RPGWatch Feature - Insomnia Interview

[Ripper]

I don't know why indie RPGs go for realtime combat. I've nothing against realtime, but it's clearly one of the hardest things to do well. Only a small handful of AAA studios manage to do it in a satisfying way. I think it's a very specialist job that requires a fair bit of investment.

For a game like this, I would definitely go for a combat system more like DA:O or KOTOR. In those cases, the basic animations really don't bother me. But in realtime, there's nothing worse than floaty character models swinging around in an unconvincing way. Really puts me off when I see ropey-looking realtime combat.

 

[forgottenlor]

I don't know why indie RPGs go for realtime combat. I've nothing against realtime, but it's clearly one of the hardest things to do well. Only a small handful of AAA studios manage to do it in a satisfying way. I think it's a very specialist job that requires a fair bit of investment.

For a game like this, I would definitely go for a combat system more like DA:O or KOTOR. In those cases, the basic animations really don't bother me. But in realtime, there's nothing worse than floaty character models swinging around in an unconvincing way. Really puts me off when I see ropey-looking realtime combat.

While I 100% agree with you, I think indie developers prefer realtime combat because they think it appeals to more people than turn based or realtime with pause. I unfortunately think its true. Its why the best selling rpg games are the Witcher 3 and Skyrim. Its also why more people own Diablo 2 than Baldur's Gate 2. One of my good friends is a casual computer player who played D&D with me when we were kids. He only owns action rpgs.

 

[Ripper]

Yes, you might well be right. Still, I'd weigh that against the quality of the experience of the finished product, and the importance of review scores. I'd rather bet on a well-received game that is somewhat niche, rather than risk a third-rate actioner that gets lost in a sea of mediocrity on Steam.

 

[Farflame]

It is. But if you have to block and roll it isn't rtw/p like Baldur's Gate or Dragon Age. Originally I asked if the game was more like Baldur's Gate or like Diablo, and they answered that their big influences were games like Baldur's Gate and Fallout, so I assumed rtw/p would be something like in Baldur's Gate or Dragon Age.

Well, companions had bigger roles in their initial pitch… so combat basically looked more like BG than Diablo. But that idea was too big and probably unrealistic. So the role of companions changed… as they said in the interview:

The only thing that did change is the role of companions - now it's less prominent and we pay more attention to main the character's gameplay. When we first implemented the basics of the combat system, we had blocking mechanics, punches and covers. We started to test it and realized that the player won't have time to take control over his companions as well. However, you will still have an ability to pause the game and give orders to your NPCs, such as "take cover" and to "perform a distant attack", or "rush into the battle"…

 

[forgottenlor]

In their original pitch, how combat played out was left rather vague, which was why I contacted them in the first place. It will probably be a good game one way or the other. Its just not the kind of game I'd have backed. I find myself backing fewer and fewer games recently, and unfortunately things like this are the reason why. I now only back games I'd consider buying full price and where the features present are clearly defined and match my taste. The only action RPG I bought before release recently was Grim Dawn (I much prefer turn based or classic real time with pause), because of how much I like Titan Quest. That turned out to be a good decision, at least.