Invisible Inc.

[Sardukhar]

Invisible Inc.

May have posted this before. tired. Busy. Stealing nanoware, augmenting yourself.

Anyone try it yet? Looks quite good and I know we have some TB fans around. I think I'll be getting it.

http://www.invisibleincgame.com/

 

[Arytom]

I'm not sure Sard i watched the trailer it looks iffy to me but, its not my type of game i don't even have steam nor even online multiplayer for my console yea i know i'm missing a lot i just haven't got there yet.

 

[Suhiira]

First I've seen of it.

 

[braindancer12]

looks interesting, i think i will try it, thanks for posting

 

[227]

I read that page right up until "procedurally generated." Procedural generation is a cancer that's killing turn-based games, removing purposeful design and replacing it with meaningless fluff. You're basically left hoping the game generates a favorable level rather than actually having the focus be on your planning skills. There's no logic behind the design, no out-of-the-way nooks to find secrets in. Just randomness.

Mark of the Ninja was pretty good, so it might be worth suffering through random levels for the story, but I'm definitely not going out of my way for another crappy procedural game. This has "wait for a bundle" written all over it.

 

[Sardukhar]

Mark of the Ninja was pretty good, so it might be worth suffering through random levels for the story, but I'm definitely not going out of my way for another crappy procedural game. This has "wait for a bundle" written all over it.

So you didn't go any deeper into the design or gameplay or forum feedback or anything like that? Just stopped at "turn-based"? Err..sorry. "Procedurally generated"?

Ah, prejudice.

I'm not a fan of procedural generation either, but perhaps they either did it right or it's only a minor niggle.


I have yet to play it still. Anyone done so? A pretty critical friend of mine quite likes it, so, yeah.

"It all plays out like some sort of stealth-based XCOM, and that’s one of the most wonderful sentences I’ve had cause to write in some time." from Incgamers.

So I played the first tutorial level! Pretty fun. Little slow, some lag. Fixable. Very cool feel. Xcom Classic permadeath is neat. Cyberpunk setting is neat. We'll see how this goes.

 

[Suhiira]

I read that page right up until "procedurally generated." Procedural generation is a cancer that's killing turn-based games, removing purposeful design and replacing it with meaningless fluff. You're basically left hoping the game generates a favorable level rather than actually having the focus be on your planning skills. There's no logic behind the design, no out-of-the-way nooks to find secrets in. Just randomness.

But, but, but ... how else are they going to get you to keep playing their game over-and-over forever?

 

[Arytom]

Has anyone tried this game?

 

[227]

Has anyone tried this game?

It's not out yet. Early access only, and I'd like to think that the people here know better than to support early access and preorders.

 

[Sardukhar]

It's not out yet. Early access only, and I'd like to think that the people here know better than to support early access and preorders.

I totally support both mechanisms of showing your support for a promising game. I have played it and quite like it, by the way. As well as Divinity Orginal Sin, Wastelands 2 and a lot of other games I dumped money into before the product was finished.

Haven't had a disappointment yet, actually. Might be Shadowrun Online...wasn't too impressed with the demo.

 

[227]

I totally support both mechanisms of showing your support for a promising game.

And I believe that games should live or die based on their merits rather than their marketing's ability to make you feel that a game is promising, especially when the developer's vision of the game can completely change or never actually come to fruition (like StarForge and Towns, if their forums are any indication).

It's not about the disappointment it could potentially lead to so much as encouraging bad industry practices.

 

[Sardukhar]

And I believe that games should live or die based on their merits rather than their marketing's ability to make you feel that a game is promising, .

And fair enough, although I'd point out the a game and even a series may live or die off marketing's ability, period.

Your method means that a lot of games wouldn't be made unless they pleased the bottom-line, pay attention to sales stats crowd. Wasteland 2 and Pillars come to mind as examples. Oh and the new Shadowrun games.

I think games should live or die based on their merits in general, too, I just think there is no way to know those merits until after they've been green-lit. Or not. And that's a control we hand to a small group of people rather than a larger group of people.

 

[227]

Your method means that a lot of games wouldn't be made unless they pleased the bottom-line, pay attention to sales stats crowd. Wasteland 2 and Pillars come to mind as examples. Oh and the new Shadowrun games.

Can't argue with that, though it's worth pointing out that Wastelands 2 and Pillars are being made by established studios. Early access seems to have given established developers more creative freedom, but it's also created an environment where people can put an impressive tech demo up, make a bazillion dollars, then cut off all communication and retire with their ill-gotten gains. For all the good it's capable of doing, I think the system needs a major overhaul before it becomes something worth supporting. Something to ensure that developers are held accountable within reason.

 

[Sardukhar]

Something to ensure that developers are held accountable within reason.

Yeah, right now it's a lot like gambling - you checks your odds and lays your bets. Perhaps some kind of rebate program. I was mildly pissed at some of the changes that were made from promises that raised money.

I made an argument at one point that those promises were a contract and you better have a really, really good and specific reason to break contract, not a vague, "it just wasn't working as well as we'd liked" or, "we ran out of time. But look! Reflective water! In your turn-based old-school RPG!" Mutter.

 

[227]

Perhaps some kind of rebate program.

That's an interesting thought. What if they had to submit a number of development milestones, and each one passed reduced the amount of the rebate should the game never come to fruition? That way, they would have a continual financial incentive to both finish the game and stick to the original design without going off on crazy "wouldn't it be cool if..." tangents.

 

[Garrison72]

Klei is a great dev. They make unique games with different design concepts each time out. Not a huge TB fan, but it's something I want to get into even if I have to force feed myself at first. I'll wait till it's officially out as I will not support early access. I've seen that idea abused to hell and back.

 

[Suhiira]

Can't argue with that, though it's worth pointing out that Wastelands 2 and Pillars are being made by established studios. Early access seems to have given established developers more creative freedom, but it's also created an environment where people can put an impressive tech demo up, make a bazillion dollars, then cut off all communication and retire with their ill-gotten gains. For all the good it's capable of doing, I think the system needs a major overhaul before it becomes something worth supporting. Something to ensure that developers are held accountable within reason.

Yeah, some sort of accountability is called for. The current system is tailor made for scam artists.
On the other hand only the established studios are getting the big bucks from player donations (so far) and their reputation is their accountability.

That's an interesting thought. What if they had to submit a number of development milestones, and each one passed reduced the amount of the rebate should the game never come to fruition? That way, they would have a continual financial incentive to both finish the game and stick to the original design without going off on crazy "wouldn't it be cool if..." tangents.

The tracking and accounting costs don't make this very practical.
On the other hand Kickstarter could potentially require a signed contract of development goals to solicit donations on their site, thus allowing for class action suites vs bogus developers.