Lords of the Fallen....hardcore rpg for next-gen consoles and PC

B

Blade-Runner

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Feb 25, 2013
Messages
4,366
http://www.polygon.com/2013/5/16/4336972/lords-of-the-fallen-city-interactive-ps4-next-gen-pc

Lords of the Fallen is a hardcore fantasy action-RPG being developed by City Interactive on Windows PC, PlayStation 4 and the next Xbox, the company said today. The game's executive producer is Tomasz Gop, who previously served as senior producer on The Witcher 2: Assassins of Kings at CD Projekt Red. He unofficially announced the game in an update to his LinkedIn profile last August, and told Eurogamer last month that Lords of the Fallen is a title with challenging combat akin to Dark Souls and skill trees that resemble Borderlands. "From the very beginning, Lords of the Fallen will intrigue and satisfy players’ hunger to explore each corner of a brand new world, freely customize and build their own character and take down some of the most epic enemies ever seen," said Gop in a press release. Players step into the shoes of Harkyn, a man living in a "world where the Gods have failed mankind," according to City Interactive. It's up to Harkyn to take up arms against a seemingly unstoppable otherworldly power. Some people in the world follow the Fallen God, but others resist, and players' decisions will change their individual story and the world in the third-person RPG. City Interactive will debut a playable version of Lords of the Fallen at E3 2013.
Click to expand...

A hardcore console rpg is an oxymoron. Still will be interesting to see a game developed solely for next-gen systems in mind not limited by 8 year old hardware.
 
Last edited:
"Hardcore fantasy RPG" ... "skill trees that resemble Borderlands"... :D

It might be good though, hopefully you can be more than some generic fantasy guy. That was one of the worst things about the Witcher, the main character was dull, had a stupid face and no personality.
 
As DeathPrincess only partially pointed out...a lot of terms that conflict with each other have been thrown into a single description of the game. So I don't have high hopes, but who knows...at least it is an independent studio and they have a high-level Witcher 2 developer on the team.
 
So... what I take from this is -

"Hey, we're making an AWESOME RPG! We have all this stuff, including stuff that doesn't make sense, and the other stuff that all RPGs have touted as their "Way awesome and totally different!" mechanics - but THIS time we mean it!!!!"


It reads exactly like every other RPG announcement. Unfortunately, I don't even read game announcements and what not anymore - none of them ever mean anything in the end, the game is no different than any other RPG out there, because that's what sells.
 
Well they can certainly talk the talk. Their going to destroy themselves with hype if they make all these assertions.
 
So with the name "Harkyn", why not bring back Mangar, Falkentyne and Kylearan, and the Scarlet Bard, too? And throw in a healthy dose of the Old Man and Tarjan, while you're at it.


Talk about name ripoffs...
 
Aphotic said:
Well they can certainly talk the talk. Their going to destroy themselves with hype if they make all these assertions.
Click to expand...

So right you are. Every mmorpg I've attempted to play within the last 2 years was like this. Guilds wars 2 the most recent offender.
 
When you know by the press release that the game will suck.........

Makes me a sad panda.
 
I'm sorry, you can't call a PC game a hard core RPG unless it is turn based because the hard core PC RPG fans prefer turn based.

Does the world want another Ninja Gaiden or Dark/Demon Souls? Probably, but get your terms right for your audience.
 
Mozex said:
I'm sorry, you can't call a PC game a hard core RPG unless it is turn based because the hard core PC RPG fans prefer turn based.

Does the world want another Ninja Gaiden or Dark/Demon Souls? Probably, but get your terms right for your audience.
Click to expand...

RPGs used to be turn based only because of limitations of the hardware. Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 were definitely hard core, and they used a hybrid system that worked turn based and real time.
 
ballistic90 said:
RPGs used to be turn based only because of limitations of the hardware. Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 were definitely hard core, and they used a hybrid system that worked turn based and real time.
Click to expand...

RPGs used to be and still are turn based because their tabletop equivalents are turn based. It has nothing to do with hardware or software limitations in most cases.

BG1 and BG2 are middle of the road RPGs, not hardcore - fairly mainstream. Though, a game does not have to be turn based to make it hardcore.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
RPGs used to be and still are turn based because their tabletop equivalents are turn based. It has nothing to do with hardware or software limitations in most cases.

BG1 and BG2 are middle of the road RPGs, not hardcore - fairly mainstream. Though, a game does not have to be turn based to make it hardcore.
Click to expand...

100 hours RPGs aren't hardcore? Then please, enlighten everyone what a hardcore RPG is. Give examples and show your work.
 
Are we seriously debating the definition of hardcore? Aye Caramba... so many people here are quick to unleash their inner Sheldon Cooper.

Anyways, more importantly, will this game be fun?
 
ballistic90 said:
100 hours RPGs aren't hardcore? Then please, enlighten everyone what a hardcore RPG is. Give examples and show your work.
Click to expand...

Time spent in a game doesn't make it hardcore. Otherwise Skyrim would be a hardcore RPG.

Hardcore RPGs = Wizardry 1-8, ToEE, KotC, AoD, some of the Ultimas, Fallout, Pool of Radiance (well, most of the Gold Box games in general), Dark Heart of Uukrul, Arcanum, Demons/Dark Souls...

Hardcore just means it has roleplaying mechanics that are difficult to master.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Time spent in a game doesn't make it hardcore. Otherwise Skyrim would be a hardcore RPG.

Hardcore RPGs = Wizardry 1-8, ToEE, KotC, AoD, some of the Ultimas, Fallout, Pool of Radiance (well, most of the Gold Box games in general), Dark Heart of Uukrul, Arcanum, Demons/Dark Souls...

Hardcore just means it has roleplaying mechanics that are difficult to master.
Click to expand...

Fallout uses a simplified SPECIAL roleplaying engine running it. It's really not that difficult to master. Baldur's Gate 1 is based on AD&D 2nd Edition rules and Baldur's Gate uses 2.5, and takes place within Forgotten Realms campaign. It also features a bigger and broader character creation system, more branching and in depth story than Fallout, and more to the game to master. I've played Fallout 1 and 2, and Baldur's Gate 1 and 2, and Baldur's Gate is way more in depth and difficult.

I've also played a great deal of the Wizardry games and several Ultimas, and Arcanum and Dark Souls. In fact, many of these games are based on the Infinity engine from Bioware. None of them used the engine to it's fullest potential like they did in Baldur's Gate 2, in my opinion. You also might want to remove Wizardry 8 from that list, because despite doing their damndest to maintain it's original appeal, it is much easier and simpiler than previous games in the series. It also plays a bit like an offline Everquest, which made it interesting.

If Dark Souls is a "hardcore RPG", then Baldur's Gate 2 is definitely hardcore.
 
Baldur's Gate doesn't have a branching storyline. Fallout does. Other than being able to kill some NPCs in BG, none of the choices you make have any meaningful impact on the story. Same is true in BG2. They're great games, don't get me wrong (replaying them both now), but they were an attempt to bring RPG to the masses.

None of the games I listed were Infinity Engine games, nor does the engine have anything to do with RPG mechanics.

Wizardry 8 actually has the most complex leveling system out of any of the Wizardries, plus the most tactical combat system. Though it is not the most difficult in the series to beat. Wizardry 4 would take that crown.
 
LeninGHOLA said:
Baldur's Gate doesn't have a branching storyline. Fallout does. Other than being able to kill some NPCs in BG, none of the choices you make have any meaningful impact on the story. Same is true in BG2. They're great games, don't get me wrong (replaying them both now), but they were an attempt to bring RPG to the masses.

None of the games I listed were Infinity Engine games, nor does the engine have anything to do with RPG mechanics.

Wizardry 8 actually has the most complex leveling system out of any of the Wizardries, plus the most tactical combat system. Though it is not the most difficult in the series to beat. Wizardry 4 would take that crown.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of decisions in Baldur's Gate 2 that make a difference. True, the ending doesn't really change, but the choices you make can make some big differences in the way you get there. Fallout's choices are more obvious and, in a way, simplified. Baldur's Gate is NOT an entry level RPG. Far from it, and it was never designed as a game to bring "RPGs to the masses".

And yes, you mentioned Arcanum and Fallout, both use the Infinity engine. It also was used to make Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment.

Finally, Wizardry 8's leveling up system was pretty much "use skill until it levels up", much like it happened in Everquest or Final Fantasy 2 (jp) or Elder Scrolls games. Not exactly that nuanced.
 
It's not hardcore unless you're using an 87 sided die, with uranium dye for 1-20. Roll low, and die IRL. Duh.
 
Blade-Runner said:
Just because they are hard doesn't make them 'hard core' western rpgs.
Click to expand...

Please give examples of what is a "hardcore" western RPG. Skyrim is a console RPG, is that not hardcore? In case you haven't noticed they don't make RPGs with dice rolls and TB combat anymore.
 
ballistic90 said:
If Dark Souls is a "hardcore RPG", then Baldur's Gate 2 is definitely hardcore.
Click to expand...

I agree with your logic, but I disagree that Dark Souls is a hardcore RPG.

People who are in love with Fallout, Wizardry, Ultima and Baldur's Gate are not the same group of people who are in love with Dark Souls and Demon Souls. We are talking about two different groups of fans. It's not appropriate to say both games are the same type of "hardcore" as they have different "core" audiences/fans.
 
Mozex said:
People who are in love with Fallout, Wizardry, Ultima and Baldur's Gate are not the same group of people who are in love with Dark Souls and Demon Souls. We are talking about two different groups of fans. It's not appropriate to say both games are the same type of "hardcore" as they have different "core" audiences/fans.
Click to expand...

What if I love both?! Does this make me a god or a monster?
 
ballistic90 said:
And yes, you mentioned Arcanum and Fallout, both use the Infinity engine. It also was used to make Icewind Dale and Planescape Torment.
Click to expand...

You are simply wrong here. Fallout and Arcanum used different engines neither of which was the Infinity Engine.

Here's a complete list of all the infinity engine games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_engine
Baldur's Gate (1998)
Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast (1999)
Planescape: Torment (1999)
Icewind Dale (2000)
Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter (2001)
Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter: Trials of the Luremaster (2001)
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn (2000)
Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal (2001)
Konung: Legends of the North[citation needed] (2000)
Icewind Dale II (2002)
Konung 2: Blood of Titans[citation needed] (2004)
Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition (2012)
Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition (TBA)
 
Mozex said:
You are simply wrong here. Fallout and Arcanum used different engines neither of which was the Infinity Engine.

Here's a complete list of all the infinity engine games
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinity_engine
Baldur's Gate (1998)
Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast (1999)
Planescape: Torment (1999)
Icewind Dale (2000)
Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter (2001)
Icewind Dale: Heart of Winter: Trials of the Luremaster (2001)
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn (2000)
Baldur's Gate II: Throne of Bhaal (2001)
Konung: Legends of the North[citation needed] (2000)
Icewind Dale II (2002)
Konung 2: Blood of Titans[citation needed] (2004)
Baldur's Gate: Enhanced Edition (2012)
Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition (TBA)
Click to expand...

All old games and the combat in those is simply point and click. The combat in Skyrim requires more skill than any of those.
 
AceCR42 said:
No they don't. Fallout and Arcanum use an in-house Black Isle/Troika engine.
Click to expand...

Bah, I was thinking about a lawsuit back in 2001 between Bioware and Interplay, thinking that the lawsuit was about licensing of Bioware's Infinity engine for use with Fallout and etc, but it was about sub-licensing of NeverwinterNights and Baldur's Gate IPs. It was a mistake between the two.

I can't even find the engine Arcanum was made on.
 
Mozex said:
I agree with your logic, but I disagree that Dark Souls is a hardcore RPG.

People who are in love with Fallout, Wizardry, Ultima and Baldur's Gate are not the same group of people who are in love with Dark Souls and Demon Souls. We are talking about two different groups of fans. It's not appropriate to say both games are the same type of "hardcore" as they have different "core" audiences/fans.
Click to expand...

.... I didn't call Dark Souls a Hardcore RPG, I said IF, implying in the case that, etc etc etc.

I meant that if you called Dark Souls a Hardcore RPG (although I would not), then Baldur's Gate is definitely a Hardcore RPG. It's a lot more complicated.
 
Mozex said:
I agree with your logic, but I disagree that Dark Souls is a hardcore RPG.

People who are in love with Fallout, Wizardry, Ultima and Baldur's Gate are not the same group of people who are in love with Dark Souls and Demon Souls. We are talking about two different groups of fans. It's not appropriate to say both games are the same type of "hardcore" as they have different "core" audiences/fans.
Click to expand...

I like all of the games you listed. :)
 
Pleb said:
All old games and the combat in those is simply point and click. The combat in Skyrim requires more skill than any of those.
Click to expand...

Skyrim's "skill" involves a lot of running around and exploiting hit boxes and animation cycles, and 'kiting'. It's an entirely different set of skills and plays a lot like an action game.

Those "old games" involve a lot more planning and strategy than that, which generally is why they are called "hardcore". Skyrim is not a game I'd call hardcore, although it is a hell of a lot of fun.
 
Pleb said:
All old games and the combat in those is simply point and click. The combat in Skyrim requires more skill than any of those.
Click to expand...

You gotta be kidding me, Skyrim combat and skill in the same sentence? I'm a big fan of TES, but combat has never been deep or difficult in any way.
 
ballistic90 said:
There are a lot of decisions in Baldur's Gate 2 that make a difference. True, the ending doesn't really change, but the choices you make can make some big differences in the way you get there. Fallout's choices are more obvious and, in a way, simplified. Baldur's Gate is NOT an entry level RPG. Far from it, and it was never designed as a game to bring "RPGs to the masses".
Click to expand...

I never said it was entry level, and yes I would agree it is far more complex than something like Skyrim. I was pointing out they took inspiration from the old Gold Box games, but made it more accessible and a little less complex. They increased the complexity when designing BG2, though. It was a much better interpretation of the ruleset. BG lacks any creative or difficult encounter design. BG2, again, improved upon this greatly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top