Add free-roam features

AuthorTopic: Add free-roam features
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #0
Please add free-roam features in Avernum 5.

Like the ability to craft weapons, harvest food, etc.

And the ability to explore without following linear quests, etc.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Canned
Member # 8014
Profile #1
You don't have to follow quests (except to advance the game), but it is rewarding if you do.

Harvest food? Food became useless in A4. It is said that the way A5 works will be similar to that of A4.
Besides, Empire soidiers won't waste time harvesting food.

Crafting? Much hope.

--------------------
I can transform into almost anything, though not sanity.

My brother tried to type something here. I just erased it.
Posts: 1799 | Registered: Sunday, February 4 2007 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
Profile #2
Avernum 4 was strong on linear plot line. The earlier games allowed for more exploration and do what you want. I'm guessing that the first part will be fairly linear with clues to direct you.

Avernum 4 had to be patched after release because players kept wandering off to explore areas before they were supposed to and the patches kept them in line.
Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00
Lifecrafter
Member # 7252
Profile #3
If crafting was so implemented..A5 will be
somewhat WoW-ish..plus..what's the point in crafting? You'll get way better equipment exploring and killing stuff..

Now..enhancing your equipment via Enchantments..that be good..

--------------------
Oh you're a cute Adze-Haakai you are..
Posts: 732 | Registered: Saturday, June 24 2006 07:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #4
Well then Spidweb should make a rogue-like using the avernum engine. So you could have a party of adventurers, forge weapons, get food, etc.

Also, adding LAN wouldn't be bad either.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #5
Wouldn't using the Avernum engine make it basically not a roguelike anymore? Also, Spidweb has said that multi-player is probably just not going to happen within their games.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #6
Well, it depends how you define rogue-like.

Some people take it as being a tedious dungeon-crawl.

But I think Diablo and even Runescape in some ways come under rogue-likes.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #7
The most characteristic feature of a roguelike is that it generates random dungeons on-the-fly. For most other elements, you can find examples of roguelikes that treat them quite differently.

That said, the Avernum engine is really not an obvious choice for a roguelike.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #8
I suppose, it's just the whole party/combat/inventory/etc. system would work pretty well.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 335
Profile Homepage #9
I'm pretty sure that party and roguelike don't go together.

—Alorael, who considers ASCII fairly important but not essential to roguelikes. You could make a very strong case for Diablo as a direct descendent of Rogue. Roguelikes tend to offer far more choices, though. When was the last time you carefully created and destroyed walls to arrange the perfect chamber for killing an enemy slightly slower than you in a non-ASCII game?
Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
Lack of Vision
Member # 2717
Profile #10
Hmmm, I actually kind of like the idea of an Avernum-Rogue game. I kind of think Avernum 4 would have be improved with randomized dungeons, treasures and monsters, since there is very little about the plot that requires defined layouts for many of the dungeons.

Then again, if it made every dungeon feel like the goddamn tunnels under the Eastern Gallery, then perhaps I should reconsider.

--------------------
Pan Lever: Seventeen apple roving mirror moiety. Of turned quorum jaggedly the. Blue?
Posts: 186 | Registered: Thursday, February 27 2003 08:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #11
quote:
Originally written by Surprised by Joy:

I'm pretty sure that party and roguelike don't go together.

—Alorael, who considers ASCII fairly important but not essential to roguelikes. You could make a very strong case for Diablo as a direct descendent of Rogue. Roguelikes tend to offer far more choices, though. When was the last time you carefully created and destroyed walls to arrange the perfect chamber for killing an enemy slightly slower than you in a non-ASCII game?

Agreed about Diablo. There are some intermediaries that cleave closely to roguelikes in almost every way aside from the graphics. Dragon Crystal was an early, console-based graphical roguelike. Dungeon Hack was a first-person dungeon-crawl roguelike that used (I think) a variant of the Eye of the Beholder engine, and AD&D ruleset, but with all the rogue trappings we expect.

There are, however, party-based roguelikes. One of the earliest (and most unusual) is the Ancient Cave, actually a subgame of the SNES RPG Lufia II. It uses the characters, items, spells, etc. of Lufia II, but everything about it screams rogue. More recently, there is the Mysterious Dungeon series of games, many of which haven't been released in America. It began with Torneko's Mysterious Dungeon, a Dragon Quest spinoff that was basically just graphical rogue, but more recent offerings like Pokemon Rescue Team have incorporated multiple PCs.

Sure, these aren't traditional roguelikes, but they have far more in common with the roguelike than with any other genre of RPG (or any other video game type).

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #12
I've played Lufia 1 and 2 they're decent games. I would say they have more in common with Final Fantasy than Rogue though.

Still, I think a party-based rogue-like would be fun, and at least make a change to the hundreds of variants of hack'n'slash ones out there.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #13
*facepalm*

Read the post. I'm not talking about all of Lufia II, I'm just talking about the Ancient Cave. The rest of Lufia II clearly has nothing to do with roguelikes by any stretch of the imagination.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #14
Sorry,
I'll try and play that sometime.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 335
Profile Homepage #15
I think that the transition to four-character menu-based combat entirely separate from the map you walk around on excludes the Ancient Cave from roguedom. I love that part of the game (it has as much of a plot as the rest of Lufia II!), but it's no Rogue.

—Alorael, who would also exclude several other randomly generated dungeons with party battles for the same reason.
Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #16
quote:
Originally written by Yama:

There are, however, party-based roguelikes. One of the earliest (and most unusual) is the Ancient Cave, actually a subgame of the SNES RPG Lufia II. It uses the characters, items, spells, etc. of Lufia II, but everything about it screams rogue.
If you liked that one, try the one in Lufia III. Twice as long, and brutally unfair toward the end.

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #17
OK, i agree that crafting might not suit a game like Avernum.

But I still think 'living' AI and a day/night engine, so the AI go back to their homes and sleep, etc. would be good.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7032
Profile #18
The AI in A4 did roam about, well, some NPC's did anyway. Take that guard outside of Fort Monastery, the one who sells you a nice belt for 300 coins.

quote:
Originally written by jamesmcm:

and a day/night engine
**coughs**
**coughs again**

--------------------
_ _ _____________________________ _ _
Power to (the) Mas(ses)
Posts: 102 | Registered: Friday, April 14 2006 07:00
Warrior
Member # 7745
Profile #19
Yeah, well I'm just suggesting they incorporate it all into Avernum 5.
Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00
Warrior
Member # 7032
Profile #20
I mean, did Avernum move to the surface?

And anyway, suppose there was such a day/night system, then you'd have to wait till it was the right time of the day every time.
Sound rather annoying to me. I don't know about you, But I'd like to move one whenever it suits me.

Realism is nice, but Game-play always triumphs realism! Every time again!
Otherwise I'd be better off getting a life in RL, And thats what I was hoping to avoid!

[ Wednesday, May 23, 2007 10:49: Message edited by: SevenMass ]

--------------------
_ _ _____________________________ _ _
Power to (the) Mas(ses)
Posts: 102 | Registered: Friday, April 14 2006 07:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #21
Kelandon would like you all to know that he is a benevolent moderator.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00