What games are we looking forward to?

[Mr Fish]

Why? Wouldn't it be better if the game was a hit (quality wise) and everybody enjoyed it? Especially since the concept is really interesting. I'm kind of sad that this might make other devs not consider doing something creative with procedural generation.

Sure, I'd love for every game out there to be an instant classic that is excellent in every way imaginable. Sadly, that isn't the world we live in, and No Man's Sky is something I've thought looked like a huge piece of shit ever since the start and when something looks like a huge piece of shit at the start and it ends up failing miserably then I'm gleeful about its misery.

And no, its concept is not interesting to me. It's yet another exploration game where they try to sell you on (near) infinite content and I've learned long ago that such promises are full of shit. I loathe procedural generation. It's an excuse so that developers don't have to actually design an interesting world by hand. Just throw in a few algorithms and then sell it as (near) infinite content. I find it lazy and pointless. Oh gee willikers, when I play the game then I run into purple dildo's whereas my friend runs into blue ones!

So if it deters other developers from doing the dreadfully awful RNG content? Good. Nothing of value was lost.

 

[AskWazzup]

Sure, I'd love for every game out there to be an instant classic that is excellent in every way imaginable.

But then you would lose those moments where you love overhyped flops.

And no, its concept is not interesting to me. It's yet another exploration game where they try to sell you on (near) infinite content and I've learned long ago that such promises are full of shit. I loathe procedural generation. It's an excuse so that developers don't have to actually design an interesting world by hand. Just throw in a few algorithms and then sell it as (near) infinite content. I find it lazy and pointless. Oh gee willikers, when I play the game then I run into purple dildo's whereas my friend runs into blue ones!

So if it deters other developers from doing the dreadfully awful RNG content? Good. Nothing of value was lost.

Good procedural generation has a much wider scope for interesting outcomes than placing everything by hand (because of limited time, resources and mind). Of course, there has to be a middle where these things meet, at least until we have a very sophisticated system. I have discovered (playing around with programming sounds in supercollider) that if you have a pretty good base, procedural generation can not only add much flavor to it (in my case with making say some drum beats, you can have a constant phrase and then flavor it constantly with some off beats, which are generated by an algorithm), but it can actually generate outcomes and ideas that you yourself would never have thought of. It doesn't have to be a system that is just so that you can generate endless useless content, and actually, games with no procedural generation have been doing this for decades already (generating endless useless content), so it's not like designing a boring game is any much easier with procedural generation than just adding... well... boring content by hand.

Diablo 2 already made good use for it by transforming dungeons everytime you entered them and deciding the loot drops. This made it much more refreshing when doing the same place dozens of times.

 

[Kohno]

There's TToN, DOS 2 and Battletech that I kinda have to look forward to since I threw good money in their respective Kickstarters. All's looking well enough in those fronts (we'll see how the console stuff affects the TToN... though I doubt it'll do much harm).

Other than that... There's No Truce with Furies and Civ 6. Colony Ship is probably too far from release so I don't pay much attention at this point. And I'm a bit on the fence on the new Deus Ex and CDPR's Cyberpunk 2077 (of which nobody knows anything, but everybody can guess it hopefully not but wiill probably be some sort of Techno Witcher GTA hybrid).

Turn-Based combat instead of RTwP (I know, I know, kind of strange that coming from the Codex, but they had pretty good explanation and also they brought up that somehow Brother None rigged the whole voting back then, so Turn-Based wins instead of RTwP when the majority, and even the Codex, were in uproar as to why they favored Turn-Based. Especially since the original Torment was RTwP)

I don't remember a Codex uproar on InXile favoring TB. What I remember is most (who cared enough) being overjoyed.

There were lots of laughs at those who, at that InXile forum for those votes and in the KS comments, got butthurt over the decision (someone even made a video on Youtube crying about how he felt bad and betrayed and stuff).

 

[Operation Wignut]

I still need to play that game, I backed its kickstarter/support fund back in the day after playing and enjoying Rebuild 2 so much.
I think some of the weirder new additions have come from when the developer asked what ideas fans had for a sequel, resulting in some of the more sillier additions like the Hippies and the Internet nerds.

So there is a storyline in this now? And was the idea for a nuclear weapon scenario also added?

I'd say there's more of a storyline than previous games. Instead of trying to take one city in particular, you move between cities with different factions. Once you finish either defeating that faction or becoming friends you can move on to the next city. This is kinda boring and stupid, because you don't bring anything between cities. It's mildly irritating, not really what you'd want from a story. The only reasons I kept playing were

1. I like the city-building and management itself. I think it's well-implemented and really works.

2. Each city has a different gimmick and some of them are pretty fun to play.

3. You don't actually have to progress the story. You can just stay and build your city out. To me, it's fun seeing how big your city can get.

If you backed it then play it, it's okay. I'd give it like a 7/10, but I could see how many people wouldn't like it. It's niche, and if you aren't in that niche, then you probably shouldn't buy it.

 

[dopezilla]

(someone even made a video on Youtube crying about how he felt bad and betrayed and stuff).

Yeah, that's the Codex for you.

 

[Mr Fish]

I can't fucking stand Diablo 2 because of its RNG. Bunch of annoying stumbling around trying to find the next plot point.

 

[Black Angel]

I dunno man, I see your point, but I'm not fazed. Developers break promises, deal with it. InXile were never an exception. They may have presented themselves as a caring company that loves its passionate fans, but you just know what was PR bullshit anyway. I'm not condoning it, but I know stuff like this happens in the business, and I simply don't care. You can now suddenly assume the game is going to be shit, or just wait and see what happens when it is finally released. Which is what I'm going to do. You can do your thing and get all riled up about stuff, but I'm keeping my cool, I'll play the game when it's released and then form an opinion.

No, mate, you ARE condoning this bullshit mega-corporation practice. Fargo, for years, had been talking about how it's important to keep a close and good relationship with the community, and how the "Evil Publisher" shall not mediate between the developers and their community. In a single move, Fargo broke those principles. That's not a good way to maintain the trust of their audience.

On top of that, if their game is going to be actually good, what's to fear from an interview from the Codex, then? Why would they cancel the interview on the last minute, especially based on bullshit reason? Like I mentioned, take a look again on Bubbles post, they prepared and worked hard for the interview. And then, Techland cancelled the interview based on Infinitron disclosing the info of Torment's presence in Gamescom, but they specifically asked not to disclose the console version, which wasn't even talked about until they actually announce it. And take a look at Fargo's and BN's response to it. This is bullshit, alright?

What gives me hope, though, is that so far reactions to the early access version have been quite positive.

Oh, but what's stopping the final version from being a complete 180?

But that does not add up at all. While i have nothing against one or the other system and if the backers voted for the rtwp system, i think they should have gotten one... BUT... If there is anything you don't want to do to appeal to the console crowd, is slow paced turn based combat! I just don't see how this would help them in any way possible to "consolize" the game.

Divinity: Original Sin was Turn-Based, and it sells very, pretty well on consoles. Hell, from what I've heard it actually sells better than Wasteland 2!

I don't remember a Codex uproar on InXile favoring TB. What I remember is most (who cared enough) being overjoyed.

There were lots of laughs at those who, at that InXile forum for those votes and in the KS comments, got butthurt over the decision (someone even made a video on Youtube crying about how he felt bad and betrayed and stuff).

Yeah, I'm trudging along the older threads on Torment updates in the Codex. Most of the butthurt was in the KS's comment. But! That was in 2013, the honeymoon phases for the hopes and dreams, of promises that inXile would learn from their mistakes of Wasteland 2, and that they would bear the Torment's name with respect.

Now, though, as Fargo broke his promises and principles, the Codex finally brought it all in the open for all to see.

Spoiler: Fairfax posted

The most clear cut lie I can recall:
I said somewhere (maybe it wasn't the Codex) that InXile rigged the TTON combat poll about RtwP x TB, as even if they didn't rigged the vote count itself, they changed the original poll description to convince people to vote TB after RtwP started winning and it became too close.
Brother None replied, and said he was responsible for posting the poll and that he never changed the description. Unfortunately for him, there were screenshots:

InXile and some devs openly said they preferred TB, and the descriptions are extremely biased as well, with subjective and/or debatable qualities being given to TB such as "more depth", "more thoughtful", "more options", etc.

He also said this:

The comments on the KS page and the forum were strongly in favour of RtwP, and most of the comments after the decision was made were negative. I personally believe they manipulated the actual vote count as well, but I'll never have proof. Even if they didn't, the poll was just meant to validate their choice to go TB, and backers were given a Biowarian choice.
The interesting thing is that Brother None said the team had a "slight lean towards RtwP" before the KS, but despite what InXile called a "statistical tie", they went with TB regardless.

And yes, I know the vast majority of the Codex prefers TB and voted for it. Just explaining how he lied.

 

[aenemic]

Mass Effect: Andromeda and Divinity: Original Sin 2 mostly, at the moment. Those are the two games I have a hard time not getting pretty damn hyped about. I also look forward to Dishonored 2, as I liked the first game and enjoyed the setting and gameplay. I will play Deus Ex Mankind Divided as well, but got a bit fed up after recently replaying Human Revolution. I like it a lot, but it easily gets a bit same-y after a little while.

As for inXile, you guys realize there are bigger issues in the world than the Codex not getting a schedule spot, right? Now put down those tin foil hats and go for a walk.

 

[Black Angel]

As for inXile, you guys realize there are bigger issues in the world than the Codex not getting a schedule spot, right? Now put down those tin foil hats and go for a walk.

I repeat: if the game is going to be good, that everything is going to be okay in the end, why would they (inXile) cancel the interview by way of their Publishers (after Fargo made those statement that Publishers shall not meddle with Developer-Community relationship), and based on bullshit reason (The Codex breach an NDA, when the guy didn't even sign any NDA, and also when Techland specifically asked not to disclose console version while the guy only disclosed the fact that Torment would appear in Gamescom and that's it) on top of that?

I assume you guys are only being like this because of ignorance. Like I mentioned, most likely that most of you didn't keep tabs on Torment 2's development, and thus, have no idea what's going on after 3 years.

Note that I'm just like you guys and I was really looking forward to Torment 2. However, we lacked vigilance to updates and development logs, here in NMA. The Codex, however, were much more vigilant and paid really close attention to it. Reading through the updates and the development logs now, and having to read on what the Codex has to say about it (especially since the Codex is obviously far more experienced with cRPGs and RPGs in general, AND the working of developers and the meddling of publishers)...

 

[aenemic]

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

And also, when did the Codex become the grand authority on rpg's? They're "obviously far more experienced"? Who are they? More experienced than whom? I basically do nothing other than play rpg's and have done so for the bigger part of my 32 year long life. I'd say I'm pretty experienced. That still doesn't give me any authority over anything, it only gives me opinions. Tons of opinions.

 

[Black Angel]

Don't believe everything you read on the internet.

Of course, lesson learned. Don't believe when Fargo said he's going to:

1. 100% fully focused on delivering PC version
2. Not going to the "Evil Publisher"
3. Not appealing to the "Mass Market"

And also, when did the Codex become the grand authority on rpg's?

That's not what I'm saying, nor implying.

They're "obviously far more experienced"? Who are they? More experienced than whom?

Many of the Codexers, of course. More experienced than NMA, RPG Watch, the likes of IGN, Gamespot, Polygon, Kotaku.

I basically do nothing other than play rpg's and have done so for the bigger part of my 32 year long life. I'd say I'm pretty experienced.

Then what's your take on Torment 2 having simultaneous release for both PC and console? What's your take on health bars/something like that? What's your take on the game apparently going to pander to SJWs crowd?

More importantly, have you keep tabs on the updates and development logs for Torment 2? You should be knowing everything, then, and why the Codex's interview getting canceled at the very last minute AND after the Codex's overwhelmingly negative response to the simultaneous PC-console release is a bad sign that something fishy is going on.

That still doesn't give me any authority over anything, it only gives me opinions. Tons of opinions.

Again, I'm not implying anyone can have authority or whatever over anything. It's all about good will, and keeping good relationship with the community that obviously, absolutely supported you with passion. Imagine you officially donated tons of bucks to this small developer and helped them grew, and then when they becoming big and finally capable to attract some publisher to do the marketing and PR for them, and then they canceled an interview for you with them (for some bullshit reason), simply out of fear that you would rip them apart with critical questions, would you feel good about it?

And yeah, opinions. The difference between NMA and the Codex in this case, however, is at least the Codex vigilantly keep tabs on the updates and development logs for Torment 2. This site mostly infatuated with Obsidian and Tyranny, and only very rarely talk about Torment 2. Thus, the opinions of the Codexers are far more informed than that of NMA about Torment 2.

 

[Mr Fish]

Of course, lesson learned. Don't believe when Fargo said he's going to:

1. 100% fully focused on delivering PC version
2. Not going to the "Evil Publisher"
3. Not appealing to the "Mass Market"

In one of the updates I read on their kickstarter page it was stated that none of the money from the funding campaign would go towards the console port, CONSOLE port, not PC port, CONSOLE port. It is Techwhatever that is going to handle that. Chances are that they struck a deal with them where Techwhatever will port and ship physical copies of the game and in return they will get X% of revenue made from the game. I do not see how Fargo has gone back on his word at all.

And evil publisher? Techwhatever is evil? All publishers are automatically evil? There can never be a good publisher? Ever? At all? One that is capable of bringing a game to more people that want it? Capable of porting it to consoles so that those without good computer can enjoy them too? I don't see how that is evil. Fargo and company asked for funding to create the game because they wanted free reign to create it. They got the funding and have free reign to create it. Only difference is that now they are able to create their game 'and' broaden the potential audience.

And what mass market? It's still a niche game. It's just available to more systems now.

 

[Black Angel]

In one of the updates I read on their kickstarter page it was stated that none of the money from the funding campaign would go towards the console port, CONSOLE port, not PC port, CONSOLE port. It is Techwhatever that is going to handle that. Chances are that they struck a deal with them where Techwhatever will port and ship physical copies of the game and in return they will get X% of revenue made from the game. I do not see how Fargo has gone back on his word at all.

Ah, but that's where things got weird. With Wasteland 2, inXile delivered console version by way of Deep Silver as Distributor. This time around, however, before the game finally finished they turn to Techland as publishers, not just distributor, so there's a possibility that they ran out of money. To fund the rest of the game, inXile turns to Techland. But what do Techland demanded from inXile, then, to publish the game? Console versions, delayed release to gimp the PC version, etc etc it's the usual PC game being gimped to balance the console version shenanigans.

And evil publisher? Techwhatever is evil? All publishers are automatically evil? There can never be a good publisher? Ever? At all? One that is capable of bringing a game to more people that want it? Capable of porting it to consoles so that those without good computer can enjoy them too? I don't see how that is evil. Fargo and company asked for funding to create the game because they wanted free reign to create it. They got the funding and have free reign to create it. Only difference is that now they are able to create their game 'and' broaden the potential audience.

Techland canceled the Codex interview at the Gamescom. The cancellation message was received sometime after the announcement for simultaneous PC-console release, which received overwhelmingly negative responses. The reason for the cancellation was a bullshit, if you haven't paid attention. If that's not evil, I don't know what is.

On top of that, Fargo's and BN's response to the Codexers who asked why they got cancelled for some bullshit reason were really half-hearted and most likely set up by the publisher. Fargo, who's supposedly standing up to those "Evil Publishers", now can't do anything to correct those very Publisher from meddling with developers-community relationship. There's no compensation for this so far.

Let's just see if the PC version is going to stay the way it was.

 

[aenemic]

Of course, lesson learned. Don't believe when Fargo said he's going to:

1. 100% fully focused on delivering PC version
2. Not going to the "Evil Publisher"
3. Not appealing to the "Mass Market"

1. I won't pretend to know how inXile develop their games, but I'm pretty confident that it's not developed for consoles first and all we'll get is a crappy pc port. I'd venture a guess and say that the pc version has been close to finished for a good while now, and the console developement began much more recently. A studio works on many parts of a project simultaneously. If all they're doing for the pc build now is localization, then where's the harm in the programmers transferring it over to consoles? Without any facts to back it up, this complaint is nothing more than "whaaa, I want it to be pc exclusive, filthy console peasants, whaaa".
2. I'm glad publishers are taking an interest in these types of games. Isn't that what we kinda wanted ever since Fallout 2?
3. In what way is Torment now appealing to the mass market? Just because the genre is now finally getting more popular again, doesn't mean it's mass marketed shovelware.

Many of the Codexers, of course. More experienced than NMA, RPG Watch, the likes of IGN, Gamespot, Polygon, Kotaku.

Some maybe. But you're making gross generalizations.

Then what's your take on Torment 2 having simultaneous release for both PC and console? What's your take on health bars/something like that? What's your take on the game apparently going to pander to SJWs crowd?

I don't have any more to say about the console version than I said above. I don't see why it would automatically make for a bad game. Health bars? What is that even about? And I'm one of those SJW's you're so afraid of. That whole thing is so utterly ridiculous. Please explain to me exactly how the game will "pander to the SJW crowd".

More importantly, have you keep tabs on the updates and development logs for Torment 2? You should be knowing everything, then, and why the Codex's interview getting canceled at the very last minute AND after the Codex's overwhelmingly negative response to the simultaneous PC-console release is a bad sign that something fishy is going on.

No I have not, and reading from your previous posts in this topic neither have you. You reacted upon reading on the Codex, and then you searched for information (on the Codex) on what to think. Hence, you chose to hate it because they hate it, not really knowing why. That's how it looks, at least.

It's all about trying to be a little realisitc. What exactly would inXile gain from turning on their fanbase, releasing a completely different game than they've been working on, and lying about all sorts of little things? Give me some actual reasons why.

Again, I'm not implying anyone can have authority or whatever over anything. It's all about good will, and keeping good relationship with the community that obviously, absolutely supported you with passion. Imagine you officially donated tons of bucks to this small developer and helped them grew, and then when they becoming big and finally capable to attract some publisher to do the marketing and PR for them, and then they canceled an interview for you with them, simply out of fear that you would rip the apart with critical questions, would you feel good about it?

See, the problem here is that you seem to think that you get a definitive say in the developement because you donated a larger amount of money than most. That's not how it works. No matter the amount, if you backed you're a backer and the developers will listen to all backers (that take part in the discussion) in equal measures. You're not buying shares in the company. You're not publishing their game. It's the exact same thing I saw on the Obsidian forums when I followed the developement of Pillars of Eternity. Some members (well, one in particular) seemed to think he had a bigger say and was more important than even the devs themselves, simply because he spent hours scrutinizing the betas and making videos about his opinions. I salute him for doing that, he did a great job and found a lot of bugs and wonky mechanics. But whenever he didn't get his proposed changes into the game, he acted like a little entitled brat.

I think it's a shame the Codex didn't get their interview, but I find it hard to believe they're lying about how it all went down, and that it's some kind of big conspiracy again the Codex. And in the end, it won't affect the quality of the game whatsoever. What, do you think the Codex will ask the type of questions that will suddenly make inXile push back the release and go back to developement?

Even if they had a reason for not wanting to talk to the Codex (such as the Codex actually breaking embargo), then that's their prerogative.

 

[Mr Fish]

Ah, but that's where things got weird. With Wasteland 2, inXile delivered console version by way of Deep Silver as Distributor. This time around, however, before the game finally finished they turn to Techland as publishers, not just distributor, so there's a possibility that they ran out of money. To fund the rest of the game, inXile turns to Techland. But what do Techland demanded from inXile, then, to publish the game? Console versions, delayed release to gimp the PC version, etc etc it's the usual PC game being gimped to balance the console version shenanigans.

Sounds like an awful lot of wild speculation to me. It's like some people are just trying to find reasons to be disappointed to the point that they are bouncing conspiracy theories around until they are so sure of themselves that they consider it factual.

Do we 'know' or even 'suspect' that InXile ran out of money?

Do we 'know' that Techland 'demanded' that console versions be made? InXile wanted console versions for WL2, and releasing the PC and console versions at the same time when the marketing and hype is at its highest near release date is far better for sales than releasing a port a year later.

Do we 'know' that the PC version was delayed?

Do we have any clear cut 'evidence' of the PC version being gimped?

Techland canceled the Codex interview at the Gamescom. The cancellation message was received sometime after the announcement for simultaneous PC-console release, which received overwhelmingly negative responses. The reason for the cancellation was a bullshit, if you haven't paid attention. If that's not evil, I don't know what is.

No, that is not evil. They were working on making sure that they could get a distributor/publisher for console release and wanted to make an announcement about it and then some fuckwad goes and spoils it and Techland goes "fuck 'em" and I agree. Fuck 'em. The Codex is a place that has always rubbed me the wrong way. Whenever I hear about them or go in there to see what's up I see a bunch of shitheads sniffing their own farts.

Interview is scheduled.
InXile works with Techland to get console support.
They probably got an announcement to make.
Someone from the Codex ruins it and paranoia begins to spread.
Techland ain't having none of that shit and cancels the interview in a misguided attempt to punish The Codex.

This sounds far more plausible to me.

I think The Codex is reading too far into things with this but I agree that I would like Fargo to give a full disclosure as to what's going on but I ain't ready to put on a tinfoil hat and start throating Alex Jones' cock.

On top of that, Fargo's and BN's response to the Codexers who asked why they got cancelled for some bullshit reason were really half-hearted and most likely set up by the publisher. Fargo, who's supposedly standing up to those "Evil Publishers", now can't do anything to correct those very Publisher from meddling with developers-community relationship. There's no compensation for this so far.

Let's just see if the PC version is going to stay the way it was.

Alternatively, Fargo and BN might be busy and therefore didn't get into a multiparagraph short-novel answer?

I admit, I don't know enough about all of this to clearly and definitely judge InXile on their actions.
The thing is, neither do you or the Codex.

I don't want to sit here and be a fucking apologist for InXile but you and The Codex are freaking out over something you don't know enough about and instead of calmly just repeatedly asking InXile what the fuck is up you make a snap judgement and put on the tinfoil hat and start raving about how much of a sellout they are, clearly not thinking about how it could hurt InXile's reputation if you're wrong.

I don't know shit.
You don't know shit.
And The Codex doesn't know shit either.

Keep pressing Fargo on the issue until you get a clear answer from him but until you do this kind of paranoia ain't fucking helping.

All you got is wild speculation.

That's all.

And that ain't enough for me. It does raise concerns, concerns I want answered. But I ain't going to get those answers from a bunch of hysterics flailing their arms around about how InXile is suddenly worse than EA.

 

[Black Angel]

1. I won't pretend to know how inXile develop their games, but I'm pretty confident that it's not developed for consoles first and all we'll get is a crappy pc port. I'd venture a guess and say that the pc version has been close to finished for a good while now, and the console developement began much more recently. A studio works on many parts of a project simultaneously. If all they're doing for the pc build now is localization, then where's the harm in the programmers transferring it over to consoles? Without any facts to back it up, this complaint is nothing more than "whaaa, I want it to be pc exclusive, filthy console peasants, whaaa".

The game was funded on KS at April 6 2013. The promised initial release was December 2014, ~17 months of development period, which was supposedly unbound by a publisher's demands etc etc and they could have delivered it that way since they were a veteran developers. Of course, there's an inevitable delay for many unseen problems along the way. But then, it was delayed 27 months since initial release date (Jan/Feb 2017 or Q1 of 2017). They announced working with Techland as the publisher back at Jun 10, means they got 6-7 extra months to work on the game--for what? What's stopping them to publish the game for PC, right now? If it's not for gimping the PC version in favor of the console version, then I don't know what is.

2. I'm glad publishers are taking an interest in these types of games. Isn't that what we kinda wanted ever since Fallout 2?

Huh, really? I don't know, man. I'm still a new guy in the Fallout/cRPG community, so I wouldn't know.

3. In what way is Torment now appealing to the mass market? Just because the genre is now finally getting more popular again, doesn't mean it's mass marketed shovelware.

From what I could remember as far back before this whole Codex-inXile debacle, the game was supposed to have some system regarding the health. It was changed to regular health bars, or something, supposedly due to newer players not understanding it at all.
There was also the Torment tradition that suggest 6-man party, now changed to 4-man party because the mass market was used to it (see: Dragon Age games).

I don't have any more to say about the console version than I said above. I don't see why it would automatically make for a bad game.

It won't make for a bad game, but would most likely prevent the PC version potential fully realized.

Health bars? What is that even about? And I'm one of those SJW's you're so afraid of. That whole thing is so utterly ridiculous. Please explain to me exactly how the game will "pander to the SJW crowd".

Like I said, there was a system that was scrapped all together, due to newer players don't really understanding it related to the health system, and thus "dumbing down" the game.
As for SJW stuff, I apologize if I say something wrong. I shouldn't have mentioned it any further than once. I preferred not to talk about it anymore.

No I have not, and reading from your previous posts in this topic neither have you. You reacted upon reading on the Codex, and then you searched for information (on the Codex) on what to think. Hence, you chose to hate it because they hate it, not really knowing why. That's how it looks, at least.

Yeah, sorry. Should've tried to research more. I got angry at Techland cancelling the interview for bullshit reason, and then to add fuel to the fire Fargo and BN's response was too half-hearted and too set up.
But you gotta admit the Codex were much more in the know here. All I'm suggesting initially was to thread carefully, and don't just throw money just because it's Torment. This whole debacle stink, that's what I'm trying to say/

It's all about trying to be a little realisitc. What exactly would inXile gain from turning on their fanbase, releasing a completely different game than they've been working on, and lying about all sorts of little things? Give me some actual reasons why.

We've all been wondering why Bethesda did that, right? Oh, right, all the money from a newer, more ignorant fanbase that would easily threw money at them without second thought. Think about it, the Codex would most likely be very vocal and critical when interviewing Fargo at Gamescom, which might hinder their attempt at selling the game (console version most likely) to wider audience, mass market out there. Can you do that with the game being so niche, and when you start changing all the fundamental principles surrounding the game that made it niche in the first place, there's this vocal, critical minority interrupt its marketing process?

See, the problem here is that you seem to think that you get a definitive say in the developement because you donated a larger amount of money than most. That's not how it works. No matter the amount, if you backed you're a backer and the developers will listen to all backers (that take part in the discussion) in equal measures. You're not buying shares in the company. You're not publishing their game.

Right, that's the reality. Oh, well, fortunately I personally haven't wasted any dime for this. The Codex spent so much money together, and then disposed simply because inXile no longer need their support.

A small-time company turning to mega-corporation trashing their loyal supporter in favor of mass market. More news at 11.

I think it's a shame the Codex didn't get their interview, but I find it hard to believe they're lying about how it all went down, and that it's some kind of big conspiracy again the Codex. And in the end, it won't affect the quality of the game whatsoever. What, do you think the Codex will ask the type of questions that will suddenly make inXile push back the release and go back to developement?

Even if they had a reason for not wanting to talk to the Codex (such as the Codex actually breaking embargo), then that's their prerogative.

Have you even paid attention to all those links I gave you? Here, I reiterate them:

12th of July: I ask Techland if Torment would be at Gamescom. 3 hours later, Techland PR confirms their presence and promises to get in touch to book us a slot once the invitations are ready.

19th of July: we receive the invitation through the third party PR agency, asking us not to reveal any information about the console release. Infinitron confirms in the forums that Torment will be present at Gamescom. (note that he waits a full week, until the official invite, to reveal this)

26th of July: we successfully book the presentation and interview with the agency (waiting times are long with Gamescom bookings)

4th of August: Torment is officially confirmed for a console release. Infinitron publically states that we had known about this since July.

10th of August: we receive the question about Infinitron from Techland at 16:22 Berlin time. I politely ask for the reason behind this request at 17:54. We are informed of the cancellation of our interview and presentation slot at 18:22.

And to add to that:

For future reference, this is the text of the "NDA"

And this is in the e-mail:

Information about the game's planned console release is strictly confidential and not for publication.

So Techland specifically asked not to reveal the console release. What Infinitron revealed was only that he knew Torment would be presented at Gamescom and....that's it. And then Techland cancelled the interview anyway.

Do we 'know' or even 'suspect' that InXile ran out of money?

Just.... take a look at this, and follow it.

Do we 'know' that Techland 'demanded' that console versions be made? InXile wanted console versions for WL2, and releasing the PC and console versions at the same time when the marketing and hype is at its highest near release date is far better for sales than releasing a port a year later.

Well, from most of my experiences, many games that had simultaneous release, had flashy trailers and all that, only to get released in a gimped version to balance that of the console's (see: Dark Souls 2, the Witcher 3, there were some changes to Wasteland 2 Director's Cut due to console from what I've heard).

Do we 'know' that the PC version was delayed?

The game's initial delivery was December 2014. It was eventually pushed back to Q4 of 2015, and then 2016, and now Q1 of 2017.

Do we have any clear cut 'evidence' of the PC version being gimped?

This is remain to be seen. I admit I'm don't have experience in the whole market of PC-console gaming industry, to but from what little I could experienced many PC version were gimped in favor of console (see: No Man's Sky).

No, that is not evil. They were working on making sure that they could get a distributor/publisher for console release and wanted to make an announcement about it and then some fuckwad goes and spoils it and Techland goes "fuck 'em" and I agree. Fuck 'em. The Codex is a place that has always rubbed me the wrong way. Whenever I hear about them or go in there to see what's up I see a bunch of shitheads sniffing their own farts.

Interview is scheduled.
InXile works with Techland to get console support.
They probably got an announcement to make.
Someone from the Codex ruins it and paranoia begins to spread.
Techland ain't having none of that shit and cancels the interview in a misguided attempt to punish The Codex.

This sounds far more plausible to me.

I think The Codex is reading too far into things with this but I agree that I would like Fargo to give a full disclosure as to what's going on but I ain't ready to put on a tinfoil hat and start throating Alex Jones' cock.

Seriously? Just follow those thread and read again what Bubbles said. This whole stuff is bullshit, if you really paid attention to it. In a twist of irony, though, the Codex guy who's supposedly fucked up this whole thing were actually inXile's biggest sycophant.

Alternatively, Fargo and BN might be busy and therefore didn't get into a multiparagraph short-novel answer?

Read again on both of their answers. It sounded way too similar.

I admit, I don't know enough about all of this to clearly and definitely judge InXile on their actions.
The thing is, neither do you or the Codex.

Oh, yes, not me, but the Codex certainly do. Like I said, they raised ~$5000 for Torment, so it's only make sense they would pay close attention and be vigilant to the updates and development logs of Torment 2 (and, in an extent, how inXile's doing along the way ever since Torment 2 got funded, especially since Brother None and sea still more frequently participate in there, more so than here).

last snip

All I'm saying is we have to be careful from now on. Look, I'm tired repeating my points, and you guys completely missing the point and misunderstanding the whole thing, all because I seemingly wanted to trash Torment 2, but there's something really fishy going on here. So, I repeat:

"Why would they cancelled the interview, for such a bullshit reason, if everything's okay?"

Just.... follow those threads in the Codex. Read up on the console announcement, and then the cancelled interview thread in inXile's Subforum. Some of the points of the messages there got missing as I brought the news to you guys, so I prefer you guys see it for yourselves.

 

[Kohno]

Yeah, that's the Codex for you.

Oh, it wasn't a Codexer who made that particular video.

the game was supposed to have some system regarding the health. It was changed to regular health bars, or something, supposedly due to newer players not understanding it at all.

The health was separated from the three stat pools that doubled as pools from where the PC could draw effort to improve his chances with a variety of challenges. It is an unfortunate move that they did it since the system was more interesting and considerate the way it was (and the PnP Numenera had it that way), but "dumbing down" at this point is still a bit of a kneejerk reaction. The official word for the change is "easier balancing on the encounters and challenges", whether it actually does "dumb the game down for the dumdum's" remains to be seen (as we know, most all RPG's do have HP pools).

there were some changes to Wasteland 2 Director's Cut due to console from what I've heard

I didn't notice anything significant that would've made the game feel more "console like" than before the DC. I remember some people complaining about the used fonts, but who gives a shit about that?

Huh, really? I don't know, man. I'm still a new guy in the Fallout/cRPG community, so I wouldn't know.

It's been the bane of RPG enthusiasts for years that publishers wouldn't want to touch oldschool style RPG's like that but rather churn out shit like Mass Effect and TES 4 and all of that variety.

 

[CerberusGate]

As per the topic, I'm looking forward to Divinity OS 2, Tyranny, Dishonored 2 and Deus Ex Mankind Divided (though I'm worried about the latter two being underwhelming).

divinity were looking good so far with chris avellone and larian

I'm glad the Codex managed to bring these two together. Hopefully, something mind-blowing would emerge for the final product.

(Borrowed the Swen head from Codex)

EDIT: As for NMS, I already predicted that the game would be underwhelming based on the hype, and lack of proper promo materials. The cancerous fan-base it developed made it more easier to predict this game's failings since they would have hyped the game up in their minds and made sure to keep those misconceptions alive in their respective circle-jerks.

 

[eissa]

As per the topic, I'm looking forward to Divinity OS 2, Tyranny, Dishonored 2 and Deus Ex Mankind Divided (though I'm worried about the latter two being underwhelming).

I'm glad the Codex managed to bring these two together. Hopefully, something mind-blowing would emerge for the final product.

(Borrowed the Swen head from Codex)

EDIT: As for NMS, I already predicted that the game would be underwhelming based on the hype, and lack of proper promo materials. The cancerous fan-base it developed made it more easier to predict this game's failings since they would have hyped the game up in their minds and made sure to keep those misconceptions alive in their respective circle-jerks.

dont worry, its a 9 writer project with previous two decent writer (and chris himself) providing development.

 

[AskWazzup]

I can't fucking stand Diablo 2 because of its RNG. Bunch of annoying stumbling around trying to find the next plot point.

You don't like most games, so this does not surprise me, however the game has stood the test of time, since many people still play it even after 16 years.

Divinity: Original Sin was Turn-Based, and it sells very, pretty well on consoles. Hell, from what I've heard it actually sells better than Wasteland 2!

What is pretty well? I tried to find some numbers, but the only things i found is the retail sales for consoles:

http://www.vgchartz.com/game/85624/divinity-original-sin/

http://www.vgchartz.com/game/85623/divinity-original-sin/

And this qoute from wiki:

"On July 3, 2014, within a week of the game's release, the game had sold 160,000 copies, and became Larian Studios' fastest-selling game;[15] as of September 12, 2014, the game had reached the 500,000 copies sales mark."

So at least from these two data points, pc sold more units in 2 months, than both console versions in 10 months.

In comparison, their "Divinity II: Ego Draconis" sold more on xbox than original sin, while getting reviews like this:

IGN scored it a 4.8 out of 10, stating "I can’t recommend the Xbox 360 version of this product to anyone."