Infamous Quests
The Games => Quest for Infamy => Topic started by: Bad2DaBone on July 13, 2014, 06:55:06 PM
-
So it mentioned that the game was Version 1.01.
Can we expect to see much more added to this game in future updates or a possible DLC expansion pack? (please say yes)
Anyway, this is enough "BadToTheBones" topics for now. Quite an exciting game and it's good to see the Adventure Point N'Click Genre got a nice release. Ya'll should send the Coles this game as a gift on Steam, and maybe Elsa could get a copy too. ;)
-
The Coles made $400k + in their Kickstarter. If they want it, they can buy it! :)
No there won't be DLC, it doesn't really work with our engine like that.
There will be a patch sometime in the near future but that will mostly be to fix a couple of bugs that have found their way past testing into the game. There MIGHT be a little content in there though!
-
Cool! Might want to make the content accessible for newgamers and people with saved games near the end.
-
One thing I would like is a chest where you can keep all your items at the game.
Item Management can be kind of, uh.... tricky, later in the game.
It'd also be nice if there was a way to sell off old weapon/armor in the game.
The Thief can steal a Best Sword, but he will still wind up unable to get rid of his old blade or do anything. (non-Thieves will have it transformed by Mr. Magic)
It'd also be nice to have dialogue for all the stolen items, and have a separate inventory menu in the loot bag where you can check out all the swag you got. It'd also be cool to get individual responses for each stolen item from the fence, that was always something fun in the QFG games. (Master Thief really loved pearls it seems, heh :P )
-
This game is already pretty massive on it's own. It's the biggest adventure game I've played in a long time. I think it might even be bigger than any of the QFG games
-
Yeah. That is part of the appeal. It's pretty damn huge as far as games though. Around the time I was in the Grasslands and at Tyr, I kept wondering how many more environments there would be.
Does give the world a nice, massive feel to it and it's quite a pretty world at that.
Kinda wish there were more shops down in Tyr though.
-
Personally, I feel that there is a LOT of open and under-utilised space in this game, with loads of potential. I feel like another entire game could fit in here without a single new background, and perhaps two games if the team chose to flesh out a couple of indoor environments for plot reasons.
Given the choice, I'd prefer sequels set in this land over DLC-style content expansions. The team might get bored, stuck here though. I don't really know how they happen to feel.
-
Personally, I feel that there is a LOT of open and under-utilised space in this game, with loads of potential. I feel like another entire game could fit in here without a single new background, and perhaps two games if the team chose to flesh out a couple of indoor environments for plot reasons.
Given the choice, I'd prefer sequels set in this land over DLC-style content expansions. The team might get bored, stuck here though. I don't really know how they happen to feel.
I know an even better idea!
Someone fan/s should make a nostalgic QFG 4.5-like sequel to this game and call it QFI 1.5! Or something else if more games get made.
Honestly, if they did that I really hope they'd use characters from other Sierra series. Bernard made a great villain for QFG 4.5. I'd see no harm in bringing him back. :)
-
I know an even better idea!
Someone fan/s should make a nostalgic QFG 4.5-like sequel to this game and call it QFI 1.5! Or something else if more games get made.
Honestly, if they did that I really hope they'd use characters from other Sierra series. Bernard made a great villain for QFG 4.5. I'd see no harm in bringing him back. :)
But then I'd have to sue them for infringing my intellectual rights and that would just suck.:)
-
So it mentioned that the game was Version 1.01.
Can we expect to see much more added to this game in future updates or a possible DLC expansion pack? (please say yes)
Anyway, this is enough "BadToTheBones" topics for now. Quite an exciting game and it's good to see the Adventure Point N'Click Genre got a nice release. Ya'll should send the Coles this game as a gift on Steam, and maybe Elsa could get a copy too. ;)
I'll bet Al Lowe would get a few chuckles re this game...Ken & Roberta would probably enjoy playing it as well ;)
-
Btw, it seems obvious that a game series named "Quest for Infamy" probably won't ever have a Paladin class in store.
So.... is there a possibility of ever seeing something else as a secret 4th Class for Roehm?
The opposite of Pure Good is Pure Evil, and while Roehm can be a mean bastard at times he doesn't come across as being pure evil though.
-
It's possible. ;)
-
One last thing- although it sounds like I'm complaining a lot about it, I actually did enjoy combat in the game a lot. I wasn't ranting like AVGN while fighting battles in the later half, I really was enjoying myself even though I did yearn for more challenge. The system for this game did introduce a lot of new and original ideas to it which I do appreciate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q#ws (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cxhs-GLE29Q#ws)
I'm something of a challenge-phile though.
My advice for dlc or an update would be to add in an optional "Extreme" difficulty option, complete with an achievement with those who play through the game entirely with it. Skyrim's one of my fave games for the ability to switch over to a wimpier combat skill set when things get too rough.
Toss in a few deliberately hard side-quests, etc., (maybe an "Emerald Weapon"-FF7 type boss?) call it an Extreme pack, and charge $1.99-$4.99 for it. And call the hardest difficulty "Infamous" difficulty. ;)
The benefits of this would be it'd be a way of introducing new changes without having to be married to them for a whole game. You could see how well it works and how people respond to it, and use the data to make further decisions on how combat would operate in the sequel.
-
One more thing I'll add- if you guys were to put in any kind of DLC to the game you'd probably want to do it sometime around Christmas, the best time to regenerate additional interest in the game while it's still newly fresh in the minds of players! ;)
A good place to put a new area would be to the right of where you have to travel for weeks to reach the Baron's place.
Obviously Roehm won't be going back there, but he might not be adverse to going slightly in that direction if there was something there that interested him.
-
Finally, if there were more romance to this game then that'd be pretty awesome, it was a great addition to QFG 3-5 but alas, not too much here.
-
Btw, it seems obvious that a game series named "Quest for Infamy" probably won't ever have a Paladin class in store.
So.... is there a possibility of ever seeing something else as a secret 4th Class for Roehm?
The opposite of Pure Good is Pure Evil, and while Roehm can be a mean bastard at times he doesn't come across as being pure evil though.
If he ever does go worse, how about an aniti paladin, he better not encounter any paladins after that though. Matters could be rather explosive.
-
The opposite of a Paladin in a lot of fantasy literature is the Shaman. And no, we won't be introducing a shaman.
-
Roehm the shaman. Ha!
-
if you use antipaladin there's a joke there. paladin meets anti paladin much like matter meets antimatter.
-
Or dark/chaos knights.
-
Yeah Chaos Knights too. Man they're cool. But a bit "evil" for our games I think. It'd be hard to turn the character of Roehm into a chaos knight.
-
One of my favorite paladin classes in D&D 3.5 is the Grey Knigt, who is basically a paladin who has to do the dirty work that their goody two shoes brothers can't do; things like assassinating evil overlords, before they can start a war that might kill millions. I can definitely see Roehm becoming this kind of paladin, where he does what has to be done, even if it's distasteful, because not doing it would be worse.
-
don't forget doing it with much grumbling.
-
Adding stuff to this game is rather moot. The first thing to do is fix QFI1. I started through the Rogue again and forgot to hold off on the bird in cage mission till after the treants. Now I'm forced to start over @$?!!%
-
We're fixing those issues at the moment, and tweaking a few other things for an upcoming patch.
-
Will our current saved games work with the patched version? It seems to be common that games written with AGS won't accept old saved games once they've been patched, and that could be a problem with steam's auto-update default setting. Is this rejection of older saved games inherent to AGS, or is it a programmer's choice?
-
It is, unfortunately, inherent to AGS. I expect we'll try to do everything we can to make people aware of the coming update AND the fact that it will negate old saves, when we get a little closer to that point. But yeah, it sucks--one of the limitations of AGS in its current state.
-
Breaking old saves is not at all unique to AGS. Sierra's SCI saves were extremely version specific. It would be very hard, if not impossible to guarantee backwards compatibility in all cases, regardless of engine. Think of the variables that have to be stored in a save game file. This stores things like time and other stats, inventory items, tasks performed and events. Bug fixes can easily change the exact value of some of these, breaking the old saves.
For a patch, I could have the installer check for old saves and offer to allow the user to keep the old saves by moving them instead of simply deleting them, but to use them, the user would need to reinstall the old version of the game.
-
yeah. this is an issue to any game that does not literally hold your hand through the process of the whole game. In most games today all you need to know are what room the player is in, how much ammo, and what weapons they hold, and their last checkpoint. No need for more. It makes it easy. In AGS, we could create our own custom save feature that records ALL global and room variables (this would include literally thousands of variables) and then resets them when you restore a game...but what f there are new variables? how would we handle those? there are other components ags keeps track of that we cannot, and those values (like first time a room is entered, etc) that trigger certain plot events would cause all types of bugs. Basically in any open world kind of game that does not just keep track of few things like what missions have been completed (think gta, or other rockstar games) it is almost impossible to keep save games for new updates.
-
Oh, I completely understand how difficult it is to make things backward compatible, especially when dealing with a platform that inherently doesn't support it. I just spent a few years working in a lab where one change to the code could easily keep you from reading any of the old data that had been collected without a considerable amount of double-checks and legacy code.
From a gaming perspective, I also remember getting the bug at the end of QfG4 where you couldn't do the final action that would complete the game. Either I got lucky and the fix incorrectly loaded my old saved game, or some good samaritan wrote a patch that didn't break backward compatibility. To this day I'm still not sure which it was.
From the bugs I've seen posted, and the vast nonlinearity of the game, it's clear that implementing backward-compatibility for saved games simply isn't an option (even if AGS supported it). My concern then is with the individuals who are part-way through the game and then run it from steam one day to find all their progress erased from an auto-update. Is there a way, from the server side, to prevent automatic updates? That way a player could get a notification that an update is available with a disclaimer that it would eliminate their current progress. If the player applies it, then he or she would have been warned, and if instead the player chooses to wait to finish a particular play-through, then no progress would be lost (even if the player would miss out on the bug-fixes and potential new content). One could claim that a user should have auto-updates turned off if he or she is concerned about this, but I haven't yet played a game through steam that lost progress with updates. Granted, my library is quite small. Games outside of steam are a completely different story, but usually those games require manual updates which come with disclaimers.
-
I believe that we can do that in Steam. We can set a patch to be opt-in instead of automatic. It wouldn't solve the problem completely, but in the short term it would solve people's issues. Eventually we would have to make it auto-patch otherwise people will buy the game and encounter the same issues that have already been fixed.