A Shroud of the Avatar Epoch Observation

Probably because art style was what they meant, as art style and immersion are two very different things.

 

Style is about consistency in tone and feeling.

The art style inasmuch as it sticks to traditional Ultima stuff is fairly consistent and feels OK and everything jives well together. You go to an old scene like Ravensmoor and it feels good, like a D&D campaign or Ultima game.

It only feels inconsistent when it runs up too much against the other stuff added in, and added in without much forethought about how the whole game would feel together.

Art style is a subset of immersion concerns. In addition to the style of the visuals, you have the style of the storytelling, world building, game mechanics, and everything else that should fit together... and if they don't fit together, neither will the art style. That's my point.

 

Well ok - but you can say immersion and its sort of vague, art style is very specific and to the point, and you can do a lot of things to make a game immersive without adjusting art style.

You can -nail- art style for instance, and still have a game which isn't immersive.

 

@stealth_

My point in this case is it's the immersion concerns that take away from the art style, and not much else.

 

I think they're talking about a consistency and thematic tone, as a sort of stylistic "brand". And then sometimes art style, or lack thereof is what pulls people out of immersion.

Or whatever. What? Idk.

But part of the problem is that a large part of the game is crowd-sourced unity assets, is it not?

 

Nah I don't think the core fantasy elements have less of a 'style' than the Ultima games did and don't think that was a problem there. I don't think that's a problem here, either. Certain parts of the game, limited to those core fantasy aspects look and feel very good.

Speaking of the branding aspect.. Style and stylization aren't the same thing. Style is the art, stylization is affect. Games like Skyrim don't have much affect to the style, people still like it and it had a 'brand'. There are only so many ways to draw a table or barrel or crate or model a wolf (which the dev's did later modify, improve and replace). The Unity derived assets that work with the game's tone and theme are not the major problem. The ones that don't are. And I think a few of the dev created assets are more of a problem.

 

Okay. Yeah, well see I think those dev created assets are what they mean, they need to arrive at a cohesive soft-ruleset regarding the artistic choices.

Also epoch.

 

We agree; I just think for SotA it comes down pretty much to immersion issues in the end, and I don't think we should avoid the word just because there are a lot of different feelings and opinions on what it means, from restrictive ones to negative ones. It's not a bad word.

Epoch isn't so much an issue if things feel like they jive or blend well together

 

That's called immersing yourself into a bush!

 

Are you saying, though, that if they increase the immersion that we won't care about the 'style' ?

Either way, I'm not sure it matters - I think that the devs voicing there opinion about such a thing might not have much to do with the playerbase.

 

Of course no one is backing the horses, because they were originally planned as an Episode 2 feature.

 

I think there's that and I also think that horses, as described, just seem like a vanity pet and nothing more. If it had some purpose, I'd be onboard regardless of if it was promised or not.

 

I think if they explained how horses/riding was intended to WORK, they'd have a better chance of getting money out of us.
We can only speculate based on what we see/know now:

Summoning a "pet" uses your necklace slot and costs focus, and the annoyance of having to fiddle about with your gear to get your horse out and summoned, the inability to put a tamed "pet" on a lot as deco, etc. doesn't make a horse seem that useful.

If we operate on the assumption that we're not talking mounted combat here, then getting damaged would likely knock you off of said horse if you were riding it across a scene. Scenes aren't that big to begin with. If the time it takes to activate/mount your horse and dismount it is too long, then it becomes pointless to do so.

Case in point : I've been recently playing another game that has a mount feature. When you click on your mount, the mount walks up, your character stops and has a 4-5 second "getting on horse" animation and then you can go. The horse drives like a car - turns left and right, but doesn't strafe, and turns a lot slower than the character. Its clunky to control and can't take tight corners. Fair enough. Getting off the horse requires similar fanfare. Honestly? I never use the thing, the time saved by the speed increase the mount gives is lost in the mountingup/dismounting stages and/or mitigated by the difficulty in handling. Once bought, the mount was an item you had to carry around to use.

In yet another game, the mount buttonpress to fully mounted is almost instant, and the mount handles exactly like the player, just faster. Its got additional benefits that you can train the horse to carry more stuff or run faster etc. and level it up. You can have multiple mounts with different skillsets in a stable. Once learned, the mount was like a skill, no inventory management nonsense involved. The mount system in that game is MUCH more useful.

So, Shroud, how will you do it? Tell us your plans, give us the info, and then we'll decide.

Mounts like case A: I wont spend for, don't need it, pointless fluff. Unless its a ride-able cat. Then I will have to have it even if its useless.
Mounts like case B: I will absolutely spend for, it would add value to my gameplay experience.

There's a case C as well, from a bit of a throwback game, where the mount actually added skill bonuses to the player, like a piece of gear. So maybe you didn't want the fastest one, you wanted the mounted turtle because it gave you more defense (even if you werent visibly riding it, it was implied). I think more people here are envisioning something they can physically get on and ride around, and that's fine, but of limited use in our small scenes. If there were other benefits, that ups the appeal.

 

Somewhere in your observation of changing themes also rests the story of how SOTA lost its way emphasizing add-on store bling over game design around its lore.

This is a time after the Obsidians when society's fragments are finding themselves again with the help of outlanders growing as avatars. Yet - despite all the themed bling added to the game - do we truly see that noble story being developed further outside of the main quest line now several years old? Not really. 'Living' NPCs still go without names, the wealthy Graff family runs a mostly-vacant island, Valhold's soldiers haven't gotten to be more than barbarian rabble, Ardoris still has little purpose but to look pretty, Brittany remains a vacant castle that not even a ghost haunts, Lord British and DarkStarr continue to be characters of zero in-game significance, and practically nobody cares about being an Avatar or pursuing the virtues. And now we turn to the next theme, horses and ships, to improve the game?

The point is this: Horses and ships are just the next theme to deliver the next bling. And while that may be cool from a sand box perspective, will it truly improve the game, or will it be just like the pirate peg legs, indoor plumbing, and roman columns that came before? We should take heed of this. Because as we watch development of Episode 2, the developers have only been talking about next themes that bring the next bling. There is practically no dialog around further game design to integrate game play with SOTA's story (avatar, virtues, etc.). It took Richard and Lum years to get the main quest line working, and here we are six months out from Episode 2 with no discussion on more story to follow? Its as if SOTA is now being developed as a mobile bling game (which was Port's founding mission).

 

They've previously stated that there would be no mounted combat, they would not be usable on the overworld map, and they could not be ridden indoors or underground. Its possible that has changed or changes, of course, but I think that's the most they've outlined.

 

Darkstarr did explain it on a livestream. It was not what we wanted to hear since most of us do want interesting features for mounts and all new features we get. Mounts as talked about were very basic. Never once did any excitement get added in to the description of mounts. Now treasure hunting I was happy to hear was talked about in a better light. My biggest concern was that it would just be another grindfest feature but Darkstarr said they were going to make it special. Now to just do this with everything in the game.

An encounter I went into yesterday was so disappointing. A traveler took me in and never was he to be seen again or even a hint of him. After accidentally killing all mobs in the encounter it gave the notice something was coming and that was cool but still no story no books lying around and no explained reason for the whole thing. These are missing details and yes I no there is no one to do these details but it should be on the jiras to make a reason to do anything in game some hint, some details that make these things more interesting. Mounts have potential just as any feature. We should not miss out on anything.

 

No, I'm just saying that its related.

There are a lot of components of art style. Aside from stylization, you can talk about the palette and textures, for instance, Skyrim has a very restricted palette and has grainy textures. Early on in development, the devs said they were consciously not doing that, and besides Skyrim's choices were due to it being set in a wintry and moorish environment. SotA has a variety of locales which all can have different colors, like eerie swamps versus wintry scenes. Witcher has more poppy bright colors combined with a strong sense of realism that makes it pop. I don't know that the devs can really go in that direction either.

All in all, I still think whatever can be improved in that area, Shroud still feels pretty good when it stays to the basics it started out with. A lot of the stuff -- the stuff based on Stephen Daniele's artwork, done early in the design work, done in the kobold city, the elves, the dungeons, etc. has like a consistent style that feels and looks good and feels and looks good together and gives the player good vibes....

This shows up in screen shots, which can be quite impressive under the right lighting. And I know, because I've done screenshots for most releases this game has been out. You also see some pretty impressive screenshots collected by the devs that they give to the press and use on the website launch page.

The stuff that is hard to screenshot and make look good, and sticks out like a sore thumb, is all the assets that feel stacked on top and clash with the tone and themes of the game. You can't avoid noticing this if you're looking at the game from an artistic perspective. And fixing palettes and textures and atmospheric effects and stylization and visual motifs doesn't address it. It can't be addressed without thinking about immersion in the game IMO. SotA isn't much of a cartoon, it has a realistic tone and style to it, so you have to take that into consideration.

I personally think the UI and other design elements can be improved too, and improving them will make the game look and feel better, but then we're not talking about game assets anymore.

I can't be sure what the devs are talking about. I do know that the immersion elements are a sore thumb as far as the art style is concerned and the core game elements feel relatively good to me as a player & designer. Possibly could have improvements, but its not the real issue.

 

I wonder just how much work is done to create a scene. I know that all the outskirts were done by a particular level designer if I'm not mistaken, although he isn't with Port anymore..

And while they are some of the most lush scenes, they also suffer from a certain effect I would describe as "postcard syndrome." - It's just sort of a postcard that has a hologram on it rather than a scene which might be considered "immersive". If perhaps the static backdrops of the scenes could somehow reflect local geography - such as scenes near Nightshade Pass portraying the volcano or tower in the distance...

 

I don't disagree. I think some scenes have a better feel to them than others, and I still have some fondness for some of the early game scenes and others inspired by Stephen Daniele artwork.