Answer to Thomas Mahler post on what to do to sell more early access

Wicked General
42

I’m going to reply to this because I think it’s under looked and I had the same feedback in my after 250+ hours thread.

The average gamer does not want to play a character that looks like themselves. This is about escapism. Only narcissists like Asmongold will make a character that looks just like themselves.

Obviously you don’t need to go the Stellar Blade route but people want to look like Conan, Aragorn, Legolas, Gimli, King Arthur, the Green Knight or Arwen, Daenerys, Ciri (witcher 4 version), and Galadriel.

Without doing a complete rework of the art, you could at least have the option for better looking character faces. Or if I’m playing an old wizard, let me take my hat off so I can see my character, not just the top of his hat (without effecting stats).

Clothes. Yes, too many outfits are a bit clownish. Being able to adjust colors might help a little. You’re basically at the endgame before you find some of the cooler stuff like the Ashen plate stuff. And it’s a recipe so it’s RNG to get it plagued (if that is even possible).

I think the proportions aren’t helping either with the PopEye arms and PopEye errmmm thighs?

It may be better to introduce some of the cooler items EARLIER in the game? And more of it? I feel like the majority of the gear would be fine but should be replaced by level 15 at the latest. Not after 100 hours of playing.

43

Yup, had a couple of friends curious about the game, they see the beautiful environments and attacks.

They open the game I shared on Steam, and immediately lose interest and close out the game when they get to character creator. They say the player character is hideous.

It will be trivial to diehard fanboys, but this is feedback developers should take to heart.

People play games where they can connect and aspire to the protagonist. Ugly protagonists are a huge obstacle to this early game hook and player retention.

And even then, you spend some time on character creation to never see your character’s face again because all head items are hoods, plate helms with visors down, or humongous hats completely covering your character’s face.

This is a cardinal sin of armor design. Most people want toggles for not showing helm for a reason. They want to see the face and hair. This is why diadems and circlets are popular.

Take note of Baldur’s Gate 3 character presentation and armor design. People want cool characters whose faces and expressions they can see.

2 Likes
44

Yep, forgot about BG3. I guarantee if the characters looked like they do in NRFTW there would be zero interest in interacting and romancing in that game. It’s a huge hook for many people and just look at people’s play throughs. Are they making their characters pretty/good looking or are they making them look like Popeye? I think most people will make their characters look good.

But yeah, it’s about making an Avatar. Design choices around making that Avatar look like a hobo or someone that needs Ozempic isn’t ideal.

45

What if you like’em thick?

1 Like
46

Then you should complain that some outfits take that away…

47

I have already … haha

2 Likes
48

I agree with the premise that people want to like what they are looking at. The creative director is working with something unique in NRftW and it shows in the game so far - it is working well IMO. It won’t be for everyone, but it is sort of like Cyberpunk 2077 being first person only - it was purely a creative decision that was intended to make the storytelling hit the way they wanted it to.

Looking at NRftW, the combat, the movesets, and all of that…the proportions of the avatar are partly responsible for how showy and flashy things are. Leg movement in melee combat…is honestly pretty subtle. Not a lot of action going on there. Arm movement in combat is much more pronounced, visual, and something to show off. And the character avatar with the exaggerated proportions it has does this very well. In a game like NRftW combat is going to be more important than RP/romancing. I don’t see there being a choice to make between what to emphasize more…because a core game element (combat) is being considered alongside a secondary/tertiary game element (depending on how you look at it: RP/appearance). Despite the character avatar proportions I still feel there is the ability to build a satisfying fashion set with equipment, so the character appearance is really what you are comparing to the overall feel and performance of combat.

I wouldn’t call the presentation of what is there now “ugly” because it is obviously stylized along a very specific and unique axis - it isn’t trying to be anything else, or be compared to anything else. It is bold and unapologetic, visually. The game presentation as it comes together with the environment, sound, movement, and character visuals are a unique but very satisfying fingerprint that has far more substance and gravitas than BG3 will ever dream of with its 4th wall breaking pot-hole shallow millennial writing. Given the isometric angle and level of zoom that gameplay occurs at, an increase to the poly and texture space of the armor, weapons, and character avatar would be a very “expensive” game performance investment for very, very little return.

Still, it might not be out of hand to ask for more avatar appearance sliders, including those that modify character proportions. That would be predicated on armor meshes that are no longer static, but dynamically interpret the shape of the avatar under the gear. That might be a seriously big ask (can current items be adapted, or would they have to be re-made?) if that is not the direction they intended to go.

49

You won’t see me arguing with the writing on BG3, the freedom and interactivity is amazing, but to no one’s surprise it is former Kotaku as its lead writer and the other ones are Tumblr dwellers. Halsin’s random ass polyamory was total BS. The best writing happened with Jaheira, Gale, and Minsc.

But that wasn’t the point. I’m referring to aesthetics. The armors in BG3 don’t cover up the character in a way that completely undermines the features you spend hours in the character customization for. The armors showcase your cool proportions, and most importantly the face and hair by and large.

And regarding stylistic choices, that is fine and all, but why is it so lopsided? Because the female character in Wicked might have kinda longer arms too, but it’s not grossly disproportionate.

It’s always somehow the male characters that end up with the weird and experimental and unsightly designs while the female characters always end with the safe conventionally attractive ones. If the female character weren’t in a hunched posture, she’d actually be fairly good.

But the male characters in this game not only have the exaggerated popeye arms, which is not the largest offender, but those nonexistent calves and thighs are HORRENDOUS anytime you gotta wear any remotely fitting pants.

If you’re not covering those stick legs with the Balak Taw feather wide bell pants or the sailor wide bell pants, or a robe, the character looks absolutely ridiculous and top heavy.

And yes, people can have their stylistic decisions and reasons, but the point of this thread is to give feedback that this stylistic decision regarding the male character is gonna alienate a lot of prospective players.

That’s why I had to bring up my personal example with acquaintances. I’ve been evangelizing this game, because I think it’s an absolute gem outside the player character, but I simply cannot defend the character creation and proportions, and I understand why many people are not connecting with the game, because you first connection to the game is your character.

The armors are way too goofy, I imagine they tried to do a lot of meta reference to Elden Ring, where player characters are usually an eyesore and have super goofy armors, but even then there are a few dignified high fantasy alternative armors that make the character look good.

In current early access, there is not a single cloth helm that isn’t an unholy oversized brim hat covering up all my character’s face and head, or some really ridiculous helm or privateer hat. It is a problem.

The game’s tone does not match the armor offerings. This game has a serious story with gravitas and high fantasy elements, the dialogue is impeccable, and then in a cutscene your character, supposedly of a noble mysterious sacred warrior race is a goofy ass hobo/rascal/peasant-looking character next to the impressive and handtailored looks of Seline, Ellsworth, Baurus, Winnick, and Odessa.

It just looks totally out of place and undermined the tone of the game. I absolutely support some goofy armors to joke around, but we also need more serious attires for at least cloth and leather that aren’t just peasant NPC attires or rags.

There is just no way to make my current caster cloth or leather archer guy look heroic instead of a random wretch from the Sacrament slums.

2 Likes
50

I agree, however i dont think the devs have any time atm to invest in this. Too much is at stake, they have other priorities, I think. I am not a programmer but changing how the avatars look have big programming implications… or am I mistaken?
They need to push out content, the story is still very short, we have little info on Odessa a very interesting character. Also the other npc have little backstory. These people are excellent writers, however implementing a good story in a videogame takes alot of time and money and they dont seem to have much of both.

51

you’re mistaken… kinda… :slightly_smiling_face:
has not as much to do w/ programing and more to do w/ bandwidth…
you are right that they have bigger priorities, is after all early access, and not every promised feature is yet finished nor even in game yet…
the biggest issue changing the game stylistic is that they would have to re-work a lot of assets (IMO) to keep it concise, but then again that will depend on how much they would be changing them characters… (it obviously impacts 2D/3D art, but as for “programming” it would depend on how much it changes “sizes, hitboxes, etc.” which is unlikely to be changed)…

Personally, I do not care much neither about the aesthetics nor story more than I do care about gameplay… that being said, I don’t find the characters nor the “fashion” aspect as appealing as other games offer (if I were to be completely honest) which is a bummer to some extent, I just don’t mind as much because I still believe Moon have the right to express their art the way they see fit… but no one should ignore reality, not players, nor Moon, that popular things are popular for a reason, and since this is a thread to give feedback in order to “sell more”, people’s opinion on the “characters being ugly” is as valid, if not more than, any other opinions give…

ultimately is about compromise, and how much them devs are willing to sacrifice in order to sell… even if most players (costumers) fail to understand this basic principle, them devs (Moon Studios in this case, but any dev team out there) knows this and is probably the reason they’ve asked for feedback in the 1st place…

52

I do agree. It makes mixing sets of armor particularly unsatisfying from a visual and aesthetic standpoint.

I tend to see the legs on par with the arms - a stylistic choice in the opposite direction - a deliberate de-emphasis if you will. That said, I do not see it as necessary, and apart from having a ~2004 Disney/The Incredibles aesthetic for the sake of having it…I’m in agreement that is not drawing people in (at all) and certainly may be an off-putting force with no up-side.

As a BG3 specific statement I’m in total agreement, though I believe the character models in NRftW are low-poly enough that the visual spectacle it is is not nearly comparable to any other RPG you might reach for (From BG3 all the way back to OG Skyrim). We don’t have 2k/4K skin texture maps, sub-dermal maps, normal and specular maps that capture the sheen of the hair, the skin, and the dynamic reactions these things have with real-time environmental lighting (or the view to appreciate them even if we did). I’m not sure that is goal-state either, given the more “graphic novel” art style and presentation. Materials lighting components are used to make the combat/equipment look better, but that’s about it for now.

The hunched/stooped posture, the elephant-heavy steps the character takes while walking normally on flat terrain - these are detractors to a more refined aesthetic in their own right and could certainly be improved. The running animation looks great. At some point all of these little changes will become transformative for the overall experience but in and of themselves they are a steep cost on the development team.

As for selling more early access I’m not sure that the aesthetics is the most direct path. I think there is enough promotional material and gameplay footage out there that people will understand enough of what they are getting into to make a decision on that information. Making the improvements to the aesthetics mentioned will help retain people, but may not be the most relevant when it comes to getting the game into more hands.

Expanding the scope of experiences the game offers is what I see as the most direct path for drawing new players.

We have:

  • A single-player RPG campaign
  • Snappy, responsive, visually pleasing skill-oriented combat system
  • A highly refined visual style (character, environment…including/in spite of all of the criticisms leveraged before)
  • A unique blend of ARPG and 3rd person Souls/Fable combat
  • Co-op (coming soon tm)

There is more, of course, but these are the selling points as I view them.

The crafting system may as well not exist because there is not enough freedom or determinism or availability for it to be useful or meaningful. You can end up with plenty of base resources, but the rare resources are only had when farming dailies or plagued zones (and the meager amount you get doing the campaign). The crafting recipies need serious adjustment to even be viable.

The balance of the game currently works against Crucible being a meaningful player experience because there is no first-run locked difficulty. So no matter what you will be at an equipment disadvantage until you have 80-90% of a full build ember’d into all of your build-specific needed mods before level 18. And it gets expensive to run Crucible both from a time invested and resources invested point of view. After level 18 difficulty ramps pretty hard, demands you have more and more exalted gear, etc. So as far as I am concerned Crucible is completely optional for the people that like the skill challenge - and if not it is completely ignored (so there goes your “engaging endgame content”). It exists on a completely separate difficulty tier - which there is nothing wrong with - but that only works to make it more optional to more players, not less.

The housing system exists as a crutch to manage an arbitrarily limited inventory. Its a choice to arbitrarily limit the inventory space, but I believe this to be an antiquated way of looking at ARPGs and vidya games in general. If a player is playing your game and pushing to acquire equipment or resources, why stand in the way of that? Why limit that? The only answers I can come up with is: we don’t have enough to offer this player when they collect all of the things too fast.

Which brings me back to experiences the game can offer. Improving the systems which are currently shooting themselves in the foot for one reason or another would be the best start.

  • Don’t limit the inventory space. Give us separate tabs for item types (2H weapons, 1H weapons, Offhands, gloves [all types], legs [all types], chests [all types], head/helmets [all types], and Rings…and one last tab for ALL crafting reagents). Take ALL crafting reagents of ALL kinds OUT of inventory space just like the currency is. This will make people farm resources MORE not less.
  • Re-balance and expand crafting (enchanting, infusing) so that RNG gear finding is not the only viable way to approach an endgame build. All I have to say is: Two Winged Brood skulls to craft Freiheit…zero reason for that kind of negligence with respect to recipe balancing. Make weapon/armor recipes more plentiful earlier. Then expand crafting into city and housing projects.
  • Lock the first “run/tier” of Crucible difficulty at level 18, and make increasing difficulties player-determined very similar to plagued zones. Who cares if people have to get to level 25 or 30 to beat it for the first time: this lets people run it faster and learn the patterns faster/easier so they are more motivated to push higher difficulties instead of ignore it or barely engage with it. This makes Crucible more accessible without taking away anything from the people that can push the highest difficulties (and enjoy it).
  • Make the housing system more meaningful. More city projects. More housing projects - maybe take houses out of the city (or consolidate the number of housing areas down to a small few…3 or so) and do a build-your-own-manor type thing. Let the key NPCs be recruitable to your Manor once it is built up enough to support them (definitely Finley, The Watcher, Elsa, and Roan).

This approach ensures that the experiences the player has with the systems they choose to engage with have enough depth and integration to be fun and rewarding, instead of broken, unbalanced, unfulfilling, and disappointing.

And if we ever get done with all of those…you have the foundation for offering more experiences to the player. Companionship/romance. Thomas has already hinted at Farming (a la Stardew Valley) which would be far more intuitive with a build-your-own manor system. Strategy (leveraging Crafting/Farming to build up defenses/fortifications in different locations to participate in more regional story and gameplay dynamics - I’m thinking instanced battlefields against plagued denizens with support from the fortifications you built…but also spills over into ‘preparing the realm’ for an offensive into the mountains to seal away the evil for good). You could even set up for different endings depending on how much the player chose to build up the realm defenses before provoking the source of evil in the mountains.

As it is, I think there are some core elements that need to be fixed before we enter the territory of expanding the scope of experience offered to the player - but there is definitely opportunity to do that. Quite a lot.