Xenocide: What a shame...

arocoun DeleteThis @hush.com wrote:
> Does anybody else feel that the roguelike Xenocide would have great
> potential, if its development were restarted?

Surely it would!

> I just tried the game out today, and it was absolutely great.

I "won" it. After defeating the boss and getting into some place that
was evidently under development I consider myself a winner.

> It was addicting, but more
> importantly it was fun. It has a lot of the stuff that I like about
> Crawl, like the system where unused exp raise skills by using them, and
> the fact that different types of chars with different abilities are
> able to advance (unlike some roguelikes).

Yes, it is indeed uncommon feature.

> The game also has other great ideas, like interesting boss fights, lots
> of interesting items, and a DNA splicing system which makes you want to
> try all kinds of combinations to see what'll happen. Unfortunately,
> one of my characters was recently killed by a bug in the program.

To avoid it make sure that all robotic entities are completely
disassembled into parts when exiting level. This includes all automatic
guns of course.

> I think it's a shame this game isn't being worked on anymore. Too bad.
> If I had programming skill, I'd offer to help fix and develop it.

It is sad that such a great concept had to be abandoned. I am learning
C/C++ so *maybe* next year I will be competent enough to be able to fix
that bug if Jakub doesn't do this himself earlier.

> What does everyone else think about this game?

An unique amongst all roguelikes. My project has been heavily inspired
by Xenocide.
--
Michal Bielinski
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

Jakub Debski wrote:
> Dnia 30 Oct 2006 00:11:00 -0800, arocoun.TakeThisOut@hush.com napisa³(a):
> > It was addicting, but more importantly it was fun.
> > It has a lot of the stuff that I like about
> > Crawl, like the system where unused exp raise skills by using them, and
> > the fact that different types of chars with different abilities are
> > able to advance (unlike some roguelikes).
>
> There are some problems with such approach to skills. F.e. training
> mechanical skills requires usage of tools or building robots.
> As player usually don't have many experience points to allocate, this kind
> of progress is very slow. I thought about training these skills when your
> "pet robot" kills something, maybe this would solve the problem.
> The same is with throwing. Maybe I should give weapons like boomerang, that
> thrown away would back to player's hand...

With mechanical skills I see no problem. Xenocide's equivalent of
victory dance is to toy around a bit with your (or utility) robot's
power switch. Exp sinks in very fast. Throwing on the other hand makes
problems.

By the way I love utility bots! This is only neutral NPC known to me
that does not stand firmly in place or wander by choosing random
direction each turn. Perfect example what might scavenger's AI look
like. I have been making it to follow me around by "giving treats".
--
Michal Bielinski
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

Jakub Debski wrote:
> Dnia 30 Oct 2006 00:11:00 -0800, arocoun DeleteThis @hush.com napisa³(a):
> > Does anybody else feel that the roguelike Xenocide would have great
> > potential, if its development were restarted?
>
> I do

Heh, of course.

> > It was addicting, but more importantly it was fun.
> > It has a lot of the stuff that I like about
> > Crawl, like the system where unused exp raise skills by using them, and
> > the fact that different types of chars with different abilities are
> > able to advance (unlike some roguelikes).
>
> There are some problems with such approach to skills. F.e. training
> mechanical skills requires usage of tools or building robots.
> As player usually don't have many experience points to allocate, this kind
> of progress is very slow. I thought about training these skills when your
> "pet robot" kills something, maybe this would solve the problem.

Sounds like a good idea.

> The same is with throwing. Maybe I should give weapons like boomerang, that
> thrown away would back to player's hand...

Yeah, throwing weapons have lots of possibilities. Boomerangs; light,
stackable throwing knives; darts that can cause status effects if
filled/coated in the right stuff; etc.

> > The game also has other great ideas, like interesting boss fights,
>
> There is only one boss for now, and as a special taks you can try to get
> into Bunker

Oh, so that's the only boss for now? I never got a chance to make it
to the bunker. On one game, it kept crashing when I tried to leave
level 2 of the mines. Maybe due to the enemy robots being there when I
tried to leave?

In another attempted game, it crashed when I ATTACKED the enemy robots.

> > I think it's a shame this game isn't being worked on anymore. Too bad.
>
> I simply have not time. Serious life and serious programming takes so much
> time, that I have no time time for programming for fun :/

Yeah, I don't know programming, but I know plenty about not having
enough time for stuff.

> > If I had programming skill, I'd offer to help fix and develop it.
>
> Learn then

I'm working on that.
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

Michal Bielinski wrote:
> arocoun.RemoveThis@hush.com wrote:
> > I just tried the game out today, and it was absolutely great.
>
> I "won" it. After defeating the boss and getting into some place that
> was evidently under development I consider myself a winner.

Heh, I guess that could be considered a victory condition, at this
time!

> > I think it's a shame this game isn't being worked on anymore. Too bad.
> > If I had programming skill, I'd offer to help fix and develop it.
>
> It is sad that such a great concept had to be abandoned. I am learning
> C/C++ so *maybe* next year I will be competent enough to be able to fix
> that bug if Jakub doesn't do this himself earlier.
>
> > What does everyone else think about this game?
>
> An unique amongst all roguelikes. My project has been heavily inspired
> by Xenocide.

Oh, which project is that?

> With mechanical skills I see no problem. Xenocide's equivalent of
> victory dance is to toy around a bit with your (or utility) robot's
> power switch.

I tend to see the NEED for a victory dance as more of a mistake than a
feature. The point of the skill leveling system seems to be that the
skills should go up as you use them naturally. But that's just my
humble opinion.
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

arocoun.DeleteThis@hush.com wrote:
> Does anybody else feel that the roguelike Xenocide would have great
> potential, if its development were restarted?

I do, and that's why I used to pepper xenocide-development yahoo
group/mailing list with various ideas. There were some pretty crazy,
really verbose people in there. If you're looking for ideas for future
Xenocide development, try to look there.

I'd like to point out two areas where current Xenocide should be
improved.

- Some weapon skills, particularly Melee, are MUCH more dependant on
skill level and possibly stats than actual weapon used. You can wield a
wrench or steel pipe and play Xenocide just like you would an ordinary
roguelike. Which is not that cool, because you soon learn that despite
all the blood and human remains lying around the safest way is to
engage enemies in melee.
My guess is that 'melee attack = stats+skill+weapon'. I think it should
be 'melee attack = (stats+skil)l*weapon', more less. That's not to say
wrenches and steel pipes should be useless, (they're too cool and
elegant for that), but a bit weaker.

- Ranged weapons feel like waterguns. Which is a real shame, because
the setting is in the future. Suggested antidote - play DoomRL. That's
how guns should feel like. It baffles me that no one else realised guns
should *hurt*. This makes DoomRL probably the most tactical roguelike
in modern setting, because your position and the way you explore rooms
matter a lot.
I played a few focused ranged characters, and I was rarely able to kill
things before they get close. Weapons feel like darts in Crawl, except
you can actually do some damage with darts. I had a lot of trouble with
the boss, simply because I almost completely ran out of ammo.
Then I started a new character. Pure melee character. I used just my
trusty wrench, high-tech melee weapons are not that good and eat up
energy too fast. I easily murdered everything in my path, especially
the boss, which is suprisingly unimpressive up close.
In short: I recommend replacing the combat system with the one from
DoomRL, or something equally brutal. Or just make all weapons deal
triple damage.

I don't mind too much that fights are quite long in fantasy-medieval
roguelike games, because there's parrying, dodging, shields and stuff.
But guns are guns.

I don't really like the idea of building your own robots. It looks like
*someone* desperately needed a replacement for necromancy. I think that
Xenocide shouldn't try to apologize for its 'moderness', but rather
take advantage of it.

Jakub: I'm not bashing your game, it's just the way I talk. I just
don't mention the stuff I liked - plenty of it.

Kill you later,
B0rsuk
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

B0rsuk wrote:
> - Some weapon skills, particularly Melee, are MUCH more dependant on
> skill level and possibly stats than actual weapon used. You can wield a
> wrench or steel pipe and play Xenocide just like you would an ordinary
> roguelike. Which is not that cool, because you soon learn that despite
> all the blood and human remains lying around the safest way is to
> engage enemies in melee.
> My guess is that 'melee attack = stats+skill+weapon'. I think it should
> be 'melee attack = (stats+skil)l*weapon', more less. That's not to say
> wrenches and steel pipes should be useless, (they're too cool and
> elegant for that), but a bit weaker.

Agreed. Weapon damage *should* be proportional to weapon quality. It
makes sense, and it would fix balance problems.

> I played a few focused ranged characters, and I was rarely able to kill
> things before they get close. Weapons feel like darts in Crawl, except
> you can actually do some damage with darts. I had a lot of trouble with
> the boss, simply because I almost completely ran out of ammo.
> Then I started a new character. Pure melee character. I used just my
> trusty wrench, high-tech melee weapons are not that good and eat up
> energy too fast. I easily murdered everything in my path, especially
> the boss, which is suprisingly unimpressive up close.
> In short: I recommend replacing the combat system with the one from
> DoomRL, or something equally brutal. Or just make all weapons deal
> triple damage.

I agree, ranged weapons do seem a tad underpowered, and melee ones
overpowered. But I think that doubling gun power, improving gun
accuracy, and readjusting melee weapon power to be proportional to how
good the weapon itself is would be adequate. Unless you're playing a
commando-type with a backpack stuffed full of ammo; or you're fighting
on a full-fledged military base, guns shouldn't and can't be the only
good option available. But that's just what I think.

> I don't really like the idea of building your own robots. It looks like
> *someone* desperately needed a replacement for necromancy. I think that
> Xenocide shouldn't try to apologize for its 'moderness', but rather
> take advantage of it.

Lots of good games give you the ability to get and/or modify allies,
without neccessarily using necromancy. The robots seem like a neat
idea, to me.

--Arocoun
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

B0rsuk wrote:
[lots of good stuff about Xenocide]
> I don't really like the idea of building your own robots. It looks like
> *someone* desperately needed a replacement for necromancy. I think that
> Xenocide shouldn't try to apologize for its 'moderness', but rather
> take advantage of it.

I disagree. Putting together robots out of modular parts is nothing like
necromancy. It involves much more customisation, and if (as you
suggested in the snipped part) guns become more deadly I could
definitely see the fun in playing a mechanic sort of character who hides
behind his robot and repairs it as it gets damaged, provides it with
ammo, weapons, and so on, tinkering and customising the robot for each
challenge he faces.

Also, the same applies here as in Crawl. If you don't like playing
mummies - don't.
--
A good signature is a concise and original summary of personality. This
is not a good signature.
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

arocoun.DeleteThis@hush.com wrote:
> Michal Bielinski wrote:
> > An unique amongst all roguelikes. My project has been heavily inspired
> > by Xenocide.
> Oh, which project is that?

It has never been announced anywhere. It is far too early to release it
to public. In middle of December perhaps.

> > With mechanical skills I see no problem. Xenocide's equivalent of
> > victory dance is to toy around a bit with your (or utility) robot's
> > power switch.
>
> I tend to see the NEED for a victory dance as more of a mistake than a
> feature. The point of the skill leveling system seems to be that the
> skills should go up as you use them naturally. But that's just my
> humble opinion.

I agree with that fully. My point was that way mechanical skill improve
can be lived with.
--
Michal Bielinski
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

B0rsuk wrote:
> I don't really like the idea of building your own robots. It looks like
> *someone* desperately needed a replacement for necromancy. I think that
> Xenocide shouldn't try to apologize for its 'moderness', but rather
> take advantage of it.

You can dislike robot building but why compare it to necromancy? It has
nothing to do with it nor could be even crude replacement. Closest
medieval fantasy roguelike concept would be golem animation. You bring
items and polymorph them. With robots you bring parts and assemble
them. And CPU you install matters very much! To me robots are more
equivalent of pets. Necromancy could be substituted with some kind of
alien embryo you implant into dead corpses and wait till specially
engineered life form develops from the dead flesh and awaits your
commands.
--
Michal Bielinski
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

> I agree, ranged weapons do seem a tad underpowered, and melee ones
> overpowered. But I think that doubling gun power, improving gun
> accuracy, and readjusting melee weapon power to be proportional to how
> good the weapon itself is would be adequate. Unless you're playing a
> commando-type with a backpack stuffed full of ammo; or you're fighting
> on a full-fledged military base, guns shouldn't and can't be the only
> good option available. But that's just what I think.

There was a related discussion on Xenocide-development about this. Some
of us thought it would be fun if player was scared that a monster could
reach him in melee. Once a monster gets into melee range, you're in
trouble. I agree with this point of view. Too often (for my tastes)
sci-fi games end up as fantasy games in disguise - you get the same
categories of items, classes, armors etc as in typical fantasy games.
In a way, sci-fi games often have more in common with medieval/ancient
ages than with modern times. So far, present times are marked by
advantage of firepower over armor. Chainmails and platemails became
obsolete, because crossbows and especially gunpowder made them
pathetic. Heavy tanks became unpopular; people try crazy stuff like
reactive armor, armor that essentially blows itself up to soften the
blow. (Did you know that a medieval pope declared crossbows forbidden
because 'crosbows threaten social order' ? A peasant with 2 weeks of
training could reliably kill fully armored noble knight. You could
train crossbowmen much faster than longbowmen, for example. Crossbow
mercrenaries were often killed instead of taken prisoner. Just like
flamethrower soldiers in ww2.)
As you may expect, I grew tired of Fallout-style Power Armors,
superstrong personal forcefields etc. I'd like to see sci-fi roguelike
with roots in the present warfare.
What was I talking about ? Ah, yes. Melee monsters should inspire fear.
For me, if you can survive a lot of time with a monster in melee
combat, the suspense is gone. Things get much less dramatic when you
realize the monsters who filled all these levels with severed limbs,
guts, pools of blood are actually not so scary.
Part of the issue may be that I despise katanas, ESPECIALLY in modern
settings.

It can be the other way around, too. If a fantasy game focuses too
heavily on ranged combat (heretic, heretic2) it loses the authentic
feel for me. Hexen did it right if you ask me. Rune (you can throw
weapons at best, no bows). Blade of Darkness.

>You can dislike robot building but why compare it to necromancy? It has
>nothing to do with it nor could be even crude replacement. Closest
>medieval fantasy roguelike concept would be golem animation. You bring
>items and polymorph them. With robots you bring parts and assemble
>them. And CPU you install matters very much! To me robots are more
>equivalent of pets. Necromancy could be substituted with some kind of
>alien embryo you implant into dead corpses and wait till specially
>engineered life form develops from the dead flesh and awaits your
>commands.

How is necromancy so much different ? I see a lot of similarities:
- you hide behind an army of allies that do the dirty work for you.
- you collect items to make more allies. In many cases you even get
them from destroyed enemies, because many of them are robots. So the
'necromancy is different because the items are called corpses' point is
moot.
- you spend a lot of time caring about your allies, be it casting heal
spells/fixing or just letting them rest.
- better items get you better allies. You often get better allies from
more dangerous enemies destroyed. A badass robot is more likely to
contain high quality components. A nasty monster makes a nastier
zombie.
- allies created this way tend to be permanent, unlike, say, summons.
- you cite ability to customize as something unique to robots, but it
doesn't have to be this way. In Crawl you can make either skeletons or
zombies. Or you can cut the corpse into chunks and make several
short-lived simulacrums. You can assemble a lot of corpses and make
Abominations. Rotten corpses determine color of your abomination .
You can create spectres, too. You can equip many undead types with
weapons.

For me, mechanic just screams Robotmancer or Robot Summoner. Pills
replace potions. Grenades replace wands. If you want to make a sci-fi
roguelike quite similar to fantasy ones, you're wasting a lot of
potential.

I am well aware that I'm likely to be alone im my view on sci-fi
games, roguelikes in particular. I also understand that it's going to
be easier to make my own game on my own rather than convince others.
And I know it takes a lot of time and motivation, probably more than I
have. But DoomRL shows that it can be done right.
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

B0rsuk wrote:
[snipped opinion about meele being unstylish for sci-fi roguelikes,
left part that probably describes the point well enough]
> As you may expect, I grew tired of Fallout-style Power Armors,
> superstrong personal forcefields etc. I'd like to see sci-fi roguelike
> with roots in the present warfare.
> What was I talking about ? Ah, yes. Melee monsters should inspire fear.
> For me, if you can survive a lot of time with a monster in melee
> combat, the suspense is gone. Things get much less dramatic when you
> realize the monsters who filled all these levels with severed limbs,
> guts, pools of blood are actually not so scary.

On this I agree fully. Very few Xenocide monsters are deadly in meele
combat. Wasps do that well but only thanks to poison attack. Kamikaze
bots would be good if turning them off wasn't so easy to character who
practiced mechanical skills a bit. What bugs me most is that creatures
having radiation attack should be ones you are afraid to just get near
not even mentioning touching it. Instead radiation is only slightly
tweaked type of poison.

> >You can dislike robot building but why compare it to necromancy? It has
> >nothing to do with it nor could be even crude replacement. Closest
> >medieval fantasy roguelike concept would be golem animation. You bring
> >items and polymorph them. With robots you bring parts and assemble
> >them. And CPU you install matters very much! To me robots are more
> >equivalent of pets. Necromancy could be substituted with some kind of
> >alien embryo you implant into dead corpses and wait till specially
> >engineered life form develops from the dead flesh and awaits your
> >commands.

> How is necromancy so much different ? I see a lot of similarities:
(I reordered list a bit to make replying easier)
> - you hide behind an army of allies that do the dirty work for you.
> - you spend a lot of time caring about your allies, be it casting heal
> spells/fixing or just letting them rest.
> - better items get you better allies. You often get better allies from
> more dangerous enemies destroyed. A badass robot is more likely to
> contain high quality components. A nasty monster makes a nastier
> zombie.
> - allies created this way tend to be permanent, unlike, say, summons.
> - you cite ability to customize as something unique to robots, but it
> doesn't have to be this way. In Crawl you can make either skeletons or
> zombies. Or you can cut the corpse into chunks and make several
> short-lived simulacrums. You can assemble a lot of corpses and make
> Abominations. Rotten corpses determine color of your abomination .
> You can create spectres, too. You can equip many undead types with
> weapons.

Agreed to all above. But this one point is misleading and changes
everything:

> - you collect items to make more allies. In many cases you even get
> them from destroyed enemies, because many of them are robots. So the
> 'necromancy is different because the items are called corpses' point is
> moot.

Nah, necromancy allows only one kind of items: parts of killed enemies.
Mechanics allows you to thrive only on found parts. In Crawl you'll
never find chunks lying around only for purpose of creating
simulacrums. Also, if you zombify Sigmund who was wearing elven chain
mail and wielding a runed scytche of reaching/slicing the zombie will
be equal to zombified Terence in cursed leather armor wielding a
vanilla whip. Just humans. But killing Sigmund in this example is much
more problematic. A robot constructed from Utility bot equipped with
minigun and guardian CPU is far more deadly than robot built from
Utility bot with crowbar in attack slot and simple seeker CPU. So, here
you get better pet by defeating better outfitted robot.

Necromancy:
Get a corpse and then you decide what servant you create. Strength
depends on race of defeated opponent.
Robot-mancy:
Get parts but you can create only servants that parts allow. Strength
depends on equipment of defeated opponent.

You have defeated a bat, so your necro-servant will have greater speed.
However if you defeat fast robot you can build your fast robot but can
build a slow one too just by saving propulsion systems for another
machine. Also you have more control over robots but as you pointed out
is doesn't have to be like that.

These are most relevant difference between these two. Of course you are
right that both necromancy and mechanincs bear very much in common. But
I strongly doubt the latter was designed only to substitute former. If
that would be the aim it could look far more similar to necromancy.
What changes you would propose to mechanics to make it more sci-fi
specific?

> For me, mechanic just screams Robotmancer or Robot Summoner.

This is because mechanic is restricted only to robots and all other
aspects are nonexistant. Xenocide was still much in development.

> Pills replace potions.

True. They could work more like drugs.

> Grenades replace wands.

No, you have heavily exagerrated. There are only very few similarities
between them and lots of differencies. They haven't wand feeling.
Grenades are area affecting items while wands can also take out enemy
in crowd of allies. Wands can't work few turns after use. Wands cannot
be given to allies/enemies and activate themselves from their
inventory. Grenades are always one shot items. For sci-fi replacement
of wands look at ZapM roguelike (www.zapm.org). There are "ray guns"
implemented which work exactly like wands. ZapM has grenades too which
are similar to ones Xenocide has. So, will you say that ZapM has two
types of wands? Angband has wands/rods/staves whcih are almost the
same. But grenades and ray guns are hardly similar.

> I am well aware that I'm likely to be alone im my view on sci-fi
> games, roguelikes in particular.

Hey, it isn't that bad. Our view overlaps partially.

> I also understand that it's going to be easier to make my own game on my
> own rather than convince others. And I know it takes a lot of time and motivation,
> probably more than I have. But DoomRL shows that it can be done right.

The problem here is word "right" means something other to each person.
--
Michal Bielinski
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

B0rsuk wrote:
> What was I talking about ? Ah, yes. Melee monsters should inspire fear.
> For me, if you can survive a lot of time with a monster in melee
> combat, the suspense is gone. Things get much less dramatic when you
> realize the monsters who filled all these levels with severed limbs,
> guts, pools of blood are actually not so scary.
> Part of the issue may be that I despise katanas, ESPECIALLY in modern
> settings.

Actually, I think I understand your point. You want a kind of Doom
feeling out of this game, where you're a weak human fighting against
strong monsters. You want the kinds of monsters that you should fear
to have anywhere near you, and that you should want to blast away ASAP.

I guess, then, that what kind of game Xenocide develops into (assuming
it develops anymore) would be determined by what attitude it's meant to
have. If Xenocide's meant to have an "develop you char however you
want, go on a quest/quests, and do lots of different things" type
attitude like Crawl or Adom, then your suggestions wouldn't work so
well. But if it's meant to have a "defend yourself from armies of
superpowered monsters; your mission is get out alive" type attitude,
then your suggestion would be pretty good.

Xenocide's current plot has a mix of both: You wake up on a ship full
of human remains and mutant monsters, and your first mission is to get
out of the ship alive. But after that, it seems your mission is to
explore the planet and find out what's going on. So plotwise, it can
go either way. And gameplay could thus go either way, depending on how
the plot's supposed to develop.
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame... 

B0rsuk wrote:
> What was I talking about ? Ah, yes. Melee monsters should inspire fear.
> For me, if you can survive a lot of time with a monster in melee
> combat, the suspense is gone. Things get much less dramatic when you
> realize the monsters who filled all these levels with severed limbs,
> guts, pools of blood are actually not so scary.
> Part of the issue may be that I despise katanas, ESPECIALLY in modern
> settings.

Actually, I think I understand your point. You want a kind of Doom
feeling out of this game, where you're a weak human fighting against
strong monsters. You want the kinds of monsters that you should fear
to have anywhere near you, and that you should want to blast away ASAP.

I guess, then, that what kind of game Xenocide develops into (assuming
it develops anymore) would be determined by what attitude it's meant to
have. If Xenocide's meant to have an "develop you char however you
want, go on a quest/quests, and do lots of different things" type
attitude like Crawl or Adom, then your suggestions wouldn't work so
well. But if it's meant to have a "defend yourself from armies of
superpowered monsters; your mission is get out alive" type attitude,
then your suggestion would be pretty good.

Xenocide's current plot has a mix of both: You wake up on a ship full
of human remains and mutant monsters, and your first mission is to get
out of the ship alive. But after that, it seems your mission is to
explore the planet and find out what's going on. So plotwise, it can
go either way. And gameplay could thus go either way, depending on how
the plot's supposed to develop.
 >> Stay informed about: Xenocide: What a shame...