• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived.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)

Just noticed it now, but in the platforming prototype video when Ajna is jumping you can't see the ground during the top portion of the jump, that kinda sucks if it stays like that.
 
CaioLugon said:
Just noticed it now, but in the platforming prototype video when Ajna is jumping you can't see the ground during the top portion of the jump, that kinda sucks if it stays like that.

That was recorded before the camera was finalized, so that aspect of the vid is somewhat irrelevant. It's something we've paid attention to. And there are other visual cues a player will use to judge how far above a lower platform they are. The finished prototype will not be just green boxes on a black background.
 
render said:
That was recorded before the camera was finalized, so that aspect of the vid is somewhat irrelevant. It's something we've paid attention to. And there are other visual cues a player will use to judge how far above a lower platform they are. The finished prototype will not be just green boxes on a black background.
So, how do you estimate the (average) duration of the finished prototype?
 
So, I have a question. We see here that its possible to push back enemies further and further while still in the same maze like sections. Is it possible to move the enemy so far away that they fall off a ledge? what happens then?
 
Demifiend said:
So, how do you estimate the (average) duration of the finished prototype?
Months of work. :^P
And yes, I know this isn't what you asked.

CaioLugon said:
Just noticed it now, but in the platforming prototype video when Ajna is jumping you can't see the ground during the top portion of the jump, that kinda sucks if it stays like that.
As mentioned, that was before the final camera. However...you can't see the ground when Samus jumps and this is before you get high-jump boots.
The important thing is that the camera pans downward as you fall downward so you can see it way before you reach it.
Lots of games don't have the camera move in the direction the player is moving, but we do.

I don't really get the comments about them moving, I mean, it's a prototype...you know...prototype?

CountofBleck said:
So, I have a question. We see here that its possible to push back enemies further and further while still in the same maze like sections. Is it possible to move the enemy so far away that they fall off a ledge? what happens then?
If the enemy falls off, they exit the battle. They stay in the world unless they were an enemy created specifically for the battle. They preserve their HP lost.
If an Incarnation falls off, they currently also exit the battle. (^.^) This will probably require you to spend some resource (a turn or some super meter) to bring them back.
If Ajna falls off, the battle ends, and you don't get any of the benefits of winning it, like getting back HP. Enemies also preserve their HP.
 
Ravi posted this tidbit on NeoGAF:

Q: Can I ask you about how loot will work? And equipment in general, too. If that's okay with you.

A: Currently, the thought is that equipment progression will be tied to exploration.
So as you explore the world, you'll be finding items that will be used to upgrade your weapons and armor at the blacksmith. Instead of, say, Missile Expansions and Energy Tanks.
While we'll be faking it in the prototype with exp., the thought is that we're going to have relatively few weapon and armor upgrades, but we want them to be very significant when you get them. Like, a weapon upgrade would be another attack segment, for example, potentially doubling your damage output.
So it's more about giving you new tools to play with in battle than it is about just increasing stats.
​
That's pretty cool. But what about levels then? Will finished game have exp/lvl system at all and if so what can you gain from it? Base HP/Dmg rise?
 
Mike_Z said:
If the enemy falls off, they exit the battle. They stay in the world unless they were an enemy created specifically for the battle. They preserve their HP lost.
If an Incarnation falls off, they currently also exit the battle. (^.^) This will probably require you to spend some resource (a turn or some super meter) to bring them back.
If Ajna falls off, the battle ends, and you don't get any of the benefits of winning it, like getting back HP. Enemies also preserve their HP.

Well, since this is a not a non answer, this basically confirms that there WILL probably be shoving enemies off of ledges cheese strats. Yesssssss.

Wait, how will they preserve their health if they fall into a bottomless pit?
 
Last edited:
Mike said no bottomless pits.

About the exp thing, if it's not going in the final product you should state it in the proto, maybe
 
I just had a crazy thought:

Indivisible's Twitter said:
Future Incarnation that will be joining you.

The tweet probably means "future" as in "to be revealed," but this gives me a crazy idea: What if Ajna's Incarnations aren't just past versions, but one or two future selves, too? Could be cool. Why, there could even be a bad future Incarnation you have to resolve; could be a cool way to have "Good Ajna vs Bad Ajna."

Then again, I'm kind of a sucker for sudden space levels and time travel. And optional super-bosses.
 
Exp might still be a thing. We haven't really had full confirmation. Maybe EXP will work differently? Or it's built up to unlock certain perks? In the battle demo we saw Ajna beat the singular enemy at the start, she flashed, and the game said "Ajna can now attack twice." Which I took to mean that fulfilling certain conditions or earning enough EXP will level the char up in ways of things like HP, ATB gauge, but maybe not be as active a boost to char's stats like in most RPGs.
 
North888 said:
Exp might still be a thing. We haven't really had full confirmation. Maybe EXP will work differently? Or it's built up to unlock certain perks? In the battle demo we saw Ajna beat the singular enemy at the start, she flashed, and the game said "Ajna can now attack twice." Which I took to mean that fulfilling certain conditions or earning enough EXP will level the char up in ways of things like HP, ATB gauge, but maybe not be as active a boost to char's stats like in most RPGs.
They've already said the plan is to make upgrading achievable via exploration, and that the prototype's style of progression is just faked to speed things up.
 
Oh ok, I must have missed that post. My bad. I wonder kind of rewards you'll get from defeating enemies? Gold? Buffs? Having them out of the way? I dunno, if you don't get exp...it makes battles a bit pointless except as a means to remove obstacles, since you can get most progression through exploration, if that's they're goal. I assume there'll be some incentive to clear away enemies and do battle, they just haven't explained it set it up yet...

So then what benefits do I get from beating up enemies?
 
North888 said:
So then what benefits do I get from beating up enemies?
Satisfaction from bragging about that one-hit kill combo you did on that one enemy.:PUN:
 
Last edited:
Gamrdogg said:
Satisfaction from bragging about that one-hit kill combo you did on that one enemy.
Eh, I don't think that's enough. In a fighting game, your reward for beating on opponents is damage, victory, and better setups. However, in RPGs, one of the core aspects is the enemy encounters. I get that this game is focusing on the platforming and those interactions, but having the battle system as it is, with how diverse and interesting it looks and how it interacts with the environment, feels like it would be a waste if there wasn't much reward and battles became monotonous to get through when I could just go around or over, find the next upgrade, and get stronger anyways. Again, I'm assuming there'll be some reward or some way ot use battles to your advantage, we just haven't seen it yet.

It'd be funny if there was a platforming challenge that required you to enter battle and use certain moves to combo an enemy into a goal over a pit or something funny like that though XD
 
I think a good "reward" for victory would be "you get to keep on living".

'Course, this would be dependent on enemy encounters not being easily escapable or avoidable.
 
North888 said:
Eh, I don't think that's enough. In a fighting game, your reward for beating on opponents is damage, victory, and better setups. However, in RPGs, one of the core aspects is the enemy encounters. I get that this game is focusing on the platforming and those interactions, but having the battle system as it is, with how diverse and interesting it looks and how it interacts with the environment, feels like it would be a waste if there wasn't much reward and battles became monotonous to get through when I could just go around or over, find the next upgrade, and get stronger anyways. Again, I'm assuming there'll be some reward or some way ot use battles to your advantage, we just haven't seen it yet.

It'd be funny if there was a platforming challenge that required you to enter battle and use certain moves to combo an enemy into a goal over a pit or something funny like that though XD
There will probably be rewards for winning battles, we just haven't seen what it is yet. I'll just wait until they reveal what it is.
 
Squire Grooktook said:
I think a good "reward" for victory would be "you get to keep on living".

'Course, this would be dependent on enemy encounters not being easily escapable or avoidable.
I disagree. "You get to keep living." could work, but look at games like Paper Mario Sticker Star. That RPG the only reward for fights is gold and continued living. Fights were worth jack squat cause you could get all you needed in the fields. My whole point is that, depending on how enemies are placed, unless they're all mostly forced fights, if htere is no reward for engaging them, then you could simply kick them out of battle and continue on, grabbing power ups in the field and still getting stronger through that.

My whole point here is basically that I think it's counterintuitive to have a battle system but give reward for using it aside from removing an enemy from the map. Otherwise why not just make it a platformer where hitting the enemy or jumping on their head kills them, you'd get just as much reward, spend much less time learning the system, and be able go back to exploring much faster.

So I assume there'll be some reward or incentive. I'm just voicing my opinion as to why a reward or incentive is necessary.
 
Squire Grooktook said:
I think a good "reward" for victory would be "you get to keep on living".

'Course, this would be dependent on enemy encounters not being easily escapable or avoidable.
My problem with that would be that it treats battles as an obstacle or chore instead of a fun activity with a reward at the end.
If battles are unavoidable (I'm assuming a few won't be considering you could theoretically just jump over the enemies), then they will be something you will get tired of doing. Think of it like eating, but no matter what you eat you don't feel full. You still need to do it to keep doing what you're doing, but you don't get a reward for it so it becomes a chore after a while.
Edit: Oops, was beaten to it.
 
North888 said:
My whole point is that, depending on how enemies are placed, unless they're all mostly forced fights, if htere is no reward for engaging them, then you could simply kick them out of battle and continue on, grabbing power ups in the field and still getting stronger through that.

I kinda addressed that with my second paragraph.
North888 said:
My whole point here is basically that I think it's counterintuitive to have a battle system but give reward for using it aside from removing an enemy from the map. Otherwise why not just make it a platformer where hitting the enemy or jumping on their head kills them, you'd get just as much reward, spend much less time learning the system, and be able go back to exploring much faster.

That's probably why most Metroidvania's have embraced real time combat. That being said...

Turn based combat has it's own style and it's own sense of strategy. If battles are an involved, strategic affair that help to define and add character and tension to dangerous areas like dungeons, then I don't see a problem if they don't offer a reward, since they'd be fufilling the same purpose they do in a real time action game.

That last sentence also implies that exploration is the only enjoyable part of the experience. If combat was realtime, you'd need just as much time to "learn the system" if it were challenging.

Meow-Professor said:
If battles are unavoidable...then they will be something you will get tired of doing.

I think there's some holes in the logic here. Why exactly will you get tired of doing them? There are many actions and combat elements in games that don't have palpable rewards afterwards. Killing an enemy for survival doesn't get boring in Metroid, so what makes you think it will get boring here? Unless you're admitting that turn based combat is inherently more boring then realtime, and only runs on skinners box appeal.
 
Squire Grooktook said:
I think there's some wholes in the logic here. Why exactly will you get tired of doing them? There are many actions and combat elements in games that don't have palpable rewards afterwards. Killing an enemy for survival doesn't get boring in Metroid, so what makes you think it will get boring here? Unless you're admitting that turn based combat is inherently more boring then realtime, and only runs on skinners box appeal.
Battles in RPGs can get tedious after a while compared to a game like a platformer IMO. RPG battles require a lot of strategy and attention and they also usually take longer than shooting an enemy in a platformer. They're different genres that ask different things from the player for their battles.
Basically it isn't a problem with the battles being boring, but they take longer most of the time and can get tedious, so a reward helps give you some incentive.
 
Meow-Professor said:
Battles in RPGs can get tedious after a while compared to a game like a platformer IMO. RPG battles require a lot of strategy and attention and they also usually take longer than shooting an enemy in a platformer. They're different genres that ask different things from the player for their battles.
Basically it isn't a problem with the battles being boring, but they take longer most of the time and can get tedious, so a reward helps give you some incentive.
That's fair enough, but keep in mind the fights in this game might be very fast paced.

I also do find that battles in rpg's can be very exciting on a purely survival basis, if the stakes are high enough.
 
Squire Grooktook said:
That's fair enough, but keep in mind the fights in this game might be very fast paced.
I think this is likely the case. Peter already posted that the idea was to have the player get in and out of combat very quickly, so I don't think they'll be as long-winded as people are dreading.
 
the problem is that if enemies get repetitive tha can lead to a negative experience. You don't want to require grinding or to give too little incentive to fight. The combat reminds of PxZ and VP. However, in PxZ battles were a bit of a chore because you'd just find the better combo and beat that into enemies instead of needing to find effective strategies, and fights became a massive chore given how long the stages were.

It really depends on the elements presented, but I think the safest way is to offer an incentive to fight. If the only incentive to fighting is to survive then why go out of your way to get into a fight? you'd just avoid it and keep HP. I get battles are gonna be fast-paced and probably fun, and that's good, but I know, from experience, that fighting the same enemes over and over gets tiresome, even with exp and gold as rewards. lacking any rewards kills wanting to jump on every enemy I see to get them outta the way.
 
Fights should not be repetitive, period. If they are, just offering rewards isn't going to fix anything.

North888 said:
If the only incentive to fighting is to survive then why go out of your way to get into a fight?

Same reason you'd do it in Metroid I'd imagine. You kill stuff so that it won't kill you. There's also terrain to think about here, apparently. Avoiding enemies might be a platforming challenge in itself, or you may want to try and engage enemies in advantageous situations rather then let them chase you into a bad spot. Speculation etc.

North888 said:
but I know, from experience, that fighting the same enemes over and over gets tiresome,

That's why good games have a variety of unique and smartly designed enemies that all have their own tactics but never cease to surprise you. I'm thinking of several games right now and suddenly want to play them but I can't because I have had -5 hours sleep and still have way too many math problems to finish before midnight.
 
People don't like the game but FFXIII had a good non-repetative monster system i thought. Ever monster could pretty much kill you if you didn't know how to fight them. It wasn't all "keep hitting it till he dies" gameplay. actually had to fulfill conditions to make the battle easier. (that is untill you had god like stats then everything dies with one hit)

FFXIII-3 did an even better job of this when they basically added counter hits. Where if you attack the enemy during certain actions it makes the fight easier. The story was meh but the fighting was great in.
 
But don't forget possible back tracking, unless enemies are gonna be on about the same curve the whole game so all the fights are engaging, but that also begs the question of monotone of enemies going from point A to point B. There are so many variables at work here.

Squire Grooktook said:
Fights should not be repetitive, period. If they are, just offering rewards isn't going to fix anything.
A large number of games are popping up in my head. SMTIV and SMT3 fights can get repetitive because each one is tough and not always when you want them to be tough. Yeah that creates tension, but it also serves as a turn off to some when they already passed through an area and are being assault by enemies they should, in other games, be able to swat away. Throw in consistently repeating enemies in the same area...

I think games like Mega Man Battle Network series do repetitive fights very well. The fight starts the same with a number of preset enemy formations you can encounter in an area, but the randomized cards and your own skills affect how each fights goes, making them less repetitive early on, but also fairly quick when running through previous areas. It still got a bit annoying when trying to get specific chips that required specific buster rank to get.

Squire Grooktook said:
Same reason you'd do it in Metroid I'd imagine. You kill stuff so that it won't kill you. There's also terrain to think about here, apparently. Avoiding enemies might be a platforming challenge in itself, or you may want to try and engage enemies in advantageous situations rather then let them chase you into a bad spot. Speculation etc.
But in Metroid enemies go down in a few hits, and you have a number of tools you can hit them with to do different things. We don't yet know the extent of Ajna's abilities towards enemies in the overworld just yet, though, so I can't really continue any speculation or counter points just yet.

Squire Grooktook said:
That's why good games have a variety of unique and smartly designed enemies that all have their own tactics but never cease to surprise you. I'm thinking of several games right now and suddenly want to play them but I can't because I have had -5 hours sleep and still have way too many math problems to finish before midnight.
Well goodluck with those math problems. All I can say is that I do expect smartly designed enemies. However, even if the enemies are designed well and the battle system fun and engaging, it still doesn't change my worry that without any sort of incentive or reward, people looking to just continue, or who want to get from point A to point B have no reason to partake in battles except to learn how to fight in them. And even then, they could just throw themselves at each boss until they find a winning strategy, which some games in RPGs have this issue of. Basically, regardless of how interactive or fun or dynamic you can make the battle system, if players don't have an active reason to engage in fights when they can avoid them, then at some point players may just decide to ignore battles and go about looking for secrets and hidden items, avoiding all the enemies since beating them means absolutely nothing, thus rendering their purpose mute.

I think we've run this chain of speculation dry. I'm sure there's some incentive or reason for players to partake in battle, but we still don't have quite enough to go on yet. It's really just us debating whether the reward is just the fun of the system, or if there needs to be a reward after the battle to incentivize you. Obviously it can go either way, but neither is quite applicable here yet till we know more.
 
North888 said:
if players don't have an active reason to engage in fights when they can avoid them, then at some point players may just decide to ignore battles and go about looking for secrets and hidden items, avoiding all the enemies since beating them means absolutely nothing, thus rendering their purpose mute.

Given the emphasis on platforming, I'm guessing that that will be the solution to that kind of complaint. Actually attempting to skip enemies when possible may take skill and finesse, and be a fun and challenging part of the game.
 
Yeah, I can see them setting up so that you can skip certain enemies and others are harder or may ambush you when you think you've found a cheeky alt path. There are options. Making how you'd avoid certain enemies important. I get the feeling most of this thread of speculation will be answered away and we'll all be happy with it either way.
 
VP had you throw crystals with Circle that made icy platforms on walls and stopped enemies for a while and let you touch them without engaging in battle.
 
Cheesedragon said:
Wait, how will they preserve their health if they fall into a bottomless pit?
Said it before - no bottomless pits, and hopefully no instant-death traps or junk either. Curiosity should be rewarded, not punished. You should never be afraid to go into somewhere.

ArgonBern said:
About the exp thing, if it's not going in the final product you should state it in the proto, maybe
Oh, we will.

Ktulu said:
Like a summon?
Summons confirmed?
No, like a "you run into one monster but you are now fighting three," the extra two are just-for-battle.

North888 said:
I dunno, if you don't get exp...it makes battles a bit pointless except as a means to remove obstacles, since you can get most progression through exploration, if that's they're goal. I assume there'll be some incentive to clear away enemies and do battle, they just haven't explained it set it up yet...
So then what benefits do I get from beating up enemies?
There will likely be XP, it just won't go toward massive boosts to your defense or attack stats. There are other things to increase.
Samus gets health and ammo back. Alundra gets gold and the ability to leave the room. Even without XP in Chrono Trigger you get Tech points which let you learn new attacks. There are plenty of things that aren't exp. Bosses in some FFs don't even give XP. :^P
You have a LONG way to go for game design, sirrah.

Squire Grooktook said:
That's probably why most Metroidvania's have embraced real time combat. That being said...
They most likely did that because they already had a character that could move and take damage, and they wanted to leverage what existed and not do extra work.
C'mon now.

North888 said:
If the only incentive to fighting is to survive then why go out of your way to get into a fight?
If they're fun, you play them by choice. If they are NOT fun, you need to be forced to play them. If you need to be forced to play them, why not make them fun instead?
Given ANY single-player game you can name, by the end of the game you are avoiding as many battles as possible through whatever means you can avoid them, unless you are presented with a new enemy or unavoidable situation. I count "I want the Gold Boots of Greatness but I need to beat the Spider of Doom to get them" or "I need to beat some mooks so I can be Lv25 for this boss" as unavoidable situations, because if you could get the boots by buying them or beat the boss without grinding you'd do that instead.
If people enjoy doing something, they'll do it regardless of reward - there are people that grind for fun, or (say) play training mode in fighting games for fun. If they dislike doing the thing, they will avoid it as much as possible regardless of reward - you have doubtless experienced this yourself.
So this whole line of thought is kinda meaningless. More than kinda. If you like it you'll like it, if you don't then no amount of reward will help you enjoy it.

ArgonBern said:
Can I just say a thing? No breakable weapons like in VP. That shit was useless in my opinion.
No breakable weapons like in VP, yes.
(Although in VP they wouldn't break until you finished a complete turn with the enemy alive, so if you had 3 attacks and only used 2, it would never break...or if you killed the enemy and won before your turn ended, like with a Dragon Slayer, it would never break. This is probably a bug, but it makes them way not useless.)
 
Mike_Z said:
There will likely be XP, it just won't go toward massive boosts to your defense or attack stats. There are other things to increase.
Samus gets health and ammo back. Alundra gets gold and the ability to leave the room. Even without XP in Chrono Trigger you get Tech points which let you learn new attacks. There are plenty of things that aren't exp. Bosses in some FFs don't even give XP. :^P
You have a LONG way to go for game design, sirrah.
I believe I stated earlier something akin to this, where EXP could possibly go towards less noticable buffs, like boosting overall HP or go towards unlocking skills. There are TONS of ways you can reward a player, they don't all have to be strictly stuff for levels. I know this, I've played more than one type of RPG in my life XD

But yeh, I know I've got a lot to learn on game design. Not gonna argue that at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top