• Add Review
  • Subscribe
  • Nominate
  • Submit Media
  • RSS

Solid state

  • NTC3
  • 03/10/2017 08:01 PM
  • 2129 views
Project W.I.P.E.D is a short game that exists mainly to demonstrate the developer’s position-based update to a traditional turn-based combat system. As far as that goal goes, it’s actually pretty good, and its type of combat is something I would like to see more MV games employ.

Storyline



It’s the typical sci-fi/cyberpunk premise of waking up in a facility with your memory wiped, and learning that you are one of five people worked on under the titular project from the mysterious hacker’s voice, who guides you towards the escape. Here, you also have the initial choice between a male (W) or a female (I) protagonist (I went with a female one, since male’s prisoner faceset is realistically unshaven and ugly), although it matters less later on, as after the first few fights they encounter each other and fight, before realizing they need to work together. From then on, it’s a road to the shuttle, past a few more guards and a Warden boss who’s had some history with W that we’ll now never get to know. The ending is a typical sequel hook, as the two escapees name themselves properly and resolve to find the prisoners P, E and D. I suppose the one good touch was I’s initial reluctance to shoot and concern/guilt about the people they had to kill to escape.

I should say that while the game doesn’t really have spelling errors per se, there are a lot of errors with tense and such, of the have/has/had form and the like – so many I eventually didn’t bother recording them. It’s the kind of stuff Word doc underlines in blue or green, and something that should largely be addressed through copy-pasting the game’s lines into it.

Aesthetics (art, design and sound)



It’s mainly RTP, as you can see above. There’s the nearly-traditional clash between the stout figures and the comparatively enormous high-ceilinged rooms, but otherwise it works about as well as could be expected. Some soundtrack apparently comes from this artist, and it’s fine for the sci-fi setting here, though certainly not the greatest I've heard. The icons’ graphics can be recognized from Mass Effect, Dragon Age, etc. The one thing that’s a little distracting is that the “Move Forwards” ability still seems to have the same icon as the “Move Backwards” one, when it should’ve been mirrored, or something.

Gameplay



Yes, the defining principle of the combat is the way each battle screen is effectively divided into your starting side, the enemies’ one, and the “no man’s land”, and both you and the enemies can move either forwards or backwards by one, depending on your current position. It’s a little weird that you can’t do either from the middle: the game will essentially choose for you whether to provide moving forwards or moving backwards ability. It is also a free action (though one with a cooldown), and deciding whether to use it before or after your attacks, if at all, is very important. Obviously, the reason this is important is because of the three weapon types, as shotguns are obviously useless at far ranges, and vice versa for sniper rifles. Assault rifles don’t have such a disparity: they do deal slightly more damage at mid-range, but their 30-40-30 damage spread is clearly nothing when compared to 10-30-50 of a sniper rifle, for instance.

However, this is compensated for by the rifle’s weapon ability, Spray, which happens to be the least useful one on its own. Sure, targeting two random enemies at once sounds nice – until you remember about the shields, that is. Much like the Mass Effect/Halo brand of sci-fi, they will regenerate here, unlike health, and do so at the start of every round. The guards start off with shields when you have just escaped and have nothing, and they’ll soon become stronger than the damage Spray inflicts on its own. Meanwhile, shotgun’s Pulsing Shot pulls the enemy forward towards you and locks them there, to be torn apart over the next few turns, and sniper has an extremely helpful Damping Shot, which is shields-only, but does bonus damage against shields and prevents their regeneration for several turns if it breaches them + applies a damage debuff. Spray’s true value is of a different sort altogether – it’ll double the following damage dealt to the target over that round. Thus, it’s most helpful when you are in a team – or for the enemy’s team.

So, the game lets you choose your main character’s preferred weapon type, and a little later, whether they’ll use heavy or light armour (50 shields and 3-turn movement cooldown, vs. 20 shields and a powerful, but intermittent, Adrenaline Rush.) I always chose sniper rifle for I, and soon settled on light armour, while the game picked heavy armour + assault rifle for W, presumably to match my playstyle (even though as an enemy, he had both doubled shields, and a shotgun.) Regardless of your choice, though, you should prepared to die a few times. After all, the game really embraces the idea that these guards are both better armoured and possess the same weapons, with the same abilities and damage ranges as you do. As such, even the initial one-on-one against a Rifleman can leave you dead. Several following group battles are all different and challenging in their own way, as you are required to really think about buffs, debuffs, cooldowns and enemy’s targeting (you thankfully get to see who will get shot at by whom once your round is over and theirs begins). The enemies’ movements add a dash of unpredictability, too: sometimes, it’s even worth it as a Riflewoman or a Sniper to get into the mid-field and the enemy’s melee range after your own attacks just to avoid the worst of theirs, or vice versa.

Ironically, the boss, who has three stages corresponding to each weapon type, is actually considerably easier than the preceding group fights, as it was simply much easier to control him. Still, it was hardly mindless: just that while earlier battles had the tense kind of challenge, this one was more relaxed and enjoyable, as it was possible to let loose with attacks even while wary of his impressive capabilities. Though the game lets you heal in between each round of that boss fight, I ultimately didn’t need to do so. This healing is done purely via a syringe, of which you get 3 at the start, and which restore 50% health. Pretty much all you can do once any battle is over is to watch whatever dialogue is on screen, inject this healing if you need to, save (occasionally) and move on to the next screen. It’s fine for this kind of a short game, but it does get me wondering whether this format could allow for the more adventure-game elements, almost the way it was done in Darkest Dungeon. A sci-fi JRPG that functions just like Darkest Dungeon on a micro level (with a more defined plot replacing the endless roguelike/economic manager macro aspect) has been a dream of mine for a while, and it now seems possible MV can allow for it. Hell, if the creator of this managed to include shields separate from health, who says it wouldn’t be possible to replicate the Stress?

Conclusion

However, let’s not get too sidetracked. As far as this game goes, it’s simply pretty good, though people used to the typical JRPG level of challenge will certainly take a while to adjust. I understand the limited graphics and the storyline, though I do hope it’ll be updated to be improved in readability.

Posts

Pages: 1
Can you tell me if l lost 1.5 stars due to the shitty story and graphics or you got bothered due to the boss not being hard enough?

Also, l don't understand this sentence:

"It’s a little weird that you can’t do either from the middle: the game will essentially choose for you whether to provide moving forwards or moving backwards ability."

Did it bothered you that W weapon changed when he became an ally? Hows it works is your ally will always have a different armor and weapon than you, so he got heavy armor and 1/2 rifle/shotgun.

How do you feel that besides enemy AI and targeting you can see in advance, the game has 0 RNG?

Thanks for playing and making a very good review.
author=Fisherolol
Can you tell me if l lost 1.5 stars due to the shitty story and graphics or you got bothered due to the boss not being hard enough?


The former; after all, I've seen plenty of games where latter battles were less challenging then some of the preceding ones, and like I said before, having such control was actually fun in a way. For me, the game had a very promising system and was quite enjoyable to play through, but there wasn't anything else memorable to it, so I wasn't really invested in anything that went on. To me, a game that gets 4 stars and higher should a) lack significant, persistent flaws and be memorable (for the right reasons, that is), and other then unusual combat, there wasn't much worth remembering. Hence, a 3.5 star rating, which still indicates a pretty good and enjoyable game in my reviewing system.

author=Fisherolol
Also, l don't understand this sentence:

"It’s a little weird that you can’t do either from the middle: the game will essentially choose for you whether to provide moving forwards or moving backwards ability."


I meant this:


They are both in the middle of the field here, yet they are only allowed to move backwards. Perhaps the Heavy Trooper blocks them from moving forwards, but right now, I cannot recall any instance in the game when there was both a "Move Forwards" and a "Move Backwards" ability available. I might've missed that one, in which case I'll correct it. Either way, it's just a minor immersion thing, much like W's weapon one: I understand why it was there, and thought it was a fine design decision, that worked for this kind of game. In a larger project, though, I think it might've been even better if the game checked your weapon loadout when it first spawned W as an enemy, so that W the enemy would have the same equipment as W the ally, maintaining the immersion. These are just the kind of things that mark the difference between 4.5 and 5 stars for me.

author=Fisherolol
How do you feel that besides enemy AI and targeting you can see in advance, the game has 0 RNG?


I think that it was a good call in general. In particular, because the damage numbers stayed consistent, each battle really felt like a contest where you truly needed to outsmart the enemy to win, with no hope that you'll get lucky and they won't. Similarly, it's your fault when losing, and you can't blame it on a bad crit or the like, like it often happens in Darkest Dungeon. Of course, that game is all about risk management, during battles, during exploration and when deciding what to upgrade/where to embark on, so its more randomised system fits what it's going for well. So well, in fact, that I don't think there's room for another game exactly like it.

A system like yours, though, with its determinism, fits a plot-driven game much better, which is what needs to happen. To me, the next step where your system should be taken is enemy morale/stress and in-combat dialogue. Both are the things Darkest Dungeon omits because of its premise. Here, though, I did wonder whether a nearly dead Heavy Trooper wouldn't have just surrendered or ran after seeing her allies killed, for instance (and I's dialogue encourages such thoughts). Make the pre-combat dialogue non-linear, the overall story better, with possibility of multiple endings and such, and something really awesome may happen.
It's funny that you keep taking Darkest Dungeon in your examples because it's where my main movement system/battle command interface design inspiration come from.

The game was taking into account if you were backward or forward and took the other as a movement skill.
I really wonder if it's possible with what l have to make something that you could walk in the enemies backline but have some kind of backlash like if you get backstabbed you take more damage. I'll probably have to prototype further because someone else also had this criticism about the movement.

Fair enough, I'll make it so the weapon is chosen right when you fight your ally. It wasn't needed in my eyes so this kind of feedback is good to know.

My writing is one of the worse there is(not as worse as my drawing skills though) but since my only strength is designing I know I have to improve on something and that might be it.

Thanks a lot for that extra feedback.
Well, DD is both an awesome game, and a resoundingly successful one as well. The way Red Hook were able to take all these seemingly disparate elements that no-one tried adding together before (cosmic horror + semi-roguelike + point-and-click style curios + psychological damage), refined them into a coherent whole and were rewarded with more than a million in sales really confirms what I suspected for a while: that a truly massive success, especially in the commercial development world, is one that consciously creates its own distinctive niche and offers something other games can't, in addition to just functioning well on its own merits.

And as for the writing, I think you might want to check out Dreams of a Hero. That game also has a simple formation system (there's a back rank where enemy archers hide that can only be reached with your own ranged attacks, basically) but is more of a typical rmk game design-wise (I also got stuck on one level after bringing a wrong character to it, but I really should retry it and finish/review the game). It does have custom animated battlers, but they are hardly good-looking, and nor is the RTP mapping. Lastly, its writing is never really complex or sophisticated: however, it feels grounded, and it frequently offers you enough choice to feel engaging regardless. I think that game's writing is a standard you could reach.
Pages: 1