-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Valkyrie: Azure Revolution will be more RPG like due to demo feedback
- Thread starter koutoru
- Start date
The Artisan
Member
i guess it's too late for that now, buddy
Yep. I have faith that they're really trying to get the game and its systems right.
There's no way this is making a 2016 date though. Lots of system changes this late in, more balance is going to be required and with a change this large there's no way they aren't doing a third demo. But that's just fine by me.
CertifiedFP
Member
So, from reading that...
Knights of the old Republic 3 baaaaaby!
Knights of the old Republic 3 baaaaaby!
Oh snap I didn't think of that. If the game has proper effects that could look really cool to have action pauses like KOTOR.
CertifiedFP
Member
Also, I think "Field encounters removed" is a mistranslation or misinterpretation.
Pretty sure what was meant is they got rid of the Symbol Encounters system in favor of enemies always being active combatants on the map instead of waiting for the player to attack for their full combat AI to activate. IE, the Persona 3/Neptunia/Last Remnant-esque Good Situation/Bad Situation encounter system.
You might have seen from the first demo how the player could just snipe enemies from far away and they'd just stand in place firing pot-shots back instead of actually fighting back. What I'm guessing here is that they'll actively advance on the player and demonstrate a fight/flight instinct, and that instead of having a Field-Mode/Combat-Mode with symbol-encounters like in, say, Persona, instead enemy NPCs will always be active with no distinction between field-mode and combat-mode, like Knights of the Old Republic or Xenoblade.
Pretty sure what was meant is they got rid of the Symbol Encounters system in favor of enemies always being active combatants on the map instead of waiting for the player to attack for their full combat AI to activate. IE, the Persona 3/Neptunia/Last Remnant-esque Good Situation/Bad Situation encounter system.
You might have seen from the first demo how the player could just snipe enemies from far away and they'd just stand in place firing pot-shots back instead of actually fighting back. What I'm guessing here is that they'll actively advance on the player and demonstrate a fight/flight instinct, and that instead of having a Field-Mode/Combat-Mode with symbol-encounters like in, say, Persona, instead enemy NPCs will always be active with no distinction between field-mode and combat-mode, like Knights of the Old Republic or Xenoblade.
FallenGrace
Member
Still not sure until I try. I hated the demo. Despised it.
I only played VC1 on the PS3 (rebought it on ps4) and loved it, the platform change prevented me getting the sequels. I just don't understand why they don't just make VC4? They could use exactly the same visuals as the original and it would still look great due to the style
I only played VC1 on the PS3 (rebought it on ps4) and loved it, the platform change prevented me getting the sequels. I just don't understand why they don't just make VC4? They could use exactly the same visuals as the original and it would still look great due to the style
Still not sure until I try. I hated the demo. Despised it.
I only played VC1 on the PS3 (rebought it on ps4) and loved it, the platform change prevented me getting the sequels. I just don't understand why they don't just make VC4? They could use exactly the same visuals as the original and it would still look great due to the style
Sega is chasing the bigger money. Just as an example: Tales of Zestiria shipped over 400k copies in 1 week in Japan. Valkyria Chronicles has done exceptionally well over its lifespan on steam, but most of those sales were not even the full $20 price, let alone a $60 new game price. There's no doubt that Action RPGs are still where the market is at.
Now, the question is can Sega even hope to capture a good segment of that market? Honestly, probably not, and alienating their core VC base isn't helping them either. It's easy to see why a business person would want it to be an Action RPG, but time will tell if that can be successful.
I like rpgs so this is relevant to my interests!
Gotta say though will all the "monsters" be humans and vehicles/mechs? That'd be pretty different! Or will this reboot-ish-thing do something like "ragnite causes animals/plantlife to mutate!" just to have the standard slate of rpg baddies to mix things up?
Gotta say though will all the "monsters" be humans and vehicles/mechs? That'd be pretty different! Or will this reboot-ish-thing do something like "ragnite causes animals/plantlife to mutate!" just to have the standard slate of rpg baddies to mix things up?
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
I'm thinking only humans and vehicles. They seem to still be going the war route between two different fractions.
It can be 50/50 it all depends on how much feedback they take in and which the apply to the final game.
Is that what the game looks like? First I've seen it in motion. Visually at least the game looks fantastic.when they say field encounters are removed, do they mean this shit?
Like everything, it can be good as long as the Feedback is kept in perspective.
If you're making a game and investing in a battle system that you think your player base is going to like, but find out they want something a bit different, tweeking that will lead to a better experience for everyone and a better game. You aren't necessarily compromising an artistic vision, unless you have some intention for the Battle System to have some thematic meaning but that's not a thing that really happens in larger budget RPGs.
If you hear fans say 'we want more big boobed anime ladies' and you turn every character into a big boobed anime lady, that's obviously another story. Not all feedback is valuable.
CertifiedFP
Member
See my previous post. Not anymore, I'd assume.
From what I guess, encounters with enemies in the field are still a thing, but instead of traditional-JRPG symbol-encounters (Think, for example, Rival Trainers on the field in PokeMon or Shadows in Persona) that switch the game into combat-mode, they're switching it to be like Dark Souls and Xenoblade where enemies are always completely-active and there is no discrete field-mode/combat-mode difference.
Anyway, as for this not being an SRPG...
The SRPG market on consoles is GONE.
The two megaton multi-million SRPG IPs, Fire Emblem and XCOM, have abandoned consoles in favor of portables and PC, with the former being 3DS exclusive and the latter being Mobile and PC, with table-scraps for Vita.
Logically, if there was a market and tangible demand left for SRPGs on consoles, the remaining console-SRPGs like Disgaea should have had a boon in sales from starving XCOM fans, right? But no, Disgaea is selling less and less with each iteration, and now NIS has decided to start porting their SRPG library to PC since allegedly Disgaea 5 is too demanding for a Vita port to be possible. The SRPG market on consoles is GONE. Fire Emblem and XCOM took the market with them. There is no disputing that fact.
Well they're almost changing the battle system genre, sounds pretty drastic to me.
They didn't say they were changing the battle system genre. They are making it more tactical. That doesn't mean it'll be an SRPG. Adding pauses and stuff to the current battle system isn't really that big a change. Changing the way encounters are done is also more of a quality of life change than any sort of artistic compromise.
No shit. You realized this until after starting the project, releasing a demo and getting destroyed by 'feedback'? ok lol.
I don't think the combat can be saved by changing and tuning, a do over is more like it and sounds like they might be doing just that. The field map was really awful too.
Neoleo2143
Member
The core of the game is really confused. Even if they allow pauses, what exactly is that going to change about the gameplay flow? Valkyria's Strategy had much more to do with actual level design, stuff like Chapter 7's insanity was not unlike the extremely OP units/squads appearing in the FE games to throw the player off. Azure Revolution swinging towards that is a bad idea because its core is more suited to Ys-like combat flow, which the chunky enemies utterly ruin.
KingdomHeartsFan
Member
Honestly the gameplay in that demo looked really bad, idk if they can turn that into something good.
CertifiedFP
Member
Honestly, the reactions to the VAR demo are EXACTLY why the majority of developers prefer to play their cards close to their chest until the final hype-cycle, with at most very heavily scripted and rehearsed vertical-slices instead of demoing what their games really look like.
Believe it or not, VAR as it looked in February looked and played a LOT better than most games at the same stage of development would look and play. Should I remind everyone that Demon's Souls at TGS 2008 felt like a complete disaster of a game? The game released in Asia barely five months later, and as far as I can tell, it's genuinely agreed the final game is anything but a disaster.
VAR as we know it is what a game looks like before going through multiple polish cycles. Have faith, people.
The Artisan
Member
from the sounds it of it it sure seems like just less action.
I submitted my criticism (in English), so it's nice to see that a few of my points made it along with the rest of the group of Japanese opinions though. If they got 3x the amount of submitted opinions than expected then the fanbase for Valkyria must be pretty hardcore in Japan, even if they're small.
Neoleo2143
Member
The Level design in the demo would not be able to support any decent kind of strategy. This is the same awkward place that FFXV is in.
If anything they should've looked to Ys and pursued high intensity badass action with crazy machines everywhere.
GravityMan
Member
The demo was just bad. I don't think there would've been many complaints if the action-y gameplay was actually good. I have a feeling that this game will still turn out poor despite these changes to make it more RPG-like.
Holundrian
Unconfirmed Member
Or have someone with a strong unyielding vision.
CertifiedFP
Member
You've always been able to control your entire party by switching characters.
Unless you mean whole-party assigned tactics, which they just announced they're adding.
That can just as easily lead to catastrophe honestly.
CertifiedFP
Member
entremet
Member
I prefer auteurs. People don't know what they want.
CertifiedFP
Member
You people make this too easy.
...And if Prequel Trilogy allusions aren't cool anymore, I raise thee MGSV.
I hate to say it, but games just haven't evolved enough as a medium yet. Pretty much every game I can think of that had STRONG EXECUTIVE ARTISTIC VISION surrounded by Yes Men in its development has been a disaster.
KimonoNoNo
Member
Well this fan here wants VC3:Remake, but knows I'm not going to get it.
Can't help dreaming though.
Can't help dreaming though.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
This will be interesting to see what comes out of this.
Unknown Soldier
Member
Why don't they just change the combat system to the one used in Valkyria Chronicles
Neoleo2143
Member
Because it's not purely the core mechanics that made Valkyria Chronicles Tick. It was that the level design facilitated those mechanics in various ways most of the time.
You can't just plop a set of core mechanics into another game.
orthodoxy1095
Banned
This game was never going to be an example of an auteurs' vision come to life. So who cares.
Blackleg-sanji1
Banned
Because it isn't a valkyria chronicles.
Because then they have to cancel this game and make another one. They probably wish they made that game instead now though, it was such a bad call.
Pound_lb003
Member
Just watched the demo, this game looks like an awful way to pay homage to a great game universe.
Character design especially disappointing, given it's a Valkyria game.
Character design especially disappointing, given it's a Valkyria game.
I don't think that's true. They are making another type of game entirely, doing yet another chronicles set in the same time period would have been the easy thing after 3 games in that franchise.
Chronicles And Revolution are inherently different from a world standpoint, and that was always going to be the case.
In general, the development team itself was disbanded after VC1, and VC2 and 3 were made by other parties entirely. This new game is made by new blood as well, and the actual head honchos of the franchise have wanted to take it in another direction for a long time now anyway
The Valkyria Chronicles main staff has wanted to make a fantasy game for a very long time. This is their first chance to do it in 8 years.
CertifiedFP
Member
Conspiracy Time:
They intentionally made the action suck whilst opening it up to player feedback so they could show it to executives and tell them "See? People don't want it to be an action game."
I ought remind everyone that the director said this was originally going to be an RTS-ish game before someone higher on the chain than him at Sega said that RTS games don't sell.
This flip-flop in game design isn't the kind of one made lightly. There's quite a chance this is what they wanted to make all along.
They intentionally made the action suck whilst opening it up to player feedback so they could show it to executives and tell them "See? People don't want it to be an action game."
I ought remind everyone that the director said this was originally going to be an RTS-ish game before someone higher on the chain than him at Sega said that RTS games don't sell.
This flip-flop in game design isn't the kind of one made lightly. There's quite a chance this is what they wanted to make all along.