• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines 2 announcement

LatinaBunny

Overprotective Angel
Validated User
This guy managed to get the data with a bit less bloodshed (and avoiding the janky combat, he said, lol):


I like that. I like avoiding (too much) bloodshed, if/when I can.

Edited to Add: Oh, that turning into smoke/cloud and traveling through fans/vents that way?

Totally gave me Infamous: Second Son vibes there, lol! :D

Spoiler: Show
Infamous Second Son Trailer
 
Last edited:

DuckFate

Bonafide Quack
Validated User
Wow, that combat looks...terrible. Just terrible. Really hope they can tighten that up, but I'm skeptical. Too many times I've heard, "Oh, don't worry, they have months to fix it." Nah, months of work don't seem to add up to much in terms of game development. At least from what I've seen.

Still, it seems like they got the atmosphere down. And it's not like I'm drowning in Vampire the Masquerade games. If I could deal with the combat in the first game, I can deal with it in this one, at least from the examples I've seen.
 

Tyrmatfrage

Registered User
Validated User
That said, it would be great if this time around, I wouldn't have to choose between a character that gets all the cool social interaction, and a combat focused character that can actually finish the game without much trouble. I feel that this is a design trap a lot of FPSRPGs fall into.
The worst offender of this for me was Arcanum, where I played as a cool Victorian lady with massive charisma and recruited followers to do the fighting for me... only to quit midway through when I realized that I wasn’t gaining any XP from my followers defeating enemies, so my character was completely non-viable.
 

Argent

Anywhere... just not here
Validated User
The worst offender of this for me was Arcanum, where I played as a cool Victorian lady with massive charisma and recruited followers to do the fighting for me... only to quit midway through when I realized that I wasn’t gaining any XP from my followers defeating enemies, so my character was completely non-viable.
Yeah, I feel that pain.
 

Thanaeon

Mostly simulationist
Validated User
The worst offender of this for me was Arcanum, where I played as a cool Victorian lady with massive charisma and recruited followers to do the fighting for me... only to quit midway through when I realized that I wasn’t gaining any XP from my followers defeating enemies, so my character was completely non-viable.
Yeah, there was much greatness to that game, but considered game-design was decidedly not among them. The optimal route to play was to start as a meleeist (because double exp for melee damage!), then build up to a magic build using experience earned along the way.
 

Uncle Claudius

Villain, villain, smiling damned villain.
Validated User
Arcanum is one of the rare games where I ended up using a save game editor with a clear conscience. Play through most of the game as intended, but give massive combat buffs to deal with the awful grinding tedium of the mandatory combat areas.
 

wheloc

He's trying real hard to be one of the good guys.
RPGnet Member
Validated User
The worst offender of this for me was Arcanum, where I played as a cool Victorian lady with massive charisma and recruited followers to do the fighting for me... only to quit midway through when I realized that I wasn’t gaining any XP from my followers defeating enemies, so my character was completely non-viable.
I agree that not getting xp from your follower's attacks was poor design, but this is countered by another poor design decision, in that the level cap is too low and it's hard not to reach max-level by the middle of the game. So the slower leveling from a large party actually makes the progression curve extend through the whole game.
 

Tyrmatfrage

Registered User
Validated User
I agree that not getting xp from your follower's attacks was poor design, but this is countered by another poor design decision, in that the level cap is too low and it's hard not to reach max-level by the middle of the game. So the slower leveling from a large party actually makes the progression curve extend through the whole game.
From what I recall, the point where I quit was during a main storyline quest, where I had to go through a monster-filled dungeon where all the monsters severely over-levelled me, and my high-cha, high-int, low physical attributes character had to stay in the back in the hope of not getting insta-killed if any of the monsters so much as looked at me. I guess it's partly my fault for building a character that was unsuited for combat - but dammit I had thought that was a viable character to play for the game!
 

LordofArcana

Registered User
Validated User
From what I recall, the point where I quit was during a main storyline quest, where I had to go through a monster-filled dungeon where all the monsters severely over-levelled me, and my high-cha, high-int, low physical attributes character had to stay in the back in the hope of not getting insta-killed if any of the monsters so much as looked at me. I guess it's partly my fault for building a character that was unsuited for combat - but dammit I had thought that was a viable character to play for the game!
I've had that problem in a number of games. It sure would be nice if there were rpgs where killing stuff was simply one option among many instead of the primary conflict resolution mechanic.

I understand why: non-violent encounters don't have a solid abstraction built yet, so hanging a game around a "talk to people" system would require way too much dev work and would likely end up feeling arbitrary to players anyway. But damn its frustrating.
 

Naxuul

Emo hair power!
Validated User
I've had that problem in a number of games. It sure would be nice if there were rpgs where killing stuff was simply one option among many instead of the primary conflict resolution mechanic.

I understand why: non-violent encounters don't have a solid abstraction built yet, so hanging a game around a "talk to people" system would require way too much dev work and would likely end up feeling arbitrary to players anyway. But damn its frustrating.
It's basically a choice: either you have combat, and as such build your game in a combat engine and have to devote enormous resources to making combat work and have issues because all your interaction mechanisms are built for killing things, or you don't, and can focus the engine and time elsewhere. A lot of work in RPG making is essentially trying to poorly meld adventure game and action games into one single game using engines usually poorly developed for both.

-Naxuul
 
Top Bottom