Skip to main content

Renowned Explorers International

It's pure luck (or maybe karma) that I even looked at this game, but I'm really glad I bought it for more than one reason.

The day it came out, Tess had just that morning asked me what I had been playing, and I answered "Path of Exile". Her response was "Don't you ever play things with non-depressing titles?". If that conversation hadn't happened, I probably wouldn't have looked very deeply at the news of the release on Steam, and I might have missed a game that is both fun and innovative.

Before I get into the ways in which the actual game design is innovative, I should mention two things.

First, it's a really fun little game. I don't expect to be playing it fanatically, but it doesn't require a huge time commitment yet has some strategic depth and fun storytelling. I'll likely have it installed for a long time, playing it in short spurts when I haven't the time for a deeper game or am just taking a break.

Second, much has been written about the way in which the encounter system treats physical attacks, bullying speech, and friendly speech all as ways of getting your opponents to let you do what you want; additional mechanics around the mood of the encounter and each participant add to this theme.

But despite the philosophically interesting flavor of this, the actual underlying mechanics in this area are far from new. Each character's available attacks are categorized into one of the three bins, assigned a mood effect from the subset appropriate to that bin, and a global rock-scissors-paper superiority mechanic based on the recent attacks used by both sides makes changing bins in mid-encounter with the right timing extra effective.

But what is really interesting to me about the game design here is the fresh take on some of the common elements of the recently-trendy "roguelike" genre. In most of these games that feature highly random procedurally generated maps, battles, and character upgrades, the randomness is king. Every playthrough is very different, but at least as much as in the ASCII classics the genre name evokes, player skill takes a huge backseat to luck.

Renowned Explorers does something really different here. While the rewards from the random adventures are randomized, they are expressed in terms of a set of currencies - call them research, fame, and money. The trees on which you spend these currencies are almost completely nonrandom, and they interact in different ways to directly buff your party members or your incomes.

The net result is a game that is both much more interesting and much less frustrating than most "roguelikes", because your success is dominated by your choices, rather than by random loot. "Encounters" (battles) are also fairly deterministic, though there is a small random component to damage. There is enough randomization that even if you make identical strategic choices you can get very different payoffs, but enough determinism that your choices really do matter.

It's a fine balancing act, and it's very well done. I'm particularly impressed that this level of innovation showed up in an indie "roguelike" game, of which it seems like there is at least one new one every week, many of which are best described as "like <x> but <y>" for some other roguelike "x".


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

This article didn't quite change my life, but it was the most worthwhile thing I've read in a while

I like the games I like, and I'm no longer in the business of making games, so in many ways this article is not to my address. But it was still really worth my time to read carefully. It never gets anywhere near the stupid misogynistic pseudo-editorial "defense of games" crap that I'm not naming to avoid the still-raging humans pretending to be flamebots, and it comes from the opposite, and very constructive direction. And it quotes Tim Gunn more than once, in a very on-topic way. Tim Gunn is an awesome individual, even though I doubt he's ever been in the same room as a videogame for long. http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2016-11-07-video-games-are-boring

New Stellaris patch - the power of a name, the sadness of the lame

Paradox just shipped a free update to Stellaris featuring a story written by Alexis Kennedy. That's enough to get me to think about trying it again. I checked out the patch notes, and I see a lot of clean up of things that bugged me about the game. But wait a minute. These are the notes for the fourth major patch, and they clean up things that were wrong (sometimes obviously) from the start? I'll chalk it up to development priorities; certainly there was a lot missing that needed to be added, and since the main point of the game is to look like a 4X while actually being a 1X bolted on to a standard Paradox set-piece political game I guess problems with the other three Xes were not as high a priority. I'm certain I'll try Stellaris again at some point, especially if they get more good writers in on making snippets for it. But I doubt it will ever really be my kind of game.

GW2 Heart of Thorns, after some serious play time

The first week or two after Heart of Thorns went live, I was a bit disappointed. Playing on, first because four of my friends and I always play together on Mondays, I got a little more of a philosophical handle on how the expansion changes the game, and I'm no longer ambivalent about having bought it - I love some parts, and I just had to learn that the "different kinds of fun as you feel like it" game design is now painted in broader strokes - especially you should only go into one of the new zones if you feel like the activity that is going on in it. Roughly speaking, HoT adds four things to the game: A new character class, a new "elite" subclass for each class, a new form of progression at L80, and a bunch of new zones with their story. Of these, the zones are the most visible and important, and the mastery tracks are the most novel and IMO successful, so I'll leave those for last. In thinking about these changes together, I think I see a philosophica...