Planescape, Arcanum, VtMB), you can't do everything in one playthrough. Good RPG design encourages variety of situations and play styles. Both the Bioware dialogue syndrome and Bethesda Jack-of-all-trades syndrome are, IMO, inferior design decisions.

I just would like to see another take at that universe and, given the popularity of FPS/RPG hybrids I wondered if there would be a resounding "Fuck, no" to an Arcanum game in that vein.

Well, there's few enough steampunk games that this could be accomplished without necro-rising an old franchise. Regardless of whether it bears the "Arcanum" name or not, we'd probably end up with another Bioshock anyway. At best. Considering how Commandos FPS looked, and how X-COM upcoming FPS is looking, allow me to remain skeptical.

Now if some gaming company came around and made an original steampunk setting game, I'd probably be a bit interested. You know, like a group of people making something they're passionate about, not a big company sweeping up a dusty franchise name and releasing crap in hopes of a quick cash-in.

 

[rcorporon]

God no... a thousand times no.

Leave the old games that I love so much alone please. No more FPS/"RPG" nonsense. I've had my fill....

Next thing I know I'll be playing Final Fantasy Tactics in first person, Chrono Trigger, Super Mario, chess, Crusader: No Remorse, Alpha Centauri... hell, all those games need FPS cover systems.

 

[generalissimofurioso]

Now if some gaming company came around and made an original steampunk setting game, I'd probably be a bit interested. You know, like a group of people making something they're passionate about, not a big company sweeping up a dusty franchise name and releasing crap in hopes of a quick cash-in.

Well, there was that game Damnation that came out a whiles back.

It was a Steampunk U.S. Civil War game.

Don't think it was very good.

Pretty sure it put a few developers off the idea of Steampunk shooters, you know how they are.

 

[Horus9k]

And you cannot possibly be this illiterate? Cvet is the author of the engine. Lexx "only" works with the engine, so do hundreds of other people (me including). You should really settle down your temper, especially when you accuse others being stupid and you don't even have the right facts. Quite ironic, isn't it?

As if he'd know what I meant had I written Cvet's engine. FOnline engine would be the most apt phrase to use, but oh well. Fuck him and fuck you.

 

[mobucks]

Fuck all about perspective, and if combat is true turn based or RTwP. Baulders Gate 2 was a fabulous RPG and used RTwP. Here are my rules for an awesome post 2011 RPG:

Absolutely no aiming or twitch gameplay that resembles an FPS/Action game.

An extremely detailed world to explore.

Not being able to become a jack of all trades with any character. (maybe ONE type of character can be a "semi" JoaT, but thats it"

NOT an open world sandbox game, im getting tired and bored of these. Free up resources for more detailed/focused areas that i can map travel to. Running into a new town or community every 500 yards in New Vegas was stupid and did not do the "wasteland" theme justice.

Combat directly based on your characters skills/stats. turn based, or RTwP, i dont care, as long as the underlying mechanics rely on dice rolls and combat rounds.

Ability to play as good/neutral/bad, each equally fleshed out.

 

[Faceless Stranger]

As if he'd know what I meant had I written Cvet's engine. FOnline engine would be the most apt phrase to use, but oh well. Fuck him and fuck you.

Jesus, someone's a little testy, call someone stupid for not knowing what your talking about, even though it was wrong, and then just reason that "he wouldn't of known anyway" to make yourself feel better? Anything useful to add other than trying to act like a true internet tough guy?

As for the original question, I believe that it could work in essence of the setting. But it would never hold the same feel as the original. As someone said before, it would really take a shining group of writers and artists to be able to pull it off. It would be interesting if done properly though, especially if they keep the music style intact.

 

[Horus9k]

Jesus, someone's a little testy, call someone stupid for not knowing what your talking about, even though it was wrong, and then just reason that "he wouldn't of known anyway" to make yourself feel better? Anything useful to add other than trying to act like a true internet tough guy?

When did I call anyone stupid for not knowing what I was talking about? Last I checked, Lexx does work on that engine. Thus phrasing it 'Lexx's Engine' leaves very little ambiguity, even though a small detail was admittedly left out, but do you honestly think that calling it 'Cvet's engine' would have made the appropriate synapses connect? I think referring it as the FOnline engine would probably be best suited for... forum goers here.

In other words, suck it.

 

[SharkClub]

How? By stripping its core mechanics?

Be fair.

Bethesda already did that, Obsidian just had to pick up the pieces and strap it all back together.

 

[Faceless Stranger]

Bullshit

In other words call someone stupid for not knowing what "Lexx's 2.5D Engine" is when a) While Lexx worked on it, he didn't create it, Cvet did and b) you admit that FOnline's engine's a better name. Be difficult then call someone stupid for not knowing 'the fuck you're talking about, then end every subsequent post concerning people telling you to cool the fuck down with an insult? Classy.

 

[UniversalWolf]

For those who are against FPS, could you provide me an example of modern gaming that you feel does turn-based combat well?

Temple of Elemental Evil was probably the last game that tried. ToEE combat is superb, actually.

Leave the old games that I love so much alone please. No more FPS/"RPG" nonsense. I've had my fill....

This is the correct answer. Why do you want every game to be the same FPS format? You already have a million games in that boring category. Here's a better idea: make an Arcanum sequel with game mechanics faithful to the original but updated with current technology.

 

[Horus9k]

Drollery.

a) yes, Lexx worked on it. Does Cvet post here? Does he have over 6000+ posts and an interview? Nope. I guess saying 'Lexx's' was more of a 'hey, Lexx the guy who posts on NMA, you know?' but alas, the dullard did not.

b) I admit it, I doubt even that would have clicked, though.

 

[Starseeker]

lol, at times like this, I miss Rosh.

I don't know how many times we've had this type of "discussions". RT v.s. TB First person v.s. Third person/iso.

If you can't get into a particular type of game mechanics, then stop playing the games. I never liked FPSs, and it has never bothered me before. I played all the oldies as well, but I never saw the charm of it to keep buying those games. I got over it.

What bothers me is people like you who insist on slapping on a game mechanic that you like onto a setting that's not suitable for it. But it's the popular thing to do right now, so I guess you should rejoice. It's probably because of people like you, that I am forced to play games in franchises that I like with crappy real time battle systems, even though it doesn't suit the games AT ALL.

Seriously, a lot of games I see these days are just doing things because they CAN, not because they should or if it's suitable at all. Unless we can build a true holodeck or have some kind of brain jacking technology, I doubt there is any point to keep pushing the graphic technology. I mean, if you want to simulate reality that badly, you know, there is always something called the outside? Personally, I have never played any real time games that the A.I. (ally or enemy) behaved in a believable or logical manner. Of course, to get rid of this problem of having to write complicated AI scripts or god forbid, create a proper character and properly flush him/her out with proper development, they now avoid the problem entirely by going online. Since a lot of publishers are looking to get rid of piracy and second hand market all together in their bid to become traditional media companies, they are trying to turn the whole thing into a subscriber based type of business like ISP or cable tv. If you have that, why bother writing a story or characters at all? You have to be online to play and you can play with "real" people!

Anyway, I think I got off too far on my tangent, so I'll stop here.

 

[Faceless Stranger]

b) I admit it, I doubt even that would have clicked, though.

After insulting people, implying that makes it all better. Cool story bro.

 

[Ausdoerrt]

Well, there was that game Damnation that came out a whiles back.

It was a Steampunk U.S. Civil War game.

Don't think it was very good.

Pretty sure it put a few developers off the idea of Steampunk shooters, you know how they are.

I'm not saying anyone can pull it off, I'm just saying it's the only reasonable way to do it. I am, like many people here, very skeptical about big company old franchise acquisitions, reboots etc. cause they rarely ever result in anything worth playing. The only positive example I can think of is King's bounty, and look what they did - took an almost 20-year-old game and basically remade it with recent technology, leaving much of the core mechanics intact.

What you need to make such a project successful is some group of people who're in it not just for the money, and if it turns out to be someone with the dedication and skill of CD Project RED, it'll be successful.