Gggmanlives - We Happy Few Early Access Game Preview - General

[video]https://youtu.be/lS6pOSqCr7Q[/video]

Pretty much what I thought. Seems like the game's biggest strength would be it's story, but without that for now it's just another survival sim, and not an incredibly remarkable one at that.

Someone else said that the Prologue is something entirely of a lie that the game sells itself on. And I mean holy shit is the Prologue done wonderfully well, it's brilliant and encapsulates the tone and theme of an Orwellian state and what We Happy Few Should be. Should. Be. Instead from what i've seen it's as Falstad describes: A survival sim. A very boring survival sim. Why? Because when people are first introduced to the idea of We Happy Few they wish to experience the idea of something new and they're not. Any broadcasters were simply running all over the place and showing little to no regard as the game didn't rightly care for them much. Unless they were doing something mindboggling stupid. The atmosphere looks beautiful but it's droll and plain when you're outside of the Prologue. You're dumped inside the ruins which is outside the town which seems nice until you realize that's all there is to it as it's a procedural mish-mash that has no inherent unique aesthetic or identity. There's roughly thee places and everything it seems is just the same.

I just wanted a damn London Mod Bioshock clone

I was writing a post but felt It got a bit too long, so im gonna condense my thoughts: I respect the thought process the reviewer went through, but I ultimately disagree. I believe with the game being a "gameplay alpha" the game has time to change some of its flaws, such as the combat system and the not-so great landmark markers. I dont think the game being a survival game intrinsically brings the game down, but the lack of a consistent game world for it's story mode is something that I agree is sort of a flaw that works against this game. Overall, I still think this game can work out but it needs time to work on its current flaws. But I dont view the survival gameplay necessarily being one, more the combat gameplay that's currently in place.

The review reflects the problems that I had when just looking at the gameplay footage but I cannot agree with the simple minded idea that procgen is lazy and always inferior to manual work.

[QUOTE=DOG-GY;50811926]The review reflects the problems that I had when just looking at the gameplay footage but I cannot agree with the simple minded idea that procgen is lazy and always inferior to manual work.[/QUOTE] Yeah after the novelty effect wore off, procedural gen and randomly stapled together pre-designed rooms really made me appreciate traditional design a lot. Especially arcadey design (that may feature interesting gimmick rooms with 20'000 explosive barrels or only 2 enemy types that the room is designed around) and level design that matches "narrative" (not necessarily built towards a story goal, but at least a difficulty crescendo leading up to a boss fight instead of a bunch of generic rooms). I do think that procedural gen has its place (like in Crypt of the Necrodancer), but I do hope that in the future it'll be used more deliberately and people will learn certain lessons from it and mix it with traditional design to add some dynamic appeal to backtracking or having to walk through the same area after every respawn for example.

[QUOTE=Marik Bentusi;50812300]Yeah after the novelty effect wore off, procedural gen and randomly stapled together pre-designed rooms really made me appreciate traditional design a lot. Especially arcadey design (that may feature interesting gimmick rooms with 20'000 explosive barrels or only 2 enemy types that the room is designed around) and level design that matches "narrative" (not necessarily built towards a story goal, but at least a difficulty crescendo leading up to a boss fight instead of a bunch of generic rooms). I do think that procedural gen has its place (like in Crypt of the Necrodancer), but I do hope that in the future it'll be used more deliberately and people will learn certain lessons from it and mix it with traditional design to add some dynamic appeal to backtracking or having to walk through the same area after every respawn for example.[/QUOTE] I agree, games really fall flat when they try to use a certain kind of tech (or really any feature, mechanic, whatever) without purpose. Nobody serious criticizes procgen when used for something like Crypt of the Necrodancer because it is an integral part of the experience. It all feeds back into the game loop and is harmonious within the intent of the game. WHF is a good example of using something where the devs couldn't figure out how to make it belong, imo. I have posted about this before but its fair to reiterate. One of the artists on Halo 2 Anniversary gave a really great GDC talk on procgen and how it's useful for game development. They used it in a limited manner on that game, but he was very forward thinking. One of the ideas he proposed is that in the not so distant future, game designers could program a sophisticated level generator that's used for really just coming up with ideas. A system that produces maps with choke points, verticality, and other traditional lvl design rules that humans tend to follow. Blockout is always the hardest phase of level design and art in general so this would be a huge timesaver. By using a system like that you can produce a hundred level variants in a matter of minutes and pick your favorites to iterate on. Now, take the above idea and extrapolate it to work with anything you like. What a lot of people argue is a lazy way to work now appears to be an invaluable asset. Tbh I have a bit of a chip on my shoulder towards the attitude that something so promising is wrong just because players cherry pick the worst examples.

Imo Warframe does it right. They're rooms designed with a gameplay purpose stitched together with a random seed. Also can you link that GDC talk? [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=072HkIJ_DMs"]nvm I think it's this one[/URL]

[QUOTE=xalener;50811753]I just wanted a damn London Mod Bioshock clone[/QUOTE] this is EXACTLY what I was hoping for too. I bought it release date, played it, and it was the first refund I've ever gotten from steam :( I was so, so disappointed but at the same time idk why I held high hopes for it knowing it's in alpha. I feel like I've judged it unfairly since it's just a baby, but there's no way I can spend almost 30 bucks for it to sit there for months untouched. I hope it gets better as the months go by, I will think about buying it again once the story comes out. This is definitely the last time I jump headstrong into a game without waiting around to see if it's good or not. fucking alphas.

[QUOTE=xalener;50811753]I just wanted a damn London Mod Bioshock clone[/QUOTE] That was my initial impression as well. BioShock 1, in mid '50s London. Not that it's a bad thing. It's all about the execution. For now I'll follow its progress and see how it develops.

If they nail the gameplay through this EA, there's nothing (but money) stopping them from making a proper campaign with these systems. It's just that it seems like they're focusing all their energy on making a game that should have been an extra mode for a game with a traditional campaign. In fact, I almost wish other games would use procedural generation like this to make side-modes for themselves. Imagine if the Arkham games had a procedurally generated maps and crimes for folks that have beat the game and unlocked everything.