• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived. You can find them at the bottom of the forum in the Archives (2021) section. The archives are locked, so please use the new forum sections to create new discussion threads.

Indivisible: Lab Zero's Action-RPG! (General Discussion)

I've never played Valkyrie Profile so I dunno what to expect with the combat
 
I wish we had more to go on at this point D:

I'm not super familiar with the Metroidvania genre quite yet despite recently getting into it, but I'm wondering how much of a narrative or story the game will actually have? If the speculation about sequence breaking is true...I find it hard to see how an effective narrative could be created around that without bottleknecking the adventure to get certain cutscenes or events. I mean, I see how they COULD do it, but making a world more based on you figuring it out yourself as the player without any context doesn't seem L0's style. They can be subtle, but at the same time...have any of you played Skullgirls? The subtlety of many of the things in there is about as subtle as Snake's carboard box.
 
All I know about Valkyrie Profile is that Odin was in the game and he got his everloving ass handed to him by Haggar.

I am however, super familiar with Metroid, and I hope L0 can nail the atmosphere of the games as well as the gameplay.
 
Oh man, VP is still on my backlog. Wasn't that semi-turn based though?

e...I find it hard to see how an effective narrative could be created around that without bottleknecking the adventure to get certain cutscenes or events. I mean, I see how they COULD do it, but making a world more based on you figuring it out yourself as the player without any context doesn't seem L0's style

Dark Souls is pretty much a 3d metroidvania and perfectly balances "figure it out for yourself" and brief exposition.

Order of Eclessia has a decent story too, mostly cutscene driven, but it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jet Set Dizzy
I haven't played Valkyrie Profile, but I seen a bit of gameplay and I am a bit excited about what could be in store for the battle system.
 
Dark Souls is pretty much a 3d metroidvania and perfectly balances "figure it out for yourself" and brief exposition.
Gonna have to disagree with you there. Dark Souls doesn't really balance it. It drops you into the world and tells you to figure it out for yourself, and then just leaves you there. There are some pretty asinine things you have to do to "progress" the game. Notable instances like that stupid bird behind the secret jump off point on that elevator in DS. It wasn't even remotely hinted at. I know the whole argument is that you should be figuring this out yourself and exploring everything, but when you do that, AND THEN HIDE THE NEXT PART OF THE PATH OVER A JUMP, then it's not fair to the player. Granted a lot of the time you can general idea of where to go by heading forward and just generally exploring, but the game doesn't really give you context to your actions. You just go from boss to boss and key item to key item, picking up tidbits as you go. Why am I fighting the Martyr King in Bloodborne? "Oh, because you need his crown." When was this ever told? "It was kinda hinted at, but you don't realize you need it until after you get it." Then...the whole point of coming here was to get an item to continue the story. An item I didn't know I would need until I got it. I didn't really like the way it did that. The world, to me, was just kind of there and didn't give me any real reason to do anything. I just progressed forward because I wanted to experience the game and the Dark Souls difficulty. You often times don't get context unless you go out of your way to MAKE things makes. Dig into every world tidbit to not only flesh out the world, but actually explain your adventure. I don't really enjoy it when the adventure makes no sense, when the game basically tells me that it will all make sense in the end, and then doesn't make it any more clear. Immersion is broken until I go out of my way to look up all the theories and world info others and I dig up. But by that point, I've already put the game down and cease to care about being immersed in the game world itself.

2D metroidvanias, at least the ones I've played, tend to have actual narratives and drive the reason why you're doing this, or drive the atmosphere and world into you. They don't make you grope around in the dark, hoping you can make some sense of your adventure, they task you to get better and break the game, or find interesting ways to get around your obstacles. They don't force you to master everything about the game right from the start just to get from point A to point B, they give you multiple to get from A to B and give you the lenience to learn and master said tools as the adventure progresses. Sorry, but your Dark Souls comparison just bugs the living hell out of me. I feel the whole 3D metroidvania style was better done in games like the Metroid Prime games. Where there's an active reason for you to be doing whatever thing it is you're doing to further your mission while also giving the world substance outside of just the use of the scanner.
 
I'm confused. So its going to be a metroidvania. And its going to have turn-based combat like in Valkyrie Profile. I thought metroidvania was always real-time action. I need to have another look at the definition.

On another note, I will definitely buy this game.
 
I have a very strict definition of metroidvanias, if there are no reverse boss order sequence breaks or mockballing, it's just some action adventure platformer at best.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IsaVulpes
when the game basically tells me that it will all make sense in the end, and then doesn't make it any more clear. Immersion is broken until I go out of my way to look up all the theories and world info others and I dig up. But by that point, I've already put the game down and cease to care about being immersed in the game world itself.

I don't really see it that way.

DS's story is simplistic but "makes sense" even if you completely ignore everything. YOu fight your way to the Kiln, and either light it or don't, and await what happens next. It's not illogical or nonsensical, it just doesn't develop the ideas.

The DS experience kind of depends on how you play it. If you're a kid with no internet, then you'd be gradually digging up more and more plot with each new game +, much like the way many classic western rpg's did it. If you're using the internet, you can forge your path more easily.

Regardless, I was more talking about DS's plot and story with the assumptian that you do know where to go to get crucial information. I feel once you do, the story is simply genius.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jet Set Dizzy
I'm confused. So its going to be a metroidvania. And its going to have turn-based combat like in Valkyrie Profile. I thought metroidvania was always real-time action. I need to have another look at the definition.

On another note, I will definitely buy this game.
This is what I could find of Valkyrie Profile: Looks to be Metroid-style world navigation with Final Fantasy-ish combat.
I never really got into Metroid or Castlevania, but it could be fun. Especially if it's less "Platform Hell and Collect-a-thon" and more "Exploratory Role-Playing Game."
 
I'm confused. So its going to be a metroidvania. And its going to have turn-based combat like in Valkyrie Profile. I thought metroidvania was always real-time action. I need to have another look at the definition.

On another note, I will definitely buy this game.

Metroidvania is actually a really poorly defined term. Some people say they have to be 2D. Some people say it has to have platforming. Or be non-linear, or have sequence breaks, etc. Some people don't even consider Metroids to be metroidvanias, and instead call them "Metroid games". Part of the problem is that a lot of people who don't even play Metroid or Castlevania define the term for other franchises, so it becomes a vague nondescript portmanteau.

I don't care personally that it will be turn based. Turn based RPGs and Metroidvanias are becoming stale. This may be the game to change all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Dave
Eh, I never like the way DS or any of the other Souls games did their story. It doesn't really make the boss fights make sense. They're more there to act as obstacles to the next area or item you need. Yes, there can be buildup to them, but it still doesn't explain why they tie into everything. I does occasionally make sense, like the Father Gascione fight in Bloodborne, but stuff like the final boss of Bloodborne, the old man in the wheelchair, it didn't make any sense. "Oh, you did all this and killed all these enemies. Now that the night is over, I have to kill you. Why? Uhh...this whole event was too traumatic for you or something." I felt tacked on and unnecessary. I don't care how "genius" the plot is, if it isn't involving or given to me, the player, in a cohesive way that ties my actions to the fights and trials I'm going through, I don't feel immersed. There are exceptions to this, of course. As I said earlier, the Father Gascione fight in Bloodborne and the final boss of DS both felt like they made sense and were placed appropriately. I just can't say I felt the plot did anything for the game itself. Especially in games like Bloodborne. I've beaten Bloodborne twice and understand a ton of the backstory and world lore, but I still have no idea what our goal was aside from just killing all these beasts and try to make sure we're not the only sane ones left afterwards. The locations didn't feel totally justified aside from places to go and explore as places to explore.

My point being that I feel a plot should be more involved and actively apart of the adventure in games like DS or just games in general. We know L0 is capable of great writing, why not make it an actually grand adventure? It doesn't have to be the most explanitive, but at the same time, I'd be seriously disappointed if there weren't buildup, reasons, and an actively engaging plot. I can see the style working with more of a Castlevania-style approach to the plot, which a big journey and a big enemy that may not be actively shown to you, but is actively built up and explained and given reason.

Also, they stated the game would be an action RPG, doesn't that usually mean its not a straight up turned based RPG like Valkyria Profile?
 
Metroidvania is actually a really poorly defined term. Part of the problem is that a lot of people who don't even play Metroid or Castlevania define the term for other franchises, so it becomes a vague nondescript portmanteau.

So, you mean like,
every other video game genre descriptor?
Nothing's more descriptive than calling your game an action adventure.
Hell, First-Person Shooter just refers to where the camera's located. And that it's not just sword combat.
 
I just find strange, because i read somewhere that the combat would have the depht that lab zero knows best, so i assumed would be a combat that would ressemble fighting games, in the sense that would be fast paced, the character having alot of moves and combos, with cancels and shit.

Since Mike Z likes super metroid a lot, i can imagine that this game will have a lot of exploration, upgrades, and probably sequence breaking.

And is safe to assume that is going to be a lot of platforming, well, because is 2d, and i saw platforms in the teaser
 
  • Like
Reactions: No longer exist
So, you mean like,
every other video game genre descriptor?
Nothing's more descriptive than calling your game an action adventure.
Hell, First-Person Shooter just refers to where the camera's located. And that it's not just sword combat.

But Metroidvania is supposed to be specific and stupendously fails, unlike shooter/action adventure/etc.. That's like calling your game a PokeZelda and still having zero consensus. At least people can tell when a game is a shooter or something. But Metroidvania? Not really.
 
In regards to combat, Ravidrath says:
"The combat will be inspired by Valkyrie Profile's, but we're going to put our own spin on it. Sort of like MvC2 was a starting point for Skullgirls' gameplay, but we took it a lot of different places from there.

I mean, if you think about it in the context of us, the party in VP1 is basically a single customizable fighting game character. So expect combos, lots of ways to build your perfect team, etc.?"
 
Given the way Lab Zero likes to do things Indivisible will probably more closely resemble the second Valkyrie Profile than the first.

This seems WAY MORE their style
 
I think the only turn based game that i enjoy playing is pokemon, but just because i don't see any other way of the game working.

And is not the turns that put me off, i don't like the thing where the battle is a separate thing from the rest of the gameplay, like, you are walking, and bam, background changes and you are in a battle.

But as i said before, i like pokemon, so i can like turn based games, so i'm excited to see what this game is about.
 
But Metroidvania is supposed to be specific and stupendously fails, unlike shooter/action adventure/etc.. That's like calling your game a PokeZelda and still having zero consensus. At least people can tell when a game is a shooter or something. But Metroidvania? Not really.

lololololololololololol I forgot that one big exception.

250px-MetroidPrimebox.jpg
 
Good shit, hope to see more.
 
This is what I could find of Valkyrie Profile: Looks to be Metroid-style world navigation with Final Fantasy-ish combat.
I never really got into Metroid or Castlevania, but it could be fun. Especially if it's less "Platform Hell and Collect-a-thon" and more "Exploratory Role-Playing Game."

Honestly that video doesn't do the combat system in VP any justice at all.

All 4 of your characters can attack at the same time and they each have their own combos that can juggle the opponents in different ways. If you managed to chain your entire team's attacks together enough to fill the combo gauge you get to do special finishing moves. Your character's attacks have actual hitboxes and you have to find a team that can work together and chain their attacks in the correct order to make the whole combo work. Also hitting downed opponents generates crystals that give you XP or orbs that refill your super-move gauge or cause the enemies to drop chests. Characters fill different roles in the team where some are good at filling the combo meter while others are good at farming crystals and others just deal big damage.

Its one of the most fun RPG combat systems I've ever played. The only real problem with it is that the super-move animations get kind of overly long and a bit repetitive after a while.


If it wasn't for the fact that you have to sit though like 5 hours of unskipable cutscenes in a single playthough I'd never stop playing it.
 
I think the real question that's on everyone's minds about Indivisible is, will it be fight stick compatible?
 
Eh, I never like the way DS or any of the other Souls games did their story. It doesn't really make the boss fights make sense. They're more there to act as obstacles to the next area or item you need.

That's because that's exactly what they are, it's the context you eventually learn that makes them more meaningful. Quelaag is just an obstacle on your path, but it's an obstacle with more ramifications than you think. And by pitting two forces trying to protect something against eachother, the games sense of moral ambiguity is further expressed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jet Set Dizzy
I never got a chance to play Valkyrie Profile, and since it's the inspiration for combat for this game, is it still worth playing now? Does it still hold up?
 
I never got a chance to play Valkyrie Profile, and since it's the inspiration for combat for this game, is it still worth playing now? Does it still hold up?

Something I've been meaning to ask myself too. Turned based games are kinda stale on me now, BUT some examples like SMT: Devil Survivor and Advance Wars have pretty strategic and deep systems, and from what I've read tonight, VP sounds like it isn't some basic Pokemon/FF combat engine.
 
I never got a chance to play Valkyrie Profile, and since it's the inspiration for combat for this game, is it still worth playing now? Does it still hold up?

I would say absolutely yes but be prepared to spend time sitting though a ton of unskipable dialogue and cutscenes and the combat system really doesn't come into its own until you get some multi-hit weapons.
 
Did they confirm turn based combat? I thought it was ARPG.
Cool if so since I have a ton of turn based combat games I enjoy.
 
Considering my new found love for the Igavania genre and having played at least one classic Final Fantasy I can offically say I am hype for this game. This is a new chapter in the story of Lab Zero...
 
Honestly if it's turn-based I'll close my eyes for some years and wait for the next game, I can't stand that kind of stuff
I hope for a "direct action" platform like Rayman Origins, or at least with combos like Guacamelee
 
I don't mind turn-based as long as its either active or cool looking like FF7/Chrono Trigger. When I say active I guess I mean like, in super mario and the legend of the seven stars where you could block to reduce damage or in The Legend of the Dragoon where every hit requires timing and is cool to execute.

Or the combat has something from Sands of Destruction which I also really liked.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Dave
I would say absolutely yes but be prepared to spend time sitting though a ton of unskipable dialogue and cutscenes and the combat system really doesn't come into its own until you get some multi-hit weapons.

Ok, so i'm going to try it out based solely off of your recommendation, but If I hate it I'm personally holding you responsible and then still proceed to donate to the indiegogo campaign since I have no standards. LOL
 
That's because that's exactly what they are, it's the context you eventually learn that makes them more meaningful. Quelaag is just an obstacle on your path, but it's an obstacle with more ramifications than you think. And by pitting two forces trying to protect something against eachother, the games sense of moral ambiguity is further expressed.
Quelaag is a great example, yeah, but honestly, while I felt bad fighting her, what made me feel worse is that I felt the reasons for having to fight him were a bit weak. That's my problem with it. Until after you beat most of the bosses or get farther in the game or do some digging into the lore, some of these obstacles don't make much sense. Honestly it feels more like games like Dark Souls were meant to be expressed almost as a piece of great literature in video game form. There's nothing wrong with that. Being deep and meaty on the meanings and possible implications of everything. But ya know what also isn't so bad? Being grounded. Having a reason and being given an incentive to be a part of these events. A sense or moral ambiguity is great, but I feel it would have been expressed better if you'd had more input from the narrative as to why you were doing all this aside from lighting that last bonfire and making your choice. Having immediate or obvious implications and meaning to the events we transpire in can be effective as well. In my personal opinion, Dark Souls gives to much open ended storytelling. It doesn't really engage the player on an immediate level. It gives the player the task and then lets them figure out the world and die trying to get to complete that task by whatever means necessary. Sometimes, however, it might just be more effective and immersive to have an active reason to partake in a boss fight. Quelaag is an example that really breaks the mold and stands out thematically and in what she symbolizes, but what exactly does the giant butterfly have ANYTHING to do with your quest? Yes, there's a reason why it exists and is the way it is, but why as an obstacle? The games could have done with a bit more active buildup towards bosses and make them more an active part of the quest instead of just being there as obstacles. Again, Quelaag breaks this and is one of my favorite bosses in the game.

This debate could be considered off topic, but I feel going over this storytelling debate is actually pretty helpful just for pointing out different ways to tell stories. My personal hope is that L0 gives us something with plenty of background to it, but makes the game and the story a great experience overall.

Also, again, I don't think it'll necessarily be turned-based. Given they said it was going to be an action RPG guys, we should maybe expecting the VP-style combat in a more active way?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 Eyes
Ok, so i'm going to try it out based solely off of your recommendation, but If I hate it I'm personally holding you responsible and then still proceed to donate to the indiegogo campaign since I have no standards. LOL

lol ok. I would add the disclaimer that there's a lot of mechanics in the game that aren't explained very well, or at all, and you'll just have to figure them out as you go.
 
Certainly intrigued by this project. In particular, it's the direction the art's headed. Especially when it comes to RPGs, art direction impacts my enjoyment/investment to varying degrees. Dark/Macabre doesn't do it for me, and though there's much yet to be seen, the color choices and character designs in Indivisible hint that dark/macabre aren't necessarily the goal this time around.

...Though I could be completely wrong and the moment the heroine steps into the ruins in the background art, the floors are strewn with corpses, walls are dripping blood while disembodied eyes watch you from the ceiling... But here's hoping that's not the case.